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 jclmontana on Oct 22, 2020 11:04:25 GMT -5
Mookie signed in LA, for 12 freaking years. I am inclined to give him the most basic respect and say that he WANTED to sign there. It is not too far of a stretch to say that he did not want to sign in Boston, because, you know, he did not resign with Boston. All this talk about how the Sox blew the negotiation is actually disrespectful towards Mookie. Do people really think that if the Sox pushed the right buttons they could have maneuvered Mookie into signing? Or that Mookie didn’t really have any agency or self-determination in this process? If Mookie says he is happy and excited about LA, then I will take him at his word. He settled pretty quickly on a lower than expected contract, and given his hardcore stance with the Sox about the amount of money he wanted, I don’t think his contract was all about the money. I wonder if the Sale extension and Eovaldi signing were done because they knew Mookie was not going to resign, so they didn’t really need to save their dollars for a huge extension.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 22, 2020 11:05:45 GMT -5
So mookie is better then two guys that have played a combined one season in the bigs. A bunch of gms in here watch out. All it takes is one injury to mookie and the red sox put the dodgers over the barrell in that deal. Mookie is a top 5 player noone is arguing against that but at 30 mil a year for the next 5 years. You are getting far more value with verdugo and downs then mookie at his cap number. In fact if downs turns out to be half decent with the cash savings your getting from verdugo and downs you saved a ton of cap money. This is all counting wong as a zero.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 22, 2020 12:44:20 GMT -5
No, it wasn't. The Red Sox were the ones with their backs up against the wall. What were the Sox going to do? Keep Mookie and watch him leave for a draft pick? Take a lesser deal with San Diego? What great choices did the Red Sox have? And again, I'm not saying that Graterol > Downs plus Wong or even that Graterol < Downs plus Wong. What I'm telling you is that Graterol actually fits the Dodgers' needs (this year and going forward, as I suspect he'll eventually close for the Dodgers) better than Downs or Wong did. Once the Sox announced the deal, there was no way Mookie was not getting traded, nor was there any way some team was going to step forward and give the Sox a better deal. It doesn't matter what the Dodgers needs were, it only matters what's best for the Sox. If the Sox backs were against the wall, they wouldn't have rejected Graterol. Do you think the Sox fans were as excited about Graterol as the Dodgers fans were about Betts ? Well, that's a very Red Sox-centric point of view. Did the Red Sox make the trade with themselves? No. It certainly does matter to the Dodgers what their needs are. Once the original trade happened, there was pressure on both teams to complete the deal. The Red Sox were certainly not backing out of the deal. They had the pleasure of dealing with Nomar when that deal fell apart. They weren't going to go down that road again. They wanted to get under the luxury tax and they knew they weren't going to re-sign Betts and they knew that keeping him and having him walk away was the worst case scenario they wanted no part of, and they also knew they were NOT getting a better package elsewhere. Nobody was going to give the Red Sox a better centerpiece than Alex Verduo. Yeah, the Dodgers didn't want to back out of the deal, but if the deal died, it wasn't going to stop the Dodgers from being the class of the league. Obviously they wanted him. They're not stupid. Substituting one high quality but for them expendable prospect and their third best catching prospect from a deep farm system for a reliever with premium stuff who can contribute right away filling another need of theirs, made all the sense in the world for them. The Dodgers weren't going to walk away when they knew they could have Betts and not lose anything that was going to harm them. They lost Verdugo but Betts is better. They lost Downs but they like Lux better. They lost Wong, but they like Smith, Cartagena, and Ruiz better. And they weren't pressured that bad that they surrendered any pitching in the deal, and that team had pitching to deal, pitching the Sox could have used. So no, while there was pressure on the Dodgers to complete the deal, they weren't that pressured. And hell I haven't even mentioned David Price - you really think the Sox didn't want to get out from under that?Don't you think the Red Sox were dying to get rid of Price? Who else was going to take half of his salary? There was more pressure on the Sox to complete the trade. Given both club's individual needs, it was win-win for both teams when the Sox found out Graterol wasn't going to be the starter they wanted. They needed a regular second baseman and catching depth, so they got it. The Dodgers needed immediate bullpen help and got a guy with a high ceiling who might eventually close. Win-win.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 22, 2020 13:26:56 GMT -5
it could, but we don't know his motivation. He could use any Sox offer to leverage more money from the Dodgers. That is fair game in negotiating. it is entirely possible that he set an offer, the Sox matched it, but he had no intention of signing, and instead used that as a barometer for other offers. Remember Mark Texiera. Or how bout David Price. But how do you leverage a $420 million offer into a $365 million one (over 24 years)? That is, er, the opposite of leverage. A little thing called Covid? So instead of hitting the market which he always said he would do, he took a big offer. Your thought process only makes sense if he signed this deal without Covid and maybe the worst free agent market ever. Otherwise he could hit free agency knowing that the Red Sox would likely offer that same deal again, heck if not a little more because they got a big trade package. Just like with Lester and he'd have a big bidding war. You know darn well if Betts didn't sign that's what everyone would be demanding we resign Betts. I always said Betts #1 goal was to get the biggest offer ever. Then Covid happened. It actually helps explain why they waited so long to trade him, they tried hard to actually sign him.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 22, 2020 13:38:36 GMT -5
The Dodgers as of today recieved the two best players in the deal and it's not even close. Graderol looks filthy and Betts is a top 2 player. It speaks volumes on how Andrew Friedman is able to own pretty much everyone he deals with. I get why the Sox made the deal but you can also make a case that Friedman deserves to go to the hall of fame based on his success in Tampa and the Mookie trade. The Sox boned themselves be reworking the trade unless Downs becomes a multiple time all star. Graderol looks legit. Who knows why Betts wanted to leave. The fact that he's close with Price and the reputation of Boston being the most racist city in the world probably didn't help matters. Not saying that it is but this certainly isn't my original thought either. I remember hearing about something being thrown at his duck boat during the parade and hitting his kid. Was that claim ever substantiated? Talk about a hot take. Graderol isn't close to Verdugo, who was 6th in the AL in bwar for positional players this year. He has a big arm, but he's a reliever. Even the best ones only match a good positional player in value. It's funny because after the season he's had for the Dodgers I feel much better about the trade and Downs. 13 strikeouts in 23.1 innings for a guy with his stuff doesn't excite me.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 22, 2020 13:49:26 GMT -5
I don’t understand the “Red Sox owners are screwups” narrative being pushed by some. Fallible sure...but is this not the most successful franchise this century save maybe like the patriots? I mean Jesus every other city would kill for Henry and company”s results...what am I missing? So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime!
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 22, 2020 14:01:03 GMT -5
If you are going to evaluate a trade from the Red Sox point of view, how it works out for the Dodgers doesn't matter. The question becomes are the Red Sox better off having made the swap or aren't they. They are clearly better off when you consider the entire situation. AGREE! In many ways, this season and all of its ups and downs will be looked as a plus one day. Bloom had no choice. The organization could not afford another 30+ million dollar contract. I do believe the Sale contract was the last straw in being able to sign Betts. Dombrowski paid the wrong guy.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 22, 2020 14:55:14 GMT -5
I don’t understand the “Red Sox owners are screwups” narrative being pushed by some. Fallible sure...but is this not the most successful franchise this century save maybe like the patriots? I mean Jesus every other city would kill for Henry and company”s results...what am I missing? So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime! They have overspent to deliver us titles and the ppl around here still complain its laughable. Its like ppl ripping brady on his way out.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Oct 22, 2020 15:29:23 GMT -5
So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime! They have overspent to deliver us titles and the ppl around here still complain its laughable. Its like ppl ripping brady on his way out. I’m not complaining they overspent. I am complaining they stopped! I don’t care if a billionaire has to pay some tax. 😥 I do care that they field the junk they did this year.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 22, 2020 15:39:57 GMT -5
So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime! They have overspent to deliver us titles and the ppl around here still complain its laughable. Its like ppl ripping brady on his way out. I'm not sure where the bashing is you're talking about. I don't see where anybody said that having Henry and Werner for owners has been bad or anything remotely close. What's being said is that if what Felger says isn't true (I really don't believe it), then the Red Sox made mistakes offering Betts an obviously much lower figure (if Merloni's sources are correct) than it would take to secure his services and forced themselves into a situation where they had to trade their franchise player. Great owners make mistakes all of the time. Just like great GMs. Great managers. I don't think anybody is bashing their overall body of work. I don't see why you can't offer a valid criticism when it warrants it. I'll give you another criticism. While I would trade 4 last place finishes for 4 trophies any day of the week, and a million times on Sunday, they still have those valley years....and the Red Sox know this, which is why they're taking steps to remedy this with the hiring of Chaim Bloom, with the goal in mind to make their winning sustainable, the way it was during the Theo era - Theo never had a team finish worse than 86-76. Ownership knows that fans tune out when the team stinks.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 22, 2020 15:49:30 GMT -5
They have overspent to deliver us titles and the ppl around here still complain its laughable. Its like ppl ripping brady on his way out. I'm not sure where the bashing is you're talking about. I don't see where anybody said that having Henry and Werner for owners has been bad or anything remotely close. What's being said is that if what Felger says isn't true (I really don't believe it), then the Red Sox made mistakes offering Betts an obviously much lower figure (if Merloni's sources are correct) than it would take to secure his services and forced themselves into a situation where they had to trade their franchise player. Great owners make mistakes all of the time. Just like great GMs. Great managers. I don't think anybody is bashing their overall body of work. I don't see why you can't offer a valid criticism when it warrants it. I'll give you another criticism. While I would trade 4 last place finishes for 4 trophies any day of the week, and a million times on Sunday, they still have those valley years....and the Red Sox know this, which is why they're taking steps to remedy this with the hiring of Chaim Bloom, with the goal in mind to make their winning sustainable, the way it was during the Theo era - Theo never had a team finish worse than 86-76. Ownership knows that fans tune out when the team stinks. By around here i meant boston not ppl on this site in particular. And yes ppl ripped ownership saying they were cheap after they traded mookie. Even a couple of the clown sportswriters in the city went after them after the trade.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 22, 2020 15:52:45 GMT -5
And I'll take the losing seasons every couple years if we get a title every 5 years without complaining about ownership at all. They have been amazing for the red sox.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 22, 2020 16:12:28 GMT -5
And I'll take the losing seasons every couple years if we get a title every 5 years without complaining about ownership at all. They have been amazing for the red sox. They have. I think it's fair to complain about ownership when they do something you feel is incorrect as long as you balance it with praise when they do something you feel is correct. It's like anything in life - there's always room for improvement. Nobody is perfect in all categories. Nobody is above reproach. I think it's fair to be critical of the ownership in Mookie's case (unless Felger's source is right). Again, on balance, I appreciate their stewardship. Best I've seen. I've been watching for 40 years, so that's a large sample size and I'm enough of a historian to know about Yawkey and the owners that preceded him and this ownership grades out the best. There's a bit of luck involved in the Championships just like the Yawkey ownership had some bad luck involved in the drought. So you have to also look at the overall record, which includes the ups and downs, and which still grades out very well for the Henry/Werner ownership group. Again, it's fair to criticize them for things like lowballing Lester, bringing on Bobby V, the atmosphere of Lucchino vs Theo, etc, but also to give them credit for the championships, bringing in the archetype of the modern day young Ivy League educated GMs like Theo (who does have a Cooperstown resume), saving Fenway and making it a jewel, doing what they can to counter the racial stigma of Red Sox ownerships prior, and many other things.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 22, 2020 16:31:20 GMT -5
The atmosphere in this thread is anti Red Sox and anti Ownership. In a way I get it, yet overall it's crazy. Our owners aren't cheap, sure I'll complain that they could do more, yet they aren't close to cheap. Not signing a guy to one of the longest and biggest money deals in the history of the game isn't cheap. Given the history of deals like that, it's actually smart. The early returns with Verdugo are excellent.
We dismiss an article that actually makes sense, even if the source is so-so because of what? Sounds mostly like people wanted Betts and just want to hate on ownership that has frankly been brilliant for two decades!
This mini rebuilds suck, bridge years suck. Yet the overall strategy has been brilliant and won us four Championship's. Restock the system, clear the books, create finical flexibility and go crazy hard at title #5. It's the smart play and a big part of that is guys like Verdugo and Downs making peanuts. I can honestly say I love ownership and feel blessed to be able to enjoy this crazy run.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Oct 22, 2020 16:31:52 GMT -5
I don’t understand the “Red Sox owners are screwups” narrative being pushed by some. Fallible sure...but is this not the most successful franchise this century save maybe like the patriots? I mean Jesus every other city would kill for Henry and company”s results...what am I missing? So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime! I really think the exit was driven by Mookie.
|
|
|
Post by kevfc89 on Oct 22, 2020 16:32:30 GMT -5
Let's not forget the Dodgers actually traded Kenta Maeda to get Graterol, and Maeda performed way better this year than Graterol may ever in his entire career.
Maeda is also under control until 2024 at an AAV of just $4.13M so maybe the Dodgers weren't really so smart there (tbf, it wouldn't have been a bad idea for the Sox to try for Maeda as part of the trade).
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 22, 2020 16:55:31 GMT -5
Let's not forget the Dodgers actually traded Kenta Maeda to get Graterol, and Maeda performed way better this year than Graterol may ever in his entire career. Maeda is also under control until 2024 at an AAV of just $4.13M so maybe the Dodgers weren't really so smart there (tbf, it wouldn't have been a bad idea for the Sox to try for Maeda as part of the trade). The fact that graterol will be a bullpen only arm was all I needed to hear to them changing for downs.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Oct 22, 2020 17:54:08 GMT -5
Let's not forget the Dodgers actually traded Kenta Maeda to get Graterol, and Maeda performed way better this year than Graterol may ever in his entire career. Maeda is also under control until 2024 at an AAV of just $4.13M so maybe the Dodgers weren't really so smart there (tbf, it wouldn't have been a bad idea for the Sox to try for Maeda as part of the trade). To paraphrase Cash, "We have a bullpen full of Graterol's."
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 22, 2020 18:02:34 GMT -5
They have overspent to deliver us titles and the ppl around here still complain its laughable. Its like ppl ripping brady on his way out. I'm not sure where the bashing is you're talking about. I don't see where anybody said that having Henry and Werner for owners has been bad or anything remotely close. What's being said is that if what Felger says isn't true (I really don't believe it), then the Red Sox made mistakes offering Betts an obviously much lower figure (if Merloni's sources are correct) than it would take to secure his services and forced themselves into a situation where they had to trade their franchise player. Great owners make mistakes all of the time. Just like great GMs. Great managers. I don't think anybody is bashing their overall body of work. I don't see why you can't offer a valid criticism when it warrants it.
I'll give you another criticism. While I would trade 4 last place finishes for 4 trophies any day of the week, and a million times on Sunday, they still have those valley years....and the Red Sox know this, which is why they're taking steps to remedy this with the hiring of Chaim Bloom, with the goal in mind to make their winning sustainable, the way it was during the Theo era - Theo never had a team finish worse than 86-76. Ownership knows that fans tune out when the team stinks. Back at you. There has definitely been a lot of negativity on ownership, and some of it is warranted. But they have not ever been cheap. Yes everyone makes mistakes. I just like focusing on the good much more than you!
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 22, 2020 18:35:58 GMT -5
I'm not sure where the bashing is you're talking about. I don't see where anybody said that having Henry and Werner for owners has been bad or anything remotely close. What's being said is that if what Felger says isn't true (I really don't believe it), then the Red Sox made mistakes offering Betts an obviously much lower figure (if Merloni's sources are correct) than it would take to secure his services and forced themselves into a situation where they had to trade their franchise player. Great owners make mistakes all of the time. Just like great GMs. Great managers. I don't think anybody is bashing their overall body of work. I don't see why you can't offer a valid criticism when it warrants it.
I'll give you another criticism. While I would trade 4 last place finishes for 4 trophies any day of the week, and a million times on Sunday, they still have those valley years....and the Red Sox know this, which is why they're taking steps to remedy this with the hiring of Chaim Bloom, with the goal in mind to make their winning sustainable, the way it was during the Theo era - Theo never had a team finish worse than 86-76. Ownership knows that fans tune out when the team stinks. Back at you. There has definitely been a lot of negativity on ownership, and some of it is warranted. But they have not ever been cheap. Yes everyone makes mistakes. I just like focusing on the good much more than you! I could see ppl getting on the gms, players or even coaches. But the ownership has overspent to put the best product on the field. I'll take them over any other group. So in that case no complaints about ownership from me.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 22, 2020 23:23:14 GMT -5
I'm not sure where the bashing is you're talking about. I don't see where anybody said that having Henry and Werner for owners has been bad or anything remotely close. What's being said is that if what Felger says isn't true (I really don't believe it), then the Red Sox made mistakes offering Betts an obviously much lower figure (if Merloni's sources are correct) than it would take to secure his services and forced themselves into a situation where they had to trade their franchise player. Great owners make mistakes all of the time. Just like great GMs. Great managers. I don't think anybody is bashing their overall body of work. I don't see why you can't offer a valid criticism when it warrants it.
I'll give you another criticism. While I would trade 4 last place finishes for 4 trophies any day of the week, and a million times on Sunday, they still have those valley years....and the Red Sox know this, which is why they're taking steps to remedy this with the hiring of Chaim Bloom, with the goal in mind to make their winning sustainable, the way it was during the Theo era - Theo never had a team finish worse than 86-76. Ownership knows that fans tune out when the team stinks. Back at you. There has definitely been a lot of negativity on ownership, and some of it is warranted. But they have not ever been cheap. Yes everyone makes mistakes. I just like focusing on the good much more than you! If the subject is Mookie -and if Felger's source isn't correct, then it's fair game to criticize. If you read the entirety of my post you'd see that I complimented them a heckuva lot more than I criticized them. They are the best owners the Red Sox organization have ever had. As far as focusing on the good over the bad, I can assure you that the shrine room I have focuses on Red Sox championships and pennants. You wouldn't see too many reminders of 2012, 2014, 2015, or 2020 there. I prefer to focus on the good over the bad myself when the subject warrants it. And yeah, I'll take this time to thank the ownership for allowing me to have a shrine room like I do, because the idea to have one never would have occurred to me prior to 2004. Then when I bought my house in 2010, there was also a 2007 championship (and of course the five ancient championships from early last century) as well plus three Patriots championships to celebrate, so then the idea was there to celebrate championships, a foreign concept when I was a kid/young adult. And since then, there are 3 more Patriots championships to commemorate along with 2 more Red Sox championships and even an additional Celtics championship. So I'm very thankful to the current Red Sox ownership for allowing me to be able to create a room where I re-live the glory every time I go down there.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,823
|
Post by wcp3 on Oct 24, 2020 7:46:38 GMT -5
I don’t understand the “Red Sox owners are screwups” narrative being pushed by some. Fallible sure...but is this not the most successful franchise this century save maybe like the patriots? I mean Jesus every other city would kill for Henry and company”s results...what am I missing? So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime! Calling them screwups is preposterous, but it’s been one of the strangest runs of dominance in any sport. During that stretch of four World Series, they’ve had so many moments of being a circus - Theo leaving Fenway in a monkey suit, the Bobby Valentine debacle, multiple runs of worst to first, smearing several players and managers on their way out the door, etc. I think a lot of the dislike for Henry and co. is justified (particularly for the smear campaign they ran against Francona), but they’re one of the most successful ownerships in all of sports. Personally, my biggest issue with them is that they seem to change their organizational philosophy whenever the wind blows. One year, they want to build the farm system and be fiscally responsible, and then after one down season, they’re pushing for the team to throw money at guys like Pablo Sandoval. That has to make it hard for any GM to build the organization his way.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 24, 2020 13:38:52 GMT -5
So darn true. I, as a Red Sox fan of over 60-years, will take this ownership group over ANY we've ever had. It is down right silly we even have this conversation. For many years the Sox were a joke. I would gladly take another period from 2004 to 2018 over the next 15 to 20 years. Sign me up! Some of the posters are spoiled. Give me Henry and Werner anytime! Calling them screwups is preposterous, but it’s been one of the strangest runs of dominance in any sport. During that stretch of four World Series, they’ve had so many moments of being a circus - Theo leaving Fenway in a monkey suit, the Bobby Valentine debacle, multiple runs of worst to first, smearing several players and managers on their way out the door, etc. I think a lot of the dislike for Henry and co. is justified (particularly for the smear campaign they ran against Francona), but they’re one of the most successful ownerships in all of sports. Personally, my biggest issue with them is that they seem to change their organizational philosophy whenever the wind blows. One year, they want to build the farm system and be fiscally responsible, and then after one down season, they’re pushing for the team to throw money at guys like Pablo Sandoval. That has to make it hard for any GM to build the organization his way. I don't agree they change their organizational philosophy whenever the wind blows. They have been constant for 20 years in that we go for it in spurts. Then retool, reset, bridge years whatever you want to call it. Then go for it again. Like if Bloom thinks he has five years to build this team through the farm he's dead wrong. He'll get a few years and then be forced to go for it. Yet how he goes for it will be one the GM. Don't blame ownership for Sandoval, that's on Cherington. They never said sign him, he did because his marching orders are to win and he thought that was the best way. It's why if I'm Bloom you should take this free agency period seriously. If they aren't good again next year, our owners will demand he make big moves. We know this already because our owners marching orders have never changed. They don't mind some down years, yet you only get a few and you have limited time to get us back to being title contenders. Our owners have been great, they went against their plan in 2019 because the GM talked them into it. It turned into crap, made things even worse. Yet as a fan, after that 2018 team I respect the hell out of our owners for going for it. When it failed, it was right back to the grand plan. I get it, it sucks having down years. Yet it seems what most fans bitch about is exactly what makes our owners so good. It's not that they just change the plan, it's that they always stick to it. I've complained about so many moves over the years, like letting Pedro walk, trading Nomar, the Lester mess, the Lackey mess, letting Papelbon leave, firing DD, etc. Yet you can't complain about them not having a long-term plan. We know exactly what that is. Bloom knows exactly what his marching orders are. He also knows what will happen after this next cycle ends, we'll restart it.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 24, 2020 14:25:18 GMT -5
Calling them screwups is preposterous, but it’s been one of the strangest runs of dominance in any sport. During that stretch of four World Series, they’ve had so many moments of being a circus - Theo leaving Fenway in a monkey suit, the Bobby Valentine debacle, multiple runs of worst to first, smearing several players and managers on their way out the door, etc. I think a lot of the dislike for Henry and co. is justified (particularly for the smear campaign they ran against Francona), but they’re one of the most successful ownerships in all of sports. Personally, my biggest issue with them is that they seem to change their organizational philosophy whenever the wind blows. One year, they want to build the farm system and be fiscally responsible, and then after one down season, they’re pushing for the team to throw money at guys like Pablo Sandoval. That has to make it hard for any GM to build the organization his way. I don't agree they change their organizational philosophy whenever the wind blows. They have been constant for 20 years in that we go for it in spurts. Then retool, reset, bridge years whatever you want to call it. Then go for it again. Like if Bloom thinks he has five years to build this team through the farm he's dead wrong. He'll get a few years and then be forced to go for it. Yet how he goes for it will be one the GM. Don't blame ownership for Sandoval, that's on Cherington. They never said sign him, he did because his marching orders are to win and he thought that was the best way. It's why if I'm Bloom you should take this free agency period seriously. If they aren't good again next year, our owners will demand he make big moves. We know this already because our owners marching orders have never changed. They don't mind some down years, yet you only get a few and you have limited time to get us back to being title contenders. Our owners have been great, they went against their plan in 2019 because the GM talked them into it. It turned into crap, made things even worse. Yet as a fan, after that 2018 team I respect the hell out of our owners for going for it. When it failed, it was right back to the grand plan. I get it, it sucks having down years. Yet it seems what most fans bitch about is exactly what makes our owners so good. It's not that they just change the plan, it's that they always stick to it. I've complained about so many moves over the years, like letting Pedro walk, trading Nomar, the Lester mess, the Lackey mess, letting Papelbon leave, firing DD, etc. Yet you can't complain about them not having a long-term plan. We know exactly what that is. Bloom knows exactly what his marching orders are. He also knows what will happen after this next cycle ends, we'll restart it. How many owners keep learning from their mistakes and keep at it like these two? We have owners who always have the goal of being the best. They self-correct a lot. They quickly found out Valentine was worse then a dead-end and changed (one example). They pour millions into making the Sox a contender, and somehow, because they aren't perfect, we have folks get on their butts. I will always appreciate their efforts and yes their championships!! I love the latest change....bringing in Bloom to attempt more consistent outcome. Some of you sound like DAN SHAUGHNESSY.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Oct 24, 2020 14:42:00 GMT -5
I don't agree they change their organizational philosophy whenever the wind blows. They have been constant for 20 years in that we go for it in spurts. Then retool, reset, bridge years whatever you want to call it. Then go for it again. Like if Bloom thinks he has five years to build this team through the farm he's dead wrong. He'll get a few years and then be forced to go for it. Yet how he goes for it will be one the GM. Don't blame ownership for Sandoval, that's on Cherington. They never said sign him, he did because his marching orders are to win and he thought that was the best way. It's why if I'm Bloom you should take this free agency period seriously. If they aren't good again next year, our owners will demand he make big moves. We know this already because our owners marching orders have never changed. They don't mind some down years, yet you only get a few and you have limited time to get us back to being title contenders. Our owners have been great, they went against their plan in 2019 because the GM talked them into it. It turned into crap, made things even worse. Yet as a fan, after that 2018 team I respect the hell out of our owners for going for it. When it failed, it was right back to the grand plan. I get it, it sucks having down years. Yet it seems what most fans bitch about is exactly what makes our owners so good. It's not that they just change the plan, it's that they always stick to it. I've complained about so many moves over the years, like letting Pedro walk, trading Nomar, the Lester mess, the Lackey mess, letting Papelbon leave, firing DD, etc. Yet you can't complain about them not having a long-term plan. We know exactly what that is. Bloom knows exactly what his marching orders are. He also knows what will happen after this next cycle ends, we'll restart it. How many owners keep learning from their mistakes and keep at it like these two? We have owners who always have the goal of being the best. They self-correct a lot. They quickly found out Valentine was worse then a dead-end and changed (one example). They pour millions into making the Sox a contender, and somehow, because they aren't perfect, we have folks get on their butts. I will always appreciate their efforts and yes their championships!! I love the latest change....bringing in Bloom to attempt more consistent outcome. Some of you sound like DAN SHAUGHNESSY. I am agnostic, because I dislike all owners on principle. They are not benevolent lords. They are capitalists. If they could lose and make more money, they would. I would say Henry et al have done quite well for themselves. They have not exhibited an enormous amount of loyalty to the people most responsible for their success. We all know the pattern of crapping on people on their way out. If there is any clear indicator they are going to rehire Cora, to me it is that if they weren’t, they’d have slagged him already a la Tito. But... it is hard to blame Valentine, DD’s treatment of the system etc. and not call that ultimately the owners’ responsibility. As for “learning,” I think the issue some of us have is that there are cyclical patterns that don’t actual seem to change. Betts recalls Lester. Pablo and Hanley recalled Crawford. If they splurge this off-season, it will be another example of blowing it with in-their-prime home talent, then buying FAs. The counter is a) yes, the Sox benefit from rich owners who do spend — and can eat some really bad decisions (to a point); and b) there have been some exceedingly lucky moments. The AGon/Crawford trade erased two massive, expensive mistakes and was pretty much franchise saving. That was not a “plan” — even a “lesson learned” — it was the miracle of the Dodgers taking out salary dump. And a lot of franchises don’t have the luxury of writing of contracts like Pablo’s or Hanley’s.
|
|
|