Sox get Sale

[Kimmi]

"Speculative Nonsense" -- that sums it up very well.

 

Actually, 'short sighted' sums up the 'win now' philosophy much better.

[Kimmi]

It sure does.

 

There are very few "experts" who are right any of the time much less being spot on for 10 years.

 

I'll just watch my team and enjoy the talent that we have and be thankful that Ben is gone.

 

The putz.

 

I don't know why some of you are so thankful that Ben is gone. Criticize him all you want, but this is Ben's and Theo's team, not Dombrowski's. Even the players that Dombrowski acquired were possible because the state that the team was in when Dombrowski took over.

 

Seriously, praising Dombrowski while criticizing Ben is wrong. Very wrong.

 

If you want to know how good of a job Dombrowski is doing, see in 3-5 years from now.

[Kimmi]

65 innings spread out over 10 years doesn't mean much either.

 

This is correct.

 

65 innings is a small sample to begin with, about a 3rd of the season.

 

When you spread it over several seasons it makes the data even less meaningful.

[Emp9]

Price, Porcello, and Sale could all pitch lights out in the postseason, and we could still lose.

 

The argument that 'the playoffs are a crapshoot, therefore we don't need Sale' might be a weak argument if we weren't already strong contenders and if that deal didn't deplete our farm system even more than it had already been. You can't look at that trade as just a short term improvement. You have to weigh the short term improvement against the long term ramifications.

 

Is it worth it? If we win a World Series in the next two years, then yes. If we don't, then no. And that being said, it's quite possible that we would have won the World Series even if we didn't trade for Sale.

 

I respectively disagree. It's the perfect time to trade for Sale. What other time would there be? When the team has less of a chance to make the post season? I feel like the argument here is ...We're good, so by all means, lets not get better. He's not redundant.

 

I don't believe it was a good time to stay status quo. I don't believe we were strong WS contenders. How were we WS Contenders when we're down Ortiz and our most likely competition is up Salazar & Carrasco? Without the Sale deal mind you. He's not a luxury.

 

I'm of the opinion Starting pitching does win Championships if you have a balanced team in all/most other areas. Defense, Offense, relief pitching, base-running, good bench, probably coaching ( a good manager helps)... Starting Pitching alone doesn't get you there. One has to look no further than the Mets. Great SP, but bad defense, shaky BP, & inconsistent hitting. I can make a similar argument about the Tigers' recent failures. They weren't that balanced a team.

 

Looking at the 2017 Red Sox from 50,000 ft (not literally), I'm a tad worried about our offense (without Ortiz), but our young core could prove me wrong and continue to get better. With the addition of Sale, we shouldn't have to score as many runs to win games, so Sale should offset losing Ortiz in theory. That's important, so let me stress that: WE DON'T HAVE TO SCORE AS MANY RUNS AS WE NORMALLY DO TO WIN GAMES. I love our defense. I love our base running (we were the most efficient team in base running last season, last time I checked), besides maybe one more RP I love our BP (that will work itself out over the season), our bench is ok (I like Holt and Hernandez, and our catchers as a group interchangeably), and our manager is no rookie and has won before and in different roles. Before Sale, I simply didn't have a lot of confidence in our Starting staff in a post season environment, with good reason. We can hand the ball to Sale 6 times in the post season if need be, instead of a lesser pitcher. I'm not guaranteeing anything. I don't think we're a lock. I just think we got a s*** load better in an area I had the least confidence in, an area that also happens to be the most important in trying to win a WS.

 

 

 

Cough (Yes, our long term future is worse off.) cough

[Kimmi]

Since arriving, Dombrowski has traded awayan impressive list of prospects.

 

But let's not go overboard. In any BA Top 100 list, you have about 10 players give or take who go on to be star players. Another 30 who are serviceable starters, another 30 who are bench players, and 30 who never make MLB beyond maybe a September call up. Those of you from BDC might recognize this as Notin's First Law of Prospects or the 10-30-30-30 Rule.

 

By the logic of this rule, we probably traded away one star, three other starters, some bench players and AAAA fodder. At most, four players we might miss. If it is 4, we did give up a lot. Quite a bit to give up 24 years of starting MLB service time, especially if 6 of them are from a star player. We better win a title or two to justify it.

 

But it might be less than that...

 

It's not going overboard.

 

No one is saying that we're going to win the World Series in 10 years, or even 6 years. Of course not all of the prospects are going to pan out. For that matter, we don't know that Sale is going to pan out.

 

But it is accurate to say that the state that our farm system was in gave us a very promising outlook for the foreseeable future. It is also accurate to say that our current long term outlook is a lot more bleak than it was when Dombrowski took over.

[Kimmi]

I agree that it doesn't mean much.. but it certainly does mean something.

 

Not necessarily. It could mean something, or it could mean nothing.

 

It could be nothing more than a fluke.

[oldtimer]

It's not going overboard.

 

No one is saying that we're going to win the World Series in 10 years, or even 6 years. Of course not all of the prospects are going to pan out. For that matter, we don't know that Sale is going to pan out.

 

But it is accurate to say that the state that our farm system was in gave us a very promising outlook for the foreseeable future. It is also accurate to say that our current long term outlook is a lot more bleak than it was when Dombrowski took over.

 

Of course there is risk when you bring an Ace pitcher in and trade away very good prospects. Sale at best will start around 35 games and with no feeling out period or significant injuries might post an ERA in the low 3's. The rest of the games we will start guys we had last year although the back end rotation guys probably will not be called on as often. We should give up less total runs in 2017 if all goes well.

 

Missing Ortiz means we probably will not score as many. We have risks with Sandoval at 3rd base, Leon's hitting may not be repeated and JBJ may not have taken the off season to improve his swing. We will learn about this as the season unfolds. What was done will now play out on the field. DD may make one more move with Buch and pick up one more BP pitcher. I don't see more than that happening.

[Slasher9]

I agree that it does mean something...but it certainly doesn't mean much.

 

It means everything. Well, if you value parades.....

[Slasher9]

Not necessarily. It could mean something, or it could mean nothing.

 

It could be nothing more than a fluke.

 

Or it could mean Price is made out of paper. The stats we have would indicate this.

[Jack Flap]

Give me the most talented roster to get through the regular season with, and whatever will be will be in October. The Schillings and Papis who are consistent studs in the postseason over the course of a career are the exception rather than the rule.

[cp176]

It sure does.

 

There are very few "experts" who are right any of the time much less being spot on for 10 years.

 

I'll just watch my team and enjoy the talent that we have and be thankful that Ben is gone.

 

The putz.

 

I think that I am entering the realm of the casual fan. I want them to be as strong as they can be I guess right now. When I go to Boston to watch them, I want to go in expecting them to win. I want all of our opponents to think that we very well might be the best team in baseball. I was brought up with the old song -Wait till next year. I don't want to wait until next year. I guess that I am ok with a little future sacrificing in order to seize the moment. There have been a lot of very sensible posts, thoughtful posts about what has been going on. I don't know anymore about what DD has for plans than anyone else but our team at least looks stronger perhaps minus some offense than it did last year. I plan to enjoy the ride. It is not the job of the casual fan (me) to worry about the condition of this franchise 4 or 5 years from now. If he found a way to add EE to the roster, I would be ok with that as well. It should be a great time to be a Red So fan in Attleboro next year. Same goes for Maine (undisclosed location). I'm looking forward to it. I will also be rooting for all those prospects we gave up to get to this point.

[Bellhorn04]

It may be speculative, but it is far from nonsense.

 

Anything that involves the future is speculative.

 

People are projecting how good this team should be this year. Is that nonsense? No one knows with certainty how we will finish.

 

Projecting the long term outlook of a team is fair and reasonable based on the knowledge that we have.

 

I am resolutely staying with the position that it's unreasonable to say that any team is well set up for the next 10 years. I think it's a ridiculous statement and it offends me. If someone wants to say something like that and be taken seriously, they should show exactly how a team can do that under our current system. Show me how we're going to pay guys like Betts and Bogey and JBJ and Beni or how we're going to replace the ones we can't pay. And that's just for starters. I don't think anyone has any sort of simulation tools that can do this. You can do it for a few years. But every year the accuracy diminishes considerably.

[Jack Flap]

We're very well set for the next 2-3 years, after which we'll have a thousand and one question marks - primarily dealing with what the pitching staff will look like after several key pieces hit free agency within a year or two of each other, and whether the young core can be extended. This was always going to be the case.

 

Our long term outlook may be a bit thinner than it was before Dombrowski's moves, but I didn't think having guys like Moncada, Espinoza, Kopech, etc. made us anything close to "set for the next 10 years." No one that we've lost was/is anything resembling a sure thing.

[notin]

It's not going overboard.

 

No one is saying that we're going to win the World Series in 10 years, or even 6 years. Of course not all of the prospects are going to pan out. For that matter, we don't know that Sale is going to pan out.

 

But it is accurate to say that the state that our farm system was in gave us a very promising outlook for the foreseeable future. It is also accurate to say that our current long term outlook is a lot more bleak than it was when Dombrowski took over.

 

Agree.

 

Outside of Moncada, and even going back to include Guerra and Margot, a lot of fans justified the deals with "that might never pan out anyway." But panning out can be a serviceable minimum wage player who enables the Sox to keep Bogaerts, Betts and Bradley and whatever other overpriced players the Sox have...

[notin]

I am resolutely staying with the position that it's unreasonable to say that any team is well set up for the next 10 years. I think it's a ridiculous statement and it offends me. If someone wants to say something like that and be taken seriously, they should show exactly how a team can do that under our current system. Show me how we're going to pay guys like Betts and Bogey and JBJ and Beni or how we're going to replace the ones we can't pay. And that's just for starters. I don't think anyone has any sort of simulation tools that can do this. You can do it for a few years. But every year the accuracy diminishes considerably.

 

It offends me when people say Cherington was fired, although I don't see that on too much on this board. But if we want to set the record straight, Dombrowski was fired and Cherington quit...

[Kimmi]

I respectively disagree. It's the perfect time to trade for Sale. What other time would there be? When the team has less of a chance to make the post season? I feel like the argument here is ...We're good, so by all means, lets not get better. He's not redundant.

 

I don't believe it was a good time to stay status quo. I don't believe we were strong WS contenders. How were we WS Contenders when we're down Ortiz and our most likely competition is up Salazar & Carrasco? Without the Sale deal mind you. He's not a luxury.

 

I'm of the opinion Starting pitching does win Championships if you have a balanced team in all/most other areas. Defense, Offense, relief pitching, base-running, good bench, probably coaching ( a good manager helps)... Starting Pitching alone doesn't get you there. One has to look no further than the Mets. Great SP, but bad defense, shaky BP, & inconsistent hitting. I can make a similar argument about the Tigers' recent failures. They weren't that balanced a team.

 

Looking at the 2017 Red Sox from 50,000 ft (not literally), I'm a tad worried about our offense (without Ortiz), but our young core could prove me wrong and continue to get better. With the addition of Sale, we shouldn't have to score as many runs to win games, so Sale should offset losing Ortiz in theory. That's important, so let me stress that: WE DON'T HAVE TO SCORE AS MANY RUNS AS WE NORMALLY DO TO WIN GAMES. I love our defense. I love our base running (we were the most efficient team in base running last season, last time I checked), besides maybe one more RP I love our BP (that will work itself out over the season), our bench is ok (I like Holt and Hernandez, and our catchers as a group interchangeably), and our manager is no rookie and has won before and in different roles. Before Sale, I simply didn't have a lot of confidence in our Starting staff in a post season environment, with good reason. We can hand the ball to Sale 6 times in the post season if need be, instead of a lesser pitcher. I'm not guaranteeing anything. I don't think we're a lock. I just think we got a s*** load better in an area I had the least confidence in, an area that also happens to be the most important in trying to win a WS.

 

 

 

Cough (Yes, our long term future is worse off.) cough

 

IMO, there is no good time to go all out if it means depleting the farm system in the process. There has to be a balance between short and long term goals. We could have been very competitive for the next 3 years while maintaining a good long term outlook.

 

I don't believe in staying status quo either. Most of what you said in this post I actually agree with, though I don't think Sale makes as big a difference as you do.

I think our only real point of disagreement is that I don't think it was right for Dombrowski to sacrifice our long term for the short term goals. It wasn't necessrily the Sale deal, but rather the combination of moves he has made since he joined our team.

[Kimmi]

Of course there is risk when you bring an Ace pitcher in and trade away very good prospects. Sale at best will start around 35 games and with no feeling out period or significant injuries might post an ERA in the low 3's. The rest of the games we will start guys we had last year although the back end rotation guys probably will not be called on as often. We should give up less total runs in 2017 if all goes well.

 

Missing Ortiz means we probably will not score as many. We have risks with Sandoval at 3rd base, Leon's hitting may not be repeated and JBJ may not have taken the off season to improve his swing. We will learn about this as the season unfolds. What was done will now play out on the field. DD may make one more move with Buch and pick up one more BP pitcher. I don't see more than that happening.

 

No disagreement with anything you posted.

 

Overall, I believe our team is improved over last year's team.

 

I don't share the concern that you do about JBJ, but we still don't know for sure exactly what we have in him offensively. Either way, though, his defense keeps him on the field.

[Kimmi]

Or it could mean Price is made out of paper. The stats we have would indicate this.

 

Price could be made out of paper, but I don't think so. I also don't think that the stats really show any evidence of this.

 

Like you, I was a strong critic of Price last season when he was not pitching up to his 'ace' expectations.

 

But I'm not going call him a 'choker' based on his postseason stats.

 

I also believe that Price will be our ace this upcoming season.

[Kimmi]

I am resolutely staying with the position that it's unreasonable to say that any team is well set up for the next 10 years. I think it's a ridiculous statement and it offends me. If someone wants to say something like that and be taken seriously, they should show exactly how a team can do that under our current system. Show me how we're going to pay guys like Betts and Bogey and JBJ and Beni or how we're going to replace the ones we can't pay. And that's just for starters. I don't think anyone has any sort of simulation tools that can do this. You can do it for a few years. But every year the accuracy diminishes considerably.

 

Well, it offends me when people say that they don't care what happens in 2021, so we're even.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. As I said before, 10 years might have been pushing it a bit, but the point stands about the long term outlook of the team. Of course there are no guarantees. But if you have a strong farm system and a very strong young core of players already at the MLB level, the future is very bright. There are a lot more possibilities available to a team who has a well-stocked farm than to a team who has a depleted one.

 

There are analysts whose job it is to work on these very long term projections and scenarios.

[Kimmi]

It offends me when people say Cherington was fired, although I don't see that on too much on this board. But if we want to set the record straight, Dombrowski was fired and Cherington quit...

 

You were not here at the time. There was quite a bit of heated discussion on the topic.

 

Cherington is not well-liked on this board by most.

[Nick]

I think everyone liked Ben. It's the march towards second consecutive last place finish that ended his career. Of course having his one hand tied behind his back when it came to signing 30+ something, tons of mileage free agent starting pitchers, did him no favors. Edited December 18, 2016 by Nick

[Bellhorn04]

It offends me when people say Cherington was fired, although I don't see that on too much on this board. But if we want to set the record straight, Dombrowski was fired and Cherington quit...

 

Actually, if we're going to be technically accurate, Dombrowski was "released from his contract to pursue other opportunities".

[Bellhorn04]

Well, it offends me when people say that they don't care what happens in 2021, so we're even.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. As I said before, 10 years might have been pushing it a bit, but the point stands about the long term outlook of the team. Of course there are no guarantees. But if you have a strong farm system and a very strong young core of players already at the MLB level, the future is very bright. There are a lot more possibilities available to a team who has a well-stocked farm than to a team who has a depleted one.

 

There are analysts whose job it is to work on these very long term projections and scenarios.

 

And the Red Sox have their own analysts, who, I expect, put much more work more on projections for our team than any of the freelance analysts do.

[notin]

You were not here at the time. There was quite a bit of heated discussion on the topic.

 

Cherington is not well-liked on this board by most.

 

He had his good points and bad ones, much like any GM. I didn't like that he never traded any prospects, but then I also don't like Dombrowski's approach of trading them all

[notin]

Actually, if we're going to be technically accurate, Dombrowski was "released from his contract to pursue other opportunities".

 

And if we're being technically accurate, that is the very definition of being fired, just phrased as softly as possible. .

 

And Detroit should have fired him. He overextended almost every good move he made well beyond usefulness, he killed the farm and failed to replenish it, and he never seemed to address yearly glaring weaknesses on his team...

[Bellhorn04]

And if we're being technically accurate, that is the very definition of being fired, just phrased as softly as possible. .

 

OK, but let's be consistent. You're soft-selling what happened to Ben by saying he quit. He quit after being replaced as the primary baseball ops decision maker by Dombrowski and being offered to stay only in a reduced capacity.

[Jack Flap]

You were not here at the time. There was quite a bit of heated discussion on the topic.

 

Cherington is not well-liked on this board by most.

 

Not surprising since, with one notable exception, Ben's years as GM were not very good ones, and Dombrowski's style is built to win favor with fans who prefer flashy, exciting moves over a more patient, cautious approach. It's evident that we have some people here who couldn't care less about prospects or the farm system or much beyond the immediate future (I don't say that to be insulting, but it's what I see in some of the posts I read), which translates into a lot of DD love.

 

There's no denying that Dombrowski has set us up quite well for the next several years, but the real test of his mettle will come down the line when Cherington's players and the others he acquired by trading Cherington's players are going into free agency and he's run out of Cherington prospects to trade. As it stands, this is still very much a team with Ben's fingerprints all over it, whether people want to admit it or not.

[moonslav59]

I am resolutely staying with the position that it's unreasonable to say that any team is well set up for the next 10 years. I think it's a ridiculous statement and it offends me. If someone wants to say something like that and be taken seriously, they should show exactly how a team can do that under our current system. Show me how we're going to pay guys like Betts and Bogey and JBJ and Beni or how we're going to replace the ones we can't pay. And that's just for starters. I don't think anyone has any sort of simulation tools that can do this. You can do it for a few years. But every year the accuracy diminishes considerably.

 

You can certainly improve your odds of being a competitive team 5 and 10 years down the road by acquiring and keeping near and far away top prospects.

 

Theo and Ben did the acquiring part of the equation, which is the hard part.

 

Keeping a balance was entrusted to DD, and he decided to go for broke at the expense of seriously weakening our extended outlook.

 

We'll find out 4-10 years from now, and I don't want to hear any crap about how "we don't know if these ex-Sox players playing allstar baseball elsewhere would be doing that for us had we kept them."

 

The same way we view the AGon trade differently years later as Rizzo has become a star, and Rizzo wasn't even projected to be as great as several guys we have traded in the last 13 months.

 

The HanRam/Sanchez- Beckett/Lowell trade was different, as we all expected HanRam to become something special, but it was still "speculative" to some extent, and the fact that he and Anibal went on to have some very good to great seasons does make that trade look more questionable than it did at the time and after our 2007 ring. A ring in the next 3 years will certainly make viewing these recent trades in a much different light down the road, but if we fail to win a ring, DD will probably be gone and someone else will have to pick up the pieces.

 

[moonslav59]

He had his good points and bad ones, much like any GM. I didn't like that he never traded any prospects, but then I also don't like Dombrowski's approach of trading them all

 

There is no way of knowing, but I am as close to certain as can be that if Ben has stayed on, he would have made at least one blockbuster top prospect trade and would have signed a big named SP'er.

[Jack Flap]

Would that involve someone whose name starts with Q and rhymes with 'Iguana'?