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.
What Can Be Done to Fix the Sox?
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Oct 21, 2015 11:16:36 GMT -5
Wow. That organization isn't exactly tip top, but if you agree to an interview and get offered, that's a major blow to say no, especially given that he doesn't exactly have a prominent role with the Sox. I'd imagine he likes the spot he has with the Sox, and I guess you never turn down the interview opportunity, but wow It was reported when he took the interview that he wasn't too keen on leaving the northeast and his family (or moving his family). It could be that the terms offered didn't meet his price to do that. Professionally, there's value in interviewing for a position even if it's not super likely you're going to take it, especially if it's your first interview for that sort of gig. In addition to what you said, people act if you are supposed to take a job just because it was offered to you, you are not. The interview is a 2 way street meant to see of both sides agree the other side is a good fit. Varitek does not NEED a job and he's aware that Farrell has some health issues that may impact whose the coach next year AND we have a new GM who has not had time to be attached to anyone person.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 21, 2015 12:26:38 GMT -5
It was reported when he took the interview that he wasn't too keen on leaving the northeast and his family (or moving his family). It could be that the terms offered didn't meet his price to do that. Professionally, there's value in interviewing for a position even if it's not super likely you're going to take it, especially if it's your first interview for that sort of gig. In addition to what you said, people act if you are supposed to take a job just because it was offered to you, you are not. The interview is a 2 way street meant to see of both sides agree the other side is a good fit. Varitek does not NEED a job and he's aware that Farrell has some health issues that may impact whose the coach next year AND we have a new GM who has not had time to be attached to anyone person. And somewhere Terry Francona is frowning.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Oct 21, 2015 16:35:39 GMT -5
Wow. That organization isn't exactly tip top, but if you agree to an interview and get offered, that's a major blow to say no, especially given that he doesn't exactly have a prominent role with the Sox. I'd imagine he likes the spot he has with the Sox, and I guess you never turn down the interview opportunity, but wow It was reported when he took the interview that he wasn't too keen on leaving the northeast and his family (or moving his family). It could be that the terms offered didn't meet his price to do that. Professionally, there's value in interviewing for a position even if it's not super likely you're going to take it, especially if it's your first interview for that sort of gig. No doubt. I'm not surprised at all that he took the interview. More the fact that it was his first managerial interview by all accounts, AND he got offered the job AND he turned it down to stay in a mid-level albeit comfortable role with the Red Sox. I think it's clear that if he wants a shot managing at the MLB level he can probably get it without ever managing in the minors, which is a big step, if only for not having to deal with the crap that comes with minor league baseball, traveling, living, etc. What's the thought on here of him ever becoming the manager of the Sox? I feel like they have to have given Lovullo some sort of "promise" that he would probably be the next guy if Farrell is no longer with the club, but I guess this is a conversation for down the road
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2015 16:57:15 GMT -5
Seems odd for Varitek to turn down a manager position with the Mariners. He's got a little history with them, having been drafted by Seattle. Also, I imagine he'd have made some decent coin. What do you figure - 3 years / $7 million offer minimum? That's more per year than he was making at the end of his playing days, just a few years ago.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,842
|
Post by wcp3 on Oct 21, 2015 18:38:48 GMT -5
Seems odd for Varitek to turn down a manager position with the Mariners. He's got a little history with them, having been drafted by Seattle. Also, I imagine he'd have made some decent coin. What do you figure - 3 years / $7 million offer minimum? That's more per year than he was making at the end of his playing days, just a few years ago. I doubt anyone's still around from when he was drafted. And he may feel that managing the Mariners would be setting himself up to fail, which could make it harder to land his next gig.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 21, 2015 18:44:44 GMT -5
Could be as simple as you have to blow me out of the water to move. Hope he stays with the sox.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2015 19:19:58 GMT -5
Seems odd for Varitek to turn down a manager position with the Mariners. He's got a little history with them, having been drafted by Seattle. Also, I imagine he'd have made some decent coin. What do you figure - 3 years / $7 million offer minimum? That's more per year than he was making at the end of his playing days, just a few years ago. I doubt anyone's still around from when he was drafted. And he may feel that managing the Mariners would be setting himself up to fail, which could make it harder to land his next gig. I hope you're wrong. I would lose some respect for Varitek if he was afraid of failing. It's not like Seattle is completely hopeless. They're always at or near the top of their division in terms of payroll, so it's not like ownership is stingy. They play in perhaps the weakest division. Also, they've got a nice 3-4-5 in Cano, Seager and Cruz and King Felix to front the rotation. Who knows though - maybe he sniffs a better offer coming.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 21, 2015 19:24:34 GMT -5
From what I can see, Varitek is in the process of making his way into a front office job. He doesn't need experience as a manager to do that.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,103
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Oct 21, 2015 21:43:13 GMT -5
Playing the pessimist - Not sure Varitek would be a great manager. Seems like the "go with my gut over analytics" type that I think pretty much is a guaranteed negative long term. Matheny is a good example.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 21, 2015 21:59:57 GMT -5
There are many ways to become a good manager, and it's hard to know how committed to analytics Varitek would or wouldn't be. In general though, I'd like someone with experience as either an MLB coach or milb manager, and ideally both.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 22, 2015 0:29:59 GMT -5
Playing the pessimist - Not sure Varitek would be a great manager. Seems like the "go with my gut over analytics" type that I think pretty much is a guaranteed negative long term. Matheny is a good example. I'm not sure that's the case. Varitek studied the scouting reports Theo and his minions would provide for him. He was very studious. I'm not saying he's Bill James, but Tek would be a guy who could probably mix dealing with numbers with dealing with personalities. I think he'll make a good manager some day. I think I read that he could have had the Mariners job but was hesitant to be on the west coast away from his daughters. I would guess the Ms would have had to break the bank to lure him there and when they didn't he decided against taking the job.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,103
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Oct 22, 2015 6:26:26 GMT -5
Good points. I think Girardi is a very solid manager and there's no reason Tek couldn't be as good. I overstated my doubt with him.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 23, 2015 10:38:52 GMT -5
I don't know the answer to this and I am curious. Is a former catcher likely to be a better in-game manager than someone who either didn't play, or played another position? It occurred to me that it is possible because the skills necessary to be a good catcher include in-game management.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 23, 2015 10:45:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 23, 2015 10:53:34 GMT -5
Dombrowski "may" have something to do with it? Don't put yourself out there too far, Jon.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 23, 2015 11:35:37 GMT -5
Reading between the lines that means that Margot, Devers, Kopech, Owens, and everybody else would be on the table. I'd hate to see them deal Devers who I think will become a masher at the major league level. And if they do trade for a pitcher, I think he along with Margot is very likely to be dealt. I just hope the Sox don't deal him. The last time they developed a LH masher was Mo Vaughn. I really hope the Sox hold onto this kid. To me, I'd want them to hold onto Moncada, Benintendi, Espinoza, and Devers (not necessarily in that order). If the Sox could get a decent short-term OF or two, I'd also entertain the idea of dealing JBJ over Margot.
|
|
|
Post by justinp123 on Oct 23, 2015 11:46:21 GMT -5
I really don't think trading away 4 or 5 prospects for a #1 pitcher is going to make us an annual playoff team. I think all it's going to do is deplete our farm system of talent and when it comes time to replenish the mlb team, we will have to go overspend for another free agent like the red sox always do when they start to get impatient. They went out and overpaid for panda and hanley and now they are stuck with them. So how do they remedy that? By going out and making another huge mistake. That to me would be very bad for the present and future of the red sox.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Oct 23, 2015 13:31:15 GMT -5
Reading between the lines that means that Margot, Devers, Kopech, Owens, and everybody else would be on the table. I'd hate to see them deal Devers who I think will become a masher at the major league level. And if they do trade for a pitcher, I think he along with Margot is very likely to be dealt. I just hope the Sox don't deal him. The last time they developed a LH masher was Mo Vaughn. I really hope the Sox hold onto this kid.
To me, I'd want them to hold onto Moncada, Benintendi, Espinoza, and Devers (not necessarily in that order).If the Sox could get a decent short-term OF or two, I'd also entertain the idea of dealing JBJ over Margot. Agree. I'd like to see Devers in the hands-off group as well, unless the return is something amazing
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Oct 23, 2015 13:32:06 GMT -5
John heyman reports the Sox will be busy. But Espinosa, Moncada and Benitendi will be off limits.
Edit- shoulda read back, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Oct 23, 2015 14:09:42 GMT -5
The more I ponder this the more I think we shouldn't trade away any major prospects for pitching yet, assuming the position players are locked in. Solve the need on mid level short term free agents. It would probably push the payroll over what they would want to spend in one year, but you hope to reap the low cost benefit at a later date. Color me optimistic, but I don't think this team is far from competing for the division.
It hasn't worked for us this year, but I'd say that Hanley, Pablo, (and the Porcello extension) were a tier up (at the time of signing) from who we should of been targeting.
If I could protect 3 players from our top 10 it would be those three. If I had to trade a valuable asset it would Swihart, due to his high value and the depth of Vazquez and Hanigan.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 23, 2015 14:17:17 GMT -5
Dombrowski "may" have something to do with it? Don't put yourself out there too far, Jon. Fascinating to parse Heyman's language. The dude hangs around the insular NY-Washington types and breathes the lingo. In the words of one my go-to sources, David Roberts at Vox, he spends too much time in " The Village". Endless "triangulation" just drips from his written words. You have got to be kidding. This is Dave Dombrowski who has his rep tattooed on his forehead. Half this board went into panic mode when the guy was hired for that very reason. Well it's not New York, but it's just a train ride away and the high pressure system that's in place extends at least that far. Tell us something we don't know. ...and on and on. How long till this guy gets an invite to Face the Nation?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 23, 2015 15:23:16 GMT -5
Let me know when a team actually wants to trade an ace for anything less than a massive overpay.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Oct 23, 2015 16:14:33 GMT -5
If you sit back & think, what will this team look like in 3 years if they don't trade any of their top eight prospects....It may be WAY better that the Cubs/Astros were this year.....I know you still need to pitch, but pitching has become so volatile, hit or miss....I mean David Price can't pitch in October....Kershaw finally won...I don't know, look at Estrada from Toronto the other day...it's more of a crapshoot....hang on to the kids.
|
|
|
Post by pdangle on Oct 24, 2015 1:09:56 GMT -5
Tough situation to call. In the past, Boston would package 2-3 B+ (Boston media hyped) prospects, for an Ace and be done with it. But never have I seen 4-5 potential A (some A+) prospects (and so young) ready to break out (or not). I'm actually a bit worried. You have a new GM, wanting to make a splash and dozens of shiny new trading beads he just pulled from the stocking he was given for xmas.
I agree with many of the previous posters, for now, I'd plug a few holes with some B level FA's, see how the rooks develop, both at the MLB and MilB levels. No need to rush into things when so much is unknown.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,962
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 24, 2015 3:16:02 GMT -5
Of course, the notion that we "must" get a top-of-the-rotation starter is monumentally wrong, and wrong several different ways. It would be a damn good idea, but that's a long way from "must." Any time you think you "must" have anything (other than water), you're in big trouble. I'm sure DDo is acutely aware of this.
Using bWAR/GS and SIERA weighted equally, the best KC pitcher this year was Ventura, who ranked 48th out of 150. Then they traded for Cueto, who ranked 37th. You're talking about going most of the season with a staff leader who was a top #3 starter, and trading for a lesser #2 at the deadline, and nevertheless leading the league in wins and then winning the pennant. Meanwhile, the team with the #1 and #3 pitchers in MLB loses in the NLDS.
And I'm pretty well convinced that Eduardo Rodriguez can be a top-of-the-rotation guy if he can learn to thrown an average MLB curveball.
|
|
|