2011-2012 Offseason Thread

[SoxFanForsyth]

Blow it up? Really?

 

This is the exact same team that was 31 games over .500 on August 27th, and if they could have played .500 baseball from there on out, would have won 97 games.

 

And we want to blow the team up?? This is incomprehensible.

 

The reason the clubhouse was in such shambles was because Francona didn't crack the whip. He was a great "players manager" but when the players stopped respecting him, he had nothing to fall back on. Francona is gone now. A new voice in the clubhouse is all this team needs. You get a guy in there who gets onto Lackey when he rips his defense for misplays, or when he shoots a bad look before he's pulled. Get a guy who won't allow drinking in the clubhouse, and limits the "family trip" to one per year, like all the other teams. Make sure all the players are in the dugout for every single game. Nobody gets a free pass to just sit and play PS3 while the team is out there fighting to win the game.

 

You know what the difference is between the Rays and the Red Sox? Heart. That's it. Every single game, you know who is on the top of the steps, high fiving players when the come off the field, after homeruns, screaming at umps when they miss a call? David Price. A starting pitcher. And our SP are in there drinking beer and playing PS3.

 

That's the problem. The leadership. It's not Theo. It's partially the players. But it's ultimately the manager who ALLOWS it to happen. And that's why they've done what they need to do, and should move on at this point. Be a f***ing team and have each others back. Watch the damn games from the dugout and take a page out of David Price's book.

 

We have all the talent in the world, and for that, we absolutely do not need to blow anything up. But we need a manager who can come in and promote team unity, and make sure everyone is playing together, as a team, both on the field and in the dugout.

[a700hitter]

 

You know what the difference is between the Rays and the Red Sox? Heart. That's it. Every single game, you know who is on the top of the steps, high fiving players when the come off the field, after homeruns, screaming at umps when they miss a call? David Price. A starting pitcher. And our SP are in there drinking beer and playing PS3.

No, the difference between the Sox and the Rays was starting pitching and pitching depth. We were running Wakefield, Miller, Weiland and Lacey to the mound three out of every 5 games with virtually no chance of winning. Does the whole roster need to be plown up? No, but there was an organizational failure that needs to be addressed. The FO and management team needs to be blown up. Are they a long way from winning ? No, but you should have some good talent assembled for $174 million. It is no feather in their cap that they won 90 games for $174 million. Someone else can take the core of this team and fine tune it to get it to the next level.

[Cocos Disciples]

Yeah I'm gonna go with a700. Kyle Weiland and Andrew Miller can have all the heart they want, they still suck a bag of dicks.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yeah I'm gonna go with a700. Kyle Weiland and Andrew Miller can have all the heart they want' date=' they still suck a bag of dicks.[/quote']

 

True, but Weiland, Miller, and Wakefield only started 9 games in September, and Wakefield, by the way, had one of the 7 wins. The other 18 were started by Lackey/Beckett/Lester/Bedard. So you can't put the entire blame on them. Our top 4 SP started 72% of the games in September.

[SoxSport]

Let's face it. this is one SOFT organization--from the top down.

Ultimately, they let the inmates run the asylum. Expensive ones, at that.

[a700hitter]

True' date=' but Weiland, Miller, and Wakefield only started 9 games in September, and Wakefield, by the way, had one of the 7 wins. The other 18 were started by Lackey/Beckett/Lester/Bedard. So you can't put the entire blame on them. Our top 4 SP started 72% of the games in September.[/quote']Yes, but I grouped Lackey in with Weiland, Miller, and Wakefield as pitchers who gave us virtually no chance to win. Lackey started 5 games in September. Between Weiland. Miller, Wakefield and Lackey we rolled them to the mound for 14 of 27 games. That's horrendous.

[Palodios]

Yes' date=' but I grouped Lackey in with Weiland, Miller, and Wakefield as pitchers who gave us virtually no chance to win. Lackey started 5 games in September. Between Weiland. Miller, Wakefield and Lackey we rolled them to the mound for 14 of 27 games. That's horrendous.[/quote']

 

The must-win games were when Beckett/Lester were on the mound. Did the team look like they treated them like must-win games?

[a700hitter]

The must-win games were when Beckett/Lester were on the mound. Did the team look like they treated them like must-win games?

You are diverting the discussion. SFF said that the difference between the Sox and Tampa was heart. I disagreed and said that the difference was pitching and mentioned that some combination of Lackey, Wakefield, Miller and Weiland were going to the mound 3 out of 5 days with little hope for success. That was the difference-- pitching and pitching depth. You are wandering off topic.

[VA Sox Fan]

From the Globe yesterday, Peter Abraham:

 

Extra Bases Five-Point Plan To Fix The Red Sox:

 

1. John Henry has to get involved. The Red Sox should be a priority, not part of his portfolio. Make it clear in words and deeds that you expect excellence. His silence is deafening.

 

2. Close the Fort Myers County Club. Make it clear to every player invited to spring training that they better show up early and in shape. If it takes sending trainers out to check up players every few weeks this winter, then that's what it takes.

 

Being in good condition and ready for 162 games should be an expectation for the players, not a choice.

 

3. Demand accountability. The Red Sox have lost track of the little things. The whole team should be on the field for the National Anthem, for instance. There should be a less excuse-making or complaining. Hiding from the media should not be allowed. Why is it every time the Sox lose, the same two or three players are left to explain it?

 

You saw how it translated onto the field. Missed cutoff men, running into outs, etc. Being professional and accountable is not a sometimes thing.

 

4. Get a strong pitching coach. Or a manager who knows pitching. All Terry Francona knew about pitching was that he didn't know much about pitching and he left it in the hands of others. That works with a strong pitching coach like John Farrell, but Curt Young never seemed to get a handle on the staff.

 

The Red Sox don't have to have dominant pitching to win. But they have to be reliable and that wasn't the case.

 

5. Change some faces. The 2012 Red Sox should not look like a reunion of the 2007 team. Shake it up a little bit. Get some players in here with something to prove, not reputations to protect.

 

The Red Sox do not need to start over, blow the whole thing up or run the bums out. They finished a game out of the playoffs, not 10. Let's not descend on Fenway Park with pitchforks and torches quite yet.

[jung]

They need Mr Fixit, more than Mr Changeit. The challenge is the fixin' is across so many dimensions of the team but no question that starting pitching comes first.

 

I think there will be more attrition this year than we have seen but in some cases it just seems that it is time anyway doesn't it? Wake and Tek must be at the end of the string and even Ortiz unless he can be had for short money. When a guy has that last "did better than we thought he would" year like Tek did when it is at the end of a long career, watch out, you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment if you are banking on a repeat. Ortiz even falls into that category a bit.

 

Ortiz if for no other reason than we have got to get away from this dedicated DH thing. It is just too costly not in money but in wear on guys that obviously broke down at the end. I would still keep Ortiz for a year if he can be had at a decent number. I think he will push hard for two years and that is probably going to be tough for the Sox to swallow. At least it should be.

[Palodios]

You are diverting the discussion. SFF said that the difference between the Sox and Tampa was heart. I disagreed and said that the difference was pitching and mentioned that some combination of Lackey' date=' Wakefield, Miller and Weiland were going to the mound 3 out of 5 days with little hope for success. That was the difference-- pitching and pitching depth. You are wandering off topic.[/quote']

 

Sure, Tampa had better pitching, but the Red Sox had better offense. What SFF says is true. Even in the games they should have won-- when they did have good pitching-- they didn't have heart.

[a700hitter]

Sure' date=' Tampa had better pitching, but the Red Sox had better offense. What SFF says is true. Even in the games they should have won-- when they did have good pitching-- they didn't have heart.[/quote']Did they really have better offense when they had Lowrie batting cleanup and 5th, or when Reddick was batting behind Ortiz or when Lavarnway was batting 5th behind AGon. The offense was the better functioning part of the team, but it was not enough to overcome a pitching staff that had 7.5 + ERA in September. Heart had nothing to do with it. Why would anyone want to establish that it was heart in light of the fact that most of the heartless roster will be returning for 2012. That doesn't give me much hope.

[iortiz]

No' date=' the difference between the Sox and the Rays was starting pitching and pitching depth. We were running Wakefield, Miller, Weiland and Lacey to the mound three out of every 5 games with virtually no chance of winning. Does the whole roster need to be plown up? No, but there was an organizational failure that needs to be addressed. [b']The FO and management team needs to be blown up.[/b] Are they a long way from winning ? No, but you should have some good talent assembled for $174 million. It is no feather in their cap that they won 90 games for $174 million. Someone else can take the core of this team and fine tune it to get it to the next level.

 

Exactly.

 

That's what I meant. Blow up the FO and the coaching staff. I would like that some players walk as well like Lackey but let's face the true, these busts are under long terms and expensive contracts thanks to our GM and nobody would trade him, not even for peanuts.

 

It's clear that our top management has showed a huge lack of leadership and discipline execution among a lot other. It's not like "oks Theo, take the money and bring CC, Gonzalez, Lackey etc. and then take the rest of the year off". He is responsible for the whole operation of this team; not only prior the season but during and after it as well. Sure, maybe he doesn't spend the same time with the players like the manager and the coaching staff do, but still his obligation is being observant, mindful, attentive, regardful, watchful, obliging, etc. for what is going on in this team and execute the needed measures in order to correct the issue(s).

 

You can put an all-star team but if you have a poor and weak leadership by the manager, coaching staff and mostly your GM, like ours (last 3-4 years), you will not succeed. This organization is clearly soft from the FO to the manager to the coaching staff (in the end the GM puts or removes this staff). We need a GM and a coaching staff with strong hand. People who can lead "super stars" and not one who make 'em their buddies.

 

A lot of "ifs" "should have played" "what else he can do "they were lucky, we are not" " in the paper...." "OPSs", "2 WSs" . Stop excuses. Front our reality, we have failed back to back to back years. Assume the accountability and mostly accept THE CONSEQUENCES.

 

Our new GM shouldn't be necessary a current employee at the baseball industry. As I said, we need the profile. Someone with great management skills and leadership profile in all aspects. I don't care if he is young or not, that argument is ********. We need someone talented beyond the age. Tons of young and not too young with great experience managing great companies, even bigger than the Red Sox are out there with MBA and PHD degrees, so... Don't be afraid if Theo walks. This organization is bigger than him.

[SoxSport]

"Ft Myers Country Club"?

 

My, how the media has changed their tune. Not a whisper of this for years.

It takes a team collapse and a manager to get fired for the media to start spilling the beans to the fans.

 

A year ago, just a few "conspiracy-theorist" posters were suggesting maybe there was a connection between all the injuries last year and improper conditioning. And that maybe the slow April was an indication these guys were spending more time on the Sanibel beach than the Ft Myers ballpark during spring training.

 

I had a funny feeling this team was beginning to look like the old Yawkey Country clubs of the 1950s and 60s. That was prior to Dick Williams arrival, by the way. Apparently, not far from the truth.

[SoxSport]

From the Globe yesterday, Peter Abraham:

 

Extra Bases Five-Point Plan To Fix The Red Sox:

 

1. John Henry has to get involved. The Red Sox should be a priority, not part of his portfolio. Make it clear in words and deeds that you expect excellence. His silence is deafening.

 

2. Close the Fort Myers County Club. Make it clear to every player invited to spring training that they better show up early and in shape. If it takes sending trainers out to check up players every few weeks this winter, then that's what it takes.

Being in good condition and ready for 162 games should be an expectation for the players, not a choice.

 

3. Demand accountability. The Red Sox have lost track of the little things. The whole team should be on the field for the National Anthem, for instance. There should be a less excuse-making or complaining. Hiding from the media should not be allowed. Why is it every time the Sox lose, the same two or three players are left to explain it?

 

You saw how it translated onto the field. Missed cutoff men, running into outs, etc. Being professional and accountable is not a sometimes thing.

 

4. Get a strong pitching coach. Or a manager who knows pitching. All Terry Francona knew about pitching was that he didn't know much about pitching and he left it in the hands of others. That works with a strong pitching coach like John Farrell, but Curt Young never seemed to get a handle on the staff.

The Red Sox don't have to have dominant pitching to win. But they have to be reliable and that wasn't the case.

 

5. Change some faces. The 2012 Red Sox should not look like a reunion of the 2007 team. Shake it up a little bit. Get some players in here with something to prove, not reputations to protect.

 

The Red Sox do not need to start over, blow the whole thing up or run the bums out. They finished a game out of the playoffs, not 10. Let's not descend on Fenway Park with pitchforks and torches quite yet.

 

This guy Abraham knows how to read my lips.Or my posts.

 

Actually, I'm not the only poster who said Francona doesn't know beans about pitching.

Said it for years. How do I know? I saw him manage in Philly--and wreck Schilling.

Curt loves him because he let him throw 145 pitches per game-after which he had to have a shoulder operation.

[Spitball]

I agree the Rays have done a better job of drafting, but they have had an advantage by being crappy for years. Between 1999 and 2008, they had four number 1 overall picks, one number 2, one number 3, a number 4, a number 6, and a number 8. In the same period, the earliest Red Sox pick was number 17 and most were way down there.

[jung]

I really do think it is time for MLB to consider seriously allowing teams to trade draft picks. There is no longer any benefit to the small market teams in not being able to trade draft picks and it just hamstrings the whole process. How much more flexibility would all teams have to move players if they could move draft picks into the deal?

[SoxSport]

No' date=' the difference between the Sox and the Rays was starting pitching and pitching depth. We were running Wakefield, Miller, Weiland and Lacey to the mound three out of every 5 games with virtually no chance of winning. Does the whole roster need to be plown up? No, but there was an organizational failure that needs to be addressed. The FO and management team needs to be blown up. Are they a long way from winning ? No, but you should have some good talent assembled for $174 million. It is no feather in their cap that they won 90 games for $174 million. Someone else can take the core of this team and fine tune it to get it to the next level.[/quote']

 

Some of this is Epstein. But some of it is Tito, too. He always stayed with dead horses for too long.

Abraham had it right in the Globe about Tito. Henry was not enthiusiastric about extending him before the September collapse. He knew about the team problems. When players are underachieving, the manager gets implicated.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Well, for everyone who was crying about us not getting anymore pitching, take a look at this from ESPN Boston

 

The Red Sox, according to a club official, also discussed Fister with the Mariners. The club official said the Sox would have had to part with pitcher Kyle Weiland, outfielder Ryan Kalish and two lesser prospects to make the deal.

 

Theo made the absolute right move in not pulling the trigger on this. Kalish is a future 20/20 guy.

 

I'm not saying that Theo did a good job this season, because he didn't. But it sounds like the Mariners were trying to trade rape Theo on the Fister deal.

 

And yes. That's the last time I'll ever use "rape" and "fister" in the same sentence.

[a700hitter]

Well, for everyone who was crying about us not getting anymore pitching, take a look at this from ESPN Boston

 

 

 

Theo made the absolute right move in not pulling the trigger on this. Kalish is a future 20/20 guy.

 

I'm not saying that Theo did a good job this season, because he didn't. But it sounds like the Mariners were trying to trade rape Theo on the Fister deal.

 

And yes. That's the last time I'll ever use "rape" and "fister" in the same sentence.

I never believe the after the fact cover stories on why they didn't get a player. It's just CYA propaganda. When the unnamed Sox official comes forward and Seattle confirms the information, I'll believe it. Until that happens, I'll not be duped by them. This is standard operating procedure for the Red Sox FO.

[example1]

I never believe the after the fact cover stories on why they didn't get a player. It's just CYA propaganda. When the unnamed Sox official comes forward and Seattle confirms the information' date=' I'll believe it. Until that happens, I'll not be duped by them. This is standard operating procedure for the Red Sox FO.[/quote']

 

Quick a700, who did the Tigers give up for Fister? Don't look it up, just tell us. Were they good prospects? Do you know?

 

Everything that looks reasonable by the FO is propaganda in your eyes. Everything that looks like a poor decision (despite not being confirmed) is immediately seen as a sign of incompetence.

 

This seems like a very reasonable proposal, and an attempt to buy low from the Sox on Kalish--particularly when they were desperate for pitching and had Reddick having a typical hot-streak in RF.

 

I'm glad they didn't pull the trigger on that move either.

[boston22407]

I also think that Tito and/or Theo will be gone .

 

[a700hitter]

I'm glad they didn't pull the trigger on that move either.

If the offer really happened, then why won't a Red Sox FO person attach his name to it? There's no privacy to be protected that they haven't already breached by leaking it on a no-name basis. It's not like the story is anti-Red Sox so the person would have to fear retribution by the employer. The story supports the team decision. The reason that no name is attached is because it gives them deniability. I am not so easily duped by these tactics.

[Palodios]

If the offer really happened' date=' then why won't a Red Sox FO person attach his name to it? There's no privacy to be protected that they haven't already breached by leaking it on a no-name basis. It's not like the story is anti-Red Sox so the person would have to fear retribution by the employer. The story supports the team decision. The reason that no name is attached is because it gives them deniability. I am not so easily duped by these tactics.[/quote']

 

When was the last time a team officially stated what offers were on the table? It doesn't happen, it is always done behind close doors. Are you really asking Theo to throw away business ettiquette for your own ego?

[a700hitter]

When was the last time a team officially stated what offers were on the table? It doesn't happen' date=' it is always done behind close doors. Are you really asking Theo to throw away business ettiquette for your own ego?[/quote']But leaking them on a no name basis isn't a breach of business etiquette? Get real.

[SoxFanForsyth]

But leaking them on a no name basis isn't a breach of business etiquette? Get real.

 

It's always "sources" and names are never revealed.

 

That doesn't withdraw the validity of the information by any means. And Gordon Edes isn't the type of reporter who would risk his job by spewing a ******** story, or by printing something that he heard from a less-than-credible source.

[Palodios]

But leaking them on a no name basis isn't a breach of business etiquette? Get real.

 

Nope, no it is not. That is how things are done.

[a700hitter]

It's always "sources" and names are never revealed.

 

That doesn't withdraw the validity of the information by any means. And Gordon Edes isn't the type of reporter who would risk his job by spewing a ******** story, or by printing something that he heard from a less-than-credible source.

I am not doubting Edes or the quality of the source. There is a reason why names are never attached to the stories. It has nothing to do with business etiquette. It's ridiculous to think that it is not a breach of business etiquette, because it is done on a no-name basis. The story is deliberately planted to provide cover for the FO. Is the story true? It might be. It might not be. I give it no credence unless a name is associated with it. I know for a fact that the Mets planted a story about an offer they had made to Toronto for Halladay. It was a very generous offer which they claimed Toronto turned down. The claim was made on a no name basis. Later, a Toronto official stated that the Mets had not inquired about Halladay. Without confirmation from Seattle, the story is meaningless to me. If the offer is accurate, getting a staring pitcher at age 27 with a 2.83 ERA and 216 IP, would not be a terrible deal.

[a700hitter]

Nope' date=' no it is not. That is how things are done.[/quote']...and it's done that way to CYA and provide both teams with deniability. That's the reason for the etiquette. If you disagree, tell me the reason for doing it on a no-names basis. What the reason why that is the etiquette? The answer is not "well, that's just the way it is done." It's done that way for a reason. What's the reason?

[example1]

...and it's done that way to CYA and provide both teams with deniability. That's the reason for the etiquette. If you disagree' date=' tell me the reason for doing it on a no-names basis. What the reason why that is the etiquette? The answer is not "well, that's just the way it is done." It's done that way for a reason. What's the reason?[/quote']

 

The funny part is that if the Sox were trying to prove that Fister was virtually unavailable because the asking price was too high, why would they choose Weiland, Kalish and two low level prospects? Most fans don't know who Kalish is. Many (including you) might still have made the deal (again, based on hindsight).

 

If they were making it up, why not say "they were asking for Bard, Weiland, Kalish and Lavarnway" to just seal the deal? Or "Iglesias, Ranaudo, Kalish and Bryce Brentz"? There's plenty of deals that could be absolute locks according to anyone.

 

Weiland and Kalish and low-level ++ is only unacceptable to the informed. Joe-Red-Sox doesn't care about any of those players at this point and sees Fister as the potential savior...