|
Post by bois on Dec 6, 2021 11:50:49 GMT -4
Other than Bauer who was suspended all year, most of LA's regulars were guys they developed or traded for thanks to their player development. None of the moves were blockbuster ones, just pointing out that flashy signings in FA more often than not don't lead to success, I think Texas will be one of them despite spending half a billion. I think big market teams need a blend on smart FA(some will be big money) along with self developed players and trades. Most of LA's success has been due to their farm system, which has been one of the best the last 10 years. They traded for Max Scherzer and Trea Turner. They've regularly added to their team over the last few years. You dont need to sign FA's to spend money/assets on improving your team. LA's success comes down to spending resources. Whether it be on MLB talent or on their farm system. They've regularly spent big and invested big. Never thought a Boston Red Sox fan would be so touchy about pointing out their team hasnt really done much to improve lately. Is that not the truth? Or am I missing something? Because it really does seem like ownerships efforts are clearly distracted by trying to grow their overall portfolio. And that all seems to line up with when they decided to move Betts and Price. Ironically enough to LA lol
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 6, 2021 11:55:17 GMT -4
They traded for Max Scherzer and Trea Turner. They've regularly added to their team over the last few years. You dont need to sign FA's to spend money/assets on improving your team. LA's success comes down to spending resources. Whether it be on MLB talent or on their farm system. They've regularly spent big and invested big. Never thought a Boston Red Sox fan would be so touchy about pointing out their team hasnt really done much to improve lately. Is that not the truth? Or am I missing something? Because it really does seem like ownerships efforts are clearly distracted by trying to grow their overall portfolio. And that all seems to line up with when they decided to move Betts and Price. Ironically enough to LA lol Yep lol I'm not a Red Sox fan...but if I was i'd be just agreeing that they decided to take a different route with the Betts move. Because its not like they immediately pivoted and spent it on others. They kept their very solid core together and are seeing what they have in their system. Which is fine. But its a bit of a change from their usual plan of spending and acquiring top talent to try and win. Toronto and Seattle are signing FA's to 9 figure deals and Boston isn't. That's a huge shift. No matter how anyone wants to justify/explain/talk around it.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Dec 6, 2021 12:06:52 GMT -4
Other than Bauer who was suspended all year, most of LA's regulars were guys they developed or traded for thanks to their player development. None of the moves were blockbuster ones, just pointing out that flashy signings in FA more often than not don't lead to success, I think Texas will be one of them despite spending half a billion. I think big market teams need a blend on smart FA(some will be big money) along with self developed players and trades. Most of LA's success has been due to their farm system, which has been one of the best the last 10 years. They traded for Max Scherzer and Trea Turner. They've regularly added to their team over the last few years. You dont need to sign FA's to spend money/assets on improving your team. LA's success comes down to spending resources. Whether it be on MLB talent or on their farm system. They've regularly spent big and invested big. Never thought a Boston Red Sox fan would be so touchy about pointing out their team hasnt really done much to improve lately. Is that not the truth? Or am I missing something? Because it really does seem like ownerships efforts are clearly distracted by trying to grow their overall portfolio. And that all seems to line up with when they decided to move Betts and Price. I was just pointing out free agency is not always the best place to spend resources, especially when teams are overpaying liker crazy. LA used their very good farm system to add Turner and Scherzer, not everybody was willing to give up 2 stud prospects and 2 other B prospects. They used their financial resources to get 2 good prospects from Milwaukee by eating Bradley Jr's contract. They did the same with Ottavino. They didn't trade Betts because they couldn't afford him, he was traded because he didn't want to talk contract before he hit FA so they wanted to get assets rather than lose him for nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 6, 2021 12:10:54 GMT -4
They traded for Max Scherzer and Trea Turner. They've regularly added to their team over the last few years. You dont need to sign FA's to spend money/assets on improving your team. LA's success comes down to spending resources. Whether it be on MLB talent or on their farm system. They've regularly spent big and invested big. Never thought a Boston Red Sox fan would be so touchy about pointing out their team hasnt really done much to improve lately. Is that not the truth? Or am I missing something? Because it really does seem like ownerships efforts are clearly distracted by trying to grow their overall portfolio. And that all seems to line up with when they decided to move Betts and Price. I was just pointing out free agency is not always the best place to spend resources, especially when teams are overpaying liker crazy. They used their financial resources to get 2 good prospects from Milwaukee by eating bradley Jr's contract. They did the same with Ottavino. They didn't trade Betts because they couldn't afford him, he was traded because he didn't want to talk contract before he hit FA so they wanted to get assets rather than lose him for nothing. We know that. My point is they had the money to happily sign Betts and keep Price. But they moved them. And didnt spend the money to try and win necessarily. They spent it buying prospects as you point out. Not buying #2 pitchers or going after a Sale replacement when he was hurt. Thats a change for an organization that seemed to put every resource on the field to try and win since 2000 or so.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Dec 6, 2021 12:13:14 GMT -4
I was just pointing out free agency is not always the best place to spend resources, especially when teams are overpaying liker crazy. They used their financial resources to get 2 good prospects from Milwaukee by eating bradley Jr's contract. They did the same with Ottavino. They didn't trade Betts because they couldn't afford him, he was traded because he didn't want to talk contract before he hit FA so they wanted to get assets rather than lose him for nothing. We know that. My point is they had the money to happily sign Betts and keep Price. But they moved them. And didnt spend the money to try and win necessarily. They spent it buying prospects as you point out. Not buying #2 pitchers or going after a Sale replacement when he was hurt. Thats a change for an organization that seemed to put every resource on the field to try and win since 2000 or so. They are going for sustainable success by upgrading the farm system that they used to add guys like Sale Kimbrel etc that dropped from top 5 to bottom 5-10. At some point you can't go all in every year, which is the point they were at.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 6, 2021 12:48:58 GMT -4
We know that. My point is they had the money to happily sign Betts and keep Price. But they moved them. And didnt spend the money to try and win necessarily. They spent it buying prospects as you point out. Not buying #2 pitchers or going after a Sale replacement when he was hurt. Thats a change for an organization that seemed to put every resource on the field to try and win since 2000 or so. They are going for sustainable success by upgrading the farm system that they used to add guys like Sale Kimbrel etc that dropped from top 5 to bottom 5-10. At some point you can't go all in every year, which is the point they were at. Right. Thats the point I made 4-5 days ago. No matter what you say they're trying to do, and I do agree that they're trying to upgrade the farm system, but they stopped spending on proven MLB talent like they were. They pivoted from big spending on the field and business wise put their resources into growing their company...tried with MLSE and ended up in Pittsburgh.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Dec 6, 2021 13:04:43 GMT -4
They are going for sustainable success by upgrading the farm system that they used to add guys like Sale Kimbrel etc that dropped from top 5 to bottom 5-10. At some point you can't go all in every year, which is the point they were at. Right. Thats the point I made 4-5 days ago. No matter what you say they're trying to do, and I do agree that they're trying to upgrade the farm system, but they stopped spending on proven MLB talent like they were. They pivoted from big spending on the field and business wise put their resources into growing their company...tried with MLSE and ended up in Pittsburgh. You can't really say they stopped spending when they will have a top 5 payroll around 200M, they just had most of their guys signed with no key guys in FA...Toronto had Ray and Semien so they went and got a SP.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 6, 2021 13:49:09 GMT -4
Right. Thats the point I made 4-5 days ago. No matter what you say they're trying to do, and I do agree that they're trying to upgrade the farm system, but they stopped spending on proven MLB talent like they were. They pivoted from big spending on the field and business wise put their resources into growing their company...tried with MLSE and ended up in Pittsburgh. You can't really say they stopped spending when they will have a top 5 payroll around 200M, they just had most of their guys signed with no key guys in FA...Toronto had Ray and Semien so they went and got a SP. They stopped trying to put themselves over the top. We can play semantics all day. You know exactly what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Dec 6, 2021 14:29:22 GMT -4
You can't really say they stopped spending when they will have a top 5 payroll around 200M, they just had most of their guys signed with no key guys in FA...Toronto had Ray and Semien so they went and got a SP. They stopped trying to put themselves over the top. We can play semantics all day. You know exactly what I mean. You can put yourself over the top without spending wildly on the top 6-10 free agents, Atlanta proved that. I'm sure once JDM and sale come off the books they will be more aggressive in free agency.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 6, 2021 14:44:19 GMT -4
They stopped trying to put themselves over the top. We can play semantics all day. You know exactly what I mean. You can put yourself over the top without spending wildly on the top 6-10 free agents, Atlanta proved that. I'm sure once JDM and sale come off the books they will be more aggressive in free agency. Why would they be more aggressive if they can win without spending wildly? All Atlanta proved is what we all know anyway. Every year there are a good 10-15 teams who can win. My entire point, which you seemed to take issue with, was how Boston stopped being a major FA player. You went on about how they still spent even though that wasnt the argument. Then you said Atlanta won so why spend on the top FA's? Now you're back saying when Boston will spend on top FA's again. Which was the point I made...that they weren't and their biggest acquisition was an NHL team. So we've come full circle and you're now telling us when they team that still spends and is a top payroll will decide to spend again after arguing that they never stopped spending. Makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Dec 6, 2021 15:03:07 GMT -4
You can put yourself over the top without spending wildly on the top 6-10 free agents, Atlanta proved that. I'm sure once JDM and sale come off the books they will be more aggressive in free agency. Why would they be more aggressive if they can win without spending wildly? All Atlanta proved is what we all know anyway. Every year there are a good 10-15 teams who can win. My entire point, which you seemed to take issue with, was how Boston stopped being a major FA player. You went on about how they still spent even though that wasnt the argument. Then you said Atlanta won so why spend on the top FA's? Now you're back saying when Boston will spend on top FA's again. Which was the point I made...that they weren't and their biggest acquisition was an NHL team. So we've come full circle and you're now telling us when they team that still spends and is a top payroll will decide to spend again after arguing that they never stopped spending. Makes perfect sense. My point is that they didn't completely change philosophy, they just didn't have huge holes to fill worth overpaying for top FA's, plus they already had a big payroll. Bloom wants to get them to a point where they can pick and chose which FA's to go hard on instead of having big holes every year and needing to overpay for top FA's. Plus most years, some of the best signings are 2nd or 3rd wave FA's.
|
|