Fire alex cora

[moonslav59]

17 seasons from 2003-2019:

 

5 AL East Titles

5 Wild Card Entries

4 AL Championships

4 WS Championships

 

(Only three 4th or 5th place ALE finishes)

 

[cp176]

Look, I already said I was fine with ruining the farm to get a ring. I have no beef with DD. He got us a ring.

 

That does not mean I have to sugar coat the consequences. He destroyed the farm. It's been bottom 5 for 3 straight years.

 

I never said I could have done better than DD, but I certainly have the right to say I think he went too far. We'll never know if we'd have won a ring or not without Pom, Thornburg, Kinsler, Kimbrel or others. That's what a site like this is all about- debating the what ifs.

 

I've been saying all along I do not think Henry will keep spending 10-300% more than other teams, but it doesn't "please" me to hear him finally say the over-spending is going to be slowed or stopped. It's just reality. I'm glad we have an owner that was willing to do what it took to win us several rings. I wish he'd keep spending what it takes to keep us winning every year, but I don't think it's right to expect it, and part of me thinks we're being a little hypocritical for bashing the Yankees all those years for buying championships and then being more than fine with us outspending everyone else by tens of millions 2 years in a row, and then expecting that to continue, just because he's filthy rich and can afford to spend $500M on the team every year.

 

I'm thrilled we won 4 rings in the last 2 decades. I went 3 decades with nothing. I often said, I'd be fine with 9 last places finishes for just one ring, and although my views changed after that first ring, I'm still fine with some down stretches, if it means we're working towards a long term plan of getting back to the top. (Plus, I don't think the cliff will be as bad as I once thought, but I'm fine with a couple to three years of no ring, as long as our future is looking brighter and brighter each year- that almost surely means our farm is getting better. I don't think DD was the guy to build up the farm. I don't think spending like maniacs for 2-3 more years would have been a great idea, either. The penalties incurred on the farm by maxing out year after year would have deepened the rebuilding process and lengthened the time needed to retool.

 

 

Perhaps it is the choice of wording I guess. Saying that someone ruined something certainly implies that something really bad was done. Using words of exaggeration to attempt to prove a point is something that gets done a lot these days. Having watched the production of the players traded tells me that if trading them caused the ruination then that farm system really was all that good to begin with. I don't agree with the people here who constantly claim that the sole cause of this teams exagerated decline was a result of DD trading the players he traded.

[cp176]

Why is it ridiculous? He took a top tier farm and turned it into a bottom tier farm. The only question really is - do you think it was worth it? And while it was in 2018, there is an obvious fallout. The real problem is that fallout happened in 2019 and the repercussions are going to be felt in 2020.

 

The Sale trade was the price of doing business. Sale was one of the best contracts in baseball, and the Sox gave up two of the bet prospects. If you're waiting for those future all stars to produce, I would guess Yoan Moncada's .916 OPS this year should qualify for something. The primary reason he won't get a Silver Slugger this year is the change from 2B to 3B.

 

The Pomeranz trade was probably slso the cost of doing business. An All Star SP with 2 1/2 seasons of control also has a price.

 

Kimbrel felt like an overpay on Day One. And as the Sox cannot likely afford to retain either Bradley or Porcello, having Margot and Logan Allen would be nice. And certainly better options that Mike Shawaryn and Rusney Castillo.

 

The only real question was - was the decimation of the farm worth it. In 2018, it was. Was it in 2019? I believe the idea was to have a more substantial run of success than just the one title. And the real problem now becomes, what next? The internal solutions the Sox have to fill any gaps are not really all that enticing. Sure, they have warm bodies. But do they have future significant contributors?

 

And no one is "happy" that Henry plans to cut spending. Not sure why so many people draw the conclusion that acknowledging the pending budget changes is the same as rooting for them. I think a bag part of that is that too many just assume the Sox are a money-making machine and therefore can and should spend unlimited amounts of cash. John Henry is spending over a quarter of a billion dollars each year for our entertainment, I am not surprised he wants to dial back, especially since other teams are now showing better or equal success while spending less. The writing was on the wall, and randomly accusing people of wanting it and assuming they meant to say they could do better because you disagree with Henry's plan doesn't change that.

 

So as far as we know, there will be a lower payroll. Trades have to come, since free agency and cutting payroll are counter-intuitive. And the cheaper farm system players - and there will be one or two on the roster next year - should only be counted on to do so much. So the Sox have two options. 1) Rebuild the farm. I doubt they do this, as it can be a long and drawn out process taking several seasons. Or 2) make a few trades. If I had to guess, the primary trade bait will be JD Martinez (who also doubles as a salary dump to get to whatever the new payroll goal is), Matt Barnes, and Bobby Dalbec. I hope they don't trade Betts, but that is also a possibility. And I think Bradley is gone, but I doubt he has much in the way of trade value. I also hope they retain a few of the long term promising young players, like Casas, Mata, and Groome. I'm not wild about Duran, so if he gets dealt, I'll have mixed feelings. I do hope they keep as much of the farm as possible, but other teams like cheaper players when you trade with them.

 

The biggest obstacle and worst case scenario is if they decide they have to move one of Martinez or Betts. Because Martinez will be a lot oharder to trade due to his lack of a position and his expensive, option-laden contract. And I think we all hope that if they can't move him, they just keep spending and hold on to Betts...

 

I think that the trades made by DD were absolutely worth it. I really don't think that losing the players that we lost ruined anything. Maybe from a depth perspective I guess but that is about it.

I really don't think that there are many players on the roster that should feel particularly safe right now. If you are intent on dumping payroll why would you not try to get rid of anyone who poses a $ problem regardless of how good they might be. I think that Porcello and Bradley are both gone and if we buy the different approach that could happen with ownership I think that if Martinez does not opt out that he will be traded. Lip service is being given To Betts but once again i think that it is quite likely that he winds up playing somewhere else.

[notin]

Oh I assume Porcello is already done in Boston and Bradley is into his last 4 innings...

[moonslav59]

Perhaps it is the choice of wording I guess. Saying that someone ruined something certainly implies that something really bad was done. Using words of exaggeration to attempt to prove a point is something that gets done a lot these days. Having watched the production of the players traded tells me that if trading them caused the ruination then that farm system really was all that good to begin with. I don't agree with the people here who constantly claim that the sole cause of this teams exagerated decline was a result of DD trading the players he traded.

 

I'm not sure I used the word "ruin" first. I think I just said that in response to your comment that some of us said he ruined the farm. I think I have said, "nearly emptied" most of the time or "traded away almost the whole farm."

 

I think I've been pretty clear all along about my position. I was fine with trading away a lot of our prospects. I wouldn't have gone as far as DD went, but I don't think I know more than DD or would have done better. His moves brought us a ring. That was the goal. I'm fine with what he did, but I knew all along there would be consequences.

 

I find it strange you seem to pick on those of us who said there would be consequences at some point rather than those who said the farm would or could be rebuilt easily and quickly. That certainly hasn't happened. There were many who sugar coated the consequences and still are. Clearly some mistakes were made, even if just in hindsight, and that's the nature of evaluating GMs.

 

DD did what he was brought in to do. We won a ring. This place would be a lot different had we not won last year. I'm thankful it worked. He built a great ML team. He sacrificed much of the future to do so-more than Theo did and way more than Ben did. They both won rings and left a decent to great farm for the next guy. DD did not. Those are facts. Call it "ruining" the farm, depleting or emptying it, or whatever, but regardless of how much of what you think DD did was right or wrong, there's no denying he left a much weaker farm than when he came here.

 

BTW, it's not the "sole cause," but it is a major factor. Big contracts, some not given by DD, add to the problems. Changing rules and regulations have added to the problem, again, not DD's fault, but he is the only GM to get the 10 pick drop penalty for going over $40M over. Ben was the one who got us the international signing ban right as DD came to power, but he's done very poorly in that area- a usual big strength of this team in the past.

 

He made some very good in-season trades, like A Reed, Nunez and Eovaldi, but the Buttrey-Kinsler deal seems to look pretty bad, tight now.

 

BTW, I'm not sure what poster ever said DD's trades are the "soul cause" of our steep decline. I've heard more criticism on the Price, Sale and Eovaldi signings than the trading of prospects.

[moonslav59]

I think that the trades made by DD were absolutely worth it. I really don't think that losing the players that we lost ruined anything. Maybe from a depth perspective I guess but that is about it.

I really don't think that there are many players on the roster that should feel particularly safe right now. If you are intent on dumping payroll why would you not try to get rid of anyone who poses a $ problem regardless of how good they might be. I think that Porcello and Bradley are both gone and if we buy the different approach that could happen with ownership I think that if Martinez does not opt out that he will be traded. Lip service is being given To Betts but once again i think that it is quite likely that he winds up playing somewhere else.

 

Porcello is certainly gone. JBJ is very likely to be traded or non tendered.

 

I'm not sure we trade JD & Betts, but if we trade one, I can see the reasoning to trade both (and more- like 2021 or 2022 FAs Workman, ERod & Barnes).

[Elktonnick]

JD is virtually impossible to trade until he makes a decision on his option. In addition, he has an opt out in 20 and 21 as well. If he exercises his opt out option in 2019 there is nothing to trade. Edited September 29, 2019 by Elktonnick

[Slasher9]

The day he was hired some of us posted that he will decimate the farm and that is exactly what he did.

 

Also, if I was GM during DD’s tenure and inherited the farm and team that Ben built I would have had 3 parades during these DD years. And had Moncada going forward.

[moonslav59]

JD is virtually impossible to trade until he makes a decision on his option. In addition, he has an opt out in 20 and 21 as well. If he exercises his opt out option in 2019 there is nothing to trade.

 

He has an opt out after this year and 2020, not 2021.

 

I think he has to decide pretty quickly, so if he takes the option, there will be time to trade and teams that want him.

 

We may need to kick in some cash to get a better return, but I think we could get something nice without adding any cash.

 

I'll hate to see him go.

 

[moonslav59]

The day he was hired some of us posted that he will decimate the farm and that is exactly what he did.

 

Also, if I was GM during DD’s tenure and inherited the farm and team that Ben built I would have had 3 parades during these DD years. And had Moncada going forward.

 

LOL.

 

I'm waiting for CP's response.

[Elktonnick]

According to sportstrac web site, JD indeed does have an opt out in both 20 and 21. He remains virtually impossible to trade. Plus if he suspects the Sox have any inclination to trade him if he doesn't elect to opt out Boras would insist on written guarantees.

[notin]

According to sportstrac web site, JD indeed does have an opt out in both 20 and 21. He remains virtually impossible to trade. Plus if he suspects the Sox have any inclination to trade him if he doesn't elect to opt out Boras would insist on written guarantees.

 

Written guarantees of what? They’re already player options. And JD doesn’t have any no trade protection that would allow to make demands before approving a trade.

 

All JD can do is opt out if he doesn’t want to be dealt. And he isn’t guaranteed to get 3 years $62million in this market at his age...

[notin]

The day he was hired some of us posted that he will decimate the farm and that is exactly what he did.

 

Also, if I was GM during DD’s tenure and inherited the farm and team that Ben built I would have had 3 parades during these DD years. And had Moncada going forward.

 

I remember when he was hired, the Sox farm was headlined by Beninteni, Moncada, Kopech and Espinoza. Someone on BDC, possibly you, commented that “two of those 4 would never play for the Sox.”

 

Whoever it was was close. And their sarcasm fell short of reality...

[Elktonnick]

The point is that opt outs make it it very difficult to trade him. Besides with Boras as his agent everything is a negotiation. The opt.out provisions gives him a virtual veto to any trade. All he has to do is insist that Boston commit to not trade him or he opts out. If Boston refuses then he opts out. Boston is not going to play fast and loose with a Boras client regardless of any no trade clause that is why Boras put the opt outs in the contract to give his client some negotiation power over his own future.

[cp176]

The day he was hired some of us posted that he will decimate the farm and that is exactly what he did.

 

Also, if I was GM during DD’s tenure and inherited the farm and team that Ben built I would have had 3 parades during these DD years. And had Moncada going forward.

 

Decimate is a far better word than ruin for sure. You are honest at least with yourself. You think that you should have had the job and certainly could have done a better one than DD. Of course I don't agree with you but I like the up front straight forward approach. No playing around - good. Oh, i think that if you had used the word depleted I could agree with you .

[cp176]

I'm not sure I used the word "ruin" first. I think I just said that in response to your comment that some of us said he ruined the farm. I think I have said, "nearly emptied" most of the time or "traded away almost the whole farm."

 

I think I've been pretty clear all along about my position. I was fine with trading away a lot of our prospects. I wouldn't have gone as far as DD went, but I don't think I know more than DD or would have done better. His moves brought us a ring. That was the goal. I'm fine with what he did, but I knew all along there would be consequences.

 

I find it strange you seem to pick on those of us who said there would be consequences at some point rather than those who said the farm would or could be rebuilt easily and quickly. That certainly hasn't happened. There were many who sugar coated the consequences and still are. Clearly some mistakes were made, even if just in hindsight, and that's the nature of evaluating GMs.

 

DD did what he was brought in to do. We won a ring. This place would be a lot different had we not won last year. I'm thankful it worked. He built a great ML team. He sacrificed much of the future to do so-more than Theo did and way more than Ben did. They both won rings and left a decent to great farm for the next guy. DD did not. Those are facts. Call it "ruining" the farm, depleting or emptying it, or whatever, but regardless of how much of what you think DD did was right or wrong, there's no denying he left a much weaker farm than when he came here.

 

BTW, it's not the "sole cause," but it is a major factor. Big contracts, some not given by DD, add to the problems. Changing rules and regulations have added to the problem, again, not DD's fault, but he is the only GM to get the 10 pick drop penalty for going over $40M over. Ben was the one who got us the international signing ban right as DD came to power, but he's done very poorly in that area- a usual big strength of this team in the past.

 

He made some very good in-season trades, like A Reed, Nunez and Eovaldi, but the Buttrey-Kinsler deal seems to look pretty bad, tight now.

 

BTW, I'm not sure what poster ever said DD's trades are the "soul cause" of our steep decline. I've heard more criticism on the Price, Sale and Eovaldi signings than the trading of prospects.

 

You should find nothing i say as being strange. I do not wordsmith. I try to be fairly upfront. I think that Dombrowski is a very talented GM and I do not believe that he ruined anything. I hope that you do not think that I am picking on you or your friends. My comments are direct responses to comments that I do not think are fair.

[cp176]

I remember when he was hired, the Sox farm was headlined by Beninteni, Moncada, Kopech and Espinoza. Someone on BDC, possibly you, commented that “two of those 4 would never play for the Sox.”

 

Whoever it was was close. And their sarcasm fell short of reality...

 

 

Moncada and Kopech for Sale - hmmmmmmm

Espinoza for someone who could throw a ball - we shall see on this one.

I like Benintendi of course but out of this group I was really only saddened by the loss of Moncada although I think that it was a good necessary deal to make.

[moonslav59]

You should find nothing i say as being strange. I do not wordsmith. I try to be fairly upfront. I think that Dombrowski is a very talented GM and I do not believe that he ruined anything. I hope that you do not think that I am picking on you or your friends. My comments are direct responses to comments that I do not think are fair.

 

I see some comments as unfair, too.

 

I only used the word "ruined" to parrot the term you used in your comment, but there have been some posters who have used similar words.

 

I think I've been fair to DD. I've said I have liked his overall plan, and I am thrilled it worked. Personally, I don't think it's being unfair to say I think he went a little too far with the prospect trades and there are clearly 2-4 that did not work out all that well, so that type of criticism goes with the GM job and is within the limits of fairness, IMO.

 

I was fine with the trade off, and who am I to say he "went to far?" He wanted to make sure we had the horses to win a ring, and he got them. GMs have to plan on some deals not working, and going back in hindsight is not all that "fair," but it's tuhe nature of the business and certainly the nature of boards like this. Theo caught slack and Ben was crucified on this board and others. Fair? Maybe not, but I think pointing out that are farm is comparatively very weak, fight now, because of some things DD did along with other factors is just speaking to truth.

 

With a limited budget and a new system of making it very hard for winning and big spending teams to rebuild their farm, getting back to glory will not be easy. One could argue DD knew these new rules and the direction MLB was going, and how keeping a strong farm while still winning may be what it's all about, and he chose to go for broke. It worked. I'm fine with any GM that brings us a ring. Now, it's time for the "broke" side of the equation. The budget will be reset at some point, and the farm has to be rebuilt for us to have a better chance at returning to glory.

 

[Bellhorn04]

The day he was hired some of us posted that he will decimate the farm and that is exactly what he did.

 

Also, if I was GM during DD’s tenure and inherited the farm and team that Ben built I would have had 3 parades during these DD years. And had Moncada going forward.

 

OK, I'll bite. How would you have had 3 parades?

[moonslav59]

OK, I'll bite. How would you have had 3 parades?

 

One for Saint Paddy's, one for Thanksgiving,,,

[Slasher9]

OK, I'll bite. How would you have had 3 parades?

 

by winning the last game of the MLB season 3 times during my tenure.

[notin]

The point is that opt outs make it it very difficult to trade him. Besides with Boras as his agent everything is a negotiation. The opt.out provisions gives him a virtual veto to any trade. All he has to do is insist that Boston commit to not trade him or he opts out. If Boston refuses then he opts out. Boston is not going to play fast and loose with a Boras client regardless of any no trade clause that is why Boras put the opt outs in the contract to give his client some negotiation power over his own future.

 

That's really not the option you think it is.

 

There is a set date for him to opt out. Typically these are shortly after the World Series. At that point, JD has to make a decision. If he opts out, he is a free agent. If he does not, he has no say in anything the Sox do with regards to him, and Boras has no power to stop any trades. This isn't an NTC where he can veto the trade but might approve it if some condition is met. There is nothing to negotiate.

 

At some point in the near future, JD has a choice. Opt out and become a free agent or do not opt out and leave his fate is in the hands of whoever is running the Sox.

 

In 2020, JD Martinez will make $23.75million. In 2021 and 2022, he will make $19.35mill each year. If he opts out now, he is walking away from $62.5mill over the next 3 years, but he will recoup $2.5mill per the OP. If he opts out next year, it;s only $38.7mill over 2 years. If he does not opt out this year, he will next year.

 

JD will be entering his age 32 season next year. The highest paid contract for a player entering his age 32 season last year was for Michael Brantley at 2 years / $32mill. While Martinez should be able to get a higher AAV, I doubt he gets too many more years the way the market has been treating 30+ year old free agents. (AJ Pollock was one year younger than JD will be and did get a 4 year $50mill contract. But even that is less than what JD would be leaving on the table.)

 

The ever-predictable Scott Boras will advise him to wait one more year before opting out. If JD chooses to listen is another matter. But he didn't hire Boras for the purpose of ignoring his advice...

[notin]

OK, I'll bite. How would you have had 3 parades?

 

Slasher would have won 3 World Series titles. THat's what he is saying.

 

I can't definitively prove him wrong..

[notin]

Moncada and Kopech for Sale - hmmmmmmm

Espinoza for someone who could throw a ball - we shall see on this one.

I like Benintendi of course but out of this group I was really only saddened by the loss of Moncada although I think that it was a good necessary deal to make.

 

IMO the only dumb trade was the Kimbrel deal. To give up two top 100 prospects plus another for one of the highest paid closers and still taking on the full contract. And San Diego was a bad team. In no way did they want to keep the contract of a pricey closer. Not to mention, the Sox problem in 2015 was the rotation. Having a great closer and a weak rotation doesn't really do much for you.

 

There were so many reasons to think this deal was just silly, especially at that price...

[Bellhorn04]

by winning the last game of the MLB season 3 times during my tenure.

 

But how would you have made the 2016 and 2017 teams significantly better?

[Bellhorn04]

IMO the only dumb trade was the Kimbrel deal. To give up two top 100 prospects plus another for one of the highest paid closers and still taking on the full contract. And San Diego was a bad team. In no way did they want to keep the contract of a pricey closer. Not to mention, the Sox problem in 2015 was the rotation. Having a great closer and a weak rotation doesn't really do much for you.

 

There were so many reasons to think this deal was just silly, especially at that price...

 

Kimbrel's contract was a very favorable one, when we saw what Chapman and Jansen got.

 

And they obviously intended to upgrade the rotation. Not sure why the order they made the acquisitions in matters.

[Slasher9]

But how would you have made the 2016 and 2017 teams significantly better?

 

i dont think either of those teams needed to be "significantly better" to have a parade 1 of those 2 seasons. this year would have been a parade too with Slasher9 as President of Baseball Operations.

remember under my physical and mental approach to this season sale and price would not have been injured and had sub 3 ERA's.

[notin]

Kimbrel's contract was a very favorable one, when we saw what Chapman and Jansen got.

 

And they obviously intended to upgrade the rotation. Not sure why the order they made the acquisitions in matters.

 

Even the bigger contracts for Chapman and Davis were money only. Not top tier money plus surrender top prospects. And the valuation of those contracts was probably influenced by the overpay for Kimbrel...

[Bellhorn04]

Even the bigger contracts for Chapman and Davis were money only. Not top tier money plus surrender top prospects. And the valuation of those contracts was probably influenced by the overpay for Kimbrel...

 

I'm just trying to evaluate the contract itself, forgetting about what we gave up in prospects.

 

It was definitely a good contract for the Sox, with only 2 years guaranteed for a total of 24 mill, plus a team option for 13 mill.

[Bellhorn04]

i dont think either of those teams needed to be "significantly better" to have a parade 1 of those 2 seasons. this year would have been a parade too with Slasher9 as President of Baseball Operations.

remember under my physical and mental approach to this season sale and price would not have been injured and had sub 3 ERA's.

 

Your approach would appear to entail a complete repudiation of the 'playoffs are a crapshoot' premise.