A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

[moonslav59]

Sox have the 24th pick as the draft order is now set.

 

The Cubs get the 27th and 30th pick due to Fowler signing with the Cards.

The Blue Jays get 22 and 28. The Rangers 26 and 29.

 

[Nick]

Sox have the 24th pick as the draft order is now set.

 

The Cubs get the 27th and 30th pick due to Fowler signing with the Cards.

The Blue Jays get 22 and 28. The Rangers 26 and 29.

 

 

Moon, new CBA runs through 2021, meaning Xander, Betts and Bradley will turn FA before current CBA expires.

Looking at what happened to some of big name FA this year, I'm wondering if the players are misguided thinking there's a huge pay day for them.

 

I just can't see very many $30M contracts waiting for them.

 

It maybe that if we win it all in 2017, 'selection/eilimination process may start'. I'm hoping for Pablo resurgence and then executing a trade for him. We need Devers/Shaws and their mlb minimum wage to help with our finances.

 

Again, it's not so much the money, it's the non monetary penalties in the new CBA that will bind the Sox adhering to competitive balance limits.

Edited January 22, 2017 by Nick

[moonslav59]

Moon, new CBA runs through 2021, meaning Xander, Betts and Bradley will turn FA before current CBA expires.

Looking at what happened to some of big name FA this year, I'm wondering if the players are misguided thinking there's a huge pay day for them.

 

I just can't see very many $30M contracts waiting for them.

 

It maybe that if we win it all in 2017, 'selection/eilimination process may start'. I'm hoping for Pablo resurgence and then executing a trade for him. We need Devers/Shaws and their mlb minimum wage to help with our finances.

 

Again, it's not so much the money, it's the non monetary penalties in the new CBA that will bind the Sox adhering to competitive balance limits.

 

If Betts, Bogey and JBJ do well, they will get a big payday. Maybe they won't get $30M, but they are not Bautista or Trumbo.

 

I'm hopeful we can dump Pablo's salary after this year, and HanRam and his deals are done at about the right time to have to pay big to keep the stars we want. We may end up losing one, but I think we can keep the ones we need.

 

I'm mostly worried about rebuilding the farm under the new rules. We have Swihart, Groome, Devers and Travis that can help with some low cost for a while, but eventually a weak farm is going to catch up to us.

 

Those who think it's going to be easy to build back up are betting on rolling the dice to snake eyes.

[moonslav59]

Bags is in the Hall, and Fangraphs reports...

 

A Note on the Infamous Andersen-Bagwell Deal

 

Andersen made 15 appearances with the Red Sox, allowing three runs over 22 innings. Boston finished two games ahead of Toronto to win the AL East. That winter, Andersen was one of several players declared a free agent as part of the 1990 collusion settlement. Lou Gorman, the Red Sox GM at the time, later told me that he went to the league office prior to making the deal and was told Andersen wouldn’t be affected, only to have an arbitrator subsequently decide otherwise.

 

[Bellhorn04]

One of the first and most obvious rules of being a GM is to meet the needs of ownership. That means making the right decisions and following the correct strategy, and executing it in such a way, that ownership's needs are met.

 

Very true, and I am certain Ben's "5 year plan" as I called it was approved by ownership just as DD's 3 year plan is now.

 

I don't know where you get the idea that Ben had a "5 year plan". Are there any quotes about this?

 

The simple explanation for why Ben got canned is the back-to-back last place finishes. But there may have been other stuff going on that we don't know about. There may have been 'philosophical differences' between JH and Ben. There may have been specific moves Ben made that JH disagreed with. For example, maybe it was Ben who sold the front office that Hanley would be just fine in left field. Like I say there's a lot we don't know about.

[S5Dewey]

Ok, and if all of this comes to fruition - we rid ourselves of Hanley's and Pablo's contracts and use the money to sign the B's - we'll have essentially the team we have now minus Pablo and Hanley - with no money to replace them without going over the LT limit.

 

[in a related opinion, that's why the FO is Hell-bent on getting below the limit this year, so they can exceed it next year and the year after before they try to reset it again. I see a cycle coming here.]

 

Let's hope that these guys can pull out at least one WS Championship before they become FA's and while Hanley (and Sandoval?) is still around.

 

As bleak as that sounds, the sliver lining in all of this is that the Sox are better poised to get those Championships while those guys are around because the team probably won't be as good in five years as it is now whether they made those trades or not.

[oldtimer]

If Betts, Bogey and JBJ do well, they will get a big payday. Maybe they won't get $30M, but they are not Bautista or Trumbo.

 

I'm hopeful we can dump Pablo's salary after this year, and HanRam and his deals are done at about the right time to have to pay big to keep the stars we want. We may end up losing one, but I think we can keep the ones we need.

 

I'm mostly worried about rebuilding the farm under the new rules. We have Swihart, Groome, Devers and Travis that can help with some low cost for a while, but eventually a weak farm is going to catch up to us.

 

Those who think it's going to be easy to build back up are betting on rolling the dice to snake eyes.

 

When folks talk about how things are likely to go forward, with us keeping our young stars and trading away aging and costly players I caution them to consider that baseball is not a linear situation. You use the word 'if" they play well we may be able to move some of the older players to allow us to pay the younger guys. I would hazard a guess that at least one of our outfielders will perform well below expectations and other thinking about the team may be needed. The same in the catching department.

 

We do have 4 good pieces left in the farm system but only one of those is a potential starting pitcher. Not so deep there. Maybe all three of the others you mention will be brought up some time this year giving us the opportunity to drop some of our other ageing players, like Moreland and Young.

[Kimmi]

Agreed.

 

And, on paper, we should have been much better, if not contending, in 2015 as well.

 

People are assuming it was BC's plan to never trade a top prospect. I think that is a false narrative.

 

I also think the lifting of the ban on signing aging SP'ers and LL's removal just as DD took over as GM has to be a consideration when viewing the context from which each GM was working under.

 

100% agree.

[Kimmi]

I don't know where you get the idea that Ben had a "5 year plan". Are there any quotes about this?

 

The simple explanation for why Ben got canned is the back-to-back last place finishes. But there may have been other stuff going on that we don't know about. There may have been 'philosophical differences' between JH and Ben. There may have been specific moves Ben made that JH disagreed with. For example, maybe it was Ben who sold the front office that Hanley would be just fine in left field. Like I say there's a lot we don't know about.

 

It's no secret that Ben (and Theo) are all about building a strong farm system, then filling the holes with free agent signings and trades. A '5 year plan' was never mentioned specifically, but it takes about that long to get the pieces into place.

 

The Red Sox fan base, on the whole, does not have the patience for a complete rebuild, like Theo did with the Cubs. Ben had to try to keep the team competitive while rebuilding. IMO, he did a pretty good job of that. We won a championship in 2013. Our teams failed miserably in 2014 and 2015, but 'on paper', the teams that Ben put together were contenders. As I've said many times, that's really all you can ask of a GM. What happens on the field is beyond his control.

 

What I think happened is that Henry 'panicked' after two last place finishes. JMO, of course, but he has shown the tendency to act rashly when things go badly. He should have given Ben the chance to stay on as GM, now that his long term vision has come to fruition. I am very certain that our teams would have done just as well with Ben at the helm as they did or will do with Dombrowski at the helm. This is still largely Ben's team, after all.

[Bellhorn04]

Amazingly enough, the major share of the WAR on the 2016 team came from players acquired by Theo.

[Kimmi]

Ok, and if all of this comes to fruition - we rid ourselves of Hanley's and Pablo's contracts and use the money to sign the B's - we'll have essentially the team we have now minus Pablo and Hanley - with no money to replace them without going over the LT limit.

 

[in a related opinion, that's why the FO is Hell-bent on getting below the limit this year, so they can exceed it next year and the year after before they try to reset it again. I see a cycle coming here.]

 

Let's hope that these guys can pull out at least one WS Championship before they become FA's and while Hanley (and Sandoval?) is still around.

 

As bleak as that sounds, the sliver lining in all of this is that the Sox are better poised to get those Championships while those guys are around because the team probably won't be as good in five years as it is now whether they made those trades or not.

 

I don't think the FO will have much concern in going over the tax limit next season, once they've reset. Resetting this year seems to be vital for them.

 

We may not have been as good in 5 years as we are this year, even if we kept our prospects, but our long term outlook would look much better. Perhaps this year's team would not be quite as strong, but we would still be a contender. As someone wrote several weeks ago, Sale is a luxury a luxury that we did not need.

 

Seriously, does it matter whether we win the division by 2 games or by 5 games? If given the choice between winning the division by 2 games and keeping our prospects versus winning the division by 5 games and depleting the farm, I'll take the first option.

[Emp9]

MLBTR...

 

Drew Pomeranz told reporters (including Tim Britton of the Providence Journal) that he received a stem-cell injection in his left elbow after last season concluded. The southpaw said he felt some “minor elbow discomfort” last year but is now feeling healthy as he enters his pre-Spring Training preparations. Pomeranz’s health was a major source of controversy last season, as Padres GM A.J. Preller was issued a 30-day suspension for failing to disclose medical information about Pomeranz to the Red Sox before Boston acquired the lefty for top pitching prospect Anderson Espinoza. Speaking of Pomeranz, Red Sox president of baseball operations Dave Dombrowski told the Boston Globe’s Pete Abraham and other reporters that the two sides are getting close to a deal to avoid an arbitration hearing. Pomeranz filed for a $5.7MM salary while the Sox countered with a $3.6MM offer.

 

So stem cell injections must be legal in MLB? I didn't know and got too busy to look that up. That stem cell s*** is amazing. Thanks Obama.

Edited January 22, 2017 by Emp9

[Kimmi]

Amazingly enough, the major share of the WAR on the 2016 team came from players acquired by Theo.

 

Yes, I am aware of this. And Ben was Theo's right hand man when those players were acquired. Ben was also adamant about not trading those players away when many people were calling for it. I have no problem calling this mostly Theo's team, if you prefer. The point still stands that Ben was right on track with his plan, and it was a darn good plan, both short and long term, despite the two last place finishes.

[Bellhorn04]

It was a good plan spoiled by some bad moves, perhaps.

[Kimmi]

It was a good plan spoiled by some bad moves, perhaps.

 

I don't think most of the moves were bad. I think they were decent moves that turned out badly.

 

Even the Pablo signing, which I didn't necessarily like, should not have turned out as badly as it did in 2015. The same with Hanley and the left field experiment, with which I was fully on board.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't think most of the moves were bad. I think they were decent moves that turned out badly.

 

Even the Pablo signing, which I didn't necessarily like, should not have turned out as badly as it did in 2015. The same with Hanley and the left field experiment, with which I was fully on board.

 

You're a very generous soul, Kimmi.

[moonslav59]

I don't know where you get the idea that Ben had a "5 year plan". Are there any quotes about this?

 

The simple explanation for why Ben got canned is the back-to-back last place finishes. But there may have been other stuff going on that we don't know about. There may have been 'philosophical differences' between JH and Ben. There may have been specific moves Ben made that JH disagreed with. For example, maybe it was Ben who sold the front office that Hanley would be just fine in left field. Like I say there's a lot we don't know about.

 

I clearly said the "five year plan" was my term.

 

I know why BC got canned.

[moonslav59]

Amazingly enough, the major share of the WAR on the 2016 team came from players acquired by Theo.

 

Yes, the Theo prospects BC did not trade away.

[Bellhorn04]

I clearly said the "five year plan" was my term.

 

Then you took it a step further and said you were certain this plan was approved by ownership. That's getting a little carried away with your own idea.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, the Theo prospects BC did not trade away.

 

DD didn't trade them away either. We need a pie chart to allocate the credit.

[notin]

I very much disagree with most of this post.

 

Me too.

 

Cherington's "rebuilding" strategy involved the Great Reset Button trade, which then only took slightly over 13 months to lead to a title. He also didn't deal Lester and Lackey for prospects and instead focused on Major Leaguers. That's not building a sustainable farm. He did sign a lot of free agents, including Uehara, Napoli, Drew, Victorino, Dempster, Sandoval, Hanley, etc.

 

Dombrowski's method of garnering stability was to sign Verlander and Cabrera to such cumbersome deals, the Tigers are actually trying to work in a rebuilding period right now...

[Bellhorn04]

Dombrowski's method of garnering stability was to sign Verlander and Cabrera to such cumbersome deals, the Tigers are actually trying to work in a rebuilding period right now...

 

But to this point Verlander and Cabrera have yielded values in keeping with their salaries. Isn't that a good thing?

[moonslav59]

Then you took it a step further and said you were certain this plan was approved by ownership. That's getting a little carried away with your own idea.

 

Whatever you want to call BC's plan, I am certain those above him signed onto it.

 

I called it a 5 year plan, because I think he was eyeing adding pitching the next year. Maybe it was more of a 4 year plan. This didn't mean the Sox could suck for 4-5 years while his plan took effect. Clearly, with the spending continuing, we were supposed to remain competitive for those 2-3 years before his plan reached fruition- or being highly competitive as a top 3 ring contender for several years afterwards.

 

It's my opinion- nothing more.

[moonslav59]

DD didn't trade them away either. We need a pie chart to allocate the credit.

 

Because they weren't prospects anymore and had already become indispensable. Wasn't Margot and Shaw Theo's guys?

 

DD has traded away these prospects in the last 8 months (by highest soxprospects ranking):

 

1 Moncada (Sale)

3 Espinoza (Pomeranz)

3 Margot (Kimbrel)

5 Kopech (Sale)

6 Guerra (Kimbrel)

7 Basabe (Sale)

9 Dubron (Thornburg)

12 Rijo (A Hill)

12 Shaw (Thornburg)

13 L Allen (Kimbrel)

18 Basabe (Ziegler)

20 C Asuaje (Kimbrel)

21 V Diaz (Sale)

24 Pennington (Thornburg)

40 J Almonte (Ziegler)

43 Wilkerson (A Hill)

 

Had BC traded similar ranked guys for an immediate win now strategy, where would 1 or 2 of Betts, Bogey, JBJ and others be right now?

 

Maybe BC would still have his job.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Whatever you want to call BC's plan, I am certain those above him signed onto it.

 

They signed the cheques. That's all we know. Maybe nobody was really sure what they were doing. By August 2015 JH was obviously unimpressed with the results.

[Bellhorn04]

Because they weren't prospects anymore and had already become indispensable. Wasn't Margot and Shaw Theo's guys?

 

DD has traded away these prospects in the last 8 months (by highest soxprospects ranking):

 

1 Moncada (Sale)

3 Espinoza (Pomeranz)

3 Margot (Kimbrel)

5 Kopech (Sale)

6 Guerra (Kimbrel)

7 Basabe (Sale)

9 Dubron (Thornburg)

12 Rijo (A Hill)

12 Shaw (Thornburg)

13 L Allen (Kimbrel)

18 Basabe (Ziegler)

20 C Asuaje (Kimbrel)

21 V Diaz (Sale)

24 Pennington (Thornburg)

40 J Almonte (Ziegler)

43 Wilkerson (A Hill)

 

Had BC traded similar ranked guys for an immediate win now strategy, where would 1 or 2 of Betts, Bogey, JBJ and others be right now?

 

Maybe BC would still have his job.

 

 

Now you're changing the argument. DD didn't trade away Betts, Bogaerts or Bradley. He deserves some credit for that. He was almost certainly asked for these guys when talking to other teams about starting pitchers.

[notin]

I very much disagree with most of this post.

 

But to this point Verlander and Cabrera have yielded values in keeping with their salaries. Isn't that a good thing?

 

Is it if the team has to shop JD Martinez and Ian Kinsley just to stay afloat? And Cabrera still has 7 years and $212mill REMAINING!!!!

 

Coupled with the $84mill still owed to Verlander over the next three seasons, and that is an INSANE $300 million to two aging players who are most definitely NOT going to repeat their 2016 seasons until their respective free agencies.

 

Is this really how a team builds a window to win in your eyes?

[Emp9]

DD didn't trade them away either. We need a pie chart to allocate the credit.

 

Well as they say you can't keep all your... Ahem... I mean you can't trade all your prospects. ehh.. nevermind.

[moonslav59]

Now you're changing the argument. DD didn't trade away Betts, Bogaerts or Bradley. He deserves some credit for that. He was almost certainly asked for these guys when talking to other teams about starting pitchers.

.

My point was that BC did not trade away Theo's top prospects.

 

To say DD didn't either is really "changing the argument" as DD's comparable would be BC's prospects not Theo's who mostly had graduated.

[moonslav59]

Is it if the team has to shop JD Martinez and Ian Kinsley just to stay afloat? And Cabrera still has 7 years and $212mill REMAINING!!!!

 

Coupled with the $84mill still owed to Verlander over the next three seasons, and that is an INSANE $300 million to two aging players who are most definitely NOT going to repeat their 2016 seasons until their respective free agencies.

 

Is this really how a team builds a window to win in your eyes?

 

I guess it's all about the hear and now for some.

 

Miggy and Verlander have earned their keep so far and damn the future.