Which players ended up costing Francona his job?

[iortiz]

I'll laugh at this when he rebuilds the Cubs and gets them their first WS ring in over 100 years. Theo can only construct the roster, he can't get the players to perform. There's a certain level of accountability for signing these guys, but this team was the best team for most of the year, and essentially pissed it away in 30 days, where the pitching staff shat the bed. Theo has put together 2 championship teams, and 1 team that should have easily won in 2008. This 2011 team was just as powerful as any of those teams, moreso offensively, and the pitching staff at 100% on paper, was very solid. No one expected Lackey to s*** the bed this year, or for Buch and Dice-K to go down, forcing Wake and Weiland/Miller to pitch. No one expected Lester and Beckett to s*** the bed for an entire month either.

 

This team had all the tools to win the WS this year, the players were the ones who didn't come through. Crawford will now continue to hit for .600 OPS, in fact I think it's very likely he returns to .800+ OPS. I highly doubt Lackey continues to fight Burnett for worst starting pitching in baseball. He was solid in 2010, I think he can be at that form next year if he doesn't get traded. All there is to do is add a pitcher to replace Dice-K, and IMO, this team is as well-rounded as the Phillies. I'm not counting on Lackey to come through at all, but I believe he is capable of returning to at least 2010 form, which is a very solid middle of the rotation pitcher.

 

I know that you like the OPS thing and the Sabermetric stuff, but in this case it doesn't matter how you split those stats. This team achieved zero results the last 3 years, ZERO. Organizations don't live and breath from the past, trust me. They move on, and if you no longer deliver results, you go, as simple as that. Hell, how much money did he spend? and how much money did this team lose by not making the POs the last 3 years? Seems like the balance is not favorable according with his expected KPIs given by the owners vs the outcome (last 3 years). I wouldn't be surprise if JH doesn't understand about sabermetrics. What He understands and very well is about financial metrics and concepts like NPV/IRR/ROI/cash flow etc. Seems like the owners are not comfortable how these metrics look like lately.

 

As i said, a GM doesn't take a portion of accountability when things go good or bad but ALL of it. This is how Organizations work. This is not a matter of good intentions or feelings but results. If the owners are letting him talk with the Cubs, it's pretty clear that they realized that the gap between good intentions and expected outcome can't be borne anymore and as a result they are making his exit easier. If he he succeed there, good for him and the Cubs, but this team needs fresh blood. This ain't personal but strictly business.

[a700hitter]

I'll laugh at this when he rebuilds the Cubs and gets them their first WS ring in over 100 years. Theo can only construct the roster, he can't get the players to perform. There's a certain level of accountability for signing these guys, but this team was the best team for most of the year, and essentially pissed it away in 30 days, where the pitching staff shat the bed. Theo has put together 2 championship teams, and 1 team that should have easily won in 2008. This 2011 team was just as powerful as any of those teams, moreso offensively, and the pitching staff at 100% on paper, was very solid. No one expected Lackey to s*** the bed this year, or for Buch and Dice-K to go down, forcing Wake and Weiland/Miller to pitch. No one expected Lester and Beckett to s*** the bed for an entire month either.

 

This team had all the tools to win the WS this year, the players were the ones who didn't come through. Crawford will now continue to hit for .600 OPS, in fact I think it's very likely he returns to .800+ OPS. I highly doubt Lackey continues to fight Burnett for worst starting pitching in baseball. He was solid in 2010, I think he can be at that form next year if he doesn't get traded. All there is to do is add a pitcher to replace Dice-K, and IMO, this team is as well-rounded as the Phillies. I'm not counting on Lackey to come through at all, but I believe he is capable of returning to at least 2010 form, which is a very solid middle of the rotation pitcher.

Theo fine tuned the 2004 team. He didn't build it. I give him almost all of the credit for 2007. In 2008, we would have had back to back titles, but Beckett got injured and they stuck with Buchholz too long. He wasn't ready. He went 2-9 and cost us the Division Title. In the end the 2008 team wasn't good enough.

 

The same goes for 2011. The team wasn't good enough. You say that the team had all the tools, but the players didn't come through. Of course the players are at fault. They lost it on the field. They weren't good enough, and Theo put together the roster of players that were not good enough. Saying that they were good enough but just didn't win is a cop out. If they didn't lose because they weren't good enough, then why did they lose? Injuries? That's another cop out. Injuries are part of the game. Underperformance? Another cop out. Every roster has guys that over perform and under perform. We got a break out season from Ellsbury that no one expected. Beckett outperformed, so did Papelbon, and so did Ortiz. Are you saying that the players didn't give it their best? I'm not buying in on that one. On the whole the team just wasn't good enough over 162 games. That fault is at Theo's doorstep.

[SoxSport]

The only two beer drinkers left next year will be Lester and Beckett.

[Palodios]

The same goes for 2011. The team wasn't good enough. You say that the team had all the tools' date=' but the players didn't come through. Of course the players are at fault. They lost it on the field. They weren't good enough, and Theo put together the roster of players that were not good enough. Saying that they were good enough but just didn't win is a cop out. If they didn't lose because they weren't good enough, then why did they lose? Injuries? That's another cop out. Injuries are part of the game. Underperformance? Another cop out. Every roster has guys that over perform and under perform. We got a break out season from Ellsbury that no one expected. Beckett outperformed, so did Papelbon, and so did Ortiz. Are you saying that the players didn't give it their best? I'm not buying in on that one. On the whole the team just wasn't good enough over 162 games. That fault is at Theo's doorstep.[/quote']

 

The truth is out. Tito had absolutely no control over the club by the end of the year. Pitchers were drinking in the clubhouse, half the team was out of shape, and the environment was a poison for the younger players. I'm starting to think that A-gon's comments about God may have been guilty/condescending words.

 

The team may not have been good enough this year, but Theo gave them plenty of parts that could be good again next year.

[Emmz]

Theo fine tuned the 2004 team. He didn't build it. I give him almost all of the credit for 2007. In 2008, we would have had back to back titles, but Beckett got injured and they stuck with Buchholz too long. He wasn't ready. He went 2-9 and cost us the Division Title. In the end the 2008 team wasn't good enough.

 

The same goes for 2011. The team wasn't good enough. You say that the team had all the tools, but the players didn't come through. Of course the players are at fault. They lost it on the field. They weren't good enough, and Theo put together the roster of players that were not good enough. Saying that they were good enough but just didn't win is a cop out. If they didn't lose because they weren't good enough, then why did they lose? Injuries? That's another cop out. Injuries are part of the game. Underperformance? Another cop out. Every roster has guys that over perform and under perform. We got a break out season from Ellsbury that no one expected. Beckett outperformed, so did Papelbon, and so did Ortiz. Are you saying that the players didn't give it their best? I'm not buying in on that one. On the whole the team just wasn't good enough over 162 games. That fault is at Theo's doorstep.

 

You're ridiculous if you're saying these teams weren't good enough. They were supposed to win titles, they were built to win, but the fact that the players choked doesn't mean they weren't good enough, it means that they didn't play up to their capabilities. This is not Theo's fault. Theo's just accountable to some degree as is the case with all GMs when their teams fail. He can only assemble the roster, which is something that, for the past hundred or so posts on this topic, you've let go in one ear and out the other. You just keep saying that he put together teams that weren't good enough, even when you know full well that they were, considering how hyped you were coming into this season, and when they were the best team in baseball.

 

I don't get how the team choking, plus the combination of bad luck equals to not being good enough.

[example1]

You're ridiculous if you're saying these teams weren't good enough. They were supposed to win titles, they were built to win, but the fact that the players choked doesn't mean they weren't good enough, it means that they didn't play up to their capabilities. This is not Theo's fault. Theo's just accountable to some degree as is the case with all GMs when their teams fail. He can only assemble the roster, which is something that, for the past hundred or so posts on this topic, you've let go in one ear and out the other. You just keep saying that he put together teams that weren't good enough, even when you know full well that they were, considering how hyped you were coming into this season, and when they were the best team in baseball.

 

I don't get how the team choking, plus the combination of bad luck equals to not being good enough.

 

a700 doesn't believe in luck. That pretty much explains it. "Breaks" don't go your way, or the other teams way. They even out and, therefore, don't exist.

[iortiz]

A lot of "luck-thing" "good intentions", "ifs" and "excuses". The results are there. Move on, Theo is the main responsible, if you can't see that you should research what is the role of a GM in an organization and how they are rated and evaluated.

[Palodios]

A lot of "luck-thing" "good intentions"' date=' "ifs" and "excuses". The results are there. Move on, Theo is the main responsible, if you can't see that you should research what is the role of a GM in an organization and how they are rated and evaluated.[/quote']

 

If your coaches can't keep the players in good physical shape, it doesn't matter how stacked the team is. That's not an excuse, that's pointing the blame to where it belongs: The terrible job done by the coaching staff.

[iortiz]

If your coaches can't keep the players in good physical shape' date=' it doesn't matter how stacked the team is. That's not an excuse, that's pointing the blame to where it belongs: The terrible job done by the coaching staff.[/quote']

 

Sure, but still Theo's fault. All those guys are under Theo's command and as GM he bears all the accountability, that's the my point. This is how organizations works.

[Palodios]

Sure' date=' but still Theo's fault. All those guys are under Theo's command and as GM he takes all the accountability, that's the my point. This is how organizations works.[/quote']

 

Sounds like you're using him as a scapegoat to me.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

The drunks aka

 

Lester

 

Beckett, Lackey

 

Wakefield...

 

& the impressionable Buckholz

 

What'd you know?! Our starting pitching staff!

 

 

I just saw this video a couple minutes ago. I damn near went out and brought a f***ing Yankee jersey.

 

Get rid of everyone in this video. Even Lester, I don't give a s***. This is one of the worst things I've ever seen.

[a700hitter]

The truth is out. Tito had absolutely no control over the club by the end of the year. Pitchers were drinking in the clubhouse, half the team was out of shape, and the environment was a poison for the younger players. I'm starting to think that A-gon's comments about God may have been guilty/condescending words.

 

The team may not have been good enough this year, but Theo gave them plenty of parts that could be good again next year.

They don't have enough to win next season. We are kidding ourselves if we think the return of Buchholz and a couple BP pieces will return this team to prominence.

[Emmz]

They don't have enough to win next season. We are kidding ourselves if we think the return of Buchholz and a couple BP pieces will return this team to prominence.

 

I guarantee this team will make the playoffs next season. Sig that if you want.

[a700hitter]

I guarantee this team will make the playoffs next season. Sig that if you want.

It would be pointless to sig it, because the cast of characters will be very different than the roster at the end of the season.

[Emmz]

Sure' date=' but still Theo's fault. All those guys are under Theo's command and as GM he bears all the accountability, that's the my point. This is how organizations works.[/quote']

 

Well he hasn't been fired, so I guess that's not how organizations work. Maybe yours, but not the Red Sox. He is accountable as GM, but he did his job, he built a winner, the players did not produce. We'll never agree on this.

[Emmz]

It would be pointless to sig it' date=' because the cast of characters will be very different than the roster at the end of the season.[/quote']

 

Yeah, we're one good starter away from being an even more overpowering team than we should have been this season. I've got a good feeling about Crawford and even to some extent, Lackey next season. Even without a good starter, this team will be a force if Beckett, Lester and Buch pitch the way they should, and if Lackey even returns to 2010 numbers, he's a very solid 4th starter.

 

I think they will go after some SP help this offseason, and complete a formidable rotation to compliment what is likely to be the best offense in baseball.

[a700hitter]

Well he hasn't been fired' date=' so I guess that's not how organizations work. Maybe yours, but not the Red Sox. He is accountable as GM, but he did his job, he built a winner, the players did not produce. We'll never agree on this.[/quote']They didn't win, so he didn't build a winner. Give it time. If the FO gives the Cubs permission to talk to Theo, he's a goner. I think that where there is smoke there is fire, and this Cub thing has been out there for some time. I don't think it is baseless.

[Emmz]

They didn't win' date=' so he didn't build a winner. Give it time. If the FO gives the Cubs permission to talk to Theo, he's a goner. I think that where there is smoke there is fire, and this Cub thing has been out there for some time. I don't think it is baseless.[/quote']

 

Because they didn't win does not mean they weren't built to win, that's bad logic. You know full well that this team should have won 100 games and gone to the WS, you're just pissing and moaning and trying to take your frustration out on a guy who've you've been criticizing ever since I've joined this site. What about that old Super Theo avatar you had after he signed Crawford? You're sure singing a different tune now that the collapse has come and gone, and the Red Sox failed to meet expectations.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

They didn't win' date=' so he didn't build a winner.[/b'] Give it time. If the FO gives the Cubs permission to talk to Theo, he's a goner. I think that where there is smoke there is fire, and this Cub thing has been out there for some time. I don't think it is baseless.

 

Exactly that. No other way to put it.

 

a700 and iOrtiz are owning this thread

[DwightFright]

If Albert Pujols goes 3-21 in a 5 game series, does that mean he wasn't "good enough" to help his team win? If Roy Halladay loses a game in a 5 game series and his team loses the series, does that mean he wasn't "good enough" to help them win, or just that his performance during that stretch wasn't good enough. We're talking about team construction here, not performance over a short period. Any team with Pujols or Halladay would be right to say that the cleanup spot or the #1 rotation spot were sufficient (good enough) to get them a win, but for whatever reason it didn't work out.

 

I contend it is the same with the Sox #1 and #2 down the stretch. Neither was overloaded from the season. They both just choked when it mattered.

 

They weren't good enough down the stretch. Does that mean they weren't good enough pitchers to accomplish the task before them? No. Nobody thinks Lester and Beckett were too bad to bring this team to the playoffs.

 

Frankly, if Lester and Beckett were pitching like they can this team could have made a run in the playoffs. They had the best offense in baseball.

 

We shall see how the 'good enough' theory works out this evening when David Price takes the mound for the Rays. He was good enough in the regular season, but an enigma under pressure recently. Not even the Rays are sure which Price will show up. For a serious playoff contender, I contend that inconsistency isn't good enough just because the skillset is present.

[Emmz]

Exactly that. No other way to put it.

 

a700 and iOrtiz are owning this thread

 

Sure there is. Not winning does not mean the team wasn't built to win.

 

It's sort of like when a Quarterback is getting criticized because his receivers are dropping the balls, all the QB can do is get it there.

[SoxSport]

Just read Youks' remarks in the Globe in a radio interview. Looks like somebody was trying to make him a fall guy--of all people. He's a plugger--like Pedroia. When he falls, the team falls. Having a hernia operation tommorrow. Do you think he ever would admit the switch back to 3B was too tough for him? Not on your life. The trouble with the Sox is they don't have enough Pedeys and Youks.

 

These guys make ridiculous salaries--seen the stock market today? But they are fodder for other people who make a living writing stories or talking about them.

[a700hitter]

Sure there is. Not winning does not mean the team wasn't built to win.

 

It's sort of like when a Quarterback is getting criticized because his receivers are dropping the balls, all the QB can do is get it there.

If he used $174 million and didn't build he team to win, well that would have been a big waste of money. Unfortunately, he failed in his task, because they didn't win. It doesn't matter that the computer projections, the pundits and fans like me picked them to win, they were all wrong. Unfortunately, it goes on Theo's record.

[Palodios]

Just read Youks' remarks in the Globe in a radio interview. Looks like somebody was trying to make him a fall guy--of all people. He's a plugger--like Pedroia. When he falls, the team falls. Having a hernia operation tommorrow. Do you think he ever would admit the switch back to 3B was too tough for him? Not on your life. The trouble with the Sox is they don't have enough Pedeys and Youks.

 

These guys make ridiculous salaries--seen the stock market today? But they are fodder for other people who make a living writing stories or talking about them.

 

Can you provide a link to this? If someone was trying to make Youk the fall-guy, perhaps we are we seeing the trade machine at work here?

[BigPapiEnFuego]

Just read Youks' remarks in the Globe in a radio interview. Looks like somebody was trying to make him a fall guy--of all people. He's a plugger--like Pedroia. When he falls' date=' the team falls. Having a hernia operation tommorrow. [b']Do you think he ever would admit the switch back to 3B was too tough for him? Not on your life.[/b] The trouble with the Sox is they don't have enough Pedeys and Youks.

 

These guys make ridiculous salaries--seen the stock market today? But they are fodder for other people who make a living writing stories or talking about them.

 

Then screw him. If he is in too much pain to play then he shouldn't play. I don't really care about how tough he tries to act. Yeah it's nice he wants to be a tough guy but instead of putting himself out there and playing like complete s*** just take time off and get better. He was doing nothing but hurting the team for most of the season by putting himself out there. To be honest I'm pretty sick of Youk. Seems like nothing but a hot-headed selfish loudmouth. The team certainly could use more Pedroias, but it doesn't need more Youks.

 

He wanted to talk all that crap about Ellsbury but I'll still have more respect for Ellsbury for actually dealing with his injury and making an effort to get healed instead of trying to "tough it out" and playing abysmally for a year, dragging the team down.

[example1]

They don't have enough to win next season. We are kidding ourselves if we think the return of Buchholz and a couple BP pieces will return this team to prominence.

 

 

I expect that Youk will be injured most of the year and your favorite player, Carl Crawford, will produce virtually nothing.

 

Laughable.

[example1]

I'm going to keep trusting the assessment of statistical methods and things like Expected W-L over the opinions of those who struggle to take a nuanced view.

 

The Sox had an Ex W-L of 94-68 this year. Ex W-L is one of the basics of sabermetric analysis. Look over the past few years. It is a very strong predictor (for the Sox and otherwise) of a team's outcomes.

 

This team, as much as others don't like it, was an outlier. They underperformed their Ex W-L significantly. They scored enough runs and prevented enough runs over the course of a season that should have warranted them a playoff spot.

 

Given that teams have to use actual information rather than the utility of hindsight to construct their teams, this club shouldn't scrap everything and start over.

 

There's no need to re-evaluate the way that baseball is understood. You will not see sabermatricians re-writing their books due to the tremendous new data that the epic failure of the 2011 Sox provided. They will look for why the team under-performed the projections... why the team on the field did not perform as it should have.

 

It just isn't as simple as saying that the team was poorly constructed and, in hindsight, never stood a chance. That's such a simplistic way of looking at a complex game it doesn't even do most of us justice to read it or spend any time lending it credence. I could find more intellectual gold by picking my nose for 3 hours and wiping it on a piece of graph paper.

 

The circular argument of "they weren't good enough because they weren't good enough" doesn't get anybody anywhere. It doesn't move the discussion forward at all in terms of how to best evaluate players moving into a season. It's weak sauce and reductionistic.

 

There were a ton of factors that went into it. To say the team wasn't good enough--and therefore the person who put it together needs to be fired--is reactionary and unintelligent. The argument can be made that there need to be changes, but the argument that it is "because they lost" is like saying that BB should be canned from the Patriots because they haven't won for a number of years despite their superior talent. It isn't convincing in and of itself.

[iortiz]

Sounds like you're using him as a scapegoat to me.

 

Nah... GMs always bear the whole accountability of the business, for good or for bad. Always.

 

Well he hasn't been fired' date=' so I guess that's not how organizations work. Maybe yours, but not the Red Sox. He is accountable as GM, but he did his job, he built a winner, the players did not produce. We'll never agree on this.[/quote']

 

All companies, organizations, enterprises, etc, work that way. All of 'em. The key of the game is results, not good intentions, not feelings but results, trust me. He hasn't showed results lately.

 

Maybe you'll realize how organizations work when you run a company or take a top management position. I'd be surprise if he continues. We'll see how it ends.

 

BTW I won't take credit for that prediction, since this is how organizations work. No results, you go.

As simple as that.

[Palodios]

Nah... GMs always bear the whole accountability of the business' date=' for good or for bad. Always. [/quote']

 

I don't think you understand American industry. If a company loses money here, the head of the company will fire half its staff, make the remaning staff work harder, and give himself a big bonus.

 

Which... is probably the best approach here too. Give Theo a big raise so he doesn't want to leave for the Cubs, and get rid of half the coaching staff.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

I don't think you understand American industry. If a company loses money here, the head of the company will fire half its staff, make the remaning staff work harder, and give himself a big bonus.

 

Which... is probably the best approach here too. Give Theo a big raise so he doesn't want to leave for the Cubs, and get rid of half the coaching staff.

 

...and this is why American industry and our economy is s*** :harhar: