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.
Blow it up?
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Nov 30, 2017 15:33:11 GMT -5
Understood, but what happens when Xander bolts or gets overpaid? JBJ in 2020? Not to mention all of the other players coming up? Can we agree that the Red Sox will not win the World Series next year? So why not at least trade the guys you know are going to test the market like Pomeranz Xander and Kimbrel? JBJ is going to be an awful contract for whoever gives it to him in a couple years. Take one step backward to take two forward. 1) Give him a QO and receive draft pick compensation. 2) See 1) 3) No really though, it's ok if guys leave as free agents sometimes. It happens. 4) You are unrealistically pessimistic, my friend. Rather than the broad generalities of saying this team has no chance, let me ask you to provide this: In what specific ways do you expect last year's 93-win team to get WORSE this coming season? Because I can point to at least three major ways you can expect them to be better this year: starter at 3B is now a competent major league baseball player; David Price, in theory, pitches more than 1/3 of a season; team will acquire a middle-of-the-order hitter for 1B/DH. I'd also say it's fair to speculate that Bogaerts, now healthy, will be much better. Maybe make that 2a along with the Price thing, since his health is uncertain. So again, I ask - how is last year's 93-win team any WORSE in 2018? They lost no significant free agents and can be expected to have better health after an unlucky year on that front. Okay so give Kimbrel Xander and Pomeranz QO's then what? You get someone in the draft probably about 4 years away from seeing the majors as opposed to trading them now and getting someone who might end up being apart of the 2018 team. I see an opportunity for this organization to do what the Yankees did and trade off pieces and get cost controlled talented players in return. None of these three with the possible exception of Kimbrel should be resigned so I'm okay with them leaving for nothing if it comes to that. The team is not actually going to be worse than 2017, heck it might even be slightly better. However, will the Astros become better having another year of experience? Yes. The Indians? Yes. Even though they're losing Santana. That's an extremely resourceful organization. They'll get someone like Matt Adams and semi duplicate Santana for pennies on the dollar. The Yankees will be better as well than last year. Theres about 4 or 5 other teams depending on how free agency shakes out who could be on the same level as Boston or slightly below when the season starts. Think of it as the Western Conference in the NBA. Are you content with being the Clippers of the last few years or do you want to take that step back with the reward potentially being a dynasty. They don't even need to do it multiple years. They have a good core. Just this year is where it makes the most sense.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Nov 30, 2017 15:35:35 GMT -5
If a team doesn’t win the World Series, can you honestly say you got no enjoyment at all from watching them for the entire season? I don’t think baseball is right for you if that’s the case. I really enjoyed the last two seasons, especially watching the kids blossom and struggle and figure things out and I’m counting on enjoying at least 2-3 more years under a smart young manager. I think it’s more likely that I win the next two PowerBalls than the Red Sox have thought about blowing the team up for more than two seconds. 2016 was enjoyable yes. Last year? That was the one of the most joyless teams I've watched play. The bright spots was Devers and Benny. Other than that nothing else really. I saw a team that took a big step back while carrying an almost 200 million dollar payroll. So when you hold a payroll like that your goal needs to be winning the World Series.
|
|
|
Post by trajanacc on Nov 30, 2017 15:35:54 GMT -5
-The Sox have ZERO chance. Did you not just see the team that won the WS? A home grown monster. Kuechel, Altuve Springer, Correa, Bregman, Verlander. The Sox cannot touch that. Yes they got "closer" this year. I don't think you understand what "zero" means.
|
|
|
Post by trajanacc on Nov 30, 2017 15:45:57 GMT -5
They can make the playoffs. Not questioning that. But there is legitimately zero chance they can make the World Series. So you're saying that there is a greater chance of getting hit by an asteroid, or winning the lottery 5 times in a row, or waking up and finding that you have superpowers...than the Red Sox making the playoffs and winning three straight short series, in a sport where even the worst teams win 35-40% of their games. Is that what you're saying?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 30, 2017 16:06:04 GMT -5
1) Give him a QO and receive draft pick compensation. 2) See 1) 3) No really though, it's ok if guys leave as free agents sometimes. It happens. 4) You are unrealistically pessimistic, my friend. Rather than the broad generalities of saying this team has no chance, let me ask you to provide this: In what specific ways do you expect last year's 93-win team to get WORSE this coming season? Because I can point to at least three major ways you can expect them to be better this year: starter at 3B is now a competent major league baseball player; David Price, in theory, pitches more than 1/3 of a season; team will acquire a middle-of-the-order hitter for 1B/DH. I'd also say it's fair to speculate that Bogaerts, now healthy, will be much better. Maybe make that 2a along with the Price thing, since his health is uncertain. So again, I ask - how is last year's 93-win team any WORSE in 2018? They lost no significant free agents and can be expected to have better health after an unlucky year on that front. Okay so give Kimbrel Xander and Pomeranz QO's then what? You get someone in the draft probably about 4 years away from seeing the majors as opposed to trading them now and getting someone who might end up being apart of the 2018 team. I see an opportunity for this organization to do what the Yankees did and trade off pieces and get cost controlled talented players in return. None of these three with the possible exception of Kimbrel should be resigned so I'm okay with them leaving for nothing if it comes to that. The team is not actually going to be worse than 2017, heck it might even be slightly better. However, will the Astros become better having another year of experience? Yes. The Indians? Yes. Even though they're losing Santana. That's an extremely resourceful organization. They'll get someone like Matt Adams and semi duplicate Santana for pennies on the dollar. The Yankees will be better as well than last year. Theres about 4 or 5 other teams depending on how free agency shakes out who could be on the same level as Boston or slightly below when the season starts. Think of it as the Western Conference in the NBA. Are you content with being the Clippers of the last few years or do you want to take that step back with the reward potentially being a dynasty. They don't even need to do it multiple years. They have a good core. Just this year is where it makes the most sense. So to sum it up, you admit that a 93-win team is not going to be worse this year, and in fact might get better, but insist that this same team has absolutely no chance to win the world series? That is literally nonsense.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 30, 2017 16:24:50 GMT -5
I'm not going to read any of this thread, but I was going to make this point anyway in the main off-season thread. Apologies if this has been said already.
You are one year removed from a trade that everyone agreed was a huge long-term overpay but would make you much better for the next two or maybe three years. The entire point of the Sale trade was try to win the championship in 2017, 2018, or 2019, by making it significantly less likely that you win in 2020 to 2024.
They didn't win in 2017 in large part because Sale showed the same pattern of decline across the season he had always shown (costing them first seed), and was predictably mediocre in the post-season. They fired the manager who may well have resisted a strategy to give him more rest.
In 2018 you do everything you can do get the April and May Sale in September and October. And you surround him with the best possible team you can.
One of Theo's rules of thumbs (learned the hard way after 2011) was "resist the temptation to build an uber-team." It hurts you in the long run. That's why I disliked (OK, hated) the Sale trade: too much sacrifice of long-term for the short.
But once you have embarked on that strategy, you continue. Once you have decided to Go For It Now, you don't back down from it. It's like bluffing the first round of betting and then folding on the next.
That's why you don't hesitate to sign both Martinez and Hosmer (or Santana) if you think that both will give you more value than their contracts, and if doing so doesn't prevent you from adding a huge piece in 2020 and beyond.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Nov 30, 2017 16:32:48 GMT -5
If a team doesn’t win the World Series, can you honestly say you got no enjoyment at all from watching them for the entire season? I don’t think baseball is right for you if that’s the case. I really enjoyed the last two seasons, especially watching the kids blossom and struggle and figure things out and I’m counting on enjoying at least 2-3 more years under a smart young manager. I think it’s more likely that I win the next two PowerBalls than the Red Sox have thought about blowing the team up for more than two seconds. 2016 was enjoyable yes. Last year? That was the one of the most joyless teams I've watched play. The bright spots was Devers and Benny. Other than that nothing else really. I saw a team that took a big step back while carrying an almost 200 million dollar payroll. So when you hold a payroll like that your goal needs to be winning the World Series. With the all comebacks and extra inning wins, this last year was joyless? For all the struggles with injuries and the step back for Mookie and Xander (or at least no step forward), this team showed a ton of grit. It was a joy to watch them battle and never give up. Man, you need to find another team to cheer for.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Nov 30, 2017 16:38:06 GMT -5
Nuts. I'd be extending our core, if at all possible... not blowing anything up.
Our outfield, with the multiple ways it can affect a game, is invaluable. All three of those guys are building blocks for the long road.
My hope is that Dombrowski does not make a big splash this offseason. We have a damn solid squad, and a little better management of our arms would improve the odds of a longer run in October. Maintain financial flexibility, both short term and long term.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 30, 2017 16:48:18 GMT -5
You do know that Pedroia is a 10-5 guy and can't be traded without his permission, right? And the team has 0 shot next year? Really. They won 93 games, had underperformances from a lot of players, will likely upgrade either the DH/1b position and have a staff headed by Sale, Price, and Pomeranz with Kimbrel heading the bullpen. Yeah, they totally suck. It's amazing - you get the yahoos who can't understand a scenario in which the Red Sox don't win 100 games in the upcoming season (the same yahoos who couldn't see how the Patriots could actually lose a game this season). And then there's you on the opposite end of the spectrum. The Red Sox most certainly do have an excellent chance of making the post-season, and certainly a solid chance at making serious noise in the playoffs, and they could even win it all if everything breaks right for them. The 2013 Red Sox didn't look nearly this good! Your pronouncement that the Red Sox have 0% chance is asinine. And you want to rebuild(destroy) this team but keep Sale and Betts? Why? So the Red Sox can win 75 games and not get the best returns on their most valuable players? If you're going to blow it up you go all the way, and doing so when the Sox clearly have 2 if not 3 years of having a realistically solid shot of winning the Championship, is absolutely moronic. What good is it if you waste Mookie's or Sale's best years when it doesn't matter, watch him leave for little or nothing, and then have some kids coming up who by time they come wish they had a Sale or Mookie available to them in their prime. And YOU complain about Dombrowski as GM? Sheesh. A few points -The Sox have ZERO chance. Did you not just see the team that won the WS? A home grown monster. Kuechel, Altuve Springer, Correa, Bregman, Verlander. The Sox cannot touch that. Yes they got "closer" this year. -The 2013 Sox was a team that I love and cherish but that was the one and a million team that got insanely lucky. They had no business making the playoffs let alone winning it all. We all know that. -Pedroia has his 10-5 rights but guys wave those all the time to go to a better situation. I'm not saying cut him because I think Pedey can still be a semi productive player but he really has no future here. Better to give him a shot elsewhere. -Wasting Betts and Sale's prime would be giving them a situation where they actually become better off in the long run? They aren't going anywhere with this roster. What do the Sox gain from letting Kimbrel Xander and Pomeranz walk next year? Or worse how about overpaying them? Then the player turns from an asset to a net negative. A home grown monster? What the hell do you think the Red Sox lineup looked like most days? Vazquez, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Devers, Benintendi, JBJ, and Betts are all home grown. Even Hanley Ramirez is home grown. And on days Sam Travis played the whole damn lineup was homegrown. What wasn't homegrown was the pitching. The Sox didn't do a good job developing starting pitchers over the past decade - hence the free agent signings and trades for pitching. What you seem to not understand is that the post-season is mainly a crapshoot. While it's true that it would seem some teams are better suited for the playoffs than others, it gets to the point you realize that when things are going well and you get the momentum is when you're most likely to win. The Red Sox were pretty much 1 inning away from sending Houston to a decisive Game 5. The Sox lost Game 4 when Sale ran out of gas and Kimbrel had an uncharacteristically bad outing - it wasn't because the talent wasn't there. You act like teams like Houston can't have injuries or regression from their young players like the Sox had this year. It's silly to assume that the Astros will always win the decisive playoff games. If I'm playing the odds I think Houston and NY have a better shot, but it's not written in stone. My God did you think the 85 Royals or 87 Twins or 88 Dodgers or 03 Marlins or 06 Cardinals or 11 Cardinals looked like post-season monsters going into the seasons?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 30, 2017 16:54:21 GMT -5
The reason the Red Sox don't have a Torres and Frazier on the farm is because Benintendi and Devers shot through the minor leagues so fast. Understood, but what happens when Xander bolts or gets overpaid? JBJ in 2020? Not to mention all of the other players coming up? Can we agree that the Red Sox will not win the World Series next year? So why not at least trade the guys you know are going to test the market like Pomeranz Xander and Kimbrel? JBJ is going to be an awful contract for whoever gives it to him in a couple years. Take one step backward to take two forward. Because you could buy Machado next year, then trade one year of Xander for a prospects in positions of need. Or you could buy Harper and trade JBJ. Or Price may opt out giving you a whole new level of salary flexibility to play with (so you could buy Machado or Harper or Kershaw). Or... But as others have said, this team was a hit or three from advancing in the playoffs. Much of the success hinges on injuries and players play at or above their projections for a short period of time. And if advanced stats have shown anything, they've shown that short series are often, as Theo once said, "a crap shoot." So, yeah, they get in the playoffs they have a legit chance of winning. Blowing it up seems like a really rash response. The fanbase would never stand (or sit and watch, as the case may be) for it, anyway. Hell, get testy when the team wins the division two years in a row and doesn't advance.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 30, 2017 16:58:26 GMT -5
Most likely they won't win the World Series. The odds are 1 out of 30 for each team so for each team the answer is they will not likely win the World Series. Do the Red Sox have a decent to good shot (as good as just about everybody else) to win the Series in 2018? If Dombrowski does a good job this offseason and/or the team plays well, the answer is Yes, and I doubt you'd find anybody here that agrees with you that 2018 is already a lost cause. Nobody is guaranteed a World Championship before the season. Ok, just because I have to comment on the math here -- it is not true that each team has a 1 in 30 chance of winning the World Series each year. There are teams who are literally trying to lose each year, and those do not have the same chance as the Astros or the Dodgers or even the Cubs or Nats or Red Sox or Yankees. That is just not real math. The quality of players on your roster and other factors do give some teams a better chance of winning before the season starts. That is why the odds at Vegas are not even for all teams at the beginning of each year. Yes, I know that it's not equally 1 out of 30, but it doesn't dilute my point. Nobody is like a 50% - 75% at winning the Series. Maybe the best team is 15% and the worst is 3%. Either way it's not a shoo-in that the best projected team is going to win. The odds are against everybody by a lot. Can we agree on that? When it's all said and done only 1 team will actually finish (100%) above their projection while the other 29 (0%) will finish below.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Nov 30, 2017 18:30:12 GMT -5
If blowing it up is a viable option, then arguably we can still go for it for another 1-2 years and then blow it up and rebuild very quickly.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedKyle on Nov 30, 2017 18:54:03 GMT -5
I don't understand people who say Xander "isn't that good" but at the same time think we'll get a haul for him
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 30, 2017 20:08:00 GMT -5
2016 was enjoyable yes. Last year? That was the one of the most joyless teams I've watched play. The bright spots was Devers and Benny. Other than that nothing else really. I saw a team that took a big step back while carrying an almost 200 million dollar payroll. So when you hold a payroll like that your goal needs to be winning the World Series. 2017 wasn't enjoyable? The team that won like like a thousand games in walkoff fashion or dramatic comebacks wasn't enjoyable?
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by gerry on Nov 30, 2017 20:08:40 GMT -5
2016 was enjoyable yes. Last year? That was the one of the most joyless teams I've watched play. The bright spots was Devers and Benny. Other than that nothing else really. I saw a team that took a big step back while carrying an almost 200 million dollar payroll. So when you hold a payroll like that your goal needs to be winning the World Series. With the all comebacks and extra inning wins, this last year was joyless? For all the struggles with injuries and the step back for Mookie and Xander (or at least no step forward), this team showed a ton of grit. It was a joy to watch them battle and never give up. Man, you need to find another team to cheer for. Let's expand this post and the next post as well. This team began with a solid month (end of March, most of April) battling a very bad flu and still limped to about 12 and 8 at the end of Aptil. In addition to the Flu, Price, Pom, Thornburg and others began the long, numbing year of being dragged down by performance busting injuries to wrists, knees, thumbs, fingers, ankles, elbows, shoulders, feet (C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF, Bench, Bench, Bench, SP, SP, SP, SP, SP, RP, RP, RP, RP, RP) that I can think of. Snakebit much? On the other side, not just Beni and Devers emerged as potential shining stars. So did Vasquez, Lin, Marrero, Kimbrel, Barnes, Maddox, Scott, Workman, Taylor, and eventually Price, Smith, Pomeranz, Fister, Nunez and a host of minor leaguers like Brentz, Chavis, Mata, etc. This, to me, was a fun team to watch find ways to win 93G. The season was more puzzling and even heart stopping than usual, but it was fun and it won 93G against the obstacles they constantly faced. Add a bat, a renewed zeal from the new direction and coaches, and some health, and this team can and will compete against the best in 2018. Blow this up? I get the desire to rebuild the farm with judicious trades. This may even happen if it is necessary to get back under the 237 mark. But that will be to better compete, not lose. C'mon Feb 14th. Can't wait.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Nov 30, 2017 21:35:10 GMT -5
What about blowing it up? Keep Sale. Thats fine. But trade Kimbrel for prospects. Pedroia can be dealt in July if he shows that he's healthy. Bradley would have a ton of value to a contender. Porcello would be a nice chip as would Pomeranz. Xander would get a haul as well. Do what the Yankees did two years ago. Then if you want to resign Kimbrel in the offseason next year then go ahead. But they need to punt in order to restock the farm. Tank for the best pick possible then get back on track what they were before 2016 which was a player development machine. So my idea is to deal Xander, Pomeranz, Porcello, Bradley and Kimbrel for high end prospects. Hanley, Pedroia and Price for whatever they can get for them. Then run out this team for 2018 C-Vazquez 1B-Travis 2B-Holt SS-Nunez (Resign 1 year 11 mil option for a 2nd) 3B-Devers LF-Benentendi CF-Maybin (1 year 10 million) RF-Betts DH-Brentz (Or if Otani picks the Sox for some reason that would be amazing) Rotation Sale Erod Wright Velasquez Chatwood (Signed 2 years 18 million) Closer - Give Kelly the job and see how he handles it. Thornburg is coming back and Smith is probably 100% by the spring Yes the team is an eyesore but thats the point. The Sox have been built as a treadmill squad. Need to break it up and start relying on becoming a player development machine again. Cut the payroll down to 100-120 million for a couple of seasons. It can be done. Look at Houston. i am all for unfiltered posting, but i have been noticing your style and i gotta say, it appears to exist on the margains of the debate. it is fine by me, but no, we should not blow it up. we have good players who deserve a chance to compete and win. Frankly, my (or anyone else's) frustrations follwing the team should have no bearing on DD's organiztional decisions. with the exception that fielding a terrible club will likely cost him some revenue.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Nov 30, 2017 21:52:19 GMT -5
2016 was enjoyable yes. Last year? That was the one of the most joyless teams I've watched play. The bright spots was Devers and Benny. Other than that nothing else really. I saw a team that took a big step back while carrying an almost 200 million dollar payroll. So when you hold a payroll like that your goal needs to be winning the World Series. 2017 wasn't enjoyable? The team that won like like a thousand games in walkoff fashion or dramatic comebacks wasn't enjoyable? it was enjoyable. i will say that there were high levels of frustrion for me also. there was something about last year that gave me higher anxiety than most any other year. maybe it was because every win seemed so hard fought. maybe it was because offense struggled. maybe it was because i predicted the team was gonna run away with it. W ait.......i think i know......i spent too much time in the gameday threads reading posts complaining about John Farrell.
|
|
|
Post by jiant2520 on Nov 30, 2017 22:17:34 GMT -5
What about blowing it up? Keep Sale. Thats fine. But trade Kimbrel for prospects. Pedroia can be dealt in July if he shows that he's healthy. Bradley would have a ton of value to a contender. Porcello would be a nice chip as would Pomeranz. Xander would get a haul as well. Do what the Yankees did two years ago. Then if you want to resign Kimbrel in the offseason next year then go ahead. But they need to punt in order to restock the farm. Tank for the best pick possible then get back on track what they were before 2016 which was a player development machine. So my idea is to deal Xander, Pomeranz, Porcello, Bradley and Kimbrel for high end prospects. Hanley, Pedroia and Price for whatever they can get for them. Then run out this team for 2018 C-Vazquez 1B-Travis 2B-Holt SS-Nunez (Resign 1 year 11 mil option for a 2nd) 3B-Devers LF-Benentendi CF-Maybin (1 year 10 million) RF-Betts DH-Brentz (Or if Otani picks the Sox for some reason that would be amazing) Rotation Sale Erod Wright Velasquez Chatwood (Signed 2 years 18 million) Closer - Give Kelly the job and see how he handles it. Thornburg is coming back and Smith is probably 100% by the spring Yes the team is an eyesore but thats the point. The Sox have been built as a treadmill squad. Need to break it up and start relying on becoming a player development machine again. Cut the payroll down to 100-120 million for a couple of seasons. It can be done. Look at Houston. While I don't always agree with others on here, it usually is something I can at least try to understand or see their rational, but in this case... I just cannot see your way of thinking as anything but crazy. Short answer: No thank you. But.... say I agreed with you, why sign Maybin to a 10 mil deal instead of just playing Castillo and saving 10 mil? Why sign Nunez, at SS no less? Why not just Marrero and save money? Why Chatwood instead of Johnson and save money? Those three, at the price you gave them, just wasted 30 mil..... Also, Boston is a lot closer to be a contender than they are at being a bottom 10 team, so why not sign a few players and compete?? I cannot understand why "blowing up the team" is even a thought with the players on this team.... they are built to win now. This is a top 10 team now, at least, and if they add a piece or two, can be top five. Who is a better team? Dodgers, Astros, Indians and Nationals?? Yankees, D-Backs and Cubs are right there with Boston.... Rockies, Cardinals and Mariners, Rays, Angels, Jays, Pirates and Brewers are definitely below the Sox.... As a fan, I want to add and win, not rebuild... if I were the owner, I'd want to add and win. Player, coach... add, win. Now if this was a team coming off 100 losses, maybe we subtract some payroll and attempt to retool, but not this current team. In my humble opinion of course.
|
|
|
Post by doctorduck21 on Nov 30, 2017 22:32:28 GMT -5
I don't understand this. Will the Sox be the favorite anytime in the next 3 years? Probably not but we have a good chance at a world series. We should add and compete not blow up a good team.
We've won two division titles in a row. Rebuilding after finishing last 3 out of 4 or 5 years would've made sense. Not at this point.
You build around a young core. You don't trade them to get minor leaguers that might become what the young players already are if we're lucky. Maybe in 2019 or 2020 if it doesn't work out the next two years
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Nov 30, 2017 22:58:35 GMT -5
2016 was enjoyable yes. Last year? That was the one of the most joyless teams I've watched play. The bright spots was Devers and Benny. Other than that nothing else really. I saw a team that took a big step back while carrying an almost 200 million dollar payroll. So when you hold a payroll like that your goal needs to be winning the World Series. 2017 wasn't enjoyable? The team that won like like a thousand games in walkoff fashion or dramatic comebacks wasn't enjoyable? Kungfuizzy hot takes are the best. I think he's funny, but I can see how other people get on him so quick. All of his ideas doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but it's good to let off steam. We probably need a thread just dedicated to Kung Fuizzy's meltdowns when it comes to Dombrowski.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 1, 2017 1:03:34 GMT -5
You mean they can't touch the team they got a couple outs from forcing a winner-take-all game 5 in the ALDS? I understand when some people take a more pessimistic view on things, but this is just going way overboard entirely. Once you make the playoffs anything can happen. To say that this team has zero chance of winning the WS is insane. Can they make the playoffs? They most certainly can, which means they definitely have a chance of winning. The Astros are obviously a great team, but anything can happen in a long series like the playoffs. On top of that, there is a chance that really anything can happen in sports. Can the Padres win the WS next year? It would be highly unlikely, but if things break right and many of there players improve over last year than sure they have a chance. There is almost never a 0% chance before the season actually begins because you have absolutely no idea what is truly going to occur. You asserting that there is zero chance as of this moments doesn't help your point, it only makes it look like you are trolling. They can make the playoffs. Not questioning that. But there is legitimately zero chance they can make the World Series. They just don't have the horses. Seriously, who do you consider untradeable on this team? Sale, Betts, Benny, and Devers. I just gave you 5 or 6 players from the Astros alone. Cleveland you have more of the same issues. Yankees are going to be there if they aren't already the prospects they have are too damn good not to be. Thats two or three teams right there ahead of you in the American League. Sure a couple of bounces and yes the Sox would have forced Game 5. But can you ever truly say you watched that series and expected the Sox to win? The answer is no. The one outlier is Anaheim. If they can get actual players around Trout who is the best player in baseball then they don't need the core the Astros or Cleveland has in the American League. I have plenty of issues with the Dombrowski method, but...no. This team absolutely has every chance of winning a WS. They may not be a favorite, but, for example, compare Altuve’s development to Mookie. It’s entirely possible Mookie goes 2014 Portland-style in MLB. Benintendi and (full-season) Devers could take significant leaps. So could Rodriguez. Price could return to 2015 form...look at Grienke’s bounce-back. The Astros relied on their home-grown core (Altuve, Springer, Bregman, etc.) developing, and established players contributing. The Red Sox are eminently capable of the same, with Betts, Bogaerts, JBJ, Benintendi, Rodriguez, Barnes, Vazquez, Swihart, and Devers all likely contributors, all still before or just entering historical prime production years (26-29, roughly). What you’re saying is ludicrous. Incredibly so. Look at the emergence of the Cubs, and sudden backslide (although it was kinda predicted by BABIP/defensive regression). This is baseball. The season—the games themselves— tells the truth, for that season, not the next. There are at least 173 games to be played. As for targeted, intelligent value trades, I’m all for it. But those are situational, and the only situation that matters right now is being in contention in July. If they’re not, yeah, OK, move Kimbrel, Pomeranz, Porcello, and maybe a few others. But the sensible reason to do so now is if an acquisition (Ohtani, Darvish, etc.) creates a redundancy (move Porcello). That’s it.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 1, 2017 1:06:20 GMT -5
They can make the playoffs. Not questioning that. But there is legitimately zero chance they can make the World Series. So you're saying that there is a greater chance of getting hit by an asteroid, or winning the lottery 5 times in a row, or waking up and finding that you have superpowers...than the Red Sox making the playoffs and winning three straight short series, in a sport where even the worst teams win 35-40% of their games. Is that what you're saying? “This is gold, Jerry, GOLD.” (“Waking up and finding you have superpowers...” made my day. Well-played, sir.)
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Dec 1, 2017 7:45:43 GMT -5
I agree with pedro that the sox unless something very drastic happens will not blow up the team. But it is kind of fun to look at things from the other side of the coin. What does Dave do? Dave came in and fixed the biggest hole for the sox, pitching. We now have a very strong starting and relief core. BUT, for us guys on this web site it came with a heavy price the beloved farm system. The pitching staff allows us to have a good chance to make the playoffs. Which then gives us a good chance to win it all. We seem to be putting 3 teams ahead of us in the American league. Each year is new and different. Do the astros have enough pitching? What if Dallas K gets hurt? Will all their young kids have a fall back year, that quite often happens after winning the series. Cleve appears to not have depth. Hitting seems a little short. For the Yankees how many people think that Judge is going to have another year like last. Not to mention a new manager that has to adjust to the microscope of the NY media. Add to that mix, how will the team and the league adjust to a new mgr in Boston?
I think a couple of things this thread brings out into a different light. One, how does Dave manage payroll? I do not get the impression that the sox will blow by the 237 number that seems to be a common assumption that they will because they are built to win NOW. I think that it is more tied to how many guys they have coming up for large contracts. They will be very good whether they make a big splash or not. Henry has a lot of money because he has always managed his money carefully. I do not think that means at the trade deadline that he does not spend an extra 10 or 12 to get a guy who Dave thinks puts them over the top.
Second, I think Dave has a matrix set up on who he would like to keep and for how much. I think he has a percent number against the likelihood of the signing. I think it is similar to the value metric system that Eric and umass talk about on value of contracts. I think with the big FA class coming next winter that Dave is looking at a better market to move people this winter. Is he tanking? Is he weakening the club? NO, definitely not. He is NOT going to give anybody away for nothing. He seems to have a skill of getting back good talent. Yes, sometimes we think he overpays. If he does not find a great deal that will benefit this year 2018, I think he hangs on to what he's got and waits. I do not think he keeps them until he gets a draft choice for them.
I do not think Dave waits until 2020 with this club and ride out the next 2 years, spends lots of money, and waits to see what he HAS to do. I think he starts the process this winter.
No moves he does this winter would surprise me. But, he will not blow up the club. The sox still want to put people in the seats.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Dec 1, 2017 8:10:54 GMT -5
it was enjoyable. i will say that there were high levels of frustrion for me also. there was something about last year that gave me higher anxiety than most any other year. maybe it was because every win seemed so hard fought. maybe it was because offense struggled. maybe it was because i predicted the team was gonna run away with it. W ait.......i think i know......i spent too much time in the gameday threads reading posts complaining about John Farrell. Oh I get that, it was a tense journey last year and the team was always on the brink of disappointment. But they never did disappoint (on the regular season anyway), the games were always close but they seemed to find a way to win. It was nerve-wracking, but it was awesome seeing them consistently pull wins out of their a**.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 1, 2017 8:13:36 GMT -5
Gotta nuke somethin'.
|
|
|