2017 Rotation Discussion

[Spudboy]

and what bothers some posters ( i might be the only one ) is that this whole idea of a "3 year window" has been even a created concept. I do not believe that there is nor will there be any such thing. Before you force feed ( don't take that personally) me your stats that you and some think might prove your point, let it suffice to say that I am not buying it. I do not see DD's moves as going for broke. i do not see them as panic or desperation moves and I do not think that he left our system bankrupt. It is all in what you believe and quite possibly what you want to see. I might be the only one here who thinks this way and that is ok too. I see his moves as being calculated and rational with a healthy dose of common sense added in to the mix.

 

Yup.

[moonslav59]

I didn't specifically mention Devers, but he's a long term asset, is he not?

 

The fact is that a lot of people were howling for a trade for a bat and none happened.

 

Yes, Devers is a long term asset, but he was also counted on to be our 3B for at least 2 of the 3 year window and to fill a void this team has had since Beltre left.

 

That's the reason DD kept him and not Moncada, Kopech or others he traded away. I'm happy he made that choice, and not just because Devers has looked great for a week.

 

I'm glad we didn't trade for a bat, if it would have meant dealing away someone like Devers.

[moonslav59]

The playoffs may be a crapshoot , but you can't win the World Series without going through the playoffs. Being in the playoffs should always be the goal. It means you had an interesting and exciting season with a chance to win it all. Who wants to sit through dismal, non-competitive seasons , hoping that the prospects we are holding onto may someday get us to the playoffs ?

 

You mean like former prospects Betts, Bogey, JBJ, Beni, and others?

 

I guess we should have traded them all away for a better chance at winning in 2014 and 2015.

[moonslav59]

and what bothers some posters ( i might be the only one ) is that this whole idea of a "3 year window" has been even a created concept. I do not believe that there is nor will there be any such thing. Before you force feed ( don't take that personally) me your stats that you and some think might prove your point, let it suffice to say that I am not buying it. I do not see DD's moves as going for broke. i do not see them as panic or desperation moves and I do not think that he left our system bankrupt. It is all in what you believe and quite possibly what you want to see. I might be the only one here who thinks this way and that is ok too. I see his moves as being calculated and rational with a healthy dose of common sense added in to the mix.

 

I respect that opinion, and I've never said it was illogical.

 

I do think a big part of our extended future was sacrificed for a 3-4 year window. There's no stats or data to prove my position is right and yours is wrong. Heck,

even looking back on all DD's moves 7-10 years from now might be inconclusive.

 

I remember people thinking we should trade some of our currents young stars for Cole Hamels. Keeping them had value. Trading them would have had value too.

 

I happen to think we went a little too far with trading away so many good prospects. I'm not calling for DD's removal. I'm happy with many of his moves. A couple of moves I hated have worked out well, so far. I've never pretended to be smarter than DD or any of our past GMs. I have my opinions like you do too. I know I come across as someone who thinks he's right and many others are wrong, but I'm really not like that. We might not ever hit "a cliff". There might not really be a 3 year window. Myself and others might prove to be very wrong just as you and others might be, if we do have serious struggles in 4-6 years.

 

To me, it looks pretty clear we will have serious financial issues in 3-4 years. Nobody know how Henry will address this issue. Nobody knows if some of our lower first round draft picks will be surprisingly better than we ever hoped. Nobody knows if we will keep swinging and missing so badly on big FA signings or not. Hopefully, Price is not the next "miss". I actually thought he rated to be as good a gamble as ever on a big signing.

 

We're both die-hard Sox fans who want us to win now, next year and for decades to come. We both have different opinions on what is the best way to do it. I'm giving DD a long look... just like I gave Ben (a longer one than many did).

 

[a700hitter]

and what bothers some posters ( i might be the only one ) is that this whole idea of a "3 year window" has been even a created concept. I do not believe that there is nor will there be any such thing. Before you force feed ( don't take that personally) me your stats that you and some think might prove your point, let it suffice to say that I am not buying it. I do not see DD's moves as going for broke. i do not see them as panic or desperation moves and I do not think that he left our system bankrupt. It is all in what you believe and quite possibly what you want to see. I might be the only one here who thinks this way and that is ok too. I see his moves as being calculated and rational with a healthy dose of common sense added in to the mix.

If DD was going for broke, he would have signed Encarnacion and traded for Quintana.

[moonslav59]

If DD was going for broke, he would have signed Encarnacion and traded for Quintana.

 

So, should we fire his ass for playing it halfway and burning up the extended future without even getting good enough to win now (in the 3 year window)?

[cp176]

I respect that opinion, and I've never said it was illogical.

 

I do think a big part of our extended future was sacrificed for a 3-4 year window. There's no stats or data to prove my position is right and yours is wrong. Heck,

even looking back on all DD's moves 7-10 years from now might be inconclusive.

 

I remember people thinking we should trade some of our currents young stars for Cole Hamels. Keeping them had value. Trading them would have had value too.

 

I happen to think we went a little too far with trading away so many good prospects. I'm not calling for DD's removal. I'm happy with many of his moves. A couple of moves I hated have worked out well, so far. I've never pretended to be smarter than DD or any of our past GMs. I have my opinions like you do too. I know I come across as someone who thinks he's right and many others are wrong, but I'm really not like that. We might not ever hit "a cliff". There might not really be a 3 year window. Myself and others might prove to be very wrong just as you and others might be, if we do have serious struggles in 4-6 years.

 

To me, it looks pretty clear we will have serious financial issues in 3-4 years. Nobody know how Henry will address this issue. Nobody knows if some of our lower first round draft picks will be surprisingly better than we ever hoped. Nobody knows if we will keep swinging and missing so badly on big FA signings or not. Hopefully, Price is not the next "miss". I actually thought he rated to be as good a gamble as ever on a big signing.

 

We're both die-hard Sox fans who want us to win now, next year and for decades to come. We both have different opinions on what is the best way to do it. I'm giving DD a long look... just like I gave Ben (a longer one than many did).

 

 

I do think that you are a die hard Sox fan and I respect what you say. Like reading what you post. I don't really know if I see things differently than anyone else but to me any debate over what any GM has or hasn't done is pointless. They are kind of like principals of a school - far to much credit when things go well - and probably much too much blame when things don't work out. I do honestly feel that if John henry continues to own this team, he will do what is necessary to put people in the seats. i really don't think he worries much about 3-4 year windows or cliffs or whatever. Obviously there will be some obstacles that will need to be dealt with as there have always been but I will be very surprised if monetary issues of any kind will present a stop sign to this franchise under his leadership. For what it is worth, if Pomeranz continues to do what he has done, I would be very surprised if they don't try to reup him. It is all good here though Moon - you have been good for this forum and give us plenty of material to comment on.

[moonslav59]

I do think that you are a die hard Sox fan and I respect what you say. Like reading what you post. I don't really know if I see things differently than anyone else but to me any debate over what any GM has or hasn't done is pointless. They are kind of like principals of a school - far to much credit when things go well - and probably much too much blame when things don't work out. I do honestly feel that if John henry continues to own this team, he will do what is necessary to put people in the seats. i really don't think he worries much about 3-4 year windows or cliffs or whatever. Obviously there will be some obstacles that will need to be dealt with as there have always been but I will be very surprised if monetary issues of any kind will present a stop sign to this franchise under his leadership. For what it is worth, if Pomeranz continues to do what he has done, I would be very surprised if they don't try to reup him. It is all good here though Moon - you have been good for this forum and give us plenty of material to comment on.

 

Thanks, cp. I enjoy your knowledgeable posts. Debating choices GM make is a big part of what these sites are all about. I'm not sure I'd call it pointless, but in the scheme of what's going on in the world right now, one could surely say it is.

 

I will, say, I've volunteered teaching ESL at 4 different middle schools in the last 9 years, and my wife has been a bilingual teacher for over 10 years, and the principal truly does make a huge difference.

[cp176]

If DD was going for broke, he would have signed Encarnacion and traded for Quintana.

 

There is no question about this. Trading away what amount to as surplus players who for the most part would never play in Boston, might be questionable I guess if they garnered 0 in return. For the most part, we did ok. We continue even today to have payers stockpiled in our system who could very likely play for some other teams.

[dgalehouse]

Ideally, you trade some prospects to fill immediate needs , and hold on to others to fill future needs. The trick is to know which ones to trade and which ones to keep. One thing to remember about prospects ; they are not the Last of the Mohicans. There are always more coming along.

[Larry Cook]

We added a reliever and an infielder and did not give up any of our top prospects.

 

We improved the team and did not overpay or cripple our future.

 

Maybe desperate dave is learning.

[moonslav59]

We added a reliever and an infielder and did not give up any of our top prospects.

 

We improved the team and did not overpay or cripple our future.

 

Maybe desperate dave is learning.

 

I liked both deals.

 

I'm glad he kept Devers, since 3B has been our cess pool ever since Beltre left.

 

I never thought DD was dumb. He knew he needed Devers to win during the 3 year window, and the extended future is helped as well.

 

He's made some shrewd moves. Had it not been for injuries to Thornburg and Smith, he might be batting close to a 1,000 on his trades.

 

[Larry Cook]

I liked both deals.

 

I'm glad he kept Devers, since 3B has been our cess pool ever since Beltre left.

 

I never thought DD was dumb. He knew he needed Devers to win during the 3 year window, and the extended future is helped as well.

 

He's made some shrewd moves. Had it not been for injuries to Thornburg and Smith, he might be batting close to a 1,000 on his trades.

 

 

And that is the rub. There was tons of pre-trade chatter about injuries or predicted injuries to both players.

 

Yet he chose to ignore it and overpay for both.

[moonslav59]

And that is the rub. There was tons of pre-trade chatter about injuries or predicted injuries to both players.

 

Yet he chose to ignore it and overpay for both.

 

I never heard of any injury talk at the times of those two trades.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong. I just never heard a peep.

 

[a700hitter]

So, should we fire his ass for playing it halfway and burning up the extended future without even getting good enough to win now (in the 3 year window)?

I disagree with your characterization of DD burning up the extended future. Are you so much more knowledgeable about the pipeline of prospects at the professional level than big league GM's that you can precisely predict a cliff in 5 years or so? Also, in the ensuing 5 years are you taking the position that there is no way of restocking the farm? That is no only fatalistic, but it is quite impossible to predict the actions of an organization over such an extended period. If you want to fret over this, that is your prerogative, but to push your concern as a certain impending doom is nonsensical. DD clearly is not in a win it now at all costs mode, because we still have a number of good prospects in our pipeline and some are major league ready now or very soon, and DD did not trade them for short term rentals or missing pieces. Also, he did not sign a big bat like Encarnacion which would have blown the Luxury cap. These are known facts. No one knows what the personnel of the organization will be in 5 years.

[moonslav59]

I disagree with your characterization of DD burning up the extended future. Are you so much more knowledgeable about the pipeline of prospects at the professional level than big league GM's that you can precisely predict a cliff in 5 years or so? Also, in the ensuing 5 years are you taking the position that there is no way of restocking the farm? That is no only fatalistic, but it is quite impossible to predict the actions of an organization over such an extended period. If you want to fret over this, that is your prerogative, but to push your concern as a certain impending doom is nonsensical. DD clearly is not in a win it now at all costs mode, because we still have a number of good prospects in our pipeline and some are major league ready now or very soon, and DD did not trade them for short term rentals or missing pieces. Also, he did not sign a big bat like Encarnacion which would have blown the Luxury cap. These are known facts. No one knows what the personnel of the organization will be in 5 years.

 

1) I was pulling your leg. I know you disagree with the "burning up the extended future" argument.

 

2) You are creating another straw man. I have never said I think it is impossible to rebuild the farm. I said that the new system of acquiring young talent and the fact that we rate to have lower draft picks than we had under Ben will make it much more difficult to build a farm as good as DD had when he took over the reigns.

 

3) Another straw man by saying I think DD is in "win at all costs mode". "All costs" is something I've never even hinted at. If he was in "all costs mode", we'd have traded Groome, Mata and maybe some of our recent draftees or other players not considered assets for the next 3 years for pieces that would improve our chances this year and/or the next 1-2 years.

 

My position is that DD has over-reached to make us better for the next 3-4 years by worsening our chances for years 4-7. I happen to think he greatly worsened our chances in years 4-7. You don't. I happen to also think the prospects we traded away were highly rated nationally and will not be easily replaced or replenished by drafting lower and having higher restrictions on international signings. It's not impossible. I've never come close to saying I know with any certainty that the farm will not be rebuilt sufficiently enough to keep us strong from years 4-7, so you can stop pretending that's been my position. I think the odds are strongly against us being able to build up the farm quick enough to allow us to stay strong after year 4. Maybe we can have better luck with our FA signings and rebuild that way. Maybe we can have some surprise draft picks make it big. Nothing is impossible, but excuse me, if I don't subscribe to the pink glasses club concerning our extended future. To me, we are clearly worse of after 2020 due to deals DD has made. How much is up for debate. Cliff, hill or plain, nobody really knows, but to me the odds aren't pretty.

[Spudboy]

I disagree with your characterization of DD burning up the extended future. Are you so much more knowledgeable about the pipeline of prospects at the professional level than big league GM's that you can precisely predict a cliff in 5 years or so? Also, in the ensuing 5 years are you taking the position that there is no way of restocking the farm? That is no only fatalistic, but it is quite impossible to predict the actions of an organization over such an extended period. If you want to fret over this, that is your prerogative, but to push your concern as a certain impending doom is nonsensical. DD clearly is not in a win it now at all costs mode, because we still have a number of good prospects in our pipeline and some are major league ready now or very soon, and DD did not trade them for short term rentals or missing pieces. Also, he did not sign a big bat like Encarnacion which would have blown the Luxury cap. These are known facts. No one knows what the personnel of the organization will be in 5 years.

 

You don't know s*** old man.

 

Shut the f*** up!!!!

 

I had to.

 

Great post.

[Spudboy]

It worked.

 

I started to read the walls of text in defense of the "three year window - impending cliff" idea.

 

Now I need to be excused as I need to evacuate my bowels.

[moonslav59]

it worked.

 

I started to read the walls of text in defense of the "three year window - impending cliff" idea.

 

Now i need to be excused as i need to evacuate my bowels.

 

lol

[a700hitter]

you don't know s*** old man.

 

Shut the f*** up!!!!

 

I had to.

 

Great post.

lol!!!

[cp176]

You don't know s*** old man.

 

Shut the f*** up!!!!

 

I had to.

 

Great post.

 

Like I said - you really do come alive after midnight.

[cp176]

You don't know s*** old man.

 

Shut the f*** up!!!!

 

I had to.

 

Great post.

 

 

i sometimes (not really sometimes) think that this cliff or window myth that has been created really is all about someone still trying to defend Ben Cherington's ill fated reign as the club's GM. To some eyes, it would have made no difference who came after. They were still going to be criticized because Cherington just wasn't given a fair shot. Now i get the fact that DD is a little older than Ben but really he does at least try to look young.

[Kimmi]

Yup, this is the biggest indicator to me that they didn't go all out for this year.

 

It's not a one year window. It's a 3 year window. Resetting the tax this year will allow them greater financial flexibility in the next 2 years.

 

My statement of 'winning now at any cost' is hyperbole, but the point stands. The FO has been building a very strong short term team at the expense of the long term.

[Kimmi]

This team has had a putrid offense this year. They've needed bats more this year than any other.

 

Going into the season, there was not a need for offense.

[Kimmi]

The playoffs may be a crapshoot , but you can't win the World Series without going through the playoffs. Being in the playoffs should always be the goal. It means you had an interesting and exciting season with a chance to win it all. Who wants to sit through dismal, non-competitive seasons , hoping that the prospects we are holding onto may someday get us to the playoffs ?

 

I agree that building a team to get to the playoffs is the goal. I don't think the long term outlook of the team has to be compromised to do that.

[Kimmi]

Ideally, you trade some prospects to fill immediate needs , and hold on to others to fill future needs. The trick is to know which ones to trade and which ones to keep. One thing to remember about prospects ; they are not the Last of the Mohicans. There are always more coming along.

 

Your first sentence is spot on. Yes, there are always more prospects coming along, but that takes time. The farm should not be depleted at a rate faster than it can reasonably be restocked. The new CBA laws will make it more difficult to do so.

[Kimmi]

We added a reliever and an infielder and did not give up any of our top prospects.

 

We improved the team and did not overpay or cripple our future.

 

Maybe desperate dave is learning.

 

I think the FO is now going to put more focus on the long term.

 

I like what they did at the deadline.

[Kimmi]

If I read correctly this morning, our pitchers are all being pushed back a day in their starts. Subsequently, if the rotation then stays on turn, Sale will not pitch against the Yankees in our next series with them.

 

Memo to Farrell: Fix this!

 

Farrell got my memo.

 

Sale is slated to pitch in all 3 remaining series against the Yankees.

[a700hitter]

 

3) Another straw man by saying I think DD is in "win at all costs mode". "All costs" is something I've never even hinted at. If he was in "all costs mode", we'd have traded Groome, Mata and maybe some of our recent draftees or other players not considered assets for the next 3 years for pieces that would improve our chances this year and/or the next 1-2 years.

I guess I had you confused with another "glass is half empty" "future is doomed" poster. But let's be honest and stop trying to tiptoe around the crux of the issue which is not that you think DD "has pushed it too far", but rather that you think he has sacrificed the future for the present. That is not a strawman, and I think your concern in this regard is at best based on a worst case hypothetical scenario.

[a700hitter]

Going into the season, there was not a need for offense.

I disagree with you in this . I was vocal about it during the off season, and one of us has been proved right.