2016 Red Sox Hot Stove Discussion Thread

[Elktonnick]

Elk I have been away from the board for the bulk of the day. So I just saw your post quoting about Larry and his part in some of these signings.

 

The basis for my view is that Larry was the boss. JH had stuffed the Pres of Baseball Ops job under Larry's Pres of the Red Sox position. So whatever freedom either BC or Theo had was granted by Larry. So it really comes down to whether they forwarded up to Larry their most favored guy for a position or if they forwarded up to him a few guys with the available data and a recommendation. If they only forwarded up one guy for Larry to yea or nay, then that sounds like more responsibility for BC and/or Theo than if they were sending up several candidates with opinions and the available data for Larry to review.

 

In some cases I suspect that Larry would allow either guy to make his own choice. But I would bet that anything on the scale of $$ ala' Panda or Hanley was a decision by Larry with again the only variable whether Larry was receiving multiple candidates and choosing one or just one favored candidate. If the later then that is very close to an approval process. If the former, the Larry is really doing much more than just approving...he is making the choice.

 

 

 

 

In any event it is clear that Theo just got to a point where he felt throttled by the process and hit the road.

 

Again I also think that JH was really telling us more than we understood at the time when he said "Larry runs the Red Sox". As it turns you that was absolutely the case and what happened with Theo makes much more sense when considered within that context.

 

While I can't say for sure how exactly it went down but I am willing to bet that neither Larry nor John Henry came up with the idea on their own. It was their job to. Ben as the Chief of Baseball operations more than likely went to Larry and to John and said "I think we should try and get Sandoval" Larry and John said what's it going to cost And Ben gave a figure. And Larry and John said yes to the figure. I don't know for sure but I am sure based on everything that's been said about the Red Sox management it went down something like that.

[jung]

There is no question that the Sox have run this shell game for years making it difficult to understand who is doing what. Now that the Pres of Baseball Ops job is separated out from the Pres of the Club job with both Kennedy and DD reporting directly to JH, that shell game will be much harder to run. In fact I suspect that was another Larry concoction. That is just so Larry.

 

I really don't think the Sox got much value from it but Larry did. I suspect that is another thing that drove Theo absolutely up the wall though I think BC would have had less problems with it. I think as long as the checks cleared, BC was OK with just about anything upper management did. BC is not Theo.

[Kimmi]

A sexy doughnut? Seriously? I don't think he was signed as a PR coup.

 

Pablo was a fan favorite in SF. For the casual fan, which is who PR is typically aimed at, Pablo is definitely a "sexy" signing. He was a well known free agent name, and you can bet the post season heroics also bode well with that group.

 

Had he played well and had the team played well, Panda marketing could have been huge.

[cp176]

Let's hope he is right.

 

I hope that it is an easy transition for him. it is a very important position for us. His role can't be taken lightly.

[cp176]

I hope that it is an easy transition for him. it is a very important position for us. His role can't be taken lightly.

 

6'2" and 234 is still a very big man. Now Sandoval's last year listing of 5'11" and 255 is something else altogether.

[Kimmi]

Which executives, and were they stating their opinion or do they have first hand knowledge? You make it sound like they have factual knowledge of the decision making process.

 

I don't know which executives, but seeing as how they are baseball executives who deal with the Sox FO regularly, I would think that they have a pretty good understanding of what's going on. Certainly, I would value their opinions over the opinions of posters on a message board who have a bias against Ben and who have no first hand knowledge.

 

From Peter Abraham's article at the Globe:

 

"A few other notes from the GM Meetings:

 

In speaking to several executives, it’s clear that Ben Cherington will not lack for employment opportunities. The consensus is that many of his moves will pay off long-term for the Red Sox and that several mistakes made on his watch were the product of decisions made above him."

[Kimmi]

You don't pay fat over weight who may be above average hitters but substandard defensively the kind of money Sandoval got, so it is more of a pet theory there are some data to support the hypothesis. I simply don't believe Cherrington would have gone after Sandoval as hard as he did (ignoring the red flags about his weight) if he hadn't had those outstanding playoff number.,

 

Seriously, most of us here understand that you don't sign a player based on playoff numbers. You really think that Cherington is that stupid that he would give out a large contract based on that?

[Elktonnick]

I don't know which executives, but seeing as how they are baseball executives who deal with the Sox FO regularly, I would think that they have a pretty good understanding of what's going on. Certainly, I would value their opinions over the opinions of posters on a message board who have a bias against Ben and who have no first hand knowledge.

 

From Peter Abraham's article at the Globe:

 

"A few other notes from the GM Meetings:

 

In speaking to several executives, it’s clear that Ben Cherington will not lack for employment opportunities. The consensus is that many of his moves will pay off long-term for the Red Sox and that several mistakes made on his watch were the product of decisions made above him."

 

That quote merely states the obvious that Cherrington didn't make the final decision. It doesn't say what his recommendations were or whether he disagreed with the decisions. It reminds me of those political articles citing "anonymous" sources. It is significant that none of those executives would go on the record. One can't but notice that Cherrington is still unemployed.

[Kimmi]

Sandoval had a fWAR of 3.1 in 2014, which is strictly regular season, and translated to a dollar value of $23.4 million by FanGraphs calculations. Those would be the types of numbers a guy like Cherington was looking at. Which would also explain why he went so big on Porcello - a guy who has just about zilch playoff pedigree.

 

Thank you.

 

FTR, I believe that Porcello is a Ben move. That's his type of move. Signing Panda is not.

[a700hitter]

Pablo was a fan favorite in SF. For the casual fan, which is who PR is typically aimed at, Pablo is definitely a "sexy" signing. He was a well known free agent name, and you can bet the post season heroics also bode well with that group.

 

Had he played well and had the team played well, Panda marketing could have been huge.

I disagree. Like I said in a prior post, his signing dominated the news cycle in Boston for all of 5 minutes. They have been filling the ballpark without him and revenue from Panda memorabilia is a joke.

[Kimmi]

We already know howFanGraph calculations and projections produce such wide variability in results that from a scientific statistical point of view they are virtually useless as both the results for Sandoval and Porcello illustrate. That being said, here is a fangraph article on Sandoval

 

Which Pablo Sandoval Did the Red Sox Buy

by Eno Sarris - November 24, 2014

 

It makes the point that because of his weight, he should experience a rapid decline. It really calls it question about the wisdom of the Sandoval signing.

 

Fangraphs' standings projections have a wide variability in results, as does every other projection system, computer or human based. As far as individual player projections go, they do a much better job.

 

Regardless of their predictive value, fWAR is an extremely accurate measure of what has taken place. Sandoval's WAR of 3.1 in 2014 indicates that he was a very good player in 2014, and there was no reasonable expectation that he would play so poorly in 2015.

 

His contract was an overpay, but it should have been okay for at least the front half.

[Elktonnick]

Seriously, most of us here understand that you don't sign a player based on playoff numbers. You really think that Cherington is that stupid that he would give out a large contract based on that?

 

I am saying that his playoff numbers seduced him to believe that was better than he was. I am saying that his playoff numbers seduced him to overlook the red flags about his weight and the data on how overweight players decline more quickly than others and have a higher incidence and longer periods on the DL. I am saying that his playoff numbers seduced him to overlook his mediocre dWAR ratings which when correlated on the data on the decline of overweight players seem to suggest that Sandoval would be a less viable 3rd baseman in years 3,4 and 5 of his contract. I am saying that if Sandoval hadn't been such a standout in the palyoffs the Red Sox wouldn't have signed him at all given these issues. So in summation, yes I think Cherrington made a stupid recommendation to Henry to sign Sandoval to that contract and he got fired because of it.

[Kimmi]

Headley >>> Sandoval

 

I personally preferred Headley.

[Kimmi]

Let's hope he is right.

 

On the topic of Hanley, my concerns with him playing first base have always been more of a mental concern than an athleticism concern. To me, he just seems like an airhead who can't stay focused. The inability to keep his head in the game is obviously a huge concern playing first base.

 

I've been wondering recently if being involved in most defensive plays could help him to better stay in the game mentally. Perhaps his focus will be better if he has more to pay attention to and doesn't have time to let his mind wander?

 

One can only hope.

[Elktonnick]

Fangraphs' standings projections have a wide variability in results, as does every other projection system, computer or human based. As far as individual player projections go, they do a much better job.

 

Regardless of their predictive value, fWAR is an extremely accurate measure of what has taken place. Sandoval's WAR of 3.1 in 2014 indicates that he was a very good player in 2014, and there was no reasonable expectation that he would play so poorly in 2015.

 

His contract was an overpay, but it should have been okay for at least the front half.

 

Actually there was I suggest you look at the data on overweight players and their rapid decline.

 

Regarding the reliability or validity of FanGraph projections compared to human projections, there are two points: FanGraph uses humans to interpret the data and set the parameters as to which data to use when constructing their models and projections. Secondly I've seen no objective scientific study on how FanGraphs projections compare to others. If you have seen such a comparative analysis of theirs to others I'd be curious to see it. They may in fact do a better job. They may not. There may be better model than FanGraphs. In any case because of the margin of error being plus or minus 10 games it is not much better than random chance.

[Elktonnick]

Thank you.

 

FTR, I believe that Porcello is a Ben move. That's his type of move. Signing Panda is not.

 

And your basis for that is?

[Kimmi]

That quote merely states the obvious that Cherrington didn't make the final decision. It doesn't say what his recommendations were or whether he disagreed with the decisions. It reminds me of those political articles citing "anonymous" sources. It is significant that none of those executives would go on the record. One can't but notice that Cherrington is still unemployed.

 

Sorry, but that's not what the quote is saying at all. And Cherington is unemployed in baseball by his own choice.

[Kimmi]

I disagree. Like I said in a prior post, his signing dominated the news cycle in Boston for all of 5 minutes. They have been filling the ballpark without him and revenue from Panda memorabilia is a joke.

 

Because he had such a terrible year. It would have been a completely different story if he and the team played well.

[Kimmi]

I am saying that his playoff numbers seduced him to believe that was better than he was. I am saying that his playoff numbers seduced him to overlook the red flags about his weight and the data on how overweight players decline more quickly than others and have a higher incidence and longer periods on the DL. I am saying that his playoff numbers seduced him to overlook his mediocre dWAR ratings which when correlated on the data on the decline of overweight players seem to suggest that Sandoval would be a less viable 3rd baseman in years 3,4 and 5 of his contract. I am saying that if Sandoval hadn't been such a standout in the palyoffs the Red Sox wouldn't have signed him at all given these issues. So in summation, yes I think Cherrington made a stupid recommendation to Henry to sign Sandoval to that contract and he got fired because of it.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not buying it for a second, but I'm obviously not going to convince you otherwise.

[User Name]

Why do some people here talk like they have the "Inside track" to insider information pertaining the Sox organization? None of us know. Cut that s*** out.

[Elktonnick]

Sorry, but that's not what the quote is saying at all. And Cherington is unemployed in baseball by his own choice.

I think we all know why Cherrington is unemployed. He wasn't going to get a job equal to that he had in Boston. The article merely said what we all know that Cherrington didn't make the major decisions, good bad or indifferent. The article really didn't say anything but state the obvious.

[mvp 78]

Why do some people here talk like they have the "Inside track" to insider information pertaining the Sox organization? None of us know. Cut that s*** out.

 

C'mon, making stuff up is half of the content around here...

[a700hitter]

I don't know which executives, but seeing as how they are baseball executives who deal with the Sox FO regularly, I would think that they have a pretty good understanding of what's going on. Certainly, I would value their opinions over the opinions of posters on a message board who have a bias against Ben and who have no first hand knowledge.

 

From Peter Abraham's article at the Globe:

 

"A few other notes from the GM Meetings:

 

In speaking to several executives, it’s clear that Ben Cherington will not lack for employment opportunities. The consensus is that many of his moves will pay off long-term for the Red Sox and that several mistakes made on his watch were the product of decisions made above him."

It is a consensus? That would be a consensus opinion by unnamed executives. You stated it as if it were a fact that executives said this on the record in an interview. This is not what I call backing up an opinion with facts. It is bcking up an opinion with innuendo. It's absurd to think that the people above him were negotiating deals with personnel if the GM didn't recommend those moves. If they did, then I guess that you are right that he didn't get fired, because he was not the acting GM. If your theory is true, we can't even form an opinion about whether he is or is not a good GM, because he was just a puppet. Edited January 24, 2016 by a700hitter

[Kimmi]

Actually there was I suggest you look at the data on overweight players and their rapid decline.

 

Regarding the reliability or validity of FanGraph projections compared to human projections, there are two points: FanGraph uses humans to interpret the data and set the parameters as to which data to use when constructing their models and projections. Secondly I've seen no objective scientific study on how FanGraphs projections compare to others. If you have seen such a comparative analysis of theirs to others I'd be curious to see it. They may in fact do a better job. They may not. There may be better model than FanGraphs. In any case because of the margin of error being plus or minus 10 games it is not much better than random chance.

 

I have read all the data on overweight players. I know they age more rapidly than other players. I am not arguing that Pablo's contract was a good one. I just don't think that anyone could have realistically or honestly predicted a 5 WAR decline in one year.

 

As far as Fangraphs choosing what data to use for their models, that is true. And they constantly test and tweak their models to make them better.

 

As far as other models doing a better job, I have no scientific study comparing them. I have already posted that human projections are probably just as good. However, as I have stated a couple of times already, it is statistically impossible to consistently predict standings with an error better than 6.4 games.

 

An error of 6.4 games would be considered perfect. An error of 10 games is not that bad. You can criticize Fangraphs projections as much as you want, but you won't find anything statistically better.

[Kimmi]

And your basis for that is?

 

This is my opinion, nothing more. The point is, almost everyone here considers the Porcello trade, and especially his extension, a bad move (although I did not). I am "blaming" Ben for this "bad" move. That should make you guys happy.

[a700hitter]

I have read all the data on overweight players. I know they age more rapidly than other players. I am not arguing that Pablo's contract was a good one. I just don't think that anyone could have realistically or honestly predicted a 5 WAR decline in one year.

 

Mo Vaughn

[Kimmi]

I think we all know why Cherrington is unemployed. He wasn't going to get a job equal to that he had in Boston. The article merely said what we all know that Cherrington didn't make the major decisions, good bad or indifferent. The article really didn't say anything but state the obvious.

 

No, you think you know why Cherington is unemployed. Your opinion is so far over the top, nothing is going to change your mind.

[Kimmi]

It is a consensus? That would be a consensus opinion by unnamed executives. You stated it as if it were a fact that executives said this on the record in an interview. This is not what I call backing up an opinion with facts. It is bcking up an opinion with innuendo. It's absurd to think that the people above him were negotiating deals with personnel if the GM didn't recommend those moves. If they did, then I guess that you are right that he didn't get fired, because he was not the acting GM. If your theory is true, we can't even form an opinion about whether he is or is not a good GM, because he was just a puppet.

 

Yes, it's a consensus among the executives that Abraham interviewed. You are obviously going to believe what you want to believe. I'm going to believe the opinions of these executives who do have some inside knowledge.

[Kimmi]

Mo Vaughn

 

Oh yes, he is definitive proof that Pablo was going to decline by 5 WAR in one year at age 28.

[a700hitter]

Oh yes, he is definitive proof that Pablo was going to decline by 5 WAR in one year at age 28.

Mo is the first weight challenged Red Sox guy that pops to mind and he dropped like a stone at age 30.