Sources say Napoli signs with Sox.

[jung]

Well maybe a different perspective is that in years past the Sox on several occasions built teams that you could see competing for the division. They had a chance to win the division. Last year was the first I can remember in awhile where you could not make that argument no matter how you sliced it. They were not going to compete for the division. For my part I could not find my way clear to the Sox competing for the division with their pitching last year.

[BSN07]

Well maybe a different perspective is that in years past the Sox on several occasions built teams that you could see competing for the division. They had a chance to win the division. Last year was the first I can remember in awhile where you could not make that argument no matter how you sliced it. They were not going to compete for the division. For my part I could not find my way clear to the Sox competing for the division with their pitching last year.

 

It just boils down to the talent that would have made them a consideration for the division title this season was either not available or just not smart business moves(Hamilton, Grienke) IMO. So they built a competitive good group of good guys that should make them easy to root for.

[Bellhorn04]

Winning the division has far more meaning now then it did. Theo built to win 90-95 games because that should be good enough to get you into the playoffs which was the point. Being the WC team or Division winner had no real advantage. Now it does. I would think most teams would be trying to build for a division title and trying to avoid the WC game all together.

 

The WC has become what it should have been, a last chance not the same chance as a division winner. I think the new format is great. And will feel the same even if the Sox were a one and done team. 1 game is a lot to put 2 teams seasons on the line for, but they didn't win the division, so that's not a luxury the team gets to have.

 

Personally I was kind of hoping St. Louis would win it all this year-and they nearly did, but for Barry Zito -because it would have been an instant repudiation of the new Wild Card system. We would have had a 'second wild card' team winning it all in Year One. A team that wouldn't even have been in the playoffs under the old system. I would have enjoyed this because it would have quickly proved that it's ******** that the new system rewards teams for winning their division. I still believe it's ********. I believe the second wild card teams do have a legit shot at winning it all. It's all about getting hot and getting lucky at the right time. It's ********, but that's what we've got. And the owners are all richer for it.

[BSN07]

Yes they do have a chance. But it's less then the division winners. Which it should be. The last format was the one that didn't make sense. They shouldn't have called it the WC winner. Just call it division winner 1a, because they had the same basic rights and advantages to the actual division winner.

 

Like it or not this was the best way to keep the WC teams and give an advantage to winning the division.

[jung]

It is to a very large degree about getting hot at the right time or at least it can be. That makes it similar to the NFL in that regard. The difference is that in the ML, they play 162 games over a season that spans across 6 months. The NFL plays 16 regular season games over a span of 4 months. IMO, minimizing the importance of the 162 which in effect is what MLB has done by allowing teams that have no business being in the post season a shot via a one game play in, a game played against an opposing team that beat them over the 162 makes no sense.

 

As I have said before the old system was defensible because you could very often make the case that the team with the best record that had not won a division actually had a better record than one or more division winners. That is not the case with the 2nd WC. That team has no business getting a shot at boosting a team that beat them over the 162 in a one game play in scenario. In fact there is every chance that we will see teams taking the 2nd WC that were handily beaten by the 1st WC team over the 162, win there way into post season play based on winning 1 game. There is no legitimate defense for such a ridiculous system.

[a700hitter]

But on the other hand, who cares about having the best regular season record? It's meaningless.

 

The St. Louis Cardinals won 105 games in 2004 and 100 games in 2005. No cigar. They won 83 games in 2006 and 90 games in 2011. Two cigars.

 

This is just an academic debate IMO.

yes it is, but it doesn't change the fact that the Yankees have won 15 divisions in 17 years. We finished ahead of the Yanks twice and one of those times the Rays won the division. It's just not a great record of success.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes they do have a chance. But it's less then the division winners. Which it should be. The last format was the one that didn't make sense. They shouldn't have called it the WC winner. Just call it division winner 1a, because they had the same basic rights and advantages to the actual division winner.

 

Like it or not this was the best way to keep the WC teams and give an advantage to winning the division.

 

I think the 'more fair' argument was just a way to sell the new system. I believe the real reason this was done was for entertainment purposes. Even the godawful Red Sox seemed to have a sniff at the playoffs in the days when they were still straddling a .500 record.

 

Bud Selig is a good marketing guy, I give him full marks for that. He knows how to make more money for the owners and players. But I think he could care less about the 'fairness' stuff.

 

As long us fans keep buying it, the MLB money machine just keeps rolling harder.

[a700hitter]

Do any of your posts start with something other then "This" "I totally agree with you" or some other reference to how much your are 100% on board with anything and everything a700 writes? I mean if thats what you want so be it, I just figure why not be something other then a a700 co-signer? Not trying to be a dick, just trying to encourage you to write something of your own view instead of just agreeing with and re-writing something someone already said all the time. I mean ya I get we all say the same things but most of us venture of on our own thought process as well from time to time. I can honestly not re-call a post written by you that was not co-signing something a700 said.

 

Uh but you are being a dick with this. Iortiz can debate in his second language better than most people can in their first language. Also, we frequently disagree about about topics, but we do so respectfully, so people just don't notice. Again, this entire post was unnecessary and yes you were being a dick.

[Bellhorn04]

As long as there are 3 divisions in each league there's no way it can be fair. So a team wins a s***** division with an 85-77 record. Big f***ing deal. Why should that be rewarded? One of the wild card teams might have a 95-67 record and get turfed out in one day. It's all a big joke IMO.

[User Name]

yes it is, but it doesn't change the fact that the Yankees have won 15 divisions in 17 years. We finished ahead of the Yanks twice and one of those times the Rays won the division. It's just not a great record of success.

 

I've always thought, and always will think this is failthought. In the WC era winning the division is largely meaningless, but saying any team tries to build for a WC berth is beyond ludicrous. Not just the Red Sox, any team. Everybody wants home-field advantage in the playoffs if they get there.

 

I just don't understand the thought process of some of the people in this board, looking for things to whine about where there aren't any.

[a700hitter]

As long as there are 3 divisions in each league there's no way it can be fair. So a team wins a s***** division with an 85-77 record. Big f***ing deal. Why should that be rewarded? One of the wild card teams might have a 95-67 record and get turfed out in one day. It's all a big joke IMO.

 

They should go back to 2 divisions. Keep the game pure. Selig has allowed the game to be sullied with PEDs, hurt the integrity of the 162 game season with wild cards, and instituted unbalanced inter league play for commercial purposes. His reign was terrible for the game.

[SoxSport]

They should go back to 2 divisions. Keep the game pure. Selig has allowed the game to be sullied with PEDs, hurt the integrity of the 162 game season with wild cards, and instituted unbalanced inter league play for commercial purposes. His reign was terrible for the game.

 

Selig is just a spokesman for the owners. And the owners kowtow to TV--because TV pays the bills these days. The scheduling, playoffs, interleague play, etc are all designed to generate higher TV ratings. I doubt any other factors come into play in a big way. Even the tacit acceptance of steroids was probably brought about by the desire to increase TV ratings during the Big Mac/Bonds era. That Mitchell report pretty much spelled out the involvement of all the higher ups.

[Bellhorn04]

yes it is, but it doesn't change the fact that the Yankees have won 15 divisions in 17 years. We finished ahead of the Yanks twice and one of those times the Rays won the division. It's just not a great record of success.

 

The Yankees record of consistent regular season success since 1996 has been an impressive achievement, and vastly superior to ours, I fully agree on that.

[SoxSport]

The Yankees record of consistent regular season success since 1996 has been an impressive achievement, and vastly superior to ours, I fully agree on that.

 

Money does make a difference. Plus Yankee stadium has always been their secret weapon.

They tailor their teams to its asymmetry.

[rjortiz]

Not absurd at all Rdsx. If you followed Theo Epstein's pre-season spiels over the years he always said the first priority was to win between 90-95 games and get into the playoffs. He never said WIN THE DIVISION, I gu ess because he didn't we had to since we usually had better records than other second place teams in other divisions. Now with the new format winning division titles takes on a more important aspect in a teams potential success.

 

In fact the only person connected to the Red Sox who talked about winning the division was Larry Lucchino who said he wanted to win it in 2003 (we didn't) and wanted to win one or two afterward. Interesting to note that when the team looked like it was ready to blow what was once a 12 game lead over the Yankees and finish second again in 2007, the strategy challenged Francona said the WC was fine with him only to have Larry tell him in no uncertain terms that it was not ok, that this year we win that division and stop using Eric Gagne in key situations that last week of the regular season because of his constant failures in key situations that last month. It was the only division we have won in 17 years and it helped us get home field advantage---and that be came critical in the ALCS with Cleveland when the last two games were played at Fenway.

 

Perhaps you remember that.

 

This isn't a fair criticism. There were four playoff teams when Epstein made those comments.

[jung]

Every team tailors its team to its ballpark. When artificial surfaces were more prevalent, those teams had speed burners that constantly put the ball on the ground as it would zip through the infield.

 

We look for guys that can attack the green monster.

 

By far the most changes we have seen over the years in baseball have been designed to pump offense or hitting. This includes the way MLB has treated the use of PED's in the main (ie...we don't want to know so don't get caught).

 

The effort to to boost offense started in the 60's when pitching had grown to such a position of dominance that teams could barely eek out any offense at all. This was the era of the starting pitcher when guys like Sandy Kolfax, Bob Gibson and Marachal regularly went nine innings completely dominating games and defenses were much more stout. Ferguson Jenkins may be one of the last pitchers of that particular era. The mound was lowered in both leagues so the pitcher was not throwing downhill so much. The AL adopted the DH and successive rounds of expansion basically watered down the pool of available pitching talent enough to stem the tide of pitching dominance.

 

However pitching is catching up again and this time Starting Pitching is coming back at a time when MLB has fully developed its use of relief pitchers to a very high level of sophistication. I don't see any expansion on the way either. So, there is nothing out on the horizon that looks like it will water down an ever growing pool of pitching talent on a relative basis.

 

I suspect that unless this generation of PED's can really help hitters, we are going back and maybe all the way back to the era of pitching dominance we saw in the 60's. In which case if baseball truly thinks it needs big boppers to retain fan interest in the game, I am just not sure what it will do this time to boost offense.

 

There also does not appear to be as many teams as there used to be that sport a recognizable, unified offensive style as well. There used to be more teams that were known for sporting a particular offensive style. You used to watch teams as much to watch them exhibit their particular flavor of team play. Most guys just seem to go up there these days and take their hacks. Even plate discipline seems to be more and more going out the window making these hitters cannon fodder for stout pitching.

 

While I for one never liked the efforts to boost offense and was alway totally content with baseball as it was once played, there were also periods during that era where ballparks were completely empty. It takes more effort to truly appreciate what can and should be happening out on a baseball diamond.

 

You can be a fan of physical violence, hitting and find happiness in football or a fan of passing or a fan of super running backs. You really do not have to swallow the whole enchilada to have a strong appreciation for football. But go to a baseball game and see how many fans have no idea what is going on between the pitches and it is not hard to understand why the powers that be would think it needs big boppers to fill seats.

[example1]

they made it very clear over many years that it was more important to "line up their pitching for the post season" rather than finish first. That is playing for second.

 

That is playing for the World Series instead of the Division. They won two of them. Lets stop ignoring that fact and give credit where it is due.

[a700hitter]

That is playing for the World Series instead of the Division. They won two of them. Lets stop ignoring that fact and give credit where it is due.

 

No one is denying them credit. 2004 and 2007 were two seasons where they clearly built their teams with the intent of beating the Yankees. In 2004, they went out and got Big Schill and Foulke and in 2007 they signed their starting SS, right fielder and a starter. Those years they were loaded for bear. Too many other years they were content with building teams that would compete for the wild card.

[mvp 78]

Uh but you are being a dick with this. Iortiz can debate in his second language better than most people can in their first language. Also, we frequently disagree about about topics, but we do so respectfully, so people just don't notice. Again, this entire post was unnecessary and yes you were being a dick.

 

Whether or not he was being a dick, his point is valid. Iortiz NEVER disagrees with you. You say he does "about personnel issues" but I have yet to see it.

[Rdsxmbnt]

No one is denying them credit. 2004 and 2007 were two seasons where they clearly built their teams with the intent of beating the Yankees. In 2004, they went out and got Big Schill and Foulke and in 2007 they signed their starting SS, right fielder and a starter. Those years they were loaded for bear. Too many other years they were content with building teams that would compete for the wild card.

 

2006 they traded for Beckett

2009 they traded for Victor Martinez

2010 they signed John Lackey

2011 they traded for Gonzalez and signed Crawford

 

And there's a on of other big moves out there to cite. For the past decade they have always been gunning for the World Series title and to say otherwise is just baseless whining. No they haven't always won the World series but in the past 10 years they have won two world series, made it to game 7 in two additional ALCS's, and two other playoff appearances.

 

There's no argument to be made that they haven't been trying to compete with the Yankees nearly every year. You don't spend 150+mil to half ass something and all their moves (even though many haven't worked out) makes it very clear to me that the goal is to try to put the best team on the field every year while managing the future.

[jung]

Only 2012 stands out as a year when they did not make an effort to be the best. That much was painfully obvious from the start. But I am struggling with how one could make the case that they were not trying to go all the way in the previous years. Their efforts were somewhat wrongheaded but if anything they tried to hard to buy it. Those were stout teams as well. I don't think those were efforts to finish behind the Yankees....I just think that in most cases the money was spent building sort of historically typical Red Sox teams....short just to short on pitching but long on hitting.

 

We always used to chid ourselves as fans because we would get all exited about the Sox usual early sprint to first followed just as quickly by the usual late season collapse. In reality how much does that sounds like a team that never really had the pitching in the first place. Pitching takes over late and more often than not we could hit with most teams but did not have enough pitching to make it through the dog days of August.

[Rdsxmbnt]

Only 2012 stands out as a year when they did not make an effort to be the best. That much was painfully obvious from the start. But I am struggling with how one could make the case that they were not trying to go all the way in the previous years. Their efforts were somewhat wrongheaded but if anything they tried to hard to buy it. Those were stout teams as well. I don't think those were efforts to finish behind the Yankees....I just think that in most cases the money was spent building sort of historically typical Red Sox teams....short just to short on pitching but long on hitting.

 

We always used to chid ourselves as fans because we would get all exited about the Sox usual early sprint to first followed just as quickly by the usual late season collapse. In reality how much does that sounds like a team that never really had the pitching in the first place. Pitching takes over late and more often than not we could hit with most teams but did not have enough pitching to make it through the dog days of August.

 

It would have been hard to make any large moves for 2012 when they had such large commitments to players. They had two 100+ contracts for Crawford and Gonzalez and two 80+ contracts for pitchers Beckett and Lackey. You can't continually add gigantic pieces like that every offseason and hope to compete with other teams moves. Very glad they aren't pigeonholed into large contracts for once and have some flexibility to incorporate a growing farm system in the next year or two.

[a700hitter]

Whether or not he was being a dick, his point is valid. Iortiz NEVER disagrees with you. You say he does "about personnel issues" but I have yet to see it.

Iortiz is a very smart guy. What can I say? He lis usually right about most basball issues, so we agree alot. I agree with him just as often as he agrees with me. Maybe I am the one who should be criticized. The times that I dont agree with him I am usually wrong. Iortiz knows baseball and the Red Sox. You guys should be ashamed to denigrate him when he is smarter than both of you with half of his brain tied behind his back.

[BSN07]

Iortiz is a very smart guy. What can I say? He lis usually right about most basball issues, so we agree alot. I agree with him just as often as he agrees with me. Maybe I am the one who should be criticized. The times that I dont agree with him I am usually wrong. Iortiz knows baseball and the Red Sox. You guys should be ashamed to denigrate him when he is smarter than both of you with half of his brain tied behind his back.

 

I literally made the post because Iortiz seems like an intelligent poster and I think he could add more to the board then just "agreeing" all the time. I mean if your going to agree with something someone says all the time, why even bother to post it when we all know what he's going to say? I'm trying to help the guy become something other then a joke around here. If that deems me to be a dick then I guess I'm guilty.

[a700hitter]

2006 they traded for Beckett

2009 they traded for Victor Martinez

2010 they signed John Lackey

2011 they traded for Gonzalez and signed Crawford

 

And there's a on of other big moves out there to cite. For the past decade they have always been gunning for the World Series title and to say otherwise is just baseless whining. No they haven't always won the World series but in the past 10 years they have won two world series, made it to game 7 in two additional ALCS's, and two other playoff appearances.

 

There's no argument to be made that they haven't been trying to compete with the Yankees nearly every year. You don't spend 150+mil to half ass something and all their moves (even though many haven't worked out) makes it very clear to me that the goal is to try to put the best team on the field every year while managing the future.

If you think about, I am the one giving the FO credit. I am saying that they have finished second to the Yankees several years because they didn't aim to beat them. I am giving them credit for accomplishing their business plan. You, on the other hand, are saying that they have tried every year to beat the Yanks. If that is true, then they are bigger failures than I thought, because they have beaten the Yanks twice and won 1 division.

[a700hitter]

I literally made the post because Iortiz seems like an intelligent poster and I think he could add more to the board then just "agreeing" all the time. I mean if your going to agree with something someone says all the time, why even bother to post it when we all know what he's going to say? I'm trying to help the guy become something other then a joke around here. If that deems me to be a dick then I guess I'm guilty.

Guilty. Now move on to baseball.

[BSN07]

Guilty. Now move on to baseball.

 

Yup. I kinda liked your Carlos Lee idea at 1B on a one year deal.

[a700hitter]

Yup. I kinda liked your Carlos Lee idea at 1B on a one year deal.

Iortiz likes LaRoche, not Lee;)

[a700hitter]

I think there is going to be a flurry of activity very soon. There are a lot of players left unsigned and a lot of teams have holes to fill. There are only 6 week until pitchers and catchers report. This week might be quiet, but then the chips will start falling rapidly. I hope that they have resolved the Napoli issue by then.

[User Name]

It's easy to be right most of the time when you live by Murphy's Law.