Eminor3rd

Trading MLB relievers for other MLB relievers would be a really sad and bad deadline strategy.

Hosmer's only value, at this point, is to an early-stage rebuilder, with 1B ABs to spare, who can take his contract to get some prospects along with it.

That's probably true, which is why I imagine the Diamondbacks are taking all the time they can to shop around. I bet he'll move for about what we expect within a day of the deadline.

This ^ Many of us pointed out how thin the team was on Opening Day -- the position they're in now is related to that, both in terms of their on-field needs (not signing depth in the offseason) and the fact that they have nothing in the upper minors to move (having called everyone up to be the depth they didn't sign). You can say they "tried" and be correct if they spent their money, but they didn't -- we're still right in the middle of the payroll pack where we were before the rebuild began.

Haha, well they actually didn't the first time, but I definitely hope they do this time.

I think you can make an argument for this type of future-mortgaging thing if it pushes you over the top, but given that there are rental alternatives, I don't think it floats in this case. For example, is the team better in 2021 if it adds Turner but loses Vaughn and Crochet, or if it adds Escobar and loses nothing (only prospects)? I think it's clearly the latter.

Do not have the bullets for this without subtracting from the MLB team, thus reducing the effectiveness of the add.

Whoever they get, the Sox need to eat money to get it done. The cupboard is pretty bare in terms of current prospect talent, so to win the bidding on talent alone could be potentially disastrous for the future pipeline if it's even possible in the first place. If the Sox aren't ever going to increase FA spending, then this is how they should use the money. A ton of possible bullpen upgrades and a several MI options available; I'd be good with any of them but would target the ones that allow us to eat $10m and only have to send a random live arm-type prospect back. I know that doesn't sound like a "dream" scenario, but I want them to protect the system so we don't end up with another massive rebuild in a few years.

So, not at all to argue, but just since I have firsthand knowledge — interestingly enough, it’s not true at all that everyone liked the Pizza Rats rebrand, haha. It IS true that the national audience loved it and that the gear was very popular and sold well everywhere. But locally, there was extremely passionate pushback from politicians, sponsors, and about half of the season ticket holders. The community felt like they were being represented as a meme joke. The borough president published an open letter in the newspaper begging for a different name when it “leaked” as the likely favorite. And yes, the Yankees hated it so much that they actually “didn’t approve” the change, which they could do as part of the affiliate agreement. Which is why the team never actually changed the name officially, it just made it into a weekend promotion, where they would don the gear every Friday and Saturday. The Yankees, of course, couldn’t be bothered to return any calls about their opinion of the name during the actual selection and design process, but that didn’t stop them from throwing ultimatums around after the money was already sunk. Staten Island reaped the benefits of the merch push and PR, but they paid a heavy price in loss of community support , actual loss of season ticket accounts, and a substantial strain to the Yankees relationship. It’s been suggested that it was the final straw when it came to the Yankees throwing them under the bus during the great MLB takeover/realignment, ultimately leading to the dissolution of the franchise, but I think that’s going too far. The real issue was ongoing and impossible facility issues given the state of the public lease and lack of city support. So anyway, it all just serves as an example of the risks associated with boldness with regard to rebrands, and the inevitability of never being able to please everyone.

Yeah there’s way more to lose than to gain when it comes to making a change like this at the MLB level. You’re gonna sell merch regardless because the fanbase is stable. It makes a lot more sense to take a huge risk at the minor league level, where you stand to potentially gain from something viral

Lmao Top ten all time GIDP: 1. Albert Pujols 2. Cal Ripken Jr. 3. Ivan Rodriguez 4. Miguel Cabrera 5. Hank Aaron 6. Carl Yastrzemski 7. Dave Winfield 8. Eddie Murray 9. Jim Rice 10. Julio Franco

Interesting. I would have thought Spiders was popular. Flows well. not a lot go people seem to know it, but there’s actually an Indy team called the Rockers already, in NC.

Totally agreed

I don’t know, Goldstein literally worked in the astros FA as their director of scouting until the trash can firings. I feel like he’s probably got his finger on the pulse of the industry on terms of valuation much more than the typical author.

I will say, having been through a renaming process in the minors, it’s really, really difficult to get it right. It seems like it shouldn’t be, but there’s always a major constituency somewhere that passionately disagrees with whatever your consensus is.

Yeah that feels generic even in a sport full of generic-sounding names. but whatever, I root against the team so I don’t need to like it haha.

I heard Sox are in on Jake Peavy

No-pop Moncada strikes again

Absolutely BRUTAL for Berrios. Reminds me of that time Sale fucked up the Angels all night and then finally walks a couple and Trout homered on that slider low and away. Such a rapid reversal of emotions.

Oh hell yes

I'm sorry I forgot the green

No power though

Man, if this team DOES go all the way, there are going to be SO many storylines.

This is likely true, though

You can make an argument that every post ron makes should be in teal.