Debunking the 3 year window myth -- the Red Sox in 2020

[Fan_since_Boggs]

There is a common belief among many fans that the Red Sox have a 3 year window (beginning in 2017) to win a championship. After the three year window is up (in 2020), the Red Sox will need to rebuild. However, I don’t agree with this assessment.

 

Let’s take a look at the Red Sox in 2020. One important piece of info: I believe the Red Sox are going to sign Hosmer for 1b after the 2017 season. I will operate on that assumption (I have taken a conservative approach in saying that Hosmer will be the only major free agent acquisition for the Red Sox over the next three years). Also, I’m not going to address the bullpen due to the extreme amount of volatility among relievers. It is virtually impossible to predict the Red Sox bullpen in 2020.

 

2020 Red Sox – position players:

1b: Hosmer (30 years old)

2b: Pedroia (36 years old)

SS: ???

3b: Devers (3 years from now he will still be a young guy!)

C: Vazquez (still under 30)

LF: Benintendi (26 years old)

CF: Bradley (final year of arbitration)

RF: Betts (final year of arbitration – will still be under 30 years old)

DH: Chavis (he will be around 25 years old)

 

NOTES: Bogaerts is a free agent after the 2019 season. I wouldn’t resign him--his defense at SS isn't good enough. Top international prospect Daniel Flores © will turn 20 in 2020 and will likely be a year or two away from replacing Vazquez.

 

This doesn’t seem like a rebuilding team to me. At this point, Hosmer and Betts should still be really good. Benintendi, Chavis, and Devers will hopefully be stars. The Red Sox will need solid depth behind the 36 year old Pedroia, but maybe he can age gracefully, kind of like Ben Zobrist.

 

2020 Red Sox Starting Staff:

David Price (34 years old, I doubt he opts out)

E.Rodriguez (27 years old—arbitration year)

???

???

???

 

NOTES: C.Sale is a free agent after 2019. R.Porcello is a free agent after 2019.

 

While the Red Sox have stability with their position players for many years to come, their 2020 rotation is very much an unknown. But guess what? Dombrowski knows this too and that is why the Red Sox have been so aggressive in drafting starting pitching: Jay Groome, Tanner Houck, Alex Scherff. B.Mata could be another piece to the puzzle. These guys will be ready around 2020, just when the Red Sox need them. I would expect Dombrowski to aggressively pursue starting pitching in the 2018 draft as well.

 

If the Red Sox organization can produce starting pitching, something they have struggled to do in recent years, there is no reason to rebuild in 2020. Instead, the Red Sox will go full speed ahead after another championship. The drafting and developing of starting pitching will be crucial to the process of sustaining success when the three year window is up.

Edited August 4, 2017 by Fan_since_Boggs

[moonslav59]

I have actually said the window might be 4 years, since I think re-setting the luxury tax will allow Henry to open the purse string for a few years.

 

It will be hard to fill the voids you showed here for 2020. I doubt we finish in last place,even if we can't fill any of the voids with average to plus players, but certainly you have showed clear reason to be more concerned about 2020 and beyond than 2017 to 2019.

 

I'm not sure you made a strong case for debunking the "myth".

 

[OH FOY]

Hosmer would be an excellent pick-up, always liked his game.

[Spudboy]

I have actually said the window might be 4 years, since I think re-setting the luxury tax will allow Henry to open the purse string for a few years.

 

It will be hard to fill the voids you showed here for 2020. I doubt we finish in last place,even if we can't fill any of the voids with average to plus players, but certainly you have showed clear reason to be more concerned about 2020 and beyond than 2017 to 2019.

 

I'm not sure you made a strong case for debunking the "myth".

 

 

Neither has anyone made a "strong" case for the impending cliff.

 

But feel free to post a few chapters for the umpteenth time to explain further.

[moonslav59]

Neither has anyone made a "strong" case for the impending cliff.

 

But feel free to post a few chapters for the umpteenth time to explain further.

 

I've already explained why I think it will be very difficult to stay highly competitive after 2020 or 2021.

 

Almost certainly all the prospects traded away recently will adversely affect 2020 and beyond to some extent. It would be very unlikely that all those prospects fail. The rules have changed- making it much more difficult for high spending teams to sign international FAs and draftees that fall down the draft order into their laps due to signing issues.

 

It's not impossible. I'm encouraged by some growth shown by our remaining prospects, and I liked our new draftees, but it looks to me like we will suffer to some large extent for the deals made for the "3-4 year window". I might be wrong. You guys might be right. I hope you are.

 

[a700hitter]

Neither has anyone made a "strong" case for the impending cliff.

 

But feel free to post a few chapters for the umpteenth time to explain further.

He must type very fast.

[cp176]

I don't care how well he hits, if numbnutts McGee continues to run into outs and throw the ball into Nevernever Land from left field, I might jump off that cliff long before the window of expiration. Can't we just use a pinch runner for this kid? Wish I could have been in the dugout lat night when he came in after the latest. I wonder if he was told it was ok to run in to an obvious out because the world has changed. Out with the old and in with the new.

[Nick]

With the current salary cap structure, Sox will need to plug in a rookie every year. We can 'overpay' only to limited number of contracts. Price obviously was costly in terms of eating up much of luxury tax threashhold. We'll eat $19M next two years for Pablo. Just think what we could have done with that money. For one, we could have extended Pomeranz.

 

Devers will give us cliff years 2020-2023.

This is Beni's rookie year. He can give us cliff years 2020, 2021, 2022. Include Price in this group along with Barnes and Hembree.

E Rod will give us cliff years 2020 and 2021 as well Dustin Pedroia.

Betts, JBJ, Leon, C Smith and Vazquez will hang with us in cliff year 2020.

[jad]

"Rebuild" is a common term promoted by front offices to disguise failure. Nor does 'not rebuilding' or its variant "not rebuilding jes' reloading" guarantee any short term success (e.g., RS last place finishes 3 of 4 years). I imagine it's also helped by fans who believe that their silly notion "anything less than a championship is a failure ..." somehow proves that they have more lofty standards than the rest of us.

[Bellhorn04]

"Rebuild" is a common term promoted by front offices to disguise failure. Nor does 'not rebuilding' or its variant "not rebuilding jes' reloading" guarantee any short term success (e.g., RS last place finishes 3 of 4 years). I imagine it's also helped by fans who believe that their silly notion "anything less than a championship is a failure ..." somehow proves that they have more lofty standards than the rest of us.

 

Well, you have to admit that Theo Epstein with the Cubs pretty much nailed the 'rebuild from nothing and then kick ass' scenario.

[Jack Flap]

I think there is definitely a "window" (in that our roster for the next 2+ years is pretty much set, after which there will start to be a lot of turnover one way or another), but not necessarily a "cliff"; as I've written before, I fully expect we'll find ways to stay competitive into the 2020's, and if we don't, it will be because we didn't play our cards right between now and then, not because it was predetermined by moves we've already made.

[Kimmi]

Dombrowski was given the directive to 'reel it in' this trade deadline in hopes of beginning to repair some of the damage done to the farm. Henry feels the 3 year window. Are the 3 year window and subsequent cliff a foregone conclusion? Of course not, but there is definitely a lot of validity to the 3 year window.

[sk7326]

The word "rebuilding" is about setting customer expectations. If a team is going to go young - they are going to lose - a lot. But there is purpose there - especially if the kids have some talent. I don't think the Sox get to that point - at all.

 

1. Betts, Bogaerts, Benintendi, Devers will all be 28 or younger. Yes, extensions for Betts and Bogaerts will be expensive (and yes that decision is fair game). But really it is a matter of the payroll and tax Henry wants to carry. This team can probably work with 2 years - reset as a pattern. They might not want to do that - but that is because of ownership's priorities.

 

2. While the Red Sox could slip in 2020 for some of the reasons cited above - there is almost no chance that Betts or Bogaerts, under contract for 4-5 years would not be a pretty darn tradeable contract (Betts in particular).

 

3. The prospect inventory is not great right now - that is a challenge for the development guys. Teams cannot push chips around in the amateur market like they used to (ironically this hurts Tampa much more than Boston) ... but do the Red Sox have the scouts and development guys to find those sorts of 2-sport kids and whatnot who blossom and such. This part worries me also.

 

4. The window of opportunity for this team is 3 years for sure - but it could be longer. It depends on whether ownership wants to choose to do it - and pay the freight. The team is chock full of young, good players - with more than enough financial wherewithall to keep. It is always tempting to treat the tax as a hard cap - because ownership might ... instead of questioning that premise.

[Kimmi]

Here is an excellent article written by Matthew Kory back in January regarding the 3 year window. He explains it much better than I ever could.

 

http://boston.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2017/01/20/dave-dombrowski-and-the-three-year-window/

 

In particular, the following paragraph rings so true with me:

 

"Ideally a baseball organization rolls along like a bus. It stops every now and again for some people to get off, but usually others get on as well. The job of the GM is to keep all the seats filled with quality players. The perfect case scenario would see an almost seamless addition of players from the minor league system to the major league roster, with the occasional free agent signing as needed. The Red Sox were pretty close to that ideal, about as close as could reasonably be asked, when Dombrowski took over."

[Nick]

Here is an excellent article written by Matthew Kory back in January regarding the 3 year window. He explains it much better than I ever could.

 

http://boston.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2017/01/20/dave-dombrowski-and-the-three-year-window/

 

In particular, the following paragraph rings so true with me:

 

"Ideally a baseball organization rolls along like a bus. It stops every now and again for some people to get off, but usually others get on as well. The job of the GM is to keep all the seats filled with quality players. The perfect case scenario would see an almost seamless addition of players from the minor league system to the major league roster, with the occasional free agent signing as needed. The Red Sox were pretty close to that ideal, about as close as could reasonably be asked, when Dombrowski took over."

 

If all the seats were filled with quality players, we would not have finished DEAD FREAKIN' LAST three out of four years. All of you doomsdayers conveniently IGNORE that fact.

 

DD is one for one and has chance to go two for two. He's made bold moves.

 

DD has filled the bus with true ace in Sale. DD was smart enough to keep Devers and trade away Moncada. Not both as requested by the White Sox.

 

Kimbrel will have good three years on the bus as it cruises. The one that got off the bus is in the body shop.

 

I'm good with DD driving the bus.

Edited August 4, 2017 by Nick

[Bellhorn04]

I think Dombrowski walked into a franchise that was very well-stacked with position players at the major league and farm level, but at the same time in terrible shape with its pitching at the major league level and at the farm level (aside from prospects who were several years away). Every single one of his major moves has been aimed at addressing the pitching paucity.

[Kimmi]

If all the seats were filled with quality players, we would not have finished DEAD FREAKIN' LAST three out of four years. All of you doomsdayers conveniently IGNORE that fact.

 

DD is one for one and has chance to go two for two. He's made bold moves.

 

DD has filled the bus with true ace in Sale. DD was smart enough to keep Devers and trade away Moncada. Not both as requested by the White Sox.

 

Kimbrel will have good three years on the bus as it cruises. The one that got off the bus is in the body shop.

 

I'm good with DD driving the bus.

 

You are missing the point about the long term plan, both with Ben and Dombrowski.

 

Dombrowski has us set up very well for the near future. I am not denying that. It's what happens after the 3 year window that concerns me.

 

After seeing that Henry seems serious about staying under the luxury tax this year and reading that Henry has told Dombrowski to 'reel it in', I am more hopeful about our long term. But it remains to be seen what can be done between now and then.

[sk7326]

You are missing the point about the long term plan, both with Ben and Dombrowski.

 

Dombrowski has us set up very well for the near future. I am not denying that. It's what happens after the 3 year window that concerns me.

 

After seeing that Henry seems serious about staying under the luxury tax this year and reading that Henry has told Dombrowski to 'reel it in', I am more hopeful about our long term. But it remains to be seen what can be done between now and then.

 

if we cannot survive past a window where our best players are 25-28 years old - that is a deep indictment of ownership

[Kimmi]

I think Dombrowski walked into a franchise that was very well-stacked with position players at the major league and farm level, but at the same time in terrible shape with its pitching at the major league level and at the farm level (aside from prospects who were several years away). Every single one of his major moves has been aimed at addressing the pitching paucity.

 

This is true. It's always been my understanding that the Sox (and other franchises) don't draft pitching just for the sake of drafting pitching, but they draft the best available player, regardless of need. As we all know, part of building a farm is to use some of the pieces in trade to fill the needs.

 

My problem is not that Dombrowski made trades. It's the extent to which he traded away the farm, and my belief that he did not get sufficient value for some of the prospects traded.

[Kimmi]

if we cannot survive past a window where our best players are 25-28 years old - that is a deep indictment of ownership

 

I think that our best players being 25-28 and hitting FA at the same time is wherein much of the problem lies. There could be a lot of needs to fill in 3 years, without sufficient finances or farm players to fill them.

 

That being said, I do get the sense that the FO is now going to put more focus on the long term.

[sk7326]

This is true. It's always been my understanding that the Sox (and other franchises) don't draft pitching just for the sake of drafting pitching, but they draft the best available player, regardless of need. As we all know, part of building a farm is to use some of the pieces in trade to fill the needs.

 

My problem is not that Dombrowski made trades. It's the extent to which he traded away the farm, and my belief that he did not get sufficient value for some of the prospects traded.

 

I think that is largely true - although I am also sure he was doing what his owner told him. "I can get Kimbrel for a couple of blocked prospects" "I can get the top starter on the trade market for an 18 year old" ... "I can land a Top 5 pitcher with another year of control" ...

 

It is a bit why the story of Henry telling Dombrowski "Don't do that!" seems far fetched to me ... first, that Henry is that actively plugged in on Sam Travis, second that he has not empowered Dombrowski more or less completely. Dombrowski did not trade those guys because there was no trade to be had.

 

The Sox have traded and graduated a lot of their inventory - how they fill the gaps in is on them. We know Dombrowski can do that too - but it's really on ownership to make that a priority.

[sk7326]

I think that our best players being 25-28 and hitting FA at the same time is wherein much of the problem lies. There could be a lot of needs to fill in 3 years, without sufficient finances or farm players to fill them.

 

That being said, I do get the sense that the FO is now going to put more focus on the long term.

 

There are sufficient finances - if there are not, it is by choice ... those guys under contract for their peak years also become potentially useful trade chips - and probably the actual best way to re-stock the farm if that becomes a real issue

[Kimmi]

I think that is largely true - although I am also sure he was doing what his owner told him. "I can get Kimbrel for a couple of blocked prospects" "I can get the top starter on the trade market for an 18 year old" ... "I can land a Top 5 pitcher with another year of control" ...

 

It is a bit why the story of Henry telling Dombrowski "Don't do that!" seems far fetched to me ... first, that Henry is that actively plugged in on Sam Travis, second that he has not empowered Dombrowski more or less completely. Dombrowski did not trade those guys because there was no trade to be had.

 

The Sox have traded and graduated a lot of their inventory - how they fill the gaps in is on them. We know Dombrowski can do that too - but it's really on ownership to make that a priority.

 

I agree that a large part of the reason that Dombrowski did not make a trade was because there wasn't a trade to be made.

 

However, I do think that Henry is also pulling the reigns on Dombrowski's aggressiveness.

[BstHcpr]

Neither has anyone made a "strong" case for the impending cliff.

 

But feel free to post a few chapters for the umpteenth time to explain further.

 

He must type very fast.

 

Lol

[Jack Flap]

I also don't buy the idea of ownership giving Dombrowski some sort of blanket prohibition against trading prospects...after all of the talent we've dealt recently, I find it hard to believe that John Henry or anyone in the front office would draw the line at trading a Chavis or Mata if the right deal was there and it would maximize our chances of winning in the next 2-3 years. Looking around at the market, it seems far more likely that the "right deal" involving any of our top guys just wasn't there.

[Kimmi]

There are sufficient finances - if there are not, it is by choice ... those guys under contract for their peak years also become potentially useful trade chips - and probably the actual best way to re-stock the farm if that becomes a real issue

 

There are sufficient finances, within certain luxury tax limits. The Red Sox will spend within those limits, but they won't without limit. Not having the cost controlled players on the team in 3 years that we have now will provide less financial flexibility.

 

Valid point about trading some to re-stock the farm, but when will the trades be made? Likely after the 3 year window, I'm guessing. Will the return prospects be major league ready at that time?

[OH FOY]

The Shaw Trade would have me skeptical of any moves DD makes if I was a Owner. Not because Reliever got hurt, but we kept Sandoval and moved Shaw and Prospects. Not too good at evaluating with what we had that were home grown.

This team should win with what we have. If not, its on the Players.

[Nick]

The Shaw Trade would have me skeptical of any moves DD makes if I was a Owner. Not because Reliever got hurt, but we kept Sandoval and moved Shaw and Prospects. Not too good at evaluating with what we had that were home grown.

This team should win with what we have. If not, its on the Players.

 

Everyone here thought we needed upgrade from Shaw last year. Look at his splits. It's always easy to look back after the fact.

 

WHO THE FREAK WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE? DEVERS OR SHAW? SHAW ARRIVED 4 MONTHS LATE, THAT'S ALL. Mistake was giving Pablass $95M contract. That certainly wasn't DD's fault.

[moonslav59]

Well, you have to admit that Theo Epstein with the Cubs pretty much nailed the 'rebuild from nothing and then kick ass' scenario.

 

It helped having the 2nd overall pick in 2013 (Kris Bryant).

 

Maybe we can find the next Bryant with a 25th pick. Maybe not.

[sk7326]

There are sufficient finances, within certain luxury tax limits. The Red Sox will spend within those limits, but they won't without limit. Not having the cost controlled players on the team in 3 years that we have now will provide less financial flexibility.

 

Valid point about trading some to re-stock the farm, but when will the trades be made? Likely after the 3 year window, I'm guessing. Will the return prospects be major league ready at that time?

 

IF you are committed to not paying Betts - for instance - the time to trade him is with 1 or 2 full years of control left ... (like how the Orioles really should have dealt Machado before the deadline). Then you can get a legitimate haul - with some near big league ready stuff. But yeah it would be a step back.

 

There are luxury tax limits - but they are largely self-enforcing. Maybe 15% tax is tractable (and this is marginal tax of course) - and 30% is not. But that is ownership's call - too often this is discussed like this is an NFL cap - even if it is more punitive now than it was in the last CBA.

 

I do not blame ownership for wanting to pay less tax. But I also do not blame me for expecting a large revenue franchise to throw its weight around.