Where the Moneyball Meets the Road

[example1]

So I've been trying to come up with a way to understand exactly what happened with the Teixeira signing debacle, where the frustration lies among other great Sox fans here, and I think the title of this thread is a solid summary. An article kind of provoked my thinking on this issue too:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view/2008_12_25_Free_agency_not_worth_it_for_Red_Sox:_P ulling_out_of_Mark-et/

I'm going to put down my thoughts and see what others think.

The Red Sox and Yankees take two very different approaches to constructing teams. They both value the things that teams should value when constructing a team: youth, OBP, SLG, OPS. This was the crux of the moneyball on field approach: get guys who don't make outs. Get guys who have power. It seems obvious, but the switch from AVG to OBP over the past 15 years or so has been a monumental one in baseball and I think we all know it is theoretically correct.

The other substantial part of Moneyball was the way that a team can exploit an unappreciated asset to make their team better without breaking the bank. The A's were able to replace the production of big time FA's like Damon and Giambi without literally replacing them with a FA star.

So my thinking is that the Red Sox FO has structured itself to be the pure moneyball machine. They believe in the Jamesian approach to not making outs, devaluing defense when possible, and drafting and signing young players to improve the farm system and the talent pool. Drafting and developing players, or signing them from abroad, has proven to be very useful, as they often get players for cheap, for a longer period, and without having to do the FA dance. They have also done much of this without regard for the reaction of their fan base.

Throughout this process of reshaping how the Sox manage their team, many fans here have come to appreciate the teams the Sox put together, as well as some of the artistry involved in doing so. My sense is that the loss of Damon was tough on many Sox fans (myself included), but the loss of Teixeira to the Yankees was too much to handle. The reason for this difficulty seems to be that those of us who have come to understand the philosophy could justify keeping or signing these guys even if they went outside the bounds of that approach.

In other words, even with a moneyball approach to player development, guys like Damon and to a much larger degree Teixeira seemed to still fit the model, even if they cost a shit-ton of money to sign. Teixeira, as a switch hitting, high OBP, high SLG, gold-glove defensive 1B would have cemented the Sox lineup for a long time, given them another trading chip or two (Lowell and possibly Anderson) and appeared to be not just a good fit, but a perfect fit. Additionally, there is a sense that the Duquette Sox FO would not have let him get away. They would have overspent on 10 players previously, but they also would have landed the guy that they needed.

I guess that my sense is the Red Sox are still learning how to manage this machine, and that the Teixeira negotiations may turn out to be a good learning opportunity for them--one way or another. They may find that the Yankees landing Teixeira makes them virtually unbeatable, and that they eliminate the Sox ability to compete. Or, they may learn that with some intelligent moves and wise allocation of resources, even acquisitions like Teixeira and CC and Burnett can be countered and overcome on the field.

The Red Sox certainly handled these negotiations like a moneyball team, trying to maxamize every dollar they spent while still making a strong push--they didn't want Boras to play them and, frankly, they didn't. I think the reason so many of us loved that philosophy in the past is that the Sox do have a financial advantage over most other teams in the game, so with some wisdom they should be able to dominante, even over teams like the Yankees. The perfect combination of wealth and intelligence.

That combination of wealth and savvy are what allowed this team to get to the playoffs in 03, 04, 05, 07 and 08, got them two WS victories, two 7th game ALCS losses, a division championship (07) and to beat the Yankees a second time in 08, forcing them to miss the playoffs.

My point is that this signing is where the moneyball truly meets the road. The front office may learn that in order to get the guy they really want, they need to throw their philosophy out the window and just say "Scott, whatever your player wants, he can get here". They haven't done that yet, but I wonder if Teixeira will represent a high water mark in spend thriftiness. Or, they could still field a good team for around 100m, get to the playoffs, and be completely reinforced in their philosophy.

We're about 6 or 7 years into this philosophy and so far I see no reason that the Front Office would have to believe it isn't the correct approach. Teixeira asking for 23 million or whatever is A LOT of money. And when people say the Sox can't complain for lack of resources, I take it with a grain of salt. Yes, they have the money to perpetually have a payroll in the low-to mid-100m range (between 110 and 135 I would say). But that doesn't mean they have the same payroll strength as the Yankees. The Yankees have the payroll strength of the Sox franchise PLUS the Indians franchise, not an insignificant difference. Part of that may be a choice by the ownership to not reinvest every dollar in the club, but part of that may be their belief that to field a competitive team every year a club doesn't have to pay what the Yankees do.

Long story short, I don't think losing out on Teixeira was as much about getting burned at the negotiating table as it was about a clashing of philosophies. Teixeira wanted the A-Rod contract, he wanted the Manny contract. He wanted a deal that would be sky high and considerably better than just about everyone else... additionally, he wanted to be a Yankee and saw value in that alone. I believe if the Sox had offered him 30m he would have taken their offer, but I don't think we should realistically expect that from Henry and co., any time soon, not when 5 million a year can buy two top draftees and their first 3 years of MLB service.

The article above says the Sox might just swear off of top FAs altogether, and that doesn't shock me in the slightest. It will be interesting to see how this works out.

Should the Sox drop their moneyball approach for cases like Teixeira, or do we know that answer yet? I don't think we know yet because I don't think they have encountered a situation like this yet. In fact, I think the data available to them about signing the very best player available tells them to NOT get caught up in it: they didn't land A-Rod and managed to win the division, a WS, and then get to a game 7 while the Yankees were watching at home.

My guess is that until they are embarassed by their approach, they won't change it--even if the perfect fit is staring them in the face. Until they have a season where they don't make the playoffs (with a healthy team) I don't see any reason that they would change their approach. In other words, we could have more Teixeira moments in the future.

[Dojji]

I think there's a bit of overreaction here. The Sox got outbid for one FA and suddenly we have to look at their whole approach

Where Theo's genius lies is not necessarily Moneyball, but in a kind of player chess where he lines up his backups, his depth, his 5 year plan, until most positions (not all since SNAFU's happen but most) are protected both by a veteran and by the ability for one or more younger players to come in and cover for the veteran should he go down. (to the point that Tito gets some blame for briniging in the WRONG alternate when Lowell went down -- if we'd had Jeff Bailey's bat in the playoffs we might have won them)

Even in our weakest positions, catcher and 3B, we have players, and I mean multiple players, who can fill in at the big league level at needed and probably do fine.

Remember back in 2003 when he signed like a billion players to fill our holes at 1B and 3B? A year later when the gold separated itself from the dross we had Millar, Mueller, and Ortiz destroying the baseball and playing a huge role in the 2004 championship run

That's moneyball, but it's smart, big market moneyball, not putting all your eggs in one basket but still hunting for value in bulk purchases and intelligent pickups of guys who fit the model. It's one of the reasons I think that Johjima is a distinct possibility. It fits the prior model.

This is one of the reasons I suspect Theo Epstein has already decided exactly what he's going to do with the catcher question and just hasn't told us. Because we haven't seen him acquiring large numbers of marginal catchers or in negotiations for marginal catchers.

[diony]

if we'd had Jeff Bailey's bat in the playoffs we might have won them)


Who?

[Dojji]

Power-hitting career minor league 1B who went off and had a great season both in AAA and in limited MLB playing time. He would have provided righthanded power either on the bench or in the field that might have helped when Lowell was unable to play.

If you think "Boston's answer to Shelley Duncan" you're not wrong, except Bailey takes more walks. He's not Teixeira, but he was available at the time and would have improved the postseason roster.

[BSN07]

So I've been trying to come up with a way to understand exactly what happened with the Teixeira signing debacle, where the frustration lies among other great Sox fans here, and I think the title of this thread is a solid summary. An article kind of provoked my thinking on this issue too:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view/2008_12_25_Free_agency_not_worth_it_for_Red_Sox:_P ulling_out_of_Mark-et/

I'm going to put down my thoughts and see what others think.

The Red Sox and Yankees take two very different approaches to constructing teams. They both value the things that teams should value when constructing a team: youth, OBP, SLG, OPS. This was the crux of the moneyball on field approach: get guys who don't make outs. Get guys who have power. It seems obvious, but the switch from AVG to OBP over the past 15 years or so has been a monumental one in baseball and I think we all know it is theoretically correct.

The other substantial part of Moneyball was the way that a team can exploit an unappreciated asset to make their team better without breaking the bank. The A's were able to replace the production of big time FA's like Damon and Giambi without literally replacing them with a FA star.

So my thinking is that the Red Sox FO has structured itself to be the pure moneyball machine. They believe in the Jamesian approach to not making outs, devaluing defense when possible, and drafting and signing young players to improve the farm system and the talent pool. Drafting and developing players, or signing them from abroad, has proven to be very useful, as they often get players for cheap, for a longer period, and without having to do the FA dance. They have also done much of this without regard for the reaction of their fan base.

Throughout this process of reshaping how the Sox manage their team, many fans here have come to appreciate the teams the Sox put together, as well as some of the artistry involved in doing so. My sense is that the loss of Damon was tough on many Sox fans (myself included), but the loss of Teixeira to the Yankees was too much to handle. The reason for this difficulty seems to be that those of us who have come to understand the philosophy could justify keeping or signing these guys even if they went outside the bounds of that approach.

In other words, even with a moneyball approach to player development, guys like Damon and to a much larger degree Teixeira seemed to still fit the model, even if they cost a shit-ton of money to sign. Teixeira, as a switch hitting, high OBP, high SLG, gold-glove defensive 1B would have cemented the Sox lineup for a long time, given them another trading chip or two (Lowell and possibly Anderson) and appeared to be not just a good fit, but a perfect fit. Additionally, there is a sense that the Duquette Sox FO would not have let him get away. They would have overspent on 10 players previously, but they also would have landed the guy that they needed.

I guess that my sense is the Red Sox are still learning how to manage this machine, and that the Teixeira negotiations may turn out to be a good learning opportunity for them--one way or another. They may find that the Yankees landing Teixeira makes them virtually unbeatable, and that they eliminate the Sox ability to compete. Or, they may learn that with some intelligent moves and wise allocation of resources, even acquisitions like Teixeira and CC and Burnett can be countered and overcome on the field.

The Red Sox certainly handled these negotiations like a moneyball team, trying to maxamize every dollar they spent while still making a strong push--they didn't want Boras to play them and, frankly, they didn't. I think the reason so many of us loved that philosophy in the past is that the Sox do have a financial advantage over most other teams in the game, so with some wisdom they should be able to dominante, even over teams like the Yankees. The perfect combination of wealth and intelligence.

That combination of wealth and savvy are what allowed this team to get to the playoffs in 03, 04, 05, 07 and 08, got them two WS victories, two 7th game ALCS losses, a division championship (07) and to beat the Yankees a second time in 08, forcing them to miss the playoffs.

My point is that this signing is where the moneyball truly meets the road. The front office may learn that in order to get the guy they really want, they need to throw their philosophy out the window and just say "Scott, whatever your player wants, he can get here". They haven't done that yet, but I wonder if Teixeira will represent a high water mark in spend thriftiness. Or, they could still field a good team for around 100m, get to the playoffs, and be completely reinforced in their philosophy.

We're about 6 or 7 years into this philosophy and so far I see no reason that the Front Office would have to believe it isn't the correct approach. Teixeira asking for 23 million or whatever is A LOT of money. And when people say the Sox can't complain for lack of resources, I take it with a grain of salt. Yes, they have the money to perpetually have a payroll in the low-to mid-100m range (between 110 and 135 I would say). But that doesn't mean they have the same payroll strength as the Yankees. The Yankees have the payroll strength of the Sox franchise PLUS the Indians franchise, not an insignificant difference. Part of that may be a choice by the ownership to not reinvest every dollar in the club, but part of that may be their belief that to field a competitive team every year a club doesn't have to pay what the Yankees do.

Long story short, I don't think losing out on Teixeira was as much about getting burned at the negotiating table as it was about a clashing of philosophies. Teixeira wanted the A-Rod contract, he wanted the Manny contract. He wanted a deal that would be sky high and considerably better than just about everyone else... additionally, he wanted to be a Yankee and saw value in that alone. I believe if the Sox had offered him 30m he would have taken their offer, but I don't think we should realistically expect that from Henry and co., any time soon, not when 5 million a year can buy two top draftees and their first 3 years of MLB service.

The article above says the Sox might just swear off of top FAs altogether, and that doesn't shock me in the slightest. It will be interesting to see how this works out.

Should the Sox drop their moneyball approach for cases like Teixeira, or do we know that answer yet? I don't think we know yet because I don't think they have encountered a situation like this yet. In fact, I think the data available to them about signing the very best player available tells them to NOT get caught up in it: they didn't land A-Rod and managed to win the division, a WS, and then get to a game 7 while the Yankees were watching at home.

My guess is that until they are embarassed by their approach, they won't change it--even if the perfect fit is staring them in the face. Until they have a season where they don't make the playoffs (with a healthy team) I don't see any reason that they would change their approach. In other words, we could have more Teixeira moments in the future.

I don't know if the article is correct, or your theory is. But I don't see them as terribly unreasonable. Nice post:D

[jacksonianmarch]

While I applaud the effort, I find your post to be a bit too reactionary. The sox werent crying poor when they dealt for and resigned Shill. They werent crying poor when they dealt for and resigned Beckett. They werent crying poor when they resigned Lowell or signed Drew or resigned Tek or paid 100 mil over 6 yrs to talk to and then sign DiceK. They cannot cry poor now. They cannot sit back and think that they will swear off big time FAs altogether. If they do that, then they'll be the marlins (sans 97 since that was a high priced team). That being said, when the yankees have holes they are willing to fill them with high priced talent. If their needs and the sox needs collide, the sox should expect a bidding war. If they arent willing to do that, then shame on them. The first yankee-sox bidding war this century netted them a player who was a key cog in the sox 2 championship machine. You just cannot give up on it. What the sox do need to do, though, is identify guys that they need regardless of cost. Those players do exist. CC for us was that kind of player. A glaring need with an obvious fit that is young and dominant. Sometimes you gotta just write the check.

Regardless, I have been impressed with how the sox find talent. Their draft strategies have been solid and their scrap heap signings have been second to none. But they cannot rely on that every yr to make themselves competitive. Cause if we hit on all of these big time deals, which I think finally may be a likelihood, then scrap heap guys wont win you a championship.

[Dipre]

While I applaud the effort, I find your post to be a bit too reactionary. The sox werent crying poor when they dealt for and resigned Shill. They werent crying poor when they dealt for and resigned Beckett. They werent crying poor when they resigned Lowell or signed Drew or resigned Tek or paid 100 mil over 6 yrs to talk to and then sign DiceK. They cannot cry poor now. They cannot sit back and think that they will swear off big time FAs altogether. If they do that, then they'll be the marlins (sans 97 since that was a high priced team). That being said, when the yankees have holes they are willing to fill them with high priced talent. If their needs and the sox needs collide, the sox should expect a bidding war. If they arent willing to do that, then shame on them. The first yankee-sox bidding war this century netted them a player who was a key cog in the sox 2 championship machine. You just cannot give up on it. What the sox do need to do, though, is identify guys that they need regardless of cost. Those players do exist. CC for us was that kind of player. A glaring need with an obvious fit that is young and dominant. Sometimes you gotta just write the check.

Regardless, I have been impressed with how the sox find talent. Their draft strategies have been solid and their scrap heap signings have been second to none. But they cannot rely on that every yr to make themselves competitive. Cause if we hit on all of these big time deals, which I think finally may be a likelihood, then scrap heap guys wont win you a championship.

So you're trying to criticize the MO for sticking to a model that works, instead of jumping to the model that hasn't and probably will not work?

[Dojji]

No, he's saying that the dedication to that model is mostly an accident of history combined with the fact that they haven't won too many head to head financial battles with New York recently -- or ever.

He's saying that we try to be a big market power team and that Moneyball strategies are always a Plan B for the Sox. That is the case, but it makes a very solid Plan B and it's a plan we've successfully fallen back on for the entire history of the Epstein regime with much greater success than we've enjoyed with any of the other Plan A's we've had since 1918.

[pinstripezac]

solid post example1,

but at the risk of sounding arrogant, when discussing the sox

philosophy in acquiring players, it might be more accurate

to separate the times when the yanks target to same players

we all know the yanks have an unfair advantage when it comes to signing the

big money players





and appeared to be not just a good fit, but a perfect fit. .


I want to question / disagree with that statement

but too much depends on what the FO knows and expects about lowells recovery

and to a lesser degree ortiz ability to rebound.


then again, I guess that's more about need vs fits


but need is something you left out

unless sox FO has serious concerns about lowell

the yanks needed tex more, again, at the risk of sounding arrogant

it's pretty hard for anyone to get a FA the yankee really need / want




My point is that this signing is where the moneyball truly meets the road. The front office may learn that in order to get the guy they really want, they need to throw their philosophy out the window and just say "Scott, whatever your player wants, he can get here". They haven't done that yet, but I wonder if Teixeira will represent a high water mark in spend thriftiness. Or, they could still field a good team for around 100m, get to the playoffs, and be completely reinforced in their philosophy.

couldn't one say they did with drew? if I remember right they did what the yanks

did with CC, they made it clear right off the bat that the best offer was coming from

boston and they just had to work out the details, in both cases the GM's knew that

they wouldn't be competing against each other for these players

same thing with lugo.

my point is they have shown to be very aggressive

when theo clearly wants / needs someone

I gave them large kudos for how aggressive that Dmatt bid was




We're about 6 or 7 years into this philosophy and so far I see no reason that the Front Office would have to believe it isn't the correct approach.


I think it's going to get sticky / interesting when this crop of home growns

reach FA, is doesn't appear paps or youk have any intent to take a

dusty / beckett type deal to delay becoming a FA

I'm thinking

they will be harder to let walk away than a johnny or pedro




Part of that may be a choice by the ownership to not reinvest every dollar in the club, but part of that may be their belief that to field a competitive team every year a club doesn't have to pay what the Yankees do.

% of revenue used on payroll, doesn't really tell us squat ,

but you might find it interesting





Mrkt; Payroll; Revenue; Franchise; % of revenue used on payroll
NYY 1, 1 (209), 1 (327), 1 (1306), 64% (2)

NYM 1, 2 (138), 3 (235), 2 (824), 59% (7)

LAA 3, 6 (119), 6 (200), 6 (500), 60% (6)

LAD 3, 7 (119), 4 (224), 4 (694), 53% (9)

CHW 5, 5 (121), 11 (193), 14 (443), 63% (3)

Mrkt; Payroll; Revenue; Franchise; % of revenue used on payroll

CHC 5, 8 (118), 5 (214), 5 (642), 55% (8)

PHI 7, 12 (98), 13 (192), 10 (481), 51% (11)

TEX 8, 21 (68), 16 (172), 16 (412), 40% (21)

SFG 9, 17 (77), 8 (197), 8 (494), 39% (24)

OAK 9, 28 (48), 24 (154), 26 (323), 31% (29)

Mrkt; Payroll; Revenue; Franchise; % of revenue used on payroll

BOS 11, 4 (133), 2 (263), 3 (816), 51% (11)

ATL 12, 10 (102), 7 (199), 7 (497), 51% (11)

WAS 13, 26 (55), 25 (153), 13 (460), 36% (26)

HOU 14, 14 (89), 11 (193), 12 (463), 46% (15)

DET 15, 3 (138), 15 (173), 17 (407), 80% (1)

Mrkt; Payroll; Revenue; Franchise; % of revenue used on payroll

ARZ 16, 23 (66), 20 (165), 20 (379), 40% (21)

TBR 17, 29 (44), 28 (138), 29 (290), 32% (28)

SEA 18, 9 (118), 9 (194), 11 (466), 61% (4)

MIN 19, 25 (57), 26 (149), 25 (328), 38% (25)

FLA 20, 30 (22), 30 (128), 30 (256), 17% (30)

Mrkt; Payroll; Revenue; Franchise; % of revenue used on payroll

CLE 21, 16 (79), 14 (181), 15 (417), 44% (17)

COL 22, 20 (69), 17 (169), 21 (371), 41% (20)

STL 23, 11 (100), 9 (194), 9 (484), 52% (10)

PIT 24, 27 (49), 27 (139), 28 (292), 35% (27)

BAL 25, 22 (67), 19 (166), 18 (398), 40% (21)

Mrkt; Payroll; Revenue; Franchise; % of revenue used on payroll

SDP 26, 19 (74), 18 (167), 19 (385), 44% (17)

KCR 27, 24 (58), 29 (131), 27 (301), 44% (17)

CIN 28, 18 (74), 21 (161), 23 (337), 46% (15)

MIL 29, 15 (81), 23 (158), 24 (331), 51% (11)

TOR NA, 13 (98), 22 (160), 22 (352), 61% (4)

http://royalsblog.kansascity.com/?q=node/176

[Teddyballgame10]

I dont know who said it but one of you guys mentioned that the Sox won't get in a bidding war with the Yankees because the drop of from the best player at a certain to position is not that great from the 2nd or 3rd. Whoever said that I think is correct. So we didnt get Tex for 185 mill but in the future we if we need a 3b or 1b we can get a quality player whos talent gap is not to large from Tex at a cheaper price.

[example1]

1. My point isn't that the Sox are crying poverty. They are saying "enough" when bidding gets absurdly high on guys solely because the Yankees are involved. If it was the Sox and the Nationals and the O's they wouldn't cry poverty. There's a difference between crying poverty and saying an investment wouldn't be money well spent.

2.
my point is they have shown to be very aggressive

when theo clearly wants / needs someone


I couldn't agree more. Whenever the Sox want someone that the Yankees don't want, they seem able to land them. That's why I don't get mad when they lose out to the Yankees and blame the FO. It simply isn't worth going to the mat with a team that is willing to pay 20m more than their nearest competition. Again, it isn't crying poverty it is seeing a limit to how much they are willing to pay for someone--whether or not they have an intended target.

3. I actually don't think my post overreacted at all. I think this team likely can compete with the players it has, I think Lowell is one of the top 3B in the AL and Youk is clearly one of the top 1B. Even if they "only" get the 2nd best player at a position in FA, that player is likely to be very good. Florida or USC may be able to recruit the best players in football, but that doesn't mean that LSU and Texas can't compete. Perhaps that's a stretch, but you get my point.

Thanks for the feedback folks!

[MANNYHOF24]

We Lost to the Yankees in a FA negotation. We were willining to pay 170 million dollars. The Red Sox will still sign big time players to big money when they see the right opportunity. Teixeria was the right opportunity, and they lost. Thats all there is too it. I wouldnt be shocked if we gave Derek Lowe a big contract for 4 years. Look, I dont know why people think our mindset has changed, last time I checked the Red Sox are a big market team, that brings in revenue probably better than anyone not named the New York Yankees. Overreaction.

[example1]

We Lost to the Yankees in a FA negotation. We were willining to pay 170 million dollars. The Red Sox will still sign big time players to big money when they see the right opportunity. Teixeria was the right opportunity, and they lost. Thats all there is too it. I wouldnt be shocked if we gave Derek Lowe a big contract for 4 years. Look, I dont know why people think our mindset has changed, last time I checked the Red Sox are a big market team, that brings in revenue probably better than anyone not named the New York Yankees. Overreaction.

You're naive if you think that Teixeira's desire to play in one city or another didn't have anything to do with it. Sometimes a player is happy to get whatever the best deal is, other times he wants to play in a particular place. If the Angels had offered what the Yankees did do you think Teix ends up on the West Coast, despite his claim that he wants to play in the East? What about if they raised their offer, 2 million? 5 million?

I'm not sure what you say I'm overreacting about. I'm not saying they should do anything differently, but I'm saying that I think these situations make them LESS likely to jump into these types of negotiations in the future.

[soxfan17881]

I don't see any reason that they would change their approach. In other words, we could have more Teixeira moments in the future.

The Sox have as much as said that they are out of the big money free agent market for awhile (ARTICLE: Free agency Not Worth it for Red Sox (http://xrl.in/1am0))

But you never really know, I guess.

[soxfan17881]

I wouldnt be shocked if we gave Derek Lowe a big contract for 4 years.

The Sox are reportedly giving up on Lowe (SEE ARTICLE (http://xrl.in/1am3)). They don't believe him to be worth the loss of the first round pick.

[a700hitter]

The Sox are reportedly giving up on Lowe (SEE ARTICLE (http://xrl.in/1am3)). They don't believe him to be worth the loss of the first round pick.Losing the likes of Jason Place would be devastating to the future of the franchise.

[BoSox21]

there's always SOMETHING preventing this team from pulling the trigger on a free agent these days which makes it even more of a head scratcher to me that they overpaid for Drew and Lugo. If it isnt $1.5 mil annually on a $180 million contract, its an NTC or the amount of years or the loss of a draft pick

[jacksonianmarch]

You're naive if you think that Teixeira's desire to play in one city or another didn't have anything to do with it. Sometimes a player is happy to get whatever the best deal is, other times he wants to play in a particular place. If the Angels had offered what the Yankees did do you think Teix ends up on the West Coast, despite his claim that he wants to play in the East? What about if they raised their offer, 2 million? 5 million?

I'm not sure what you say I'm overreacting about. I'm not saying they should do anything differently, but I'm saying that I think these situations make them LESS likely to jump into these types of negotiations in the future.

He's a Boras client. Unless there is a possibility of more money in endorsements, there is no reason other than money for a player to go somewhere. You dont hire Boras to find the right "fit". You hire Boras to become filthy stinking rich

[example1]

He's a Boras client. Unless there is a possibility of more money in endorsements, there is no reason other than money for a player to go somewhere. You dont hire Boras to find the right "fit". You hire Boras to become filthy stinking rich

Once you're a Boras client I largely agree with you. I think plenty of players want to play in particular places (while making a lot of money) for reasons other than maxing their income.

[Dojji]

there's always SOMETHING preventing this team from pulling the trigger on a free agent these days which makes it even more of a head scratcher to me that they overpaid for Drew and Lugo. If it isnt $1.5 mil annually on a $180 million contract, its an NTC or the amount of years or the loss of a draft pick

They didn't see anything coming up the minor league system within a the next few seasons when they signed Drew and Lugo.

The alternative at the time to paying Drew was putting David Murphy out there as our full time starting RF. That doesn't look like as horrible an idea now as it likely did before he cut loose for a couple seasons in Texas, but even Murphy's Texas numbers aren't really as good as JD Drew's, And there was no way to reasonably predict that Murphy would choose then to break out. And how did Murphy finish this season anyway? On the DL.

When we inked Lugo to a contract Lowrie was coming off a mediocre season in A+ Wilmington and we had just had a year of Alex Gonzalez as our starting shortstop. He was OK defensively but he was fragile and made sure we saw too much of Cora so I was glad to see him go when he did. But when Gonzo walked we couldn't count on being able to replace there at all within a reasonable time frame so Theo stole Henry's wallet and went on a shopping spree to cover his bases and end the goddamn shortstop-go-round until the farm stepped in and let a hand.

Muddying the waters on Lowe is the fact that unlike Drew and Lugo where there really isn't or at least doesn't seem to be a quality replacement, Justin Masterson, Mike Bowden, and Clay Buchholz, as well as potentially the underrated Kris Johnson, or even David Pauley, Miguel Gonzalez and a couple other bit players, profile as possible fits for at least the bottom of the Red Sox rotation at some point in 2009. In other words we have multiple quality replacements possible.

It's just like the other places where we've explored possible blockbusters this season -- either the cost in actual talent is prohibitive or we have a replacement who should be good for enough production to make the premium paid for the expensive veteran likely not worthwhile. If we believe the rumor right that Theo wants his 1st rounder this year both are the case on the subject of Lowe, at least in his eyes.

[jacksonianmarch]

Once you're a Boras client I largely agree with you. I think plenty of players want to play in particular places (while making a lot of money) for reasons other than maxing their income.

that is correct. But once you hire Boras, cash is your primary objective and everything else gets thrown away

[example1]

I think the next stage of the moneyball + big money approach needs to be heavy investment in drafted players.

Let Matt LaPorta go? No. Let Meier go? No.

Why not spend 2m or 3m on the players you want in the draft? If you're going to be a player development machine then get the guys you want and don't hold back. YOu get them for 6 years for crying out loud.

If the Sox are truly going to transition away from FAs they should take great delight in signing the very best young talent and even if they miss on 3/4 of them, they will have 6 years of MLB control over them and will get them cheaper than they would paying for ONE big market free agent.

EDIT: I know the Sox spend a lot of money already in player development. However, would anyone have a problem if they drafted only guys that they want, and blew other teams out of the water with their signing bonuses? It seems likely that the Sox could become the Yankees of player development, it would cost less, produce about as much, and they would be doing something that other teams can't cry "foul" over... at least if Yankee fans are saying nobody can cry foul over their FA spending, spending 1/10th of that would be a harmless and effective way of improving the team.

[a700hitter]

Why not spend 2m or 3m on the players you want in the draft? If you're going to be a player development machine then get the guys you want and don't hold back. YOu get them for 6 years for crying out loud.A lot of players, even stars, take 3-4 years at the major league level to full establish themselves, especially pitchers. In the meantime, the team suffers through the growing pains. When they become stars, the Yankees will take them. I am sorry, but I don't want the red Sox to become the Yankees player development farm team. If the Sox had been willing to package Ellsbury, Bucholz, and Bowden to get Santana, a third banner would be flying over Fenway this summer. Bulcholz's poor showing may have singlehandedly cost them the division crown this season.

[BoSox21]

Keep in mind a lot of those prospects they'd be blowing other teams out of the water to sign would be used as trade chips as well to support the prospects they choose to keep with proven veterans, many of whom they can potentially extend before their contracts expire rather than let them to go to the FA market. So basically, the damage the team who suffer through growing pains would be limited. It's definitely a more sensible way of running your team.

[mvp 78]

I think the next stage of the moneyball + big money approach needs to be heavy investment in drafted players.

Let Matt LaPorta go? No. Let Meier go? No.

Why not spend 2m or 3m on the players you want in the draft? If you're going to be a player development machine then get the guys you want and don't hold back. YOu get them for 6 years for crying out loud.

If the Sox are truly going to transition away from FAs they should take great delight in signing the very best young talent and even if they miss on 3/4 of them, they will have 6 years of MLB control over them and will get them cheaper than they would paying for ONE big market free agent.

EDIT: I know the Sox spend a lot of money already in player development. However, would anyone have a problem if they drafted only guys that they want, and blew other teams out of the water with their signing bonuses? It seems likely that the Sox could become the Yankees of player development, it would cost less, produce about as much, and they would be doing something that other teams can't cry "foul" over... at least if Yankee fans are saying nobody can cry foul over their FA spending, spending 1/10th of that would be a harmless and effective way of improving the team.

Actually, I think this would be a great way to go. Even if you ignore Craig Hansen, this seems like a good way to both teach young players to play the style you want them to and scoop up talent that others would not be able to. Plus, since I still cherish the days when my parents bought us Pawsox season tickets, I always get excited when a top prospect is called up.

[Dipre]

A lot of players, even stars, take 3-4 years at the major league level to full establish themselves, especially pitchers. In the meantime, the team suffers through the growing pains. When they become stars, the Yankees will take them. I am sorry, but I don't want the red Sox to become the Yankees player development farm team. If the Sox had been willing to package Ellsbury, Bucholz, and Bowden to get Santana, a third banner would be flying over Fenway this summer. Bulcholz's poor showing may have singlehandedly cost them the division crown this season.

Extending them beforehand is usually an option, the Red Sox have the ability to sign them long term beforehand, look at Pedroia.

That's the answer to the problem you mentioned earlier, young talent could be used to acquire premium veteran talent from teams who cannot afford it, eliminating the "growing pains" in the process.

[a700hitter]

Extending them beforehand is usually an option, the Red Sox have the ability to sign them long term beforehand, look at Pedroia.

That's the answer to the problem you mentioned earlier, young talent could be used to acquire premium veteran talent from teams who cannot afford it, eliminating the "growing pains" in the process.How big of an advantage is it to extend the player before they reach FA status? You end up overpaying them in the earlier years when you would have had control over them. You really only get a bargain for 1 or tops 2 years when they would have been eligible for FA. I don't see the big advantage. I am in favor of poaching players developed by teams like the Marlins, Kansas City, etc.

[Dipre]

How big of an advantage is it to extend the player before they reach FA status? You end up overpaying them in the earlier years when you would have had control over them. You really only get a bargain for 1 or tops 2 years when they would have been eligible for FA. I don't see the big advantage. I am in favor of poaching players developed by teams like the Marlins, Kansas City, etc.

Really?

So you mean structuring a contract for a guy like Pedroia so his AAV during his Arb. years to be around $4 or $5 mill, when he could EASILY beat 6 or 7, and reach as much as 10 in his last year, and also buy out at least 2 years of free agency which would come at around 12+ mill per year, and you're overpaying?

Well ok then, buddy.

Then if we go by your logic then i don't see why every team around the majors is doing it.

[a700hitter]

Extending them beforehand is usually an option, the Red Sox have the ability to sign them long term beforehand, look at Pedroia.Pedroia is an exception. Very few players win an MVP in their second season. very very few. Let's not look at his success and think that the team should get as many draft choices as it can to build a dynasty. FA's and veterans obtained in trades are necessary to build a winner. A solid farm system is also needed. There needs to be a balance. You can't go totally in one direction to the exclusion of the other direction.

[Dipre]

Pedroia is an exception. Very few players win an MVP in their second season. very very few. Let's not look at his success and think that the team should get as many draft choices as it can to build a dynasty. FA's and veterans obtained in trades are necessary to build a winner. A solid farm system is also needed. There needs to be a balance. You can't go totally in one direction to the exclusion of the other direction.

Why is he an exception?

If you have elite young talent and you lock them up for the long term, how can it not make sense?

If Pedroia is an exception, then do you sugeest not locking up Lester, Youk and Paps?

Because those 3 are also on the upper echelon of talent, and would make a load of money through arb. and their first FA contracts.

[a700hitter]

Really?

So you mean structuring a contract for a guy like Pedroia so his AAV during his Arb. years to be around $4 or $5 mill, when he could EASILY beat 6 or 7, and reach as much as 10 in his last year, and also buy out at least 2 years of free agency which would come at around 12+ mill per year, and you're overpaying?

Well ok then, buddy.

Then if we go by your logic then i don't see why every team around the majors is doing it.I didn't say that you were overpaying for the life of the contract. They will be overpaying him for this season. He could get injured etc. I questioned whether the savings in the later years when balanced by overpaying in the earlier years is worth the fact that for most of these years the players are still in their formative years. Very few guys hit the ground running like Pedroia. Those who become immediate stars usually don't sign away their FA years. Extending Ellsbury wouldn't be such a great idea, because he may not fully develop for 2 or more years. Let's not use the freak case of Pedroia as the standard. They extended Nomar before he was Arb eligible and overpaid for the early years and had to endure years of inactivity due to injury in his early FA years, so nothing was saved. Would you extend Papelbon for 6 years to capture his first 2 years of FA? He could blow his arm out in year two and you'll have overpaid for the last 4 years. As a cost savings strategy, for each two players where it pays off, there might be another guy who goes bust. Where's the big cost savings?

[a700hitter]

Why is he an exception?

If you have elite young talent and you lock them up for the long term, how can it not make sense?

If Pedroia is an exception, then do you sugeest not locking up Lester, Youk and Paps?

Because those 3 are also on the upper echelon of talent, and would make a load of money through arb. and their first FA contracts.But Youk isn't going to sign on the cheap... is he? IMO the Sox will not take a chance on Papelbon's shoulder for 6 years even at a reduced rate. The Sox extended Beckett and got one good year from him out of two so far. They underpaid for 1 year and overpaid for 2008. Let's see how he performs the rest of the way before we determine whether or not the Sox got value by the early extension.

[Dipre]

I didn't say that you were overpaying for the life of the contract. They will be overpaying him for this season. He could get injured etc. I questioned whether the savings in the later years when balanced by overpaying in the earlier years is worth the fact that for most of these years the players are still in their formative years. Very few guys hit the ground running like Pedroia. Those who become immediate stars usually don't sign away their FA years. Extending Ellsbury wouldn't be such a great idea, because he may not fully develop for 2 or more years. Let's not use the freak case of Pedroia as the standard. They extended Nomar before he was Arb eligible and overpaid for the early years and had to endure years of inactivity due to injury in his early FA years, so nothing was saved. Would you extend Papelbon for 6 years to capture his first 2 years of FA? He could blow his arm out in year two and you'll have overpaid for the last 4 years. As a cost savings strategy, for each two players where it pays off, there might be another guy who goes bust. Where's the big cost savings?

Yes i would, if the price is right, although Paps has 3 years of ML experience, so in order to buy out his first 2 arb years, you'd extend him for 5, not 6.

Also, how is his "blowing his arm out" a deterrent to locking him up long term?

If you don't wanna shell out FA contracts, then you lock up your young talent, but in turn, it's not like big-money FAs or players acquired through trade from small market teams can't blow out their arms either, effectively canceling your argument.

[a700hitter]

Yes i would, if the price is right, although Paps has 3 years of ML experience, so in order to buy out his first 2 arb years, you'd extend him for 5, not 6.

Also, how is his "blowing his arm out" a deterrent to locking him up long term?

If you don't wanna shell out FA contracts, then you lock up your young talent, but in turn, it's not like big-money FAs or players acquired through trade from small market teams can't blow out their arms either, effectively canceling your argument.Papelbon has a medical history that is not the greatest. He has a misplaced ulnar nerve that causes him to have a constant tingling in his hand. He has a loose shoulder joint that has popped out once already. Papelbon has a track record of getting fatigued at the end of the season. Other pitchers are more durable and are worth the risk of a long term investment.

[Dipre]

Papelbon has a medical history that is not the greatest. He has a misplaced ulnar nerve that causes him to have a constant tingling in his hand. He has a loose shoulder joint that has popped out once already. Papelbon has a track record of getting fatigued at the end of the season. Other pitchers are more durable and are worth the risk of a long term investment.

Name two other elite closers under the Red Sox' control who are more worthy of the investment.

[a700hitter]

Name two other elite closers under the Red Sox' control who are more worthy of the investment.Just because there are no other closers worthy of investment doesn't mean that you offer Papelbon a 5 year $40- 45 million deal. He has a bad medical history.

[a700hitter]

For the FO to declare that Free Agency is not the way to go is short-sighted. Sometimes a player comes along who will transform a franchise. Manny was that type of player. He transformed he red Sox offense into a wrecking crew. The Sox had to blow away the market to get him, but he was worth it. He was a once in a generation type of hitting talent.

[Dipre]

Just because there are no other closers worthy of investment doesn't mean that you offer Papelbon a 5 year $60 million deal. He has a bad medical history.

If you offer him a 5 year $60 million deal, then you just gave him a FA contract, that's where "buying years" comes into play, so you don't have to pay an AAV to a player who has not reached FA, as if he already had, just look at Soriano and Howard, who received massive paydays during their arbitration years (Howard still in it), but in the case of Soriano, he made a lot of money before FA, and landed a top-20 all-time contract after he became a FA.

Bottom line, if you have a very good player in your hands, avoiding arbitration and delaying FA is the way to go, not with a $60 million contract as you state, because that would just be silly.

[a700hitter]

If you offer him a 5 year $60 million deal, then you just gave him a FA contract, that's where "buying years" comes into play, so you don't have to pay an AAV to a player who has not reached FA, as if he already had, just look at Soriano and Howard, who received massive paydays during their arbitration years (Howard still in it), but in the case of Soriano, he made a lot of money before FA, and landed a top-20 all-time contract after he became a FA.

Bottom line, if you have a very good player in your hands, avoiding arbitration and delaying FA is the way to go, not with a $60 million contract as you state, because that would just be silly.
I edited my post. Don't get caught up in hypothetical dollar amounts being thrown around on this forum. The bottom line is that Papelbon will not get 5 years because of his medical history unless it is steeply discounted, in which case, he'll play out his arbitration years and go FA.

[example1]

How big of an advantage is it to extend the player before they reach FA status? You end up overpaying them in the earlier years when you would have had control over them. You really only get a bargain for 1 or tops 2 years when they would have been eligible for FA. I don't see the big advantage. I am in favor of poaching players developed by teams like the Marlins, Kansas City, etc.

I see a big advantage. I notice you didn't say that you favor poaching players developed by teams like the D-Rays. Why? Because the Rays have locked up their players longterm.

Kazmir: locked through 2012
Shields: locked through 2014
Price: locked through 2012
Longoria: Locked through 2016 (at 11.5m in 2016)
Garza and Upton: both have 4+ years left before FA

It looks to me like the Rays were able to lock up their star talent long term, without having to spend at FA cost and keeping their team competitive throughout.

It seems like a no-brainer to me. They don't have to throw away dollars to young talent if they have a solid veteran in that position, but it is certainly useful when looking for trades, or trying to solidify player for the long term.

Also, your adoration of Manny's talent is warranted, but if the Sox didn't have the other FA pieces and trade pieces, then they don't win even with Manny.

[a700hitter]

I see a big advantage. I notice you didn't say that you favor poaching players developed by teams like the D-Rays. Why? Because the Rays have locked up their players longterm.

Kazmir: locked through 2012
Shields: locked through 2014
Price: locked through 2012
Longoria: Locked through 2016 (at 11.5m in 2016)
Garza and Upton: both have 4+ years left before FA

It looks to me like the Rays were able to lock up their star talent long term, without having to spend at FA cost and keeping their team competitive throughout.

It seems like a no-brainer to me. They don't have to throw away dollars to young talent if they have a solid veteran in that position, but it is certainly useful when looking for trades, or trying to solidify player for the long term.

Also, your adoration of Manny's talent is warranted, but if the Sox didn't have the other FA pieces and trade pieces, then they don't win even with Manny.Locking up Longoria was a smart move. He is one of those transformational players for a franchise. Kazmir is already experiencing arm problems. His velocity is way down, and he completely abandoned his slider (his out pitch). Price's contract will run out just as his Arbitration Eligibility will kick in, so I don't see what they have saved with him. With regard to Shields... only time will tell. Baldelli was locked up to a multi year contract. That didn't work out too well. For every two times it works well, there is usually one bust.

[Dojji]

Just because there are no other closers worthy of investment doesn't mean that you offer Papelbon a 5 year $40- 45 million deal. He has a bad medical history.

He has one mishap that was brought on by overuse and an otherwise 100% clean bill of health including 2 healthy seasons of more innings than he pitched in his injury year. Surround him with a decent bullpen and don't expose him with stupid roster decisions and it's unlikely to be a problem in the near or intermediate future.

[a700hitter]

He has one mishap that was brought on by overuse and an otherwise 100% clean bill of health including 2 healthy seasons of more innings than he pitched in his injury year. Surround him with a decent bullpen and don't expose him with stupid roster decisions and it's unlikely to be a problem in the near or intermediate future.His ulnar nerve is out of place and it has been since he dislocated his elbow in senior year of High School. Unless you are an orthopedic specialist, you are not authorized to give him a clean bill of health. The fact is that his displaced ulnar nerve gets irritated throughout the season. That can't be a good thing.

[Dipre]

His ulnar nerve is out of place and it has been since he dislocated his elbow in senior year of High School. Unless you are an orthopedic specialist, you are not authorized to give him a clean bill of health. The fact is that his displaced ulnar nerve gets irritated throughout the season. That can't be a good thing.

But are you one to so "accurately" predict that he will, in fact, be the victim of a major injury in the next 5 years?

[a700hitter]

But are you one to so "accurately" predict that he will, in fact, be the victim of a major injury in the next 5 years?I am not predicting any such thing. I am saying that he has a bad medical history, which he does. Based on that history, IMO the FO would be reluctant to give him a 5 year contract.

[a700hitter]

But are you one to so "accurately" predict that he will, in fact, be the victim of a major injury in the next 5 years?I am not predicting any such thing. I am saying that he has a bad medical history, which he does. Based on that history, the probability of injury increases. IMO the FO would be reluctant to give him a 5 year contract.

[example1]

My guess is that Papelbon will want to be the highest paid closer in baseball when he is a FA and the Sox will not pay him, given their belief that they can come up with someone who is (some percentage) as good as Papelbon, for 1/20th the difference. If he were asking for a reasonable amount of money then I'm sure they would be happy to sign him to a longer deal. There's always room in the pen for a reasonably cheap arm. He won't be reasonably cheap, so they won't offer him anything longterm.

[example1]

Theo was named executive of the year by Baseball America. Good article:

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/majors/awards/executive-of-the-year/2008/267270.html

[TheKilo]

This is an interesting thread. From my understanding, I think we're trying to evaluate what the FO is going to do to strengthen the team not just for 2009 but for the next decade.

The problem I am having with this FO and their "plan" is consistency. It's clear they have aversions to long term deals for position players and pitchers alike - and that is not a bad thing at all. I have no problem with roster flexibility.

The problem comes in the fact that the Red Sox are the second most profitable team in all of baseball and will continue to make money at an alarming pace. The Red Sox are recession-proof. There will always be money flowing on Yawkey Way. I can understand a billionaire like JWH being apprehensive devoting that serious coin to Teixeira, but if people making far less than him are willing to sell out Fenway for every home game for the foreseeable future, then he needs to have a damn good reason for not spending their money.

If you're not going to spend money on big time FAs, then they need to pump even more money into their player development and scouting departments. There's no excuse to not sign any of their draft picks if they aren't going to pony up for big FA contracts. The issue with this policy is that following 2009, we will be without their left fielder and after 2010, their corner infielders. Where are their replacements coming from? Do we really think they're going to pay Youkilis $20 million plus? Why? It would go against their supposed policy of not doling out big contracts to FAs. I can't come up with any rational explanation as to why they would give Youkilis that money and not Teixeira. I don't think Youkilis will be able to be a 3B for much longer, I'm not sure his body will allow him to do so after being a 1B for such a prolonged period of time.

The thing I am beginning to really struggle with is the fact that the Sox are not using their financial resources to put the best product on the field. They are not working on extensions for Bay, Youkilis, or Papelbon. They got extremely lucky that Pedroia signed to an affordable contract following an MVP season, comparable to Ryan Braun or Evan Longoria. If those two won MVPs this season, do you think they'd sign the same deal? I don't - for every Pedroia there's hundreds of other players that want to follow the dollar signs.

I think the biggest fault of the FO and a lot of people on this board is to assume that since the Red Sox made game 7 of the ALCS with an injured squad, they'll rebound and still be a 95 win team when everyone comes back next season. In a vacuum, sure, the improvements should be a great help - and they should, but the Rays are going to get better and the Yankees improved substantially. The Rays will get a full, healthy season of BJ Upton and David Price in their rotation. The Yankees close the 5 game gap between the Sox and themselves, surpassed it even (IMO).

It's frustrating to see a team, and an ownership group, with the incredible resources at their disposal, not make use of them. I've asked this question many times on this board - but if you're not going to spend bigtime FA dollars on a guy like Mark Teixiera, who are you going to spend it on? I have no interest seeing this team become a big market Marlins, Pirates, or Royals. Spend money. Improve the team.

[example1]

This is an interesting thread. From my understanding, I think we're trying to evaluate what the FO is going to do to strengthen the team not just for 2009 but for the next decade.

The problem I am having with this FO and their "plan" is consistency. It's clear they have aversions to long term deals for position players and pitchers alike - and that is not a bad thing at all. I have no problem with roster flexibility.

The problem comes in the fact that the Red Sox are the second most profitable team in all of baseball and will continue to make money at an alarming pace. The Red Sox are recession-proof. There will always be money flowing on Yawkey Way. I can understand a billionaire like JWH being apprehensive devoting that serious coin to Teixeira, but if people making far less than him are willing to sell out Fenway for every home game for the foreseeable future, then he needs to have a damn good reason for not spending their money.

If you're not going to spend money on big time FAs, then they need to pump even more money into their player development and scouting departments. There's no excuse to not sign any of their draft picks if they aren't going to pony up for big FA contracts. The issue with this policy is that following 2009, we will be without their left fielder and after 2010, their corner infielders. Where are their replacements coming from? Do we really think they're going to pay Youkilis $20 million plus? Why? It would go against their supposed policy of not doling out big contracts to FAs. I can't come up with any rational explanation as to why they would give Youkilis that money and not Teixeira. I don't think Youkilis will be able to be a 3B for much longer, I'm not sure his body will allow him to do so after being a 1B for such a prolonged period of time.

The thing I am beginning to really struggle with is the fact that the Sox are not using their financial resources to put the best product on the field. They are not working on extensions for Bay, Youkilis, or Papelbon. They got extremely lucky that Pedroia signed to an affordable contract following an MVP season, comparable to Ryan Braun or Evan Longoria. If those two won MVPs this season, do you think they'd sign the same deal? I don't - for every Pedroia there's hundreds of other players that want to follow the dollar signs.

I think the biggest fault of the FO and a lot of people on this board is to assume that since the Red Sox made game 7 of the ALCS with an injured squad, they'll rebound and still be a 95 win team when everyone comes back next season. In a vacuum, sure, the improvements should be a great help - and they should, but the Rays are going to get better and the Yankees improved substantially. The Rays will get a full, healthy season of BJ Upton and David Price in their rotation. The Yankees close the 5 game gap between the Sox and themselves, surpassed it even (IMO).

It's frustrating to see a team, and an ownership group, with the incredible resources at their disposal, not make use of them. I've asked this question many times on this board - but if you're not going to spend bigtime FA dollars on a guy like Mark Teixiera, who are you going to spend it on? I have no interest seeing this team become a big market Marlins, Pirates, or Royals. Spend money. Improve the team.

First of all, solid, coherent post Kilo. A few points, if I may:

1) I agree with you completely about the draft picks and consistency. Alex Meyer wants 3m and the Sox offer 2m? I admit, it's a shit load of money, but not compared to what he will get at his first extension as a 1st round pick for (insert non-Red Sox team here). That shit doesn't make any sense to me. Part of the reason I made this post was because I'm curious whether the Teixeira deal will ultimately push them to do that.

Is it possible that they are avoiding all type-A free agents so they can draft the absolute best prospects, and sign every single one of them without delay? FWIW, they have signed every top 10 round pick for the past 4 years, except for Hunter Morris in the 07 draft. Also, I think it is important to note that they have dropped 1.8m on Tazawa and 1.5m on Almanzar in the past two years as well. They should double their efforts in this respect, and sign every single player that they want.


2)
The thing I am beginning to really struggle with is the fact that the Sox are not using their financial resources to put the best product on the field. They are not working on extensions for Bay, Youkilis, or Papelbon.

I think they are putting the best product on the field, and that not spending a lot of money on guys like Youkilis who have two years of arbitration left doesn't seem too incompatable with the 'rational' approach to contract offering. If they signed him to 15m/yr deals and he ends up injured for whatever reason, then they are burdened with that deal and can be criticized for it. They have a little room left in his case. Papelbon has said directly that he wants to become a FA. I don't know what to expect from that. I do know that teams can be lulled into overspending on a closer, even when the job of a closer (usually coming into a game with nobody on and a lead) is replaceable. I think Papelbon is a special closer, but he's clearly got his eyes on the prize.


3)
I think the biggest fault of the FO and a lot of people on this board is to assume that since the Red Sox made game 7 of the ALCS with an injured squad, they'll rebound and still be a 95 win team when everyone comes back next season.

They may or they may not. I think that objectively they have a solid team from top to bottom They also have some things to figure out (#5 pitcher, C, backup OF) but not things that should ultimately make the difference. If they play well they could make the playoffs. That said, this could be a ONE playoff-team division next year, with the three top teams beating on each other. The AL Central may ultimately benefit.

Personally, I'm not going to cry if they don't make the playoffs and I will be excited if they do. I don't think the FO is assuming that because last year happened, this year they will get there. I think we can hope for better performances from Beckett, Buchholz, Ellsbury and Lowrie (i.e., the shortstop position). I think we can expect a better performance from the catching position, and, frankly, the 08 team actually UNDERPERFORMED based on their pythag. I see reason to think this will be a competitive team, but every year in baseball is filled with surprises.

4)
if you're not going to spend bigtime FA dollars on a guy like Mark Teixiera, who are you going to spend it on? I have no interest seeing this team become a big market Marlins, Pirates, or Royals. Spend money. Improve the team.

I don't think that spending money always improves the team. We agree with the importance of drafting. I think the type of money you are talking about is on expensive FAs, which means that somehow the Sox are at fault for having traditionally expensive positions covered by young, inexpensive talent: 1B, CF, LF, CP, #5 starter, which was their goal all along. They could easily have a payroll 30m higher than they do currently, but they wouldn't be as good, IMO. They could have Johnny Damon in CF for 14m per-season, not covering enough ground; they could have spent 13m (or whatever) on K-Rod, because they could have traded Papelbon for a 'proven star', they could have spent money to get Mike Cameron or some other expensive, 'proven' CF, but they have developed from within.

I think the money you're talking about is ultimately somewhere between what they have allocated currently, and what they usually spend ($120-$130m).

Otherwise, I'm glad you find the topic interesting. You make some good points and you and I are in complete agreement about needing to sure up their minor league picks. Matt Laporta and Alex Meyer should be at the top of the board at Soxprospects, along with a number of other people who I don't even know about :D . You will get no disagreement from me: if they're truly going to develop their machine then there's no reason to hold back over 3m here or 4m there.

EDIT: http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2008/12/28/search_party/?page=5

article re: Sox farm spending, development

[a700hitter]

My guess is that Papelbon will want to be the highest paid closer in baseball when he is a FA and the Sox will not pay him, given their belief that they can come up with someone who is (some percentage) as good as Papelbon, for 1/20th the difference. If he were asking for a reasonable amount of money then I'm sure they would be happy to sign him to a longer deal. There's always room in the pen for a reasonably cheap arm. He won't be reasonably cheap, so they won't offer him anything longterm.Papelbon is as close as Mo Rivera in a Red Sox uniform as anything I have seen in since Dick Radatz. He's got the perfest closer demeanor. He's got the dominating stuff, and he always throws strikes. I think the only thing holding the Sox back from signing him long term is his medical history. If he stays healthy for a couple of more years, then I maybe they will conclude that he is durable despite his past medical history and sign him to a long term contract. After the way the idiot Yankee fans treated him and his wife during the All Star break, hopefully we will never have to watch him in pinstripes.

[BSN07]

At this point I don't ever see the Yankees out on anyone in the FA market, Papelbon or whoever. And if Papelbon goes for the $, then the Yankees are a real possibility. Papelbon is an intense competitore and adrealine junky. The Yanks can provide the rush of closing on the big stage like at Fenway+ the $ he seeks. So I wouldn't consider myself shocked if he wears pinstripes at some point. And I'm not trying to be synical. Only realistic.


I agree Kilo, I don't see the Sox giving that much $ to Youk either.

[a700hitter]

So I wouldn't consider myself shocked if he wears pinstripes at some point. And I'm not trying to be synical. Only realistic.Just reading this makes me gag and throw up in my mouth.

[BSN07]

Just reading this makes me gag and throw up in my mouth.

Ya it sucks, but have you seen anything to make you think it isn't plausable? IMO ANY Red Sox player to hit the FA market over the next couple years has the chance of wearing pinstripes. To deny it is pointless.


A labor strike might be the only thing that stops it( on the assumption the strike is because of the owners wanting a salary cap LOL)

[TheKilo]

First of all, solid, coherent post Kilo. A few points, if I may:

1) I agree with you completely about the draft picks and consistency. Alex Meyer wants 3m and the Sox offer 2m? I admit, it's a shit load of money, but not compared to what he will get at his first extension as a 1st round pick for (insert non-Red Sox team here). That shit doesn't make any sense to me. Part of the reason I made this post was because I'm curious whether the Teixeira deal will ultimately push them to do that.

If they are really going to avoid spending huge money on big name FAs, then they absolutely have to do this. I have zero issue with doing so because it could mean you develop your own talent (ie a Pedroia, Papelbon, Youkilis) or you use prospects to lock up young talent via trade (Sanchez/Ramirez for Beckett/Lowell).

The issue you run into doing this is that you lock up a lot of money (relatively) for a prospect that may not be MLB-ready now or will ever be (Craig Hansen, anyone?) This brings a lot of risk in it as well because these guys, while "underpaid" are not MLB-proven at all, vs. overpaying for talent that may not live up to the duration of the contract.

If they're going to go the scouting and development route, then scenarios like Alex Meyer cannot and should not happen at all. Like you said, the top of soxprospects should be filled with names like Matt LaPorta, Michael Inoa, and Alex Meyer.


Is it possible that they are avoiding all type-A free agents so they can draft the absolute best prospects, and sign every single one of them without delay? FWIW, they have signed every top 10 round pick for the past 4 years, except for Hunter Morris in the 07 draft. Also, I think it is important to note that they have dropped 1.8m on Tazawa and 1.5m on Almanzar in the past two years as well. They should double their efforts in this respect, and sign every single player that they want.

Complete agreement.



2)

I think they are putting the best product on the field, and that not spending a lot of money on guys like Youkilis who have two years of arbitration left doesn't seem too incompatable with the 'rational' approach to contract offering. If they signed him to 15m/yr deals and he ends up injured for whatever reason, then they are burdened with that deal and can be criticized for it. They have a little room left in his case. Papelbon has said directly that he wants to become a FA. I don't know what to expect from that. I do know that teams can be lulled into overspending on a closer, even when the job of a closer (usually coming into a game with nobody on and a lead) is replaceable. I think Papelbon is a special closer, but he's clearly got his eyes on the prize.

Youkilis is a double-edged sword. If you let his contract run out to become a true FA, then there's no way they will sign him to any sort of a team friendly deal. I think the proper avenue would be to offer him a JD Drew type contract - 5 years, 70-80 million dollars. There is absolutely risk involved with buying out the last few years of arbitration - but that seems to be counterbalanced by signing him to a lower AAV than he would get if he hits FA.

Papelbon is a different animal - he's got three years left before FA. I have no problem making him earn his paycheck the next three seasons - But just in case, I'd offer him 4/50 after next season if he makes it completely healthy. I find it difficult to believe Papelbon would get much more than $12.5 million on the FA market - KRod just got that exact same AAV, for less years, after setting the save record.



3)

They may or they may not. I think that objectively they have a solid team from top to bottom They also have some things to figure out (#5 pitcher, C, backup OF) but not things that should ultimately make the difference. If they play well they could make the playoffs. That said, this could be a ONE playoff-team division next year, with the three top teams beating on each other. The AL Central may ultimately benefit.

They will be a solid team. Right now - they're the third best team in the division, and I don't think anyone can really dispute that. The Yankees have surpassed them - they're getting a Cy-Young caliber pitcher to replace Mike Mussina, and AJ Burnett to replace Sidney Ponson. They're getting a GG-caliber 1B to replace the statute they had before. They are a much better team - there's no disputing that. The Rays added Matt Joyce (completely underrated move) and will have BJ Upton and David Price for 162.

In a vacuum, the Sox look to be a very good team. When taking the other teams in the division into context, they have not lived up to their end of expectations, especially as the 2nd richest team in baseball. Luckily, they still have time.


Personally, I'm not going to cry if they don't make the playoffs and I will be excited if they do. I don't think the FO is assuming that because last year happened, this year they will get there. I think we can hope for better performances from Beckett, Buchholz, Ellsbury and Lowrie (i.e., the shortstop position). I think we can expect a better performance from the catching position, and, frankly, the 08 team actually UNDERPERFORMED based on their pythag. I see reason to think this will be a competitive team, but every year in baseball is filled with surprises.

See above - I'm not saying they won't be competitive, I'm not saying they'll tank - right now they look like an 88-90 win team which will be good for 3rd place in the division this season. That doesn't get you into the playoffs, which should be the goal for this team every season.

All I'm asking in consistency in the way they'll get there. It's becoming clearer, now they need to execute.


4)

I don't think that spending money always improves the team. We agree with the importance of drafting. I think the type of money you are talking about is on expensive FAs, which means that somehow the Sox are at fault for having traditionally expensive positions covered by young, inexpensive talent: 1B, CF, LF, CP, #5 starter, which was their goal all along. They could easily have a payroll 30m higher than they do currently, but they wouldn't be as good, IMO. They could have Johnny Damon in CF for 14m per-season, not covering enough ground; they could have spent 13m (or whatever) on K-Rod, because they could have traded Papelbon for a 'proven star', they could have spent money to get Mike Cameron or some other expensive, 'proven' CF, but they have developed from within.

I think the money you're talking about is ultimately somewhere between what they have allocated currently, and what they usually spend ($120-$130m).

I'm glad they didn't sign Johnny Damon, KRod, or Mike Cameron. Mark Teixeira is exactly the guy you spend that kind of coin on. The fact they cry poverty after losing out to Teixeira is completely disingenuous - this guy was their first priority all offseason, and they lost the bidding by $12 million. Now they want to swear off big name FAs forever, and say the Yankees are ruining baseball? Don't buy it.


Otherwise, I'm glad you find the topic interesting. You make some good points and you and I are in complete agreement about needing to sure up their minor league picks. Matt Laporta and Alex Meyer should be at the top of the board at Soxprospects, along with a number of other people who I don't even know about :D . You will get no disagreement from me: if they're truly going to develop their machine then there's no reason to hold back over 3m here or 4m there.

EDIT: http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2008/12/28/search_party/?page=5

article re: Sox farm spending, development

Yeah - good thread. This is exactly what was needed - I need to understand the direction this FO wants to go in.

I don't necessarily agree with it 100%, but we'll see where it goes.

[ydeologi]

For what it's worth, some articles today say that Tex's wife never liked the idea of playing in Boston, and that he personally had concerns about what would happen to Mike Lowell (both if he stayed or if he was traded away). I wonder how early on the Yankees really expressed their interest?

[jacksonianmarch]

A lot of these stories are being siphoned out of the sox media stew. From all reports, Tex was a 100% through and through Boras client. Top dollar was all he was after and he got it in NY

[example1]

A lot of these stories are being siphoned out of the sox media stew. From all reports, Tex was a 100% through and through Boras client. Top dollar was all he was after and he got it in NY

That's why Boras said "raise it by 10m" and then called them back and said "he'll take it" without contacting the Red Sox? Why was Teixeira signed so quickly before Christmas? Because he said he wanted to be signed by Christmas?

So Boras clients get
a) the money and nothing but the money and
b) signed by any arbitrary date they set

but they DON'T get:

c) any preference about where they play


You are telling me that if the Angels had come in with 185m he's be on the West Coast. I got it now, thanks for that newsflash.

Honestly, above a certain amount of money I bet Boras clients get to make choices about things that would make them and their family happy.

[jacksonianmarch]

You dont sign on with Boras if you intend on taking a lesser valued contract UNLESS there is another potential moneymaker involved (endorsements). By signing with Boras, you essentially say, I am gonna go to the highest bidder. Very few players actually turn down the highest offer when Scott is their agent.

[Dipre]

You dont sign on with Boras if you intend on taking a lesser valued contract UNLESS there is another potential moneymaker involved (endorsements). By signing with Boras, you essentially say, I am gonna go to the highest bidder. Very few players actually turn down the highest offer when Scott is their agent.

And how would we know if Tex wasn't one of those "very few players"?

[example1]

You dont sign on with Boras if you intend on taking a lesser valued contract UNLESS there is another potential moneymaker involved (endorsements). By signing with Boras, you essentially say, I am gonna go to the highest bidder. Very few players actually turn down the highest offer when Scott is their agent.

Sorry. Teixeira said from the beginning he wanted to play on the east coast and that's what he got. Boras wasn't opening th ebidding to everyone, or if he was it was well understood that Teixeira had preferences and would likely follow through on them.

I think it makes you feel good to say that Boras clients follow the money and only the money, because for whatever reason you don't like the idea that the Yankees won Teixeira because he wanted to be a Yankee--you want this to have been a "Yankees beat the Red Sox in head-to-head, even competition, again!" headline. It simply isn't true though and I think Teixeira got both of what he wanted: money, prefered city.

[redsoxrules]

Sorry. Teixeira said from the beginning he wanted to play on the east coast and that's what he got. Boras wasn't opening th ebidding to everyone, or if he was it was well understood that Teixeira had preferences and would likely follow through on them.

I think it makes you feel good to say that Boras clients follow the money and only th emoney, because that's what the Yankees have and what helps them win clients. It simply isn't true though and I think Teixeira got both of what he wanted: money, prefered city.

he didn't have a prefered city
he follows the money . he's well known for that and a lot of GM crtiticied him because of that

NY offered the most so he took and made it look like thats what he was looking for all along

[example1]

he didn't have a prefered city
he follows the money . he's well known for that and a lot of GM crtiticied him because of that

NY offered the most so he took and made it look like thats what he was looking for all along

Isn't it just easiest to see it that way? Why look at the actual reports that are coming out. The Murray Chass piece stated pretty clearly that his wife didn't want to live in Boston and that he had prefered NY the entire time.

Even if you question the validity of that piece (don't know why you would) did you not notice that Teixeira said he prefered to be on the East Coast? So... does that mean that he "prefered" to be in Los Angeles or that he "prefered" to be in New York? The jeopardy music starts now...

At the very least he was allowed to eliminate a number of cities, so the theory that he didn't have any say beyond taking the most money is absurd. If they wanted the bidding to go up why cut it off by Christmas? Why not wait more than 30 minutes after NY's first offer? Oh wait, he said he wanted to be signed by Christmas!! So there's another place where his preferences played out over letting a free-market bidding take shape.

[jacksonianmarch]

Sorry. Teixeira said from the beginning he wanted to play on the east coast and that's what he got. Boras wasn't opening th ebidding to everyone, or if he was it was well understood that Teixeira had preferences and would likely follow through on them.

I think it makes you feel good to say that Boras clients follow the money and only the money, because for whatever reason you don't like the idea that the Yankees won Teixeira because he wanted to be a Yankee--you want this to have been a "Yankees beat the Red Sox in head-to-head, even competition, again!" headline. It simply isn't true though and I think Teixeira got both of what he wanted: money, prefered city.

I wonder why he would say he preferred the east coast? Hmm. Any teams out there that might have a lot of money and be willing to get into a bidding war? Hmmmmm. And he wanted to go to NY SOOOOO MUCH that it only took 10 million dollars MORE than what the sox offered for him to commit. That idea holds NO water and is just media spin to avoid a fanbase backlash on the favorite son, Theo

[Dipre]

So Washington, who offered MORE money, isn't on the East Coast?

Talking about ideas that hold no water...........

[jacksonianmarch]

Washington offered even money according to the latest reports.

[Dipre]

Washington offered even money according to the latest reports.

Where are the links?

[jacksonianmarch]

http://www.rootzoo.com/threads/view/MLB-Baseball/Washington-Nationals/Nationals-offer-Teixeira-8-years-and-180-million_204371

Rotoworld had it as well.

[Dipre]

http://www.rootzoo.com/threads/view/MLB-Baseball/Washington-Nationals/Nationals-offer-Teixeira-8-years-and-180-million_204371

Rotoworld had it as well.

Come on man, get me something legit, lol.

[example1]

I wonder why he would say he preferred the east coast? Hmm. Any teams out there that might have a lot of money and be willing to get into a bidding war?

You're getting more dilusional every day. Teixeira said he wanted to be on the east coast because he wanted to be closer to home. You think he was lying about that? Bullshit. Bull. Shit. Yes, there are bigger money teams on the east coast, but anyone who is TRULY willing to get the most money doesn't eliminate teams from the bidding geographically. It just doesn't happen



Hmmmmm. And he wanted to go to NY SOOOOO MUCH that it only took 10 million dollars MORE than what the sox offered for him to commit.

Yeah, which Boras initially turned down, asked for 10 million MORE than that, and then called back and said "we'll take it" without checking in with other teams. Teixeira wanted to be in NY. He got to be in NY. He wanted to be signed by Christmas. He was signed by Christmas.

Show me a link or any legitimate piece that says what you are arguing: "Scott Boras always gets his players top dollar and his players never get any say in terms of which city they want to play in or what would make their family happiest". If you can't show it to me then I call bull shit.



That idea holds NO water and is just media spin to avoid a fanbase backlash on the favorite son, Theo

It's just a fact. Players who sign with Boras always get paid, but they have some say in where they end up as well. Boras would not be the BEST agent if this weren't the case.

If what you were saying is true, then the following


Washington offered even money according to the latest reports.

would warrant a continued bidding, no? Boras clients always go to the highest money =/= BOras clients choosing one team over another with even money. There would be no even money, there would be bidding until one team won out.


This isn't a worthwhile discussion to have with you jacksonian. Your team got Teixeira, our team didn't. There is reason to believe that Teixeira wanted to play in NY, given the reports that his wife didn't want to live in Boston and his love of Mattingly and the boner that he (and you) get when thinking about playing ball with other men wearing stripes. I don't know why that's so hard for you to believe... it's like an 'extra' "fuck you!" if you can somehow paint this as solely a problem of Theo's.

Of course, Theo wasn't the one who stopped the bidding and it isn't Theo's money. He, unlike Brian Cashman (apparently) doesn't have an open wallet to work with. He actually has to get approval of ownership before writing checks for hundreds of millions of dollars.

[a700hitter]

The post mortem rationalization of the Teixeira is getting boring. We are convincing ourselves that it was his life long dream of being a Yankee and his wife sings "I love NY." It's all speculation and rationalization. The players statements after the signing are canned BS that they feed to a willing press for the home town fans of his new teams to gobble up like gullible fools. The only facts regarding this signing that can be verified are that he was the Red Sox #1 off season priority and they didn't sign him. Fail by the FO. Everything else is BS.

[TheKilo]

+1

[example1]

The post mortem rationalization of the Teixeira is getting boring. We are convincing ourselves that it was his life long dream of being a Yankee and his wife sings "I love NY." It's all speculation and rationalization. The players statements after the signing are canned BS that they feed to a willing press for the home town fans of his new teams to gobble up like gullible fools. The only facts regarding this signing that can be verified are that he was the Red Sox #1 off season priority and they didn't sign him. Fail by the FO. Everything else is BS.


+1

Yeah, you're right. I think it is much better to just assume that the FO is stupid, or cheap, or that they are intentionally trying to not win, or that they don't know how to win, or that they are just hoarding 'our' money and not doing what they can to win.

The suicidal reaction around here after they didn't get Teixeira warrants an attempt at rationalization by calmer heads, IMO. The absurd claims that "Boras clients go after one thing and one thing only: money" overlooks many obvious other points which some may see as rationalizations, but which are actually facts playing directly against the posited theory.

If Boras clients --> highest money and only highest money

then no Boras client would ever say anything like "I want to be on the east coast", and Boras would never say anything like "so and so discussed it with his family and decided 'x' ".

That said, I too am tired of the Teixeira discussion but mostly because I get the sense that there is a groupthink that goes on here, some combination of "I didn't get my way" and "I hate the Yankees" that turns people who were being rational 2 weeks ago into irrational defeatists now.

In other news, I don't know where the word "fail" came from, but I find it pretty lame. I feel like I'm walking down a hall in high school and everyone is trying to use the newest lingo but that lingo is already passe.

[a700hitter]

Yeah, you're right. I think it is much better to just assume that the FO is stupid, or cheap, or that they are intentionally trying to not win, or that they don't know how to win, or that they are just hoarding 'our' money and not doing what they can to win.

The suicidal reaction around here after they didn't get Teixeira warrants an attempt at rationalization by calmer heads, IMO. The absurd claims that "Boras clients go after one thing and one thing only: money" overlooks many obvious other points which some may see as rationalizations, but which are actually facts playing directly against the posited theory.Whoa! Come in off the ledge. You seem to be the one who is suicidal. Did anything in my post accuse the FO of being stupid, cheap, etc.? Teixeira was the #1 FO priority and they didn't achieve their objective. You can call it what you want, but not achieving an objective is failure to me.

[example1]

I'm off the ledge my friend. I'm off.

We can have different assumptions about goals, and different views about how to improve the club, what improving the club means, and the value of any particular move on the long term economic health and competitiveness of the franchise. We just tend to disagree.

---------------
That said, if anyone has extra Christmas (or festivus) money, I would recommend getting the book "Diamond Dollars". I would love to see if anyone has read it and discuss it a bit. It is a much more complex approach to 'moneyball'--moneyball looked at Oakland as an example of a "small market team" and described how it competed against "big market teams". This book looks at the variables that change among each individual market and the factors that drive particular owners in each market to make the decisions they do.

I recommend reading it... I'm not through with it yet, but it should be an interesting discussion.

[a700hitter]

I'm off the ledge my friend. I'm off.

We can have different assumptions about goals, and different views about how to improve the club, what improving the club means, and the value of any particular move on the long term economic health and competitiveness of the franchise. We just tend to disagree.Differences? I wanted the team to build it's pitching, rather than go after Teixeira. The FO had different priorities. We were both disappointed that the Red Sox did not get him after making him a priority, so we have no difference there. I will not make excuses for them not getting their man. There could be many reasons why they didn't get him, and there is no one single definitive story even from the parties involved. Posters on a forum are merely guessing. Why should I engage in pointless guessing about why the outcome was the outcome? They set out to get him and they didn't. Their plan failed. If Tex had no intention ever of coming to Boston, because his wife's hair stylist is in NY or some other reason, I still don't let the FO off the hook. If he was unsignable by the Sox, the should have done their due diligence and known that, then they could have gone in a different direction with their resources and maybe signed Burnett or made an early start on some serious trade negotiations. Differences? We both wanted the FO to get their man.

---------------

[TheKilo]

Whoa! Come in off the ledge. You seem to be the one who is suicidal. Did anything in my post accuse the FO of being stupid, cheap, etc.? Teixeira was the #1 FO priority and they didn't achieve their objective. You can call it what you want, but not achieving an objective is failure to me.

Yup.

[example1]

Thanks for your contribution Kilo. I'm the one who is arguing against an automatic 3rd place finish before a single pitch has been thrown, but I guess I'm also the one on a ledge. Whatever.

[TheKilo]

I'm not saying anything about ledges.

The Red Sox made Mark Teixeira their #1 priority this offseason. They did not land him, and that is a failure for the FO. They did not accomplish what they set out to do, so they failed.

That's all.

[jacksonianmarch]

I'm off the ledge my friend. I'm off.

We can have different assumptions about goals, and different views about how to improve the club, what improving the club means, and the value of any particular move on the long term economic health and competitiveness of the franchise. We just tend to disagree.

---------------
That said, if anyone has extra Christmas (or festivus) money, I would recommend getting the book "Diamond Dollars". I would love to see if anyone has read it and discuss it a bit. It is a much more complex approach to 'moneyball'--moneyball looked at Oakland as an example of a "small market team" and described how it competed against "big market teams". This book looks at the variables that change among each individual market and the factors that drive particular owners in each market to make the decisions they do.

I recommend reading it... I'm not through with it yet, but it should be an interesting discussion.


Judging by the majority of your posts, if anyone has any extra money they should send it to the sox pronto as well as all leftover jewelry and unused cars. Cause with just a little bit more money, the sox could have gotten their #1 priority. But those bad, bad yankees with their willingness to put the fans money back into the team swooped in with their big money machine and took him from the sox!! Big money spending yankees!!!

[TheKilo]

Well, the Yankees are over budget by 30% for their new stadium and are asking their city for a bailout.

Not exactly the most fiscally responsible crowd over there.

[example1]

Judging by the majority of your posts, if anyone has any extra money they should send it to the sox pronto as well as all leftover jewelry and unused cars. Cause with just a little bit more money, the sox could have gotten their #1 priority. But those bad, bad yankees with their willingness to put the fans money back into the team swooped in with their big money machine and took him from the sox!! Big money spending yankees!!!

You're a fucking idiot jacksonian :D. Way to take a casual suggestion and turn it into innane discussion.

1) I'm not crying poverty. I haven't cried poverty. I have stated that the Sox set their limit with Teixeira and didn't go beyond it. They had reason to believe that their offer wasn't going to suit him--whether it was that he didn't want to be in Boston, that the Yankees were going to bid high on him, or that he was demanding a NTC or opt out in his negotiations with Boston. How that is 'crying poverty' I don't know.

2) the interesting thing about the book is that it looks at the differences between markets and fan responses to spending money on players. I'm sure you've seen similar things, but it talks about the value of particular wins to a team. It has been discussed in various BP's an din other books like "the Economics of Baseball" (I think that's what it was called) and "Baseball Between the Numbers" (a tremendous book). The point is that there are different values for different franchises when they talk about picking up a player who will add 'x' wins.

For instance, a team like KC or PIT could spend 20m on an 8 win player, and improve from 73 wins to 81 wins. Their economic return would be minimal, compared to if they were able to add that player to a team that has a baseline of 88 wins.

Additionally, there are unique features to each individual market that either encourage or discourage such expenditures. The long and short of it is that the 'challenges' the Red Sox face very closely resemble those of teams like the Cubs, Angels, Mets and Dodgers. The Yankees are on their own planet with regard to spending on players, as tier 20+m person market and ability to draw casual fans away from the Mets with a successful season givest incentive for them to field soemthing percieved as a "hyper competitive" team each and every year. Their pay off for wins between 90 and 95 is something like 18m. For the Sox it is closer to 11m.

For teams like the Red Sox, who do not get as much "bang for their buck" due to the high baseline saturation of the Sox in the NE market, their already high national popularity, their maxamizing of revenues through ventures like NESN and national advertizing, they don't have as much incentive to spend 'whatever it takes' on a FA who might put them over the top, particularly if they believe they already have a baseline of 90+ victories on the team (which I think they do if players like Buchholz, Ellsbury, Lowell and Ortiz return to a 50% performance level).

Furthermore, historically it has held true that as teams make it to the playoffs in consecutive seasons they make less money for each appearance. This is true for all teams. It also holds true that they make less money for a team that wins 105 games than they do for a team that wins 96--due largely to the fact that teams who rest their players the last few weeks, and who have games that don't 'mean as much' get lower ratings, lower demand for tickets, etc., as they approach the playoffs. Sad but true.

The long and short of it for the Sox is that it is absolutely, 100% in their best interest to field a winning team. The same is true for the Yankees. At the same time, the Sox have a strong incentive to field that team int he most economically sound way possible--largely driven by having a majority of farm-grown players rather than expensive FA's that give the same production. The Angels are in a similar position in that regard. They should spend on FA's to fill the holes, but they have different incentives than the Yankees do, who are competing for fans within a dual-team fan base, and whose need to be hyper competitive to stoke regional interest pays of in dividends that no other team can touch. The Yankees value as a club between 2001 and 2006 nearly doubled, due to the success of YES, the publicity machine that is mlb.com and the high profile nature of their all-star team. For the Sox what matters more is wins (especially between 91-96), how they get there is less important to the market that they are appealing to.

I'm disappointed that they didn't get Teixeira, but I can understand why they would drop out if they felt assured that they would end up spending 20m or 30m more than what they believed his value to be to the team. In 3 years they DO have the prospect of having Lars Anderson join the team, and even if he just joins the team to the tune of an additional 4 or 5 wins, those wins could keep them in the 'maximized' profit region with much lower expenditure on their part. Their top priority this year was to add Teixeira if the contract made sense. At some point the negotiations apparently turned to where it didn't make sense for them to keep going--whether because they were being played off against the Yankees, or because there were demands for an opt out or NTC, or because it became clear that Teixeira prefered to be in NY. I can accept that--I don't have much choice.

You can say it is making excuses, but as someone who realizes that baseball is a business, and that each team represents a separate business, I think looking at how the economics of baseball actually work is warranted. Winning is a very important part of finding economic success--actually THE MOST IMPORTANT PART, but there is a limit on what different teams are willing to spend on the FA market based on the revenues they will get back for their spending.

I think other fans look at their team's willingness to buy THE biggest FA as a sign of whether or not their teams love them. I don't. I don't feel entitled to big name FAs, just to a competitive team, and there are clearly numerous ways for a team to achieve competitiveness.

[example1]

Well, the Yankees are over budget by 30% for their new stadium and are asking their city for a bailout.

Not exactly the most fiscally responsible crowd over there.

They make money like no other team and they are currently as iconic of NY as the Empire State Building or Statue of Liberty. I think it is in the city's best interest to keep the Yankees fat and successful, as much as it is in their ownership's interest to be "hyper competitive", which is essentially competitive in terms of on-field production and projections, but also to have the names that make everyone else say "there's no way this isn't the team to talk about, follow, and love. Look at their players!"

The Sox do best if they are able to say "we're so competitive" but their players are underpaid. Even resigning players is a different beast for the Sox, because as soon as they are paying Youkilis roughly wha the is worth, they have lost an area of potential profit--if that makes sense.

The Yankees aren't fiscally responsible in the traditional sense, but the projected income they bring to the city and in paying taxes, I think they ultimately end up making lots of money above whatever they borrow.

[TheKilo]

They make money like no other team and they are currently as iconic of NY as the Empire State Building or Statue of Liberty. I think it is in the city's best interest to keep the Yankees fat and successful, as much as it is in their ownership's interest to be "hyper competitive", which is essentially competitive in terms of on-field production and projections, but also to have the names that make everyone else say "there's no way this isn't the team to talk about, follow, and love. Look at their players!"

The Sox do best if they are able to say "we're so competitive" but their players are underpaid. Even resigning players is a different beast for the Sox, because as soon as they are paying Youkilis roughly wha the is worth, they have lost an area of potential profit--if that makes sense.

The Yankees aren't fiscally responsible in the traditional sense, but the projected income they bring to the city and in paying taxes, I think they ultimately end up making lots of money above whatever they borrow.

Oh no I agree with you 100% - I'm just relaying how completely disingenuous the people running the Yankees are when they can spend $450 million on FAs but then turn around in the same breath and ask to be covered for the 30% they were over budget for their new stadium.

NYC taxpayers will continue to suffer and sheep like Gom will continue to say "It's a BUSINESS - you'd do the same thing if you could."

Doesn't make it any less ethical or irresponsible.

[BoSox21]

in fact, it makes it "Detroit autoheads going to Washington on a private jet to ask for a bailout"-level ridiculous

[Dipre]

Oh no I agree with you 100% - I'm just relaying how completely disingenuous the people running the Yankees are when they can spend $450 million on FAs but then turn around in the same breath and ask to be covered for the 30% they were over budget for their new stadium.

NYC taxpayers will continue to suffer and sheep like Gom will continue to say "It's a BUSINESS - you'd do the same thing if you could."

Doesn't make it any less ethical or irresponsible.

The problem is, to some people, unethical is only wrong when they're not the ones doing it.

I bet that if, starting next year, the Yankees started, for some reason, having to tighten their budget, and John Henry opened his wallet like a $20 dollar hooker spreads her legs, and the Sox went out and spent 400 mill on FAs, every yankee fan on this board would cry "poverty" or "it's unfair", and that, to me, is what makes their claims of "it's BUSINESS" fake and acted, hell, they say the 2007 WS championship was "bought", but if we complain 'cause they spend a shitload of money on players then ask for more money and more tax cuts from the city, then complaining is the least we can do, but anyways, ethics, to some fans, only depend on the team they root for.

[CrespoBlows]

They make money like no other team and they are currently as iconic of NY as the Empire State Building or Statue of Liberty. I think it is in the city's best interest to keep the Yankees fat and successful, as much as it is in their ownership's interest to be "hyper competitive", which is essentially competitive in terms of on-field production and projections, but also to have the names that make everyone else say "there's no way this isn't the team to talk about, follow, and love. Look at their players!"


Why?

[example1]

Why?

Because the team-city combination is a global brand name, like Coke or McDonalds.

[CrespoBlows]

Because the team-city combination is a global brand name, like Coke or McDonalds.


The Yankees aren't fiscally responsible in the traditional sense, but the projected income they bring to the city and in paying taxes, I think they ultimately end up making lots of money above whatever they borrow.

This is actually wrong. The handout to the Yankees by the city of New York is the favoritism of one economic group over the other. In this case, a wealthy billionaire gets his stadium, the taxpayers get the bill. Oh, and they have to repair this billionaire's stadium, and clean it up. They make no actual money.

[example1]

This is actually wrong. The handout to the Yankees by the city of New York is the favoritism of one economic group over the other. In this case, a wealthy billionaire gets his stadium, the taxpayers get the bill. Oh, and they have to repair this billionaire's stadium, and clean it up. They make no actual money.

I'm not here to argue about whether or not they should have borrowed money for the stadium, and frankly I couldn't give two shits about whether NY makes money from the Yankees. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I've seen on previous pages in your arguments with others that you know a lot more about their stadium's financing than I do, and I don't care to get into it. None of it is central to the enormous post that I made a few pages back.

My initial point ws about the team's ability to earn money in a different way than the Red Sox do, and how their earning curve (win-curve) encourages spending on FA's at a pace that may be considered reckless by other teams. At least, that was the basis of this book that I'm citing.

[CrespoBlows]

If you were citing the book "Diamond Dollars," then you are absolutely correct.

In exchange for his new shiny ballplayers, the dauphin of the Yankee Empire would have been pressed to use those funds to build his new shiny stadium, built entirely from the generous taxpayers of New York City. Imagine a Yankee franchise that was actually restrained to adhere to a realistic budget. Thanks to Mayor Bloomberg, who in 2001 said that they couldn't afford 800M for both stadiums, we may never know. Steinbrenner may be given the stigma of a greedy entrepreneur that is looking to minimize his own cost, but the city of New York eventually caved to his demands. For this, they deserve a giant FAIL.

Another book I recommend is "Public Dollars, Private Stadiums," which exposes the disgusting nature of public officials and team officials that collude in order to screw a third party out of millions of dollars to get stadiums built. None of which are any benefit to the public. It should outrage any citizen that happens to reside in these cities, and should outrage anyone who subscribes to certain political philosophies that are impacted by these deals. The socialist should jeer at the political conspiracy hatched against the working class. The libertarian should abhor that the government is forcibly taking property from the taxpayer. The conservative? Well, they don't know what the fuck they want, as long as Steinbrenner praises JESUS they should be OK. Douches.... Besides Jesus, Conservative ideals are quite noble, but they have strayed from their roots. It should outrage everyone on the principle that some brilliant central planner, has decided that spending some of your money is best spent on the New Yankee Stadium. Rather than helping the truly desolate of New York City, or even better, leaving that money in your own pocket. The precedent has already been sent, just wait until a local politician is pitching the idea to you.