Bloom/Cora's Obsession with Marginal Players?

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,680
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Not every player is a superstar. Some are serviceable with upside. Some are just serviceable. Some are stopgaps.

Yesterday, Arauz was called up. In what seemed like an active pursuit of a loss v. an absolutely reeling Angels squad, we fielded a lineup of:

By 2022 OPS+

56
141
169
81
103
94
77
63
-100
I just don't get the Arauz choice over Fitzgerald. Both have options. Fitzgerald is 27 and hitting well, so it's not like they should be worried about preserving his options for his age 31 season. Arauz is 23. He sucks. Maybe he'll develop into a useful MLB player. But stints of complete futility at the ML level aren't going to do that, and I see nothing to indicate he's going to help the club while here.

Likewise, I don't get keeping Arroyo on the team at this point. But maybe he's your one "could develop" scratch ticket, because he has no options and the might need a middle infielder next year. But they're also committed to carrying Dalbec, Bradley, Franchy, and Enrique Hernandez (currently injured). Not all of those are working out poorly, and there's certainly potential upside, but it's hard to look at that group and find a strong player. Collectively, they don't say "you can add a noodle bat to this mix without consequence."

Question: Is is wise to adopt a catch-lighting-in-a-bottle mentality when you have a beer stein, two teacups, and one bottle?
 
Last edited:

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
Not every player is a superstar. Some are serviceable with upside. Some are just serviceable. Some are stopgaps.

Yesterday, Arauz was called up. In what seemed like an active pursuit of a loss v. an absolutely reeling Angels squad, we fielded a lineup of:




I just don't get the Arauz choice over Fitzgerald. Both have options. Fitzgerald is 27 and hitting well, so it's not like they should be worried about preserving his options for his age 31 season. Arauz is 23. He sucks. Maybe he'll develop into a useful MLB player. But stints of complete futility at the ML level aren't going to do that, and I see nothing to indicate he's going to help the club while here.

Likewise, I don't get keeping Arroyo on the team at this point. But maybe he's your one "could develop" scratch ticket, because he has no options and the might need a middle infielder next year. But they're also committed to carrying Dalbec, Bradley, Franchy, and Enrique Hernandez (currently injured). Not all of those are working out poorly, and there's certainly potential upside, but it's hard to look at that group and find a strong player. Collectively, they don't say "you can add a noodle bat to this mix without consequence."

Question: Is is wise to adopt a catch-lighting-in-a-bottle mentality when you have a beer stein, two teacups, and one bottle?
Fitzgerald is not on the 40 man roster. Do you want to release Arroyo, or a pitcher?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Fitzgerald is not on the 40 man roster. Do you want to release Arroyo, or a pitcher?
This is the answer, like it or not. All GMs want to control as many assets as they can. At present, no one on the 40-man is viewed as expendable enough to bring up Fitzgerald.

Arauz got the call up on Wednesday in place of Kike specifically because Cora wanted to give his infielders a day off each. This was stated at the time. That makes sense on a 10-day, 10-game west coast trip. The only questionable thing in my mind was giving two of those guys a day off on the same day. Arauz is probably going back down at the end of the trip, and Duran will be back up to fill in for Kike.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,229
I feel like the fetish is with multi-positional players. Dalbec playing second and third. Arroyo out of position in right field despite a lack of experience in the outfield. Kike switching between 2nd and CF last year. The Marwin Gonzalez experience.

A decent (well formerly decent) hitter like Hernandez with positional flexibility has real value. Guys like Gonzalez, Arroyo and Dalbec have a lot less value than our brain trust seems to think.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
If Arauz can pitch, he has more hidden value than I thought he did.
So Kike gets hurt and the moves are...release Arroyo from the 40 man, add Fitzgerald and call him up, keep Arauz in AAA.

OK, I got it now. I'm not too sure I want to release Arroyo right now, but I see what you want.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I feel like the fetish is with multi-positional players. Dalbec playing second and third. Arroyo out of position in right field despite a lack of experience in the outfield. Kike switching between 2nd and CF last year. The Marwin Gonzalez experience.

A decent (well formerly decent) hitter like Hernandez with positional flexibility has real value. Guys like Gonzalez, Arroyo and Dalbec have a lot less value than our brain trust seems to think.
The fetish pre-dates both Cora and Bloom if it's multi-positional players. Brock Holt says hello.

Gonzalez sucked and had no value and the brain trust saw that and cut him loose. The value of Arroyo and Dalbec is rooted in their cost, not their flexibility. If they were making what Gonzalez was making last year, they'd be gone already. But they aren't, so the bar for them to provide value to the team is lower.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
MassLive.Com is reporting that Refsnyder is on his way to Seattle to join the Sox there. No word on the 40 man roster move needed yet.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,316
Not every player is a superstar. Some are serviceable with upside. Some are just serviceable. Some are stopgaps.

Yesterday, Arauz was called up. In what seemed like an active pursuit of a loss v. an absolutely reeling Angels squad, we fielded a lineup of:

I just don't get the Arauz choice over Fitzgerald. Both have options. Fitzgerald is 27 and hitting well, so it's not like they should be worried about preserving his options for his age 31 season. Arauz is 23. He sucks. Maybe he'll develop into a useful MLB player. But stints of complete futility at the ML level aren't going to do that, and I see nothing to indicate he's going to help the club while here.
I just don't get the Arauz choice over Fitzgerald. Both have options. Fitzgerald is 27 and hitting well, so it's not like they should be worried about preserving his options for his age 31 season. Arauz is 23. He sucks. Maybe he'll develop into a useful MLB player. But stints of complete futility at the ML level aren't going to do that, and I see nothing to indicate he's going to help the club while here.

Likewise, I don't get keeping Arroyo on the team at this point. But maybe he's your one "could develop" scratch ticket, because he has no options and the might need a middle infielder next year. But they're also committed to carrying Dalbec, Bradley, Franchy, and Enrique Hernandez (currently injured). Not all of those are working out poorly, and there's certainly potential upside, but it's hard to look at that group and find a strong player. Collectively, they don't say "you can add a noodle bat to this mix without consequence."

Question: Is is wise to adopt a catch-lighting-in-a-bottle mentality when you have a beer stein, two teacups, and one bottle?
40-man issue, of course, but also, Xander, Story, and Hernandez all sat last night. Fitzgerald instead of Arauz mayyyyyybe is the difference in this game, but probably not. But even if it were, Iike it or not, the Sox are going to rest players throughout the year, calculating that the reduced odds of winning a particular game are more than made up for by keeping players fresh and healthy throughout the season. I know what you’re going to say: “That’s fine! But why not get better players to fill in for the starters?” I think the answer is simply that this year’s Red Sox team was not built to contend for a championship. It was built to win 85 to 90 games and try to win a wildcard. That means there are going to be holes, and one of the most likely areas for one is going to be “up-and-down minor leaguers who spell resting/recuperating starters.”
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,347
Really only one of Devers, Martinez, X and/or Story should be sitting in any game. That was a complete bullshit lineup.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
The complaint is about the fetish with marginal players and the OP wants Ryan Fitzgerald, who's also a "marginal player" by just about any definition?
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,713
Fitzgerald instead of Arauz mayyyyyybe is the difference in this game, but probably not.
Unless this Fitzgerald guy has Go-Go Gadget arms that can render home runs moot or had four RBI in him I think we can safely assume ol' Fitzy wasn't going to make a lick of difference last night.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,713
The complaint is about the fetish with marginal players and the OP wants Ryan Fitzgerald, who's also a "marginal player" by just about any definition?
Right. I'd like to hear a cogent case for Fitzgerald who has a decent but underwhelming .764 OPS over the last 30 days as a 28-year-old at AAA, he can't hit lefties, and spends most of his time at the 3B, 1B, and LF with only two appearances this year at SS.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
This weird fetish with marginal players took them to the ALCS last year. I'd like to see them cut bait on a few of these JAGs too, but it's not like some kind of weird strategy like the Houston Rockets playing a 6'5" guy at center for a whole year. It has kinda worked for them.
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,007
I think he will, but it will be to get Taylor, Sale, or Paxton on the 40 man. Sawamura seems to be the next logical candidate after that.
I think it's Brasier who goes when Sale comes back. Then some tough choices when Paxton and Taylor come off the 60 day list. Valdez could be candidate to get taken off the 40 man roster.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
I feel like the fetish is with multi-positional players. Dalbec playing second and third. Arroyo out of position in right field despite a lack of experience in the outfield. Kike switching between 2nd and CF last year. The Marwin Gonzalez experience.

A decent (well formerly decent) hitter like Hernandez with positional flexibility has real value. Guys like Gonzalez, Arroyo and Dalbec have a lot less value than our brain trust seems to think.
I’m not the first person to point this out, but what they seem to do a lot these days is intentionally moving people out of position. I get trying to extract value out of cheap, okay-ish players like Dalbec and Arroyo and Franchy, but they acquired Schwarber and Story (arguably the two biggest names Bloom has picked up for Boston) with the intention of playing them at positions other than where they’ve usually played. In both of those cases it worked out, granted, but I do find it a bit odd.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Really only one of Devers, Martinez, X and/or Story should be sitting in any game. That was a complete bullshit lineup.
Can't disagree with that in general. However, if there's a game to rest a couple guys and put out a "bullshit" lineup during a long road trip, doing it against the best pitcher they're going to see on the whole trip isn't the worst timing in the world. Especially when you've got one of your hottest pitcher going for you. I didn't like it, but I can see the reasoning behind it.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Just to add a bit to what has already been mention... Arauz was promoted over Duran as to not only give IFs a breather, but also because the Sox were going to face 3 lefties on the remainder of the road trip. The idea was that Duran would likely take his spot after that to help out in the OF.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,680
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I know what you’re going to say: “That’s fine! But why not get better players to fill in for the starters?” I think the answer is simply that this year’s Red Sox team was not built to contend for a championship. It was built to win 85 to 90 games and try to win a wildcard. That means there are going to be holes, and one of the most likely areas for one is going to be “up-and-down minor leaguers who spell resting/recuperating starters.”
That is, in essence, my question and concern. Whether or not they were built to win a wildcard, every game counts. If you can plug a hole, why not do that? (And if it looks like you're in for a lingering injury stretch, why not try to win winable games while you can?)


The complaint is about the fetish with marginal players and the OP wants Ryan Fitzgerald, who's also a "marginal player" by just about any definition?
Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing Fitzgerald is a superstar in the offing, but I think any comparison of Fitzgerald and Arauz suggests Fitzgerald is likely able to help the ML club marginally more than Arauz. See my comment below.


This is the answer, like it or not. All GMs want to control as many assets as they can. At present, no one on the 40-man is viewed as expendable enough to bring up Fitzgerald.
And that's what I don't get. A marginal asset is just a marginal asset.

If the Sox think burning through Arauz's options is a good strategy there are three main possibilities to consider: 1) Opposed to another player Arauz brings some positive value to the ML club right now, 2) Arauz going to develop into a long term asset that will stick on the ML roster, 3) Arauz does not bring something now and is not likely to develop, but using him this way now preserves assets elsewhere.

However, unless there's some kind of secret-sauce value, Arauz seems to bring nothing to the club now. While young, it seems he's not going to develop into anything but a glove-first player. So making him shuttle makes sense, in a sense, if there's no better option. There is no long-term Arauz future, and the club is basically acting like there isn't.

But a smiliar argument applies to Fitzgerald. He's 27, got a full set of options, and is better than Arauz. So why not shuttle him if he's more likely to help? Or do they think a year of unbroken AAA experience is going to significantly develop him to debut in the ML at age 28 or 29?

It's just weird.

***
Anyway, as noted elsewhere in the thread, this is not just an Arauz v. Fitzgerald concern. But A v. F is a good example.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
And that's what I don't get. A marginal asset is just a marginal asset.

If the Sox think burning through Arauz's options is a good strategy there are three main possibilities to consider: 1) Opposed to another player Arauz brings some positive value to the ML club right now, 2) Arauz going to develop into a long term asset that will stick on the ML roster, 3) Arauz does not bring something now and is not likely to develop, but using him this way now preserves assets elsewhere.

However, unless there's some kind of secret-sauce value, Arauz seems to bring nothing to the club now. While young, it seems he's not going to develop into anything but a glove-first player. So making him shuttle makes sense, in a sense, if there's no better option. There is no long-term Arauz future, and the club is basically acting like there isn't.

But a smiliar argument applies to Fitzgerald. He's 27, got a full set of options, and is better than Arauz. So why not shuttle him if he's more likely to help? Or do they think a year of unbroken AAA experience is going to significantly develop him to debut in the ML at age 28 or 29?

It's just weird.

***
Anyway, as noted elsewhere in the thread, this is not just an Arauz v. Fitzgerald concern. But A v. F is a good example.
I think part of the calculus is that Arauz is 23 and got a bit rushed when he was picked up via Rule 5, so they're not quite ready to give up on him entirely. Clearly they trust him to play competent defense in the middle infield and his bat isn't a complete black hole (acknowledging that he's slashing .000/.000/.000 in his limited time this year). I don't think it's about preserving Fitzgerald's options or his development so much as he's 27 and hasn't gotten a shot at the big leagues yet for a reason. Perhaps they don't think he can do the job. Maybe he's more Jack Lopez than Brock Holt (a break glass emergency guy, not a 40-man guy).

Personally, I'm indifferent to either one. Like you say, a marginal asset is a marginal asset. I don't think the team would be notably better if they called up Fitzy today in place of Arauz.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
Why is Arroyo leading off? I am honestly curious about this. What does Cora see in Arroyo or what are his thoughts on lineup construction that make Arroyo at the top make sense?
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,680
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I think part of the calculus is that Arauz is 23 and got a bit rushed when he was picked up via Rule 5, so they're not quite ready to give up on him entirely. Clearly they trust him to play competent defense in the middle infield and his bat isn't a complete black hole (acknowledging that he's slashing .000/.000/.000 in his limited time this year). I don't think it's about preserving Fitzgerald's options or his development so much as he's 27 and hasn't gotten a shot at the big leagues yet for a reason. Perhaps they don't think he can do the job. Maybe he's more Jack Lopez than Brock Holt (a break glass emergency guy, not a 40-man guy).

Personally, I'm indifferent to either one. Like you say, a marginal asset is a marginal asset. I don't think the team would be notably better if they called up Fitzy today in place of Arauz.
Another possibility is they want to trade Fitzgerald without exposing him to ML pitching. But if they don't, and are planning on keeping him in-org., there's very little downside to choosing option Fitzgerald, instead of repeatedly choosing option Arauz.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Why is Arroyo leading off? I am honestly curious about this. What does Cora see in Arroyo or what are his thoughts on lineup construction that make Arroyo at the top make sense?
What does he see in Kike that makes putting him at the top of the order make sense? Whatever that answer is, I'm sure the answer about Arroyo isn't far off.

I don't understand either choice, other than perhaps a lack of better alternatives.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
What does he see in Kike that makes putting him at the top of the order make sense? Whatever that answer is, I'm sure the answer about Arroyo isn't far off.

I don't understand either choice, other than perhaps a lack of better alternatives.
Kike had a good year last year and over the past few weeks he seems to be hitting well. The fact his slash line is so poor is a testament to how deep the hole is that he dug. Basically Kike makes a tad bit more sense then Arroyo, but neither make sense when you have Story hitting so well.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,684
San Diego
I think the other issue besides the obsession with playing players out of position that @Yelling At Clouds point out above, is that Cora + Bloom have a problem adjusting quickly and keep certain players on the roster way too long. M Gonzalez was given 250 ABs last year and put up a 52 OPS+. Santana put up a 57 OPS+ in 116 ABs.

Fitzy hit .306/.370/.694 in April and .280/.333/.470 in May - that could've helped them win some games when they needed it, but instead we found out that Travis Shaw is very much cooked and Arroyo is still a black hole. Maybe Fitzy comes up and sucks, but then we're in the same position we're in now. Are they just averse to riding the hot hand?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,017
Oregon
I was listening to a radio show yesterday and they were talking about the Rams roster and how they get all these stars signed under the cap. The point the guys was making is that they're going to have a roster that is star-laden but thin ... an injury or three will have them relying on retreads and inexperienced players in key spots.
They made the comparison to the Patriots (with a lot of help from Brady's example) being able to spread the payroll out among the starters and key reserves.

This might be what we're seeing with the Red Sox. Maybe they sign Devers or X -- I doubt they sign both -- but the roster could evolve into a serviceable but not top shelf array of players, none of whom are seriously impacting the tax threshold. We're seeing that work thus far this season in the starting rotation. It hasn't worked consistently in the pen or the bench, but I doubt that sways management away from this type of goal.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,715
I think the other issue besides the obsession with playing players out of position that @Yelling At Clouds point out above, is that Cora + Bloom have a problem adjusting quickly and keep certain players on the roster way too long. M Gonzalez was given 250 ABs last year and put up a 52 OPS+.
I think sometimes there are factors we can't fully determine from the outside. Marwin maybe got too many ABs for BOS last year, but since he was released, two very smart organizations in HOU and now NYY have given him a shot, so there must be something there (maybe just his positional versatility in this era of 3 man benches, but still).
 

bluefenderstrat

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2002
2,587
Tralfamadore
I think the other issue besides the obsession with playing players out of position that @Yelling At Clouds point out above, is that Cora + Bloom have a problem adjusting quickly and keep certain players on the roster way too long. M Gonzalez was given 250 ABs last year and put up a 52 OPS+. Santana put up a 57 OPS+ in 116 ABs.

Fitzy hit .306/.370/.694 in April and .280/.333/.470 in May - that could've helped them win some games when they needed it, but instead we found out that Travis Shaw is very much cooked and Arroyo is still a black hole. Maybe Fitzy comes up and sucks, but then we're in the same position we're in now. Are they just averse to riding the hot hand?
He’s not on the 40…it wasn’t an option.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,684
San Diego
He’s not on the 40…it wasn’t an option.
He came out of spring training hitting .313/.450/1.063. My point is that he should've been given a spot on the roster (either out of ST or soon after) over Travis Shaw or Arroyo, who were both given significant playing time in April, or Arauz, who owns a career 60 OPS+.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
Another possibility is they want to trade Fitzgerald without exposing him to ML pitching. But if they don't, and are planning on keeping him in-org., there's very little downside to choosing option Fitzgerald, instead of repeatedly choosing option Arauz.
And they will reach a limit with sending down Arauz, as teams will use an option year, but can only use that option to send him to the minors 5 times in a year. He was originally optioned May 12th, so he's got 4 to go for the rest of the year.
 

bluefenderstrat

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2002
2,587
Tralfamadore
He came out of spring training hitting .313/.450/1.063. My point is that he should've been given a spot on the roster (either out of ST or soon after) over Travis Shaw or Arroyo, who were both given significant playing time in April, or Arauz, who owns a career 60 OPS+.
I actually hope he gets a shot; I just don’t think it’s realistic to think they would have opened up a roster spot for him in April as a 27/28 year old with a half season of minor league usefulness and a hot Spring Training. Shaw was cooked, but they only gave him 19 ABs (enough to probably cost them a win given how badly they were scrounging for runs in April to be sure); it was Dalbec’s utter hopelessness that compounded that mistake. Anyway, I‘m just annoyed with the tone of this forum and certain threads lately, and my first response didn’t add much to this discussion.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
Another possibility is they want to trade Fitzgerald without exposing him to ML pitching. But if they don't, and are planning on keeping him in-org., there's very little downside to choosing option Fitzgerald, instead of repeatedly choosing option Arauz.
The downside is adding him to the 40 man as has been mentioned. Correct or am I missing something? Sure they can DFA Arauz but what about when Taylor, Paxton and Sale get back?

What is the actual upside? Seems to be very little upside to adding Fitzgerald at this point especially if they want to keep him in the organization. I don't think there are many organizations that would have approached this situation differently.