GreenSox

It's the context: Rodon option declined while Kimbrel was exercised. Under no objective measure is using $16 million on Kimbrel a wise investment. If there are concerns about his health, then why shoot for a longer deal? And it's the context: not picking up 18.4 for Rodon, while exercising $16 for Kimbrel. The 18.4 is dependent on his health; but the $16 is objectively a large overpay in any circumstance.

Well sure he's had some hits. But he's had far more misses. And when you trade for veterans, you're supposed to be getting the sure thing and you should have more hits than misses. Many of his trades for veterans are obvious overpays on the front end, even if the veteran performed as expected. Part of it is that the Sox don't have the FO infrastructure of the top orgs (pro scouting, state-of-the-art analytics) and are still too 'friends and family." And a lot of contending teams aren't veterans only, and keep a constant infusion of young talent.

Ugh. Rather stick with the Engel/Sheets/Vaughn trinity. Duvall is a 2 WAR player only because of D; and yet in the 2 prior years, he had a negative defensive WAR. Seems akin to the Eaton 7-8 WAR he throw out there once. Otherwise, he's a low OBP hitter, not exactly in short supply on the southside.

If he's eligible for a QO (is he?), then $18.4 mill for Rodon seems reasonable (esp. if you're paying, by choice, $16 mill for Kimbrel). The first half of the year Rodon is absolutely worth that, and more. If he declines, he declines...the Sox will get some comp.

Perhaps. Or maybe it's the GM who, once again, refuses to face the reality that he overpaid for and overrated yet another veteran. Squandering assets takes its toll.

$16 million is far greater than his market value. The only way to trade him for anything, and it won't be much, is to eat 1/2 the salary. That said, if they didn't pick up the option, they likely would have traded for a reliever, so at least this may preclude that overpay.

Well, that was extra high....and they didn't really need the pitcher that I guess Hahn thought was the best closer in the game...they just needed another good reliever. Kimbrel was an easy trade to make - not much scouting required. And perhaps that's part of the problem - lack of a functional pro scouting department. And they put so many resources into relievers - that's effectively 3 first round picks that Hahn has used on relief pitching (maybe Crochet is a starter but that's never been better than 50/50) plus some high priced free agents. Sadly, Robertson/Kahnle/Frazier was an exception to July "Buy high"

The Kimbrel trade was a classic buy high trade.

Giants did it. As have done it for 20 years. The Sox could have done it - Hahn effed it up.

This is interesting. I think tanking for its own sake will be a thing of the past. The Astros tanked because they had very little major league talent in their prime (hunter pence and a couple of okay pitchers)- as a tanker, they scored in the draft with Correa and Bregman. The Cubs big draft score, however was luck - the Astros passed on Bryant. The Sox tanked because Hahn could figure out how to build around a quality core, and he squandered all of the young talent trying. In the end, the Sox didn't get anyone who was a major contributor out of the draft. Rodon was technically a FA, and as a draft pick, he was pre-tank. They got players out of their dispersal; but really, the best haul (3 pitchers for Eaton) was a trade that a savvy GM could have made with a non-tanking team. What changed with the Cubs and Astros, was how they evaluate and develop young talent. The same things that the Sox continue to struggle with as per Farm #30. I don't think you have to tank to change the philosophy. Look at the Giants. As don't tank. Rays were bad for a few years, but have been good for a while.

What I want them to do is to a) bring in a new front office that implements and embraces state-of-the-art analysis. b) trade some of the logjam at the corners for young starting pitching. c)sign Semien. What I think they will do is sign a) sign someone like Castellanos, worsening the log-jam; b) trade Sheets or the like for a veteran pitcher. c) trade one of the young middle infielders and or low minors pitchers for a veteran 2B.

Cherish depth, but when the depth a) is not in pitching b) is in corner positions and c)when you have holes on the roster, it might be a good idea to use some of that depth to address a) and c). The pitching really broke down in the playoffs; perhaps overused during the regular season, perhaps it wasn't as good as the stats due to the comparatively soft schedule, or maybe just "one of those things/bad luck". But not only do they lack depth, they have 2 slots in the rotation to fill.

I don't see how Hahn's record with the Sox would be particularly attractive to other teams. 2 quick exists preceded by 7 losing seasons. He inherited a lot of talent; drafts were so-so. Slow to bring in analytics. He's not a talent evaluator. But his contract work was first-rate and he may be well-regarded in the business. An owner not trusting his GM is just bad business all around.

That's the problem - this FO is consistently on the "old veteran" side of these trades, especially when it comes to relievers. And they insist on paying a premium price. Buy high and sell low is the mantra, and the price adds up and shows its wear and tear.

If Rodon really is back in form, he's the guy I want pitching in Houston.

Still a lot of lifers and FOHs around. The scouting director is Sox lifer (20 years), Getz' had little experience when named farm director (but he's a friend of Hahn). The prior scouting director, is now a Hahn assistant, in charge of pro scouting (that didn't go well in July). They're about the last to move team to adopt analytics world; and now that they have them, are they using state-of-the-art analytics or are they still behind? The loyalty to Williams (who should move along) I understand - the prospect accumulation in the late 1990s when he was in charge of the draft, 2005, Cuban connection, 9 winning or .500 seasons out of 12 as GM. But Hahn?

I think this is judged more on whether the Sox win the division next year, and the next, versus whether they win tomorrow. TLR is here because JR doesn't trust his FO (and for good reason). Unfortunately, the team now gets 2 anchors: Hahn AND TLR.

Who could have known?

The analysis doesn't include the trades that yielded nothing, such as the trades of Swarzak, Soria, Robertson/Kahnle/Frazier. Nor does it include the trades that caused the need for rebuild (Shields, Samardzija, Frazier). And even in the rebuild trades included above, the net WAR is negative and the only big winner is the Eaton trade. The big winners are both Eaton trades, the "Cuban connection" and drafting Sale and Anderson (the draft picks during the rebuild haven't contributed that much).

Moncada also has the same WAR that Machado has this season (Moncada had a higher WAR in 2019, and a lower WAR in 2020). And the poster is right - Machado DOES bring some dog-and-pony show with him; heck the Sox bought into that when they were trading for his buddies as enticements for him to sign. Let Preller stew in his own <.500 mess. Sox need a 2B and RF - but the big need is starting pitching; they are down 2 going into next season and even if both Crochet and Kopech seamlessly slide over, they will need some depth.

He can't even eat innings anymore. That was basically his job all year as a 5th starter, and his ERA exceeded 5.0. I was hoping they'd do a bullpen trial with him, they did and the results are what they are, and that's that.

No. Absolutely not. But do sign Semien.

Well he's consistent with his other analysis that I've seen. As I recall, he judges the winner of trades as the team that received the most players.

Yes, Cease too.

Great news tonight that Rodon's back. Gio, Rodon and Lynn matches up with anyone (and overmatches several).