Red Sox 2012/2013 Offseason Thread

[mvp 78]

CERA is more important than throwing out runners. Tek was one of the greatest Sox catchers of all time (second to Fisk). The flack he got on here was from people who think they know more about the game than they actually do. I'd take 2011 Tek over any of the options we have this year.

[seabeachfred]

Tek was great at handling pitchers and game prep. He was average to tolerable as a defensive catcher for a period but as he aged he went from tolerable to "what was that" status. His throwing really tanked as he aged.

 

Some of my friends agree with me that Tek hung on a little too long. He had a miserable 2008 season and when he went FA it might have been wise to just let the guy walk. He couldn't hit a lick after the middle of June, his throwing was pathetic and he deteriorated as a defensive catcher. His strengh was preparation and handling pitchers; he was A1 there, but the problem we had was his always seeming to come to the plate those last few summers when we needed a big hit and Francona's stubborn refusal to pinch hit for a guy who could no longer hit after the first two months of the season. Varitek, as well as the stumbling Wakefield, should have been shown the door two or three years before they were but that's just my opinion.

[SoxSport]

Tek, Timlin and Wakefield were allowed to stay around too long--blocking the development of younger players.

 

When you see that happening, you wonder about an organization's dedication to winning. The decline started after the 07 championship season. Perhaps the priority shifted to selling tickets. Complacency started to set in. Let's preserve the Country Club.

[seabeachfred]

Tek, Timlin and Wakefield were allowed to stay around too long--blocking the development of younger players.

 

When you see that happening, you wonder about an organization's dedication to winning. The decline started after the 07 championship season. Perhaps the priority shifted to selling tickets. Complacency started to set in. Let's preserve the Country Club.

 

I have always believed Sox Sport that after those two World Series titles the ownership and front office shifted from emphasis on winning to what you hinted at, selling tickets, emphasizing promotions and marketing and selling the "Red Sox brand". It was as if they told the fans we got you two titles, be satisfied and let us now do what's needed to make some real money. Of course, I could be wrong but what I read in the Francona book and Theo's amplifying what Tito said pretty much makes me suspicious that you and I and others who feel the same way might be on to something.

 

I don't mean to piss anyone off here but on another board I used to mimmick Francona by always prefacing anything I said about him with some words to an old hit some two or three decades ago.....FEELINGS, OH THOSE FEELINGS!!!!. Tito was so blind loyal to his old guard that he just couldn't bring himself to cut the umbilical cords of people like Wakefield and Varitek. Certainly a sort of complacency set in and now we're paying for it . So there is enough blame to go around, but Francona and Epstein don't get off scott free either. Together they concocted some on field strategy with the rotation and lineup in crucial series in 2008 and 2009 that torpedoed any chance we had to win a division title and if anyone wants to question me on that I can give him chapter and verse of specific instances that this was so.

 

Hell, though, this is now in the past----what do we do now? I think there has to be a deliniation of authority as to who is in charge of what. I have always believed that Lucchino is a big royal pain in the balls; he wants to be the general manager but he doesn't want the title. He is disgusting meddler. Henry has become pretty much of a ghost in every day running of the team as his interest seems to be elsewhere and Werner is concerned with TV ratings. As for Cherington, I wonder just how much power he really has, whether he is competent enough to operate on his own, and whether the whole front office edifice is in dire need of a good enema.

 

:dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno:

[DocHolliday]

I have always believed Sox Sport that after those two World Series titles the ownership and front office shifted from emphasis on winning to what you hinted at, selling tickets, emphasizing promotions and marketing and selling the "Red Sox brand". It was as if they told the fans we got you two titles, be satisfied and let us now do what's needed to make some real money. Of course, I could be wrong but what I read in the Francona book and Theo's amplifying what Tito said pretty much makes me suspicious that you and I and others who feel the same way might be on to something.

 

I don't mean to piss anyone off here but on another board I used to mimmick Francona by always prefacing anything I said about him with some words to an old hit some two or three decades ago.....FEELINGS, OH THOSE FEELINGS!!!!. Tito was so blind loyal to his old guard that he just couldn't bring himself to cut the umbilical cords of people like Wakefield and Varitek. Certainly a sort of complacency set in and now we're paying for it . So there is enough blame to go around, but Francona and Epstein don't get off scott free either. Together they concocted some on field strategy with the rotation and lineup in crucial series in 2008 and 2009 that torpedoed any chance we had to win a division title and if anyone wants to question me on that I can give him chapter and verse of specific instances that this was so.

 

Hell, though, this is now in the past----what do we do now? I think there has to be a deliniation of authority as to who is in charge of what. I have always believed that Lucchino is a big royal pain in the balls; he wants to be the general manager but he doesn't want the title. He is disgusting meddler. Henry has become pretty much of a ghost in every day running of the team as his interest seems to be elsewhere and Werner is concerned with TV ratings. As for Cherington, I wonder just how much power he really has, whether he is competent enough to operate on his own, and whether the whole front office edifice is in dire need of a good enema.

 

:dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno:

 

As much as the FO denies the notion that they changed their vision for the Red Sox in recent years, my feeling is that they have come to the conclusion, at least temporarily, that their vision for the organization needed to be re-evaluated after what transpired the last two seasons, and even going back to 2008. The Francona book really highlighted the change in philosophy after 2007, but I wouldn't say that is some huge revelation that the media and fans weren't aware of before the book came out.

 

As I've said in other posts, the organization burned through all of the goodwill they built up in the first 6 years of the current ownership with 5 years of varying degrees of mediocrity and disgust. For me, its almost as if they are starting from a clean slate at this point.

[mvp 78]

Ah yes, Francona "torpedoed" 2008, rather than got them almost to the WS...

 

The alternate reality that some people live in is just amazing to me.

[mvp 78]

The same blind loyalty that had Francona leave Wakefield off various postseason rosters...

 

Let's just throw out logic and reason because who needs it? We're straight shooters!

[mvp 78]

If the Sox had lost to the Guardians in 07, would everyone be pissing and moaning about a Sox decline since 05? While they didn't win in 08, it was a great year. Stop pissing on it just because they didn't win a ring. If the only thing that makes you happy is a WS win, you're a pretty s***** fan, imo.

[mvp 78]

You know, the same "Country Club" that had them ship out Manny...

[Dojji]

Pretty much. The first year I really noticed chinks in the armor was 09.

[DocHolliday]

If the Sox had lost to the Guardians in 07, would everyone be pissing and moaning about a Sox decline since 05? While they didn't win in 08, it was a great year. Stop pissing on it just because they didn't win a ring. If the only thing that makes you happy is a WS win, you're a pretty s***** fan, imo.

 

You're right about the 08 team. IMO, it was probably one of, if not the best, squads they have assembled since Henry et al have been in charge. It was also the year Pedroia won the MVP and DiceK had a 2.90 ERA - so it was definitely a year of extraordinary accomplishments in addition to making it to game 7 of the ALCS.

 

My larger point is that the change in philosophy of ownership and the FO began to take place after the 2007 season. It wasn't something that happened overnight and largely had no effect on the 2008 team. The main pieces of the 08 team were largely holdovers from 2007 and the young crop of players drafted before 2007 who had become impact players at the ML level (Pedroia, Ellsbury, Masterson, Lowrie, etc.). Manny's time to go was well overdue and 2008 just happened to be the year where things reached a boiling point AND he was nearing the end of his contract.

 

So to me, the changes began after 07 and really didn't start to show up on the ML team until 09.

[Dojji]

*shakes head*

 

I think they'd have been insane not to make a shift. That was the year they lost Schilling, and they have still never managed to adequately replace him. That's also when the game of "Who Is Our Shorstop This Week?" began, when Tek started to seriously play out, Manny was gone, Drew was ineffective and then gone, Beckett sagged down into his on-again, off-again pattern, Buchholz revealed himself to be a project rather than a potential ace... basically we got hit with a whole lot of entropy in the wake of the 2007 World Series title that we've never managed to successfully reverse or recover from.

 

So in 08 and 09, they went ahead and brought in some patchwork veterans to try to play the string out, and that kinda worked, but each year was worse than the last so they tried to make a series of over-the-top moves... while they were nowhere near the top. And paid for it.

 

Once we rebuild our core into something stable that can contend for multiple years in a row without major repair work each offseason, I expect the FO to start resembling the version of itself we had in 03-07 when that was true. Until then, it's going to be the team doing everything it can to rebuild itself in any given year, which means you don't have a lot of resources left for over the top moves like Schill was in 04.

[DocHolliday]

*shakes head*

 

I think they'd have been insane not to make a shift. That was the year they lost Schilling, and they have still never managed to adequately replace him. That's also when the game of "Who Is Our Shorstop This Week?" began, when Tek started to seriously play out, Manny was gone, Drew was ineffective and then gone, Beckett sagged down into his on-again, off-again pattern, Buchholz revealed himself to be a project rather than a potential ace... basically we got hit with a whole lot of entropy in the wake of the 2007 World Series title that we've never managed to successfully reverse or recover from.

 

So in 08 and 09, they went ahead and brought in some patchwork veterans to try to play the string out, and that kinda worked, but each year was worse than the last so they tried to make a series of over-the-top moves... while they were nowhere near the top. And paid for it.

 

Once we rebuild our core into something stable that can contend for multiple years in a row without major repair work each offseason, I expect the FO to start resembling the version of itself we had in 03-07 when that was true. Until then, it's going to be the team doing everything it can to rebuild itself in any given year, which means you don't have a lot of resources left for over the top moves like Schill was in 04.

 

I'm referring more to the shift in their drafting philosophy - which they themselves have been on the record saying that during the 07-10 period they shifted away from some principles that made them successful in drafting and developing prior to 2007. They have also said that they have since gone back to similar principles that helped them draft and develop the current core of players like Pedroia, Ellsbury, Lester and Buchholz.

 

It may very well be that they are heading in the right direction in rebuilding the core that you're referring to. It certainly appears they made the most out of letting Adrian Beltre walk, as that netted them Barnes and Bradley Jr. The Punto trade was a step back in the right direction as well.

 

My biggest hope at this point is that they follow through with letting this up and coming group prove themselves and then supplement that group with established players who are better fits to the mold of what they are trying to accomplish than Crawford and Gonzalez were.

[Dojji]

Outside the 2005 draft their draft record has been nothing to write home about for almost their entire tenure.

 

The best moves this franchise has made in its history were all trades, and with the exception of drafting Dustin Pedroia they haven't really yielded that franchise defining player in the draft.

 

I think their drafting philosophy was in need of adjustment in 2007 whgen they adjusted. It's just that their adjustment made things as bad or worse than the original policy.

[Palodios]

Outside the 2005 draft their draft record has been nothing to write home about for almost their entire tenure.

 

You're judging the drafts based on players that have barely had their cup of coffee, or are no longer in the system. 2006 had Bard, Masterson, Reddick, Kalish. 2007 had Haggadone, Middlebrooks, Rizzo, Britton. 2008 had Kelly, Westmoreland, Lavarnway. They've gotten plenty of talent despite having late first rounders, it just hasn't turned into players for a variety of reasons.

[seabeachfred]

As much as the FO denies the notion that they changed their vision for the Red Sox in recent years, my feeling is that they have come to the conclusion, at least temporarily, that their vision for the organization needed to be re-evaluated after what transpired the last two seasons, and even going back to 2008. The Francona book really highlighted the change in philosophy after 2007, but I wouldn't say that is some huge revelation that the media and fans weren't aware of before the book came out.

 

As I've said in other posts, the organization burned through all of the goodwill they built up in the first 6 years of the current ownership with 5 years of varying degrees of mediocrity and disgust. For me, its almost as if they are starting from a clean slate at this point.

 

Red Sox fans hope that the organization is starting from a clean slate finally after four miserable years of rot, but they will do it without the goodwill they once had. Except for the pink hats and pollyannas, most fans know pretty well how inept the team has been run since 2009. I would also include 2008 but I give that one mainly to Francona's inept handling in the dugout. What fans really want to see is a full commitment to winning, a complete deliniation of authority and the end to the constant meddling from up above, and less dependence on marketing and TV ratings and more for the nuts and bolts of winning. Can it be done? It can if John Henry will just take over the ship and start acting like an owner who gives a s***. Great if we could see some of this in 2013.

[seabeachfred]

Ah yes, Francona "torpedoed" 2008, rather than got them almost to the WS...

 

The alternate reality that some people live in is just amazing to me.

 

Well some of us here are amazed at just how much some of the apologists and pollyannas refuse to get a dose of reality and continue to hew the wood and carry the water for the organization. Francona was the topic right and the year was 2008? How about a trip down memory lane and see if your memory and brain can compute what went down that dreary summer.

 

I have always believed that Francona cost the Red Sox three division title--2005-2008, and 2009. Now for 2008 and the summer youu can't seem to remember. That was the first year of what would become the four year June swoon of the fast fading Jason Varitek. That summer as we pissed away the division lead there were at least a dozen or more times that Jason came to the plate with a key runner in scoring position and failed miserably to get the guy home. Not once did Francona ever pinch hit for him even though he had Sean Casey, either Jacoby Ellsbury or Coco Crisp, or Jed Lowrie available to take his place. We lost all those games. It wasn't until the ALCS that Francona finally pinched hit for the guy and the result was a scene in the dugout.

 

Want more? Second game ALCS!!!!! Francona announces before hand that Beckett, who has been nursing a sore shoulder on and off all season, will be tabbed to go seven. Never mind that he may not be able to, the master pre-game plan is that he must. So what happens. We blow three leads, score enough runs to win but because Josh is g etting hosed by the Rays we wind up in an extra inning game. On two occasions later in that contest, we have two on and no outs and Terry refuses to bunt the runners along. The result was two rally crushing double plays. I could pass one off because one of the times Youk was at the plate. The second time Crisp was and still no bunt. We lost in extra innings.

 

You may not like to hear it but in my opinion Francona cost us the division and league title that year. Division? Remember that last series with the Rays in Boston? Of course you don't. Well their pitchers weren't even watching our runners on second, four or five times I saw that on TV. Not once did Francona send those runners. We lost both games after Lester won the opener. So, yes, I stick by what I said.

[jacksonianmarch]

The sox have had a change of philosophy. It started in August with the mega trade. They brought Bill James back in. They have a very highly rated farm system and they havent spend the entire winter trading it away for guys who likely wont work in the Bean. They did go out and sign 3 guys to high money contracts who likely were overpaid a little (until Napoli's hip crumbled during the physical) to bridge the team to when the rest of the crop comes up. It should be enough to keep the team interesting, but won't be enough to keep them in contention. That being said, another season like last with the team languishing in last place from the ASB on would be horrendous for business, so it made sense to give sox fans some hope. But their major change of philosophy has been to avoid signing guys with draft pick comp, avoid major deals involving prospects who are highly likely to contribute at the big league level, and avoid the seriously long contracts for players with questionable capacity to handle Boston. The change wont be felt completely until 2014, IMO, when Doubront, Barnes, Webster, and De la Rosa will all be seriously contending for major spots on the sox team out of ST and guys like Bogaerts and Bradley will be sliding into starting gigs on the offensive side. I see the sox bridging 2013, growing in 2014 and contending in 2015. If they hit like they did during the 00's with their prospects, the sox could be on a sustained championship run come the second half of this decade

[seabeachfred]

The same blind loyalty that had Francona leave Wakefield off various postseason rosters...

 

Let's just throw out logic and reason because who needs it? We're straight shooters!

 

What the hell are you talking about? Wakefield was left off the 2007 post season roster because he had a bad shoulder and couldn't pitch. I felt that a mastermind like you would have remembered that. As for those other times I'm pretty sure it was a physical thing with Wakefield because he usually came up lame late in the season, a reason I always felt why he should have been shown the door two or three years before he was.

[seabeachfred]

Pretty much. The first year I really noticed chinks in the armor was 09.

 

Our friend MVP no doubt has not read the Francona book because if he had he would have known that by 2009 owner John Henry had become very critical of him as a field manager. Someone send mvp the message. I also agree that for he whole organization the chinks really did start in 2009. By then the whole organization was in headlong retreat.

My take on 2008 was and always has been that Francona's inept handling of the team in the dugout was the cause of our not going to the WS.

[Bellhorn04]

Our friend MVP no doubt has not read the Francona book because if he had he would have known that by 2009 owner John Henry had become very critical of him as a field manager. Someone send mvp the message. I also agree that for he whole organization the chinks really did start in 2009. By then the whole organization was in headlong retreat.

My take on 2008 was and always has been that Francona's inept handling of the team in the dugout was the cause of our not going to the WS.

 

All depends how you look at it. Francona messed up big time in Game 2 and it helped cost us that game. But then Maddon turned around and messed up equally bad in Game 5 and helped us win that one. It all came down to Game 7 and Lester got outpitched by Garza. Extremely disappointing but we had that game right there to win and we just didn't do it.

[seabeachfred]

All depends how you look at it. Francona messed up big time in Game 2 and it helped cost us that game. But then Maddon turned around and messed up equally bad in Game 5 and helped us win that one. It all came down to Game 7 and Lester got outpitched by Garza. Extremely disappointing but we had that game right there to win and we just didn't do it.

 

On the face of it you are absolutely on target Bellhorn. It did play out that way, but I also remember those two series with the Rays September of that year where we won the opener and then dropped the next two games. I always felt Francona's miserable handling of the team in the dugout, his refusal to move runners, hit and run, and bunt once in a blue moon, cost us those games. Hell, even on TV Remy wondered why Tito wasn't allowing the runners to move when the Rays pitchers weren't even paying attention to them. I guess they knew that Francona was cemented down with a station-to-station philosophy that wouldn't allow that. Of course, in his eight years as manager didn't the Red Sox lead the AL in hitting into DP's six or seven of those years?

 

Look, I am not saying that Francona didn't have his strengths. He took bullets for his players, deflected criticism of them to himself, ran a great clubhouse, handled the press with aplomb and kept the pressure off the players. Those are terrific attributes for a manager to have nowadays. It was in the dugout where his ineptness shined brightly, and, keep in mind, by 2009 John Henry had become very critical of the way Francona ran the team from that dugout.

[SoxSport]

As much as the FO denies the notion that they changed their vision for the Red Sox in recent years, my feeling is that they have come to the conclusion, at least temporarily, that their vision for the organization needed to be re-evaluated after what transpired the last two seasons, and even going back to 2008. The Francona book really highlighted the change in philosophy after 2007, but I wouldn't say that is some huge revelation that the media and fans weren't aware of before the book came out.

 

As I've said in other posts, the organization burned through all of the goodwill they built up in the first 6 years of the current ownership with 5 years of varying degrees of mediocrity and disgust. For me, its almost as if they are starting from a clean slate at this point.

 

The other thing they did was to get rid of James and a few other cyber consultants after 07.

They also started losing their top FO people during this period--Hoyer and Byrnes--without really replacing them. Cherington pretty much got the GM job by default after Epstein left--there was nobody else. It remains to be seen on whether that was a Peter Principle promotion.

[mvp 78]

1. They never "got rid of" Bill James. He's been on the payroll since 03.

 

2. Hoyer didn't leave until Oct 09.

 

Where is all this "all downhill since 07" nonsense coming from? You can make a case that it's been downhill since the end of 09, but anything else is pushing it.

 

2008 was a solid year. Most posters would give their left nut to have a repeat of 09 rather than 12...

[DocHolliday]

1. They never "got rid of" Bill James. He's been on the payroll since 03.

 

2. Hoyer didn't leave until Oct 09.

 

Where is all this "all downhill since 07" nonsense coming from? You can make a case that it's been downhill since the end of 09, but anything else is pushing it.

 

2008 was a solid year. Most posters would give their left nut to have a repeat of 09 rather than 12...

 

If 2013 turns out to be a repeat of 09, I think the majority of posters and fans of the Sox would be ecstatic. Making the playoffs in and of itself in 2013 would likely be above what many of us see as the ceiling for this year's current squad.

 

As for the downward trend, it makes sense to me that it would take a couple of years to show up. Like I mentioned in a previous post, the 08 team - and to an extent the 09 team as well, still had significant holdovers from the 07 team. You see the decline and inconsistency of significant players from the 07 team (Beckett, Lowell, DiceK, Varitek, Wakefield, etc.) along with the departure of key pieces of the 07 team (Schilling, Manny) and the growing pains of young players (Ellsbury, Buchholz). It all contributed to the decline from 07/08 to 09.

 

You can also make the case that the player development machine did not produce enough impact players to help make up for the lost contributions from 07-09.

 

Keeping in mind that impact talent from the draft usually does not arrive to the majors until atleast 2-3 years after the draft year, here's a look at the impact/potential impact players drafted under Theo through 2009:

 

2003: David Murphy, Jonathan Papelbon

2004: Dustin Pedroia

2005: Jacoby Ellsbury, Clay Buchholz (they also drafted Lowrie and Craig Hansen)

2006: Daniel Bard, Justin Masterson, Ryan Kalish

2007: Will Middlebrooks, Anthony Rizzo

2008: Casey Kelly (also drafted Ryan Lavarnway and Ryan Westmoreland)

2009: Reymond Fuentes

 

Its pretty clear to me that the overall level of talent coming through the development system dropped off significantly after 2007 - around the time the Sox have gone on the record about a change in draft philosophy. Several of these guys could have been potential impact core pieces going into this season (Kelly and Rizzo) - but we all know that the majority of us, including myself, were on board when they were traded away.

 

But it can work the other way too. Since the Sox have gone back to a refined version of their original draft strategy, they appear to have assembled a significant pool of potential impact talent:

 

2010: Garin Cecchini, Bryce Brentz, Anthony Ranaudo

2011: Matt Barnes, Blake Swihart, Henry Owens, Jackie Bradley

2012: Deven Marrero, Brian Johnson, Pat Light

 

This year's draft is also shaping up to be promising for the future - when you consider the Sox were able to keep all of their unprotected draft picks, in addition to their protected #7 overall pick in the draft.

 

Going forward, I'd like to see them be more hesitant to trade top prospects and more focused on integrating talent from the minor leagues onto the major league roster.

[DocHolliday]

Red Sox fans hope that the organization is starting from a clean slate finally after four miserable years of rot, but they will do it without the goodwill they once had. Except for the pink hats and pollyannas, most fans know pretty well how inept the team has been run since 2009. I would also include 2008 but I give that one mainly to Francona's inept handling in the dugout. What fans really want to see is a full commitment to winning, a complete deliniation of authority and the end to the constant meddling from up above, and less dependence on marketing and TV ratings and more for the nuts and bolts of winning. Can it be done? It can if John Henry will just take over the ship and start acting like an owner who gives a s***. Great if we could see some of this in 2013.

 

I don't want to put an ultimatum on anything, but I feel a lot of things this year will depend on how the team begins the season - particularly in the first couple of weeks of the season. If you look at the Sox record through the first 14 of games of the season, which is roughly 10% of the season, here's where they've stood the past 3 seasons:

 

2010: 5-9

2011: 4-10

2012: 4-10

 

Compare that to the season average from 2003 - 2009 of 9-5 (worst start being 8-6).

 

Its not so much a matter of statistical significance but more so of mindset and morale. The organization can say all they want about it being a long season, etc, but the fact is the slow starts have had an ill effect on the final outcome in each of the past 3 seasons.

 

Getting off to a fast start this year would go a long way to making a positive influence on the organization from a number of fronts: instilling some level of credibility and confidence of the real owners of the team - the fanbase, deflecting negative criticism of the organization from sources like the media, the Francona book, etc, and, perhaps most importantly, giving the players a sense of unity and confidence that they in fact CAN get back to playing winning baseball.

[RicoP]

I don't want to put an ultimatum on anything, but I feel a lot of things this year will depend on how the team begins the season - particularly in the first couple of weeks of the season. If you look at the Sox record through the first 14 of games of the season, which is roughly 10% of the season, here's where they've stood the past 3 seasons:

 

2010: 5-9

2011: 4-10

2012: 4-10

 

Compare that to the season average from 2003 - 2009 of 9-5 (worst start being 8-6).

 

Its not so much a matter of statistical significance but more so of mindset and morale. The organization can say all they want about it being a long season, etc, but the fact is the slow starts have had an ill effect on the final outcome in each of the past 3 seasons.

 

Getting off to a fast start this year would go a long way to making a positive influence on the organization from a number of fronts: instilling some level of credibility and confidence of the real owners of the team - the fanbase, deflecting negative criticism of the organization from sources like the media, the Francona book, etc, and, perhaps most importantly, giving the players a sense of unity and confidence that they in fact CAN get back to playing winning baseball.

 

Considering that our first 4 series are against division rivals, I'd be happy if we could get out of that with something around a .500 record.

 

We start out with 3 vs the Yankees, 3 vs Blue Jays, 3 vs the O's and 4 vs the Rays. I think if we can go 7-6 or 6-7 during that stretch we'll be in good shape. The better way to look at it may be to look at the past April records, because even though we have a tough start to this season, the remaining teams we play in April are: The Guardians, Royals, A's and Astro's (+1 game vs TOR on the 30th). Even considering that, I agree that getting off to a 4-9 start wouldn't be the right tone to set starting the season......it never is.

 

That said, if we go 6-7 to start, but finish the month going 9-5, I'd consider that (15-12 April) a fair 1st month considering who we had to play.

[SoxFanForsyth]

HAPPY TRUCK DAY!!!!

 

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2011/0208/bos_fenway_truck_576.jpg

[a700hitter]

With the start of Spring Training only about 2 weeks away, it is probably a safe bet that our roster is set and there will be no further acquisitions. As presently constituted, the talent level is roughly the same as it was at the beginning of last year on both sides of the ball, maybe slightly lower than last year. IMO, they are at best a 4th place team with a good likelihood of finishing last unless one of the other division rivals implode. I'll wait until the official start of spring training to make my predictions, but this is how I see things shaping up.

[mvp 78]

What "series" are they referencing? Pocket Change?