5GoldGlovesOF,75

At the turn of the century I was at a funeral and actually heard a man say in the eulogy that he was happy for his late mom, a Yankee fan, because she would never have to live long enough to see the Red Sox win the World Series. Before the ’19 playoffs, an oldtimer in a NY cap stopped at my family's booth in a diner -- he saw my son's Sox shirt -- and started giving my 8-year-old the business. Glad that man's world was back on its axis… but gotta wonder if he viewed the entire season as a failure after Altuve’s HR.

Starting pitching. As much as Bloom and Tampa have redefined pitching staffs (initially for small market clubs), at least Washington just reminded everyone of the value of starters. On a tangent to Moon's idea -- with a nod to Notin -- the Red Sox standard-bearer is the '04 rotation, with five guys staying healthy to make at least 29 starts each; it was 15 years ago, but I bet everyone on talksox can name them all without going on baseball-reference... Boston only had two pitchers start at least 30 games last year, which explains part of the problem -- but staff durability was never a Sox trademark even when winning three divisions in a row. The best was '17, when three made at least 30 starts; '16 and the great '18 team only had two apiece. BTW, Porcello has made at least 27 starts in every year of his career, over 11 straight seasons. Obviously, it's unreasonable to expect any modern rotation to get lucky enough to start 97% of its team's games like the '04 champs. But the '19 Nats had four guys make at least 27 starts. An overworked Sox bullpen broke down last year (even though there are still guys I never want to see in the 9th again, even on full rest). But it all comes back to starters. We all know that acquiring veterans is costly and too risky. It's time to develop some, and I really think this will be Bloom's forte. Expect to see some openers early, but hopefully only as placeholders.....

I think I get it now: guys who were considered aces in the MLB, most before even playing for Boston. Lackey and Price never threw like aces in Boston... except for one postseason each, when it counted most. Lonborg was only an ace for one season, then got hurt... but a Cy Young winner throwing one-hitters in the World Series is legit. The outlier -- as far as equating recognition with reputation -- has to be Porcello, who even when he won the Cy was never considered an ace. Though regarding depth, he was arguably the Sox third best starter/rover in the '18 postseason, just ahead of Sale.

I agree with your premise, but might debate the second aces or missing number twos... though I'm sure you considered guys like Rick Wise, DiceK, and Buchholz in '75, '07 and '13. They were all solid and at least 2-worthy in the regular season -- Wise won one more than Luis and had virtually identical numbers; DiceK was the legendary ace of Japan and actually the Sox top winner in '07/08; Clay began 9-0 and was the Sox All-Star pitcher before getting hurt. I'd include Wakefield, too, but they kept moving him to the pen and even left him off the '07 WS roster. The guys on your list were no doubt aces (including Lackey as an Angel) and most turned it up a notch in the postseason. On that tangent, I have to agree with posters about Hurst, but then I'd also add Eovaldi -- who I'd argue was Boston's most valuable postseason pitcher in '18. Having two horses is hard to beat, and looking at those years I also think starting depth was the difference in getting to the World Series (as opposed to other division winners or wild cards who fell short). Number three guys like Spaceman, Oil Can, DLowe, and Porcello were probably better than most number twos on all those Sox also-rans. That's all. I just like researching to kickstart the offseason... before they actually make some moves.

In the '04 offseason, the Boston brass toured New England with the World Series trophy. One scheduled stop was at a town green, where I was in a group of about a hundred people. No one gloated or carried on -- it was more to marvel at something we'd never seen up close before. At the back of the crowd a grown man showed up wearing a full, pinstriped Yankees uniform, cap to stirrups, #2. I don't think he was joking because he never smiled; it wasn't Halloween, but he was creepy. I wondered what possessed him to feel we needed such a reminder.

Having the best pitcher in the game making starts every five days sure made it seem like we had a chance to win titles for six or seven years. It felt that way through Clemens' first seven years in Boston, too. And Sale's first two...

Good point. Those were the days, when teams weren't afraid to call up their best prospects lest they start the clock on years of control. The also-ran decades were more interesting and easier to watch when the Sox were out of it because young guys with star potential always offered hope. But all the 4A players called up in 2019 just rendered the product hopeless. The only hope I had was to never see Chris Owings in a Sox uni again.

Pedro

Yes... and even to diehards (or turnoff-remote-hards) like us, the 2020 Red Sox had better change the narrative fast. They can't possibly expect people to watch re-runs of the same pitchers who led the league in walks allowed, and hitters who led the league with eight guys with over 100 strikeouts.

Fans may not have known anything about Cabrera off the field, but what we saw in '04 was a jolt of enthusiasm that seemed to energize the Red Sox. His fielding, hitting and running were all done with a verve that was opposite of Nomar's nope and mope act. OCab also popularized the dugout handshake celebrations, the kind of theatrics that bring a team together. Ironic that neither shortstop seemed to find a permanent home after Boston, though Cabrera was clearly the better player in his 30s, with 10 WAR to Nomar's 3 WAR.

Notin, I was trying to agree with you that there were a lot of guys who have transitioned successfully to first... but I just don't want anything to do with JD anywhere on the field. What's the sense of 10 games anyway -- interleague? If he isn't going to platoon there with a couple other guys on a semi-regular basis he wouldn't be doing us any favors with a few cameos. I mean, even in the World Series in LA, all the MLB talk was about moving Mookie to second, never JD to first. Then Martinez misjudged a fly ball by about 30 feet, which luckily everyone forgot about since JD himself homered and then Sale made Machado go all serpentine like the snake that he is.

I remember it was awkward being a fan of Nomar: easy to love the hitter, hard to like Nomar the Red Sox player. He just seemed so sour in all his interviews in the end, like he couldn't stand answering any questions and wanted to be anywhere but Boston. He wasn't the first or last reticent athlete -- and I guess any of us would be bitter if we discovered we were traded and replaced by ARod, and then told, "oops, that fell through, you're still our guy... no, really." But in New England, it's always important that ballplayers at least pretend they care about playing for the Red Sox, for as much as we care about rooting for them.

You forgot 1974! The record shows a mediocre 84-win third-place finish... but it's underrated in Sox suckitude -- mainly because of how memorable the following year went. Boston was in first place all summer, even with Fisk lost to injury, and the Sox were seven games up in late August. Then they went to Baltimore to start September and got swept and shutout in three straight, including both games of a doubleheader, 1-0 and 1-0. The Bosox limped to a 14-24 finish, despite debuts by Lynn .419 and Rice the last few weeks, and even got passed by the Yankees. Of course, the O's blew by both, going 26-6 down the stretch. The Birds were always pulling stunts like that -- mainly because they always had the best starting pitchers...

Glad to hear you say that, Kimmi. As a baseball fan, all I want is for my favorite team to be a contender -- and make the moves in the winter and spring, and win the games during the summer -- that put them in a position to qualify for the postseason.

'03 was rock-bottom as the culmination of all previous collapses leading up to that moment on that stage vs. that opponent, with what was at stake, in the postseason and for the franchise. The day after Game Seven in the '03 ALCS, I had Yankee fans laughing at me at work because I was a Sox fan. Some were just front-runners, people I never heard discuss sports before. To them it was somehow fun to give crap to someone whose team never won it all during our lifetimes. Only one Yankee fan -- an actual ballplayer and teammate of mine -- sincerely said he felt sorry for me. '04 was the absolute right-side up reciprocal... and this century we've been living in an alternate universe.

How could I forget Youk? There's one that worked -- slid over to first, won Gold Glove, won World Series.

I never said "all outfielders have to do is hit the cutoff" -- I said, "usually". I've played outfield for 50 years, and 99% of our throws are to a cut-off man: get rid of the ball quickly and accurately, and after that it's literally out of our hands. I would never say playing outfield is easier, because fast guys that can outrun flies or liners are a premium at any level. But I've played some first base, too, and first basemen have more responsibilities because they're just more involved. I don't want anyone over there that I can't trust defensively. As for my admittedly general statement about the effects of a good first baseman -- this isn't a cop-out, but I don't know if there's a way (at least for me) to quantify it. I can't put numbers on how confidence translates to better play by third basemen, shortstops and second basemen when they know they don't have to be perfect with every throw, and that their guy is going to save them some Es every week. But I bet the '04 Sox upped their killer instinct every time Doug M replaced Millar in late innings. Hernandez certainly changed the way opposing teams strategized on offense because he nullified the sacrifice bunt (granted, it was NL in the 80s). But good first basemen are part of good defensive teams, and defense win pennants. Guys who transition well over to first have good hands (but maybe waning range), and teams have won pennants or rings with converted infielders, outfielders or catchers: Konerko, Spiezio, Daulton, Benzinger, Rose, Perez, Powell... Yaz. And while it's true that some players go to die there, so does his team if he's someone clunky. Corny, but true.

Sorry, lazy of me trying to think of other public figures. How about: every Hollywood sex scandal vs. unreported Hollywood depravities?

a player definitely tired of Boston to a player maybe tired of Boston 44.2 WAR through age 35 to 42 WAR through age 26 couldn't get more money to knows he'll get more money frown is to smile

This may be blasphemy on this board, but I am curious: do most posters on talksox consider a season successful only if your team wins the World Series? Anyone who grew up last century knows that Red Sox years in the 70s, 80s and 90s didn't just end, but often imploded amid utter ridicule and internal scarring. This century overall has been great, even with some last place finishes and the worst ending ever in '03 (followed by redemption in ’04). Old Yankee fans grew up expecting to win titles, and I know many who still won't accept anything less than a ring as a good season. Ironically, modern Yankee fans under the age of 10 don't view championships as a birthright, since they've yet to experience one. Meanwhile, the script has flipped for young Sox fans. Obviously, only one team ever wins the final game of any sports season. But champions celebrate on our screens all year, every year. Technically, all other teams are losers… but that doesn't make them all failures. The attitude of “win it all or it’s all for naught” can set folks up for a lifetime of disappointment and bitterness. As a spectator, I want the season to be worth watching and following -- with hope -- from the beginning to almost the ending. I want to watch the best Red Sox team possible to have a chance to win in every season. How about you?

Ballplayers will do or use anything to get an edge, so none of this is worth getting worked up about. I have no doubt that the majority of MLB players have done some form of PEDs since cocaine was an ingredient in Coca-Cola. Nicotine, caffeine, amphetamines, sour mash -- you name it. As for The Era -- one need look no further than the Texas Rangers of the early-90s. I won't drop any names -- except Jose Canseco, the King of Roids, who claims/admits he introduced his edge to so many teammates. Among them were several who got caught from Oakland and Texas; feel free to speculate away on others, some who even made the Hall of Fame, including guys whose miracle bodies allowed them to perform at high levels longer than the average human's can bear (mixed Yogism). Canseco then played a few years in Boston, where there's no reason to think his legacy didn't continue (except for Mike Greenwell, who said he refused... and seems believable, as a lifetime .303 hitter who was done by age 32). As for stealing signs, it's been divulged that the most famous home run in history -- Bobby Thomson's Shot-Heard-Round-The-World -- was furtively assisted by the technology of the day: binoculars, wielded by a peeping employee beyond centerfield, to spy and relay signs. That was in 1951... so again, any modern scandal is no reason to get bent out of shape. The Astros just got caught -- like Nixon, Clinton and Trump. Does anyone really believe all the other presidents are innocent?

I know -- I keep fluctuating, wondering whether they hired Bloom as the best man to arrange a way to keep Betts or because Bloom is the best man to make the most out of trading Betts.

Tanner was the racist shortstop for the Bad News Bears. But we all loved him when he said this: "Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!"

I'd rather have Betts in his prime in his salary-drive season than this century's versions of Tanana and Rudi. To me as a Red Sox fan, one more year of Mookie is better than barely warm bodies already halfway to rigor mortis. As for Dombroski, a lot of folks forget that after his Marlins won in '97, the owner ordered him to gut the team. DD went full fire-sale for one calendar year and completely turned over the Fish... He didn't get much back in return, as far as prospects who'd become future stars (but it's not like he was trading future Hall of Famers, either). Point is, DD has done a reset in his past -- which makes comments about how he wasn't the right man going forward for Boston curious. Maybe Dave told Henry and Co. he couldn't stomach another tear-down in his old age. Or more likely, they felt Bloom, with all his peer connections and modern research, is better-poised for acquiring cheaper talent with upside -- instead of the kind of established talent that the senior Dombro targets and relies upon.

First basemen have a lot more responsibilities than corner outfielders -- by default, because of the much greater percentage of fielding chances. Of course, fast outfielders can be competent first basemen, while slow first basemen don't make decent outfielders. But good first basemen have to do more than just scoop; they have to make good throws all the time: starting the 3-6-3 DP, after pouncing on bunts, and maybe most importantly -- getting into position to take and make relays. Outfielders usually just have to hit the cutoff... while the first sacker is the cutoff, on two-thirds of the diamond with runners in scoring position. Good teams can get by with mediocrity at first, but great first basemen can make good teams great. For example, Keith Hernandez was a defensive weapon, and it's no coincidence he won rings manning first for two different franchises (ok, maybe he was more offensive to Elaine).