Why are we taking the A's approach with the sox payroll?

[mtbykr]

Just wondering why we are trying to "build for the future" with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball and a market that demands winning. I will tell you one thing though, the sox are great at marketing---they are selling the "building for the future" line to the public:blink:

 

 

 

I am glad Theo is our GM, but he's doing his best to disolve that trust: i mean since 04 we dump proven winners in pedro, lowe, o-cab, damon---and replace them with becket, clement, rent-a-wreck, and coco. (just to name a few) in every position, we have taken a step backwards. The FO now uses the payroll to get out of bad moves (rent-a-wreck) instead of signing good FA's ....what's really frustrating is that we have the best 3-4 combo in the game, and we are taking the "building for the future" approach instead of building around them. the only reason the FO hasn't been strung up yet is becuase papi. manram, paps, and shill have played their hearts out

 

i am seriously thinking about driving back home and beating the front office with their laptops----ok i am done ranting now;)

[mtbykr]

one more thing...the sox didn't want to give damon the extra money becuase they would be afraid he would decline in the last 2 years of the contract----however how much money are we paying right now becuase of the bonehead rent-a-wreck deal ( i have always hated that --i wanted to keep o-cab) ....the sox are paying other teams more money this year than it would have taken to keep damon even if he crapped out in year 4

[a700hitter]

Just wondering why we are trying to "build for the future" with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball and a market that demands winning. I will tell you one thing though, the sox are great at marketing---they are selling the "building for the future" line to the public:blink:

 

 

 

I am glad Theo is our GM, but he's doing his best to disolve that trust: i mean since 04 we dump proven winners in pedro, lowe, o-cab, damon---and replace them with becket, clement, rent-a-wreck, and coco. (just to name a few) in every position, we have taken a step backwards. The FO now uses the payroll to get out of bad moves (rent-a-wreck) instead of signing good FA's ....what's really frustrating is that we have the best 3-4 combo in the game, and we are taking the "building for the future" approach instead of building around them. the only reason the FO hasn't been strung up yet is becuase papi. manram, paps, and shill have played their hearts out

 

i am seriously thinking about driving back home and beating the front office with their laptops----ok i am done ranting now;)

You are entitled to rant and you are right. The Yankees kept the key components of their wiining teams together as long as possible, and they still have Jeter and Mo. The WhiteSox re-signed Garland and Konerko. They didn't low ball them the way our FO lowballed our stars. They never even made an offer to Lowe. The White Sox kept their core together and built on it with Thome. Our Fo took a different path, and the results are undeniable.

[riverside sluggers]

current 2006 roster going to next year

 

Gone- Matt Clement (trade/waivers), David Wells, Keith Foulke, Mike Embree, Javier Lopez, Kyle Snyder, Javy Lopez, Mark Loretta, Trot Nixon

 

Staying- Jason Varitek, Doug Mirabelli (Wake stays in rotation), Kevin Youkilis, David Ortiz, Alex Cora, Mike Lowell, Manny Ramirez, Wily Mo Pena, Eric Hinske, Curt Schilling, Josh Beckett, Tim Wakefield, Jon Lester, Jonathan Papelbon, Manny Delcarmen, Craig Hansen

 

???- Coco Crisp, Alex Gonzalez, Julian Tavarez

[mtbykr]

I hope they keep gonzo--either that or get o-cab, please no lugo:rolleyes:

[a700hitter]

I hope they keep gonzo--either that or get o-cab, please no lugo:rolleyes:

Me too-- no Lugo.

[riverside sluggers]

I put him down as a question mark because Ive been hearing a lot that Lugo will be one of the main free agents that they are setting their sights on. Its just a revolving door at shortstop, they cant make their minds up

[RoyNHSox]

A bit OT, but with the luxury tax and revenue sharing, does anyone know what the Yankees will be paying out over the next few years? I heard a snippet on the radio that it will be close to $100M over the next few years, with the rate that it’s increasing. Is this true?

[ksushi]

They need to keep Gonzo. That is a sticking point with me. If the first thing they do is cut ties with him Ill be very mad. Some guys thrive in Boston, Ocab and Gonzo are among them. I think they never should have let Ocab go, but I love Gonzo.

 

The Oakland A's approach with the Sox payroll is pretty much unstoppable if you think about it. Letting guys go is a product of the payroll in Oakland, not the result of the philosophy out there. Homegrow your pitching, pay for your hitting.... basically its a little more complicated but we all know what goes on. Hopefully the Sox can purchase the rest of the pieces to be not just competitive, but dominant. They're only a few pieces away.

[Mr Crunchy]

whats this?

no ellsburys murphys and pedroias on the above lists??

[rician blast]

Just wondering why we are trying to "build for the future" with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball and a market that demands winning. I will tell you one thing though, the sox are great at marketing---they are selling the "building for the future" line to the public:blink:

 

 

Its very valid to question management moves and motivation at this point in time, particularly given that this market "demands winning".

 

But how does the FO define winning? To many fans "winning" may mean win a WS title...does management have a different view? i.e. success is making the playoffs? or success is fielding a competetive team that continues the string of sellouts at Fenway?

 

 

Your comment on the Sox marketing abilities is dead on and makes me wonder (and Sean, perhaps you can comment):

 

Does "building for the future" = "we misjudged the market" (the Bruins b.s. line after the lockout)?

[a700hitter]

Its very valid to question management moves and motivation at this point in time, particularly given that this market "demands winning".

 

But how does the FO define winning? To many fans "winning" may mean win a WS title...does management have a different view? i.e. success is making the playoffs? or success is fielding a competetive team that continues the string of sellouts at Fenway?

 

 

Your comment on the Sox marketing abilities is dead on and makes me wonder (and Sean, perhaps you can comment):

 

Does "building for the future" = "we misjudged the market" (the Bruins b.s. line after the lockout)?

They got the fans all excited when they told us their goal was to win several titles, but they are going about it in a very odd way.

[rician blast]

They got the fans all excited when they told us their goal was to win several titles, but they are going about it in a very odd way.

 

exactly my point. just like B's management. In the B's case they helped define and design the post-lockout landscape of NHL hockey and then when they built a team of sh*t they said "we misjudged the market". Now this year they say they are "building a contender".

 

While I don't mind my wife fondling my ass....I do have a problem with the FO of my favorite sports teams blowing smoke up it.

[Rdsxmbnt]

Why are the sox using the A's approach? Because if you get enough talent like the A's had a couple years ago, a team like the Red Sox can afford to give contract extensions, and locking up young talented players for many years is how you sustain a winning team for a long period of time. FAs are necessary to sign to fill holes but to build just around signing and trading for long contracts doesnt work unless your the Yankees and gives a window of oppurtunity to win a lot less than developing your own talent.

[Mr Crunchy]

as long as 2,400,000 tickets are sold before xmas day??

the 19 different investors who make up this ownership group have won

this is the bottom line jimma

and its something i dont think many of our younger friends on board here understand

from a competetive standpoint dare i say that the sox winning it all in 04 may indeed be the worst thing to happen to them??

as ryan said

it gave the front office a free pass for years

hence instead of getting a starter or a reliever or a bench player they went out and did nothing

3 men who were involved this weekend

snyder johnson and vanburen all were waived by last place teams

we(theo) however,deem them essential to our pennant run?

 

did you hear ryan on sports reporters yesterday??

when asked how the ""fans"" would respond to a rebuilding year he immediatly went into a tirade about the ""fans""

 

"dont get me started"" he screamed at lupica

""these fans are there to be seen,fenway is like disneyland,if they cant wait for another

winner then too bad""...did you see these ""fans"" friday nite,was that the wave i saw after the yanks hung 7 in the 7th inning""

 

indeed bobby

indeed

and

this guy is another unofficial front office ballwasher as its their duty because the sox are owned by a division of the ny times which is also owns the globe

 

but i did love the way he attacked the posers

 

if our future is directly tied into lester hansen beckett and delcarmen then i think we have a bleak future indeed

meanwhile 56 year old bloodied sock curt schilling

and the older,more banged up david wells

are pitching their balls off in the hope of getting another shot at october

 

which i can honestly say is now a pipe dream

[Mr Crunchy]

FAAAAAAAAAAAAK

[Rdsxmbnt]

 

if our future is directly tied into lester hansen beckett and delcarmen then i think we have a bleak future indeed

[a700hitter]

as long as 2,400,000 tickets are sold before xmas day??

the 19 different investors who make up this ownership group have won

this is the bottom line jimma

and its something i dont think many of our younger friends on board here understand

from a competetive standpoint dare i say that the sox winning it all in 04 may indeed be the worst thing to happen to them??

as ryan said

it gave the front office a free pass for years

hence instead of getting a starter or a reliever or a bench player they went out and did nothing

3 men who were involved this weekend

snyder johnson and vanburen all were waived by last place teams

we(theo) however,deem them essential to our pennant run?

 

did you hear ryan on sports reporters yesterday??

when asked how the ""fans"" would respond to a rebuilding year he immediatly went into a tirade about the ""fans""

 

"dont get me started"" he screamed at lupica

""these fans are there to be seen,fenway is like disneyland,if they cant wait for another

winner then too bad""...did you see these ""fans"" friday nite,was that the wave i saw after the yanks hung 7 in the 7th inning""

 

indeed bobby

indeed

and

this guy is another unofficial front office ballwasher as its their duty because the sox are owned by a division of the ny times which is also owns the globe

 

but i did love the way he attacked the posers

 

if our future is directly tied into lester hansen beckett and delcarmen then i think we have a bleak future indeed

meanwhile 56 year old bloodied sock curt schilling

and the older,more banged up david wells

are pitching their balls off in the hope of getting another shot at october

 

which i can honestly say is now a pipe dream

I worked in the life insurance business for many years. An agent is a prospects besw friend throughout the sales process holding his/her hand throughout. Once the sale is closed, you can't find anyone to service your contract. Management closed the sale with the '04 Championship, and I thank them for that, but now they have the guaranteed full houses every night, so they don't have to and are not doing their best to have the team win in 2005 and 06. They'll put their best foot forward when there is more juice to squeeze out of the fans. We need to cancel our season tickets and stop going to the games to get them moving faster. Of course no one will do that, so we will get jerked around like the closed-sale that we are.

[Mr Crunchy]

We need to cancel our season tickets and stop going to the games to get them moving faster. Of course no one will do that, so we will get jerked around like the closed-sale that we are.

__________________

 

ha

as long as the 16 year old girls from everett can replace their #19 pink shirts with paplebon pink shirts

and the other sheep continue to buy into the ""poor mouth"" ******** thats being stuffed up their asses

then the front office is safe economically

[a700hitter]

ha

as long as the 16 year old girls from everett can replace their #19 pink shirts with paplebon pink shirts

and the other sheep continue to buy into the ""poor mouth"" ******** thats being stuffed up their asses

then the front office is safe economically

You are right. I can't argue with that.

[rician blast]

2 yankee fans came into my office today to talk about the series. Ya know what? NEITHER of them broke my balls, gloated or claimed their team was on its way to #27.

 

What did they have to say?

 

"Who's Jason Johnson?"

"What's up with Beckett walking so many guys?"

"Do you think the Red Sox rushed Hansen and Lester to the bigs?"

and

"Why did the Sox do nothing at the trading deadline when their pitching is this weak?"

 

 

My answer was like it was outta Fast Times at Ridgemount High....I utterred a Spicoli-ism when I said "I don't know".

 

And I don't. I'm not so sure that Theo and Larry didn't say "even if we added an Oswalt...or a Smoltz...we aren't going to win it...we're not good enough, not deep enough". Or maybe they really believe that the young arms will be the future of this organization? Or maybe they just chose to keep the investors happy and not commit to any additional $? Or maybe next year is the year and they'll be grabbing the best of the available FA talent?

 

I really don't know.

[NateGrey]

Building for the future + Sell outs = Cash cow .

[ImTooSoxy]

And I don't. I'm not so sure that Theo and Larry didn't say "even if we added an Oswalt...or a Smoltz...we aren't going to win it...we're not good enough, not deep enough".

 

I think your right on the money there. It's a crappy viewpoint but it's one that Theo and Larry probably had. Why force a move that isn't going to improve a team enough to make a playoff push? The Giants did the very same thing, Sabean didn't make a move and was blasted in the bay area press for it, but honestly it was polishing brass on the Titanic and he knew it. Keep your cards close, admit defeat, see what you can do in the offseason.

[a700hitter]

I think your right on the money there. It's a crappy viewpoint but it's one that Theo and Larry probably had. Why force a move that isn't going to improve a team enough to make a playoff push? The Giants did the very same thing, Sabean didn't make a move and was blasted in the bay area press for it, but honestly it was polishing brass on the Titanic and he knew it. Keep your cards close, admit defeat, see what you can do in the offseason.

There's another saying: strike while the iron is hot.

[Sara]

And I don't. I'm not so sure that Theo and Larry didn't say "even if we added an Oswalt...or a Smoltz...we aren't going to win it...we're not good enough, not deep enough". Or maybe they really believe that the young arms will be the future of this organization? Or maybe they just chose to keep the investors happy and not commit to any additional $? Or maybe next year is the year and they'll be grabbing the best of the available FA talent?

 

I was amazed and wholely depressed at this trade deadline. It seemed, based on published news reports, that the Red Sox had a shot at two players that not only could have helped this year, but also had promising futures: Roy Oswalt or Andrew Jones. I would have taken either of those players over "prospects" like Lester and Hansen. Both Oswalt and Jones are All-Star players under the age of 30 that could have helped as corner stones of the franchise. These weren't just rentals either; both are under contract beyond 2006. Heck, the Red Sox traded some of the best "prospects" in all of baseball (HanRam, Sanchez, and Marte) for Lowell, Beckett, and Crisp and then can't pull the trigger on a trade for Oswalt or Jones? Imagine a line up with Manny, Papi, and Andrew Jones or a pitching staff with Schilling and Oswalt at the top in 2007. I guess my point is, even if the front office thought the team was not competitive enough to win in 2006, either of those guys would have been huge in the years beyond this season. The one time the Red Sox SHOULD have traded prospects, they didn't. :dunno: