Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 19:21:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 6, 2015 21:22:51 GMT -5
Dombrowski was hired to win now in Detroit. In both Montreal and Miami he built extremely strong farm systems. He traded away Detroit's awesome prospects for bums like Max Scherzer and Anibal Sanchez. Don't let him anywhere near the Red Sox. And he practically gave away Fister and Porcello, two high-caliber starting pitchers in their primes... ( btw)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 21:43:32 GMT -5
He traded away Detroit's awesome prospects for bums like Max Scherzer and Anibal Sanchez. Don't let him anywhere near the Red Sox. And he practically gave away Fister and Porcello, two high-caliber starting pitchers in their primes... ( btw) Just because Rick Porcello is paid like a "high-caliber starting pitcher in his prime" doesn't mean he actually is one.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 6, 2015 21:55:36 GMT -5
And he practically gave away Fister and Porcello, two high-caliber starting pitchers in their primes... ( btw) Just because Rick Porcello is paid like a "high-caliber starting pitcher in his prime" doesn't mean he actually is one.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Aug 6, 2015 22:40:38 GMT -5
People, that's why we italicize sarcasm.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 6, 2015 23:52:39 GMT -5
Yea but that's why they get paid millions per year. If we continue to just hoard our prospects we will be wasting a ton of good resources. I never looked at Betts that way. He came out of high school with all the tools you could ask for but was seen as raw. He developed faster then many thought, but he always had that superstar upside. You don't trade those prospects unless your getting someone like Gray from Oakland. He was a 5th round pick and had one mediocre season and then one breakout season. There have been tons of prospects like him that have one good year and then do nothing. Deciding if a prospect is for real or just a charade is basically as much of a crap shoot as actually drafting players. Come on really? You think after Betts second year that the Sox knowing if he was the real deal was a much of a crap shoot as when they drafted him? I don't think so. I can look at our system right now and tell who I think we need to keep and who I would trade. Sure I won't get everyone right but you can tell in general terms. For example I would trade Margot ASAP!
Betts checked all the boxes when he was 20 years old and dominated middle and high A ball hitting .296 with an .418 obp and .341 and .414. He also hit 15 homeruns and stole 38 bases. Also when 19 making debut in low A ball hitting .267 with a .352 obp is not a bad start in my opinion. So after two years you knew you had a great athlete that played good D at second, he could steal bases, hit for average and power and had elite on base skills. So you pretty much knew you had a five tools player that showed you all five tools in two years. I mean how many prospects have two seasons like that in there 19 and 20 age seasons?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 7, 2015 6:10:44 GMT -5
Deciding if a prospect is for real or just a charade is basically as much of a crap shoot as actually drafting players. So... not at all a crap shoot and instead something that takes a lot of skill and time and analysis (and yes, some luck too)? Yeah I agree with that then. Yeah, with not a very high amount of success. The point I made isn't one that should be controversial enough to argue with - that it's easier said than done to trade away prospects when their value is highest. And that doesn't even take into account that the team has to know something about a prospect that the team they're trading with doesn't know so that they overvalue them. I bet there aren't too many secrets in baseball.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 7, 2015 6:12:56 GMT -5
He was a 5th round pick and had one mediocre season and then one breakout season. There have been tons of prospects like him that have one good year and then do nothing. Deciding if a prospect is for real or just a charade is basically as much of a crap shoot as actually drafting players. Come on really? You think after Betts second year that the Sox knowing if he was the real deal was a much of a crap shoot as when they drafted him? I don't think so. I can look at our system right now and tell who I think we need to keep and who I would trade. Sure I won't get everyone right but you can tell in general terms. For example I would trade Margot ASAP!
Betts checked all the boxes when he was 20 years old and dominated middle and high A ball hitting .296 with an .418 obp and .341 and .414. He also hit 15 homeruns and stole 38 bases. Also when 19 making debut in low A ball hitting .267 with a .352 obp is not a bad start in my opinion. So after two years you knew you had a great athlete that played good D at second, he could steal bases, hit for average and power and had elite on base skills. So you pretty much knew you had a five tools player that showed you all five tools in two years. I mean how many prospects have two seasons like that in there 19 and 20 age seasons?
And you're doing this with hindsight. It's harder to look into the future. It's kind of ironic that your avatar is Cecchini by the way.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Aug 7, 2015 13:57:30 GMT -5
People, that's why we italicize sarcasm. Amen. I admit my sarcasm meter is weak. But we have a couple of mods ,and several posters who use it so often, it's tough to know when they are actually trying to have a discussion instead of belittling people.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 7, 2015 14:55:21 GMT -5
Come on really? You think after Betts second year that the Sox knowing if he was the real deal was a much of a crap shoot as when they drafted him? I don't think so. I can look at our system right now and tell who I think we need to keep and who I would trade. Sure I won't get everyone right but you can tell in general terms. For example I would trade Margot ASAP!
Betts checked all the boxes when he was 20 years old and dominated middle and high A ball hitting .296 with an .418 obp and .341 and .414. He also hit 15 homeruns and stole 38 bases. Also when 19 making debut in low A ball hitting .267 with a .352 obp is not a bad start in my opinion. So after two years you knew you had a great athlete that played good D at second, he could steal bases, hit for average and power and had elite on base skills. So you pretty much knew you had a five tools player that showed you all five tools in two years. I mean how many prospects have two seasons like that in there 19 and 20 age seasons?
And you're doing this with hindsight. It's harder to look into the future. It's kind of ironic that your avatar is Cecchini by the way. So I am calling Margot the most overrated prospect in the system using hindsight? Been saying we should trade him since last deadline. As to my avatar I love Cecchinis bat always have, but even when his bat was on fire you knew his ceiling was limited by his lack of power, so so defense and not great speed. You are looking at a player that really only showed us that he has two really good tools, he can hit for average and has good on base skills. Ceccchini is a perfect example of a player they should have traded 2 years ago when his value was through the roof. It seems that even last year they didn't think he had the skills to be an everyday 3rd baseman or they would have given him more playing time at the end of the year and they didn't. If you remember he got really hot in the 2nd half of last year.
Look I understand this is hard and you might trade a player that you will regret down the road, doesn't mean you just hoard prospects and not trade them when their value is high. We all know that only a handful of our prospects will be impact players in the big leagues for the Red Sox. We simple don't have the room or time to develop that many prospects. We will never be Houston/Chicago were we can spend 3-4 years developing a whole core of young players while being one of the leagues worst teams.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Aug 9, 2015 14:17:01 GMT -5
Indications are that former Tigers GM Dave Dombrowski is more likely to wind up with the Blue Jays or the Mariners than the Red Sox, Brian MacPherson of The Providence Journal writes. Still, MacPherson says that doesn’t mean that the Red Sox can’t learn from Dombrowski by looking at how he built a winner in Detroit. Dombrowski’s Detroit teams had structural flaws, but he took them from a team void of stars to a powerhouse organization with aggressive trades. Boston has worked to hang on to its young talent in recent years rather than moving it for established players, but many of those prospects have failed to live up to expectations.
Mlbtr
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2015 18:13:10 GMT -5
It's times like this that the Red Sox can be an incredibly unnerving team to follow. I love most of the players (except for the ones who are overpaid and/or fat) and am far more forgiving than most of the coaching staff. Management, on the other hand, I just can't get on board with. Horrible offseason signings and questionable contract extensions are one thing. But, when you have a vacancy and a perfect opportunity to fill that vacancy AND positively reshape the direction of the organization and the team essentially says "Meh," you start to wonder - "What kind of unhealthy organizational dynamic has taken hold of this team that it doesn't look to better itself at every opportunity?"
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 10, 2015 10:26:32 GMT -5
Indications are that former Tigers GM Dave Dombrowski is more likely to wind up with the Blue Jays or the Mariners than the Red Sox, Brian MacPherson of The Providence Journal writes. Still, MacPherson says that doesn’t mean that the Red Sox can’t learn from Dombrowski by looking at how he built a winner in Detroit. Dombrowski’s Detroit teams had structural flaws, but he took them from a team void of stars to a powerhouse organization with aggressive trades. Boston has worked to hang on to its young talent in recent years rather than moving it for established players, but many of those prospects have failed to live up to expectations. Mlbtr This "powerhouse organization," this "winner in Detroit," has had three seasons of more than 90 wins in fourteen years, with ZERO titles. Is this what we want to sign up for? This emperor has no clothes.
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Aug 10, 2015 11:52:39 GMT -5
It just may end up that we have our head of baseball operation already here. Ben Cherington. If what I have been hearing about Lucchino are true and that he has been first and foremost responsible for the deals this offseason, then maybe Ben will be given full reign to fix this mess. I can't help but believe that LL has stepped down knowing he bungled up the whole process. farrell in an interview was asked a one name description of LL and he said "Demanding", but also said in that interview that he was responsible for the improvements to the park and also the make-up of the roster. Bingo! It just seemed that he had his mitts in this whole shabang. Maybe Cherington can do what it takes to straighten it out. I think picking up Machi and Cook are good low cost choices for the bullpen. I look back at the trades that were made by this club and specifically Lester and Gomes for Cespedes and their competitive balance pick, then Cespedes was traded to Detroit along with Alex Wilson and Gabe Speier for Porcello. cespedes was a good solid piece for Detroit and Alex Wilson has been the Tigers best reliever and Speier has been doing well in the minors. Cespedes was then dealt to the Mets for 2 excellent minor league pitchers, Michael Fulmer and Louis Cessa. the Mets could afford giving them up because of their pitching depth. Guess who got fleeced in all these deals? I hope that it was LL that was responsible for all this, but if it was Ben, he should be out the door right after the season. they always give up more than they receive and it is maddening. Talent evaluation has been terrible. trades should be made to benefit both teams, but they ahve helped other teams to the detriment of their own. Eddy rodriguez was the only exception I can recall, but they failed to get Miller back and that has hurt. I personally wouldn't mind if Jed Hoyer took over baseball operations. It would be a promotion over his GM job in Chicago and might be interested in coming back.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,824
|
Post by nomar on Aug 10, 2015 12:13:23 GMT -5
I'm fine with it being Cherrington.
I think he's a great influence for the farm system which is the biggest determinant of long term success. And having a new GM running the roster for the major league team looks like it may be a smart move at this point anyway.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 10, 2015 16:52:40 GMT -5
Oh come on, way too much has been messed up to blame it all on Lucchino. Signing Ramirez and Sandoval, perhaps. Getting Craig and Kelly for Lackey? I doubt it. Resigning Craig "White Flag" Breslow? Definitely not. Calling up Brian Johnson too early? Letting Masterson continue to start when it was clear he was done, and then again when he came back off the DL? No, Cherington is part of the problem, not the solution.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 10, 2015 20:00:32 GMT -5
No, Cherington is part of the problem, not the solution. He could be both. Put him in a role that utilizes his strengths and doesn't require him to do things he is not as good at, or supplements him with someone better at those things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 14:47:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Aug 11, 2015 15:55:08 GMT -5
People, that's why we italicize sarcasm. This is precisely why we don't italicize sarcasm.
|
|