notin

Actually not. Saying the best players do not always win titles is not even remotely the same as saying teams would be better off without them. However, if someone did say allocating far too many resources to keep the best player hampers a team's ability to build a competitive team around that player (which was the original actual point), would you agree or not? Most GMs would agree with that, which is why they frequently backload heavier contracts. It is a strategy that gives them more financial flexibility when the player is at his most productive and therefore easier to build a better team around him. And when he hits his more expensive years, he was unlikely to be as able to carry the team anyway...

Well, yesterday's cliff is today's abyss...

As do you apparently...

No Pivetta? Bloom apparently wanted him. That trade was far from a salary dump...

With Eovaldi, the question was never really talent. Not many pitchers can throw as hard as he does as many times as he does. But that is also probably the cause of the real concern...

A team should probably have about 10 SPs ready to go for a full season. Might not need that many, but a team should be prepared if they do. If ERod returns, they should have ERod, Perez, Eovaldi, and Pivetta ready on the MLB roster. Mata and Seabold in the minors. That's 6, and 7 if they think Ward is good to go. So maybe 3-4 SPs, at least two of whom will need an option year. But maybe 5 if ERod just can't go, Ward isn't added to the 40-man, and maybe if someone is dealt...

What do you mean by “starters”? Starting pitchers only? Or position players and starting pitchers?

I wonder if he explored the trade market for starters instead of closers...

Can we let the Patriots play one game before we bury them?

They started the pummeling against Pablo Lopez, who is usually a very good pitcher...

My philosophy is typically - sign relievers and trade for starters, although that latter part is not always possible. Good SPs do usually demand the type of contracts that become a big problem, whereas closers often take shorter contracts. I'm ok overpaying a closer of it's only for 3-4 years. Has any free agent closer ever signed a long term deal?

Except that I do not think Bloom will move Eovaldi to the bullpen. At best, maybe he can utilize as a into a high-priced opener. There were rumors of an Eovaldi/Oder swap in August. I have to wonder if that might get revisited, and if it is a good idea. Oder is cheaper, creating more flexibility. But Texas isn't dissatisfied with him solely because of his contract. He really does sort of suck at a lot of things. He's basically Michael Chavis, but with a bigger, uglier contract. However, he is only 26, 16 months older than Dalbec...

And yes, it is a foolish retort to say that anyone who suggests not overpaying for an aging free agent with a mega contract is "trying to save Henry's money." Fans who say that typically think the contract is going to go south and be a burden that hamstrings the team's ability to improve, and do so sooner rather than later. The foolish people think his spending is limitless and the Sox can "print money" in some sort of neverending supply. History has shown repeatedly this is not true. And right now, what exactly do you mean about "gave us some excitement to "look forward to"? That's actually the exact opposite of what Dombrowski did. He did give us some in the past, but the situation the Sox are in was actually a very predictable one. How many posts in the past 3 or 4 years have referenced the inevitable "cliff"? You know, the one we fell off this year?

And Eovadi probably would have also fallen into that same category, but he had a whole different set of issues that made his contract foolish....

No. You drew the conclusion that teams would therefore be better off without star players. When it comes to the players I mentioned, the economics of baseball were different and those players (as far as I know) did not command the type of payroll-flexibility killing cotnracts some players get today. But they still did not win. Nowadays, teams certainly can limit themselves with huge contracts. Especially if they give them out rather freely, like DD did with Price and Eovaldi...

The 2020 Red Sox are part of what he did...

That's not what I said. Just expounding on S5's point about stars and championships. Nothing I said there is incorrect...

A fact that changes not one character in my post.

Typically spending is also related to fanbase. Teams that have a more voluminous and more enthusiastic/rabid fanbase tend to get better revenue streams and therefore can spend more money. It's not like anyone owning a major sports franchise is living paycheck-to-paycheck. If they have a product people want, they can use that to generate more money and produce a better product. But the small market teams do tend to lack fans, so when they spend less fewer people are disappointed. However, there is a self-propagating aspect to this, too...

Exactly. I care more about years than money. And about age when those years begin...

I'm a little simpler. DFA/release the following: Chris Mazza, Jeff Springs, Matt Hall, Robinson Leyer, Andrew Triggs, Dylan Covey, Mike Kickham, Ryan Weber, Zack Godley, Austin Brice Option the following to Pawtucket: Robert Stock, Colten Brewer (will require a DFA, but he'll clear), Kyle Hart, Marcus Walden Retain the following for MLB roster: SP: Eduardo Rodriguez, Nick Pivetta, Martin Perez BP: Barnes, Hernandez, Brasier, Taylor, Phillips Valdez, Nate Eovaldi (Yes, it is time to move the ever-fragile Eovaldi out ofthe 150 IP role and into a 60 IP role, assuming he cannot be dealt). Add 2 SP's, one of whom might be Mata or Seabold, who can hold on to Sale's spot for a couple months. Load up on relief pitchers. C: Vazquez, Plawecki. (Vazquez might be some form of trade bait.) INF: Dalbec, Devers, Bogaerts, Chavis, Munoz/Lin/Chatham. Maybe add a 2B. While I like Munoz, it's not like he has a great track record. Non-tender Peraza and option Arauz to Pawtucket. OF: Benintendi, Verdugo, Martinez. Add a CF and a 4th OF. So the Sox need one SP (minimum), one 2B (?), one CF, maybe a 4th OF if they can't find one internally, and maybe 3-5 relief pitchers. And a catcher if they deal Vazquez, unless they like a Plawecki/Gruillon tandem back there...

My only problem with the Pomeranz trade was letting Preller clearly cheat, lie and steal. And Pomeranz has turned into an excellent pitcher who has pitched for 4 teams since that trade, while Espinoza has pitched all of 32 innings for the San Diego minor league system, and none since 2016. Had the Sox not made that trade, what good would Espinoza be doing us today? Making Jay Groome look healthy by comparison?

He has, and I am thankful the man has dropped a couple billion dollars on my entertainment. And I have reciprocated by spending exactly 0 dollars on his. But the bottom line is the man does have spending limits, despite the numerous foolish retorts of money-saving moves being to "save Henry money." Never my thought. My thoughts/plans/posts typically revolved around retaining players like Betts rather than foolishly dropping huge quantities of cash of players on the wrong side of 30 and hoping they miraculously don't age, or by signing players for 6-7 years to fill a one or two year gap in production. Which brings me to a conundrum on Trevor Bauer this offseason. He is clearly going to be looking at a Price-esque contract, but no one else on the market can expedite the turnaround of this team any better. But that might mean a better team in 2021-2023, and then, what? Right back here again, dumping Casas and Groome to get someone to take Bauer off our hands?

Price was also 30 at the time, and signed for 7 years. That meant even a healthy Price was probably going to start declining very early in that contract (which he did). Betts is 27. He had more years of production ahead of him, and he was a better player to begin with. So while Price was dropping from a 5-6 fWAR pitcher to a 4 fWAR pitcher to a 2 fWAR pitcher, from Betts we might have seen him go from being an 8-10 fWAR outfielder to a 7-9 fWAR outfilder to maybe a 5-6 fWAR outfielder over time. And maybe after 9 or 10 years, he is a 3-4 fWAR outfielder, but by then you have a much better ROI on that contract...

For me, I don't care about the size of the payroll, but I do care when too much money starts getting tied up in aging players, because that limits the team's ability to retain younger players and limits their ability to improve in the near future, which is where we are today. That's why I did not like the Price signing and the Eovaldi signing. I would have liked the Sale extension, but I do think Sale only signed it because he knew he was hurt (and I think Dombrowski only offered that lowball extension because he also knew). But paying heavily for younger players like was done for Manny and Pedro were both fine with me...