A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

[cp176]

I don't understand how some posters can't at least just understand the concept that having less great prospects diminishes the chances that we will have enough low-cost quality players to off set the larger contracts down the road.

 

Those of us with concerns understand the "win now" theory and argument.

 

Also, there are many in the middle who feel some "win now" type deals were called for but maybe not so many or all. It's a valid position to hold.

 

Even to remotely suggest that there are any posters here that don't care are on not concerned about the future of our team because of recent deals that have been done is preposterous. Everybody cares! No one really likes to see good prospects traded away! Personally, although I see the moves as being aggressive, when I hear the expression "win now" at any cost, I don't see these moves as being that dramatic. Dramatic for sure but survivable. I'm a middle ground kind of guy. In today's world it kind of looks like there is no place for a middle ground point of view and perspective. I plan to keep right on trudging along though.

[Fisk]

I don't understand how some posters can't at least just understand the concept that having less great prospects diminishes the chances that we will have enough low-cost quality players to off set the larger contracts down the road.

 

Those of us with concerns understand the "win now" theory and argument.

 

Also, there are many in the middle who feel some "win now" type deals were called for but maybe not so many or all. It's a valid position to hold.

We are going to have to make some hard decisions in the next few years on who to sign to long term contracts. Some fans are going to be very disappointed because we won't be able to afford everyone. It makes it very important for Benindenti, Devers, Groome, Travis to develop as we hope to help offset some of the losses. Going to be very hard to restock the farm without the advantages of the past, hopefully we find the new advantage.

[Fisk]

Even to remotely suggest that there are any posters here that don't care are on not concerned about the future of our team because of recent deals that have been done is preposterous. Everybody cares! No one really likes to see good prospects traded away! Personally, although I see the moves as being aggressive, when I hear the expression "win now" at any cost, I don't see these moves as being that dramatic. Dramatic for sure but survivable. I'm a middle ground kind of guy. In today's world it kind of looks like there is no place for a middle ground point of view and perspective. I plan to keep right on trudging along though.

 

Exactly

[moonslav59]

I love prospects I follow the minor league boxes every day during the season, but I have to disagree with you. This was the right time to cash in, we have our young core in place, but our pitching was not good enough to win, by the time Kopech, Espinoza and Groome are ready our young guys will be in the later years of arbitration and starting to hit free agency. Our problem has not being able to develop pitchers, and its far from a guarantee that our young pitchers will reach there ceiling

 

1. We have new people on the farm, so our lack of "developing pitchers" in the past is not a guarantee it will continue.

2. Maybe it was not lack of developing but instead poor scouting and draft picks.

3. If we suck so much with pitchers, should we never draft anymore pitchers?

4. Where's the guarantee that Kimbrel and Pomeranz reach their ceiling of expectations? Yes, I realize there's a much higher chance they do something good in the majoes with us that say, Espinoza or Kopech, but the same argument could have been made for trading Betts & Bogey for Cole Hamels. We had a "window" then too as Papi was nearing retirement. One could argue that window (2014-2016) was a better opportunity than this one.

5. I haven't seen one poster here who thinks we should not have made any prospect trades. It's not an absurd position to think that this is going too far:

 

Sox prospects traded away in the past year (highest soxprospects.com):

 

1 Y Moncada

3 A Espinoza

3 M Margot

5 M Kopech

6 J Guerra

7 L Basabe

9 M Dubon

12 T Shaw (not a prospect when traded)

12 W Rijo

13 L Allen

13 P Light

18 L Basabe

20 C Asuaje

21 V Diaz

24 J Pennington

30 A Wilkerson

40 J Almonte

 

I'm happy with our team right now. I would take back one or two moves, if we could, but overall, I'm happy. That being said, what we did was extreme. It has caused concern to me about our future ability to provide low cost players to our luxury tax budget. I want to keep as many of our young stars as possible, and having a steady influx of top young players is one reason this "3 year window" exists in the first place. I want more "windows" down the road too.

 

[moonslav59]

Even to remotely suggest that there are any posters here that don't care are on not concerned about the future of our team because of recent deals that have been done is preposterous. Everybody cares! No one really likes to see good prospects traded away! Personally, although I see the moves as being aggressive, when I hear the expression "win now" at any cost, I don't see these moves as being that dramatic. Dramatic for sure but survivable. I'm a middle ground kind of guy. In today's world it kind of looks like there is no place for a middle ground point of view and perspective. I plan to keep right on trudging along though.

 

We've traded away 7 of out top 10 prospects in one year. (14 out of 21) That is dramatic and drastic.

 

Just talking about concerns, we've been called whiners and implied doomsday apocalyptic naysayes.

 

There can be a "middle ground" and I think that is what I had hoped for. I think Kimmi is pretty close to my position too.

 

True, we could have traded Swihart, Devers and Groome too, so I guess you could call what we have done a "middle ground", but to me and others what we did was at least a little too far to one end of the spectrum.

 

Personally, I'd take back the Pom and Kimbrel trades. With the money and some of prospects "saved" (I'd have traded Margot & Guerra) I would have acquired a not-so-glamorous closer and starter. I'd even feel much better without just the Pomeranz trade and maybe trying to sub Espi for Kopech in the Sale trade.

 

I'm not upset with where we are now, but I'm not going to deny that our future will be impacted.

 

Let's not deny that many posters said, "Don't worry; our farm can be rebuilt," or "We can spend more to fill future needs."

[Fisk]

1. We have new people on the farm, so our lack of "developing pitchers" in the past is not a guarantee it will continue.

2. Maybe it was not lack of developing but instead poor scouting and draft picks.

3. If we suck so much with pitchers, should we never draft anymore pitchers?

4. Where's the guarantee that Kimbrel and Pomeranz reach their ceiling of expectations? Yes, I realize there's a much higher chance they do something good in the majoes with us that say, Espinoza or Kopech, but the same argument could have been made for trading Betts & Bogey for Cole Hamels. We had a "window" then too as Papi was nearing retirement. One could argue that window (2014-2016) was a better opportunity than this one.

5. I haven't seen one poster here who thinks we should not have made any prospect trades. It's not an absurd position to think that this is going too far:

 

Sox prospects traded away in the past year (highest soxprospects.com):

 

1 Y Moncada

3 A Espinoza

3 M Margot

5 M Kopech

6 J Guerra

7 L Basabe

9 M Dubon

12 T Shaw (not a prospect when traded)

12 W Rijo

13 L Allen

13 P Light

18 L Basabe

20 C Asuaje

21 V Diaz

24 J Pennington

30 A Wilkerson

40 J Almonte

 

I'm happy with our team right now. I would take back one or two moves, if we could, but overall, I'm happy. That being said, what we did was extreme. It has caused concern to me about our future ability to provide low cost players to our luxury tax budget. I want to keep as many of our young stars as possible, and having a steady influx of top young players is one reason this "3 year window" exists in the first place. I want more "windows" down the road too.

 

You do realize Kimbrel and pomerantz are more proven then Kopech, Groome and Espinoza. Don't even know why you are arguing with me. I'm just stating it was probably the right time to go in because where our positional players are in there development compared to our pitchers.

[moonslav59]

We are going to have to make some hard decisions in the next few years on who to sign to long term contracts. Some fans are going to be very disappointed because we won't be able to afford everyone. It makes it very important for Benindenti, Devers, Groome, Travis to develop as we hope to help offset some of the losses. Going to be very hard to restock the farm without the advantages of the past, hopefully we find the new advantage.

 

Well said.

 

I could be wrong, but I have gotten a very distinct impression that some posters do not feel much concern about the difficulties that are ahead of us.

 

I get that some personalities are more inclined to think about the here and now than the future. and some are somewhere in between, but the day will come when end up cutting a good talent loose based on the decisions we made this past year, or we'll have to settle on a lesser in house solution than we might have had otherwise, and that could be the difference between being highly competitive or not 4-8 years from now.

[Fisk]

1. We have new people on the farm, so our lack of "developing pitchers" in the past is not a guarantee it will continue.

2. Maybe it was not lack of developing but instead poor scouting and draft picks.

3. If we suck so much with pitchers, should we never draft anymore pitchers?

4. Where's the guarantee that Kimbrel and Pomeranz reach their ceiling of expectations? Yes, I realize there's a much higher chance they do something good in the majoes with us that say, Espinoza or Kopech, but the same argument could have been made for trading Betts & Bogey for Cole Hamels. We had a "window" then too as Papi was nearing retirement. One could argue that window (2014-2016) was a better opportunity than this one.

5. I haven't seen one poster here who thinks we should not have made any prospect trades. It's not an absurd position to think that this is going too far:

 

Sox prospects traded away in the past year (highest soxprospects.com):

 

1 Y Moncada

3 A Espinoza

3 M Margot

5 M Kopech

6 J Guerra

7 L Basabe

9 M Dubon

12 T Shaw (not a prospect when traded)

12 W Rijo

13 L Allen

13 P Light

18 L Basabe

20 C Asuaje

21 V Diaz

24 J Pennington

30 A Wilkerson

40 J Almonte

 

I'm happy with our team right now. I would take back one or two moves, if we could, but overall, I'm happy. That being said, what we did was extreme. It has caused concern to me about our future ability to provide low cost players to our luxury tax budget. I want to keep as many of our young stars as possible, and having a steady influx of top young players is one reason this "3 year window" exists in the first place. I want more "windows" down the road too.

 

 

Being a little over dramatic with your comments.

[Fisk]

Well said.

 

I could be wrong, but I have gotten a very distinct impression that some posters do not feel much concern about the difficulties that are ahead of us.

 

I get that some personalities are more inclined to think about the here and now than the future. and some are somewhere in between, but the day will come when end up cutting a good talent loose based on the decisions we made this past year, or we'll have to settle on a lesser in house solution than we might have had otherwise, and that could be the difference between being highly competitive or not 4-8 years from now.

 

We have to trust our front office and scouts. I really believe our window is 4-5 years.

[moonslav59]

You do realize Kimbrel and pomerantz are more proven then Kopech, Groome and Espinoza.

 

Yes, I said this in this post you responded to: "...Yes, I realize there's a much higher chance they do something good in the majoes with us that say, Espinoza or Kopech,..."

 

Don't even know why you are arguing with me. I'm just stating it was probably the right time to go in because where our positional players are in there development compared to our pitchers.

 

I agreed that it "was the right time", but my position is that we didn't have to be so extreme or drastic about it.

 

We probably could have traded some prospects earlier than we did (the "Papi window" has come and gone), but finishing in last place did help us get Kopech & Groome.

[Bellhorn04]

Well said.

 

I could be wrong, but I have gotten a very distinct impression that some posters do not feel much concern about the difficulties that are ahead of us.

 

I get that some personalities are more inclined to think about the here and now than the future. and some are somewhere in between, but the day will come when end up cutting a good talent loose based on the decisions we made this past year, or we'll have to settle on a lesser in house solution than we might have had otherwise, and that could be the difference between being highly competitive or not 4-8 years from now.

 

For me it's a philosophical thing. I've become a Zen fan of sorts - I hasten to add that I was only able to do so because of seeing us win it all 3 times.

 

There's not a thing any of us can do about what the team does. I'm fully aware of the possible negative outcomes of some of their moves. But worrying about the future is absolutely pointless suffering.

[Fisk]

I agreed that it "was the right time", but my position is that we didn't have to be so extreme or drastic about it.

 

We probably could have traded some prospects earlier than we did (the "Papi window" has come and gone), but finishing in last place did help us get Kopech & Groome.

 

Kopech was our second pick in 2014. Or high picks have been Trey Ball, Benni and Groome. Looks like we might have blown the Ball pick.

[moonslav59]

Being a little over dramatic with your comments.

 

The list speaks for itself.

 

We traded away a massive amount of potential.

 

11 players, who at some point, reached the top 13 in the rankings.

 

[Fisk]

The list speaks for itself.

 

We traded away a massive amount of potential.

 

11 players, who at some point, reached the top 13 in the rankings.

 

 

My dramatic comment was base on point number 3 where maybe we shouldn't draft pitchers anymore.

[Fisk]

For me it's a philosophical thing. I've become a Zen fan of sorts - I hasten to add that I was only able to do so because of seeing us win it all 3 times.

 

There's not a thing any of us can do about what the team does. I'm fully aware of the possible negative outcomes of some of their moves. But worrying about the future is absolutely pointless suffering.

 

Agree enjoy the team now hopefully things work out.

[moonslav59]

We have to trust our front office and scouts. I really believe our window is 4-5 years.

 

We will begin to see the affects of not having as many low-cost players in 2-3 years, but I agree, we should be highly competitive for 4 maybe 5 more years.

 

It could last longer with some shrewd moves, extensions and draft/IFA picks. I'm not projection doomsday in 5-6 years.

 

The way the rules have changed, it's going to be much harder for us to get guys like Moncada, Bogey, Devers, Espinoza, Raudes and Margot through international signings. By winning, we won't be getting top 10 draft picks like Kopech and Groome anymore. By facing heavier fines and even other strong penalties by going over the luxury limit or significantly over the limit, we may not be able to "buy our way" out of a mess, if we need to. With hefty arb raises and extensions on the near horizon, our ffront office and scouts may need to be near flawless to keep us highly competitive beyond 4 or 5 years.

 

An argument could be made and supported that "now was the time" to hold onto at least the far-away prospects to offset the reality of just how tough it will be to acquire top young talent while winning and spending so much.

 

Again, I'm fine with where we are, but I know we sacrificed a significant part of our extended future for this 3-4 or maybe 5 year window.

 

I'm glad we didn't take this road from 2011-2015, or maybe we wouldn't have Betts, Bogey, JBJ and others right now.

[moonslav59]

My dramatic comment was base on point number 3 where maybe we shouldn't draft pitchers anymore.

 

Yes, that was overly dramatic, I agree, but if we truly believe the weakness is still great and is still here now, it's not an outlandish idea, unless we plan on drafting and then trading them away like Espi and Kopech, before they fail due to poor development in our farm system.

 

I've heard some say that if Espi or Kopech thrive, we can't assume they would have here- already hedging the post-mortem debate on how these deals worked out 8 years down the road.

[moonslav59]

For me it's a philosophical thing. I've become a Zen fan of sorts - I hasten to add that I was only able to do so because of seeing us win it all 3 times.

 

There's not a thing any of us can do about what the team does. I'm fully aware of the possible negative outcomes of some of their moves. But worrying about the future is absolutely pointless suffering.

 

I don't see concern as suffering. Concern about the future kept us from trading Betts & Bogey for Hamels.

 

That foresight and concern for the future created this current "Zen moment" or "3-5 year window".

[moonslav59]

Agree enjoy the team now hopefully things work out.

 

I'm going to really enjoy the next 3-5 years and hopefully many years beyond that.

[Fisk]

We will begin to see the affects of not having as many low-cost players in 2-3 years, but I agree, we should be highly competitive for 4 maybe 5 more years.

 

It could last longer with some shrewd moves, extensions and draft/IFA picks. I'm not projection doomsday in 5-6 years.

 

The way the rules have changed, it's going to be much harder for us to get guys like Moncada, Bogey, Devers, Espinoza, Raudes and Margot through international signings. By winning, we won't be getting top 10 draft picks like Kopech and Groome anymore. By facing heavier fines and even other strong penalties by going over the luxury limit or significantly over the limit, we may not be able to "buy our way" out of a mess, if we need to. With hefty arb raises and extensions on the near horizon, our ffront office and scouts may need to be near flawless to keep us highly competitive beyond 4 or 5 years.

 

An argument could be made and supported that "now was the time" to hold onto at least the far-away prospects to offset the reality of just how tough it will be to acquire top young talent while winning and spending so much.

 

Again, I'm fine with where we are, but I know we sacrificed a significant part of our extended future for this 3-4 or maybe 5 year window.

 

I'm glad we didn't take this road from 2011-2015, or maybe we wouldn't have Betts, Bogey, JBJ and others right now.

 

That's why ithink Ben was the right person to build our farm, we were not at the point in our development to trade Betts, Bogey, Etc. now that we have that established positional group it was determined it was time to go all in. Probably why DD was hired.

[Fisk]

I'm going to really enjoy the next 3-5 years and hopefully many years beyond that.

 

Agree

[Bellhorn04]

I don't see concern as suffering. Concern about the future kept us from trading Betts & Bogey for Hamels.

 

There is no us. The team's concern is the only concern that matters. We can't do anything. There's no point telling other posters how concerned they should be about the future.

[cp176]

We've traded away 7 of out top 10 prospects in one year. (14 out of 21) That is dramatic and drastic.

 

Just talking about concerns, we've been called whiners and implied doomsday apocalyptic naysayes.

 

There can be a "middle ground" and I think that is what I had hoped for. I think Kimmi is pretty close to my position too.

 

True, we could have traded Swihart, Devers and Groome too, so I guess you could call what we have done a "middle ground", but to me and others what we did was at least a little too far to one end of the spectrum.

 

Personally, I'd take back the Pom and Kimbrel trades. With the money and some of prospects "saved" (I'd have traded Margot & Guerra) I would have acquired a not-so-glamorous closer and starter. I'd even feel much better without just the Pomeranz trade and maybe trying to sub Espi for Kopech in the Sale trade.

 

I'm not upset with where we are now, but I'm not going to deny that our future will be impacted.

 

Let's not deny that many posters said, "Don't worry; our farm can be rebuilt," or "We can spend more to fill future needs."

 

Easy - no one is denying that our future might not be impacted by the trading of prospects. It very well might be but it might very be a positive impact. I'm pretty sure that you will take this to mean that I am all excited about getting rid of our prospects. That could not be further from the truth. I believe that for the most part you get what you pay for and on occasion you have to take some risks in life. I tend to believe that DD knows exactly what he is doing and that he is also concerned about the future of the team. But once again I will add that I have no particular loyalties toward anyone involved with Red Sox management-past or present.

[moonslav59]

That's why ithink Ben was the right person to build our farm, we were not at the point in our development to trade Betts, Bogey, Etc. now that we have that established positional group it was determined it was time to go all in. Probably why DD was hired.

 

One could argue (not me) back during the year up to when Cole Hamels was eventually traded, that a Betts & Bogey for Hamels would have been just what we needed for the "Papi window". We had just won a ring in 2013, so the base was there to add to and keep the "window" open for 2-3 more years.

 

I'm not arguing against the Sale and Thornburg trades. I love them. I'm just saying I think striking a better balance would have made us very competitive now while still improving our extended outlook as well.

 

I'm tickled to death with our 25 man roster and about 5-6 guys beyond that. We have a nice window. It's not easy building a team with a 3-5 year "window" and one could argue 2016 was within the window too as we had a good chance last year. That's really a 4-6 year window Ben & DD built.

 

I hope we find a way to be highly competitive from 4-8 or more years beyond that. I'm concerned not obsessed. I'm a bit worried but not "suffering".

 

It's winter. There's no baseball, so sometimes the talk diverts to our extended future.

[moonslav59]

There is no us. The team's concern is the only concern that matters. We can't do anything. There's no point telling other posters how concerned they should be about the future.

 

I'm not telling others to be concerned.

 

I'm responding to those who wrongly label us concerned posters as "suffering".

 

I'm responding to those, who a while back, seemed to be saying rebuilding the farm back up to a plus was something we should expect and felt even talking about how difficult that was going to be under the new system was "whining" or negating the thought that we have ability to enjoy what we have now, because we are somehow "suffering" over our long term outlook.

 

If the team's concerns are the only thing that matters, why are any of us here voicing our opinions, concerns and beliefs?

 

BTW, I think the team was concerned aout our long term future when they said no to Philly, but that's just my opinion.

[moonslav59]

Easy - no one is denying that our future might not be impacted by the trading of prospects. It very well might be but it might very be a positive impact. I'm pretty sure that you will take this to mean that I am all excited about getting rid of our prospects. That could not be further from the truth. I believe that for the most part you get what you pay for and on occasion you have to take some risks in life. I tend to believe that DD knows exactly what he is doing and that he is also concerned about the future of the team. But once again I will add that I have no particular loyalties toward anyone involved with Red Sox management-past or present.

 

I've never said or implied anyone is happy to get rid of prospects, but clearly there are posters who for a long time are much more willing to trade prospects than others. There are others on the other extreme who seem to never want to trade prospects.

 

In my opinion, much of the debate about our long term future heated up when some posters seemed to be making light of just how difficult it was going to be to rebuild the farm to even close to what it was a year or two ago. Maybe I misread their statements like many misread mine, but there were a few posters who came right out and said, "Don't worry about the future." It's hard not to assume they meant there was nothing to worry about, or that they are the types of people who live in the moment. Maybe I'm wrong on those assumptions the same way others are wrong in saying we're "suffering", when nothing is further from the truth, for me anyway.

 

I'm ecstatic right now, and I think having some higher concern about the future than I had 1-2 years ago in no way implies or suggests my current enjoyment is compromised or lessened in any way.

 

We all want the Sox to win now and forever.

 

[moonslav59]

Easy - no one is denying that our future might not be impacted by the trading of prospects.

 

Some posters clearly hinted this might be the case when they spoke of it just being potential we traded and nobody knows if the prospects ever will amount to anything.

 

That was saying our future "might not be" impacted.

 

Of course, they are right, but the chances are our future will be significantly affected by at least one of these trades over the last year is great.

[Kimmi]

I love prospects I follow the minor league boxes every day during the season, but I have to disagree with you. This was the right time to cash in, we have our young core in place, but our pitching was not good enough to win, by the time Kopech, Espinoza and Groome are ready our young guys will be in the later years of arbitration and starting to hit free agency. Our problem has not being able to develop pitchers, and its far from a guarantee that our young pitchers will reach there ceiling

 

I agree with you that now is the time to 'cash in'. What I disagree with is the extent of the cashing in. I don't think that we needed to add Sale. We were already strong contenders. Perhaps it would have been better to wait until midseason to see if there was a real need that we needed to trade for.

 

As I have said before, I don't have a problem with the Sale trade per se. What I have a problem with is what Dombrowski has done to our farm system in less than 2 years. Yes, he needed to make some moves because it is time to cash in. I do not like the 'win now at any cost' philosophy. IMO, we could have had a strong contender for the next 3 years and kept some of the prospects that were traded.

[Kimmi]

I don't understand how some posters can't at least just understand the concept that having less great prospects diminishes the chances that we will have enough low-cost quality players to off set the larger contracts down the road.

 

Those of us with concerns understand the "win now" theory and argument.

 

Also, there are many in the middle who feel some "win now" type deals were called for but maybe not so many or all. It's a valid position to hold.

 

That's my contention. You can have a win now philosophy without sacrificing the future. Is it really necessary to improve your team from one that should win the division by 3 games to one that should win the division by 6 games, at the expense of the long term outlook? My answer is no.

[Fisk]

I agree with you that now is the time to 'cash in'. What I disagree with is the extent of the cashing in. I don't think that we needed to add Sale. We were already strong contenders. Perhaps it would have been better to wait until midseason to see if there was a real need that we needed to trade for.

 

As I have said before, I don't have a problem with the Sale trade per se. What I have a problem with is what Dombrowski has done to our farm system in less than 2 years. Yes, he needed to make some moves because it is time to cash in. I do not like the 'win now at any cost' philosophy. IMO, we could have had a strong contender for the next 3 years and kept some of the prospects that were traded.

 

I'm not sure our overall pitching was going to be good enough, with the top three we have now we really lesson the load on the bullpen, all three should be able to pitch over 200 innings and if Wrights healthy he can too. Should make the pen stronger. We still have our whole young core , along with a couple blue chipper so still coming. Understand your angst but still think organization is in great shape.