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.
Red Sox $4.5m over CBT in 2022
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,421
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Sept 22, 2022 14:54:20 GMT -5
The Paxton move is not one you make if you're worried about the CBT. I also don't agree that it was predictable that Paxton would hurt his oblique rehabbing an arm injury unless you've seen his medical file and there's something in there that would indicate such a problem. That's just post hoc rationalizion. The problem was not getting the starting RF and going further over. Not specifically, but the idea that Paxton could not stay healthy? I said it at the time. It is not post hoc at all. But yes, once you make that move, signaling the CBT is not a ceiling, why not fill the holes that virtually everyone on here saw from the start. There is a frustrating inconsistency to the approach.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Sept 22, 2022 14:54:32 GMT -5
Yes, you technically posed it in the form of a question, but it's also a topic you've brought up dozens of times. At some point you're not genuinely seeking any answer and just making sure your opinion is heard. And I've yet to receive an answer. People come and go here, so I don't know if anyone has this skillset in their toolbox, who may be a retired scout/etc. I will assume going forward, we don't have any legit player evaluators here. We had a retired scout that frequented the board for a little while, some say the best scouting mind to ever grace this earth... he liked tacos.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 22, 2022 15:02:26 GMT -5
And I've yet to receive an answer. People come and go here, so I don't know if anyone has this skillset in their toolbox, who may be a retired scout/etc. I will assume going forward, we don't have any legit player evaluators here. We had a retired scout that frequented the board for a little while, some say the best scouting mind to ever grace this earth... he liked tacos. See, now, that's a conversation I would like to have! And I am talking about the talent evaluation of taco providers/makers!
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Sept 22, 2022 15:10:12 GMT -5
The Paxton move is not one you make if you're worried about the CBT. I also don't agree that it was predictable that Paxton would hurt his oblique rehabbing an arm injury unless you've seen his medical file and there's something in there that would indicate such a problem. That's just post hoc rationalizion. The problem was not getting the starting RF and going further over. Not specifically, but the idea that Paxton could not stay healthy? I said it at the time. It is not post hoc at all. But yes, once you make that move, signaling the CBT is not a ceiling, why not fill the holes that virtually everyone on here saw from the start. There is a frustrating inconsistency to the approach. It's mind boggling to use the first year lowest tax rate to just barely go over. Given the luxury tax line growth, you should have spent most of it. Not like we didn't have holes.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 22, 2022 15:29:17 GMT -5
Dalbec came into this season as an above average major league hitter and had been especially hot in the second half of last season. There were no upgrades available on the free agent market other than Rizzo and Freeman. And he's getting paid league minimum salary. Going with Dalbec at 1B was the obvious right move. Shaw as the backup 1B was a bad move, but the only other good option there in retrospect would have been Vogelbach, and obviously no one saw the season he had coming.
Hey, I was as high on Dalbec as anyone here. Ditto Duran. But I am not a professional player evaluator (nor do I play one on TV...). But the professionals appear to have gotten both of them wrong. I would ask again, was this a case of over-valuing two prospects? That's something that every team struggles with at times, but I keep having Cherington flashbacks on Duran and Dalbec because the org under him seemed to do this more than most. Even knowing what we know now, there was no better option than Dalbec (other than signing Vogelbach, but absolutely no one was calling for that and he signed for $1 million, so obviously no one saw his year coming). Those options were:
-Sign Freeman for a whole bunch of money, making a huge investment at the very position where one of our top two prospects plays. -Sign Rizzo - ditto. And with either of these guys you forfeit the chance to sign Story. -Sign one of the other free agents who haven't done any better than Dalbec.
And even now Dalbec is not without value - he has a 120ish wRC+ against righties. The bigger mistake was signing Shaw as the lefty backup, but again, there just weren't better options out there.
If you think they should've sold high on him post-2021 they still have the dilemma of needing to sign one of the only two good free agents at a position where they had a top prospect at AAA. So again, going with Dalbec was just an obvious move.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,421
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Sept 22, 2022 15:41:19 GMT -5
Hey, I was as high on Dalbec as anyone here. Ditto Duran. But I am not a professional player evaluator (nor do I play one on TV...). But the professionals appear to have gotten both of them wrong. I would ask again, was this a case of over-valuing two prospects? That's something that every team struggles with at times, but I keep having Cherington flashbacks on Duran and Dalbec because the org under him seemed to do this more than most. Even knowing what we know now, there was no better option than Dalbec (other than signing Vogelbach, but absolutely no one was calling for that and he signed for $1 million, so obviously no one saw his year coming). Those options were:
-Sign Freeman for a whole bunch of money, making a huge investment at the very position where one of our top two prospects plays. -Sign Rizzo - ditto. And with either of these guys you forfeit the chance to sign Story. -Sign one of the other free agents who haven't done any better than Dalbec.
And even now Dalbec is not without value - he has a 120ish wRC+ against righties. The bigger mistake was signing Shaw as the lefty backup, but again, there just weren't better options out there.
If you think they should've sold high on him post-2021 they still have the dilemma of needing to sign one of the only two good free agents at a position where they had a top prospect at AAA. So again, going with Dalbec was just an obvious move.
I don’t think GMs get paid to say “hey, what could I do?” We can all play fantasy, but Bloom is here because he is supposed to be a creative thinker. So it is actually fair to say do your job, find a solution, even if Joe Sixpack can’t, you know, match the entire Sox FO’s creative thinking.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 22, 2022 15:50:49 GMT -5
Even knowing what we know now, there was no better option than Dalbec (other than signing Vogelbach, but absolutely no one was calling for that and he signed for $1 million, so obviously no one saw his year coming). Those options were:
-Sign Freeman for a whole bunch of money, making a huge investment at the very position where one of our top two prospects plays. -Sign Rizzo - ditto. And with either of these guys you forfeit the chance to sign Story. -Sign one of the other free agents who haven't done any better than Dalbec.
And even now Dalbec is not without value - he has a 120ish wRC+ against righties. The bigger mistake was signing Shaw as the lefty backup, but again, there just weren't better options out there.
If you think they should've sold high on him post-2021 they still have the dilemma of needing to sign one of the only two good free agents at a position where they had a top prospect at AAA. So again, going with Dalbec was just an obvious move.
I don’t think GMs get paid to say “hey, what could I do?” We can all play fantasy, but Bloom is here because he is supposed to be a creative thinker. So it is actually fair to say do your job, find a solution, even if Joe Sixpack can’t, you know, match the entire Sox FO’s creative thinking. Yes, that's what you always say about this, but I'm not just hand-waving here. It is very different from the OF situation, for instance; there were just limited options available at 1B - few enough, in fact, that it's easy to look through them all if you bother to - and the organization had certain constraints that are relevant (like having a top prospect at the position). Saying "just doooo something" is a pretty brainless level of discourse.
If you absolutely must attribute blame to the organization here, then blame them for not having more good prospects pan out recently. Like if they had some top free agent ready to plug in at 2B or CF then Bloom would have been freer to spend on 1B. Of course that criticism would land some blame on the management of the franchise in the 2010s...
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 22, 2022 15:54:17 GMT -5
Hey, I was as high on Dalbec as anyone here. Ditto Duran. But I am not a professional player evaluator (nor do I play one on TV...). But the professionals appear to have gotten both of them wrong. I would ask again, was this a case of over-valuing two prospects? That's something that every team struggles with at times, but I keep having Cherington flashbacks on Duran and Dalbec because the org under him seemed to do this more than most. Even knowing what we know now, there was no better option than Dalbec (other than signing Vogelbach, but absolutely no one was calling for that and he signed for $1 million, so obviously no one saw his year coming). Those options were: -Sign Freeman for a whole bunch of money, making a huge investment at the very position where one of our top two prospects plays. -Sign Rizzo - ditto. And with either of these guys you forfeit the chance to sign Story. -Sign one of the other free agents who haven't done any better than Dalbec. And even now Dalbec is not without value - he has a 120ish wRC+ against righties. The bigger mistake was signing Shaw as the lefty backup, but again, there just weren't better options out there. If you think they should've sold high on him post-2021 they still have the dilemma of needing to sign one of the only two good free agents at a position where they had a top prospect at AAA. So again, going with Dalbec was just an obvious move.
Or they could've traded for one-two years of someone such as Bell, Cron or Mancini. People here are fond of saying, "Oh you can't get much for one year of player X," so a 1-year rental of a 1.5 to 2.0 fWAR player should not have cost the farm or even a top 10 prospect. And if they were selling high on Dalbec, they may have been able to trade him straight-up for one of those guys (or even get a bit more), claiming they were making room for Casas or whatever. Again, I was all in on Dalbec, but are always more options out there than free agents. And as Manfred said, we expect Prez's of Baseball Ops to be better at this than us.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Sept 22, 2022 16:00:05 GMT -5
You need a guy at 1B that can hit RHP, not something that's crazy hard. It's not even he signed a guy that sucked, it’s he didn't make a move at all. Daniel Vogelbach career splits were perfect and he easily could have got him. Kills RHP, is dreadful versus LHP.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 22, 2022 16:02:16 GMT -5
Even knowing what we know now, there was no better option than Dalbec (other than signing Vogelbach, but absolutely no one was calling for that and he signed for $1 million, so obviously no one saw his year coming). Those options were: -Sign Freeman for a whole bunch of money, making a huge investment at the very position where one of our top two prospects plays. -Sign Rizzo - ditto. And with either of these guys you forfeit the chance to sign Story. -Sign one of the other free agents who haven't done any better than Dalbec. And even now Dalbec is not without value - he has a 120ish wRC+ against righties. The bigger mistake was signing Shaw as the lefty backup, but again, there just weren't better options out there. If you think they should've sold high on him post-2021 they still have the dilemma of needing to sign one of the only two good free agents at a position where they had a top prospect at AAA. So again, going with Dalbec was just an obvious move.
Or they could've traded for one-two years of someone such as Bell, Cron or Mancini. People here are fond of saying, "Oh you can't get much for one year of player X," so a 1-year rental of a 1.5 to 2.0 fWAR player should not have cost the farm or even a top 10 prospect. Again, I was all in on Dalbec, but are always more options out there than free agents. And as Manfred said, we expect Prez's of Baseball Ops to be better at this than us. Mancini is not that good. Cron wasn't even available at the trade deadline so that obviously wasn't an option. Bell? Okay, but that would cost a pretty significant prospect, probably top 10, not to mention a salary $9 million higher than Dalbec's.
Meanwhile, Dalbec had a very rough/unlucky first month of the season and since then has been a league average bat who is well above average against lefties. He's just not the disaster that he always gets portrayed as. If he's like replacement level, okay; this team has enough holes, thanks to the lack of cheap young talent, that they had to go with replacement level at 1B. It was their least bad option.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 22, 2022 16:05:45 GMT -5
You need a guy at 1B that can hit RHP, not something that's crazy hard. It's not even he signed a guy that sucked, it’s he didn't make a move at all. Daniel Vogelbach career splits were perfect and he easily could have got him. Kills RHP, is dreadful versus LHP. There were a handful of Vogelbach-tier free agents: Vogelbach himself, Moran, Shaw, Jesus Aguilar, Tsutsugo. They've all sucked except for Vogelbach. So kudos to you if you were saying before the season that they should have gotten him. Like I said, going with Shaw as the backup was the bigger mistake than penciling in Dalbec as the starter.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 22, 2022 16:13:48 GMT -5
Or they could've traded for one-two years of someone such as Bell, Cron or Mancini. People here are fond of saying, "Oh you can't get much for one year of player X," so a 1-year rental of a 1.5 to 2.0 fWAR player should not have cost the farm or even a top 10 prospect. Again, I was all in on Dalbec, but are always more options out there than free agents. And as Manfred said, we expect Prez's of Baseball Ops to be better at this than us. Mancini is not that good. Cron wasn't even available at the trade deadline so that obviously wasn't an option. Bell? Okay, but that would cost a pretty significant prospect, probably top 10, not to mention a salary $9 million higher than Dalbec's.
Meanwhile, Dalbec had a very rough/unlucky first month of the season and since then has been a league average bat who is well above average against lefties. He's just not the disaster that he always gets portrayed as. If he's like replacement level, okay; this team has enough holes, thanks to the lack of cheap young talent, that they had to go with replacement level at 1B. It was their least bad option.
Before the season began. I should've been more explicit.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Sept 22, 2022 17:10:25 GMT -5
The Paxton move is not one you make if you're worried about the CBT. I also don't agree that it was predictable that Paxton would hurt his oblique rehabbing an arm injury unless you've seen his medical file and there's something in there that would indicate such a problem. That's just post hoc rationalizion. The problem was not getting the starting RF and going further over. It may have not been predictable, but it could certainly be forecast. He has pitched a grand total of 754 innings in 9 years. It was another questionable roster component that didn't account for the historical data of his injuries enough. I just can't wait to see if hubris kicks in the option.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 22, 2022 17:35:37 GMT -5
The Paxton move is not one you make if you're worried about the CBT. I also don't agree that it was predictable that Paxton would hurt his oblique rehabbing an arm injury unless you've seen his medical file and there's something in there that would indicate such a problem. That's just post hoc rationalizion. The problem was not getting the starting RF and going further over. It may have not been predictable, but it could certainly be forecast. He has pitched a grand total of 754 innings in 9 years. It was another questionable roster component that didn't account for the historical data of his injuries enough. I just can't wait to see if hubris kicks in the option. Barring some sort of bad set of medicals saying Paxton is complete toast, they will pick up that option. It would be a peer-collective snicker and a fan-screaming collective outrage if Paxton rehabbed on the Sox's dime this year and then turns out to be a #3 pitcher or better next year for 20+ starts.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxpride34 on Sept 22, 2022 17:46:57 GMT -5
It may have not been predictable, but it could certainly be forecast. He has pitched a grand total of 754 innings in 9 years. It was another questionable roster component that didn't account for the historical data of his injuries enough. I just can't wait to see if hubris kicks in the option. Barring some sort of bad set of medicals saying Paxton is complete toast, they will pick up that option. It would be a peer-collective snicker and a fan-screaming collective outrage if Paxton rehabbed on the Sox's dime this year and then turns out to be a #3 pitcher or better next year for 20+ starts. I think its far from a lock that the sox pick up paxton's option for the next 2 yrs at 13 mill per. He will be 34 this November, will need to build up innings and arm strength since he was unable to do so this season and is possibly the least durable pitcher in the league. He's exactly the type of pitcher this team doesnt need heading into next season. The rotation desperately needs to get younger and more durable.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 22, 2022 17:47:56 GMT -5
Yeah it's much more likely they try to find a middle ground between his option and the team option than them simply picking up the team option.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Sept 23, 2022 9:24:29 GMT -5
You need a guy at 1B that can hit RHP, not something that's crazy hard. It's not even he signed a guy that sucked, it’s he didn't make a move at all. Daniel Vogelbach career splits were perfect and he easily could have got him. Kills RHP, is dreadful versus LHP. There were a handful of Vogelbach-tier free agents: Vogelbach himself, Moran, Shaw, Jesus Aguilar, Tsutsugo. They've all sucked except for Vogelbach. So kudos to you if you were saying before the season that they should have gotten him. Like I said, going with Shaw as the backup was the bigger mistake than penciling in Dalbec as the starter. I had a bunch of crap going on, never went through the options. Yet Vogelbach is clearly the best RHP hitter out of the group and sucks badly against LHP. So he clearly made the most sense. Shaw is the type of guy you sign to minor league deal to backup a better free agent signing. He's sucked against RHP for the last 3 years. So it makes no sense to bring him in with Dalbec. Even better would have been also going after an OF that can hit RHP and also play 1B if you worried about the bench with a platoon at 1B. Can't find it on free agent market, you can make a trade. I thought Bloom was supposed to be creative.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Sept 23, 2022 12:07:37 GMT -5
It may have not been predictable, but it could certainly be forecast. He has pitched a grand total of 754 innings in 9 years. It was another questionable roster component that didn't account for the historical data of his injuries enough. I just can't wait to see if hubris kicks in the option. Barring some sort of bad set of medicals saying Paxton is complete toast, they will pick up that option. It would be a peer-collective snicker and a fan-screaming collective outrage if Paxton rehabbed on the Sox's dime this year and then turns out to be a #3 pitcher or better next year for 20+ starts. The FO doesn't care nearly that much about armchair GM opinions lol
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Sept 23, 2022 12:22:10 GMT -5
There were a handful of Vogelbach-tier free agents: Vogelbach himself, Moran, Shaw, Jesus Aguilar, Tsutsugo. They've all sucked except for Vogelbach. So kudos to you if you were saying before the season that they should have gotten him. Like I said, going with Shaw as the backup was the bigger mistake than penciling in Dalbec as the starter. I had a bunch of crap going on, never went through the options. Yet Vogelbach is clearly the best RHP hitter out of the group and sucks badly against LHP. So he clearly made the most sense. Shaw is the type of guy you sign to minor league deal to backup a better free agent signing. He's sucked against RHP for the last 3 years. So it makes no sense to bring him in with Dalbec. Even better would have been also going after an OF that can hit RHP and also play 1B if you worried about the bench with a platoon at 1B. Can't find it on free agent market, you can make a trade. I thought Bloom was supposed to be creative. Why do you need to be creative when you already have a perfectly serviceable 1B making league minimum and the top 1B prospect in all of baseball at AAA? Investing heavily there would not have made sense. Vogelbach's platoon splits are pretty ludicrous, so the second Casas was ready he'd have been unrosterable. A $1 million deal for a guy you intend to DFA after ~2 months is a bit different, since it's more like a $3 million deal pro-rated. It's exactly breaking the bank, but it's not efficient either. Turns out it would have been a good value regardless, but he was coming off a -0.1 fWAR season in 258 PA for Milwaukee and had really only had one even kind of okay season, a 1.2 fWAR in 558 PA for Seattle back in 2019. He's a career 1.9 fWAR player and 1.3 of that is this year.
In Bloom's position last offseason I would rather have had Franchy platoon there; he's already paid for, plays other positions, and can pinch run. He also has options left, so you get to preserve the depth when Casas comes up.
WITH THAT SAID, with the hindsight of knowing the team finished $4.5 million over the LT, yeah, sign as many Vogelbachs as you want.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 23, 2022 15:12:08 GMT -5
I had a bunch of crap going on, never went through the options. Yet Vogelbach is clearly the best RHP hitter out of the group and sucks badly against LHP. So he clearly made the most sense. Shaw is the type of guy you sign to minor league deal to backup a better free agent signing. He's sucked against RHP for the last 3 years. So it makes no sense to bring him in with Dalbec. Even better would have been also going after an OF that can hit RHP and also play 1B if you worried about the bench with a platoon at 1B. Can't find it on free agent market, you can make a trade. I thought Bloom was supposed to be creative. Why do you need to be creative when you already have a perfectly serviceable 1B making league minimum and the top 1B prospect in all of baseball at AAA? Investing heavily there would not have made sense. Vogelbach's platoon splits are pretty ludicrous, so the second Casas was ready he'd have been unrosterable. A $1 million deal for a guy you intend to DFA after ~2 months is a bit different, since it's more like a $3 million deal pro-rated. It's exactly breaking the bank, but it's not efficient either. Turns out it would have been a good value regardless, but he was coming off a -0.1 fWAR season in 258 PA for Milwaukee and had really only had one even kind of okay season, a 1.2 fWAR in 558 PA for Seattle back in 2019. He's a career 1.9 fWAR player and 1.3 of that is this year.
In Bloom's position last offseason I would rather have had Franchy platoon there; he's already paid for, plays other positions, and can pinch run. He also has options left, so you get to preserve the depth when Casas comes up.
WITH THAT SAID, with the hindsight of knowing the team finished $4.5 million over the LT, yeah, sign as many Vogelbachs as you want.
But remember the last top AAA first base prospect in baseball, Spencer Torkelson? He has virtually face-planted in MLB in his first year despite the vast bulk of professional evaluators rating him one of the top overall prospects in baseball, not just at first base. And when I say face-planted, the guy who went 1/1 is a -0.7 fWAR player with a .613 OPS after nearly 400 PAs. And no one ever had Casas rated higher than Torkelson. This isn't to say Casas will be a bust. In fact, he may be a regular All Star, and so may Torkelson. But prospect development isn't linear, and the transition from AAA to MLB is said to be the most difficult jump in levels in professional sports. Plus, if Bloom is bringing Tampa's player development philosophies to Boston, they prefer to have position players and starting pitchers go through an entire year at AA and AAA as part of that process. Sometimes, an outlier will play his way up to MLB faster than that - or injuries at the MLB level may for management's hand, but that's their overall philosophy. Anyway, that's why Bloom may wish to be creative when certain prospects who they project to get 5-6 years or more as MLB starters, no matter how good they are projected to be, start getting close to majors.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 23, 2022 15:22:09 GMT -5
Barring some sort of bad set of medicals saying Paxton is complete toast, they will pick up that option. It would be a peer-collective snicker and a fan-screaming collective outrage if Paxton rehabbed on the Sox's dime this year and then turns out to be a #3 pitcher or better next year for 20+ starts. The FO doesn't care nearly that much about armchair GM opinions lol Maybe not - although this piece about Caleb Ort in The Athletic says that the organization is aware of such perceptions or missing something about another player only to have another team see it and grab the player when the Sox discard him. Excerpt: Why this guy?
“We don’t want to be that team,” Cora elaborated, “that, we got somebody that is interesting, and he’s talented, and we know that there’s upside regardless of the age — and then we lose him and somebody else picks him up, and we see him during the season seven times and he throws seven scoreless innings...“We have lost some guys because (other teams) recognized them for X and Y reasons, and they’ve been successful,” Cora said, without naming names. “Others have struggled, too, on the other side. It’s not that it’s always perfect."Peer perceptions aside, I will add that this ownership group seems to give heed to negative fan perceptions if it is persistent and affecting viewer and listener market share.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 23, 2022 15:36:45 GMT -5
The FO doesn't care nearly that much about armchair GM opinions lol Maybe not - although this piece about Caleb Ort in The Athletic says that the organization is aware of such perceptions or missing something about another player only to have another team see it and grab the player when the Sox discard him. Excerpt: Why this guy?
“We don’t want to be that team,” Cora elaborated, “that, we got somebody that is interesting, and he’s talented, and we know that there’s upside regardless of the age — and then we lose him and somebody else picks him up, and we see him during the season seven times and he throws seven scoreless innings...“We have lost some guys because (other teams) recognized them for X and Y reasons, and they’ve been successful,” Cora said, without naming names. “Others have struggled, too, on the other side. It’s not that it’s always perfect."Peer perceptions aside, I will add that this ownership group seems to give heed to negative fan perceptions if it is persistent and affecting viewer and listener market share. You're really stretching to fit that statement into your oddly postmodern interpretation of their motivations. Cora is pretty clearly just saying they don't want to give up on the wrong guys.
Conveniently, what's good for ratings is winning, so you don't need to ascribe some tortuous logic about hyperreal perceptions to their decision-making process. They'll pick up the option on Paxton if they think it'll help the team win; otherwise they won't.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,655
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 23, 2022 16:10:25 GMT -5
Maybe not - although this piece about Caleb Ort in The Athletic says that the organization is aware of such perceptions or missing something about another player only to have another team see it and grab the player when the Sox discard him. Excerpt: Why this guy?
“We don’t want to be that team,” Cora elaborated, “that, we got somebody that is interesting, and he’s talented, and we know that there’s upside regardless of the age — and then we lose him and somebody else picks him up, and we see him during the season seven times and he throws seven scoreless innings...“We have lost some guys because (other teams) recognized them for X and Y reasons, and they’ve been successful,” Cora said, without naming names. “Others have struggled, too, on the other side. It’s not that it’s always perfect."Peer perceptions aside, I will add that this ownership group seems to give heed to negative fan perceptions if it is persistent and affecting viewer and listener market share. You're really stretching to fit that statement into your oddly postmodern interpretation of their motivations. Cora is pretty clearly just saying they don't want to give up on the wrong guys. Conveniently, what's good for ratings is winning, so you don't need to ascribe some tortuous logic about hyperreal perceptions to their decision-making process. They'll pick up the option on Paxton if they think it'll help the team win; otherwise they won't.
Post modernism is deconstructionalist neoMarxism. My reply...isn't that. I'm just saying they likely don't want to get caught paying for Paxton then not picking his option up if they think he could succeed next year, only to have some team grab him and have him succeed. That article I cited talked about that with regards to Ort, later in the article comparing his case to Springs, who the Sox gave up on, only to have Tampa grab him and have significant success. Cora's remorse was pretty clearly stated there.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 23, 2022 17:05:51 GMT -5
You're really stretching to fit that statement into your oddly postmodern interpretation of their motivations. Cora is pretty clearly just saying they don't want to give up on the wrong guys. Conveniently, what's good for ratings is winning, so you don't need to ascribe some tortuous logic about hyperreal perceptions to their decision-making process. They'll pick up the option on Paxton if they think it'll help the team win; otherwise they won't.
Post modernism is deconstructionalist neoMarxism. My reply...isn't that. I'm just saying they likely don't want to get caught paying for Paxton then not picking his option up if they think he could succeed next year, only to have some team grab him and have him succeed. That article I cited talked about that with regards to Ort, later in the article comparing his case to Springs, who the Sox gave up on, only to have Tampa grab him and have significant success. Cora's remorse was pretty clearly stated there. There's no way that's about perceptions elsewhere. It's about not wanting to give up on guys who can help the team. It has nothing to do with fans or something being mad about it. Seriously, the idea that the Red Sox under Chaim Bloom care at all about what outside perception is of their moves went out the window REAL QUICK during his first offseason with the team. Lol.
|
|
|
Post by ghostofrussgibson on Sept 23, 2022 20:22:10 GMT -5
I guess as I age I've become more of a casual Sox fan. Help me understand why Boston would only be over the CBT by $4.5 million. What's the financial/draft pick benefit to have sliced another $5 million and gotten under that threshold, especially when Boston was a long shot to make the postseason? Or, at least, the $4.5 million wasn't worth the marginal difference it'd have made in reaching the postseason. What does being over the CBT mean for the next year, two years, or three years? It would seem to me that if Boston wanted/needed to go over it, they would not only spend BIG but also do so with it being a great chance to make the playoffs and possibly win their division.
|
|
|