Theo Is Gone - Boston Herald

[SoxSport]

Wow. I'm willing to bet that if Crawford isn't surrounded by jerks in the upcoming years he's going to produce like he did in Tampa. Him and Gonzalez always did seem to have good personalities. They did seem uncomfortable this year and after all this info came out I can understand why.

 

I think Crawford has to lead off next year. Pedey 2nd, Ellsbury 3rd.

 

Having Crawford lead off will improve his walk percentage (he'll be trying to get on base),

utilize his speed and restore his confidence. Ells has made himself into a no.3 hitter.

Pedey is Pedey.

[jung]

The perception problem that the Sox have at this point is that they have missed the post season two seasons in a row and look like a basket case that needs to resolve a number of issues in order to get past the teams like the Yanks and Rays to get into the post season next year. The Yanks don't appear to be getting better at this point but you cannot think they will sit still. There is always the possibility that the Yanks will buy there way back into contention. The Rays are getting better as are the Rangers for that matter.

 

The Sox are a potent team but they need so much fixing over so many dimensions of the team.

[NativeBostonian]

Red Sox keep changing. First Tito, then Theo, now this. The Red Sox replaced their old slogan "WE WON'T REST" with " Too Drunk to Care". Also, "Sweet Caroline" will be replace with “Hell, Yeah, I Like Beer".

[SoxSport]

The perception problem that the Sox have at this point is that they have missed the post season two seasons in a row and look like a basket case that needs to resolve a number of issues in order to get past the teams like the Yanks and Rays to get into the post season next year. The Yanks don't appear to be getting better at this point but you cannot think they will sit still. There is always the possibility that the Yanks will buy there way back into contention. The Rays are getting better as are the Rangers for that matter.

 

The Sox are a potent team but they need so much fixing over so many dimensions of the team.

 

It's not only a possibility, it's a matter of policy. They do what it takes.

Expect them to sign at least one lefty FA starter named Wilson.

[example1]

I still find it laughable to pretend that Theo was pushed out, as if he wouldn't still be around if the Cubs position weren't open.

 

I haven't seen a report that backs that up. So far, it is "Theo offered 20m for promotion" and "Theo deciding whether or not to go", not "Red Sox secretly fire Theo".

 

Nobody says he's perfect, but he isn't being fired and the Sox aren't cleaning with him leaving. He's being replaced by his clone, for christsakes.

[example1]

FREE AGENTS

Finds

DH David Ortiz (2003, 1 year, $1.2 million)

INF Bill Mueller (2002, 2 years, $4.5 million)

RHP Keith Foulke (2004, 3 years, $20.2 million)

LHP Hideki Okajima (2006, 2 years, $2.5 million)

RHP Takashi Saito (2009, 1 year, $1.5 million)

3B Adrian Beltre (2010, 1 year, $9 million)

RHP Alfredo Aceves (2011, I year, $650,000)

 

Busts

SS Edgar Renteria (2004, 4 years, $40 million)

RHP Matt Clement (2004, 3 years, $25.8 million)

SS Julio Lugo (2006, 4 years, $36 million)

RHP Daisuke Matsuzaka (2006, 6 years, $52 million plus $51 million posting fee)

RHP Brad Penny (2008, 1 year, $5 million)

RHP John Smoltz (2009, 1 year, $5.5 million)

RHP John Lackey (2009, 5 years, $82.5 million)

OF Mike Cameron (2009, 2 years, $15.5 million)

RHP Bobby Jenks (2 years, $12 million)

 

I ran a quick raw dollar figure by adding up all the successes and failures of Epstein during his tenure.

Successes cost his bosses: $39.55M

Failures cost his bosses: $325.30M

 

That is exactly why I think he was less than adequate for this organization. He WASTED nearly a third of a billion dollars, money that could have been spent on better players. His failures to successes ratio was nearly 10:1 in raw dollars. I could live with even a 50-50 ratio, but 10:1? Come on. There must be a guy who can use the budget a little better than that.

 

This is a pretty simplistic analysis.

 

Just to add a little bit of balance. Fangraphs values players based on the going cost of a "win" in the free agent market for each individual year. In interviews Theo has noted that the Sox use a very similar valuation tool to choose the value of their players. Remember, the Sox have made a profit so they must be getting that money/value from somewhere...

 

Anyway, my fairly simplistic value of home-grown players since 2003. I found the WAR and value from Fangraphs, and the salary composites from Baseball-Reference. Feel free to do it better if you want to spend the time:

 

[Table] Name | WAR | $-Value | Cost | Profit

Pedroia | 25.7 | 111.7 | 12.087 | 99.613 |

Lester | 22.7 | 96.3 | 11.305 | 84.995 |

Ellsbury | 17.3 | 77 | 3.751 | 73.249 |

Youkilis | 18.9 | 68.9 | 31.97 | 36.93 |

Papelbon | 15.1 | 61.9 | 29.136 | 32.764 |

Buchholz | 7.8 | 32.5 | 1.394 | 31.106 |

Bard | 4.2 | 17.4 | 0.902 | 16.498 |

Lowrie | 3.5 | 15.5 | 1.298 | 14.202 |

Masterson | 2.1 | 9.6 | 0.415 | 9.185 |

Reddick | 1.8 | 7.8 | 0.8 | 7 |

Kalish | 0.6 | 2.2 | 0.4 | 1.8 |

 

TOTAL | 119.7 | 500.8 | 93.458 | 407.342 | [/TABLE]

 

 

When people say that home grown players are very valuable, they aren't kdding.

 

Combine the above profits with the constant seat sales (sellout record) and two WS titles and it quickly becomes obvious why Theo wasn't shown the door as soon as the ownership agreed with his first poor FA signing.

[ipot]

Ortiz is already stirring the pot by grumbling in an ESPN interview that he's not sure if he wants to be on the team next year. "I don't konow if I wanna be a part of that mess..." he says.

 

Likely a ploy to get his 2-year deal.

[iortiz]

If they wanted to keep him, he'd be working on an extension with the Red Sox. You need to wake up. Ownership wants a change. Top organizations don't let top talent walk to competitors. They just don't. They step up and do what it takes to retain the talent.

 

Iortiz, you may need to chime in on this. E1 is still not getting it. :dunno:

 

Well, we said that this team could collapse in the first week of September and some called us crazy and pessimist. Then we said that Theo could go due this collapse and some called us crazy and ungrateful. Then we said that since the FO let him talk with the Cubs, they definitely wanted to try with another GM and some called us crazy again. Then we said that organizations often run this way (Fire the GM/heads) when results are not delivered and still some called us crazy and out of context ("this doesn't happen in the US and in the Boston Red Sox", sure!). And now Theo goes because he wants to?, Really?

 

If some still thinking that he is walking against RS-FO's will (keep him as GM), they are definitely crazy my friend.

 

As you said, Organizations always keep and do everything in their hands when they want to keep key pieces. It's clear that Theo is not longer a key piece in this organization, he is full of failure lately (3 years).

 

We have explained this a lot of times with apples and oranges.

 

BL. GMs walk after a consistent record of failures. In China, Mexico or US. At chemical, life science or baseball organizations. In small, medium or large corporations. Is it so hard to see? Really?

[example1]

The condecention about other people not understanding these very simple concepts like letting an executive go for under performance needs to stop.

 

Your point--that sometimes a team that does poorly fires it's executive--is true. However it is certainly not always the case. One need look no further than Brian Cashmam to see someone who has endured disappointing seasons and been retained.

 

I have been listening to as much sports radio and reading as many articles as I can find. This is a group of media that would gladly and quickly report something like the GM essentially being fired. Yet in this case that's not what they are saying. They acknowledge that this is a ruthless ownership group that smears players on their way out but they are saying almost universally that Theo is deciding to leave. There have even been reports that the ownership feels betrayed by it. With the current shitstorn I suspect they would much rather have Theo stick it out at least until his contract is up. Of course I can't confirm that just like you guys can't confirm the opposite.

 

I just warn against confusing correlation with causation here until the facts all surface. The media and ownership are so far indicating that this is Theos choice. Just as you can point to industries where sometimes executives are released for underperformance I could point to instances where employees left for a significant promotion and raise, particularly as their company is falling apart. It isn't wishful thinking. If the story were as clear as you guys initially indicated it would be widely reported as the Sox pushing Theo out. At most it is a mutual parting and I haven't seen confirmation that the sox wanted him gone--no matter how much some fans want him gone. More details are certain to emerge but this isn't a simple instance of a company replacing an underperforming executive. They are replacing him with his own clone.

[ORS]

The condecention about other people not understanding these very simple concepts like letting an executive go for under performance needs to stop.

 

Your point--that sometimes a team that does poorly fires it's executive--is true. However it is certainly not always the case. One need look no further than Brian Cashmam to see someone who has endured disappointing seasons and been retained.

 

I have been listening to as much sports radio and reading as many articles as I can find. This is a group of media that would gladly and quickly report something like the GM essentially being fired. Yet in this case that's not what they are saying. They acknowledge that this is a ruthless ownership group that smears players on their way out but they are saying almost universally that Theo is deciding to leave. There have even been reports that the ownership feels betrayed by it. With the current shitstorn I suspect they would much rather have Theo stick it out at least until his contract is up. Of course I can't confirm that just like you guys can't confirm the opposite.

 

I just warn against confusing correlation with causation here until the facts all surface. The media and ownership are so far indicating that this is Theos choice. Just as you can point to industries where sometimes executives are released for underperformance I could point to instances where employees left for a significant promotion and raise, particularly as their company is falling apart. It isn't wishful thinking. If the story were as clear as you guys initially indicated it would be widely reported as the Sox pushing Theo out. At most it is a mutual parting and I haven't seen confirmation that the sox wanted him gone--no matter how much some fans want him gone. More details are certain to emerge but this isn't a simple instance of a company replacing an underperforming executive. They are replacing him with his own clone.

You must remember a fundamental fact of human nature, my friend. Whenever the media reports contradict someone's opinion, it's always because the media is either lying or has been duped by their sources. The media is only right when it can be used for confirmation.

 

Carry on.

[a700hitter]

The condecention about other people not understanding these very simple concepts like letting an executive go for under performance needs to stop.

 

Your point--that sometimes a team that does poorly fires it's executive--is true. However it is certainly not always the case. One need look no further than Brian Cashmam to see someone who has endured disappointing seasons and been retained.

 

I have been listening to as much sports radio and reading as many articles as I can find. This is a group of media that would gladly and quickly report something like the GM essentially being fired. Yet in this case that's not what they are saying. They acknowledge that this is a ruthless ownership group that smears players on their way out but they are saying almost universally that Theo is deciding to leave. There have even been reports that the ownership feels betrayed by it. With the current shitstorn I suspect they would much rather have Theo stick it out at least until his contract is up. Of course I can't confirm that just like you guys can't confirm the opposite.

 

I just warn against confusing correlation with causation here until the facts all surface. The media and ownership are so far indicating that this is Theos choice. Just as you can point to industries where sometimes executives are released for underperformance I could point to instances where employees left for a significant promotion and raise, particularly as their company is falling apart. It isn't wishful thinking. If the story were as clear as you guys initially indicated it would be widely reported as the Sox pushing Theo out. At most it is a mutual parting and I haven't seen confirmation that the sox wanted him gone--no matter how much some fans want him gone. More details are certain to emerge but this isn't a simple instance of a company replacing an underperforming executive. They are replacing him with his own clone.

You have slipped back into denial. As for the Cashman analogy, if the Yankees miss the playoffs 3 out of 6 seasons and collapse like the Sox did in September, he too will be gone. That hasn't happened to the Yankees. They win the division almost every season and they go to the playoffs every year. In Theo's tenure the Sox won the division once--the same number of times that Duquette won the division. Over Theo's 9 years, the Rays also won the division once.

 

Believe what you want to believe. The real facts probably won't come out for years if ever. They create the public reality and release it to the press. Do you really think that someone will breach those confidences in the not too distant future? Not likely. Theo and the FO have probably inked a confidentiality agreement as well as a non-compete agreement. The FO doesn't want Theo poaching other key FO personnel. We told you that Theo was responsible, and that he would likely be gone, and he is. All the reasons why really don't matter. If he was their guy, they would have matched the Cubs offer. The Sox made the determination that they didn't want to match the offer. Believe whatever you want to believe about the circumstances of his exit, but to keep posting that you have seen no evidence that the Sox wanted him gone is making you look a little foolish and out of touch with reality.

[SoxSport]

I still find it laughable to pretend that Theo was pushed out, as if he wouldn't still be around if the Cubs position weren't open.

 

I haven't seen a report that backs that up. So far, it is "Theo offered 20m for promotion" and "Theo deciding whether or not to go", not "Red Sox secretly fire Theo".

 

Nobody says he's perfect, but he isn't being fired and the Sox aren't cleaning with him leaving. He's being replaced by his clone, for christsakes.

 

Actually, Cherington was hired by Duquette. They both went to Amherst.

 

Duquette was an underrated GM--by the media. He didn't get along with Gammons et al.

It was his players, mainly, and his farm system that won in 04.

Gammons was always pissed that Duquette didn't give him the story on the Manny Ramirez signing.

 

Epstein is getting credit in the media for everything, now that he's in Chicago--they are even saying he traded for Beckett and Lowell to win in 07. Heard that on mlb.com last night.

 

You could say Epstein was an overrated GM.

[SoxSport]

Well, we said that this team could collapse in the first week of September and some called us crazy and pessimist. Then we said that Theo could go due this collapse and some called us crazy and ungrateful. Then we said that since the FO let him talk with the Cubs, they definitely wanted to try with another GM and some called us crazy again. Then we said that organizations often run this way (Fire the GM/heads) when results are not delivered and still some called us crazy and out of context ("this doesn't happen in the US and in the Boston Red Sox", sure!). And now Theo goes because he wants to?, Really?

 

If some still thinking that he is walking against RS-FO's will (keep him as GM), they are definitely crazy my friend.

 

As you said, Organizations always keep and do everything in their hands when they want to keep key pieces. It's clear that Theo is not longer a key piece in this organization, he is full of failure lately (3 years).

 

We have explained this a lot of times with apples and oranges.

 

BL. GMs walk after a consistent record of failures. In China, Mexico or US. At chemical, life science or baseball organizations. In small, medium or large corporations. Is it so hard to see? Really?

 

Bingo

[FredLynn]

The condecention about other people not understanding these very simple concepts like letting an executive go for under performance needs to stop.

 

Your point--that sometimes a team that does poorly fires it's executive--is true. However it is certainly not always the case. One need look no further than Brian Cashmam to see someone who has endured disappointing seasons and been retained.

 

I have been listening to as much sports radio and reading as many articles as I can find. This is a group of media that would gladly and quickly report something like the GM essentially being fired. Yet in this case that's not what they are saying. They acknowledge that this is a ruthless ownership group that smears players on their way out but they are saying almost universally that Theo is deciding to leave. There have even been reports that the ownership feels betrayed by it. With the current shitstorn I suspect they would much rather have Theo stick it out at least until his contract is up. Of course I can't confirm that just like you guys can't confirm the opposite.

 

I just warn against confusing correlation with causation here until the facts all surface. The media and ownership are so far indicating that this is Theos choice. Just as you can point to industries where sometimes executives are released for underperformance I could point to instances where employees left for a significant promotion and raise, particularly as their company is falling apart. It isn't wishful thinking. If the story were as clear as you guys initially indicated it would be widely reported as the Sox pushing Theo out. At most it is a mutual parting and I haven't seen confirmation that the sox wanted him gone--no matter how much some fans want him gone. More details are certain to emerge but this isn't a simple instance of a company replacing an underperforming executive. They are replacing him with his own clone.

 

First, I appreciate your analysis of the home grown talent Epstein has provided us with over the years (in a previous post). However, that was not my point. I never disputed the fact that he is one of the most successful GMs around in drafting and developing young talent, and that is a valuable cog in the function of a GM. I would give him an A- in that regard (he did, after all, pick Bowden in round 1 and Lars Anderson and some other lemons). My point is that Epstein was given a HUGE bank roll with which to fortify the franchise with high priced proven FAs and he has failed miserably in that regard. For every dollar spent on a "find", he has spent $8.22 on a bust. That is simply unacceptable; its not even close to acceptable. In this area I would give him an "F". For this reason I think he has proven that he has fallen off the cliff as far as being the right GM for this job. And it would be a mistake IMO to replace him with someone who is his clone from within the organization. It doesn't matter to me whether he was forced out or opted out of his own volition, as long as he is OUT. Now the team can move forward and begin to become relevant again.

[FredLynn]

Ortiz is already stirring the pot by grumbling in an ESPN interview that he's not sure if he wants to be on the team next year. "I don't konow if I wanna be a part of that mess..." he says.

 

Likely a ploy to get his 2-year deal.

 

Hey IPOT...you found us.

Regarding Ortiz: he should be offered a one year deal with a club option IMO. He did produce this year; he could produce next year too. If he cannot accept that, let him walk-anywhere he wants to go. The team is in rebuilding mode now and should be looking to get younger anyway. A DH who can also play in the field and not embarass himself seems like a good idea to me.

[example1]

You have slipped back into denial. As for the Cashman analogy' date=' if the Yankees miss the playoffs 3 out of 6 seasons and collapse like the Sox did in September, he too will be gone. That hasn't happened to the Yankees. They win the division almost every season and they go to the playoffs every year. In Theo's tenure the Sox won the division once--the same number of times that Duquette won the division. Over Theo's 9 years, the Rays also won the division once.[/quote']

 

So the Yankees and Sox have the same expectations, even though the Yankees regularly spend 40-60m more than the Sox? When do the Sox get that type of leeway?

 

If the Sox spent that much more you would be expecting more for your dollars. The reality is that the Yankees have done what we expected the Sox to do (in terms of playoff appearances and one WS) and neither team has achieved what it should for the resources behind it.

 

Believe what you want to believe.

 

Phew.. I was worried I had lost your blessing to do this!

 

 

The real facts probably won't come out for years if ever. They create the public reality and release it to the press. Do you really think that someone will breach those confidences in the not too distant future? Not likely. Theo and the FO have probably inked a confidentiality agreement as well as a non-compete agreement. The FO doesn't want Theo poaching other key FO personnel. We told you that Theo was responsible, and that he would likely be gone, and he is. All the reasons why really don't matter.

 

They matter because your argument was premised on the ownership group needing to get rid of Theo, actively purge him from the situation. I contend that this group would not be getting rid of him, but he was offered a better job for more money. The Sox wanted Theo as their GM, but they didn't want him as their president. The Cubs did. Hence the move.

 

If he was their guy, they would have matched the Cubs offer.

 

And made him GM/President while firing Lucchino? I don't think so.

[NativeBostonian]

Hey IPOT...you found us.

Regarding Ortiz: he should be offered a one year deal with a club option IMO. He did produce this year; he could produce next year too. If he cannot accept that, let him walk-anywhere he wants to go. The team is in rebuilding mode now and should be looking to get younger anyway. A DH who can also play in the field and not embarass himself seems like a good idea to me.

 

Who would you have in-mind to replace him, if he walks? I would put Youkilis there. He can play DH most of the time, but unlike Ortiz, he can play the field when needed. I would have Mike Aviles play third full time and see how that goes. I know you lose a lot of power, but you also make a lot of room to sign a pitcher. Which is something that is highly needed.

[ORS]

They matter because your argument was premised on the ownership group needing to get rid of Theo' date=' actively purge him from the situation. I contend that this group would [i']not[/i] be getting rid of him, but he was offered a better job for more money. The Sox wanted Theo as their GM, but they didn't want him as their president. The Cubs did. Hence the move.

As with most of the polarized arguments here, I think the "why" falls somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

 

As a700 states, they didn't move the world to keep him, so to some degree, they didn't want him. That's not the same as absolutely wanting to be rid of him, though. I don't think he'd be on his way out if there wasn't a better offer to leave to, which is to say, take away the opportunity with the Cubs, and I think he's still the GM. The FO didn't want him enough to increase his role with the team, in other words, they didn't evaluate his performance as good enough to continue the progression of his career with them. That does show some indication that they weren't totally pleased with his work. Ultimately, the Cubs offer provided a convenient means of separation. The FO could move on to the next thing....which really isn't bad timing for them, because if you are going to institute big changes, ie "clean house", it's best to get as many rooms as you can in one sweep....without the boat rocking caused by a firing.

[a700hitter]

As with most of the polarized arguments here, I think the "why" falls somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

 

As a700 states, they didn't move the world to keep him, so to some degree, they didn't want him. That's not the same as absolutely wanting to be rid of him, though. I don't think he'd be on his way out if there wasn't a better offer to leave to, which is to say, take away the opportunity with the Cubs, and I think he's still the GM. The FO didn't want him enough to increase his role with the team, in other words, they didn't evaluate his performance as good enough to continue the progression of his career with them. That does show some indication that they weren't totally pleased with his work. Ultimately, the Cubs offer provided a convenient means of separation. The FO could move on to the next thing....which really isn't bad timing for them, because if you are going to institute big changes, ie "clean house", it's best to get as many rooms as you can in one sweep....without the boat rocking caused by a firing.

If the Cubs interest hadn't been there, he might not have been fired at this time. I believe that if had stayed, he would have been on very thin ice. However, the Cubs situation was the perfect excuse for ownership to change direction without dirtying its hands. If they thought he was the key to the franchise's future, the owners would have sweetened the pot and convinced him to stay.

[a700hitter]

They matter because your argument was premised on the ownership group needing to get rid of Theo, actively purge him from the situation. I contend that this group would not be getting rid of him, but he was offered a better job for more money. The Sox wanted Theo as their GM, but they didn't want him as their president. The Cubs did. Hence the move.

No, it wasn't. My initial argument was about responsibility and accountability. As for getting rid of him, I felt that the time was right to make a change, and they should let him him walk to the Cubs. It was convenient way for the Sox to implement their own personnel strategy. There's no reason to shoot someone when they'll voluntarily remove themselves. My argument was never premised on any active purging.

 

They didn't want him any more. He probably told the owners what the Cubs were offering, and asked what the Red Sox had planned for him. They told him that they could not promise that he would ever get to that level with the Sox and they did not attempt to offer him anything additional to stay. Everyone left the room understanding that the Sox didn't want him to stay. The Sox owners made the choice for him. You are in serious denial if you think they wanted to move forward with Theo as their GM.

[example1]

As with most of the polarized arguments here, I think the "why" falls somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

 

As a700 states, they didn't move the world to keep him, so to some degree, they didn't want him. That's not the same as absolutely wanting to be rid of him, though. I don't think he'd be on his way out if there wasn't a better offer to leave to, which is to say, take away the opportunity with the Cubs, and I think he's still the GM. The FO didn't want him enough to increase his role with the team, in other words, they didn't evaluate his performance as good enough to continue the progression of his career with them. That does show some indication that they weren't totally pleased with his work. Ultimately, the Cubs offer provided a convenient means of separation. The FO could move on to the next thing....which really isn't bad timing for them, because if you are going to institute big changes, ie "clean house", it's best to get as many rooms as you can in one sweep....without the boat rocking caused by a firing.

 

Seems like the fair middle ground.

[ipot]

Originally Posted by pumpsie green

Hey IPOT...you found us.

Regarding Ortiz: he should be offered a one year deal with a club option IMO. He did produce this year; he could produce next year too. If he cannot accept that, let him walk-anywhere he wants to go. The team is in rebuilding mode now and should be looking to get younger anyway. A DH who can also play in the field and not embarass himself seems like a good idea to me.

 

 

 

Who would you have in-mind to replace him' date=' if he walks? I would put Youkilis there. He can play DH most of the time, but unlike Ortiz, he can play the field when needed. I would have Mike Aviles play third full time and see how that goes. I know you lose a lot of power, but you also make a lot of room to sign a pitcher. Which is something that is highly needed.[/quote']

 

This is a tough dilemma. Youk would be the obvious choice for DH if they cant work something out for Ortiz. Aviles had a couple of good seasons when he hit over .300 for KC.

 

His defensive issues at 3B may be a problem, but if he can project to be Bill Mueller-type hitter, it won't be the worst idea.

[ipot]

Hey IPOT...you found us.

Regarding Ortiz: he should be offered a one year deal with a club option IMO. He did produce this year; he could produce next year too. If he cannot accept that, let him walk-anywhere he wants to go. The team is in rebuilding mode now and should be looking to get younger anyway. A DH who can also play in the field and not embarass himself seems like a good idea to me.

 

Pumpsie, check your PM over here.

[FredLynn]

Pumpsie' date=' check your PM over here.[/quote']

 

Done. Responded too.

[FredLynn]

Seems like the fair middle ground.

 

Exactly which position was available within this organization for Epstein to move up in a way he moved up when he joined the Cubs? Isn't Lucchino blocking further advancement by being the club President? Just trying to understand the corporate structure.

I think that Henry loved Epstein for whatever reason. If there is a smear campaign when he leaves I will change my mind, but I have read nothing that says otherwise. On the other hand, if someone wasted a third of a billion of my dollars on FA busts, I would be pretty pissed at him.

[Muggah]

This is a tough dilemma. Youk would be the obvious choice for DH if they cant work something out for Ortiz. Aviles had a couple of good seasons when he hit over .300 for KC.

 

His defensive issues at 3B may be a problem, but if he can project to be Bill Mueller-type hitter, it won't be the worst idea.

 

I think they're gonna look long and hard at moving Youkilis, as well as what life without Big Diva can be like. Aviles, IMO, isn't acceptable as a full time 3B, so there's a move to be made there. But the time is right to move on from all three sacred cows. The fans are behind parting with all three, and it's an easy first move for whoever the new GM is if they want to send the message that they're serious about sanitizing the clubhouse.

 

I just think they've got to make at least a couple initial moves to let the fanbase know they mean business. And it'll a) speak volumes, and buy them the time they're gonna need to explore options involving the cancers under contract, if they simply unceremoniously cut ties with Wakefield, Putritek, and Big Diva.

[example1]

Exactly which position was available within this organization for Epstein to move up in a way he moved up when he joined the Cubs? Isn't Lucchino blocking further advancement by being the club President? Just trying to understand the corporate structure.

I think that Henry loved Epstein for whatever reason. If there is a smear campaign when he leaves I will change my mind, but I have read nothing that says otherwise. On the other hand, if someone wasted a third of a billion of my dollars on FA busts, I would be pretty pissed at him.

 

There was no position for Theo to move into. That's kind of my point.

 

There is speculation that LL might be done after next year, in which case Theo could have taken over at that time.

[Mr Crunchy]

Hi kids, its been a while and I thought Id offer my opinion of the maggots who own this team.

Im not a Theo guy or even a Francona guy, it will be another lifetime before I forget that Curtis Leskanic was on the mound in the 12th inning of game 4 vs NY when we started that comeback.

Anyway.

The owners are despicable, they could give a f*** less about the fan base as the place is an ATM machine..They weaseled their way into town when others offered more money..Yes Frank McCourt and James Dolan were the other men and God knows we were fortunate not to get those 2 guys but lets call spades spades..Everything being equel John Henry Lucky Lucchino and Tom Werner along with their other 16 investors were given this franchise on a silver platter and in turn have made a killing turning millions of clueless jocksniffers into official members of RedSox nation.

We saw them grease the skids for Duquette and they tore him down so bad hes been out of baseball since...They did the same to Grady Little, personally I wouldnt have gone to Scott Williams either with the best pitcher in franchise history stoked to a 3 run lead in the 8th...Today there arent 3 people on earth who would admit it but back then?? Little was a good man...After winning in 04 the exodus began..DerekLowe,Martinez,Cabrerra, Damon, Millar and finally Manny were all sent packing and all were s*** on by the owners as well as their mouthpiece The Boston Globe.

Im not alone in saying this team hasnt been the same since the Tampa series in 08 and for a guy that saw a dozen games a year in Fenway I cant remember the last time I was in the building, I think it was the Jimmy Fund game in 2008??

Whats that tell you? Maybe nothing but if theyve lost me then theyve lost anyone with a casual love of the sox...My love wasnt casual, I was a die hard my whole life...I still got a Reggie Smith jersey in this house for chrissakes....Point being I guess is this ownership group has taken away my love of this team and replaced it with people who think Neil Diamond songs have always been sung in the 8th inning.

I hadnt even noticed I stopped going to the games, I had no idea Becks was in Cy Young contention in August or that AGon was on pace for 150rbi in June.

Is that on me?

Maybe but if I could hang with them after Aparacio fell on his ass rounding 3rd or with Pete Rose scoing the winning run in game 7 in 75 and Bill Lee blowing a 3run lead&watching Bucky Dents 3r homer in front of Petnovs tv in 78 or the Bill Buckner affair in 86 or Toney Pena in 95 and Aaron Boone in 03...Well you get the picture, Ive dealt with 5 lives of heartache from these guys and still came back but the last 3 summers have been a blur and sad to say I couldnt care less.

These owners dont deserve your money, these players dont deserve your attention and Terry Francona and Theo Epstein certainly deserved much more respect and a dignified exit rather than the sodomy they got from these 3 ****s and their minions.

As for the Cubs?

f*** them too, they deserve mediocrity, theyve accepted it willingly since 1908 and they too dont have to worry about their next dime cause the gates at Wrigley like Fenway will keep turning.

[FredLynn]

There was no position for Theo to move into. That's kind of my point.

 

There is speculation that LL might be done after next year, in which case Theo could have taken over at that time.

 

Thanks for the clarification. Seems that LL might be done after next year, or he might not. It was a good business decision for Epstein to take a position that was open because had the team done next year what they did this year (ie not make the playoffs) he never would have been invited back.

[SoxSport]

The Yanks have crashed and burned before, too. In fact, not getting beyond the 1st round in the playoffs amounts to that for them--EVERY year. With their $200 million dollar team.

 

The difference is Steinbrenner has a quick hook. The NY media is used to people getting fired by a Steinbrenner.

 

In contrast, Henry is a procrastinator. The roof has to fall in on his head before he takes any action.

Maybe that's what happened to him on his yacht. LOL