notin
-
Posts
55,185 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by notin
-
While true, especially for relievers (Diekman!!), I don’t expect farm-altering pieces for any of them. Although if one of them gets a non-descript heretofore unknown who turns into the next Josh Winckowski, it will be a job well done…
-
Vazquez is a free agent anyway. Keeping him or trading him doesn’t change that status…
-
Replacing Mookie was never going to happen. If you think he did poorly because all the pundits gave the trade a D, what better option did he pass on? (Disclosure - I preferred the original Verdugo/Graterol deal at the time. And despite Graterol’s health struggles, I still do.) But it’s not like 29 teams were throwing their best names at Boston and Bloom just chose poorly. His options were limited. He could: 1) have held Betts and Price (whom the Sox would still be paying $31mill to) for one more season. He really couldn’t re-sign Betts because Mookie wanted a ton of money and Henry wanted to reset the limit, which becomes impossible while paying full price Mookie and Price 2) traded him to LA as we saw 3) traded him and Price to San Diego for Wil Myers, one of Cal Quantrill or Joey Lucchesi, and one of Manny Margot or Josh Naylor. That’s it. Those are the options. So if 2 is a D, which of 1 or 3 was better? I suspect you’ll ignore the question and continue to complain while pretending there were dozens of better offers that were refused for no reason whatsoever…
-
The most free-spending GM in team history couldn’t lock him up. Nothing that Mookie (or more accurately, Mookie’s agent) said at the time indicated this was going to be possible except in an extremely cost-prohibitive way. And even then, had the Sox extended Mookie, Bogaerts would have left after 2019. So it comes down to Betts vs Bogaerts and Verdugo. That’s not a slam dunk either way IMO…
-
But they’d be even more worse off if they held Mookie for one more 60 game season and then saw him walk to free agency. And Winckowski is making a good argument that 6 season of him is better than 2 season of Benintendi would have been…
-
Gee you spotted the only flaw with that post…
-
Eovaldi has been a home run machine this year, not a good trait for a pitcher. He’s had a long career riddled with injuries, and is already 32. He’s very unlikely to be healthier in his 30s than he was in his 20s. The Sox already have Sale and Paxton under control for next season; how many oft-injured pitchers do they need? You can’t rant about the GM not filling in all the injuries on one thread and then advocate for more players whose Topps baseball card lists their position as “IL” on another…
-
Dude half the league needs SO, and so far only one has been moved, and that happened this weekend. Could the Sox have acquired Luis Castillo? Sure. But it would have cost at least one of Casas or Mayer…
-
The starting pitching has been addressed multiple times, but internal options go first for two reasons. 1. Easier to undo if something doesn’t work out 2. Can do it anytime, unlike trades that require waiting for another team to sell
-
Hell mine are often unpopular among the stat crowd. And many are not so hesitant to point it out, especially my mistakes and flawed logic (which I am more than fine with)…
-
Nope. That’s not looking solely at results. That’s making up results that you like, which is the opposite…
-
BTV suggests “not much”. None of Eovaldi (0.7), Martinez (0.4) nor Vazquez (0.4) offer much in the way of surplus trade value. Maybe a high A pitcher like Jordany Ventura or Nick Zwick. Or possibly AA RHP Grant Hartwig. The Sox reportedly want 3b prospect Mark Vientos, but on BTV, that’s a No Go. Of course, Cohen seems to care less about salary than most owners , and we can hope he might be willing to ensure a deal gets done, too. But then he presumably didn’t get rich by giving everyone what they want…
-
Yes. But also more AL East pennants than any manager in franchise history. More than Cora. More than Francona. More than everyone. And, hey, all that matters are results…
-
Results matter. But so does the starting point. If you go by nothing but looking at each individual season in a vacuum, then you have to conclude John Farrell was the best manager in franchise history…
-
Then they should stop handing out long term 9-figure contracts like they’re lotto scratch offs…
-
Technically he’s a troll desperately trying to look intelligent…
-
That’s because Bogie is on the short list of Sox players with TWO World Series rings already…
-
Are you actually criticizing the Sox for letting Martinez play DH? That’s f***ing ridiculous. Hey counterthought - maybe if the Sox benched him, other teams would think he was too fragile to acquire. Bottom line is nearly every team is playing their marketable players right now. Willson Contreras might be the jewel of the trade deadline, but he’s in the Cobs’ lineup almost every night, at either catcher or DH…
-
I’ve seen some defend Sale’s contract despite him only pitching 48 IP in the first 3 seasons…
-
Not true. Their $30mill ace pitcher was injured in February and not allowed to tell the team until March. This had a very big impact, as it caused a re-shuffling of the bullpen once the Sox started using Houck and eventually Whitlock in the rotation…
-
No debate. They’d be 1.7 games better…
-
Maybe there’s a reason moon isn’t the GM. . Either way, Bloom won’t be listening to him. So if 30yo Bogaerts wants an 8 year deal, do you think the Sox should capitulate? He likely won’t be very good in 8 years, and probably less than that. But he will still get his guaranteed money and could become an anchor, like plenty of others. Trout’s deal is looking awful. And going around the league, you can find plenty similar ones. The Angels themselves are facing trading their best player (Ohtani) because they likely can’t afford him while also paying for the immovable contracts if Trout and Rendon. That’s why the Sox desperately need to bulk the farm. There is a reason the Padres can pay for Machado, Tatis, Hosmer, and Darvish and still entertain the ida of dealing for Soto. Their farm fills void after void with minimum wage talent. Some of them (Cronenworth, who joined their minors via trade) contribute at an All Star level, while others (Aguilar, Abrams) barely contribute beyond making no money. But it is a system that works…
-
The 2021 bullpen was extremely good lead by Barnes, Ottavino and Whitlock (and eventually Houck) at the back end. Barnes was an All Star until the wheels just fell off. Granted he was having a career year so regression could be expected, but he regressed down to the level of Beer League Benchwarmer. It looked to me like maybe the Sox thought he could bounce back from his 10 inning slump at the end of 2021. And if he did, even to his serviceable less-than-All-Star norms, a bullpen anchored by Barnes, Houck, Whitlock, Taylor (remember him?),Brasier appeared to be the plan and in reality, shouldn’t be that bad. And if things swung right, could be an absolute strength. And that’s before we even mention names like Diekman, Strahm and Davis. The problem was the Sox kept dipping into the bullpen to fill injury voids in the rotation. Not sure if that was Bloom, Cora, or (more likely) both. But all during the shutdown when Sale was not allowed to tell the team he was injured, the bullpen didn’t look as bad on paper until it turned into what was left standing.
-
Are both producing now? JD has been OK. Eovaldi has had flashes of disaster. That’s the whole point. Locking up a player for 7 years to get 3 or 4 good years does mean you also pay for the bad ones.
-
True. Players typically waive the NTC for one of 3 reasons 1) Go to a contender or better situation 2) Have a team option turned into a guarantee 3) Have an incentive clause turned into a guarantee I don’t know if Bogaerts has any incentives, and his option is a player one, so item 1 is the reason he would waive his. I know he has always said he prefers Boston. While nearly every player under control says this, Bogaerts is the rare case I believe, because he signed his extension when he only had one year left. And that extension was less than he would have gotten in free agency at his age at the time…
