moonslav59

Well said. It's hard to know how much some in the organization has been lied to or misled, but it does seem like it occurs.

Exactly, he has to have smarter and better guys in charge than the others, while staying ahead of the changes being made. You can bet the teams that have mastered staying good while spending less are not just repeating what they do, every year. They are making changes and adjustments, all the time. Trying to copy last year's Rays does not mean you will beat this year's Rays.

I get your point, but what are these guys getting paid?

He was very good from 2017 to 2020, but only started more than 21 games, once in that time period (8 out of 12 in '20.) We need a 30 start/ 175+ IP starter. THe only one we might have, Pivetta, is a 5th starter type. This guy missed 2021 and averaged 23 GS & 123 IP, the last 2 seasons. He'd still be our #3, due to his 4.03 ERA (103 ERA+) and 4.61 FIP (1.213 WHIP,) but I really hoped for much better. I almost think Paxton on a 1 year deal might be just as good a bet.

He must think he's smart enough to pick the right quants to get the job done.

The goal has been lowered to trying to finish in 4th place without spending. Until we do that, Breslow gets no more money to try for 3rd place, the following season.

Isn't just about every pitcher who is really good, somewhat of an egomaniac?

$37M/2 w vesting option, which would make it $55M/3.

Plan B s dropping, quickly.

Drop in the draft?

and it's not close to what he wants

Wonderful!

Also, how we spent the money has been a bigger issue than not spending enough, except for maybe 2023, where I think it's about even. I don't think we spent poorly, overall in 2022, but we would have needed to spend a whole lot more to win in '22 or '23.

I get that. The numbers can sometimes be misleading, as our budget was higher in 2019 than 2018, despite not bringing back Kimbrell and Kelly. To me, we have not really matched where we were in 2018. That's 5 years of slippage, which is unprecedented under JH. In terms of CBT budgets and the CBT Tax Line: 2003: Under 2004: Over 2005: Over 2006: Over 2007: Over 2008: Under 2009: Under 2010: Over 2011: Over 2012: Under $1M 2013: Under $1M 2014: Under $3M 2015: Over $10M 2016: Over $15M 2017: Under $3M 2018: Over $43M 2019: Over $38M 2020: Under $23M 2021: Under $2M 2022: Over $6M 2023: Under$6- $10M (depending on your source) You are right, we have been under by more than we used ato be, especially in 2020. Last year was not a whole lot more under, but it was more. This year may be under by more than 2023, and that would be 2 years in a row and shift from past amounts going under by a significant amount. The going under for 2-3 years in a row is not new. I am not liking the direction we are going, especially when it comes at a time when 6-7 other teams have seen massive spikes in spending since 2022. I'm not optimistic about this changing, in any way. I do think those 6-7 rising spenders have more to do with our fall in the rankings than our lack of spending more. That may change after 2024.

We are talking between $3-7M differentials, when "under." You're saying that's the major problem? Again, I'm not saying we're spending enough, and we do need to keep up, to some extent.

Now, you've gone too far.

Here is a shorter version on why we slipped from #1-4 in the rankings to 13th in 2 years: We spent about $6M more per year in '22 and '23 than '21. 9 of the 10 teams that passed us spent this much more: Avg increase in $M spent from 2021. Per year! $126M NYM $75M TEX $67M SDP $53M PHI $52M ATL $40M TOR $30M CWS $10M LAA $6M CHC (just ahead of us, last year) $2M HOU (finished 3 ahead of us) I see about 6 or 7 teams that we should not have had to match or spend more than they did over the last 2 years. The rest were all bunched up, and had we spent a few more $M to get to #8, I doubt we'd have been much better than we were.

That does seem like wishful thinking, but again, my definition of an ace is not as strict as others. Maybe a solid 1/2 every 4-5 years and another 2/3 or top 4 in the same time frame sound about right? Some teams seem to churn out a 1/2 every 2-3 years.

True. He also got an arb raise from$7.5M in 2022 to $10.4M in 2023, despite having a down year in '22. ERA+ 124>81 FIP 3.79>4.06 WHIP 1.10>1.44

No, you were right. I should not have said highest and 4th highest in red Sox history without at least mentioning inflation adjustments might lessen the value of my claim. I was not trying to claim we spending enough. Last winter, we left a few million on the table, but I really did not have an issue with re-setting, after the stupid 2021 budget mess-up, but we are talking about what? $5-7M? Surely, that can be the major reason we sucked. This year looks different, but we have done this before when the following year looked brighter. (2013 was freaky, as we spent less and won.) I'll try to keep it short and simple. We are still spending large and long on some players. (3 since March 2021) We have let some stars go, and nobody more impactful than Betts, but that was 4 years ago. We have levelled off our spending, more or less, while 6-7 teams have spent way more than us, and passed us in the rankings. That is the main reason we dropped from top 3-4 to 13th, but not the whole reason. So far, our choices on our biggest contracts have not paid off, like many did or partially did in the past: Devers for obvious reasons. his extension starts in 2024. (Not improving in 2023 as a normal age curve might project is a bit concerning.) Story has been hurt over half of the first 2 years of his 6 year deal. Yoshida was ok in year 1 of 5, but you normally expect worse after year one. (We both agree he might do better year 2.) I'm really on board with the idea that we should spend more, but I'm not going to pretend we are heading towards being like PIT.

Imagine a player getting a big bump in pay, because he actually got much better! Hell, Gio got a big raise for getting worse, and not just for 1 year.

Agreed. I think having them as about the best we might expect is scary as hell. We need an ace every 3-4 years, and a #2 or 3, as well.

Would you be okay, if I had worded it like this? I'm not happy with the direction of our budget, but let's not pretend JH has been anywhere near like some other owners. In the last 2 years, alone... Adjusted for inflation... 1. signed Devers to one of the largest 2-3 contract in Red Sox history! 2. signed Story to one of the 6th or 7th largest AAV in Red Sox history and to 6 years, a length not often given by him. (only 5 players at 6+ Devers, Price, AGon, CC, Story) 3. signed Yoshida and paid a fee that put the total cost over $100M, which I believe, when adjusted for inflation is top 25 in Red Sox history of money spent on one contract period. That's not "headed towards Pittsburgh."

You brought up inflation, not me. I agree that some past big contracts are likely higher than Story's, when adjusted for inflation. I'm not sure more than 1 or 2, if any, beat Devers. I'm sure several have topped Yoshi. As for our spending budgets, how does inflation adjustments make 2022 and 2023's budgets look, in comparison? I'm not doing the math. I've said I think we should spend more and can spend more. We dropped down, a lot after 2019, despite the Sale, nate and Bogey deals inked that winter. (Not bringing Kimbrell & Kelly back was really the start, to me, and that was after 2018, and then we dumped Price on the betts trade. No doubt, we slashed budget, like never before. My point is, we are not even close to looking like PITT of even 10-14 other teams. Our spending has not been all that much different from times in the past, except for the big dip in 2020, where we still were 3rd ranked. Hell, Steve the Ump had us still 3rd in 2021. The main reason we have dropped in the rankings, is that other teams have begun to spend more or way more, while we have stayed about the same, with repeated fluctuations and trends. Seperate yourself from the emotions of watching us not go up in spending, when we need to and "can afford to" do so. Pretend you are a non Sox fan looking at these numbers to determine what the main reason is for the Sox drop in spending ranking... I'll just start at 2021: (2022>2023) 1. LAD 235 (1. 277> 5. 218) -17M (2>5 2. NYY 191 (3. 240> 2. 269) +78M (2=2) 3. BOS 180 (6. 195> 13. 176) -4M (3>13) 4. LAA 177 (9. 169> 7. 204) +27M (4>7) 5. PHI 174 (4. 222> 4. 232) 58M (5>4) 6. SDP 172 (5. 209> 3. 269) +97M (6>3) 7. HOU 171 (11. 164> 11. 181) +10M (7>10) 8. NYM 167 (2. 253> 1. 334) +167M (8>1) 9. WSH 161 (19. 115> 24. 80) -81M (9>24) 10. CHC 150 (15. 131> 12. 180) +30M (10>12) 11. TOR 137 (10. 168> 6. 206) +49M (11>6) 12. STL 135 (12. 150> 16. 148) +13M (12>16) 13. ATL 134 (8. 174> 8. 200) +66M (13>8) 14. SFG 128 (13. 142>14. 176) +38M (14=14) 15. CWS 126 (7. 182> 10. 181) +55M (15>10) 16. MIN 121 (20. 111>17. 141) +20M (16>17) 17. CIN 119 (21. 100> 22. 86) -33M (17>22) Big drop 22. TEX 85 (14. 135> 9. 184) +99M (22>9) We added $15M from 2021 to 2022 and still dropped from 3rd to 6th. The cut from '212 to '22 was certainly a factor in our drop, but if we stayed at the 2021 level of spending in 2023, we'd have placed 9th (just behind ATL and above TEX). 6 place drop. had we stayed at the 2021 number, we'd have been ranked 10th. (7 place drop) We dropped 10 spots, in reality. Once could say 6-7 were because others spent way more and 3-4, because we leveled off or dropped, a little. I live near HOU. While people complain about the Astros not spending to keep their stars (sound familiar?), I don't here any calls for the owner's head. Why? Because they still win, despite spending about the same as us. The major issues are how we spend our money and other teams going nutty with spending and jumping over us. That's not to say, our lack of spending is not a major issue.

It seems you can multiply your investment by 6 without adding any.