5GoldGlovesOF,75

What a dick.

Mr. Hand ate Spicoli's pizza in Social Studies class.

Not judging by Bloom's time in Tampa. The Rays' big league roster that's been so successful the past few years wasn't built developing their own draft picks, but by constantly trading for and hoarding young, inexpensive, controllable, and ultimately expendable players. A key part of that style is to continually deal those guys while they still have value, to acquire more assets and keep pedaling the cycle. The latter pattern is atypical of most GMs, and unlike any Red Sox GM in modern history.

I think from math class that means he'll have a 7 one year, a 6 in another, and a 5 in the third; but not necessarily in condescending order.

Anyone else not? I'm not saying old dogs like Henry and Warner can't be convinced to look at new tricks... but Bloom compared to all past Sox GM/Officers is such a contrast. If they really believe in Bloom's style, then Warner, at least, and Sam Kennedy, need muzzles about returning to instant contenders again after who they traded and who they added the past year.

Believe it or not I'm hopeful of the same thing, too. I'm also hopeful Henry isn't getting ready to sell the team.

I'd argue DJ at second and leadoff would be a better fit in turning around the Sox than Springer. And Realmuto behind the plate and in the heart of the order would be an upgrade over Vaz, who many here want to be swapped for a MLB pitcher who could actually contribute to the starting rotation. Personally, I'd rather not invest so much in an over-30 second baseman when other holes are more pressing. But just throwing out names and numbers: would you rather -- as a fan -- have Vazquez and 20 million dollars for future investments or Realmuto and Taillion for the 2021 Red Sox?

If the Sox continue with #2), it will eventually lead to #1) -- but most likely next offseason. That is, unless, the Resets make a major trade next summer for one of the Big Five shortstops they don't really need... but will still improve the club.

I'm not dropping any specific names -- Bloom himself said the Sox wouldn't rule out anyone who is available. But I just keep reading a lot of experts online dismissing the Red Sox from making any major moves because they're not good enough yet. It's one thing if another club offers a better package of prospects in a trade for a game-changer. The Padres landed Snell; good for them. He's still not Sale circa 2016. It's another thing if a team has the money, but doesn't reinvest it to make it's roster better when they claim they're intending to. I've been saying since the Betts trade that the Red Sox would eventually splurge on another big name splash who will never be as good as Mookie. After the 2020 last place debacle -- that was mercifully abbreviated -- don't be surprised if it's soon. Unless... Bloom gets another pass because of Covid restrictions and adjustments that alter another season's sked...

I'm not a big Bauer fan, but I'll never see the logic in refusing to sign a great player because the team stinks. I also don't agree with those who think it's worthless to sign a great player longterm -- like for five years -- because he may not be around when the window of contention finally reopens. Talent opens windows. The 1997 Red Sox had a losing record and finished in fourth place, 20 games out of first place. And then -- unbelievably -- they traded for the best pitcher in baseball: Pedro. What were they thinking? Possibly that he'd be a huge factor in making them a contender again. The next season they won 92 games, made the playoffs, and never looked back.

They only have about $290 million left of the money they offered Mookie. The Padres just signed Kim, even though they didn't need him: 4 years, $25 million. But the Rebuilding Resets can't use a 25-year infielder who can hit, run and play D for their future dreams at sustained contention?

When it comes to spending, I'm not talking about total payroll (even though that's the factor in reset taxes). Obviously there are leftover commitments from the Dombrowski era... ... but I'm only interested in how much has been invested in the past two years by Bloom to extend (no arbs, just new contracts) or acquire players. How do the Red Sox compare to actual spending this winter and last winter vs. past offseasons in the Henry era? It would also be interesting to see where the Sox rank among other clubs in these past two offseasons. Remember, they keep insisting they are going for it -- they said it last Spring and said again this past Fall...

The national media had fun blasting Boston for trading Betts, but I don't recall any poster here calling John Henry "cheap". However, any diehard Sox fan would be myopic if he or she hasn't noticed a drastic change in the last two offseasons, compared to the rest of this century. You can't keep saying "we're still going to be one of the biggest spenders" without any evidence. There is evidence, though, that MLB drafts are less reliable than signing or trading for bonafide big leaguers. The Red Sox tanked to get that vaunted #4 overall pick next summer; here is over half a century's data of players chosen in that slot: 2 Hall of Famers -- Winfield and Larkin; 3 ace pitchers -- Kevin Brown, Kerry Wood, Alex Fernandez; 1 All-Star closer -- Gregg Olson; 4 All-Star batters -- Ryan Zimmerman, Dimitri Young, Jeffrey Hammonds, Thurman Munson. The highest the Sox ever picked was #3 in 1967, when they chose righty Mike Garman. The #4 guy was the one that got away -- Jon Matlack -- who became a lefty stud for the Mets for five years. That's 11 stars in 55 years from the #4 pick. Most of the others didn't make the majors or stay very long. But at least a 1 in 5 shot at a star gives us a 20% chance at having another top player someday (if we can sign him). Here's the link (obviously, some picks from the last decade still have long careers ahead): https://www.baseballamerica.com/draft-history/mlb-draft-database/#/?pick=4

The Red Sox are just not good enough to get any good players yet. When they're better in a few years they'll be able to get better players. No sense in adding star players now, when they're not going anywhere. Fans would rather watch a last place team slowly improve to fourth place this year, then third place, and finally contend in three or four seasons. And only then should Boston spend resources on really good baseball players... unless one becomes great, then we'll all be rooting to dump the guy for prospects so we can enjoy another rebuild.

I keep seeing this line, and I will keep insisting they won't be until they add better players. Nobody is advocating the Sox "dealing off" their few good prospects... unless there is a major blockbuster that will improve the club longterm. But that certainly and definitely should be considered if it comes up, because the acquisition of star talent at any position improves a team. Ultimately, the newfound reset resources -- money -- can and should be invested in making the club better. If not, it makes fans suspicious about the commitment of current ownership going forward.

... so, which is more alarming this winter for Sox fans: free agents choosing states like Texas and California over Massachusetts, or Boston not showing enough re$pect to lure them here. Surely, such professionals wouldn't consider a competitive factor like playing for contenders over a doormat (the Rangers sucked, too).

Apparently so are the Red Sox owners by hiring Bloom -- but I'm guessing your post is a set-up for someone to reply in this way. I'm not judging Tampa by how far they go in the postseason, just from a possible viewpoint of their fans... the opposite of a line from the recently renamed Godfather III: "Just when I thought I was in (as in, buying my favorite player's jersey), they throw me back out!" Tampa is innovative out of default, but it's not a brand the enamors me, like other sports teams that revolutionized their game -- and caused new rules to outlaw their methods -- like the NC hoop team that won by running out clocks, passing to "four corners", or the NJ Devils hockey team that won by stopping scoring with their neutral zone trap.

But this time they're serious, aggressive loomers! Your rhetorical -- "how many times have they reset the tax and stayed cheap the following season?" -- is disconcerting for those of us spoiled from winters targeting one or two stars to round out the roster of contenders. Still, there are so many decent players available now, I have to wonder if the signing of one or two choice free agents will suddenly cause a massive domino effect on the entire market... or if it is in perpetual quarantine awaiting vaccination reassurance.

Reportedly, the Sox are. Kim's age, skills and pricetag make him a potential longterm asset -- and not one to be dismissed by resetters who are more than "a player away from the top". I know Kim is not a pitcher, but last place teams need to add a lot of good players to climb back up.

The American League champions traded their ace in his prime for prospects. What a great time it must be to be a Rays fan!

While we don't know if stardom in the KBO will transfer to the MLB, it would seem Kim is exactly the type of player Bloom would be all-in on -- if the Red Sox are actually committed to upgrading this winter for the long run. If salary projections are true -- 5 for $40M or even $50M -- Kim is a 25-year old gold glove infielder who can hit at half the cost of what Semien is seeking. If another club outbids another one of Boston's "aggressive strong interests", then you can trust there will be and should be discussions here and elsewhere about the definitions of trust...

Kike's got a surprisingly quick bat; at least, I was surprised when he hit a freaking blast off Kimbrel in the World Series.

Hurdle, ha. That metaphor collapses to the height of an ant-hill (and not fire ants). Tunnel?

Well, starting to sense a trend. That's twice in the past week Boston's efforts to sign a pitcher has been described as "aggressive" -- after the guy signs with someone else. All that flexibility with all that Mookie money and they still get outbid by Texas (watch, someone will now bring up ARod, circa two decades ago). Maybe Bloom and Co. have a list of names on a large whiteboard with dollar limits on each... or they're not as desperate as those of us who choose to watch this club, since perhaps they're waiting on bigger fish to bite?

... according to Gammons (sorry, no link).