The search for an ace

[cp176]

Not fretting about signing a bonafide ace. Fretting about the possible long term repercussions of a big contract. Contrary to what people think, the Red Sox do not have unlimited resources. They may be willing to go over the luxury tax limit this year, but I very much doubt they will be willing to go over it in consecutive years.

 

So, what happens if Price's contract prices us out of being able to retain Mookie and/or Xander when they become free agents? Will we be happy then?

 

There are so many different ways to look at things. Will we be ok in a few years with Moncada as our new second baseman? very possibly. How about Benintendi? Is it possible that he might become a better player than Betts? Deevers? No one has the magic crystal ball to the future. In or 4 or 5 years we get rid of the contracts of both Ramirez and Sandoval. IMO - Signing Price as a free agent alone will only affect the future of our team positively. Using your approach- if Betts chooses to follow the big money out of town and he is covered by a very good cost controlled young player, I will be fine.

[Bellhorn04]

I disagree. Everyone wants to win championships, but I think it can be done without sacrificing the long term outlook of the team. I don't like that approach at all.

 

But what is long term success - forever? Can it really be done, with the way baseball is structured now - with much more money spread around and much more parity in the standings?

[Kimmi]

With the Jays signing JA Happ, it appears they have closed the door on re-signing Price. Not that they were likely to re-sign him anyway, but that has to be good news for the Sox, even if it helps us out only slightly.

[Kimmi]

There are so many different ways to look at things. Will we be ok in a few years with Moncada as our new second baseman? very possibly. How about Benintendi? Is it possible that he might become a better player than Betts? Deevers? No one has the magic crystal ball to the future. In or 4 or 5 years we get rid of the contracts of both Ramirez and Sandoval. IMO - Signing Price as a free agent alone will only affect the future of our team positively. Using your approach- if Betts chooses to follow the big money out of town and he is covered by a very good cost controlled young player, I will be fine.

 

I have said that if Dombrowski signs Price and does not further gut our farm system, I will be happy. I still won't like that contract, but as a fan, I will be thrilled. If future moves involve trading players that you've listed above (win now at any cost mentality), then there's a problem.

[Dojji]

But what is long term success - forever? Can it really be done, with the way baseball is structured now - with much more money spread around and much more parity in the standings?

 

Let me be clear about this: The Red Sox organization has on the whole run itself extremely well for a very long time. Even with our financial advantage not many franchises could have had the level of sustained success we've maintained for the last 18 years or so.

 

Personally I saw chinks in the armor since 2009 when the Angels finally beat us in a postseason series, that was when the team entered its decline and it's declined steadily ever since. That was also the last time we graduated a premium level SP of our own to head the rotation. I think the two concepts are linked.

 

The firing of Epstein was foolish, no one since has been able to jump start the farm on the pitching front, and the move was basically blaming a man for not holding off entropy forever, which I find mildly retarded to tell you the truth. He was still a better bet to assemble our next winning roster than anyone we've seen in that office sincce.

[Kimmi]

But what is long term success - forever? Can it really be done, with the way baseball is structured now - with much more money spread around and much more parity in the standings?

 

I think it is possible to field a competitive team year in and year out. That doesn't mean that you'll win every year. It might also turn out that the team finishes in last place due to injuries and/or gross underperformances. But the team should at least be competitive on paper. I know that the games aren't played on paper, but as I've said before, all a GM can do is put together a team that is competitive on paper. He can't control what takes place on the field.

 

Since this new ownership took over, I have felt like we have had a team that could compete every year. If Dombrowski signs Price and makes a few other tweaks, I will feel like we have a competitive team again this year.

 

What I don't want to happen is to go into a season knowing up front that the team has no chance.

 

Let me say for the record, contrary to popular belief, I am not a Dombrowski hater.

[Spudboy]

Who are the teams that have been able to demonstrate an ability to win now while maintaining long term success? The Cards? Who else?

 

Things are cyclic. A Team may be good for a while and then become an also-ran.

[Bellhorn04]

The firing of Epstein was foolish, no one since has been able to jump start the farm on the pitching front, and the move was basically blaming a man for not holding off entropy forever, which I find mildly retarded to tell you the truth. He was still a better bet to assemble our next winning roster than anyone we've seen in that office sincce.

 

Losing Epstein was a blow. Whether he was fired or whether he jumped when he had the chance is another question.

[a700hitter]

Sign me up for 4 consecutive Division championships and 10 years of competitive winning baseball. Could a fan hope for more? BTW the AL East has not been a great division for a few years.

[User Name]

Let me be clear about this: The Red Sox organization has on the whole run itself extremely well for a very long time. Even with our financial advantage not many franchises could have had the level of sustained success we've maintained for the last 18 years or so.

 

Personally I saw chinks in the armor since 2009 when the Angels finally beat us in a postseason series, that was when the team entered its decline and it's declined steadily ever since. That was also the last time we graduated a premium level SP of our own to head the rotation. I think the two concepts are linked.

 

The firing of Epstein was foolish, no one since has been able to jump start the farm on the pitching front, and the move was basically blaming a man for not holding off entropy forever, which I find mildly retarded to tell you the truth. He was still a better bet to assemble our next winning roster than anyone we've seen in that office sincce.

 

Your assesment of the Sox' inability to acquire premium pitching is completely and utterly incorrect, and I will explain why. Besides of the inherent difficulty that comes with drafting premier pirching while not really having picks in the range required to acquire said type of pitcher, the real problem with the franchise has been its use of assets. They hold on too long to prospects they should deal, and keep kids that don't have the potential to start too long in that role, instead of converting them to relief early and creating a self-sustainable BP. With balance being the name of the game today, teams are winning when they have many ways to win, like the Royals and Texas last year.

 

Teams trade propspect currency for good pitching all the time. It's not a novel concept. And that's why Dombrowski was brought in. Look at the juggernaut rotation he built in Detroit when the only good pitcher he drafted was Verlander. When this team manages a better use of its MiLB resources, they will be able to create another winner. It's not about drafting pitching, it's about drafting valuable assets.

[Kimmi]

Who are the teams that have been able to demonstrate an ability to win now while maintaining long term success? The Cards? Who else?

 

Things are cyclic. A Team may be good for a while and then become an also-ran.

 

Things are cyclic to an extent, meaning that no team is going to be able to win every year due to injuries, underperformances, and just plain luck. However, I still believe that a well-run team, especially one with the financial resources that the Sox have, should be able to put together a contender (on paper) year in and year out.

[Kimmi]

Let me be clear about this: The Red Sox organization has on the whole run itself extremely well for a very long time. Even with our financial advantage not many franchises could have had the level of sustained success we've maintained for the last 18 years or so.

 

Personally I saw chinks in the armor since 2009 when the Angels finally beat us in a postseason series, that was when the team entered its decline and it's declined steadily ever since. That was also the last time we graduated a premium level SP of our own to head the rotation. I think the two concepts are linked.

 

The firing of Epstein was foolish, no one since has been able to jump start the farm on the pitching front, and the move was basically blaming a man for not holding off entropy forever, which I find mildly retarded to tell you the truth. He was still a better bet to assemble our next winning roster than anyone we've seen in that office sincce.

 

The Sox have been a very well-run franchise for a long time now and letting Theo go was indeed foolish. The Sox have never had it so good. Since winning a couple of WS rings, the fanbase, on the whole, has become spoiled and entitled. I know that people here don't like to hear that, but it's true. We (and I use that term loosely) have become exactly what we and other team's fans always hated about the Yankees fans. There was something kind of nice about being the loveable losers, not that I would give back any of our championships.

[Bellhorn04]

The Sox have been a very well-run franchise for a long time now and letting Theo go was indeed foolish. The Sox have never had it so good. Since winning a couple of WS rings, the fanbase, on the whole, has become spoiled and entitled. I know that people here don't like to hear that, but it's true. We (and I use that term loosely) have become exactly what we and other team's fans always hated about the Yankees fans. There was something kind of nice about being the loveable losers, not that I would give back any of our championships.

 

From my perspective, there was nothing nice about being the loveable losers. It was decades of frustration.

[Kimmi]

From my perspective, there was nothing nice about being the loveable losers. It was decades of frustration.

 

Of course it was decades of frustration (though I did not suffer as long as many of you did). That said, we, as a fanbase, were loveable. There's always something nice about being loveable, isn't there? Since winning, we are one of the most hated fanbases in baseball. Honestly, I can't say that I blame the other fans. I would hate us also, if I were a fan of another team. As I said, it's what we always hated about the Yankees fans.

[Bellhorn04]

Of course it was decades of frustration (though I did not suffer as long as many of you did). That said, we, as a fanbase, were loveable. There's always something nice about being loveable, isn't there? Since winning, we are one of the most hated fanbases in baseball. Honestly, I can't say that I blame the other fans. I would hate us also, if I were a fan of another team.

 

I much prefer being hated.

[a700hitter]

I don't at all feel entitled to another last place finish. In my 50 years of being a fan, it only happened one other time (1992) under Butch crackhead Hobson, who once forgot and left his little boy at Fenway Park. He didn't realize it until he got home. Accomplishing the ignominious feat three times in the last four years has not spoiled me and I don't feel entitled to the basement of the standings.

[jacksonianmarch]

Looks like Zimmerman has agreed to a deal with Detroit

[cp176]

Looks like Zimmerman has agreed to a deal with Detroit

 

Looks to be a similar amount of money to what we will be paying Porcello. Porcello is younger maybe we could pull a switcheroo with them.LOL - I could understand an overpay for Price but not Porcello.

[a700hitter]

Looks to be a similar amount of money to what we will be paying Porcello. Porcello is younger maybe we could pull a switcheroo with them.LOL - I could understand an overpay for Price but not Porcello.

I'd much rather have Zimmerman for the same price as Porcello.

[Kimmi]

I much prefer being hated.

 

LOL Point taken.

[cp176]

I'd much rather have Zimmerman for the same price as Porcello.

 

Who wouldn't?

[Kimmi]

I don't at all feel entitled to another last place finish. In my 50 years of being a fan, it only happened one other time (1992) under Butch crackhead Hobson, who once forgot and left his little boy at Fenway Park. He didn't realize it until he got home. Accomplishing the ignominious feat three times in the last four years has not spoiled me and I don't feel entitled to the basement of the standings.

 

I bet fans of most other teams would love to have that WS title, even if it meant finishing in last the other 3 years.

 

At any rate, it isn't even just this year that Sox fans have started acting entitled. In other words, it didn't take finishing last 3 out of the last 4 years to give us a sense of entitlement.

[Kimmi]

Looks to be a similar amount of money to what we will be paying Porcello. Porcello is younger maybe we could pull a switcheroo with them.LOL - I could understand an overpay for Price but not Porcello.

 

Let me first say that I think this is a pretty good deal for Detroit.

 

Porcello was awful last year, but seriously, take that out of the picture for the time being because how he pitched last year was not known when the Sox gave him his extension.

 

Porcello's extension covers his age 27-30 years. Zimmermann will be 34 when his contract ends. Porcello's contract is for 4 years, while Zimmermann's is for 5 years. Keep in mind that the Sox like the idea of paying a higher AAV for fewer years.

 

The season prior to Porcello's extension, he had an ERA of 3.43 and a 2.8 WAR. Zimmermann had a 3.66 ERA and a 3.0 WAR. Fairly comparable performances leading up to their contracts.

 

Taking all that into consideration, what the Sox gave Porcello is right in line with what Zimmermann received, and as I said earlier in the post, I think it's a good deal for Detroit.

[cp176]

You paint a good picture here for Porcello. Do you think that the majority of GM's see Zimmerman and Porcello as having equal ability and value?

[User Name]

No, but (before last year) they probably saw Porcello as having more upside than Zimmerman. Not to mention the fact that Zimmerman pitched in the offense-starved NL East with all of those gigantic stadiums.

[cp176]

No, but (before last year) they probably saw Porcello as having more upside than Zimmerman. Not to mention the fact that Zimmerman pitched in the offense-starved NL East with all of those gigantic stadiums.

 

I can live with that. He still has time to make a solid contribution.

[Kimmi]

You paint a good picture here for Porcello. Do you think that the majority of GM's see Zimmerman and Porcello as having equal ability and value?

 

After last year, no. But before Porcello's year last year, I think if both were free agents right now, it would be a toss up as to whether GMs would prefer to sign Porcello for his 4 year contract or Zimmermann for his 5 year contract. As UN said, they would see more upside in Porcello, whereas Zimmermann has the more established track record.

[Palodios]

Zim has been among the most consistent pitchers in baseball. But he cost a draft pick and is a tommy john surgery ahead of the other guys.

[a700hitter]

I bet fans of most other teams would love to have that WS title, even if it meant finishing in last the other 3 years.

 

At any rate, it isn't even just this year that Sox fans have started acting entitled. In other words, it didn't take finishing last 3 out of the last 4 years to give us a sense of entitlement.

I have been expecting a winning team since 1967, and with rare exceptions, that is what they have fielded.

[cp176]

I have been expecting a winning team since 1967, and with rare exceptions, that is what they have fielded.

 

You are correct here and once again I will say that we are in the middle of one of the worst runs we have had since the late 50's all the way to 67. With minor blips we have been consistently competitive year after year. I do not believe that it is a cyclical thing at all.