Dave Dombrowski

[notin]

This argument about the Sale deal that 'anyone could have done that' irks me too. What matters is that DD was the one who did it. He seized the opportunity.

 

.

 

And Sox fans repeatedly console themselves over this deal because Moncada and Kopech are not superstars yet and are therefore busts.

 

Hey unless Dombrowski pulls off a few miracle draft picks, this team could actually be pretty bad when 25% of the luxury tax money is going to Price and Betts and the Sox lineup features Sam Travis and Josh Ockimey and CJ Chatham. Because these are the guys who will help the Sox pay for Benintendi and Devers in arbitration.

 

And it is very possible the Sox have no pitching then and no prospects to deal for it. If that is a last place team in 2020 or 2021, will you be content and say “well, we did really well and had a fun team in 2018” and be content?

 

You know, like everyone did in 2014 and 2015?

[Kimmi]

Oh I know, it's shudder-worthy for sure.

 

But Zack Greinke is the current AAV bar-holder at very close to 35 million.

 

Yes, but Greinke's contract is insane. Just because other teams are being crazy doesn't mean we should try to beat their insanity.

[Bellhorn04]

And Sox fans repeatedly console themselves over this deal because Moncada and Kopech are not superstars yet and are therefore busts.

 

Hey unless Dombrowski pulls off a few miracle draft picks, this team could actually be pretty bad when 25% of the luxury tax money is going to Price and Betts and the Sox lineup features Sam Travis and Josh Ockimey and CJ Chatham. Because these are the guys who will help the Sox pay for Benintendi and Devers in arbitration.

 

And it is very possible the Sox have no pitching then and no prospects to deal for it. If that is a last place team in 2020 or 2021, will you be content and say “well, we did really well and had a fun team in 2018” and be content?

 

You know, like everyone did in 2014 and 2015?

 

Well, we do need to get lucky with some draft picks, I'm certainly not arguing that.

 

But it doesn't change my thinking that DD has done pretty much what he had to do given the roster he inherited and the mandate I believe Henry gave him.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, but Greinke's contract is insane. Just because other teams are being crazy doesn't mean we should try to beat their insanity.

 

I agree, I'm just looking at where the market is.

 

The Machado and Harper deals will be very interesting and instructive on what Mookie will be looking for.

[Kimmi]

Albert Pujols, mentioned in the post you replied to, had a .672OPS at age 37. This is comparable to the OPS of the Sox players fans complain about like Bradley and Nunez.

 

I would never assume a 37yo is going to even be good, let alone someone we want out there. Pedroia is only 34 and fans want him to voluntarily retire and forego the remainder of the his deal...

 

Albert Pujols, through the age of 30, was worth an average of 7.73 WAR per year.

 

After the age of 30 through the present, he has been worth an average of 1.36 WAR per year.

 

Even worse, from the age of 32 through the present, he has been worth a mere .6 WAR each year, on average.

[Kimmi]

The question nobody who accuses DD of decimating the farm system can really answer is how else he was supposed to assemble a good pitching staff from what he was left with.

 

1. Don't trade for Kimbrel.

2. Find the Eovaldi's and Porcello's of the world. They are out there.

[Kimmi]

1. Don't trade for Kimbrel.

2. Find the Eovaldi's and Porcello's of the world. They are out there.

 

3. No need for overkill.

[Bellhorn04]

Albert Pujols, through the age of 30, was worth an average of 7.73 WAR per year.

 

After the age of 30 through the present, he has been worth an average of 1.36 WAR per year.

 

Even worse, from the age of 32 through the present, he has been worth a mere .6 WAR each year, on average.

 

That was probably the worst contract in history.

 

Pujols has a big body, though, probably not a real comp for Mookie?

[Kimmi]

Thornburg and Smith are not really great supports for your argument. Pomeranz has definitely fallen out of favor despite a good last year. So it's Sale and a closer.

 

Why do you keep saying Dombrowski had n pitching and had to rebuild the entire staff? He did inherit Porcello, Rodriguez, Wright, Johnson, Barnes, Kelly, Hembree and Workman. Or do you think Thornburg and Smith are more important than the bulk of the staff?

 

Side note - which acquistion took more baseball accumen - emptying the farm for Chris Sale or trading a pending free agent for Rick Porcello? Chris Sale and his talent were hardly a secret to anyone with a pulse. But why is it when a GM acquires a player like Porcello and watches him turn into a high level pitcher, it is written off as "luck"?

 

Amen, brother Notin.

 

I am far more impressed with Dombrowski's acquisitions of Pearce, Kinsler, and Eovaldi, and his earlier signing of Moreland, than I am with his acquisitions of Sale, Kimbrel, and Price.

[dgalehouse]

You do realize this isn't always true, right?

 

Notin , You are just a contrarian and a small time Charlie. Try to think big for once. Enjoy what you are seeing this year. Or else , stick to what you do best. Scouring the bushes for some obscure , undervalued third string catcher we can sign for depth at Pawtucket.

[Bellhorn04]

1. Don't trade for Kimbrel.

 

Even this is a relatively small quibble.

 

Compare this to Ben's results trading for Bailey, Hanrahan and Melancon.

[S5Dewey]

Honestly most of the people who complained about this do realize why it was done.

 

It helps that the players we acquired are mostly in their 20s. If they can bridge until the farm can regenerate then it was a good gamble, and even if not, if we win some postseason banners, it is still worth it

 

This post needs a 'Like" emoji.

[Kimmi]

I still like the idea of setting a budget for the team, in the form of a pay pyramid with the most valuable guys at the top but with an eye on paying all the players. If you pay enormous amounts for one or two players that takes away from what can be paid to the more journeyman types, who nevertheless contribute to the team. The league really sets the total amount available and assuming the big market teams will be willing to pay that much, then the distribution among the players can be argued, but clearly has to leave enough to get quality supporting players.

 

As far as the length of time allowed for a contract, I see it as dependent upon the age of the player. Most players start to decline in their early 30's and by their mid 30's the change in capability becomes evident. Then their are injuries which haunt the careers of most players. Pitchers are in a special category as few of them are still able to produce into their later 30's so the risk goes up. Most pitchers also incur injuries so are more fragile. I would set the 10 year limit on the absolute star who is 25 or 26. Between 27 and 30 I would go with 7 or 8 years, just over 30 5 years and 33 up maybe 2 or 3 years as an upper limit.

 

Historically, we will be carrying Pedey for a few years, perhaps as a reward for his long and valuable service. Panda was a mistake and Price might turn out to become a burden. If we lose a guy when staying within reasonable guidelines it is too bad, but remember, other teams are accepting the risk that management sets as being too high for us to accept. In the long run, being prudent should work out the best.

 

Your budget idea has some merit to it. I don't think that the players would go along with it though. I wonder what guys like Moreland and Pearce are thinking playing alongside players like Price and eventually Mookie who are making several times more than they are.

 

IMO, anything over 4 years is a big contract. For the top players, I can see going 5 or 6 years. And obviously, the player's age is a consideration. For someone like Mookie, I might begrudgingly go 7 or 8 years.

 

Ideally for me, Mookie would take an 8 year extension this offseason @ $30 mil per year.

[Bellhorn04]

Amen, brother Notin.

 

I am far more impressed with Dombrowski's acquisitions of Pearce, Kinsler, and Eovaldi, and his earlier signing of Moreland, than I am with his acquisitions of Sale, Kimbrel, and Price.

 

Kimmi you are such a coupon-clipper.

[Kimmi]

This argument about the Sale deal that 'anyone could have done that' irks me too. What matters is that DD was the one who did it. He seized the opportunity.

 

Are Yankee fans consoled by the fact that Cashman could have done this too? I'm thinking not.

 

That's not the point. It doesn't take a whole lot of genius to spend (overpay) other people's money or prospects to get a player. I could do that.

[Emp9]

Amen, brother Notin.

 

I am far more impressed with Dombrowski's acquisitions of Pearce, Kinsler, and Eovaldi, and his earlier signing of Moreland, than I am with his acquisitions of Sale, Kimbrel, and Price.

 

I agree in general with this. Finding diamonds in the rough isn’t quite the right saying, but close enough I’ll go with it. Although I still think the Sale trade was his best, these low key mid-season acquisitions are equally as important if you’re trying to build a winner.

[Bellhorn04]

That's not the point. It doesn't take a whole lot of genius to spend (overpay) other people's money or prospects to get a player. I could do that.

 

No, I think there's a whole other point. Credit should be given for seizing a great opportunity. Supposedly many other GM's could have gotten Sale too. But guess what, they didn't. They were snoozing, I guess.

[Emp9]

Kimmi you are such a coupon-clipper.

 

Lol

[Kimmi]

That was probably the worst contract in history.

 

Pujols has a big body, though, probably not a real comp for Mookie?

 

I'm not even talking about his contract. Pujols was older when he signed his, I realize that.

 

I'm talking about age by age comparisons.

 

Pujols might not be the best comp. I understand that some players age better than others. But the fact of the matter is, players peak at about 28. They start to decline in their very early 30s, and by the mid 30s that decline is usually quite drastic. It is completely possible that the last 5 years of Mookie's 10 year deal will be an albatross.

 

There are some players who defy those odds. Mookie might be one of them.

 

For me, it's too big of a risk to take.

 

I'll ask again. Is 5 years of an MVP type player worth also having 5 years of replacement level?

[Kimmi]

No, I think there's a whole other point. Credit should be given for seizing a great opportunity. Supposedly many other GM's could have gotten Sale too. But guess what, they didn't. They were snoozing, I guess.

 

Or maybe they weren't willing to overpay as much as Dombrowski was?

[Bellhorn04]

Or maybe they weren't willing to overpay as much as Dombrowski was?

 

You believe that we overpaid for Sale?

[Bellhorn04]

I'll ask again. Is 5 years of an MVP type player worth also having 5 years of replacement level?

 

I think FanGraphs would argue yes. They have an 8 WAR player worth about $65 million.

 

Factor in present value considerations and all that, and I'd say you're winning or breaking even.

[Slasher9]

No, I think there's a whole other point. Credit should be given for seizing a great opportunity. Supposedly many other GM's could have gotten Sale too. But guess what, they didn't. They were snoozing, I guess.

 

It’s not like we traded a bag of balls for him.

[Slasher9]

Or maybe they weren't willing to overpay as much as Dombrowski was?

 

Overpay might not be the right word. But I would guess that nobody matched our very very good trade offer for Sale.

[Emp9]

That was probably the worst contract in history.

 

Pujols has a big body, though, probably not a real comp for Mookie?

 

I always thought Mauer’s was.

[S5Dewey]

 

I'll ask again. Is 5 years of an MVP type player worth also having 5 years of replacement level?

 

That's a pretty big drop from year five being an MVP type player to year 6 being replacement level. I certainly would be happy with five years of MVP quality from Mookie followed by a (IMO) more reasonable assumption of a decline over the next five years to the point of being slightly above average. And that's what I think we'd be getting.

[Slasher9]

I always thought Mauer’s was.

 

A-roid?

[S5Dewey]

You believe that we overpaid for Sale?

 

I'm not sure where that line between "fairly paid" and "overpaid" is when we're talking about what Sale has brought to this club. Maybe the more reasonable question to ask is where would we be if we hadn't made that trade and instead either kept the players we traded or traded them for another player.

 

Then the next logical question is, would that "other player" bring more to the team than Chris Sale does? I doubt it.

[Emp9]

That's a pretty big drop from year five being an MVP type player to year 6 being replacement level. I certainly would be happy with five years of MVP quality from Mookie followed by a (IMO) more reasonable assumption of a decline over the next five years to the point of being slightly above average. And that's what I think we'd be getting.

 

For a guy like Mookie, I would also look at the “MVP type” year(s) he’s already given us on the cheap. No? I cld be wrong. Wouldn’t we be paying atleast some of a huge contract for what he did prior?

[notin]

Well, we do need to get lucky with some draft picks, I'm certainly not arguing that.

 

But it doesn't change my thinking that DD has done pretty much what he had to do given the roster he inherited and the mandate I believe Henry gave him.

 

In that respect, isn’t this more about Henry than Dombrowski? Cherington was building a long term pipeline.

 

In fact, trying to keep Cherington on was one of Dombrowsk’s better ideas, since Cherington was good at scouting and drafting, whereas Dombrowski has a sportier record there. But then, according to many, Dombrowski fired Cherington, which, all things considered, was not a smart move.

 

So according to you, Henry mandated the change, Cherington was fired for making it possible, and Dombrowski gets all the credit. That about right?