2017/18 Hot Stove Thread

[cp176]

I don't mean to sound condescending. I do find it hard to believe some feel our future will not be affected by trading away so many of our top prospects in such a short period of time, especially from a farm that was ranked so highly- not by just me but by many national services.

 

I'm fine with those who believe we can and will find other ways to stay competitive or those who feel it isn't worth thinking so far ahead when it's so hard to project anything in baseball.

 

I will sat sometimes I feel some who disagree with those who believe in some sort of cliff can come off as condescending as well.

 

I for one, am happy we have different viewpoints, and I respect just about everyone's opinions on this site- even ones I often disgaree with.

 

 

I'm really not one of those last word kind of guys but oh well:

 

P-1 - I think that most of us think about but don't necessarily worry about what the future might hold for the team we cheer for. Suggesting that we don't or that we don't understand how trading anyone might affect a team negatively is condescending.

 

P-2 - Most of us probably realize the value in having a plan it just isn't something that some of us see as worthy to obsess over.

 

P-3 - I realize that I can be condescending ordinarily though it is about one of the few the things that I consider myself to be an expert in. One of which is not how to run a ml baseball franchise. Just a fan here.

 

P-4 - I truly respect the opinion of every poster here even the ones who never agree with me. But what the hell I am a believer that when it comes to this stuff and most other things as well, there is never one right or wrong answer.

[moonslav59]

 

I truly respect the opinion of every poster here even the ones who never agree with me. But what the hell I am a believer that when it comes to this stuff and most other things as well, there is never one right or wrong answer.

 

I totally agree. There's a lot of gray area between every differing opinion.

 

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure at least one poster has said the trades of all those prospects will not affect our longterm future.

 

If I'm wrong, I'm sorry for bringing that point up.

 

I never meant to imply many posters here (or you) are blind to possible negative affects to trading prospects or vets.

[a700hitter]

I totally agree. There's a lot of gray area between every differing opinion.

 

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure at least one poster has said the trades of all those prospects will not affect our longterm future.

 

If I'm wrong, I'm sorry for bringing that point up.

 

I never meant to imply many posters here (or you) are blind to possible negative affects to trading prospects or vets.

I am pretty sure that you are wrong that any poster has said "the trades of all those prospects will not affect our future." Every deal whether good or bad affects the future. Predicting a cliff as a certain result is completely unsupportable as there will be many more moves in the ensuing years and some will be aimed at restocking prospects and there will be a new draft class each year. You can worry about a cliff, but it is not a certainty. Edited November 30, 2017 by a700hitter

[moonslav59]

I am pretty sure that you are wrong. Every deal whether good or bad affects the future. Predicting a cliff as a certain result is completely unsupportable as there will be many more moves in the ensuing years and some will be aimed at restocking prospects and there will be a new draft class each year.

 

1) Nobody has said it is a "certain result", so this is "strawman".

2) Saying our position is "completely unsupportable" sounds as condescending as anything Kimmi and I have said about non believers positions.

 

Of course the cliff might not occur. We could restock the farm with lower than before draft picks and more difficult international signing rules. We could trade vets for prospects, but that almost presupposes we have a sucky year or do something we've never done before: trade key vets during a winning season.

 

I have said numerous times, I'm happy with DD's draft picks and internation signings. It's unfortunate Flores died, but I still think we've done better than I expected under the new rules and with the lower picks that came with winning.

 

We also will not have to re-sign everyone coming off the books, especially HRam, Porcello and Pablo, but others will be very difficult to replace in kind without spending large or expecting a prospect to rise quickly to great hieghts. Notjing is impossible. Betts and others were drafted in lower rounds. I guess if DD had a track record of building strong farms with low picks, I'd feel a little better, but it's hard for me to believe that trading away so many highly, nationally ranked national is not going to bite us in the ass years from now. Of course speculative topics like this can never be locked down supported with evidence, but we can speak to the chances or odds of something happening or not happening.

 

I'm fine with those who shun that sort of speculation, and I really do not mean to sound condescending to those who do not agree with me. I know neither side can prove anything when we talk about the extended future. Heck, we can barely know what will likely happen next year. I get that.

 

Of course, every single prospect we traded could bomb out, and DD would look like a genius, even if we win no rings.

 

Nobody seemed to care what HRam and Anibal Sanchez did with the Marlins once we won that ring in 2007. I suspect the same would be true if we win in the next year or two. if we don't and those prospects go on to great things, Dd will be judged harshly wether we hit a cliff or not.

[a700hitter]

1) Nobody has said it is a "certain result", so this is "strawman".

2) Saying our position is "completely unsupportable" sounds as condescending as anything Kimmi and I have said about non believers positions.

 

Of course the cliff might not occur. We could restock the farm with lower than before draft picks and more difficult international signing rules. We could trade vets for prospects, but that almost presupposes we have a sucky year or do something we've never done before: trade key vets during a winning season.

 

I have said numerous times, I'm happy with DD's draft picks and internation signings. It's unfortunate Flores died, but I still think we've done better than I expected under the new rules and with the lower picks that came with winning.

 

We also will not have to re-sign everyone coming off the books, especially HRam, Porcello and Pablo, but others will be very difficult to replace in kind without spending large or expecting a prospect to rise quickly to great hieghts. Notjing is impossible. Betts and others were drafted in lower rounds. I guess if DD had a track record of building strong farms with low picks, I'd feel a little better, but it's hard for me to believe that trading away so many highly, nationally ranked national is not going to bite us in the ass years from now. Of course speculative topics like this can never be locked down supported with evidence, but we can speak to the chances or odds of something happening or not happening.

 

I'm fine with those who shun that sort of speculation, and I really do not mean to sound condescending to those who do not agree with me. I know neither side can prove anything when we talk about the extended future. Heck, we can barely know what will likely happen next year. I get that.

 

Of course, every single prospect we traded could bomb out, and DD would look like a genius, even if we win no rings.

 

Nobody seemed to care what HRam and Anibal Sanchez did with the Marlins once we won that ring in 2007. I suspect the same would be true if we win in the next year or two. if we don't and those prospects go on to great things, Dd will be judged harshly wether we hit a cliff or not.

Are you getting your anger up again?

 

Saying that there will be a cliff in 2020-22 is completely unsupportable, and that is not condescending, nor was it meant to be. Right after you said it was condescending you went on at length about the number of ways that it might be avoided. No one here has a crystal ball about the dozens if not hundreds of personnel moves that will occur in the interim period. Each of those moves will impact the future to some degree. If I misinterpreted your certainty about the cliff, I stand corrected, but when you post about it you seem so alarmed that I get the impression that you are staring directly into abyss. I don't think that I am the only one reading you that way.

[moonslav59]

Nobody ever said the cliff was certain. Your half-ass apology is hard to accept, since your reading comprehension skills are unrivaled among posters on this site.

 

Yes, I went into details on how the cliff might be avoided. It's not the first time I've brought up those possibilities.

 

I've gone out of my way to avoid talking like the cliff will be some sort of long standing abyss. I've said we will most likely not be highly competitive for a couple of years or so starting in 2020 or 2021. it could last longer depending on DD's draft picks and international signings. I seriously doubt we trade any established and valuable vets for prospects unless we are in the middle of a lost season and look to deal away rentals. I think we will be too good for that to happen before 2020.

 

Anyone who speaks of the extended future is speculating, and my position is that due to the trading away of so many highly rated prospect in such a short period of time coupled with the tightening up of the rules on drafting, international signings and increased penalties for going over the luxury limit, it willbe very difficult to keep a highly competitive team from about 2020 or 2021 to 2023 or so. It just my opinion. I'm not calling anyone dumb for disgreeing.

 

Yes, there will be dozens and dozens of moves made by 2021, but we can all see how difficult it is to improve the team to near top contender status, even with a possible $40M or so to spend this year. It seems it will only get more difficult as we look to replace lower paid hugh producers in kind from the FA market and a depleted farm. One good thing about our current farm is that most of the best prospects look to be 2-3 years away, although those who cheered the trading away of lower level prospects as long shots seem to be putting faith in them for 2021 now, even though the ones we have now are lower ranked than what Ben left DD.

 

I guess that's what puzzles me. I've yet to get a satisfying answer to that point.

 

Anyways, I'm glad we are where we are. I like what DD has done, even though I've disgareed with some moves here and there. I see us as being highly competitive for 2 maybe 3 more years and we were pretty competitive for the last 2 years. That's a nice 4-5 year stretch. I happen to think Ben was building towards a longer stretch, but without maybe as high a degree of chances at winning it all as DD has provided us.

 

I'm more about rings than seats at the crap table, but it seems I'm a minority on that one. (I'm not claiming my way is the right way here either.)

 

And, no I am no getting angry. People around me know me to be one of the calmest people they know. It takes a lot to get me angry.

[a700hitter]

Nobody ever said the cliff was certain. Your half-ass apology is hard to accept, since your reading comprehension skills are unrivaled among posters on this site.

 

Yes, I went into details on how the cliff might be avoided. It's not the first time I've brought up those possibilities.

 

I've gone out of my way to avoid talking like the cliff will be some sort of long standing abyss. I've said we will most likely not be highly competitive for a couple of years or so starting in 2020 or 2021. it could last longer depending on DD's draft picks and international signings. I seriously doubt we trade any established and valuable vets for prospects unless we are in the middle of a lost season and look to deal away rentals. I think we will be too good for that to happen before 2020.

 

Anyone who speaks of the extended future is speculating, and my position is that due to the trading away of so many highly rated prospect in such a short period of time coupled with the tightening up of the rules on drafting, international signings and increased penalties for going over the luxury limit, it willbe very difficult to keep a highly competitive team from about 2020 or 2021 to 2023 or so. It just my opinion. I'm not calling anyone dumb for disgreeing.

 

Yes, there will be dozens and dozens of moves made by 2021, but we can all see how difficult it is to improve the team to near top contender status, even with a possible $40M or so to spend this year. It seems it will only get more difficult as we look to replace lower paid hugh producers in kind from the FA market and a depleted farm. One good thing about our current farm is that most of the best prospects look to be 2-3 years away, although those who cheered the trading away of lower level prospects as long shots seem to be putting faith in them for 2021 now, even though the ones we have now are lower ranked than what Ben left DD.

 

I guess that's what puzzles me. I've yet to get a satisfying answer to that point.

 

Anyways, I'm glad we are where we are. I like what DD has done, even though I've disgareed with some moves here and there. I see us as being highly competitive for 2 maybe 3 more years and we were pretty competitive for the last 2 years. That's a nice 4-5 year stretch. I happen to think Ben was building towards a longer stretch, but without maybe as high a degree of chances at winning it all as DD has provided us.

 

I'm more about rings than seats at the crap table, but it seems I'm a minority on that one. (I'm not claiming my way is the right way here either.)

 

And, no I am no getting angry. People around me know me to be one of the calmest people they know. It takes a lot to get me angry.

So now my apology is half-assed? LOL!! I said that i stand corrected if i misinterpreted you-- without qualification. I told you why I misinterpreted your intent but didn't question you correcting my misinterpretation.

 

You seem to be spoiling for another nasty argument.

[jacksonianmarch]

a700, how is it not supportable? Your core will be up for FA contracts by 2020. You’ll still have Price and Pedroia on the books. The lux tax limits will still be there. You’ve got one year of Kimbrel and Pom and two of Sale as well. Over the next three seasons, you’ll need to re-sign Kimbrel, Sale, Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Pomeranz. It help that Devers and Benintendi will be there, but there’s no “next wave” of prospects coming down the pipe. Your best prospects are years away and are lottery tickets due to their proximity. The deals from your upper levels will create a void of new talent at the same time that your core gets really expensive. Without insane spending (which the upper limits really curb spending) you can’t keep the band together and without the next wave or prospects, you won’t have viable replacements. Without getting lucky, the cliff is coming

[Bellhorn04]

a700, how is it not supportable? Your core will be up for FA contracts by 2020. You’ll still have Price and Pedroia on the books. The lux tax limits will still be there. You’ve got one year of Kimbrel and Pom and two of Sale as well. Over the next three seasons, you’ll need to re-sign Kimbrel, Sale, Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Pomeranz. It help that Devers and Benintendi will be there, but there’s no “next wave” of prospects coming down the pipe. Your best prospects are years away and are lottery tickets due to their proximity. The deals from your upper levels will create a void of new talent at the same time that your core gets really expensive. Without insane spending (which the upper limits really curb spending) you can’t keep the band together and without the next wave or prospects, you won’t have viable replacements. Without getting lucky, the cliff is coming

 

I think we're all capable of understanding the cliff without having it explained to us over and over. Are we supposed to be a bunch of f***ing half-wits or something?

[jacksonianmarch]

Read a700s posts above

[cp176]

I think we're all capable of understanding the cliff without having it explained to us over and over. Are we supposed to be a bunch of f***ing half-wits or something?

 

lol - meatballs my friend meatballs!

[Bellhorn04]

Read a700s posts above

 

Yes, he said the cliff is not a certainty.

[moonslav59]

So now my apology is half-assed? LOL!! I said that i stand corrected if i misinterpreted you-- without qualification. I told you why I misinterpreted your intent but didn't question you correcting my misinterpretation.

 

You seem to be spoiling for another nasty argument.

 

I never came close to saying the cliff was a certainty or that the cliff meant we'd finish in last place. I do think the odds strongly favor us having an extremely hard time staying HIGHLY COMPETITIVE starting around 2020 to 2021 and maybe lasting 2 years or so. This is based on an assumption that Henry is not going to spend $39M (or more) over the luxury limit almost every year going forward.

 

I hope DD drafts well and makes some shrewd international signings, and we stay pretty competitive through those years, but I wouldn't bet on it.

 

I'll leave it at that.

[S5Dewey]

Meh. Here's the way I see the "cliff" argument.

 

Before I agree there is a cliff I want it defined. Is the cliff going to be as some posters are implying, that the sky will be falling and we'll have several consecutive years of finishing last in the division? Or is it that we'll have a 2-3 consecutive years of being middle-of-the-pack?

 

It's always been my opinion that one reason for the 84 year drought was because the team ("team" can be defined as FO and/or fans) were complacent with being often the bridesmaid but never the bride. The call of "Wait until next year" came about because many times the Sox were almost - but not quite - good enough to win their division. There was always hope for "Next Year". Then MLB expanded the playoffs to include WC teams and the landscape changed. Suddenly Almost Good Enough became Good Enough. And the Sox capitalized on it.

 

Barring boneheaded moves like trading away the entire pitching staff I don't see the Sox ever finishing last for consecutive years again but I can see them "reloading" while missing the playoffs for a couple of years after being true contenders, and I'm good with that. Not crazy about it, but good with it.

 

But what do I know? I'm just one of those crazy imports from BDC whom some poster(s?) would prefer just fade off into the darkness anyway.

[Bellhorn04]

I never came close to saying the cliff was a certainty or that the cliff meant we'd finish in last place. I do think the odds strongly favor us having an extremely hard time staying HIGHLY COMPETITIVE starting around 2020 to 2021 and maybe lasting 2 years or so. This is based on an assumption that Henry is not going to spend $39M (or more) over the luxury limit almost every year going forward.

 

I hope DD drafts well and makes some shrewd international signings, and we stay pretty competitive through those years, but I wouldn't bet on it.

 

I'll leave it at that.

 

Good, you've said all you need to say about it, then.

[moonslav59]

a700, how is it not supportable? Your core will be up for FA contracts by 2020. You’ll still have Price and Pedroia on the books. The lux tax limits will still be there. You’ve got one year of Kimbrel and Pom and two of Sale as well. Over the next three seasons, you’ll need to re-sign Kimbrel, Sale, Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Pomeranz. It help that Devers and Benintendi will be there, but there’s no “next wave” of prospects coming down the pipe. Your best prospects are years away and are lottery tickets due to their proximity. The deals from your upper levels will create a void of new talent at the same time that your core gets really expensive. Without insane spending (which the upper limits really curb spending) you can’t keep the band together and without the next wave or prospects, you won’t have viable replacements. Without getting lucky, the cliff is coming

 

In a sense, we got "lucky" with Betts- drafting him with out 8th pick in the 2011 draft (round 5). That is not an easy thing to do, and our organization does not have a long history of these types of draftings, not does DDwith his previous teams.

 

We have a pretty awful record drafting 20th or below. It's also been a long time since we got any sandwich picks- an area we have obtained many good players from in the past. (We may get something if Pom & Kimbrel are offered QO's and decide to bolt.) A lot of Ben's farm building came via international signings, and now that is heavily restricted, and our farm is still suffering from the ban on signings we went through a while back.

 

It's not impossible, but it will be extremely difficult to draft or sign as international FAs as many good players as we did before.

 

2011 to 2014

Own Draft Picks

2011

2 (81) Williams Jerez

3 (111) Jordan Weems)

4 (143) N Ramirez

5 (172) M Betts

9 (292) T Shaw

2012

1 (24) Marrero

2 (87) Callahan

3 (118) Maddox

4 (151) Buttrey

2013

1 (7) T Ball (big swing and miss)

2 (45) Stankiewicz (not protected for rule 5)

3 (81) J Denny (out of baseball)

4 (113 Miles Smith

9 (263) Kyle Martin

11th round C Asuaje (traded for Kimbrel)

26th round M Dubon (big part of Thornburg trade)

2014

1 (26) Chavis (looking better)

2 (67) Travis (stock slipped last year)

3 (103) Jake Cosart

5 (164) Ockimey

13 (404) C Shepherd (protected from rule 5)

2015

1 (7) Beni (should not be getting #7 pick for a while, especially if we never hit "the cliff")

3 (81) A Rei

4 (111) T Matheny

8 (231) L Allen (part of Kimbrel trade)

 

Comp Picks

2011

1 (19) Barnes & (36) Owens for VMart

1 (26) Swihart & (40) JBJ for Beltre

2012

1 (31) B Johnson & (37) Pat Light (traded for Abad)

2013

none

2014

1 (33) Kopech (big part of Sale trade)

 

International Signings:

2011:

M Margot (big piece for Kimbrel deal)

T-W Lin

J Aro (part of Smith deal)

A Tavarez

2012

L Basabe (part of Sale trade)

L Basabe (part of Ziegler trade)

J Guerra (part of Kimbrel trade)

W Rijo (part of A Hill trade)

V Acosta

2013

R Devers (big signing)

D Hernandez

2014

Y Moncada (big part of Sale trade)

A Espinoza (Pomeranz deal-straight up)

R Castillo (bust)

R Raudes

 

Now look at 2016-2017 (compare the quality of players)

2016

1 (12) J Groome (should not be picking this high for a while)

2 (51) Chatham

3 (88) Anderson

4 (118) Dalbec

5 (148) Shawaryn

2017

1 (24) T Houck

2 (63) C Brannen

3 (101) B Netzer

4 (131) J Thompson

5 (161) A Scherff

 

No Comp picks since 2014 (and Kopech was the only one since 2012).

 

International Signings:

2016:

B Mata

H Velazquez

2017:

D Flores (passes away)

Danny Diaz

E Quiroz

 

I guess one thing that seems a little inconsistent is that when we traded away so many of our top prospects, many posters kept stressing the point that these players had only speculative value and couldn't be counted on for anything, and these prospects were very highly ranked.

 

Now, we are being asked to have faith in lower ranked prospects to fill out the roster in 2020 with low-cost, high-yield players. With much tighter restrictions on international signings, we are being expected to keep stocking the farm like we did with Devers, Moncada, Espinoza, Margot, Basabe, and others.

 

No, it's not impossible, but where's the evidence to support the position that we are on the right track towards rebuilding a farm even close to as strong as 2014-2015? To me, that position is hard to support.

 

 

[mvp 78]

The "cliff" does not start after 2018, when we lose Kimbrel, Pom and Porcello. (Sale's time is up after 2019.)

 

Most believers in the cliff think 2020 or 2021 will mark the beginning of the end of a highly compeitive team.

 

Porcello isn't a FA until after 2019?

[mvp 78]

Well, the loss of the prospects used to get Kimbrel and Pom are part of the window closing a year or two after their time is up. They are related...just not immediately.

 

Espinoza isn't part of the window. He had major surgery and now is the Padres 7th ranked prospect. He won't be ready in 2 years.

[mvp 78]

Some who are critical of DD are concerned that getting to the "crap table" long term was sacrificed in order to give us a shorter term of going to the crap table with a better chance at winning within a 3-4 year window.

 

I, for one, do think we have less of a chance from 2020 or 2021 forward for a couple years or so, but I'm fine with going for it all as long as it wasn't just for a 1 to 2 year shot.

 

If the goal is just to get to the playoffs as many years as possible, then I can certainly sympathize with those who feel we did not need to trade as many prospects as we did to still make the playoffs in 2016, 2017 and theoretically 2018 and 2019.

 

Other seem to just criticize any GM no matter what they do.

 

 

Did the cliff just move back from 2020 to 2021???? Does that mean it could move back to 2022 and then 2023 and then.....???

[mvp 78]

I don't mean to sound condescending. I do find it hard to believe some feel our future will not be affected by trading away so many of our top prospects in such a short period of time, especially from a farm that was ranked so highly- not by just me but by many national services.

 

I'm fine with those who believe we can and will find other ways to stay competitive or those who feel it isn't worth thinking so far ahead when it's so hard to project anything in baseball.

 

I will sat sometimes I feel some who disagree with those who believe in some sort of cliff can come off as condescending as well.

 

I for one, am happy we have different viewpoints, and I respect just about everyone's opinions on this site- even ones I often disgaree with.

 

 

The prospects were used to fix the underlying problem with the system that Theo and Ben had. THEY COULDN'T DEVELOP PITCHING.

[mvp 78]

a700, how is it not supportable? Your core will be up for FA contracts by 2020. You’ll still have Price and Pedroia on the books. The lux tax limits will still be there. You’ve got one year of Kimbrel and Pom and two of Sale as well. Over the next three seasons, you’ll need to re-sign Kimbrel, Sale, Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Pomeranz. It help that Devers and Benintendi will be there, but there’s no “next wave” of prospects coming down the pipe. Your best prospects are years away and are lottery tickets due to their proximity. The deals from your upper levels will create a void of new talent at the same time that your core gets really expensive. Without insane spending (which the upper limits really curb spending) you can’t keep the band together and without the next wave or prospects, you won’t have viable replacements. Without getting lucky, the cliff is coming

 

Sandoval and Hanley's contracts will come off the books. JBJ is not a $20M player as projected. Xander is not a $20M player as projected. They can sign anyone they want to. Kimbrel and Sale and Pomeranz can all be replaced by future signings or trades. Sale and Pomeranz may not be long term options anyway (health).

[mvp 78]

Yes, he said the cliff is not a certainty.

 

But it is a certainty that we'll have to hear about it everyday for the next however many years.

[a700hitter]

a700, how is it not supportable? Your core will be up for FA contracts by 2020. You’ll still have Price and Pedroia on the books. The lux tax limits will still be there. You’ve got one year of Kimbrel and Pom and two of Sale as well. Over the next three seasons, you’ll need to re-sign Kimbrel, Sale, Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Pomeranz. It help that Devers and Benintendi will be there, but there’s no “next wave” of prospects coming down the pipe. Your best prospects are years away and are lottery tickets due to their proximity. The deals from your upper levels will create a void of new talent at the same time that your core gets really expensive. Without insane spending (which the upper limits really curb spending) you can’t keep the band together and without the next wave or prospects, you won’t have viable replacements. Without getting lucky, the cliff is coming

Baseball operations and rosters are fluid situations and not at all static. We don’t know what intervening moves or strategy changes will be employed in the intervening years. Any predictions of doom 3 years out are not supportable, because it is so speculative. That’s my opinion. Is our farm system light on prospects compared to a couple of years ago? Yes, but to predict or worry about doom based on that is unwarranted.

[a700hitter]

Read a700s posts above

Are you calling my a half-wit, Jacko? LOL!

[a700hitter]

Did the cliff just move back from 2020 to 2021???? Does that mean it could move back to 2022 and then 2023 and then.....???

Is someone moving the cliff? LOL. It is so much easier to move goalposts. LOL!

[a700hitter]

The prospects were used to fix the underlying problem with the system that Theo and Ben had. THEY COULDN'T DEVELOP PITCHING.

I think the major thing being missed by those who are bemoaning the trading of prospects is that if we didn’t trade some of them for pitching, we were never going to climb out of the abyss —not even byv2020, because we had no pitching at the MLB level and almost no top pitching talent in the pipeline. I remember a time when the organization thought Owens was a part of the future. The development of pitching has been awful for generations. To get it from the outside costs either big bucks or top talent. DD has done both.

[a700hitter]

Meh. Here's the way I see the "cliff" argument.

 

Before I agree there is a cliff I want it defined. Is the cliff going to be as some posters are implying, that the sky will be falling and we'll have several consecutive years of finishing last in the division? Or is it that we'll have a 2-3 consecutive years of being middle-of-the-pack? .

Hmmm, if the Cliff can’t be defined, is it just a myth like hot streaks and clutch? LOL!

[mvp 78]

Is someone moving the cliff? LOL. It is so much easier to move goalposts. LOL!

 

I'm really looking forward to talking about a cliff for everyday until this site closes. It makes me very appreciated of April 2016 when we had nothing every to talk about before then. Someday, we'll talk in TalkSox terms that 2015 was 1 year BC (Before Cliff). We are now 1 year AD (After Deluge of cliff posts).

[mvp 78]

I think the major thing being missed by those who are bemoaning the trading of prospects is that if we didn’t trade some of them for pitching, we were never going to climb out of the abyss —not even byv2020, because we had no pitching at the MLB level and almost no top pitching talent in the pipeline. I remember a time when the organization thought Owens was a part of the future. The development of pitching has been awful for generations. To get it from the outside costs either big bucks or top talent. DD has done both.

 

Yup, until the Sox can develop pitching, they have to trade their positional prospects for MLB ready pitching. Otherwise, it's going to look more and more like 2012, 2014 and 2015.

[moonslav59]

Porcello isn't a FA until after 2019?

 

Yes, you are right.

 

Pom & Kimbrel after 2018 (along with Kelly)

Sale & Porcello after 2019 (along with Bogey & Thornburg)

 

My bad.