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 thursty on May 14, 2017 14:43:00 GMT -5
Obviously you're unaware of the Los Angeles Dodgers
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 14, 2017 14:47:53 GMT -5
Obviously you're unaware of the Los Angeles Dodgers Please explain how you would have duplicated that this past offseason for the Red Sox. The Red Sox don't have a Urias in AAA and that's basically the main difference.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on May 14, 2017 14:53:07 GMT -5
Soxjim, Like others have said: re point 1 & 2, there's not much the Sox could do to get a higher quality #7 starter than Kendrick. Most guys of any quality aren't going to sign if they're not guaranteed a spot unless there's a ton of money involved and the Sox didn't have that money available or else Buchholz wouldn't have been dealt. As far as point 3 goes, I agree with you. With Espinoza's injuries, he's a bit of a question mark, too, but I'd take my chances that he develops well over a six year stretch of control than Pomeranz, because if Pomeranz does require major surgery, he wouldn't be back until 2019 when he was no longer under the Red Sox' control. Obviously Dombrowski thought he was getting a front-line starter. He looks more like a backend to me, certainly not worth a prospect of Espinoza's caliber. I'm wrong about a lot of stuff, but I was screaming bloody murder on that one the day that trade was made. Re: point 4, Shaw was the definition of replacement level last season - he got replaced in September because he was so damn bad. Competent defensively yet, but pretty mediocre to useless last season. I'd take Tyler Thornburg's 2016 season over Travis Shaw's 2016 season anytime, and I wish the Sox had 2016 Thornburg (or 2015 Carson Smith) setting up for dominant (AND "elite" - ha!!) Craig Kimbrel. What happened was that the Sox got three guys to back up and ALL three got hurt. That's crazy. It's not shocking that any of them got hurt - but all three at the same time! Dombrowski figured that Sandoval was shaping up and he was and that he had Holt to back up. He tried to get Plouffe but like most others he wanted more money and guaranteed ABs. Holt is not better than a reasonably healthy Sandoval. Holt starts off well and fades drastically and he is hardly a good defensive 3b himself. He's a really good utility guy but not a good starting player. I do question why Dominguez hasn't gotten the call. Yes, he's not been really good at Pawtucket, but he's been in the bigs, been thoroughly mediocre to be charitable, but can at least play 3b and perhaps platoon with Rutledge. Otherwise, why did the Red Sox even bother to sign him? What kind of depth is he if he can't get an opportunity with all this stuff going on? I do share your concern that Dombrowski makes a deal to secure a 3b for this season if Sandoval can't hack it or if Devers isn't ready and those 3 guys you mentioned are exactly who I thought DD would dangle - I'd also add Lakins as a candidate to be dealt too. Unfortunately the Red Sox look top-heavy, kind of the way Dombrowski's team were in Detroit and kind of how Dan Duquette's late 1990s Red Sox were built, so I share your concern. I see this team as an 87 win team that plays as the 2nd wild card team. A healthy David Price, a competent 3b, and a reliable reliever in front of Kimbrel, and some good health, and that equation can change drastically. Redsox-- as I've just posted to umassgrad-- I'm not so sure the cap had to be so bad. It could be the GM mishandling. Maybe he could have found others ways to pinch dollars. How can you rely on Pomeranz, ERod and Wright to get you through a full season? Maybe it is Monday Morning QB what I'm doing. But a lot of posters on here for example said to send Pomz back. Why? His injury issues as you cite; meaning he can't make a full season. If you believe for example he can't make a full season, why wouldn't you plan better than "Kendrick," while you also have questions of Wright and an effective end-of-season from ERod?
As far as Epinoza-- we aren't really agreeing or disagreeing, right? I just brought up that that decision could wind up being really dumb. That's true isn't it? I'm not the evaluator -- I only read what others say. But a guy still playing in A level ball - I'll always be cautious to a degree especially now I heard eh got hurt starting the season. And he is a small-framed guy.
As far as Shaw. He is better than Rutledge, Marrero and Hernandez at 3b. IMO he is better than Panda. But regardless, I disagree with the context of "we had 3 backups at 3b." Rutledge is NOT a capable backup at 3b. He is awful as was Hernandez at 3b unless by backup you mean 1 game. But you've seen two years Panda get hurt, what would make you ever assume he is to be someone you can rely on? Therefore the backups you cite are not capable for a top-tier team with title aspirations because the need from the Sox was more than juts a 1 game backup player. ANd i'll reiterate Panda cannot hit lf pitching. And Panda is a pathetic defender. With what I've described of Panda, where am I going wrong and why?
I agree with your overall outlook. Maybe this year injuries may wear us down-- but if no playoffs this year --- they had better be something real good next year.
As for Panda-- the next game he plays-- tell late how valuable he is a close game? Can't we see it in our sleep that a lefty is going to come in and face him and Panda just won't be capable of producing? And then any ball hit his way, especially slow rollers, how confident are you he can make a play?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 14, 2017 14:54:48 GMT -5
We didn't have 10 million to spend on a #7 starter, that's why they traded Clay. We needed to get under luxury tax and have money for in season moves. How many teams spend anywhere near 10 million on a #7 starter? Your #7 starters are usually guys like Kendricks or minor league guys. IMO calling someone "a 7th starter" is irrelevant when you factor in that Wright and Pomeranz are coming back from injuries in which they are unknown and ERod is an unknown for the entire season. In that context, the Sox are trying to win it all. Pomeranz and Wright and ERod have not ever had to carry a full load for a full MPB season. It could be considered way too wild to have to rely on all of them. SO calling him "7th starter" when you had so many questions form starters and you have built your team with the idea that the starters would be your strength, you left your team too short.
Also - not sure how much we are under-- but Abad was a waste for the $2m. Farrell really doesn't use Ross like he should so if you are pinching for dollars you could have moved/passed with him. Thornburgh - giving up so much for a reliever - especially Shaw was a waste. I think you can recall that there wasn't very much excitement at all with Mitch Moreland. Could have gotten Thames for less. OFC its hindsight but imo what you are suggesting us being over $10m is hindsight too but you are accepting DD's possible less-than-stellar decisions-- yet it didn't have to be. That's how a GM partly should get evaluated, shouldn't he?
Therefore, the number 7 starter in which the Red Sox are trying to compete for a championship in which they are built on starters in which three (4,5 and 6) were questionable, is a lot more important under these circumstances than normal and as a result- imo the GM can be questioned for his prior salary cap/signing decisions.
Wow. You wanted us to keep Clay right? Well he got injured. So would you've been saying we needed a better 8th starter if we kept him? Out of the 3 pitchers you mention they were all healthy. Wright just got injured again, so I'm not sure what your point is. Injuries happen all the time, teams just don't have 10 million plus dollar #7 starters when the other 6 starters are healthy. You might have a point if Wright or Pomeranz were injured to start the season but they weren't. Come on go look at who a high spending team like the Yankees have as a #7 starter.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on May 14, 2017 15:00:02 GMT -5
IMO calling someone "a 7th starter" is irrelevant when you factor in that Wright and Pomeranz are coming back from injuries in which they are unknown and ERod is an unknown for the entire season. In that context, the Sox are trying to win it all. Pomeranz and Wright and ERod have not ever had to carry a full load for a full MPB season. It could be considered way too wild to have to rely on all of them. SO calling him "7th starter" when you had so many questions form starters and you have built your team with the idea that the starters would be your strength, you left your team too short.
Also - not sure how much we are under-- but Abad was a waste for the $2m. Farrell really doesn't use Ross like he should so if you are pinching for dollars you could have moved/passed with him. Thornburgh - giving up so much for a reliever - especially Shaw was a waste. I think you can recall that there wasn't very much excitement at all with Mitch Moreland. Could have gotten Thames for less. OFC its hindsight but imo what you are suggesting us being over $10m is hindsight too but you are accepting DD's possible less-than-stellar decisions-- yet it didn't have to be. That's how a GM partly should get evaluated, shouldn't he?
Therefore, the number 7 starter in which the Red Sox are trying to compete for a championship in which they are built on starters in which three (4,5 and 6) were questionable, is a lot more important under these circumstances than normal and as a result- imo the GM can be questioned for his prior salary cap/signing decisions. It's easy to second guess. No teams in MLB had 6 better starters than the Red Sox had entering the season. Teams just don't spend resources on 7th and 8th starters. If you have an excess of good AAA starter prospects, your team will have better depth than any other team, but those pitchers are almost never traded, except to improve the major league team. In other words, you'd have to subtract from the major league team to add good 7th and 8th starters. And that's pretty dumb. What rotations in baseball have sure things in the rotation at #4, 5, 6, 7 and 8? Feel free to go back several seasons. If you find a team, look and see how they were built, and I'll bet that it's mostly homegrown, so that is not something you can do in an offseason or two. I have to go. And I know it's easy to 2nd guess but we do it a lot don't we?
And imo it is wrong for you and others to assume 7th starters are the same for each team. Wright, and Pomeranz are injury concerns. You can't rely on them this year or next like another team can or if they have some very good prospects in the minors. This year ERod is questionable hoe effective he'll be late in the season. Other teams vying for a title - I don't think have the same concerns with their 4/5 and 6 starters as the Red Sox should have had between health, experience and prospects. Some teams would be built also more on hitting so they wouldn't be the same. The sox are built for starting pitching. You have to ensure you have it. We're going for a tile. We have to ensure an extreme strength we were counting on.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on May 14, 2017 15:03:17 GMT -5
Obviously you're unaware of the Los Angeles Dodgers Please explain how you would have duplicated that this past offseason for the Red Sox. The Red Sox don't have a Urias in AAA and that's basically the main difference.
That's my point. A team like the Dodgers has someone in the minors they can rely on for their 7th starter. Therefore because we don't- we have to find it another way.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 14, 2017 15:05:26 GMT -5
It's easy to second guess. No teams in MLB had 6 better starters than the Red Sox had entering the season. Teams just don't spend resources on 7th and 8th starters. If you have an excess of good AAA starter prospects, your team will have better depth than any other team, but those pitchers are almost never traded, except to improve the major league team. In other words, you'd have to subtract from the major league team to add good 7th and 8th starters. And that's pretty dumb. What rotations in baseball have sure things in the rotation at #4, 5, 6, 7 and 8? Feel free to go back several seasons. If you find a team, look and see how they were built, and I'll bet that it's mostly homegrown, so that is not something you can do in an offseason or two. I have to go. And I know it's easy to 2nd guess but we do it a lot don't we?
And imo it is wrong for you and others to assume 7th starters are the same for each team. Wright, and Pomeranz are injury concerns. You can't rely on them this year or next like another team can or if they have some very good prospects in the minors. This year ERod is questionable hoe effective he'll be late in the season. Other teams vying for a title - I don't think have the same concerns with their 4/5 and 6 starters as the Red Sox should have had between health, experience and prospects. Some teams would be built also more on hitting so they wouldn't be the same. The sox are built for starting pitching. You have to ensure you have it. We're going for a tile. We have to ensure an extreme strength we were counting on.
You also can't prepare for everything going wrong at the same time. It's impossible. They would have been just fine through this point of the season if David Price were the David Price who never gets hurt ever.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 14, 2017 15:11:57 GMT -5
Please explain how you would have duplicated that this past offseason for the Red Sox. The Red Sox don't have a Urias in AAA and that's basically the main difference.
That's my point. A team like the Dodgers has someone in the minors they can rely on for their 7th starter. Therefore because we don't- we have to find it another way. I've asked many times now. How? They're too expensive to trade for because any team with decent prospect starters in AAA want to keep them for depth. Decent free agents want a guaranteed rotation spot, which is why Rich Hill wouldn't sign here last year. So that leaves you with minor league free agents like Kendrick and international free agents like Velazquez. I don't criticize people without having an actual plan of what I would have done differently. I also hesitate to criticize after the fact because it just sounds like 2nd guessing.
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on May 14, 2017 17:52:35 GMT -5
Bottom line is this and the facts are undisputed. This Organization has not been able to produce or develop Pitching depth at any level. In that case what do you do? You make trades and sometimes those trades do not work out as we have seen with Smith, Thornburg and the list goes on at this point in the season.
From an Offensive stand point we have heard all the B.S comments by players regarding the absence of Ortiz. Ortiz being retired is not the problem. the problem is the Manager. Dombrowski's biggest blunder thus far has been retaining Farrell and letting Lovullo walk to Arizona. Lovullo took a Team under .500 and finished 8 or 9 games above .500 in 2015. Thus far in Arizona the Dbacks have cooled but they 15 7 at home with half the talent.
I like Farrell, I root for the guy, but there is something missing and its not Ortiz. Focus, discipline, in game management? Something is wrong in mudville and I don't blame all of this on DD but he is in charge and it must be fixed
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on May 14, 2017 18:04:22 GMT -5
That's my point. A team like the Dodgers has someone in the minors they can rely on for their 7th starter. Therefore because we don't- we have to find it another way. I've asked many times now. How? They're too expensive to trade for because any team with decent prospect starters in AAA want to keep them for depth. Decent free agents want a guaranteed rotation spot, which is why Rich Hill wouldn't sign here last year. So that leaves you with minor league free agents like Kendrick and international free agents like Velazquez. I don't criticize people without having an actual plan of what I would have done differently. I also hesitate to criticize after the fact because it just sounds like 2nd guessing. I already provided it. You keep speaking of trade. I gave you the link last year of free agent starting pitchers $10m and under. If I pick a player that is doing well enough- you'll just say I picked him because he is doing good right now, so what is the point to give you a name? Okay- I did just that - picked a not good/not awful pitcher-- how about Jesse Chavez? And he signed one year at $5.75m. Isn't Jesse better than Kendrick or Henry?
More importantly the name I gave you is irrelevant. The point was -- the GM -- DD -- he had amongst the top 3 farm systems. Now he has made a ton of trades, he has to win, right? You mention "2nd guessing." Sure it is to a point. But you can go back and I've been vocal we needed another starter. I'm not good enough to be the GM-- but I can add an opinion that we should have gone down that path. SO how much "2nd guessing" am I doing?
If they had a Jesse type and had Shaw at 3rd, that wouldn't have been so bad, would it? Boston isn't Milwaukee. There is a pressure to win. I'm not in love with how DD covered our team with starting pitching while the pitchers 4/5 and 6 had serious questions. Partly, what I am saying is-- he better win. My moves might not be what you and others agree with-- but I have to think if we don't win - get into the playoffs over the next two years-- there's going to be a lot more grievances of DD than what I've posted. So I'm doing things ahead of time.
I give DD two years. I don't agree with you or others that didn't want another pitcher. But you can come at me all you want with my belief I could have also taken Clay. I was wrong there. So now I should shut up because I was wrong about Clay? Nah. Kendrick was downright awful.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on May 14, 2017 18:18:14 GMT -5
IMO calling someone "a 7th starter" is irrelevant when you factor in that Wright and Pomeranz are coming back from injuries in which they are unknown and ERod is an unknown for the entire season. In that context, the Sox are trying to win it all. Pomeranz and Wright and ERod have not ever had to carry a full load for a full MPB season. It could be considered way too wild to have to rely on all of them. SO calling him "7th starter" when you had so many questions form starters and you have built your team with the idea that the starters would be your strength, you left your team too short.
Also - not sure how much we are under-- but Abad was a waste for the $2m. Farrell really doesn't use Ross like he should so if you are pinching for dollars you could have moved/passed with him. Thornburgh - giving up so much for a reliever - especially Shaw was a waste. I think you can recall that there wasn't very much excitement at all with Mitch Moreland. Could have gotten Thames for less. OFC its hindsight but imo what you are suggesting us being over $10m is hindsight too but you are accepting DD's possible less-than-stellar decisions-- yet it didn't have to be. That's how a GM partly should get evaluated, shouldn't he?
Therefore, the number 7 starter in which the Red Sox are trying to compete for a championship in which they are built on starters in which three (4,5 and 6) were questionable, is a lot more important under these circumstances than normal and as a result- imo the GM can be questioned for his prior salary cap/signing decisions.
Wow. You wanted us to keep Clay right? Well he got injured. So would you've been saying we needed a better 8th starter if we kept him? Out of the 3 pitchers you mention they were all healthy. Wright just got injured again, so I'm not sure what your point is. Injuries happen all the time, teams just don't have 10 million plus dollar #7 starters when the other 6 starters are healthy. You might have a point if Wright or Pomeranz were injured to start the season but they weren't. Come on go look at who a high spending team like the Yankees have as a #7 starter. You are missing my point here. I offered that I was wrong about Clay. I admit it. Come on-- you have been wrong about some things over the years, haven't you? I didn't want to come across as someone arrogant. Anyone can be wrong. It's like in another thread - some people think Joe Torre is the perfect human being incapable of having a spec of a human flaw.
And I would have accepted I blew it. and had to work with "Kendrick." I recognize these type of moves would have probably gotten me fired. If DD doesn't make the playoffs over the next two years, what will you think of DD? He had one of the finest farm systems. It is possible we don't make playoffs this year, right?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 14, 2017 19:16:27 GMT -5
Wow. You wanted us to keep Clay right? Well he got injured. So would you've been saying we needed a better 8th starter if we kept him? Out of the 3 pitchers you mention they were all healthy. Wright just got injured again, so I'm not sure what your point is. Injuries happen all the time, teams just don't have 10 million plus dollar #7 starters when the other 6 starters are healthy. You might have a point if Wright or Pomeranz were injured to start the season but they weren't. Come on go look at who a high spending team like the Yankees have as a #7 starter. You are missing my point here. I offered that I was wrong about Clay. I admit it. Come on-- you have been wrong about some things over the years, haven't you? I didn't want to come across as someone arrogant. Anyone can be wrong. It's like in another thread - some people think Joe Torre is the perfect human being incapable of having a spec of a human flaw.
And I would have accepted I blew it. and had to work with "Kendrick." I recognize these type of moves would have probably gotten me fired. If DD doesn't make the playoffs over the next two years, what will you think of DD? He had one of the finest farm systems. It is possible we don't make playoffs this year, right?
I've been wrong a bunch of times. Nothing wrong with that, we are just giving our opinions. Thing is the injuries to Price, Clay and Wright all at the same time show you can't plan for everything. I loved our pitching depth. Mainly because you had Sale, Price and Porcello as your top 3. Then ERod, Pomeranz and Wright as your 4th and 5th starters. I didn't worry one bit about those guys, because they were your back end starters and your top 3 were studs. Thing is Price gets injured and he's been a workhorse for years. By reports he's getting close to coming back. If he's healthy i don't worry about our pitching. The thing that I question is not spending more money on a bat and trading away Shaw without replacing him. I get why they want to stay below Luxury Tax, but in a season when you traded a ton of good young players I wouldn't have worried about resetting the tax this year. Thing is I still would have traded Clay, but put that money into hitting, not pitching. I still worry more about our hitting than pitching. I might have even spent on a reliever, but not on another starter. Overall I'm not really that worried. We have had a ton of injuries. As long as Price, Holt, Hernandez, Smith, Sandoval, and Thornburg get healthy we'll be fine. Heck Smith and Thornburg aren't even musts, more like luxuries. Baseball is a very long season and this team has not been even close to full strength yet.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 14, 2017 19:29:10 GMT -5
There have been plenty of posts on Dombrowski's team-building (and specifically, depth issues), there's not much a team can do when three starters get hurt at once, barring minor league depth. There's no way a guy is going to sign for $5M to sit on the bench or languish in AAA (and no way a team intentionally pays to do that). And really, the scrap heap reclamation projects are crapshoots...1 in 3 works out. The Sox bet and lost, like the majority of teams do. Personally, I was/am a lot more concerned about 3b, although I think there's a shot Devers comes up.
Basically, what's happening is exactly why I don't like the "all-in" approach Dombrowski's taken. Obliterate the minor league depth, and you're in trouble when your major league depth is compromised. That said, I agree with Umassgrad...it's a long season, and as recently as 2013 the team struggled early only to turn it around, gel, and steamroll through a WS win. But yeah, if they don't, and inevitably dismantle in 2-3 years, it's a pretty bad (if somewhat predictable) look. At least Sale and Kimbrel have been incredibly entertaining to watch.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 14, 2017 19:49:05 GMT -5
There have been plenty of posts on Dombrowski's team-building (and specifically, depth issues), there's not much a team can do when three starters get hurt at once, barring minor league depth. There's no way a guy is going to sign for $5M to sit on the bench or languish in AAA (and no way a team intentionally pays to do that). And really, the scrap heap reclamation projects are crapshoots...1 in 3 works out. The Sox bet and lost, like the majority of teams do. Personally, I was/am a lot more concerned about 3b, although I think there's a shot Devers comes up. Basically, what's happening is exactly why I don't like the "all-in" approach Dombrowski's taken. Obliterate the minor league depth, and you're in trouble when your major league depth is compromised. That said, I agree with Umassgrad...it's a long season, and as recently as 2013 the team struggled early only to turn it around, gel, and steamroll through a WS win. But yeah, if they don't, and inevitably dismantle in 2-3 years, it's a pretty bad (if somewhat predictable) look. At least Sale and Kimbrel have been incredibly entertaining to watch.They have been. But I hate watching top-heavy teams, particularly in baseball more than any other major sport. I'd much rather watch an all-around above-average team. That's why enjoyed watching the 2013 team so much even before they really took off. That team was like a well-oiled machine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2017 20:49:35 GMT -5
If I were DD, I do a couple of things:
I'd identify root cause of why the Red Sox can't develop pitching? Rather than adding people like BB, maybe they should fire some of the coaches and rebuilding the pitching development program including strength training, mental preparation and preventative training to avoid injuries.
Additionally, never pay a pitcher who slings the ball with a skinny body like Price that much money for that long of a period. If you are going to pay, overpay for 3 years and make sure his mechanics are good - using his legs and back to drive the ball thru the zone and not his arm/shoulder.
It seems like we draft well, mid 90s guys and then they end up in AAA throwing high 80s and walk too many because they are picking the corners and can't throw a fb by anyone? Or we find pitchers who over throw, claim they will be studs until they hit AA and are surprised when they can't compete or contribute to the big club.
The internal evaluation can be done by implementing a 360 review. Send out (blind) surveys to the players /'coaches for recommendations. In a top down organization like the Red Sox, good ideas can be stymied. Appoint an outside consulting team to review ideas to present to management.
Character of players obtained. Boston has an extensive physiological testing problem prior to the draft. Really more on that, than metrics, velo / 60 time, etc... We need an entire team of Dustin P. types. My concern is the Barnes incident, there was no reason to throw at someone's head and to not be on the same page with Dustin, its concerning.
Trade from strength. Due to how the organization has transformed or mandated so many starting arms to the pen, trade from strength, i.e., right handed relievers and solidify 3rd base now. Other teams are dying for pitchers, they are dropping out like flies. I'm sure we can find a good (in shape infielder) who can play third.
Bring Devers up now, put him in (out of hand) games just for a taste until he's comfortable and has adjusted to the Bigs. Maybe he can contribute later in the year.
DD will have to trade the farm, he's all in now. He has no choice since the Boston fans are so demanding.
Lastly, I like JF. I think he's a nice mix of old / new school. Unless you can bring back Billy Martin from the dead, firing JF won't solve this problem.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 14, 2017 22:07:40 GMT -5
There have been plenty of posts on Dombrowski's team-building (and specifically, depth issues), there's not much a team can do when three starters get hurt at once, barring minor league depth. There's no way a guy is going to sign for $5M to sit on the bench or languish in AAA (and no way a team intentionally pays to do that). And really, the scrap heap reclamation projects are crapshoots...1 in 3 works out. The Sox bet and lost, like the majority of teams do. Personally, I was/am a lot more concerned about 3b, although I think there's a shot Devers comes up. Basically, what's happening is exactly why I don't like the "all-in" approach Dombrowski's taken. Obliterate the minor league depth, and you're in trouble when your major league depth is compromised. That said, I agree with Umassgrad...it's a long season, and as recently as 2013 the team struggled early only to turn it around, gel, and steamroll through a WS win. But yeah, if they don't, and inevitably dismantle in 2-3 years, it's a pretty bad (if somewhat predictable) look. At least Sale and Kimbrel have been incredibly entertaining to watch.They have been. But I hate watching top-heavy teams, particularly in baseball more than any other major sport. I'd much rather watch an all-around above-average team. That's why enjoyed watching the 2013 team so much even before they really took off. That team was like a well-oiled machine. I agree 100% with your perception of "team". My statement was true, but not without a heavy dose of irony and some good-natured ribbing at the "trust in DD" crowd.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on May 14, 2017 22:54:08 GMT -5
There have been plenty of posts on Dombrowski's team-building (and specifically, depth issues), there's not much a team can do when three starters get hurt at once, barring minor league depth. There's no way a guy is going to sign for $5M to sit on the bench or languish in AAA (and no way a team intentionally pays to do that). And really, the scrap heap reclamation projects are crapshoots...1 in 3 works out. The Sox bet and lost, like the majority of teams do. Personally, I was/am a lot more concerned about 3b, although I think there's a shot Devers comes up. Basically, what's happening is exactly why I don't like the "all-in" approach Dombrowski's taken. Obliterate the minor league depth, and you're in trouble when your major league depth is compromised. That said, I agree with Umassgrad...it's a long season, and as recently as 2013 the team struggled early only to turn it around, gel, and steamroll through a WS win. But yeah, if they don't, and inevitably dismantle in 2-3 years, it's a pretty bad (if somewhat predictable) look. At least Sale and Kimbrel have been incredibly entertaining to watch. At the end of the day, we can debate dombrowski's performance for as long as we want. For every great move, trading for sale, there are two bone headed moves, like trading for thornburg and smith, who everybody knew had arms that we're going to explode soon. But in my mind dumbrowski needs to be fired for two reasons. 1.) our current all in team has no leadership. Dumbrowski banked on pedroia and he is not that kind of guy. Somebody needs to take ownership of that locker room focus these guys because what we got now is not fun to watch. 2.) the massive brain drain from the organization's front office after cherington pulled the rip cord and jumped and dumbrowski came in is frightening. It is not that the product on the field is mediocre and the players appears to be going through the motions without a care in the world, it is that we do not have anybody who can come up with a plan, we are relying on dumbrowski and he is not the guy. Possible solutions: 1.) send dumbrowski packing and bring back cherington. 2.) send dumbrowski packing and bring in mccloud from the Cubs to take over dumbrowski's position.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on May 14, 2017 23:11:45 GMT -5
There have been plenty of posts on Dombrowski's team-building (and specifically, depth issues), there's not much a team can do when three starters get hurt at once, barring minor league depth. There's no way a guy is going to sign for $5M to sit on the bench or languish in AAA (and no way a team intentionally pays to do that). And really, the scrap heap reclamation projects are crapshoots...1 in 3 works out. The Sox bet and lost, like the majority of teams do. Personally, I was/am a lot more concerned about 3b, although I think there's a shot Devers comes up. Basically, what's happening is exactly why I don't like the "all-in" approach Dombrowski's taken. Obliterate the minor league depth, and you're in trouble when your major league depth is compromised. That said, I agree with Umassgrad...it's a long season, and as recently as 2013 the team struggled early only to turn it around, gel, and steamroll through a WS win. But yeah, if they don't, and inevitably dismantle in 2-3 years, it's a pretty bad (if somewhat predictable) look. At least Sale and Kimbrel have been incredibly entertaining to watch. At the end of the day, we can debate dombrowski's performance for as long as we want. For every great move, trading for sale, there are two bone headed moves, like trading for thornburg and smith, who everybody knew had arms that we're going to explode soon. But in my mind dumbrowski needs to be fired for two reasons. 1.) our current all in team has no leadership. Dumbrowski banked on pedroia and he is not that kind of guy. Somebody needs to take ownership of that locker room focus these guys because what we got now is not fun to watch. 2.) the massive brain drain from the organization's front office after cherington pulled the rip cord and jumped and dumbrowski came in is frightening. It is not that the product on the field is mediocre and the players appears to be going through the motions without a care in the world, it is that we do not have anybody who can come up with a plan, we are relying on dumbrowski and he is not the guy. Possible solutions: 1.) send dumbrowski packing and bring back cherington. 2.) send dumbrowski packing and bring in mccloud from the Cubs to take over dumbrowski's position. Please no Ben Cherrington. One of the most incompetent GM's of our time. We had among the highest payrolls in baseball and out of 4 years three he helped drive us to last place. Please no.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 14, 2017 23:58:12 GMT -5
At the end of the day, we can debate dombrowski's performance for as long as we want. For every great move, trading for sale, there are two bone headed moves, like trading for thornburg and smith, who everybody knew had arms that we're going to explode soon. But in my mind dumbrowski needs to be fired for two reasons. 1.) our current all in team has no leadership. Dumbrowski banked on pedroia and he is not that kind of guy. Somebody needs to take ownership of that locker room focus these guys because what we got now is not fun to watch. 2.) the massive brain drain from the organization's front office after cherington pulled the rip cord and jumped and dumbrowski came in is frightening. It is not that the product on the field is mediocre and the players appears to be going through the motions without a care in the world, it is that we do not have anybody who can come up with a plan, we are relying on dumbrowski and he is not the guy. Possible solutions: 1.) send dumbrowski packing and bring back cherington. 2.) send dumbrowski packing and bring in mccloud from the Cubs to take over dumbrowski's position. Please no Ben Cherrington. One of the most incompetent GM's of our time. We had among the highest payrolls in baseball and out of 4 years three he helped drive us to last place. Please no. He also amassed arguably the most talented farm system in baseball (after said system graduating Betts, Bogaerts, JBJ, Swihart, Barnes, etc.) and won a WS...the same number Dombrowski has won in his twenty-plus years as a GM. Cherington had his share of head-scratchers (Sandoval and Bailey being two moves I particularly disliked at their consummation) but much of last year's success is a direct product of his work.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 15, 2017 8:00:34 GMT -5
The problem with third base right now comes largely from Dombrowski trading too much from depth. The problem with starting pitching depth comes from the fact the 2012 and 2013 draft were disasters in terms of producing useful organizational depth.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 15, 2017 8:35:41 GMT -5
The problem with third base right now comes largely from Dombrowski trading too much from depth. The problem with starting pitching depth comes from the fact the 2012 and 2013 draft were disasters in terms of producing useful organizational depth. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only one that would've helped the rotation this season that they passed on was Zach Eflin.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 15, 2017 8:48:25 GMT -5
Lance McCullers' cap number ended up being less than Light plus Buttrey plus Willie Ethington. So that's another obvious one. But beyond the top tier guys who would clearly be in the majors, there are several players who were available in those two drafts who would've been better depth options than Kyle Kendrick and what they have at Triple-A right now. Arms like Paul Blackburn who are in Triple-A and would be a totally acceptable up-and-down guy right now.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on May 15, 2017 8:51:59 GMT -5
Please no Ben Cherrington. One of the most incompetent GM's of our time. We had among the highest payrolls in baseball and out of 4 years three he helped drive us to last place. Please no. This, frankly, is nonsensical poppycock. I don't even know how to respond to stuff like this. And the poster calling DD "Dumbrowski" should just stop it too. It really doesn't help you make whatever point you are trying to make. Quite the opposite, actually. The topic of this thread is a fair one. It's too bad these types of posts make the thread unbearable to read. With that said, I'd add two things. -I'm not a DD fan, but I don't think we have a choice but to wait a little bit. I'd give it through Sept/Oct. You have a rotation of Sale/Price/Porcello, maybe Thornburg and Smith come back and make an impact. I think things might look a little different then. Third base, I don't know. They've got to figure that one out. -At this point, I think the Sox are all in. It's win or bust. This call has been made, from the front office to (it would seem, most of) the fans. That's a dangerous place to be, but here we are. If there are major weaknesses, they're gonna have to trade whatever is left of minor league assets to shore them up. I really don't see any other paths. I'll enjoy watching Sale and Price pitch whenever they do. But boy, I've rarely dreaded the future of this team like I do now.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 15, 2017 9:34:33 GMT -5
Ben Cherrington lucked into a title, the team was mostly Theo's. See how that works. He made the great Dodger trade and built a great farm system. Thing is he could never get all the pieces to fit together. Key free agent signings and trades are always going to be key to any championship team. If he learns from his mistakes he might be a great GM down the road. I just can't get over the Lackey trade, the Cuban signing and the Sandoval signing. The fact he gave away Lackey and then couldn't replace him was a huge mistake. With his deal and the way he was pitching you should have got a massive haul for him or just kept him!
Now DD has made some big trades that might come back to haunt us down the road. Thing is as of right now they haven't. Undo all his trades and we are a crappy team with a great farm system. No Sale, Kimbrel or Pomeranz and we have major pitching issues. The only players that might help you right now are Margot and Moncada. Thing is there's no way they are helping you more than Sale and Kimbrel are currently. It's not even close.
You really can't call the Smith trade bad, he didn't really give up anything. Miley had a horrible year, not like he would have helped us last year. If Smith can come back mid season that could still be a great trade. Pomeranz trade was a head scratcher but Espinoza is having arm troubles and 2-3 years away. Could be 3 plus years if he needs surgery. Right now the worst trade looks like the Thornburg trade. We could really use Shaw and our bullpen has been just fine without Thornburg. Thing is that looks so bad because all of our 3b options are currently injured. If Sandoval, Hernandez and Holt are healthy that combo should give you OK production. Still it's kind of funny that Shaw is the guy we miss the most, a guy most people didn't care being traded because he wasn't a top prospect.
In general this team just needs to get healthy. Once healthy they are still one of most talented teams in Baseball. Once healthy they might only have one big hole and that's 3B. Overall I'm still very high on this team. All these injuries and we're still above .500. I don't in anyway see a top heavy team and I certainly don't see a team that has no depth because of trades. It's all injuries to Price, Bradley, Sandoval, Holt, Hernandez, Wright, Thornburg and Smith. It looks like only Thornburg and Wright are not going to help us going forward, Maybe Smith.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on May 15, 2017 10:14:32 GMT -5
Ben Cherrington lucked into a title, the team was mostly Theo's. See how that works. He made the great Dodger trade and built a great farm system. Thing is he could never get all the pieces to fit together. Key free agent signings and trades are always going to be key to any championship team. If he learns from his mistakes he might be a great GM down the road. I just can't get over the Lackey trade, the Cuban signing and the Sandoval signing. The fact he gave away Lackey and then couldn't replace him was a huge mistake. With his deal and the way he was pitching you should have got a massive haul for him or just kept him! Now DD has made some big trades that might come back to haunt us down the road. Thing is as of right now they haven't. Undo all his trades and we are a crappy team with a great farm system. No Sale, Kimbrel or Pomeranz and we have major pitching issues. The only players that might help you right now are Margot and Moncada. Thing is there's no way they are helping you more than Sale and Kimbrel are currently. It's not even close. You really can't call the Smith trade bad, he didn't really give up anything. Miley had a horrible year, not like he would have helped us last year. If Smith can come back mid season that could still be a great trade. Pomeranz trade was a head scratcher but Espinoza is having arm troubles and 2-3 years away. Could be 3 plus years if he needs surgery. Right now the worst trade looks like the Thornburg trade. We could really use Shaw and our bullpen has been just fine without Thornburg. Thing is that looks so bad because all of our 3b options are currently injured. If Sandoval, Hernandez and Holt are healthy that combo should give you OK production. Still it's kind of funny that Shaw is the guy we miss the most, a guy most people didn't care being traded because he wasn't a top prospect. In general this team just needs to get healthy. Once healthy they are still one of most talented teams in Baseball. Once healthy they might only have one big hole and that's 3B. Overall I'm still very high on this team. All these injuries and we're still above .500. I don't in anyway see a top heavy team and I certainly don't see a team that has no depth because of trades. It's all injuries to Price, Bradley, Sandoval, Holt, Hernandez, Wright, Thornburg and Smith. It looks like only Thornburg and Wright are not going to help us going forward, Maybe Smith. Agree with you about pretty much everything you said. I would also add that the LA trade in 2012 was at the Lucchino level not BC. www.espn.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/8323305/boston-red-sox-los-angeles-dodgers-blockbuster-trade-anatomy
|
|
|