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.
John Henry/Sox ownership/direction
|
|
Post by trotnixon7 on Jun 12, 2024 13:08:48 GMT -5
I think these Henry quotes have been totally overblown. I don’t really like how the FT piece was written—it’s not exactly an interview, more a long-form story with quotes sprinkled in with limited context—but I didn’t really get the sense that he was saying winning the World Series is random, that there’s no point in trying to outcompete the rest of the league, that fans are idiots who should be grateful they have a team to watch in the first place, or whatever other uncharitable spin the likes of Tomase and Cotillo want to put on it. All he really seemed to say was “the odds are against you any given year, and you have to be strategic about making win-now moves because you can end up making your future odds worse without substantially increasing your present odds, but fans don’t really want to hear that.” Based on the reaction to his comments, it seems he was right! I really don’t get what has gotten people so upset about these comments. The word “unreasonable” does not appear in the FT piece. There are no harsh words used toward Red Sox fans. There is no indication that they’re done spending forever—I came out feeling much more confident that they’ll get back to spending big in the near future than I was going into it. If we’re really getting mad that he said “[FSG] generally doesn’t sell assets,” where “assets” is scary business jargon meaning “the things we own” then I think we’ve lost the plot a bit. Call me a bootlicker or whatever all you want, but I really don’t think Chris Cotillo’s interpretation of a piece another journalist wrote is newsworthy or worth discussing. I’ve seen people say that it sends a bad signal to the players in the dugout or whatever, but I don’t think many players are reading the Financial Times. Based on Cotillo’s article about the player reaction to it, it seems like most of them a) did not know about the comments before reporters told them and b) didn’t really care. I guess I just would prefer to be mad about real stuff, like the team being mired in mediocrity for the past few years, than pointless BS that someone who, to borrow from Ernie Adams, mostly doesn’t know what they’re talking about is telling me to be mad at. But at some point, sacrificing short term/making a deal you may lose out long term etc aren't necessarily bad things to do..when done in moderation. I don't think being uber obsessed with "value" and $/WAR is always the right way to go about it either. Granted yes, 1 could argue the time to do those types of deals is more so in the nearish future and not quite the last few yrs. Obviously I don't love dombrowskis method but I'd like to see a hybrid approach like Theo where you pick spots/aren't afraid but overall lean aggressive. I think what people seem to forget is you can be BOTH aggressive AND build a good farm. Dodgers have done it for years, yankees have a pretty solid farm also. I just think overall boston hasn't run things nearly as good as they could have. If 2025/2026 was looked at as the time frame to start getting competitive? Be more willing to go "all in" on that time frame and sell off a bogearts or eovaldi etc. |
|
briam
Veteran
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by briam on Jun 12, 2024 13:30:20 GMT -5
The main issue is Henry and co are no longer acting like a group that is passionate about winning and are instead acting like a group that’s passionate about profit. They’re setting budgets that brings them outside of the top spending teams in baseball all while charging the most expensive prices in the league.
You can spend and still have a measured approach with the future. They aren’t behaving like the ownership group that won 4 World Series which is why that argument has lost steam to me. You start losing credit when your behavior no longer resembles the behavior that led to your success.
The fact John Henry spent a large chunk of his time at the MLB owners meetings pitching his PGA investment says it all. The Sox aren’t a priority, rather they’re just a financial asset in the portfolio. Plus, right or wrong, you lost any goodwill when you trade a generational talent for financial reasons in his prime. It’s going to take high level success to wash that bad taste out of folks mouths, if even then.
|
|
chaimtime
Veteran
Posts: 1,152
Member is Online
|
Post by chaimtime on Jun 12, 2024 13:48:29 GMT -5
I think these Henry quotes have been totally overblown. I don’t really like how the FT piece was written—it’s not exactly an interview, more a long-form story with quotes sprinkled in with limited context—but I didn’t really get the sense that he was saying winning the World Series is random, that there’s no point in trying to outcompete the rest of the league, that fans are idiots who should be grateful they have a team to watch in the first place, or whatever other uncharitable spin the likes of Tomase and Cotillo want to put on it. All he really seemed to say was “the odds are against you any given year, and you have to be strategic about making win-now moves because you can end up making your future odds worse without substantially increasing your present odds, but fans don’t really want to hear that.” Based on the reaction to his comments, it seems he was right! I really don’t get what has gotten people so upset about these comments. The word “unreasonable” does not appear in the FT piece. There are no harsh words used toward Red Sox fans. There is no indication that they’re done spending forever—I came out feeling much more confident that they’ll get back to spending big in the near future than I was going into it. If we’re really getting mad that he said “[FSG] generally doesn’t sell assets,” where “assets” is scary business jargon meaning “the things we own” then I think we’ve lost the plot a bit. Call me a bootlicker or whatever all you want, but I really don’t think Chris Cotillo’s interpretation of a piece another journalist wrote is newsworthy or worth discussing. I’ve seen people say that it sends a bad signal to the players in the dugout or whatever, but I don’t think many players are reading the Financial Times. Based on Cotillo’s article about the player reaction to it, it seems like most of them a) did not know about the comments before reporters told them and b) didn’t really care. I guess I just would prefer to be mad about real stuff, like the team being mired in mediocrity for the past few years, than pointless BS that someone who, to borrow from Ernie Adams, mostly doesn’t know what they’re talking about is telling me to be mad at. But at some point, sacrificing short term/making a deal you may lose out long term etc aren't necessarily bad things to do..when done in moderation. I don't think being uber obsessed with "value" and $/WAR is always the right way to go about it either. Granted yes, 1 could argue the time to do those types of deals is more so in the nearish future and not quite the last few yrs. Obviously I don't love dombrowskis method but I'd like to see a hybrid approach like Theo where you pick spots/aren't afraid but overall lean aggressive. I think what people seem to forget is you can be BOTH aggressive AND build a good farm. Dodgers have done it for years, yankees have a pretty solid farm also. I just think overall boston hasn't run things nearly as good as they could have. If 2025/2026 was looked at as the time frame to start getting competitive? Be more willing to go "all in" on that time frame and sell off a bogearts or eovaldi etc. I think they tried to use the Theo approach and it still didn’t work out. With Sale and Story’s injury issues, Eovaldi and JD struggling with injuries and/or ineffectiveness, and not really getting any production of note from their pre-arb guys, the spent a lot of money for not much production, and didn’t have anybody making up the difference from the farm. Some of that comes down to the fact that MLB has worked tirelessly to shrink the financial advantage big market teams have. You can’t trade for a rental, eat his salary for a half season, and then get a first round pick when he walks in the winter like you could in the Theo days, for example. I’m certainly not saying they’ve done everything perfectly. But I think there are legitimate reasons for making a lot of decisions they’ve made that go beyond “John Henry is cheap and will never spend the money it takes to field a good team.” I think focusing too much on the budget being cut for this season has created a woe-is-me, eternal victim mindset in a lot of Red Sox fans that’s distracting from the very real and very exciting progress the organization has made this season. I just don’t like it when the media tries to stir the pot and gin up that negative sentiment for clicks, rather than producing high-quality work that actually informs the reader. |
|
chaimtime
Veteran
Posts: 1,152
Member is Online
|
Post by chaimtime on Jun 12, 2024 14:08:06 GMT -5
You can spend and still have a measured approach with the future. They aren’t behaving like the ownership group that won 4 World Series which is why that argument has lost steam to me. You start losing credit when your behavior no longer resembles the behavior that led to your success. I just disagree with this. It’s not apples to apples. The 2018 team had Mookie, Xander, Vazquez, JBJ, Benintendi, Devers, E-Rod all on pre—FA salaries. That’s a core worth surrounding with expensive vets. The 2013 team still had Lester, Buchholz, Pedroia, and Ellsbury on pre-FA salaries, and the mid-tier veterans they surrounded them with performed better than anyone could’ve hoped for, and those same guys were making even less in 2007. 2004 is five CBAs ago, so it might as well be ancient history. Conversely, the 2020-2023 Red Sox had pretty much nothing coming from the farm, and what they did get came sporadically. If the general trends of this season hold, they’ll be going into the offseason with a ton of money to spend and not many roster holes to patch. With the production they’ve gotten from the farm, they should be well-positioned to make some big moves for the first time in years, and the pitchforks should come out if they don’t. But I think there’s an eagerness to grab the pitchforks right now that is overshadowing a lot of really positive developments this season, even if the record is still disappointing. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jun 12, 2024 14:21:04 GMT -5
The problem with the organization from 2018-2024 isn't that ownership decided to go Scrouge McDuck and lock away all their coins in their vault. It's that the farm system output in that time frame dried up next to no output, certainly in the 2018-2022 timeframe. It's starting to put out good players in the last few years with what we all hope another boom period coming with the top 3-4 guys all looking so promising and a step or two away from the bigs.
Even if Henry wanted to spend like Cohen did a few years ago and go to 300+M the organization probably is sitting in the same spot as it is now. It's really hard if not impossible to win in the current MLB if you don't have good cheap controlled players filling in to the roster where needed. Bloom and now Breslow would have had to be a regular current day Nostradamus in order to have the organization as perennial WS contenders the last few years with how little they have gotten from the farm in that stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jun 12, 2024 14:36:39 GMT -5
Just for the record it is true that there was a point in time in the early 2000s when the Red Sox were the second tier of spending all by themselves after the Yankees and that was indeed an advantage.
That said, I do think they have continued to spend around the LT and would probably go over for the right time and obviously losing that advantage is not the only reason they haven’t been as competitive recently.
|
|
chaimtime
Veteran
Posts: 1,152
Member is Online
|
Post by chaimtime on Jun 12, 2024 15:34:01 GMT -5
Just for the record it is true that there was a point in time in the early 2000s when the Red Sox were the second tier of spending all by themselves after the Yankees and that was indeed an advantage. That said, I do think they have continued to spend around the LT and would probably go over for the right time and obviously losing that advantage is not the only reason they haven’t been as competitive recently. I think the death of cable has hit the Sox a lot harder than people realize. NESN used to be a cash cow, but it appears from this MLBTR article that the Red Sox’ local broadcasting revenue is pretty middle of the pack. www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/each-teams-local-broadcasting-arrangement.htmlAnd of course, in the early 2000s it paid to spend because of the free agent compensation rules. You could pay half a guy’s walk year salary and get two top-50 picks for your trouble. These two guys didn’t work out, but the Red Sox got the picks that turned into Bryce Brentz and Kolbrin Vitek for eating Billy Wagner’s salary in 2009 and letting him walk. They got Barnes, Owens, Swihart, and JBJ for letting Victor Martinez and Adrian Beltre walk. They got Jacoby Ellsbury and Jed Lowrie for letting Orlando Cabrera walk. Big market teams were heavily incentivized to go for it because there was a very good reward waiting for them even if it didn’t work out. Those incentives just don’t exist anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Jun 12, 2024 17:38:13 GMT -5
Sam Kennedy on the pre-game show doing damage control
|
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jun 12, 2024 18:12:39 GMT -5
Sam Kennedy on the pre-game show doing damage control Is that meant ironically? |
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Jun 13, 2024 7:24:07 GMT -5
Sam Kennedy on the pre-game show doing damage control Is that meant ironically? He was "clarifying" JWH's comments |
|
shagworthy
Veteran
My neckbeard game is on point.
Posts: 1,875 
|
Post by shagworthy on Jun 13, 2024 8:04:27 GMT -5
I will just say this:
You would think for such a successful guy he would have one iota of a pulse of the team he has owned for 20+ years and its fans. Just STFU. Stay in the background dude. Every single time you open your mouth you end up putting your foot in it. There was literally no need to give that interview, it didn't serve you, or the club any good. Now everyone around you has to answer to it.
You've got 5 billion reasons to grow a thicker skin and just take the occasional abuse. Yeah, I don't like the moves you've made these past few years, and neither do several of the fans, but so what? You'll spend the weekend on a Yacht being served by 20 something girls (or guys, I don't know what you're into and good on you either way) and I will be mowing my yard. It baffles me why he even tries to address us as if he is somehow going to win this conversation.
They call it F-U money for a reason my man. Take the hint.
|
|
briam
Veteran
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by briam on Jun 17, 2024 11:15:06 GMT -5
You can spend and still have a measured approach with the future. They aren’t behaving like the ownership group that won 4 World Series which is why that argument has lost steam to me. You start losing credit when your behavior no longer resembles the behavior that led to your success. I just disagree with this. It’s not apples to apples. The 2018 team had Mookie, Xander, Vazquez, JBJ, Benintendi, Devers, E-Rod all on pre—FA salaries. That’s a core worth surrounding with expensive vets. The 2013 team still had Lester, Buchholz, Pedroia, and Ellsbury on pre-FA salaries, and the mid-tier veterans they surrounded them with performed better than anyone could’ve hoped for, and those same guys were making even less in 2007. 2004 is five CBAs ago, so it might as well be ancient history. Conversely, the 2020-2023 Red Sox had pretty much nothing coming from the farm, and what they did get came sporadically. If the general trends of this season hold, they’ll be going into the offseason with a ton of money to spend and not many roster holes to patch. With the production they’ve gotten from the farm, they should be well-positioned to make some big moves for the first time in years, and the pitchforks should come out if they don’t. But I think there’s an eagerness to grab the pitchforks right now that is overshadowing a lot of really positive developments this season, even if the record is still disappointing. How they acted in 2013 isn’t even close to how they approached this season, and that’s the point. All the guys you mentioned from that “core” (adding Buchholz is a little generous considering he had 6.4 WAR over 6 seasons entering 2013) were either last year of Arb or on pre-arb extensions. It’s not like they were pre-arb guys making pennies, so they supplemented them with a bunch of veterans to make a run and bridge the gap with the next great core that won a title in 2018. This offseason they basically threw their hands up and said they tried with Yamamoto and just signed Giolito and Criswell with a budget approximately 20 below the LTT. They’ve gone from top 5 in payroll every season to 11th in back to back years. Originally it was “they’ll spend once Price’s money is off the books” and the can has been kicked 3 years down the road. This offseason was supposed to be “full throttle.” Now it’s NEXT year is it. The fans are Charlie Brown and they’re Lucy, maybe we’ll kick the ball next winter. |
|
chaimtime
Veteran
Posts: 1,152
Member is Online
|
Post by chaimtime on Jun 17, 2024 12:51:26 GMT -5
I just disagree with this. It’s not apples to apples. The 2018 team had Mookie, Xander, Vazquez, JBJ, Benintendi, Devers, E-Rod all on pre—FA salaries. That’s a core worth surrounding with expensive vets. The 2013 team still had Lester, Buchholz, Pedroia, and Ellsbury on pre-FA salaries, and the mid-tier veterans they surrounded them with performed better than anyone could’ve hoped for, and those same guys were making even less in 2007. 2004 is five CBAs ago, so it might as well be ancient history. Conversely, the 2020-2023 Red Sox had pretty much nothing coming from the farm, and what they did get came sporadically. If the general trends of this season hold, they’ll be going into the offseason with a ton of money to spend and not many roster holes to patch. With the production they’ve gotten from the farm, they should be well-positioned to make some big moves for the first time in years, and the pitchforks should come out if they don’t. But I think there’s an eagerness to grab the pitchforks right now that is overshadowing a lot of really positive developments this season, even if the record is still disappointing. How they acted in 2013 isn’t even close to how they approached this season, and that’s the point. All the guys you mentioned from that “core” (adding Buchholz is a little generous considering he had 6.4 WAR over 6 seasons entering 2013) were either last year of Arb or on pre-arb extensions. It’s not like they were pre-arb guys making pennies, so they supplemented them with a bunch of veterans to make a run and bridge the gap with the next great core that won a title in 2018. This offseason they basically threw their hands up and said they tried with Yamamoto and just signed Giolito and Criswell with a budget approximately 20 below the LTT. They’ve gone from top 5 in payroll every season to 11th in back to back years. Originally it was “they’ll spend once Price’s money is off the books” and the can has been kicked 3 years down the road. This offseason was supposed to be “full throttle.” Now it’s NEXT year is it. The fans are Charlie Brown and they’re Lucy, maybe we’ll kick the ball next winter. Im not really sure where you disagree with me other than your certainty that they’ll keep a low payroll going forward, something that Alex Speier has explicitly said is not the plan. Those 2013 guys weren’t making pre-arb pennies, but they were still all legitimate MLB starters making arbitration salaries, so still less than their market value. If they weren’t underpaid, then they would’ve been non-tendered. I mean, Jon Lester, who was on a pre-arb extension, counted for $5 million against the luxury tax! The point I’m making is that none of the young guys who are currently carrying this team had done anything to convince anyone that they were the real deal. Now they have, and, going back to what Speier has said, that’s exactly what ownership wanted to see before authorizing more big spending. And I don’t really know how the Charlie Brown metaphor works here—you have to all the way back to…two years ago to find them paying the luxury tax and running a top-5 payroll. That team really struggled and exposed issues that continued to plague them in 2023. It’s not like they haven’t spent money in half a decade. Based on the state of the team, past ownership behavior, and the words of the most trustworthy reporter following the team, I think it takes a lot more mental gymnastics to conclude that mid-tier payrolls are the new normal rather than a temporary blip. |
|
briam
Veteran
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by briam on Jun 17, 2024 14:08:27 GMT -5
How they acted in 2013 isn’t even close to how they approached this season, and that’s the point. All the guys you mentioned from that “core” (adding Buchholz is a little generous considering he had 6.4 WAR over 6 seasons entering 2013) were either last year of Arb or on pre-arb extensions. It’s not like they were pre-arb guys making pennies, so they supplemented them with a bunch of veterans to make a run and bridge the gap with the next great core that won a title in 2018. This offseason they basically threw their hands up and said they tried with Yamamoto and just signed Giolito and Criswell with a budget approximately 20 below the LTT. They’ve gone from top 5 in payroll every season to 11th in back to back years. Originally it was “they’ll spend once Price’s money is off the books” and the can has been kicked 3 years down the road. This offseason was supposed to be “full throttle.” Now it’s NEXT year is it. The fans are Charlie Brown and they’re Lucy, maybe we’ll kick the ball next winter. Im not really sure where you disagree with me other than your certainty that they’ll keep a low payroll going forward, something that Alex Speier has explicitly said is not the plan. Those 2013 guys weren’t making pre-arb pennies, but they were still all legitimate MLB starters making arbitration salaries, so still less than their market value. If they weren’t underpaid, then they would’ve been non-tendered. I mean, Jon Lester, who was on a pre-arb extension, counted for $5 million against the luxury tax! The point I’m making is that none of the young guys who are currently carrying this team had done anything to convince anyone that they were the real deal. Now they have, and, going back to what Speier has said, that’s exactly what ownership wanted to see before authorizing more big spending. And I don’t really know how the Charlie Brown metaphor works here—you have to all the way back to…two years ago to find them paying the luxury tax and running a top-5 payroll. That team really struggled and exposed issues that continued to plague them in 2023. It’s not like they haven’t spent money in half a decade. Based on the state of the team, past ownership behavior, and the words of the most trustworthy reporter following the team, I think it takes a lot more mental gymnastics to conclude that mid-tier payrolls are the new normal rather than a temporary blip. Speier also reported the expectation was for them to spend big this past offseason until Bloom was fired. It also seems incredibly unlikely they would trot their mouthpiece out to say they were going “full throttle” when their real plan was actually to wait and see pre-arb player success before they spend. Again, their process changed. They’ve owned the team for over two decades and 2023 and 2024 are the first times they’ve ever been outside of the top 10 in payroll. That’s a major change! Even when they did go into the luxury tax in 22 it was by a whopping $6 million for a $1.2 million tax. |
|
chaimtime
Veteran
Posts: 1,152
Member is Online
|
Post by chaimtime on Jun 17, 2024 17:58:09 GMT -5
Im not really sure where you disagree with me other than your certainty that they’ll keep a low payroll going forward, something that Alex Speier has explicitly said is not the plan. Those 2013 guys weren’t making pre-arb pennies, but they were still all legitimate MLB starters making arbitration salaries, so still less than their market value. If they weren’t underpaid, then they would’ve been non-tendered. I mean, Jon Lester, who was on a pre-arb extension, counted for $5 million against the luxury tax! The point I’m making is that none of the young guys who are currently carrying this team had done anything to convince anyone that they were the real deal. Now they have, and, going back to what Speier has said, that’s exactly what ownership wanted to see before authorizing more big spending. And I don’t really know how the Charlie Brown metaphor works here—you have to all the way back to…two years ago to find them paying the luxury tax and running a top-5 payroll. That team really struggled and exposed issues that continued to plague them in 2023. It’s not like they haven’t spent money in half a decade. Based on the state of the team, past ownership behavior, and the words of the most trustworthy reporter following the team, I think it takes a lot more mental gymnastics to conclude that mid-tier payrolls are the new normal rather than a temporary blip. Speier also reported the expectation was for them to spend big this past offseason until Bloom was fired. It also seems incredibly unlikely they would trot their mouthpiece out to say they were going “full throttle” when their real plan was actually to wait and see pre-arb player success before they spend. Again, their process changed. They’ve owned the team for over two decades and 2023 and 2024 are the first times they’ve ever been outside of the top 10 in payroll. That’s a major change! Even when they did go into the luxury tax in 22 it was by a whopping $6 million for a $1.2 million tax. I dunno, I remember him spending the winter telling everyone that Jordan Montgomery and Blake Snell weren’t coming. Seemed pretty clear to me that they were willing to go big for Yamamoto and regrouped once they discovered they weren’t really close. Either way, I’d be more inclined to believe Alex Speier than SoxProspects Forum user briam’s third eye. Also not sure I’d call the club chairman and second-largest shareholder a mouthpiece, but that’s neither here nor there. The biggest thing that makes me think this “John Henry doesn’t care about winning” stuff is a load of bull, though, is the simple fact that owning the Red Sox has earned Henry, Werner and Co. a ton of money by virtue of being perpetual winners, outside of the odd blip here and there. There is no better way to debase the value of their crown jewel than to turn them into perpetual also-rans. Locking in big contracts for players you don’t think are all that great, just because fans are clamoring for a big move (like Jordan Montgomery) is the easiest way to get mired in long-term mediocrity. With each new CBA pushing harder and harder to punish big market teams for trying to spend to win, I’m not sure why the idea that they looked at the model franchises around the league and decided to follow their shared model of building a world class player development apparatus and, once in place, supplementing it with strong spending is such a nonstarter for Red Sox fans. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Jul 2, 2024 6:07:33 GMT -5
With the speculation of FSG potentially trying to buy the Celtics, I think I speak for most when I say, please don't. Regardless of how this team does, they should sell.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 3,410
Member is Online
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 2, 2024 7:29:44 GMT -5
With the speculation of FSG potentially trying to buy the Celtics, I think I speak for most when I say, please don't. Regardless of how this team does, they should sell. “This year we need to be under the second apron. That was something we've known for more than a year now.” (don’t freak out this is just a joke) |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 2, 2024 7:59:18 GMT -5
Wouldn't Henry and Co. need to buy out Lebron if FSG wanted to buy the Celtics in the next few years? Not saying it couldn't happen but due to the Lebron link to FSG I have a hard time seeing them buying an NBA team while Lebron is still an active player.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Jul 2, 2024 8:02:00 GMT -5
Wouldn't Henry and Co. need to buy out Lebron if FSG wanted to buy the Celtics in the next few years? Not saying it couldn't happen but due to the Lebron link to FSG I have a hard time seeing them buying an NBA team while Lebron is still an active player. They might. Then again this is a league where everyone knows LeBron is a silent partner in Klutch and they still allow it. |
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jul 2, 2024 13:22:07 GMT -5
Well, JH & Friends have won twice as many championships as Wyc & Friends in a similar timeframe, so I say if Wyc wants out, and his partners don't want to buy his shares, then, Go FOR IT, JH.
|
|
|
|
Post by trotnixon7 on Jul 2, 2024 18:45:22 GMT -5
Well, JH & Friends have won twice as many championships as Wyc & Friends in a similar timeframe, so I say if Wyc wants out, and his partners don't want to buy his shares, then, Go FOR IT, JH. I'm pretty certain boston was in the top 3 in payroll all 4 title runs under Henry. They haven't won anything operating the way they are currently operating. |
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Jul 2, 2024 21:00:09 GMT -5
Well, JH & Friends have won twice as many championships as Wyc & Friends in a similar timeframe, so I say if Wyc wants out, and his partners don't want to buy his shares, then, Go FOR IT, JH. I'm pretty certain boston was in the top 3 in payroll all 4 title runs under Henry. They haven't won anything operating the way they are currently operating. True, but the next core of players was not ready yet. The Red Sox needed to turnover the roster. They have done that now, so I will be anxious to see what the next two off seasons look like before I past judgement. |
|
briam
Veteran
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by briam on Jul 2, 2024 22:39:24 GMT -5
With the speculation of FSG potentially trying to buy the Celtics, I think I speak for most when I say, please don't. Regardless of how this team does, they should sell. “This year we need to be under the second apron. That was something we've known for more than a year now.” (don’t freak out this is just a joke) “I grew a fan of Stan Musial and would’ve been devastated if St. Louis traded him, but basketball players are expensive and trading Tatum was the only way to build a sustainable winner moving forward.” |
|
|
|
Post by trotnixon7 on Jul 3, 2024 8:49:10 GMT -5
The problem with the organization from 2018-2024 isn't that ownership decided to go Scrouge McDuck and lock away all their coins in their vault. It's that the farm system output in that time frame dried up next to no output, certainly in the 2018-2022 timeframe. It's starting to put out good players in the last few years with what we all hope another boom period coming with the top 3-4 guys all looking so promising and a step or two away from the bigs. Even if Henry wanted to spend like Cohen did a few years ago and go to 300+M the organization probably is sitting in the same spot as it is now. It's really hard if not impossible to win in the current MLB if you don't have good cheap controlled players filling in to the roster where needed. Bloom and now Breslow would have had to be a regular current day Nostradamus in order to have the organization as perennial WS contenders the last few years with how little they have gotten from the farm in that stretch. 1. Than don't clearly lie to fans. 2. Sell off assets. Letting players like XB, JDM, Eovaldi etc Walk for nothing doesn't seem like a smart decision if the whole plan was 2025/2026ish 3. Why not sign players for shortish contracts at a decent AAV that you can likely flip at the deadline if you are out? |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 3, 2024 9:05:00 GMT -5
The problem with the organization from 2018-2024 isn't that ownership decided to go Scrouge McDuck and lock away all their coins in their vault. It's that the farm system output in that time frame dried up next to no output, certainly in the 2018-2022 timeframe. It's starting to put out good players in the last few years with what we all hope another boom period coming with the top 3-4 guys all looking so promising and a step or two away from the bigs. Even if Henry wanted to spend like Cohen did a few years ago and go to 300+M the organization probably is sitting in the same spot as it is now. It's really hard if not impossible to win in the current MLB if you don't have good cheap controlled players filling in to the roster where needed. Bloom and now Breslow would have had to be a regular current day Nostradamus in order to have the organization as perennial WS contenders the last few years with how little they have gotten from the farm in that stretch. 1. Than don't clearly lie to fans. 2. Sell off assets. Letting players like XB, JDM, Eovaldi etc Walk for nothing doesn't seem like a smart decision if the whole plan was 2025/2026ish 3. Why not sign players for shortish contracts at a decent AAV that you can likely flip at the deadline if you are out? 1) What "clear lie" did ownership sell to the fans? 2) XB and Eovaldi did not walk for nothing they received QOs and the Sox got picks, one can argue that they should have ducked under the LT that season to get 2nd round picks not 4th but that argument has been beat to death on this site so I'm not going to go there. 3) What theoretical players should they have signed this offseason on short term AAV deals that would have helped the team or been flipped at the deadline this year? The list is extremely small so not sure what the argument is here. |
|
|
