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 pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 15:45:31 GMT -5
John Henry is either the best owner in MLB or the most fortunate owner in MLB. I'll pick the latter. He hired good people to do his job, but he was no better or worse at spending than any big market team. The success of the Red Sox on field product is more on the GM's who constructed the team at the time. Spending was a good part of it, and he takes some credit, but calling him the best owner in MLB. I can't do it. He's no Steinbrenner. Not even close. Steinbrenner would put himself into debt, just to win back in the day. In fact, when John Henry intervened, you can say that's when things went south. The Pablo Sandoval signing (Panda sales!!), the John Lester disaster, the Manny Ramirez situation. We are lucky he even spent the cash to get Price. At least he had the foresight to do that. He had no other choice, but to do that. You're giving credit to the GMs without acknowledging A.) John Henry was responsible for hiring them B.) he's won four championships with three different guys running the show. I'm at a loss for what you want from an owner, he spends, maximizes their resources, and hires good people. This wasn't Kraft lucking into Belichick and letting him run the show for two decades, they've won with teams built by Theo, Cherington, and DD. John Henry "intervened" on the Yoan Moncada negotiations too, but lets talk about the "Manny Ramirez situation" which is when they put him on irrevocable waivers and no team claimed him so literally nothing actually happened and it proved he accurately read the market. If only he could've made some extensions for the core, say a Xander Bogaerts…oh wait, nope, that must've beenl Dombrowski. The Sale signing we can attribute to Henry assuming it doesn't work out, if it does work out we can credit the GM and suggest Henry is lucky. Lol, Henry didn't even need to put Manny Ramirez on the market. That's the point. He tried to get rid of him for nothing. There was no reading of the market correctly here. He was being cheap at the time on a good contract because it was expensive. He was a good owner, but I don't believe he's a super owner or whatever ridiculous label you or others put on him. He's the average big market spender here, but has probably just as many limits, if not more limits on his spending. You can't say he doesn't after this past year. I have zero faith in Henry making a market value deal for Mookie. If Mookie wants to stay, he's going to have to take less.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 15:37:24 GMT -5
John Henry is either the best owner in MLB or the most fortunate owner in MLB. I'll pick the latter. He hired good people to do his job, but he was no better or worse at spending than any big market team. The success of the Red Sox on field product is more on the GM's who constructed the team at the time. Spending was a good part of it, and he takes some credit, but calling him the best owner in MLB. I can't do it. He's no Steinbrenner. Not even close. Steinbrenner would put himself into debt, just to win back in the day. In fact, when John Henry intervened, you can say that's when things went south. The Pablo Sandoval signing (Panda sales!!), the John Lester disaster, the Manny Ramirez situation. We are lucky he even spent the cash to get Price. At least he had the foresight to do that. He had no other choice, but to do that. The current Steinbrenner's are trash, and the other one died, so that's like saying you can't call Bill Belichick the best coach in the game because of Vince Lombardi. Who is a better owner? What? Yeah the current Steinbrenner's are garbage. We can agree on that. You were talking about past owners. I said that no owner was going to spend more than GEORGE Steinbrenner back in the day. Wasn't happening. The Sox were never going to have the highest payroll with him around, and that's the simple truth of the matter.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 15:29:55 GMT -5
Aug 11, 2019 15:09:35 GMT -4 pedrofanforever45 said: Lol, I would threw a fit. That's a joke. Nope, I would have posted that the move didn't work and moved on with my life, just like I just did with Cashner. I throw fits. If something is wrong, then I'll point it out. You're darn right. Is that you, Rick James? Over something small, I wouldn't have thrown a fit. I do on the big things. The only time I threw a fit over something small was the Steve Pearce thing, because I knew Henry was going to set limits on the payroll and every small thing was big.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:59:13 GMT -5
Lol, I would threw a fit. That's a joke. Nope, I would have posted that the move didn't work and moved on with my life, just like I just did with Cashner. I would have reviewed and said that the Sox in fact, did SOMETHING to make the beleaguered bullpen better. I'm glad you have the foresight to know what happens in the future of Dyson or Greene in a Sox uniform though. I bet you would have predicted that Dave Roberts got tagged out at second base in 2004 because marginal moves don't matter in winning seasons. Talk about a hypocrite here. Talking about others predicting foresight while predicting foresight. Yeah, you never throw fits. The only one that ever pretends to know for sure what will happen, what would have happened or (even more often) claims to have been certain all along of what did happen (even when it runs perpendicular to what you had already predicted with certainty was going to happen) is you Pedro. Lucky you to always have hindsight to tell you what to believe. Others like DD and myself will just have to follow educated thought processes, listen to others, set limits and goals and do the best we can, I suppose... As for me being a hypocrite, I didn’t offer any insight into what would have happened if Greene and Dyson were traded to Boston. I only offered insight into how your ‘truths’ would have changed if the players you demanded didn’t deliver. I wouldn’t necessarily call that foresight, we’ve all seen it many times before. The sun rises every morning... Anyway, my workout is over so I’ll be going about my day. Last word for you if you want it (lol, of course you do, you can’t help yourself #foresight)... There is nothing to say other than you hate my opinion on baseball. Yeah, "truths." No truth to that, dude. The sunrise doesn't rise everytime a reliever fails, because they do or don't. Doing nothing will get you nothing. That's the truth here. Even Cora said that before the trade deadline and then backtracked after the fact. If you hadn't gotten in your "knowledgeable snark," this wouldn't have been a conversation. Yeah, I throw fits. If something is wrong, then I'll point it out. You're darn right. The Red Sox doing nothing all year in the bullpen was plain wrong. Wouldn't throw a fit over a small move though. The Sox shouldn't have limits. Eduacated people aren't always smart. Go above and beyond. The Sox didn't do any of this this year. I guess me and you are two polar opposites and that's cool.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:42:17 GMT -5
Not that Kinsler helped, but I wouldn't change a thing. Ripple effect and such. Kinsler had key hits in both the Yankee and Astros playoffs last year.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:34:24 GMT -5
Wow Butteys stuff is filthy. A 99 mph fastball with movement. Why the hell did we trade this guy? To win a world series.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:30:32 GMT -5
I think your read on MLB front offices is a few years out of date. Not based on trades like Bauer, Grienke and Goldschmidt recently. Your not getting a Sale type package, but you can get a haul! Like what are you basing your thoughts on? We get way less than the Bauer deal? Like your getting more and that a very good young OF and a top 100 prospect starter for 1 and 1/3 seasons of a head case who's not in Betts league as a player. I bet you could even get close to the Chris Sale package. Like Mookie Betts type of players don't ever become available. The elite of the elite here. So the Sox could definitely take advantage of that.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:09:35 GMT -5
That’s why it was laughable to to watch you talk about Boston HAVING to make a move for a RP - because if it had turned out along the lines of a Sam Dyson, Shane Greene or Mark Melancon - the chances of you claiming they did the right thing (what you wanted) and it just didn’t work out would have been zero. No, you would have thrown a fit about DD and the scouts getting the wrong guy and wasting assets (which of course you foresaw entirely at the time and why you would have traded for a different arm with different prospects)... Lol, I would threw a fit. That's a joke. Nope, I would have posted that the move didn't work and moved on with my life, just like I just did with Cashner. I would have reviewed and said that the Sox in fact, did SOMETHING to make the beleaguered bullpen better. I'm glad you have the foresight to know what happens in the future of Dyson or Greene in a Sox uniform though. I bet you would have predicted that Dave Roberts got tagged out at second base in 2004 because marginal moves don't matter in winning seasons. Talk about a hypocrite here. Talking about others predicting foresight while predicting foresight.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:07:23 GMT -5
Setting aside your slick attempt to pretend you were all in on this team’s ability to make a run (Mr Positivity!) prior to the trade deadline as the fiction it is, you just made DD’s point for not making an RP move at the deadline. The fault lies with the the stars - especially the starters - not doing their jobs at a good enough or consistent enough level. It doesn’t matter who you add or don’t on the perimeter of the roster if the meat of the club doesn’t deliver. That was the exact argument SO MANY were making against your insistence they had to add an arm no matter what and you dismissed it off-hand. Lol, now you’re using it to defend your own point as if the team has only just begun to let you down...? So let's just focus on this LOL. Yeah, Dave Dombrowski could predict one of the biggest collapses ever. The point is, if the Sox starters did their job and were competitive, pieces added on top of it could have made a difference. In the end, Dave Dombrowski was right for all the wrong reasons. I doubt it was even a Dombrowski call. It sounds like a Henry call with how they stopped wanting to spend money. So you can point your finger all you want, it doesn't make your point any better.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 14:01:46 GMT -5
John Henry is either the best owner in MLB or the most fortunate owner in MLB. I'll pick the latter. He hired good people to do his job, but he was no better or worse at spending than any big market team.
The success of the Red Sox on field product is more on the GM's who constructed the team at the time. Spending was a good part of it, and he takes some credit, but calling him the best owner in MLB. I can't do it. He's no Steinbrenner. Not even close. Steinbrenner would put himself into debt, just to win back in the day.
In fact, when John Henry intervened, you can say that's when things went south. The Pablo Sandoval signing (Panda sales!!), the John Lester disaster, the Manny Ramirez situation.
We are lucky he even spent the cash to get Price. At least he had the foresight to do that. He had no other choice, but to do that.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 13:37:16 GMT -5
So, now you’re saying it was a mistake to make a move for a marginal upgrade (at best) that presented a real possibility of lack of impact or ineffectiveness just for the sake of making a move? So you're saying Dombrowski needs to do a better job finding better marginal moves? Wait you're not saying anything, but depicting other people like you have been for the past 3 weeks. Just to add to this, if the Sox weren't historically bad the past three weeks, good marginal moves could have made a impact in a wild card race. Instead, Price pitched hurt. Sale has had a career worst year. Porcello has had the worst year I could have ever seen in a full year for a Red Sox starting pitcher. Eduardo has been the best pitcher in the rotation. Which says, A LOT. Marginal moves do make a difference. Bobby Kielty hit the last important homerun in the 2007 playoffs. Scott Williamson was the Red Sox closer by the end of 2003. Ohh and best of all, Dave Roberts once stole a important base that changed the course of Red Sox history. Yeah, marginal moves aren't impactful though, especially in important games.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 13:20:54 GMT -5
How many times did the Red Sox have the highest payroll in baseball before John Henry? Do you remember how much they used to spend before he increased their revenue streams? I'm not sure how he can be considered more stingy than say the Dodgers or Yankees ownership, considering he's spent more than them despite lesser resources. Again, if you can name an owner who is more likely to give that type of contract, have at it. Maybe some team with a ton of payroll space will go nuts, but it'll be an outlier move for that owner because there is no post-George Steinbrenner owner who has shown himself as more likely to outspend every other owner. I'd argue if the Red Sox went crazy this past offseason and added more multi-year salaries it'd make signing Betts less likely. Adding a couple relievers on multi-year deals for $10m+ would've further limited their flexibility. If Mookie leaves it'll be because the Red Sox don't think he'll want to be here or don't project him to earn a record setting deal going forward, it won't be due to hitting a limit in the budget and refusing to sign him on what they believe is a fair deal. Now, maybe the Red Sox undervalue Betts going forward, but that's a different argument. What does it matter about the past Red Sox ownership? Like Henry has owned the team for 2 decades. For some of us, John Henry is the history for Red Sox owners. Red Sox owners had no chance bidding against George Steinbrenner back in the day. Teams with payroll flexibility is the *exact* fear here, especially given the fact that Henry sets limits as we all have proven to see here with his history. The Red Sox payroll is up against it's limits next year, even without adding anyone beyond next year.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 13:08:37 GMT -5
Yeah, Cashner has given you absolutely nothing. You needed a starter, and you got the absolute worst option. This is on the scouting department and on Dombrowski for this move. So, now you’re saying it was a mistake to make a move for a marginal upgrade (at best) that presented a real possibility of lack of impact or ineffectiveness just for the sake of making a move? So you're saying Dombrowski needs to do a better job finding better marginal moves? Wait you're not saying anything, but depicting other people like you have been for the past 3 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 13:00:53 GMT -5
There's only 2 questions that come to my mind when it comes to the Mookie Betts extension- Will Mookie take less to stay? Will John Henry even give close to a market value deal? Right now, I have zero faith in either happening. Even the most John Henry loyalist can look at his actions of him this year. He stopped spending when the team got to certain point. Look at his actions during the Manny Ramirez contract, one of the most expensive in baseball at the time (he tried to sell him for practically nothing, or give him away multiple times). This isn't a Dave Dombrowski thing, this is squarely a John Henry thing. Like Dombrowski is only in the conversation if Betts gets traded, not extended. This is what makes the Mookie situation complicated. John Henry. John Henry gave the biggest pitching contract to David Price and has the highest payroll in the game two years running. What owner is more likely to give a precedent setting contract than John Henry? John Henry gave David Price the largest contract to a pitcher because he was absolutely desperate. It wasn't even close to the highest contract in baseball, even at the time. That's what we are talking about here with Betts. The highest or close to the highest contract in baseball. John Henry had the highest payroll in baseball twice in his 19 years here total and he stopped spending during one of them. Henry is just like any other big market spending owner, only arguably, a little bit more stingy.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 12:50:06 GMT -5
Yeah, Cashner has given you absolutely nothing. You needed a starter, and you got the absolute worst option. This is on the scouting department and on Dombrowski for this move.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 12:43:26 GMT -5
There's only 2 questions that come to my mind when it comes to the Mookie Betts extension-
Will Mookie take less to stay?
Will John Henry even give close to a market value deal?
Right now, I have zero faith in either happening. Even the most John Henry loyalist can look at his actions of him this year. He stopped spending when the team got to certain point. Look at his actions during the Manny Ramirez contract, one of the most expensive in baseball at the time (he tried to sell him for practically nothing, or give him away multiple times).
This isn't a Dave Dombrowski thing, this is squarely a John Henry thing. Like Dombrowski is only in the conversation if Betts gets traded, not extended.
This is what makes the Mookie situation complicated. John Henry.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 12:36:56 GMT -5
At this point, if you like watching the Red Sox right now, then you like being chained and whipped. It's torture. They're giving you no hope this year.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 11, 2019 12:18:56 GMT -5
Not bored. I just want the team to be good past 2020. You're very likely to have one regardless of what happens with Mookie. I also think that people are vastly overrating the prospect return Mookie would demand at this point. Everyone understands the value of top prospects and team control just as well as the Red Sox do -- arguably they understand it a lot better than a team run by Dave Dombrowski. 31 year old Paul Goldsmidt who plays 1B fetched a haul with one year of control left. A really good one. A 27 year old Betts who has the ability to play CF should get a even better package. That's the expectation and nothing less. No one's missing the point on anything.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 10, 2019 19:56:08 GMT -5
This isn't what baseball today is. This pitch would have been destroyed in 1955 too. Porcello has been awful all year. Let him go. I would also debate letting him go now, but the season is over so who cares?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 10, 2019 18:02:13 GMT -5
Playing embarrassing baseball against a dreadful team. This is your 2019 Boston Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 10, 2019 16:35:41 GMT -5
I would ask for Anderson, Waters, and Pache. They want Mookie, okay, but it's going to hurt. Problem with Atlanta is they have no real high-end talent. Lots of very good, probably marginally above-average MLBers, but not like Houston with Whitley-Tucker. Of course, for just one year, that may be all the Sox can get. Sucks. Mookie leaving will be the worst thing to happen to the franchise in my lifetime, or at least since Bagwell-Andersen. Pache is a top 15 prospect in all of baseball in the list I saw recently. I wouldn't be opposed to Kyle Tucker either and some sort of package built around him.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 10, 2019 6:57:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 10, 2019 6:41:59 GMT -5
And pass up on elite talents like Rafael Devers for 1.5 Million? I don't agree with you You don't have to agree with me. I know I am right. Look at what they brought Xander in for. How about Darwinzon, and Mata. Come on. Look at all of the money wasted in the international market. Rusney and friends say hello. The correct answer is that you do both. You sign the big international minor league free agent signings and the small signings too. The key here is getting as much talent as possible that you scout and like. Big or small signing talents. The Sox might be the best in the league overall at this. Like it's amazing how many international guys they pump out seemingly each year. It's one of the reasons why I never worry about the farm system. The Sox always find a way to keep finding guys, even sometimes out of no where.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 9, 2019 22:49:55 GMT -5
Well if we trade Mookie to the Braves I want Waters and Anderson as the main pieces I would ask for Anderson, Waters, and Pache. They want Mookie, okay, but it's going to hurt.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 9, 2019 22:48:26 GMT -5
The Twins are one game ahead or even dead tied in the standings. You're right, but the Sox are still 9.0 back from both. Yeap, the Sox need to crush the next 3 weeks to have a realistic shot of catching anyone.
|
|
|