2014 Offseason Thread

[seabeachfred]

Nope. Lucchino even refuted the idea of ever wanting a bridge year:

 

“That’s not been the way we’ve operated,” Lucchino said. “We believe with the kind of market we have, the passion and intensity of our fanbase, and the financial wherewithal that that passion turns into, that we should be able to compete year after year. "

 

Well hooray for you Larry, but you think he could have helped the cause by offering Lester a contract extension offer that was little better than coolie wages in today's baseball market? Someone remind Lucchino that talk is cheap and if you stop making blunders like that we just might be able to do it every year, contend, that is.

[Bellhorn04]

My recollection is that Lars was the more highly rated prospect, so why would they turn him down.

 

Lars was Baseball America #87 prospect before 2010 season.

Rizzo was Baseball America #75 prospect before 2011 season.

[a700hitter]

I'm not trying to shift my initial point, just defending against your strawmen so let me get back to my initial point.

 

If you saw a 1st basemen prospect putting up a .720 OPS for 3 years, you would be among the first ones asking for his head.

Because of that, its completely unfair for you to then criticize the FO for trading him before the 4th year.

 

They're damned if they trade, and damned if they don't trade. There is zero chance for them to win your favor.

Sure I can. It's their decision and it is their performance that gets evaluated-- not my opinion. If I like a player and he stinks, I don't try to tell people how good he is because I liked him. I say that I was wrong about the guy. You have used the strawman argument here. You have made the following assumptions: that Rizzo would have struggled as much in Fenway as he did at Petco and in the Cubs pathetic lineup and that I would have complained about him. You have used those hypothetical assumptions to conclude that I have no right to complain about getting rid of Rizzo. Assume that I grant you your strawman hypotheticals and admit that as a complainer and critic of prospects (not true by the way) that I never have the right to criticize the FO for trading prospects. Assuming that all of your faulty premises, hypotheticals and other mullarkey that you have splattered in this thread are right, none of it disproves the fact that they made the wrong move keeping Lars and having him higher on their list than they did Rizzo. It doesn't matter what you think my agenda is (and you are wrong about that too), they botched it by keeping the wrong first baseman.

[mvp 78]

We can't agree on anything because you're just not very smart Fred. That's a joke btw.

 

But maybe if you just found a way to stop being a condescending prick all the time, i could let it go.

 

In fact, here's what i plan to do. I won't respond to a single one of your posts and wait to see how long you can last without being a dick. As long as you hold out, so will I.

 

Fyi Fred.

[a700hitter]

Lars was Baseball America #87 prospect before 2010 season.

Rizzo was Baseball America #75 prospect before 2011 season.

At one point Lars was the Red Soz #1 rated prospect (2009) and he was in the top 10 a couple of years. Rizzo was never higher than the Sox #7 prospect.

[Palodios]

Sure I can. It's their decision and it is their performance that gets evaluated-- not my opinion.

 

By now, I think you have a pretty good understanding of how to push my buttons.

 

I'm going to cool down, and agree to disagree on this one.

[Bellhorn04]

At one point Lars was the Red Soz #1 rated prospect (2009) and he was in the top 10 a couple of years. Rizzo was never higher than the Sox #7 prospect.

 

Hoyer was the Padres GM when the trade was made. It's entirely possible that he thought more highly of Rizzo than he did of Lars when the trade was made. Unless anyone has some quotes this is all just speculation.

[seabeachfred]

Fyi Fred.

 

First a dig masqueraded as a joke ;)then the personal insult and now a promise to ignore my posts. Your friend is one sad and sorry ******** artist. He should put me on ignore, then he wouldn't have to read anything I write and because he refuses to do it I think he wants this pissing contest to go on. He called me a dick and prick and you now hint I should let it go. s*** on that. He makes one more nasty reference to me and they'll be a war on the board. You tell your pal that. He better put me on ignore and keep his damn mouth shut where I'm concerned........For his and your information.

[a700hitter]

By now, I think you have a pretty good understanding of how to push my buttons.

 

I'm going to cool down, and agree to disagree on this one.

Okay okay, but you really just push your own buttons. You take every criticism of the FO moves too personally. Admitting that they have made mistakes is not a condemantaion of them and it doesn't in any way reflect on you. We discuss the Red Sox every day here mostly in a cordial and civil manner. None of those FO guys would discuss anything with either one of us or have a drink with us, so they are not worth the loyalty of either of us.

[a700hitter]

Hoyer was the Padres GM when the trade was made. It's entirely possible that he thought more highly of Rizzo than he did of Lars when the trade was made. Unless anyone has some quotes this is all just speculation.

Maybe we let the wrong FO guy go. Is that your point? Either way, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and keeping Lars while trading Rizzo has been some bad pudding.

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe we let the wrong FO guy go. Is that your point?

 

My point is that it's very possible we had to trade Rizzo to get A-Gon. If that's the case, it's a defensible move, and there's no reason to lament it.

[mvp 78]

First a dig masqueraded as a joke ;)then the personal insult and now a promise to ignore my posts. Your friend is one sad and sorry ******** artist. He should put me on ignore, then he wouldn't have to read anything I write and because he refuses to do it I think he wants this pissing contest to go on. He called me a dick and prick and you now hint I should let it go. s*** on that. He makes one more nasty reference to me and they'll be a war on the board. You tell your pal that. He better put me on ignore and keep his damn mouth shut where I'm concerned........For his and your information.

Ok. I'll let him know.

 

P.S. Now that there is a new female poster on this board, do try to be nicer to her than you were to VA or Emmz. Thx.

[Palodios]

Okay okay, but you really just push your own buttons. You take every criticism of the FO moves too personally. Admitting that they have made mistakes is not a condemantaion of them and it doesn't in any way reflect on you. We discuss the Red Sox every day here mostly in a cordial and civil manner. None of those FO guys would discuss anything with either one of us or have a drink with us, so they are not worth the loyalty of either of us.

 

I once ran into Theo outside of Fenway a few offseasons back. He was in jogging clothes out for a run and I may have accidentally heckled him, just because I was excited to see him. Someday, I will figure out Ben's favorite bar, and we'll talk about how upsetting the Lester trade was, and how awesome 2013 was.

[a700hitter]

My point is that it's very possible we had to trade Rizzo to get A-Gon. If that's the case, it's a defensible move, and there's no reason to lament it.

It just means that they couldn't sell the other guy on the wrong guy so we could keep the right guy. There is nothing defensible about being out-negotiated by the other guy. Keeping Lars and losing Rizzo adds up as a negative. I'm not lamenting. I'm just evaluating instead of rationalizing.

[a700hitter]

I once ran into Theo outside of Fenway a few offseasons back. He was in jogging clothes out for a run and I may have accidentally heckled him, just because I was excited to see him. Someday, I will figure out Ben's favorite bar, and we'll talk about how upsetting the Lester trade was, and how awesome 2013 was.

The next time I go to a Sox game I will tell you where to find me, and I will buy you a drink. Hopefully, we will be enjoying a good team.

[a700hitter]

I once ran into Theo outside of Fenway a few offseasons back. He was in jogging clothes out for a run and I may have accidentally heckled him, just because I was excited to see him. Someday, I will figure out Ben's favorite bar, and we'll talk about how upsetting the Lester trade was, and how awesome 2013 was.

btw It sounds like Theo acted like a scared rabbit -- typical behavior of History Majors.

[Palodios]

Rosenthal reporting that current Shields discussions are under 100 million for teams that he actually wants to go to.

 

A 4/90 deal with a vesting option seems almost reasonable -- he would end that contract at 36 years old. You get a big inning eater, a veteran presence in a rotation of 20-somethings, and a borderline ace at much less than Lester's contract. I hope they are still in on him.

[Kimmi]

What a huge waste of money that would be for them this year. They either think that they can win with the pitching staff that they have now or they make an addition. I truly do not believe (I hope anyway) that they would not have signed the people that they have signed if their intent was to build a team for 2016.

 

 

I agree. The FO wouldn't have signed who they signed, and wouldn't have gone over the luxury tax this season if their eyes are on 2016. I believe they are all in it for this year.

[Kimmi]

That's not how farm systems work. Prospects take time to develop in both the minors and majors, and they can also be used to trade for major league talent. So besides Xander and Vasquez, the farm system essentially produced Wade Miley as well.

 

 

Too many people don't understand that building a strong farm system means more than just having home grown players on the team. As you mentioned, the farm system essentially produced Miley (and others via trade). Additionally, the farm system effectively produced Hanley and Panda. It's the cost-controlled, young guys on the team that allow for spending money on free agents to fill the holes.

[User Name]

It just means that they couldn't sell the other guy on the wrong guy so we could keep the right guy. There is nothing defensible about being out-negotiated by the other guy. Keeping Lars and losing Rizzo adds up as a negative. I'm not lamenting. I'm just evaluating instead of rationalizing.

 

But.....you're rationalizing here. You're making an excuse to justify the fact that you're flat out wrong here......

[Kimmi]

Nope. Lucchino even refuted the idea of ever wanting a bridge year:

 

“That’s not been the way we’ve operated,” Lucchino said. “We believe with the kind of market we have, the passion and intensity of our fanbase, and the financial wherewithal that that passion turns into, that we should be able to compete year after year. "

 

 

Most people misinterpreted what was meant by "bridge year". Theo was not saying that they were writing off 2010, with their eyes on 2011, but rather that some of the players that were signed were a one or two year "bridge" until the youngsters were ready. The FO had every intention of competing that year.

 

If I'm not mistaken, that's also the year Theo said their focus was on "run prevention". Certainly not a novel idea, but many people did not take well to that phrase.

[mvp 78]

At the end of the day, the Sox are a product to be sold. Theo was doing a poor job of that at the time.

[Kimmi]

Well Epstein has fled to Chicago and his influence should no longer concern us unless we meet his team in the World Series---say like 2018. What a hoot that would be, the 100th Anniversary of our last encounter with the Cubbies. Unless under dire circumstances we should not be having any bridge years. The Red Sox are a wealthy and big time organization and should contend for a playoff berth EVERY DAMN YEAR---and this year is no exception. We don't have to win every year (ok mvp?) and we won't, but we should contend every season and that includes 2015.

 

 

Since this ownership group took over, I have not entered a season feeling like the team that was assembled was not going to contend. I felt like we had a team that would contend last year, and I feel like we have a team that should contend this year. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't, but I have felt good about the teams going into each season. As a fan, that's really all you can ask for.

[cp176]

Most people misinterpreted what was meant by "bridge year". Theo was not saying that they were writing off 2010, with their eyes on 2011, but rather that some of the players that were signed were a one or two year "bridge" until the youngsters were ready. The FO had every intention of competing that year.

 

If I'm not mistaken, that's also the year Theo said their focus was on "run prevention". Certainly not a novel idea, but many people did not take well to that phrase.

 

I hope that that is what most people interpreted the meaning of the concept of a bridge year as being. I also never felt that it was a "throwaway year". The issue becomes one of have those younger players allowed us to cross the bridge. If people think that they have - great. If they haven't, how much time do you give them? I think most of us would like to see Bradley getting it done as predicted in centerfield. I am not sure management sees it the same way. 127 games is probably close to their limit. I would like to see him in Boston but if he winds up somewhere else and produces - good for him.

[cp176]

One sad aspect of this story is that if you want to remain strong year in and year out and you have $, you probably won't be as patient with your young prospects as some other teams. At some point in time a decision has to be made. In Bradley's case it might come very soon.

[Kimmi]

At the end of the day, the Sox are a product to be sold. Theo was doing a poor job of that at the time.

 

 

To the casual fan, perhaps. IMO, most fans under value and under appreciate "value" contracts and run prevention.

 

It didn't work out, but signing Mike Cameron was a far better value than re-signing Bay would have been.

[seabeachfred]

Ok. I'll let him know.

 

P.S. Now that there is a new female poster on this board, do try to be nicer to her than you were to VA or Emmz. Thx.

 

 

Thank you mvp. I know Kimmi from other boards. We had some differences because she was more supportive of the ownership than I was, but she was a good poster and we got along well. In fact, she helped me to get my avatar on two boards. She's a good fan and a very nice lady. We will have no problems. Emmz? I thought for the most part we got along ok. In fact, I enjoyed her posts and after a little conflict or two we also got along. As for VA......that would take a term paper to explain. I also hope whatever differences we may have had will go by the boards because I know you're a great fan who wants this board to be state of the art. We'll all try to make it so.

[seabeachfred]

I once ran into Theo outside of Fenway a few offseasons back. He was in jogging clothes out for a run and I may have accidentally heckled him, just because I was excited to see him. Someday, I will figure out Ben's favorite bar, and we'll talk about how upsetting the Lester trade was, and how awesome 2013 was.

 

Pal, I met Theo at a snack bar at Edison Field in ST, 2007. He was open and friendly and we exchanged greetings. He seemed like a nice guy, and I met Lucchino near the Coke bottle seats on a Red Sox Destination series back in 2008. He was also cordial and friendly. That may seem strange coming from me since I have lampooned both of them at times, but truth be told, they seemed like ok guys to me. Some of the things they did??? Maybe not so much.

[seabeachfred]

btw It sounds like Theo acted like a scared rabbit -- typical behavior of History Majors.

 

Ted, I'm your good friend. You know I'm not a scared rabbit. I was also a history major.

[cp176]

Ted, I'm your good friend. You know I'm not a scared rabbit. I was also a history major.

 

me too