2011-2012 Offseason Thread

[a700hitter]

I like what Ortiz has given all of us for years, but I wasn't overly impressed with him last year as a leader and don't think that he's capable of being an elite team leader, which is what this team needs.

Do you blame him for Theo leaving?

[example1]

What do you mean by this?

 

I don't think Ortiz handles team adversity too well. When things are going well he's great, when things aren't going well I think he could show more leadership. It's a subtle thing; he's not a BAD leader.

 

Do you disagree?

[example1]

Do you blame him for Theo leaving?

 

What?

[a700hitter]

In particular, Ortiz last year looked like he really had made a step with his plate discipline. I saw him not chase a lot of pitches that he chased in previous years. I don't know what caused that change but it was impressive.

I thought you suspected that his plate discipline was PED induced?

[User Name]

I don't think Ortiz handles team adversity too well. When things are going well he's great, when things aren't going well I think he could show more leadership. It's a subtle thing; he's not a BAD leader.

 

Do you disagree?

 

I simply didn't understand what you meant by "elite" leader. I'm assuming from this post it's because you think he's not good at dealing with adversity.

 

I honestly don't have an opinion on the subject, but wanted you to clear yours up because i didn't understand.

[example1]

I thought you suspected that his plate discipline was PED induced?

 

I don't know what to attribute it to. I suspect that his improvement could have been induced. He's been caught once, so I won't take it off the table. I won't take it off the table for any player who returns to near-peak form who has also been associated with PEDs. I think that's well within my rights.

[example1]

I simply didn't understand what you meant by "elite" leader. I'm assuming from this post it's because you think he's not good at dealing with adversity.

 

I honestly don't have an opinion on the subject, but wanted you to clear yours up because i didn't understand.

 

I think there are different levels of leaders. I wouldn't put Ortiz at the top of that list. Of course, I don't work with him so I don't know how he was behind the scenes, but in public I think he could have handled things better.

[a700hitter]

I don't know what to attribute it to. I suspect that his improvement could have been induced. He's been caught once' date=' so I won't take it off the table. I won't take it off the table for any player who returns to near-peak form who has also been associated with PEDs. I think that's well within my rights.[/quote']I didn't realize that PEDs helped plate discipline.

[a700hitter]

I think there are different levels of leaders. I wouldn't put Ortiz at the top of that list. Of course' date=' I don't work with him so I don't know how he was behind the scenes, but in public I think he could have handled things better.[/quote']If I jumped to a conclusion like this about someone, your head would be exploding.

[example1]

I didn't realize that PEDs helped plate discipline.

 

I don't know if it does. I suspect that you would find that a huge number of admitted PED users historically had a better OBP (whether driven by AVG or seeing worse pitches).

 

I do think that if Ortiz is suddenly hitting the ball hard, pitchers are going to pitch him more carefully and, conversely, when he can't hit anything even s***** pitchers are going right after him. That could play as an appearance of plate discipline.

[example1]

If I jumped to a conclusion like this about someone' date=' your head would be exploding. [/quote']

 

No I wouldn't. If you said "Tom Brady is a better leader than Mark Sanchez" do you think I would freak out? How about Bill Belichick over Rex Ryan?

 

I'm not even a Patriots fan (believe it or not!) but I can't imagine a situation where Belichick says "that timeout was the worst timeout in the history of football" about a young quarterback who needs his coach to have his back. It's a stupid and impulsive thing to say; Ryan has plenty of them and apologizes for them later.

 

I think someone like Ryan is a good leader compared to the average person, but that he doesn't take it to the next level the way other people can. Similarly, I think Ortiz is a good leader but isn't "elite" because he loses his composure and doesn't consistently take the team into account.

 

He goes after umps, he charges into press conferences, etc., None of those are deal-breakers for me, but they compromise the greater-good for his impulses.

[a700hitter]

No I wouldn't. If you said "Tom Brady is a better leader than Mark Sanchez" do you think I would freak out? How about Bill Belichick over Rex Ryan?

 

I'm not even a Patriots fan (believe it or not!) but I can't imagine a situation where Belichick says "that timeout was the worst timeout in the history of football" about a young quarterback who needs his coach to have his back. It's a stupid and impulsive thing to say; Ryan has plenty of them and apologizes for them later.

 

I think someone like Ryan is a good leader compared to the average person, but that he doesn't take it to the next level the way other people can. Similarly, I think Ortiz is a good leader but isn't "elite" because he loses his composure and doesn't consistently take the team into account.

 

He goes after umps, he charges into press conferences, etc., None of those are deal-breakers for me, but they compromise the greater-good for his impulses.

Leadership in football is much easier to gauge, because teams are designed around their QBs. Their leadership is demonstrated on the field and most fans would make a judgment about their leadership in that context. We still don't know what the guy is like in the clubhouse. He could be a great field general, but a dick in the clubhouse.

[example1]

Leadership in football is much easier to gauge' date=' because teams are designed around their QBs. Their leadership is demonstrated on the field and most fans would make a judgment about their leadership in that context. We still don't know what the guy is like in the clubhouse. He could be a great field general, but a dick in the clubhouse.[/quote']

 

Who would be the dick in the clubhouse? You lost me.

 

I think Ortiz and Youkilis are similar. I think their passions get the best of them and sometimes at the expense of the team. Ortiz will scream at a pitcher for a brushback or even get suspended few games and charge the mound.

 

Yes, football and baseball are different games.

 

I hate to say it, but Jeter is a great leader. He's steady and measured. I think he's a notch above someone like Ortiz. When things are going well he isn't out there being flamboyant and boisterous, and when things are going poorly he doesn't disappear. Measured and consistent.

 

I don't think Ortiz is that way. It's just my opinion, but I think there are examples to back it up.

[a700hitter]

Who would be the dick in the clubhouse? You lost me.

A QB could demonstrate great field generalship but be a dick in the clubhouse. Both are aspect of leadership. We can observe one and not the other.

 

I hate to say it' date=' but Jeter is a great leader. He's steady and measured. I think he's a notch above someone like Ortiz. When things are going well he isn't out there being flamboyant and boisterous, and when things are going poorly he doesn't disappear. Measured and consistent.[/quote']Jeter is non-controversial, and some people mistake that for other attributes like leadership. What i have heard about him is that he is a fairly aloof teammate.

[example1]

A QB could demonstrate great field generalship but be a dick in the clubhouse. Both are aspect of leadership. We can observe one and not the other.

 

What about a quarterback who is both a great field general and great in the clubhouse? Would that person be a better leader than someone who has deficiencies in one area or the other? I would say so.

 

If you agree that there are traits that make people better leaders than others (such as being a good leader across multiple domains) then you agree with me that there are levels of leadership.

 

Jeter is non-controversial, and some people mistake that for other attributes like leadership. What i have heard about him is that he is a fairly aloof teammate.

 

I guess so man. I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

You name someone you consider to be a consistently good leader. Joe Montana? Jason Varitek?

 

Some player from back in your heyday? I'm sure you can come up with someone who you think is better than others, and you can undoubtedly articulate why you (and others) bought into that person's leadership style.

 

Have at it.

 

What I'm saying isn't particularly controversial.

[a700hitter]

What about a quarterback who is both a great field general and great in the clubhouse? Would that person be a better leader than someone who has deficiencies in one area or the other? I would say so.

 

If you agree that there are traits that make people better leaders than others (such as being a good leader across multiple domains) then you agree with me that there are levels of leadership.

My point is that it is much harder to know about the type of leader a guy is in the clubhouse. Our only window into that aspect is what the players teammates, coaches and managers say about the guy. I haven't heard anything negative about Ortiz from those sources throughout the years, but i ahve heard a lot positive about him

 

I guess so man. I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

It's been written and said a lot about Jeter in the NY Press. He leads by example in how he prepares himself and how he plays the game. But he is not a go to guy in the clubhouse. He's not an active clubhouse leader.

 

I'm sure you can come up with someone who you think is better than others, and you can undoubtedly articulate why you (and others) bought into that person's leadership style.

 

Have at it.

 

What I'm saying isn't particularly controversial.

I think leadership in baseball is vastly overrated. It's a game that lends itself to individualism. You don't need someone to pass you the ball or block for you to be successful. Some of the best players in history were very selfish people. There have been very few leaders that I have seen in baseball that make a difference-- Fisk and Bench were two of them. Those don't grow on trees.

[example1]

I guess we can just disagree then?

 

I think that all things being equal, leadership is an important trait to have in sports--whether baseball or football or hockey. It isn't more important than talent, but it bumps a talented player to another level IMO and is something to be coveted.

[a700hitter]

I guess we can just disagree then?

 

I think that all things being equal, leadership is an important trait to have in sports--whether baseball or football or hockey. It isn't more important than talent, but it bumps a talented player to another level IMO and is something to be coveted.

I don't see this happening to any significant extent in baseball. I think a hitter like Pujols (or when the Sox had Manny and Ortiz) makes the hitters around him better, but that has nothing to do with leadership.

[example1]

You've made your point. You think leadership is essentially insignificant in baseball and you don't think that a good player is better (i.e., more valuable) if they are a good leader. I disagree. I think baseball is a team sport and I think there are plenty of examples of players whose leadership was a significant aspect of what they brought to the table.

 

Leadership can look very different for different players, as you pointed out, but the trait of being able to get others to follow you into battle--whether as a pitcher, a catcher, a manager, etc.,--is something that I suspect most teams would say is valuble.

 

Again, we can agree to disagree since this is an entirely subjective subject... assuming that is okay with you.

[Bellhorn04]

On the leadership/clubhouse thing, the Joe Torre book did have some fairly interesting stuff on this. You could even see some parallels between what happened with Torre and what happened with Francona.

 

Torre confirmed that it was important to have guys within the clubhouse that helped you control things. Paul O'Neil was a guy who would get in other players' faces when they weren't giving it full effort or whatever. And he was respected so other players would listen to him. The impression of Jeter was that he was quiet but that he did give leadership by example because of his work ethic and the fact that he wanted to play every game even when he wasn't 100%.

[SoxFanForsyth]

According to Rob Bradford from WEEI (via Twitter), the Sox have made an offer to Ortiz. Not sure any numbers, probably low ball right now.

[a700hitter]

You've made your point. You think leadership is essentially insignificant in baseball and you don't think that a good player is better (i.e., more valuable) if they are a good leader. I disagree. I think baseball is a team sport and I think there are plenty of examples of players whose leadership was a significant aspect of what they brought to the table.

 

Leadership can look very different for different players, as you pointed out, but the trait of being able to get others to follow you into battle--whether as a pitcher, a catcher, a manager, etc.,--is something that I suspect most teams would say is valuble.

 

Again, we can agree to disagree since this is an entirely subjective subject... assuming that is okay with you.

You almost got it right. I never said that leadership doesn't make a good player better. Of course it does, but leaders in baseball are rare, because it is has always been an individualized game, and it is more so today since team play like hitting behind runners etc. has essentially gone out the window as sabremetirics has dominated the sport. There's no situational hitting any more-- among other things. These were the the things that set the team player apart. The team players were the leaders. In baseball there are less opportunities for leaders to assert themselves.

[SoxFanForsyth]

BNightengale Bob Nightengale

The #Cubs telling teams they'll listen to trade offers on everyone this winter while trying to rebuild team to be competitive in future.#mlb

 

Wonder what kind of a haul it would take to pull Garza from the Cubbies. There's zero chance that Theo/Hoyer don't covet a lot of the Sox prospects. Maybe throw the Cubs Ranaudo + Kalish/Brentz/Jacobs + Vitek, and then don't ask for anything in return for Theo.

[a700hitter]

Wonder what kind of a haul it would take to pull Garza from the Cubbies. There's zero chance that Theo/Hoyer don't covet a lot of the Sox prospects. Maybe throw the Cubs Ranaudo + Kalish/Brentz/Jacobs + Vitek' date=' and then don't ask for anything in return for Theo.[/quote']Before can we make a trade with them we need to settle the compensation issue. BTW When Selig extended the Nov 1 deadline for the compensation, was that an open-ended extension?

[SoxFanForsyth]

Before can we make a trade with them we need to settle the compensation issue. BTW When Selig extended the Nov 1 deadline for the compensation' date=' was that an open-ended extension?[/quote']

 

I'm saying that they can tack on the compensation for Theo into the deal. So, ultimately it would be Theo + Ranaudo + Kalish + Vitek for Garza + Mid-Level.

 

I would hate to get rid of Kalish, but I'm all for getting Garza.

[a700hitter]

I'm saying that they can tack on the compensation for Theo into the deal. So, ultimately it would be Theo + Ranaudo + Kalish + Vitek for Garza + Mid-Level.

 

I would hate to get rid of Kalish, but I'm all for getting Garza.

I would take it, but what is Garza's contract? If they are looking to stay under the cap, that is a concern.

[Laser Show]

I would take it' date=' but what is Garza's contract? If they are looking to stay under the cap, that is a concern.[/quote']

 

2 more years of team control before he hits the FA market.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I would take it' date=' but what is Garza's contract? If they are looking to stay under the cap, that is a concern.[/quote']

 

Yup. Arb eligible through 2013, FA in 2014. Beckett's last year is in 2014, so there could be a bit of tradeoff there. Also, 2014 is the last year of Lackey's deal (2015 league min option, which we will surely exercise but that won't matter too much).

 

The problem is that guys like Lester and Ellsbury will have their contracts expire around the same time. Could be a bit tricky, but by the time he's a FA, the cap will be over $185mm (it was $178mm in 2011), so that will free up some room too.

[FredLynn]

Before can we make a trade with them we need to settle the compensation issue. BTW When Selig extended the Nov 1 deadline for the compensation' date=' was that an open-ended extension?[/quote']

 

Its open ended to an extent. Cherington said that if the two sides don't come to an agreement soon then MLB will take over and make a determination on compensation. I have already proposed to Sox management that in exchange for taking Epstein off our hands we should not surrender anything more than one starting position player.

[NZSox]

A fit and healthy (touch wood) Buchholz will feel like a new signing.