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.
|
Post by chud on Dec 9, 2016 19:00:52 GMT -5
I thought it might be a good idea to discuss DD's running of the Sox to this point as i know there's a lot of angst in his trading of prospects, which ultimately is the reason we're all on this site in the first place...I love following the Sox prospects, which again is probably redundant since I'm posting here in the first place, but think perspective is also important since the ultimate goal of having a strong farm system is to sustain a winning major league roster with young talent, so here's a few observations from that perspective:
1) DD has traded a lot of the upper tier prospects from the Sox farm system, which is in direct conflict to why we're all here...however, how many major league teams would trade their 40 man roster for the Sox 40 man roster? If they could afford it, i'm not sure there's another team (outside of the Cubs) that wouldn't trade there entire 40 man roster in 2 seconds for the Sox roster
2) Although it's a little concerning that DD has traded away a lot of "unproven" minor league talent, I don't think we can look at this in a vacuum...He did this with a team loaded at the major league level with young proven talent and a team with the potential to win now and for the next 3-4 years...which i'm sure was important to ownership, which from what i've read seemed to feel that the previous regime overemphasized the future for the present
3) DD usually seems to win trades...and i've read a bunch of DD "overpaying" for some players and really think that needs to be put into perspective. The perspective needs to be of the current market place for players/pitchers and not based in previously conceived notions of what we think of certain players/pitchers (i.e. relievers)...as to this point, DD has targeted high end talent/relievers which in this current market are at a premium, regardless of what we're used to
4) I'm no DD apologist, but think to this point he's used the Sox assets (i.e. money, redundant prospects, prospects) to leverage the Sox place within MLB, which right now is at the very top of the AL if not all of MLB in terms of talent/young talent...and although we all like following prospects, if the goal isn't to have a loaded/young talented MLB roster (which we have) then i think following prospects only is a little misguided...just that it's very unusual for an MLB team to be so loaded with young premium talent...and DD IMO has levered that to put the Sox into a position to not waste this very uncommon window of opportunity...
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 9, 2016 23:36:04 GMT -5
I thought it might be a good idea to discuss DD's running of the Sox to this point as i know there's a lot of angst in his trading of prospects, which ultimately is the reason we're all on this site in the first place...I love following the Sox prospects, which again is probably redundant since I'm posting here in the first place, but think perspective is also important since the ultimate goal of having a strong farm system is to sustain a winning major league roster with young talent, so here's a few observations from that perspective: 1) DD has traded a lot of the upper tier prospects from the Sox farm system, which is in direct conflict to why we're all here...however, how many major league teams would trade their 40 man roster for the Sox 40 man roster? If they could afford it, i'm not sure there's another team (outside of the Cubs) that wouldn't trade there entire 40 man roster in 2 seconds for the Sox roster 2) Although it's a little concerning that DD has traded away a lot of "unproven" minor league talent, I don't think we can look at this in a vacuum...He did this with a team loaded at the major league level with young proven talent and a team with the potential to win now and for the next 3-4 years...which i'm sure was important to ownership, which from what i've read seemed to feel that the previous regime overemphasized the future for the present 3) DD usually seems to win trades...and i've read a bunch of DD "overpaying" for some players and really think that needs to be put into perspective. The perspective needs to be of the current market place for players/pitchers and not based in previously conceived notions of what we think of certain players/pitchers (i.e. relievers)...as to this point, DD has targeted high end talent/relievers which in this current market are at a premium, regardless of what we're used to 4) I'm no DD apologist, but think to this point he's used the Sox assets (i.e. money, redundant prospects, prospects) to leverage the Sox place within MLB, which right now is at the very top of the AL if not all of MLB in terms of talent/young talent...and although we all like following prospects, if the goal isn't to have a loaded/young talented MLB roster (which we have) then i think following prospects only is a little misguided...just that it's very unusual for an MLB team to be so loaded with young premium talent...and DD IMO has levered that to put the Sox into a position to not waste this very uncommon window of opportunity... 1) C.H.U.D. is a classic. That screen name cracks me up every time. 2) I think the spectrum is much more complex that "win-now" vs. "prospect hoard." So it's not always easy to frame. From my own standpoint, I've disliked essentially every (major) trade Dombrowski has made so far involving prospects, with the exception (marginally pro-) of the Thornburg deal. And the reason, for me, is much less about prospects as future stars, and much more about prospects as future low-cost production (and current depth). Margot could've helped a lot early last year. Moncada and Kopech later this year. The Pomeranz deal because I thought there were less costly options (though my dislike of that trade is mild). On purely individual, value levels, each trade had its merits, and I think none was particularly good or bad. But they were not made in a vacuum, which leads me to: 3) It's tough to call Kimbrel or Carson Smith a "win" at this point. I think Smith will be. Pomeranz to this point is probably a loss, but it's still very early. Sale, who knows. But when one looks at the overriding direction of the team (and here's my counterpoint), DD has drastically reduced their future flexibility and locked them into a high-salary structure that may very well adversely effect their ability to retain their current players, and almost certainly, pursue new ones. He's taken a huge gamble in obliterating the farm for a three-year window. I don't see that as a wise approach at all for a franchise's long-term health. To me, its impetuous and impatient, and while speeding up the timeline to maximal success, I think it's almost assuredly severely shortened the timeframe of that success, while not at all improving the peak. It's just poor (specifically, selfish) business management in my view: it's the come-in-guts-things-make-yourself-rich-then-run approach. It might be "smart" when viewed from Dombrowski's standpoint, since he'll look good by standing on Cherington's shoulders. But it only helps him, in the long term, it will hurt the franchise significantly, I'm certain.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 9, 2016 23:41:48 GMT -5
I thought it might be a good idea to discuss DD's running of the Sox to this point as i know there's a lot of angst in his trading of prospects, which ultimately is the reason we're all on this site in the first place...I love following the Sox prospects, which again is probably redundant since I'm posting here in the first place, but think perspective is also important since the ultimate goal of having a strong farm system is to sustain a winning major league roster with young talent, so here's a few observations from that perspective: 1) DD has traded a lot of the upper tier prospects from the Sox farm system, which is in direct conflict to why we're all here...however, how many major league teams would trade their 40 man roster for the Sox 40 man roster? If they could afford it, i'm not sure there's another team (outside of the Cubs) that wouldn't trade there entire 40 man roster in 2 seconds for the Sox roster 2) Although it's a little concerning that DD has traded away a lot of "unproven" minor league talent, I don't think we can look at this in a vacuum...He did this with a team loaded at the major league level with young proven talent and a team with the potential to win now and for the next 3-4 years...which i'm sure was important to ownership, which from what i've read seemed to feel that the previous regime overemphasized the future for the present 3) DD usually seems to win trades...and i've read a bunch of DD "overpaying" for some players and really think that needs to be put into perspective. The perspective needs to be of the current market place for players/pitchers and not based in previously conceived notions of what we think of certain players/pitchers (i.e. relievers)...as to this point, DD has targeted high end talent/relievers which in this current market are at a premium, regardless of what we're used to 4) I'm no DD apologist, but think to this point he's used the Sox assets (i.e. money, redundant prospects, prospects) to leverage the Sox place within MLB, which right now is at the very top of the AL if not all of MLB in terms of talent/young talent...and although we all like following prospects, if the goal isn't to have a loaded/young talented MLB roster (which we have) then i think following prospects only is a little misguided...just that it's very unusual for an MLB team to be so loaded with young premium talent...and DD IMO has levered that to put the Sox into a position to not waste this very uncommon window of opportunity... The three-year window they have now isn't uncommon. What WAS uncommon was their opportunity to have a 10+-year window. That has been squandered. Dombrowski traded the exceptional for the banal. This is a team that has three WS this century. Frankly, to me, winning another is ho-hum. So what? Been there, done that. The Sox were on the verge of a dynasty like the '95-2009 Yankees, and DD threw it away. People call him bold, but if you think of it, really, what he did was very timid.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on Dec 10, 2016 0:31:02 GMT -5
He has traded, what, 16 prospects? 19? I lost count. And so far, the only return that has performed to expectations is Ziegler. For two months. I guess jury is still out on the others, but DDo is off to a bad start. It goes to show that not unlike prospects there's no sure thing in baseball.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 10, 2016 1:15:28 GMT -5
I thought it might be a good idea to discuss DD's running of the Sox to this point as i know there's a lot of angst in his trading of prospects, which ultimately is the reason we're all on this site in the first place...I love following the Sox prospects, which again is probably redundant since I'm posting here in the first place, but think perspective is also important since the ultimate goal of having a strong farm system is to sustain a winning major league roster with young talent, so here's a few observations from that perspective: 1) DD has traded a lot of the upper tier prospects from the Sox farm system, which is in direct conflict to why we're all here...however, how many major league teams would trade their 40 man roster for the Sox 40 man roster? If they could afford it, i'm not sure there's another team (outside of the Cubs) that wouldn't trade there entire 40 man roster in 2 seconds for the Sox roster 2) Although it's a little concerning that DD has traded away a lot of "unproven" minor league talent, I don't think we can look at this in a vacuum...He did this with a team loaded at the major league level with young proven talent and a team with the potential to win now and for the next 3-4 years...which i'm sure was important to ownership, which from what i've read seemed to feel that the previous regime overemphasized the future for the present 3) DD usually seems to win trades...and i've read a bunch of DD "overpaying" for some players and really think that needs to be put into perspective. The perspective needs to be of the current market place for players/pitchers and not based in previously conceived notions of what we think of certain players/pitchers (i.e. relievers)...as to this point, DD has targeted high end talent/relievers which in this current market are at a premium, regardless of what we're used to 4) I'm no DD apologist, but think to this point he's used the Sox assets (i.e. money, redundant prospects, prospects) to leverage the Sox place within MLB, which right now is at the very top of the AL if not all of MLB in terms of talent/young talent...and although we all like following prospects, if the goal isn't to have a loaded/young talented MLB roster (which we have) then i think following prospects only is a little misguided...just that it's very unusual for an MLB team to be so loaded with young premium talent...and DD IMO has levered that to put the Sox into a position to not waste this very uncommon window of opportunity... The three-year window they have now isn't uncommon. What WAS uncommon was their opportunity to have a 10+-year window. That has been squandered. Dombrowski traded the exceptional for the banal. This is a team that has three WS this century. Frankly, to me, winning another is ho-hum. So what? Been there, done that. The Sox were on the verge of a dynasty like the '95-2009 Yankees, and DD threw it away. People call him bold, but if you think of it, really, what he did was very timid. Why can't we still be like the Yankees? I'm so confused by this line of thinking. Those Yankees teams were made up of a strong core of homegrown talent, big time trades and free agent signings. There main core was there for years. If we're smart and lock up our young players we can easily have a 10 year run still. We have if not the best, the 2nd best young core in Baseball. We still have Devers and Groome in minors. We will draft, sign and develop more prospects over the next 3-4 years. We will resign players, we will sign free agents and we will make more trades. I don't get or agree with all of DD moves. For example I could live with Espinoza trade because i thought it completed team. It gave them enough pitching. So I never really thought the Sale interest was that real. Just trader Dave seeing if he can get a great deal. Paying the price he did for Pomeranz, then getting Sale looks very bad in my opinion. Seems very short sighted. For years I wanted a GM that could know when to sell high on prospects and tell the difference between the truly elite ones and the good ones. DD record on trades is very good. So either he is going to look like a genius 2-4 years from now or like a total moron. I really can't wait to see how this unfolds.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on Dec 10, 2016 23:02:08 GMT -5
My reaction to what DD has given up in each of the trades (except the 1 for 1 Espinoza deal) has been..."and HIM too???!!!"
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 10, 2016 23:02:40 GMT -5
The three-year window they have now isn't uncommon. What WAS uncommon was their opportunity to have a 10+-year window. That has been squandered. Dombrowski traded the exceptional for the banal. This is a team that has three WS this century. Frankly, to me, winning another is ho-hum. So what? Been there, done that. The Sox were on the verge of a dynasty like the '95-2009 Yankees, and DD threw it away. People call him bold, but if you think of it, really, what he did was very timid. Why can't we still be like the Yankees? I'm so confused by this line of thinking. Those Yankees teams were made up of a strong core of homegrown talent, big time trades and free agent signings. There main core was there for years. If we're smart and lock up our young players we can easily have a 10 year run still. We have if not the best, the 2nd best young core in Baseball. We still have Devers and Groome in minors. We will draft, sign and develop more prospects over the next 3-4 years. We will resign players, we will sign free agents and we will make more trades. I don't get or agree with all of DD moves. For example I could live with Espinoza trade because i thought it completed team. It gave them enough pitching. So I never really thought the Sale interest was that real. Just trader Dave seeing if he can get a great deal. Paying the price he did for Pomeranz, then getting Sale looks very bad in my opinion. Seems very short sighted. For years I wanted a GM that could know when to sell high on prospects and tell the difference between the truly elite ones and the good ones. DD record on trades is very good. So either he is going to look like a genius 2-4 years from now or like a total moron. I really can't wait to see how this unfolds. I went over the economics in another thread. It's impossible to keep the players that they have now. Yes, if they start trading some, it's theoretically possible, just as if they have ludicrous draft luck, it's possible. But the likelihood is probably an order of magnitude or two lower. It will be fascinating to watch, though. Particularly the media response in 2-3 years.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Dec 10, 2016 23:17:27 GMT -5
We dont know what Henry's expectations are with regard to money spent on salaries and how soon DD is expected to win. I think if the team wins a ring or two in short order we'll be happy. Maybe we all got a little spoiled with three rings in ten years on the heels of an 86 year drought.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 10, 2016 23:35:03 GMT -5
The three-year window they have now isn't uncommon. What WAS uncommon was their opportunity to have a 10+-year window. That has been squandered. Dombrowski traded the exceptional for the banal. This is a team that has three WS this century. Frankly, to me, winning another is ho-hum. So what? Been there, done that. The Sox were on the verge of a dynasty like the '95-2009 Yankees, and DD threw it away. People call him bold, but if you think of it, really, what he did was very timid. Why can't we still be like the Yankees? I'm so confused by this line of thinking. Those Yankees teams were made up of a strong core of homegrown talent, big time trades and free agent signings. There main core was there for years. If we're smart and lock up our young players we can easily have a 10 year run still. We have if not the best, the 2nd best young core in Baseball. We still have Devers and Groome in minors. We will draft, sign and develop more prospects over the next 3-4 years. We will resign players, we will sign free agents and we will make more trades. I don't get or agree with all of DD moves. For example I could live with Espinoza trade because i thought it completed team. It gave them enough pitching. So I never really thought the Sale interest was that real. Just trader Dave seeing if he can get a great deal. Paying the price he did for Pomeranz, then getting Sale looks very bad in my opinion. Seems very short sighted. For years I wanted a GM that could know when to sell high on prospects and tell the difference between the truly elite ones and the good ones. DD record on trades is very good. So either he is going to look like a genius 2-4 years from now or like a total moron. I really can't wait to see how this unfolds. I agree with you. Your Yankee points are excellent - I agree with them all. I am still stunned that some speak that we had this super 8-10 year window if we stayed the Big-Ben course but we don't have with DD. IMO it is so wrong to be knocking DDD at this point vs Big Ben's performance. We had garbage for pitching. We had a window "this year" because of DD. OFC the ones that think the farm was this 8-10 year window and now it isn't is that they think their Red Sox pitching prospects would hit and close their yes to the possibility that we'll make future trades and signings just as you say. Yet we have been pathetic for so long with pitching prospects. It's just wishful thinking - nothing more.
The fact is, before DD came, our pitching was awful. Clay and ERod were pathetic to start the year. Instead of getting Price the sox could have gotten jeff samardzija, so it's not like Price is a disaster. But Price was an overpay and had one of his worst years and Kimbrel was an overpay had one of his worst years. Without these moves we were stuck with Big Ben's Joe Kelley as a starter and Koji and Taz in the bullpen. So in other words to imply we had a 8-10 year window - it means you had to believe Big Ben would have made the right moves to get pitching. One of the more obviously moves was that he could have gotten Miller instead Koji.
With his track record of 3 last places in his 4 years with a very high payroll, why would anyone think that? OFC this is all on DD now. And just as you say I can't wait. I would have been a bit more patient not rushed the team to be a playoff team this past year but DD did and he got it done. Thus past year was sooooo enjoyable. I get the feeling some red sox fans couldn't enjoy the season we had because they seem to be in love with the idea of prospects rather than watching the team win a lot of games.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2016 0:19:09 GMT -5
Why can't we still be like the Yankees? I'm so confused by this line of thinking. Those Yankees teams were made up of a strong core of homegrown talent, big time trades and free agent signings. There main core was there for years. If we're smart and lock up our young players we can easily have a 10 year run still. We have if not the best, the 2nd best young core in Baseball. We still have Devers and Groome in minors. We will draft, sign and develop more prospects over the next 3-4 years. We will resign players, we will sign free agents and we will make more trades. I don't get or agree with all of DD moves. For example I could live with Espinoza trade because i thought it completed team. It gave them enough pitching. So I never really thought the Sale interest was that real. Just trader Dave seeing if he can get a great deal. Paying the price he did for Pomeranz, then getting Sale looks very bad in my opinion. Seems very short sighted. For years I wanted a GM that could know when to sell high on prospects and tell the difference between the truly elite ones and the good ones. DD record on trades is very good. So either he is going to look like a genius 2-4 years from now or like a total moron. I really can't wait to see how this unfolds. I went over the economics in another thread. It's impossible to keep the players that they have now. Yes, if they start trading some, it's theoretically possible, just as if they have ludicrous draft luck, it's possible. But the likelihood is probably an order of magnitude or two lower. It will be fascinating to watch, though. Particularly the media response in 2-3 years. It can easily be done, but your going to have to take some risks. Like trying to lock up young players now. Look into signing Benintendi and ERod to long term deals when there value is low. You have to lock up Betts. I would look at Bogaerts and Bradley, if you can't get good deals they might need to be traded down the road. Even look at Swihart, you could probably get him to sign for what could turn into a major steal in a year or two. You can't just let all our young guys hit free agency and try and resign them. That will cost way too much, even though I think salaries are about to start going down due to new CBA. We need to do what White Sox have done for years. I don't think you need draft luck, just producing useful players for trades, depth for major league team and a starter like every other year. We won't need a top 5 farm system to compete for the next 10 years. Also if you have to trade a Bogaerts or Bradley down the road, that could give you a bunch of good young players/prospects.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 11, 2016 1:05:09 GMT -5
I went over the economics in another thread. It's impossible to keep the players that they have now. Yes, if they start trading some, it's theoretically possible, just as if they have ludicrous draft luck, it's possible. But the likelihood is probably an order of magnitude or two lower. It will be fascinating to watch, though. Particularly the media response in 2-3 years. It can easily be done, but your going to have to take some risks. Like trying to lock up young players now. Look into signing Benintendi and ERod to long term deals when there value is low. You have to lock up Betts. I would look at Bogaerts and Bradley, if you can't get good deals they might need to be traded down the road. Even look at Swihart, you could probably get him to sign for what could turn into a major steal in a year or two. You can't just let all our young guys hit free agency and try and resign them. That will cost way too much, even though I think salaries are about to start going down due to new CBA. We need to do what White Sox have done for years. I don't think you need draft luck, just producing useful players for trades, depth for major league team and a starter like every other year. We won't need a top 5 farm system to compete for the next 10 years. Also if you have to trade a Bogaerts or Bradley down the road, that could give you a bunch of good young players/prospects. Estimates/salaries for 2020: Price: $31M Porcello: (FA, market value est.): $25M, 5-7 years Sale: (FA, market value est.) $33-35M, 6-10 years ERod: (last arb year, an inflation-adjusted Quintana-like deal would buy out that year and add 2-3 at $10-$15M): $5-$10M (depending on performance) Pomeranz: (FA, possible extension candidate, possible trade candidate): $12-18M (low end, presuming an extension) Wright: (arb 2): $3-5M, depending on role Buchholz: almost guaranteed trade, so I won't include him. Even if Pomeranz gets traded, that's roughly $95-$110M, just on five starting pitchers. Just addressing the young guys, JBJ will be a FA. Betts and Bogaerts will be in their walk years. Assume JBJ signs an extension this winter...a (very) team/friendly deal would be roughly 5 years, 2-5-8-16-20. So Bradley will cost $16M. Betts's best comparo at this point is Trout. So look at Trout's last arb-year buy-out. It's $15.2M. Mookie's a bit older and not quite (maybe) as good, so we'll skip inflation adjustment and call it $15M. But the next year it'll be close to $20M, and after that, by 2022, approaching $35M plus. Bogaerts could probably be extended now at a deal roughly similar to Bradley's. He'd be selling out his walk year at probably $10-$12M and getting 2-4 additional years around 2/3 of what Mookie would. So, 15-20-22-24. For those three, on team-friendly deals, it's about $40M in 2020 but balloons to about $75M in 2022. They still need a 1b, maybe 2b (they've got Pedroia's salary potentially, still), a 3b, a 4th OF, a utility INF, and an entire bullpen including a closer (at which point the salary for a closer will be close to $20M a year). So in 2020, at the low end, you're talking $140M for eight players, and in order to KEEP those players, you have to agree to deals that project a combined salary of roughly $180M two years later. They can't keep the guys they have. It's not possible. Even if Devers is good (I think he will be) and Groome can replace, say, Porcello, by that time, you've still got a $80M rotation and three Bs costing another $40M. That's $120M, again on 8 players. Look at Mitch Moreland: FA scrubs will cost $6-8M a year by then. Who's the closer? Barnes, on an extension? He's still going to cost $4-8M as a walk-year guy. Benintendi will be in his second arb year. What's he going to cost? Even if they plug scrubs in across the board to fill in all of those empty slots (and some young guys like Devers/Groome/Benintendi), at $4M average salary, that's $68M, for 17 players. So, in that unlikely scenario, you're looking at a minimum of $120M for the rotation and three Bs, plus $68M for the other guys. Works, right? Except the next year, you're well over $200M, as the three B's salaries increase, and guys like Devers/Groome get raises, and Benintendi gets arb, etc. They're going to have to (partially) blow up the team, with the young core that they have now becoming the high-$ guys. And, maybe, getting big value (elite prospects) back for Pomeranz, Porcello, JBJ, etc. That's going to reduce their chances of winning and create some "bridge" years.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 11, 2016 1:17:52 GMT -5
To be clear, I'm not saying that they can't keep the young core (Betts-Bogaerts-JBJ-Benintendi-ERod-Wright-Swihart-etc.), but that they can't do that, and keep Price-Sale-Porcello-Kimbrel-Pomeranz et al as well. Some big names will need to be moved. And that's going to mean losing significant performances. Without the minor league depth to infuse more talent, that's going to dramatically effect the team's performance, barring a ton of drafting/development luck.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 11, 2016 1:46:37 GMT -5
Why can't we still be like the Yankees? I'm so confused by this line of thinking. Those Yankees teams were made up of a strong core of homegrown talent, big time trades and free agent signings. There main core was there for years. If we're smart and lock up our young players we can easily have a 10 year run still. We have if not the best, the 2nd best young core in Baseball. We still have Devers and Groome in minors. We will draft, sign and develop more prospects over the next 3-4 years. We will resign players, we will sign free agents and we will make more trades. I don't get or agree with all of DD moves. For example I could live with Espinoza trade because i thought it completed team. It gave them enough pitching. So I never really thought the Sale interest was that real. Just trader Dave seeing if he can get a great deal. Paying the price he did for Pomeranz, then getting Sale looks very bad in my opinion. Seems very short sighted. For years I wanted a GM that could know when to sell high on prospects and tell the difference between the truly elite ones and the good ones. DD record on trades is very good. So either he is going to look like a genius 2-4 years from now or like a total moron. I really can't wait to see how this unfolds. I agree with you. Your Yankee points are excellent - I agree with them all. I am still stunned that some speak that we had this super 8-10 year window if we stayed the Big-Ben course but we don't have with DD. IMO it is so wrong to be knocking DDD at this point vs Big Ben's performance. We had garbage for pitching. We had a window "this year" because of DD. OFC the ones that think the farm was this 8-10 year window and now it isn't is that they think their Red Sox pitching prospects would hit and close their yes to the possibility that we'll make future trades and signings just as you say. Yet we have been pathetic for so long with pitching prospects. It's just wishful thinking - nothing more.
The fact is, before DD came, our pitching was awful. Clay and ERod were pathetic to start the year. Instead of getting Price the sox could have gotten jeff samardzija, so it's not like Price is a disaster. But Price was an overpay and had one of his worst years and Kimbrel was an overpay had one of his worst years. Without these moves we were stuck with Big Ben's Joe Kelley as a starter and Koji and Taz in the bullpen. So in other words to imply we had a 8-10 year window - it means you had to believe Big Ben would have made the right moves to get pitching. One of the more obviously moves was that he could have gotten Miller instead Koji.
With his track record of 3 last places in his 4 years with a very high payroll, why would anyone think that? OFC this is all on DD now. And just as you say I can't wait. I would have been a bit more patient not rushed the team to be a playoff team this past year but DD did and he got it done. Thus past year was sooooo enjoyable. I get the feeling some red sox fans couldn't enjoy the season we had because they seem to be in love with the idea of prospects rather than watching the team win a lot of games.
1) Porcello (that guy who won the Cy Young?) was acquired by Cherington. 2) Miller was acquired by Cherington, and turned into ERod. Yes, he shouldve been re-signed. But Dombrowski chose to trade for Kimbrel. 3) Essentially everyone Dombrowski's traded was acquired by Cherington. 4) The team that was sooooo fun to watch was largely Cherington's, including the major pieces that guys like you wanted to trade for Cole Hamels. 5) Jeff Samardzija? Really? 6) It's not about THIS year, it's about EVERY year.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 11, 2016 1:47:09 GMT -5
It's Bogaerts that is a FA in 2020; Betts and Bradley will be in their walk years (Bradley is a Super-2)
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2016 2:17:51 GMT -5
Well yea you can't keep everyone. Those Yankees teams had very high turnover rates also over their stretch. They just made sure they kept the right elite guys homegrown guts like Jeter, Posada, Williams and Petite. They went through David Cone, David Wells and Mike Mussina just to name a few starting pitchers. They went from Wetteland at closer to Rivera.
In 2020 we don't even know if we'll still have Price, he could opt out after 2018 season. The other thing we don't know is if ownership will blow past luxury tax to keep team together if we win a couple championships. Also the new CBA is what 5 years, so luxury tax should go up starting in 2022.
Also Trader Dave has been great at using a weak Detroit farm system to make trades to improve his team. Why do we need luck drafting and developing players to succeed? We don't need our system to be top 5 like the last 4 years. That was some luck and great development. We just need a good system, even league average should do. Like I said before we'll need depth, prospects for trades and a cheap starter level guy ever couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2016 2:26:40 GMT -5
I agree with you. Your Yankee points are excellent - I agree with them all. I am still stunned that some speak that we had this super 8-10 year window if we stayed the Big-Ben course but we don't have with DD. IMO it is so wrong to be knocking DDD at this point vs Big Ben's performance. We had garbage for pitching. We had a window "this year" because of DD. OFC the ones that think the farm was this 8-10 year window and now it isn't is that they think their Red Sox pitching prospects would hit and close their yes to the possibility that we'll make future trades and signings just as you say. Yet we have been pathetic for so long with pitching prospects. It's just wishful thinking - nothing more.
The fact is, before DD came, our pitching was awful. Clay and ERod were pathetic to start the year. Instead of getting Price the sox could have gotten jeff samardzija, so it's not like Price is a disaster. But Price was an overpay and had one of his worst years and Kimbrel was an overpay had one of his worst years. Without these moves we were stuck with Big Ben's Joe Kelley as a starter and Koji and Taz in the bullpen. So in other words to imply we had a 8-10 year window - it means you had to believe Big Ben would have made the right moves to get pitching. One of the more obviously moves was that he could have gotten Miller instead Koji.
With his track record of 3 last places in his 4 years with a very high payroll, why would anyone think that? OFC this is all on DD now. And just as you say I can't wait. I would have been a bit more patient not rushed the team to be a playoff team this past year but DD did and he got it done. Thus past year was sooooo enjoyable. I get the feeling some red sox fans couldn't enjoy the season we had because they seem to be in love with the idea of prospects rather than watching the team win a lot of games.
1) Porcello (that guy who won the Cy Young?) was acquired by Cherington. 2) Miller was acquired by Cherington, and turned into ERod. Yes, he shouldve been re-signed. But Dombrowski chose to trade for Kimbrel. 3) Essentially everyone Dombrowski's traded was acquired by Cherington. 4) The team that was sooooo fun to watch was largely Cherington's, including the major pieces that guys like you wanted to trade for Cole Hamels. 5) Jeff Samardzija? Really? 6) It's not about THIS year, it's about EVERY year. Even Theo knows sometimes you have to go for it, look at Chapman trade. The Charington model will never result in a Championship. He loves his prospects to much. For prospects lovers Charington was a god, but a team will never produce a completely homegrown Championship team. BTW wasn't it DD who drafted Porcello? DD chose Kimbrel because Charington didn't sign Miller the year before. Just like he didn't resign Lester. Charington was in no way perfect, his faults are why we have DD. How about giving Lackey away?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 11, 2016 9:10:30 GMT -5
The Charington model will never result in a Championship. He loves his prospects to much.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,518
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 11, 2016 9:22:40 GMT -5
Why can't we still be like the Yankees? I'm so confused by this line of thinking. Those Yankees teams were made up of a strong core of homegrown talent, big time trades and free agent signings. There main core was there for years. If we're smart and lock up our young players we can easily have a 10 year run still. We have if not the best, the 2nd best young core in Baseball. We still have Devers and Groome in minors. We will draft, sign and develop more prospects over the next 3-4 years. We will resign players, we will sign free agents and we will make more trades. I don't get or agree with all of DD moves. For example I could live with Espinoza trade because i thought it completed team. It gave them enough pitching. So I never really thought the Sale interest was that real. Just trader Dave seeing if he can get a great deal. Paying the price he did for Pomeranz, then getting Sale looks very bad in my opinion. Seems very short sighted. For years I wanted a GM that could know when to sell high on prospects and tell the difference between the truly elite ones and the good ones. DD record on trades is very good. So either he is going to look like a genius 2-4 years from now or like a total moron. I really can't wait to see how this unfolds. I went over the economics in another thread. It's impossible to keep the players that they have now. Yes, if they start trading some, it's theoretically possible, just as if they have ludicrous draft luck, it's possible. But the likelihood is probably an order of magnitude or two lower. It will be fascinating to watch, though. Particularly the media response in 2-3 years. I think we're like minded in many of our views. Honestly the only guy I "lock up" is Mookie Betts. His skill set should translate well. Bogaerts? I probably don't. Unless his bat is otherworldly, which it could still be, but honestly I'd be pleasantly surprised if he's able to stay at SS over the next three years. I certainly wouldn't want to gamble on that much beyond. I think it's a matter of time until he's a 3b. With Devers at 3b (hoping DD doesn't have to fill a "need" that requires losing Devers), the need for Bogaerts at 3b isn't too strong. I have no desire for the Red Sox to extend JBJ. By time he's a free agent after 2020 he's pushing CF, and his bat isn't consistent enough to be a corner OF. I'd rather see the Red Sox have a young CF on the way. The only other guy I'd like to see get extended is probably Benintendi who is supposed to have an amazing hit tool. So what happens is that as these guys need replacing, there will be very little reinforcements coming from the minor leagues (like Dubon for 2b or SS or Basabe for CF). You can't give big free agent deals for everybody or even replacement free agents and there's not much left to trade, although that can change over the next several years. But I think it's going to be a lot harder. If you're drafting 20 something the next few years, you can't do what Theo did in 2011, and you can't do what the Sox have done on the international market as those rules are changing. I think it's going to be very tough for the Red Sox to replenish their system by the time the Red Sox need those guys ready. So if they can't do that adequately enough and there's not much to deal, the Red Sox are going to have to find free agents that won't cost them a fortune. I think you splurge for what you need that is truly worth splurging for. The 2018-2019 offseason is huge and I remember wanting the Red Sox to go all about for Jose Fernandez, but that unfortunately has changed forever. Kershaw is a free agent, although it will be scary to think what he could fetch. Machado and Donaldson are big ticket items, but both are 3b and if Devers is what we think he is, they thankfully won't be in the market for a 3b. I doubt the Red Sox want to give Bryce Harper $400 million - I think the Yankees are at the head of the line for that "honor". I'd say the guy to save the big $ is Otani, who should be coming over after the 2019 season, when Chris Sale and Rick Porcello see their contracts expire. Maybe by then Groome is knocking on the door? We know Espinoza won't be. I have to say - I wish Dombrowski hadn't done what he has done, but I do understand it, and most of the deals on a 1-1 basis can easily be justified. Dombrowski shops at the top end, no doubt about it, so it's different than what the Yankees of the 80s used to do, where they'd trade a good prospect for a name that was good once upon a time, but the totality of his moves makes me think that beyond the three to four year window the Red Sox can have a big mess for somebody else to clean up toward the beginning of the next decade. I understood the desperation of the Tigers to win now with their octogenarian owner, and never had an issue with what Dombrowski did for the Tigers. I just don't really understand the desperation now with the Red Sox. The Red Sox had themselves a replenishing core that could win 90 something games consistently for maybe as long as a decade giving the Red Sox a lot of opportunity to get themselves at least one trophy. Now Dombrowski is trying to build a 100 win team, but the cost of that is a much shorter window to win, at least I think so as I don't really see the "next wave" of Red Sox talent on the horizon. It's all so contradictory and confusing in a way. Because it's more of a post-season tournament crap shoot where the chance variance that a juggernaut or a 90 win team wins it all is minimal. Yet, when the Red Sox have won their 3 World Championships, it can be argued (at least by their pythagorean record), that they had the best team each year in 2004, 2007, and 2013. They didn't get lucky and pull a 1987 Minnesota Twins, so maybe what Dombrowski did makes sense? Also I have always of the thought that dominating top notch starting pitching is the key giving yourself the best chance of winning the World Series once you get there (kind of remembering the way Johnson and Schilling dominated the Yankees in 2001 or Bumgarner won the Series by himself seemingly in 2014), but I've had many people here tell me I'm misinformed and point out the 2013 Tigers and the Braves teams that only won once, but yet here we are celebrating the Red Sox getting an excellent starter at the cost of a guy who really, really think will be a superstar and a guy who at worse is a dominating closer or at best an ace if his control improves. Meanwhile lost in the joy of obtaining Sale to improve the team (which he does - how can that be argued?), the Red Sox offense has taken a huge downgrade from Ortiz to Moreland) that a potentially significant upgrade in LF and a potential improvement at 3b probably won't make up for (and that doesn't factor in if Pedroia and Ramirez can stay as healthy in 2017 as they were in 2016 given their injury histories). So all in all I don't know that Red Sox are a lot better in 2017 than 2016 but maybe they play closer to their projected pythag record? And that's where the improvement comes from? I still can't figure out why I was more excited to see the Red Sox come away with Moncada in the first place (instead of the Yankees) than I am to see him converted into one of the best pitchers in baseball. I'm trying to be more excited, but I think I feel like I'd be faking it. I'm not unhappy about it, just more like confused. So now my head is spinning, I've confused the crap out of myself, and I'm going to stop posting.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Dec 11, 2016 9:55:23 GMT -5
I agree with you. Your Yankee points are excellent - I agree with them all. I am still stunned that some speak that we had this super 8-10 year window if we stayed the Big-Ben course but we don't have with DD. IMO it is so wrong to be knocking DDD at this point vs Big Ben's performance. We had garbage for pitching. We had a window "this year" because of DD. OFC the ones that think the farm was this 8-10 year window and now it isn't is that they think their Red Sox pitching prospects would hit and close their yes to the possibility that we'll make future trades and signings just as you say. Yet we have been pathetic for so long with pitching prospects. It's just wishful thinking - nothing more.
The fact is, before DD came, our pitching was awful. Clay and ERod were pathetic to start the year. Instead of getting Price the sox could have gotten jeff samardzija, so it's not like Price is a disaster. But Price was an overpay and had one of his worst years and Kimbrel was an overpay had one of his worst years. Without these moves we were stuck with Big Ben's Joe Kelley as a starter and Koji and Taz in the bullpen. So in other words to imply we had a 8-10 year window - it means you had to believe Big Ben would have made the right moves to get pitching. One of the more obviously moves was that he could have gotten Miller instead Koji.
With his track record of 3 last places in his 4 years with a very high payroll, why would anyone think that? OFC this is all on DD now. And just as you say I can't wait. I would have been a bit more patient not rushed the team to be a playoff team this past year but DD did and he got it done. Thus past year was sooooo enjoyable. I get the feeling some red sox fans couldn't enjoy the season we had because they seem to be in love with the idea of prospects rather than watching the team win a lot of games.
1) Porcello (that guy who won the Cy Young?) was acquired by Cherington. 2) Miller was acquired by Cherington, and turned into ERod. Yes, he shouldve been re-signed. But Dombrowski chose to trade for Kimbrel. 3) Essentially everyone Dombrowski's traded was acquired by Cherington. 4) The team that was sooooo fun to watch was largely Cherington's, including the major pieces that guys like you wanted to trade for Cole Hamels. 5) Jeff Samardzija? Really? 6) It's not about THIS year, it's about EVERY year. I basically agree with you, but just nitpicking - Miller was acquired by Theo, not Cherington.
|
|
|
Post by wrangler713 on Dec 11, 2016 10:14:38 GMT -5
We are at a win for the next three years point. We have the pieces at the major league level and it's time to use them. I love what he's done. He's taken chances and some of them haven't paid out but we still have a good system with JBJ, Mookie, Xander, Bendi, ERod. Then of course Porcello, Price, and now Sale. Looking at the minors we have Devers, Groome, and Travis. Some others we can dream on too. Lets try and win the world series next year and DD is doing just that.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on Dec 11, 2016 11:29:49 GMT -5
I agree with you. Your Yankee points are excellent - I agree with them all. I am still stunned that some speak that we had this super 8-10 year window if we stayed the Big-Ben course but we don't have with DD. IMO it is so wrong to be knocking DDD at this point vs Big Ben's performance. We had garbage for pitching. We had a window "this year" because of DD. OFC the ones that think the farm was this 8-10 year window and now it isn't is that they think their Red Sox pitching prospects would hit and close their yes to the possibility that we'll make future trades and signings just as you say. Yet we have been pathetic for so long with pitching prospects. It's just wishful thinking - nothing more.
The fact is, before DD came, our pitching was awful. Clay and ERod were pathetic to start the year. Instead of getting Price the sox could have gotten jeff samardzija, so it's not like Price is a disaster. But Price was an overpay and had one of his worst years and Kimbrel was an overpay had one of his worst years. Without these moves we were stuck with Big Ben's Joe Kelley as a starter and Koji and Taz in the bullpen. So in other words to imply we had a 8-10 year window - it means you had to believe Big Ben would have made the right moves to get pitching. One of the more obviously moves was that he could have gotten Miller instead Koji.
With his track record of 3 last places in his 4 years with a very high payroll, why would anyone think that? OFC this is all on DD now. And just as you say I can't wait. I would have been a bit more patient not rushed the team to be a playoff team this past year but DD did and he got it done. Thus past year was sooooo enjoyable. I get the feeling some red sox fans couldn't enjoy the season we had because they seem to be in love with the idea of prospects rather than watching the team win a lot of games.
I knew it was only a matter of time for people to start crediting the 2016 success to DDo, when the team was largely Theo's and Ben's.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 11, 2016 12:48:01 GMT -5
1) Porcello (that guy who won the Cy Young?) was acquired by Cherington. 2) Miller was acquired by Cherington, and turned into ERod. Yes, he shouldve been re-signed. But Dombrowski chose to trade for Kimbrel. 3) Essentially everyone Dombrowski's traded was acquired by Cherington. 4) The team that was sooooo fun to watch was largely Cherington's, including the major pieces that guys like you wanted to trade for Cole Hamels. 5) Jeff Samardzija? Really? 6) It's not about THIS year, it's about EVERY year. I basically agree with you, but just nitpicking - Miller was acquired by Theo, not Cherington. Good point, 2012. Probably Bobby V's only real success with the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 11, 2016 13:29:00 GMT -5
It can easily be done, but your going to have to take some risks. Like trying to lock up young players now. Look into signing Benintendi and ERod to long term deals when there value is low. You have to lock up Betts. I would look at Bogaerts and Bradley, if you can't get good deals they might need to be traded down the road. Even look at Swihart, you could probably get him to sign for what could turn into a major steal in a year or two. You can't just let all our young guys hit free agency and try and resign them. That will cost way too much, even though I think salaries are about to start going down due to new CBA. We need to do what White Sox have done for years. I don't think you need draft luck, just producing useful players for trades, depth for major league team and a starter like every other year. We won't need a top 5 farm system to compete for the next 10 years. Also if you have to trade a Bogaerts or Bradley down the road, that could give you a bunch of good young players/prospects. Estimates/salaries for 2020: Price: $31M Porcello: (FA, market value est.): $25M, 5-7 years Sale: (FA, market value est.) $33-35M, 6-10 years ERod: (last arb year, an inflation-adjusted Quintana-like deal would buy out that year and add 2-3 at $10-$15M): $5-$10M (depending on performance) Pomeranz: (FA, possible extension candidate, possible trade candidate): $12-18M (low end, presuming an extension) Wright: (arb 2): $3-5M, depending on role Buchholz: almost guaranteed trade, so I won't include him. Even if Pomeranz gets traded, that's roughly $95-$110M, just on five starting pitchers. Just addressing the young guys, JBJ will be a FA. Betts and Bogaerts will be in their walk years. Assume JBJ signs an extension this winter...a (very) team/friendly deal would be roughly 5 years, 2-5-8-16-20. So Bradley will cost $16M. Betts's best comparo at this point is Trout. So look at Trout's last arb-year buy-out. It's $15.2M. Mookie's a bit older and not quite (maybe) as good, so we'll skip inflation adjustment and call it $15M. But the next year it'll be close to $20M, and after that, by 2022, approaching $35M plus. Bogaerts could probably be extended now at a deal roughly similar to Bradley's. He'd be selling out his walk year at probably $10-$12M and getting 2-4 additional years around 2/3 of what Mookie would. So, 15-20-22-24. For those three, on team-friendly deals, it's about $40M in 2020 but balloons to about $75M in 2022. They still need a 1b, maybe 2b (they've got Pedroia's salary potentially, still), a 3b, a 4th OF, a utility INF, and an entire bullpen including a closer (at which point the salary for a closer will be close to $20M a year). So in 2020, at the low end, you're talking $140M for eight players, and in order to KEEP those players, you have to agree to deals that project a combined salary of roughly $180M two years later. They can't keep the guys they have. It's not possible. Even if Devers is good (I think he will be) and Groome can replace, say, Porcello, by that time, you've still got a $80M rotation and three Bs costing another $40M. That's $120M, again on 8 players. Look at Mitch Moreland: FA scrubs will cost $6-8M a year by then. Who's the closer? Barnes, on an extension? He's still going to cost $4-8M as a walk-year guy. Benintendi will be in his second arb year. What's he going to cost? Even if they plug scrubs in across the board to fill in all of those empty slots (and some young guys like Devers/Groome/Benintendi), at $4M average salary, that's $68M, for 17 players. So, in that unlikely scenario, you're looking at a minimum of $120M for the rotation and three Bs, plus $68M for the other guys. Works, right? Except the next year, you're well over $200M, as the three B's salaries increase, and guys like Devers/Groome get raises, and Benintendi gets arb, etc. They're going to have to (partially) blow up the team, with the young core that they have now becoming the high-$ guys. And, maybe, getting big value (elite prospects) back for Pomeranz, Porcello, JBJ, etc. That's going to reduce their chances of winning and create some "bridge" years. If Price continues to produce at/near current levels this year and next year I fully expect him to opt-out and go into Free Agency. I'm basing this on other pitchers/position players with opt-outs and their history of exercising them in years where they have been successful. There is always a dumb/desperate owner somewhere who wants a "name" or "proven veteran." I also fully expect the Sox to let him walk.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,171
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Dec 11, 2016 13:35:22 GMT -5
I thought it might be a good idea to discuss DD's running of the Sox to this point as i know there's a lot of angst in his trading of prospects, which ultimately is the reason we're all on this site in the first place...I love following the Sox prospects, which again is probably redundant since I'm posting here in the first place, but think perspective is also important since the ultimate goal of having a strong farm system is to sustain a winning major league roster with young talent, so here's a few observations from that perspective: 1) DD has traded a lot of the upper tier prospects from the Sox farm system, which is in direct conflict to why we're all here...however, how many major league teams would trade their 40 man roster for the Sox 40 man roster? If they could afford it, i'm not sure there's another team (outside of the Cubs) that wouldn't trade there entire 40 man roster in 2 seconds for the Sox roster 2) Although it's a little concerning that DD has traded away a lot of "unproven" minor league talent, I don't think we can look at this in a vacuum...He did this with a team loaded at the major league level with young proven talent and a team with the potential to win now and for the next 3-4 years...which i'm sure was important to ownership, which from what i've read seemed to feel that the previous regime overemphasized the future for the present 3) DD usually seems to win trades...and i've read a bunch of DD "overpaying" for some players and really think that needs to be put into perspective. The perspective needs to be of the current market place for players/pitchers and not based in previously conceived notions of what we think of certain players/pitchers (i.e. relievers)...as to this point, DD has targeted high end talent/relievers which in this current market are at a premium, regardless of what we're used to 4) I'm no DD apologist, but think to this point he's used the Sox assets (i.e. money, redundant prospects, prospects) to leverage the Sox place within MLB, which right now is at the very top of the AL if not all of MLB in terms of talent/young talent...and although we all like following prospects, if the goal isn't to have a loaded/young talented MLB roster (which we have) then i think following prospects only is a little misguided...just that it's very unusual for an MLB team to be so loaded with young premium talent...and DD IMO has levered that to put the Sox into a position to not waste this very uncommon window of opportunity... 1) C.H.U.D. is a classic. That screen name cracks me up every time. 2) I think the spectrum is much more complex that "win-now" vs. "prospect hoard." So it's not always easy to frame. From my own standpoint, I've disliked essentially every (major) trade Dombrowski has made so far involving prospects, with the exception (marginally pro-) of the Thornburg deal. And the reason, for me, is much less about prospects as future stars, and much more about prospects as future low-cost production (and current depth). Margot could've helped a lot early last year. Moncada and Kopech later this year. The Pomeranz deal because I thought there were less costly options (though my dislike of that trade is mild). On purely individual, value levels, each trade had its merits, and I think none was particularly good or bad. But they were not made in a vacuum, which leads me to: 3) It's tough to call Kimbrel or Carson Smith a "win" at this point. I think Smith will be. Pomeranz to this point is probably a loss, but it's still very early. Sale, who knows. But when one looks at the overriding direction of the team (and here's my counterpoint), DD has drastically reduced their future flexibility and locked them into a high-salary structure that may very well adversely effect their ability to retain their current players, and almost certainly, pursue new ones. He's taken a huge gamble in obliterating the farm for a three-year window. I don't see that as a wise approach at all for a franchise's long-term health. To me, its impetuous and impatient, and while speeding up the timeline to maximal success, I think it's almost assuredly severely shortened the timeframe of that success, while not at all improving the peak. It's just poor (specifically, selfish) business management in my view: it's the come-in-guts-things-make-yourself-rich-then-run approach. It might be "smart" when viewed from Dombrowski's standpoint, since he'll look good by standing on Cherington's shoulders. But it only helps him, in the long term, it will hurt the franchise significantly, I'm certain. How can one call Pomeranz trade a loss? Loss of what? AE has never played a game. If the point is he could have been part of a different trade, that is just theory (and assumes trading prospects CAN be ok). Pomeranz was up and down for Sox, so that makes it wait-and-see, but if he has .01 WAR this year and AE never makes the bigs, it's a practical win (and people can play alternative reality trades forever). AE, Kopech, Margot: not a game between them. In return, all star, all star, all star. At least 2 of those all stars have high likelihood of repeat all star seasons, and Pom has high potential to be really solid at #4. I won't call that a loss for years, if ever (those prospects will have to reach ceilings to make these losses). The trades for Smith and T'burg are always risky, w/ relievers' health, but combined, they basically gave up Dubon. Not losing sleep. If a GM doesn't try for those power arms, it's gross negligence.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 11, 2016 13:42:51 GMT -5
Actually Margot played 10 games for the Padres (and Asuaje 7) last year (not that you're susceptible to data)
|
|
|