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 mredsox89 on Nov 19, 2014 12:33:02 GMT -5
How much of merchandise sales even goes directly to the Sox? I know a portion (significant?) ends up in the 30 team split according to the CBA, and I really don't think much of this decision is truthfully based on sales and marketing.
They nearly sell out every game even if they suck (actually getting 38k in the park is obviously still a plus), and winning seems to be one of the greatest influences to actually getting the people in the park. Flash names and a crap team in Boston won't do that, unflashy names and a winning team likely would.
I see very little chance sales/marketing plays an influence on this deal
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 19, 2014 12:35:20 GMT -5
Sox ownership doesn't care that much about jersey sales. What they really care about is NESN ratings and stadium attendance. Winning is of course key but you can absolutely bet that they look at the Panda as Papi light. A likeable, marketable player who can relate to an entire audience segment they would not normally be able to reach. Look around. A lot of us are fat and relate to guys like the Panda. The fact that they need a middle of the order left handed bat is also a huge factor. I expect them to sign him but SF might have a lot to say about that.
Look at how a typical sitcom is cast. An older person, some young people, often a gay person and a person of color. This is Werner's world. It's part of their mind set.
Edit: I'm on the record saying I'd rather not sign the Panda or Headley or half the others being bandied about here but I think it's pretty likely they land him. In regard to them not caring that much about attendance teams are constantly adjusting seat prices based on attendance figures. If attendance lags, seat prices drop. It's about net revenue per seat. Not attendance.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Nov 19, 2014 12:41:10 GMT -5
Has everybody here completely given up on Middlebrooks becoming an everyday 3B? I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.
I haven't yet and that's why I think the Sox should sign Hanley Ramirez instead of Pablo. If Middlebrooks does pan out Ramirez could move to Left next year when Victorino is gone and if Middlebrooks continues to fail they could leave Ramirez at 3B.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Nov 19, 2014 12:42:54 GMT -5
I don't know about anyone here but the Red Sox sure seem to have given up.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 19, 2014 12:44:22 GMT -5
Has everybody here completely given up on Middlebrooks becoming an everyday 3B? I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. I haven't yet and that's why I think the Sox should sign Hanley Ramirez instead of Pablo. If Middlebrooks does pan out Ramirez could move to Left next year when Victorino is gone and if Middlebrooks continues to fail they could leave Ramirez at 3B. Not sure why you haven't given up. But props to you for being the last hope. Personally I think it's clear that someone with no discipline at the plate has no chance of sticking around no matter how much raw power they have. MLB pitchers are too good and Middlebrooks has shown no signs of improvement at that plate.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 19, 2014 12:54:51 GMT -5
It was snarky. I wouldn't really do it. I'd just bitch about it here that it's ridiculous for the Red Sox to care more about marketing and jersey sales than about putting the best team together. Are we really going to go that route again? that the marketing office is making decisions for BC? I thought we were past that.... And really, like I said, the FA market for 3B is pure crap for the next 4 years.. So who do you want to man 3B. Do you want to get in a bidding war with the yankees for Chase Headley? That's what they're talking about in this thread, the Panda marketing. I don't think there's a more annoying subject. I'd rather have Headley, yes. Or Lowrie and Moncada. I don't think Panda is worth a whole lot more than Jed Lowrie to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Nov 19, 2014 12:55:53 GMT -5
I think with Middlebrooks the point is that he hasn't proven yet he is a MLB caliber player, and he still has an option left. They really can't afford to leave a gaping hole at 3B after last year while they left Middlebrook develop. I like Middlebrook, and I wouldn't trade him unless we were getting good value back, which isn't going happen. Best we can do is leave him in AAA as depth, and if he goes all 2012 on us we have a good problem on our hands.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Nov 19, 2014 12:57:06 GMT -5
Are we really going to go that route again? that the marketing office is making decisions for BC? I thought we were past that.... And really, like I said, the FA market for 3B is pure crap for the next 4 years.. So who do you want to man 3B. Do you want to get in a bidding war with the yankees for Chase Headley? That's what they're talking about in this thread, the Panda marketing. I don't think there's a more annoying subject. I'd rather have Headley, yes. Or Lowrie and Moncada. I don't think Panda is worth a whole lot more than Jed Lowrie to be honest. I agree, I'm not going to progress the marketing aspect of this further unless it is in the offtopic forums. I just think it should be noted that it is a factor in decisions, although we would have a very hard time trying to quantify it.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 19, 2014 12:56:51 GMT -5
How do you expect WMB to "pan out" while Hanley is playing 3rd? You want to sign Hanley to play third then move him if WMB pans out, but where is WMB going to play to prove he has "panned out"?
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 19, 2014 12:58:18 GMT -5
I think with Middlebrooks the point is that he hasn't proven yet he is a MLB caliber player, and he still has an option left. They really can't afford to leave a gaping hole at 3B after last year while they left Middlebrook develop. I like Middlebrook, and I wouldn't trade him unless we were getting good value back, which isn't going happen. Best we can do is leave him in AAA as depth, and if he goes all 2012 on us we have a good problem on our hands. Can they more afford to give a player a 6 year 18m contract who might stink?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 19, 2014 12:58:27 GMT -5
WMB can either be a huge surprise in AAA or he'll get outrighted this time next year.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Nov 19, 2014 12:58:48 GMT -5
How do you expect WMB to "pan out" while Hanley is playing 3rd? You want to sign Hanley to play third then move him if WMB pans out, but where is WMB going to play to prove he has "panned out"? AAA
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Nov 19, 2014 13:09:03 GMT -5
So if Sox make an external move at 3B who gets the majority of reps at 3B in AAA? Does Cecchini move to the OF full time? Do they move them both around at DH and 1B?
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Nov 19, 2014 13:13:54 GMT -5
It doesn't cost anything of value to keep Middlbrooks in AAA next year and hope for upside. Personally I would like to see him get some more positional flexibility, but I'm hardly the source to evaluate this. I.E. if he can become a non SS utility player he could be of value to the Sox. I liked the idea of converting him to Nava's platoon partner in the past.
For AAA lineup, I would guess that Middlebrooks gets more reps at 3B, as it seems that Cechinni isn't too fluent at the position. Just a guess.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Nov 19, 2014 13:17:55 GMT -5
It doesn't cost anything of value to keep Middlbrooks in AAA next year and hope for upside. Personally I would like to see him get some more positional flexibility, but I'm hardly the source to evaluate this. I.E. if he can become a non SS utility player he could be of value to the Sox. I liked the idea of converting him to Nava's platoon partner in the past. For AAA lineup, I would guess that Middlebrooks gets more reps at 3B, as it seems that Cechinni isn't too fluent at the position. Just a guess. I guess that the opposite would happen, as Cecchini needs reps at 3B to improve, while Middlebrooks can handle 3B properly, just needs to fix his bat.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Nov 19, 2014 13:20:12 GMT -5
I think with Middlebrooks the point is that he hasn't proven yet he is a MLB caliber player, and he still has an option left. They really can't afford to leave a gaping hole at 3B after last year while they left Middlebrook develop. I like Middlebrook, and I wouldn't trade him unless we were getting good value back, which isn't going happen. Best we can do is leave him in AAA as depth, and if he goes all 2012 on us we have a good problem on our hands. Can they more afford to give a player a 6 year 18m contract who might stink? If you're talking about Sandoval I think so, I'm against his signing. I think Headley is the perfect target, because I wouldn't see his commitment as being immovable and he has quite the upside. I.E. if he signs for 4 years 48M (MLBtrderumors projection)and produces his 2014 hitting line (worse hitting line in last 3 years) I wouldn't think it would be that hard to buy part of his contract and move him.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 19, 2014 13:25:28 GMT -5
If WMB mashed AAA it won't tell us anything about what he'd do in MLB, certainly not enough to bring him up and move Hanley off of third base to try it out.
|
|
|
Post by youngbillrussell on Nov 19, 2014 13:32:28 GMT -5
Will Middlebrooks dug his own grave when he refused taking an assignment in the winter league. The Red Sox should keep him at Pawtucket as long as they can. I'd have him taking reps at 1st base and left field in addition to 3rd base.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 19, 2014 13:52:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 19, 2014 13:59:33 GMT -5
RE:redsox040713champs. While researching your history to find out who I'm talking to and to see what makes you tick, I must say I like your writing style and your stance on many points of interest. Though you don't know me,I am a near 40yr.fanatic of the Sox. I take my team and it's chemistry very seriously. I share in your opinions with much of what you say in your 100's of postings. Your beliefs toward the team and its happenings are basically parallel to mine. I like your honesty,your sarcasm,your insight,and even your defensive nature as a fan of the Sox with other Posters. You're quite the vocal guy...in a good way of course,very much like myself. I,unlike you,don't tend not to dilly with forums online because I prefer face to face conversations and debates. Typing is slow and boring,thus my conversations tend to be short-lived/very few postings. When I do get involved though,it's because I have alot of time on my hands,am having great concerns about the team's dealings or in this case, being put on the spot. Well,I'll offer you my point of you in volley. I'm like any other Sox fan..I and my kids want to see them win and make the right moves. I will get very vocal when the time comes when I see some concerning issues and negative developments in the team's state of affairs and involve myself online. True, 2013 was the perfect storm/great chemistry,I might even say it was a miraculous fluke of a sort. I as a fan will take the Titles anyway they come after such a long drought. I personally have always kept a watchful eye with the front office over the years because I'm a businessman just like them. I think BC&Co. have done a commendable job thus far,up only until recently,in the early-mid points of this past year in '14. I feel they waited far too long in dealing with their soon-to-be FA's. Though we'll never truly know what they could have got in return with all their moves,some were respectable. Decent returns in Cespedes,Kelly,Rodriguez but that's about it. They did gain a little appreciation back from me with the Castillo signing. In the end though,some poor business dealings were allowed to go unattended. In respect with you being a Veteran Poster,I'm not going to get into an argument with what our separate opinions are about the meaning of "Chemistry". I will defend myself though. My viewpoint is that a negative message was sent Team-Wide by not seeking to reward our Ace J.Lester with his hard-earned and well-deserved contract extension. I got it,he got sent sailing for bluer waters because they couldn't afford Jon. That's all good..sad..but all good with me. On the other hand,not replacing him with like a Quality Ace was just irresponsible and idiotic. Thinking that Buchholz and the Farm could hold the fort for the time-being...well let's just say that move has left me pissed ever since. A true baseball fan knows you can't win without a proper pitching alignment,lopsidedness will eventually fail. Yes,I agree a positive was seen with the play from the youngsters and such,that I can't deny. But now,here we are watching the off-season float on by with Jonny as a FA,and we sit pleading for his return. How desperate is that? It's poor business,plain and simple. We may get him,we may not. Thus my concern over the recent passive-minded idiocy the Front Office as a whole has put on display. When you cut the head off a snake it essentially is still alive...aimless but still alive nonetheless. Take a steering wheel out a car,sooner or later it's going to crash. In a nutshell, the very state BC&Co. left the team mid-season this year. They allowed the head/Ace of the team to be cut off and hoped the team could wriggle and try desperately to survive and eventually crash. Eventually enter injury and in conclusion,the Front Office play their part in f***ing up the team's Chemistry,period. If still have a difference of opinion on the meaning of Chemistry and what it to the meant to the player's then go ahead and ask about their opinions on some of those moves and see what they would say...I bet much of them reply with a completely opposite response than mine...."no comment". Hi bstrong. I'm flattered that you took time to look at my previous posts (hope it wasn't too painful to read - I'm still flicking myself in the head for the stupid post I did years ago where I expressed a (totally moronic) opinion that I'd rather have Bryce Brentz than Hanley Ramirez, and of course I hated the Shane Victorino signing so much - and by the end of 2013 he made me eat my words, and I was ready to ship Lester off to TB for Wil Myers, too) That was a lot of work for you to do and it wasn't necessary. I think that 2013 was a perfect storm of everything going right just as 2014 was a perfect storm of just about everything going wrong. You believe it was chemistry. I don't feel it was. Yet I don't think you're crazy for thinking that at all, and whether I'm a veteran poster or not, that doesn't make my opinion any more worthy than yours. I guess it depends on the definition of chemistry. Were the Sox of 2013 close knit? Were they extra inspired to succeed by the tragic events of Apr 15th? Who can truthfully say. Chemistry and success are sort of like the chicken and the egg. From an analytical perspective I'd say chemistry is BS. But in real world that stuff does matter and can impact productivity. Harold Reynolds is a terrible broadcaster yet he told a quick interesting story how one day a young and wild Randy Johnson had a lunch date with Nolan Ryan, and from that day on he became RANDY JOHNSON, the LH version of Ryan. Who is to say that didn't really happen or that Ryan didn't make a huge difference on Johnson? All I can say is welcome aboard to the site. It's always cool to disagree. Nobody owns the corner on truth. Last thing - Like you I prefer face to face baseball talk but I work with almost all women and my wife couldn't care less about sports, so this is my place to talk Red Sox baseball.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Nov 19, 2014 14:00:58 GMT -5
As long as they don't guarantee a 6th year, I won't be majorly opposed to it. Doesn't mean I'll be all to thrilled with a 5/95 deal, but it should make them significantly better for at least the next 2-3 years
6/120 and I'll want to blow my lid
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 19, 2014 14:30:40 GMT -5
Sean McAdam ?@sean_McAdam 8m8 minutes ago
Was just told - emphatically -- by a major league source that the SF report of the Giants being out on Sandoval is "NOT'' accurate.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Nov 19, 2014 14:35:32 GMT -5
Posted in other thread, this appears to be a PR game, with Sandoval's agent trying to drumm up furor in SF by talking to local columnist, a report McAdam knocks down. Presumably after 3 days here, the Sox could have knocked Sandoval's socks off. Sandoval would have accepted it if he was ambivalent, but the leaks to SF wanting them to match suggests that he left his heart in SF.
|
|
|
Post by youngbillrussell on Nov 19, 2014 14:36:51 GMT -5
Ehh Sean McAdam hasn't reported anything good in years
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Nov 19, 2014 14:43:46 GMT -5
If WMB mashed AAA it won't tell us anything about what he'd do in MLB, certainly not enough to bring him up and move Hanley off of third base to try it out. After he hit 32 home runs in 615 total at-bats the previous two seasons it’s important to note that Middlebrooks’ struggles came in conjunction with a finger injury, which nagged him from spring training through the middle of the season and caused a DL stint. He also missed time with calf and hamstring problems, making for a season we’d all like to forget. Still, Middlebrooks is just one year removed from hitting 17 home runs in only 348 at-bats
|
|
|