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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by beasleyrockah on May 6, 2022 12:08:18 GMT -5
Turning a $15-16m contract into a $500m payroll is not a realistic argument. Closer was a huge question this off-season (and the impetus for some clever person to start a thread about it with a poll that attracted 57 responses). Jansen at $16m was a legitimate option for a big-market team with no CBT worries. Jansen is 7/7 in saves and has already had a streak of 8 straight hitless outings. Would he have closed out all of the Sox save situations so far? Maybe not but I'd sure as hell take my chances compared with what we've had so far. Whitlock's blown save occurred in the 8th (in his third inning of work), and then Brasier blew another save in the same game in the 10th. Barnes blew one in the 8th. Austin Davis blew one in the 7th, and then Diekman blew one of his two later that game in the 9th (as far as I can see, only Diekman has blown saves in the 9th this year, one of which came from an inherited runner on a single). Robles blew one in the 10th. Some of these save situations wouldn't have involved Jansen regardless of whether he was on the team. Jansen hasn't pitched more than an inning this year, and last year he got six outs once, five outs once, and four outs five times, he's not a guy you'd stretch for extra outs at this point. If the pen's only issue was holding the lead in the 9th inning in conventional save opportunities it'd be an easier argument, but they are blowing saves when you need your setup men to do their job too. I'd also point out the lack of offense has put a lot of pressure on the pen in some of these situations.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on May 6, 2022 0:07:30 GMT -5
Wait… so what you are saying is 2020 wasn’t a bridge *year* and this is still part of the bridge? So… we agree? That it is the bridge era, not a bridge year? My beef is with reducing seasons to "second place finishes" given the wild card system. Once you make it, all that matters is your results. The 2016-2017 Red Sox won back to back divisional titles and a grand total of one playoff game. If they finish in second next year there's a good chance they're a top team given the strength of the division, it could be a title team. I'm not suggesting they'll be that team mind you, it's tough to have any feel for next year given the current pending FAs. Definitions vary for what a bridge team actually is. To me, it's when you expect a chunk of your core to turnover soon and a new, more sustainable core to emerge (usually cost controlled internal young talent). Bloom hasn't turned over the core that much to this point, with the big exception of Betts (plus Price, Benny, Porcello and now Erod). Eovaldi and Sale have been kept. X, JD, Devers, Vazquez, and JBJ (other than one year) are still here. They've had the bulk of this core together for a long time relative to modern baseball, you just don't see everyone kept. Was the 04 team a bridge team considering they were about to lose Nomar (then Cabrera), Pedro, and Lowe? The 2013 team had a couple 3/39 signings and short term small deals (despite moving a ton of payroll the previous deadline), it wasn't a go all out year, you could certainly call it a bridge year if these years qualify. The 07 team felt like the start of a dynasty run, and while the 08 team was excellent as well they didn't win a playoff game from 09-12, things can change fast. Bloom has generally been more invested in maximizing long term chances and retaining future value than selling future value (or paying long term money) for short term upgrades which I think is the part that feels like a "bridge". I can't argue much with that general strategy given the farm system and contracts he inherited. When DD took over he had elite cost controlled talent that allowed him to sign an ace and elite DH, and flip prospects for a better ace and elite closer while still making the money work in the short term. Maybe Bloom could've leaned in to a more aggressive rebuild entering 2020, but at that time there weren't many players to sell.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on May 5, 2022 21:26:44 GMT -5
I recall bridges being bandied ‘bout in 2020. If that bridge is reset by a 2nd place finish and we are now bridging again to a potential 2nd place finish next year, I stand corrected. That sounds much better. The first place team lost in the postseason to the second place Red Sox. The 2004 team finished in second too. Are we seriously caring more about the divisional finish than how deep they get in the postseason now? I'm pretty sure if they finished first and then lost to the Yankees or Rays you'd be making fun of their first place finish being wasted. Call me crazy, but I'd prefer to go to the ALCS as a second place team than win the division and get swept in the ALDS like the 2016 team. Ignoring postseason results and reducing a season solely to your regular season finish is a good way to make a terrible take. There are plenty of legitimate things to be negative about right now without reaching like this. The division was absolutely loaded and the Red Sox beat the best two teams in their division when it counted. Also, if you thought the 2020 Red Sox were in position to become a sustainable winner after one rebuilding season your expectations were off. Compare the farm system and financial flexibility when DD took over compared to Bloom, it's night and day. Last year was great, but it was unexpected and took a series of good moves along with a lot of luck and good health. So far this year we've seen the opposite end of that spectrum, not unlike 2012 to 2013, or 2013 to 2014.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 10, 2022 15:00:53 GMT -5
You know Peppers has played in 61 games starting 59 and Wilson is 43 with 28 starts right? The Giants liked Peppers enough to pick up his 5th year option at 6.8 million last year. McGrone and Perkins are 2nd/3rd round prospects types. You can draft new ones, yet how does that change anything? Perkins last 19 games in College 24 TFL and 11.5 sacks. He fell in the draft due to a failed drug test while at College. Do they workout? Who knows, yet both players are very talented and have the upside of NFL starters. What I want to know, is what happened to Uche, 3 sacks the first two games last year. Gets injured and then was a zero the rest of the season. So I'm not worried at LB with projected starters Wilson, Bentley and Peppers, along with McGrone for Depth, nevermind other guys like Jennings who I really wanted to see be given a chance at middle LB. Yet this is a completely different defense than the one he played on as a rookie. Jennings last two years at Bama after his injury, 134 tackles, 26.5 TFL, 14.5 sacks, 2 interceptions and 16 PD. He's just an afterthought right now. Yet that's better production than most LB in this draft. My hope is that it's just taking him some time to adjust to the Patriots complex defense. That's a lot of options to throw against the wall and see you sticks. They likely draft another LB. They also play a ton of two safety looks taking out a LB, that's not changing Now DL you have two good young options that are unproven mostly. Yet they certainly need more. That's my bigger worry. It's why I want Flowers and Hicks, or you'll need to look into drafting a few guys. Yet again, they'll be unproven. The right DE could solve run issues on running downs and be a pass rusher next to Barmore like Flower did for years, while bringing in Perkins/Uche. This draft has a bunch of those guys, your 265 to 280 DE types. I'm growing to really like Neil Farrel Jr. as a run stuffing DT in the draft. Bill stated he wanted to get younger and faster on D, he's done that. Yet getting younger does carry risk, yet so many veterans also doesn't give young players a chance to play. I don't see Peppers as the KVN replacement like you do. I expect they'll relax size requirements somewhat in exchange for needed speed and athleticism but Peppers can't hold up in that role for the 80-90% of the snaps like KVN, they don't have the same skillset beyond the size difference. Peppers will take more limited snaps there and be a box safety while moving all over, but he's got to prove himself, there's a reason he signed for so cheap. With McCourty, Dugger, and Phillips near locks to log as many or more snaps than Peppers, if you play all four at the same time with a couple corners you'd better have a lot of beef in the front five that can both rush the passer and defend the run. I like Bentley enough, but if he's the best bet at LB it's a reach to even call them an average NFL group right now. I agree with your concerns about the DL group, and that factors in because an elite DL group would make me okay with the dice throws on youth at LB. I'm hopeful Barmore takes another step this year, he's the guy to build with up front but pairing him with a complimentary piece would be ideal. To get away with a primary Peppers/Bentley/Wilson alignment you'd need to get a lot more stout up front, you need space eaters. If they drafted Jordan Davis okay, but that's illustrating the need which was my point. As is, this group would leave Peppers getting eaten up off the edge by blockers, he can't shed them like KVN. It would be big play city off the edges with Judon and Peppers, good lord. Hopefully Judon improves in that regard this year too. With the current cornerback group it'd be ideal to have an above average defense in front of them. Forget the particular position, they need to add an impact defender to the front seven (or, an internal guy become one next season). Outside of the safety group, every positional group on defense could use an impact defender - I don't care if it's on the interior, edge, at linebacker, just find a legit guy to build with. I like the McGrone, Perkins, etc. types enough but none of those guys should be relied upon for big roles to start the season, they have to earn it in camp - I'd say the same about Peppers and Wilson too. The AFC is too competitive to suck out of the gate, I have faith in Bill to build a coach them up over the year but there are too many risks in key roles to start. I don't see Bill as a guy afraid of benching/cutting vets, he's not a coach who pencils in starters in the offseason and sticks with it if they don't deserve it. I'd rather these young guys earn playing time like the Pats have always done it, but they are the front line right now.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 9, 2022 13:42:45 GMT -5
I have them at about .500 but with a lot of risk to the downside, meaning the possibility of a 2014 or 2015 scenario where a few things go wrong early and they never get it going. I don't see any part of this team as outstanding. The offense is probably their strongest area, but I expect decline from JDM, KKH and less offense out of RF. The defense should be better than last year but I can't call it a strength with X and Raffy on the left side. The four and five spots in the rotation look iffy and the BP is Whitlock and a bunch of guys Cora will have to sort through. Just as I thought at the start of last year, I'd rather win 78 and sell at the deadline than be on the fringes of the race and either miss out on the PS or make an early exit from the PS. An 84-win season gets you nothing. You don't get future assets at the deadline and you draft in the second half of each round.You never will know future results with certainty though, obviously if we knew for a fact the Red Sox weren't going to win the title this year it'd impact roster decisions but you have to play it out. Throwing away contending years just because you aren't the odds on favorite will decrease your chances over the long term of winning titles. Plus, even when you are the favorite to win it all, the field is the overwhelming real favorite. They were extremely close to making the WS last year, just because it didn't work out doesn't mean they were destined to fail. In order for them to have won 78 games last year, their players would've had to play much worse than they actually did. Maybe you flip some short term value for long term value, but you'd also have many players lose trade value in this transaction, as a 14 win difference likely more than offsets any "gain" you've made in future value acquired through deadline trades. Like, okay, say they flipped Erod and other pieces and didn't buy Schwarber. They might've gained prospects, but in losing that many more games it's likely they didn't receive breakout performances from guys like Whitlock, Houck, and Hernandez or guys like X, Devers, or Eovaldi got hurt. Rooting for bad team performance is going to leave real consequences. If you're already out of contention, sure, rooting to bottom out in the second half is different.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 9, 2022 12:44:59 GMT -5
Can anyone make a front seven for the Pats defense right now and actually feel good about it? Not a sub package of rushers in obvious passing situations, I mean the front seven that will take the most snaps for the team. Who is the third best player in their front seven right now? I know free agency isn't over and the draft hasn't arrived, but I'm trying to illustrate the current need here.
People seem to cite all the unproven young-ish players with talent on the roster, but right now they're depending on a couple of those guys becoming regulars to open next year when they shouldn't be counted on like that. Uche, McGrone, McMillian, Perkins, Wilson, Peppers, etc. are good depth to have to push the starters if they can breakout, but none of those guys should be the leading candidates to have a full time role to open the year right now, and yet here we are.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 5, 2022 15:26:38 GMT -5
Comparing the length of an NFL game to an MLB game is misguided because each NFL game is the equivalent of about 9.5 baseball games. If the Red Sox played once a week it'd be different too. So are you saying MLB should shorten its season so that people don't complain about long games?
There are three NFL games televised every Sunday, one (sometimes two) on Monday, one (sometimes two or three) on Thursday, and occasional games on Saturday (after the college football season ends) and they're all long and they're the most watched programs on television. Plenty of fans will watch all of them, 5+ games per week, regardless of whether the game has a bearing on their favorite team.
People aren't tuning into NFL games for 15-20 hours/week (plus hours of hype during the week) because they need to see how their team will do, they're tuning in because they like watching football and don't care how long a game takes. Turns out that's exactly how I feel about baseball (and hockey -- for football, I only really follow the Patriots and watch their games when I can).
A big part of the NFL's success is that it's more conducive to generating drama than baseball and is much more TV-friendly: one day of games for each team and six days of hype in between. The NFL is also much more centralized, with a unified narrative (like a totalitarian state) compared to baseball; this is reflected in its superior marketing, which is league-centric all season long. Baseball can't even properly market generational talents like Mike Trout. If baseball knew what the hell they were doing with marketing, Andrew McCutcheon would be a household name, even today. Finally, probably the biggest separator of all, NFL games are incredibly intuitive to bet on, which is not the case for baseball. Ultimately, the games are about the same length between the two sports; one sport clutches its collective pearls constantly over game length and one sport doesn't care. The NFL definitely gets it right on that account too.
Obviously not. I'm saying comparing the length of individual games without even mentioning the massive difference in schedules is a bad way to make a worthy comparison. It's like the difference between going to the gym once a week and going every day, or auditing one class vs being a full time student, one is casual and one is a lifestyle. Compare the length of MLB games to the NBA or NHL, and they feature regular seasons half as long as the MLB. If the length of games were the exact same, the Red Sox would still be asking for 9.5X more of your time than the Patriots require for a regular season. While the large majority of Pats games are concentrated on Sundays and usually in the afternoons during colder weather months, the Red Sox ask for many nights during the summer. The time allocation is just not remotely similar for a fan. You could follow nine NFL teams throughout the year and watch all their games and it'd still be less total games played than just the Red Sox. This is part of the reason why the MLB is a regional game and the NFL isn't. You can watch the Pats and Bucs every week and it's nothing like the time you have to invest to follow the Red Sox. I'm a life long Red Sox fan and care more about them than the Pats, yet I either have most Sox games on as background noise or miss them entirely while I do other stuff - for the Pats, I'm almost always closely watching every play because the stakes are much higher per game.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 5, 2022 12:06:44 GMT -5
Comparing the length of an NFL game to an MLB game is misguided because each NFL game is the equivalent of about 9.5 baseball games. If the Red Sox played once a week it'd be different too.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Mar 15, 2022 15:02:44 GMT -5
I've seen multiple posters suggest wanting flexibility means not wanting to spend money, and this isn't necessarily true. A $230-235m payroll with a bunch of expiring contracts and a deep farm system would be a flexible situation. A $230-235m team with a bunch of long term deals at or above market rate with a weak farm system is not a flexible situation. The years matter.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Mar 15, 2022 14:56:07 GMT -5
Who cares? The Padres were pegged for 95 wins last year and wound up under .500. Also, when you are good at finding market inefficiencies, which the Red Sox are under Bloom, you're always going to be underrated.I call recency bias. Sox finished 19 games out of first in 2019 and, well, 2020 was a total punt year that ultimately can't be used to gauge any legitimate level of performance. So we have 2019 (inherited a third of the way through), the 2020 Cluster Cluck Rodeo and last year - which may show this ability - and if so Bloom should be so anoited - or it could've been a 2013 Ben Cherington "Look what I found!" year. TBA Bloom was hired after the 2019 season, not a third of the way through.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Mar 7, 2022 15:43:47 GMT -5
The defense needs a lot of help, at every level. If Bill is going to allocate more of his time to the offensive side I'm even more concerned about this unit.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Feb 17, 2022 13:02:06 GMT -5
This doesn't relate directly to the CBA, but since TV contracts are being brought up I see a problem for the Red Sox going forward. In the local market, in order to subscribe to NESN you either need cable/satellite or FuboTV. NESN is not carried by the two most popular live tv streaming services, YoutubeTV and Hulu TV. The MLB already has a problem attracting younger fans, and younger fans are cutting cable more and more each year. Younger fans do know how to find free (illegal) streaming links, but ultimately that just allows them to watch the game and the MLB misses out on their dollars. I've gone two years without NESN and will continue to do so until they find a deal with one of the two major streaming services OR create their own standalone service that you can purchase directly through NESN. Right now, NESN is hitching its wagon to a dying industry (cable), and it's not the most sustainable way to keep and grow the fan base moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jan 20, 2022 13:54:35 GMT -5
As I understand it, McCourty's deal will void and the full cap hit will occur next year unless they can extend him before the new league year begins. There are no other maneuvers that can be done to spread out the dead money.
If McCourty does agree to an extension before the new league year, his cap hit will still be close to the current projection, certainly closer than projecting his 2022 cap at $0 or $2.15m or whatever. We obviously can't know exactly what an extension will cost, so it makes sense to use this as the placeholder until/if an extension is reached.
Hopefully they extend him and his 2022 cap is close to what the dead money would be, otherwise add another big hole to fill without gaining any cap flexibility for next year. Either way, a McCourty extension won't be free, if he doesn't get real money he'll leave or retire.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jan 16, 2022 16:49:44 GMT -5
This was a good year for the rookie class, but other recent draft classes look even worse after this season. I feel worse about Onwenu, Wynn, Uche, Winovich, Harry, Williams, Jennings, Stidham, Asiasi, and Keene than I did at the end of last year. I don't think there's any argument to suggest any of those players improved their stock this year. Dugger and Harris improved, but Harris is already entering a contract year and that step forward/step back ratio is beyond terrible. They've had a huge problem with drafting and developing for years now, and that's why the roster is still full of holes after a record spending spree.
The good news is this recent draft class looks like a hit, but things need to keep trending that way in year two, and they really need to stack two or three more good to great draft classes to get this roster where it needs to be. JC is the first big domino, and if they can't extend him it makes most sense to tag and trade him, as letting him play out the year on the tag feels like the worst possible option at this current time.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jan 6, 2022 20:56:39 GMT -5
Why are so many people on Twitter arguing Matthew Slater should be a HOFer? It’s driving me crazy. He will definitely be a finalist and I wouldn't be shocked if he gets in tbh. Devin Hester is a finalist in his first year of eligibility and Steve Tasker didn't get in but got a lot of consideration. The NFL HOF voting process is very flawed (I mean, Devin Hester is a finalist), and coming from a dynasty run where he was a team leader and hugely likable figure to the media can't hurt his cause either. Now I wouldn't vote for him, there are too many more impactful players left out, but I could see it happening for sure.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jan 4, 2022 15:33:10 GMT -5
Who's your most disappointing player? Mine are Jonnu Smith, Uche and Winovich. Definitely Smith for me, especially with the contract involved. Uche is disappointing but his lack of durability was always a concern so it's not a shock he's had a mostly lost year. Winovich should be in another system. Onwenu is on the radar too, in terms of preseason expectations vs results. I thought he'd be closer to their best lineman than a depth/rotational option.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 27, 2021 18:09:57 GMT -5
The defense was terrible yesterday, that's the main issue for a team built to win behind strong defense. The offense obviously needs to be better too, but even if they were very good they'd still likely lose that game 9/10 times. You can't expect to win a game when you force zero punts, zero sacks, zero turnovers, and allow them to drive to the red zone all game. I kept waiting for an adjustment and they had zero answers, even though it didn't look like the Bills were doing anything exotic and they were shorthanded.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 22, 2021 14:29:21 GMT -5
I think HBO has the best selection of original content. Netflix may have more, but there's a lot of mediocrity and few top end choices imo. If you haven't explored many HBO shows beyond the older big names (The Sopranos, The Wire, Band of Brothers, True Detective, Deadwood, Six Feet Under, GOT, etc.) you should pick it up ASAP. They have a good selection of documentaries too.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 15, 2021 14:12:39 GMT -5
Disaster obviously oversells it. And in isolation, it really probably doesnât move the needle enormously one way or the other. But if a FO leans heavily into taking a slight loss now to accumulate prospects, cumulatively, it diminishes short term prospects. Mookie, Beni, Renfroe⦠all trades that were short/medium losses talent-wise. Even Moreland, who would have helped last year. Iâm not saying a) the idea was bad; or b) *case by case* there wasnât a rationale. I think, though, some of us would like to see more balance of short and long game. As people say, they were two wins from the WS last year⦠so get those wins! And not literally 1/2 WAR here, half there⦠if you need 2, shoot for 5. They were 2 wins from the series⦠and 1 game from not making the playoffs. You lose a little, you could be going home early. Weren't you just suggesting the difference between Kiké and JBJ wouldn't have made a difference to their season, despite the huge difference in WAR and production? I know you said JBJ would've had his typical year if he stayed in Boston, but even still that would've been clearly inferior to what Kiké did. Now you're citing the minuscule difference between Renfroe and Benny as a loss, when the CF switch was clearly much more significant. Moreland was also replacement level (or below according to Fangraphs) last year, so now we're assuming he would've been valuable too if he stuck around? Let me ask: if we're to believe all the players who Bloom sold before their performances declined would've had career average years if they simply stayed, shouldn't we also assume Benintendi's bounce back year wouldn't have happened if he stuck around? To be clear, I don't buy any of those narratives, I think it's only fair to judge players on what they actually did, not what they could've done if they played for another team.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 10, 2021 15:47:42 GMT -5
He also fumbled early in the game on second down stretching for more yardage. About a week ago he also said Steeler practices weren’t fun enough and they needed to play music. He’s a very talented receiver, but his upstairs needs some serious maturation. UMASS may be right that he’s be different here but this version of him isn’t a guy I want. Tomlin has either created or had to deal with a lot of Divas over the years. Not sure which. It's an interesting question, kind of a chicken or egg argument. The Steelers prioritize talent, while the Patriots partly have a small draft board because they value football character and work ethic as much as any team. The Pats will take chances on guys with off the field concerns, but they don't take many chances on guys with football character issues, and even then it's usually vets on one year deals who have motivational issues on a losing team. Overall, the Pats draft a ton of former college captains with leadership qualities and the Steelers take more high upside athletes. I think this is part of the issue the Pats have had drafting WR's. Of all positions, WR historically has a lot of "me first" diva types, and that profile is a tough culture fit here. It's not an excuse, just a contributing factor. I do wonder how Tomlin would be if he didn't have the AB, Leveon, Porter, etc. types as team leaders (even Big Ben is kind of trash by QB standards). On the flip side, would Belichick's style work with that type of team long term? He'd still be able to scheme, but I'd think the culture would resemble the 09 team or worse.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 10, 2021 12:22:31 GMT -5
How about Claypool last night? It was a bad look in itself, but when you factor in how he was benched earlier in the game for a stupid penalty and how bad his team needed this win it's even worse. He didn't really take responsibility after the game either, seemingly blaming his teammate (and the ref) who was actually doing the right thing (trying to get the ball to set it for the next play ASAP). He's quite a talent, but he's an absolute goon on the field, which makes him a perfect Steeler. When you clash with Tomlin and can't fit in on the Steelers loose ship you're in trouble. Crying about the music at practice was a bad look, but at least that didn't cost his team on the field.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 6, 2021 12:58:25 GMT -5
Maybe my point got lost. The league changed the rules when the Rams then the Colts were complaining about how they couldn’t beat Bills defense. It was too physical. So no Bill didn’t make the changes himself they were made to counter act him and promote fantasy football. If I remember correctly it was a couple months after the Colts lost the AFCCG. I'm not sure it was an official rule change, as much as a renewed emphasis of eliminating contact past five yards and becoming stricter with pass interference calls. Bill Polian was on the competition committee and was said to be a major influence in making this a point of emphasis, it was informally known as the Ty Law rule. Belichick bashed it at the time, commenting how subjective interference calls would become, and here we are now. Funny enough, the next year the Colts did even worse in their postseason loss to the Pats despite them missing Law, their #2 corner, and Seymour. Those Colts teams were SOFT.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 3, 2021 13:04:14 GMT -5
See my comment above about taking on JBJ's contract. And the "replacing Franchy + Santana with JBJ" was just a reductio ad absurdum of manfred's argument: I don't think the idea of thinking of acquisitions in terms of "replacements" like manfred was makes any sense. How does it not make sense? You have limited roster spots. Last year, one of those spots was Renfroe. This year, it is JBJ. You can move them… JBJ is in Franchy’s slot… but who is in Renfroe’s? For now… no one. And you can go find a guy who is, say, 3 WAR and say, see, we opened a slot for him trading Renfroe! — but your overall team WAR remains unchanged while the team gets far more expensive (which might limit further moves, because going over the limit or no, at some point Henry is going to say enough). The *slotting* is artificial, sure, but if you want to set up two columns, team WAR and payroll, we can say we are lower in WAR and higher in payroll. Using your logic, heading into 2021, JBJ to Renfroe was a -2 bWAR swing on your roster based on 2020 (and that was a short year). So technically the Red Sox "got worse" with that switch on paper, even though the following year Renfroe was actually much more productive than JBJ. You can't just bank performance from the prior year and expect it to carry through the following year, and you don't build a roster to compete on paper with your team from the prior year, you build it to compete against other teams for the upcoming season. You could certainly argue the "upgrades" aren't worth the cash considerations involved in the swaps, but from a bottom line 2022 perspective there's a clear path to improving the outfield with these moves, while also picking up potential future value. Like Incandenza already said, you can play the same game and say JBJ could replace Duran and Franchy's combined -1.4 bWAR in a reserve outfielder role, and if he rebounds and puts up ~1 bWAR you come out 2.4 bWAR ahead of last year just in that swap (and if he's simply a replacement level player that's still +1.4 bWAR vs. last year). Of course, that's not the way to judge moves, because last year's results are meaningless at this point. It's just a really bad way to evaluate moves, last year is over, and even bringing back the exact same team wouldn't give the same results.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 1, 2021 23:57:37 GMT -5
If the Sox don't land Suzuki, then JBJ is your starting RF. I don't see it as pumping tires. Suzuki is definitely not the only option.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 22, 2021 16:43:18 GMT -5
I think there's room for a Devers extension and a big signing. JD Martinez. Eovaldi. Price (contract). Vazquez. Kiké. Renfroe. All could be gone soon. Clearing a ton of space in payroll. Not to mention the possibility of Xander and Sale leaving as a wild card in 2022, clearing even more space. All the contracts you named except JD and Price project to offer surplus value, and even JD's isn't that bad at this point. Yeah, money will be available, but you'll be missing your #1 or #2 starter, starting catcher, starting CF, starting RF, and DH. Replacing their collective value will likely cost more than the money they free up. Clearing salary is only helpful when bad contracts expire, and only Price's dead money truly falls into that category (plus arguably JD's). In this case, we're talking about taking 4 of the 9 positional starters off the team plus their one workhorse starting pitcher who looked like an ace this past year.
|
|
|