I think you're exactly right. They don't want to bring up anybody they view as important when they're more likely to see game time in Worcester over the next few days. There is no break this week for the minors, so who would they rather have sitting idle over the next few days, Brice or pick one of Ort/Houck/Valdez?Brice is emergency fodder if the starter is out in the first couple innings. They will use him for as long as his arm stays attached and then DFA him again and resign him once they reattach his arm. And if they don’t use him he gets DFA’d after tomorrow’s game anyway, or as soon as a slot is needed.
And I say that as a guy who has been rooting for Brice since before he made the team.
I mean, most of the time I'd agree with this statement. But the other day, when we were playing the A's, up 6-4 in the 12th and down to our last pitcher (Andriese), it would've been nice to have a pitcher who didn't immediately come in and give up 3 runs.People spend far too much time kvetching over the bottom 2 spots on the roster
if they miss the playoffs by one game, I'll issue an apologyYes, almost all the time, the Andriese/Brice/fungible pitcher archetype doesn't matter, but that one cost us a game.
Well, now I don't know what to root for.if they miss the playoffs by one game, I'll issue an apology
Considering RedsHawksFan's take on this in relation to being 2 days before the AS break you're probably right. Generally speaking, I'm guilty. I don't want to wait until some helpful pieces may end up going somewhere else. That said, when you consider that many of us see upgrades to the rotation and outfield to be in house solutions that are on the horizon, the Sox are fortunate that those bottom two spots seem to be the two slots of greatest concern. Thus the kvetching.People spend far too much time kvetching over the bottom 2 spots on the roster
How much time is appropriate?People spend far too much time kvetching over the bottom 2 spots on the roster
If you find yourself worrying about it publicly on a message board, that's too much timeHow much time is appropriate?
I love the way you put this and appreciate your "good nudge" towards team balance and fresh bloom. Of course tweaking is essential, when you put it this way. I am old enough to remember the teams of the pre-free trade era and how the rosters were relatively constant and "our" players were deeply beloved by we kids. even with their foibles and completely different parcels of strengths that on a cohesive team became a powerful positive group dynamic. Experience with ensembles and productions that stimulate a group dynamic as you described , to become transcendent --well that would give you great insight, i think, into how important popping in a well-chosen player or two to can do just as you said and shake things up in a good way.This is a beautiful entry and I think there is great validity to it. The whole is certainly greater than the sum of its parts with this Red Sox team (and I think Cora and Bloom should be credited for influencing as much). I am a professional actor and director (mostly theater), and I know from personal experience that chemistry and group dynamics are just as important, if not more important than the respective talents of individual performers on influencing outcomes. When casting a production it's wise to avoid the talented but egotistical malcontent. Time and again, a healthy, vital, positive group dynamic proves to be the most essential factor in "success."
But there are some other truisms, too, and one is that "all things change." You can't freeze the present moment, or sentimentalize it. To try to do so would ultimately be unwise. It is okay -- even in a healthy system/community/team/group -- to consider where things can improve, and where growth is still possible. This is certainly an imperative truth in competitive sports. Any overhaul of the team right now, given the good vibes and outcomes, would indeed be counter-productive. But adding a player or two to shore up some weak spots may well be appreciated by most of the players (aside from the couple who may get demoted as consequence) and add to the overall positive vibe.
Appreciating what you've got and taking an honest look to address weaknesses are not mutually exclusive in my mind.
As currently constructed, I don't think anyone thinks the rotation is just fine. Many see internal options as potential improvements. Many also wonder the cost of bringing in an outside arm that figures to be better than what is currently in house as well as how deep the organization is willing to dig in terms of personnel, $$$ against the luxury tax and commitment to taking on future years and $$$ if necessary.I'm wondering if most folks still feel the starting pitching is just fine? It's a tricky group. One pass through they look great and it seems like there's no room at the Inn (for replacements). The next pass through they stink. I think the sum total is accurate: their inconsistency should be expected because they aren't blue chip talents. They're decent. Sometimes they'll look better than their mean, sometimes worse, and sometimes right at it, naturally. But I hope the organization doesn't get lulled by those good stretches. This is not a championship caliber starting rotation, and the team could otherwise compete for a championship.
IMO - still feel like the team needs to trade for a quality arm in addition to Sale's (hopeful) return.
Well, to respond to his question: Not me.Bradford's clearly lost his mind
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/who-says-no-to-this-red-sox-trade-for-anthony-rizzo?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Rizzo for ... eclipses be damned ... Chavis
True enoughWell, to respond to his question: Not me.
What you say makes sense. And certainly these considerations of cost/benefit are universal for any trade. There have been several comments in this thread and others that the team doesn't have space for an acquired starter. Meanwhile, I'm not sure I'd put all my chips in Sale and Houck. Sale coming off surgery so you never know (though I'm pollyanna-ish there for whatever reason, but the team should have contingencies); Houck's era is now over 5 so far at Worcester, and career MiLB era over 4 (I think his couple good ML starts maybe allowed us to project something on to him that might exceed his actual ability).As currently constructed, I don't think anyone thinks the rotation is just fine. Many see internal options as potential improvements. Many also wonder the cost of bringing in an outside arm that figures to be better than what is currently in house as well as how deep the organization is willing to dig in terms of personnel, $$$ against the luxury tax and commitment to taking on future years and $$$ if necessary.
Which team's 14th best pitcher is better?I mean, most of the time I'd agree with this statement. But the other day, when we were playing the A's, up 6-4 in the 12th and down to our last pitcher (Andriese), it would've been nice to have a pitcher who didn't immediately come in and give up 3 runs.
Yes, almost all the time, the Andriese/Brice/fungible pitcher archetype doesn't matter, but that one cost us a game.
Yup.Bradford just likes to hear the sound of his own voice. That's ridiculous.
It's amazing how many baseball beat writers who deal with their teams day to day, have zero idea about trade valuation.Yup.
Bradford has been talking a lot about how the Cubs will be in a firesale, but any trade offer needs to at least beat the value of a comp pick, which Chavis doesn't.
You have a valid point, but I think there are a couple ways of looking at this. The easy one (perhaps) is you look at Ort and what he's doing in WOOster at age 29 it's hard to wonder why he's not in Boston. Also while the rotation as a whole has done better than most of us would have expected, there are some concerns when your 1-5 is made up of 3-5's. Overall the bullpen has been a blessing and Andriese hasn't been pressed into action all that often, but when the staff struggles to get you more than 5 innings the pen will get taxed and you're going to have to use #14 in spots where you would rather not. The other take I have on this and I really haven't heard it anywhere else is that if you're opting to go with 14 pitchers and a 3 man bench that includes Marwin and Santana/Chavis, #14 has got to be more valuable than Matt AndrieseWhich team's 14th best pitcher is better?
IMO, the Yanks is a push due to freakishness.Three series losses in a row. Offense is in a funk and the bullpen has sprung a few leaks as well. They played over their heads in the first half, time for AC to earn his money and stem the tide, because this stretch of games ahead has the potential to do some serious damage to their standing in the division race if they can't get back to their winning ways.
Guessing but is it six in 2003?What is the Sox record for most players with 20+ HRs in a season?
I believe it is 6, in 2003. All 6 actually hit 25+. They had 9 guys hit 12+ HR that year - the entire starting lineup. 218 combined HR from those 9 guys. 8 of the 9 had 85+ RBI as well. Just an insane offense.What is the Sox record for most players with 20+ HRs in a season?
Chaim Bloom quoted today:This thread seems to have gotten very quiet> But, for my part here I am in the middle of the night with an insatiable desire to clarify my earlier, post a page or so ago, to which cantor 44 made such a thoughtfully engaged response (I was chuffed) -anyway I am gonna quote my own post to explicate a little. s I do not post often i hope my little eccentricity here will be tolerated.
Hopefully the quote comes out above, but if not i will repos below., So what i was getting at is the sometimes magical balance that a winning team achieves.in ways which are both serendipitous and planned. And how individual prowess (whether by a player , manager, or coach and support staff ) - can be optimized by a kind of Zen approach to "getting in the zone" of performance that is supra-powered by mindful focus on targeted goal .. When enough individuals achieve this individually with focus that is continually directed away from distractions then no matter what their personalities or how they differ so long as their attention is managed like a light saber then it carries over with guided support from tacit trust in key individuals coaching and management calls into an optimized team. To an old-timer that has played the game, albeit not at the lofty levels but still valuable, amateur levels like the basketball playing courts of the old New York I knew for 3 decades (in my case womens softball leagues ) well sometimes the importance of stability to a winning team is overlooked in favor of tinkering. It is a baseball sacred cow that fans make valuable suggestions and have informed opinions about who and what will make a team advance to what used to be called October play time -now post season. And fans as well as managers also have plenty of their own fantasy baseball acquired numbers crunching to consider and support their theories. But to me the theories and the numbers crunching and the mid-season fiddling (when not brilliant and rare) almost treat the players as interchangeable widgets who should be able to manufacture optimal team feats despite lack of on-field playing time with new team members suddenly inserted into a new chemical composition . And no matter that they have forged a beautiful chemistry of previous player collaboration which is as critical to winning as their own playing at strength.
I do believe that winning teams do not have to achieve perfect harmony insofar as never having a diva or malcontent in their midst --rather I believe that championship teams have a level of tacit trust in themselves and knowing own and others weaknesses and strengths on the field and use that knowledge to build a kind of dynamic chemistry that is easier to renew in every game and that, when combined with the team trades and strategizing over the winter and during drought seasons of losing and struggling when clearly there is a need for tinkering and freshening . I am just not sure that when we have got a team that is demonstrating excellence over the long summer haul may not be helped and could possibly be harmed by interrupting focus and developed player knowledge of one another on the field, by popping in new personnel. (Except perhaps for an absolutely stellar player .)
MY ORIGINAL POST: As an old timer, I am a great believer in great Cora and Bloom, in the Zen of mindfulness by each player 's personal aiming with intent focus on each target. There is an enhanced performance realization resulting in game-winning that comes from doing so with intensity and practice. Many times in my lifetime i have seen that the chemistry of a team is greater than the sum of its individual parts. I have seen that when you have brilliance in the key triad of managers, coaching, and players that stellar results follow. I see the numbers and stats and endless playfulness with same by the fans and sadly team staff as too often a distraction from the daily grind challenging flesh and blood and brains to creatively adapt to each game's dynamics to achieve one win at a time and accomplish a winning season.
We have been achieving brilliance as a team. I would not dicker with the players. I would focus on stability and beautiful, dedicated intention aka creative visualization, and the mental and physical development of stamina, courage, and confidence in current players to keep this up for the entire season. As Alex said earlier this week, home field advantage is crucial to achieve playoff optimal strength and doing so could make our talented Sox unbeatable this year. JMO.
Such a generic answer but that should always be his thinking. If there's a trade that makes sense, you pull the trigger. If not, you don't.Chaim Bloom quoted today:
"I agree that we don't want to disrupt what we have, but I think if we're able to find the right additions with moves that make sense for the organization, I don't think it will do that," Bloom said. "I think it would be welcomed. It's on us to make sure anything we do makes sense and doesn't disrupt what we have going. We certainly don't want to do anything that is going to take away from a lot of the good stuff that we have going on here, but I also think that if the opportunities are there fresh reinforcements would be welcome. We just have to make sure they're the right fit, the right people and the right players."
Yes, a bit generic, but the relevant part to aminayaquin's posts are the considerations of getting the "right people" and being sure that they "don't disrupt what we've got going" ...Such a generic answer but that should always be his thinking. If there's a trade that makes sense, you pull the trigger. If not, you don't.
I don't expect anything other than generic but he basically repeated himself over and over. It's like a kid writing an essay with a word count. I like tacos. Tacos are good. I enjoy eating tacos. Tacos are tasty.Yes, a bit generic, but the relevant part to aminayaquin's posts are the considerations of getting the "right people" and being sure that they "don't disrupt what we've got going" ...
LOL!I don't expect anything other than generic but he basically repeated himself over and over. It's like a kid writing an essay with a word count. I like tacos. Tacos are good. I enjoy eating tacos. Tacos are tasty.
All the evidence points to Chaim being a great general manager (or President of Baseball Ops, or whatever dumb title they're giving out), but he's never said a single interesting thing in an interview. He's the master of stretching a generic obvious statement of doing what's best for the team in the near and long terms into 200 words.
Well, compadres and comadres , 1st, @cantor44 very sweet to read this quote from the GM of few words! And, I agree with @papelbonafide58 --what he said as well as Mr Bloom's cagey pithy tantalization. Anyway, caps lock-whoops! But anyway another oldtimer concern for forecasting post season participation is the timing of the "seasonal slump". There may be more than one mini-slump in a season, but proverbially all teams have one comparatively longer one. And, WHEN in the season it is situated is of great importance. A serious slump watching fan NEVER wants their team to enter the post-season without having had it! So. I'll just observe that if we have just had ours, and this year our maxi - slump is a mini, then we are looking at perfect timing for another notch towards post-season play !! Okay. so I am having a bit of fun here, but the ZEN stuff is for real ; sports psychologists (some of them are also for real) have worked very successfully in various sports with this , often modified according to their creative and therapeutic approaches. Also there are two books that explore this: the lighthearted Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and the scholarly Zen and the Art of ArcheryYes, a bit generic, but the relevant part to aminayaquin's posts are the considerations of getting the "right people" and being sure that they "don't disrupt what we've got going" ...
Because some team might think we're in the market for a starting SS - and Bloom will confuse them to his advantage by instead asking about 1B options?Agreed, these statements are pretty "vanilla," but I much prefer that to him tipping his hand to other teams out there.
What's wrong with tacos? I like tacos too. They're tasty.I don't expect anything other than generic but he basically repeated himself over and over. It's like a kid writing an essay with a word count. I like tacos. Tacos are good. I enjoy eating tacos. Tacos are tasty.
How would you read my statement and come away with thinking anything is wrong with tacos?What's wrong with tacos? I like tacos too. They're tasty.
Point taken. I suppose I meant it more so to prevent the beginnings of a media circus that could create a distraction, rather than confusing a team.Because some team might think we're in the market for a starting SS - and Bloom will confuse them to his advantage by instead asking about 1B options?
Yes.How would you read my statement and come away with thinking anything is wrong with tacos?
I'm probably missing the joke but if one says they like tacos, they don't really need to say they are tasty, or that they are good or that they enjoy eating them.
Bloom openly stating that they are going to upgrade 1B could easily cause unnecessary friction where none exists today, especially if such upgrade never comes to fruition for whatever reason.Point taken. I suppose I meant it more so to prevent the beginnings of a media circus that could create a distraction, rather than confusing a team.