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:_Pulling_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 s***-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 Guardians 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:_Pulling_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 s***-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 Guardians 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' date=' 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 [i']regardless of cost[/i]. 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' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

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' date=' we could have more Teixeira moments in the future.[/quote']

 

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)

 

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). 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). 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' date=' 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[/quote']

 

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' date=' its an NTC or the amount of years or the loss of a draft pick[/quote']

 

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' date=' 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[b'] Yankees will take them[/b]. 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' date=' Kansas City, etc.[/quote']

 

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' date=' the Red Sox have the ability to sign them long term beforehand, look at Pedroia.[/quote']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.