Poll: Rate Your Faith in the Red Sox Front Office

Rate Your Faith in the Red Sox Front Office


  • Total voters
    595

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,716
I would argue that the Yankees are better at hyping their talent than producing it these days
This would not be a very good argument on your part. NY has been cranking out pitching for a while now, I am pretty sure that they lead all of MLB in relievers produced in the last 10 or 15 years. Last deadline they traded 9 or 10 pitchers to clear out excess, 4 of these were in MLB rotations by the end of the year (Montgomery, Sears, Waldichuk, Wesneski). They haven't been as successful with position players (with the massive in every way exception of Judge), but they also haven't picked in the top half of the first round in decades. I think the current group of position player prospects is the best NY has maybe ever had, but we'll see in five years how much of that is reality and how much is hype.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
It's December. We're smack dab in the middle of the off season and free agency. The Red Sox 2023, as of now, team looks wildly inadequate. It's unclear to me how the Sox could possibly address their many holes through the remaining free agents and trades. We were told that this was going to be a big off season and that they were going to improve the team.

I'm sorry if reading negativity about the front office bothers you or makes you think that my posts or the posts of others who are along the same lines of mine are somehow not up to the quality of SoSH of yesteryear. But I think stating, in the wake of the current situation, my opinion of Bloom and the front office is fair game under the circumstances. That others have previously said similar things is what it is. I mean, we could only allow upbeat posts or shut down all evaluation of the front office, as an alternative.
Read what I wrote again, I didn't say stop criticizing the front office, I said pretending you know what Devers or JDM or any other player thinks about the front office and how it affect contract negotiations is bullshit and not main board quality posting.
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
5,932
Guess all those publications that have noted how the strength of the farm under Bloom has improved are wrong, because you said so? If those prospects all eventually fail, then sure, he did it wrong, but we aren't even in the window for them to graduate yet.
And it will be even stronger in 2025 after we add the 14th pick this year and the 8th pick in 2024 draft.

in other words, adding the #3 pick Marcello Mayer to headline the system, and having inherited guys Casas/Bello and Rafaella bloom helps a lot.
Of course, it also would have helped if in retooling the roster the past three years he had acquired a prospect of substance in the trade to add to the group.
 

astrozombie

New Member
Sep 12, 2022
394
Guess all those publications that have noted how the strength of the farm under Bloom has improved are wrong, because you said so? If those prospects all eventually fail, then sure, he did it wrong, but we aren't even in the window for them to graduate yet.
The farm was trash under Dombrowski, so there was nowhere to really go but up. Has the farm depth improved? Sure! It went from "abysmal" to "mediocre".
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
717
Read what I wrote again, I didn't say stop criticizing the front office, I said pretending you know what Devers or JDM or any other player thinks about the front office and how it affect contract negotiations is bullshit and not main board quality posting.
I said nothing about JDM. I have no idea why he left though in his shoes, I would have, too. I mean based on what I know, which is not nearly everything.

As to Devers, Pedro Martinenz said before Bogaerts left that if the Sox failed to sign him, that he thought Devers would read the tea leaves and leave. That informs my speculation to some extent. And sorry, I think speculating (and we KNOW we are just speculating), on how players might react to the overall situation is totally fine on the main board. I enjoy reading informed, logical speculation, and I think mine is that in this case.

No one here knows what WILL happen. But looking at it and saying that (a) Devers is unlikely to sign before he hits free agency given that he's seen so many fellow stars go and given that he would seemingly want to play for a contender and (b) that Devers would most likely only sign with the Sox if it was at a massive premium to market is NOT below the standard of this board. We have seen players in all sports flock to teams they think can win when all things are basically equal.

In my mind, there's room for speculation based on the current landscape. Just as there's room for posting based on advanced stats. And all of the other topics we see here.

Am I wrong? Is trying to get inside the heads of the players in light of what we have seen to date really bad posting? Not at all worthy of discussion? I mean we speculate all the time. Why did the Manager do this? Why did the GM do that?
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
This would not be a very good argument on your part. NY has been cranking out pitching for a while now, I am pretty sure that they lead all of MLB in relievers produced in the last 10 or 15 years. Last deadline they traded 9 or 10 pitchers to clear out excess, 4 of these were in MLB rotations by the end of the year (Montgomery, Sears, Waldichuk, Wesneski). They haven't been as successful with position players (with the massive in every way exception of Judge), but they also haven't picked in the top half of the first round in decades. I think the current group of position player prospects is the best NY has maybe ever had, but we'll see in five years how much of that is reality and how much is hype.
Two years ago, MLB.com had Yankees and Sox back to back for systems ranking, I believe one was #13 and the other was #14. Since then, it seems like the Yankees have done a much better job turning that talent into help for the major league club (either through trades, player development, etc.)
 

astrozombie

New Member
Sep 12, 2022
394
This would not be a very good argument on your part. NY has been cranking out pitching for a while now, I am pretty sure that they lead all of MLB in relievers produced in the last 10 or 15 years. Last deadline they traded 9 or 10 pitchers to clear out excess, 4 of these were in MLB rotations by the end of the year (Montgomery, Sears, Waldichuk, Wesneski). They haven't been as successful with position players (with the massive in every way exception of Judge), but they also haven't picked in the top half of the first round in decades. I think the current group of position player prospects is the best NY has maybe ever had, but we'll see in five years how much of that is reality and how much is hype.
Fair. For years it seemed like the Yankees would do things like the Montero/Severino trade because Montero was such a strong prospect (who never panned outt), or claim that Soriano was the second coming of Hank Aaron (good, but not *that* good), or Gary Sanchez was a future perennial all star. Maybe that was more position players and maybe it's been better lately.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
The fact that Bloom apparently still has Henry’s confidence says a lot more about the situation than posters saying he got played and needs to be dumped.
Bloom was brought in to rebuild while trying to compete (at least perceivably) and other THAT direction is the absolute most difficult to manage. I don’t like where the direction is currently at but I still think there’s a direction. I don’t believe X fit that but they still need to go through the motions.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,175
And it will be even stronger in 2025 after we add the 14th pick this year and the 8th pick in 2024 draft.

in other words, adding the #3 pick Marcello Mayer to headline the system, and having inherited guys Casas/Bello and Rafaella bloom helps a lot.
Of course, it also would have helped if in retooling the roster the past three years he had acquired a prospect of substance in the trade to add to the group.
Exactly this. We’d all probably feel a lot better right now if we had a couple of:

One of Vargas or Pepiot (Mookie);

Pete Crow Armstrong, Jordan Walker, Cade Cavalli or Bobby Miller (all taken within 10 picks after Yorke in 2020),;

Andrew Abbott, Zack Gelof, Kyle Manzardo or Robert Gasser (all taken in the 2nd round of 2021 after Fabian);

Any prospects instead of losing Martinez, Eovaldi, Hill and Wacha for nothing.

Yes, this is cherry picking - and no, it’s not like I knew whom any of these guys were - but if the argument is “Bloom is great at and is building a great farm system“, he should have more wins like this. If he did, I’d believe in him moving forward a heck of a lot more.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
Under Bloom the farm system has gone from one of the worst in baseball to a top half system.

2019: 30th
https://www.milb.com/news/farm-system-rankings-overall-30-21-304615150

2023: 9th
https://www.prospects1500.com/milb/2022-mlb-farm-system-rankings/

I don’t know that they’re really 9th (who knows?) but basically every site has the Sox at least top 15. That’s a dramatic improvement from when Chaim took the job.

To say he has “demonstrated repeatedly that he is not the person” to create the excellent farm system seems quite premature given the progress already made.
But is it due to selecting good players and trading major league players for quality prospects, or is it due to a combination of 1) picking Mayer and 2) just not trading any quality prospects for major league talent? Feels like much more of the latter to me.
 

jteders1

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2022
117
Under Bloom the farm system has gone from one of the worst in baseball to a top half system.

2019: 30th
https://www.milb.com/news/farm-system-rankings-overall-30-21-304615150

2023: 9th
https://www.prospects1500.com/milb/2022-mlb-farm-system-rankings/

I don’t know that they’re really 9th (who knows?) but basically every site has the Sox at least top 15. That’s a dramatic improvement from when Chaim took the job.

To say he has “demonstrated repeatedly that he is not the person” to create the excellent farm system seems quite premature given the progress already made.
This list is over a year old. Jeter Downs which is listed has since been DFA’d. In addition, Casas and Bello are about to graduate this year. Has Bloom improved the farm? Yes, but he hasn’t really drafted any top, top tier players outside of Meyer who fell to him. He’s done a good job with the farm, and while the depth is nice, the lack of top end talent is disappointing.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
Half the soxprospects top 10 are Bloom guys, which I think is pretty good considering he's only had 2 full seasons + 2020 to work with. Also he's gotten a bunch of high school kids; I can understand feeling frustrated cause his picks haven't impacted Boston yet or made waves on the national rankings, but development takes time. They may succeed, they may fail, but we just can't judge the success a bunch of 18 year olds yet.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Well I mean if Bloom sucks at putting together a MLB roster AND the Sox’ improved farm system really has nothing to do with him, then yeah I guess he completely blows at this job and it amazes me that Henry keeps the guy around.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
717
Well I mean if Bloom sucks at putting together a MLB roster AND the Sox’ improved farm system really has nothing to do with him, then yeah I guess he completely blows at this job and it amazes me that Henry keeps the guy around.
That's a false choice. The mission was to improve the system and remain competitive.

I don't know how much they really have improved the system. I know that people who earn their living evaluating such things say they have. That's a good thing.

But I also know that it reality we wont know until many years from now how good the pipeline was in 2023. And even if the system is balls out awesome and even if Bloom has a lot to do with that, he has not kept up the "keep the team competitive" side of the mission.

Has the mission changed?
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
The whole point of having a good farm system is to support the big league team. Just being a top ten farm system doesn’t really have any value on its own. Some early signs are promising but we don’t really know yet, like was Nick Yorke a good pick, it’s TBD. Hopefully the farm system will soon start to help the big league club, either by contributing players getting called up or being traded for players who can help. It’s all a balance; if the Sox trade a few prospects for major league help, the farm system will be worse! But, the big league club will be better.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
The whole point of having a good farm system is to support the big league team. Just being a top ten farm system doesn’t really have any value on its own. Some early signs are promising but we don’t really know yet, like was Nick Yorke a good pick, it’s TBD. Hopefully the farm system will soon start to help the big league club, either by contributing players getting called up or being traded for players who can help. It’s all a balance; if the Sox trade a few prospects for major league help, the farm system will be worse! But, the big league club will be better.
Exactly. And I’d argue one of the main reasons the system has crept up to the top 10 range is because they haven’t really traded anyone valuable in the last 3 years. And the other main reason is Mayer. Couldn’t literally anyone execute this strategy? The GM skill comes from A) making shrewd picks and B) making shrewd trades of vets for good prospects. Bloom might have one to two of the A category under his belt. Does he have any of the B? Renfroe deal certainly was a bust.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
Exactly. And I’d argue one of the main reasons the system has crept up to the top 10 range is because they haven’t really traded anyone valuable in the last 3 years. And the other main reason is Mayer. Couldn’t literally anyone execute this strategy? The GM skill comes from A) making shrewd picks and B) making shrewd trades of vets for good prospects. Bloom might have one to two of the A category under his belt. Does he have any of the B? Renfroe deal certainly was a bust.
The Pivetta deal has to be given credit for.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
The Pivetta deal has to be given credit for.
Yeah but it has nothing to do with the system. Ditto Whitlock. Those moves affected the big club.

Chaim does deserve credit for those. But overall if you had to grade him on the major league team building over 3 years what does he get? C+ at best? And if 2023 goes like a lot of us expect, that falls to like a D.

And then what grade does he deserve on the minor league system? B at best?

Add it all up and he gets a below average grade. Not an overall fail, not yet. But in a year’s time it might be.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
That's a false choice. The mission was to improve the system and remain competitive.

I don't know how much they really have improved the system. I know that people who earn their living evaluating such things say they have. That's a good thing.

But I also know that it reality we wont know until many years from now how good the pipeline was in 2023. And even if the system is balls out awesome and even if Bloom has a lot to do with that, he has not kept up the "keep the team competitive" side of the mission.

Has the mission changed?
According to many here, Chaim has done poorly both keeping the MLB club competitive and making the farm system good. Hence, he should go.

I don’t agree with that take but that’s basically the feeling among many here, quite obviously.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Exactly. And I’d argue one of the main reasons the system has crept up to the top 10 range is because they haven’t really traded anyone valuable in the last 3 years. And the other main reason is Mayer. Couldn’t literally anyone execute this strategy? The GM skill comes from A) making shrewd picks and B) making shrewd trades of vets for good prospects. Bloom might have one to two of the A category under his belt. Does he have any of the B? Renfroe deal certainly was a bust.
Was it? Both players brought back have two seasons each in the minors and after two minor league seasons Binelas has 659 miL PAs (A, A+, AA) and has hit 34 HR and driven in 107 runs. Might it be a bit early to call it a bust?
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,096
Was it? Both players brought back have two seasons each in the minors and after two minor league seasons Binelas has 659 miL PAs (A, A+, AA) and has hit 34 HR and driven in 107 runs. Might it be a bit early to call it a bust?
It's not over yet but Binelas is currently ranked 37th on soxprospects (down from 21st at the beginning of the season), only 8 slots above the guy they just traded to KC for some anonymous reliever. It's definitely trending toward bust.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
920
Boston
Was it? Both players brought back have two seasons each in the minors and after two minor league seasons Binelas has 659 miL PAs (A, A+, AA) and has hit 34 HR and driven in 107 runs. Might it be a bit early to call it a bust?
Binelas struck out a third of the time over 260 PAs in AA. He may have only been 22, but thats horrid and he would need to cut it down to sub-25% next year to be thought of as much. He's a DH/1B so the bat has to carry him the entire way. He's also not a 70-80 power like Joey Gallo, but more of a 60-65 so he needs some level of ability to make contact.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Bloom this off season reminds me of that fantasy baseball owner who went into the draft with a 10 dollar outfield and two dollar closers but then refused to spend $25 on any player before remembering he could only keep up to 10.

I understand that you can't force people to play in your city, but you can certainly control making it a more desirable destination and thus far he has completely failed on that front.
I was one of his bigger cheerleaders but he has backed himself into the trade market and that's not a place to hang out if you're trying to keep a sustainably competitive team.

I officially have no idea what he's doing.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
Binelas struck out a third of the time over 260 PAs in AA. He may have only been 22, but thats horrid and he would need to cut it down to sub-25% next year to be thought of as much. He's a DH/1B so the bat has to carry him the entire way. He's also not a 70-80 power like Joey Gallo, but more of a 60-65 so he needs some level of ability to make contact.
It's not over yet but Binelas is currently ranked 37th on soxprospects (down from 21st at the beginning of the season), only 8 slots above the guy they just traded to KC for some anonymous reliever. It's definitely trending toward bust.
And Binelas would have to amount for a lot to justify the trade since it left the team without a RF for a season that might have been seen as still within a window of contention (after all they had just been 2 wins away from the world series just prior to the trade). It was a very unique trade in that very few GMs like to create holes heading into a season, especially if they are at all interested in contending. In retrospect it was almost like he was trying to tank, but oddly, he also took on a bunch of extra money and there were no other trades of starters to follow. It was mystifying and the only real explanation might be that he thought he was about to sign Sekiya. Anyway, he didn't, JBJ sucked and the prospects have been underwhelming - when they really would have needed to be spectacular to justify the cost of acquiring them.
 
Last edited:

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
And even if the system is balls out awesome and even if Bloom has a lot to do with that, he has not kept up the "keep the team competitive" side of the mission.
How so?

2021 was competitive, despite lacking Sale. Bloom augmented the team as needed.

2022 was not competitive due to what seemed like unremitting waves of injuries. I can't remember if you watched the season or not, but Josh Winckowski got 14 starts and Crawford picked up another 12.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
717
How so?

2021 was competitive, despite lacking Sale. Bloom augmented the team as needed.

2022 was not competitive due to what seemed like unremitting waves of injuries. I can't remember if you watched the season or not, but Josh Winckowski got 14 starts and Crawford picked up another 12.
Poor writing on my part. I mean now. I do not believe that the Red Sox will be competitive in in 2023. And while the Sox, like many teams, including the Hated Yankees, who managed to make the playoffs, suffered a raft of injuries in 2022, I think many of Bloom's decisions and failures contributed mightily to the results in 2022.

And how could you have memories of whether I watched the season? We don't know each other. How could you possibly know. I did, in fact.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,951
Isle of Plum
I'm struggling to figure out where we're headed over next 2-3 and mostly I’d love to better understand their overall view of taking on risk.

I wonder whether the owners of the Padres and Mets have spiked the market but perhaps not substantially altered it in a sustainable way. Will contract size really keep accelerating? Cohen genuinely doesn’t seem to care at all, that’s a Black Swan, but San Diego may view these as investments in their business. Not just as a pure $/WAR (I know...god forbid ; ) but rather a depreciating asset like they might invest in infrastructure around the park or maybe as marketing and branding. That would be a potentially ‘contagious’ behavior another owner could copy.

The idea of increasing AAV to avoid long contracts is also saying ‘I will for sure waste money now to avoid maybe wasting money later’. Never bought any of the sell the team stuff, but for the first time I'm not so sure.

Still time for the Bloominati to have their day, but it does seem to be getting late early and threading of the needle is beginning to look a camel-sized challenge.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
913
Has anyone seen a choose-your-own-adventure analysis of potential extensions for Xander and Devers? As in, if the Sox signed Xander and Devers to huge extensions after the 2020 season, the payroll would have been X, penalties of Y, impact of Z under the relevant CBA?

I'm trying to understand what the team impact would have been, other than spending tons of money, of increasing payroll to make those extensions work.
 

Dr Strangeglove

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
86
Mililani, HI
When I was a boy, the Kansas City Athletics were essentially an AAAA farm team for the Yankees. We now fill that role for the Dodgers. They get our good players, we get their aging rejects
 

TimScribble

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
1,474
Saw one of those dumb twitter posts of what the lineup could have been if the Sox handled things better. I haven’t messed with pitching numbers but:

$161M leaving you with ~75M before you hit the threshold. And you could probably even estimate Vaz or C replacement at less. This assumes Bogey accepts a deal similar to Story. Oh to say “what if…?”

Betts 30M CF
Devers 30M 3B
Bogaerts 25M SS
Casas 700k 1B
Schwarber 20M DH
Story 23M 2B
Renfroe 7M RF
Vaz 10M C
Beni 15M LF
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,392
Park Slope, Brooklyn
How so?

2021 was competitive, despite lacking Sale. Bloom augmented the team as needed.

2022 was not competitive due to what seemed like unremitting waves of injuries. I can't remember if you watched the season or not, but Josh Winckowski got 14 starts and Crawford picked up another 12.
If only for posterity’s sake.

The glaring issue for this 2022 edition, right out of the gate — and apparent in the abbreviated ST — was in the construction of the bullpen. I add this because Bloom’s wish-casting around the productivity of downward trending relievers, bubble types and rehabilitation projects was evident from the jump.

I would offer that the ship took on the most water early on when — after Jake Diekman’s mind-boggling save and a week or two thereafter of holding down the fort — they turned into a collection of veritable gas cans. Take Whitlock out and what does that opening day pen suggest about their hopes for ‘22?

Matt Barnes, Garrett Whitlock, Ryan Brasier, Kutter Crawford, Hansel Robles, Hirokazu Sawamura, Jake Diekman, Austin Davis, Matt Strahm, Phillips Valdez.

Strahm flirted with reliability for a stretch, Kutter had an eye-poppingly good run of appearances and some good starts — but that pen had a strong whiff of the execrable and is a big reason why, in my house anyway, the bloom was off the rose in April, well before the injuries narrative gained any steam. He lost me in the spring.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
If only for posterity’s sake.

The glaring issue for this 2022 edition, right out of the gate — and apparent in the abbreviated ST — was in the construction of the bullpen. I add this because Bloom’s wish-casting around the productivity of downward trending relievers, bubble types and rehabilitation projects was evident from the jump.

I would offer that the ship took on the most water early on when — after Jake Diekman’s mind-boggling save and a week or two thereafter of holding down the fort — they turned into a collection of veritable gas cans. Take Whitlock out and what does that opening day pen suggest about their hopes for ‘22?

Matt Barnes, Garrett Whitlock, Ryan Brasier, Kutter Crawford, Hansel Robles, Hirokazu Sawamura, Jake Diekman, Austin Davis, Matt Strahm, Phillips Valdez.

Strahm flirted with reliability for a stretch, Kutter had an eye-poppingly good run of appearances and some good starts — but that pen had a strong whiff of the execrable and is a big reason why, in my house anyway, the bloom was off the rose in April, well before the injuries narrative gained any steam. He lost me in the spring.
Be serious.
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,392
Park Slope, Brooklyn
Be serious.
On May 4th the pen had 5 saves and had blown 8. This observation came that day from Tom Caron:
“The Sox are about to be 0-5 in extra innings.

In every one of the 5 games they had the lead in the eighth inning or later. Five different relievers with blown saves.

They’ve been outscored 13-3 in extra innings this year.

They haven’t won back-to-back games since April 16-17.“

Serious enough dereliction of duty?
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
That's kinda glossing over the fact that in the first month the offense was so dead that they could only score 3 runs in extra innings across 5 games. The pen was not the biggest problem in April.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
Saw one of those dumb twitter posts of what the lineup could have been if the Sox handled things better. I haven’t messed with pitching numbers but:

$161M leaving you with ~75M before you hit the threshold. And you could probably even estimate Vaz or C replacement at less. This assumes Bogey accepts a deal similar to Story. Oh to say “what if…?”

Betts 30M CF
Devers 30M 3B
Bogaerts 25M SS
Casas 700k 1B
Schwarber 20M DH
Story 23M 2B
Renfroe 7M RF
Vaz 10M C
Beni 15M LF
You don't even need to go this far. Take Schwarber, Renfroe, Benintendi and Vazquez out for lower-cost options and that lineup is still likely among the best in the AL. Reallocate 75% of those dollars to pitching and it's a Series contender.
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
8,266
Manchester, N.H.
That's kinda glossing over the fact that in the first month the offense was so dead that they could only score 3 runs in extra innings across 5 games. The pen was not the biggest problem in April.
To put a little extra on this point, the Sox in April were 9-13 - they scored 76 runs in that time frame for an average of 3.45 runs per game - that rate would be just a tick above the worst offense in baseball last year (like one one hundreth of a run per game) - they allowed 3.68 runs per game - this would have been the 4th best pitching performance in baseball over a full season.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
On May 4th the pen had 5 saves and had blown 8. This observation came that day from Tom Caron:
“The Sox are about to be 0-5 in extra innings.

In every one of the 5 games they had the lead in the eighth inning or later. Five different relievers with blown saves.

They’ve been outscored 13-3 in extra innings this year.

They haven’t won back-to-back games since April 16-17.“

Serious enough dereliction of duty?
Better - but I think if you're trying to make the case this was apparent in the off-season, you have to explain why the Sox knew (or should have known) there would be a lackluster performance on a case-by-case basis. For example, Barnes was problematic based on his 2021 finish, but unless there was a reason to think he wouldn't bounce back, was it unreasonable for the Sox to expect him to be a contributor? On the other hand, Diekman - was he what they should have expected or not? And why? Why did the Sox expect Brasier to have his worst year? Etc.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,175
Better - but I think if you're trying to make the case this was apparent in the off-season, you have to explain why the Sox knew (or should have known) there would be a lackluster performance on a case-by-case basis. For example, Barnes was problematic based on his 2021 finish, but unless there was a reason to think he wouldn't bounce back, was it unreasonable for the Sox to expect him to be a contributor? On the other hand, Diekman - was he what they should have expected or not? And why? Why did the Sox expect Brasier to have his worst year? Etc.
FWIW, I always think this is fair, and good for discussion. It's also why I spend so much time outlining why I think the team (as presently constructed AND with what is available remaining in FA is so flawed). The most likely outcome of this "high error bar" team, as I think Speier would put it is half the stuff that I think goes wrong goes wrong, half the stuff that someone thinks goes right will go right, and we finish with something between 75-85 wins and most likely miss the playoffs, or possibly make the last WC slot and get bounced before the ALCS.

Since I've spent plenty of time outlining why I think Sale and Paxton are not good bets to place on being healthy and effective pitchers and why I don't think the Sox should assume they will be, I'll talk a little about the bullpen.


In general, I admit MY theory is that you should pay for a closer when you can (whether in terms of money or assets). I do think there is something to a) allowing a manager to have a guy he knows he's going to pitch in the 9th and to mix and match the rest of the pieces to get there; b) slotting everyone down a rung and c) having guys know their roles. I don't know that this can be quantified in statistical analysis, but it's something I believe. Especially over the course of a 162 game season. When you get to the playoffs, it's different because you can do what we did in 2018, for instance, with shorter rotations. That can't be done over the course of a full season, though.

As such, there is no way I'd have paid nearly what we gave Barnes in 2021 ($9.375m AAV), no way I'd have given Martin what we just did ($8.75m), and no way I'd combine to spend $5.5m on Rodriguez, Brasier and Taylor. In general, I think bullpen arms are so volatile that I'd literally go league minimum / minor league deals / prospects breaking into the bigs on every single bullpen piece besides the closer.

The only exception is talking about a prospect / young pitcher whom comes up and is elite, where you then buy out their arb years (ie Whitlock) with options. As guys age I think giving significant money to anything but an experienced closer is a bad allocation of resources if you're operating with $LTT as a budget.

As it stands and with what we've done, I think the 'pen is:

Jansen (no argument giving him $16m and two years). He's not the guy he was, but he's a reasonable bet to continue being a "dependable" closer for two years (ie he's probably going to blow 4 saves but convert 30 of them).

Barnes ($9.375m) - No way I'd give a 30 year old non-closer RP that deal, but we did and we're stuck with him.

Martin ($8.75m) - See above. In 2019 he had a 3.40ERA and a 1.7 bWAR. In 2021 he had a 3.95ERA and had a .4 bWAR. In 2022 he had a 3.05ERA and a 1.0 bWAR. He's probably going to be fine as a RP. But I think betting an $8.75m cap hit the next two years on a non-closer RP whom will be 37 and 38 is too much of a risk for me, and I think the money would be better used elsewhere.

Rodriguez ($2m) - See above.

Schreiber (pre-arb) - He was good last year. He is pre-arb, so no real risk. If someone would give up decent prospect for him, I'd move him rather than assume a 2.20ERA is the new norm for will be 29 year old whom had ERAs above 6.00 at 25 and 26. But I can't imagine he has any value to another team. If he does, again, I'd move him. Since he doesn't, why not, he gets sent to Pawtucket / DFA'ed if he goes back to sucking.

Brasier ($2.3m arb projection) - There is no reason for him to be on the roster. Career 4.14ERA guy. Prosecution exhibit A about the variance of relief pitchers.

Josh Taylor ($1.1m arb projection) - See above, especially coming off a season in which he couldn't pitch in the big leagues.


What I'd rather do:

Jansen - $16m. No problem there.
Whitlock / Houck - $4.7m. Hope one is Papelbon. This was a good extension from Bloom, even if Whitlock gets hurt, a good risk.
*Barnes - $9.375m. Sunk cost, no choice but to keep him.
Schreiber (pre arb). Exactly the kind of guy for middle relief. (If someone actually believes in him, I'd trade him).*
ZKelly (pre arb). Costs nothing. If he's good, great, if not, he's back in Pawtucket / DFA'ed.
TToussaint ($minor league deal). Because I've heard of him before and I assume he'd take a minor league deal since he was non-tendered. If not, replace him with someone who will.
JKoenig ($minor league deal). See above.
*DStrotman ($minor league deal). This is if someone would actually give you a good prospect for Schreiber, but I doubt it.

Why I'd rather do that - again, I think relief pitchers are so volatile that the only one I'd pay for is a closer or young prospects whom come up and show excellent results / stuff (Whitlock).

The moves I've outlined would mean no Martin, Rodriguez, Brasier or Taylor makes that $40.35m below $LTT based on where we are now. I'd have used that money to have extended Devers and resigned Bogaerts (to his SD deal, if necessary).

Because I'd FAR rather have:

Yoshida - LF, Story - 2b, extended Devers - 3b, Bogaerts - SS, Casas - 1b, Turner - DH, Verdugo - RF, Hernandez - CF, McGuire - C. Rotation: Pivetta, Bello, Houck / Whitlock, Mata, Walter. BP - Jansen, Whitlock/Houck, Schreiber, ZKelly, Toussaint, Koenig, Barnes (Toussaint and Koenig can be literally anyone on a minor league deal)

As opposed to:
Hernandez - CF, Yoshida - LF, Story - MI1, lame duck Devers - 3b, Turner - DH, Casas - 1b, Verdugo - RF; SegurAndrus - MI2, McGuire - C. Rotation: Pivetta, Bello, Houck/Whitlock, lets say Eovaldi and Wacha. BP - Jansen, Barnes, Martin, Rodriguez, Schreiber, Brasier and Taylor.


If you have the Braves or Astros core locked down, sure, spend on some BP arms. Our core is Trevor Story. Not at all similar.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,499
In general, I think bullpen arms are so volatile that I'd literally go league minimum / minor league deals / prospects breaking into the bigs on every single bullpen piece besides the closer.

The only exception is talking about a prospect / young pitcher whom comes up and is elite, where you then buy out their arb years (ie Whitlock) with options. As guys age I think giving significant money to anything but an experienced closer is a bad allocation of resources if you're operating with $LTT as a budget.
This is the route most tanking teams take, except that once they find out who can pitch consistently that year, they trade off the reliever for some assets.

But teams lose a lot of games while cycling through the various league minimum (or near-minimum) guys to see who has it that year and who doesn't.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
I'm unclear on how "closer" is being defined here, and what exempts them from the volatility you claim other relievers are subject to. Matt Barnes sure as hell looked like a closer last year with 19 saves before the all star break when they handed him the contract.
FWIW, I always think this is fair, and good for discussion. It's also why I spend so much time outlining why I think the team (as presently constructed AND with what is available remaining in FA is so flawed). The most likely outcome of this "high error bar" team, as I think Speier would put it is half the stuff that I think goes wrong goes wrong, half the stuff that someone thinks goes right will go right, and we finish with something between 75-85 wins and most likely miss the playoffs, or possibly make the last WC slot and get bounced before the ALCS.

Since I've spent plenty of time outlining why I think Sale and Paxton are not good bets to place on being healthy and effective pitchers and why I don't think the Sox should assume they will be, I'll talk a little about the bullpen.


In general, I admit MY theory is that you should pay for a closer when you can (whether in terms of money or assets). I do think there is something to a) allowing a manager to have a guy he knows he's going to pitch in the 9th and to mix and match the rest of the pieces to get there; b) slotting everyone down a rung and c) having guys know their roles. I don't know that this can be quantified in statistical analysis, but it's something I believe. Especially over the course of a 162 game season. When you get to the playoffs, it's different because you can do what we did in 2018, for instance, with shorter rotations. That can't be done over the course of a full season, though.

As such, there is no way I'd have paid nearly what we gave Barnes in 2021 ($9.375m AAV), no way I'd have given Martin what we just did ($8.75m), and no way I'd combine to spend $5.5m on Rodriguez, Brasier and Taylor. In general, I think bullpen arms are so volatile that I'd literally go league minimum / minor league deals / prospects breaking into the bigs on every single bullpen piece besides the closer.

The only exception is talking about a prospect / young pitcher whom comes up and is elite, where you then buy out their arb years (ie Whitlock) with options. As guys age I think giving significant money to anything but an experienced closer is a bad allocation of resources if you're operating with $LTT as a budget.

As it stands and with what we've done, I think the 'pen is:

Jansen (no argument giving him $16m and two years). He's not the guy he was, but he's a reasonable bet to continue being a "dependable" closer for two years (ie he's probably going to blow 4 saves but convert 30 of them).

Barnes ($9.375m) - No way I'd give a 30 year old non-closer RP that deal, but we did and we're stuck with him.

Martin ($8.75m) - See above. In 2019 he had a 3.40ERA and a 1.7 bWAR. In 2021 he had a 3.95ERA and had a .4 bWAR. In 2022 he had a 3.05ERA and a 1.0 bWAR. He's probably going to be fine as a RP. But I think betting an $8.75m cap hit the next two years on a non-closer RP whom will be 37 and 38 is too much of a risk for me, and I think the money would be better used elsewhere.

Rodriguez ($2m) - See above.

Schreiber (pre-arb) - He was good last year. He is pre-arb, so no real risk. If someone would give up decent prospect for him, I'd move him rather than assume a 2.20ERA is the new norm for will be 29 year old whom had ERAs above 6.00 at 25 and 26. But I can't imagine he has any value to another team. If he does, again, I'd move him. Since he doesn't, why not, he gets sent to Pawtucket / DFA'ed if he goes back to sucking.

Brasier ($2.3m arb projection) - There is no reason for him to be on the roster. Career 4.14ERA guy. Prosecution exhibit A about the variance of relief pitchers.

Josh Taylor ($1.1m arb projection) - See above, especially coming off a season in which he couldn't pitch in the big leagues.


What I'd rather do:

Jansen - $16m. No problem there.
Whitlock / Houck - $4.7m. Hope one is Papelbon. This was a good extension from Bloom, even if Whitlock gets hurt, a good risk.
*Barnes - $9.375m. Sunk cost, no choice but to keep him.
Schreiber (pre arb). Exactly the kind of guy for middle relief. (If someone actually believes in him, I'd trade him).*
ZKelly (pre arb). Costs nothing. If he's good, great, if not, he's back in Pawtucket / DFA'ed.
TToussaint ($minor league deal). Because I've heard of him before and I assume he'd take a minor league deal since he was non-tendered. If not, replace him with someone who will.
JKoenig ($minor league deal). See above.
*DStrotman ($minor league deal). This is if someone would actually give you a good prospect for Schreiber, but I doubt it.

Why I'd rather do that - again, I think relief pitchers are so volatile that the only one I'd pay for is a closer or young prospects whom come up and show excellent results / stuff (Whitlock).

The moves I've outlined would mean no Martin, Rodriguez, Brasier or Taylor makes that $40.35m below $LTT based on where we are now. I'd have used that money to have extended Devers and resigned Bogaerts (to his SD deal, if necessary).

Because I'd FAR rather have:

Yoshida - LF, Story - 2b, extended Devers - 3b, Bogaerts - SS, Casas - 1b, Turner - DH, Verdugo - RF, Hernandez - CF, McGuire - C. Rotation: Pivetta, Bello, Houck / Whitlock, Mata, Walter. BP - Jansen, Whitlock/Houck, Schreiber, ZKelly, Toussaint, Koenig, Barnes (Toussaint and Koenig can be literally anyone on a minor league deal)

As opposed to:
Hernandez - CF, Yoshida - LF, Story - MI1, lame duck Devers - 3b, Turner - DH, Casas - 1b, Verdugo - RF; SegurAndrus - MI2, McGuire - C. Rotation: Pivetta, Bello, Houck/Whitlock, lets say Eovaldi and Wacha. BP - Jansen, Barnes, Martin, Rodriguez, Schreiber, Brasier and Taylor.


If you have the Braves or Astros core locked down, sure, spend on some BP arms. Our core is Trevor Story. Not at all similar.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,175
This is the route most tanking teams take, except that once they find out who can pitch consistently that year, they trade off the reliever for some assets.

But teams lose a lot of games while cycling through the various league minimum (or near-minimum) guys to see who has it that year and who doesn't.
Yup, I agree. I'm fine with that.

In my scenario, you have the "core" of Bogaerts, Devers, Story locked up for a long time. You see whom of the kids end up being decent starting pitchers.

Last year we spent on Barnes ($9.375m), Strahm ($3m), Robles ($2.5m) and Brasier ($1.5m) and our pen absolutely sucked (we're locked into Barnes this year too). I'd rather "risk sucking" which I think pretty much the vast majority of set up and below bullpen arms do on a year by year basis. So I'd rather risk "no money" on those guys than $16.5m like we did last year so that you can pay for top of the roster talent elsewhere.

Put another way, I think having a consistent 3/4/5 in your line up is far more important and far better investment to make. We've already lost the ability to have 3 hitters in that middle of the line up core under contract, but I'd far rather have 2 of them than 1 of them.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,175
I'm unclear on how "closer" is being defined here, and what exempts them from the volatility you claim other relievers are subject to. Matt Barnes sure as hell looked like a closer last year with 19 saves before the all star break when they handed him the contract.
1 - Have a track record of successfully closing games that is more than half a season (ie Keith Foulke, Craig Kimbrel, Kenley Jansen). Barnes high for saves was 4 in 2019, he was 31 at the time and had spent 5 seasons in MLB (I'm discounting the Covid year across the board, for everyone in every way). No, I don't think giving $9m a year to a 31 year old relief pitcher was a good move. If Joely Rodriguez literally looks like the second coming of Mariano Rivera in April, May and June I don't want him getting a $9m a year extension either.

2 - They're really not. But I at least understand why a manager wants someone whom has shown an ability to close games in the past, especially when navigating a 162 game season. Cora mentioned it many times, and I get it. Francona did too. Jansen could absolutely stink this year, I still think a guy with that track record is a good risk to allow a manager to mix and match the rest of the way.

Now, if you want to tell me we have the Braves / Astros model and you've already got your core and you want to spend a bit more on another bullpen arm short term, go nuts. For instance, Cherington kind of did this in 2013 when we had Pedroia and Ortiz anchoring the line up with Bogaerts, Betts, Bradley Jr (and at that point we all felt good about Middlebrooks) ready to come up, with Lester and Buchholz fronting the rotation sure, go nuts and allocate money to Bailey, Koji, Breslow, Miller, Aceves and whomever else.

But when the question of allocating a budget is at hand and the choices seem to be 1) depth in the bullpen, depth on the bench or 2) core middle of the line up talent, I'm allocating money to the latter at the expense of the former literally every single time. I think there is much less variance there.
 
Last edited:

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
I'm unclear on how "closer" is being defined here, and what exempts them from the volatility you claim other relievers are subject to. Matt Barnes sure as hell looked like a closer last year with 19 saves before the all star break when they handed him the contract.
No he didn't, respectfully. He looked like a guy enjoying the best 3 month stretch of his career. Which was great, but I can't imagine I was the only one waiting for the bottom to drop out. And it did. That extension was not good and I know many felt that way at the time.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
This is like arguing which hole in the boat is bigger. Who cares, they both were awful. The difference was the offense plugged the hole and the bullpen just kept taking on more water. The pen was a disaster from the start and was poorly constructed from the word go.
The offense corrected and the pen was fine through May and June (so was the whole team). The pen really fell apart when it had to pick up the slack of an injured rotation, and never got back on track. That's not to say the bullpen couldn't have been better, but it's never just one thing.
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,392
Park Slope, Brooklyn
That's kinda glossing over the fact that in the first month the offense was so dead that they could only score 3 runs in extra innings across 5 games. The pen was not the biggest problem in April.
There’s a strong argument to be made they wouldn’t have had the opportunity to demonstrate their offensive fecklessness in extras if the bullpen hadn’t been so inept at holding 8th inning leads. 8 BS on May 4 takes some impressive ineptitude. If the pen had nailed down some wins, there’d be no talk of 3 measly runs across 5 games. Chicken/Egg, but in this case, the one clearly preceded the other.

RR makes good points, and limited to my phone, I’m really not able to make a stronger case for why they should have known the pen was chewing gum, baling wire and a paper clip, but there was plenty of discussion about it at the time in here, and I was among the most gimlet-eyed about any reliance on Barnes, Brasier and crew for any level of effectiveness. I figured if a seamhead simpleton like myself thought it was the leakiest of boats in which to set sail, they would see that too. Guess not.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
No he didn't, respectfully. He looked like a guy enjoying the best 3 month stretch of his career. Which was great, but I can't imagine I was the only one waiting for the bottom to drop out. And it did. That extension was not good and I know many felt that way at the time.
Barnes had been a spot high-leverage guy for years before he was put into the closer role in 2021.

And as to his performance, his first three months of 2018 were actually better (by OPS allowed) than the first three of 2021, and in 2019 he had an equivalently excellent March, May and July in 2019. So a string of 3 good months to begin 2021 wasn't exactly a mirage or out of the blue.

Barnes problem seems to be that he's liable to hit a wall in later in the season and suffer a performance drop. Month by month shows a bad September in 2017, a bad August in 2018 (with a bit of a recovery in Sept/Oct), and a bad June and August in 2019 (followed by an excellent September). Perhaps that's addressable with better management or by giving him a week off mid season or something - I really don't know. But I think you have a point in that nobody should have been shocked that, absent some change, he hit a wall in the late summer of 2021 as well.

But, to get back to the point at hand, a typical Barnesian blip in the summer of 2021 does not mean he might not have done what he always does and started 2022 like a lion.

I get that tempers are high, but it really shouldn't be too much to ask that everyone click on B-ref or whatever and take a cursory look at the numbers before posting.
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
8,266
Manchester, N.H.
No he didn't, respectfully. He looked like a guy enjoying the best 3 month stretch of his career. Which was great, but I can't imagine I was the only one waiting for the bottom to drop out. And it did. That extension was not good and I know many felt that way at the time.
I mean...if we want to look...

Sox Extend Barnes; 2 years, $18.75 M | Sons of Sam Horn
or
Red Sox and closer Matt Barnes agree on two-year contract extension : redsox (reddit.com)

Credit to Ale Xander for side-eyeing it and nvalvo on the spin rates, but it was pretty universally positive here as a below market deal because players love playing for Boston - the questioning started in earnest after the wheels fell off a bit as 2021 ended. In retrospect he may have had concerns that led to what was considered at the time a good team deal but it doesn't seem many fans did.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
Barnes had been a spot high-leverage guy for years before he was put into the closer role in 2021.

And as to his performance, his first three months of 2018 were actually better (by OPS allowed) than the first three of 2021, and in 2019 he had an equivalently excellent March, May and July in 2019. So a string of 3 good months to begin 2021 wasn't exactly a mirage or out of the blue.

Barnes problem seems to be that he's liable to hit a wall in later in the season and suffer a performance drop. Month by month shows a bad September in 2017, a bad August in 2018 (with a bit of a recovery in Sept/Oct), and a bad June and August in 2019 (followed by an excellent September). Perhaps that's addressable with better management or by giving him a week off mid season or something - I really don't know. But I think you have a point in that nobody should have been shocked that, absent some change, he hit a wall in the late summer of 2021 as well.

But, to get back to the point at hand, a typical Barnesian blip in the summer of 2021 does not mean he might not have done what he always does and started 2022 like a lion.

I get that tempers are high, but it really shouldn't be too much to ask that everyone click on B-ref or whatever and take a cursory look at the numbers before posting.
First, in what way was my post a display of "temper"?

Second, fine, it was the second best 3 month stretch of his career.

Third, the extension was a poor allocation of resources and several people said so at the time.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
There’s a strong argument to be made they wouldn’t have had the opportunity to demonstrate their offensive fecklessness in extras if the bullpen hadn’t been so inept at holding 8th inning leads. 8 BS on May 4 takes some impressive ineptitude. If the pen had nailed down some wins, there’d be no talk of 3 measly runs across 5 games. Chicken/Egg, but in this case, the one clearly preceded the other.
Those 8 blown saves by May 4...

4/8 (Opening Day at Yankees) = Whitlock gives up game tying HR in 8th, Brasier gives up tying run on sac fly in 10th
4/23 (Sox no hit for first 9 innings at Rays) = Robles blows 2-0 lead in 10th: free runner to start inning, K, K, balk runner to 3rd, E4, walk-off HR by Kiermaier.
4/24 (at Rays) = Brasier gives up three runs in the 5th inning to go from up 2-0 to down 3-2.
4/26 (at Jays) = up 5-2, Diekman goes 2B, 2B, K, K, walk-off HR by Springer
4/30 (at O's) = up 1-0, Barnes gives up one run in 8th
5/4 (vs Angels) = Davis gives up game tying HR in 7th, Diekman gives up game tying run in 9th.

In three of those six games, the offense failed to score more than 2 runs in total. The worst offenses in baseball still average at least 3.5 runs per game. I'm reticent to put the blame solely on the bullpen for failing to hold a team under 2 runs, especially if it goes to extras.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
I mean...if we want to look...

Sox Extend Barnes; 2 years, $18.75 M | Sons of Sam Horn
or
Red Sox and closer Matt Barnes agree on two-year contract extension : redsox (reddit.com)

Credit to Ale Xander for side-eyeing it and nvalvo on the spin rates, but it was pretty universally positive here as a below market deal because players love playing for Boston - the questioning started in earnest after the wheels fell off a bit as 2021 ended. In retrospect he may have had concerns that led to what was considered at the time a good team deal but it doesn't seem many fans did.
Well there were like a couple dozen people who commented and 3-4 had some reservations. I wasn't spending much time on the main board then, but I didn't love the deal. You'll just have to trust me. ;)