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 chud on Sept 16, 2023 9:57:06 GMT -5
I don't post much and just getting caught up a bit and wanted to chime in....my last post about a month or 2 ago basically spelled out why I thought Chaim, a great baseball guy apparently, was a failure as a leader so I won't rehash all of that but wanted to add a few more things for those maybe thinking he got short changed:
1) In a multi-billion dollar industry, baseball or other, 4yrs is an eternity....an absolute freaking eternity....Just like any business, some things take longer to improve than others, but the CEO/#1 official running the business getting 4yrs to show overall success of the org is an absolute and complete eternity
2) If you have the choice to pick an SME to run your business or a leader, you pick the leader every time...the leader can hire SME and surround himself or herself with them to ensure they're getting good intel to make the best decisions....but the #1 official is paid to make decisions, good ones, to increase the revenue of the org....
3) There's a HUGE difference between having a good philosophy and executing against the plan to achieve the philosophical goals...If you're in the "pro-bloom" camp (full disclosure that I'm not) don't get confused between liking/agreeing with his philosophy and then feeling stuck to agreeing with the way he executed his plan....I have no idea if the philosophy was a bad one or just the execution was god awful....but I definitely know the execution was 100% god awful
4) Indecision, scared to pull the trigger, hoarding things w/out being able to give a little to get little or give a lot to get a lot....the fact that this guy got 4yrs is a miracle....Great, the farm is much better....of course it is, he never traded any of them for value (due to being scared)...they you start to lose them for free anyway....never made any sense
5) Having to clearly win trades (hello 2022/2023 trade deadline) and only seeking low risk/high reward players (hello 2021 trade deadline) had to make owners question him....it certainly made me question him....but that's what scared people do, make it look like they're engaging in risk taking but never actually taking the risk
6) If you defend Bloom and your first line after 4yrs of his leadership starts with "It's starting to turn around" or "if you look deeper" or "the team isn't really as bad as you think" or "the farm is better"....I would say, you're trying to turn the prism too fine at the exact right time of day to get the perfect color...this is a production business and after 4yrs, despite improvements he's made to any area of baseball ops, the revenue driving portion of the org was not successful....he understood the importance of that as his opening press conference but again, his execution ultimately failed him. You never want to see anyone lose their job but in this case, he's financially set for life and he had every chance to succeed, next person up!
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2023 14:50:58 GMT -5
While that's true, it doesn't make any sense then to not add (in this case, finding even an average SP/4th SP type)...I could even make a case for selling (granted, not a good pr case) as if you're not sold on this team and want to sell us on the "young core" (god I'm sick of Bloom saying that although he's got nothing else so he's sticking to it) then plan for a stronger 2024....But it's the taking no action which is borderline criminal. You can smell it on the guy, he doesn't like operating/making decisions against timelines...And, he only feels comfortable dealing if there's a clear win for him or if he's found a great bargain to hope on....Classic case was Schwarber, worked great but only got him because he was on sale. He can't give up equal talent, especially would be future talent for current talent.... I was listening to the SP pod yesterday and the guys made a great point, 40 man crunch is coming so you have to makes moves anyways....and regardless, Bloom can't even find it within himself to package a few prospects that won't make the cut to get a serviceable SP for this team. Like Cherington, he's even holding on to some so long that they've becoming depreciating assets. Time to go man.... Who should he have sold and who would it have brought back? Let’s get back to complaining that he didn’t protect Song and Ward! A guy like Lorenzen, who you could have gotten for 3rd tier prospect type, comes to mind...likely for one or two who you'll not even be able to put on the 40man next yr....I'm not saying you needed a frontline starter....but an SP to give you serviceable innings would have worked and seemingly very doable...just an example
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2023 14:46:56 GMT -5
That’s a good point Ghost. We don’t know how many if these decisions are the front office’s and how many are the front office doing what they’re told. Regardless it seems like this front office is on the same page with ownership. That’s just my attempt at reading the tea leaves and I could be wrong. I'll stop my ranting after this one but it's been 4yrs of frustrations with Bloom....Remember, the CBO gets paid to tell Henry/Kennedy what should be done and then to execute that action...granted big dollar stuff need the blessing of owners like in any business....but we need to keep the blame where it should be, on Bloom, and not think he's being micromanaged by ownership. And keep in mind, Bloom is Kennedy's hire, so while Henry gets final say, the President/CEO is the guy who recommends and puts his rep on the line for the guy...which is probably why this thing is playing out like a Shakespeare tragedy....Keeping him is bad, and Kennedy getting it wrong isn't great either
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2023 14:37:26 GMT -5
Yeah, I think one of my frustrations is the defense of Bloom is that he is not just some old GM, he’s a creative thinker… but when he doesn’t act, the defense is “ who would do that”? That is… he acted like any other GM would. Well… is he just the same ol’ traditional thinker or some innovator? He often feels like… neither. Completely agree, all this "he's creative" stuff...how has he been even the slightest bit creative in any kind of positively impactful way? Listening to his post deadline comments was insulting....telling us how much they had been on the phone all day, blah, blah, blah....trying to tell us how hard his job is....Parcells said it best, don't tell me about the labor, show me the baby...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2023 14:32:43 GMT -5
The deadline approach the last 2 seasons has been incredibly short-sighted Which I find a bit ironic since they are supposedly looking for sustainable success The fact is if we had sold the last two deadlines our 2024 and beyond would look much better. Yeah all potential prospects acquired in that scenario could all flame out, but that doesn’t make the last two deadlines any less of a bad decision. No sane GM was going to sell when we were 2 games back of the WC at the time. We had a better record than NYY. If we sold off and NY didnt. That would be malpractice While that's true, it doesn't make any sense then to not add (in this case, finding even an average SP/4th SP type)...I could even make a case for selling (granted, not a good pr case) as if you're not sold on this team and want to sell us on the "young core" (god I'm sick of Bloom saying that although he's got nothing else so he's sticking to it) then plan for a stronger 2024....But it's the taking no action which is borderline criminal. You can smell it on the guy, he doesn't like operating/making decisions against timelines...And, he only feels comfortable dealing if there's a clear win for him or if he's found a great bargain to hope on....Classic case was Schwarber, worked great but only got him because he was on sale. He can't give up equal talent, especially would be future talent for current talent.... I was listening to the SP pod yesterday and the guys made a great point, 40 man crunch is coming so you have to makes moves anyways....and regardless, Bloom can't even find it within himself to package a few prospects that won't make the cut to get a serviceable SP for this team. Like Cherington, he's even holding on to some so long that they've becoming depreciating assets. Time to go man....
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2023 9:31:56 GMT -5
I don't post much but had a few thoughts I had to get off my chest....
1) I'll start with, I love our ownership group...Over the past 20yrs or so they've done an unbelievable job....are they perfect, no, is anyone....I think we all would have signed up for this outcome and would do it all over again if we could...I know sometimes it looks like Henry/others aren't engaged, but think there was a recent interview with Bloom (maybe a month or so ago) where he mentioned talking/texting with Henry who wasn't thrilled with their product so far...So Henry's engaged but not overly so which I would suggest is good, he's a money manager and the last thing we want or need is a guy with his background making tactical baseball decisions....His job is to set the budget, evaluate the business metrics and ask hard questions of Kennedy and Bloom. I also don't think this philosophy has changed much as you may remember Henry's comments about not thinking they needed Carl Crawford....He could have stopped it but ultimately let Theo's business case win out (correctly or not)....Henry's job is to hire good people, keep them accountable to their business metrics and listen to what his trusted leadership team tells him to do....Once he doesn't trust them anymore, it's time to change the people...
2) FSG seems like a VC that has about half a dozen businesses in it...the Sox being one of course....Each has a leader (I think Kennedy runs the Sox and FSM)....Kennedy's job is to manage the "business of Red Sox baseball" not "Red Sox Business", the latter falls to Bloom. Kennedy needs to keep Bloom accountable to the budget and team metrics (whatever they are) while being a part of the public facing leadership team for the Sox. I think Kennedy is good at his job and has a proven track record, however has made a mistake with the Bloom hire. That's a big black mark on his resume but it happens....In year 4, you just have to wonder how long he'll let this go, throwing good money after bad so to speak.
3) And Bloom....man, I bet he was an excellent #3, then #2 in Tampa....In some businesses, the #1 official is external facing leaving the #2 to run ops and make the hard decisions. In baseball, the #1 official is the shot caller. So when he was insulated from that responsibility in Tampa, I bet he could make a great business case for all things to his boss yet never have to live w/ the consequences of making the final call...To some, that's a great place to be and you really need to know yourself before leaving that role for the shot caller role...one which he's just not at all suited for
4) Bloom part 2....what I would always tell exec leaders are 3 things: 1) Managers follow plan, leaders know when to take decisive action to deviate from the plan.... 2) the name of the game is risk mitigation not risk elimination, you have to be able to live with risk and sleep like a baby at night with it....3) Inform vs. Involve, while you can't involve everyone in everything you can explain most things to them to get their buy in, even/especially when they disagree with the decision....Bloom can't do any of the three well, effectively or even fake it to look like he can. I bet in an honest moment he'd probably say this job doesn't suit him well, stresses him out and doesn't provide piece of mind to him whatsoever
In short, the philosophy of always trying to turn $1 into 100 pennies doesn't work as you need a blend....He can't give up things of future value for present value, deviate from his plan even when the situation dictates the need and worst of all, can't explain anything to anyone that makes rational sense about why he did or didn't so something. God it's frustrating but holy smokes, everyone in that org must know this by now and am sure his employees (as we've heard before) are as frustrated as us with the lack of decision making on Bloom's part....no action is the same as no decision and that's how companies fade away.
|
|
|
Post by chud on Jan 22, 2023 9:41:19 GMT -5
The best part of sports is at the end of the day, it's a "show me" business...In most businesses, there's some tolerance for when things go wrong, personal feelings sometimes cloud cold hearted business moves, metrics can be turned to explain losses, unforeseen impediments can explain short term failure etc...In sports, although there's like some of this, it's a clear production business...WAR this, exit velocity that, FRAA vs. OAA...despite all of that, at the end of the day, how the team did will decide a regime's fate.
We can argue the sustainability of Dave Dombrowski's philosophy, but 3 Division titles and a WS is some pretty good brass tax....Theo of course...Cherington and his WS were great until his desperation FA plunge ultimately did him in...Bottom line, if you think Bloom is doing a good job and this team tanks this year, he'll be gone...If you think Bloom is not doing a good job (full discloser, that's me) and the team does great, he'll get more time....But based on the team construction to date, I don't see how he survives past this season.
Don't discount how impactful a fans voice can be in this process. There are a few facets to enterprise risk mgt. which an org like the Red Sox I'm sure adhere to and where the fans play a big role. Financial Risk, fans can impact the team's purse strings by not showing up and not buying NESN...And Reputationall Risk, now showing up hurts the brand, booing owners/execs almost to the point of not being able to speak,, hurts the brand....While I'm not the booing type, it's impactful in such a large and personal public setting.
Ultimately, owners/execs showing their face in public is important, in good times and bad. The Red Sox fall into this weird public/private collaborative...privately owned but completely publicy supported in a very intimate way that goes way beyond heading to the local Kohl's and buying their merchandise. Being a smart fan base, I can't see how the message on the Betts trade was that the farm system was too bare to sign a then 28yr old superstar to say a 12yr contract putting him at age 40 at the end but still at age 30 by the time they're now saying they can make that type of contract as proof by being ok signing the Devers deal...Devers I think being 37 or 38 at the end...this makes zero sense and seems like either very bad logic for which to make that decision or very bad spin...and ultimately, the former is more concerning than the latter to me...and they wonder whey they're getting booed while that's the best they could come up with after 2yrs of no comms....sheesh...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 29, 2022 22:19:48 GMT -5
I'm starting to worry about the safety of Bloom's family and may request a proof of life photo, clearly someone has them hostage and making Bloom read from their printed cue cards....I kid, I kid...But, c'mon and I mean that in the most plural sense: 1) C'mon, every reference to the 2021 team makes me embarrassed for him...It's all he has so it's now his "go to" reference 2) C'mon, although the 2021 team made it to the ALCS, it wasn't all that talented of a team...they played well, but it just wasn't all that talented...I think in an honest moment most of us expected that 2021 team to play like the 2022 team did...Don't get me wrong, I'm psyched they didn't but continuing to measure the 2021 team like it was a very talented one is making a mistake when benchmarking against other teams 3) C'mon, you probably lost the best player from your 2021 team and your SP staff is a whole bunch of question marks...granted it's (basically) January so you still have another month, but shopping at the Salvation Army will not get the 2023 team more talent than the 2021 team did...and I already mentioned, it's not even a huge threshold to surpass 4) C'mon, C'mon, C'mon...Here's how "plan g" is shaping up: Lose (maybe that's the wrong word as to lose something means you meant to keep it) best SS in the history of the franchise (check), trade best RF in franchise history in order to keep the SS that you lost (check), probably alienate your current best player by lack luster contract offers and dismantling of team (check), make qualifying offer to your best healthy SP who rejects it then gets an extra year for same AAV but don't match it to get the 134 pick in the draft proving you do value the draft (check), don't get under the threshold in 2022 to lose immense draft value (check), don't protect a player who goes #1 in the Rule 5 draft (check), release lesser players off the 40 man roster after losing #1 rule 5 pick (check), hold a fan raffle to see who actually plays SS at 81 home games (in process)...Have comms team prepare notes for how 2024 is shaping up to be more talented than the 2021 team (in story board review).
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 26, 2022 20:06:29 GMT -5
These are great conversations! The only thing I'd add is, whatever the % was for them to make the playoffs and whichever way Bloom should have went (buy or sell), he didn't really do either...I think the correct term that was used at the time was that he more or less went "sideways"...Kind of goes to my point of being indecisive...Getting out of the "it was better to buy or better to sell" part of the equation, as we can also debate that one as I was way more of a "sell" guy but would have understood if they went "full buy" to make a playoff run...What I don't get and will never get was this lack of moving in either direction. Good leaders are decisive and can pick a path and more often than not be right, yet not be afraid to be wrong in moving the football down the field. It's mind-boggling...and I'd say with all of the media articles coming out lately from local and even nationally respected writers, about the lack of direction of the org, there's some fire here...almost like, they're beginning the distancing process for what they envision is not going to end well...Just so happens I totally fall into that category. At the end of Bloom's reign we can more accurately evaluate the job he did over his likely 4 year run, that will ultimately showcase the job he did...To this point, two last place finishes, one ALCS run and likely a 4th or 5h place finish will not likely get him his next GM job. Think about this from a quick laymen's perspective...Was the team he inherited better or worse than it is today? Finishes last, then ALCS run (seemingly getting better) then last again...then this current mess...From the ALCS run, is this team better or worse as it sits today? While I'd love, love, love him to prove me wrong, to think that's likely to happen is more of a wish than reality. He'll make a good #2 again somewhere, supporting a #1 who's a true shot caller In fairness to Bloom, I don't know that I hold 2020 against him. I don't know if ownership told him he needed to duck under the luxury tax line and that they weren't willing to give Betts a Trout like offer or if Bloom felt that giving Mookie the money would be a waste or a bit of both...I really don't know and of course I'm not looking to reopen that case. All I'm saying is I don't know to what point Bloom is culpable for not willing to offer Trout like money - and I say this as somebody who is uneducated about a lot of this but knew damn well he was shooting for Trout's contract. Once Betts and Price were dealt and Sale was injured there wasn't too much the Sox could do. There was still a strong core, the same core that was mainly responsible for the strong showing in 2021. I can grade the value of Bloom's return for the Betts deal, knowing that Price's presence did diminish the return even with the subsidy which seems kind of crazy to me as he was still an effective pitcher going into the 2020 season, just not one worth 30 million/year. Anyways I'm willing to mitigate 2020 somewhat out of fairness, but I haven't agreed much with what he's done since last offseason, although I will say I like the risk he took with Yoshida and once his contract offer was far short for Abreu, I think I'm fine with the Turner signing although I personally would have brought JDM back for one year roughly at the deal he got with the Dodgers. I'm not crazy about the Jansen signing but I won't give him grief over it even if it backfires which it could do. I was fine with the Martin signing. So I'm not a "everything Bloom touches is terrible" or anything like that. I call each move as I see it. In totality I'm not fine with a lot of the bigger decisions, but if I'm going to be critical, I do have to be fair and be complementary of what I like or see that he does that I'm cool with. I'm trying to be as balanced as I can be anyways. That makes totally sense and is a very, very logical take! From the cheap seats, we'll never know the inner dynamics of any specific deal to know who mandated doing something or who killed something...but my take, which me be totally unreasonable, is that the CBO is 100% responsible for the baseball product, for better or worse. I'm not naive enough to think owners don't play a huge part in all high level/financially impactful decisions, but I do think that prior to Bloom getting the job for a multi-billion dollar global org like the Sox, philosophy on how to handle these types of decisions was discussed and Bloom's philosophy had to have matched the philosophy of ownership. Never more so than with the essential firing of Dombrowski and the hiring of his Bizzaro world counterpart in Bloom...And to this point, I can't say the Bloom philosophy doesn't work but I can say that the Bloom execution of whatever his philosophy is, is just completely terrible.
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 26, 2022 19:57:40 GMT -5
This “they had no plan at the deadline” stuff is nonsense. They had a plan- to try to make some low cost, easy upgrades and get some guys back from injury to push for the playoffs. Eh, I think they basically admitting to shopping everyone except Bogaerts. They willing to keep everyone and they were willing to strip mine the team. It all came down to the price other teams were willing to pay.
Speier quoted sources from other teams saying the Sox were just looking for another team to be do something stupid. Which they got the White Sox and Astros to do. If there were some more stupid teams they would have traded Eovaldi and Martinez.
I think this hits to the crux of the issue...If there's a clear cut "win" to a deal (i.e. low risk/low downside) Bloom can thrive in that environment...being that most deals are closer to balancing that risk/reward line, leads to why Bloom has made many lesser/non-postively-impactful deals...he either needs to see the clear, no doubter perspective "win" or needs to know that a loss won't be around for very long...Sorry to be a one trick pony here but I cannot for the life of me see how he can ever be the #1 in a baseball org...but can totally see how he would thrive as a #2...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 26, 2022 17:03:10 GMT -5
The Broadway trade (as it will eventually be known) was a good trade but one good trade does not a great or even a good trade deadline make. The 2022 deadline was ultimately a failure because they only got halfway to where they needed to be.
Once Chaim decided that he was going to trade Vazquez, he absolutely had to act quickly to trade either JDM or Eovaldi first to ensure that they would land under the CBT. By not doing so, i.e. by trading Vazquez first, he ensured that no other GM would offer him a decent return for either JDM or Eovaldi because they could easily do the math and knew that they had Chaim over a barrel.
By making the smaller salary move first (with the hare-brained explanation that they were simultaneously buying and selling), he closed the door on more significant trades and resetting the CBT.
Good trades, bad trade deadline.
I disagree as clearly if they wanted those players they didn't have Chaim over a barrel since he didn't trade them and the Red Sox were ready to try to compete. I also don't agree that they "got halfway." They did exactly what they wanted to do, get better and add prospects. Now in hindsight (and yes I know some of you were certain they had no chance at the time blah blah blah please don't respond saying that) things didn't go well and clearly they would have been better off selling fully. However, the team thought they had something like 30% playoff odds, with a roster that just made an ALCS run, reinforcements (which never came) hypothetically on the way from the IR and a ravenous fan base. That is exactly the team that should stand pat at the deadline and they did better than that. Their approach was totally reasonable at the time. These are great conversations! The only thing I'd add is, whatever the % was for them to make the playoffs and whichever way Bloom should have went (buy or sell), he didn't really do either...I think the correct term that was used at the time was that he more or less went "sideways"...Kind of goes to my point of being indecisive...Getting out of the "it was better to buy or better to sell" part of the equation, as we can also debate that one as I was way more of a "sell" guy but would have understood if they went "full buy" to make a playoff run...What I don't get and will never get was this lack of moving in either direction. Good leaders are decisive and can pick a path and more often than not be right, yet not be afraid to be wrong in moving the football down the field. It's mind-boggling...and I'd say with all of the media articles coming out lately from local and even nationally respected writers, about the lack of direction of the org, there's some fire here...almost like, they're beginning the distancing process for what they envision is not going to end well...Just so happens I totally fall into that category. At the end of Bloom's reign we can more accurately evaluate the job he did over his likely 4 year run, that will ultimately showcase the job he did...To this point, two last place finishes, one ALCS run and likely a 4th or 5h place finish will not likely get him his next GM job. Think about this from a quick laymen's perspective...Was the team he inherited better or worse than it is today? Finishes last, then ALCS run (seemingly getting better) then last again...then this current mess...From the ALCS run, is this team better or worse as it sits today? While I'd love, love, love him to prove me wrong, to think that's likely to happen is more of a wish than reality. He'll make a good #2 again somewhere, supporting a #1 who's a true shot caller
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 26, 2022 12:27:30 GMT -5
...He got lucky in 2021 (when the Sox were universally grilled for not doing enough) that the team bailed him out by over performing and Schwarber/Kiké looking like Ruth/Gherig... I'll just focus on this line, because it sort of encapsulates the whole comment, in that Bloom performed better than if he had done what you apparently wanted/expected and you are criticizing him for it. He got Schwarber, Schwarber was great... and this is a bad thing? Or he just got "lucky"? I think he's had three excellent trade deadlines in a row.
2022: I know a lot of people would have preferred the team to give up when they had a 25-30% chance of making the playoffs, but I'm not a big fan of that sort of quitter's attitude, and moreover it is very rarely if ever how teams in that situation operate. And Bloom managed to improve the roster and gain prospects at the same deadline. 2021: Schwarber for Aldo Ramirez. That was the best value exchange probably any team had at the deadline that year. 2020: Pivetta and Seabold for Workman and Hembree. Speaks for itself. Bloom's made some mistakes, in my opinion, but the idea that his fatal flaw has been "indecisiveness" seems almost the opposite of the case. If anything he's stuck to his guns a little too much - e.g., by not handing out a serious extension offer to Bogaerts last spring when it might not have been optimal according to the team's own analysis.
Thanks for responding. I knew when I used the term "lucky" someone would focus on it so I'll just add a few points to clarify: 1) He wasn't lucky at all with Schwarber, that was a hell of a trade...I think where he got lucky was how the team, which now included Schwarber, performed after the deadline...At the time, Bloom was universally grilled by most (me included) for not doing more to support the team other than adding Schwarber...but it all worked out 2) Don't confuse good decisions with hard decisions...you can make a good decision w/out it being hard to decide. If I gave someone a $5 bill for a $50 bill, that would be a great decision, just not a hard one...I would agree that the Schwarber trade was a great one but let's not confuse it with being a difficult one...Guys like Bloom love those low risk/high upside decision points...no long term tail to them if they don't work out 3) The problem is, most leadership decisions don't come to that...most involve a high level of risk mitigation to be involved...So the goal of my post was not to say he only makes good or bad decisions...the goal of my post was to say that he has a hard time making difficult/risk based decisions...If every decision in front of him was the Schwarber trade, he would be in great shape...I think the question is, when confronted with making those difficult decisions, his performance has shown him to be an indecisive leader, unable to pull the trigger on players/money where there's a bigger risk involved. 4) Schwarber is actually a perfect microcosm of the cycle embodied in one player....The trade (low risk) was a good decision and an easy one for him due to what he gave up and what he was on the hook for down the road....Not re-signing Schwarber was a bad decision (I'll call it medium risk) as it would have entailed $60m-ish and a number of years commitment - result, inaction - signed by another team in FA....Replacement for OF/1B bat (medium risk) - Dalbec - let's do nothing and hope for the best - can cut bait with Dalbec if it doesn't work out....and so on.... Bottom line, no leader only ever makes good or bad decisions but truly good leaders are the ones who interject into the process at the right time to make a critical and correct decision...I'm not sure Bloom has ever done that, where his decision turned out to be both timely, difficult and correct all at the same time. But what the hell do I know, not like anyone's paying me to run a baseball team etc...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 26, 2022 10:27:23 GMT -5
It's been a while for me but had to Chaim (pun intended) in as I've lost all patience with the bloom regime...Even though I'm admittedly a Sox "rose colored" glasses type fan as in, you have my complete faith for a while until proven otherwise...we're at "otherwise" and here's why:
1) Bloom seems to be the textbook indecisive leader...Those folks use information as a weapon on why not to make a decision or take action...Usually, they look for the utopian piece of information to make some important decision, when good information is good enough...but when acting on only good information, you put yourself at risk because if you had waited that one extra day, one extra week etc...you may have uncovered the clue leading to finding the candlestick in Col. Mustard's hand right next to the dead body...However, what always happens in the search for utopia, others make decisions ahead of you that takes the decision that was in front of you off your plate...the result, no action/no decision...the explanation, someone else did something (player or team) that is out of our control...Those people look at decision making as a higher risk (due to possibly being wrong) than no action, as it appears to them as their process hadn't completed yet so other's are taking way more risk by being rash....At the start, those people are termed "exhaustively detail oriented" or "incredibly thorough" or "always looking for redundancy", by the end they're ultimately labeled as "paralysis by analysis"....Don't get me wrong, data driven decision making is right on point, but the leadership aspect comes in when needing to decide when you have enough data to make a good decision and mitigate (not eliminate) risk...Bloom can't do that...leading to
2) Lacking direction and a true org plan. While I'm sure there is or was a plan at the start of his regime, the sure kiss of death to any plan is the lack of making continued decisions as they arise...No plan ends up being linear so good leaders have several fallback options when "plan a" doesn't work out....Bloom's lack of decision making doesn't just kill "plan a" it kills "plan a - f" and the Sox are stuck with "plan g"...Plan G is never a good one
3) Bloom is particularly bad at making critical decisions with deadlines attached...An off-season has such a long deadline (approx. Nov-Feb) that must make him feel so comfortable as he can keep pushing things off for a while...While things like the trade deadline must drive him to drink. The last two years were examples of how his brain/risk tolerance are not wired in a way that makes him feel comfortable making faster/critical decisions...He got lucky in 2021 (when the Sox were universally grilled for not doing enough) that the team bailed him out by over performing and Schwarber/Kiké looking like Ruth/Gherig...Then made the mistake of thinking the team was really that good and did almost nothing leading into 2022 minus Story, who's pretty good but not a difference maker...Then 2022 trade deadline was the ultimate for lack of decisiveness...Hey played it off with this inane "we're in this unique position of possibly being in the race / possibly not, so let's not hide from that uniqueness and let's approach it with a unique strategy"....That's what indecisive leaders do, make something look thoughtful and innovative, when really it's just hiding being scared to take a stand on anything...It's even lead to some actual indefensible things like not getting under the salary cap by the end of the 2022 trade deadline, makes him look incompetent to say the least.
4) Ownership...I love them, how can you not after 4WS rings...I mean seriously, 4...looking back to 2003, it would have been comical to think we'd be staring at 4WS over the last 19yrs...But, can't rest on your laurels, so Ownership's failure in this is likely thinking Bloom (coming from Tampa) was going to do what they thought Beane was going to do in 2003 and beyond but without Bloom having any track record of his own when being the shot caller...They thought he'd make them more efficient in spending to maximize the use of their budget. Well, because Bloom is awful, he can't execute that strategy, or any strategy, on his best day so that's one problem....But the other problem is that ownership seems to have been caught way off guard with where salaries were heading in 2023. If you're going to own the Boston Red Sox and not compete at the height of the market for star players, it's probably time to look into investing into sports with a salary cap (sound familiar).
5) Where Bloom/Owners hold hands directly in complicity is not keeping their homegrown, proven commodities that can produce at high levels in likely the toughness baseball market in the U.S. You work to develop players into exactly what Boggy, Betts and Devers became, only to let them go (Devers is likely gone I'm assuming) w/out any real designs to re-sign them??? It's not the "losing the player" that's of the real concern, it's the lack of desire to keep the player which then leads to the open door where the player is eventually lost that is the real problem...I'm not sure what the point is unless they're hoping to develop fairly good players, not bad ones, not good ones and certainly not great ones, so they can pay them what they view is a reasonable salary, good luck with that.
Sorry, been meaning to get this off my chest as it's confounding....At this point, Bloom will be gone by end of 2023 as the Sox will be terrible and owners won't be able to defend keeping him on board any longer. What will be super telling is who they hire next, that will show us what they've learned or if they're going to be stubborn and keep with the same schtick just with a new guy...either way it can't come soon enough and at this point I'd wish they take all decision making from Bloom as I don't trust him at the top of the pyramid at all...Or maybe the right thing to do is to just have him keep on keeping on, no risk in anything critical being decided with that philosophy
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 7, 2022 8:14:24 GMT -5
So I haven't posted here in years...years...and admittedly, I'm usually a guy who wears Sox colored glasses, however, Bloom has awoken me from my hibernation. I was very excited when they hired Bloom as I was thinking Theo part II, but after almost 3yrs he's definitely not. What I can't figure out is if Bloom is in over his head a bit as a baseball decision maker or as a leader in general...or maybe both. As the head baseball decision maker I see too much "buy low and hope for a high return" line of thinking...As a leader I see a risk averse decision maker who thinks "can't go wrong buying low and not overpaying for anything and standing pat is a win"...It's like the football coach who thinks a punt is a positive offensive play because the team didn't turn the ball over. I think Bloom is feeling the pressure of the Boston market's scrutiny and it's paralyzed him a bit in having conviction in anything...When I read the Sox are asking for "the moon" on EV and the other comment that "Boston was hoping someone would act dumb" in trading for Sox players...that told me that he was only comfortable making a trade if he could clearly showcase a "win" and got caught after trading Vaz, hoping to sell, but finding out no one was ready to pay a ridiculous price for his assets...result - sideways move which was explained as "we didn't trade our players because we're still going for the playoffs"...what a bunch of non-sense...I liked the Homer move, but anyone telling me that the combo of losing your starting C and very minor additions is "going for it" needs to have their head examined. It was "punting" and spun in a way that seems crazy. Last year, he caught some lighting in a bottle with his moves, Schwarber was huge, and he deserves credit for it...But I always viewed that as a band-aid season where the team found themselves in the playoff hunt totally unexpectedly and forced some moves...But don't forget, Bloom faced the same criticism last year in being accused of doing too little to help a playoff bound team...it worked out, but to me was never a sustainable philosophy. Here's the best analogy I can think of...Bloom needs to drive to Detroit, realizes he can drive there just as easily in a Honda CRV vs. a BMW, so he buys a 15yr old CRV for $4k. First trip goes smoothly, his decision to by the CRV is reinforced...He makes a plan to visit Detroit monthly but on the first return trip home the CRV breaks down and needs $5k in repairs...Still cheaper than the BMW, but not a good plan...then people start asking him why he's driving to Detroit in the first place and he says because it's so scenic. The next time anyone hears from me, I will be commenting from a psych ward. The straitjacket will make it hard to type, admittedly, but they'll have no choice but to commit me because I will have completely lost my marbles at people's inability to simply listen to what Bloom says. He said multiple times, in the lead up to the trade deadline, that the team will be both buyers and sellers. Sure enough, they were both buyers and sellers. Why? Well, because they had 30% playoff odds; it didn't make sense to have a full sell-off nor to go full go-for-it-now mode. So they made a few moves that, on balance, marginally improved the roster for this year, marginally improved the roster for the next couple of years, and added a couple of prospects to the farm system. If you want to criticize the individual moves, or even the overall approach, that's fine. But how can people be baffled by the moves when he keeps telling us exactly what he's doing? The idea that Bloom is just paralyzed or indecisive or whatever is an especially unconvincing theory, given that he clearly is totally indifferent to whateverr idiot sports talk radio takes are out there.
I get it but we'll probably have to agree to disagree...Regardless of what Bloom said, I don't think he did either..."Buying" and "Selling" are verbs, meaning they're action words. Sure, players traded places and he gave himself a great out at the beginning (again, signs of lack of conviction of what to do) saying he may do both, but there was no buying and selling that took place of any consequence (i.e. something that in sum improved either the current team or the org as a whole). Hosmer is an upgrade / Vaz is a downgrade, then some filler...maybe a prospect he acquired pans out, but by BA's rating the best prospect in any of their trades was Groome. So, he painted his entire house one shade of gray lighter...I'm sure there was a lot of time spent on the painting, just that no one would ever notice as the result shows no real action took place at all. He just seems a bit over his head, or again, maybe he's just not the best GM for a big market/big media team...Pittsburg may be be a good spot for him in 5yrs when they get tired of spinning in a circle with BC, then they can spin in a circle with Chaim, because no one there cares.
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2022 8:34:42 GMT -5
So I haven't posted here in years...years...and admittedly, I'm usually a guy who wears Sox colored glasses, however, Bloom has awoken me from my hibernation. I was very excited when they hired Bloom as I was thinking Theo part II, but after almost 3yrs he's definitely not. What I can't figure out is if Bloom is in over his head a bit as a baseball decision maker or as a leader in general...or maybe both. As the head baseball decision maker I see too much "buy low and hope for a high return" line of thinking...As a leader I see a risk averse decision maker who thinks "can't go wrong buying low and not overpaying for anything and standing pat is a win"...It's like the football coach who thinks a punt is a positive offensive play because the team didn't turn the ball over.
I think Bloom is feeling the pressure of the Boston market's scrutiny and it's paralyzed him a bit in having conviction in anything...When I read the Sox are asking for "the moon" on EV and the other comment that "Boston was hoping someone would act dumb" in trading for Sox players...that told me that he was only comfortable making a trade if he could clearly showcase a "win" and got caught after trading Vaz, hoping to sell, but finding out no one was ready to pay a ridiculous price for his assets...result - sideways move which was explained as "we didn't trade our players because we're still going for the playoffs"...what a bunch of non-sense...I liked the Homer move, but anyone telling me that the combo of losing your starting C and very minor additions is "going for it" needs to have their head examined. It was "punting" and spun in a way that seems crazy. Last year, he caught some lighting in a bottle with his moves, Schwarber was huge, and he deserves credit for it...But I always viewed that as a band-aid season where the team found themselves in the playoff hunt totally unexpectedly and forced some moves...But don't forget, Bloom faced the same criticism last year in being accused of doing too little to help a playoff bound team...it worked out, but to me was never a sustainable philosophy.
Here's the best analogy I can think of...Bloom needs to drive to Detroit, realizes he can drive there just as easily in a Honda CRV vs. a BMW, so he buys a 15yr old CRV for $4k. First trip goes smoothly, his decision to by the CRV is reinforced...He makes a plan to visit Detroit monthly but on the first return trip home the CRV breaks down and needs $5k in repairs...Still cheaper than the BMW, but not a good plan...then people start asking him why he's driving to Detroit in the first place and he says because it's so scenic.
|
|
|
Post by chud on Feb 9, 2020 9:53:32 GMT -5
Here is a scenario that may be driving the holdup. Boston notices a medical red flag bringing hesitation to the original trade and a request for additional renumeration. At this time the holdup is reported and other teams call expressing interest in Betts and/or Price. Said teams layout the package they would be willing to part with which is greater than Verdugo/Graterol. Enough greater that a lesser prospect or more salary relief doesn’t compare. Boston now uses this info as a baseline for what they would like in addition to the existing deal which causes both LA and Minnesota to waiver because it is a significant enough increase over the previous deal. Bloom can draw a hard line for their asking price knowing they have a fall back deal ready to go if this falls through. I think this would seem logical. Teams such as St Louis, Philadelphia, NY Mets, Atlanta, Washington could potentially have a need for a one year superstar to push for a World Series and have enough payroll to carry added salary for one season and/or consider a long term deal next offseason. And of course San Diego still lingers. Betts has been available all winter. If there was going to be a bidding war, why would it start now? Totally agree...I can't believe I'm about to say this, as I think this guy is a stooge, but I think Heyman had a a pretty good take a day or two ago...I think the blowback on the trade in the media has give the Sox some hesitancy in the trade they were going to make and, at least in part, are using the Graterol medicals to up their ROI. This is not a knock against the ownership team as Henry et. al. have been unbelievable and have guided the org to 4 WS titles...in 2003 I think it's safe to say we would have given up a family member for that type of return and now it's reality...But, in the "no one is perfect but we demand perfection from our sports teams/ownership perspective, I never sensed the conviction in what I've read for the Sox to have a totally financially driven end goal for this year...And I think that the perception of the return being light because more emphasis was about shaving payroll to get under the LT was not a message ownership was comfortable with at all, because in fairness they've never driven the team that way and am sure they don't want part of the legacy of this ownership group to be that they traded away one of the most talented players they've ever developed for monetary reasons. The reality is the part that stinks. A 27yr old superstar with the ability/desire to test the FA market unless given a $400M contract is not the asset that everyone sees when they look at Betts...They only see what they want and that's the 27yr old superstar part. Enter Price as the problem...The link to Price with this trade screams $$ and rightly so. I'd be curious to see what a Betts Only trade w/ the Dodgers would look like. I'm going to go out on a limb and say it wouldn't look a ton different in ROI and although it might remove some of the $$ stigma attached to Price, most fans would still think we're getting fleeced. So then this comes down to the fact that if the Sox knew they couldn't sign Betts last year, they should have shopped him...But we also know that wouldn't have happened as they were thinking they had a team that could repeat as champs. If that had worked out, then this is less of an issue but because it didn't we're left with a bit of a mess. No way this trade return ends up being anything most fans are going to appreciate because they don't look at Betts as a one year rental, which is what most of the MLB trade partners do look at him as.
|
|
|
Post by chud on Nov 13, 2017 5:59:34 GMT -5
One thing we know about DD is that he's aggressive but thorough so there's no doubt he'll check in on everyone...and that all reporters will use those "check in's" as Sox interest to drive their stories and drive up their "click" counts...But specific to Heyman, he's the worst when it pertains to Boras clients...Not saying DD won't be all over JD to gauge what it would take to sign him, just think Heyman's word when it comes to Boras clients is mud...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Oct 17, 2017 5:17:33 GMT -5
[quote Joe AmorosinoVerified account @joeamorosino
Interviewing process going fast for #RedSox & could have new manager by end of the week. More on #7News @11 #AlexCora 7:38 PM - 16 Oct 2017 [/quote] The thing I love most about DD is his conviction and his focus...I remember Cherrington mentioning how a manger search affects the off season planning, think it was before the Valentine hire but could have been the Farrell hire...Either way, DD seems intent to cut to the chase, get things in order and NOT have the manager search effect the off season team building process. Personally, I love the conviction. No one is ever right 100% of the time no matter the profession...and from what I've seen/found is that you can be indecisive because you're scared to make the wrong decision (or weigh the pro's and con's too long under the same scared premise) or sometimes people who are prepared and confident just have that natural conviction knowing they've done their research, they know what's right and feel the decision is obvious so they pull the trigger...So DD isn't always right, no one is, but no reason to delay a decision if you're prepared to make it!
|
|
|
Post by chud on Oct 9, 2017 17:35:15 GMT -5
I wouldn't be so quick to trade Porcello. His durability is huge when 3/5s of the rotation is Price/Pom/E Rod. Heck the 6th and 7th as of now would be Wright and Johnson. Throw in that we could be looking to replace Price and Pom after next season without an obvious replacement beating down the AAA door. I would agree in that whatever Porcello is during the regular season (my running joke to friends was that he was a Cy Young as much as the Celtics were the #1 team in the East...), he's durable and can be good/really good...and you need those type of guys during a 162 game season...and we know he's not going to be a big game post season buy, until he proves he is... But, some positives, Sale/Price going into next season having pitched some big playoff innings...Devers/AB having some big hits in the playoffs...Betts hitting if not being a difference making hitter in the playoffs...I think resigning Nunez is a priority to play everywhere and spell Pedroia...While Stanton would be the dream, i wouldn't mortgage any more of the future to get him as he's just as likely to be hurt for chunks of the season (or worse as he ages) as that's the norm...Need a bat, and while power is crucial, i'd settle for someone who can consistently make contact in a big spot...NYY won a bunch of WS with no 30hr hitters, but instead had a relentless attack throughout the lineup, consistent contact and 4 or 5 guys with 20hr power...but let's face it, this team is built around starting pitching and what this team really needs more than anything are SP's who can pitch 6 or 7 good quality playoff innings instead of this 2IP nonsense...SP, more than lineup, killed the Sox in the playoffs 2 years running...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 22, 2016 19:11:22 GMT -5
I'm sure it's been said a few times but in summary here's my take:
1) Buch's option had to be picked up as he, at the time, was the 6th starter and a potential bullpen weapon...
2) Once Sale was acquired, Buch was the guy to go due to price tag and to years of control...for obvious reasons...
3) Could the Sox have gotten more for Buch, maybe, but not without a lot of if's...if, he proved himself in the rotation and was able to get that chance...if he proved himself in the bullpen, when he wasn't in the rotation...if he stayed healthy doing either...and then, would still be getting paid a lot of cash for that potential...
4) Sox got that salary off the books avoiding any of those potential if's, at a time when avoiding the luxury tax in the new CBA is important over multiple years...and if the Phil's get more for him at the trading deadline so bit it...as only a team out of contention from the get go could give Buch the time in the rotation to see if he has more value in him than 6th/7th starter status at $13m per year he would have been w/ the AL front running Sox...thank goodness we're not in the Phils boat...
5) It's clear that the Sox shopped him (judging by what they reportedly asked for from Miami), and found nothing huge...and would bet a lot of money they explored a lot of options between paying all of his salary (and the prospect they would get for that) all the way to what they would get for some team picking up the entire freight...and would guess from the outcome, all of the options led them to shedding the entire salary being the best option, and assuming there were only a few (if that) teams willing to take on his entire salary...IMO
|
|
|
Post by chud on Dec 9, 2016 19:00:52 GMT -5
I thought it might be a good idea to discuss DD's running of the Sox to this point as i know there's a lot of angst in his trading of prospects, which ultimately is the reason we're all on this site in the first place...I love following the Sox prospects, which again is probably redundant since I'm posting here in the first place, but think perspective is also important since the ultimate goal of having a strong farm system is to sustain a winning major league roster with young talent, so here's a few observations from that perspective:
1) DD has traded a lot of the upper tier prospects from the Sox farm system, which is in direct conflict to why we're all here...however, how many major league teams would trade their 40 man roster for the Sox 40 man roster? If they could afford it, i'm not sure there's another team (outside of the Cubs) that wouldn't trade there entire 40 man roster in 2 seconds for the Sox roster
2) Although it's a little concerning that DD has traded away a lot of "unproven" minor league talent, I don't think we can look at this in a vacuum...He did this with a team loaded at the major league level with young proven talent and a team with the potential to win now and for the next 3-4 years...which i'm sure was important to ownership, which from what i've read seemed to feel that the previous regime overemphasized the future for the present
3) DD usually seems to win trades...and i've read a bunch of DD "overpaying" for some players and really think that needs to be put into perspective. The perspective needs to be of the current market place for players/pitchers and not based in previously conceived notions of what we think of certain players/pitchers (i.e. relievers)...as to this point, DD has targeted high end talent/relievers which in this current market are at a premium, regardless of what we're used to
4) I'm no DD apologist, but think to this point he's used the Sox assets (i.e. money, redundant prospects, prospects) to leverage the Sox place within MLB, which right now is at the very top of the AL if not all of MLB in terms of talent/young talent...and although we all like following prospects, if the goal isn't to have a loaded/young talented MLB roster (which we have) then i think following prospects only is a little misguided...just that it's very unusual for an MLB team to be so loaded with young premium talent...and DD IMO has levered that to put the Sox into a position to not waste this very uncommon window of opportunity...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Oct 25, 2016 5:35:14 GMT -5
I've been reading the "brain drain" stuff and think it's not only a bit overblown, but it's not the correct way to look at this situation. Good organizations lose good people, bottom line...Look at the Indians starting all the way back with John Hart...Look at Bill Walsh/Bill Parcells...Hell, look at how many people Theo lost, he lost Hoyer and McLeod for the love of god...these things happen and it's all a sign of a very healthy and vibrant management team. If Hazen/Sawdaye were that good (and everything I've read says they were...and really what else do we really go by other than what we've read) then by definition of being a good executive it means they would have also hired good people underneath them and groomed them to one day take their place...So we can't have it both ways, if they're good then by definition there's a good succession plan just waiting to happen. And DD is a very successful MLB executive whom i think we should all have confidence in to restructure the front office. Let's face it, the "GM" title w/ the Sox was just a fancy title for "Asst. GM"...Everyone knows it, so i'm guessing any restructure is to streamline the reporting and share responsibilities vs. just having one "GM" and a bunch of other folks who probably carried close to the same responsibility as the GM did...Just a thought
|
|
|
Post by chud on Oct 20, 2016 4:56:46 GMT -5
I think the thing with Theo was that eventually he was going to leave...didn't sound like he was going to spend 40 years with the Red Sox then retire...the guy sounds like he knows himself very well..although I think he might have stayed a little while longer (possibly, possibly not) if not for the LL factor...Francona I think was a different story...I don't think Francona was going to voluntarily walk away from the Sox like Theo did...But i also think, especially in Boston, there's a shelf life for anyone...especially the manager...Kind of like a relationship, you can't necessarily see it when it's really over when you're knee deep in it but from a year or two down the road, you realize it was totally the right thing, which is where I think tito is now..
Doesn't stop the regret from realizing we had both Theo/Tito here and now they're gone...but realizing it's inevitable is the first step of the 10 step process...But let's be honest, working in the Boston market is a thankless job...yeah, the passionate fan base is great, money is great, budget is great, but comes with enormous pressure, rabid media, unforgiving fan base etc...You can get all of the good w/ none of the bad in places like St. Louis, Chicago, LA...where the pressure is less, the media scrutiny is less, and yet the money, budget, and fan base are all still totally good...Honestly, we need to appreciate the folks who want to work in Boston, not just the ones who get jobs in boston, but those who actually strive to work in boston like Farrell...Think about it, w/ 3 WS in the bank, what's the up side for someone coming in as a President of Baseball Ops, GM, Manager...Savior, no, status quo means WS or bust, relentless comparisons by the media to the "good old days"...If i had options, i'm not sure Boston would be at the top of my list.
Remember when we all thought the first guy to win a WS in Boston would have a job for life, statue in the parking lot, never pay for a dinner ever again...then think about what happened in the 2011 collapse...feelings change quickly in Boston...which is why we're lucky to have someone of DD's caliber leading baseball ops. Someone who's confident, decisive, and unafraid of the scrutiny, yet comes w/ a successful/proven track record and someone who actually "chose" Boston over other opportunities...I think those traits will be hard to come by for the Sox going forward...
|
|
|
Post by chud on Oct 17, 2016 8:26:27 GMT -5
I'll go further, let's not panic at all based on a couple of reasons:
1) DD is a very smart, extremely successful and incredibly well respected senior executive within the baseball community for a reason...sometimes I think we all think these types don't have basic understandings of team related items...although it makes for great debate, let's be honest, DD (and others) know way more than we ever well, that's why he's getting paid what he does and has been getting paid at that level for a long time...to think DD doesn't understand the dynamics of internal promotion vs. external promotion and the effects it will have is pretty crazy...sometimes trades/FA signings don't work out, but it doesn't always mean the prep/planning behind it doesn't make sense vs. the limited information available to all of us...and in this case, he certainly would understand the personnel dynamics of the next GM hire...
2) We've been down this road before and Wren didn't get the job for the same exact reason DD hired an internal candidate in Hazen (see #1)...he's not dumb and can easily understand who in the exec. staff has talent, and how that has a domino effect on the rest of the front office...There's a reason Wren didn't get the job before and won't get the job this time...
3) All it takes is one non-local guy (in this case Nightengale) to float Wren's name to cause panic...I believe he was the same guy who floated Wren's name last year...the guy's simply trying to make a connection from 50,000 feet...and will be wrong again
4) DD will also know that this “GM” job is not a true GM job and thus is a stepping stone for someone to be promoted to having total control of a MLB front office (ala the Hazen promotion to AZ…as it is a promotion)…it would make no sense to hire someone externally for what essentially is an Asst. GM+ job, where if they do a good job they’ll leave too if offered total control somewhere else vs. promoting someone from within the organization to keep some continuity…
5) They’ve known this was most likely going to happen if you believe Spiere’s article about them being contacted at the end of the season by AZ…and the potential ramifications it would have for Lovullo too…So as any good executive, he’s no doubt had behind the scene conversations about replacing both, and again no doubt has already compiled a very short list to replace both…I’ll be surprised if the Sox don’t have an internal GM in place by Friday or at least know who it will be by Friday just in case they have to satisfy meeting any mandatory commissioner’s office interviewing rules…
|
|
|
Post by chud on Sept 4, 2016 11:34:13 GMT -5
Let's hope he's not another Jack Baker- (anyone here remember him ?) big strong righty first baseman in A ball with Jim Rice, great numbers but got exposed at the highest level. One thing has me enthused that he's got a shot- Ian pushed hard to have him placed higher in the rankings- and that's on the basis of his not yet public scouting. It's funny, my first thought after reading about his strikeout issues then seeing the current power display was Greg Blosser...I kept waiting for that guy every year, and...nothing...but, ever the optimist, let's root for a Joey Gallo type w/ Dalbec (strikeouts, but made it to AAAA status so far) and not a Jerry Gallo type, as he's dead...
|
|
|