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 Chris Hatfield on Aug 22, 2019 7:10:20 GMT -5
Just as a point of information, it doesn't make sense to credit a GM for players drafted and developed, at least directly. The GM has input on the first round pick, really, and little else, in the draft room.
Now, if you want to give him some credit for having been part of putting together the apparatus that was in place that did that, that would make sense.
That goes even moreso for IFAs. Save for the Moncadas of the world, Cherington wouldn't have had much to do with them.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 22, 2019 10:08:40 GMT -5
1. Hanley was a mistake. This I'll admit. Bad signing. All GMs have them. 2. They got Rick Porcello out of Lester who won a Cy Young and was instrumental in a ring. Even if you disagree with what happened, would you undo the deal? I wouldn't. 3. Jon Lackey trade almost was a bust, but Kelly was awesome out of the pen in October. Also, if Lackey is openly threatening retirement, what trade leverage do you have? 4. He also was the guy who acquired Andrew Miller in the first place sne got Eduardo Rodriguez for him. 5. And how is that Sale extension looking already? The Eovaldi contract? How was the Travis Shaw trade? The Wade Miley trade? How was the plan to rely on Pedroia at 2B this year? How'd Drew Pomeranz work out for a blue chip prospect? How'd Buttrey for Kinsler? You can pick apart bad moves for any GM really. Dombrowski vastly overpaid for Price and if he wasn't so awesome last year that deal would have been pretty bad. This is why we are on opposite sides of the country. I just wrote 7 counter points (plus ready to write more) and I realize I was getting nastier and nastier. I don't want that. You'll reply back and get brutal with me and would probably carry over to other posts. I just have to say your reply to me-- well let's just there are many that like Ben (such as you) just as there are many like me who think he was overall an incompetent GM. I'm just stunned by your reply and reasoning etc. I'm just stunned. And just because you are incompetent doesn;t mean every move you;ve ever made was bad. I respect you but I'm dropping this with you. If there was a forum that we could swear at each other in fun tearing into each other's opinion with more what we feel evidence that backs up our own -because at the end of the day - this is supposed to be fun -- I'd be all for it. Have fun and note we are complete opposites here. How you look at everything - - I'm stunned. And what you call "pick apart" I call MAJOR BLUNDERS not worthy of a competent MLB GM for a big market team. I'll leave it at that. Sorry was going off my mobile phone, but a lot to unpack here. No worries, just a difference of opinion I think to say he got NOTHING for Lackey and Lester is just false. He got a starter who won a Cy Young and a WS ring who was one of their better arms. They also got Joe Kelly and Allen Craig who were both reclamation projects. The trade was a complete bust up until Kelly had a strong October performance. It took years, but I think there's some vindication there. Lackey also gave the team zero leverage. Everyone knew he was threatening retirement because he didn't want to honor his league minimal contract and that he didn't like it here. He also found a sucker to take on Crawford, Beckett and Adrian Gonzalez's contracts and used the money saved to spread it around the team on short-term deals to bridge to the Devers, Xander, Moncada, Mookie's of the farm and ended up winning a ring by getting the right combination of guys. That ring was heavily on him catching that much lightning in a bottle. His mistake was thinking they could replicate the success the next year, but so didn't Dombrowski. I'll argue whatever points until I'm blue in the face, but don't really take it personal if you disagree. Though the heat Dombrowski is getting and how if you go to sports article pages and the comment section on social media literally everyone is telling Dombrowski to go pound sand. I get a little heated on those comments because it really is short-sighted. 1. Hanley was a mistake. This I'll admit. Bad signing. All GMs have them. 2. They got Rick Porcello out of Lester who won a Cy Young and was instrumental in a ring. Even if you disagree with what happened, would you undo the deal? I wouldn't. 3. Jon Lackey trade almost was a bust, but Kelly was awesome out of the pen in October. Also, if Lackey is openly threatening retirement, what trade leverage do you have? 4. He also was the guy who acquired Andrew Miller in the first place sne got Eduardo Rodriguez for him. 5. And how is that Sale extension looking already? The Eovaldi contract? How was the Travis Shaw trade? The Wade Miley trade? How was the plan to rely on Pedroia at 2B this year? How'd Drew Pomeranz work out for a blue chip prospect? How'd Buttrey for Kinsler? You can pick apart bad moves for any GM really. Dombrowski vastly overpaid for Price and if he wasn't so awesome last year that deal would have been pretty bad. Just a correction here - yes Cherington traded Miller for E-Rod, but Cherington wasn't the GM when Miller was acquired. It was Theo who got Miller. He was on the 2011 Red Sox when Theo was still GM. Wow. For some reason I had Miller in my memory as a bit later than that. Especially given E-Rod's age. Just as a point of information, it doesn't make sense to credit a GM for players drafted and developed, at least directly. The GM has input on the first round pick, really, and little else, in the draft room. Now, if you want to give him some credit for having been part of putting together the apparatus that was in place that did that, that would make sense. That goes even moreso for IFAs. Save for the Moncadas of the world, Cherington wouldn't have had much to do with them. Honestly, I'm not sure how much say the GM goes into IFA and the drafting process, so I'll certainly take your word for it. If he's the over-sight that picks the correct people to make those choices then that's still a feather. It took him a few tries, but his team started to nail draft picks and IFA guys. Dombrowski hasn't drafted anyone (yet) who is highly touted around baseball. We have a lot of "maybe can be a regular, but has x, y, and z flaws". Casas could be that guy, but we'll have to wait to see if he can crack a top 50 list. I also believe Cherington started as head of scouting or was somehow directly involved with making draft picks during the Theo years IIRC (and please, do correct me if I'm mistaken). 1. Hanley was a mistake. This I'll admit. Bad signing. All GMs have them. 2. They got Rick Porcello out of Lester who won a Cy Young and was instrumental in a ring. Even if you disagree with what happened, would you undo the deal? I wouldn't. 3. Jon Lackey trade almost was a bust, but Kelly was awesome out of the pen in October. Also, if Lackey is openly threatening retirement, what trade leverage do you have? 4. He also was the guy who acquired Andrew Miller in the first place sne got Eduardo Rodriguez for him. 5. And how is that Sale extension looking already? The Eovaldi contract? How was the Travis Shaw trade? The Wade Miley trade? How was the plan to rely on Pedroia at 2B this year? How'd Drew Pomeranz work out for a blue chip prospect? How'd Buttrey for Kinsler? You can pick apart bad moves for any GM really. Dombrowski vastly overpaid for Price and if he wasn't so awesome last year that deal would have been pretty bad. I just have to ask how you can keep tearing into DD on the Sale Extension and act like Porcello was a plus for Ben? Porcello was given a huge extension and was way worse than Sale was this year his first year. Heck his AAV on a contract from 5 years ago is just about the same as Sales today and he's never been close to the pitcher Sale is. Yes he would go on to have some good years, but it was a huge overpay at the time and Sale could still make that contract look good. Yet overall Porcello has had two good years and three bad years for us, which isn't great for a guy making 25 million a year. Same type thing with Eovaldi, looks bad now, but we'll see what happens. Way to early to slam that signing, it could look good in three years or not. Like another poster said what was the other options you could have traded Lester for? Like look at how the Yankees rebuilt that system with one huge deadline sell off. Ben could have done that with Lester, Lackey, and Miller. Yet he messed up the roster so bad they needed or wanted veteran OF instead. You can't even come close to talking bad trades when Ben traded Reddick, a trade he lost by like 40 bwar. That has to be one of the worst top 5 trades in Red Sox history. I get it you like Ben, but you are really overlooking how big some of his mistakes were. Like trying to say the Miley trade was bad because he was good for the first time in three years? Hasn't he been on like 5 teams since then? Every GM makes mistakes, few make so many huge mistakes like Ben did. It's telling that a guy who was once seen as the next Theo hasn't got a second chance since his disaster here, he was that bad. Just think about that, so many bad teams and yet nothing. The way he built up the farm can't be done anymore, no more extra first round picks, no more big spending in the draft, no more huge international bonus guys. He had the ability to do things DD can't currently do. I LOVED the Sale trade. I also don't think it was especially hard for a GM/President of operations to trade the 1/2 prospect in baseball (or whatever fell back 10 or so slots), a top 25 prospect and some high upside kids to get an ace. I feel like anyone could have done that move quite honestly, but I'm glad he had the guts to do so. As of 8/22/19 I'm not a huge fan of the Sale extension. He's worn down/broken down just about every year since he's been here and he's only getting older. The value they signed him for does make sense for the organization, but he's a guy (going to be over 30, history of wearing down, wiry frame) makes me want to wait till the absolute last minute to give him whatever deal it would take to retain him. If the extra 5 million end of year ends up costing them a good bench piece, so be it. He can be Cy Young the next 5 years in a row and make people like me questioning his early extension a complete joke. As of today, I'm skeptical. I still wanted Sale moving forward. As for Eovaldi, it is too soon, but I think it's fair to say that even at the time of the signing most people were saying, "way too much". I'll admit to being conflicted at the time of the trade. Beeks was my binky, but I was closely following Eovaldi at the time because of fantasy baseball and knew he had been absolutely electric with the Rays. With that said, you'll never see me calling David Price a bad signing. It was, but they won a ring. That's the thing. I'm also of the mindset that you could trade Mike Trout for Eduardo Nunez, but if Eduardo Nunez is vital to a championship run, I wouldn't undo the trade. If I wouldn't undo it then that has to be considered a win. I understand that Mike Trout is going to be a top 5 (if not better) player of all-time and Nunez could maybe get a job with the Royals. Reddick was fair deal for the pitcher they thought they were going to get. He was also very aggressive and was not a fan of the Red Sox hitting philosophy. What made it a truly bad deal was the fact they got literally nothing out of Andrew Bailey. When they traded him he had 50 strike outs to 19 walks with a .786 OPS in 278 PA at the age of 24. He was terrible in his limited action at the ages of 23 and 22. There was reason to suspect that he had some serious holes in his swing. He then had .768, .686, .763, .781, .749, .847, .718, .679. I will concede he is a very good defender which is highlighted by his 1 Gold Glove. I mean, those numbers look very Jackie Bradley-ish and I'm not really that beat up over getting nothing for a JBJ type of player. Miley was bad because Carson Smith was a major train-wreck and gave zero value what-so-ever. Again, revisionist history because he was another guy I was following and was amped to get on the Sox. Even still, everyone knew Smith was a pending surgery waiting to happen. Same with Thornburg. Wade Miley sucked in his half-season with Seattle (maybe decent for a number 5) with a 4.98 ERA and a 4.76 FIP, but was traded to Baltimore and posted a confusing 6.17 ERA with a 3.79 FIP. The following year he was very bad, but the two years thereafter he has been electric with a 2.57 ERA (shortened season with Brewers) and now a 3.18 ERA with the Astros. There was value there for a back-end starter. I think your last point is rather fair about the draft and IFA guys. His wheelhouse has been plugged by MLB so his strength in cultivating talent has been handicapped. He is currently working for the Blue Jays as VP though. Last year, it was heavily rumored the Mets were trying to acquire him. www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/report-blue-jays-vp-ben-cherington-not-eager-leave-organization/I still call the Pomeranz trade a bad trade since he didn't exactly help in the playoffs and while he was 10000% correct in moving Espinosa (my favorite pitching prospect in a long time), I don't believe he got as much as he could for him. I think the fact SD pounced all over that deal shows what teams thought of him. SD could have waited closer to the deadline and try to haggle teams who were absolutely desperate for pitching help.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Aug 22, 2019 12:07:03 GMT -5
Quick 2 cents re: Dombrowski
I feel like overall he's done a very good job to this point, most of his moves in hindsight made the team better from a talent perspective. It really doesn't feel like he should be let go based on what he's done.
But he does seem to be trending towards creating another top-heavy, low-depth organization like he did in Detroit, and the longer that trend continues the harder it will be to reverse it. So if the rumors that he's only making decisions within his tight inner circle (Wren, LaRussa) while ignoring other intelligent opinions, I can see how Henry might see this as the right time to move on.
Another observation, it seems like when we change GM's and the new one fills the holes the previous GM seemed to have, it works out very well. Duquette had his strengths and build the foundation of the '04 team, but Theo's change in organizational direction blended nicely for a while after. Same thing when we did a 180 from Cherington to Dombrowski. Maybe that's just coincidence, or a SSS quirk.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 22, 2019 12:33:02 GMT -5
That they have stopped trading (significant) prospects and started holding onto them since the Sale trade, tells me that DDO is cognizant of not doing what he did in Detroit.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Aug 22, 2019 12:55:43 GMT -5
That they have stopped trading (significant) prospects and started holding onto them since the Sale trade, tells me that DDO is cognizant of not doing what he did in Detroit. I agree, but meant more roster construction overall. As in not having adequate starting depth, 4th OF depth, that type of stuff. I should have used the word 'roster' instead of 'organization' in the other post. EDIT: Tried to push that post out between work tasks and didn't explain too well. The reason for it being harder to reverse over time is that too much payroll is being tied to top players, like how Detroit has Cabrera on a long-term albatross deal now. Sox have Price, Sale, Eovaldi alone tied up for what, $73 million for another 4 years? Health concerns for all make that a potential worrisome burden. Payroll inflexibility limited our chance to do things this year, and we've got a lot of critical long-term decisions coming up this winter. If it were me I'd keep him, but see the thinking in making a change.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 22, 2019 13:03:30 GMT -5
Quick 2 cents re: Dombrowski I feel like overall he's done a very good job to this point, most of his moves in hindsight made the team better from a talent perspective. It really doesn't feel like he should be let go based on what he's done. But he does seem to be trending towards creating another top-heavy, low-depth organization like he did in Detroit, and the longer that trend continues the harder it will be to reverse it. So if the rumors that he's only making decisions within his tight inner circle (Wren, LaRussa) while ignoring other intelligent opinions, I can see how Henry might see this as the right time to move on. Another observation, it seems like when we change GM's and the new one fills the holes the previous GM seemed to have, it works out very well. Duquette had his strengths and build the foundation of the '04 team, but Theo's change in organizational direction blended nicely for a while after. Same thing when we did a 180 from Cherington to Dombrowski. Maybe that's just coincidence, or a SSS quirk. I think these are all great points. I actually do think he's adjusted to circumstances and taken a reasonable approach in replenishing the prospect pipeline, as others have noted. My big worry with him is and has always been that he builds stars-and-scrubs teams. The lack of depth has bitten the team this year. And frankly it was even an issue last year (Nunez at 2B!) that they nonetheless overcame to sort of miraculously win 108 games. When you look at the value that the Yankees and Rays have gotten out of seemingly marginal guys acquired in trades or as free agents, you see what we're up against. I don't know if he doesn't pay enough attention to that sort of thing, or he just doesn't have a knack for it. At any rate, if I was John Henry, I'd be talking to Dombrowski and looking for assurance that he has a plan to address this issue. As for the GM replacement pattern - it makes some sense, doesn't it? You inherit the strengths of the previous GM and then you add in your own strengths to fill in the weak spots in the organization. Then when the inheritance of the previous guy fades out, there are new holes in the organization - bring in a new GM, rinse, repeat.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 22, 2019 13:14:46 GMT -5
That they have stopped trading (significant) prospects and started holding onto them since the Sale trade, tells me that DDO is cognizant of not doing what he did in Detroit. I'll be pedantic and say it was more after the 2017 season. Anderson, Santos, Nogosek, Callahan, and Bautista was not an insignificant price for Reed and Nunez. But the general point remains true.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 13:26:31 GMT -5
That they have stopped trading (significant) prospects and started holding onto them since the Sale trade, tells me that DDO is cognizant of not doing what he did in Detroit. I agree, but meant more roster construction overall. As in not having adequate starting depth, 4th OF depth, that type of stuff. I should have used the word 'roster' instead of 'organization' in the other post. This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day.
|
|
|
Dombrowski
Aug 22, 2019 14:58:16 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 22, 2019 14:58:16 GMT -5
I agree, but meant more roster construction overall. As in not having adequate starting depth, 4th OF depth, that type of stuff. I should have used the word 'roster' instead of 'organization' in the other post. This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day. The reports were Pedroia was coming back so they wanted a cheap solution to bridge the gap. I question the logic in relying on Pedroia returning and staying healthy. We do have to keep in mind he was told to stay under the luxury and needed some space to make a move if needed.
|
|
|
Post by jbsox on Aug 22, 2019 16:07:37 GMT -5
That they have stopped trading (significant) prospects and started holding onto them since the Sale trade, tells me that DDO is cognizant of not doing what he did in Detroit. I agree, but meant more roster construction overall. As in not having adequate starting depth, 4th OF depth, that type of stuff. I should have used the word 'roster' instead of 'organization' in the other post. EDIT: Tried to push that post out between work tasks and didn't explain too well. The reason for it being harder to reverse over time is that too much payroll is being tied to top players, like how Detroit has Cabrera on a long-term albatross deal now. Sox have Price, Sale, Eovaldi alone tied up for what, $73 million for another 4 years? Health concerns for all make that a potential worrisome burden. Payroll inflexibility limited our chance to do things this year, and we've got a lot of critical long-term decisions coming up this winter. If it were me I'd keep him, but see the thinking in making a change. I thought starter depth was ok to start the season with Johnson, Velasquez, and Wright to start for our 6th plus starters. Injuries/down performance from our starting pitching brought down our performance this year, and that’s not really DD’s fault. With Sales extension I am fine with that risk. If we didn’t sign Sale to an extension, and he had a very strong year he might have cost much more this offseason or sign with someone else. There are some looming big decisions to be made Betts extension or trade, same with JBJ, maybe some other extensions such as Erod, do we reinforce our starting pitching and how? Nobody is perfect, but I trust DD over most to make those decisions. Me personally more stability with our starting pitching is vital as it’s hard to rely on Sale, Price, and Eovaldi. So how does he get there maybe he eats into the farm a bit to trade for a very good cost controlled starter, bumps up against the 3rd tax line again in FA with the likes of Wheeler, Bumgarner, Hamels (on a short contract), dream big with Cole out there, gets starting pitcher back in a Betts or JBJ trade. Either way I hope for 2 solid starting pitchers (an improvement over Porcello) to join Sale, Price, and Erod and keep Eovaldi stretched out for multiple innings in our bullpen as sort of our bandaid SP when needed. Anyway I trust DD to make these decisions, and to keep the right prospects for the future as he has proven in the past.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 17:04:16 GMT -5
This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day. The reports were Pedroia was coming back so they wanted a cheap solution to bridge the gap. I question the logic in relying on Pedroia returning and staying healthy. We do have to keep in mind he was told to stay under the luxury and needed some space to make a move if needed.All the more reason not expend what few resources you have on a fragile pitcher!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 22, 2019 20:28:23 GMT -5
I agree, but meant more roster construction overall. As in not having adequate starting depth, 4th OF depth, that type of stuff. I should have used the word 'roster' instead of 'organization' in the other post. This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day. To be fair, Nunez was also supplemented by Holt, Lin, Hernandez and Pedroia. Later, Chavis. It's fair to assume that among all those options, you could get reasonable production from them. The biggest problem is Cora's stubbornness in L/R matchups and his tendency to ignore defense on occasion. I mean he pinch hit .140 hitter Chris Owings for .316 hitter Marco Hernandez with 2 runners on in the 8th the other night, down by 2. This is a problem that should be fixed. Sometimes, the best hitter is the best hitter, not the favorable platoon matchup.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 22, 2019 21:26:00 GMT -5
This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day. To be fair, Nunez was also supplemented by Holt, Lin, Hernandez and Pedroia. Later, Chavis. It's fair to assume that among all those options, you could get reasonable production from them. The biggest problem is Cora's stubbornness in L/R matchups and his tendency to ignore defense on occasion. I mean he pinch hit .140 hitter Chris Owings for .316 hitter Marco Hernandez with 2 runners on in the 8th the other night, down by 2. This is a problem that should be fixed. Sometimes, the best hitter is the best hitter, not the favorable platoon matchup. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I always thought Holt hung in against lefties. I never understood the knee-jerk reaction from Cora to have to PH for Holt any time a lefty enters the game or the need to have to start a righty against a southpaw at 2b for Holt, usually for righties who can't hit lefties anyways (Nunez mostly and now Owings).
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 24, 2019 13:06:36 GMT -5
The reports were Pedroia was coming back so they wanted a cheap solution to bridge the gap. I question the logic in relying on Pedroia returning and staying healthy. We do have to keep in mind he was told to stay under the luxury and needed some space to make a move if needed.All the more reason not expend what few resources you have on a fragile pitcher! What would you have done? Like how do you take Eovaldi's money and deepen the team getting your second basemen, starter, and more depth? I'm on record not wanting Eovaldi and if we did get him trading Porcello to free up money and get a young starter hopefully. I wanted Schoop for 2nd base, he's been a 1.2 bwar player. I would have signed Kimbrel and a few vets like Pomeranz and Harvey. First we didn't have the money to do that. Second while I think Kimbrel given a normal off-season helps us early, he doesn't fix the rotation. Schoop is an upgrade over Nunez, but not Chavis. Every free agent pitcher has basically sucked besides one in Morton and he cost just about the same as Eovaldi in 2019 for his age 35 season. So you couldn't sign him and add a bunch more depth. So did DD trade away a bunch of pitchers that could have helped us? Nope, the two guys currently pitching in the majors in Anderson and Allen have been down right bad so far this year. It's just seems crazy to blame DD because every starter besides ERod is having massive down years. Can you blame him for the lack of starter depth in the minors? Maybe, but it's been what three years? So not really, the starters left from Ben's time as GM haven't done anything either and that is the main issue. Between injuries and ineffectiveness, they have done nothing in the majors so far. For all the great players our system as produced we just can't seem to produce starters. Guys like Johnson and Vaz went from very useful to crap in a season. So while I agree the Eovaldi deal was bad, I just don't see how you fix this team spending that money elsewhere. Unless you want to point to one free agent signing, which is kinda crazy. You weren't trading Sale or Price, no one besides me wanted to trade Porcello. The free agent options were bad and ownership wants to rebuild the farm system so they didn't want to empty it to acquire a young starter and frankly who knows how that plays out. So I just really don't see how you can blame DD for this team unless you could predict all of our starters would suck this year. All of the good luck we got last year would turn out to be bad this year. Just look at Cashner, who was pitching really well when we acquired him, seemed like a solid move. He turns into a pumpkin the minute we got him and litterally killed us more than without him. If you really want to blame someone blame ownership. If they really wanted to go for back to back Championships they shouldn't have limited the payroll. A few bullpen arms gets us a few more wind early on and at the deadline DD gets a better starter than Cashner because we are right in the thick of things. Yet even then it doesn't fix Sale, Price, and Porcello, which is this teams biggest issue. You likely spend a ton of extra money, trade a bunch of prospects and get nothing extra.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Aug 24, 2019 15:47:32 GMT -5
If we're playing the "what if" game of how to allocate Eovaldi's money, DJ LeMahieu's current production would've been very nice. This would've added wins to the team and had money left over without committing any salary beyond next year instead of being on the hook for three more years with Eovaldi. There were players out there that could've helped the Red Sox this winter. It would've been a bad look from the Red Sox to underbid for Eovaldi after the way they used him last postseason, but are there any reports that any team was remotely close to the Red Sox offer? It felt like yet another acquisition where Dombrowski was easily the top bidder, surpassing the competition by a comfortable margin. Doing those type of deals repeatedly got them in the position of having limited flexibility to take advantage of good value buying opportunities.
|
|
|
Dombrowski
Aug 24, 2019 16:41:25 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by wcsoxfan on Aug 24, 2019 16:41:25 GMT -5
If we're playing the "what if" game of how to allocate Eovaldi's money, DJ LeMahieu's current production would've been very nice. This would've added wins to the team and had money left over without committing any salary beyond next year instead of being on the hook for three more years with Eovaldi. There were players out there that could've helped the Red Sox this winter. It would've been a bad look from the Red Sox to underbid for Eovaldi after the way they used him last postseason, but are there any reports that any team was remotely close to the Red Sox offer? It felt like yet another acquisition where Dombrowski was easily the top bidder, surpassing the competition by a comfortable margin. Doing those type of deals repeatedly got them in the position of having limited flexibility to take advantage of good value buying opportunities. In hindsight, every team in baseball should have signed DJ LeMahieu. I also feel, and felt at the time, like Eovaldi was an overpay and a risk given his injury history and overuse last postseason. But the Red Sox needed a starting pitcher (and still do) and there wasn't a clearly better option. The hitting has been great, the RP have been good but they have a bad rotation on big free agent contracts. David Price for 7 years was a bad contract at the time. Sale 1 year before free agency was an overly risky decision and Porcello just had a down year. The problem with the rotation is that it's reliant on veteran pitchers rather than young developed pitchers - but that's going to take years to fix. In the meantime, we just have to cross our fingers and hope they bounce back.
|
|
|
Post by pudsauce on Aug 24, 2019 18:50:41 GMT -5
Just as a point of information, it doesn't make sense to credit a GM for players drafted and developed, at least directly. The GM has input on the first round pick, really, and little else, in the draft room. Now, if you want to give him some credit for having been part of putting together the apparatus that was in place that did that, that would make sense. That goes even moreso for IFAs. Save for the Moncadas of the world, Cherington wouldn't have had much to do with them. You are telling me that the GM only has minimal input into who gets drafted onto his team?? I understand that they have an entire team that looks over draft prospects and I am sure he relies heavily on his staff for the later rounds but there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that the GM isnt one of the top 3 people in the organization that has control into who is chosen. 22nd round, sure, that is scouting director’s time to shine. Those top draft picks (not just the first) and most definitely the International free agents are one of the biggest responsibilities a GM, (constructor of the organization), has in creating the team. Cherington was gifted plenty, screwed up plenty and in no way was i sad to see him go. Your post strikes me as a roundabout way of giving Dombrowski a pass on recent drafts.
|
|
|
Dombrowski
Aug 24, 2019 19:54:55 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by dmaineah on Aug 24, 2019 19:54:55 GMT -5
Dombrowski should be fired. And here is why;
He signed Sale to an extension. A $tupid, co$tly exten$ion that will hurt this team for it's entire length.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 24, 2019 20:45:11 GMT -5
You are telling me that the GM only has minimal input into who gets drafted onto his team?? I understand that they have an entire team that looks over draft prospects and I am sure he relies heavily on his staff for the later rounds but there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that the GM isnt one of the top 3 people in the organization that has control into who is chosen. 22nd round, sure, that is scouting director’s time to shine. Those top draft picks (not just the first) and most definitely the International free agents are one of the biggest responsibilities a GM, (constructor of the organization), has in creating the team. Cherington was gifted plenty, screwed up plenty and in no way was i sad to see him go. Your post strikes me as a roundabout way of giving Dombrowski a pass on recent drafts. I didn't mean to put a "like" on your post. The screen moved when I hit "quote." I think you are out of your mind. Your expectation of GM's must mean you think they are supermen.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 24, 2019 21:18:03 GMT -5
All the more reason not expend what few resources you have on a fragile pitcher! What would you have done? Like how do you take Eovaldi's money and deepen the team getting your second basemen, starter, and more depth? Step one: sign Charlie Morton instead. Step two: whatever.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 24, 2019 22:10:43 GMT -5
What would you have done? Like how do you take Eovaldi's money and deepen the team getting your second basemen, starter, and more depth? Step one: sign Charlie Morton instead. Step two: whatever. Morton was rumored to want to retire if he didn't re-sign with Houston. Nice assumption that it was possible.
|
|
|
Dombrowski
Aug 24, 2019 22:29:30 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by larrycook on Aug 24, 2019 22:29:30 GMT -5
What kind of gm do we want for this team?
A.) Do we want a gm that can build a perennial playoff team with a superior farm system that produces talent annually and we augment with key free agents?
B.) Or do we want the gm that wins one championship using the scorched earth policy and needs another decade for a successor to rebuild the team into a contender.
Seems to me ownership lost their patience with the timeline and fired type a and hired type b and now we have to live with the consequences of that decision.
|
|
|
Dombrowski
Aug 24, 2019 23:50:39 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pudsauce on Aug 24, 2019 23:50:39 GMT -5
You are telling me that the GM only has minimal input into who gets drafted onto his team?? I understand that they have an entire team that looks over draft prospects and I am sure he relies heavily on his staff for the later rounds but there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that the GM isnt one of the top 3 people in the organization that has control into who is chosen. 22nd round, sure, that is scouting director’s time to shine. Those top draft picks (not just the first) and most definitely the International free agents are one of the biggest responsibilities a GM, (constructor of the organization), has in creating the team. Cherington was gifted plenty, screwed up plenty and in no way was i sad to see him go. Your post strikes me as a roundabout way of giving Dombrowski a pass on recent drafts. I didn't mean to put a "like" on your post. The screen moved when I hit "quote." I think you are out of your mind. Your expectation of GM's must mean you think they are supermen. Thank you for clarifying that for me. I was very concerned about whether or not this internet person, who doesnt’t have the basic ability to simply “unlike” a post, was moved by my words. Beyond that however, could you please tell me what part of my expectation requires a “superhuman” being?
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 25, 2019 1:08:37 GMT -5
What kind of gm do we want for this team? A.) Do we want a gm that can build a perennial playoff team with a superior farm system that produces talent annually and we augment with key free agents? B.) Or do we want the gm that wins one championship using the scorched earth policy and needs another decade for a successor to rebuild the team into a contender. Seems to me ownership lost their patience with the timeline and fired type a and hired type b and now we have to live with the consequences of that decision. I think the guy you are suggesting in A was as incompetent as you can get. The sox came in last place in their division 3 of the past 4 years. And I think the guy you are suggesting in B imo it is laughable that you are implying it will take a decade to recover. SO for example you know for certain Sale is done and Eovaldi will stink the remainder of their contracts?
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 25, 2019 1:09:54 GMT -5
I didn't mean to put a "like" on your post. The screen moved when I hit "quote." I think you are out of your mind. Your expectation of GM's must mean you think they are supermen. Thank you for clarifying that for me. I was very concerned about whether or not this internet person, who doesnt’t have the basic ability to simply “unlike” a post, was moved by my words. Beyond that however, could you please tell me what part of my expectation requires a “superhuman” being? Thank you for misrepresenting my post. I don't think I'll waste my time with you. How's that?
|
|
|