Dombrowski in Cherington Out

[cp176]

Your post here makes sense to me probably because I agree with it. What is a "hulk smash" though? It has been fun to watch the kids come along. I also still think although I might be in a minority here that they are getting about what could be expected from Sandoval. The big question ? comes to pitching. Who gets signed? Who goes to the pen? Who gets sent down? Who will be the top 5 in the rotation? I should say who will be the 5 deserving of being in the rotation?

[sk7326]

Your post here makes sense to me probably because I agree with it. What is a "hulk smash" though? It has been fun to watch the kids come along. I also still think although I might be in a minority here that they are getting about what could be expected from Sandoval. The big question ? comes to pitching. Who gets signed? Who goes to the pen? Who gets sent down? Who will be the top 5 in the rotation? I should say who will be the 5 deserving of being in the rotation?

 

Personally?

 

Rodriguez stays - he's one of our top 5 starters and the best bet to be really special. Has to learn how to prevent innings from spiraling.

Owens stays - clear swing and miss stuff, that start last week where he shook off the horrible start to deliver 6 innings was very professional.

Porcello stays - Whatever you argue about his ceiling, he is just not this bad.

Buchholz stays - for the lack of durability, the cost control is very attractive

Wright stays - knuckleballers aren't trade sweeterners to begin with, but he can provide versatility and reasonable bulk

Miley stays - durable bulk

 

Barnes goes - his starts have shown there is a big league starter there - not a special one, but a competent one. But he is clearly someone who fits in a trade. Brian Johnson fits here too.

 

But you take the first five, add at the minimum one quality starter (I'd also add another bulk guy) and those seven starters look like a competitive staff. Of course this gets backed up by a good 'pen.

[Dojji]

You're counting on a lot from Rodriguez to call that competitive. I'd want to add another 200 inning 3 ERA guy to that mix if I wanted to call that a winning rotation.

[sk7326]

You're counting on a lot from Rodriguez to call that competitive. I'd want to add another 200 inning 3 ERA guy to that mix if I wanted to call that a winning rotation.

 

Their run prevention needs to improve. Your call is correct if the starting is all you want to address.

[Dojji]

Thing is, our defense wasn't that bad this year, at least on paper. The outfield wasn't great but there were no below average defenders in our infield. The only really viable spot to upgrade our defensive infield right now is third, where Panda showed exactly what I suspected he would at the start of the year -- good hands, bad range. That's not that terrible on its own, but we don't have the rangiest shortstop, and having two handsy near-pylons on the same side of the infield is one near-pylon too many.

 

Getting our starting catcher back finally is going to have a huge impact on what we can expect going into next season. We really really need Christian Vazquez to be strong out of the gate, I'd say at this early date that his performance is key to our results next season -- but if he is good to go and performing at a competent level, a lot of the other pieces will click into place pretty rapidly.

[sk7326]

Thing is, our defense wasn't that bad this year, at least on paper. The outfield wasn't great but there were no below average defenders in our infield. The only really viable spot to upgrade our defensive infield right now is third, where Panda showed exactly what I suspected he would at the start of the year -- good hands, bad range. That's not that terrible on its own, but we don't have the rangiest shortstop, and having two handsy near-pylons on the same side of the infield is one near-pylon too many.

 

Getting our starting catcher back finally is going to have a huge impact on what we can expect going into next season. We really really need Christian Vazquez to be strong out of the gate, I'd say at this early date that his performance is key to our results next season -- but if he is good to go and performing at a competent level, a lot of the other pieces will click into place pretty rapidly.

 

We had the league's two worst defenders on the left side - that has to get better. Catcher will be fine, no matter how it turns out. But decent starting + good defense + good bullpen works. I don't think the team is actually that far away.

[a700hitter]

Not sure JBJ was the reason people were ok with him leaving. People were ok with him going to the Bronx because the money was too high for what amounts to a better version of Denard Span and Ells has an dxtensive injury history.

 

^ This. The economics were out of whack in most people's minds. It was impossible to see the value for a guy that lands on the DL so regularly. Unfortunately, Ben took the money that was saved on Ells plus more and squandered it on Hanley and Porcello.

[a700hitter]

My bold prediction is that JBJ becomes a better player than Ells and way more durable.

 

It was never an either/or proposition. An OF of Betts, JBJ and Ells would have been speedy and dynamic. Also, opposing batters would have trouble finding hitting gaps. Too clarify, I am not saying that paying Ells a huge contract was the right move. I am just pointing out that the different direction taken by the FO has been just as expensive and a big failure. Two years into Ellsbury's deal, we have done nothing with those savings to improve our team. Those bad decisions and contracts will take us through to the last year of Ells contract, so I view it as a total squander unless one or both of Hanley and Porcello turn it around.

[reYoukilis]

Long contracts are not ideal in isolation. Of course, from a buyer side, you'd like to go transaction to transaction. But we know the practical limitations. Long contracts are sometimes necessary to win an auction - and you have to evaluate whether the end state of the deal is acceptable. The Pedroia deal for instance, you know at the end of it he is not going to be an All-Star, but if you think he can be an average-below average 2nd baseman, the salary (taking into account baseball inflation) is pretty reasonable. (not a bargain, but not a ripoff) I was in favor of a long Lester deal because I thought his stuff aged well enough that by the end you'd be paying $27M for a durable low-end #3, which is still a useful guy. The administration's general belief I think is that longer deals are better bets for position players than pitchers, which is certainly sensible and true, but there are no absolutes.

 

Seeing Cherington's work here as something a bit more complex than good or bad, a devotee or a hater - is also sensible, but clearly some of the angry posters on the topic have a bit of "Hulk Smash!" in their thought process. The biggest mistake Cherington administration made was wussing out on playing the children. Letting Ellsbury walk because you had Bradley did make sense - you knew you were not getting 6 wins out of Bradley, but you also knew that Ellsbury was a very very low likelihood to be that too. What did NOT make sense was signing Grady Sizemore's broken down, past sell-date body and then giving him a starting gig over a spring's worth of at-bats. Moving Bogaerts off of shortstop was another of those things too - although that was a little more sensible seeing what a wasteland 3B was, and Drew was a good SS for us in 2013 - but still skittishness that the kids would not all turn into Mike Trout at-once. AJ Pierzynski was another - although there were sound reasons for keeping Vasquez on the farm. The team has an elite development machine, let it do its thing and be confident in your own evals.

 

I mean, you look at the last few weeks and the team has shown some life. It's fun - the kids are working through things which can only be learned at the big league level - and you get some information. Now, a team like Boston can afford to only want their premium guys playing for the big club - instead of Tampa who needs farm kids of all stripes to be affordable at all - but go ahead and play them. This was something Bobby Cox did to great effect in Atlanta, and something Epstein and Francona knew how to handle as well. (the best example being staying with Pedroia despite how overwhelmed he was when he first arrived)

Yes, I think Cheringtons biggest blunder was not going all in with the prospects. Of course 2013 naturally made us readjust that plan and I understand trying to repeat that success in 2014 but when it didn't I would've A, signed Lester and B, gone all in with the prospects that I could. When you go in with that intention you lower expectations and the fans can enjoy the rebuild if they can't enjoy the winning, yet. On the other side of the rebuild you have a team built for sustained success. When you go all in you are wasting less time. I mean what was Cherington expecting when he signed both Sandoval and Ramirez yet such a weak rotation and bullpen?Where did he expect us to be at the end of the season? There's split energies going on and we just end up spinning our wheels. Edited August 24, 2015 by reYoukilis

[iortiz]

It was never an either/or proposition. An OF of Betts, JBJ and Ells would have been speedy and dynamic. Also, opposing batters would have trouble finding hitting gaps. Too clarify, I am not saying that paying Ells a huge contract was the right move. I am just pointing out that the different direction taken by the FO has been just as expensive and a big failure. Two years into Ellsbury's deal, we have done nothing with those savings to improve our team. Those bad decisions and contracts will take us through to the last year of Ells contract, so I view it as a total squander unless one or both of Hanley and Porcello turn it around.

Honestly I prefer Ells (when healthy) over both Hanley and Castillo, I probably would have used what we paid for them to keep Ells, IDK. The thing with Ells is that he just can not stay healthy.

Edited August 24, 2015 by iortiz

[a700hitter]

Honestly I prefer Ells (when healthy) over both Hanley and Castillo, I probably would have used what we paid for them to keep Ells, IDK. The thing with Ells is that he just can not stay healthy.

 

As I have said, Ells deal is hard to swallow, but we wasted $170 million on Hanley and Porcello. People think there is time for those deals to work out. I think they are a sunk cost. Porcello is at best a #4 pitcher not worth $20+ million/year and Hanley is a waste. If we kept Ells and didn't sign those 2 bums, we would have an OF of Betts, JBJ and Ells plus $28 million saved to go along with the $72 million spent on Castillo who wouldn't be needed. That would be $100 million to spend on pitching. If we let Ells walk and used $156 million to retain Lester, we would have an OF of Betts, JBJ and Castillo with Lester spearheading our staff. Either scenario, is better than the direction which Ben went -- 2 contracts that are albatrosses for players who will contribute very little.

[iortiz]

As I have said, Ells deal is hard to swallow, but we wasted $170 million on Hanley and Porcello. People think there is time for those deals to work out. I think they are a sunk cost. Porcello is at best a #4 pitcher not worth $20+ million/year and Hanley is a waste. If we kept Ells and didn't sign those 2 bums, we would have an OF of Betts, JBJ and Ells plus $28 million saved to go along with the $72 million spent on Castillo who wouldn't be needed. That would be $100 million to spend on pitching. If we let Ells walk and used $156 million to retain Lester, we would have an OF of Betts, JBJ and Castillo with Lester spearheading our staff. Either scenario, is better than the direction which Ben went -- 2 contracts that are albatrosses for players who will contribute very little.

Yeah, actually I had thought in a scenario like that but keeping Cespedes. Using Porcello's and Castillo's money I would have resigned Lester. All these scenarios were talked in the offseason. Unfortunately Ben's plan was a mistake since day 1 and some of us were very vocal about that.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

The truth is that nobody wins on the big free agent deals except the players. Only a small % of these deals come close to value for the teams.

 

The Yankees made that huge splash before 2009 with CC, Tex and Burnett. They got a championship out of it so maybe it was worth it. But they ended up getting burned on those deals eventually which is what almost always happens.

 

The Sox approach has been a disaster the last two years.

 

There's no easy road to success even for big money teams.

 

Manny and Papi were FAs that worked out pretty well for the team. But you are right, they are the exceptions.

[User Name]

Ortiz was not a big free agent deal. Quite the opposite. Ramirez, on the other hand, is a good example of a big-money deal that worked out.

[a700hitter]

“We didn’t know what he would be defensively in left field. He’d never done it, so it was impossible for us to evaluate him,” Cherington said, according to reports. “We made a bet based on the history of what players looked like when they moved from middle-infield positions to other positions. There’s data to help us make an educated guess in asking him to do that.

 

“We knew that he wanted to do it, seemed committed to doing it, but we didn’t know. There was no way to know for sure. Obviously, we’ve seen what’s happened. It hasn’t gone well.”

 

It is astonishing to think that $88 million was invested on this basis.

[sk7326]

It is astonishing to think that $88 million was invested on this basis.

 

$88M was invested on his bat - as noted many times before the Benny Hill soundtracked performance in left field would be tractable (and the subject of some funny fan limericks) if you were looking at a guy who was putting up a .270/.350/.450 sort of thing ... if there has been a failure, it's on the former end as much as anything. That said, he has always had a good approach - and he did not take stupid pills overnight. The bat should recover reasonably next season.

[sk7326]

Ortiz was not a big free agent deal. Quite the opposite. Ramirez, on the other hand, is a good example of a big-money deal that worked out.

 

Indeed. Ortiz is probably the best non-tender in baseball history.

[a700hitter]

$88M was invested on his bat - as noted many times before the Benny Hill soundtracked performance in left field would be tractable (and the subject of some funny fan limericks) if you were looking at a guy who was putting up a .270/.350/.450 sort of thing ... if there has been a failure, it's on the former end as much as anything. That said, he has always had a good approach - and he did not take stupid pills overnight. The bat should recover reasonably next season.

When David Ortiz is your DH, any other acquired bat has to be able to play a position.

[sk7326]

When David Ortiz is your DH, any other acquired bat has to be able to play a position.

 

Since discussing Manny, Mike Greenwell, Jim Rice, Albert Belle will lead down the inevitable Old Man Yells at Cloud sort of revisionism ... I'll just stop by noting that Hanley's performance has made me sad too

[sk7326]

Yes, I think Cheringtons biggest blunder was not going all in with the prospects. Of course 2013 naturally made us readjust that plan and I understand trying to repeat that success in 2014 but when it didn't I would've A, signed Lester and B, gone all in with the prospects that I could. When you go in with that intention you lower expectations and the fans can enjoy the rebuild if they can't enjoy the winning, yet. On the other side of the rebuild you have a team built for sustained success. When you go all in you are wasting less time. I mean what was Cherington expecting when he signed both Sandoval and Ramirez yet such a weak rotation and bullpen?Where did he expect us to be at the end of the season? There's split energies going on and we just end up spinning our wheels.

 

If you look at 2014, you had the defending champs and you were basically counting on kids for two positions ... CF and SS. 3B was a giant sucking sound in 2013 too, so whatever you got there was going to have to be worked around, and the same goes for catcher to great degree. That should not have required rebuilding, or some branding that we were lowering expectations. Hell they might have STILL signed Castilo or promoted Betts (Betts was so good he forced them) since Victorino turned back into a pumpkin. But you don't walk away from an eval because of March.

[a700hitter]

Since discussing Manny, Mike Greenwell, Jim Rice, Albert Belle will lead down the inevitable Old Man Yells at Cloud sort of revisionism ... I'll just stop by noting that Hanley's performance has made me sad too

Each of those other guys was Willie Mays compared to 2015 Hanley... seriously.

[Spudboy]

It is astonishing to think that $88 million was invested on this basis.

 

In the real world this is the kind of decision that forces the closing of plants.

 

Just terrible management.

[SoxnCycles]

In the real world this is the kind of decision that forces the closing of plants.

 

Just terrible management.

 

Being a bit dramatic, aren't we?

 

Sure, if a company is worth 200 mil, it's a major setback.

 

If the company is worth over 2 billion, like the Sox, not so much.

[iortiz]

In the real world this is the kind of decision that forces the closing of plants.

 

Just terrible management.

 

Terrible.

 

90 M is a lot of money. It's almost the half of their payroll in a year basis.

 

...and still this is beyond the money (which it is considerable), it is about the decisions made.

 

I would say that in the real world this is the kind of decisions that makes you lose your job like in Ben's case, for example.

[Behindenemylines]

I think DD has made it clear by what he hasn't said that Ramirez will not be your Sox LF in 2016 and the Sox will have a true ace. Word is Castillo gets some reps in LF during seasons final few weeks. Its funny that DD said he tried trading for JBJ and he made a run at Castillo when teams where biding on them. I think if you read between the lines DD's outfield may be Castillo - Betts - Bradley. Good D, not that expensive, and it looks like the O is coming around.

[mvp 78]

Being a bit dramatic, aren't we?

 

Sure, if a company is worth 200 mil, it's a major setback.

 

If the company is worth over 2 billion, like the Sox, not so much.

Won't someone please worry about the poor Aramark vendors?!?!?

[Kimmi]

It is astonishing to think that $88 million was invested on this basis.

 

The money was not invested on Hanley being a great defensive left fielder. He could stink as much as he does and still be a positive contributor to the team if his offense were at the same level it was at last year. This point has been made many times. He has always been a poor defender, but his bat has always been good enough to overcome that. That is what the FO invested in.

[a700hitter]

The money was not invested on Hanley being a great defensive left fielder. He could stink as much as he does and still be a positive contributor to the team if his offense were at the same level it was at last year. This point has been made many times. He has always been a poor defender, but his bat has always been good enough to overcome that. That is what the FO invested in.

He is not just a poor fielder. He is atrocious-- the worst fielder in the game at any position.

[sk7326]

He is not just a poor fielder. He is atrocious-- the worst fielder in the game at any position.

 

He belongs in the picture (although Matt Kemp has a good case without the excuse of a new gig) ... and it doesn't change the reality that the bat is what has made the package untenable. It would be easy to overlook the defense then - Sox fans have had plenty of practice with that.

[mvp 78]

He is not just a poor fielder. He is atrocious-- the worst fielder in the game at any position.

 

Pablo and Hanley have been the two WORST defensive players per WAR, I think. Disaster. He should never step foot in LF again.