5GoldGlovesOF,75

57: ERod's uniform number. 5 at $77 mil... $15.4 AAV?

The blip was Rudolph's nose in the fog, but then Christmas morning came and they unwrapped new reindeer games.

If the Sox were to deal with the on-the-verge-of-teardown Reds, one outfielder they should consider is Jesse Winker. While not an upgrade defensively, Winker has a career OPS of .888 -- higher than anyone in Boston's lineup. His lefty bat could replace Schwarber's (if he isn't resigned). Winker's #1 most Similar Batter on bb-ref is Vlad Guerrero Jr...

With the expanded playoffs in 2020, the Dodgers had to win a record 13 postseason games to earn their rings.

I don't live in California, but can only assume fans there were glad when the Dodgers signed the NL Cy Young last winter, and then made the blockbuster of all deadline deals in July. Most pundits predicted LA to repeat as world champs even before these moves, but imagine the outlook when they were still celebrating a year ago if someone said, "And next year, you're going to add Trevor Bauer, Max Scherzer and Trea Turner!" And the Dodgers didn't even make it back to the World Series.

Doesn't every franchise have an entire department dedicated to doing this? As for a totally biased answer based on my own observations, maybe Bloom spends more time doing due diligence (or at least using the phrase) than Dombrowski did in Boston... at least, in consummating deals; Dombro seemed to land some targets before a lot of other GMs, while Bloom has shown more patience, while others are acting hasty... in retrospect. I don't think the Steve Pearce contract was solely a reward for his '18 postseason. In the regular season, he was really good at his job, too: as a platoon specialist, Pearce hit .337 with a 1.052 OPS vs. lefthanded starting pitchers. He also cranked three homers in one game vs. the Yankees at the beginning of August.

It's true, the pressure is off -- so much so that rival fans and media have regressed from elitist to hapless, still clinging to tired Big Lies like whose HR was the difference in '78, and that an error lost the '86 World Series, and who the attacker was in the '03 takedown...etc, etc.

After the past year of fortifying the farm, making the playoffs and upsetting the Yanks and Rays, few can say Bloom is on the wrong track. However, what -- to you -- will confirm Bloom has achieved his goal of building "sustained contenders"? As we saw again this year, qualifying for the Wild Card game definitely makes contending for a title possible, if not always probable. But what defines sustainment? A). Will a minimum of five straight Wild Card years do it? . How about just five straight 90ish-win seasons, maybe with a missed postseason or two, staving off elimination until the last week? C). Or is even the Houston model acceptable: five ALCS in a row with one ring mixed in? D). Sorry, but last-last-World Series champs-and last isn't an option. I'm not spoiled, since I've experienced B. most of my life rooting for the Red Sox. Dick O'Connell turned things around from '67-77, with a few pennants and second places; his Sox weren't always contenders, but had winning records for a decade. Lou Gorman traded Bagwell but built a sustained contender for a spell, with three division champs in five years, from '86-90 (Haywood Sullivan's back office lost homegrown stars in the early disastrous days of free agency, but at least drafted Clemens). Dan Duquette teams made the playoffs three times in five years and helped build the eventual curse-breakers, signing Ramirez and Damon, trading for Martinez, etc. The most recent GMs are already well-documented...

Ryu's an old pro; he got the intrinsic reward of contributing to a team victory! I heard the union, led by Boras, is trying to ban attitudes like that in the new CBA.

Why does anyone care about wins anymore? They shouldn't even keep score, and just give ribbons to all players. And make parents tie their shoes. Unless they're velcro. Families like that stick together. And stick up for each other. Unless they're stuck up.

Like Ceddanne Rafaela, I'm also 5'8 and can reach the top shelf (but my drug of choice comes in pint cans). Even though I have played baseball or softball for over 50 years now, I've learned from this forum that my body type is bound to break down and prevent me from playing into my 70s. Ironically, there are several over-70 guys playing in my wood bat hardball league, many shorter than me (it's an age thing, curvature of the bell curve; Mookie will be 5'2 by the time he's makes our team). None of us are prospects, but some are prospectors... most have good prospects.

Is it fair to say almost all GMs inherit rosters that include both promising prospects and payroll burdens from past regimes? Bloom's goal of building sustained contenders has to be the ideal for GMs and CBOs, but how many years does that entail -- and do they all have to be consecutive? Dombrowski-led teams did finish in first place three years in a row, which had never been done before in Boston, so that could be considered sustained success right there. The clubs that won world titles a hundred years earlier when Babe Ruth was pitching certainly sustained success. So did the Epstein-led Sox that won two rings and made it to four ALCS Game Sevens in seven seasons. Yes, Dombro inherited an organization rich with young talent, and had access to a big budget. But he also closed deals that assured success, by assembling championship pitching -- adding Sale, Price, Eovaldi and Kimbrel, among others. It's arguable that those moves were his most important in sustaining contention... and that a front office that acquires similar stability to the staff will key the next Bosox title run.

Ceddanne Rafaela, Boston's Minor League Player of the Year, age 21... has speed and some pop: in 102 games at Salem, had 23 SBs, 3 CS, 20 doubles, 9 triples, 10 homers... and plays everywhere: started 51 games in CF, 9 LF, 1 RF, 17 3B, 15 SS, 6 2B. Ian Browne reports "a laser for an arm", with nine assists from OF. Rafaela is 5'8", but if he grows an inch per year by the time he makes the majors, even tall posters may like his future.

I'm not even accountable to myself.

2021 Salary numbers from bb-ref: Richards $8.5, Perez $4.5, though "values may not include every bonus the player received during a season." I had seen/heard Richards' was closer to 10, with Perez at 6.

Respectfully, I was replying to your question: "Would last year's team have been better if they had Price instead of Richards and Perez?" Performances notwithstanding, I said no because of the literal cost alone. Again, if the Sox still had Price, they would've been on the hook to pay his entire '21 salary, which I believe was twice as much as they paid to Richards and Perez last year.

If they still had Price instead of Perez and Richards, it would've cost twice as much; money that was subsequently used elsewhere.

This is a good point, and also brings up this question about not just his trade value, but his opportunities as a free agent a year from now: after all the big spenders have their new shortstops in place for 2022, how many other teams -- eager to pay the seven figures it will presumably take to sign X -- will see Bogaerts as a longterm answer at shortstop? There may not be a lot of markets left for Bogie as a shortstop; as a hitter, yes, but career .290 batters and .812 OPS men aren't quite as valuable and Silver Sluggerish at other positions.

All were either left off postseason rosters, or at least in such discussions (not considering possible positive or negative contributions off the field)... but financially, it looks like a wash, as Richards and Perez made almost what the Dodgers paid Price. Of course, if Sox had to pay twice that, again, the answer is nope. That second $16 mil could've meant no Kike, no Renfroe, no Hiros...

It wasn't a straight trade, because LA also had to agree to take Price and pay half of what he was owed. Does anyone think the return for Mookie wouldn't have been better -- wherever he landed -- if Price wasn't attached to the deal? This is in part to answer your earlier query of whether any other team would've traded for Betts; my answer is not if Price was part of the agreement (at least one other was reportedly in negotiations -- the Padres -- though we don't know if Price was the deal-breaker).

But people can still say, "Thanks, Dave" (maybe even for GMing Boston's last world champs).

Thanks for the stats. I was just wondering if anyone thought Toro and company made the difference or if there were regrets about falling just short of the postseason without Graveman, Chargois, etc. I had heard a few Mariners were outraged at the deals at the deadline. The before and after numbers for guys who came and went are interesting, as long as we acknowledge change of scenery contexts: new or modified roles living in new cities and time zones, with new teammates, coaches and home ballparks, playing against different opponents and divisions, etc., etc.

The M's fell just two Ws short at least a playoff for the Wild Card game; just curious if anyone in Seattle -- fans, media, players -- blamed the deadline switch of relievers Graveman and Castillo. Graveman couldn't possibly have stayed near-perfect, which he didn't, and Castillo wasn't bad after blowing a few his first week. Haniger went crazy down the stretch when he was one of the most valuable bats in the AL... especially without the protection of a line-up like those in Houston, Boston, Toronto...so I thought. But in bb-ref's "Clutch" (WPA) category, Seager was #1, Crawford tied for #2, and Moore #6... with Haniger #12. Boston leaders were Arroyo and Verdugo, tied for #7.

Great line-up; is this from 2021 or career? If just '21, Wander Franco beats them all in his 70 games -- if you use his 3.5 bWAR. But his fWAR is only 2.5... Not sure what factors account for the discrepancies... because Bogaerts' fWAR of 5.2 > bWAR of 4.9. Franco, to me, is the best player in the AL right now -- or will be in 2022. Note: the preceding is based on only a basic SSS vs. the Red Sox, which is basically, they couldn't get him out.

Freeman isn't a step in the right direction, either. He doesn't improve the defense, which is the Sox' biggest weakness besides pitching -- though metrics have shown the latter was worse because of the defense. Wouldn't it be better to use the money it would take to sign Freeman (who at least one poster covets) and spread it around to upgrade actual areas that are priorities, like on the mound?