The Official Dead Horse Topics Thread

[Kimmi]

The Phillies job was not the nbr 1 job. The Phillies hired Andy MacPhail for that position early in 2015 to replace Gilick.. Any baseball operations person in Philadelphia will work for him. The Phillies job was the equivalent of the job that Cherrington was offered in Boston under Dombrowski.

 

The fact that Boston has a good farm system isn't Ben's doing but Theo's. Regardless the person responsible for creating a good farm system doesn't mean that person is qualified nor capable of being a good general manager or chief of baseball operations. The farm system can be created leisurely compared to trying to create a winning major league franchise.

 

Fair enough about the Phillies job.

 

Most of the farm system (not the graduated players) is Ben's doing. IMO, having a good farm system is the backbone of any good franchise, and far more difficult to achieve than throwing the most money at a free agent. Trying to create a contending team while building a strong farm deserves a lot more credit than you are willing to give.

[Kimmi]

Why do you say that Kimmi?

 

My understanding is that Lackey was not at all happy about the way the FO dealt with Lester in their attempt to re-sign him. The rumors followed that Lackey would rather retire than play for league minimum for the Sox. All speculation, I know. But if there is truth to that, then it wouldn't have made any sense for the Sox to keep Lackey.

 

In hindsight, I agree with everyone that it has been a terrible trade so far.

[Kimmi]

No it doesn't. It merely speaks poorly and how often computer projections can be wrong. What truly speaks volumes is the person who knew Ben best professionally, John Henry, lost confidence in his judgement and replaced him along with Larry Luchhino. I think the only reason Henry kept Ben as much authority as he had was because he had Luchhino to oversee him. Once Luchhino was out of the picture so was Ben. BTW Larry Luchhino was more responsible for the championship teams then was Ben. Ben was merely his factotum.

 

It wasn't just the computer projections that had the Sox winning the division. The majority of analysts did too.

 

Yes, Henry lost confidence in Ben. That doesn't mean that Ben was a bad GM. It means that Henry was ready to move in a different direction, very much like the Tigers were ready to do when they fired Dombrowski.

[Elktonnick]

Fair enough about the Phillies job.

 

Most of the farm system (not the graduated players) is Ben's doing. IMO, having a good farm system is the backbone of any good franchise, and far more difficult to achieve than throwing the most money at a free agent. Trying to create a contending team while building a strong farm deserves a lot more credit than you are willing to give.

 

I am not saying a farm system isn't important but a winning ML franchise is much more than merely its farm system. I think you think because someone builds a good farm system that that person has the skill set to run the entire organization. I don't. As I said earlier Ben was promoted beyond his level of competency. Once he held the top job he wants nothing else. I'd have no problem with Ben serving in a subordinate capacity.

[Kimmi]

We'll never agree on if the rotation should have been mediocre enough to contend, but I just didn't see it. Which of these rotations going in to last season would you expect to be better?

A: Lester, Lackey, Buchholz, Peavy, Doubront

B: Porcello, Miley, Buchholz, Kelly, Masterson

To me, it's clearly A by a good margin. Lester>>>Porcello, Lackey>Miley, Buchholz=Buchholz, Peavy/Kelly could go either way, Doubrount>Masterson imo (Masterson looked done, I wasn't expecting any kind of bounceback). Well, the A rotation was below average the prior year, so I didn't see B even sniffing average. Looked like a bottom 3 rotation, which is what they were, and is not good enough to contend unless the offense is awesome. (Hanley increased that possibility, Sandoval not so much (except in October apparently (I like parentheses)))

 

I would expect A to be better also.

 

As far as B being good enough to keep the team in contention, keep in mind that Vazquez and the defense were supposed to help the pitching. The staff took a huge blow when both starting catchers were injured early in the season, and having Pablo forget how to play defense didn't help.

[Kimmi]

The Larry/BC regime was a stark staring mess. BC never had JH's confidence and Larry simply saw his defacto Pres of Baseball Ops position as a subset of his President of the Sox role and did the job that way.

 

Neither was responsible for 2013. By Larry's own admission, they had no idea that the 2013 team had that sort of potential and they had not built it for that purpose. It was in their eyes the very definition of a bridge and no less authority than Larry called it that publicly. Serendipity built that championship...entirely and completely unrepeatable by that route. It is virtually impossible to repeat a combination of vets each individually with something to prove with young guys about to burst on MLB, pretty solid pitching and getting 4 deep into closers before you stumble upon the best guy you had [but didn't know it] right from the start.

 

As for last year's mess......Hanley bamboozled BC to get the job...lied through his teeth in fact and fanboy handed over $20m of JH's money for the privilege. Then went on to call Hanley's efforts Heroic. Fanboys don't get much responsibility in MLB Front Offices. Panda was signed without a weight clause...something SF was not willing to do and now we have a player that is literally owned by his weight issues. Many of us saw this as soon as he was signed but hoped he would not be owned by the issue for at least a couple of years....instead of right from year 1. There was no earthly reason to extend Porcello when we did for what we did. We literally gave him more money than he could have ever hoped to have secured in FA. Lets not forget Castillo, the Mr. potential to be a JAG at best being paid millions of $$. Then there is getting fleeced by the Cards who clearly knew more about the players they were trading to us than we did.

 

No folks.....it will IMO be a long long time before somebody in MLB gives BC a job where he is making major decisions involving millions of $$. BC should have never risen above Director of Player Personnel here.

 

Suffice it to say that I pretty much disagree with this entire post.

[Elktonnick]

It wasn't just the computer projections that had the Sox winning the division. The majority of analysts did too.

 

Yes, Henry lost confidence in Ben. That doesn't mean that Ben was a bad GM. It means that Henry was ready to move in a different direction, very much like the Tigers were ready to do when they fired Dombrowski.

 

I also think that Henry didn't think that Ben was suited for the nbr 1 job. As long as Larry Lucchino was around Ben may have had the title but as Henry often said "Larry runs the Red Sox." I've come to the opinion that with Larry leaving John Henry simply never saw Ben as having the skills to be the chief of baseball operations without a Larry Lucchino and a Jermy Kaperstein around. I think it is no coincidence that Ben's not being slotted for the top job coincides with Larry's departure.

[Kimmi]

Do you even logic? You can't take away the accomplishments (and good fortune) of 2013, then turn back and assign blame for the errors (and honestly, terrible luck) of 2014/2015. Common sense does not work like that. Stop.

 

IMO, there was far more bad luck in both 2014 and 2015 then there was good luck in 2013. People always want to say 2013 was a fluke or pure luck, which is definitely not the case.

[Kimmi]

I also think that Henry didn't think that Ben was suited for the nbr 1 job. As long as Larry Lucchino was around Ben may have had the title but as Henry often said "Larry runs the Red Sox." I've come to the opinion that with Larry leaving John Henry simply never saw Ben as having the skills to be the chief of baseball operations without a Larry Lucchino and a Jermy Kaperstein around. I think it is no coincidence that Ben's not being slotted for the top job coincides with Larry's departure.

 

So, if Larry is running the Red Sox, why is Ben being blamed for the past two years? Larry should be blamed for all of those terrible signings.

 

And if that's the case, then Henry has no one to blame but himself for the past two years because Ben, like Theo, could do a much better job if given the autonomy to do so. I have no doubt.

 

And I'll refer to the quote from an article that said that several baseball excutives have more or less confirmed my opinion.

[Elktonnick]

So, if Larry is running the Red Sox, why is Ben being blamed for the past two years? Larry should be blamed for all of those terrible signings.

 

And if that's the case, then Henry has no one to blame but himself for the past two years because Ben, like Theo, could do a much better job if given the autonomy to do so. I have no doubt.

 

And I'll refer to the quote from an article that said that several baseball excutives have more or less confirmed my opinion.

 

What you can't and won't admit no matter whose fault it was Ben didn't have Henry's confidence to be the nbr 1. It is Henry who is in a better position then any of us to make that judgement.

[jung]

For my part I almost never separate Larry from BC often referring to the period as the Larry/BC era. Larry had the job. He was the defacto Pres of Baseball Ops while holding the title of Pres of the Red Sox. However IMO though JH gave Larry the job as a check and balance on and to manage BC, Larry always saw the job through the prism of his Pres of the club title. His motivation was marketing. BC wants to bring two guys here that hold significant marketing potential, Larry would very likely sign off on those deals based on just about any argument BC would make. Poor John Henry, done in no matter how hard he tried to check BC.

 

Porcello appears to me to be an instance where Larry let BC have his head and I tend to think Castillo was half Larry insisting that everybody was getting one of these guys from Cuba and half BC somehow convincing himself that this guy was a player. We missed Bobby Abreau. So in typical knee jerk reaction they went right after the very next guy available...Castillo. Never mind whether he stands any chance at all of being what Bobby ABreau was....he's the next guy from Cuba'. He's ours. Castillo playing the best he could play had no chance of ever being Abreau. He is not the same kind of player at all. So explain to me why you miss the guy you want and then go after a guy that is not even close to the same kind of player?

 

Both Larry and BC are now out of their former jobs because Larry did not do the job JH wanted and BC was incapable of doing that job. JH would have stabbed himself with a dull knife before naming BC to the Pres Baseball Ops job. Credit BC for recognizing that not firing him outright was a set up. JH would have left DD to do that job after some period of time had lapsed and BC knew it. If there is one aspect of personnel management that JH has never handled well here it is firing somebody, choosing instead every circuitous route you can think of.

 

As for the other parts of my post:

We know Hanley lied to get Sox names on the line that was dotting

We know that Panda's weight owns him now and we know SF would not sign a contract with him that did not include a weight clause

We know Porcello did not need to be extended when he was and that he was extended for much more money than was necessary

We know Clark has been a complete bust and will now start making big money this year and next with Kelly receiving strong consideration for the pen

We know Castillo can't hit breaking balls at age 29. If you can't hit breaking balls in this league at age 29, you are usually on the way out unless you are one of the greatest Fast Ball hitting power hitter's playing. Any chance of Castillo being that???? If it were not for his ridiculous contract, Castillo would very likely be on the way out instead of logging time as another of our OF projects.

Edited December 29, 2015 by jung

[a700hitter]

 

As I've said many times, I can't blame Ben for the underperformances of the players. His job is to assemble a team that looks good on paper, and he did that. I know that Panda, Hanley, and Porcello are not in the same class as Price, but if Price pitches like a #4/5 pitcher this season instead of pitching like an ace, will that be Dombrowski's fault?

I fundamentally disagree with this. The GM's job is to assemble a team of players who perform well, not to assemble players who look good on paper.

Edited December 29, 2015 by a700hitter

[jung]

I fundamentally disagree with this. The GM's job is to assemble a team of players who performs well, not to assemble players who look good on paper.

 

You are right 700. Assembling players that look good on paper has a place in this world. It is called "Fantasy League Baseball"

[Youk Of The Nation]

I fundamentally disagree with this. The GM's job is to assemble a team of players who perform well, not to assemble players who look good on paper.

 

So are you saying that there are teams made up entirely of guys who look bad on paper who somehow perform well enough to seriously contend? Doesn't every team made up of "players who perform well" begin as a team that "looks good on paper"? I don't really get what you mean here. If a GM isn't supposed to build a team in the offseason that looks good on paper, what is he supposed to measure the offseason by?

[User Name]

So are you saying that there are teams made up entirely of guys who look bad on paper who somehow perform well enough to seriously contend? Doesn't every team made up of "players who perform well" begin as a team that "looks good on paper"? I don't really get what you mean here. If a GM isn't supposed to build a team in the offseason that looks good on paper, what is he supposed to measure the offseason by?

 

Gumdrops and ice cream clearly, not logic.

[User Name]

For my part I almost never separate Larry from BC often referring to the period as the Larry/BC era. Larry had the job. He was the defacto Pres of Baseball Ops while holding the title of Pres of the Red Sox. However IMO though JH gave Larry the job as a check and balance on and to manage BC, Larry always saw the job through the prism of his Pres of the club title. His motivation was marketing. BC wants to bring two guys here that hold significant marketing potential, Larry would very likely sign off on those deals based on just about any argument BC would make. Poor John Henry, done in no matter how hard he tried to check BC.

 

Porcello appears to me to be an instance where Larry let BC have his head and I tend to think Castillo was half Larry insisting that everybody was getting one of these guys from Cuba and half BC somehow convincing himself that this guy was a player. We missed Bobby Abreau. So in typical knee jerk reaction they went right after the very next guy available...Castillo. Never mind whether he stands any chance at all of being what Bobby ABreau was....he's the next guy from Cuba'. He's ours. Castillo playing the best he could play had no chance of ever being Abreau. He is not the same kind of player at all. So explain to me why you miss the guy you want and then go after a guy that is not even close to the same kind of player?

 

Both Larry and BC are now out of their former jobs because Larry did not do the job JH wanted and BC was incapable of doing that job. JH would have stabbed himself with a dull knife before naming BC to the Pres Baseball Ops job. Credit BC for recognizing that not firing him outright was a set up. JH would have left DD to do that job after some period of time had lapsed and BC knew it. If there is one aspect of personnel management that JH has never handled well here it is firing somebody, choosing instead every circuitous route you can think of.

 

As for the other parts of my post:

We know Hanley lied to get Sox names on the line that was dotting

We know that Panda's weight owns him now and we know SF would not sign a contract with him that did not include a weight clause

We know Porcello did not need to be extended when he was and that he was extended for much more money than was necessary

We know Clark has been a complete bust and will now start making big money this year and next with Kelly receiving strong consideration for the pen

We know Castillo can't hit breaking balls at age 29. If you can't hit breaking balls in this league at age 29, you are usually on the way out unless you are one of the greatest Fast Ball hitting power hitter's playing. Any chance of Castillo being that???? If it were not for his ridiculous contract, Castillo would very likely be on the way out instead of logging time as another of our OF projects.

 

Literally nothing of what you state here is a fact. Nothing. A lot of this is hindsight for what happened last season, and could (should actually) improve, and a lot of stuff you're making up. Amazing.

[mvp 78]

I'm just glad jung is posting again. Too many people have disappeared from this ghost town.

[SoxnCycles]

How can someone who likes to toot his own horn so much about how smart he is be so terrible at logic and make so much s*** up? It's inconceivable. I usually don't put people on ignore here, but goddamn you're insufferable.

 

The best part is he puts people on ignore for insulting him, when he does it on a daily basis.

Can you add "Biggest Candyass Award" to your voting thread?

[Elktonnick]

For my part I almost never separate Larry from BC often referring to the period as the Larry/BC era. Larry had the job. He was the defacto Pres of Baseball Ops while holding the title of Pres of the Red Sox. However IMO though JH gave Larry the job as a check and balance on and to manage BC, Larry always saw the job through the prism of his Pres of the club title. His motivation was marketing. BC wants to bring two guys here that hold significant marketing potential, Larry would very likely sign off on those deals based on just about any argument BC would make. Poor John Henry, done in no matter how hard he tried to check BC.

 

Porcello appears to me to be an instance where Larry let BC have his head and I tend to think Castillo was half Larry insisting that everybody was getting one of these guys from Cuba and half BC somehow convincing himself that this guy was a player. We missed Bobby Abreau. So in typical knee jerk reaction they went right after the very next guy available...Castillo. Never mind whether he stands any chance at all of being what Bobby ABreau was....he's the next guy from Cuba'. He's ours. Castillo playing the best he could play had no chance of ever being Abreau. He is not the same kind of player at all. So explain to me why you miss the guy you want and then go after a guy that is not even close to the same kind of player?

 

Both Larry and BC are now out of their former jobs because Larry did not do the job JH wanted and BC was incapable of doing that job. JH would have stabbed himself with a dull knife before naming BC to the Pres Baseball Ops job. Credit BC for recognizing that not firing him outright was a set up. JH would have left DD to do that job after some period of time had lapsed and BC knew it. If there is one aspect of personnel management that JH has never handled well here it is firing somebody, choosing instead every circuitous route you can think of.

 

As for the other parts of my post:

We know Hanley lied to get Sox names on the line that was dotting

We know that Panda's weight owns him now and we know SF would not sign a contract with him that did not include a weight clause

We know Porcello did not need to be extended when he was and that he was extended for much more money than was necessary

We know Clark has been a complete bust and will now start making big money this year and next with Kelly receiving strong consideration for the pen

We know Castillo can't hit breaking balls at age 29. If you can't hit breaking balls in this league at age 29, you are usually on the way out unless you are one of the greatest Fast Ball hitting power hitter's playing. Any chance of Castillo being that???? If it were not for his ridiculous contract, Castillo would very likely be on the way out instead of logging time as another of our OF projects.

 

Signing Panda without a weight clause is tantamount to malfeasance. Ben (or Larry or both) could have been fired on that stupidity alone.

[jung]

Not trying to put words in the man's mouth but i think what Elk is saying is that a team that ONLY "looks good on paper" is tantamount to a team that is an assemblage of stats. IMO, it is just as bad a process as not paying any attention to the stats.

 

A team that is an assemblage of stats alone is no team at all. You should not be surprised when a team like that is unable to develop any sort of meaningful offensive process to score runs. More often than not, you end up with each guy going to the plate to protect his own hind end with no rhyme nor reason to what they are doing....guys with no speed that end up hitting singles and clogging up the base paths....guys with at least some power up with nobody on, guys that represent a very low possibility of hitting one out constantly swinging for the fences...stuff like that....sound familiar??? But of course we will get the Fantasy crowd utterly convinced that they can do a GM or Pres Baseball Ops job using their success in Fantasy Leagues as proof positive of that.

Edited December 29, 2015 by jung

[Elktonnick]

Not trying to put words in the man's mouth but i think what Elk is saying is that a team that "looks good on paper" is tantamount to a team that is an assemblage of stats. IMO, just as bad a process as not paying any attention to the stats.

 

A team that is an assemblage of stats alone is no team at all. You should not be surprised when a team like that is unable to develop any sort of meaningful offensive process to score runs. More often than not, you end up with each guy going to the plate to protect his own hind end with no rhyme nor reason to what they are doing....guys with no speed that end up hitting singles and clogging up the base paths....guys with at least some power up with nobody on...stuff like that....sound familiar??? But of course we will get the Fantasy crowd utterly convinced that they can do a GM or Pres Baseball Ops job using their success in Fantasy Leagues as proof positive of that.

 

I think the 2003 -2015 Red Sox were a team that relied heavily on stats and less on the human factors. Now the team was successful but it also had its failures. If one objectively looks at its failures they generally fall into the category of failing to adequately take into consideration those human factors when constructing a winning team.

[a700hitter]

So are you saying that there are teams made up entirely of guys who look bad on paper who somehow perform well enough to seriously contend? Doesn't every team made up of "players who perform well" begin as a team that "looks good on paper"? I don't really get what you mean here. If a GM isn't supposed to build a team in the offseason that looks good on paper, what is he supposed to measure the offseason by?

It is the GMs job to put together a roster that functions well together. The aim isn't to put together a team that looks good on paper. Plenty of teams look good on paper, but they don't perform on the field because they are poorly constructed in some way -- maybe they have a strong infield but a flyball pitching staff with weak outfielders or vice versa. Maybe they have guys with bad attitudes. The point is that it isn't just about the numbers. It has been pointed out here many times that the 2015 Red Sox did not look bad on paper, but a good GM would have made sure that Hanley could play the Outfield or that he had more depth in AAA to back up very mediocre starters. There is a lot more to it than assembling a team on paper. If that is your mindset, I am not going to be able to change your mind, but I disagree that building a team on paper is his primary function.

[Youk Of The Nation]

But a team with a strong infield but a weak outfield wouldn't be a team that looked good on paper. I understand what you're trying to say, but my point is that from October to March, there is no baseball being played. Any team assembled in the offseason HAS to look good on paper, because it's all they have until play begins. You can't be sure that a team will play well until they actually play, and until that happens, paper is what you have.

[a700hitter]

But a team with a strong infield but a weak outfield wouldn't be a team that looked good on paper. I understand what you're trying to say, but my point is that from October to March, there is no baseball being played. Any team assembled in the offseason HAS to look good on paper, because it's all they have until play begins. You can't be sure that a team will play well until they actually play, and until that happens, paper is what you have.

I think often times there are situations where a team gets big break out years from players propelling a team to success. A good GM will know if a guy is coming into his own because they are tracking his development closely. You might want to argue that you can predict break out seasons from stats on paper. I would disagree with that. Most of the break out years predicted by experts are busts. A good GM knows his players. The reports from his coaches are better indicators than numbers. You can't put together a team of .220 pop gun hitters with pitchers with 5 ERAs and expect to compete, but building a team is not about assembling numbers except in Fantasy leagues (which I excel at BTW). If you build a good team, they usually come along with good numbers. If you are emphasizing building a team from stat sheets, I would disagree with that emphasis. Look at Carl Crawford-- great numbers, but he clearly didn't like or want to play in Boston. That is something that should have been unearthed.

[Elktonnick]

But a team with a strong infield but a weak outfield wouldn't be a team that looked good on paper. I understand what you're trying to say, but my point is that from October to March, there is no baseball being played. Any team assembled in the offseason HAS to look good on paper, because it's all they have until play begins. You can't be sure that a team will play well until they actually play, and until that happens, paper is what you have.

 

I don't know if that is universally true. Take the Washington Nationals for example. They looked good on paper but haven't performed well on the field. Their failure to perform on the field has been predicted by many analysts who recognized the poor team chemistry and bad management. There are no metrics to measure team chemistry other than results.

[cp176]

Great discussion by the way. What I am hearing is that there is no one way to assemble a quality team. It isn't black or white, old or new, advanced metrics or personal scouting alone. It takes a combination of all available tools with quite a bit of plain luck involved as well. I think that the current direction looks good. Even looks as though there is a dose of common sense being used as well.

[jung]

Another element of team building that uses the stats without using them to exclusion of everything else is building the team to the confines and characteristics of your own park. Do you guys really think the Royals excel in their own park because of some fan enthusiasm thing or "JUST BECAUSE". They are built to excel there.

 

Conversely, only people who do not understand Fenway Park think it is a HR hitter's park. It is not. It is the best doubles park in all baseball bar none. In most of the last twenty years the Sox have been 1st in doubles and if not first 2nd and until last year there was only one exception in the last sixteen years.

 

Last year we spent most of the time mired in the bottom half of baseball in doubles...just unheard of here and ultimately struggled up to 6th I think by the end. 6th might sound impressive to some. But in truth, 6th here is almost criminal.

[User Name]

Fenway is also a good park for RHH homeruns, even though it excels as a doubles park. Saying otherwise is asinine, considering how readily available park factors are.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't put much stock in the 2015 team looking good on paper. The 2014 team went 71-91. We replaced Lester and Lackey with Porcello and Kelly. We added Miley and Masterson. We added guys like Ross and Ogando to the bullpen. The 2015 pitching staff was a major gamble. Everything needed to go right.

 

The offensive underperformance of Hanley and Panda couldn't be predicted. But putting Hanley in left might have to be described as an experiment at best.

 

There were just way too many X factors IMO. When you have that many X factors projections are not going to be reliable.

[Elktonnick]

Another element of team building that uses the stats without using them to exclusion of everything else is building the team to the confines and characteristics of your own park. Do you guys really think the Royals excel in their own park because of some fan enthusiasm thing or "JUST BECAUSE". They are built to excel there.

 

Conversely, only people who do not understand Fenway Park think it is a HR hitter's park. It is not. It is the best doubles park in all baseball bar none. In most of the last twenty years the Sox have been 1st in doubles and if not first 2nd and until last year there was only one exception in the last sixteen years.

 

Last year we spent most of the time mired in the bottom half of baseball in doubles...just unheard of here and ultimately struggled up to 6th I think by the end. 6th might sound impressive to some. But in truth, 6th here is almost criminal.

 

Fenway Park was 19th in home runs in 2015 but 2nd in doubles. Solid observation