Dombrowski in Cherington Out

[a700hitter]

I never thought I'd see the day that Red Sox fans would be so determined to label a championship won by their team as a fluke.

2013 was not a fluke. What was a fluke was that Ben had no idea how to build on 2013. He kept and resigned the portions of that team that crumbled over the next 2 years -- Victorino, Napoli, and Buchholz. And he let the wrong parts of the foundation walk or he traded them --Lester, Ellsbury, Lackey

[iortiz]

Any plan that includes finishing last in the two years following a championship while spending more than almost any team in baseball is not a plan that anyone would want.

 

Those plans showed to Ben the exit door.

[a700hitter]

Ellsbury? Not so much. Yes, the team missed him in 2014, but his contract was too much. Is there anybody who would want Ells and his contract now over Mookie? Anybody?

It wasn't an either/or choice. We could have had both in our OF. I'd much rather have that than Betts and Hanley. Hanley has been a complete waste of money and he will continue to be so, because he is not and will not become an adequate OFer. Imagine the havoc that Ellsbury and Betts would cause for the opponents defenses.

[Bellhorn04]

2013 was not a fluke. What was a fluke was that Ben had no idea how to build on 2013. He kept and resigned the portions of that team that crumbled over the next 2 years -- Victorino, Napoli, and Buchholz. And he let the wrong parts of the foundation walk or he traded them --Lester, Ellsbury, Lackey

 

It's very questionable that letting Ellsbury go was a mistake. He has a .736 OPS for the Yanks and has missed a lot of games. Last night the Yankee announcers were grumbling about the fact that he didn't start the game, with a RHP on the mound, and yet he was healthy enough to be brought into the game in the 7th inning.

[a700hitter]

It's very questionable that letting Ellsbury go was a mistake. He has a .736 OPS for the Yanks and has missed a lot of games. Last night the Yankee announcers were grumbling about the fact that he didn't start the game, with a RHP on the mound, and yet he was healthy enough to be brought into the game in the 7th inning.

 

He will play a big part on that team before the season ends. Also, Hanley has been the OF replacement and he has been a far far worse investment. Did I say far worse? Lol!

[Bellhorn04]

2015 Ellsbury:

 

74 games played

47 games missed

.713 OPS

6 HR

26 RBI

 

Pretty pathetic numbers. If he was doing this for the Sox, you know damn well the FO would be getting ripped for investing $153 million in him.

[a700hitter]

2015 Ellsbury:

 

74 games played

47 games missed

.713 OPS

6 HR

26 RBI

 

Pretty pathetic numbers. If he was doing this for the Sox, you know damn well the FO would be getting ripped for investing $153 million in him.

 

Here is the if this happened we would be screaming argument. Do people ever get tired of this poor and ineffective debating technique? Let me answer very straightforward. I would much rather pencil 2015 Ellsbury into our lineup than 2015 Hanley. Hanley has a .727 OPS and has cost us a ton of runs in the field.

Edited August 22, 2015 by a700hitter

[mvp 78]

Yup, it's not hard to understand.

 

Then you don't know what fluke means.

[Bellhorn04]

Here is the if this happened we would be screaming argument. Do people ever get tired of this poor and ineffective debating technique? Let me answer very straightforward. I would much rather pencil 2015 Ellsbury into our lineup than 2015 Hanley. Hanley has a .727 OPS and has cost us a ton of runs in the field.

 

You say it was a mistake to let Ellsbury go. I say it wasn't. I think that's straightforward.

[a700hitter]

You say it was a mistake to let Ellsbury go. I say it wasn't. I think that's straightforward.

 

Two last place finishes since Ellsbury left. I am leading.;)

[a700hitter]

You say it was a mistake to let Ellsbury go. I say it wasn't. I think that's straightforward.

 

Also, this is a misinterpretation of what I am saying, so it is not straightforward. I said that Ben made a series of bad moves after 2013 dismantling and ruining that team. He kept the wrong guys, let the wrong guys walk and brought in the wrong replacements. Does that mean that it was a mistake to let Ellsbury go? I wouldn't conclude that yet, but surely his effort to restock the OF has been an abject failure. In 2015, I would take Ellsbury having an injured off year over 2015 Hanley without a doubt. That does not mean that I am saying that we should have paid him $142 million, but in the first 2 years after letting him walk the FO really s*** the bed with their alternatives, and they haven't saved a lot of money in the process.

Edited August 22, 2015 by a700hitter

[Bellhorn04]

Also, this is a misinterpretation of what I am saying, so it is not straightforward. I said that Ben made a series of bad moves after 2013 dismantling and ruining that team. He kept the wrong guys, let the wrong guys walk and brought in the wrong replacements. Does that mean that it was a mistake to let Ellsbury go? I wouldn't conclude that yet, but surely his effort to restock the OF has been an abject failure. In 2015, I would take Ellsbury having an injured off year over 2015 Hanley without a doubt. That does not mean that I am saying that we should have paid him $142 million, but in the first 2 years after letting him walk the FO really s*** the bed with their alternatives, and they haven't saved a lot of money in the process.

 

Now you're trying to cloud the issue. Was it a mistake to let Ellsbury walk or not?

[Dalas21000]

Just need better management in the dugout!!!! Why isnt Bogaerts leading off?????? Betts is not a leadoff hitter

 

1.Boegarts (.313)

2.Shaw(.375)

3.Castillo(.286)

4.Sandoval

5.Ortiz

6.Ramirez

7.Betts

Edited August 22, 2015 by Dalas21000
Woops Cant forget to put Betts in

[Orange Juiced]

2013 was not a fluke. What was a fluke was that Ben had no idea how to build on 2013. He kept and resigned the portions of that team that crumbled over the next 2 years -- Victorino, Napoli, and Buchholz. And he let the wrong parts of the foundation walk or he traded them --Lester, Ellsbury, Lackey

 

2013 was a fluke. Just about everything that could go right, did. Nothing wrong with that. That's how magical seasons work. Everything came together. Lackey finally pitched well. Lester was great. Clay was (when healthy) brilliant and not the sucky Clay that often shows up. Koji put together one of the greatest seasons of relief in MLB history. Look at the offensive seasons these guys put up:

 

Player - 2013 ops+, career ops+

Salty - 118, 94

Drew - 111, 94

Gomes - 110, 106

Victorino - 118, 103

Nava - 127, 103

Carp - 139, 108

Lavarnway - 106, 56

 

Heck, they even got 17 hr and 87 ops+ out of Middlebrooks (he has only 11 hr and a 58 ops+ in 2014 and 2015 combined). And they got a 1.81 era out of Craig freaking Breslow.

 

2013 was magical, a statistical anomaly. So many players performed at a better-than-normal level. Kind of the opposite from, say, 2014, when they got below-normal performances from most players.

[Spudboy]

Just need better management in the dugout!!!! Why isnt Bogaerts leading off?????? Betts is not a leadoff hitter

 

1.Boegarts (.313)

2.Shaw(.375)

3.Castillo(.286)

4.Sandoval

5.Ortiz

6.Ramirez

7.Betts

 

Lol.

 

Betts is close to a prototypical lead off hitter.

 

Try harder to impress us.

[a700hitter]

Now you're trying to cloud the issue. Was it a mistake to let Ellsbury walk or not?

If the alternative after Hanley is equally as expensive and equally a failure for the next 3 seasons, the answer is yes.

[Dalas21000]

Lol.

 

Betts is close to a prototypical lead off hitter.

 

Try harder to impress us.

 

Were you being serious? Im not sure if I read that right

 

Not in the majors he's not....At least right now...whats he hitting? .275? And for the record...Im not here to impress anyone...I just want my voice to be heard because the team has a lot of potential if someone knew how to use it

[sk7326]

Just need better management in the dugout!!!! Why isnt Bogaerts leading off?????? Betts is not a leadoff hitter

 

1.Boegarts (.313)

2.Shaw(.375)

3.Castillo(.286)

4.Sandoval

5.Ortiz

6.Ramirez

7.Betts

 

It's not a crazy idea - but Betts is probably the best choice. On base is not idea ... but average-ish, which is not bad for 22. His approach is strong. For the bitterness that has lined the board as the season has gone down the toilet, kids have kept things fun lately.

[sk7326]

John Lester was the horse that pulled the wagon on that team. Every champ has one dominant lights out starter and he was the man for the Red Sox.

 

David Ortiz saved the playoff series with his grand slam against Detroit, then was the World Series MVP with a batting average that would rival a slow pitch softball star

 

Dustin Pedroia was Dustin Pedroai, the heart and soul of the team and a great great player

 

As you mentioned Buch was great that year too and his contribution was huge.

 

Jacoby Elsbury's effects were obvious, when he played they won and when he didn't they struggled. He was one of the keys to that team for sure.

 

What do all these players have in common? Every one was already in place when Ben took over. Now Koji, that was a key acquisition no doubt. But not sure how you can claim that Ben was the "architect" of this team when nearly every key player on that team was in place before he took control.

 

He was one of the leads in player development when those players came up. So that counts. All of those players were here AFTER Ben showed up. It's not like he was not here - and so the delineation is silly. 2012 was simply a matter of all their good players getting hurt, and 2013 those good players weren't. It's really obvious.

[Dalas21000]

It's not a crazy idea - but Betts is probably the best choice. On base is not idea ... but average-ish, which is not bad for 22. His approach is strong. For the bitterness that has lined the board as the season has gone down the toilet, kids have kept things fun lately.

 

I think Boegarts is more qualified for the lead off position based on experience(2013 WS?) and i like the BA(consistency)... and he can steal bases too right?....I think batting average speaks the most and Id rather have him see the most at bats...Betts is not bad but I have more confidence in Boegarts...In addition, Im really impressed by Shaw's performance so far as well...I think, generally, you have to allow your guys w better BA's to see more at bats to maximize productivity in the lineup

[User Name]

Batting average is probably the absolutely worst way to measure soomeone's ability to be a lead-off hitter.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Bogaerts is leading the league in batting average with RISP, I'd rather have someone with that stat in the middle of the lineup.

[a700hitter]

Ben being honest as usual.

 

Cherington On Ramirez, Donaldson, Sandoval

 

By Charlie Wilmoth [August 22, 2015 at 2:03pm CDT]

 

Ben Cherington, who recently stepped down as GM of the Red Sox, spoke at Saberseminar in Boston on Saturday (joking that the forum was “a progressive event that even invites the unemployed“) and was unusually candid about his work with the Sox and about being an executive for a big-league team. Here’s a bit of what he had to say, via Alex Speier of the Boston Globe and Tim Britton of the Providence Journal (Twitter links: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9).

 

Cherington says he misjudged how Hanley Ramirez would transition from the infield to the outfield. “We didn’t know what he would be defensively,” Cherington says. “We made a bet based on the history of what players look like going from middle infield to outfield. … It hasn’t gone well.” Ramirez has rated as well below average in left field, and his defensive struggles this season have coincided with a decline on offense, arguably making Ramirez one of MLB’s worst position players while still in the first year of his contract.

Cherington adds that the Red Sox contacted Billy Beane and the Athletics about trading Josh Donaldson last offseason, only to be told the A’s weren’t interested in dealing Donaldson. They did, of course, ultimately trade him to Toronto, and Cherington says he credits the Blue Jays for their persistence.

Instead, the Red Sox signed Pablo Sandoval to play third, a move that hasn’t worked out thus far. Cherington says he didn’t necessarily expect the run-scoring environment at Fenway Park to be a boon for Sandoval, but instead was mostly focused on filling what had been a “black hole” at third. Sandoval has hit fairly well at home this season, batting .304/.347/.451. But he’s batted just .216/.271/.337 on the road.

Some of Cherington’s mistakes as GM came as a result of rushing decisions, he says.

One of the most crucial aspects of being a GM is interacting with team ownership, Cherington says, noting that it’s a sensible and necessary part of the job.

Cherington seems happy with the state in which he left the Red Sox’ farm system, saying that there are prospects who can turn out to be special players and also areas of organizational depth.

One decision Cherington says he won’t rush is determining the next step in his career. Instead, he’ll take his time in making that decision.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

This is just intellectually dishonest. If you can throw out 2012, then you have no leg to stand on when others want to throw out 2013. Your arguments follow the same pattern. Everything good that happened was Ben's brilliant creation and everything bad that happened was not his fault -- Valentine, Luchinno, reactive fans, etc etc. His record is his record. He is accountable and does not shrink from it. What I find humorous is that you don't want to hold him accountable for any of the failures that happened on his watch, but you are ready to give him credit for successes after he is gone. Too funny.

 

OK since it touched such a nerve I will revise my assessment of 2013 and call it an aberration, not a fluke. But it was not the norm under Ben, last place was the norm. And even though this team may not be the dumpster fire that the Tigers were when DD took over I think most will agree it will take several years to correct the mistakes that Ben Cherington has made. And that's on him, nobody else.

 

As .700 says here you can not simply dismiss 2012 any more than I can dismiss 2013. To put it all on Bobby Valentine is ********.

Edited August 23, 2015 by Yaz Fan Since '67

[Orange Juiced]

Batting average is probably the absolutely worst way to measure soomeone's ability to be a lead-off hitter.

 

It's better than fielding percentage.

[sk7326]

Bogaerts is leading the league in batting average with RISP, I'd rather have someone with that stat in the middle of the lineup.

 

Stat is not indicative of anytrhing specific. I think 2nd or 3rd is fine for now - so his power can develop naturally.

[Kimmi]

No there isn't anectodal evidence. There is only internet rumor.

 

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence when you consider the history between Theo and Lucchino.

[Kimmi]

I never thought I'd see the day that Red Sox fans would be so determined to label a championship won by their team as a fluke.

 

No kidding. Isn't that what we have Yankees fans for?

[mvp 78]

He built a team to win in the short term in 2013. They won short term and lost long term. No surprise there.

[Kimmi]

This is just intellectually dishonest. If you can throw out 2012, then you have no leg to stand on when others want to throw out 2013. Your arguments follow the same pattern. Everything good that happened was Ben's brilliant creation and everything bad that happened was not his fault -- Valentine, Luchinno, reactive fans, etc etc. His record is his record. He is accountable and does not shrink from it. What I find humorous is that you don't want to hold him accountable for any of the failures that happened on his watch, but you are ready to give him credit for successes after he is gone. Too funny.

 

I have never said that everything good that happened is Ben's brilliant creation and everything bad was not his fault. Did I not just post that the Lackey trade feels like a Ben move to me? Along with the Porcello and Hanley deals? Now, I have defended those moves because I can see the rationale behind them. However, I have also defended the Panda signing, even though I disagreed with it and think that it was Lucchino's brainchild, because I can see the rationale behind it as well.

 

That said, anytime you have Bobby V as the manager, all bets are off. He alienated half the team before the season even started. IMO, it is difficult to give any kind of fair assessment to that team under that type of managerial circus.

 

In short, here's the way I look at it. Ben, and the rest of the FO, get credit for building what should have been a contending team in each of those years, 2012 included, minus Larry's insistance on hiring Bobby V. The players get credit for winning the WS in 2013, and the players get the blame for not playing to expectations in 2014 and 2015. Bobby V gets the blame for 2012.

 

Regardless of how the team did, going into the season, I felt that we had a contending team in each of those years. The FO is responsible for that. Good or bad, they are not responsible for what happens on the field - that's on the players and coaches.

 

Ben will also get part credit for any future success the team gets involving players that were acquired under his watch.