WestEddy

Nope. You're playing word games. You guys ask me a question, and I'll give you a full, good faith answer. I thought this board was a little more jokey when I amped up last winter. But apparently, me being light about the bullpen and "Nicky .300" really hurt some people. Here's a list of pitchers who could very well be vying for spots in the AAA rotation: Iriarte, Nastrini, Eder, W. Gonzalez, Ky Bush, Mason Adams, Justin Dunn, and Thorpe will probably rehab there. That's 8 starters. AA: Schultz, Tyler Schweitzer, Gowens, Juan Carella That's only 4, but maybe they get Adams back until the logjam at AAA clears. Some of the guys behind them will be pushing quickly. High-A: Hagen Smith, Grant Taylor, Tanner McDougal, Shane Murphy, Lucas Gordon, Tommy Vail, Aldrin Batista, Seth Keener, John Bockenstedt 9 guys. Some of these guys, like Bockenstedt might be bounced out or to the bullpen. But already, they're backing up. Batista is borderline AA. Hagen Smith will move quickly. There might be lingering injuries, but you see the jam forming. Low-A: Jake Peppers, Ricardo Brizuela, Carlton Perkins, Justin Sinibaldi You also have Christian Oppor, Mathias LaCombe, Blake Larson, Maximo Martinez. There's a couple more I'm not recognizing because of bad numbers, but they have stuff, and Getz still wants them. Some guys here will argue that we only really have 2-1/2 pitching prospects in the system. Schultz, Hagen Smith and Grant Taylor. But there's a whole slew of these guys who are actual prospects that need to throw innings every 5. I just listed 29 guys for 20-24 rotation spots. No, they're not all sexy, and some will be an easy call to toss in the bullpen. But you read and listen to the same stuff I do. To pretend that you don't know any of this is silly. We have a glut of pitching, and we'll be adding to it in this year's draft. So anybody thinking I'm "full of it" is just being argumentative.

We were both wrong. Your implication was that none of these players deserved major league innings because they all sucked, which you could tell, and they would never attain the numbers of a couple years ago. A small bunch of these guys actually did. You even mocked the notion that Fedde's experience in Korea was indicative of anything, that he was a bum, also. The "depth" he tried to create last year was in rehabbing closers and set-up guys. I thought that was an interesting idea, but it didn't work. I'm guessing timelines with deadlines, or maybe even players even forced the issue to get back on the FA market and not participate in the slaughter that was the 2024 bullpen. I don't think Getz "nailed" it this off-season. I've already said that he's assembling a group that can hit the ground running, instead of carrying 6 guys coming off of surgeries. He is also starting the year with at least 5 healthy starting pitchers who have has at least some little success in their current form. He started last year with 2 question marks in Crochet and Fedde, 2 rehab cases in Soroka and Flexen, and then a hodge podge of AAAA maybes in Nastrini, Clevenger, Shuster, Chad Kuhl, Woodbridge, etc. If the bullpen is exactly the same, they won't have as much put on them early.

Seriously, I don't want you to buy into Chris Getz. I've already said that. Please don't buy into Chris Getz. You can convey that by making actual arguments, not doing drive-by "I'm laughing at you and your posts" nonsense.

Yes, those are player names. You pretty much called all those guys bums as soon as they were acquired, and hooted when I called that a shutdown bullpen. You laughed at the notion of Tim Hill realizing his ceiling from a couple years back, and voila, he did just that with the Yankees. Why don't you pull up your posts from then so we can both laugh at your lack of foresight together? And BTW, pretty much all those guys are still bouncing around the league, which tells me that other organizations see some potential in them. Funny, huh?

It is not ridiculous, for all the reasons I have given you. People here claim that 121 losses is fan-killing. (Auto-fill wanted to put in "fantastic".) If it is, then Getz needs to take care of an area that bled losses last year. He seems to feel he's doing that. Good for him, I'll wait to see if it works.

I don't see the problem in "trading" a guy who fell off the table because of an injury he wouldn't acknowledge (Wilson claimed his back injury wasn't what was affecting his bad numbers) for somebody he thinks has more potential. And if Wilson clears waivers, all the better. I'll repeat Dick Allen's line in that you're not being clever. This is a typical, end of the roster move that all teams make. It doesn't reflect on anybody except yourself when you pretend it has deeper meaning, and yet another example of how Getz sucks at his job.

That wasn't intended to be clever. The losses seem to matter to you. Getz is assembling bullpen depth that he didn't last year so that the bullpen isn't a sieve. I don't really think setting the loss record was a "plan". You guys keep bringing up picking no higher than 10th like there's some correct strategic planning that should have happened around that pick. They pick first in rounds 2-20. They picked first in the Rule 5 draft. They have first priority on waiver claims through opening day. The losses do bother me, and I have expressed that from time to time. There's a whole list of roster moves, trades, signings and such that I didn't like, and voiced it when they happened. I don't need to keep doing that on a daily basis, and express anger over them. It's done.

The Fletcher trade wasn't "catastrophic" either. Yes, Getz has to start winning some of these inconsequential trades, but they hardly rise to the level of catastrophic. The jury's still out on Vargas. I've admitted that Getz got spun around and hoodwinked on the Fedde trade, which he can't allow to happen anymore. Chicago White Sox dude summed it up nicely that JR chose familiarity over experience, so there's going to be some growing pains. Additionally, we have no idea what info he was getting from a scouting department that he eventually cleaned out at the end of the year. People went on and on about Matt Thompson and Cristian Mena, like they were building blocks. They weren't. Mena was interesting, Thompson is a real estate salesman just waiting for his current career to finish up.

You really need to get beyond your Logan's Run complex. I would hope that Booser and Gilbert aren't around on August 1. Booser is a live lefty arm who has value, much more if they tweak him and he becomes even better than he was last year. I don't care who remembers what. Memorable names really isn't the goal here, is it? Creating value and bringing back prospects is. I'm not sure how it's "wise" to not talk about baseball players on a baseball forum.

I pretty much responded to your post, point by point. You don't want the Sox expending talent they control to shore up the major league bullpen. You say they already have what they're acquiring, and that more is available on the market for cheap. I believe they signed the guys they were interested in, and traded for guys who were DFAed that interested them. I don't see an actual question in your comment, so I'm not sure what else to respond to. I'm sorry my style of writing offends you. It seems to be an actual sticking point, where if I reference something I've been beaten over the head with, you become so distracted, you can't even follow a conversation. Now, I guess you'll get distracted by that sentence, and accuse me of whining about the environment here. All to avoid the simple question of whether losses matter or not. If they do, then Getz needs to shore up the major league bullpen. If they don't, then I'll be glad to never hear about 121 losses again. If both wins and development matter, then good for you, Getz is already multitasking that, some of which requires trading from depth to fill.

Weird how you parrot the exact same deflection that your big buddy SS2k5 did. Of course they aren't. They're pre-arb, for heaven's sake. Fajardo and Combs are also no names who have barely thrown many innings. Booser and Gilbert are much closer to the bigs, and can be part of pro bullpen depth that will mitigate the bleeding for a rebuilding club. And if Getz signed a guy like Booser as a free agent, you'd post multiple times for days, mocking another dumpster dive. Any alternative you offer would be a logical argument if you hadn't already spent so much energy trashing it.

So then, I'll put you down in the "wins matter" column, which validates Getz's acquisition of major league bullpen depth pieces. I believe that when this team starts winning again, the fans will come back in throngs.

Give an inch, get an inch. If somebody's going to pretend that trading Matt Thompson and passing on signing Michael A. Taylor were catastrophic moves that portend a complete collapse of civilized society, then no, I won't be joining in the chorus calling for senseless firings of guys who were just hired.

He doesn't seem to know as much as our own insiders. Or he did, and he held that little tidbit back to maintain "access".

If winning games in 2025 isn't important, then I look forward to you never referencing 121 losses again. I'm being constantly beaten over the head with "121 losses", like it's killing the fanbase, and when children still pay attention, it causes all sorts of anxiety disorders, denying families bonding opportunities, and it's this cloud of shame I should feel the weight of. Winning games 42-60 matters or it doesn't. If it does, then shoring up the bullpen and creating depth is key to that. If Getz can create value by trading a marginal guy who was able to strike out 16-year-old kids learning the game in a distant land, then parlaying that into a better prospect in July, all the better. And why do you keep saying 121 wins? Is that auto-correct, or are you setting the bar for this team to break the single season win record by 5 games? Can you explain how having 6+ starters to find innings for in Kannapolis translates to having a full major league bullpen? Surely you're not suggesting rushing guys like Fajardo and Combs up to the majors. And relying on guys like Bush and Iriarte to step into the bullpen is what left us with a group of 1.4 WHIP set-up throwers last year. Pick a lane. Either you want Getz to build a team that valiantly wins 60 games, or you want him to complete forsake the big club in the service of filling the minor leagues with every body who doesn't run fast enough to get away. Last year's bullpen was a catastrophe. Layer Grifol's misuse with an historic cloud of bad luck that was so distracting and demoralizing, reliable vets were playing like panicked rookies. (There, I used your mantra. Are you happy?) So yeah, a veteran arm like Tim Hill (who the hoi polloi screamed sucked and didn't even deserve major league innings in the first place) sucked here, then went to a more stable environment, and realized his potential. Trading an 8th round draft pick is not "dumping" them. You also mention "recent draft pickS" with a plural "S". I can count one "recent" draft pick Getz traded out of the last 4 drafts. Are there any other draft picks he's traded ill-advisedly I don't know about? One guy seems to turn into "multiple" with you.

That's what the Twins' beat reporter conveyed after he delivered an incomplete report on a trade rumor. Again, we have no idea how far along any trade talk between the teams went. You can pretend that Getz turned down a top 100 prospect for Fedde, if you want. Nobody outside those with a narrative to flog reference that rumor like there was any legs to it.

Because "future pieces" are the only commodity we have a glut of. You can continue to complain that the Sox won't go out and start assembling a $100M bullpen. It's not going to happen right now. You claim this team is about 4-5 years off from being competitive. Do you actually believe we should be signing bullpen arms to long term deals who will be around in 5-8 years? That's sillly. and Of course Cam Booser and Tyler Gilbert shouldn't be getting paid $5-7M. They're pre-arb, for heaven's sake.

And nobody traded a top 100 prospect at last year's deadline. Are you saying they should have held onto Fedde and Kopech, and waited for a better market for pitchers in the off-season? Perhaps the pro scouting department wasn't competent, and that's why they replaced most of it after last season. Yes, it's irritating that Getz seems to have been spun around on the Fedde trade and got short-changed. There's no reason to cram the Crochet trade into that framing, and pretend he got hosed on that one, too. Please notify me when somebody trades a starting pitcher for THREE TOP FIFTEEN (in the game) PROSPECTS!!! The dynamics of prospects have shifted, and nobody is trading those guys. So if you're going to expect a GM to do what nobody else in the game is able to do, then you're going to be regularly disappointed. The Crochet trade was not a gaffe. It was a very good trade that even the guys here who pretend that every roster move is catastrophic and damning have acknowledged it was a good return. The Fedde trade was a prospect light. The jury's still out on Vargas. Kopech was a head case who had 2 good outings before the trade where he actually started listening to his coaches. There aren't even any WE COULDA HAD KEASCHALL rumors for Kopech. Could Getz have gotten more? Sure. Kopech didn't help him. I agree that Getz has to avoid gaffes like the Fedde return. That trade seemed forced. The Crochet trade was a good, old-fashioned haul any fanbase should be proud of.

Okay, you're not going to answer my question. Money is a resource they don't seem to want to dole out on relief arms at $5-$7M a clip. You will argue that our minor league system is lacking in everything, yet, we don't have a rookie ball arm/low-A bullpen arm to spare to create a bevy of major league bullpen arms to avoid last year's catastrophe.

Are you going to pretend to not understand the difference between starting pitchers in low-A ball and a major league bullpen?

Last year's bullpen was a disaster. I thought it was an interesting path to sign a bunch of rehabbing closers and set-up guys, but pretty much all of them were released or traded for cash. I'd say timing didn't work out, you'd say Getz panicked. This year, he's steering clear of that approach, and he's stocking up on guys who will be ready day one. It makes sense to me that he's not going to get trapped into using journeymen AAA starters as bullpen pieces again. They do have a glut of pitching. There's not even enough rotation spots in 4 levels of minor leagues to accommodate the number of prospects they have. While Combs and Fajardo seem to have more talent than the upper level guys they shipped out last year (Mena, Thompson), it's still dealing from wealth, rather than "shipping out young prospects".

The "2 sides" kind of force each other into their own particular corners. You can even feel the narrative shift from reasonable to "everybody must be fired"/"no, you should be thanking him for his genius". I'll agree that most of the trades have been underwhelming. But I feel it's like a guy trying to run an auto repair shop after he's been burglarized of all his tools. I just want to watch the rest of the movie to see how it turns out without the guy behind me screaming that I should be joining him in yelling for the theater manager to be fired.

At least 2 teams paid veteran infielders $4M+ for replacement level production, the Royals and White Sox. I'm sorry that makes you sad.

We didn't develop Maldonado. He was an obvious sop to a Manager Getz wanted to fire, anyway. My point is I'm talking to people who are pretending that a pitcher who had a historically great year at AA failed like nobody has ever failed before. So, of course, if Colson Montgomery comes up, hits .250/.310/.430 in his first stint, the mopes will scream that he's an abject failure, and everybody who has jobs, ever, should be fired.

I'm retired, so you've already gotten your side of the bargain. How about if I give up Mayonnaise every other Tuesday? You want people fired if something out of their control goes wrong. Why is that fair? I don't want anybody fired unfairly.