A Realistic View at 2018: Part I

[Kimmi]

I think Red Sox fans really have gotten jaded by success. The team wins 93 games and the division and people talk about them like they were a disgrace. It's kind of f***ed-up.

 

It is messed up indeed.

[Kimmi]

“They’re not likable!”

 

Don’t remember people saying this when AJ Pierzinski(sp?) was on the club.

 

I didn't like AJ because the dude would not take a pitch.

 

I know we want our guys to be a little more aggressive, but AJ took it to the other extreme.

 

At least it felt like it.

[Kimmi]

I’m not as big a “crapshoot” believer. Yes, upsets happen, but for the most part, the better teams win. This isn’t the NBA where the better teams always win. But it’s not close to the NHL where it really is a crapshoot

 

Nah, the playoffs are pretty much a crapshoot.

 

The better team does have a slight advantage, and I do mean slight, but not really enough to make a difference.

[moonslav59]

I'm not getting all the 'lack of fire' and 'lack of leadership' criticism.

 

IMO, we had some youngsters that often tried to do too much. That's about it.

 

I didn't see a lot of "fire" last year.

 

Sure, after a walk-off hit, there was celebration, but I sensed a lack of desire.

 

Also, the mental blunders were a sign of lacking focus, which can, at times, be attributed to not being fully "into it".

 

I'm not big on the whole leadership bandwagon, but I did not see JF as the type of guy to light a fire under anybody. He was too laid back, and I think that rubbed off on the kids.

[Kimmi]

I didn't see a lot of "fire" last year.

 

Sure, after a walk-off hit, there was celebration, but I sensed a lack of desire.

 

Also, the mental blunders were a sign of lacking focus, which can, at times, be attributed to not being fully "into it".

 

I'm not big on the whole leadership bandwagon, but I did not see JF as the type of guy to light a fire under anybody. He was too laid back, and I think that rubbed off on the kids.

 

There are many fans who have said similar things, or said that last year's team was not very likable. I just don't agree with it.

 

I found the team very likable and enjoyable to watch.

 

And I believe that many of the mental blunders can be attributed to the guys trying too hard.

[sk7326]

I’m not as big a “crapshoot” believer. Yes, upsets happen, but for the most part, the better teams win. This isn’t the NBA where the better teams always win. But it’s not close to the NHL where it really is a crapshoot

 

in the long run - yes. But the year's the best team in the league wins are fairly irregular, far more than any other sport.

 

Really, it's the rotating starting pitchers that does it. There is very rarely a matchup where a team is fielding a better 9 players than another team every single day. It's like goaltendiing in hockey but moreso (since hockey teams can still generate tons of chances).

[sk7326]

I didn't see a lot of "fire" last year.

 

Sure, after a walk-off hit, there was celebration, but I sensed a lack of desire.

 

Also, the mental blunders were a sign of lacking focus, which can, at times, be attributed to not being fully "into it".

 

I'm not big on the whole leadership bandwagon, but I did not see JF as the type of guy to light a fire under anybody. He was too laid back, and I think that rubbed off on the kids.

 

I can see that - but it was a team which had an incredible knack for winning close games, and a lot of those long extra inning odysseys. It was a team which even got up off the mat against the Astros. The team had toughness.

 

Indeed - if you read between the lines of the postmortems of Farrell's ouster - it seemed like the exact opposite. He was not laid back enough - just a lot of professional grinding intensity. What Farrell missed was Francona's ability to crack a dirty joke and tell a kid suffering through a slump. "it's nothing that a line drive falling between two fielders can't fix". The kids - if anything - were way way too hard on themselves.

[moonslav59]

There are many fans who have said similar things, or said that last year's team was not very likable. I just don't agree with it.

 

I found the team very likable and enjoyable to watch.

 

And I believe that many of the mental blunders can be attributed to the guys trying too hard.

 

I don't want to start that wholedebate again, but we had too many metal blunders (fielding & running) that had nothing to do with being aggressive or over aggressive.

[notin]

I don't want to start that wholedebate again, but we had too many metal blunders (fielding & running) that had nothing to do with being aggressive or over aggressive.

 

But if they are committing errors by being overly aggressive, isn't that a type of "fire" people say they lacked?

 

For the most part, this is one of those criticisms I think people throw around when they don't know why the team didn't win it all, like about 90% of all managerial criticisms. The Sox are two-time defending AL East champions. While this off-season has been an atrocity of ennui, they are still a good team.

[oldtimer]

I don't want to start that wholedebate again, but we had too many metal blunders (fielding & running) that had nothing to do with being aggressive or over aggressive.

 

We have a new coaching staff who may well restore the fire we may have lacked at times. The season is 162 games and it is hard to stay totally focused throughtout, but I look for Cora to have a positive impact.

 

A second point, Darvish now goes to the Cubs, so perhaps the FA market will begin to crack open.

[moonslav59]

But if they are committing errors by being overly aggressive, isn't that a type of "fire" people say they lacked?

 

For the most part, this is one of those criticisms I think people throw around when they don't know why the team didn't win it all, like about 90% of all managerial criticisms. The Sox are two-time defending AL East champions. While this off-season has been an atrocity of ennui, they are still a good team.

 

I liked us being more aggressive on the base paths. I don't necessarily equate that with "fire & desire".

 

Bonehead plays were made too often that had nothing to do with being aggressive.

 

I'm hoping Cora brings some positive change in a few areas.

 

[Larry Cook]

I liked us being more aggressive on the base paths. I don't necessarily equate that with "fire & desire".

 

Bonehead plays were made too often that had nothing to do with being aggressive.

 

I'm hoping Cora brings some positive change in a few areas.

 

 

Bonehead plays, lack of fire and desire, pedroia fracturing the locker room and price verbally berating eckersley. What does it all add up to?

 

A total lack of leadership in the locker room. No one is demanding accountability from fellow players in that locker room. It is madness to expect this to change in 2018 unless we bring in a guy that can lead these sheep.

[moonslav59]

Bonehead plays, lack of fire and desire, pedroia fracturing the locker room and price verbally berating eckersley. What does it all add up to?

 

A total lack of leadership in the locker room. No one is demanding accountability from fellow players in that locker room. It is madness to expect this to change in 2018 unless we bring in a guy that can lead these sheep.

 

I'm not disagreeing, but I think this may be an oversimplification.

 

Anyways, how are you so sure that "guy that can lead these sheep" isn't Cora?

 

It's also not that easy knowing what player out there has the leadership skills that match with the needs of this team. It's not like a great leader/player can just walk in the door and get everyone focused and full of fire easily.

 

 

 

[Spudboy]

I liked us being more aggressive on the base paths. I don't necessarily equate that with "fire & desire".

 

Bonehead plays were made too often that had nothing to do with being aggressive.

 

I'm hoping Cora brings some positive change in a few areas.

 

 

I don't know how fans either never saw this or somehow have forgotten.

 

But you are correct.

[dgalehouse]

Three things: 1 - This team definitely has talent. Whether it has enough talent at present to beat the top teams in 2018 in questionable. 2 - They clearly can use a power bat in the middle of the lineup . If not J.D. Martinez , then who. 3 - Cora needs to be a major improvement over Farrell . To underestimate the importance of management and leadership is a mistake. Martinez or no Martinez , it is Cora who can make the difference .

[moonslav59]

Three things: 1 - This team definitely has talent. Whether it has enough talent at present to beat the top teams in 2018 in questionable. 2 - They clearly can use a power bat in the middle of the lineup . If not J.D. Martinez , then who. 3 - Cora needs to be a major improvement over Farrell . To underestimate the importance of management and leadership is a mistake. Martinez or no Martinez , it is Cora who can make the difference .

 

I'd like to see JD & Cora make a big difference.

 

I am also expecting a combined uptick from our under prime players (Betts, Bogey, JBJ, Devers, Beni and others).

 

The health of Price, ERod, Smith & Thornburg might be what makes or breaks us.

 

[Larry Cook]

I'm not disagreeing, but I think this may be an oversimplification.

 

Anyways, how are you so sure that "guy that can lead these sheep" isn't Cora?

 

It's also not that easy knowing what player out there has the leadership skills that match with the needs of this team. It's not like a great leader/player can just walk in the door and get everyone focused and full of fire easily.

 

 

 

 

Team dynamics mean that the manager can never be the guy we need.

 

The only way to get accountability in a locker room is through the players themselves. Think of the other Boston teams and if I ask you who the leader is, you know the answer immediately. Bruins - charra and Bergeron. Patriots - Brady, McCourty, Slater and Hightower.

Red Sox - ugh??? Pedroia? (No pedroia will give you everything HE has, but he won’t demand anything of anybody else. That is not his style.) hanley? (Please give me a break. Hanley is all about Hanley.) one of the starting pitchers? (Sorry they only play once every five days. It has to be a position player.)

Betts, Bradley, bogey,???? (No. They are part of the zombies)

 

I guarantee that if we get a leader in that locker room, the zombies will step up. They desperately want that guy in the locker room, but none of the zombies wants to be that guy.

 

Its dave’s job to build to a “team” every year and that means having leaders in that locker room. Once again, dave the fireman has let our team down. We need a real GM!!!

 

Give this team a leader and I think we can win 95 games if our pitchers just stay relatively healthy and I don’t have to watch Wright start every fifth day!

[cp176]

Team dynamics mean that the manager can never be the guy we need.

 

The only way to get accountability in a locker room is through the players themselves. Think of the other Boston teams and if I ask you who the leader is, you know the answer immediately. Bruins - charra and Bergeron. Patriots - Brady, McCourty, Slater and Hightower.

Red Sox - ugh??? Pedroia? (No pedroia will give you everything HE has, but he won’t demand anything of anybody else. That is not his style.) hanley? (Please give me a break. Hanley is all about Hanley.) one of the starting pitchers? (Sorry they only play once every five days. It has to be a position player.)

Betts, Bradley, bogey,???? (No. They are part of the zombies)

 

I guarantee that if we get a leader in that locker room, the zombies will step up. They desperately want that guy in the locker room, but none of the zombies wants to be that guy.

 

Its dave’s job to build to a “team” every year and that means having leaders in that locker room. Once again, dave the fireman has let our team down. We need a real GM!!!

 

Give this team a leader and I think we can win 95 games if our pitchers just stay relatively healthy and I don’t have to watch Wright start every fifth day!

 

Actually I think that there is a lick of sense here in what you say.

[S5Dewey]

Team dynamics mean that the manager can never be the guy we need.

 

The only way to get accountability in a locker room is through the players themselves. Think of the other Boston teams and if I ask you who the leader is, you know the answer immediately. Bruins - charra and Bergeron. Patriots - Brady, McCourty, Slater and Hightower.

Red Sox - ugh??? Pedroia? (No pedroia will give you everything HE has, but he won’t demand anything of anybody else. That is not his style.) hanley? (Please give me a break. Hanley is all about Hanley.) one of the starting pitchers? (Sorry they only play once every five days. It has to be a position player.)

Betts, Bradley, bogey,???? (No. They are part of the zombies)

 

I guarantee that if we get a leader in that locker room, the zombies will step up. They desperately want that guy in the locker room, but none of the zombies wants to be that guy.

 

Its dave’s job to build to a “team” every year and that means having leaders in that locker room. Once again, dave the fireman has let our team down. We need a real GM!!!

 

Give this team a leader and I think we can win 95 games if our pitchers just stay relatively healthy and I don’t have to watch Wright start every fifth day!

 

This is a really good post. This team needs a leader and it's not going to be Pedroia. IMHO the team fractured with "It's not me, it's them". That's when the players learned that Pedroia, the heir-apparent to team leadership when Papi retired, didn't have their backs. When they tried to have his back he threw them under the bus and it created a lasting cancer in the clubhouse.

 

What goes on in locker rooms is usually a well-kept secret so one person't opinion of what happens there is every bit as good as another person's. I believe that the 2017 team won 93 games with individual talent but at the end of the day they weren't playing as a team. They lacked the leadership to behave as a unit.

 

This team is crying for a leader but I don't see anyone there who has the personality to do the job. The two who should be doing it are Hanley and Pedroia but Pedey is too wrapped up in his own performance and Hanley is too busy preening for the TV cameras and everyone else either is too young (Beni, Vaz, Devers) or doesn't appear to have the personality to do the job (JBJ, Mookie). Maybe that's what DD sees in JDM and that's why he's holding out to get him. I dunno. But I'm confident that this team lacks on-field leadership and until/unless someone steps up that will continue to be a problem.

 

But then again, I could be wrong.

[Bellhorn04]

Team dynamics mean that the manager can never be the guy we need.

 

The only way to get accountability in a locker room is through the players themselves. Think of the other Boston teams and if I ask you who the leader is, you know the answer immediately. Bruins - charra and Bergeron. Patriots - Brady, McCourty, Slater and Hightower.

Red Sox - ugh??? Pedroia? (No pedroia will give you everything HE has, but he won’t demand anything of anybody else. That is not his style.) hanley? (Please give me a break. Hanley is all about Hanley.) one of the starting pitchers? (Sorry they only play once every five days. It has to be a position player.)

Betts, Bradley, bogey,???? (No. They are part of the zombies)

 

I guarantee that if we get a leader in that locker room, the zombies will step up. They desperately want that guy in the locker room, but none of the zombies wants to be that guy.

 

Its dave’s job to build to a “team” every year and that means having leaders in that locker room. Once again, dave the fireman has let our team down. We need a real GM!!!

 

Give this team a leader and I think we can win 95 games if our pitchers just stay relatively healthy and I don’t have to watch Wright start every fifth day!

 

So if we had a leader we 'can win 95 games'.

 

Funny thing is, we won 93 games last year without a leader.

 

So you think this great leader might make a difference of 2 whole games. Wow, that's really exciting.

[Bellhorn04]

What goes on in locker rooms is usually a well-kept secret so one person't opinion of what happens there is every bit as good as another person's. I believe that the 2017 team won 93 games with individual talent but at the end of the day they weren't playing as a team. They lacked the leadership to behave as a unit.

 

I can't really buy into this. For one thing, the 2017 team had an incredible 15-3 record in extra inning games. Some of that is luck and some is just good bullpen pitching. But still, you have to have some mental toughness to put up a record like that.

[moonslav59]

Team dynamics mean that the manager can never be the guy we need.

 

The only way to get accountability in a locker room is through the players themselves. Think of the other Boston teams and if I ask you who the leader is, you know the answer immediately. Bruins - charra and Bergeron. Patriots - Brady, McCourty, Slater and Hightower.

Red Sox - ugh??? Pedroia? (No pedroia will give you everything HE has, but he won’t demand anything of anybody else. That is not his style.) hanley? (Please give me a break. Hanley is all about Hanley.) one of the starting pitchers? (Sorry they only play once every five days. It has to be a position player.)

Betts, Bradley, bogey,???? (No. They are part of the zombies)

 

I guarantee that if we get a leader in that locker room, the zombies will step up. They desperately want that guy in the locker room, but none of the zombies wants to be that guy.

 

Its dave’s job to build to a “team” every year and that means having leaders in that locker room. Once again, dave the fireman has let our team down. We need a real GM!!!

 

Give this team a leader and I think we can win 95 games if our pitchers just stay relatively healthy and I don’t have to watch Wright start every fifth day!

 

I happen to think a good manager can steer the players into taking accountability for their own actions and to help push those who are not to begin doing so.

 

Also, I'm not so sure it's all that easy to identify a "leader" and then to get him here and be sure he fits into our clubhouse.

 

Again, I'm not disagreeing with your position. I do think improved player leadership would help.

[cp176]

I really don't think that good leadership can be taken for granted at all regardless of how many wins or losses a team may have throughout the course of a long season. We use the term leader sometimes as though one person can provide what it takes to an entire group of adults. Good leadership comes from a team that is primarily made up of good people willing to sacrifice individual goals for the greater good of the team in general. I agree that good leadership can start with a good manager. I hope that Alex Cora can provide what it takes. I know that there are a number of posters here who think that his age being closer to that of his players could make a big difference. I don't share that view. I don't think that his age means anything at all. Regardless of his age, he is the boss and the boss isn't always going to be making the popular decisions. I wish him the best of luck.

[mvp 78]

I can't really buy into this. For one thing, the 2017 team had an incredible 15-3 record in extra inning games. Some of that is luck and some is just good bullpen pitching. But still, you have to have some mental toughness to put up a record like that.

 

And the 2016 unit was basically the same roster except for Papi. Were they functioning "more as a unit" because Papi was the leader? How is that even determined? Seems to me more of a personal perception thing than anything else.

[Nick]

in baseball, talent > leadership.

 

We don't share the ball. Every at bat is on you. If I go 4-4 with 4 home runs, I've done pretty much all I can as a hitter. I can be a dick, no one has to like me. I don't need to exhibit leadership skills. My night was perfect. Give me that guy over a leader any day of the week.

 

You guys are getting deep into weeds. Baseball is not complicated.

[harmony]

BP Boston columnist Matthew Kory examines the PECOTA projections for the Red Sox:

 

http://boston.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2018/02/09/the-red-sox-and-pecotas-pessimism/

[moonslav59]

And the 2016 unit was basically the same roster except for Papi. Were they functioning "more as a unit" because Papi was the leader? How is that even determined? Seems to me more of a personal perception thing than anything else.

 

I do think losing Papi hurt more than just losing his on filed production, but I'm not sure he was all that great at "leadership."

 

It's not an easy thing to identify, so I think it's hard to blame a GM when a team lack it.

 

DD changed the manager. I think that was a big step.

[cp176]

in baseball, talent > leadership.

 

We don't share the ball. Every at bat is on you. If I go 4-4 with 4 home runs, I've done pretty much all I can as a hitter. I can be a dick, no one has to like me. I don't need to exhibit leadership skills. My night was perfect. Give me that guy over a leader any day of the week.

 

You guys are getting deep into weeds. Baseball is not complicated.

 

As a spectator watching the game, I agree. As a player or a coach who has to deal with an ass hole day in and day out, I disagree. If being deep into weeds is believing that mental components might be more important to a team than physical ones, I am hanging out in the proverbial weed patch. It is always tough to understand how important something is when you just can't measure it.

[mvp 78]

I do think losing Papi hurt more than just losing his on filed production, but I'm not sure he was all that great at "leadership."

 

It's not an easy thing to identify, so I think it's hard to blame a GM when a team lack it.

 

DD changed the manager. I think that was a big step.

 

So then, when was the last time the Sox had leadership?

[sk7326]

Leadership is hard to import - it comes from the dudes who have done the work ... of course, this is all based on a strawman here, that the team lacked grit or fundamentals or toughness. That is a highly questionable premise - that the kids were lackadasical or whatever.