5GoldGlovesOF,75

More cold stove trivia -- MLB just rated the Top 25 baseball movies of all time. Top 10 are predictable, with most worth another look: Bull Durham, League of Their Own, Field of Dreams, Eight Men Out, The Natural, Major League... Best Baseball Movies of All Time WWW.MLB.COM Baseball is older than the movies themselves, and the first baseball movies featured well-recognized baseball players as the stars themselves; in many ways, they were our first movie stars. "Right Off the Bat," widely considered the first baseball flick ever made, came out in 1915, the same year as the Personally, I'd rate The Sandlot, Bad News Bears, and The Bingo Long Traveling All-Stars and Motor Kings up there with the Kostner classics. But by the time they reach the 20s they're pushing it, with Rookie of the Year and Angels in the Outfield. As usual on almost all of these lists, one that's nowhere to be found is Long Gone, made in 1987 for HBO. Is it because so many younger viewers have never even seen it? If you haven't, check it out on youtube and count how many ways it's "paralleled" by Bull Durham in 1988. One of my favorite Long Gone lines is after the KKK stop the team bus and demand they give up star player Joe Louis Brown, code-named Jose Luis Brown and supposedly from Venezeula. A teammate instead suggests a caucasian player: "Let'em hang Whizner -- he's only batting .179..." What's your favorite baseball movie? Let's go, Stogies!

That answer basically sums up the past two months, and we really can't debate either point.... except for the millionth time: "if the starting pitchers who were all stars two years ago all heal and pitch again like All-Stars..." In the meantime, all we have is nostalgia -- and I don't mean Owings or Gorkys.

I can't rate the Sox yet, at least before Spring Training. While many other teams have made many offseason moves, it's hard to make predictions about Boston's 2020 when we know this current roster has to change. If they were going to stand pat, they wouldn't have changed Chief Baseball Officers... would they? It may be easier to set the Yankees over-under at 103 (their amount of wins from 2019); I'll take the under on that. And for that matter, if we set Tampa's over-under at their last year's total of 96, I'll take the under on them, too. I think Toronto will begin to rise, especially if Ryu is this year's Charlie Morton. Overall, more parity is coming to the AL -- with less tankers in '20. If you want to say that's more competitiveness, so be it. Houston 107; under. Minnesota 101; under. Cleveland 93; under. The lone playoff team that looks like it is still improving is Oakland at 97; over.. but only by a couple wins, depending on how much better LA and Texas get.

Ha, the trade site would rip Bloom a new one for even suggesting prospects back for Price... however, we should be happy with his true ulterior motives behind such opening conversations with any interested clubs: 1. he doesn't really expect prospects for Price (after all, Bloom, himself, would laugh at such offers when he was serving Tampa) -- instead he's heading teams off at the pass, before they even ask us for additional sweeteners; 2. Bloom's sending talksox and other Soxual media a coded message: "relax, I'm not tearing anything down or blowing anything up."

I don't think any of them are, really (except Moncada) -- or not replaceable. Shaw got cut this year and Margot lost his starting position. Kopech could be good, but there have been plenty of fireballers who flame out before they make it big or are never the same after major surgery. Point is, no fans of any team wouldn't have traded all those guys if it meant their team would win a title. Counterpoint is, not many of us here would've traded so many in Dombro's 4-for-1s... unless, the extra prospects sealed the deals. We won't ever know if some other clubs had better offers on the table before Dombro threw in the Allens etc.

I think we're talking in circles; we all are basically, until something -- anything of note happens to rouse this snooze-fest offseason. Replacing decent players with other decent players so we can free up funds to invest in other decent players, all in the hopes of continuing to watch a decent team with a decent chance to win... While not indecent, it often feels like a descent.

I'm not denying that losing those prospects affected the now future... just not by as much as some people feared. I look at that list and see nothing predictable, except that Moncada's multi-talents are beginning to develop at the big league level. I see mainly some pitching depth, but no stars... yet. Kopech throws 100+, so does Eovaldi; Buttrey is a useful bullpen arm, so is Josh Taylor. In the infield, Dubon is 25, so is Jose Peraza, etc. The one guy I didn't want to give up was Espinoza, but that deal actually worked out better than most.

I didn't scream, but my words were foreboding when they came back from commercials to start the bottom of the 8th. "He's not even supposed to be out there," I scolded the TV. Pedro had pitched gallantly, but was mentally done after whiffing Soriano to end the 7th. We knew this because he tapped his heart and pointed to the heavens as he walked off the mound -- just like he always did when his day was effectively done. Yes, Pedro threw the pitches that doomed '03 in the next inning, but he'll never be blamed for the manager changing the game plan. Even the average fan who never played hardball past Little League can sense how utterly arduous it is for an athlete to shut it down and then abruptly have to somehow turn it back on again, especially in an exhaustive winner-take-all showdown behind enemy lines...

The narrative of Dombro selling the farm -- and thus dooming the future -- is overrated. He traded prospects for players who helped win a World Series; that was always the intention -- and it worked. So what, if right now the Sox don't have a lot of highly-rated minor leaguers to swap for other MLBers to help win another title. What is rare is for a club to produce so many good young players that develop into stars and stay together like the 2016-18 core... But they'll replenish the system again soon to at least be able to use it for call-ups and trade bait. I'd still rather have Sale than Moncada today; Sale had a down year, but still dominated at times with little run support. And a starting pitcher who can strike out 17 Rockies in 7 innings is harder to find these days than even a power/speed offensive threat who fans 150 times a year. I have to agree with some posters here about the impulsive owners. Henry and Co. were all in on the big contracts last winter -- and really, ever since they hired Dombro -- then all of a sudden, after one-half of a lackluster season they seized his credit cards. No deadline moves was alarming, especially with an obvious need for a bullpen guy like Hudson or Anderson, etc (and you know Dave was just itching to dangle Dalbec, Chavis or someone of their ilk). Makes you wonder how much freedom the new Chief Baseball Officer has...

This Red Sox offseason of inertia and downsizing has presented a type of stress that fans have seldom experienced here. We're worried about things that haven't happened yet or may never happen. And it all keeps getting blamed on expensive pitchers, which must seem ridiculous to fans, players, and maybe even a few GMs of other clubs. When Boston signed Sale and Eovaldi a year ago -- no matter what you think of age/health/dollars -- the bottom line is that investing in starting pitching is the right move for a contending club. And these guys had just proven they could deliver a world title; Sale had pitched like a Hall of Famer for seven years and Eovaldi looked like he had finally harnessed his potential (and before anyone brings up durability: in the WS he pitched in Game One, Game Two, and after a travel day, worked in seven innings in Game Three). Price had also come through in the clutch. And now, because of MLB rules, the Sox feel they have to trade at least one of their core starters... For what? If it's to save money to sign Mookie Betts, I'm ok with it. But if that's not a guarantee -- and every single quote from everyone involved says it's not -- then what's the point? To save money to use sooner or later to sign other pitchers, be they free agents or draft picks? The front office, Dombrowski, the owners, etc. all knew this winter coming; they couldn't all suddenly be in shock. They couldn't have just been going for it one last time in 2019, either, since they locked up their starters for multiple years. Are we really to believe that one mediocre offyear has changed the entire braintrust's plan about the roster, specifically starting pitching, and the best assets that lead to winning (the same ones that virtually every world champion has featured since 1903)?

Watched youtube highlights of '18 postseason on the new Christmas TV yesterday... Eovaldi struckout Bregman in the last AL game, 102 mph. He has the stuff to put together an All-Star season, and I hope it's for the Red Sox.

78 was the worst at the time, because of the opponent and the way that season folded and unfolded. 86 was the most disgusting, blowing a two-run lead in extra-innings that would've won a ring... there was still another game, but we all knew who'd win that one. But 03 had to be the all-time nadir, because of everything that had gone before, leading up to that moment: 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 86, 88, 90, 95, 99 ad mausoleum.. Why do you think 2011 is never talked about with so much bitterness? So soon after '04 and '07? I know I never felt confident about that '11 team or even liked them; I had wanted to keep Beltran and was against the Crawford signing from the beginning (though I did like Gonzalez).

Speaking of being smart, I'm still wondering why a rich company like the Red Sox, run by intelligent people, would deliberately tell its customer base (through the media) that its goal is to scale back payroll... Sure, such words can be used to possibly help justify making -- and perhaps temper the shock of -- some unpopular moves. But that's not going to generate ticket sales, especially with those announced price increases. Maybe to test fan reaction? There's going to be uproar and residual effects no matter what happens when... As far as making certain players available in the MLB market, I don't agree that any appearance of "desperation" really exists or affects deals any more; the minute two teams begin to discuss players in trade talks, there are immediately so many different outlets with sources reporting it to the world now. The word always gets out, and I'm sure most teams want such leaks to flow, so they can field all potential offers before making what they feel are the best decisions.

Price has never been arrested at a football game.

In which league? I could see him faring better in the NL going forward...

I have to think that ultimately moving Price will be for more than just payroll -- though they won't admit it publicly. His antics have been a distraction and detriment to the franchise image, in a time when no team can afford a further diminished fanbase. Even in Boston, where profits reportedly continue to pour in, the bad PR caused by a player can negate his contributions. The last straw for ownership and management may have been last summer, when Price called his press conference to further dis Eck, at the exact time the Sox appeared to be getting back in the race. I heard an interview with Cora, and he was not happy -- to paraphrase, "Why now?" The Sox soon dropped out of contention and Price never won another game the rest of the season. Price isn't the first Red Sox player in desperate need of a change of scenery... Spaceman, Manny, Nomar... sometimes the scenery needs alterations, too.

Thanks for reading my post in response to the quote.

It seems teams may expect both to happen; with the number of free agent signings and franchises making offers lately, it feels like there's been more activity in the past month than the past two off-seasons combined (except in Beantown...)

Expensive mediocrity... Atlanta chose to let both walk, which means neither could pitch anymore for a division winner in the NL. Teheran just led the league in hit by pitches; Keuchel led the AL in hits allowed two years ago. The latter also works slower than Price, which could be trouble when the MLB adopts a pitch-clock. If you take out his Porcello Cy year, DK is 64-63 career, mostly pitching for winning teams. I'd rather have Price than either, but I think he'll be moved once Ryu signs.

I'd have to say Elk has some decent points about the tenuous future of farms. But as far as qualitative data showing the impact of a solid farm -- if posters here haven't pointed out enough proof already -- how about Alex Speier's recent book: Homegrown: How the Red Sox Built a Champion from the Ground Up Since free agency, deep minor league systems have not been quite as crucial for teams with deep pockets. All four of Boston's titles this century were led by pitchers acquired from other clubs (with Lester and Papelbon the main exceptions). But the best point is that it sure helped to have prospects available when proposing the key trades. In the period between when the draft was instituted in the mid-60s to the advent of free agency in the mid-70s, the teams that always seemed to be in contention had the best systems, including Baltimore and Oakland in the AL, and Cincinnati and Pittsburgh in the NL. They developed a lot of MLB talent and flipped a lot of prospects to fill needs; some pieces they landed included Frank Robinson, Mike Cuellar, Reggie Jackson, Joe Morgan, George Foster, Ken Holtzman and Bert Blyleven. All of these small market clubs won titles back then, but haven't even been to a World Series in 30 years. It shows how much the landscape has changed, by not just being able to afford free agents, but to also afford good front office people, domestic and international scouting, and the funds to sign high draft picks.

This makes me want to drink a beer. Not in the woe-is-me/I-need-a-drink way, but that it's almost nostalgic in it's rationale. I toast your logic. Before there was the internet, there were only saloons. At least then we had a built-in excuse for our statements. That said, I assume a lot of what's posted here is done sober...

That was one pinstripe defection that had most Sox fans merely shrugging. Bradley was waiting to take over, and he could actually throw. It kinda sucked when Boggs and Clemens went to NY specifically to win rings that they -- Rog in particular -- couldn't deliver for Boston. Youk was just trying to hang in there (we weren't saying boo). But the all-time worst had to be Tiant. He didn't have much left, but Looie should've retired as a Red Sox. The most clutch Sox pitcher in my lifetime, and that includes Pedro... Front offices can insist that "it's just a business", but that was bad for business.

Trading Price would be this fan's favorite move for a lot of reasons.

Chavis was just an example of guy who's young enough to make an adjustment, hit 20 bombs by July and maybe get selected to an AS roster... Judge never hit more than 20 in a minor league season and suddenly cranked 52 as a rookie. I don't feel as optimistic as I am realistic about the Sox current roster as being certainly capable -- as is -- to win 90+ games. The star players are all still young and have World Series bling, I'm not worried about second base in the modern MLB game (and apparently, neither is the FO), and Sale and Eovaldi both threw close to 100 mph in the second half last year. The season will swing -- like every other team's -- on pitching depth and emerging arms... and intuition tells me Bloom isn't even close to completing his staff. Meanwhile, posters can keep suggesting depressing trade proposals while we wait out the cold stove season, but I just don't see the Red Sox dealing any fan favorites for pennies on the dollar.

Not all additions that make a difference are big name signings. Take, for example, another recent 84-win team that improved to 91 wins and back into contention: in the winter they signed a former NL batting champ to DH, and he only hit .231; in the summer they traded for a 27-year old starter who had finished third in the Cy Young two years before... and he went 4-7 (and they couldn't wait to get rid of him). "Luckily", that club got record-breaking production from a rookie outfielder, and had another young starter blossom into an ace. Now I'm not saying the Red Sox have an Aaron Judge or Luis Severino ready to step forward, but it wouldn't be the biggest surprise in hardball history if a young guy like Benintendi or Chavis developed into an All-Star at the same time Darwinzon H. progressed into a stud pitcher. Teams continue to modify rosters in ways they think will help. I'm still not ready to say that the clubs that win because of their moves are lucky or smart, or even that the ones that lose are unlucky or dumb. If Bloom and co. keep stockpiling relatively young retreads and a few of them contribute, it's because it was part of the plan.