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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by notguilty on Sept 4, 2015 17:17:32 GMT -5
Can someone please tell me why Sandoval continues to hit in the 2-spot? And why Holt, who is carrying a .601 OPS in the 2nd half, continues to hit in front of both Rusney and JBJ? Veteran "respect", just like Farrell would do it. I understand that this can't be an easy position for Lovullo, but if he wants to manage his own team one day, he's not doing a great job of showing it. He's managing not to offend Farrell by coming up with anything too different, and not doing anything too stupid with DD having everybody's job on the line. His lineups look like he's thinking "what would Farrell do", then he goes ahead and does it - rather than putting his own creativity on it and strengthening his own managerial case. Or maybe Sandoval batting second is his way of being "creative", not sure what's worse. Pretty weird that we'll see him manage for a few months - at no point does he really do anything that would excite you at the thought he could be the manager long term. He's just holding up the fort, which maybe is the mandate at this point.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Sept 1, 2015 12:41:30 GMT -5
Melancon was a garbage reliever with us, but it wouldn't have been THAT bad of a trade if we had held on to him. Instead, we traded him for high peripherals, low ERA Hanrahan after he had shown improvment, another one of Ben's "genius" moves. Yes, we got Holt back but we could've gotten him for a lot less than Melancon and his team control. We get it, you hate Cherington. You've made that clear enough. Now that that's established, can we move on without the name calling? Not trying to be a mod - just annoying to click on a thread looking forward to reading a cogent point, only to see the same gratuitous name calling-based argumentation again and again and again.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 30, 2015 11:54:39 GMT -5
I have to wonder if the Sox had started playing a month or two earlier like they are now whether Dombrowksi would be with the Red Sox and whether Cherington would be gone. I know it has only been a month or so, but it appears that much of what the old regime was trying to do with regards to the farm system is starting to work. Moreover, the trade for Kelly and the trade and signing of Porcello are not looking quite as bad today as they did a month ago. Cherington still would've built a horrendous bullpen, and a team not really competing in August and September for 3/4 years. The earliest a Theo team was ever out of it was 2006 because the team caught the flu and got swept in a 5 game series. Every other year, Theo's teams were playing meaningful baseball in September, and in every year but 2006,2010 and 2011, October. I have no idea why people are so upset Cherington left. I mean he was clearly a much worse GM than his predecessor Jeez, that's a lot of vitriol against Cherington. Terrible GM, what did he ever do for the Red Sox, right? First, stating "people are upset Cherington left" is a classic debate tactic; you overstate/misstate alternate viewpoints so as to make your own sound better, or more reasonable. That's unnecessary here, and only marginally useful. From what I've been able to tell (and I'll get corrected if I'm wrong), the concern people have is more subtle. It isn't as much that Cherington has left. It's what that departure, combined with the hiring of DD means for the future of this team. Is it allowed to be concerned about that? If you believe that long term, sustainable, major league success is built through solid farm system foundation, then it is fair to wonder whether bringing in DD, combined with the fact that ownership is probably sick of the losing, means that they are shifting from that build sustainable winning team model to a model more oriented towards winning now. Maybe, maybe not, but I think that's a fair question. I speak as somebody who mostly bought into what Cherington was selling, in terms of building the next great Red Sox team. I happen to think he was getting there. But the Cherington FO made so many mistakes (some of them quite mindboggling) over the past 18 months that there was no way he was going to survive this year. And that's perfectly understandable. But at least they held the line on building for the long term; sometimes, not trading your prospects for the next shiny big leaguer is more difficult to do than trading them, especially in a market like Boston. I think Epstein's greatest skill was to blend the win-now and build for the future; in Boston, a GM has to be able to do both, impossible though that seems. Theo gave out his share of hideous contracts too, but those were mitigated by better major league performance. That's what Ben was not able to pull off. The struggle to achieve those two goals at the same time got Theo to run away to a place where he'd have more leeway to do it his way. The inability to do it cost Cherington his job. We'll see how DD does it. But as we dump on Cherington on his way out (something we're quite skilled at, judging by this thread), we should also know that a number of GM opportunities are/were available this year in MLB. Boston's is easily one of the most attractive, and that's in part because of the foundations that Cherington built (and further proof is DD looks like he'll keep some of those foundations). I'm a bit wary of DD, because I'm not sure what his mandate is - but the guy's been making the right noises. I'm unimpressed by what he did in Detroit ( I know, I know, the owner made him do it), but in fairness, he's as solid a choice as any out there to take this team to the next level. So as much as I'm wary, I think I'll refrain from overanalyzing before he actually starts making some moves. As an aside, I think Cherington is more of an organizational, small/mid-market, build for the long term GM type. Give him a few years to build, and don't give him too much money to waste (and complement him with somebody who can evaluate MLB talent) and he'll be fine. Milwaukee would be great for him - Seattle, maybe not so much.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 22, 2015 12:09:05 GMT -5
you seem like barrels of fun. No credit for some of the great plays he's made recently or how hard he's been hitting the ball, and going the other way, just talk of him retiring? after 3 years on this site I've just come to the conclusion that ubless said player is your fave, you just seem to hate on the guy. Personally, I haven't seen any lack of effort. His weight, hasn't seen two of books related much beyond 5 to 10 pounds in spring training. Yet you're questioning his drive. Like you know him. He actually said that he signed in Boston so he could be himself and not have to get weighed all the time like the Giants made him. "Be himself" = "Be as fat as he wants to be", because what else could it mean? I read that recently and that's pretty much the entire source of my dislike of him. People are naive if they don't think the weight has anything to do with him not being as good. His best year was the year he was the thinnest. He got pulled out of a game last month because he had to run for 3 bases without stopping. Some people defending him make it sound like it's impossible for him to be in better shape. He's getting $19 million per year from the Red Sox so he owes it to the team and the fans. I agree with this. But I actually have the sense that Sandoval does care. I don't know, he's been playing with a bit more focus, doesn't look as heavy. I don't think he's a total loss. Hanley on the other hand,..ugh. Baseball is so weird. I can't begin to imagine to have the guy who brought me in a gave me a big contract get fired precisely because he brought me in. I know I'd really feel crappy about it. I feel like Sandoval and Porcello will do what they can to show this market that they're better than what they've shown.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 22, 2015 11:52:11 GMT -5
But I really, really hope they do not acquire two frontline pitchers. There are two or three reasons why (the first two are related). 1) The marginal upgrade of the FA pitcher, as he begins his decline years, over the best of Owens, Wright, or Johnson (or the second best, when Buchholz is hurt) can't possibly be worth the money. 2) One of Theo's best rules (and one he violated massively for 2011) was "try to avoid the temptation to build an uberteam." At a certain point, the money you pay to make the team better does not make you significantly likelier to make the post-season or win the WS. If you've got an excellent team, they're going to make the post-season unless disaster strikes, and the extra guy you paid $$$ to turn the excellent team into an apparent "team for the ages" isn't going to help. And the post-season itself is too much of a crapshoot. The only thing that building an uberteam does is give you less flexibility to deal with unexpected adversity later. 3) If there is a FA pitcher they really like, they'd probably be better off bundling some or all of the talent we're talking about with a heavily subsidized Hanley and grabbing a great 1B. Make the idea of gambling that Hanley can play 1B adequately and return to his 130 wRC+ hitting ways irresistible to someone else, rather than taking the gamble ourselves. Just wanted to say this was a really interesting post... one I totally agree with. Point number 2 sounds a lot like Belichick's philosophy. I thought it was an interesting post too. I usually agree with EV, but unlike the posters above, I'm a bit puzzled by this line of thinking. What is wrong with having two front line pitchers? To me, that's a basic blueprint for a championship team, all the more so one that will need to come out of the AL East. Or may be this is just a quibble on what an "uberteam" is. So, as much as I agree with the concerns associated with building an uberteam as described above, I don't think trying to have two front line pitchers rises to that "uberteam" standard - (to me, "uberteam" means you try to have 4-5 "front line pitchers" and stars all around the diamond). This team needs solid front line pitching. Currently, it has: -A pitcher who is reliable, but slots more as a 3-4 (Miley) -A high-ceiling rookie (Ed Rod) -An oft-injured pitcher capable of ace-like performances when is healthy - but can't be counted upon to be healthy for long stretches (Buch) -A pitcher who can potentially be a #2-3, but is coming off the worst season of his career and has a big contract (so you have to keep him) (I'm not including Owens/Johnson/Wright, etc., as I consider them the back-ups). Those are my characterizations, and I understand that there may be differences on those. But that's high downside volatility at three spots in your regular rotation. And the guy who's a bit of a stable value is more of a #3/#4. I think that's too much downside for a team that will aim to at least get to the playoffs. And In my opinion, you have to push that risk down further. Bring in two pitchers that put the above group in those #3/4/5 slots, however you want to play it out. Porcello and Ed Rod are pretty much guaranteed spots already, for different reasons. I think your #3 is either Miley or Buchholz; the first because that's kind of what he is, the second because he's too often injured to be counted upon to be more than that. That means you need two pitchers who can slot ahead of the current group (the names could be different depending on trades and such, but the principle remains). Some have argued one is enough, but I believe they need two. Would that make this an uberteam? I don't think so. But it'll greatly increase their chances. The question is obviously how you get these two - and the Free Agent + Trade approach sounds sensible to me. I understand that the marginal upside of new pitcher when they decline will be lower than what you'll get from an Owens. But that doesn't do anything for 2016 (or 2017). Ben Cherington lost his job partly because people think he was too patient with prospects. I happen to agree with his prospect hogging (I believe you build through the farm), and would have preferred to keep him and fix major league evaluation. But it's quite evident with the firing + the DD hiring that this ownership (along with many on this board and this market, perhaps) doesn't care for that. But now that you've gone on that path, you can't go back to the ragtag rotation. Sometimes we're guilty (not me lol) of overthinking things. This team needs frontline pitching. As things stand, they don't have it. They have to find a way to get it. And yes, I fully expect loss of long term flexibility (just need to look at what DD left in Detroit), but this is now the chosen path. As Joel Sherman said in the New York Post the other day, look who's the evil empire now.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 19, 2015 14:20:34 GMT -5
You're really taking Gammons out of context there. First of all, he wasn't saying it would take all of those guys to get Gray, nor was he saying it would be a good idea. And you make it sound like he's reporting that and not just spitballing. I know. I put it that way to get the blood going around here, lol. I'm sorry.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 19, 2015 14:00:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 19, 2015 13:53:11 GMT -5
Alex Speier @alexspeier 4m4 minutes ago Dombrowski: Rodriguez has a 'chance to be a No 1 type pitcher.' Also spoke highly of OF of Betts, Castillo, Bradley. Uh oh. Xander getting traded?
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:57:58 GMT -5
In a manner of speaking. Our owner just saw his team coming last three years out of four. Another owner is seeing NESN ratings go to the dumps, and we know he's very sensitive to those. So it's fair to surmise "win now" is probably part of the mandate here too. Discounting a little bit for the guy on his deathbed, I suppose. Unless I'm losing it, our owners have been "win now" since they bought the team. They have been encouraging winning each year as evidence by the constant spending in the top 3 of the MLB. What you are surmising is what we will call "win at any cost" which is what the situation was reportedly in Detroit and we have NEVER seen that here in Boston under current ownership. Yeah, that's a fair point, there's a difference there. Though I never like the "the owner made me do it" or "Lucchino made me do it" excuses, but whatever.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:55:37 GMT -5
My summary view: sad to see BC go, but after a year like 2015, probably inevitable. I'm not a DD fan, but whatever. He does make some pretty good trades. Not looking forward to seeing my binkies traded though.
Like many here, I'll probably fall one way or another depending on who the GM is.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:52:15 GMT -5
In Detroit, Dave Dombrowski was hired to deliver a championship before the owner rode off into the sunset; neither really cared what happened after they left (anybody here see the Tigers' future as bright? Does anybody really believe he was just hired in Boston for a different reason? Well our owner is not about to croak. So yes. In a manner of speaking. Our owner just saw his team coming last three years out of four. Another owner is seeing NESN ratings go to the dumps, and we know he's very sensitive to those. So it's fair to surmise "win now" is probably part of the mandate here too. Discounting a little bit for the guy on his deathbed, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:40:08 GMT -5
Somebody posted this on SOSH, probably relevant here- Dombrowski, in a 2002 article: "I don't think people want to hear about the minor league system," he said. "People want results." Not saying he's wrong, but that's quite a sharp turn this team is taking there. It's 13 years ago. Who knows, his philosophy might have changed. Given that the Detroit farm system was ranked the worst in the majors by Keith Law just recently (before Spring Training), that seems pretty consistent with the philosophy espoused in the above quote. That doesn't mean he'll do that here, of course (though I expect that he will). I'll just take the popcorn and watch.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:32:26 GMT -5
Somebody posted this on SOSH, probably relevant here-
Dombrowski, in a 2002 article:
"I don't think people want to hear about the minor league system," he said. "People want results."
Not saying he's wrong, but that's quite a sharp turn this team is taking there.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:28:51 GMT -5
I'll say this: DD is a hell of a sharp dresser.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 22:17:09 GMT -5
Agreed. He did a wonderful job achieving mediocrity. But that is the new goal, right? Mediocrity? lol The only teams with more wins than Detroit from 2004-2014 in alphabetical order Atlanta, Boston, LAA, LAD, New York Yankees, Philadelphia and St. Louis. Oh and shh, don't tell anyone, but the last 5 seasons before this year the only teams with more wins than Detroit: NO ONE. Detroit had the most wins from 2010-2014. Cue Robot - "More days in first place, more days in first place.." Sorry, couldn't help it.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 21:59:46 GMT -5
I don't see how this move can be viewed negatively. The last place finishes aren't becoming of a Red Sox franchise that is one of the best baseball markets MLB has. As far as BC, it appears as though he decided to leave, which IMHO means he wasn't confident to finish what he started. It appears as though he took it fairly personally, which is his right, but negates any real sympathy from me. He's had a long run of employment for one franchise, he should be very thankful for that. Jeez man. Not sure I get the logical leap to "wasn't confident to finish what he started". He built a team, team failed, they're bringing new blood, he opts to leave. Happens all the time. Guy just go fired, what exactly do you want him to do? Would you stay? Anyway, best to thank him for 2013 and wish him well. I don't think he'll need a job for long. Bring on Price or Cueto! Devers+Moncada+Owens+Kopech for Sonny Gray, who says no?
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 21:28:44 GMT -5
I thought it was common knowledge that Mike Illich had all of the Tigers upper management under strict orders to win now? As he wanted to win a title before he passed away. Unless, I'm clearly mistaken, the whole freaking out over him is a bit silly. Just like it's "common knowledge" that Lucchino made all the terrible moves the Sox have made over the past 10 years? Come on. John Henry isn't about to die, but it's quite fair to say the Red Sox are a "win-now" type of organization too. I don't think anybody is "freaking out" over him. I think it's quite fair to have reason not to partake in the general Dombrowski excitement.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 21:14:59 GMT -5
Frank Wren. Oh my God. Like somebody said above, this has disaster written over it, and I'm not just talking Bullpens. At least we'll win the winter in signing a few big money free agents.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 21:12:46 GMT -5
Remember: Dombrowski built excellent farm systems when he was GM of the Expos (Cliff Flord, Rondell White, Charles Johnson) and Marlins (Miguel Cabrera, Josh Beckett, Edgar Rentaria). It would be unfair to say that he does not understand the importance of building a strong farm system or that he is unable to build such a farm system. I hear that, but when was that? The situation in Boston, with the pressure to win is much closer to what he had in Detroit than what he faced with the Expos and the Marlins. Boston has more of a win-now mindset, as Detroit did. It's not unreasonable to anticipate that hos MO is going to be closer to what it was in Detroit than with the Expos and the marlins more than a decade ago. It's not that he can't build farm systems; it's that his most recent track record has shown that in a win-now context, he doesn't seem to care much for them.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 18, 2015 21:06:58 GMT -5
Oh well. I don't like it, but I guess this was coming. Well, people who want to trade out the farm and give out big money contracts can rejoice. Dombrowski doesn't care about no stinkin..prospects. Would have preferred somebody younger, but hey.
At least he's inheriting an organization that for all its warts, is in a better position than the one he left in Detroit. Let's hope the results, long term contracts and bullpens will be better here than they were over there.
I do want to say thanks to Ben Cherington though. He's served this organization well, and for a long time. Excellent work on the farm system, understated, etc. And lucky or not, 2013 was magic. Just too many terrible mistakes in 2015. Happens to the best of us.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 14, 2015 17:09:52 GMT -5
Everytime I see Josh Donaldson I shake my head that we signed Sandoval instead of trading for him Us and a bunch of teams who didn't even know he was available. Ergo my point above on Billy Beane. It's not like the Sox lost him in a bidding war. People didn't even know there was a bidding. For a player of that caliber and contract, that's just mindboggling.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 14, 2015 16:33:10 GMT -5
there's an overall philosophy that they are sticking to and is correct, [...] Trades have been meh, free agent signings haven't worked out, the team's rosters have proven to be unwieldy. I think the "overall philosophy" of being behind the curve in analytics is exactly what has led to trades being meh and free agent signings not working out. And the team's roster being unwieldy is certainly also a failure of the "overall philosophy" that Cherington stands for.I don't think the team's roster is a "failure of the overall philosophy that Cherington stands for". And what philosophy is that exactly? That's awfully sweeping a statement. You can have a broad philosophy, but issues with execution that lead to roster inflexibility. The only thing I can point to that I think more or less fits with the above, is the whole "deep depth" thing, which is great in principle, but in practice means you often send the better player to AAA to keep the lesser guy, or you play guys at positions that are not their best position. Even the "rotation of #3s" thing might have looked different if Porcello hadn't decided to have the worst year of his career. I have my issues with Cherington (after this year, everybody does I guess). But I do find it funny that people long for other GMs that become available. Dombrowski? Check, he was great in Detroit, he built a "winner", and all the bad contracts were done by the owner. And he made some good trades. DiPoto? Check; he made some good trades with the Angels. Really? Making trades is now the primary standard by which we rate the GM? I've said this before, but even with the "last place 3 years out of 4", Cherington would be leaving in place an organization with more talent and money flexibility than the shambles Dombrowski is leaving in Detroit. And if you take out Trout, the same can probably be said with DiPoto and the Angels. It's even funnier when the same people lust after Billy Beane, who's made some of the worst recent trades known to man. And I like Beane - but every time I see Donaldson come to bat for the Blue Jays, I just shake my head at that trade. I'd rather have somebody who's a bit more rounded in building an entire baseball operation, minor leagues + major leagues. The Sox have issues at the major league level, that's where they need the help. So go ahead and fire Cherington by any means - but you kinda need to do a bit better than "he made good trades", I think.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 11, 2015 6:12:35 GMT -5
not to mention that they'd get excoriated on the radio, given how bad the "five aces" experiment worked out. LOL, is that what you think our GM should be worried about? What idiots say on the radio? <insert umpteenth repetition explaining that there is luck involved in baseball and this year's rotation was actually fine here> On talk radio, you obviously can't run a team listening to talk radio; nobody said that. But pretending public opinion does not exist is equally silly. I think we very often do our analysis a disservice when we make an abstraction of the fact that the Red Sox are running a consumer business over there. Perception matters to their ability to make money, so yeah, perception is a factor, whether we like it or not. I wouldn't mind a rebuild of sorts. Not sure if Tom Werner and NESN are ready for that. The Red Sox are a bit like the Yankees in that sense. I couldn't tell whether the bolded was sarcastic.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 10, 2015 17:30:41 GMT -5
Here's what I'm thinking. Rotation:Trade Acquisition Buchholz Rodriguez Porcello WrightBullpen:
Uehara Acquisition, ideally LH setup guy [X*] Tazawa Ross Machi (could lose job in ST to one of optioned relievers, see below) Ogando (ditto) Layne (ditto, though as a LHR, perhaps less likely) I'm guessing this is a rebuild scenario? In which case I'd probably be fine with it. Though I saw Heyward in the line up, which I'm guessing would cost $100m+, and is really more of a win-now move. I thought that was a bit confusing - though if you're arguing that this rotation would take us to the top of the AL East (or the WC), I really don't see it. Too much uncertainty there - not to mention that they'd get excoriated on the radio, given how bad the "five aces" experiment worked out. The more you think about it, the more unbelievable it is that this team finds itself in such a hole. A year ago, we had the payroll and the upside. Now it's like the team is stuck - at least there's some pretty good youth talent there. My contribution - I'd go with the above rotation in a "rebuild", but I'm working under the assumption that a full rebuild is not possible in Boston. Therefore: -Sign a top end starter. I hate those contracts, but what are you gonna do? Show them the money. Price/Cueto preferably. -Trade for a #2. Gray, Carrasco, whomever. -Buchholz. -Porcello -Ed Rod -Wright/Johnson/Owens as back-ups. For the line-up, I move Ramirez to first, and go with a Mookie/JBJ/Castillo outfield. Or I trade JBJ+ to San Diego for Kimbrel+, and find a 1B who can hit (Davis or the Korean guy), and Hanley stays in LF. I don't think there's a whole lot you can do with the line-up otherwise, other than strengthening the bench. But the money has to go to the pitching. Then I use whatever is left to buy 2 somewhat reliable bullpen arms, and I see you in Fort Myers.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Aug 5, 2015 17:41:28 GMT -5
Brian MacPherson And that's why I'm playing effing DeAza over Castillo! The guy is a complete idiot! Maybe they're preparing a long term deal for De Aza...How about 10/$100? It's like Amaro took over the FO..Every other move is like WTF..
|
|
|