Does Ben Make Move During the GM Meetings this Week?

[example1]

I can only have it one way-- either I am right or I am wrong. The same goes for Ben. If we are both wrong' date=' my being wrong doesn't cancel out his mistake. He would still be wrong. You know the old saying about "two wrongs..." Unfortunately for Ben, he has to answer to JH. Still not sure I get your point. Shrugs.[/quote']

 

The difference is, when Ben is wrong he will get fired and disappear. When you are wrong you go on and on and on, telling everyone how wrong and incompotent he is for making the same choice you would have. That can rub people the wrong way. In any other domain, that would be considered either hypocritical or intellectually dishonest.

 

Here, anything goes, but that doesn't mean that everyone will take it lightly.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Ben is bound to be wrong just like every other GM. You have the "It's my way or the highway" attitude. If they don't make a move you like, they suck. That's why you get so much s*** for it. When we throw expensive contracts at players no one knows how they'll perform, not even you.

[a700hitter]

You are so full of yourself.

Most self professed arrogant know it alls are.:dunno: I'm real smart and good looking too. Are you trying to get me to feel bad about myself?

[a700hitter]

The difference is, when Ben is wrong he will get fired and disappear. When you are wrong you go on and on and on, telling everyone how wrong and incompotent he is for making the same choice you would have. That can rub people the wrong way. In any other domain, that would be considered either hypocritical or intellectually dishonest.

 

Here, anything goes, but that doesn't mean that everyone will take it lightly.

Take what lightly? What are you talking about? Intellectually dishonest? If I'm wrong, I admit it.:dunno: If the GM is wrong about the same thing, it still goes against his record.

[a700hitter]

E1, you never responded to this. Am I on the right track with this?

Okay I think I know what you mean. Despite finishing in third place' date=' the 2011 Sox were good enough that they could have finished higher except for the fact that they played like a third place team. Based on this we should be encouraged that the Sox will finish in better than third place in 2012, despite the fact that after the loss of Papelbon the Sox personnel is not as good as it was when it finished in third place in 2011. Is everybody following this?[/quote']

[iortiz]

Sure, It's early to judge and hard to know what Ben the boob is planing or executing. BUT... the more I read the more I think that he is not focused in our main concerns (SP, BP arms, pitching depth, RH OF/DH, etc)

 

Seems like he is focused in the manager, Sizemore, Theo's compensation and more of the manager thing.

 

Yes, I hope that he fills as soon as possible our holes. But what I hope the most is that he at least has already a solid strategic plan in order to face this 2012 offseason, mostly since seems like we won't go over the cap.

[iortiz]

He's already made it clear that he would. GMs are supposed to be able to know everything about a person' date=' including what their free will will have them do moving forward. When they are unable to do that, they should be "held accountable" for their lack of superpowers.[/quote']

 

Very few people (a handful, I'd say) beyond the industry, occupy head positions.

 

I'm not sure if you run a business or have occupied a management position. But just in case you don't or simply do not know how it works, they are always highly rated by results, outcome, profit, etc.

 

This is not about superpowers, this about plan, execute and achieve what you are paid for since you have proved managerial skills, expirence, leadership, etc. If you can't do that, you walk, as simple as that. No hard feeling, this is business.

 

I know that you love this team, and maybe you would think that we sound like we do not, but we do, trust me, but with another perspective. Some of us just are an accountable/result-oriented persons in every aspect, some are not, that's all.

 

As I said, we'll see how Cherington performs. Hope great.

[Palodios]

It's cute how the 3 of you have formed an alliance and staged an uprising against the King. Lol! Power to the people!! Let my people be free! Occupy TalkSox!! Lol!

 

Ouch, I wasn't invited to this allegiance. Its like pre-school all over again:lol:

[a700hitter]

Ouch' date=' I wasn't invited to this allegiance. Its like pre-school all over again:lol:[/quote']Feel free to join. The more the merrier. I thrive on this kind of thing, and it helps me pass the time while waiting for the Sox to make some moves.

[example1]

E1' date=' you never responded to this. Am I on the right track with this?[/quote']

 

No. You are not on track with this. I figured you asking that question was rhetorical, since it was loaded with condescention.

 

I think the Sox will have Buchholz back for the whole season. I think they will have a healthier Youkilis. I think Crawford will not be one of the shittiest players in the league. I also expect that Kalish will have something to add to this team.

 

Those three things combined, alone, will make up for the loss of Papelbon and will makeup for some regression from Ellsbury. I think it will get this team to win enough games to make the playoffs.

 

Next, I think they will make some additions in the offseason to improve the team from where they are now. Add a Beltran or Cuddyer and the Sox are favorites in the AL East.

 

Remember, the reason they didn't make the playoffs was because they had an epic collapse. That isn't going to happen again. Additionally, the team is unlikely to just spread the shittiness of that streak out over the course of the season. The team is too good. Aside from that collapse they had the 2nd best record in baseball and that's the team I think will show up.

 

You may think differently, but I suspect that there are a lot of people who are not ready to jump off the cliff and declare this a team that is incapable of making the playoffs. That's absurd.

[a700hitter]

No. You are not on track with this. I figured you asking that question was rhetorical, since it was loaded with condescention.

I figured that I would take that route as opposed to the open mocking in which you were engaged.

[seabeachfred]

Sure, It's early to judge and hard to know what Ben the boob is planing or executing. BUT... the more I read the more I think that he is not focused in our main concerns (SP, BP arms, pitching depth, RH OF/DH, etc)

 

Seems like he is focused in the manager, Sizemore, Theo's compensation and more of the manager thing.

 

Yes, I hope that he fills as soon as possible our holes. But what I hope the most is that he at least has already a solid strategic plan in order to face this 2012 offseason, mostly since seems like we won't go over the cap.

 

Well iortiz, it looks to me as if you have already made your mind up about Cherington---BEN THE BOOB!!!!!! Hey, I'm not knocking it because right now I have some serious doubts about him myself. A caught hell from one poster when I referred to him as a procrastinator until it dawned on me that I was very impatient for things to start stirring. My fear is that he might become nothing more than a Lucchino appendage without much standing on his own. May I make a suggestion? Why don't you and I wait until December 1 before we rush to judgment. Again, let me be clear....I have some deep reservations about the guy myself with his emphasis on Cubs compensation and all this time to choose a manager, but he knows the Boston Press has not been very kind after our historic collapse and they will keep his and Larry's feet to the fire. I don't think any poster on this board would find one twit wrong with your heavy emphasis on pitching, pitching and more pitching. If he fails to get us up to speed there will be a lot of people all over the guy. I have to believe that he wants to succeed very badly.

[example1]

Very few people (a handful, I'd say) beyond the industry, occupy head positions.

 

I'm not sure if you run a business or have occupied a management position. But just in case you don't or simply do not know how it works, they are always highly rated by results, outcome, profit, etc.

 

This is not about superpowers, this about plan, execute and achieve what you are paid for since you have proved managerial skills, expirence, leadership, etc. If you can't do that, you walk, as simple as that. No hard feeling, this is business.

 

I know that you love this team, and maybe you would think that we sound like we do not, but we do, trust me, but with another perspective. Some of us just are an accountable/result-oriented persons in every aspect, some are not, that's all.

 

As I said, we'll see how Cherington performs. Hope great.

 

I have nothing to add to this post. Your condescension is hard to tolerate. I hope you and a700 get hired by the Red Sox. Your ideas will turn the club around right away.

[a700hitter]

I have nothing to add to this post. Your condescension is hard to tolerate. I hope you and a700 get hired by the Red Sox. Your ideas will turn the club around right away.

Wow, I didn't think he was being condescending at all. What's going on with all the lashing out E1? Seriously.

[iortiz]

Well iortiz' date=' it looks to me as if you have already made your mind up about Cherington---BEN THE BOOB!!!!!! Hey, I'm not knocking it because right now I have some serious doubts about him myself. A caught hell from one poster when I referred to him as a procrastinator until it dawned on me that I was very impatient for things to start stirring. My fear is that he might become nothing more than a Lucchino appendage without much standing on his own. May I make a suggestion? [b']Why don't you and I wait until December 1 before we rush to judgment[/b]. Again, let me be clear....I have some deep reservations about the guy myself with his emphasis on Cubs compensation and all this time to choose a manager, but he knows the Boston Press has not been very kind after our historic collapse and they will keep his and Larry's feet to the fire. I don't think any poster on this board would find one twit wrong with your heavy emphasis on pitching, pitching and more pitching. If he fails to get us up to speed there will be a lot of people all over the guy. I have to believe that he wants to succeed very badly.

 

Sounds fair to me. I only wish nobody eats Cerington's lunch by then as in Pap's case (IMO).

 

And don't get me wrong, I don't wish any bad to Cherington or our team. We'll see.

[iortiz]

I have nothing to add to this post. Your condescension is hard to tolerate. I hope you and a700 get hired by the Red Sox. Your ideas will turn the club around right away.

 

I just figured out what condescension means.

 

Not at all was the intention of my post E1, not at all. if it sound that way, I want to clarify that it wasn't my intention. Hope you accept my apologies if I offended you in someway.

 

Though, I truely believe what I said. Business run that way, don't you think?

[Spitball]

The difference is' date=' when Ben is wrong he will get fired and disappear. When you are wrong you go on and on and on, telling everyone how wrong and incompotent he is for making the same choice you would have. That can rub people the wrong way. In any other domain, that would be considered either hypocritical or intellectually dishonest.[/quote']

 

Haha! You are totally right. When I pointed out that he was wrong about his proclamation that acquiring Carlos Beltran at the deadline would only involve a willingness to "bring Theo's wallet," he accused me of being some former poster and blocked me (informing me through the bravery of a PM). I have not blocked him but ignore his posts. He adds little beyond feeding his own ego.

[a700hitter]

Haha! You are totally right. When I pointed out that he was wrong about his proclamation that acquiring Carlos Beltran at the deadline would only involve a willingness to "bring Theo's wallet' date='" he accused me of being some former poster and blocked me (informing me through the bravery of a PM). I have not blocked him but ignore his posts. He adds little beyond feeding his own ego.[/quote']You had asked for proof of the Mets financial distress at the time and I gave it to you. It seems like that they still have major problems as they have recently cut front office staff, lost $51 million last season, they still owe MLB $25 million and the deal with the limited partner fell through.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-05/new-york-mets-facing-millions-in-losses-in-2011-cut-front-office-staff.html

 

About a week ago the Mets who are desperate for cash have announced that they will pay 3% interest to just about anyone willing to invest with them. Since you are so certain of their financial stability, you should invest with them. Three percent is a good rate in today's market.

 

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/sports/mets-will-pay-3%25-interest-to-investors-sources-say-20111105

[example1]

Wow' date=' I didn't think he was being condescending at all. What's going on with all the lashing out E1? Seriously.[/quote']

 

I just figured out what condescension means.

 

Not at all was the intention of my post E1, not at all. if it sound that way, I want to clarify that it wasn't my intention. Hope you accept my apologies if I offended you in someway.

 

Though, I truely believe what I said. Business run that way, don't you think?

 

I took this line in particular:

 

I'm not sure if you run a business or have occupied a management position. But just in case you don't or simply do not know how it works, they are always highly rated by results, outcome, profit, etc.

 

to be condescending... I realize now it wasn't how you meant it.

 

Yet again, I have written and erased multiple paragraphs to explain my point; I just don't want to argue it anymore, and certainly not with you, iOrtiz. You are a very respectful poster and someone I appreciate having on this board.

 

Having a business perspective is all well and good. You guys should continue using it and framing your points that way. It is not the primary lense that I will use to think about the team and the personnel decisions they make. They can't fire everyone in the organization when things don't go well.

 

I find it interesting that "Ben the Boob" is already doing some very Theo-like things (taking his time with decisions, not making things happen quickly just to placate the angry mob, etc.,). We all knew they would be pretty similar.

 

Thinking about it tonight, I think it is obvious that the ownership group supported Theo and his way of doing things. That's why they promoted someone who worked under him for so many years. They had the same opportunity with Tito and could have promoted Demarlo Hale, but didn't even interview him for the position. I think that speaks volumes about where they say the problem lying.

 

Yes, the team needs some tweaks and improvements in some areas, most notibly the bullpen and end of the rotation. However, the September collapse was not a reflection of a team wholely lacking in its ability to get to the playoffs or even make a WS run. It was a reflection of a team of individuals who simply didn't come through this time when it mattered most.

 

I'm still very confident that the nucleus of a winning team is here, with very few significant changes needed to move forward.

[example1]

You had asked for proof of the Mets financial distress at the time and I gave it to you. It seems like that they still have major problems as they have recently cut front office staff, lost $51 million last season, they still owe MLB $25 million and the deal with the limited partner fell through.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-05/new-york-mets-facing-millions-in-losses-in-2011-cut-front-office-staff.html

 

About a week ago the Mets who are desperate for cash have announced that they will pay 3% interest to just about anyone willing to invest with them. Since you are so certain of their financial stability, you should invest with them. Three percent is a good rate in today's market.

 

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/sports/mets-will-pay-3%25-interest-to-investors-sources-say-20111105

 

John Henry probably can't invest with them in hopes of landing David Wright, can he?

[iortiz]

I took this line in particular:

 

I'm not sure if you run a business or have occupied a management position. But just in case you don't or simply do not know how it works, they are always highly rated by results, outcome, profit, etc.

 

to be condescending... I realize now it wasn't how you meant it.

 

Yet again, I have written and erased multiple paragraphs to explain my point; I just don't want to argue it anymore, and certainly not with you, iOrtiz. You are a very respectful poster and someone I appreciate having on this board.

 

Having a business perspective is all well and good. You guys should continue using it and framing your points that way. It is not the primary lense that I will use to think about the team and the personnel decisions they make. They can't fire everyone in the organization when things don't go well.

 

I find it interesting that "Ben the Boob" is already doing some very Theo-like things (taking his time with decisions, not making things happen quickly just to placate the angry mob, etc.,). We all knew they would be pretty similar.

 

Thinking about it tonight, I think it is obvious that the ownership group supported Theo and his way of doing things. That's why they promoted someone who worked under him for so many years. They had the same opportunity with Tito and could have promoted Demarlo Hale, but didn't even interview him for the position. I think that speaks volumes about where they say the problem lying.

 

Yes, the team needs some tweaks and improvements in some areas, most notibly the bullpen and end of the rotation. However, the September collapse was not a reflection of a team wholely lacking in its ability to get to the playoffs or even make a WS run. It was a reflection of a team of individuals who simply didn't come through this time when it mattered most.

 

I'm still very confident that the nucleus of a winning team is here, with very few significant changes needed to move forward.

 

Thanks E1, I appreciate you see me that way.

 

Now, about the topic, I'm agree that we have an elite/talented nucleus in our current team, nevertheless some red flags surround that core as well, and I think that we must see both sides of the coin.

 

For example, I see red flags/warnings/opportunities/challenges on:

 

Carl Crawford (unlikely he performs as poor as he did, but who really knows, he better put the numbers.) Opportunity

Kevin Youkilis (will he be/stay healthy, will he play as everyday 3B, if no, who is gonnna share the load, how often?) Warning

Buchholz (is he going to be the same Buch, will he stay healthy?) Warning

Bard (if he takes the full time job as a closer, is he ready? If no, who is coming? How much is he gonna cost?) Red Flag.

Aceves (if he takes the 5th spot, is he ready?) Challenge.

 

Plus...

 

We have a limited budget if they don't blow the cap, and we need to cover several holes with this priority...

 

SP

BP arms

Pitching depth

DH/RH OF

Closer

........................

Manager

Coaching Staff

 

Plus.....

 

Ben Cherington is a mystery to me as GM

 

We can guess a lot of things and put a lot of scenarios but the warnings/opportunities/red flags/challenges are undeniable out there.

 

I've been pointing those issues and maybe I could sound like pessimist or something, but we must point as well our areas of opportunity .

[iortiz]

Thinking about it tonight' date=' I think it is obvious that the ownership group supported Theo and his way of doing things. That's why they promoted someone who worked under him for so many years. They had the same opportunity with Tito and could have promoted Demarlo Hale, but didn't even interview him for the position. I think that speaks volumes about where they say the problem lying. [/quote']

 

I see this in a different way. If they wanted to run the business just like Theo did, why did they let him walk? He had a 1 Y contract left in Boston, didn't he?. After this epic collapse, Failure at FA and 3 year in a row of failure record, my guess is that JH decided run the business with someone who was even before Theo's arrival and no NECESARY has the same modus operandi.

 

My guess is that they want that Cherington, Yes, take all that expirience (learn from good and bad) and do a lot better... bringing fresh ideas, and planning and executing what Theo clearly couldn't in the last 3-Y of his tenure. 2004 and 2007 gone. 2009-2011 gone. 2012 has other eviorement/challenges/market/etc.

 

BL. Theo is gone due to his last 3 years of his tenure (failure). Notice that I didn't say that he is a bad manager or that I wish bad in his future career or that I'm ungrateful.

 

We have plenty discussed this. Still, I respect your point of view, but I don't share it.

 

Ben Cherington better show he is the one, we'll see.

[User Name]

I see this in a different way. If they wanted to run the business just like Theo did, why did they let him walk? He had a 1 Y contract left in Boston, didn't he?. After this epic collapse, Failure at FA and 3 year in a row of failure record, my guess is that JH decided run the business with someone who was even before Theo's arrival and no NECESARY has the same modus operandi.

 

My guess is that they want that Cherington, Yes, take all that expirience (learn from good and bad) and do a lot better... bringing fresh ideas, and planning and executing what Theo clearly couldn't in the last 3-Y of his tenure. 2004 and 2007 gone. 2009-2011 gone. 2012 has other eviorement/challenges/market/etc.

 

BL. Theo is gone due to his last 3 years of his tenure (failure). Notice that I didn't say that he is a bad manager or that I wish bad in his future career or that I'm ungrateful.

 

We have plenty discussed this. Still, I respect your point of view, but I don't share it.

 

Ben Cherington better show he is the one, we'll see.

 

Being the savvy businessman that you are, all your experience in the field means you know you don't keep an employee that wants to go since his output wouldn't be optimal.

 

If they didn't want to continue the Epstein model, why would they hire his protege?

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Haha! You are totally right. When I pointed out that he was wrong about his proclamation that acquiring Carlos Beltran at the deadline would only involve a willingness to "bring Theo's wallet' date='" he accused me of being some former poster and blocked me (informing me through the bravery of a PM). I have not blocked him but ignore his posts. He adds little beyond feeding his own ego.[/quote']

 

First I'd like to say you're a great poster. I enjoy reading your post and hope you contribute more to the board. We all know you're not a former poster so don't worry about that. It's become clear that if you don't see eye to eye with a700 you are automatically Dutchy. We have a lot of sycophants on this board and they'll start to do the same so watch out forbthat. He's going to have half the board on ignore.

[Spitball]

You had asked for proof of the Mets financial distress at the time and I gave it to you. It seems like that they still have major problems as they have recently cut front office staff, lost $51 million last season, they still owe MLB $25 million and the deal with the limited partner fell through.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-05/new-york-mets-facing-millions-in-losses-in-2011-cut-front-office-staff.html

 

About a week ago the Mets who are desperate for cash have announced that they will pay 3% interest to just about anyone willing to invest with them. Since you are so certain of their financial stability, you should invest with them. Three percent is a good rate in today's market.

 

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/sports/mets-will-pay-3%25-interest-to-investors-sources-say-20111105

 

Are you for real? I asked you for proof of the Mets finacial woes!? Haha! That is funny. I guess I had been living under a rock and kindly asked you to enlighten me.

 

Actually, we were discussing trade deadline. I was unhappy they didn't get starting pitching and you kept harping on Beltran. I pointed out that you had claimed over and over again that acquiring Beltran would only require a team to be willing to take on his entire salary.

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/talk-sox-forum/15414-2011-trade-deadline-thread-180.html

[Spitball]

First I'd like to say you're a great poster. I enjoy reading your post and hope you contribute more to the board. We all know you're not a former poster so don't worry about that. It's become clear that if you don't see eye to eye with a700 you are automatically Dutchy. We have a lot of sycophants on this board and they'll start to do the same so watch out forbthat. He's going to have half the board on ignore.

 

Thanks, RedSoxfanforlife!

[YAZMAN]

You had asked for proof of the Mets financial distress at the time and I gave it to you. It seems like that they still have major problems as they have recently cut front office staff, lost $51 million last season, they still owe MLB $25 million and the deal with the limited partner fell through.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-05/new-york-mets-facing-millions-in-losses-in-2011-cut-front-office-staff.html

 

About a week ago the Mets who are desperate for cash have announced that they will pay 3% interest to just about anyone willing to invest with them. Since you are so certain of their financial stability, you should invest with them. Three percent is a good rate in today's market.

 

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/sports/mets-will-pay-3%25-interest-to-investors-sources-say-20111105

 

Their entire business plan must suck a$$ if they can't stay solvent in that market.

[YAZMAN]

Yet again, I have written and erased multiple paragraphs to explain my point; I just don't want to argue it anymore, and certainly not with you, iOrtiz. You are a very respectful poster and someone I appreciate having on this board.

 

Having a business perspective is all well and good. You guys should continue using it and framing your points that way. It is not the primary lense that I will use to think about the team and the personnel decisions they make. They can't fire everyone in the organization when things don't go well.

 

The thing is, things are going very well for the ownership. They're making cash hand over fist. Henry & Co may be baseball fans but don't fool yourself. This is a business, he's a bean counter, and they're all in it to make money. To them, a successful year in which they win the WS is truly successful only if the trophy ultimately yields them more money.

[iortiz]

The thing is' date=' things are going very well for the ownership. They're making cash hand over fist. Henry & Co may be baseball fans but don't fool yourself. [b']This is a business, he's a bean counter, and they're all in it to make money[/b]. To them, a successful year in which they win the WS is truly successful only if the trophy ultimately yields them more money.

 

Yup.

 

If someone/something is no longer in the same highway, they simply get rid of it, as simple as that. As you said, this is business, no hard feelings.

 

BTW LOL @ sig, good one!

[a700hitter]

Are you for real? I asked you for proof of the Mets finacial woes!? Haha! That is funny. I guess I had been living under a rock and kindly asked you to enlighten me.

 

Actually, we were discussing trade deadline. I was unhappy they didn't get starting pitching and you kept harping on Beltran. I pointed out that you had claimed over and over again that acquiring Beltran would only require a team to be willing to take on his entire salary.

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/talk-sox-forum/15414-2011-trade-deadline-thread-180.html

I guess my recollection about the discussion was mistaken. I had remembered being challenged on the seriousness of the Mets financial condition. Maybe it was another poster. You say that you have been igmoring me and I certainly have not engaged you. Yet, you took this opportunity to take a few unsolicited swipes at me. That's not in the spirit of not engaging with me. In fact, under the rules of the forum, it is considered baiting.