What did the Sox get for Epstein?

[a700hitter]

I'm sorry, but this is just looking for a reason to criticize someone....for something. Entirely too critical. There is absolutely no reason anyone could have reasonably projected Ellsbury to break out to the degree that he did, not with the amount of failure to "reach their ceiling" that they experience with over 90% of their minor league prospects. Furthermore, regardless of Ellsbury's leap to MVP level play, when they signed Crawford they signed the best player available at a position of need, and pitching, at the beginning of last year, was not something they needed to address. Do you really expect them to have signed a credible starting pitcher when Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Lackey, and Matsuzaka, with Wakefield in the BP, were all under contract?

 

Everyone in baseball misjudged "the situation" you are creating with Ellsbury. Everyone. What made the first year of the Crawford contract detrimental to their success last year was Crawfords inability to play good baseball last year.

I'm not the one that started the discussion about this. The fact is that at this point in time Crawford's acquisition was unnecessary. The money would have been better spent on top tier pitching. That's just the way it is. No criticism is leveled by acknowledging that. However, in acknowledging that, another poster built in an excuse for them with the "no one could see it coming" remark. Just as it may not be fair to level criticism at them for not foreseeing Ellsbury breakout year, I am not big on building in excuses for anyone either. If anyone should have known Ell's ceiling, it is the Red Sox organization. I'm not criticizing, but I am not building in an excuse either. As I said earlier in my first post in response to the built in excuse, it isn't relevant to the state of our team today. There was no criticism in that statement either. How the Sox got here isn't relevant to anything. The guy that made the move is gone. The fact is that we are over-weighted on speedsters and shorthanded on pitchers. There are no excuses. If people make excuses, I'll counter by finding fault.

[ORS]

I'm not the one that started the discussion about this. The fact is that at this point in time Crawford's acquisition was unnecessary. The money would have been better spent on top tier pitching. That's just the way it is. No criticism is leveled by acknowledging that. However' date=' in acknowledging that, another poster built in an excuse for them with the "no one could see it coming" remark. Just as it may not be fair to level criticism at them for not foreseeing Ellsbury breakout year, I am not big on building in excuses for anyone either. If anyone should have known Ell's ceiling, it is the Red Sox organization. I'm not criticizing, but I am not building in an excuse either. As I said earlier in my first post in response the built in excuse, it isn't relevant to the state of our team today. There was no criticism in that statement either. How the Sox got here isn't relevant to anything. The guy that made the move is gone. The fact is that we are over-weighted on speedsters and shorthanded on pitchers. There are no excuses. If people make excuses, I'll counter by finding fault.[/quote']

You don't consider it critical when you state...

 

It happened and they clearly misjudged the situation. It doesn't matter that other people didn't see it coming. They are paid to know their own organization talent better than "other people". They blew it.

 

I agree, with perfect 20/20 hindsight, it is absolutely a fact that the money would have been better spent on pitching. You aren't just stating that as a generic review without pointing a finger. You are being critical in hindsight of events that nobody, nobody at all in baseball, was predicting would happen. Stating they "blew it", when the "it" is a failure to accurately project Ellsbury into an MVP level player while also failing to identify that two previously capable pitchers would completely fall off a cliff in terms of performance due to both of them needing TJ surgery and resources would have been better used by getting better pitchers and putting over $20M in salary on the bench/in the BP.....well, yeah, they "blew it", but consider what you are expecting here.

 

EDIT: This isn't an excuse. It's a question. Is it reasonable to expect foresight that is accurate to this degree?

[a700hitter]

You don't consider it critical when you state...

 

 

 

I agree, with perfect 20/20 hindsight, it is absolutely a fact that the money would have been better spent on pitching. You aren't just stating that as a generic review without pointing a finger. You are being critical in hindsight of events that nobody, nobody at all in baseball, was predicting would happen. Stating they "blew it", when the "it" is a failure to accurately project Ellsbury into an MVP level player while also failing to identify that two previously capable pitchers would completely fall off a cliff in terms of performance due to both of them needing TJ surgery and resources would have been better used by getting better pitchers and putting over $20M in salary on the bench/in the BP.....well, yeah, they "blew it", but consider what you are expecting here.

 

EDIT: This isn't an excuse. It's a question. Is it reasonable to expect foresight that is accurate to this degree?

Like I said, I would not have been critical had it not been for the attempt to provide an excuse. In my last post, I acknowledged that it might not be fair to criticize for not having foresight with regard to Ellsbury. However, if someone is going to use that as an excuse for management, there is plenty of criticism that can be leveled at them. In your last post you mentioned that they would not have gone after top tier pitching with Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Dice K and Lackey. Well, a lot of criticism can be leveled at the acquisitions of Dice k and Lackey. An excuse viewed in a vacuum like "the no one could foresee" argument is both irrelevant and misleading. It rubs me the wrong way. Bad moves are bad moves. If someone could easily foresee that he was making a bad move, he'd have to be an idiot or a saboteur to go ahead with it. IMO, what separates the good FO guys from the also rans are the deals that work out that the others did not foresee, so the "could not have foreseen" excuse means nothing to me..

 

Here's my first response to the excuse.

Whether anyone saw it coming isn't relevant. It did happen' date=' and to a great extent it made Crawford an unecessary acquisition. The money would have been better used on pitching.[/quote'] There's nothing critical in this. He wanted to pursue the validity of the excuse. That is when I criticized.

[ORS]

Excuses are one thing, and while they, and it appears even the faintest hint of one is all that it takes, might rub you the wrong way, I find it equally aggravating to see people who sit back and pass judgment when and only when they have all the facts in hindsight. It's simple to determine whether or not something played out as success or failure after the fact. It's not so simple to assign blame. Yes, there are many things current and former management people are guilty of failing at. I don't think this "situation" is one where they can reasonably be blamed.

[a700hitter]

Excuses are one thing' date=' and while they, and it appears even the faintest hint of one is all that it takes, might rub you the wrong way, [b']I find it equally aggravating to see people who sit back and pass judgment when and only when they have all the facts in hindsight.[/b] It's simple to determine whether or not something played out as success or failure after the fact. It's not so simple to assign blame. Yes, there are many things current and former management people are guilty of failing at. I don't think this "situation" is one where they can reasonably be blamed.

Well, you should clearly know this is not me. I will level criticism at the outset. I'm not a 20-20 hindsight guy when it comes to criticism. Have you read the off season thread? However, once the results are in, there is accountability in my book. I wouldn't call it criticism at that point. They own the results, and there are no excuses. I have been proved wrong by some players, and when they prove me wrong, I own it. I like to criticize or praise moves when they are made. I am probably one of the most consistent posters in that regard. I am usually out on a limb well before a player takes the field for us. There are a lot of other posters who wait until the final tallies are in before they criticize, but that isn't me. So, I am not the guy who is rubbing you the wrong way. It must be that inflatable donut you are sitting on that is making you cranky.

[Bellhorn04]

For me it's not so much about seeking excuses for the Crawford deal as it is trying to understand what motivated it.

[a700hitter]

For me it's not so much about seeking excuses for the Crawford deal as it is trying to understand what motivated it.

Toward what end?

[Bellhorn04]

Toward what end?

 

It's just the way I am, I guess. It interests me. It's the same thing with managerial moves. I've participated in a lot of lengthy discussions about why Francona or other managers made such-and-such a move. The results are self-evident, but whether the rationale behind it made sense is often open to debate.

[a700hitter]

It's just the way I am' date=' I guess. It interests me. It's the same thing with managerial moves. I've participated in a lot of lengthy discussions about why Francona or other managers made such-and-such a move. The results are self-evident, but whether the rationale behind it made sense is often open to debate.[/quote']I get it that is why we are all here. I misunderstood what you posted as an excuse.

[ORS]

Well' date=' you should clearly know this is not me. I will level criticism at the outset. I'm not a 20-20 hindsight guy when it comes to criticism. Have you read the off season thread? However, once the results are in, there is accountability in my book. I wouldn't call it criticism at that point. They own the results, and there are no excuses. I have been proved wrong by some players, and when they prove me wrong, I own it. I like to criticize or praise moves when they are made. I am probably one of the most consistent posters in that regard. I am usually out on a limb well before a player takes the field for us. There are a lot of other posters who wait until the final tallies are in before they criticize, but that isn't me. So, I am not the guy who is rubbing you the wrong way. It must be that inflatable donut you are sitting on that is making you cranky.[/quote']

While I agree that you are usually very upfront with your criticisms, that doesn't save you from being guilty of what I described in this instance. Besides, you couldn't have been up front on this one, you were leading the "Sign Crawford!" parade.

[a700hitter]

While I agree that you are usually very upfront with your criticisms' date=' that doesn't save you from being guilty of what I described in this instance. Besides, you couldn't have been up front on this one, you were leading the "Sign Crawford!" parade. [/quote']Everyone knows that I wanted Crawford and if he plays the remainder of his contract like he did last year, I'll own it. I don't know what I am guilty of by calling for accountability when all the facts are in. That's not being critical. They own the results. There are no excuses. The Sox have underperformed expectations for the last 3 years.

[iortiz]

CEO: Red Sox 'exploring' Theo*comp

 

FORT MYERS, Fla. -- Boston Red Sox CEO Larry Lucchino said Friday that general manager Ben Cherington is "exploring" the team's options in what he called an "ongoing" issue with the Chicago Cubs regarding compensation for departed general manager Theo Epstein.

 

Lucchino, who was in attendance at Boston's exhibition game with the Minnesota Twins at Hammond Stadium, the Twins' spring park, made the comment in the aftermath of elbow surgery for pitcher Chris Carpenter, one of two players the Red Sox had received as compensation for Epstein.

 

Carpenter had surgery to remove a bone spur from his throwing elbow and was scheduled to return to camp on Friday, according to manager Bobby Valentine. The procedure was performed in Birmingham, Ala., by noted orthopedic surgeon Dr. James Andrews.

 

Damaged goods?

 

"I'm not going to comment on it,'' Lucchino said. "We assume everyone acted in good faith."

 

Carpenter had passed both his Cubs and Red Sox physicals after he was traded, a source told the Boston Globe. According to the Globe, the Red Sox were aware that Carpenter had past elbow problems but believed he was over them.

 

"We just found out about that," Cubs GM Jed Hoyer said Thursday of the Carpenter injury and subsequent surgery.

 

"It's something you never want to happen in any trade. You want both sides to feel good. That's not a great thing to have happen both for Chris and the Red Sox. It's something we just heard about and we're looking into it, but I wouldn't read anything into that."

 

Asked if Carpenter's injury means the compensation deal might be restructured, Hoyer gave a succinct, "No."

Carpenter, 26, has thrown just two innings this spring.

 

To complete the compensation saga, the Cubs received 19-year-old first baseman Jair Bogaerts from the Red Sox on Thursday.

 

The teams had settled on a scenario where the Cubs would not only give up a mid-level prospect but the clubs would also exchange players to be named later.

 

The prospect was Carpenter, and the Cubs then sent their player to be named later, right-handed pitcher Aaron Kurcz. On Thursday, Bogaerts was sent to the Cubs.

 

I'm gonna use a Mexican say here... se chamaquearon a los Red Sox.

[RedSoxNC84]

Here's what's going to go down:

 

Lucchino: "Carpenter sucks, we want someone else."

 

Epstein: "Lol no."

 

Selig: /shrug

[mvp 78]

LL just has sour grapes. He botched the Theo deal. Man up and stop trying to blame everyone else. He's pathetic.

[jacksonianmarch]

He passed 2 physicals then ends up with bone chips in the elbow. Those typically accumulate over time. I wonder if his elbow was MRId

[SoxSport]

What's the difference about compensation? The Cubs ownership knows the Red Sox wanted to unload Epstein. Why else would they let him go? I think the Red Sox are bluffing.

 

I think Theo's problem is he has a huge ego, and LL/Henry saw that--initially with the gorilla suit. I don't think Ben C. is that type of guy.

[Bellhorn04]

He passed 2 physicals then ends up with bone chips in the elbow. Those typically accumulate over time. I wonder if his elbow was MRId

 

As you know we generally disapprove of MRI's. Jed Lowrie must have been shocked when the Astros immediately MRI'd his sprained thumb.

 

Seriously the Red Sox medical people's reluctance to do MRI's the last few years is one of the nuttiest things I've ever seen. It probably cost Ellsbury and Buchholz a ton of games in 2010 and 2011, respectively.

[SoxSport]

As you know we generally disapprove of MRI's. Jed Lowrie must have been shocked when the Astros immediately MRI'd his sprained thumb.

 

Seriously the Red Sox medical people's reluctance to do MRI's the last few years is one of the nuttiest things I've ever seen. It probably cost Ellsbury and Buchholz a ton of games in 2010 and 2011, respectively.

 

MRI's are as common in sports as aspirin. I don't think it's an economic issue. It's hard to see what's going on there from the outside.

[User Name]

As you know we generally disapprove of MRI's. Jed Lowrie must have been shocked when the Astros immediately MRI'd his sprained thumb.

 

Seriously the Red Sox medical people's reluctance to do MRI's the last few years is one of the nuttiest things I've ever seen. It probably cost Ellsbury and Buchholz a ton of games in 2010 and 2011, respectively.

 

And Ellsbury in 2010.

[VA Sox Fan]

As you know we generally disapprove of MRI's. Jed Lowrie must have been shocked when the Astros immediately MRI'd his sprained thumb.

 

Seriously the Red Sox medical people's reluctance to do MRI's the last few years is one of the nuttiest things I've ever seen. It probably cost Ellsbury and Buchholz a ton of games in 2010 and 2011, respectively.

 

That never made ANY sense. Hopefully, that will change this season.

[ibot2much]

For a team that is associated with doctors from one of the best hospitals in the world, the mistakes made were mind-blowing.

[mvp 78]

Holy sheep-dick, the Chicago Sun Times has written a Theo article that is completely mind boggling. There's a picture of Theo walking on water... The week of Easter... WTF?