SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Evaluating the Front Office and Ownership
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,484
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 26, 2022 23:20:49 GMT -5
Last year, the pool money associated with that drop would've been more than $400k.
In practical terms, that's a little less than how much they used to entice young Brooks Brannon to skip college. It's hardly rounding error...
So less than what netted the 28th ranked prospect in the system? It’s not nothing but it’s hardly anything to get in a tizzy about. Seems like they’ll reset this year anyway Wouldn't you rather they have reset it last year and been able to spend to go over the luxury tax limit this year and next year when their odds of winning are better at this moment than it would have been last Aug 2nd?
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 26, 2022 23:43:55 GMT -5
Last year, the pool money associated with that drop would've been more than $400k.
In practical terms, that's a little less than how much they used to entice young Brooks Brannon to skip college.
It's hardly rounding error...
So less than what netted the 28th ranked prospect in the system? It’s not nothing but it’s hardly anything to get in a tizzy about. Seems like they’ll reset this year anyway Sorry, I'll try to keep my emotions in check. Calling him the 28th prospect in the system is one way to look at him. That's just below Wilyer Abreu and Ronaldo Hernandez and Zack Kelly, which is not shabby considering he doesn't turn 19 until Star Wars Day. He also received the team's 4th highest bonus of last year's draft. Maybe having $400k to play with doesn't mean anything but maybe it could.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,659
|
Post by cdj on Dec 27, 2022 0:18:41 GMT -5
So less than what netted the 28th ranked prospect in the system? It’s not nothing but it’s hardly anything to get in a tizzy about. Seems like they’ll reset this year anyway Sorry, I'll try to keep my emotions in check. Calling him the 28th prospect in the system is one way to look at him. That's just below Wilyer Abreu and Ronaldo Hernandez and Zack Kelly, which is not shabby considering he doesn't turn 19 until Star Wars Day. He also received the team's 4th highest bonus of last year's draft. Maybe having $400k to play with doesn't mean anything but maybe it could. You never know. It is the mlb draft after all! Perhaps they could have ended up with the next big thing with that extra money. In all likelihood it won’t alter the franchise in any real significant way though. Not saying you’re blowing up about it, I’m just saying it’s not some grave, franchise-killing error some people are making it out to be online
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,951
Member is Online
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 27, 2022 8:42:36 GMT -5
It's not nothing and shouldn't be dismissed as such. The player we would have drafted at 80 would have started higher in the vaunted SP.com rankings than whoever we draft at 140, so there's definitely a drop in the level of prospect we'll get, at least starting out. There's also the money issue that others have noted.
The thing is, it's true that 80 won't have significantly more chance of impacting the ML team than 140 - the odds against both will be great. But these missteps add up. If you make enough of them, eventually one of them costs you. Run a stop sign once and you're probably Ok. Keep it up and eventually...CRASH!
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,951
Member is Online
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 27, 2022 9:02:36 GMT -5
Wouldn't you rather they have reset it last year and been able to spend to go over the luxury tax limit this year and next year when their odds of winning are better at this moment than it would have been last Aug 2nd? Absolutely. Posters keep citing the 30 percent as reason to go over the LTT. But the odds of winning the WS were under 2 percent. The MLB playoffs are now more similar in length to the playoffs in other sports than ever before. You have to win multiple rounds to get to the championship round/game, especially if you're not one of the top two in your league, which the 2022 Red Sox were not going to be. The chances are great that the Sox would have been bounced. The payout for going over the LTT would likely have been a loss to a superior team. I mean, does anyone here think nostalgically about the 35-47, 1994-95 Celtics? Game 4 of the first round vs. Shaq and the Orlando Magic: 124-77. Yippie!
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 27, 2022 9:07:26 GMT -5
It's not nothing and shouldn't be dismissed as such. The player we would have drafted at 80 would have started higher in the vaunted SP.com rankings than whoever we draft at 140, so there's definitely a drop in the level of prospect we'll get, at least starting out. There's also the money issue that others have noted. The thing is, it's true that 80 won't have significantly more chance of impacting the ML team than 140 - the odds against both will be great. But these missteps add up. If you make enough of them, eventually one of them costs you. Run a stop sign once and you're probably Ok. Keep it up and eventually...CRASH! This is where you have to keep mentioning the Xander thing because it's relevant. If you had a slim chance of making the playoffs, was it worth keeping him? Would the return be better than a 4th round pick? You almost now have to reset this year because Devers is probably gone, and if they get another 4th rounder for Devers, people are going to be rightfully pissed. Just pay your stars, you can't go wrong with that approach. Its when you start overpaying people on the margins that it becomes an issue. The thing is, everyone more or less knew the odds were against the Sox making the playoffs, and the odds were against them keeping Xander. Both scenarios played out exactly like the majority of the board felt was going to happen. Its just feels like a massive mismanagement of assets.
|
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Dec 27, 2022 9:26:13 GMT -5
Wouldn't you rather they have reset it last year and been able to spend to go over the luxury tax limit this year and next year when their odds of winning are better at this moment than it would have been last Aug 2nd? Absolutely. Posters keep citing the 30 percent as reason to go over the LTT. But the odds of winning the WS were under 2 percent. The MLB playoffs are now more similar in length to the playoffs in other sports than ever before. You have to win multiple rounds to get to the championship round/game, especially if you're not one of the top two in your league, which the 2022 Red Sox were not going to be. The chances are great that the Sox would have been bounced. The payout for going over the LTT would likely have been a loss to a superior team. I mean, does anyone here think nostalgically about the 35-47, 1994-95 Celtics? Game 4 of the first round vs. Shaq and the Orlando Magic: 124-77. Yippie! Respectfully, it's easy for you and I to sit here and say "World Series or Bust!!!" Heck, that's my gut instinct as well. But you and I aren't the ones who would have to deal with the fallout from pissed off season ticket holders, sponsors, advertisers, etc. for running up the white flag in early August.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 27, 2022 10:14:04 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs.
I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did).
So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,484
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 27, 2022 10:21:49 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs. I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did). So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action. Did the Giants or Guardians or Orioles have valuable free agents walking away that they could have gotten value for? If the Sox were never serious about extending X (and the fact that they really thought they had a shot with their extension offer or topping out at 160 million when other clubs were going to give him 200 million plus was some serious flawed thinking), they should have gotten real value for him. They got nothing for other free agents of value. If the Red Sox didn't have certain assets like X, then I wouldn't have been as quick to say, sell, sell, sell, but they did. Getting nothing out of them is problematic and this is partially how they wind up with less value than they had.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Dec 27, 2022 10:22:16 GMT -5
Absolutely. Posters keep citing the 30 percent as reason to go over the LTT. But the odds of winning the WS were under 2 percent. The MLB playoffs are now more similar in length to the playoffs in other sports than ever before. You have to win multiple rounds to get to the championship round/game, especially if you're not one of the top two in your league, which the 2022 Red Sox were not going to be. The chances are great that the Sox would have been bounced. The payout for going over the LTT would likely have been a loss to a superior team. I mean, does anyone here think nostalgically about the 35-47, 1994-95 Celtics? Game 4 of the first round vs. Shaq and the Orlando Magic: 124-77. Yippie! Respectfully, it's easy for you and I to sit here and say "World Series or Bust!!!" Heck, that's my gut instinct as well. But you and I aren't the ones who would have to deal with the fallout from pissed off season ticket holders, sponsors, advertisers, etc. for running up the white flag in early August. You think season ticket holders aren't pissed now or won't be throughout 2023?
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 27, 2022 10:22:16 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs.
I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did).
So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action. The Sox were brutal in July and were trending in the wrong direction. As good as they were in June, they were just as bad in July. They should have traded anyone who was a pending free agent and gotten under the tax. The approach came off as half assed and too late. At that point, just trade all the pending FAs and move on.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 27, 2022 10:22:36 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs.
I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did).
So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action. Personally, I am not a tear-down voice… but I am a cr@p-or-get-off-the-pot guy. If they thought 30% was real, why not make it 50%? But trading your starting catcher away and getting Tommy Pham… it is neither. Hosmer doesn’t count because he was pretty much toast. And trading Diekman away might have gotten an ok return, but it didn’t *help* the bullpen, which was not good. In other words, they were *merely* 30% for identifiable reasons that could have been better fixed. To me, the big flaw in the “how can you give up” argument is that the FO itself did not believe in the team enough to do anything significant to give them a chance. After all, as people keep saying, they were 2 games from the WS the year before… why not at least a Schwarber-type trade? My guess is that they were not super optimistic it would help.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Dec 27, 2022 10:24:23 GMT -5
It's not nothing and shouldn't be dismissed as such. The player we would have drafted at 80 would have started higher in the vaunted SP.com rankings than whoever we draft at 140, so there's definitely a drop in the level of prospect we'll get, at least starting out. There's also the money issue that others have noted. The thing is, it's true that 80 won't have significantly more chance of impacting the ML team than 140 - the odds against both will be great. But these missteps add up. If you make enough of them, eventually one of them costs you. Run a stop sign once and you're probably Ok. Keep it up and eventually...CRASH! It's not that far from nothing. They'll get a prospect that will enter the rankings at #40 instead of #25. How much would a team be willing to pay for that kind of upgrade? $1 million? $2 million? Months later we still have endless posts about the wasted $1 million in value along with car crash analogies. They didn't even light that value on fire, they spent it on a fringe contender.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 27, 2022 10:25:48 GMT -5
Respectfully, it's easy for you and I to sit here and say "World Series or Bust!!!" Heck, that's my gut instinct as well. But you and I aren't the ones who would have to deal with the fallout from pissed off season ticket holders, sponsors, advertisers, etc. for running up the white flag in early August. You think season ticket holders aren't pissed now or won't be throughout 2023? I'm pissed but I also write off the tickets so truthfully it doesn't matter to me all that much. Getting people to see this product multiple times a year is going to be the tough part.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,484
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 27, 2022 10:29:15 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs. I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did). So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action. Personally, I am not a tear-down voice… but I am a cr@p-or-get-off-the-pot guy. If they thought 30% was real, why not make it 50%? But trading your starting catcher away and getting Tommy Pham… it is neither. Hosmer doesn’t count because he was pretty much toast. And trading Diekman away might have gotten an ok return, but it didn’t *help* the bullpen, which was not good. In other words, they were *merely* 30% for identifiable reasons that could have been better fixed. To me, the big flaw in the “how can you give up” argument is that the FO itself did not believe in the team enough to do anything significant to give them a chance. After all, as people keep saying, they were 2 games from the WS the year before… why not at least a Schwarber-type trade? My guess is that they were not super optimistic it would help. The other piece of the equation getting missed is that better teams are stacking up during this time and getting better so the odds of beating these teams even if you get in are even lesser. I call it the "King me season" where strong teams are getting even better (like in checkers when you get kinged). The Sox going sideways does little to increase their odds of getting in and their odds of doing any damage in the postseason take a further nosedive. I mean, we could very well be in this situation again this upcoming year. A .500 team on the outside looking in hoping to snag that last playoff spot, with little chance to beat the better teams who routinely kick the crap out of them, and they hang onto Devers, don't make the playoffs, or maybe get into the first round and get knocked out or if they're lucky get bounced in the ALDS round, then what? Devers leaves and you get....practically nothing. So then you're left with a huge hole there like they have at middle infield right now. And you've done nothing to put pieces in place for a team that can actually be shooting for something better than the 3rd wild card, a better long-term team that is competing for first place, sitting out the first round perhaps, and setting themselves up. I mean is it any coincidence that in each of the last four championships the Sox actually had home field advantage? It's small, but it can help. It's better than trying to build teams that just scrape on by and barely make it so they can say, "See, we're a playoff team"....if they even make it.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Dec 27, 2022 10:40:30 GMT -5
If the Red Sox didn't have certain assets like X, then I wouldn't have been as quick to say, sell, sell, sell, but they did. Getting nothing out of them is problematic and this is partially how they wind up with less value than they had. Xander had a no trade clause, very much did not want to change positions and the only team that was buying and could use a shortstop was the Yankees.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,951
Member is Online
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 27, 2022 11:18:38 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs.
I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did).
So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action. You didn't have to be clairvoyant. The odds told us our chances were well under 50 percent and my eyes thought those odds were actually a bit optimistic. I did not see good things ahead in the last two months. As far as getting Sale and Eo back, I posted at the time that I'm always skeptical of taking a rosy view of things because this guy or that guy will be back from injury. Just about every team in the ML has somebody they're looking forward to getting back off the IL at any given time. And while, yes, you may get a guy or two back, you're likely to lose someone else in the last two months.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,951
Member is Online
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 27, 2022 11:26:14 GMT -5
It strikes me that too much of this conversation - and too much of the conversation about the FO in general and CB in particular - is like our political divisions. I see the pro-Bloom people heading to their corner of the room to defend the trade deadline strategy and the Never Bloomers gleefully rushing to criticize.
We have either a strong economy with full employment and a bit of inflation or a second Great Depression wrecking American civilization right now. Depends what channel you watch.
This isn't a criticism of any one poster, so I don't want anyone to get offended. In fact, I think those participating in this discussion are among the best on the board. It's just an observation.
Edit: I should add that I also see people in the Sensible Center who may like or dislike Bloom, but who who are rational about it, expressing honest, well-thought out opinions one way of the other about the trade deadline.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Dec 27, 2022 11:41:01 GMT -5
I understand some people are clairvoyant and knew that the team that was 2 games out of a playoff spot and thought it was getting Sale and Eovaldi back, and that had gone 20-6 just a month before the trade deadline, had no chance to make the playoffs.
I really just wish those people would acknowledge that quitting on the season in that situation is something teams almost never do. Other middling teams at the time, like the Orioles and Giants and Guardians, all took middling paths themselves (though not nearly as creatively or productively as the Red Sox did).
So, okay, doing the sort of thing any other team would do in that situation was the wrong thing to do. If you believe that, fine. Just acknowledge that what you're saying Bloom should have done - a complete teardown - would have been a really extraordinary course of action. No it was just having a brain. We were 3 games behind an ADDED wild card spot. We were like 2-8 in our last 10 on July 26th. Sale was a maybe to ever come back during the season at that point. And story was injured. All I needed was some simple observation to know yeah this team isn’t doing anything this season and that 20-6 run was the very outrageous outlier that season Bloom indicted himself when he traded Vazquez. He was the worst thing you could be, indecisive about which way to go so he tried doing both.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Dec 27, 2022 11:45:51 GMT -5
It strikes me that too much of this conversation - and too much of the conversation about the FO in general and CB in particular - is like our political divisions. I see the pro-Bloom people heading to their corner of the room to defend the trade deadline strategy and the Never Bloomers gleefully rushing to criticize. We have either a strong economy with full employment and a bit of inflation or a second Great Depression wrecking American civilization right now. Depends what channel you watch. This isn't a criticism of any one poster, so I don't want anyone to get offended. In fact, I think those participating in this discussion are among the best on the board. It's just an observation. Edit: I should add that I also see people in the Sensible Center who may like or dislike Bloom, but who who are rational about it, expressing honest, well-thought out opinions one way of the other about the trade deadline. That’s the weird thing here. I’m not sure why bloom has such ardent defenders? I mean BC and DD just kind of were removed and not much was really argued. Bloom has been objectively bad but his supporters really won’t offer much in to why he has been good. It’s been 3-4 off seasons of “we can’t grade his off-season in December” or “wait until next offseason when he really had money to spend”. It’s like at what point do you stop waiting and start grading his results?
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Dec 27, 2022 11:46:58 GMT -5
There are two different deadline complaints that I see:
1) The Red Sox picked the wrong course of action. I can understand the arguments to make other choices (especially sell harder) given their odds and all. I disagree, but the argument is reasonable.
EDIT: On #1 above - Obviously in hindsight they should have sold for whatever they could get, but I'm saying from an in the moment POV.
2) The Red Sox were paralyzed and didn't make a decision. This one makes no sense, they actually laid out exactly what they were going to do before the deadline, and then they did it better than any other team who chose a similarly neutral path.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,484
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 27, 2022 11:54:18 GMT -5
If the Red Sox didn't have certain assets like X, then I wouldn't have been as quick to say, sell, sell, sell, but they did. Getting nothing out of them is problematic and this is partially how they wind up with less value than they had. Xander had a no trade clause, very much did not want to change positions and the only team that was buying and could use a shortstop was the Yankees. Very doubtful that there wouldn't have been more teams looking for a SS. The Cardinals spring quickly to mind. And the no-trade? Doubt that would have been an issue. The handwriting was on the wall for Xander all year, which is why he wasn't his usual cheery self most of last season. I think he would have waived it.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,659
|
Post by cdj on Dec 27, 2022 11:58:53 GMT -5
Xander had a no trade clause, very much did not want to change positions and the only team that was buying and could use a shortstop was the Yankees. Very doubtful that there wouldn't have been more teams looking for a SS. The Cardinals spring quickly to mind. And the no-trade? Doubt that would have been an issue. The handwriting was on the wall for Xander all year, which is why he wasn't his usual cheery self most of last season. I think he would have waived it. Little off topic but why do the cardinals spring to mind? They have Tommy Edman, he’s awesome. I do agree though, I do think he would’ve waived it if approached for a deal to a contender
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,484
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 27, 2022 12:08:05 GMT -5
Very doubtful that there wouldn't have been more teams looking for a SS. The Cardinals spring quickly to mind. And the no-trade? Doubt that would have been an issue. The handwriting was on the wall for Xander all year, which is why he wasn't his usual cheery self most of last season. I think he would have waived it. Little off topic but why do the cardinals spring to mind? They have Tommy Edman, he’s awesome. I do agree though, I do think he would’ve waived it if approached for a deal to a contender He can play all over the place. The Red Sox flat out told other teams that X wasn't available when they were receiving inquiries. There's no way they didn't receive many inquiries. They were under a crazy notion that they could keep lowballing Xander and then finally give him the Story offer he had been looking for all along during free agency season when other teams were sure to give him 200 plus million.
|
|
|
Post by bloomstaxonomy on Dec 27, 2022 12:08:06 GMT -5
There are two different deadline complaints that I see: 1) The Red Sox picked the wrong course of action. I can understand the arguments to make other choices (especially sell harder) given their odds and all. I disagree, but the argument is reasonable. EDIT: On #1 above - Obviously in hindsight they should have sold for whatever they could get, but I'm saying from an in the moment POV. 2) The Red Sox were paralyzed and didn't make a decision. This one makes no sense, they actually laid out exactly what they were going to do before the deadline, and then they did it better than any other team who chose a similarly neutral path. Re: #2 Am I the only one who remembers that after the Vazquez and Pham trades happened, Bloom was interviewed the eve before the deadline and explicitly stated that more moves would be coming and that the pieces would make sense once the dust settled? And then the deadline came and went and Hosmer was added. Then Bloom was interviewed again after the deadline and stated that it didn't play out like he had hoped it would and that the move(s) he intended to make didn't materialize. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's what happened. I don't believe he was "paralyzed" or whatever you want to call it, but this is another data point that Bloom did not have an accurate read of the market. Whether that's more common among all GMs is another conversation entirely. And I say this as a cautiously optimistic fan of Bloom.
|
|
|