What the Os did at the deadline will matter

[Sports Guy]

9 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

I don't think your definition of 'risk averse' matches a portfolio manager's definition.

In 2022, most of us were hoping for ways to raise the ceiling.  We got an innings eater and clubhouse guy.  And he did so boldly.

Same story in 2023.  Another innings eater and a low K%/high C% vet.  Then we added a future Game 1 SP at the deadline (except a year early).  And he did so boldly.

2024 saw a shift because I think the risk wasn't with the floor.  It was with not having a high enough ceiling.  Plus the market timing was perfect (like Buffet backstopping BOA during the 2009 financial crisis).  We got Burnes.  And he did so boldly.

Up to now it's mostly been on a shoestring budget.  And has always been about the Rookie Integration Program to provide the core.  We're here.  Adley, Gunnar, Westburg, and Cowser are the core/floor with current vets as supplement pieces (platoony types with Mounty and Ced's defense as something more).  Holliday, HK, and Mayo are shots on goal for the next level. 

Grayson and Eflin are strong 1-2.  Kremer is a solid #3 for any team but plays up as a #4.  I would argue that we see Povich become that guys too but still TBD.  And we have some SP depth issues, even with Bradish (but that's quite the silver bullet).  Clearly a position of need.  Are the IP needs covered with a Snell?  Are the upside needs covered with a Manaea?  What's the biggest risk factor that needs to he averted?

Will this off-season be different with new ownership?  With new trade and FA market conditions?  With the team needs?  With industry trends?  With budgetary restrictions in fan wallets?

 

We don’t need a Snell or Burnes to win the WS in 2025.  I do think we need to another solid starter…that could be Eovaldi, it could be Pivetta or several other potential guys out there.

What Snell or Burnes would do is give us a higher margin for error. I don’t think they increase our ceiling because our ceiling is a WS title with or without that elite guy but that elite guy does help cover up some things if guys don’t develop as quickly or we have injuries or anything along those lines.

 

[btdart20]

39 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

We don’t need a Snell or Burnes to win the WS in 2025.  I do think we need to another solid starter…that could be Eovaldi, it could be Pivetta or several other potential guys out there.

What Snell or Burnes would do is give us a higher margin for error. I don’t think they increase our ceiling because our ceiling is a WS title with or without that elite guy but that elite guy does help cover up some things if guys don’t develop as quickly or we have injuries or anything along those lines.

 

No disagreement here. 

Signing a Pivetta or whoever from a non-Burnesian tier doesn't mean Elias is 'risk averse' (other than the incomplete common usage).

[btdart20]

Just now, btdart20 said:

No disagreement here. 

Signing a Pivetta or whoever from a non-Burnesian tier doesn't mean Elias is 'risk averse' (other than the incomplete common usage).

Check that: he is 'risk averse' but not in the common usage.

[oriolediehard]

1 hour ago, btdart20 said:

No disagreement here. 

Signing a Pivetta or whoever from a non-Burnesian tier doesn't mean Elias is 'risk averse' (other than the incomplete common usage).

Pivetta was mediocre in Boston, why would he be better for us?  Does anybody remember how mediocre we were after the allstar break? Does anybody remember how weak our hitting or scoring runs were? This is crying out we need alot of improvement if we want to smell the WS in 2025!  Rubinstein is not Angelos.  If anyone thinks we will win with doing only petty moves, are in for a rude awakening! It is easy to say we will win or get to the WS in 2025 when we aren't playing anybody now.  I know alot of you won't like what I wrote, but it is the truth.

Edited 6 hours ago by oriolediehard

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, btdart20 said:

Check that: he is 'risk averse' but not in the common usage.

I’m fine if they add Pivetta …but not at the expense of Burnes. If Burnes departs you are back looking for an ace. So your looking for another trade to send off assets or giving millions to a lesser guy.

[Roll Tide]

4 minutes ago, oriolediehard said:

Pivetta was mediocre in Boston, why would he be better for us?  Does anybody remember how mediocre we were after the allstar break? Does anybody remember how weak our hitting or scoring runs were? This is crying out we need alot of improvement if we want to smell the WS in 2025!  Rubinstein is not Angelos.  If anyone thinks we will win with doing only petty moves, are in for a rude awakening! It is easy to say we wii win or get to the WS in 2025 when we aren't playing anybody now.  I know alot of you won't like what I wrote, but it is the truth.

Pivetta has a 1.12 WHIP over his last 2 seasons. It’s shocking how mediocre his numbers are considering that. Looking at his games logs he has a handful of 5 ER performances and also has 7 ER.  So im wondering what happens to him in those starts? Bad inherited runners by their relievers. Choking with RISP? His BB9 was in the 2.2 range while he was 3.2 and in the high 3s low 4s prior. Nothing else looks out of whack with a glance

[btdart20]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

Pivetta has a 1.12 WHIP over his last 2 seasons. It’s shocking how mediocre his numbers are considering that. Looking at his games logs he has a handful of 5 ER performances and also has 7 ER.  So im wondering what happens to him in those starts? Bad inherited runners by their relievers. Choking with RISP? His BB9 was in the 2.2 range while he was 3.2 and in the high 3s low 4s prior. Nothing else looks out of whack with a glance

Looks like a lot of HRs to RHH.  Is the difference between Fenway and OPACY enough?

[Allan Bryant]

7 hours ago, btdart20 said:

I don't think your definition of 'risk averse' matches a portfolio manager's definition.

In 2022, most of us were hoping for ways to raise the ceiling.  We got an innings eater and clubhouse guy.  And he did so boldly.

Same story in 2023.  Another innings eater and a low K%/high C% vet.  Then we added a future Game 1 SP at the deadline (except a year early).  And he did so boldly.

2024 saw a shift because I think the risk wasn't with the floor.  It was with not having a high enough ceiling.  Plus the market timing was perfect (like Buffet backstopping BOA during the 2009 financial crisis).  We got Burnes.  And he did so boldly.

Up to now it's mostly been on a shoestring budget.  And has always been about the Rookie Integration Program to provide the core.  We're here.  Adley, Gunnar, Westburg, and Cowser are the core/floor with current vets as supplement pieces (platoony types with Mounty and Ced's defense as something more).  Holliday, HK, and Mayo are shots on goal for the next level. 

Grayson and Eflin are strong 1-2.  Kremer is a solid #3 for any team but plays up as a #4.  I would argue that we see Povich become that guys too but still TBD.  And we have some SP depth issues, even with Bradish (but that's quite the silver bullet).  Clearly a position of need.  Are the IP needs covered with a Snell?  Are the upside needs covered with a Manaea?  What's the biggest risk factor that needs to he averted?

Will this off-season be different with new ownership?  With new trade and FA market conditions?  With the team needs?  With industry trends?  With budgetary restrictions in fan wallets?

 

It seems like we have different opinions on risk aversion . The moves you listed are the 1 year contracts like Lyles , Kimbrel, Gibson , Frazier , to name a few . I do understand that these occurred during Angelos regime.

’ What the biggest risk factor that needs to be averted ? ‘.  Doing  NOTHING . 

[SteveA]

On 10/25/2024 at 4:47 PM, bpilktree67 said:

Then why even have a farm system if you never going to let your young guys get a chance to make the team.  Povich, McDermott, Young should all be all be traded if you just keep signing starters.  You have to give them a chance to learn and adjust at the major league level.  You want options at that spot to give those guys chances not just block them to never get a chance.  

This is just flat out wrong.

Pitchers get hurt at an alarming rate.   Failing to get starting pitchers just so your 4th and 5th best aren't "blocked" is idiotic.

Every team that hopes to contend should go into the season with 7 or more legitimate potential MLB starters, because some will get hurt, some will perform poorly.