SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Ben Cherington to step down; Dave Dombrowski joins FO
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 31, 2015 14:10:10 GMT -5
He might be talking about Rodriguez, Devers, Moncada, Espinoza, Kopech and Benintendi too. In 2017? Only Moncada Benintendi and Rodriguez have a chance at the majors and none other than Rodriguez will be in their prime
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Aug 31, 2015 14:12:02 GMT -5
He left the team in pretty poor shape, with a bloated, inflexible payroll and little in the way of near- or medium-term help on the horizon. The no near or medium term help thing is simply false. Theo left Ben with Reddick, Lowrie and Iglesias. It's not Theo's fault Ben traded all of them away. Classic straw man move. I said "little" not "no" near- and medium-term help ... and, yeah, Reddick, Lowrie, and Iglesias qualify as "little" in my mind. You can't build a team with guys like that, guys with the potential to be mid-tier regulars. And that was pretty much it until really this year. Really, this isn't a productive thing to argue. Theo himself blasted the "Monster" for creating the situation they were in ... perhaps appropriately, judging by how he's done in Chicago, but clearly he understood the situation wasn't good. The results are the results, and the team was in bad shape at the end of 2011. Which doesn't mean Theo was an idiot, just that things got off track and some bad decisions all caught up with the team at that moment. Hey, it happens. I've led some wonderful successes in my life (genius!) but also had some things that, ah, let's just say didn't work out so well (idiot!).
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 31, 2015 14:15:45 GMT -5
The no near or medium term help thing is simply false. Theo left Ben with Reddick, Lowrie and Iglesias. It's not Theo's fault Ben traded all of them away. Classic straw man move. I said "little" not "no" near- and medium-term help ... and, yeah, Reddick, Lowrie, and Iglesias qualify as "little" in my mind. You can't build a team with guys like that, guys with the potential to be mid-tier regulars. And that was pretty much it until really this year. Really, this isn't a productive thing to argue. Theo himself blasted the "Monster" for creating the situation they were in ... perhaps appropriately, judging by how he's done in Chicago, but clearly he understood the situation wasn't good. The results are the results, and the team was in bad shape at the end of 2011. Which doesn't mean Theo was an idiot, just that things got off track and some bad decisions all caught up with the team at that moment. Hey, it happens. I've led some wonderful successes in my life (genius!) but also had some things that, ah, let's just say didn't work out so well (idiot!). That mightve been a problem if Theo didn't also leave Cherington with plenty of established major league stars. As a big market team, you absolutely can build a team like that with those guys providing a little salary relief so you can build the rest of your roster.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Aug 31, 2015 16:07:32 GMT -5
That mightve been a problem if Theo didn't also leave Cherington with plenty of established major league stars. As a big market team, you absolutely can build a team like that with those guys providing a little salary relief so you can build the rest of your roster. Established MLB stars like Crawford, Beckett, and Lackey who had severely negative trade value at the time? The only stars he inherited that performed as stars that season were Pedroia and Ortiz. Lester and Gonzalez were above average but far from stars in 2012, while Ellsbury and Crawford barely combined to play 100 games. The best position players beyond those guys were Cody Ross, WMB, Salty, and Mike Aviles. Crawford and Ellsbury barely combined to play 100 games. The pitching staff behind Lester was an absolute joke. Inheriting a worse situation with their resources would be tough to imagine, at least having a blank slate with no stars would allow the team to be reshaped for the future. Theo and company maxed out the budget for 2012 before the 2011 season even began, and they had less flexibility in Cherington's first offseason than any Red Sox team in my lifetime. The team also saw nearly every key internal piece regress or get injured, and they had no depth due to paying so much to the top end of the roster (and after dealing their top pieces for Gonzalez). The injuries weren't really Theo or Ben's fault, but investing so much money in so few players compromises your ability to create quality depth. Keeping Lowrie and Reddick would've improved the team but not enough to contend. Cherington didn't do a good job with the limited options he had for 2012, but Theo didn't allow him a reasonable shot at contention considering the immovable veteran core wasn't good enough. That core going forward wasn't going to win a World Series, they needed the Gonzalez trade, and it led directly to a WS. People were shocked by the trade because the consensus was the Red Sox were stuck with the roster they had going forward, it took that type of deal to allow Cherington the chance to change Theo's blueprint for the future Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 31, 2015 16:14:58 GMT -5
Classic straw man move. I said "little" not "no" near- and medium-term help ... and, yeah, Reddick, Lowrie, and Iglesias qualify as "little" in my mind. You can't build a team with guys like that, guys with the potential to be mid-tier regulars. And that was pretty much it until really this year. Really, this isn't a productive thing to argue. Theo himself blasted the "Monster" for creating the situation they were in ... perhaps appropriately, judging by how he's done in Chicago, but clearly he understood the situation wasn't good. The results are the results, and the team was in bad shape at the end of 2011. Which doesn't mean Theo was an idiot, just that things got off track and some bad decisions all caught up with the team at that moment. Hey, it happens. I've led some wonderful successes in my life (genius!) but also had some things that, ah, let's just say didn't work out so well (idiot!). That mightve been a problem if Theo didn't also leave Cherington with plenty of established major league stars. As a big market team, you absolutely can build a team like that with those guys providing a little salary relief so you can build the rest of your roster. I'm as big a Theo fan as anybody else. I wish that he would have left the Cubs to take Lucchino's place. That said, you're reconstructing history if you're telling me that when Theo left they weren't in disarray. They had just choked away the biggest September lead. Lester, at that point, was the only sure thing they had in the rotation as Beckett, Buchholz, and Lackey had been dealing with injuries to varying degrees and there was little help in the farm system. They were saddled with Carl Crawford's contract. The farm system had a period where nothing major was being produced except for Rizzo who had been dealt away. In hindsight it could be argued the Sox would have been better off keeping Beltre and Rizzo, although the LA Dodgers trade resulted in enough money being freed up to allow Cherington to make a bunch of moves that helped win the 2013 World Series. Theo didn't leave Cherington the 62 Mets, but he did leave him a team that was kind of on the way down and Cherington was handcuffed that first year as he got stuck with Valentine. Cherington the GM made a lot of surprisingly good short-term moves that resulted in an unbelievable World Championship of 2013, and while Theo gets the same kind of credit in my mind that Duquette in 2004 did for leaving a strong core, it was Epstein that made the moves to make the 2004 team a Champion. Likewise Cherington filled in the pieces brilliantly so that the Sox could win in 2013 without selling out the farm system. And Cherington has built a very strong farm system. He was part of its buildup when Theo was here and he maintained and guarded the farm system, maybe more than he should have at times, but if you're going to err, you err on the side of caution. We don't need an AJ Preller. That said, Cherington's decisions (or was it Henry's) not to sign Lester or spend the top dollars on Abreu, and the dealing of Lester and Lackey for major league "talent" was highly questionable. And results are the bottom line. The Sox have been lousy three of the past four years. If the Sox dumped Cherington because of lack of patience, shame on them, but if they dumped him because they feel that short-term and long-term Dombrowski is a better GM, then I'm alright with it. They better be right about that. Based on Dombrowski's track record, they have a good shot at being right about it, but he will not have been left a bad situation other than a clogged up payroll, depending on how far Henry is willing to go over the threshold. But he hardly left Dombrowski a bad ballclub. He's got a strong farm system to work with and there's a young core that has just started to emerge. Cherington should get credit for that, too. Theo is the best GM I've seen the Sox had and I'll always wonder how good they would have been had he been able to run the club as he sees fit, and didn't have to try to reconcile the business end of things. I guess we'll find out by watching the Cubs. Cherington had his faults (judging major league talent first and foremost), but he was no Ruben Amaro.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 31, 2015 17:14:43 GMT -5
That mightve been a problem if Theo didn't also leave Cherington with plenty of established major league stars. As a big market team, you absolutely can build a team like that with those guys providing a little salary relief so you can build the rest of your roster. I'm as big a Theo fan as anybody else. I wish that he would have left the Cubs to take Lucchino's place. That said, you're reconstructing history if you're telling me that when Theo left they weren't in disarray. They had just choked away the biggest September lead. Lester, at that point, was the only sure thing they had in the rotation as Beckett, Buchholz, and Lackey had been dealing with injuries to varying degrees and there was little help in the farm system. They were saddled with Carl Crawford's contract. The farm system had a period where nothing major was being produced except for Rizzo who had been dealt away. In hindsight it could be argued the Sox would have been better off keeping Beltre and Rizzo, although the LA Dodgers trade resulted in enough money being freed up to allow Cherington to make a bunch of moves that helped win the 2013 World Series. Theo didn't leave Cherington the 62 Mets, but he did leave him a team that was kind of on the way down and Cherington was handcuffed that first year as he got stuck with Valentine. Cherington the GM made a lot of surprisingly good short-term moves that resulted in an unbelievable World Championship of 2013, and while Theo gets the same kind of credit in my mind that Duquette in 2004 did for leaving a strong core, it was Epstein that made the moves to make the 2004 team a Champion. Likewise Cherington filled in the pieces brilliantly so that the Sox could win in 2013 without selling out the farm system. And Cherington has built a very strong farm system. He was part of its buildup when Theo was here and he maintained and guarded the farm system, maybe more than he should have at times, but if you're going to err, you err on the side of caution. We don't need an AJ Preller. That said, Cherington's decisions (or was it Henry's) not to sign Lester or spend the top dollars on Abreu, and the dealing of Lester and Lackey for major league "talent" was highly questionable. And results are the bottom line. The Sox have been lousy three of the past four years. If the Sox dumped Cherington because of lack of patience, shame on them, but if they dumped him because they feel that short-term and long-term Dombrowski is a better GM, then I'm alright with it. They better be right about that. Based on Dombrowski's track record, they have a good shot at being right about it, but he will not have been left a bad situation other than a clogged up payroll, depending on how far Henry is willing to go over the threshold. But he hardly left Dombrowski a bad ballclub. He's got a strong farm system to work with and there's a young core that has just started to emerge. Cherington should get credit for that, too. Theo is the best GM I've seen the Sox had and I'll always wonder how good they would have been had he been able to run the club as he sees fit, and didn't have to try to reconcile the business end of things. I guess we'll find out by watching the Cubs. Cherington had his faults (judging major league talent first and foremost), but he was no Ruben Amaro. They had down years in 2012, almost all of them, but Theo left Cherington with plenty of good players. Cherington compounded the mistakes Theo made by trading Reddick and Lowrie away for garbage relievers. The situation was bad before the Punto trade, but not as bad as people make it out to be. It seemed worse because everyone was underperforming at the time. Had the Punto trade never been made, Cherington could've had this lineup in 2013 with about 12 million to spend C Salty 1B AGone 2B Pedroia 3B Lowrie SS Iggy LF Crawford/Nava CF Ellsbury RF Reddick SP1 Lester SP2 Buch SP3 Lackey SP4 Doubront SP5 Beckett I agree Cherington was no Ruben Amaro, however, he was one of the most horrendous evaluators of pitching I have ever seen. Almost none of his pitching moves worked out better than expected, and this team's staff is in shambles. Because of this, I think he had to go.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Aug 31, 2015 19:38:54 GMT -5
Here's my problem with this entire discussion, everyone is assuming that it's some kind of player development wizard to figure out which $200+ million contract will workout. News flash: None of them workout when you're signing guys in their 30's. If you're going to do it, it's gotta be for someone younger. Price and Cueto will almost certainly be bad contracts.
If you really want to look at this like a business, you sell high buy low and reduce risk. Buchholz, Uehara, and Holt almost certainly should've been traded back in June for a lot, which many were highly averse to. I think Buchholz could've fetched Schwarber at the time to fill our 1B hole. Looking at this strategy now, Sonny Gray could be a target by using guys like Margot who is being given a huge benefit of the doubt due to age. The Mets also may undervalue a starter as they showed by their willingness to give-up Wheeler for short-term assets. With either Gray or a Mets starter, you'd be gaining 3+ years of control for an ace without the risk of the downside. Getting really creative, Jason Heyward would be an interesting target if Rusney Castillo has value on the trade market for a starter (to the NYM most likely). This depends on how much money Heyward will cost, but if it's within reason, he'd be a far lower risk than other guys on the market. Before anyone says Carl Crawford, Heyward is a RF, has a much better track record, and is younger. Obviously none will work out in a purely academic, $/WAR sense. You do it if you think front-end pitching is an essential ingredient, and that you don't have palatable trade options. The riskiest thing you can do if you're a sports franchise is miss out on a great team. Here's the thing. You can't avoid risk, you have to balance risk mitigation with being in a position to win the pennant as best as you can. The Red Sox in the past two offseasons have absorbed substantial non-aging related risk in the name of competing without paying older pitchers. They've risked $95M on Sandoval's obesity, $88M on Ramirez's ability to change positions and stay healthy, $82.5M on Porcello's metamorphosis, and $72.5M on Castillo's ability to be a major league player. The Red Sox have made a policy out of avoiding a specific model of risk they feel confident in projecting. That is fine until you fail to find impact in the "asset pool" you see as undervalued. Short of tapping out of the sport and becoming the Tampa Bay Rays, any effort to improve the team is going to be risky. In 2013 the Red Sox signed a declining, broken down OF for $39M, a marginal inning-eating RHP for $39M, and a catcher with a degenerative hip condition to play first base. And... it worked. This is why I don't think you can simply "look at baseball like a business". There are parallels but at the end of the day you can't. Business performance is proportional to profits, while a sports franchise derives infinitely more value from finishing 1st than any other position. Put another way, if the 2013 Red Sox were a business they'd be looking at a huge loss on Shane Victorino. But they're a sports team, and flags fly forever. Furthermore, I think that in talking about players as assets to buy low or sell high, you are ascribing too much variance too their valuations. I don't think professional GMs are going to look at 2 months of Buchholz or Holt and just throw out the book on them. Theo Epstein isn't going to think Clay Buchholz is a whole new player just because he's healthy for two months. Clay is a very good pitcher who doesn't throw a lot of innings, he's been a very good pitcher who doesn't throw a lot of innings, and other than looking like he might be done last year his value probably hasn't changed much in any direction. As for the specific moves, if either of the plans you submitted actually happens, I'll be absolutely thrilled. If it's already obvious it won't work out from a $/WAR number, then why the hell would you do it? Some guys do workout from a $/WAR number and those make much more sense to acquire. If you really want to go for it in 2-3 year bursts, then trade the prospects for the ace. It's likely Sonny Gray, Chris Archer, fill-in-young-ace-here will be much better even in year 1 anyway. The Sandoval deal was not one I was a fan of either obviously because of the large risk with his value built into his defense. When looking at acquiring players, I am very frustrated when so often it seems like guys are acquired for what they were instead of what they're going to be. Especially in a 6-8 year deal. If at the beginning of a deal you're going in saying we're getting an elite guy for 3 years and he will probably be pretty bad years 4+ and that's a best case scenario, then that's not a move you should be making. Especially when it will mean eating $60+ million. The Cardinals apparently threw out the book on Brandon Moss at the trade deadline. A year and a half of Carlos Gomez was almost traded for a guy many think could be a front-line starter. The market was so seller-biased based on the moves made and Buchholz was one of the top pitchers on the market since he's controllable for 2 more years at a reasonable rate. Buchholz's market was unique because teams like the Pirates and Orioles would value him much higher due to the controllable years.
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Aug 31, 2015 19:55:54 GMT -5
That mightve been a problem if Theo didn't also leave Cherington with plenty of established major league stars. As a big market team, you absolutely can build a team like that with those guys providing a little salary relief so you can build the rest of your roster. I'm as big a Theo fan as anybody else. I wish that he would have left the Cubs to take Lucchino's place. That said, you're reconstructing history if you're telling me that when Theo left they weren't in disarray. They had just choked away the biggest September lead. Lester, at that point, was the only sure thing they had in the rotation as Beckett, Buchholz, and Lackey had been dealing with injuries to varying degrees and there was little help in the farm system. They were saddled with Carl Crawford's contract. The farm system had a period where nothing major was being produced except for Rizzo who had been dealt away. In hindsight it could be argued the Sox would have been better off keeping Beltre and Rizzo, although the LA Dodgers trade resulted in enough money being freed up to allow Cherington to make a bunch of moves that helped win the 2013 World Series. Theo didn't leave Cherington the 62 Mets, but he did leave him a team that was kind of on the way down and Cherington was handcuffed that first year as he got stuck with Valentine. Cherington the GM made a lot of surprisingly good short-term moves that resulted in an unbelievable World Championship of 2013, and while Theo gets the same kind of credit in my mind that Duquette in 2004 did for leaving a strong core, it was Epstein that made the moves to make the 2004 team a Champion. Likewise Cherington filled in the pieces brilliantly so that the Sox could win in 2013 without selling out the farm system. And Cherington has built a very strong farm system. He was part of its buildup when Theo was here and he maintained and guarded the farm system, maybe more than he should have at times, but if you're going to err, you err on the side of caution. We don't need an AJ Preller. That said, Cherington's decisions (or was it Henry's) not to sign Lester or spend the top dollars on Abreu, and the dealing of Lester and Lackey for major league "talent" was highly questionable. And results are the bottom line. The Sox have been lousy three of the past four years. If the Sox dumped Cherington because of lack of patience, shame on them, but if they dumped him because they feel that short-term and long-term Dombrowski is a better GM, then I'm alright with it. They better be right about that. Based on Dombrowski's track record, they have a good shot at being right about it, but he will not have been left a bad situation other than a clogged up payroll, depending on how far Henry is willing to go over the threshold. But he hardly left Dombrowski a bad ballclub. He's got a strong farm system to work with and there's a young core that has just started to emerge. Cherington should get credit for that, too. Theo is the best GM I've seen the Sox had and I'll always wonder how good they would have been had he been able to run the club as he sees fit, and didn't have to try to reconcile the business end of things. I guess we'll find out by watching the Cubs. Cherington had his faults (judging major league talent first and foremost), but he was no Ruben Amaro. Gospel my friend
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 1, 2015 0:18:09 GMT -5
I'm as big a Theo fan as anybody else. I wish that he would have left the Cubs to take Lucchino's place. That said, you're reconstructing history if you're telling me that when Theo left they weren't in disarray. They had just choked away the biggest September lead. Lester, at that point, was the only sure thing they had in the rotation as Beckett, Buchholz, and Lackey had been dealing with injuries to varying degrees and there was little help in the farm system. They were saddled with Carl Crawford's contract. The farm system had a period where nothing major was being produced except for Rizzo who had been dealt away. In hindsight it could be argued the Sox would have been better off keeping Beltre and Rizzo, although the LA Dodgers trade resulted in enough money being freed up to allow Cherington to make a bunch of moves that helped win the 2013 World Series. Theo didn't leave Cherington the 62 Mets, but he did leave him a team that was kind of on the way down and Cherington was handcuffed that first year as he got stuck with Valentine. Cherington the GM made a lot of surprisingly good short-term moves that resulted in an unbelievable World Championship of 2013, and while Theo gets the same kind of credit in my mind that Duquette in 2004 did for leaving a strong core, it was Epstein that made the moves to make the 2004 team a Champion. Likewise Cherington filled in the pieces brilliantly so that the Sox could win in 2013 without selling out the farm system. And Cherington has built a very strong farm system. He was part of its buildup when Theo was here and he maintained and guarded the farm system, maybe more than he should have at times, but if you're going to err, you err on the side of caution. We don't need an AJ Preller. That said, Cherington's decisions (or was it Henry's) not to sign Lester or spend the top dollars on Abreu, and the dealing of Lester and Lackey for major league "talent" was highly questionable. And results are the bottom line. The Sox have been lousy three of the past four years. If the Sox dumped Cherington because of lack of patience, shame on them, but if they dumped him because they feel that short-term and long-term Dombrowski is a better GM, then I'm alright with it. They better be right about that. Based on Dombrowski's track record, they have a good shot at being right about it, but he will not have been left a bad situation other than a clogged up payroll, depending on how far Henry is willing to go over the threshold. But he hardly left Dombrowski a bad ballclub. He's got a strong farm system to work with and there's a young core that has just started to emerge. Cherington should get credit for that, too. Theo is the best GM I've seen the Sox had and I'll always wonder how good they would have been had he been able to run the club as he sees fit, and didn't have to try to reconcile the business end of things. I guess we'll find out by watching the Cubs. Cherington had his faults (judging major league talent first and foremost), but he was no Ruben Amaro. They had down years in 2012, almost all of them, but Theo left Cherington with plenty of good players. Cherington compounded the mistakes Theo made by trading Reddick and Lowrie away for garbage relievers. The situation was bad before the Punto trade, but not as bad as people make it out to be. It seemed worse because everyone was underperforming at the time. Had the Punto trade never been made, Cherington could've had this lineup in 2013 with about 12 million to spend C Salty 1B AGone 2B Pedroia 3B Lowrie SS Iggy LF Crawford/Nava CF Ellsbury RF Reddick SP1 Lester SP2 Buch SP3 Lackey SP4 Doubront SP5 Beckett I agree Cherington was no Ruben Amaro, however, he was one of the most horrendous evaluators of pitching I have ever seen. Almost none of his pitching moves worked out better than expected, and this team's staff is in shambles. Because of this, I think he had to go. That's not accurate. You say that Cherington made a deal for a garbage reliever when he dealt Jed Lowrie for Mark Melancon. Last time I checked Melancon wasn't a garbage reliever. He was a closer on a very good Pirates team after being a very good setup man. The Sox traded Jed Lowrie, a very fragile guy who never became what we hoped he would become because he was always getting injured. Melancon stunk early on with the Sox, and got buried by Bobby V who figured Melancon wouldn't be able to turn it around. Of course he did, but by then he was sent to the Pirates in a deal for Hanrahan which would have been a bust if Holt hadn't developed into a useful player for the Sox, a player not that unlike Jed Lowrie, except Holt actually can stay on the field for more than a few weeks at a time. The Reddick deal for Bailey was a bust because like Lowrie, Bailey couldn't stay healthy either, which Ben C. should have known. I didn't mourn the loss of Reddick because the guy was a hacker as a hitter. He's been a lot better than I thought he would be, so yes, that was not a good deal. The 2012 team was still hung over from the 2011 season and having lost Papelbon and having gained Bobby V, it was not going to be a good team. Lackey was out all season, and the Sox got the Clay Buchholz that you usually see after Buchholz is coming off an injury (a guy I hope we don't see in 2016), and Beckett was just about done by then. I think Theo knew that the end of 2011 would be a good time to abandon ship.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 1, 2015 0:24:11 GMT -5
I'm as big a Theo fan as anybody else. I wish that he would have left the Cubs to take Lucchino's place. That said, you're reconstructing history if you're telling me that when Theo left they weren't in disarray. They had just choked away the biggest September lead. Lester, at that point, was the only sure thing they had in the rotation as Beckett, Buchholz, and Lackey had been dealing with injuries to varying degrees and there was little help in the farm system. They were saddled with Carl Crawford's contract. The farm system had a period where nothing major was being produced except for Rizzo who had been dealt away. In hindsight it could be argued the Sox would have been better off keeping Beltre and Rizzo, although the LA Dodgers trade resulted in enough money being freed up to allow Cherington to make a bunch of moves that helped win the 2013 World Series. Theo didn't leave Cherington the 62 Mets, but he did leave him a team that was kind of on the way down and Cherington was handcuffed that first year as he got stuck with Valentine. Cherington the GM made a lot of surprisingly good short-term moves that resulted in an unbelievable World Championship of 2013, and while Theo gets the same kind of credit in my mind that Duquette in 2004 did for leaving a strong core, it was Epstein that made the moves to make the 2004 team a Champion. Likewise Cherington filled in the pieces brilliantly so that the Sox could win in 2013 without selling out the farm system. And Cherington has built a very strong farm system. He was part of its buildup when Theo was here and he maintained and guarded the farm system, maybe more than he should have at times, but if you're going to err, you err on the side of caution. We don't need an AJ Preller. That said, Cherington's decisions (or was it Henry's) not to sign Lester or spend the top dollars on Abreu, and the dealing of Lester and Lackey for major league "talent" was highly questionable. And results are the bottom line. The Sox have been lousy three of the past four years. If the Sox dumped Cherington because of lack of patience, shame on them, but if they dumped him because they feel that short-term and long-term Dombrowski is a better GM, then I'm alright with it. They better be right about that. Based on Dombrowski's track record, they have a good shot at being right about it, but he will not have been left a bad situation other than a clogged up payroll, depending on how far Henry is willing to go over the threshold. But he hardly left Dombrowski a bad ballclub. He's got a strong farm system to work with and there's a young core that has just started to emerge. Cherington should get credit for that, too. Theo is the best GM I've seen the Sox had and I'll always wonder how good they would have been had he been able to run the club as he sees fit, and didn't have to try to reconcile the business end of things. I guess we'll find out by watching the Cubs. Cherington had his faults (judging major league talent first and foremost), but he was no Ruben Amaro. They had down years in 2012, almost all of them, but Theo left Cherington with plenty of good players. Cherington compounded the mistakes Theo made by trading Reddick and Lowrie away for garbage relievers. The situation was bad before the Punto trade, but not as bad as people make it out to be. It seemed worse because everyone was underperforming at the time. Had the Punto trade never been made, Cherington could've had this lineup in 2013 with about 12 million to spend C Salty 1B AGone 2B Pedroia 3B Lowrie SS Iggy LF Crawford/Nava CF Ellsbury RF Reddick SP1 Lester SP2 Buch SP3 Lackey SP4 Doubront SP5 Beckett I agree Cherington was no Ruben Amaro, however, he was one of the most horrendous evaluators of pitching I have ever seen. Almost none of his pitching moves worked out better than expected, and this team's staff is in shambles. Because of this, I think he had to go. Your last point I won't argue with because I agree with it. The moves made at the major league level weren't the greatest. I wasn't pleased with what the Sox came away with more Lester and Lackey. They had the right idea when they dealt Miller, and I think they could have gotten more for Lester and Lackey. I never agreed with the "Let's go into the season with four mid tier starters and a good starter who can't pitch more than a 150 innings in a season, and let's see how we go." The truth is that the Sandoval, Hanley, and Porcello signings sunk Ben C. I'm surprised Hanley was as bad as he is in LF. I wasn't expecting Yaz, but he was brutal. I never cared for the Sandoval signing, but I understood why he did it. I didn't have a huge issue with Porcello. I didn't think he'd be as bad, and I never considered $20 million/year to be ace money at this point. However I didn't think it would be the kind of dough you pay a guy who's pitching near replacement level though, and I didn't think Porcello would be replacement level. The major league talent evaluation ultimately was Ben's undoing, but the complete picture of him as a GM isn't bad. The farm system is doing very well which presents the Sox with many good options, the young core is starting to mature, and that 2013 World Series flag will fly forever, something that Ben had a lot to do with, will fly forever. That outweighs the stench of 2012, 2014, and 2015.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Sept 1, 2015 11:23:54 GMT -5
They had down years in 2012, almost all of them, but Theo left Cherington with plenty of good players. Cherington compounded the mistakes Theo made by trading Reddick and Lowrie away for garbage relievers. The situation was bad before the Punto trade, but not as bad as people make it out to be. It seemed worse because everyone was underperforming at the time. Had the Punto trade never been made, Cherington could've had this lineup in 2013 with about 12 million to spend C Salty 1B AGone 2B Pedroia 3B Lowrie SS Iggy LF Crawford/Nava CF Ellsbury RF Reddick SP1 Lester SP2 Buch SP3 Lackey SP4 Doubront SP5 Beckett I agree Cherington was no Ruben Amaro, however, he was one of the most horrendous evaluators of pitching I have ever seen. Almost none of his pitching moves worked out better than expected, and this team's staff is in shambles. Because of this, I think he had to go. That's not accurate. You say that Cherington made a deal for a garbage reliever when he dealt Jed Lowrie for Mark Melancon. Last time I checked Melancon wasn't a garbage reliever. He was a closer on a very good Pirates team after being a very good setup man. The Sox traded Jed Lowrie, a very fragile guy who never became what we hoped he would become because he was always getting injured. Melancon stunk early on with the Sox, and got buried by Bobby V who figured Melancon wouldn't be able to turn it around. Of course he did, but by then he was sent to the Pirates in a deal for Hanrahan which would have been a bust if Holt hadn't developed into a useful player for the Sox, a player not that unlike Jed Lowrie, except Holt actually can stay on the field for more than a few weeks at a time. The Reddick deal for Bailey was a bust because like Lowrie, Bailey couldn't stay healthy either, which Ben C. should have known. I didn't mourn the loss of Reddick because the guy was a hacker as a hitter. He's been a lot better than I thought he would be, so yes, that was not a good deal. The 2012 team was still hung over from the 2011 season and having lost Papelbon and having gained Bobby V, it was not going to be a good team. Lackey was out all season, and the Sox got the Clay Buchholz that you usually see after Buchholz is coming off an injury (a guy I hope we don't see in 2016), and Beckett was just about done by then. I think Theo knew that the end of 2011 would be a good time to abandon ship. Melancon was a garbage reliever with us, but it wouldn't have been THAT bad of a trade if we had held on to him. Instead, we traded him for high peripherals, low ERA Hanrahan after he had shown improvment, another one of Ben's "genius" moves. Yes, we got Holt back but we could've gotten him for a lot less than Melancon and his team control.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Sept 1, 2015 11:34:24 GMT -5
I wonder to what extent the Red Sox would have considered a Shapiro and Cherington combo vs. Dombroski and Wren/O'Dowd/Hazen combo, particularly given how readily the Indians let Shapiro go with no compensation to the Jays. There clearly are a lot of good things that Cherington and his staff have done to build the Red Sox farm system to one of the best in MLB. I would hate to lose all that player development talent to the Cubs and whereever Cherington ends up and have Dombroski bring in all of his guys.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 1, 2015 11:36:53 GMT -5
Melancon was a garbage reliever with us, but it wouldn't have been THAT bad of a trade if we had held on to him. Instead, we traded him for high peripherals, low ERA Hanrahan after he had shown improvment, another one of Ben's "genius" moves. Yes, we got Holt back but we could've gotten him for a lot less than Melancon and his team control. I'm sorry, but you cannot criticize a GM for trading Melancon for Hanrahan without crediting him acquiring Holt in the same deal. You're saying he's an idiot and lucky at the same time. Maybe the deal would have fallen through if he didn't get Holt.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Sept 1, 2015 12:41:30 GMT -5
Melancon was a garbage reliever with us, but it wouldn't have been THAT bad of a trade if we had held on to him. Instead, we traded him for high peripherals, low ERA Hanrahan after he had shown improvment, another one of Ben's "genius" moves. Yes, we got Holt back but we could've gotten him for a lot less than Melancon and his team control. We get it, you hate Cherington. You've made that clear enough. Now that that's established, can we move on without the name calling? Not trying to be a mod - just annoying to click on a thread looking forward to reading a cogent point, only to see the same gratuitous name calling-based argumentation again and again and again.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Sept 1, 2015 16:53:50 GMT -5
Ben's undoing, but the complete picture of him as a GM isn't bad. The farm system is doing very well which presents the Sox with many good options, the young core is starting to mature, and that 2013 World Series flag will fly forever, something that Ben has a lot to do with, will fly forever. That outweighs the stench of 2012, 2014, and 2015. You are writing with great sensibilities on behalf of Cherington, and as a guy who has been frustrated at the losing seasons under his regime, they have been good reminders of his work in running the club. Thank you. I think the decision to replace him was the right one, but I will feel sad for him if the young core goes on to great things with him not being there.
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 87
|
Post by brisox on Sept 2, 2015 13:18:34 GMT -5
Agreed, but Gammons is, and has been, hinting that there are more defections coming. Perhaps, but Gammons focuses his attention on major leagues and pro scouts, so most of his sources will be in that area ... seems pretty clear from the quote in the ESPN piece art posted earlier that Dombrowski is very much keeping as much of the international, amateur scouting, and player development staff together as he can. But the piece pointedly goes on to say only that Dombrowski is meeting with the professional scouting staff. Doesn't necessarily mean there's going to be a huge purge, but it's underperformed for sure, so Dombrowski is going to try to figure out why. I'm actually pretty encouraged by everything I've seen so far. Besides, Gammons isn't quite the reporter he used to be. He could just be spitballing. I find it funny that people perceive this about Gammons, there is not a person in baseball who does not take a call from Gammo he simply does not divulge everything he gets because he is a class act and its the reason everyone takes his calls, they know he won't bash them or leak info that effects timed decisions they are making. How may people do you think are taking CHBs calls? I would be very worried about Theo cleaning us out. All he has to do is offer a promotion to desired candidate and there is nothing the Sox can do to stop it, even if they are under contract. You think Theo wants the best ISD in the game enough to invent a VP of IS role?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 3, 2015 0:37:20 GMT -5
Yeah, don't think I haven't thought about that.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Sept 3, 2015 5:47:27 GMT -5
I am beginnining to really hope Mike Hazen is named GM. I strongly suspect a number of people in the organization -- people who were hired by Cherington or even Epstein -- are beginning to wonder about their job security and may be starting to listen to offers. Hazen being named GM might help in this regard.
Gammons is clearly promoting the idea; he probably knows something.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Sept 3, 2015 20:39:34 GMT -5
“@jonmorosi: #RedSox assistant GM Mike Hazen among candidates #Brewers considering for GM job, sources tell @ken_Rosenthal and me. (1/2)”
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Sept 4, 2015 12:26:47 GMT -5
Does anyone have any thoughts on where Cherington might go? It would be a little surprising to see him immediately land a GM job, but I think a team that isn't expected to compete (Brewers?) for a few years and is interested in a well-stocked farm system would strongly consider him.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Sept 4, 2015 13:14:48 GMT -5
So when should we expect a GM hire? Before the end of the season?
|
|
Smittyw
Veteran
Posts: 1,286
Member is Online
|
Post by Smittyw on Sept 4, 2015 13:30:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Sept 4, 2015 15:05:36 GMT -5
Ugh. I read that article, but I guess i skipped over the final 2 sentences. Towers has failed in 2 different places; in each one with a different philosophy that was too gimicky. In San Diego he tried to create a pitcher and OBP focussed team which wasn't a bad idea, but he couldn't do it. And, in Arizona he went for a "gritty?" team?? I know less about O'Dowd, but I dislike his focus on "his type of guys" in the draft rather than the best player available. DiPoto is my pick; I really like his analytical approach to the daily games.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Sept 4, 2015 21:29:48 GMT -5
Hoping for DiPoto or Hazen, really dislike the other names I've heard mentioned. I also like David Forst, Jason McLeod and Billy Eppler, but those are all really unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Sept 5, 2015 19:12:40 GMT -5
|
|
|