Official Red Sox offseason thread

[witty_alias]

Sheets is also much more riskier. Id prefer going with Harden

 

I think with the injuries they have had they both are of equal risk. If I had to choose I would say go with Sheets IMO

[TheKilo]

How 'bout Theo shows some sack this offseason?

[witty_alias]

How 'bout Theo shows some sack this offseason?

 

Sack would be nice

[WhiskeyBreath]

How 'bout Theo shows some sack this offseason?

 

How 'bout John Henry shows some sack and opens up the wallet this off season?

[Dipre]

How 'bout John Henry shows some sack and opens up the wallet this off season?

 

How 'bout they both show some sack and we can get the best players available? (Holliday/Lackey)

[Dojji]

Or WE could show some sack and prepare ourselves to support a good team that isn't a perfect team.

[Cocos Disciples]

Or WE could show some sack and prepare ourselves to support a good team that isn't a perfect team.

 

Pretty sure everyone plans on supporting the team even if there's not an ideal off-season.

[a700hitter]

Sheets is also much more riskier. Id prefer going with Harden

Mark Prior would be a very low risk move.

[WhiskeyBreath]

How 'bout they both show some sack and we can get the best players available? (Holliday/Lackey)

 

Sounds good to me.

[Dipre]

Pretty sure everyone plans on supporting the team even if there's not an ideal off-season.

 

Dunno where anyone would get any other idea, really.

[TheKilo]

We did that this past offseason

[Dipre]

We did that this past offseason

 

Exactly right.

[das11209]

Re: support - if the fans keep extending the attendence record - irrespective of Henry and co.'s reluctance to spend money - why would the FO spend the extra money? Even though we all know they have it?

 

Not trying to say we should not support the team - but that is a legit question.

[Dipre]

Re: support - if the fans keep extending the attendence record - irrespective of Henry and co.'s reluctance to spend money - why would the FO spend the extra money? Even though we all know they have it?

 

Not trying to say we should not support the team - but that is a legit question.

 

Oh. My. God.

 

In light of not wanting to be a "douche", i'll go ahead and inform that this is a $130 million dollar payroll we're talking about, so going by that figure and the fact that this team will probably be top 5 next year in payroll just like every other year this decade, care to explain to me how exactly the FO is "reluctant" to spend money?

[bostonule25]

I think with the injuries they have had they both are of equal risk. If I had to choose I would say go with Sheets IMO

not really, Sheets is coming off injury so id consider him more injury risk

[das11209]

Oh. My. God.

 

In light of not wanting to be a "douche", i'll go ahead and inform that this is a $130 million dollar payroll we're talking about, so going by that figure and the fact that this team will probably be top 5 next year in payroll just like every other year this decade, care to explain to me how exactly the FO is "reluctant" to spend money?

 

Your forgot Theo's famous comment - " We are not the Yankees"? Instead of getting proven players - this team is trying to get washed out, injured or NL pitchers in some pet projects that never works out. For $10 million - they refused to sign the most important hitter of the last off-season. Not only that - John Henry said - the negotiations are dead paving way for the Yankees. After that he twitered that the curse of Tex has begun with the Yankees. That sounds to me like an arrogant person who is living in the past( 2004, 2007).

 

Let us say the Red Sox can up the payroll to $200 million. What would be the business reason for them to do that if that earns the same revenue as $130 million?

 

Red Sox used to be the second in payroll - now they will be in top 5? Look at the play-off teams these year - they all have spent money ( well Mets being exception that did poorly with their payroll). Red Sox currently is a good team that may go to playoff again next year. They are not even close to a championship team. And they will not be unless they commit to veteran players instead of 'projects' and compete with teams like the Yankees.

 

Edit - My question was why would the Red Sox FO spend more money if Fenway seats never go empty anyway in case it was not clear earlier.

[Dipre]

Your forgot Theo's famous comment - " We are not the Yankees"? Instead of getting proven players - this team is trying to get washed out' date=' injured or NL pitchers in some pet projects that never works out. For $10 million - they refused to sign the most important hitter of the last off-season. Not only that - John Henry said - the negotiations are dead paving way for the Yankees. After that he twitered that the curse of Tex has begun with the Yankees. That sounds to me like an arrogant person who is living in the past( 2004, 2007).[/quote']

 

So?

 

We're talking about the way the Sox conduct business, don't go on a tangent and explain how a team that spends as much money as this one on payroll and player development is "reluctant" to spend money.

 

And how do you know they refused to sign him for $10 million? You weren't there, so you're obviously making this up. My problem with the negotiations was that IMO they had a chance to close the deal, decided to bluff thinking the Yanks wouldn't swoop in, but they did and it bit them in the ass. Stop stating those ridiculous assumptions as facts.

 

Let us say the Red Sox can up the payroll to $200 million. What would be the business reason for them to do that if that earns the same revenue as $130 million?

 

This premise in itself is flawed and i don't have to explain why. Stop making s*** up please.

 

Red Sox used to be the second in payroll - now they will be in top 5? Look at the play-off teams these year - they all have spent money ( well Mets being exception that did poorly with their payroll). Red Sox currently is a good team that may go to playoff again next year. They are not even close to a championship team. And they will not be unless they commit to veteran players instead of 'projects' and compete with teams like the Yankees.

 

Lol so a 95-win team is not close to a championship team? What an asinine statement.

 

"Commiting to veteran players" is what got the Yankees in the shithole they were during most of this decade, investments need to be smart (or at least that's what i think) and for a team that has a strong rotation 1-4, investing in a project for the five spot that may pay huge dividends (Rich Harden comes to find) while maintaining payroll flexibility is key, because it allows for transactions like acquiring V-Mart next year. Please stop talking like this is a team that runs away from multi-year commitments, just because they try to be smart about who they award such contracts to. Pretty sure they're regretting the Lowell contract, how's that for "veteran players?"

 

[Edit - My question was why would the Red Sox FO spend more money if Fenway seats never go empty anyway in case it was not clear earlier.

 

The answer is that this team spends a lot of money both on payroll and player development to field a competitive team year in, year out, so your original question is an exercise in futility.

 

 

I apologize if the post rubs off as too strong or confrontational, but i didn't really find a more fluid way to convey my thoughts.

[TheKilo]

Can't believe I'm even responding to one of das's posts, but the Sox were 4th in payroll this season. The top 3?

 

NYY

NYM

Cubs

 

Mets and the Cubs both failed to make the playoffs spectacularly.

 

Yankees made the playoffs, however, they should when they spend half of the total dollars spent on free agent contracts this past offseason. $450 million of the roughly $900 million spent this offseason on new contracts.

 

The Sox won 95 games. They made the playoffs. I don't know what more you want from them. They exceeded my expectations this past offseason, for sure.

 

If they stand pat AGAIN, however, next year will be a different story.

[example1]

They cant stand pat, but I wouldnt be shocked if they signed Bay and a few role players... maybe Harden too, and called it good. I too want some new toys to be excited about, but if their goal is 95 wins, they're there.

[Lester82]

I think they might be better off with Holliday over Bay and signing a decent option to back up Drew and another backup catcher (don't really want it to be 'Tek, but whatever). Wouldn't mind seeing a Delcarmen trade, some NL team is always rumored for him, not that he's going to be part of any big deal.

[Lester82]

I don't think this team needs drastic changes, it's not like it would shock me if the Red Sox are playing in next year's World Series.

 

They will be entering a season with a Contract Year Josh Beckett; Jon Lester and a full season of rising star Clay Buchholz and a full season of Daisuke Matsuzaka. These will be starts not going to Brad Penny or even John Smoltz.

 

I think Beckett will be a FORCE in 2010. More like 2007-esque Beckett - he will be 30 already in his contract season.

[a700hitter]

They cant stand pat' date=' but I wouldnt be shocked if they signed Bay and a few role players... maybe Harden too, and called it good. I too want some new toys to be excited about, but if their goal is 95 wins, they're there.[/quote']I'm not so sure about 95 wins. Lowell and Ortiz will be a year older. Plus they will not have closed the gap on the Yankees.

[Lester82]

I love it, we need to 'close the gap on the Yankees'. I don't see a tremendous gap, I even like the Red Sox starting staff better. But the difference was offense this year. Who knows what next year's difference will be?

 

Pitching wins though, this team just needs to upgrade a offense that needs some tweaks. I'd just like Holliday instead of Bay and some complimentry offensive players added. No Baldelli types with fragile health.

 

Disclaimer: The Red Sox better sign Bay or Holliday, or they have no shot unless a trade for Adrian Gonzalez or Hanley was somehow put in place.

[example1]

How 'bout they both show some sack and we can get the best players available? (Holliday/Lackey)

 

I don't expect the Sox to go after Lackey. I wouldn't have a problem with it, but I think the cost will be prohibative.

 

John Lackey WARP (from BP, WARP Leaders)

 

2009: 3.0

2008: 3.4

2007: 7.5

2006: 4.8

2005: 3.6

2004: 2.6

2003: 0.8

2002: 1.2

 

Good FA Starting pitchers are expensive commodities.

 

If Lackey repeated his past 4 years, he will have been worth roughly 18.7 wins above replacement. That's 4.67 WARP per season. Thats a good season, the equivalent of somewhere between Pedroia (3.4) and Papelbon (4.9), and considerably better than JD Drew (2.7) as point of reference.

 

That's not good enough from your #1 pitcher, which is what Lackey will undoubtedly be billed as while he's sold around the league to other teams. It isn't an advantageous position for the Red Sox to jump into if they want to put their money to good use; they're not trying to buy a third #3 pitcher for the price of a #1.

 

Instead of signing Lackey to a deal that is likely to be really expensive and more than they want to pay (as is the nature of FA negotiations 9 times out of 10), perhaps they'll talk to Toronto again about Roy Halladay and pay his salary for one season and ship off some prospects, making a run with the core guys and Halladay, then letting him join FA with everyone else. I think this current team with Bay or Holliday and Roy Halladay could beat the Yankees over the course of a season. Halladay, Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Dice-K would be really fun.

 

If they did that it would increase their salary next year, but it would drop enormously after 2010 when Halladay ($15.75m, Ortiz ($12.5m), Lowell ($12m), Beckett ($12m), and Martinez ($7m) would all come off. That would be about $60m of yearly salary off the books, with another group of prospects ready to start contributing as well. Plus, they would stand a really good chance to win in 2010.

[example1]

I'm not so sure about 95 wins. Lowell and Ortiz will be a year older. Plus they will not have closed the gap on the Yankees.

 

I think it is enough for 95 wins.

 

They will have Buchholz and Dice-K (hopefully) healthy, an immediate improvement over the pitching they had this year.

 

They will also have Victor Martinez for a full season instead of Varitek. That's an offensive boost.

 

I agree that they will not have closed the gap on the Yankees.

[BSN07]

I read that Theo gave the Guardians permission to interview JF for the managers spot. If JF leaves, I was wondering who you guys thing the PC should be?

 

 

I'm thinking with the teams tendency to like SP reclamation projects, Dave Duncan could be a perfect match. But I admit there would have to be a couple scenarios that play out before all that went down.

 

 

Was just a thought, hadn't seen it discussed anywhere, and didn't figure it need it's own thread.

[BSN07]

WEEI's Rob Bradford reports that Tim Wakefield is set to have surgery on the herniated disc in his back next week, likely on Wednesday.

 

Why is this good news? Not only have the doctors told Wakefield that the surgery won't hinder his ability to get ready for next season, but Boston GM Theo Epstein indicated that, assuming all goes well, Boston will likely exercise the $4MM team option they hold on Wakefield.

“Wake is someone that is in our plans and we hope makes starts for us next year and is a member of the rotation,” Epstein said. “We haven’t sat down and finalized anything. Obviously we want to see how the surgery goes and then both sides will sit down and talk.”

 

Wakefield, an up-and-comer who was named to his first All Star team this season weeks before his 43rd birthday, posted an 11-5 record in 2009 with a 4.58 ERA.

[Gom]

Nothing beats a Red Sox off-season thread the first week of October.

[example1]

WEEI's Rob Bradford reports that Tim Wakefield is set to have surgery on the herniated disc in his back next week, likely on Wednesday.

 

Why is this good news? Not only have the doctors told Wakefield that the surgery won't hinder his ability to get ready for next season, but Boston GM Theo Epstein indicated that, assuming all goes well, Boston will likely exercise the $4MM team option they hold on Wakefield.

 

Am I the only one who was tired of the Wakefield mediocre-go-round 3 years ago? At this point I wonder if they'll ever get over Wake when he's gone. They may believe from now on that they shoudn't have to pay more than $4m for a 5th pitcher, ever.

[rhet]

If the goal is 95 wins again, they're just about there already. So we can take the year off and tune into the ALDS next October to see if they can beat the Angels. Go Beckett. Go Lester.