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 ajs1994 on Apr 16, 2016 18:41:59 GMT -5
Right, but then again, how are we going to get a top end pitcher like you suggest, if the low end market seems to be a 25-50ish prospect, a 50-75 prospect, a fringe 100 prospect, a solid 4 starter, and a meh prospect? We no longer have Guerra or Margot. So we can't start an offer with those pieces. So we're either giving up one of our top 4, or not getting a high end talent. And again, this seems to be the low end of a return for a top end talent. I would trade Swihart and/or Devers for the right guy like Gray. Ok thanks. I just wanted to know exactly what you actually wanted to do, so a Devers and Swihart +Johnson/Travis type deal might do it. I wouldn't really do that, but that's mostly because I don't think we're in too bad a spot right now with pitching.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 16, 2016 18:46:18 GMT -5
I mean, the Cardinals are pretty good. Yea they are, but they made a lot of trades using prospects and Young players to make that happen.Unless I'm forgetting someone, you have to go pretty far back to find an example of them doing that. Holliday was all the way back in '09. They traded for Hayward, but Miller wasn't a prospect at that point.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 16, 2016 18:56:59 GMT -5
Yea they are, but they made a lot of trades using prospects and Young players to make that happen.Unless I'm forgetting someone, you have to go pretty far back to find an example of them doing that. Holliday was all the way back in '09. They traded for Hayward, but Miller wasn't a prospect at that point. Off the top of my head theres the Heyward deal and the Lackey deal that helped make them a good team last year. They traded two young pitchers with many years of team control for older players with much less team control to try and win a title. That's like us trading EROD and Owens.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 16, 2016 20:57:25 GMT -5
None of the guys traded in the Lackey or Heyward deals was close to being a prospect and all had much more MLB service time than Rodriguez or Owens. It's more like us trading Rusney Castillo or Joe Kelly (circa 2016) or Brock Holt.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 16, 2016 21:23:42 GMT -5
None of the guys traded in the Lackey or Heyward deals was close to being a prospect and all had much more MLB service time than Rodriguez or Owens. It's more like us trading Rusney Castillo or Joe Kelly (circa 2016) or Brock Holt. I never said Miller or Kelly were prospects, I called them young players. In the Heyward trade it does say they traded Miller and a prospect. They also traded prospects/young players for Holliday years back. No team is going to consistently win with only homegrown talent and free agents.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Apr 16, 2016 22:09:45 GMT -5
Targeting and signing Chris Young instead of a left-handed outfielder, when you already had a RHH platoon outfielder on the roster, looks clearly like a mistake. Brock Holt is a very good player, but he's a very good player because of his versatility. If he's only going to be the long half of a LF platoon, that's poor roster construction. If Castillo was going to get such little rope, they needed to acquire a starting-caliber corner outfielder in the offseason. If Pablo Sandoval was going to get such little rope, they needed to trade him over the offseason before what little remained of his value evaporated. The starting rotation still looks suspect. Steven Wright had a great first start, but the jury is still out, to say the least. Dombrowski could have acquired another starting pitcher (ADD: or kept Miley as a stabilizing force in the rotation) rather than investing his trade capital in a closer (one who has not looked quite as dominant in the early going as he has in years past). Time will tell. But even beyond the above, I haven't like a decent chunk of the day-to-day roster movement (e.g., calling up Rutledge and now Hernandez). Being flexible is to be commended, but getting it right in the first instance would be even better. ADD2: this Brian MacPherson article is along the same lines as the above. I certainly see your points, but might it be that Holt and Shaw were the plan all along? Give Rusney and Pablo a chance, but put your best players on the field on opening day? Holt deserves to play, not only for his versatility. You do have the lefty Benintendi ready at least for a September callup like Ellsbury had. When you say closer, do you mean Kimbrel? or Smith? It's early, but Kimbrel looks as dominant (to me) as he ever has, especially now that he's got the brilliant Vasquez to work with. Smith may be back for the Yankees series, and should also benefit from working with Vasquez. Porcello, Kelly and Wright already look good for a 3-4-5. As ericmvan points out, Buchholz has always been a slow starter. Let's see what Vasquez does for him. Sure I'm a fanboy, but to me this looks like the Red Sox are about to run away with the division early, and never look back. (ADD: somebody is reading ericmvan's posts about Wright: www.providencejournal.com/sports/20160417/steven-wright-making-case-to-stick-in-rotation/?Start=1)
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 16, 2016 23:35:52 GMT -5
Cherington deserves a lot of credit for this team's success: Link
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on May 17, 2016 5:54:13 GMT -5
Cherington deserves a lot of credit for this team's success: Link Theo deserves more. He drafted/signed; Pedey, Xander, Mookie, JBJ, Shaw and Vazquez. Alex didn't mention that. INCREDIBLE!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 17, 2016 6:58:15 GMT -5
Cherington deserves a lot of credit for this team's success: Link Theo deserves more. He drafted/signed; Pedey, Xander, Mookie, JBJ, Shaw and Vazquez. Alex didn't mention that. INCREDIBLE! You know how tempting it would be for a GM of a team which needs to be patient to let their prospects develop to trade those prospects to save his job?
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on May 17, 2016 7:06:16 GMT -5
Theo deserves more. He drafted/signed; Pedey, Xander, Mookie, JBJ, Shaw and Vazquez. Alex didn't mention that. INCREDIBLE! You know how tempting it would be for a GM of a team which needs to be patient to let their prospects develop to trade those prospects to save his job? Not as difficult as finding them.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 17, 2016 7:11:10 GMT -5
To be fair, Cherington was farm director when Pedroia was drafted and assistant GM when the other guys were drafted or signed. He likely played as big a role in their acquisition (if not more so) than Theo.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 17, 2016 7:54:01 GMT -5
I hate this who deserves credit game. DD deserves the credit. He's at the helm and made the decisions to put he team where it is. All those players Theo got were around for 3 of the last 4 years and they finished last. Sure some were too young then but who's fault was it the cupboard was bare? Do we want to give The Duke the credit for the 2004 WS? It's just a fools game. To have a successful team it's about finding the right mix.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 17, 2016 8:05:13 GMT -5
/I hate this who deserves credit game. /<Immediately issues hot take on who deserves credit.>
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on May 17, 2016 8:09:58 GMT -5
Nevermind
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on May 17, 2016 8:43:47 GMT -5
I feel for Cherington, insofar as I wonder to what extent he actually wanted to make a lot of the moves that backfired. Did Cherington really want Cespedes and not prospects? Craig and Kelly and not prospects? To sign the "batz" and figure it out later? Most of the ugly moves that have happened since 2013 have been very obviously driven by the win-now mandate.
To add, I liked the Chris Young deal (and still do) because it was the kind of deal I always want to see the Red Sox making. Short term, reasonable cost, only in money, has a clear role that he's quite good at, veteran player, has a wall ball swing. Those are the deals that the Red Sox should be making in my mind. It's the best way to flex the financial muscle. Give me the Chris Youngs of the world please.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 17, 2016 9:12:10 GMT -5
Cherington basically built the system in exactly the same manner Epstein built the Cubs. Theo just had more job security. He also had carte blanche to do what he liked, while Cherington seems to have had some significant pressure to stay competitive through the rebuild. The result was some mixed bag trades (Lackey, although I still think the thinking behind acquiring Kelly was sound...he just never panned out; Lester was OK, because Porcello is probably going to be #2 quality going forward, Miller got ERod but probably should've been re-signed), and overspending on FAs. But really, the Sox are in pretty much the same place this year that the Cubs were last year. Benintendi and Moncada figure to be their Russell and Schwarber (roughly speaking). I do think that Dombrowski deserves a lot of credit for the final roster construction (and a decisive "performance plays" mandate), but the foundation of the team has a lot to to with B.C.'s vision.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 17, 2016 9:42:44 GMT -5
Yeah, DD deserves all the credit by blowing the competition out of the water with an insane offer to the best starter on the market and by blowing away the competition in getting the best reliever by offering the best prospects he worked so hard to acquire.
I guess the Yankees fans were right when they said Cashman was a genius in the 2008-09 offseason when he acquired the best three free agents on the market.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on May 17, 2016 10:49:50 GMT -5
I do actually give Duke a lot of credit for 2004. And Theo a lot for 2013. And if they were to win this year (#knockonwood) then I'd have to give Ben a lot of the credit. But it's also important that new people came in those years. New voices in the managerial role (or at least it's methods) played a role. You needed un-attached GM's to move Nomar, A-Gon/Punto/etc., Hanley/Panda/Miley and whatever other tough decisions there are this year (whether or not they pan out).
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on May 17, 2016 12:59:25 GMT -5
Given that a lot of the same people worked under Theo, Cherrington and Dombroski I'd give credit to the entire organization for the success over the last 10+ years in player development. Despite the last place finishes it has been a very successful run.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 17, 2016 13:13:23 GMT -5
Given that a lot of the same people worked under Theo, Cherrington and Dombroski I'd give credit to the entire organization for the success over the last 10+ years in player development. Despite the last place finishes it has been a very successful run. Yes, I very much agree with this. Also, the Red Sox are tied with the Giants for the most successful franchise thus far this century, which is a great change from what we had previously. Hiccups be damned, this is awesome.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 17, 2016 13:14:34 GMT -5
Given that a lot of the same people worked under Theo, Cherrington and Dombroski I'd give credit to the entire organization for the success over the last 10+ years in player development. Despite the last place finishes it has been a very successful run. Yes, I very much agree with this. Also, the Red Sox are tied with the Giants for the most successful franchise thus far this century, which is a great change from what we had previously. Hiccups be damned, this is awesome. Heh, let's duplicate the early 1900s.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 17, 2016 13:15:30 GMT -5
Given that a lot of the same people worked under Theo, Cherrington and Dombroski I'd give credit to the entire organization for the success over the last 10+ years in player development. Despite the last place finishes it has been a very successful run. We have to look no further than the current lineup to see just how successful. The majority of days, the entire starting eight is a product of that collaboration.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 17, 2016 13:22:35 GMT -5
Given that a lot of the same people worked under Theo, Cherrington and Dombroski I'd give credit to the entire organization for the success over the last 10+ years in player development. Despite the last place finishes it has been a very successful run. We have to look no further than the current lineup to see just how successful. The majority of days, the entire starting eight is a product of that collaboration. A homegrown starting eight PLUS a top four farm system in baseball even counting the Kimbrel trade. Really well run player development machine the past ten plus years. EDIT: And that was the point of Alex' article I linked to originally. Give credit where it is due and Cherington deserves a lot of it.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 17, 2016 14:27:31 GMT -5
Heh, let's duplicate the early 1900s. Oh yes, absolutely. Let's just not trade Jackie Bradley to the Yankees and curse the franchise for 86 years (:
|
|
|