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.
Where did things go wrong?
|
Post by crossedsabres8 on Dec 8, 2022 16:40:28 GMT -5
I am actually pretty disappointed in this despite being lukewarm on resigning/extending Xander in the first place. The way in which he was lost is very disheartening.
I will say, the 2018 team was unsustainable. Despite a "young" core, they didn't have control over their homegrown players for very many years (Bogaerts was extended that offseason) and their big contracts were on the wrong side of 30. Even if the dissolution of that team could've been handled better, it would be very difficult for them to continue being contenders, especially considering the lack of young, cheap talent that has come in the last few years.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,532
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Dec 8, 2022 16:54:13 GMT -5
Bad drafting in the middle/late 2010’s and terrible contracts handed out towards the end of DD’s tenure
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Dec 8, 2022 16:58:17 GMT -5
Failure to develop adequate starting pitching is near the top of the list. When you constantly have to either buy it or trade for it, it is both expensive and carries the highest injury risk.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 8, 2022 16:59:34 GMT -5
The Sale extension really ended it, although forr me personally the day of Eovaldi's extension was the day I gave up on what should have been a 10-year window built around that core (including Sale but not Eovaldi as part of the "core") and started wondering what was next. The finances and timing just didn't work to keep enough of the core together to be relevant after that.
Obviously I doubt the FO and ownership agree with me exactly, but I think once they moved on from Dombrowski they asked "can we win consistently with what we can still retain?" If the answer was "No" then the only course of action was to move on. That seems to be what they did, with a focus on not ending up in this situation again.
Fwiw, there's a lot of talk about how the Sox should leverage their financial strength: extend guys a year early, beat other teams for top FA, not worry about dead money at the back-end of contracts, etc. For me personally, I'd like to see them take on risk with young players very early. E.g. lock up Casas and Bello for a decade plus within the next year or so, before they get crazy expensive. Sure, not everyone will pan out but you're talking dollar amounts that the Sox have the finances to absorb, compared to the huge dead money that's effectively guaranteed in the back-end of a huge FA deal.
|
|
|
Post by carl4sox on Dec 8, 2022 17:02:22 GMT -5
This just sucks. Bogie, you're the best. Thank you for all your great RS years.
Think about it: As soon as Boras was his agent, he was going to the high bidder.
Raffie doesn't have Boras. Will he be amenable to a signing this off-season? I don't know anything about his agent.
But, as of now, we know Raffie's asking will be astronomical. What to do? Before the season starts, maybe it's time to....
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 8, 2022 17:11:50 GMT -5
You know in the off chance that Lester gets voted into the hall like 20 years from now by the Veterans committee and Xander ends up going in...You’re looking at the possibility that Mookie Xander and Lester all goes into the hall with different hats than Boston. That sucks.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Dec 8, 2022 17:14:59 GMT -5
The Sale extension really ended it, although forr me personally the day of Eovaldi's extension was the day I gave up on what should have been a 10-year window built around that core (including Sale but not Eovaldi as part of the "core") and started wondering what was next. The finances and timing just didn't work to keep enough of the core together to be relevant after that. Obviously I doubt the FO and ownership agree with me exactly, but I think once they moved on from Dombrowski they asked "can we win consistently with what we can still retain?" If the answer was "No" then the only course of action was to move on. That seems to be what they did, with a focus on not ending up in this situation again. Fwiw, there's a lot of talk about how the Sox should leverage their financial strength: extend guys a year early, beat other teams for top FA, not worry about dead money at the back-end of contracts, etc. For me personally, I'd like to see them take on risk with young players very early. E.g. lock up Casas and Bello for a decade plus within the next year or so, before they get crazy expensive. Sure, not everyone will pan out but you're talking dollar amounts that the Sox have the finances to absorb, compared to the huge dead money that's effectively guaranteed in the back-end of a huge FA deal. i guess my question would be, where does this end ? Yes, it is likely to be have less value at the end. But, why should that scare the Boston Red Sox ? They can mitigate 1 bad contract just by their revenues alone. It won't crush them. And that is my major point. Three great ballplayers, one, Xander, who is the epitome of what you look for in an employee. They can't take a long term risk on 1 of these guys ? I don't see it. They have become completely dispassionate in roster construction The negative effects of that may not be quantifiable, but they will be real. A player like X walking off the field in a Sox uniform after 15 years is something worthwhile.
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Dec 8, 2022 17:34:51 GMT -5
Perfect example is not even trying to trade Bogaerts, then making an offer that's not even close. If you complain about the farm system, this is the type of crap that haunts you for years. Your chance at jump starting our system, giving you options to make win now trades, not just sell off trades. This is it to me above all. A lot of people today trying to make this a basically binary choice between giving Xander the SD contract or losing him. This was just the last step in a totally bungled situation. They could have extended him at multiple points for a lot less. They didn't. They could have traded him for pieces that could be part fo a future winner. They didn't. At the absolute barest minimum they could have gotten below the tax line to get decent draft pick compensation when guys left They didn't Basically Xander for a pick at the end of the 4th round. That is what the team chose.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 8, 2022 17:50:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 8, 2022 19:58:12 GMT -5
There's a lot of blame to go around. To see what the Sox were from that 2016 - 2018 era to what they look like now is striking.
Blame starts at the top - ownership. It's like they won and decided, we've won enough, time to really cash in. I know I'll get pushback on that statement but for ownership to be involved like they were yesterday and still not come up with enough cash to make the offer even appealing enough to look like they really tried is disappointing. I feel like they overreacted to the disappointment of 2019.
I mean the Sox, with roughly the same team, won 192 games over two seasons. If they won 96 games both years, would they have employed the same philosophy? It seems to me ownership overreacted with their change in philosophy. I mean the core of the team was still viable enough to help them overachieve in 2021 and make the playoffs.
Of course there's the blame of the shenanigans the Red Sox international department did in getting themselves into a situation where they lost international picks. That certainly didn't help the draft pool and there were some terrible drafts.
I will say that in the last few years since Bloom arrived the drafts appear to be much better and there are some players that can help form the next core and in 2018 under Dombrowski they did draft Casas and Houck, but for the most part only recently has the drafting looked good. Since the farm system does appear to be going in the right direction, whether it's the farm director or whoever, I'll credit Bloom with that.
I've criticized Bloom plenty but will praise him when he does something good - the Whitlock heist was one of his best moves.
That said, I think that this "efficiency value" over bottom line talent is becoming problematic, which is the direction ownership wanted to go in.
I think a lot of people here will ferociously defend Bloom no matter what. I have to say, I didn't complain when the Sox dumped Dombrowski, although I did like Dombrowski's straight forward aggressive approach. I would have to say his biggest blemish was giving Sale the contract he did when he didn't have to. He was trying to do what the Sox management should have done with Xander. The problem was Dombrowski chose to do it on an injured pitcher and it was probably the driving force that cost him his job and triggered the drastic change in ownership philosophy.
I don't blame Bloom for the debacle that was 2020. I don't blame him for trading Mookie. I do blame ownership even more than Dombrowski for not stepping in and giving Mookie a bigger offer prior to free agency. They misread the market. It's ridiculous that a know-nothing like me figured that Mookie was looking for a Trout like offer. Sure enough Mookie confirmed it. He said had he gotten the offer the Dodgers gave him from the Red Sox, he would have stayed. I will take him at his word on that. I have no reason to believe he'd lie.
But the Sox didn't want to be over the luxury tax limit or incur their penalties so they had Bloom staple Price to Betts and he had to make his trade. Skipping over the rehashes of the deal, they went from superstar Mookie in RF to Alex Verdugo and two prospects. Reasonable idea from Bloom. Wrong prospects judgment as it turned out.
So a once in a lifetime 5 tool talent like Mookie winds up being converted into a average-ish/good outfielder and nothing else. Verdugo is good and is a major downgrade from Mookie.
Bloom has a great idea with Benintendi - get 5 prospects for him and let the law of averages take over. But all 5 are marginal at best, so a good player like Benintendi gets downgraded to a lot of nothing.
He keeps JBJ, doesn't trade him during a lost season and then gets nothing for him. Then he has a creative idea. Trade for JBJ's salary and buy prospects. Great idea. Terrible execution and the prospects returned are marginal and it cost them the services of an average-ish but still valuable commodity like Renfroe, which was certainly one of Bloom's better moves.
Then the debacle at the deadline. I'm sorry, but I don't need a fangraphs generated algorithm to tell me whether the Sox should have dumped their players or not at the deadline. They clearly made the wrong judgment and that's not me second guessing. Because of that they foolishly stayed over the luxury tax limit and they lost out an opportunity to recoup some value for JDM and Eovaldi and Wacha, perhaps all of them not coming back, and mostly Xander.
They take a role model face of the franchise and treat him the way they treated Jon Lester years ago and are shocked that San Diego blew them out of the water. In fact when it came time to put up several teams were well ahead of them.
I felt a 7 year 200 million offer would probably have gotten him signed had it been offered as the extension instead of that insulting tack one year on thing they did. If he would have rejected it, at least they would have known where they stood. Now they're probably going to reenact this with Devers if they don't wise up.
So all this "restraint" yet the value that was on the field has been downgraded drastically with nobody that's part of the next future core of Red Sox with the probable exception of Whitlock added (I don't think Verdugo will be around when Mayer and others are ready).
While not giving out moronic contracts is admirable - see 11 year deal given out to Xander and even the Turner one that Dombrowski gave out, the Sox still misread the market and continue to do so for their own developed stars which doesn't bode well when the next core blossoms, matures, and is ready to seek their rewards. Will they do what Atlanta does with their young stars? It would be nice.
Yesterday, while I understand the Jansen contract - that one could get ugly if Jansen heads toward washed up status and the Yoshida contract - it's concerning to see that many thing the Red Sox went nuts and overpaid for, I was glad to see them finally spend money but it remains to be seen if it was spent wisely. It shouldn't backfire as bad as some of these other enormous deals, but the Red Sox seemed to zig when others would zag.
When I look at Bloom I think a lot of us liked the idea of him, sort of like a more modern Theo, but I have to say, I'm not overly impressed at all. I think while he is creative, I think his judgment lacks and I don't trust him to properly bridge the gaps and keep the team seriously competitive until the new young core arrives and if they do I don't trust him to supplement it properly or to make sure that the best of those youngsters are secured past their first six seasons - again I don't know how much is Bloom or how much is ownership.
All I know is I'm disappointed with ownership which is crazy after 4 championships, but hey, Harry Frazee won a championship and then..... (And no I'm not saying they're him, but I will say their interests have shifted a lot lately and if it's not focused on spending whatever it takes to win because they're too busy seeking out value, then maybe it's time for them to move on in favor of somebody more willing to spend whatever it takes.
|
|
|
Post by wOBA Fett on Dec 8, 2022 20:32:17 GMT -5
So let's say they kept Mookie with the contract he has with the Dodgers. Now let's say they matched the Padres offer to Xander. Now let's say the Devers extension is in that ballpark, that's $100 million dollars+ per year tied up to three players for a decade plus and all three through their declining years at HUGE AAV's. Does any fan want that? No argument that mistakes weren't and haven't been made with all three but keeping all three seemed like a pipe dream anyway. 10 years from now the CBT limit could be $300M and all those deals look fine. Look at Bryce Harper signing his record 13-year, $330-million contract back in 2019 for $26MM a year. As the FA market continues to increase this is gradually starting to look like a steal.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 8, 2022 20:47:35 GMT -5
Don’t tell me you had to be realistic and make a hard decision not to resign Betts because the window for competing was closed the next three years, and theCBT was too important, only then not sell off at this deadline to collect assets And reset the CBT because you thought to had a slight chance at the playoffs. If the goal was important enough to walk away from Betts when you definitely could compete, then that goal should be important enough to punt JD, Evoldi and Xander. Unpopular, yes, but at least consistent. Instead, he half-assed it and now lost on all three front. No playoffs, no CBT reset, and no assets.
That indecisiveness also is shown in the incremental offers to retain our guys, always chasing the market.
Add in that he really has been poor at collecting assets for players and the lack of any luck in the gambles he’s taken (Paxton, JBJ) and you have a really crappy core and no assets to build around.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Dec 8, 2022 20:52:08 GMT -5
It went wrong when they didn't make me the GM.
|
|
|
Post by semperfisox on Dec 8, 2022 21:00:41 GMT -5
You know in the off chance that Lester gets voted into the hall like 20 years from now by the Veterans committee and Xander ends up going in...You’re looking at the possibility that Mookie Xander and Lester all goes into the hall with different hats than Boston. That sucks. Lester isn’t going to the HOF
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Dec 8, 2022 21:08:25 GMT -5
Offering Bogaerts 1 year, $30 million to add on to the remaining 3 years, $60 million was an insult to him. Offering 6 years, $162 million when there were 4 or 5 teams offering him >>>$200 million was an insult to Bogaerts and Red Sox fans. The apathy in the Red Sox ownership and management is striking. They take for granted that there will be sellouts at Fenway Park and viewers will turn on NESN. Well guess what? 2 last place finishes since 2018, with the team likely to struggle to make it out of the AL East basement again in 2023 is going to be a real wake up call for them when fans don't show up and tune in.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 8, 2022 21:20:49 GMT -5
You know in the off chance that Lester gets voted into the hall like 20 years from now by the Veterans committee and Xander ends up going in...You’re looking at the possibility that Mookie Xander and Lester all goes into the hall with different hats than Boston. That sucks. Lester isn’t going to the HOF Oh, I agree, which is why I said 20 years from now. Stranger things have happened, though. We live in a world where Harold Baines is in the hall.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 8, 2022 23:07:24 GMT -5
compared to the huge dead money that's effectively guaranteed in the back-end of a huge FA deal. i guess my question would be, where does this end ? Yes, it is likely to be have less value at the end. But, why should that scare the Boston Red Sox ? They can mitigate 1 bad contract just by their revenues alone. It won't crush them. And that is my major point. Three great ballplayers, one, Xander, who is the epitome of what you look for in an employee. They can't take a long term risk on 1 of these guys ? I don't see it. They have become completely dispassionate in roster construction The negative effects of that may not be quantifiable, but they will be real. A player like X walking off the field in a Sox uniform after 15 years is something worthwhile. My question in return is "Why was Bogaerts THE guy worth risking this for?" I say this as someone who was a huge Bogaerts fan. I thought I was far past the age of having a "favorite" player but Bogaerts was. Being objective though, I don't think he's worth paying to be the best or probably 2nd best player on your roster, never mind the insane burden the 2nd half of his current contract will bring. I'm actually worried what this contract will do to his legacy, that he'll get defined by a horrific contract and not his playing career. To answer your question, for me it ends when you have enough cost-effective young players that having dead money from a "bad" FA signing doesn't completely ruin your chances to compete.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Dec 9, 2022 8:00:57 GMT -5
i guess my question would be, where does this end ? Yes, it is likely to be have less value at the end. But, why should that scare the Boston Red Sox ? They can mitigate 1 bad contract just by their revenues alone. It won't crush them. And that is my major point. Three great ballplayers, one, Xander, who is the epitome of what you look for in an employee. They can't take a long term risk on 1 of these guys ? I don't see it. They have become completely dispassionate in roster construction The negative effects of that may not be quantifiable, but they will be real. A player like X walking off the field in a Sox uniform after 15 years is something worthwhile. My question in return is "Why was Bogaerts THE guy worth risking this for?" I say this as someone who was a huge Bogaerts fan. I thought I was far past the age of having a "favorite" player but Bogaerts was. Being objective though, I don't think he's worth paying to be the best or probably 2nd best player on your roster, never mind the insane burden the 2nd half of his current contract will bring. I'm actually worried what this contract will do to his legacy, that he'll get defined by a horrific contract and not his playing career. To answer your question, for me it ends when you have enough cost-effective young players that having dead money from a "bad" FA signing doesn't completely ruin your chances to compete. that is fair and i appreciate the response. i see him as the guy to do it with for production and legacy reasons. We probably didn't need to go to his current contract to make it happen, but that is conjecture on my part. Overall though, there just isn't an element for me that these contracts are going to have such a degree of injury to the organization. Sure, 2 or 3 of them. just 1, though, i think our market can absorb that.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 9, 2022 8:07:48 GMT -5
i guess my question would be, where does this end ? Yes, it is likely to be have less value at the end. But, why should that scare the Boston Red Sox ? They can mitigate 1 bad contract just by their revenues alone. It won't crush them. And that is my major point. Three great ballplayers, one, Xander, who is the epitome of what you look for in an employee. They can't take a long term risk on 1 of these guys ? I don't see it. They have become completely dispassionate in roster construction The negative effects of that may not be quantifiable, but they will be real. A player like X walking off the field in a Sox uniform after 15 years is something worthwhile. My question in return is "Why was Bogaerts THE guy worth risking this for?" I say this as someone who was a huge Bogaerts fan. I thought I was far past the age of having a "favorite" player but Bogaerts was. Being objective though, I don't think he's worth paying to be the best or probably 2nd best player on your roster, never mind the insane burden the 2nd half of his current contract will bring. I'm actually worried what this contract will do to his legacy, that he'll get defined by a horrific contract and not his playing career. To answer your question, for me it ends when you have enough cost-effective young players that having dead money from a "bad" FA signing doesn't completely ruin your chances to compete. I feel like people who are focusing on the Padres outbidding the Sox and being stupid with money are completely missing the point on why people are pissed about Xander. Absolutely, no one would be happy if they gave Xander 280 million. However, they could have gotten it done in the spring for a little over half that. Instead, they F'ed around and found out what happened. They low balled him, and Boras brought him to market. Once Boras brought him to the market, it was always going to be tough. It was so incredibly transparent last offseason they chose Story over Xander and it became more clear once they lowballed him. Pay your homegrown talent! In a way the Sox are operating like a small market/big market hybrid. Get the cheap years for your talent, let them walk, overpay for free agents on shorter years until young players are ready and then repeat. They're not going to sign Devers to a long term deal because thats too risky in years 6-10. When you're a big market team who the hell cares what happens on the back end of the deal?
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 9, 2022 8:41:21 GMT -5
Pay your homegrown talent! Should they? If your homegrown talent isn't as good as what else you could get, is it really the right thing to do to keep the homegrown players? There's two different ways of looking at this: pay homegrown talent when they are years from FA and hopefully cheap (although not every player is open to this, Mookie was very forthcoming about going to FA for top-dollar years in advance) and retaining homegrown players once they become FA. I definitely agree with the former, but of the 3 players discussed here, Mookie wasn't open to it; Bogaerts said he would have signed last yeat but 1) I take everything that comes from Boras and his players with a boulder-sized grain of salt, 2) the reported contract to sign him a year ago (5/150) would have been considered by many to be a huge overpay at the time, and 3) that's much closer to FA than I'm referring to as being a good deal; and we'll see with Devers but he sounds intent on getting top FA dollars as well. So, are homegrown players necessarily the right players to spend top-dollar on? As a fan I want to keep players consistent, it makes them easier to root for etc. In terms of building the best team, I'm not so sure.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 9, 2022 8:44:51 GMT -5
Pay your homegrown talent! Should they? If your homegrown talent isn't as good as what else you could get, is it really the right thing to do to keep the homegrown players? There's two different ways of looking at this: pay homegrown talent when they are years from FA and hopefully cheap (although not every player is open to this, Mookie was very forthcoming about going to FA for top-dollar years in advance) and retaining homegrown players once they become FA. I definitely agree with the former, but of the 3 players discussed here, Mookie wasn't open to it; Bogaerts said he would have signed last yeat but 1) I take everything that comes from Boras and his players with a boulder-sized grain of salt, 2) the reported contract to sign him a year ago (5/150) would have been considered by many to be a huge overpay at the time, and 3) that's much closer to FA than I'm referring to as being a good deal; and we'll see with Devers but he sounds intent on getting top FA dollars as well. So, are homegrown players necessarily the right players to spend top-dollar on? As a fan I want to keep players consistent, it makes them easier to root for etc. In terms of building the best team, I'm not so sure. I’d ask you to go back to the extension thread on this board — June 2021. No kne would have thought that was an overpay.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 9, 2022 8:57:04 GMT -5
There just seems to be either one or a combo of these things going on as far as I can tell.
The Sox are either delusional and think that these players are going to take low ball team friendly offers, IE. Xander's offer last year and honestly even this offseason. You can't convince me that anyone who was actually paying attention to the deals Turner and Judge got would actually think X would have taken 6/160.
They didn't actually want these players, hence the low ball offers but they wanted to be able to tell the fans hey we tried. Wouldn't be the first time they try and spin zone something to make themselves look better.
John Henry and ownership has instituted a no contract longer than 6 year mandate.
Just my two cents on it, the Sox are frustrating the hell out of me though that's for sure. They're zigging when folks are zagging or hell they're just off the map entirely. I literally don't think I could have predicted the Yoshida signing, at least for the money he got and I definitely never would have predicted Jansen's contract. Not saying I necessarily have a problem with either move but they just seem so polar opposite of what Bloom did his first few years.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Dec 9, 2022 9:09:27 GMT -5
There just seems to be either one or a combo of these things going on as far as I can tell. The Sox are either delusional and think that these players are going to take low ball team friendly offers, IE. Xander's offer last year and honestly even this offseason. You can't convince me that anyone who was actually paying attention to the deals Turner and Judge got would actually think X would have taken 6/160. They didn't actually want these players, hence the low ball offers but they wanted to be able to tell the fans hey we tried. Wouldn't be the first time they try and spin zone something to make themselves look better. John Henry and ownership has instituted a no contract longer than 6 year mandate. Just my two cents on it, the Sox are frustrating the hell out of me though that's for sure. They're zigging when folks are zagging or hell they're just off the map entirely. I literally don't think I could have predicted the Yoshida signing, at least for the money he got and I definitely never would have predicted Jansen's contract. Not saying I necessarily have a problem with either move but they just seem so polar opposite of what Bloom did his first few years. I've seen this in a couple comments so far and I don't understand why it's a bad thing. Isn't this usually a good way to exploit inefficiencies and find value? It won't necessarily go well, of course, but the idea seems to make sense.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 9, 2022 9:18:15 GMT -5
There just seems to be either one or a combo of these things going on as far as I can tell. The Sox are either delusional and think that these players are going to take low ball team friendly offers, IE. Xander's offer last year and honestly even this offseason. You can't convince me that anyone who was actually paying attention to the deals Turner and Judge got would actually think X would have taken 6/160. They didn't actually want these players, hence the low ball offers but they wanted to be able to tell the fans hey we tried. Wouldn't be the first time they try and spin zone something to make themselves look better. John Henry and ownership has instituted a no contract longer than 6 year mandate. Just my two cents on it, the Sox are frustrating the hell out of me though that's for sure. They're zigging when folks are zagging or hell they're just off the map entirely. I literally don't think I could have predicted the Yoshida signing, at least for the money he got and I definitely never would have predicted Jansen's contract. Not saying I necessarily have a problem with either move but they just seem so polar opposite of what Bloom did his first few years. I've seen this in a couple comments so far and I don't understand why it's a bad thing. Isn't this usually a good way to exploit inefficiencies and find value? It won't necessarily go well, of course, but the idea seems to make sense. It's not guaranteed to be a bad thing, the only problem is it kind of either works well or fails spectacularly. I don't see much room for middle ground. Like ya we bolstered the bullpen, which they needed to do. Yet if they don't have leads late in games a good bullpen goes wasted. Yoshida is either a really good asset that the scouting community maybe missed how good his hit tool and approach is at the plate or he's a negative defensively and can't hit ML pitching as well as the Sox think he will translate. There's still plenty of offseason yet and I'll admit we're missing some of the puzzle pieces that are going to be placed on the board by the time spring training starts so I shouldn't talk in such certainties I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by bloomstaxonomy on Dec 9, 2022 9:35:10 GMT -5
Where did it all go wrong? Well, almost 13 years ago to the day, we acquired a pitcher named Boof Bonser from the Twins...
|
|
|