Speier: How Well has Bloom Done Trading for Prospects?

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
31,510
Hingham, MA
Even putting aside the fact that once they decided to trade him Bloom had to take the best that he could get, the trade was not Betts for Verdugo/Downs/Wong. It was 1 year of Betts for 5 yrs of Verdugo/6 yrs of Downs and Wong.

Ignoring anything the Sox might get from Downs or Wong (and the money saved by moving Price), Betts' bWAR/fWAR for that last year of control was 3.6/2.9.

Verdugo on the other hand has put up a total bWAR/fWAR of 3.9/4.3 with 2.5 years of control still remaining.

You can argue that not extending Betts was a "catastrophic failure", but the trade itself is much closer to a win than a loss.
Thank you. While it's slightly misleading since 2020 was the Covid year, the Sox traded 55 games worth of Mookie. That's it. 55 games.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,256
Maine
Even putting aside the fact that once they decided to trade him Bloom had to take the best that he could get, the trade was not Betts for Verdugo/Downs/Wong. It was 1 year of Betts for 5 yrs of Verdugo/6 yrs of Downs and Wong.
To be even more accurate/thorough, it was 1 year of Betts and 3 years of Price for 5 years of Verdugo, 6 years of Downs and Wong, and about $50M in savings on Price's contract.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
79,391
Oregon
To be even more accurate/thorough, it was 1 year of Betts and 3 years of Price for 5 years of Verdugo, 6 years of Downs and Wong, and about $50M in savings on Price's contract.
Yep ... which in the concentrated view of just the Betts trade, makes it better. I was just trying to add some sense of comparative analysis to the discussion
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,757
The obvious flip side to this is- how does he do when trading prospects for major league players? Clearly too early to know there and a pretty small sample, but with the theory that prospects are often losing value over time (with most losing all or nearly all of their value ultimately) - how does one balance the acquisition and trading of them while maximizing their peak value. Most prospects will not turn into great major leaguers- but most great major leaguers were prospects, right? Seems like we should have a much bigger sample, on both sides here, in the next ~6 months.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
1,890
Yeah, the arguments of post-'20 Betts vs Verdugo always ring so false; there was no indication pre-pandemic that he'd be re-signing in Boston.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,139
The deal also got hung up because he rejected the inclusion of Brusdar Graterol, who's only 23 and has a 124 ERA+ in '22 and would likely- in this bullpen- either be the closer or the 8th inning guy and ended up getting Jeter Downs instead. (Yes, Graterol is on the IL w/ shoulder inflammation)
1 124 era+ for a reliever isn't that great, Houck Whitlock and Schreiber have all been much better. Sox lost out on almost nothing if this is what he is.

I agree. But the argument that Bloom is doing well usually centers on one of things, "He's really good at drafting" (which is probably true--aside from the Fabian misstep, he seems to have done a good job) and that "He's trading for prospects to build up the Red Sox system". The second part, doesn't look so great. I think that's what Speier is trying to say.
What was the Fabian misstep, not paying him a bonus that after another year the rest of the league agreed he wasn't worth getting?
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
42,735
Mtigawi
Well I’m that case he still did draft him and did so with a miscalculation on how much above slot that he was looking for. He gambled and lost. I don’t think that it’s a horrible one given the compensatory rules in place.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
18,664
Miami (oh, Miami!)
To be even more accurate/thorough, it was 1 year of Betts and 3 years of Price for 5 years of Verdugo, 6 years of Downs and Wong, and about $50M in savings on Price's contract.
As much as I agree with the recent sentiments that we have to put the trade in context. . .I think we have to say that at the time LA thought they were getting:
- 1 year of Betts, 3 years of Price at $16m.

And the Sox thought they were getting:
- 5 years of Verdugo, 6 of Downs, 6 of Wong, and $50m savings.

So at the point of trade, it looks like the most certain thing is Betts, with Price being a bit of a wild card. Verdugo looked promising, as did Downs. Dodgers get exclusive negotiating rights, and a run at a WS title with Betts. Sox get one slightly dinged up but otherwise ML ready OF with upside, a good hitting 20 year old SS/IF prospect, and a decent catching prospect.

Nobody saw COVID coming, but it reduced Mookie's effective time and induced him to sign a mega-contract with LA instead of going on the market. It also took Price off the board entirely. Since then (perhaps with the benefit of a year of rest for his arm) Price was been decent in 2021 with 11 starts, but this year he's just a middle-relief guy with a decent ERA.

On the Sox side, Verdugo is a serviceable OF, despite trending downward in performance. Downs had a year off due to COVID and never really took off since then. Wong is basically played as a AAAA catcher. Who knows with him.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
19,931
Rogers Park
The obvious flip side to this is- how does he do when trading prospects for major league players? Clearly too early to know there and a pretty small sample, but with the theory that prospects are often losing value over time (with most losing all or nearly all of their value ultimately) - how does one balance the acquisition and trading of them while maximizing their peak value. Most prospects will not turn into great major leaguers- but most great major leaguers were prospects, right? Seems like we should have a much bigger sample, on both sides here, in the next ~6 months.
This is another iteration of the running argument you and I have had for over a year now, PiaB: as you note, we haven't really seen Bloom do that yet, because the team hasn't been at that point on the success cycle. So just like he hadn't signed a big ticket FA... until he did, we haven't yet seen him make those kinds of deals.

I think the pending 40-man situation means we may start seeing them as soon as the next few days.

Not all of these Californian high school shortstops are going to debut for the Red Sox, it's safe to say.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
21,993
What was the Fabian misstep, not paying him a bonus that after another year the rest of the league agreed he wasn't worth getting?
Pretty much what Nip said. But I’d add if you’ve got the fourth pick in the second round of the draft and your farm system sucks and you don’t normally draft that high, you should probably consider drafting someone that you know that you can sign. Otherwise it’s a waste of a pick IMO.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,139
Pretty much what Nip said. But I’d add if you’ve got the fourth pick in the second round of the draft and your farm system sucks and you don’t normally draft that high, you should probably consider drafting someone that you know that you can sign. Otherwise it’s a waste of a pick IMO.
Pretty sure they didn't draft someone in the 2nd round thinking they couldn't sign him, but you were trashing Bloom for that a year ago when it didn't make sense, so it makes sense that you'd still be trashing it even though after a year not signing him at that price is trending strongly towards having been the right decision
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
42,735
Mtigawi
I don’t mind it at all, even considering he did drop this year. I’m surprised more folks don’t roll with over slot types with their protected picks. You get a free do over. Why not?
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
9,236
Pretty sure they didn't draft someone in the 2nd round thinking they couldn't sign him, but you were trashing Bloom for that a year ago when it didn't make sense, so it makes sense that you'd still be trashing it even though after a year not signing him at that price is trending strongly towards having been the right decision
So we should give Bloom credit for this guy and his father being stupid enough to prevent us from signing him to a contract that would look bad today?

Nothing wrong with some good fortune in dodging a bullet and Bloom gets points for setting a price and sticking to it, but let's not over do it.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,594
I don’t mind it at all, even considering he did drop this year. I’m surprised more folks don’t roll with over slot types with their protected picks. You get a free do over. Why not?
Yes. It's ridiculously slanted in favor of the team, but those are the rules. The Red Sox had all the leverage in the world to offer only what they were comfortable with, and took advantage of it.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,139
So we should give Bloom credit for this guy and his father being stupid enough to prevent us from signing him to a contract that would look bad today?

Nothing wrong with some good fortune in dodging a bullet and Bloom gets points for setting a price and sticking to it, but let's not over do it.
Unless we know what exactly he turned down it's hard to give Bloom credit or not for offering it. But yeah he absolutely gets some credit for not giving in and giving Fabian the 1.6x slot that seems like it would have been pretty poor value to date.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
21,993
Pretty sure they didn't draft someone in the 2nd round thinking they couldn't sign him, but you were trashing Bloom for that a year ago when it didn't make sense, so it makes sense that you'd still be trashing it even though after a year not signing him at that price is trending strongly towards having been the right decision
Trashing?JFC take it easy, scottynofaultofbloom. He blew a pick, it’s not the worst thing in the world.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
3,988
I get that and I remember it at the time but that doesn’t mean Bloom had to go forward with a Dodger trade that didn’t include Lux. Would the trade have fallen apart if Bloom had demanded Lux? Maybe. But we all know now that sticking to that position would have almost certainly have cost the Dodgers their first championship in 32 years.
I get it, trading for the right prospects requires a lot of luck, but I don’t think even Bloom would suggest it’s all luck. Clearly it requires two other things that are requisite for a successful GM: negotiation skills and talent evaluation. This is what GMs are paid for and their report card is the return they get on their trades. On this key trade, Bloom gets a C- at best. A lot of his trades are still incompletes but of the ones that can be graded there have been far too many with poor grades and only one clear win so far. That was not what the team was hoping to get out of him when he hired.
Six days after Mookie Betts was traded, MLB released their top prospect list for 2020 and Gavin Lux ranked behind only Wander Franco as the #2 prospect in all of baseball. That same off-season, BP ranked Lux at #3 overall and BA was the most pessimistic on Lux at #4 overall.

Jeter Downs was #44 (MLB), #86 (BA), and outside the top 100 (BP). There's just no way Lux was ever a realistic topic of conversation.

That said, maybe instead Bloom could've demanded a pitcher like Tony Gonsolin or Josiah Gray and the Dodgers would've caved. I remember being a bit frustrated at the time that the farm seemed to have such little quality pitching and the Mookie trade only got us position players.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,235
Not sure Bloom "blew" the Fabian pick in the traditional sense of blowing NBA/NFL/NHL draft picks. MLB is unique in that the Red Sox got a free do over; the only drawback is that they had to wait another year to get their player. And the total slot money for all the picks is somewhat lower for the Sox this year than last. Both of these drawbacks are really minor annoyances than anything else.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,139
Trashing?JFC take it easy, scottynofaultofbloom. He blew a pick, it’s not the worst thing in the world.
You were still harping on how they made a huge mistake and royally screwed up months later despite people explaining how they didn't really lose much of anything. Seems fair to characterize that as trashing.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,590
This is probably my main takeaway. It's legitimately hard to find a lot of top tier players who were acquired in trade as a minor leaguer (so no MLB experience prior) - the vast majority are draftees, international free agents, or players acquired via free agency or trade after they had shown their chops in the MLB. Hitting wise, I went through probably the top 40-50 hitters this year and I think the only one who met the "traded for as a minor leaguer from another org" who is still on that team qualifier was Yordan Alvarez - there may be others who did get traded as minor leaguers, succeed, and then left (like a Josh Naylor) but it's still less common than I thought it was. Two of the best pitchers this year (Alcantara and Fried) both fit that model, but if we were judging either of those trades 2 years out - Alcantara would be in the midst of his first good year and Max Fried is putting up middling numbers in the Sally League outside of the Top 100 prospects.

There's still a lot of time left on the evaluation of these prospects and trades and getting above average starters without trading huge assets (I'd argue Betts was the only one of those Bloom had traded) is...real tough.

He wouldn't be in the top 40-50 this year because he has been injured but Fernando Tatis Jr. would qualify as well.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
21,993
Harping? You need a dictionary, Scottyno. I wasn’t harping, I thought it was a bad idea to blow the pick and said it two or three times.

The problem is you don’t think anything Bloom has done warrants any kind of criticism, Scottyno. It’s getting kind of creepy.
 

Sad Sam Jones

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
1,513
I agree, but trades involving players like Betts are pretty rare, and even then it's hard to get apples-to-apples as there are other factors like relative ages and the inclusion of the Price contract. I'd say Seattle did better on the top end when they traded Griffey. Nobody in the haul Bloom got for Betts will likely be more productive than Mike Cameron. On the other hand, Miami fared worse in the Cabrera trade, especially since the only good player they got (old friend Andrew Miller) took forever to produce, elsewhere.
Cleveland received Andres Gimenez, Amed Rosario, Josh Wolf and Isaiah Greene for one year of Francisco Lindor and two years (has turned out to be 1⅓) of Carlos Carrasco. In this case, Carrasco's contract wasn't nearly as bad as Price's, but there were significant concerns about him holding up over a full season. You could also say Cleveland was backed further into a corner because the entire world knew there was zero chance of them extending or resigning Lindor.

Gimenez was considered the top return for Lindor and is now a 23-year-old All-Star second baseman who will probably soon be the long-term shortstop. Rosario had three years of team control left and is an above-average hitting shortstop who's also become a solid defender there. He's likely to be converted into another prospect or two either this week or in the off-season. Wolf and Greene are starting to look like busts to this point, particularly Wolf, who's lost most of the season to injury and couldn't locate the strike zone. However, both are young Lo-A ball players, so they still have plenty of time to turn things around. Over all, it appears to be a better haul than the Betts/Price deal.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,594
Harping? You need a dictionary, Scottyno. I wasn’t harping, I thought it was a bad idea to blow the pick and said it two or three times.

The problem is you don’t think anything Bloom has done warrants any kind of criticism, Scottyno. It’s getting kind of creepy.
You have been asked several times to explain how Bloom blew a pick given that the pick just rolls over to the next year and that in this specific case, they could have picked Fabian again but picked someone else, and signed him for more money than Fabian ended up getting from Baltimore.

I will also point out the fact that the failure rate of the 40th pick is so high (there have been exactly five that have produced a career WAR higher than 5) that use of the word "blown" is overly dramatic and suggests you are just carrying on the same old grudge. Did the Celtics blow the 2022 draft if JD Davidson doesn't work out?
 
Last edited:

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
21,993
You have been asked several times to explain how Bloom blew a pick given that the pick just rolls over to the next year and that in this specific case, they could have picked Fabian again but picked someone else, and signed him for more money than Fabian ended up getting from Baltimore.

I will also point out the fact that the failure rate of the 40th pick is so high (there have been exactly five that have produced a career WAR higher than 5) that use of the word "blown" is overly dramatic and suggests you are just carrying on the same old grudge. Did the Celtics blow the 2022 draft if JD Davidson doesn't work out?
Of course not and you know your Celtics example is apples and oranges. Drafting someone in the second round and not signing them is an error. Teams should not throw away high draft choices when they need to restock their farm system.

If you think that’s okay, then I don’t know what to tell you.

and BTW I’ve explained my position several times. You don’t agree. And that’s fine but don’t make it sound like I’m ranting, raving and carrying on about this for a year because I haven’t.

I personally think the Sox could use another high draft pick in the farm system. A team cant have enough cost controlled youngsters. Apparently you don’t. And that’s cool. Agree to disagree.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,139
I personally think the Sox could use another high draft pick in the farm system. A team cant have enough cost controlled youngsters. Apparently you don’t. And that’s cool. Agree to disagree.
They have the exact same number of high draft picks that they would have had otherwise. In fact they were probably have more talent in the system the way it worked out because instead of going over slot to sign Fabian and sacrificing that money somewhere else they signed someone at slot with that pick which meant the money could go to signing someone else they probably didn't expect to be able to sign.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
21,993
So this was all according to plan? That’s what you’re saying? Because I think if you ask Bloom today, he probably wouldn’t have made taht pick.

Fabian (or whomever) would have another year in the system. He’s be closer to a call up. And how do we know the person they took this year is as good as him? (And vice versa, of course).

Its not quite the even sum that you think.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
3,103
One thing I’d add to the Fabian pick conversation is that there was a pretty big knowledge gap between 2021 and 2022 because of pandemic-related scouting restrictions.

Relative to a normal draft, I’d imagine Bloom and co. did not mind the downside of kicking a protected pick down the road one year when their scouting teams would surely be more informed.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
By far the most consequential trade Bloom has made was the Mookie deal. It’s also the one over which he had the least control; the need to move Price limited his options. Looking at the rest of the trades collectively, we didn’t give up much and didn’t get much.

One pattern I’ve noticed is that Bloom seems to place a lot of stock in his (or the organization’s) ability to evaluate other teams’ prospects. I’m sure he could have gotten prospects for Renfroe that we’re more highly touted than the two guys Milwaukee gave us, and the Khalil Lee deal with the Mets was two nickels for a quarter if you go by consensus prospect rankings. It’s too early to tell if his (or the organization’s) judgments were better than the conventional wisdom.
 

Diamond Don Aase

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2001
897
Merrimack Valley
They have the exact same number of high draft picks that they would have had otherwise. In fact they were probably have more talent in the system the way it worked out because instead of going over slot to sign Fabian and sacrificing that money somewhere else they signed someone at slot with that pick which meant the money could go to signing someone else they probably didn't expect to be able to sign.
The opportunity cost of drafting Fabian and failing to sign him was not simply a year’s deferral. Andrew Abbott, Edwin Arroyo, Robert Gasser, and Zack Gelof were all drafted in that same second round and signed for less than the Red Sox’ slot, significantly less in the case of all but Arroyo. Those savings against slot could have been used to sign 13th-rounder Zach Ehrhard, who instead went to Oklahoma State and was a unanimous selection to the Big 12 All-Freshman Team; 15th-rounder Payton Green, who instead went to NC State and started all 57 games for the Wolfpack; or 20th-rounder Josh Hood, who instead transferred to NC State and also started all 57 games for the Wolfpack. Hood, a Senior shortstop, was chosen by the Mariners in the sixth round this year and signed for $250K, slightly less than slot.

Boston could have immediately added two or even three promising players to its minor-league system but, instead, took a risk for Fabian despite bonus demands far outstripping a performance that included more red flags than a Chinese New Year’s parade. That the Red Sox received a compensation pick a year later mitigates the mistake but does not correct it.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,235
The opportunity cost of drafting Fabian and failing to sign him was not simply a year’s deferral. Andrew Abbott, Edwin Arroyo, Robert Gasser, and Zack Gelof were all drafted in that same second round and signed for less than the Red Sox’ slot, significantly less in the case of all but Arroyo. Those savings against slot could have been used to sign 13th-rounder Zach Ehrhard, who instead went to Oklahoma State and was a unanimous selection to the Big 12 All-Freshman Team; 15th-rounder Payton Green, who instead went to NC State and started all 57 games for the Wolfpack; or 20th-rounder Josh Hood, who instead transferred to NC State and also started all 57 games for the Wolfpack. Hood, a Senior shortstop, was chosen by the Mariners in the sixth round this year and signed for $250K, slightly less than slot.

Boston could have immediately added two or even three promising players to its minor-league system but, instead, took a risk for Fabian despite bonus demands far outstripping a performance that included more red flags than a Chinese New Year’s parade. That the Red Sox received a compensation pick a year later mitigates the mistake but does not correct it.
I assume both Bloom and every other MLB team had much higher regard of Fabian than any of the players you just mentioned, all of whom are still unlikely to ever sniff a major league ballpark. Many players in those low rounds decide to take a chance on themselves. Even Hood, the guy who did get a nice bump by waiting, will be unlikely to ever earn a major league paycheck.

So this was all according to plan? That’s what you’re saying? Because I think if you ask Bloom today, he probably wouldn’t have made taht pick.

Fabian (or whomever) would have another year in the system. He’s be closer to a call up. And how do we know the person they took this year is as good as him? (And vice versa, of course).

Its not quite the even sum that you think.
Sure, Fabian had some red flags with regards to signability. But, even so, the overwhelming majority of second round picks amount to zilch* . So while drafting high in that round it makes a lot of sense to attempt to swing for the fences and attempt to land a guy who you think may eventually grow into a first round talent. It didn't work out that way, but they got to take another bite at the apple, which no doubt plays into the calculus here. If you know you get a second bite if the swing misses, why wouldn't you at least take the chance? I am willing to out on a limb and state that Bloom did take this into account when making a pick on a player who was probably less than 50/50 to sign.

*: 2nd rounders with more than 3 career bWAR since 2010:

2010:
Vince Velasquez (4.7)
Jedd Gyorko (9.2)
Jimmy Nelson (4.2)
Drew Smyly (10.9)
Andrelton Simmons (37.1; >2/3'rds attributed by BR to outfield defense)
Derek Dietrich (5.4)
[Honorable mention to Brandon Workman at 2.6]

2011:
Josh Bell (9.4 at top of the round)
Brad Miller (6.6)
Adrian Houser (3.2)
Daniel Norris (5.2)
James McCann (7.4)
Nick Ahmed (12.4)

2012:
Alex Wood (14)
Carson Kelly (3.2)

2013:
Mitch Garver (7.7)
Danny Jansen (4.9)
Luke Voit (5.4)

2014:
Alex Verdugo (6.9)
Spencer Turnbull (4.8)

2015:
Brady Singer (3.5)
Tyler Alexander (3.5)
AJ Minter (3.2)

2016:
Bryan Reynolds (12.3)
Pete Alonso (12.8)
Bo Bichette (10.5)

2017:
Daulton Varsho (3.6)
 
Aug 20, 2007
269
Boston
I tried to make this point the other night in the game thread. You have to judge the Betts trade not to how the return has fared, but to the return other teams received from similar trades.

It's one thing to say Verdugo, Downs and Wong haven't set the world on fire, we can all see that. It's another to say the return has proven to be far below what others teams received when trading off players of Betts stature -- that's how you can judge how Bloom did versus what other GMs pulled off.
People already mentioned the Goldschmidt and Lindor trades. The only other recent superstar trades I can think of are Giancarlo Stanton and Nolan Arenado.

Stanton netted the Marlins three players - Starlin Castro, Jorge Guzman, and Jose Devers. Castro played two not-so-great seasons for Miami (1.7bWar and 1.1 bWar.) Guzman pitched 2.2 innings for the Marlins and is currently in the San Fransisco Giants minor league system as organizational filler. Devers is currently slugging .276 in the AA.

Arenado netted the Rockies five players - Austin Gomber, Elehuris Montero, Mateo Gil, Tony Locey, and Jake Sommers. Gil, Locey, and Sommers are all stuck in the minor not reguarded as great prospects. Gomber has pitched 210 inning for Colorado over the last two seasons; his ERA over that span is 5.10. Montero made it to the majors earlier this year and struggled. He has shown some promise in the Rockies minor league system (slugging over .500 each of his last two seasons at AAA); he is currently their fifth best prospect according to BaseballAmerica.

Between Arenado and Stanton, only one player traded for even looks like he might have a decent future.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,495
Is there a reason he omitted Verdugo? Previous MLB service time, maybe? But that would also apply to Pivetta.
He did it because Verdugo was starting for the Dodgers when he was traded, Pivetta was in the minors (alternate site).
Honestly Pivetta shouldn't be on the list to me, I think he was just being generous to give Bloom a win.
 

Diamond Don Aase

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2001
897
Merrimack Valley
I assume both Bloom and every other MLB team had much higher regard of Fabian than any of the players you just mentioned, all of whom are still unlikely to ever sniff a major league ballpark. Many players in those low rounds decide to take a chance on themselves. Even Hood, the guy who did get a nice bump by waiting, will be unlikely to ever earn a major league paycheck.



Sure, Fabian had some red flags with regards to signability. But, even so, the overwhelming majority of second round picks amount to zilch* .
I strongly suspect there were scouting directors that would have preferred Arroyo to Fabian, even independent of bonus demands. But the larger point is that the Red Sox had almost $2 million to spend in a draft where they enjoyed the unusual confluence of a high position and a talent pool deepened by the prior draft’s truncated format. This is the same organization that had spent $5-$6 million to acquire Frank German the prior offseason and would spend $15-$16 million to acquire the tandem of Alex Binelas and David Hamilton the following offseason. While the opportunity to acquire multiple comparable talents at a fraction of the cost was not lost by drafting Fabian and failing to sign him, it was diminished by the corresponding deferral even before considering the consequences of the interim year of development.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,139
He did it because Verdugo was starting for the Dodgers when he was traded, Pivetta was in the minors (alternate site).
Honestly Pivetta shouldn't be on the list to me, I think he was just being generous to give Bloom a win.
Pivetta had been barely been in the minors a week when he was traded after 3+ seasons in the majors and started 2020 with the Phillies. Seems like quite the technicality to count one and not the other. Verdugo was much closer to being a prospect at that time than Pivetta was.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,495
Pivetta had been barely been in the minors a week when he was traded after 3+ seasons in the majors and started 2020 with the Phillies. Seems like quite the technicality to count one and not the other. Verdugo was much closer to being a prospect at that time than Pivetta was.
Oh I agree, I think neither is a prospect, just saying what Speier was using as his criteria
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,921
Portland
I had actually started a thread breaking down each trade he had made since taking over but lost it.

Objectively speaking, he has acquired 7 of their top 30 Soxprospects via trade and several other from 31 to 60 who most likely won't make a difference. De La Rosa may be an exception, but who knows? They needed depth as part of the soft rebuild and they have gotten it. Even if one of them hits, it's a success because they aren't throwing away a couple mill at washed up guys like Marwin Gonzalez and maybe getting marginal improvements for less money.

For a team that I think will spend to the cap when the time is right, that stuff adds up. Some of you will disagree, but John Henry has always shown a willingness to spend when things are looking good, and right now, they don't have the comparable talent (thanks in a major way to an extreme whiff with Chris Sale) as at least three of the other teams. If he missed his window by not pouncing earlier, then I think it's fair to be more critical, but I am on board with his approach and will reserve judgement through next off season.

The ones most open to questioning from my point of view are the cost controlled players like Benintendi and Hunter Renfroe. Could they have used Benny this season? Sure. Would he have been a difference maker in making the playoffs? I don't believe so, but YMMV. I think Binelas having a chance at being a minimum salary bench guy with potential for more is a good get. They don't acquire him without taking on JBJ.

Wincowski may not be the most exciting guy out there, but if he's their more effective and cheaper Matt Andriese guy next season, or maybe he's a 3rd or 4th piece for a small market team then I consider that a win.

@nvalvo has it right though - getting Whitlock and signing him to a ridiculously team friendly deal and then developing John Schreiber into a dominant reliever for absolutely nothing is how you win without rolling the dice on free agent relievers. Signing Miguel Bleis is another potential difference maker.

TL/DR I think the majority of his trades have been inconsequential, with one huge win, a loss (Springs) and some pushes depending on what your expectations were with Betts and Benintendi's returns. I think Bloom has made a lot of non-flashy but incremental improvements getting under the cap without truly taking a risk.

And FWIW, Springs has struggled over his past 4 starts, giving up 11 ER in his last 18 innings.
 
Last edited:

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
750
Stumptown via Chelmsford
TL/DR I think the majority of his trades have been inconsequential, with one huge win, a loss (Springs) and some pushes depending on what your expectations were with Betts and Benintendi's returns.
I enjoyed reading your post. I am surprised, however, that you don't consider the Renfroe-JBJ deal to be a second tally in Bloom's loss column. Was securing a minimum salary bench guy with potential truly worth going over the 2022 salary cap limit with a somewhat expensive starting outfielder with anemic offensive production?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,921
Portland
I enjoyed reading your post. I am surprised, however, that you don't consider the Renfroe-JBJ deal to be a second tally in Bloom's loss column. Was securing a minimum salary bench guy with potential truly worth going over the 2022 salary cap limit with a somewhat expensive starting outfielder with anemic offensive production?
I would fault Bloom or Cora for trotting out incredibly ineffective players for far too long, but I think it's too early to call it a win or a loss because I like Binelas' potential. And I think they'll get under the cap anyhow but could be mistaken on the date they need to be at for that to happen. In which case, ya you're right.

I also believe JBJ would be gone by now if Hernandez was healthy and Duran showed anything whatsoever.
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,757
Binelas is hitting .147 in AA with a 33% K rate. Maybe he’s a contributor at the big league level someday, but seems like an optimistic take at this point.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
3,103
Binelas is hitting .147 in AA with a 33% K rate. Maybe he’s a contributor at the big league level someday, but seems like an optimistic take at this point.
These numbers aren’t ideal, but you should probably include that Binelas has an Eastern League-lowest .154 BABIP and a quite high 14.4 BB% (which ranks 19th of 158 hitters).
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
9,236
These numbers aren’t ideal, but you should probably include that Binelas has an Eastern League-lowest .154 BABIP and a quite high 14.4 BB% (which ranks 19th of 158 hitters).
Whenever I read something like this, I think "there are two reasons that someone's BAPIP might be low - bad luck or bad talent." My BAPIP in the Eastern League would be .000 and luck would have nothing to do with it.

Wade Boggs had a .344 career BAPIP. His contemporary Marc Sullivan had a .234 BAPIP.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,235
I strongly suspect there were scouting directors that would have preferred Arroyo to Fabian, even independent of bonus demands. But the larger point is that the Red Sox had almost $2 million to spend in a draft where they enjoyed the unusual confluence of a high position and a talent pool deepened by the prior draft’s truncated format. This is the same organization that had spent $5-$6 million to acquire Frank German the prior offseason and would spend $15-$16 million to acquire the tandem of Alex Binelas and David Hamilton the following offseason. While the opportunity to acquire multiple comparable talents at a fraction of the cost was not lost by drafting Fabian and failing to sign him, it was diminished by the corresponding deferral even before considering the consequences of the interim year of development.
Given the team has stated multiple times that they are looking at a long term approach to a sustainable talent pipeline in the minors, I don't believe the deferred year of development is that big of a deal here, especially in a draft round that is very much scratching lottery tickets.
 

TheYellowDart5

Hustle and bustle
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2003
8,884
NYC
The return on previous Betts-like trades suggests pretty strongly that it's borderline impossible for the team giving up the star player to come out ahead, even if you factor in all the years of team control. Players like Betts are special, and the odds of any of the players you get in return for him reaching that level of performance are so small that the math likely never works in your favor. That's doubly so when you water down the return by stapling a big contract to it.

Trading Betts was driven by ownership, so it's not as if that's all on Bloom, but it does reflect how hard it is to build a good team if those are the moves you essentially have to make, and it looks more and more like Devers (and maybe Bogaerts) will be the next iteration of that. You can't win short-term if that's how you operate, and it makes any miss that much more painful. So long as the Red Sox play poverty, the hit rate on trades is going to have to be a lot higher than what's been the case so far.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
3,103
Whenever I read something like this, I think "there are two reasons that someone's BAPIP might be low - bad luck or bad talent." My BAPIP in the Eastern League would be .000 and luck would have nothing to do with it.

Wade Boggs had a .344 career BAPIP. His contemporary Marc Sullivan had a .234 BAPIP.
If we were talking about a noodle bat kinda player, I’d agree with you. Binelas however is known for his garish exit velocities. I don’t know anywhere that publicly tracks them at the AA level, so maybe something is off there, but I don’t think he’s fundamentally collapsed or anything.

What does seem to be up in this recent AA stint is his groundball rate, so he has to work on that. But if he’s hitting the ball hard and has a .154 BABIP (and isn’t chasing, as his 14.4% walk rate indicates) I’d expect that to normalize at some point.
 

TheYellowDart5

Hustle and bustle
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2003
8,884
NYC
I'm just glad we're discussing the Mookie trade, seems like there's still a lot to say there.
It's the most important trade of Bloom's time here and one that'll define his tenure, fairly or unfairly, for a while. Besides, beats talking about the current team, doesn't it?
 

Diamond Don Aase

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2001
897
Merrimack Valley
Imagine if SOSH was around for the Ruth trade….
The Ruth trade is fine. Babe clearly did not want to stay in Boston and Ed Barrow and Harry Frazee surely will allocate the savings toward retaining Herb Pennock and Waite Hoyt.

This board really should show a little more faith in an ownership group that brought a World Championship to the city only a couple years ago. This repeated intimation that they would neglect the Red Sox in favor of other investment ventures is No, No, Nonsense.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,432
If we were talking about a noodle bat kinda player, I’d agree with you. Binelas however is known for his garish exit velocities. I don’t know anywhere that publicly tracks them at the AA level, so maybe something is off there, but I don’t think he’s fundamentally collapsed or anything.

What does seem to be up in this recent AA stint is his groundball rate, so he has to work on that. But if he’s hitting the ball hard and has a .154 BABIP (and isn’t chasing, as his 14.4% walk rate indicates) I’d expect that to normalize at some point.
.154 is obviously some bad luck but he's not exactly fast out of the gate either. He's probably going to have lower than average BAbips. With that said, if you gave him average BAbip luck (.300), his line in Portland is .232/.345/.453.

Also 317 of his 372 PA came against older pitchers.

The power is legit, anyway. And he did the whole "reach AA in 2 years after being drafted" thing that you look for in college players.

With prospects, you want as many as possible because some will work out. Just hard to know which ones if they aren't elite.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
9,236
The Ruth trade is fine. Babe clearly did not want to stay in Boston and Ed Barrow and Harry Frazee surely will allocate the savings toward retaining Herb Pennock and Waite Hoyt.

This board really should show a little more faith in an ownership group that brought a World Championship to the city only a couple years ago. This repeated intimation that they would neglect the Red Sox in favor of other investment ventures is No, No, Nonsense.
This is excellent!