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.
Evaluating the Front Office and Ownership
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 13, 2023 8:31:45 GMT -5
If Bloom had not traded Vazquez at the 2022 trade deadline but had gotten McGuire for Diekman, Enmanuel Valdez for JD Martinez, and Wilyer Abreu for Eovaldi, would people think he did well? Ha it's an interesting question, I for one think Bloom overall did very well grabbing McGuire, Abreu and Valdez for what in essence were spare parts. Theoretically though, at the very least it would have nullified the why didn't he duck under the LT last year crowd. Not saying that people who ask that are wrong, they have a point and heck some times I am a part of that crowd myself.
Plus a number of people seem to think it would have been better to give up on the 2022 season because then it would have shown Bloom to be "decisive" rather than trying to have it both ways. This would have satisfied them as well.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Sept 13, 2023 8:42:08 GMT -5
Ha it's an interesting question, I for one think Bloom overall did very well grabbing McGuire, Abreu and Valdez for what in essence were spare parts. Theoretically though, at the very least it would have nullified the why didn't he duck under the LT last year crowd. Not saying that people who ask that are wrong, they have a point and heck some times I am a part of that crowd myself.
Plus a number of people seem to think it would have been better to give up on the 2022 season because then it would have shown Bloom to be "decisive" rather than trying to have it both ways. This would have satisfied them as well. Ha as ChaimTime pointed out, some would just argue something else instead. Probably in this case it would have been well why didn't they trade Xander too! Like I said I overall liked his 2022 deadline, obviously with the power of hindsight it's easy to say well he should have gotten under so I don't really ding him on it. Like you point out, that team had at least a shot to make a playoff push so punting on it would have been kind of tough to swallow. I feel the exact same way about the 2023 season too, this team had a shot to make a playoff push but once again the wheels fell off after July as we saw. The Bloom detractors will point to the past two deadlines as failures either way I'm sure. Which hey that's ok, this is a message board for folks to let their thoughts be known and it wouldn't be a very fun board if it was all just one big group think exercise.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 13, 2023 8:51:04 GMT -5
If Bloom had not traded Vazquez at the 2022 trade deadline but had gotten McGuire for Diekman, Enmanuel Valdez for JD Martinez, and Wilyer Abreu for Eovaldi, would people think he did well? That is basically a different way of saying if you make one really good move, dan’t you make a series of bad moves and be even? How about this equally unfair scenario: if you could get a better haul for CVaz than people expected, why didn’t you get anything for guys with equal or greater value?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2023 8:51:28 GMT -5
Who would be a few obvious upgrades from Bloom? I think I’d prefer to give him another 1-2 years and continue his plan. He’s done well setting the foundation (farm + young core guys) and I think this sets up to be the first offseason he can sign and trade for some higher profile guys with us being so far under the tax to start the winter. Glad it’s not my call. Dave Dombrowski *ducks*
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 13, 2023 8:56:29 GMT -5
I am not sure I get the notion that there has to be a guaranteed guy to fire Bloom. They *hired* Bloom, who was getting his first shot at being chief. That was not guaranteed. If they fire Cora, they would cast a wide net, possibly getting a first-time manager (or, say, a failed second time manager like Tito).
This is not about *whether* to fire him. But I don’t think they would say, well, we don’t like how you’ve done, but there is not enough talent out there in all of baseball to replace you.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 13, 2023 8:58:05 GMT -5
If Bloom had not traded Vazquez at the 2022 trade deadline but had gotten McGuire for Diekman, Enmanuel Valdez for JD Martinez, and Wilyer Abreu for Eovaldi, would people think he did well? That is basically a different way of saying if you make one really good move, dan’t you make a series of bad moves and be even? How about this equally unfair scenario: if you could get a better haul for CVaz than people expected, why didn’t you get anything for guys with equal or greater value? If you make one - but it's actually two - really good moves and a series of marginally bad moves did you have a good trade deadline or a bad one? Hence the thought experiment...
But it's true that if you are really determined to complain, your interpretation of a really good move could always be "how come other things weren't as good as this"?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 13, 2023 8:59:04 GMT -5
I can't believe super-competitive titan of business JWH told Bloom his job is to make sure the ML team doesn't suck for the first few years he's here. No sports team that isn't in full tank mode makes not sucking its goal. No successful business in any industry sets mediocrity as its goal.
If that's the bar Henry set, he deserves to have his ballpark taken over by O's and Dodgers fans in the closing weeks of this season. I was happy with the Bloom hiring when it happened and even happier after 2021. It's impossible to defend the on-field product and decision making the last two years. Yes, he took over a team with a bloated payroll (Sale, Price, Pedroia) but that was supposed to stop mattering last off-season. He had a ton of money to spend on FAs, but the team is headed for a final record only slightly better, if any better at all, than last season. This has been my contention when such statements are made. That said, we do have to throw out 2020 (though we get to keep Mayer ). And as much as I think Bloom has been mid/unremarkable, I can't see dumping him with a year left on his deal without replacing him with someone demonstrably better.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 13, 2023 9:03:51 GMT -5
I am not sure I get the notion that there has to be a guaranteed guy to fire Bloom. They *hired* Bloom, who was getting his first shot at being chief. That was not guaranteed. If they fire Cora, they would cast a wide net, possibly getting a first-time manager (or, say, a failed second time manager like Tito). This is not about *whether* to fire him. But I don’t think they would say, well, we don’t like how you’ve done, but there is not enough talent out there in all of baseball to replace you. Yeah, I think that's right. But it does also speak to the thinness of the argument for firing him. In shifting from Dombrowski to Bloom they were clearly looking for a shift in team-building philosophy. Even if they're dissatisfied with Bloom now, I don't think it would be on those grounds; they would just want someone who could execute better. But if Bloom's imperative was "field a competitive team while building up the farm," he has executed well on one and ambiguously on the other. So in replacing him you would have to be awfully confident that the guy you''re bringing in would both do better than Bloom at fielding a major league roster and wouldn't do worse than him at building the farm.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Sept 13, 2023 9:05:31 GMT -5
I can't believe super-competitive titan of business JWH told Bloom his job is to make sure the ML team doesn't suck for the first few years he's here. No sports team that isn't in full tank mode makes not sucking its goal. No successful business in any industry sets mediocrity as its goal.
If that's the bar Henry set, he deserves to have his ballpark taken over by O's and Dodgers fans in the closing weeks of this season. I was happy with the Bloom hiring when it happened and even happier after 2021. It's impossible to defend the on-field product and decision making the last two years. Yes, he took over a team with a bloated payroll (Sale, Price, Pedroia) but that was supposed to stop mattering last off-season. He had a ton of money to spend on FAs, but the team is headed for a final record only slightly better, if any better at all, than last season. This has been my contention when such statements are made. That said, we do have to throw out 2020 (though we get to keep Mayer ). And as much as I think Bloom has been mid/unremarkable , I can't see dumping him with a year left on his deal without replacing him with someone demonstrably better.This is where I am at as well, with Stearns off the board I don't really see anyone worthy of dumping Bloom for at this juncture. If they dump Bloom for another green behind the ears GM/POBO then I don't really see what that accomplishes. I guess if Henry and Co. have lost complete faith in Bloom then sure replace him now but I can't really imagine that is the case. They must be somewhat on the same page when it comes to organization & farm building but maybe not? If you dump Bloom for another inexperienced GM you're basically just replacing Bloom with Bloom in a sense.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 13, 2023 9:06:01 GMT -5
That is basically a different way of saying if you make one really good move, dan’t you make a series of bad moves and be even? How about this equally unfair scenario: if you could get a better haul for CVaz than people expected, why didn’t you get anything for guys with equal or greater value? If you make one - but it's actually two - really good moves and a series of marginally bad moves did you have a good trade deadline or a bad one? Hence the thought experiment...
But it's true that if you are really determined to complain, your interpretation of a really good move could always be "how come other things weren't as good as this"?
Or if you are being defensive, you might find the one good move — which does not a pattern make. Either view is equally legitimate.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 13, 2023 9:06:27 GMT -5
Looking back using hindsight who would have been the good FA signings last year? Turner and Bellinger were probably the 2 best players. Eovaldi and maybe Lorenzen on the mound. We got Turner and were the high bid on Eovaldi and Eflin. Last year has to be one of the worst FA offseasons. And the SP market did not really turn out well. Either injury, under performance, or a mixture of both. (Rondon, Verlander, deGrom, verlander, Abreu etc And here's the rub - this team needs starting pitching desperately. Yet the above - and add Kluber and whomever else was on the market - adds further weight to the Brian Kenny rule: "Never sign a big contract free agent pitcher over 30." The guys who are successful in those deals - Cole, Verlander when Houston signed him at 35, Gausman (so far), maybe one or two others - are in the bottom 10% of all those deals signed and tend to be near-unicorns. Yet, of the free agent pitchers available under 30 this year, one is a reprehensible violent offender and the other is a Japanese pitcher who is untested vs. MLB's hitters and marathon season (and uses a much better ball to pitch with in the Nippon League).
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 13, 2023 9:06:39 GMT -5
I am not sure I get the notion that there has to be a guaranteed guy to fire Bloom. They *hired* Bloom, who was getting his first shot at being chief. That was not guaranteed. If they fire Cora, they would cast a wide net, possibly getting a first-time manager (or, say, a failed second time manager like Tito). This is not about *whether* to fire him. But I don’t think they would say, well, we don’t like how you’ve done, but there is not enough talent out there in all of baseball to replace you. Yeah, I think that's right. But it does also speak to the thinness of the argument for firing him. In shifting from Dombrowski to Bloom they were clearly looking for a shift in team-building philosophy. Even if they're dissatisfied with Bloom now, I don't think it would be on those grounds; they would just want someone who could execute better. But if Bloom's imperative was "field a competitive team while building up the farm," he has executed well on one and ambiguously on the other. So in replacing him you would have to be awfully confident that the guy you''re bringing in would both do better than Bloom at fielding a major league roster and wouldn't do worse than him at building the farm. Well said. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 13, 2023 9:08:15 GMT -5
Who would be a few obvious upgrades from Bloom? I think I’d prefer to give him another 1-2 years and continue his plan. He’s done well setting the foundation (farm + young core guys) and I think this sets up to be the first offseason he can sign and trade for some higher profile guys with us being so far under the tax to start the winter. Glad it’s not my call. Dave Dombrowski *ducks* LOL - I think he's got all Henry's, Werner's and Kennedy's numbers blocked on his phone and their emails set for straight-to-spam.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 13, 2023 9:13:32 GMT -5
Ha it's an interesting question, I for one think Bloom overall did very well grabbing McGuire, Abreu and Valdez for what in essence were spare parts. Theoretically though, at the very least it would have nullified the why didn't he duck under the LT last year crowd. Not saying that people who ask that are wrong, they have a point and heck some times I am a part of that crowd myself. Plus a number of people seem to think it would have been better to give up on the 2022 season because then it would have shown Bloom to be "decisive" rather than trying to have it both ways. This would have satisfied them as well. This ignores the nuance. They needed to trade JD Martinez, who had a robust .505 OPS from June 17 to August 2. 149 PA. They didn't need to give up on the season to get under. The primary complaint of many during Dombrowski's tenure by some (raises hand) was a lack of attention to nuance or moves on the fringes. Failing to trade the struggling JDM to get under the CBT was a Dombrowski move. That's not what Bloom is supposed to do. And your "Brooks Brannon-level prospect" could be someone else's Mookie Betts-level prospect or, more realistically perhaps, upgrading both Campbell and Riemer to Hickey-level prospects.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 13, 2023 9:25:52 GMT -5
Plus a number of people seem to think it would have been better to give up on the 2022 season because then it would have shown Bloom to be "decisive" rather than trying to have it both ways. This would have satisfied them as well. This ignores the nuance. They needed to trade JD Martinez, who had a robust .505 OPS from June 17 to August 2. 149 PA. They didn't need to give up on the season to get under.The primary complaint of many during Dombrowski's tenure by some (raises hand) was a lack of attention to nuance or moves on the fringes. Failing to trade the struggling JDM to get under the CBT was a Dombrowski move. That's not what Bloom is supposed to do. And your "Brooks Brannon-level prospect" could be someone else's Mookie Betts-level prospect or, more realistically perhaps, upgrading both Campbell and Riemer to Hickey-level prospects. Was JD Martinez valuable or wasn't he? Citing his .505 OPS over the quarter of a season prior to the deadline implies he sucked - but then why would any team take on his full salary in a trade? On the other hand if he didn't suck, weren't the Red Sox, with hopes of making the playoffs, one of the teams that could use him? You can't have it both ways.
I do think they made a strategic error last year - they should have gone over the LTT by more. For the life of me I don't understand going barely over while simultaneously leaving obvious and fillable holes on the roster (namely, RF). But that die having been cast, they were where they were on August 2nd.
|
|
|
Post by asm19 on Sept 13, 2023 9:49:30 GMT -5
I am not sure I get the notion that there has to be a guaranteed guy to fire Bloom. They *hired* Bloom, who was getting his first shot at being chief. That was not guaranteed. If they fire Cora, they would cast a wide net, possibly getting a first-time manager (or, say, a failed second time manager like Tito). This is not about *whether* to fire him. But I don’t think they would say, well, we don’t like how you’ve done, but there is not enough talent out there in all of baseball to replace you. Yeah, I think that's right. But it does also speak to the thinness of the argument for firing him. In shifting from Dombrowski to Bloom they were clearly looking for a shift in team-building philosophy. Even if they're dissatisfied with Bloom now, I don't think it would be on those grounds; they would just want someone who could execute better. But if Bloom's imperative was "field a competitive team while building up the farm," he has executed well on one and ambiguously on the other. So in replacing him you would have to be awfully confident that the guy you''re bringing in would both do better than Bloom at fielding a major league roster and wouldn't do worse than him at building the farm. It's funny, I was wondering recently what an alternative Bloom tenure looks like if after 2020 John Henry got pissed, reversed course, and demanded more immediate results. The last three years the Red Sox (despite media predictions to the contrary) have played well enough through mid-summer for a playoff spot to be attainable as of say, July 31st. In 2021 they nearly collapsed via COVID outbreaks and bad play; in 2022/2023 what pitching they had mostly withered/fell apart. And in all three deadlines, they weren't super aggressive to fill holes or propel the team, however fun the Kyle Schwarber trade was. (Heck, this same thing dynamic was in play in 2019 with Dombrowksi too.) Might the team have been too passive and future-focused in reference to its pool of prospect capital? What does this team look like if it had been aggressive in pursuit of say, Luis Castillo (Mariners), Sean Murphy (Braves), Aaron Civale (Rays) or others who were on the trade block? Could former top 10 SoxProspects like Mata, Walter, Ward, Giminez, Seabold and others whose stocks have dipped been cashed out in deadlines past, even for rentals? Obviously hindsight is 20/20, and I think as Chris/Ian noted on the pod, they now have a large pool of cost-controlled MLB or near-MLB talent that allows them to spend big in certain areas. But I'm curious if they had been more willing to deal more of their (admittedly limited) recent prospect capital for MLB talent what that would have looked like. (FYI - my account may be familiar to ya'll despite this being my "first" post. After the Barraclough game I needed a break from Red sox talk and deleted my account and deactivated Twitter. It's pretty depressing talking Sox these days so we'll see how long this lasts lol)
|
|
|
Post by briam on Sept 13, 2023 9:53:58 GMT -5
If Bloom had not traded Vazquez at the 2022 trade deadline but had gotten McGuire for Diekman, Enmanuel Valdez for JD Martinez, and Wilyer Abreu for Eovaldi, would people think he did well? I would have liked that better than the path he chose but wouldn’t have been ecstatic. To me, he could’ve sold JD to dip under the luxury tax and hold on to Eovaldi to still have a pulse but get much better compensation for the QOs.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 13, 2023 10:18:07 GMT -5
If Bloom had not traded Vazquez at the 2022 trade deadline but had gotten McGuire for Diekman, Enmanuel Valdez for JD Martinez, and Wilyer Abreu for Eovaldi, would people think he did well? I would have liked that better than the path he chose but wouldn’t have been ecstatic. To me, he could’ve sold JD to dip under the luxury tax and hold on to Eovaldi to still have a pulse but get much better compensation for the QOs. I think the real consternation is he tried to do both - sell some off and add at the margins - when people were focused on the binary: Go For It or Sell. On the surface it looks like indecision - unless it works (working being similar to what Seattle did this year, not moving salary to get below the tax, but dealing their popular closer, a perceived strength, but actually getting better).
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 13, 2023 13:01:57 GMT -5
If Bloom had not traded Vazquez at the 2022 trade deadline but had gotten McGuire for Diekman, Enmanuel Valdez for JD Martinez, and Wilyer Abreu for Eovaldi, would people think he did well? Ha it's an interesting question, I for one think Bloom overall did very well grabbing McGuire, Abreu and Valdez for what in essence were spare parts. Theoretically though, at the very least it would have nullified the why didn't he duck under the LT last year crowd. Not saying that people who ask that are wrong, they have a point and heck some times I am a part of that crowd myself. Yes, the question needs to include McGuire, Valdez, Abreu, two R2 picks, extra money to spend on this year's draft and more payroll flexibility going forward. My answer in that scenario would be yes, getting under the LTT was important. I would quibble a bit and say that subsidizing JDM and Nate could have brought higher-rated prospects.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Sept 13, 2023 13:15:59 GMT -5
Ha it's an interesting question, I for one think Bloom overall did very well grabbing McGuire, Abreu and Valdez for what in essence were spare parts. Theoretically though, at the very least it would have nullified the why didn't he duck under the LT last year crowd. Not saying that people who ask that are wrong, they have a point and heck some times I am a part of that crowd myself. Yes, the question needs to include McGuire, Valdez, Abreu, two R2 picks, extra money to spend on this year's draft and more payroll flexibility going forward. My answer in that scenario would be yes, getting under the LTT was important. I would quibble a bit and say that subsidizing JDM and Nate could have brought higher-rated prospects. How would getting under the LT last year have effected the payroll flexibility going forward at this point? I don't disagree on the other points though. The power of hindsight says they should have traded away anyone not bolted down last year and once again this year too.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 13, 2023 13:17:02 GMT -5
My thinking would be that it might be best to either fire Bloom or give him an extension after this season. Don't put him in a position where he has to make GFIN moves to keep his job.
I agree with those who say there's no point in canning him to bring in an unproven commodity. OTOH, I wouldn't be thrilled to learn this winter that he's been extended for three years, through the 2027 season.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 13, 2023 13:24:39 GMT -5
Yes, the question needs to include McGuire, Valdez, Abreu, two R2 picks, extra money to spend on this year's draft and more payroll flexibility going forward. My answer in that scenario would be yes, getting under the LTT was important. I would quibble a bit and say that subsidizing JDM and Nate could have brought higher-rated prospects. How would getting under the LT last year have effected the payroll flexibility going forward at this point? I don't disagree on the other points though. The power of hindsight says they should have traded away anyone not bolted down last year and once again this year too. The payroll flexibility would be less significant than the draft picks and whatever prospects they could have gotten for Nate-JDM, particularly if they subsidized those guys. But I was referring to the financial benefits of resetting the tax after two years to avoid the 50 percent levy on overages in year 3.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Sept 13, 2023 13:27:18 GMT -5
How would getting under the LT last year have effected the payroll flexibility going forward at this point? I don't disagree on the other points though. The power of hindsight says they should have traded away anyone not bolted down last year and once again this year too. The payroll flexibility would be less significant than the draft picks and whatever prospects they could have gotten for Nate-JDM, particularly if they subsidized those guys. But I was referring to the financial benefits of resetting the tax after two years to avoid the 50 percent levy on overages in year 3. If anything resetting the LT this season is more advantageous to them going forward than it would have been to get under last year and then go over this season.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 13, 2023 13:44:29 GMT -5
Yes, the question needs to include McGuire, Valdez, Abreu, two R2 picks, extra money to spend on this year's draft and more payroll flexibility going forward. My answer in that scenario would be yes, getting under the LTT was important. I would quibble a bit and say that subsidizing JDM and Nate could have brought higher-rated prospects. How would getting under the LT last year have effected the payroll flexibility going forward at this point? I don't disagree on the other points though. The power of hindsight says they should have traded away anyone not bolted down last year and once again this year too. Certainly true in a sense: since they flamed out both this year and last, it would have been nice to get a little more value out of those lost seasons.
But it's also fun to consider hindsight in the alternate universe: imagine two seasons a row in which the Red Sox have 25-30% playoff odds at the deadline; two seasons in a row in which Bloom trades away star players to add prospects; two seasons in a row in which the team immediately collapses after the trade deadline. Public perceptions would be BRUTAL.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 13, 2023 13:51:50 GMT -5
How would getting under the LT last year have effected the payroll flexibility going forward at this point? I don't disagree on the other points though. The power of hindsight says they should have traded away anyone not bolted down last year and once again this year too. Certainly true in a sense: since they flamed out both this year and last, it would have been nice to get a little more value out of those lost seasons. But it's also fun to consider hindsight in the alternate universe: imagine two seasons a row in which the Red Sox have 25-30% playoff odds at the deadline; two seasons in a row in which Bloom trades away star players to add prospects; two seasons in a row in which the team immediately collapses after the trade deadline. Public perceptions would be BRUTAL.
I'm still at the point where I think this part is pretty awful (though not outright "brutal") given: 1) the levels of excellence this ownership has set from day 1, and 2) the playoffs are now a six-team affair.
|
|
|