2015 Red Sox In-Season Thread

[Northern Star]

Did you watch the game? He had solid AB, two singles and a giant assist throwing a runner out at the plate.

 

But go ahead and hate on him. He so deserves it!

 

Hold off on that MVP voting....

[Spudboy]

Good for JBJ, seriously. If he could get an offensive game going that would be a big plus for the team.

 

Amen to that.

[SoxHop]

Amen to that.

 

PAAALEASE get something going on offense JBJ.......

 

The less we need to focus on fixing the offense, the more we can spend on fixing the rotation.

 

If Craig or JBJ figured it out, it would be a huge relief. I think this time it's two strikes your out, if JBJ doesn't do well......sayonora, no third chance and he has had more or a chance than most people get.

[a700hitter]

Another day and no rumors about moves to bolster the pitching staff. They are just playing out the schedule hoping that the whole thing doesn't deteriorate into a circus. It looks like the only drama that we will have at TalkSox will be guessing the date that someone open the Offseason/Hot Stove thread. Last years was opened September 24th is my recollection. We can also have a Ben and Farrell countdown -- maybe a contest as to the date they get fired.

[mvp 78]

Sox are tanking in a way last year's Celtics could not. Season is over at this point even if they traded for two pitchers. Time to bring up the kids imo.

[a700hitter]

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox_mlb/boston_red_sox/2015/06/red_sox_acting_like_they_re_actually_a_contender

 

Ben is really starting to sound like Baghdad Bob-- delusional.

[a700hitter]

Sox are tanking in a way last year's Celtics could not. Season is over at this point even if they traded for two pitchers. Time to bring up the kids imo.

i agree, but imo, if they go in the tank from now, Ben and Farrell will not be back next season. The only chance that Ben has to prevent going to GM Siberia is to make some moves and take a shot at turning this around.

[Elktonnick]

If the downward slide continues at this pace fan pressure will force Henry to make a dramatic change at both GM and field manager. The rating slide in NESN alone will push him to make a move even if he personally may be reluctant to do so.

[a700hitter]

If the downward slide continues at this pace fan pressure will force Henry to make a dramatic change at both GM and field manager. The rating slide in NESN alone will push him to make a move even if he personally may be reluctant to do so.

If fan pressure is the reason he fires these guys, that is poor leadership. I think Ben definitely merits being fired after 3 miserable seasons in 4 years. He is damaging the franchise. Farrell, with the exception of 2013 , has been a last place manager every other season.

[Elktonnick]

If fan pressure is the reason he fires these guys, that is poor leadership. I think Ben definitely merits being fired after 3 miserable seasons in 4 years. He is damaging the franchise. Farrell, with the exception of 2013 , has been a last place manager every other season.

 

Fans are the customers. If customers stop buying your product because your management teams makes or is responsible for a poor product it isn't poor leadership to fire them. It is smart business.

[a700hitter]

Fans are the customers. If customers stop buying your product because your management teams makes or is responsible for a poor product it isn't poor leadership to fire them. It is smart business.

I think they should be fired, because imo they have done a lousy job. I am just saying that if they really think these guys are the right guys for the job they shouldn't cave to public opinion. That would just lead to more bad decisions. I think that ownership's faith in Ben and Farrell is fairly well exhausted.

[Elktonnick]

Businesses cave into public pressure all the time. In this case I do agree Ben has to go. I'd fire him first and leave it up to the new GM as to whom he brings in as manager. If it were my decision Farrell would be gone also.,

[mvp 78]

Business caved to piblic pressure during the 2010-1 offseason. That didn't work out well.

[Elktonnick]

Business caved to piblic pressure during the 2010-1 offseason. That didn't work out well.

 

I don't know nor neither do you, unless you have access to their balance sheet.

[Spudboy]

I don't think that Sox ownership will do what the public wants as much as they will do what is best to sustain and increase revenues.

 

It is a business, after all. We debate what is best to fulfill our desires for the team but ultimately the ownership will decide what is best for them personally.

 

I have said this many times in the past and for some reason no one seems to agree. Sox ownership will make moves that they believe will create and sustain a perception of being championship driven. That is all they have to do to make boat loads of money in this market.

 

This year is an example of that. They went out and spent freely on FA that have public appeal so they can further the idea that they are aiming for the top. No way in hell any responsible baseball exec was convinced that this team would contend for a WS championship.

 

They succeeded in filling the stands and marketing their product. That is what they want to do each year.

 

An occasional championship is nice. But they make their money anyway.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't think that Sox ownership will do what the public wants as much as they will do what is best to sustain and increase revenues.

 

It is a business, after all. We debate what is best to fulfill our desires for the team but ultimately the ownership will decide what is best for them personally.

 

I have said this many times in the past and for some reason no one seems to agree. Sox ownership will make moves that they believe will create and sustain a perception of being championship driven. That is all they have to do to make boat loads of money in this market.

 

This year is an example of that. They went out and spent freely on FA that have public appeal so they can further the idea that they are aiming for the top. No way in hell any responsible baseball exec was convinced that this team would contend for a WS championship.

 

They succeeded in filling the stands and marketing their product. That is what they want to do each year.

 

An occasional championship is nice. But they make their money anyway.

 

Personally I think they want the best of both worlds - they want to make money and they want a winning team. I don't think they're trying to create the illusion of having a contending team. That illusion quickly vanishes in the face of being 10 games under .500.

 

There's no way it is any fun for those guys to take the beating they have been taking so far this year.

[sk7326]

I don't know nor neither do you, unless you have access to their balance sheet.

 

NESN ratings were down, the team lacked sexiness. Fans are spoiled. The 2010 team had no business winning 89 games. It's the paradox of winning a lot - fans don't miss it until it's gone.

[Elktonnick]

All of the above is true. Which is why public pressure and smart business will push ownership to make changes in the front office is this downward trend continues.

[sk7326]

All of the above is true. Which is why public pressure and smart business will push ownership to make changes in the front office is this downward trend continues.

 

What is interesting is that most of the organizational markers are fairly strong - the books are not tied up horribly, the team is not especially old, the farm system is not barren.

 

What has happened this year has been a really simple matter - the parts of the team that were supposed to be strengths have largely not been. Every other diagnosis puts the blame in the wrong place (although yes the part of the team that was not supposed to be too hot has lived down to that).

 

I tend to be more inclined to blame Farrell than the front office because there has not actually been that much concrete evidence that the players are not talented - or that they lack character (there are a lot of rings out there). It has been a consistent team wide under performance. The roster has flaws (duh), but there is a lot of evidence that this coaching staff has not maximized their output at all.

[Elktonnick]

I don't disagree that Farrell and the coaches especially Chili Davis aren't performing well. Nevertheless Cherrington allegedly built this team. He put together one of the weakest if not the weakest pitching rotation in the major leagues. Previously he was one who allowed Daniel Bard to try and become a starter that is just one example of how he misjudges talent. If a GM is such a poor judge of baseball talent (that is his core function) he has no business being in that position.

[Spudboy]

I don't disagree that Farrell and the coaches especially Chili Davis aren't performing well. Nevertheless Cherrington allegedly built this team. He put together one of the weakest if not the weakest pitching rotation in the major leagues. Previously he was one who allowed Daniel Bard to try and become a starter that is just one example of how he misjudges talent. If a GM is such a poor judge of baseball talent (that is his core function) he has no business being in that position.

 

I certainly don't disagree with most of what you say here. However, sometime last winter I read that Bard was diagnosed with some ailment that was a substantial contributor to his failure as a starter and his spiral down. I wish that I could remember the details. I do agree that even if Bard had been healthy it was probably not the best decision to make him a starter. He was very valuable and productive as a set up guy in the pen. Hanging it all on Ben may not be fair at this point. Yes, the move may have been misguided, but Bard had problems even before the move was made.

[User Name]

I certainly don't disagree with most of what you say here. However, sometime last winter I read that Bard was diagnosed with some ailment that was a substantial contributor to his failure as a starter and his spiral down. I wish that I could remember the details. I do agree that even if Bard had been healthy it was probably not the best decision to make him a starter. He was very valuable and productive as a set up guy in the pen. Hanging it all on Ben may not be fair at this point. Yes, the move may have been misguided, but Bard had problems even before the move was made.

 

Thoracic outlet syndrome. And it was Bard who pressured the FO into letting him become a starter, and whether people want to believe it or not, players do have some leverage. An unhappy player is not likely to perform up to his abilities. Elktonnick, like many here however, will not let facts get in the way of a good argument. Also, the idea that Cherington built, on paper, the worst pitching staff in the Majors is laughable. That's not saying he didn't fail though. Lackey would certainly look good in this rotation.

 

As for your assertion that the FO only wants to create the illusion of winning, I see two main flaws in that argument: 1) The more you win, the more money you make. 2) You are assuming that, because ownership is trying to make money, they have no emotional attachment to this team. I understand your stance, but I don't share it. No one wants to be a loser, and the owners/FO are not robots.

[Elktonnick]

I certainly don't disagree with most of what you say here. However, sometime last winter I read that Bard was diagnosed with some ailment that was a substantial contributor to his failure as a starter and his spiral down. I wish that I could remember the details. I do agree that even if Bard had been healthy it was probably not the best decision to make him a starter. He was very valuable and productive as a set up guy in the pen. Hanging it all on Ben may not be fair at this point. Yes, the move may have been misguided, but Bard had problems even before the move was made.

Ben could have said no to Bard but he didn't. That was but one of Cherrington's bonehead moves since he became GM. The fact that this rotation is so bad if not the worst in baseball is totally on Cherrington.

[sk7326]

I don't disagree that Farrell and the coaches especially Chili Davis aren't performing well. Nevertheless Cherrington allegedly built this team. He put together one of the weakest if not the weakest pitching rotation in the major leagues. Previously he was one who allowed Daniel Bard to try and become a starter that is just one example of how he misjudges talent. If a GM is such a poor judge of baseball talent (that is his core function) he has no business being in that position.

 

Except that none of that stuff about the talent is true ...

 

The GM signed the two top position players on the FA market knowing they would both provide below replacement level contribution for almost half the season

 

The GM traded for a 26 year old who had improved for 3 straight years with the assumption that he would regress as a 27 year old

 

The GM traded for a decent innings horse assuming ... well Miley has actually been roughly what was expected, a couple of flammable starts notwithstanding

 

Any reasonable projection of this rotation was to be something in the middle - not awful, not the 1995 Braves, just some guys (like the 1975 Reds) nobody will remember who won't kill you. And since the guys he acquired were young you can at least cross your fingers on more.

 

The talent part was not the issue - it has been the execution therein. I know Cherington is not perfect and do not absolve him for how it has gone, but his failing - if anything - has not been at the player level. Look at the Pawtucket and Greenville rosters for proof there.

[sk7326]

Thoracic outlet syndrome. And it was Bard who pressured the FO into letting him become a starter, and whether people want to believe it or not, players do have some leverage. An unhappy player is not likely to perform up to his abilities. Elktonnick, like many here however, will not let facts get in the way of a good argument. Also, the idea that Cherington built, on paper, the worst pitching staff in the Majors is laughable. That's not saying he didn't fail though. Lackey would certainly look good in this rotation.

 

As for your assertion that the FO only wants to create the illusion of winning, I see two main flaws in that argument: 1) The more you win, the more money you make. 2) You are assuming that, because ownership is trying to make money, they have no emotional attachment to this team. I understand your stance, but I don't share it. No one wants to be a loser, and the owners/FO are not robots.

 

This front office ... has won ... A LOT. The idea that these guys don't want a taste again after having the tastes in the past is ludicrous. Going to work as a Red Sox svengali is the best gig in the world if the team is good. (granted there is the cottage industry of Sox fan unhappiness, but that is a different issue)

[Elktonnick]

What are the results that Cherrington has achieved. The team sucks. That's the bottom line.

[User Name]

Except that none of that stuff about the talent is true ...

 

The GM signed the two top position players on the FA market knowing they would both provide below replacement level contribution for almost half the season

 

The GM traded for a 26 year old who had improved for 3 straight years with the assumption that he would regress as a 27 year old

 

The GM traded for a decent innings horse assuming ... well Miley has actually been roughly what was expected, a couple of flammable starts notwithstanding

 

Any reasonable projection of this rotation was to be something in the middle - not awful, not the 1995 Braves, just some guys (like the 1975 Reds) nobody will remember who won't kill you. And since the guys he acquired were young you can at least cross your fingers on more.

 

The talent part was not the issue - it has been the execution therein. I know Cherington is not perfect and do not absolve him for how it has gone, but his failing - if anything - has not been at the player level. Look at the Pawtucket and Greenville rosters for proof there.

 

Spot on as usual SK, except for the Sandoval signing. The warning signs for the possibility of him blowing up (pun intended) were there.

[Bellhorn04]

Ben could have said no to Bard but he didn't. That was but one of Cherrington's bonehead moves since he became GM.

 

What happened to Bard was rare and unforeseeable, IMO. Countless other guys go back and forth between starting and relieving without this kind of disaster occurring.

[a700hitter]

This front office ... has won ... A LOT. The idea that these guys don't want a taste again after having the tastes in the past is ludicrous. Going to work as a Red Sox svengali is the best gig in the world if the team is good. (granted there is the cottage industry of Sox fan unhappiness, but that is a different issue)

But under Ben's leadership they have lost a lot, not won a lot.

[a700hitter]

Except that none of that stuff about the talent is true ...

 

The GM signed the two top position players on the FA market knowing they would both provide below replacement level contribution for almost half the season

 

The GM traded for a 26 year old who had improved for 3 straight years with the assumption that he would regress as a 27 year old

 

The GM traded for a decent innings horse assuming ... well Miley has actually been roughly what was expected, a couple of flammable starts notwithstanding

 

Any reasonable projection of this rotation was to be something in the middle - not awful, not the 1995 Braves, just some guys (like the 1975 Reds) nobody will remember who won't kill you. And since the guys he acquired were young you can at least cross your fingers on more.

 

The talent part was not the issue - it has been the execution therein. I know Cherington is not perfect and do not absolve him for how it has gone, but his failing - if anything - has not been at the player level. Look at the Pawtucket and Greenville rosters for proof there.

The rotation cobbled together at the start of the season lacked a top of the rotation. It was a pair of 4s, a pair of 5s and a 3, and the 3 was a borderline 4. You can't win with that. 4s and 5s are not mediocre. Generally, they suck. When combined with top of the rotation pitchers the overall result usually averages out to mediocre, I.e. League average. A rotation comprised solely of 4s and 5s will usually combine to produce a bad result.

 

To this point our two 4s, two 5a, and a 3 have performed like two 5s, two DFAs, and a 2/3 (Buch).

 

Edit: btw, the 1975 Reds had a great top of the rotation pitcher in Don Gullett. His career was cut short by injury, but he was very good -- a star that was still on the rise when injuries ends his career.

Edited June 26, 2015 by a700hitter