10000x this. People! Spending smartly will produce the best result. I know that you all know that. Who cares where they fall in the rankings for spending if they put an entertaining product/winning team on the field? Yes, yas, the best talent often costs the most, therefore to have a good team it should require a high payroll, but this incessant fixation on overall payroll in these comments is missing the point. Th e point I know we all understand. Said with respect.
What truth are you talking about here? Go back and listen to this clip and count the weasel words, slippery terms and hedges.
I agree with you here. Cotillo and McAdam are doing their jobs. But that has little relationship with the veracity of what they’re speculating.
This just feels malicious at this point by a small contingent of SoSH posters who believe the Sox brass can do nothing wrong. Cotillo, McAdam, Rosenthal, and McCaffrey have all cited sources who have said something similar about the Sox apparent payroll limitations. This SoSH contingent questions these reporters' sources "because the Sox FO doesn't leak" - how do we know what the Sox FO does and doesn't leak? Even so, teams/agents/players are talking to the Sox every day and are well aware of their limitations and can certainly speak on them to the Cotillos of the world.
I agree that they are not so far off. In July of last year, the going take was that Bloom's plan was ahead of schedule - with Casas and Duran playing well, Wong playing good D and bullpen acquisitions he got pitching well. Now suddenly there is no chance they can contend? I think 2-3 impact moves and they can. Maybe not an elite team like 04, 07 or 18 of course, but yes, could be a team that makes the post season. And we all know once there, if you're hot, anything can happen. Of course I'd like them to build a team like the 3 more dominant WS champs. But 2 top end starting pitchers (say Snell, and Imanaga or Snell and a trade for a younger quality SP) and the entire outlook is much different (health provided as always of course).
To me, it looks like they're going to try to piece 2024 together on short deals that they can potentially cash out at the trade deadline if the team isn't a serious contender - and maybe take a more serious approach in 2025 once even more salary is off the books and as our top prospects start to arrive. If they don't think they're ready to compete in 2024, and it's going to take until next season to build up to where they want to be, then why sign Montgomery or Snell now, and not Bieber or Burnes next year? If they don't see themselves as competitors this season, then signing Montgomery/Snell now is just buying risk that they'll get injured while on our payroll in 2024.
Why? I don't know if they're good moves, but I can see a pretty straightforward baseball rationale for each.
I think we are 2-3 seasons away from being championship contenders for a multi year run. We might be in for a tough run for the next couple seasons. So, I think the phone lines should be open for trade discussions. The upside is once the suffering is over, we should be pretty good again for a while.
What will the team look like, do you think, in two years to make them contenders? (This is not a provocative question, really wondering ...maybe idea for a new thread, I don't know)...Is it simply projection of young and/or upper minor league players?
Not only that….but they are trying to speculate! Based off of information from the agents. It’s just that certain posters don’t like the speculation. Simple as that
I don't really look at it as a truth/lie thing, I think it's a grayer area than that. What there's no doubt of at all is that these guys have a vested interest in getting the masses worked up, and the only standards they're really held to are those of their editors, and they are largely evaluated on how much exposure they can generate. I don't doubt they have sources giving them stuff, but sources usually have agendas. And they know that. As I said, I don't begrudge them for making their living in their medium(s). I've just learned to take nothing at face value.
Yes, they're speculating. I think that's the thing though. We have to recognize it is speculation not fact. Pointing to a reporter's speculation isn't bolstering an argument with evidence, it's pointing out that that guy seems to agree with my opinion.
I hope they ARE shopping him. I’m surprised more posters aren’t concerned about the defense. This team has three lousy fielders, and they’re not likely trading Casas or Devers.
I agree that there is a rationale for trading him. But I also think you can flip it around and question why we would trade him if we have any intention in trying to make the playoffs in 2024. If they do trade him, it's certainly not that hard to envision a scenario down the road in which injuries or ineffectiveness in the bullpen lead to a realization that it would be nice to still have him.
I tend to agree with this. The team has been at their best when they use their farm system to acquire MLB talent and extend it. Which IS spending money but not necessarily in the FA market. Generally they buttress that with “upper middle class” free agent acquisitions.
Yes, I think they are. That farm system was much better and much further advanced than this one is. There is also no Pedroia, no Ellsbury, no Buchholz (I’m putting Bello more in the Lackey category, which I think is a good thing. If someone wants to say “no, HE’S Jon Lester”, fine, but that means there is no Lackey or Buchholz - we have plenty of Felix Dubront’s though…)
I really don’t have a problem with them hard capping Bloom at $225m. I think he pissed away $230m ish for plenty of time with no real results to fall back on. Story looks like a bad contract (right now) and Yoshida looks like an overpay. Neither are bad players, but they’re not getting equal value either. His use of money on pitching led to predictably bad teams. I’d have fired him several times before they did, but I can certainly see not letting him have money even close to going over the tax.
Well, there have been plenty of stories posted here suggesting that Gray wanted to go to StLouis all along, and that ERod didn’t get along with Cora. True or not, this isn’t like going to the store. The player has to want to play for the team offering the contract.
This kind of understanding is certainly the right place to end up. You just went there a bit more directly than I did. I think it's problematic for anyone who is defined as an "entertainer" in some way to be uncritically leaned upon as if they were providing journalistic reporting. . .even if they occasionally do. Perhaps more so if they occasionally do.
I'm not sure there's really enough data to form an opinion one way or the other re: ownership's plan for this off-season, one way or another. They've been reported to be active, and they've already made a number of moves that addressed the largest concerns from last year. Batter handedness, 2B, acquiring an innings-eating SP. There's still a long way to go, many FAs (even key ones) remain unsigned, and they're well short of the tax threshold, which they've never hesitated getting near in the past, even during the most recent years.
They're not even dialed into the pulse of the organization - even in the way of vague "a major move is coming" reporting.
And I have often made arguments like that myself, and been told that money is usually the deciding factor.
If this is true, that there was a mandate to stay at $225M all year, then why were they reportedly (Rosenthal) pursuing Verlander at the deadline? Surely Cotillo has that info, right?
Looking at just the current 40-man roster, can you explain how Josh Winckowski, Wilyer Abreu, Connor Wong, Enmanuel Valdez, David Hamilton, and Garrett Whitlock all ended up in the organization?
But there's no indication that the talks about Turner and Verlander involved three-way trade discussion. It looks like they would have been two separate deals. The Turner talks got to a very advanced stage. As for Verlander, who knows exactly what that "pursuit" actually consisted of. It seems strange that if they decided to "go for it" by trading for Verlander they would at the same time unload Turner, who was pretty close to being the team MVP at that point.
I agree with you that reporters need clicks, that's the way the business is--the more clicks and the more engagement you get, the more eyeballs are on the screen, the more ads people (theoretically) see which makes the organization more money. This snowballs into what you're talking about in that the more money a reporter makes for an organization the faster his/her star will rise. But at the same time, I don't see Cotillo or McAdam or Abraham being reckless in this manner ala Jason Whitlock (to pick an extreme example). I think that for the most part, these guys do--and have done--the legwork.
I think that I spoke a bit about this while answering CR67, but I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "pivot[ing] to reporting on the (demonstrable) feelings of the fan base". Are you saying that the Sox writers are only writing to what the fans want to read? Because I think that this is (mostly) unfair and inaccurate. I think that these writers are reporting what they hear and what they're being told from reliable sources. I'm more familiar with Abraham and McAdam so I can only speak to them, but they've been around for a long time in the media (each 25-30 years) you don't stay employed on a beat like the Red Sox for that long without being a good reporter with good sources.
Is the bolded true? The Sox have acquired a second baseman, a starting pitcher and a fourth outfielder. The Rays have made more moves. The Dodgers have made more moves. With the Soto deal, the Yankess made a sexier move. The Cards and Royals have improved their teams. The M's have done some stuff. And that's off the top of my head--I may be missing some. Like I said, the Sox have done some stuff but as of January 6, 2024, one could argue that their pitching staff is slightly better or worse, their second base situation has improved and their outfield is overstuffed. They appear to be poised to make more moves, but until they do the beat writers aren't in the business of predicting, they have to report.
I agree with you about Snell and Montgomery, I sure hope the Sox don't blow the bank on them. But free agency is only one avenue, right? They can make a trade for a Burnes and sign him to long-term extension. They can get Lazurdo, sign him to an extension. Cease, same deal. It doesn't seem like the Sox are seriously interested in doing any of this--they could, no one saw the Sale trade--but as of right now, all signs point to them not being involved. You combine that with Yamamato and it's disapoinitng to a lot of fans because while the Sox have the Big Bat Three, their pitching cabinent is bare. Watching the four or five guys after Bello this year seems so damn depressing.
I think that this is really, really unfair. They have been probing how Breslow is planning to make the team better using available clues. They're absolutely doing that. You just can't write the same "Chris Farley Show" column day after day after day. Your positivity is admirable, it really is, but the reality is that as of today, the Sox are really not markedly better than they were on October 1. I don't think that they're worse, but we were promised that they'd be a lot better in 2024. Cotillo, Abraham, McAdam know that it takes time to put a team together but in a business where news is news, the Sox have been mostly spinning their wheels. I know that you don't want to hear that, but the beat writer's job is not to make you (not you specifically) feel good*. It's to find the news, report it and then disect what it means.
The Sox have been one of the more active teams. The statement that it's a stone cold fact they haven't spent any money yet is demonstrably false. It's a weird off season to say the least. There are a lot of moving parts and a lot of shoes left to drop. And while they haven't made a huge splash or major commitments up to now, I like the moves they have made, and I also like the stone cold fact that there is still a huge pile of money available to fill holes. If they don't fill those holes I'll be as pissed as anyone, but as I said above, why go there until absolutely necessary.
My phrasing was a bit loose. I'm aware of the Giolito signing. However, they have also shed payroll in the Sale trade and the Verdugo trade, they haven't re-signed Turner or Duvall, and consequently I'm pretty sure that as things stand, there's been a net reduction in payroll.
I wasn’t talking about dumping redundancies on each other. The initial report was that the Sox needed to clear payroll before going after a pitcher. So no I can’t go looking for examples of teams that added a pitcher before trading another player as it could be anyone anywhere.
More than competently addressed the issues? We have the lowest projected pitching WAR in the division. How have they addressed all the issues?
Considering there's still another six or so weeks until pitchers and catchers report, and there are a number of high profile free agents still available, maybe it's a little too soon to judge the "net reduction in payroll" as anything other than a by-product of the off-season not actually being over yet?
I'd suggest you read what I wrote again. I said all the issues they have addressed "so far". And that they still have a huge pile of money. And some more.
It would be wonderful to pull that off. It's tough to keep it all separate when the prevailing rumor is that the Sox plan on cheaping out this year, though, which if true directly relates to what the on field product will be. Or at least that's an argument I'd expect to hear if we tried to separate it out. That doesn't mean I don't feel your pain, this thread's been a tough read at times to say the least. I think the best bet is to ride with it, though, and all try to make it better while everything shakes out.
I don’t want to quote myself because that seems pretentious, but in the excerpt you posted, after that I went on to talk about it from the course of the past 3+ seasons, I suppose I should have said 2+, though I expressly mentioned the 2022 and 2023 deadlines as to where the bulk of my frustration with the past half decade lies, I also explicitly mentioned post Pivetta (acquired at the 2020 deadline, and Wong was before that, clearly).
Adore Stroman. I think he is a much better fit on the Red Sox now than he was two weeks ago. One, I think the middle infield has been improved dramatically (I could be wrong, of course, but I think the acquisition of Grissom addresses a LOT of holes on the offense).
The sentence takes some time to parse, but I believe what's being said is that perhaps Stroman's past views on Boston could change because the Red Sox acquired Grissom
I like Stroman too but I’m not sure the fit has improved. Yes we did address second base but it seems like, based on the reporting, Vaughn struggles on defense. Stroman is a pretty heavy ground ball guy (3rd* in baseball in GB% for SP over 100 IP) so giving him 3 infielders that grade out between below average and poor doesn’t position him for success.
