Dombrowski Referendum

[Eddy Ballgame]

I never said Vic and Ramirez were mistakes.

 

I said I was against both signings.

 

I do think Dempster was a mistake but understandable. We lucked out when he retired.

 

You worded it to insinuate that Ramirez, Dempster & Victorino were all mistakes.

 

As far as Dempster goes, Ben Cherington said after 2012 that the first thing he needed to do was "change the culture of the clubhouse." By all accounts, Ryan Dempster was a huuuuuge part of that. The guy also gave them 17 quality starts out of the 5 spot and the team went on to win the World Series. Calling his signing a "mistake" sounds crazy to me.

 

When Clay Buchholz was asked the next season what the biggest difference was between the 2013 team and the 2014 team that was struggling, his answer was, "No Ryan Dempster." A player's value isn't all about "statistics." You can find several quotes where members of the Sox organization discussed just how important he was to that team. My guess is that Ben Cherington might even call Dempster a "crucial" signing for that team.

 

I'm also sure they all felt "lucky" that he retired when they went from first to last without him around.

[moonslav59]

You worded it to insinuate that Ramirez, Dempster & Victorino were all mistakes.

 

I've been against many moves, but I'm not right all the time. I liked the HanRam deal better than the Pablo deal. Some said HanRam could have gotten more money. Had we done HanRam without Pablo, I'd have liked it better. Originally, I thought HanRam at 3B was the better idea. First base turned out to be much better- clearly much better than LF.

 

I liked Vic a lot. His overall play in 2013 was an essential part of our championship. I did not like the deal because of the 3 years. In my opinion, I was right, but the deal was not a "mistake". We won a ring, and his $39M was part of the cost.

 

I don't feel like bringing up the Dempster argument. I didn't like it, but I wouldn't say it was a mistake, especially since he did us a favor by retiring year 2. I meant that in the context of the alternative of him returning when he didn't really have his heart in it... and as a year older. He ate innings. He didn't embarrass himself. He was a positive clubhouse guy. I can't change the fact that I was against the deal at the time.

 

The Masterson deal was a mistake. Even the staunchest Sox brass supporter (or apologist) has to agree there, even if just on the hindsight view.

[Eddy Ballgame]

You worded it to insinuate that Ramirez, Dempster & Victorino were all mistakes.

 

I've been against many moves, but I'm not right all the time. I liked the HanRam deal better than the Pablo deal. Some said HanRam could have gotten more money. Had we done HanRam without Pablo, I'd have liked it better. Originally, I thought HanRam at 3B was the better idea. First base turned out to be much better- clearly much better than LF.

 

I liked Vic a lot. His overall play in 2013 was an essential part of our championship. I did not like the deal because of the 3 years. In my opinion, I was right, but the deal was not a "mistake". We won a ring, and his $39M was part of the cost.

 

I don't feel like bringing up the Dempster argument. I didn't like it, but I wouldn't say it was a mistake, especially since he did us a favor by retiring year 2. I meant that in the context of the alternative of him returning when he didn't really have his heart in it... and as a year older. He ate innings. He didn't embarrass himself. He was a positive clubhouse guy. I can't change the fact that I was against the deal at the time.

 

The Masterson deal was a mistake. Even the staunchest Sox brass supporter (or apologist) has to agree there, even if just on the hindsight view.

 

Being "against" a deal is a lot different than actually calling it a "mistake." Dempster wasn't a "mistake." Victorino wasn't a "mistake." Masterson was unquestionably brought in as part of the "Change the culture of the clubhouse" mantra, but that signing didn't work out. It was a one year deal, so it didn't exactly set the franchise back for a decade.

 

I didn't mention the Masterson and Sandoval signings, because they can certainly be considered "mistakes." Part of the cost of doing business in baseball is realizing that you'll very rarely ever get "full return" on your investment in a player. Teams know this. Victorino took less than what Cleveland offered to come to Boston and the guy was without question one of the most valuable players on a World championship team. In my eyes, you can't call that signing a "mistake."

[a700hitter]

Ben is with Toronto as a gopher for the real GM. He is the enemy now. I hope he does the same bang up job on their pitching staff that he did with ours.

[moonslav59]

Being "against" a deal is a lot different than actually calling it a "mistake." Dempster wasn't a "mistake." Victorino wasn't a "mistake." Masterson was unquestionably brought in as part of the "Change the culture of the clubhouse" mantra, but that signing didn't work out. It was a one year deal, so it didn't exactly set the franchise back for a decade.

 

I didn't mention the Masterson and Sandoval signings, because they can certainly be considered "mistakes." Part of the cost of doing business in baseball is realizing that you'll very rarely ever get "full return" on your investment in a player. Teams know this. Victorino took less than what Cleveland offered to come to Boston and the guy was without question one of the most valuable players on a World championship team. In my eyes, you can't call that signing a "mistake."

 

I was against the signing. It was not a "mistake".

 

Vic was a big part of our 2013 ring.

 

One could argue he helped contribute to our last place finishes afterwards.

 

In hindsight, I'd do the deal again, but I was against it at the time.

[Nick]

I was against the signing. It was not a "mistake".

 

Vic was a big part of our 2013 ring.

 

One could argue he helped contribute to our last place finishes afterwards.

 

In hindsight, I'd do the deal again, but I was against it at the time.

 

Not sure as an owner I want to pay $39M for one year's contribution, consistently. You'd be burning my wallet.

[Bellhorn04]

Not sure as an owner I want to pay $39M for one year's contribution, consistently. You'd be burning my wallet.

 

No, you wouldn't want to make a habit of it. But Victorino was a big part of winning a ring so you'd do that one again, as you would with Keith Foulke.

[moonslav59]

Not sure as an owner I want to pay $39M for one year's contribution, consistently. You'd be burning my wallet.

 

Vic's $13M in 2014 and $13M in 2015 sure didn't help, but I'm okay with the "if you win a ring" argument as long as the player clearly had a significant role in the championship.

 

There's a lot of nostalgia over the Theo and Tito years, and mush is well founded, but there were clear reasons why both are gone right now. Do I wish we had Tito back? Yes. Was I against his being shown the door? Not really. Do I wish we had Theo instead of DD? Yes. Can we look at his total body of work since the Nomar trade and see that much was not so bright and sunny?

 

There was a lot of good Theo did. We won another ring in 2007, we added some good young talent and we stayed competetive just about every year after 2004. Here are some of the head-scratchers:

 

Renteria (We paid essentially $30M for that one year here.), Arroyo>Pena, Wade Miller, Matt Clement (injury), Julio Lugo, Dice-K, Penny & Smoltz, Rizzo> AGon, Carl Crawford, Reddick> A Bailey (injury) Beckett extension, not moving Andrew Miller to the pen earlier... There's probably more, and there's certainly a lot of good things I failed to mention, but let's remember, even Theo admitted he had "lost sight" of best way to build a team.

 

I get the pining for the good ole days, but let's not forget the significant issues this team had when Theo and Tito left.

[moonslav59]

No, you wouldn't want to make a habit of it. But Victorino was a big part of winning a ring so you'd do that one again, as you would with Keith Foulke.

 

Agreed, but it gets a little foggy when you talk about Julio Lugo, Jake Peavy and Ryan Dempster.

[Dojji]

Lugo, Peavy and Dempster are the price you pay for trying to find that piece to put your team over the top. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't, but the times it works are worth making a lot of the attempts that fail.

[moonslav59]

Lugo, Peavy and Dempster are the price you pay for trying to find that piece to put your team over the top. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't, but the times it works are worth making a lot of the attempts that fail.

 

Totally agree, and Lugo actually played well in 2007, including decent D at SS.

[Dojji]

No he didn't. Lugo was barely over replacement level in 2007. He was never worth the money he was paid. But we didn't have anyone better to turn the job over to, so we had no choice but to keep rolling him out there.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Agreed, but it gets a little foggy when you talk about Julio Lugo, Jake Peavy and Ryan Dempster.

 

It only gets "foggy" when you base your entire opinion on "statistics" only.

 

David Ross hit .229 as a backup catcher for the Cubs this year, but I'm pretty certain that if you ask anyone in that Cubs organization, they would tell you that he is an invaluable part of that team. Jason Heyward spent one spring training with the guy and decided to pay for Ross to have his own suite on the road for all 82 games.

 

Dempster had a similar affect on the Sox. You can ignore it all you want. He also actually pitched well for them. I'm not going to get into Peavy's "beyond the stats" value, because I know where it will end up.

 

Sabermetrics are great, and they have a ton of value in evaluating on field performance, but until MLB starts trotting "robots" out onto the field every day, you can't base a player's value solely on "WAR," as you are clearly doing with a guy like Dempster.

[sk7326]

Ben is with Toronto as a gopher for the real GM. He is the enemy now. I hope he does the same bang up job on their pitching staff that he did with ours.

 

Turned a near washout starter and an outfielder they didn't need into a guy in line for the Cy Young and a guy who sure as hell looks like a #2 starter next season. That wasn't so bad for the pitching staff.

[a700hitter]

Turned a near washout starter and an outfielder they didn't need into a guy in line for the Cy Young and a guy who sure as hell looks like a #2 starter next season. That wasn't so bad for the pitching staff.

He was atrocious at building a pitching staff, but he was very effective at deconstructing a pitching staff. I am happy that he will be bringing his magic to Toronto.

[sk7326]

Vic was a strange signing at the time - but he had an MVP caliber one year for us before his body fell to pieces. Flags fly forever - so ultimately no real problem with it.

 

Dempster was effective at the thing he was signed to do - soak up innings at the back of the rotation. This is not much of a virtue for October, but important for surviving the marathon.

 

Figure they will aim high for another big starter - via trade. I am sure Henry does not want to stand pat on the rotation and bet ERod will make a leap (although I am pretty sure he will).

[Dojji]

I still do not see a trade that makes sense. No matter how many times people will say "just trade for a Starter", I don't see "A. Starter" anywhere on the players list, and my search for an ace in a tradeable position keeps coming up empty no matter how many times I run it.

[Eddy Ballgame]

He was atrocious at building a pitching staff, but he was very effective at deconstructing a pitching staff. I am happy that he will be bringing his magic to Toronto.

 

None of us have any idea who was responsible for what when it came to Sox decision making, except that you probably can't find anyone who doesn't think that Larry Lucchino was the one who came up with that ridiculous 4/70 initial offer to Lester. If you want to blame someone for Lester, start with Lucchino.

[Bellhorn04]

None of us have any idea who was responsible for what when it came to Sox decision making, except that you probably can't find anyone who doesn't think that Larry Lucchino was the one who came up with that ridiculous 4/70 initial offer to Lester. If you want to blame someone for Lester, start with Lucchino.

 

Probably so. Looking back, though, the 4/70 offer could have been remedied by following up with a better one. Instead we had Sam Kennedy make a statement about the public 'not knowing all the data points' or something odd like that, and then Cherington himself saying how the Sox had been waiting for a counter-offer from Lester's team and were somewhat baffled that they didn't get one. All of which was made to look absurd when they ended up finally offering him 135 million.

[a700hitter]

None of us have any idea who was responsible for what when it came to Sox decision making, except that you probably can't find anyone who doesn't think that Larry Lucchino was the one who came up with that ridiculous 4/70 initial offer to Lester. If you want to blame someone for Lester, start with Lucchino.

Ben was the GM. He doesn't get credit for the good stuff and get a pass for the bad stuff.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Vic was a strange signing at the time - but he had an MVP caliber one year for us before his body fell to pieces. Flags fly forever - so ultimately no real problem with it.

 

Dempster was effective at the thing he was signed to do - soak up innings at the back of the rotation. This is not much of a virtue for October, but important for surviving the marathon.

 

Figure they will aim high for another big starter - via trade. I am sure Henry does not want to stand pat on the rotation and bet ERod will make a leap (although I am pretty sure he will).

 

Vic was signed because a right fielder who could play defense was a top priority that off season. Tori Hunter was plan A and Ortiz recruited him heavily, but ironically he said he wanted to go somewhere where he could win right away. Oops.

 

When Ben said that the first thing he needed to do was "Change the culture of the clubhouse," after 2012, Ryan Dempster was supposedly recommended by "everyone." He wasn't just brought here to pitch, although he was pretty effective as a pitcher as well.

 

Another top starter will be difficult to find this offseason and although the White Sox starters keep coming up, they haven't given any indication as to whether they will rebuild or try to compete yet. In my opinion, they have too much of a solid core not to try to win now.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Eddy Ballgame

[Eddy Ballgame]

Probably so. Looking back, though, the 4/70 offer could have been remedied by following up with a better one. Instead we had Sam Kennedy make a statement about the public 'not knowing all the data points' or something odd like that, and then Cherington himself saying how the Sox had been waiting for a counter-offer from Lester's team and were somewhat baffled that they didn't get one. All of which was made to look absurd when they ended up finally offering him 135 million.

 

You're right. Lester's agent didn't respond. The Sox shouldn't have been baffled, either, especially when you consider earlier that week, Max Scherzer turned down 160 and the immortal Homer Bailey signed for 105. Taking those two events into consideration, the Sox should've known that 4/70 was an insult.

 

My guess is that Cherington and his staff did know. Lester would be still be in Boston if they opened with something slightly above the Bailey deal. 6/120 something easily gets it done

[Bellhorn04]

You're right. Lester's agent didn't respond. The Sox shouldn't have been baffled, either, especially when you consider earlier that week, Max Scherzer turned down 160 and the immortal Homer Bailey signed for 105. Taking those two events into consideration, the Sox should've known that 4/70 was an insult.

 

My guess is that Cherington and his staff did know. Lester would be still be in Boston if they opened with something slightly above the Bailey deal. 6/120 something easily gets it done

 

Agreed.

[Dojji]

Vic was signed because a right fielder who could play defense was a top priority that off season. Tori Hunter was plan A and Ortiz recruited him heavily, but ironically he said he wanted to go somewhere where he could win right away. Oops.

 

When Ben said that the first thing he needed to do was "Change the culture of the clubhouse," after 2012, Ryan Dempster was supposedly recommended by "everyone." He wasn't just brought here to pitch, although he was pretty effective as a pitcher as well.

 

Another top starter will be difficult to find this offseason and although the White Sox starters keep coming up, they haven't given any indication as to whether they will rebuild or try to compete yet. In my opinion, they have too much of a solid core not to try to win now.

 

Agreed. I expect the Chisox to be in up to the elbows on EE and be looking for other ways to add offense. You'd think that might mean we could get a trade done, but if 2 players under contract for CWS are unavailable, the first one is Quintana and the second one is Sale. As for Frazier, the goal in the offseason for CWS is to IMPROVE the offense, so he's likely off the table until the deadline at least. They'll give themselves at least that long to solve their other problems before they sell off major assets.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Agreed. I expect the Chisox to be in up to the elbows on EE and be looking for other ways to add offense. You'd think that might mean we could get a trade done, but if 2 players under contract for CWS are unavailable, the first one is Quintana and the second one is Sale. As for Frazier, the goal in the offseason for CWS is to IMPROVE the offense, so he's likely off the table until the deadline at least. They'll give themselves at least that long to solve their other problems before they sell off major assets.

 

Yup...The White Sox always come up when possible destinations for EE are mentioned. I also think that they'll look to compete before they become sellers. With a poor free agent class for starters, the price for one of those White Sox starters would probably be ridiculous anyway.

[Dojji]

Oh we have the pieces to make an attractive offer to CWS. Swihart and Bradley are players CWS needs more than we technically do. My resistence to the notion of bringing in Sale has more to do with a combination of an assessment of Sale's attitude and an assessment that the White Sox are likely to be in try-to-win mode and would be looking to offer other assets instead of Sale or Quintana to bring in those two players.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Oh we have the pieces to make an attractive offer to CWS. Swihart and Bradley are players CWS needs more than we technically do. My resistence to the notion of bringing in Sale has more to do with a combination of an assessment of Sale's attitude and an assessment that the White Sox are likely to be in try-to-win mode and would be looking to offer other assets instead of Sale or Quintana to bring in those two players.

 

The Sox definitely have what it takes to acquire Sale, but I don't think they'd give up both Bradley & Swihart for him. I know the majority of this board would do it in a heart beat, but I think the Sox value those guys more than the board does.

 

Supposedly the Sox were unwilling to include Bradley in any deal for Sale when they had previous discussions. Their thinking has possibly changed since then, but my guess is not enough to include Swihart as well.

 

Then again, if the White Sox are in "win now" mode, trading Sale makes no sense.

[sk7326]

If the Sox deal for Sale - would expect Rodriguez to be part of it - gets the White Sox a major league starter with top of the rotation capability (at least potentially).

[moonslav59]

No he didn't. Lugo was barely over replacement level in 2007. He was never worth the money he was paid. But we didn't have anyone better to turn the job over to, so we had no choice but to keep rolling him out there.

 

I never said Lugo was great, but in 2007, he had plus range at SS. That was lost after 2007 due to injuries and decline. He was barely above replacement value that year, but he wasn't a negative.

 

I can't believe I was defending Lugo after spending months arguing with softy the clown and his "He was the wire-to-wire SS for a championship club" rants. I stand corrected. He didn't play "well". he played "okay", but he certainly played much better than the folloing years,

[moonslav59]

It only gets "foggy" when you base your entire opinion on "statistics" only.

 

David Ross hit .229 as a backup catcher for the Cubs this year, but I'm pretty certain that if you ask anyone in that Cubs organization, they would tell you that he is an invaluable part of that team. Jason Heyward spent one spring training with the guy and decided to pay for Ross to have his own suite on the road for all 82 games.

 

Dempster had a similar affect on the Sox. You can ignore it all you want. He also actually pitched well for them. I'm not going to get into Peavy's "beyond the stats" value, because I know where it will end up.

 

Sabermetrics are great, and they have a ton of value in evaluating on field performance, but until MLB starts trotting "robots" out onto the field every day, you can't base a player's value solely on "WAR," as you are clearly doing with a guy like Dempster.

 

I don't base my opinion on stats. Really, I don't.

 

I played the game I love so much for many years. I watch every pitch of every Sox game. I draw conclusions based on my observations, but when it comes to comparative analysis I realize my observations are limited, so I look to stats to support or refute my observational conclusions.

 

I get the argument on Dempster, and though I don't value the "great clubhouse guy" as much as some do, I don't discount it either.