How is Chris Sale doing this spring ? Is he going to be back to his old self or has something been lost along the IL path?

79.5 Wins - OVER
14.5 Sale starts - OVER
24.5 Casas HR - UNDER
3.0 Verdugo WAR - UNDER
Turner/Duvall more HR - Turner
19.5 Whitlock starts - OVER
44.5 Devers doubles - UNDER
94.5 Devers walks - UNDER
Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - September 22, 2023
49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - OVER (meaning worse)

Before taking a swing at these over/unders: I largely share Jose's feelings about our beloved Red Sox. The fan base is in a malaise, caused partially by being in the hangover period following an amazing run from 2001-2018 of our baseball and football teams. I think both the Patriots and Red Sox are in a similar place right now, where the fan base was willing to be patient in the post-championship era, so long as we all feel like there is a plan. It is not clear that either franchise has a plan to climb back to the top in a sustainable way. The fact the Patriots still have Belichick, combined with the even greater heights reached by the Patriots (relative to the Red Sox, or any other sports franchise this century), buys the Pats more slack on their leash than the Red Sox have...

I go into the 2023 baseball season with the following goals for the Red Sox:
- I want them to win a lot of games, obviously, but I'll give up a lot of wins in 2023 for development of younger players, and effective sorting out of who is part of the long-term plan. If we win 87 games and sneak in as a wild card, but it is mainly because Duvall, Turner and Kluber have great years...well, that's OK, but it has nothing to do with building a sustainable winner. If they close the season strong, and rally to an 84-win season, barely missing the playoffs, but the late-season surge happens because Yoshida, Casas, and Bello have great second halves, then I am much happier. It isn't about the number of wins, or if we make the playoffs - it is about progress towards building a winner.

- Verdugo: This is the year we need to figure out if he is more than a 105 OPS+, average power and K/BB ratio, below-average glove and speed guy. If his 2023 looks like his 2021-2022, then we need to upgrade. 2020 Verdugo? Sign me up. But I am skeptical.

- McGuire, Arroyo, Pivetta: Use 2023 to figure out if guys like this are part of the long-term plan. I am optimistic about McGuire; pessimistic about Arroyo; and value Pivetta's unique durability as a real asset in today's game. Having a #5 starter who will consistently give you 30+ starts at slightly below league-average, at a good price point, is a valuable asset for a very good team. I don't like that the team is talking about using him out of the bullpen, because it fails to leverage his greatest asset: durability as a starting pitcher.

79.5 Wins? OVER, barely. Going to the balanced schedule is probably worth a handful of extra wins, by itself.
14.5 Sale starts? UNDER. I'll believe it when I see it.
24.5 Casas HRs? Under. The power is obviously there, but in 2023, I'm more excited about the OBP than the SLG.
3.0 Verdugo WAR? Under. He's average 149 games each of the last two years, and his combined WAR for 21-22 is 3.3. I think he is what he is...and it's maybe a 2-WAR player. Eh.
Turner/Duvall more HRs? Duvall. Turner will be the more valuable hitter overall, but Duvall seems poised to life more HRs out than Turner.
19.5 Whitlock starts? UNDER. I worry about Whitlock's health. The Sale/Whitlock health question is the single biggest 2023 Red Sox variable. If you tell me these two guys combine for 50+ starts, I start getting more excited about the team this year.
44.5 Devers doubles? OVER. We should enjoy the gift that is watching prime Devers hit.
94.5 Devers walks? UNDER. That's a really big number that would reflect a different level of plate discipline, or a different approach to hitting, that seems unlikely.
Mayer MLB debut? Can't imagine it is earlier than late 2024, more like 2025 he gets a shot to take the job during Spring Training.
49.5 Rafaela ranking - OVER (worse). I think he can't hit, is the problem. He has a serious strike zone command problem. It is masked a bit by the fact he is able to make contact with balls out of the strike zone better than the average prospect...the problem is that it results in weak contact, and easy outs. What I've been hearing about him in Spring Training is that the team is getting him to take more pitches. The problem is that they are not takes based on identifying a pitch; they are based on "I am not going to swing at the first pitch of this at bat, to practice not swinging at everything." That's not improved plate discipline. I think he is, at best, at the bottom of the Top 100 at the end of this season. His glove is amazing; I just don't think he can hit.

You all may recall my Devers Double watch last year. Only way he is under this season, with the new anti-shift rules, is if he gets injured again.

Here are mine. I'm looking forward to this season more than most of you, I guess, but I get it.

79.5 Wins - OVER. Mid-80s, in contention for a Wild Card.
14.5 Sale starts - OVER. He heads into the year healthy so what could possibly go wrong?
24.5 Casas HR - OVER. Tough one. I think he is going to swing for the fences a bit more and, if he stays healthy all year, that gets him into the high 20s at least.
3.0 Verdugo WAR - OVER. Another close call. He's a good hitter and appears to have readjusted his approach to fit his strengths.
Turner/Duvall more HR - Duvall. I'm assuming he gets 400+ PA.
19.5 Whitlock starts - OVER??? I added a couple question marks. I think they will give him as much chance as possible to stick in the rotation, but usage, effectiveness in longer outings, and health are all question marks.
44.5 Devers doubles - UNDER. Very close. I think he'll have an excellent year but right around 40 doubles.
94.5 Devers walks - UNDER. The rest of the lineup isn't bad enough to push his walk total this high.
Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - September 23, 2023. One day after VI's guess so that if he debuts any time after that, I am righter than him. (Yes, I watch the Price Is Right, why?)
49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - NA. Cannot be ranked because he will have used up his eligibility on the second half, playing an amazing CF for the big club.

Bonus:
.300 Masataka Yoshida batting average -- OVER. Both ZIPS (.305) and Steamer (.299) project him to have the highest batting average in the AL. I like him.

You all may recall my Devers Double watch last year. Only way he is under this season, with the new anti-shift rules, is if he gets injured again.

Do you mean they won't be able to guard the lines against him as well? Or that the guy in short right took away gap doubles?

I'm looking forward to this season more than most of you, I guess, but I get it.

Same.

Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - September 23, 2023. One day after VI's guess so that if he debuts any time after that, I am righter than him. (Yes, I watch the Price Is Right, why?)

Grrrrrr

.300 Masataka Yoshida batting average -- OVER

I'll take the UNDER on this one but I really want to take the over.

79.5 Wins - Over. Until proven otherwise, this is at least a .500 team. Should have a good team OBP.
14.5 Sale starts - Under. That delivery was never sustainable.
24.5 Casas HR - Under. He's a big guy and I think he'll be decent, but don't see the immediate light-tower power.
3.0 Verdugo WAR - Over. Not really a huge fan, but he can hit and get on base, and that's the most important thing.
Turner/Duvall more HR - Duvall. We are talking about the RBI champion!
19.5 Whitlock starts - Under. I like him in the 80's reliver mode. 2 high-leverage innings 50 times a year. I feel he's most effective that way.
44.5 Devers doubles - Over. No problem.
94.5 Devers walks - Under. He's gonna hit everything!
Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - Mid-September.
49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - Over. He'll be good but there's a lot of terrific prospects this year.

Things I like:
The Klubot - 15 wins, for sure.
The catching - Mcguire & Wong are a nice tandem.
Yoshida/Devers - Oh yeah!

Things I don't like:
The Infield Defense - Yuck.

Who knows?
The Bullpen - Should be good, butyouneverknow.
Jarren Duran - I still think he'll contribute, but time's ticking.

Looking in from outside, question for this group: does anyone understand what the Red Sox are doing? It seems to me totally ad hoc and with no obvious strategy for real success other than lucking into it. Like, even if they assume they are 2 wins smarter than the Yankees and Orioles and Red Sox (I assume no one thinks they are smarter than the Astros right now), they're just not collecting enough talent to have more than a punchers chance in any season; and that ignores the Mets/Dodgers open-the-spigots types. Is it just more profitable to run the Red Sox like a slightly smarter Cubs that leverages the ballpark, the market, and the brand to make money, but while winning 85 games instead of 79? It all seems so cynical.

79.5 Wins - OVER
14.5 Sale starts - UNDER
24.5 Casas HR - UNDER
3.0 Verdugo WAR - UNDER
Turner/Duvall more HR - Duvall
19.5 Whitlock starts - UNDER
44.5 Devers doubles - UNDER
94.5 Devers walks - UNDER
Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - NO
49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - UNDER(higher)

Bonus:
.300 Masataka Yoshida batting average - UNDER

Always take the under on individual player performance. Always. Team wins, sure you can take the over, since team isn't going to miss a month and only play 135 games.

#9: I think the Red Sox want to put a consistent winner on the field, and (but?) are waiting for the farm system to provide more of the help via players who can provide impact (Casas, Mayer, Bello, Bleis) and depth (they've got a number of pitchers who could help provide back of the rotation or relief help, like Walter and Murphy).

But the real challenge with the franchise right now, IMO, is that the farm system is really, really top heavy, and quite weak outside of about six guys who could help a lot: Casas at 1B in 2023, Mata in relief and Rafaela in the OF potentially later this year, and then three guys who are a ways away: Mayer at SS, Yorke at 2B, and Bleis in the OF.

This has been the state of the farm system since 2018, after Dombrowski had emptied it out to successfully go for it in 2018. This system - which is about the 15th best system, thanks to Mayer, Casas, Rafaela, and Bleis, or else it would be in the bottom five - is after four years of building it!

In the meantime, Chaim Bloom has tried to address the lack of depth in the system with trades and acquisitions. Unless I am forgetting somebody, the only minor-leaguer he acquired who has (up to now) become a meaningful contributor is Garrett Whitlock, a Rule V pick. Houck has graduated from the system, and looks to be an important bullpen piece. Besides that, we thought we got a legit 2B prospect in Jeter Downs in the Mookie trade - but he flamed out. Bloom is trying: Hernandez from Tampa as a catcher; Binelas and Hamilton from Milwaukee; Seabold from Phily; Winckowski and Cordero in the Benintendi deal; Wong in the Betts deal; Valdez and Abreu in the Christian Vazquez trade; etc. None of them have worked out.

So the team is stuck trying to sign available veterans on short-term deals, buying time for the system to start plugging in holes with long-term solutions. When it works out pretty well, you get the 2021 Red Sox. When it doesn't, you get the 2022 Red Sox. But outside of Bleis, there is nobody below Mayer in the minors who screams, "Impact prospect," so it is hard to see a plan based on the farm system solving problems panning out in time for Bloom to save his job. What I hope is that the 2025 lineup looks something like:

Yoshida LF
Mayer SS
Casas 1B
Devers 3B
Yorke DH
Story 2B
RF currently not on team, warming it up for Bleis
catcher (I like McGuire, and think he could be our solution through 2025)
Rafaela CF

But that requires a lot of guys in the system panning out. Otherwise, we need to open the checkbook!

Bloom has stated that he wants to emulate the Dodgers...develop a perpetual MiL pipeline of talent that provides the cost controlled base of your team and provides trade opportunities while supplementing with targeted free agents. He also seems enamored with filling in the grout with "clever" free agent bargain bin acquisitions. I think we probably in the very early phases of this project.

I'm always optimistic until given tangible reasons to change my opinion, and since it's just entertainment there is no personal risk for optimism.

79.5 Wins - OVER - 87-89 wins
14.5 Sale starts - Over, 21 or more starts, contends for a Cy, wins comeback player of the year
24.5 Casas HR - UNDER, about 20
3.0 Verdugo WAR - Over, 4.0-4.5
Turner/Duvall more HR - about the same, 14-16
19.5 Whitlock starts - Over, 21 or more
44.5 Devers doubles - Over, 50
94.5 Devers walks - UNDER
Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - NO
49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - UNDER(higher)

Bonus:
.300 Masataka Yoshida batting average - Over, .315

...there is nobody below Mayer in the minors who screams, "Impact prospect,"

I'd mention Mikey Romero here, but he's been injured this spring.

So....which team in the division is going to win less games than the Red Sox?


Last place, again. They won't hit. How about an over under on runs scored? A typical Red Sox team scores 800 a year. They'll be lucky to crack 720.

Jarren Duran is a homeless person's Jacoby Ellsbury.

At 7M per WAR, Alex Verdugo is worth 28M? Pass.

So....which team in the division is going to win less games than the Red Sox?

Orioles

How about attendance? Last year, 2.6M. I'll go "under", but that's probably a dumb bet because tickets are already sold. But if the Red Sox have another year like last year, attendance will eventually suffer, and we'll be back to the days where you can walk up to the ticket window on Landsdown St and buy your tickets for that day's game.

Orioles

OK. That's possible. So, 4th place is their ceiling.

79.5 Wins - Over. Maybe not by much but I can't buy into under-.500 before the season starts. I'm on the Hope Springs Eternal train w/Darren & VI, etc. Get back to me in mid-May . . .

14.5 Sale starts - Over. I'd feel less confident about 20 as a 50/50 prop, but 15 has to be doable if they're gonna be a .500 team.

24.5 Casas HR - Under. I'd love to be wrong but that number looks very optimistic based on his MiLB stats.

3.0 Verdugo WAR - Over for sure. The talent is still there.

Turner/Duvall more HR - Turner for sure.

19.5 Whitlock starts - Over. I like the concept of the stretched-out bullpen role but would prefer him as an effective starter

44.5 Devers doubles - Under. As his power continues to develop more of those doubles will turn into HR.

As a bonus: Devers XBH - over/under of 75, I'd take the over. 80 . . . prob not.

94.5 Devers walks - Under

Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - no, needs another year of seasoning against higher-level competition. No need to rush him up and hurt his confidence.

49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - no idea on this one.

Yoshida .300 - Over for sure. Seems like the tendency is to lose power moreso than batting eye & control coming over from Japan.

Bloom has stated that he wants to emulate the Dodgers...develop a perpetual MiL pipeline of talent that provides the cost controlled base of your team and provides trade opportunities while supplementing with targeted free agents. He also seems enamored with filling in the grout with "clever" free agent bargain bin acquisitions. I think we probably in the very early phases of this project.

But the Dodgers payroll is 33% higher than the Red Sox, and they spent years building out their draft and player development machine to get to where they are now, AND they went way over target with payroll while bringing the minor league juggernaut online. And even taking all that into account, the Dodgers play in an easier division and, lets be honest, an easier league. Is Boston's plan just to punt half a decade while Toronto and Baltimore work their way over the peak of their success cycles?

Looking in from outside, question for this group: does anyone understand what the Red Sox are doing? It seems to me totally ad hoc and with no obvious strategy for real success other than lucking into it. Like, even if they assume they are 2 wins smarter than the Yankees and Orioles and Red Sox (I assume no one thinks they are smarter than the Astros right now), they're just not collecting enough talent to have more than a punchers chance in any season; and that ignores the Mets/Dodgers open-the-spigots types. Is it just more profitable to run the Red Sox like a slightly smarter Cubs that leverages the ballpark, the market, and the brand to make money, but while winning 85 games instead of 79? It all seems so cynical.
...
But the Dodgers payroll is 33% higher than the Red Sox, and they spent years building out their draft and player development machine to get to where they are now, AND they went way over target with payroll while bringing the minor league juggernaut online. And even taking all that into account, the Dodgers play in an easier division and, lets be honest, an easier league. Is Boston's plan just to punt half a decade while Toronto and Baltimore work their way over the peak of their success cycles?

This is not intended to be snarky, but if you want this group's take on all those questions, I would check out the Sox Therapy threads from the past offseason. Those topics were discussed a ton, and we went around and around on "what the Red Sox are doing" several times (in a good way!). People may not be super eager to revisit them yet again when we are basically on the eve of opening day. The moves have been made - good or bad, the roster has been set - weak or strong, and in just a few days it will be time for the crack of the bat and the thud of leather.

This is not intended to be snarky, but if you want this group's take on all those questions, I would check out the Sox Therapy threads from the past offseason. Those topics were discussed a ton, and we went around and around on "what the Red Sox are doing" several times (in a good way!). People may not be super eager to revisit them yet again when we are basically on the eve of opening day. The moves have been made - good or bad, the roster has been set - weak or strong, and in just a few days it will be time for the crack of the bat and the thud of leather.

Fair. I've just spent the last few days in a group chat with a bunch of sophisticated Yankees and Red Sox fans (we alternate between shitting on each other and serious discussion), and the consensus of that group was \"###### if I know, what the Red Sox are doing only makes sense if they're prepared to spike payroll up by $50M or so in one of the next couple of seasons". I thought maybe this group with the benefit of the spring training chatter had some better insight.

Not like the Yankees are set up for long term success either, so this comes from a legitimate place of curiosity.

Wins - 79.5 - abstain

Chris Sale Starts - 14.5 - OVER

Triston Casas Homers - 24.5 - UNDER

Alex Verdugo WAR - 3.0 - UNDER

Justin Turner vs. Adam Duvall: Who has more dingers - DUVALL

Garrett Whitlock starts - 19.5 - UNDER

Rafael Devers doubles - 44.5 - UNDER

Rafael Devers walks - 94.5 - UNDER

Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - NO

Ceddane Rafaela prospect ranking end of year - N/A - He will be an established MLB player by then so no longer eligible for prospect lists!

and the consensus of that group was \"###### if I know

#### if I know is where most of Sox Therapy also landed!

@25 - Yeah, that's where I am too.

79.5 Wins - OVER - 87-89 wins
14.5 Sale starts - Over, 21 or more starts, contends for a Cy, wins comeback player of the year
24.5 Casas HR - UNDER, about 20
3.0 Verdugo WAR - Over, 4.0-4.5
Turner/Duvall more HR - about the same, 14-16
19.5 Whitlock starts - Over, 21 or more
44.5 Devers doubles - Over, 50
94.5 Devers walks - UNDER
Marcelo Mayer MLB debut - NO
49.5 Rafaela prospect ranking - UNDER(higher)

Bonus:
.300 Masataka Yoshida batting average - Over, .315

Move over CFBPS!

Last place, again. They won't hit. How about an over under on runs scored? A typical Red Sox team scores 800 a year. They'll be lucky to crack 720.

Last year the Red Sox scored 735 and that ranked 9th in MLB. Around 730 again sounds right, assuming the rules changes don't cause a spike in scoring.

(Edit: For reference: league average was 690 last year, which is a bit low. With a return to more normal scoring, I'd put the Red Sox above average, whatever that turns out to be.)

The team let their 1A or 1B player walk, and replaced him with a rehabbing Adelberto Mondesi. They signed a Japanese player who is likely to hit less that 20 HR, as a corner OF. They signed a pitcher who used to be very good but has lost a lot of velocity since his salad days. Maybe he'll benefit from the pitch clock and be able to finesse his way to a good season. They have an ex-ace who is coming back from Tommy John surgery, and the thing in his favor is that his elbow has had plenty of time to heal and strengthen due to a couple of freak injuries that make a lot of people think he's brittle. They let an aging DH go in favor of an even older DH, who wasn't as good as the guy he's replacing. Their first baseman is a rookie who hasn't shown that he's going to be in the ROY hunt, yet. Their catching tandem has gone from "who?" to "these guys might be ok". They signed a once-premier closer, but even if he regains his once-premier form, how many chances will he have to save games? And, will his saving 60% of the Red Sox wins this year mean that they are a good team, or they are a mediocre to bad team? IOW, unless they plan on flipping him for real value at the deadline this year, it's a confusing acquisition.

Compare the opening day lineup of the 2018 team with this one, and if you see this year's team coming within 25 wins of that team, I will once again question your sanity.

I'd put the Red Sox above average, whatever that turns out to be.

They play 81 games at Fenway. All of their good teams, throughout history, have been way above average, offensively. This years team MIGHT be slightly above average, if average is 700 runs.

Looking in from outside, question for this group: does anyone understand what the Red Sox are doing? It seems to me totally ad hoc and with no obvious strategy for real success other than lucking into it.

I don't think they're trying to luck into anything - although obviously they would welcome it if it happened. I think it boils down to this:

a) They want to rebuild the pipeline. I think this is hard - but not impossible - to do. What we're seeing is the result of this being hard to do. Like, it's not that they don't have a plan, but rather that the plan is difficult to execute and will take time to pay off. Like, here's the 2019 draft - the last one presided over by Dombrowski:

43 Cam Cannon - 25 years old this year. Spent most of the year in Portland, combining for a .581 OPS across all levels of the minors, playing 2B/3B. Was selected by the Phillies in the Rule V draft a few months ago.

One more note on that... Boston's first pick was 43rd instead of 30th because (a) 3 teams had 1st round compensation picks and (b) the CBT penalty was a tax and a team's top draft pick being dropped 10 spots. The 10 players selected ahead of Cannon in 2019 included Drey Jameson of the Diamondbacks, Matt Wallner of the Twins, and some guy named Gunnar Henderson. So if you want to say the penalty for Boston spending as much as they did was the difference between Henderson (the #1 prospect in MLB right now) and Cam Cannon, feel free.

69 Matthew Lugo - 22 years old this year, spent most of last year at shortstop in Greenville, probably starting in Portland this year. He's soxprospects.com's #14 prospect, between Chris Murphy and Blaze Jordan.

107 Ryan Zeferjahn - 25 years old this year, spent most of last year in Greenville but did OK after promotion to Portland. soxprospects.com #58. He's a late 3rd-round pick, basically. Not sure they'll get any use from him.

137 Noah Song - Exactly the player you have to take when you don't have a first-round pick, Song was a top-50 talent in the draft but fell to the 4th round because of his pending service in the Navy. The Phillies picked him up in Rule V in December, and have begun the roster shenanigans to hold on to him as long as they can.

OK, that's the 2019 draft highlights... 3 of 4 players seeming to be potentially useful, and 2 of the useful players being good enough that other teams wanted them but not good enough for Boston to have added them to the 40-man to protect them.

The 2020 draft was shortened, but the worse rounds were dropped. Here's who Bloom got:

17 Nick Yorke - Hey, a first round pick! Yorke is still forecasted to do good things, but will be in Portland to start the year. Normal development.

89 Blaze Jordan - Boston doesn't exactly need a power-hitting corner infielder, but they have another one here. He's probably a year behind Yorke, but this is also normal development for someone whose clock started late due to 2020 being cancelled and 2021 being a short season for him.

118 Jeremy Wu-Yelland - No 2020, shortened 2021, Tommy Johned in 2022. Yes, he's a pitcher whose development curve is way behind, but he'll be 24 this year and basically one year behind Zeferjahn in all aspects. It's hard to look at this type of player and have confidence of a MLB future.

148 Shane Drohan - Another 24-year-old pitcher but he's moving up the ladder, ending 2022 and starting 2023 in Portland. Mostly pitching as a starter now.

Their top 4 picks in 2020 - their only picks - are all potentially useful, but outside of Yorke "potentially useful" is about the best we can say.

Now to 2021:

4 Marcelo Mayer - you know the name and the potential
40 Jud Fabian - didn't sign
75 Tyler McDonough - infielder, soxprospects #30
105 Elmer Rodriguez-Cruz - pitcher, soxprospects #19
136 Nathan Hickey - catcher, soxprospects #18

Note, though, that Boston finally picked 5 players in the first 150 picks of the draft. They still only got 4 players out of it. (More accurately they got a compensation pick in 2022.)

2022 obviously is too early to comment on.

When we roll up all those years we see they have tended toward position players instead of pitchers in the early rounds, and suffered from some lack of development in 2020-21 from lack of games or presence of injury. Consequently we really haven't yet seen the fruits of Bloom's labor on the pipeline. Is it better? Absolutely. Is it great? Meh. They are not drafting players who will rise quickly through the system (except maybe for Mayer), and for some obvious reasons they lost a year of development. The danger there is that players need to rise quickly else they meet the fate of Noah Song and get claimed by other teams. The return has been OK, all things considered, but it's taking time.

b) Once the pipeline is built they will aim for short-term contracts with... the best players they can get on short-term contracts, and then fill in the rest from the pipeline or in trades using players from the pipeline. This is where I think most people would object to the plan, because I didn't mention anything about top free-agent talent. You're not getting top free agents under short-term contracts unless there are serious concerns about health or performance, or if it's really a long-term contract with an opt-out (Sale, Bogaerts extension, Story) that effectively becomes a short-term contract. I think the other aspect of this is...

c) Everything is incremental. They are not going to blow up the market to change things overnight. They are going to change a little bit each year: promote 1-2 players each year, sign 1-2 significant players in the offseason, and that's about it. This will keep the payroll stable, which will keep them from paying the tax frequently and losing draft picks.

When you add all that up you end up with a roster that's slowly evolving rather than experiencing drastic improvement. The fanbase is very much unaccustomed to this approach. If they had acquired a couple of top free agents this offseason they would be at best a 3rd place team in this division, while also getting taxed, and making it harder to draft their way out of their problems.

c) Everything is incremental. They are not going to blow up the market to change things overnight. They are going to change a little bit each year: promote 1-2 players each year, sign 1-2 significant players in the offseason, and that's about it. This will keep the payroll stable, which will keep them from paying the tax frequently and losing draft picks.

This is the part that I think no observer can figure out, though. Lets say the Sox are a sustainable 83 win team right now, and to be consistently competitive in the AL East, you need to be a sustainable 89 win team. What I mean by "sustainable" is that this is your baseline projection at the start of a season and maybe some years you're 92 if you're making a push and some years you're 86, and obviously luck means the true variance is more like 100 wins to 78 wins 2SD, but anyways, I digress.

If you are going to incrementally improve your whole organization and talent base, soup to nuts, you might increase your sustainable wins by 1-2 wins a year. Now, that's really good! It's adding like $15-20M of value every off season. Over the long term, if you can do that, you'll be a top organization.

But OTOH, it means you're basically punting 4 seasons, unless you catch 90th% luck in one of them. And that seems completely insane to me! Like, the Yankees sort of were planning to do that, and then they hit on Judge and that bought them like 4 wins a year over what you could've reasonably expected, and they sort of flipped that into being a contender in a couple of seasons where they probably shouldn't have been, but, that's not sustainable! That's blind ####### luck.

And this gets to a discussion that's been had ad nauseum over on the NBA thread, which is, is the point of building a team to be good, or to win championships. Because if the point is to win championships, I can kind of see what the Sox are doing - they're taking advantage of the next four years, when the rest of the division is going to be up anyways, to hide out, rebuild from the bottom up and hopefully enter into a long, sustainable success period around 2025-2026. It's not crazy, if your objective is to win championships. But if your objective is to be GOOD, and you only flip to championships as your success metric when you are already good and close and you push in your chips, then this is ####### nuts, because they are writing off a lot of time in order to turn themselves into the ####### dodgers, who, mind you, for all their success, have only gotten one championship out of it so far.

This is the part that I think no observer can figure out, though. Lets say the Sox are a sustainable 83 win team right now, and to be consistently competitive in the AL East, you need to be a sustainable 89 win team. What I mean by "sustainable" is that this is your baseline projection at the start of a season and maybe some years you're 92 if you're making a push and some years you're 86, and obviously luck means the true variance is more like 100 wins to 78 wins 2SD, but anyways, I digress.

If you are going to incrementally improve your whole organization and talent base, soup to nuts, you might increase your sustainable wins by 1-2 wins a year. Now, that's really good! It's adding like $15-20M of value every off season. Over the long term, if you can do that, you'll be a top organization.

But OTOH, it means you're basically punting 4 seasons, unless you catch 90th% luck in one of them. And that seems completely insane to me! Like, the Yankees sort of were planning to do that, and then they hit on Judge and that bought them like 4 wins a year over what you could've reasonably expected, and they sort of flipped that into being a contender in a couple of seasons where they probably shouldn't have been, but, that's not sustainable! That's blind ####### luck.

I think this approach to the topic is flawed. I don't think team results come out of a year-to-year baseline in the manner you described. Being a pre-season projected 82ish win team doesn't necessarily mean you are punting; it often means that your past efforts have partly failed, leaving you with an on-paper mediocrity. But it also doesn't mean that you are doomed for years to come.

Edit: And I don't know what you mean about the Yankees. They spend a lot, and one of their young players developed into a superstar, and they've been above .500 every year. I don't know how that is just blind luck. I'm skeptical of the notion that the only real success is the kind that is projectable in advance with no positive outlier performances. That's not really how team sports works. And you'll end up in a situation where almost every result is chalked up to being a fluke which reduces the concept to meaninglessness.

If they trying to move to competing, incrementally, over an 8 year period (past 4 and next 4), good lord that's awful. They were in a weird spot in 2020 and I can totally see regrouping for a year at that point. But that should pretty much be the limit for a team with such resources. This team has been building for 3 years, had a ton of money come off the books, and they recently reset the tax. They should be ready to spend and compete right now. If they've found themselves unable to, then they've done a terrible job.

Biv, let's see your over/unders!

I know Bivens mentioned the 2018 roster. Let's look at that, 2018 opening day vs. now:

Rotation:
2018 Sale, Price, Porcello, Hector Velazquez, Brian Johnson / Eduardo Rodriguez & Drew Pomeranz on IL
2023 Sale, Kluber, Pivetta, Houck, Crawford / Paxton & Whitlock & Bello on IL

When we consider Price was coming off an injured 2017, this strikes me as a very similar rotation to start the year.

Bullpen
2018 Kimbrel, Kelly, Barnes, Hembree, Carson Smith, Bobby Poyner, Marcus Walden / Thornburg, Wright, Maddox on IL
2023 Jansen, Martin, Schreiber, Brasier, Winckowski, Richard Bleier, Zack Kelly / Joely Rodriguez, Wyatt Mills on IL

This year's bullpen is much deeper.

Infield starters:
2018 Vazquez, Hanley Ramirez, Eduardo Nunez, Bogaerts, Devers / Pedroia on IL
2023 McGuire, Casas, Arroyo, Hernandez, Devers / Story on IL

It's worse, but not by much. Obviously worse at SS, but IMO we should expect more from Casas & Arroyo than their 2018 counterparts, and even Devers vs. Devers for that matter. And there's a better chance of getting something useful out of Story than there ever was with 2018 Pedroia. That's really the thing... The 2018 solution at 2B was a temporary plan until Pedroia returned, but it ended up being effectively permanent. And the opening day plan at 1B was "I guess we should try to play him somewhere."

Outfield starters:
2018 Benintendi, Bradley, Betts
2023 Yoshida, Duvall, Verdugo

This is at least as good in two positions IMO, but the improvements are not enough to offset the gap between 2018 Betts and Verdugo. I mean, the gap between 2018 Betts and normal Betts is about as large as the gap between normal Betts and Verdugo. Betts was that good in 2018.

DH:
2018 Martinez
2023 Turner

2023 might be worse than 2022 Martinez, who is considerably worse than 2018 Martinez.

Bench:
2018 Leon, Moreland, Holt!, Swihart / Marco Hernandez on IL
2023 Wong, Dalbec, Refsnyder, Chang / Adalberto Mondesi on IL

The differences here don't seem to be material enough for comment.

I mean, let's not pretend for a minute that the 2023 team is anywhere near as good as the 2018 team played. But the 2018 team's opening day roster wasn't nearly as good as the 2018 team ended up playing. They overplayed their preseason projections by like 16 games. This opening day roster is maybe 8 games worse than that, which is still material but not that incomparable. 108 minus 16 minus 8 is 84 wins. I think that's optimistic for this team by a few wins, as the 2018 team made moves (Eovaldi, Pearce, dropping Hanley) to improve as they went and I don't think we should assume the 2023 team will do the same. But that puts them in the neighborhood of Jose's over/under pick, maybe slightly over. The big difference in 2018 was the collective performance above expectation, and that overperformance was maybe double the gap between this roster and that one.

And I don't know what you mean about the Yankees. They spend a lot, and one of their young players developed into a superstar

I think what I mean is: At current $$ per WAR, you can only spend to success if (1) you're willing to go to economically unsustainable payroll levels (i.e., lose money) or (2) have a baseline level of non-FA talent that means you only need to buy X amount of wins, with X being equal to (your particular sustainable payroll)/($ per WAR). Because the Yankees had big hit on a prospect and a couple of moderate hits on cheap MLB-level acquisitions, they went from a regime where they couldn't spend to competitiveness to a regime where they could spend to competitiveness, so they increased payroll as opposed to taking a couple of years for a rebuild, which was the original plan.

Like, the Yankees sort of were planning to do that, and then they hit on Judge and that bought them like 4 wins a year over what you could've reasonably expected, and they sort of flipped that into being a contender in a couple of seasons where they probably shouldn't have been, but, that's not sustainable! That's blind ####### luck.

I think it's unwise to assume blind luck regarding Judge. I mean, he was an extremely athletic first round draft pick, whose strike zone judgment was solid and whose bat speed generated excellent power. I'd say the only luck involved was that he came along through the minors as teams (and players) started trying to optimize swing path, which greatly helped him develop into the player he has been in MLB. But, like, that also counts as favorable work by Judge and the Yankees' development system to make that happen. Residue of design, and all that.

Also, as many will surely point out, the Yankees paid Judge, whereas Boston traded their similarly "lucky" prospect, Betts.

taking a couple of years for a rebuild, which was the original plan.

What kind of rebuild are you talking about? Before Judge's breakout season they signed an expensive closer and went into the year with one of the top payrolls. I see no sign that a big rebuild was coming. In his first 3 years, they won 91, 100, and 103 games. That means that even if you subtract him, there is a lot of talent there (especially years 2 and 3). Hitting big on a prospect and some cheap MLB-level acquisitions is just how you succeed, it's not all luck.

But Betts is a brittle little guy but Judge is a big strong sturdy guy.

I think it's unwise to assume blind luck regarding Judge. I mean, he was an extremely athletic first round draft pick, whose strike zone judgment was solid and whose bat speed generated excellent power. I'd say the only luck involved was that he came along through the minors as teams (and players) started trying to optimize swing path, which greatly helped him develop into the player he has been in MLB. But, like, that also counts as favorable work by Judge and the Yankees' development system to make that happen. Residue of design, and all that.

Also, I'm really hesitant in pushing a superstar simply existing into the luck/fluke category with the likes of Fernando Rodney 2012 and Darin Ruf 2021.

Hitting big on a prospect and some cheap MLB-level acquisitions is just how you succeed, it's not all luck.

That's fair - and its also fair to note that the Yankees had a big miss on Gary Sanchez and a sorta miss on Gleyber Torres. But it's way more valuable to have a megahit than it is harmful to have a big whiff, because league average talent to plug holes is pretty easy to find if you have a Yankees/Red Sox level front office.

One of the things the Yankees are clearly prioritizing with position player drafting and development - after a long fallow period from which Judge was a rare exception) is massive athletes who hit the #### out of the ball (pardon, i meant "excellent exit velocities" and "good barrel percentages") with the assumption that if you get 3 of them in your system every year 1 star might fall out every couple of years, and if your system is producing one position player star every two years and you can run Boston/NY level payrolls, you will be a contender.

I have no idea if that's a good strategy or not, but that's clearly what the Yankees are going with. Find guys who hit the #### out of the ball and hope they figure out the rest of it before they're Rule 5 eligible.

Biv, let's see your over/unders!

The only o/u I care about is wins. 79.5 is about right. Flip a coin. IDGAF about any of the others. I made my comments about some of them upthread. The one that really chafes my ass is the Verdugo one. He is nowhere near a 18M to 20M player, which is what 4 WAR projects to (via Fangraphs). Get real. He's an average ballplayer. Pay him his 7M and shush.

VI, the 2018 team had 4 guys that could rake, and a 5th (Benintendi) who was a very good hitter.

This team has ONE GUY who's a definite. The rest of the lineup is either iffy or garbage.

1st base: Iffy. 2B Arroyo: Iffy. Kike: Garbage. SS: Garbage. LF: Iffy. CF: Iffy. RF: Iffy. C: Garbage. DH. passable

If they trying to move to competing, incrementally, over an 8 year period (past 4 and next 4), good lord that's awful.

I don't think we're talking about "next 4" for the time horizon for starting to compete. 2024-25 is the timeframe.

2024: acquire a ++ pitcher / Hernandez, Paxton, Duvall, Brasier depart / Rafaela, Mata, Walter, Murphy promoted
2025: acquire a +++ pitcher / Verdugo, Pivetta depart / Mayer, Abreu promoted
2026: Story (opt out), Sale, McGuire depart / Yorke, Hickey, Bleis, Gonzalez promoted

Like, obviously the pitcher acquisitions are ultimate wish-casting, and there's no real way around that given the pitching gap in the minors. But the decent players they would lose are getting replaced with decent players from the minors, which is saving around $20 million in 2024, maybe $20 million in 2025, and $50 million in 2026. If some of these don't pan out just right then they can still pursue the occasional Adam Duvalls of the world on a short term deal. But they can spend a bunch and go over the threshold in 2025 and then drop back under in 2026, or at least have more money available to replace the talent lost.

I have no idea if that's a good strategy or not, but that's clearly what the Yankees are going with. Find guys who hit the #### out of the ball and hope they figure out the rest of it before they're Rule 5 eligible.

Since hitting ability doesn’t really correlate with overall athletic ability (See John Kruk et al), I think most teams try to identify players who might be above average hitters. The Yankees hit the jackpot with Judge, but he was the 32nd pick in the draft - like Mike Trout, lots of team could have drafted Judge but didn’t.

If everything works out for the Yankees, by 2025, they will have Jasson Dominguez (a/k/a “The Martian”, because he’s so otherworldly), and Spencer Jones (“the left-handed Aaron Judge”) joining Judge in the outfield. That could be something. Or not - time will tell.

As for the Red Sox, I think there is a reasonable basis for being optimistic on Yoshida. His Japanese stats are impressive, and quite consistent. Lots of uncertainty on most other non-Devers things, IMHO.

I agree on Yoshida. Nice pickup.

I know Bivens mentioned the 2018 roster. Let's look at that, 2018 opening day vs. now:

I didn't mean "opening day lineup vs opening day lineup". I meant the team that we saw win 108 regular season games. If you want to wait until this season his over to compare results, fine. If this team comes within 25 wins of that team, I'll stand down. Not stand back and stand by.

Jose makes a good point, in that the Red Sox play less games in their own division than in years past.

I know Bivens mentioned the 2018 roster. Let's look at that, 2018 opening day vs. now:

Rotation:
2018 Sale, Price, Porcello, Hector Velazquez, Brian Johnson / Eduardo Rodriguez & Drew Pomeranz on IL
2023 Sale, Kluber, Pivetta, Houck, Crawford / Paxton & Whitlock & Bello on IL

One of these Sales was coming off three straight 200+ IP seasons. The other has pitched 48.1 IP in the last 3 seasons. Hand-waving away the fact that 2018's rotation was led by one of the 5 best pitchers in the game is a bit much. 2018's rotation is clearly better on paper.

Outfield starters:
2018 Benintendi, Bradley, Betts
2023 Yoshida, Duvall, Verdugo

JBJ '15-17 = 11.2 WAR
Duvall's entire 9 year career = 10.4 WAR

And these two are similar, how?

This opening day roster is maybe 8 games worse than that

There's about 8 wins difference in the outfield alone!

I'm convinced. This team will not win 108 games, steamroll two 100-win teams, and then win the World Series. :)

On the farm system, I don't know why being top heavy is a problem. It seems to me that's almost* exactly what you want. Three or four top prospects are worth, what, 10-15 decent ones?

*From best to worst, here's how I would rank farm system setups:

1. Strong at the top and deep.
2. Strong at the top but not deep.
3. No top prospects but deep in decent ones.
4. Bad everywhere.

#2 is not only better in that it is likely to produce better players, but it is also much easier to fill out the depth than it is to acquire top prospects.

I didn't mean "opening day lineup vs opening day lineup". I meant the team that we saw win 108 regular season games. If you want to wait until this season his over to compare results, fine. If this team comes within 25 wins of that team, I'll stand down. Not stand back and stand by.

So when you said "Compare the opening day lineup of the 2018 team with this one" you meant not that? Oh, okay, your point was a fart in a jar, and I opened it. My bad.

On the farm system, I don't know why being top heavy is a problem. It seems to me that's almost* exactly what you want. Three or four top prospects are worth, what, 10-15 decent ones?

*From best to worst, here's how I would rank farm system setups:

1. Strong at the top and deep.
2. Strong at the top but not deep.
3. No top prospects but deep in decent ones.
4. Bad everywhere.

#2 is not only better in that it is likely to produce better players, but it is also much easier to fill out the depth than it is to acquire top prospects.

I think you're right for position player prospects, but for pitchers I think depth is worth more than high-end strength.

Are jar farters an identical group to pants pissers?

Jar-farters seems appropriate, seeing as how this year is sort of a "Catch lightning in a jar" season! And it could all blow up...

1st base: Iffy. 2B Arroyo: Iffy. Kike: Garbage. SS: Garbage. LF: Iffy. CF: Iffy. RF: Iffy. C: Garbage. DH. passable

I read this in Bud Abbott's voice.

Are jar farters an identical group to pants pissers?

Hell, no! Pants pissers were proven wrong. Jar farters were right, last year. And will be right, this year.

As to Jose's point about the Red Sox having an easier schedule by dint of playing less in-division games...so does the rest of the division, so while it may translate into more wins, it's a wash, for any playoff implication.

So when you said "Compare the opening day lineup of the 2018 team with this one" you meant not that?

It was what I said, but not what I meant to say. I had forgotten HanRam was on that team, as well as a lot of others. I forgot that the 2B situation was as bad as it was.

But that OF was arguably the best OF in baseball, from day 1. This year's OF is arguably in the bottom half of all MLB. Now, Duvall could hit 30 HRs, and Verdugo and Yoshida could hit 20 each. I would take the under, there.

And who wouldn't take 2018's Sandy Leon and Christian Vazquez over these 2 scrubs they have going. Especially the back up. He's Danny Jansen before Danny Jansen found his HR stroke.

Dan/ZIPS picks Bello as a breakout candidate.

And who wouldn't take 2018's Sandy Leon and Christian Vazquez over these 2 scrubs they have going. Especially the back up. He's Danny Jansen before Danny Jansen found his HR stroke.

I'm not suggesting that this is the biggest problem the team has or anything, but at a few positions, the backup plan is so weak so as to drag down the strengths of the lineup.

I like McGuire as the catcher, but Wong is so weak offensively. And the backup catcher will be playing a fair amount.

The backup plan if (when, if history is any guide) Arroyo gets hurt, or if Hernandez gets hurt, is Chang, right? Chang also can't hit. I suspect Bloom would love to see Hamilton hit enough, and/or Valdez field 2B well enough, to be an option at some point this year to replace Chang. With Hamilton, you'd obviously have the added benefit of a difference-maker on the basepaths; with Valdez, it looks like he could be a legit bat against righties. But Chang provides none of that.

Overall, a big part of how the 2023 Red Sox could be meaningfully better than last year is simply avoiding the big holes on the roster. In 2022, Boston had the second-worst outfield WAR, at -4.7 WAR, and it was across the board: 12th in LF, 14th in CF, 12th in RF. They were 12th in WAR at 1B, at -2.7. 12th at DH. Last in relief pitching, at -3.2 WAR. Just getting these positions to league-average would be worth several extra wins in 2023.

But at the same time, there were only four positions where the team was in the top half of the AL in WAR, and they took a hit at three of them:
- Starting pitching, where their leading pitcher in WAR was Wacha, who is gone.
- Catcher, where Christian Vazquez is gone.
- Shortstop, where Bogaerts is gone.
- Third base, where Devers got locked up.

Probably my biggest reason for general pessimism for the team this year is because the places where they will obviously improve in 2023 - 1B, LF, and RP - could be largely neutralized by the complete lack of a plan at SS, combined with a sneaky-big loss at catcher (Vazquez was quite good last year).

It's not a foregone conclusion that Wong is a bad offensive player. He has hit in the minors.

We have a lineup posted! I suspect it will be slightly different against lefties.

1. Alex Verdugo (L) RF
2. Rafael Devers (L) 3B
3. Justin Turner (R) DH
4. Masataka Yoshida (L) LF
5. Adam Duvall (R) CF
6. Triston Casas (L) 1B
7. Christian Arroyo (R) 2B
8. Reese McGuire (L) C
9. Enrique Hernandez (R) SS

Yay! I'm excited, and I like Verdugo leading off.

Fangraphs Staff Predictions are a bummer. Zero writers pick the Sox to make the playoffs, compared to 1 for Baltimore, 4 for Texas, and 5 for Arizona. Oh well, the playoff odds still have us at 34%. :)

Opening day is far from sold out of face value tickets. And on Stubhub you can get significantly less than face value seats all over the park.

The Opening Day lineup, now that it is here and real, does a few things:

1) It gets me excited for the season. It is cold as #### today up here, but the sun is bright, and the entire spring, summer, and fall are in front of us. From a weather and sports fan perspective, the three worst months of the year go from when the Pats' season ends until when the Red Sox season begins. So we have made it here for another year!

2) So much of the success of the team lies in the variability of the 3-through-5 hitters in today's lineup. I think Yoshida will be at least above-average, and probably a lot of fun to watch...but he could also be extremely good, and one of the more interesting players in all of baseball. It would also go a long way to helping Bloom's standing with the team and the fans, because he is sticking out his neck a fair amount with Yoshida's contract.

Turner? Turner could be anything from an aging player who continues to decline offensively, and gets injured a few times...to a legit 120+ OPS+ guy with a lot of doubles who can help out at 1B and 3B against tough lefties, opening up DH for other options against lefties (I'd love to see Enmanuel Valdez get a shot like this during the year).

And Duvall? He's not going to get on base a ton, but if his defense his solid and he hits enough bombs, then he's fine for this year. Where things gets sketchy quick is if he's cooked, and/or the defense is below-average, or he gets hurt a lot, and then we're forced to either put Hernandez back in CF (which opens a hole at SS until Mondesi is able to play), or Duran (or I fear just can't hit or field well enough to hold the job) or rush Ceddanne Rafaela (who is a Gold Glover right now, but is highly questionable with the bat).

If those three trend towards the top of their range out outcomes, then this offense will be good enough to compete. I also think Casas will be good enough to force himself by the summer into a more central part of the lineup. With his OBP skills, I'd like to see him ahead of Devers, but that would likely mean a lot of lefties at the top of the lineup. We'll see - play ball!

Opening day is far from sold out of face value tickets. And on Stubhub you can get significantly less than face value seats all over the park.

Man that's a bummer. I opted for the month-to-month NESN 360 plan instead of paying for the annual plan and getting 4 tickets included because I suspected below face value might be pretty common this year (and I don't care about hockey, so I don't need NESN year round). Hopefully not!

Turner? Turner could be anything from an aging player who continues to decline offensively, and gets injured a few times...to a legit 120+ OPS+ guy with a lot of doubles who can help out at 1B and 3B against tough lefties, opening up DH for other options against lefties (I'd love to see Enmanuel Valdez get a shot like this during the year).

Nit picking a bit, but I would hope the new $31M/year face of the team doesn't need help from a 38 year old with a declining bat, tough lefty on the mound or not. Turner as the back up for the 10 or so games Devers should have scheduled off? All for it.

I like McGuire as the catcher, but Wong is so weak offensively. And the backup catcher will be playing a fair amount.

How good of a hitter does he have to be to be an average backup catcher?

Quick and dirty, in 2022, catchers with at least 200 PA, by WRC+

#15 - Bethancourt .252 .283 .409, 101 wRC+
#30 - Mejia .242 .264 .381, 85, wRC+
#45 - Barnhart .221 .287 .267, 63 wRC+

Opening day is far from sold out of face value tickets. And on Stubhub you can get significantly less than face value seats all over the park.

Wait until they're 10 games under .500

If anyone is interested in photos from a VERY cold Fenway Park today. Here they are. Actually if you aren't interested they are still here.

Turner? Turner could be anything from an aging player who continues to decline offensively, and gets injured a few times...to a legit 120+ OPS+ guy with a lot of doubles who can help out at 1B and 3B against tough lefties, opening up DH for other options against lefties (I'd love to see Enmanuel Valdez get a shot like this during the year).


Nit picking a bit, but I would hope the new $31M/year face of the team doesn't need help from a 38 year old with a declining bat, tough lefty on the mound or not. Turner as the back up for the 10 or so games Devers should have scheduled off? All for it.

I should have written that more clearly: Yes, I don't care what hand the opposing pitcher uses, I want Devers playing, obviously. However, if he is going to get a day off once in a while, I assume it would come against a tough lefty, all other things being equal. At a minimum, Turner could play 3rd on a day where you have Devers DH to give Devers a little bit more of a break.

Of course, as Opening Day reminded us, if your pitching staff gives up 10 runs, everything else is sort of academic.

This is not an overreaction to one game (which I'm happy to do also!), but... Someone mentioned the infield defense in another thread and it started me thinking. The ban of the shift this year means that infield defense will be more important than ever. In response, the Red Sox passed on a couple of good defensive shortstops and moved their CF, who has played fewer than 100 innings there in the past 3 years, to SS. With the increased importance of basestealing due to the pickoff rules and larger bases, they have added numerous players who are either slow, don't steal bases, or both. I don't like it.

At least Kluber looked dominant. :)

There were a couple of disappointments yesterday - 10 walks and 5 stolen bases? I think every stolen base was uncontested most a result of poor pitching, but also it shows a lack of situational awareness. It's a wonder they managed to stay in the game. Devers looks heavy, he had two misplays in the field and lost concentration at the plate resulting in clock violation punch out at a critical moment.

I'm not sure I can blame Devers for the clock violation. The pitcher wasn't on the rubber, Raffy was in the box and looking at him but wasn't in his stance. That was just weird.

73..some good ones in there. My favorite is the hot dog. No, not YOU.

Actually, the ones with the ball in the frame as the bat are good.

The hitters job is to address the pitcher with 8 seconds to go, the pitchers job to start his windup before the clock winds down. The specific situation was little off, but if Raffy had been more aware he could have probably induced a ball rather than a third strike out.

The Athletic had a good article today about how smart, situationally aware baseball that incorporates both high reward-low risk aggression and knowledgeable research about opposing player tendencies can provide small advantages at the margin on almost every play, and conversely disadvantages on almost every play. The accumulation of these advantages or disadvantages lead to runs and outs, for or against you.

Anyway, I didn't see a lot of the advantageous awareness yesterday.

I'm not sure I can blame Devers for the clock violation. The pitcher wasn't on the rubber, Raffy was in the box and looking at him but wasn't in his stance. That was just weird.

If the rule is that the batter has to be set in his stance at the 8 second mark, then it was applied correctly. The pitcher can step on the rubber, wind up, and throw to the plate in well under 8 seconds.

What's the rule say about when the pitcher has to be standing on the rubber? Is that addressed?

Not saying it was the wrong call, just that it was an unusual situation. Hopefully it won't happen again.

Fun pictures Jose, thanks for sharing! Those action shots showing the swing path & ball are amazing.

I guess we need to add:

O/U RPG: 9

I'm not sold on "fall way behind early to motivate the hitters", I'm curious to see how that plays out.

Glad you liked Pike! Those shots are definitely more about the camera than the photographer.