Gammons interview on 92.5 the River, 1/26/05

[SCM33]

Gammons reported he had a discussion with Boras regarding Johnny Damon after Damon signed with the Yankees and said that Damon would have stayed in Boston had Theo Epstein remained here. He said that Epstein would have made a deal that was slightly better than the one that Furcal got and that Boras advised Damon to take nothing less of what Furcal got. There was no way Damon was going to take less than Furcal got based on the past two seasons of production.

 

 

My opinion: Ouch. In other threads I conctantly said that the market was set with Furcal. It was all true. Why should Damon take less than Furcal? If someone is willing to pay Furcal the money he got, the Sox should have realized someone would pay Damon. Its over and done with, and Damon will be missed. The only way this turns into a postivie is if we get Reed. I really believe he is the only guy who can replace what Damon gave us.Reed only hit .250 something, but his OB% was decent, and as his batting average increases, as will his OB%. His OB% is something to work with. Eventually he too, like Damon will develop the power numbers and Reed also p[lays very good D. Now that Manny wants to stay I think we can put together a package including Arroyo/Clement/ maybe Marte, and another young arm (not Lester or Paps). Manny staying is a positive because if we get Reed we can still have a very good offense.

 

Either way I think, and once again Ill say it, The FO screwed this one up, unless we spin off something for Reed.

[riverside sluggers]

He said that Epstein would have made a deal that was slightly better than the one that Furcal got and that Boras advised Damon to take nothing less of what Furcal got.

 

Furcal got $13 million per season, which is what Damon got. Do you think it wouldve been smart of the front office to match 13 or even go higher than that?

 

My opinion is that they sacridiced by doing the right thing, 13 or more per season is just too much for Damon at this stage.

[SCM33]

Furcal got $13 million per season, which is what Damon got. Do you think it wouldve been smart of the front office to match 13 or even go higher than that?

 

Well, we will see. He could end up being another version of Bernie Williams (overpaid for age, and production) or he may end up continuing to produce. Either way I guess the point is that many people dont understand why he left and it has been clear since day 1. The market value was set and the Sox didnt match that value. Was the bar set a little high with Furcal? yes, but if we wanted to retain him we had to at least match it.

[a700hitter]

Furcal got $13 million per season, which is what Damon got. Do you think it wouldve been smart of the front office to match 13 or even go higher than that?

 

My opinion is that they sacridiced by doing the right thing, 13 or more per season is just too much for Damon at this stage.

The market was higher than expected this year, but the Red Sox should have been prepared to pay market for Damon. They misjudged the market. Furcal got 13 million and Matsui got 4/52 and even Sanders got 3/30 from KC. The Red Sox dropped the ball. The Yankees paid market or slightly above to steal our CF. That should never have happened. If the Yanks were to get him, they should have had to go overboard for additional years and $. They had to do neither. They were shocked that they could get him for 4/52. Sox FO blew it. It's as simple as that. Everything else is just spin.

[He Hate Me]

wait Reggie Freaking Sanders got 3/30???

[SCM33]

The market was higher than expected this year, but the Red Sox should have been prepared to pay market for Damon. They misjudged the market. Furcal got 13 million and Matsui got 4/52 and even Sanders got 3/30 from KC. The Red Sox dropped the ball. The Yankees paid market or slightly above to steal our CF. That should never have happened. If the Yanks were to get him, they should have had to go overboard for additional years and $. They had to do neither. They were shocked that they could get him for 4/52. Sox FO blew it. It's as simple as that. Everything else is just spin.

 

 

 

EXCELLENT point about Reggie Sanders. The nomadic ageless OF got 3/30 from the ROYALS of all teams, and we couldnt shovel out the money for an allstar leadoff hitter.

[riverside sluggers]

The Sox knew Damon wasnt worth that much and didnt want to end up overpaying, stood firm at 4 years/$40 million. Damon is as much at fault for leaving, as the front office is. So dont give him a free pass, and expect a big standing O for him during his first at bat back in Boston.

 

Yes we will see how his offense is over the course of his contract with NY...

 

66 career games at Yankee Stadium

67 hits in 266 ABs (.252 avg) (.301 OBP) (.346 SLUG) (.647 OPS)

 

2005 at Fenway

.335 batting avg, .383 OBP

 

2005 on Road

.298 avg, .341 OBP

 

Sports analyst on NESN has predicted for his first season---.292 batting avg, .352 OBP, 12 HRs, 75 RBIs

[a700hitter]

wait Reggie Freaking Sanders got 3/30???

I haven't been able to verify the 3/30. I have read that, but I have also read 1 year 10 million, and 2 for 10. If the 3/30 is accurate, it is outrageous.

[SCM33]

I actually predict Damon low with the Yankees. His first big contract was with Oakland and he absolutely bombed in Oakland, he didnt start playing well till he came to Boston.

.256 .324OB 9HR 49RBI in Oakland.

 

I predict him .275 .350 14HR 75RBI

[SCM33]

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20051223&content_id=1287048&vkey=hotstove2005&fext=.jsp

 

 

Sanders got a 2year 10M contract.

[a700hitter]

The Sox knew Damon wasnt worth that much and didnt want to end up overpaying, stood firm at 4 years/$40 million. Damon is as much at fault for leaving, as the front office is. So dont give him a free pass, and expect a big standing O for him during his first at bat back in Boston.

 

Yes we will see how his offense is over the course of his contract with NY...

 

66 career games at Yankee Stadium

67 hits in 266 ABs (.252 avg) (.301 OBP) (.346 SLUG) (.647 OPS)

 

2005 at Fenway

.335 batting avg, .383 OBP

 

2005 on Road

.298 avg, .341 OBP

 

Sports analyst on NESN has predicted for his first season---.292 batting avg, .352 OBP, 12 HRs, 75 RBIs

 

The Sox got blind-sided. This type of numerical analysis after the fact is a rationaliztion. In other words, it's spin. If the Sox had decided that he was not worth a penny more than 4/40, this years market has proven them to be wrong. Also, it makes no sense to give a 32 year old catcher with less offensive impact, and frankly only an average arm, 4/40, and hold the line on Damon claiming that he will break down in the next 4 years. The catchers historically break down quicker. Sox blew it. Spin all you want. I wish it were not true, but the market is the market. It's never smart business to pass on top talent because you don't want to pay market prices.

[riverside sluggers]

and hold the line on Dmon claiming that he will break down in the next 4 years.

 

Its not just the Sox FO who believe that Damon will break down in 4 years' time. Shows I watch including ESPN's cold pizza, have also discussed that.

[ORS]

MLB4U.com and Harballdollars.com both have Sanders at 2 years / $10M, meaning $5M per. Way to completely overstate his contract in order to try and put the FO in a bad light. Talk about creative editting.

 

The FO didn't blow anything. Yeah, I know you will call this spin because it doesn't fit into your view of what happened, but they set a price and stuck by it. He may not be getting overpaid this year or next, but those last two years are seriously questionable. I'd prefer the team have the flexibility to either pursue bigger talent in two years (Andruw Jones) or have room for a promising youngster with the same skill set and a better arm (Jacoby Ellsbury).

[SCM33]

MLB4U.com and Harballdollars.com both have Sanders at 2 years / $10M, meaning $5M per. Way to completely overstate his contract in order to try and put the FO in a bad light. Talk about creative editting.

 

The FO didn't blow anything. Yeah, I know you will call this spin because it doesn't fit into your view of what happened, but they set a price and stuck by it. He may not be getting overpaid this year or next, but those last two years are seriously questionable. I'd prefer the team have the flexibility to either pursue bigger talent in two years (Andruw Jones) or have room for a promising youngster with the same skill set and a better arm (Jacoby Ellsbury).

 

 

Thats fine if they actually go out and sign Jones, my money is on it that they wont however. They didn't stick by any price either. They were completely blindsighted and while Damon gave them fair warning, they chose to believe it was rumor and that Damon would settle for what they were offering. While negotiations were ongoing with Damon the Sox themselves created several rumors that they were pursuing other options, and to this day we still have no replacement. The thing that scares me most about the FO is their lack of driection. The Sox were blowing smoke up everyones ass and playing hardball with Damon and Damon took the best offer on the table realizing LL was too stubborn to accpet the fact that maybe someone else wanted Damon.

 

The Yankees played this whole scenario perfectly. They were telling everyone Damon was not an option and that Bubba Crosby was their starting CF only to undermine the RedSox FO importance of rushing into neogtiations with Damon and getting into a bidding war. The Yankees pulled off a steal and played the whole negotiations process perfectly, nothing leaked, unlike the Sox and their PR blunders, and in the end, ended up netting the best leadoff hitter available and filling a HUGE hole in their team while leaving their rival with yet another hole to fill.

[a700hitter]

MLB4U.com and Harballdollars.com both have Sanders at 2 years / $10M, meaning $5M per. Way to completely overstate his contract in order to try and put the FO in a bad light. Talk about creative editting.

I said in a subsequent post that I could not verify the information, and I elaborated on the various reports that I had seen. Because of the inconsistency of these reports, I would not be too confident that this latest report or 2 years $10 million is accurate. I fully disclosed the discrepancies, and did not engage in any creative editing.

[ORS]

The thing that scares me most about the FO is their lack of driection.

I'd really like to see you support this claim.

[ORS]

I said in a subsequent post that I could not verify the information, and I elaborated on the various reports that I had seen. Because of the inconsistency of these reports, I would not be too confident that this latest report or 2 years $10 million is accurate. I fully disclosed the discrepancies, and did not engage in any creative editing.

You elaborated while I was looking the info up, so I apologize for not seeing those posts. I haven't found any discrepancies on either of these sites in regards to player contracts.

[a700hitter]

But even if the Sanders 2 for 10 is accurate, Giles got 3/30, Millwood 5/60, and konerko 5/60. Damon hardly seems to be overpaid at 4/52.

[SCM33]

I'd really like to see you support this claim.

 

 

I love how I put a ton of effort in to a post, and someone takes something like that out of it, and tells me to explain it.

 

Explain what? Explain a gut feeling? I didnt state any fact there, so what is there to back up? It was opinion, my opinion. Unlike many users here I regularly back up posts and statements with references. Dont believe me? Check.

 

But sure, being the good sport I am, I will BACK IT UP....so here it goes:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/jacob_luft/12/21/dec21.chatter/index.html

[SCM33]

And here:

 

 

http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/012591.php

 

 

The Sox plan appears to be "win now and rebuild." Maybe you can't do both.-Tony Masseroti

[SCM33]

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2005/12/21/damon_jumps_to_yankees/

 

 

Another article which highlights many points I made.

[SCM33]

http://www.islandpacket.com/sports/local/story/5419665p-4895951c.html

 

 

One more for good measure....

[ORS]

I love how I put a ton of effort in to a post, and someone takes something like that out of it, and tells me to explain it.

 

Explain what? Explain a gut feeling? I didnt state any fact there, so what is there to back up? It was opinion, my opinion. Unlike many users here I regularly back up posts and statements with references. Dont believe me? Check.

 

But sure, being the good sport I am, I will BACK IT UP....so here it goes:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/jacob_luft/12/21/dec21.chatter/index.html

Thanks Mr. Luft. Oh wait, you aren't Jacob Luft, so nevermind, I'll guess I'll have to respond to what he says.

 

I can appreciate if you don't like the direction the team is taking, but saying it is dirctionless is pretty hyperbolic. Let's look at the moves.

 

1. They trade a top-10 prospect (Hanley) who's progression had slowed significantly below expectations, a good SP prospect (Sanchez), and a middle relief prospect (Delgado) for a 25 y/o proven MLB pitcher and a GG 3B coming off a bad offensive year. Beckett alone makes this a good deal. He's Papelbon++. Better velocity, good secondary pitches, and he has been pitching in the bigs for 4+ years now. Taking Lowell as part of the package was necessary, but I think it is a little unwise to write him off after one bad year. He's a RH pull hitter moving into the best park for that type of hitter.

 

2. They trade away a bad contract +$$$ (Renteria) for Baseball Prospectus's #1 rated prospect. So, the disappointing top-10 prospect lost in the first deal is replaced by someone better. Sure it opens a hole for the immediate future, but not if you consider what Renteria did for the team last year and the fact that they have someone on the roster, Cora, that can give them equivalent production. Renteria was a huge disappointment last year, yet they still won 95 games. Cora + the money sent to Atlanta is more cost effective than $10M per year for what Edgar was providing.

 

3. They trade away their backup C to upgrade 2B. Make no mistake, even if he continues the normal regression, Loretta will give them more than what Bellhorn/Graffanino/Cora gave them at 2B last year. Additionally, this opens the backup C spot for a young prospect (Shoppach) deserving of a shot at the bigs. Tek is only getting older, so they need to start thinking now about his replacement. Shoppach is an option, so it makes sense to see what he's got before trading him away. Especially since he wasn't drawing much interest in the trade market.

 

4. They let Damon walk. I never thought more than 3 years made sense for him. He's very likely to start a steep regression in 2 years when you consider the position he plays and his age. Plus, anything longer would block two recent draft picks that have the same skill set and are likely to be ready by then.

 

What is the trend? Pick-up a 25 y/o potential ace, acquire a 21 y/o top-5 prospect, make room for a catching prospect, don't get stuck with a big money contract for an older player. It seems pretty evident to me. They are looking beyond 2006/2007. I can understand if you don't like it, but that is completely different than claiming they don't have a plan.

[ORS]

http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/012591.php

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2005/12/21/damon_jumps_to_yankees/

http://www.islandpacket.com/sports/local/story/5419665p-4895951c.html

Ha, look at the dates of all those articles. December 21-25. In other words, complete knee-jerk reactions to the Damon signing.

 

Here's one to a site that you used to have in your sig. I guess Baseball Prospectus is no longer a worthy analysis site since their view doesn't fit with your rant.

 

BasballProspectus.com

 

I find their take more credible than that of a couple of beat writers.

[example1]

Well, we will see. He could end up being another version of Bernie Williams (overpaid for age, and production) or he may end up continuing to produce. Either way I guess the point is that many people dont understand why he left and it has been clear since day 1. The market value was set and the Sox didnt match that value. Was the bar set a little high with Furcal? yes, but if we wanted to retain him we had to at least match it.

 

Why should the sox let another desperate stupid team dictate how much they will pay their own players? Why should Johnny damon get one cent more than Jason Varitek if the sox feel like Varitek is as important a two-way player (decent hitter, decent fielder) as they have on the team?

 

They did it right, lets move on here... Damon is a Yankee, Theo isn't a Red Sox, there's not much we can do about it at this point.

[example1]

Thanks Mr. Luft. Oh wait, you aren't Jacob Luft, so nevermind, I'll guess I'll have to respond to what he says.

 

I can appreciate if you don't like the direction the team is taking, but saying it is dirctionless is pretty hyperbolic. Let's look at the moves.

 

1. They trade a top-10 prospect (Hanley) who's progression had slowed significantly below expectations, a good SP prospect (Sanchez), and a middle relief prospect (Delgado) for a 25 y/o proven MLB pitcher and a GG 3B coming off a bad offensive year. Beckett alone makes this a good deal. He's Papelbon++. Better velocity, good secondary pitches, and he has been pitching in the bigs for 4+ years now. Taking Lowell as part of the package was necessary, but I think it is a little unwise to write him off after one bad year. He's a RH pull hitter moving into the best park for that type of hitter.

 

2. They trade away a bad contract +$$$ (Renteria) for Baseball Prospectus's #1 rated prospect. So, the disappointing top-10 prospect lost in the first deal is replaced by someone better. Sure it opens a hole for the immediate future, but not if you consider what Renteria did for the team last year and the fact that they have someone on the roster, Cora, that can give them equivalent production. Renteria was a huge disappointment last year, yet they still won 95 games. Cora + the money sent to Atlanta is more cost effective than $10M per year for what Edgar was providing.

 

3. They trade away their backup C to upgrade 2B. Make no mistake, even if he continues the normal regression, Loretta will give them more than what Bellhorn/Graffanino/Cora gave them at 2B last year. Additionally, this opens the backup C spot for a young prospect (Shoppach) deserving of a shot at the bigs. Tek is only getting older, so they need to start thinking now about his replacement. Shoppach is an option, so it makes sense to see what he's got before trading him away. Especially since he wasn't drawing much interest in the trade market.

 

4. They let Damon walk. I never thought more than 3 years made sense for him. He's very likely to start a steep regression in 2 years when you consider the position he plays and his age. Plus, anything longer would block two recent draft picks that have the same skill set and are likely to be ready by then.

 

What is the trend? Pick-up a 25 y/o potential ace, acquire a 21 y/o top-5 prospect, make room for a catching prospect, don't get stuck with a big money contract for an older player. It seems pretty evident to me. They are looking beyond 2006/2007. I can understand if you don't like it, but that is completely different than claiming they don't have a plan.

 

Yeah, but One Red Seat, with the money they saved they might be able to acquire someone like Andruw Jones or Barry Zito next year in FA. Peee yweeeewww What are they thinking, letting Johnny Damon go? geez

[riverside sluggers]

ahem, Theo's own thoughts on the "Johnny Damon situation"

 

When asked if Johnny Damon would still be a Yankee if he were the GM, Epstein replied “Probably, given the way it’s gone down. I hate to comment on negotiations when I’m not directly involved in them but I’ll say this, I don’t think anyone’s at fault for the way things transpired. Johnny did what was best for him and his family. The Yankees, given the need they had at leadoff and in center field, did the right thing for them. They did a good job in the negotiation. And the Red Sox offered $10 million a year and really adhered to the philosophy of setting a value on a player, remaining disciplined through the course of the negotiation, a philosophy that played a large role in 95-plus wins three years in a row and as tough as it is when you lose players, as tough as it is on the fans, that philosophy will serve the fans well in the long run because it will lead to winning teams.”

[ORS]

ahem, Theo's own thoughts on the "Johnny Damon situation"

I've been trying to post that in this thread for over an hour. I can't seem to post anything with a link or long quote in this thread, thanks for adding it.

[riverside sluggers]

sure thing

 

here's the rest of the interview he had on Kiss108

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2006/01/theo_defends_so.html

[castigs850]

Now that Manny wants to stay I think we can put together a package including Arroyo/Clement/ maybe Marte, and another young arm (not Lester or Paps).

that is way to much just to get reed, i do think he is our best option but there is no way we give up marte for him especially when we have two young outfielders of our own coming up