SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Is Chaim Bloom good at his job?
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 30, 2022 23:49:29 GMT -5
Let's check the ol' fWAR and AAV leaderboards!
Freeman: 4.5 ($25 million)
Story: 1.9 ($23 million)
Correa: 1.6 ($35 million) Schwarber: 1.6 ($20 million) Suzuki: 1.0 ($17 million)
So it seems from what your posting that Correa wouldn’t have been better but the other 3 would have been or comparable, for less money and not giving up a prospect ( Suzuki) plus I would argue in a position of greater need ( outfield). But I understand this comes down to a perspective also. You said Bloom could have given a big contract to any of several players "who would be performing much better" and then named all these guys (plus an undefined "etc."). There is exactly one player on this list who has performed better than Story. Are you changing your argument now to "he should have signed the demonstrably worse Suzuki because he's a bit cheaper and wouldn't have cost a draft pick"?
That's pretty different than suggesting that Bloom made a uniquely bad choice in who he gave a big contract too.
(Unrelatedly, Correa is on pace for another sub-4 WAR season, and even prorating 2020 that'll be 4 of the last 5 years below that benchmark. He turned down $275 million last offseason. Still can't believe how outrageous Boras' approach was with him.)
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,425
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Jul 30, 2022 23:49:45 GMT -5
My concern is that someone who says we will: 1) add depth to the system 2) maintain payroll flexibility 3) compete every year sounds like a politician who doesn’t want to give you any bad news. If that was a real plan, who wouldn’t be doing it? Your favorite Red Sox GM of the past 5 years, for one.
*Definitely* my favorite of the last five years.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jul 31, 2022 6:10:16 GMT -5
Why do you get to say donât mention the Pivetta trade? Itâs a slam dunk massive win. Other good moves I would say have been: Kiké, Schwarzenegger, Renfroe (trading for), Whitlock, Schreiber off the top of my head. I agree with your point on the payroll that every year the argument holds less water. However I still think heâs not at the point where you can totally ignore the contracts he was stuck with. Theyâve had very little room to fill out the payroll the way this FO wants. I would agree that Pivetta is a win, after thinking about it. I would concede that, and Whitlock, for sure. The others have played well, but I wouldn't classify as wins. Would like some longevity to go with the good play in the decisions. It really is just too early, but I think an honest assessment of him is that it hasn't been overwhelming and that is a cause for concern.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jul 31, 2022 6:23:05 GMT -5
You people keep using that word, "disingenuously." I do not think it means what you think it means. maybe there are better words to use. However, not being entirely truthful about acknowledging that Bloom could have traded anyone at anytime and putting all the blame on DD is pretty close. There have been many posts saying such.
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Jul 31, 2022 7:16:52 GMT -5
I think we'll know in the next couple of days what kind of GM he is. If he's a buyer, he's got his head in the sand. Then I would say he's not very good. If he's a seller and gets some good pieces for the future, then I would say he's smart and look forward to whatever he does in the off season.
One of the things he was hired to do is fix the minor league. He's done that. There's some really good players in the pipeline that could make a difference down the road. He seems to be good at that.
Before this season started, our one glaring need was 2B. He fixed that with Story, who has been really good. He didn't count on so many injuries that he had to bring up rookies who are not ready yet. Injuries killed us this season like they would with any team. So, I can't blame him for that.
The bottom line is that the jury is still out. He's not Theo, so don't expect that. But, he's a good young GM who is feeling his way and trying to make good decisions. The big one comes Tuesday. Then we'll know.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jul 31, 2022 7:20:17 GMT -5
So it seems from what your posting that Correa wouldn’t have been better but the other 3 would have been or comparable, for less money and not giving up a prospect ( Suzuki) plus I would argue in a position of greater need ( outfield). But I understand this comes down to a perspective also. You said Bloom could have given a big contract to any of several players "who would be performing much better" and then named all these guys (plus an undefined "etc."). There is exactly one player on this list who has performed better than Story. Are you changing your argument now to "he should have signed the demonstrably worse Suzuki because he's a bit cheaper and wouldn't have cost a draft pick"?
That's pretty different than suggesting that Bloom made a uniquely bad choice in who he gave a big contract too.
(Unrelatedly, Correa is on pace for another sub-4 WAR season, and even prorating 2020 that'll be 4 of the last 5 years below that benchmark. He turned down $275 million last offseason. Still can't believe how outrageous Boras' approach was with him.)
I’ll be first to admit I don’t know how fwar or abcdxp or hgblm analytics is calculated. ( and feel free to message me if you do… the exact formula). But I know this- Suzuki is 27. First year in majors. Has batted .260 with 8 hr and 6 sb. Didn’t cost a draft pick. Plays a position of need ( rf) and costs 6 million less per season. Story is batting .220 has 12hr and 10 sb cost us a draft pick is 2 years older. Plays a position where we have some depth and is batting .220. And costs us 6 million more per season. ( yes I said he’s batting .220 3x now). I’ll gladly be educated how the formula works though because till I see that most of story’s “loud” damage was done during a 2 weeks stretch this year. After and before that he’s hit .220. And cost us a draft pick and 6 million more per season. ( granted I’m cherry picking a player here but these are players we were in on and it was decided story was their man over them which is on the front office.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 31, 2022 7:39:41 GMT -5
Waiting until the deadline ended up being dumb as well in my opinion.
They should’ve sold off Eovaldi and JD after the awful May month but when their values were higher. Now they are worth a fair amount less and our bargaining power is shot. Getting under the cap will be hard.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jul 31, 2022 8:10:12 GMT -5
Waiting until the deadline ended up being dumb as well in my opinion. They should’ve sold off Eovaldi and JD after the awful May month but when their values were higher. Now they are worth a fair amount less and our bargaining power is shot. Getting under the cap will be hard. It’s amazing how many people don’t realize it takes two teams to agree on a trade. Sure, maybe it made sense for the Sox to sell in May (it didn’t) but no one is really going to be all that into buying at that time. I also don’t think the idea that they somehow have less bargaining power now makes any sense either.
|
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Jul 31, 2022 8:20:08 GMT -5
I think Bloom's plan to deepen the farm system while trying to add payroll flexibility is a good one. But I have some concerns. It's great to put a lot of effort into adding young talent to the organization. But if you end up picking the wrong players to bring in, it'll never work. And to this point, I think it's fair to question whether or not Bloom's batting average is high enough. I'm also worried about the "We'll trade Martinez and Vazquez, but we're not going to trade Bogaerts or Eovaldi" approach to the deadline. You're either on board with building the farm system, or you're not. I can't think of a compelling reason to keep any of the pending free agents at this point. The fact that Bogaerts and Eovaldi seem to be off limits reeks of ownership interference, in my opinion. I'm concerned that FSG doesn't have the patience or the intestinal fortitude to fully commit to "the plan". My concern is that someone who says we will: 1) add depth to the system 2) maintain payroll flexibility 3) compete every year sounds like a politician who doesn’t want to give you any bad news. If that was a real plan, who wouldn’t be doing it? But isn't that basically what the Dodgers, Blue Jays, Padres, Braves, and (...to a lesser extent) even the Yankees have done? In most cases, if you do #1 and #2 correctly, it leads to #3. Being a team with a Top 10 payroll, a good farm system, and no bad contracts seems like a pretty good place to be. It's a good philosophy... you just have to execute it.
|
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Jul 31, 2022 8:28:27 GMT -5
I think Bloom's plan to deepen the farm system while trying to add payroll flexibility is a good one. But I have some concerns. It's great to put a lot of effort into adding young talent to the organization. But if you end up picking the wrong players to bring in, it'll never work. And to this point, I think it's fair to question whether or not Bloom's batting average is high enough. I'm also worried about the "We'll trade Martinez and Vazquez, but we're not going to trade Bogaerts or Eovaldi" approach to the deadline. You're either on board with building the farm system, or you're not. I can't think of a compelling reason to keep any of the pending free agents at this point. The fact that Bogaerts and Eovaldi seem to be off limits reeks of ownership interference, in my opinion. I'm concerned that FSG doesn't have the patience or the intestinal fortitude to fully commit to "the plan". And why would ownership react that way? Only reason is they see ratings, corporate interest, and fan interest decreasing and recognize that in a major market you need to keep that going or ultimately the value of your franchise will decrease. This is why I say we can’t play the Tampa bay ray game here. Boston is a different animal and 2 of 3 losing seasons won’t cut it. Ownership will step in and “adjust”. Somehow. This ownership generally have found a scapegoat when things go this south. We are 7-19 in July. The last win by a starter is over a month ago. We could lose our top 3 hitters ( jd, Xander, devers), not to mention our injured center fielder and starting catcher. I can see ownership finding a scapegoat because they have to sell hope somehow. I don't think Dave Dombrowski gets fired less than a year after winning a World Series if FSG didn't think that they were headed for some difficult years. And I don't think Chaim Bloom gets hired if ownership didn't realize that they need to do a much better job of developing younger talent. If they now aren't patient enough to sit through the short term pain, then they deserve to ride the "we're good, now we stink, now we're good again, now we stink again" roller coaster in perpetuity.
|
|
|
Post by e on Jul 31, 2022 9:21:19 GMT -5
You said Bloom could have given a big contract to any of several players "who would be performing much better" and then named all these guys (plus an undefined "etc."). There is exactly one player on this list who has performed better than Story. Are you changing your argument now to "he should have signed the demonstrably worse Suzuki because he's a bit cheaper and wouldn't have cost a draft pick"?
That's pretty different than suggesting that Bloom made a uniquely bad choice in who he gave a big contract too.
(Unrelatedly, Correa is on pace for another sub-4 WAR season, and even prorating 2020 that'll be 4 of the last 5 years below that benchmark. He turned down $275 million last offseason. Still can't believe how outrageous Boras' approach was with him.)
I’ll be first to admit I don’t know how fwar or abcdxp or hgblm analytics is calculated. ( and feel free to message me if you do… the exact formula). But I know this- Suzuki is 27. First year in majors. Has batted .260 with 8 hr and 6 sb. Didn’t cost a draft pick. Plays a position of need ( rf) and costs 6 million less per season. Story is batting .220 has 12hr and 10 sb cost us a draft pick is 2 years older. Plays a position where we have some depth and is batting .220. And costs us 6 million more per season. ( yes I said he’s batting .220 3x now). I’ll gladly be educated how the formula works though because till I see that most of story’s “loud” damage was done during a 2 weeks stretch this year. After and before that he’s hit .220. And cost us a draft pick and 6 million more per season. ( granted I’m cherry picking a player here but these are players we were in on and it was decided story was their man over them which is on the front office. I don't feel it's worth getting into a discussion about fwar or advanced statistics here because it will just detract from the point of this thread. Fangraphs has a great explanation of WAR on their website that I have found very useful. Small detail, but Story has 15 homeruns, not 12. Second, if you sign Suzuki then you will be left with a hole at second base. At the end of the day, there would have been a whole at right field or second base. Also the Red Sox were not even the finalists for Suzuki, there was a slim chance he would even sign with them. If he did sign with the Red Sox, they would have had to pay him much more than what the Cubs are paying him(because we were not close to his top choice). I like Story over Suzuki currently because of the track record that Story has compared to Suzuki, along with the gold glove defense Story has been playing in the middle of the field, compared to below average defense in a corner outfield spot for Suzuki.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,317
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Jul 31, 2022 9:39:17 GMT -5
Suzuki has been a butcher in wrigley’s RF, I shudder to think what it would look like at Fenway. I’d much rather have Story.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 31, 2022 9:43:13 GMT -5
My concern is that someone who says we will: 1) add depth to the system 2) maintain payroll flexibility 3) compete every year sounds like a politician who doesn’t want to give you any bad news. If that was a real plan, who wouldn’t be doing it? But isn't that basically what the Dodgers, Blue Jays, Padres, Braves, and (...to a lesser extent) even the Yankees have done?No. If you start in 2014 when, say, Andrew Friedman began as Dodgers PresOfBBOps (since many here - and maybe John Henry & Co. seem to think/want Bloom to be the next AF) and take it through to the present, it's clear what these teams have done is very different from your statement. Let's start with the MLB teams and their records. Specifically: The Padres (2014-18 and (unintentionally) 2021), Braves (2015-18) and the Blue Jays (2017-19) tanked, going well below .500. The Dodgers and Yankees have never been below .500 in that period and the Dodgers never missed the playoffs in that period. The Yankees missed it once. Now payroll over the same period: NYY has been over the luxury that Seven times in that period and only reset twice. The Dodgers have been well over the luxury tax limit, taking the highest degree of penalties a total of six years, resetting only (though coming up very close to the tax), in the three-year period of 2018-2020. According to Cots, their CBT 40 Man salary is currently at $303+M. SD has been over the luxury tax twice. ATL and TOR have never been over the luxury tax limit. In most cases, if you do #1 and #2 correctly, it leads to #3.This is again demonstrably wrong. The two most successful teams on your list (i.e., item #3) have been well over the tax, with the Dodgers pretty much calculating that it is merely a cost of doing business if a team wants to be successful. Being a team with a Top 10 payroll, a good farm system, and no bad contracts seems like a pretty good place to be.The Dodgers during this period have been the most successful team and yet rife with bad contracts over that period. For example, they were paying Carl Crawford $21.9M AAV until 2017 (fWAR from 2015-17 0.4, -0.1 and DNP all of 2017); Adrian Gonzalez $22.4 AAV until 2018 (FWAR from 2016-18 1.0, -0.7, -0.4) and Scott Kazmir until 2018 (fWAR 2016-18 0.9, DNP, DNP) and even good old David Price. In fact, they seem to see taking them on as a market inefficiency that allows them to also acquire system depth and star players from the unloading team. NYY had several bad contracts, too. They paid Jacoby Ellsbury 21.14M AAV until 2021 (fWAR 2015-2020 1.1, 1.6, 1.6, DNP, DNP, DNP) and Giacarlo Stanton $25M AAV since 2018 (fWAR 2018-2021 4.0, 0.4, 0.4, 2.4). And there are others Britton, Paxton, JA Happ, - you can go look up their fWAR or bWAR if you like). Of the other teams you mentioned, only Atlanta has won their division after the tanking, and the World Series of last year. Also, with regard to player development, the only farm system from 2014 to the present that also consistently remained in the top half, and usually in the top 10, is the team that overspent the luxury tax by $30-60+M and drafted extremely low every year - your over-spending, bad contract-eating, player development magic shop, ultra-successful, L.A. Dodgers. It's a good philosophy... you just have to execute it.No, it's decidedly different philosophies, and the most successful year-to-year in wins, playoff appearances and division titles have been the two teams that grossly overspend the tax. If John Henry and whomever else is calling the shots are looking for a winning model then it's spending over the tax and stealing away as many of LADs player development and scouting people as possible. QED.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jul 31, 2022 9:54:34 GMT -5
And why would ownership react that way? Only reason is they see ratings, corporate interest, and fan interest decreasing and recognize that in a major market you need to keep that going or ultimately the value of your franchise will decrease. This is why I say we can’t play the Tampa bay ray game here. Boston is a different animal and 2 of 3 losing seasons won’t cut it. Ownership will step in and “adjust”. Somehow. This ownership generally have found a scapegoat when things go this south. We are 7-19 in July. The last win by a starter is over a month ago. We could lose our top 3 hitters ( jd, Xander, devers), not to mention our injured center fielder and starting catcher. I can see ownership finding a scapegoat because they have to sell hope somehow. I don't think Dave Dombrowski gets fired less than a year after winning a World Series if FSG didn't think that they were headed for some difficult years. And I don't think Chaim Bloom gets hired if ownership didn't realize that they need to do a much better job of developing younger talent. If they now aren't patient enough to sit through the short term pain, then they deserve to ride the "we're good, now we stink, now we're good again, now we stink again" roller coaster in perpetuity. I agree. I’m not arguing for full dombrowski. I just worry it’s to far devil ray ( ie cheap cheap cheap). And if not it needs to be some better valuations throughout organization. I don’t want to be last place 2 out of 3 seasons and losing better players. Minor leaguers take time ( unless your Julio Rodriguez) and we dont have any Julio Rodriguez in our system . I don’t think nor expect Red Sox fans to wait 3-4 more years to be competitive year in and year out. If you believe bloom can add impact talent every year then he’s your guy. I have yet to be shown he can ( at a championship level)
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jul 31, 2022 10:08:52 GMT -5
I’ll be first to admit I don’t know how fwar or abcdxp or hgblm analytics is calculated. ( and feel free to message me if you do… the exact formula). But I know this- Suzuki is 27. First year in majors. Has batted .260 with 8 hr and 6 sb. Didn’t cost a draft pick. Plays a position of need ( rf) and costs 6 million less per season. Story is batting .220 has 12hr and 10 sb cost us a draft pick is 2 years older. Plays a position where we have some depth and is batting .220. And costs us 6 million more per season. ( yes I said he’s batting .220 3x now). I’ll gladly be educated how the formula works though because till I see that most of story’s “loud” damage was done during a 2 weeks stretch this year. After and before that he’s hit .220. And cost us a draft pick and 6 million more per season. ( granted I’m cherry picking a player here but these are players we were in on and it was decided story was their man over them which is on the front office. I don't feel it's worth getting into a discussion about fwar or advanced statistics here because it will just detract from the point of this thread. Fangraphs has a great explanation of WAR on their website that I have found very useful. Small detail, but Story has 15 homeruns, not 12. Second, if you sign Suzuki then you will be left with a hole at second base. At the end of the day, there would have been a whole at right field or second base. Also the Red Sox were not even the finalists for Suzuki, there was a slim chance he would even sign with them. If he did sign with the Red Sox, they would have had to pay him much more than what the Cubs are paying him(because we were not close to his top choice). I like Story over Suzuki currently because of the track record that Story has compared to Suzuki, along with the gold glove defense Story has been playing in the middle of the field, compared to below average defense in a corner outfield spot for Suzuki. To me you have potential of jeter downs or Kiki at 2nd. Or arroyo. We have atrocious players in outfield and some argue our best right fielder is our 6th outfielder. I agree we would have had to pony up more for Suzuki. And would have gotten another high draft pick out of it. Last point…. Last 4 years .294, .289, .251, .221 35 hrs. 25 hrs ( pace for), 24 hrs, 15 hrs That’s a downward trend I believe over 4 years. Which one has more of a trend moving up?
|
|
|
Post by e on Jul 31, 2022 10:25:15 GMT -5
I don't feel it's worth getting into a discussion about fwar or advanced statistics here because it will just detract from the point of this thread. Fangraphs has a great explanation of WAR on their website that I have found very useful. Small detail, but Story has 15 homeruns, not 12. Second, if you sign Suzuki then you will be left with a hole at second base. At the end of the day, there would have been a whole at right field or second base. Also the Red Sox were not even the finalists for Suzuki, there was a slim chance he would even sign with them. If he did sign with the Red Sox, they would have had to pay him much more than what the Cubs are paying him(because we were not close to his top choice). I like Story over Suzuki currently because of the track record that Story has compared to Suzuki, along with the gold glove defense Story has been playing in the middle of the field, compared to below average defense in a corner outfield spot for Suzuki. To me you have potential of jeter downs or Kiki at 2nd. Or arroyo. We have atrocious players in outfield and some argue our best right fielder is our 6th outfielder. I agree we would have had to pony up more for Suzuki. And would have gotten another high draft pick out of it. Last pointâ¦. Last 4 years .294, .289, .251, .221 35 hrs. 25 hrs ( pace for), 24 hrs, 15 hrs Thatâs a downward trend I believe over 4 years. Which one has more of a trend moving up? You put Kiké at second you have a hole in centerfield instead. And your math is off. 2018-2022 HRs: 37, 35, 29(on pace for), 24, 15 in 81 games(30 in 162 game pace). 2018-2022 rWAR: 6.2, 7.0, 7.0(on pace for), 4.2, 2.1 in 81 games(4.2 in 162 game pace). Not much of a downward trend if you ask me!
|
|
juanpena
Veteran
Posts: 286
Member is Online
|
Post by juanpena on Jul 31, 2022 10:44:19 GMT -5
The Farm System
The team has done from a bottom-10 to a top-10 system in just a couple years, and ranks even higher in terms of depth (per fangraphs, they have the third-most ranked prospects in the game). To judge Bloom by his own stated objectives, this is an unadulterated win.
Obviously people rank systems differently. Jim Callis, well-respected and obviously a friend of this site, called the system middle of the pack on the podcast a couple of weeks ago. In fact, the podcast with Callis was pretty damn depressing. He was lukewarm at best on the draft and said Nick Yorke doesn't look like the same player this year -- and he was factoring in his injuries.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 31, 2022 10:47:10 GMT -5
I don't have a complete grade for Bloom. Given where he came in, it's too soon to know.
He came in making promises of long-term competitiveness every year which is basically what they had under Theo, so of course that sounds great. And he is creative, from the 5 for 1 deal for Benintendi, to the pay extra for a prospect trades, to even the way Story's contract is structured.
I think based on his vision, which I fully support, there came an instant annointment of "Bloom is a top GM" from a lot of people here while he also had his detractors, or people who want more evidence before they jump to that default conclusion of him being a great GM.
At this point, I don't see where he is better than his GM peers or even better than Dan Duquette or Dave Dombrowski or Ben Cherington or Theo.
That doesn't mean that he can't be or won't be. But at this point he isn't.
I think a lot of it comes down to judgment of who can play and who can't.
I mean Devers. People didn't want to extend him for say 10 years 300 million a year ago and point to all kind of stats of why he is a 1b/dh, etc. Would those same people offer him that and be happy if he accepts?
The point is that being a GM, you have to use your crystal ball, and you have to know if Devers is going to translate his defensive skills (scouting and knowing the player) into results finally and if he's going to mature as a hitter when you make a decision of what you're going to do to try to sign him.
It's that judgment that matters in making trades and signing free agents, etc. That's what I'm not convinced on with regards to Bloom.
Like it's great that he traded an average OF like Renfroe for prospects that can help in the future, but it's bad that he didn't do anything to replace the average season that Renfroe gave him, and you have to question if the prospects he got in this deal made it worthwhile to downgrade RF if you didn't have a plan to at least keep RF the same or improved.
I mean, was RF worth downgrading for Binelas? Hamilton isn't going to amount to much. Binelas has a nice power bat, but no defensive position and might not hit enough to be a viable major league regular. I'd make that gamble if they can replace the average player that Renfroe was, but they didn't. Using JBJ as a replacement was foolish, even with his glove, as it does not make up for the bat.
I felt that last year, as Barnes struggled in July, he needed to come up with a solid reliever in a deal and between Robles and Davis, he ultimately didn't although I will say Robles helped save their bacon in September, but was awful in October and the Sox pen blew several late inning leads in the playoffs last year which helped sink them.
Knowing that, it's mind boggling that he didn't improve the pen for this season. Schreiber turned out to be an astute pickup and I won't blame him for Cora's failure to recognize that Schreiber should be the closer and Houck should be the multi inning setupguy. But his track record for picking up successful relievers is not overly impressive.
I get that it can be foolhardy to invest big bucks in guys with longer relief track records of success, but a GM needs to be able to find these John Schreiber types that can succeed more often than he has. Too many Matt Halls and Ryan Webers than Schreibers (and I don't expect them to all be that good).
When I look at the trades, other than fleecing a Phillies GM who was soon to be fired and quite desperate, his trades haven't amounted to much. They just haven't.
I don't blame him for geting less for Mookie because Price was stapled to him, but I do wonder if they could have found another taker for Price if the Sox paid say an extra $5 million more, or maybe the Sox could have made Diego Cartaya or Ruiz the second piece of the deal rather than Downs (after Graterol couldn't be a starter)? The point is that I have no idea what iterations of that trade were available to him and if he chose correctly. I had no issues with Downs so I guess I don't have a right to second guess, but then again he should know more than I do and be able to project better.
The Benintendi deal was creative but at the end it was a downgrade in which they got very little. You'd think out of 5 players, you'd hit better than he did. So the idea was creative, Benintendi was expendable, but if you don't have a good sense of what you're getting back...I mean what's the point of trading 2 seasons of an average regular OF (who actually gets on base unlike a lot of the current Red Sox players who don't walk and hack at everything) for a #5 starter/swingman type (those are a lot easier to get than regular OF are), a great athlete who has no idea how to play baseball, a young OF with no defense or hit tool, a pitcher with a track record of getting hammered in the minors, and a soft-tossing pitcher (with some potential still left)? Great idea. Not good results.
His signing of Kiké Hernandez was good, better than I thought, although the fact is that he's a good average player, hardly a cornerstone.
And that's what concerns me. The Sox seriously overachieved in 2021 and Pivetta, Whitlock, and at times Arroyo and Robles were contributors, but the core that was driving them was Devers, Bogaerts, Martinez, Vazquez, Eovaldi, holdovers from before his time there, which is fine, but there are no other core members other than Pivetta, Whitlock, and Verdugo which were added. Maybe it's too soon, but beyond Devers and Bogaerts I don't see anybody that is a must have for the core type guys that are on the team.
I had hoped that he was so smart he'd add all these pieces, and hit at the success somewhere near what Duquette enjoyed in 1995, or Theo in 2003, or even Cherington in 2013, but he really hasn't.
I was hoping that would sustain them until the improved farm system (tanking in 2020 to get Mayer as it turned out) churned out regulars.
But now it appears to me, that they're better off sucking, getting everything they can - which might even include trading X and/or Devers, adding to the farm system and hoping that the new core of an impressive and stacked farm system in ready by 2025 or 2026 and then add the impact free agents to that young core.
He's now in the mode Cherington was in around 2012 - get guys for 3 years to buy time for the prospects to graduate to form the new core. I have yet to have the trust that Bloom will be able to do that for the next three years. I think at times he's too slow to react (and he lets problems fester), like not having a 1b backup plan if Dalbec didn't hit and Casas wasn't ready, not having a closer should Barnes not snap back (predictably), not having a viable RF.
I think the Sox are in for rough times until the farm system is ready to graduate guys like Mayer and Bleis and others (Yorke, Romero, etc).
I don't see where Bloom is going to make them highly competitive until then. I hope he proves me very wrong.
|
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Jul 31, 2022 11:27:23 GMT -5
But isn't that basically what the Dodgers, Blue Jays, Padres, Braves, and (...to a lesser extent) even the Yankees have done? No. If you start in 2014 when, say, Andrew Friedman began as Dodgers PresOfBBOps (since many here - and maybe John Henry & Co. seem to think/want Bloom to be the next AF) and take it through to the present, it's clear what these teams have done is very different from your statement. Let's start with the MLB teams and their records. Specifically: I think I'm probably guilty of oversimplification as well as inadvertently allowing manfred to put some words in my mouth. When I look at those teams, most of them built up a core of younger, cost-controlled players, and then had enough payroll flexibility to add to that core either through free agency or trade. That's basically what I think Bloom's plan is. Find and/or develop enough good, young players who dramatically outperform their contracts. When you find those players, use free agency and the trade market to add to them in areas of need. When those good, young players start to approach free agency, make good decisions on signing them or trading them. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Yes, I recognize that the Dodgers and Yankees don't do things the same ways that teams in smaller markets do. And I'm not suggesting that the Red Sox should intentionally try to tank, either. I'm suggesting that if you can get to a point where you do have a young core and a strong farm system, you're not saddled with a lot of bad contracts, and you have a Top 5-10 payroll, then you've set yourself up for a period of sustained success.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 31, 2022 11:44:58 GMT -5
I don't have a complete grade for Bloom. Given where he came in, it's too soon to know. He came in making promises of long-term competitiveness every year which is basically what they had under Theo, so of course that sounds great. And he is creative, from the 5 for 1 deal for Benintendi, to the pay extra for a prospect trades, to even the way Story's contract is structured. I think based on his vision, which I fully support, there came an instant annointment of "Bloom is a top GM" from a lot of people here while he also had his detractors, or people who want more evidence before they jump to that default conclusion of him being a great GM. At this point, I don't see where he is better than his GM peers or even better than Dan Duquette or Dave Dombrowski or Ben Cherington or Theo. That doesn't mean that he can't be or won't be. But at this point he isn't. I think a lot of it comes down to judgment of who can play and who can't. I mean Devers. People didn't want to extend him for say 10 years 300 million a year ago and point to all kind of stats of why he is a 1b/dh, etc. Would those same people offer him that and be happy if he accepts? The point is that being a GM, you have to use your crystal ball, and you have to know if Devers is going to translate his defensive skills (scouting and knowing the player) into results finally and if he's going to mature as a hitter when you make a decision of what you're going to do to try to sign him. It's that judgment that matters in making trades and signing free agents, etc. That's what I'm not convinced on with regards to Bloom. Like it's great that he traded an average OF like Renfroe for prospects that can help in the future, but it's bad that he didn't do anything to replace the average season that Renfroe gave him, and you have to question if the prospects he got in this deal made it worthwhile to downgrade RF if you didn't have a plan to at least keep RF the same or improved. I mean, was RF worth downgrading for Binelas? Hamilton isn't going to amount to much. Binelas has a nice power bat, but no defensive position and might not hit enough to be a viable major league regular. I'd make that gamble if they can replace the average player that Renfroe was, but they didn't. Using JBJ as a replacement was foolish, even with his glove, as it does not make up for the bat. I felt that last year, as Barnes struggled in July, he needed to come up with a solid reliever in a deal and between Robles and Davis, he ultimately didn't although I will say Robles helped save their bacon in September, but was awful in October and the Sox pen blew several late inning leads in the playoffs last year which helped sink them. Knowing that, it's mind boggling that he didn't improve the pen for this season. Schreiber turned out to be an astute pickup and I won't blame him for Cora's failure to recognize that Schreiber should be the closer and Houck should be the multi inning setupguy. But his track record for picking up successful relievers is not overly impressive. I get that it can be foolhardy to invest big bucks in guys with longer relief track records of success, but a GM needs to be able to find these John Schreiber types that can succeed more often than he has. Too many Matt Halls and Ryan Webers than Schreibers (and I don't expect them to all be that good). When I look at the trades, other than fleecing a Phillies GM who was soon to be fired and quite desperate, his trades haven't amounted to much. They just haven't. I don't blame him for geting less for Mookie because Price was stapled to him, but I do wonder if they could have found another taker for Price if the Sox paid say an extra $5 million more, or maybe the Sox could have made Diego Cartaya or Ruiz the second piece of the deal rather than Downs (after Graterol couldn't be a starter)? The point is that I have no idea what iterations of that trade were available to him and if he chose correctly. I had no issues with Downs so I guess I don't have a right to second guess, but then again he should know more than I do and be able to project better. The Benintendi deal was creative but at the end it was a downgrade in which they got very little. You'd think out of 5 players, you'd hit better than he did. So the idea was creative, Benintendi was expendable, but if you don't have a good sense of what you're getting back...I mean what's the point of trading 2 seasons of an average regular OF (who actually gets on base unlike a lot of the current Red Sox players who don't walk and hack at everything) for a #5 starter/swingman type (those are a lot easier to get than regular OF are), a great athlete who has no idea how to play baseball, a young OF with no defense or hit tool, a pitcher with a track record of getting hammered in the minors, and a soft-tossing pitcher (with some potential still left)? Great idea. Not good results. His signing of Kiké Hernandez was good, better than I thought, although the fact is that he's a good average player, hardly a cornerstone. And that's what concerns me. The Sox seriously overachieved in 2021 and Pivetta, Whitlock, and at times Arroyo and Robles were contributors, but the core that was driving them was Devers, Bogaerts, Martinez, Vazquez, Eovaldi, holdovers from before his time there, which is fine, but there are no other core members other than Pivetta, Whitlock, and Verdugo which were added. Maybe it's too soon, but beyond Devers and Bogaerts I don't see anybody that is a must have for the core type guys that are on the team. I had hoped that he was so smart he'd add all these pieces, and hit at the success somewhere near what Duquette enjoyed in 1995, or Theo in 2003, or even Cherington in 2013, but he really hasn't. I was hoping that would sustain them until the improved farm system (tanking in 2020 to get Mayer as it turned out) churned out regulars. But now it appears to me, that they're better off sucking, getting everything they can - which might even include trading X and/or Devers, adding to the farm system and hoping that the new core of an impressive and stacked farm system in ready by 2025 or 2026 and then add the impact free agents to that young core.He's now in the mode Cherington was in around 2012 - get guys for 3 years to buy time for the prospects to graduate to form the new core. I have yet to have the trust that Bloom will be able to do that for the next three years. I think at times he's too slow to react (and he lets problems fester), like not having a 1b backup plan if Dalbec didn't hit and Casas wasn't ready, not having a closer should Barnes not snap back (predictably), not having a viable RF. I think the Sox are in for rough times until the farm system is ready to graduate guys like Mayer and Bleis and others (Yorke, Romero, etc). I don't see where Bloom is going to make them highly competitive until then. I hope he proves me very wrong. This is the Houston, Atlanta and to some degree, the Toronto, San Diego and Tampa formula. It's worked for Houston, and recently for Atlanta, but in every team but Houston (so far), it's created the exact "awful years followed by successful years" formula that many here say the Sox need to snap out of - even though in the 10-year span from the 2011 off-season when Theo was gone to 2021, the Sox produced 2 world series titles, 4 division titles, 5 playoff years and 6 years above .500. They had four losing seasons '12, '14, '15 and 20 (for whomever counts 2020 outside Los Angeles). If you look above at an earlier post, you'll find that the two teams that remained consistent winners and above .500 over that same period were not tanking teams but rather the two teams that spent well over the tax limit. Build a "Tampa with money" works if you're L.A. and go way over the tax, take on bad contracts to also get great talent in the deal, and develop better than any other team, or NYY, who does much of the same without the same player development track record. But if one looks at Tampa, they've been a sub .500 teams 4 times over the same period - just like Boston - they won the division 2 times, went to the playoffs 5 times - 2 times less and one time less than Boston, respectively - and have 1 World Series appearance (losing). In fact, in the "tank then win and sustain a winner" formula that seems inexplicable popular with members of this forum, Houston (so far) has been the only team to do that, going to the playoffs (in a decidedly much weaker division) 6 times, the World Series 2 times and winning 1 World Series. If the Sox played in the AL West, they might've had 1-2 more playoff appearances. But the evidence over the recent 10-year period for sustained wins, a great system and managed budget and using sell-offs and tanking to get there indicates that Houston is the outlier and this method (Tor, Tam, SD, ATL and whomever else) creates the same "roller coaster" over a 10 year period that everyone here wants to avoid.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,425
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Jul 31, 2022 12:02:02 GMT -5
I don't have a complete grade for Bloom. Given where he came in, it's too soon to know. He came in making promises of long-term competitiveness every year which is basically what they had under Theo, so of course that sounds great. And he is creative, from the 5 for 1 deal for Benintendi, to the pay extra for a prospect trades, to even the way Story's contract is structured. I think based on his vision, which I fully support, there came an instant annointment of "Bloom is a top GM" from a lot of people here while he also had his detractors, or people who want more evidence before they jump to that default conclusion of him being a great GM. At this point, I don't see where he is better than his GM peers or even better than Dan Duquette or Dave Dombrowski or Ben Cherington or Theo. That doesn't mean that he can't be or won't be. But at this point he isn't. I think a lot of it comes down to judgment of who can play and who can't. I mean Devers. People didn't want to extend him for say 10 years 300 million a year ago and point to all kind of stats of why he is a 1b/dh, etc. Would those same people offer him that and be happy if he accepts? The point is that being a GM, you have to use your crystal ball, and you have to know if Devers is going to translate his defensive skills (scouting and knowing the player) into results finally and if he's going to mature as a hitter when you make a decision of what you're going to do to try to sign him. It's that judgment that matters in making trades and signing free agents, etc. That's what I'm not convinced on with regards to Bloom. Like it's great that he traded an average OF like Renfroe for prospects that can help in the future, but it's bad that he didn't do anything to replace the average season that Renfroe gave him, and you have to question if the prospects he got in this deal made it worthwhile to downgrade RF if you didn't have a plan to at least keep RF the same or improved. I mean, was RF worth downgrading for Binelas? Hamilton isn't going to amount to much. Binelas has a nice power bat, but no defensive position and might not hit enough to be a viable major league regular. I'd make that gamble if they can replace the average player that Renfroe was, but they didn't. Using JBJ as a replacement was foolish, even with his glove, as it does not make up for the bat. I felt that last year, as Barnes struggled in July, he needed to come up with a solid reliever in a deal and between Robles and Davis, he ultimately didn't although I will say Robles helped save their bacon in September, but was awful in October and the Sox pen blew several late inning leads in the playoffs last year which helped sink them. Knowing that, it's mind boggling that he didn't improve the pen for this season. Schreiber turned out to be an astute pickup and I won't blame him for Cora's failure to recognize that Schreiber should be the closer and Houck should be the multi inning setupguy. But his track record for picking up successful relievers is not overly impressive. I get that it can be foolhardy to invest big bucks in guys with longer relief track records of success, but a GM needs to be able to find these John Schreiber types that can succeed more often than he has. Too many Matt Halls and Ryan Webers than Schreibers (and I don't expect them to all be that good). When I look at the trades, other than fleecing a Phillies GM who was soon to be fired and quite desperate, his trades haven't amounted to much. They just haven't. I don't blame him for geting less for Mookie because Price was stapled to him, but I do wonder if they could have found another taker for Price if the Sox paid say an extra $5 million more, or maybe the Sox could have made Diego Cartaya or Ruiz the second piece of the deal rather than Downs (after Graterol couldn't be a starter)? The point is that I have no idea what iterations of that trade were available to him and if he chose correctly. I had no issues with Downs so I guess I don't have a right to second guess, but then again he should know more than I do and be able to project better. The Benintendi deal was creative but at the end it was a downgrade in which they got very little. You'd think out of 5 players, you'd hit better than he did. So the idea was creative, Benintendi was expendable, but if you don't have a good sense of what you're getting back...I mean what's the point of trading 2 seasons of an average regular OF (who actually gets on base unlike a lot of the current Red Sox players who don't walk and hack at everything) for a #5 starter/swingman type (those are a lot easier to get than regular OF are), a great athlete who has no idea how to play baseball, a young OF with no defense or hit tool, a pitcher with a track record of getting hammered in the minors, and a soft-tossing pitcher (with some potential still left)? Great idea. Not good results. His signing of Kiké Hernandez was good, better than I thought, although the fact is that he's a good average player, hardly a cornerstone. And that's what concerns me. The Sox seriously overachieved in 2021 and Pivetta, Whitlock, and at times Arroyo and Robles were contributors, but the core that was driving them was Devers, Bogaerts, Martinez, Vazquez, Eovaldi, holdovers from before his time there, which is fine, but there are no other core members other than Pivetta, Whitlock, and Verdugo which were added. Maybe it's too soon, but beyond Devers and Bogaerts I don't see anybody that is a must have for the core type guys that are on the team. I had hoped that he was so smart he'd add all these pieces, and hit at the success somewhere near what Duquette enjoyed in 1995, or Theo in 2003, or even Cherington in 2013, but he really hasn't. I was hoping that would sustain them until the improved farm system (tanking in 2020 to get Mayer as it turned out) churned out regulars. But now it appears to me, that they're better off sucking, getting everything they can - which might even include trading X and/or Devers, adding to the farm system and hoping that the new core of an impressive and stacked farm system in ready by 2025 or 2026 and then add the impact free agents to that young core.He's now in the mode Cherington was in around 2012 - get guys for 3 years to buy time for the prospects to graduate to form the new core. I have yet to have the trust that Bloom will be able to do that for the next three years. I think at times he's too slow to react (and he lets problems fester), like not having a 1b backup plan if Dalbec didn't hit and Casas wasn't ready, not having a closer should Barnes not snap back (predictably), not having a viable RF. I think the Sox are in for rough times until the farm system is ready to graduate guys like Mayer and Bleis and others (Yorke, Romero, etc). I don't see where Bloom is going to make them highly competitive until then. I hope he proves me very wrong. This is the Houston, Atlanta and to some degree, the Toronto, San Diego and Tampa formula. It's worked for Houston, and recently for Atlanta, but in every team but Houston (so far), it's created the exact "awful years followed by successful years" formula that many here say the Sox need to snap out of - even though in the 10-year span from the 2011 off-season when Theo was gone to 2021, the Sox produced 2 world series titles, 4 division titles, 5 playoff years and 6 years above .500. They had four losing seasons '12, '14, '15 and 20 (for whomever counts 2020 outside Los Angeles). If you look above at an earlier post, you'll find that the two teams that remained consistent winners and above .500 over that same period were not tanking teams but rather the two teams that spent well over the tax limit. Build a "Tampa with money" works if you're L.A. and go way over the tax, take on bad contracts to also get great talent in the deal, and develop better than any other team, or NYY, who does much of the same without the same player development track record. But if one looks at Tampa, they've been a sub .500 teams 4 times over the same period - just like Boston - they won the division 2 times, went to the playoffs 5 times - 2 times less and one time less than Boston, respectively - and have 1 World Series appearance (losing). In fact, in the "tank then win and sustain a winner" formula that seems inexplicable popular with members of this forum, Houston (so far) has been the only team to do that, going to the playoffs (in a decidedly much weaker division) 6 times, the World Series 2 times and winning 1 World Series. If the Sox played in the AL West, they might've had 1-2 more playoff appearances. But the evidence over the recent 10-year period for sustained wins, a great system and managed budget and using sell-offs and tanking to get there indicates that Houston is the outlier and this method (Tor, Tam, SD, ATL and whomever else) creates the same "roller coaster" over a 10 year period that everyone here wants to avoid. This is a perfect and well-put summary of my view. Chapeau.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 31, 2022 12:05:12 GMT -5
You people keep using that word, "disingenuously." I do not think it means what you think it means. maybe there are better words to use. However, not being entirely truthful about acknowledging that Bloom could have traded anyone at anytime and putting all the blame on DD is pretty close. There have been many posts saying such. The point about the big contracts he was saddled with is that those players were worth less than their contracts. So how was he going to trade them? Who was going to take Pedroia or Sale in 2020? No one, unless the Red Sox gave away value to get them to, like the Yankees did when they traded Ottavino to us.
And of course Bloom did do this with Price in the Betts deal. The result was to reduce the return in that trade, and yet the Red Sox are still saddled with $16 million/year of that contract to this day.
(I don't believe I said anything dishonest here and it would be nice to not be accused of doing so.)
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Jul 31, 2022 12:12:41 GMT -5
Am I the only one who doesnt understand the Story vs Suzuki debate? They were in on Suzuki and ultimately he chose not to come here. So I dont understand the rationale. If Sox just plain had no interest in the first place that would be a whole other situation.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 31, 2022 12:15:23 GMT -5
So far, a few posters here making me dig much deeper into the evidence has started to convince me that Boom/Henry are doing this wrong. Given that the playoffs (at least, under the old system) are coin-flips, models for sustained success are The Los Angeles, The New York Yankees and the Houston Astros. Two of these teams have consistently spent above the Tax (LAD and NYY), with only one reset period for each. They obviously see that the tax is a market inefficiency that teams with superior resources can use to maximize their teams' success. LAD has done this while also intentionally and repeatedly taking on bad contracts to acquire targeted MLB and minor league talent to compensate for their reduced draft pool and lower drafts. LAD has also created a sustained "player-development machine" far superior to almost any other team. NYY has had less success with player development.
Houston followed the intentional tank and sell-off then sustain success formula, but in doing so, has had the exact same amount of winning seasons as Boston over the same period and been to 1 World Series, which they won. But their sustained success has been an outlier. Other teams that have done this have a few years of winning seasons (although only one other such team won a World Series in this time) and several seasons of sub-.500 performance.
So, if Henry and Company want sustained success, they have miscalculated significantly in picking a "Tampa with money" formula, with the "money" component being spending just up to or slightly over the Tax. Fenway Sports Group would do better to either follow the LAD or NNY organizational philosophy with better player development or see if Jeff Luhnow wants to move to Boston and try to reconstitute the Astros in a much tougher division, albeit without the in-game cheating and excessive use of spider-tack. That, or offer Andrew Friedman $10M a year and another $5M-10M to use as salary incentives to grab the key player development and scouting personnel from the LAD organization.
The latter (Friedman and friends) is thinking like a billionaire with a tremendous revenue advantage over most of the league. Luhnow is more of a Bloom-style "let see if we can do this without spending as much as the other guys" approach.
If we are talking about a proven sustained winning and playoff appearances model, the path seems clear, at least under the old 2 wild card teams per league playoff system. The new system will likely change that, but how much is to be determined.
However, if you look at the past data and want to pick two teams that are 90% or better chances to be in the playoffs in each year of the next 10 years, the answer seems fairly straightforward. Everyone else - except maybe Houston and now with Cohen following the NYY/LAD formula, perhaps the Mets - looks to be on the roller coaster.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 31, 2022 12:29:11 GMT -5
You're answering your own objection, aren't you? The Red Sox spent over the CBT and I think we can assume they were under a directive to not spend more than that. So how were they going to sign a Gausman or a Ray or whatever? Only by opening up even bigger holes elsewhere on the roster. Of course this team has spent big on starting pitching, in any case - they're paying Sale, Price, and Eovaldi close to $60 million. And getting less than 1 WAR for it.
(Trying to practice what I preach by moving this from the trade ddeadline thread. Is there a cleaner way to do this?)
|
|
|