S5Dewey

IMHO this discussion comes down into two camps: the "The numbers are everything" camp a/k/a The Writers, and the " I like the guy and I like what I see" camp, or the fans. I see the reason Duran is still around is because hes an expensive luxury. He's insurance against injuries in either the OF or the IF (and who gets to have that luxury)? [aside, that was rhetorical.] Me? I'm on the fence. I think its crazy to hold onto him for "insurance" but at the same time I think he brings "intangibles" that are very important to the chemistry of the team. But thats just MO.

IMO Soto to the Mets is great news. While it would have been "nice" to see him in a Sox uni at the same time the Sox biggest need is not a power hitting OF'er, it's pitching. Signing Soto for HALF of that money would have crippled any chance the Sox had to sign the pitching necessary to make them a true contender, (OK, that may be a bit of a stretch, but you see what I mean). My question now is, while Otani's salary was seen as an outlier, does Soto's salary make this the norm for elite players? If so, any team without very deep pockets may as well fold their tents and slip quietly away,

Not me. Now we get into the balancing act of offense/defense/pitching and Duran brings a whole new offensive dimension to the Sox. For me to be willing to consider trading Duran I'd have to be looking at a trade no partnering team would make.

Crochet was only an example, my point was that we should be prepared to give good players to get good pitching. Nothing come cheap and the situation in Chicago made me think that the CWS might match up well with the Sox. I never thought I'd be saying this because I've been on the Mayer bandwagon ever since Day 1, but his ability to stay on the field concerns me. I won't be heartbroken whether he stays or goes but whichever it is, it's a gamble. He could become the guy we're looking for or he could be another Tyler O'Neill whom we love when he's in the lineup but can't seem to stay there.

I believe Moon is right ^here^ and this should be "make or break" year for JH. JH is in a position right now where he can afford to pay some big money for some big pitchers. If he doesn't do this it's going to be apparent that he truly values his pocketbook over the Red Sox. OTOH, there is the belief (and I confess to being one of those believers) that because this team has so many young, impact, non-pitchers that they were going to take 2024 and see what they've got - who can play at the ML level and who can't- and use the 2024-25 winter to 1) decide who to keep, who to trade, and who to cut loose, and 2) start to assemble a pitching staff that will lead them to being more than "competitive". If my second paragraphs is what's happening we're going to see some controversial trades in the off season, seeing some fan-favorite young players get traded. As an example, I can see two or even three of our young position players traded to the CWS for Garrett Crochet. Crochet is good, young, and cheap, and the CWS aren't going anywhere even with him in 2025 so he's a good match for a team with young talent to spare, That's the Sox, But we have to be prepared to give up a Roman Anthony ++ to get him. As usual, JMO!

Seriously? You're smarter than that. "Irritating the opposing pitcher" is good strategy at every level of baseball. The more a pitcher is distracted the less he's focusing on his next pitch, and at the MLB level every small distraction is a plus for the offense. Of course that's JMO because you will NEVER hear a pitcher admit, "Ya, I hung a curve ball because I was concerned about that runner on 1st getting that huge frikkin' lead", but if you've watched or played any baseball you know it's true. One of the best things a team can do to improve their chances is to distract the opposing pitcher. The method of scoring runs doesn't have to be an either/or thing. It can also be a "both" thing.

I agree completely. To trade a top-10 prospect for a rental would be 'sending good money after bad". IMHO this team is on the cusp of being contenders and parting with a top-10 prospect in the (realistic) hope that the Sox might advance one level higher in the playoffs in '24 would be counter productive to the goal of having a genuine WS contender in'25 or '26.

...and one thing we can be certain about is that Breslow is smart.

I don't see them trading prospects for rentals. IMHO the Club is doing exactly what they should be doing. For 2024 they're looking at the players under moderate-to-long years of control, the young players currently with the team, and the promising players in the minors. When the season is over they'll make decisions as to where the weaknesses are and try to fill them through free agency if necessary. In short, building a team the smart way. See: Craig Breslow. If the Sox are .500-ish and the FO does nothing the fans will scream bloody murder but given our young talent it would be the smarter thing to do.

Here's Greg Maddux take on power pitchers: In a recent phone interview, Maddux, whose expertise on the mound is revered, shared his insights into the high-stakes environment that pitchers face today. “Velocity matters,” Maddux explained, “teams want guys who throw hard. As a coach, I’d rather have someone who can throw 95 mph rather than 90. Faster is better, but it’s not the solution to your problems”. My interpretation of what GM said is that location is more important than speed. When that's combined with the added stress of the additional 5 MPH a pitcher throwing has hard as he can is a lose/lose situation. JMO!

As much as we like Raffy's upside there's a definite downside to him too. IMO Raffy got off easy last night with the error that was charged to Valdez. While I'll agree that Valdez shouuld have handled that throw, at the same time the throw shouldn't have been in a place that made Valdez stretch like a 1B. As a second downside, as 5GG mentioned, he looks like he's trying to hit a 500 foot-er on every swing when he demonstrated in ST that he can go to LF. And downside #3...Is anyone other than me tired of watching him jog to first base on anything that he assumes is going to be an automatic out? IMHO at the minimum he should at least be making it look like he's TRYING. Like most everone, I like his offense but the downsides make me want to tear my hair out - what's left of it.

I'll take the blame for that. I was watching the women's basketball game and switched over just as the bottom of the 5th was starting. My bad. Sorry.

That may be dependent on who the pitcher is. In yesterday's game Crawford started the game with mostly FB's (in the high 80's) and the first three batters teed off on him. Then he went to his breaking stuff and pitched a good solid 14 outs. (he got pulled in the 5th with 2 outs). Adding 4-5 mph to his FB may work in helping to set up his breaking stuff but only if he has some movement on it.

That's what Cora has been doing at every game at JBP thus far this spring. IMO that's probably a good indication of how he'll start the season. I certainly hope that's what happens. Duran brings something to the Sox that I haven't seen in quite a bit - speed - and Duran's speed seems to get in the heads of not only the pitchers and catchers but also in the heads of outfielders. When they know they have to make perfect throws to 2B to get him their throws become less than perfect. Or maybe those throws would be less than perfect anyway and Duran is just taking advantage of them. Whichever.... it's working.

As bitter as this pill is to swallow I'm now thinking that the FO is on the right track for a change. They realize that signing Montgomery and/or Snell wouldn't put them over the top so they're going to wait a year and build their offense and defense while seeing which of their pitchers are going to develop. In addition this may be the third successive season when the Sox will garner early draft picks (although I hope they're not as high as they've been in the past two years!). Once this season 'irons itself out" the FO will be able to make intelligent decisions as to which few positions they need to improve to be legitimate contenders and make those moves. I believe that having Craig Breslow on board means that for the first time since the pre-DD days they'll have a FO with a long term plan but Breslow can't do it all in a year. Like Moon, I'm looking forward to this year. I like winning and WSC's as well as the next guy but two of my favorite seasons were watching The Three B's develop roaming the outfield qnd I see some of that same kind of talent out there in '24. Call me an unbridled optimist if you like. I don't mind. I just know what I like and I see improvement albeit not as quickly as I hoped. OTOH, I could be wrong!

You may or may not be right about that, but if he'd made those moves the fanbase would have gone INSANE!

IMHO Bloom was afraid to fail, afraid to pull the trigger.

I wish I shared your confidence. My fear is that they'll continue to sit on their hands and then say, "We were in on him but it didn't work out". OTOH my HOPE is that Theo will tell Breslow to get his fingers out of his ass and do SOMETHING even if it turns out not to be right.

Want more posters? Here's a hint: I long for the old Boston.com days. We had a core group of 20-25 posters who felt free to express themselves knowing that they weren't the most up-to-date fans but were more of a group of guys sitting around a table in a bar sharing opinions. They weren't concerned about being mocked or having another poster dig through the archives of baseball to find obscure facts to disprove their post. We were a congenial bunch. Then toward the end of BDC and at the beginning of TalkSox a small group of 2-3 began to want to believe (and prove!) that they were the person I refer to as TSPOTB (The Smartest Poster On The Board) and things went rapidly downhill from there. You know who you are. (and for the record, Moon is not one of those I refer to. His posts are sometimes long but they're factual and he's respectful of other's opinions even when he doesn't agree with them). I still drop by occasionally and things haven't changed much since I realized that I'm (still) not up to the standards that the TSPOTB's expect.... so it's easier to stay away, and given the turnover I've seen here over the years it looks like I'm not alone. JMO!

Whichever. If there's any one thing JH and/or the FO should be vilified for it's letting Mookie Betts get away. I get the idea of tying up too much money in one player and the effect it has on future signings, but this is the Boston Red Sox, a team where the fans will (begrudgingly) pay some of the highest ticket prices in baseball. But in return they expect to see star players and a team that's a contender every year. Not extending him - or however we want to say it - was the first indication that JH is no longer striving for excellence in the BRS. That attitude is how we got to where we are today. The big question now in my mind is whether all those empty seats in September sent a message to JH that the fans may not be willing to settle for second rate in exchange for high ticket prices.

To quote Chad Finn, "There is no excuse for trading a generational player. Especially when you're the Boston Red Sox."

In the five years prior to 2007 the Red Sox signed the best starting pitcher available each year. Some of them didn't work out, but some did. In no particular order, Pedro, Schilling, Beckett, Dice-K, and the ill-fated Matt Clement. Jus' sayin'

?? If they're playing each other and one of them goes 3-7 then the others goes 7-3. IMO the best we can hope for is that they split with one another and we gain ground on both of them.

This raises the question of 'what happens when two clutch players (a hitter and a pitcher) face one another?' It's easy to use "repeatable skill" as an reason for someone's not being clutch - but please define "repeatable skill" for me. The ability to strike a thrown baseball with a bat isn't a "repeatable skill" when batters are striking out every day. I have no doubt that "clutch" exists. It's the ability to summon up a shot of adrenalin, to focus just a bit more than usual in a crucial situation. Does the fact that someone doesn't always succeed in a crucial situation mean that he's not clutch? No, it just means that baseball by its nature is somewhat random. As I said before, anyone who denies the existence of "clutch... isn't. And anyone who is clutch knows it exists.