Dave Dombrowski

[SoxnCycles]

Right now Kimbrel, Barnes, and Velazquez all have about the same WAR: 1.9, 1.8, and 1.6. Why would DD want to pay a king's ransom for the 1.9 guy?

 

Because he's got that beard!

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

I'm still waiting to receive my panda hat from Amazon!

 

That fat f*** is on the DL again, this time for the rest of the season. And the Sox keep paying for his time off!

 

I do wonder why his agent has not secured for him a massive belt endorsement deal. It would have seemed obvious. No need to go on Shark Tank, just self fund and book a bunch of info-mercials for the Panda Power Belt!

 

What a wasted opportunity.

 

Mail delivery from Amazon can sometimes be very slow, Spud. I'm still waiting for my Henry Owens' autographed baseball.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Before we determine Kimbrel's fate, I think we should see how he does in the remaining 47 games and the playoffs. I'm pretty sure that's what DD's doing.

[Dojji]

OK. it took almost 800 posts in this thread but we finally ALL agree:

- DD eviscerated the Farm

 

I disagree with this. The farm was largely "eviscerated" by the graduation of Betts, Beni and Devers. Other than Shaw, most of what DD traded were A ballers who were multiple years from contending for MLB time. If those are the guys near the top of our prospect charts, that's already the sign of a pretty weak system.

 

The fact is that the real damage was done because Cherington's drafts didn't work out very well, especially on the pitching side of the game.

 

- Ben makes a good cup of coffee (but only because he wants to)

 

lol

 

I still think BC would make a good GM for a mid to small market team. He didn't understand what the Boston Red Sox are all about, but his management style might work with a team like the Reds, or the Rockies, or even a hard-luck midmarket like the Mariners.

 

- Closers are overrated by fans and should not be given LTC

 

Partially agree. But, if you need a good closer, and don't have a good internal option then your only options are to leave a festering sore at a key position, or pay the price free agent closers will agree to.

[notin]

Before we determine Kimbrel's fate, I think we should see how he does in the remaining 47 games and the playoffs. I'm pretty sure that's what DD's doing.

 

While I get your point, really none of us determine Kimbrel's fate anyway...

[a700hitter]

I'm still waiting to receive my panda hat from Amazon!

 

That fat f*** is on the DL again, this time for the rest of the season. And the Sox keep paying for his time off!

 

I do wonder why his agent has not secured for him a massive belt endorsement deal. It would have seemed obvious. No need to go on Shark Tank, just self fund and book a bunch of info-mercials for the Panda Power Belt!

 

What a wasted opportunity.

Velcro belts. They just pop off, but they don’t break. A missed opportunity.

[notin]

I disagree with this. The farm was largely "eviscerated" by the graduation of Betts, Beni and Devers. Other than Shaw, most of what DD traded were A ballers who were multiple years from contending for MLB time. If those are the guys near the top of our prospect charts, that's already the sign of a pretty weak system.

 

The fact is that the real damage was done because Cherington's drafts didn't work out very well, especially on the pitching side of the game.

 

 

 

lol

 

I still think BC would make a good GM for a mid to small market team. He didn't understand what the Boston Red Sox are all about, but his management style might work with a team like the Reds, or the Rockies, or even a hard-luck midmarket like the Mariners.

 

 

 

Partially agree. But, if you need a good closer, and don't have a good internal option then your only options are to leave a festering sore at a key position, or pay the price free agent closers will agree to.

 

 

 

DD didn't trade away a "bunch of A-ball" players. He did trade Logan Allen, a couple of Luis Basabe's and Anderson Espinoza. But Margot, Guerra, Moncada, Kopech, Dubon, Buttrey and a fwe others were all above A-ball. And he released Ben Taylor for reasons that will never make sense, especially since he was still holding on to Bryce Brentz.

 

Also, closers are overrated if you think they are typically worth market value. Most good closers have been failed starters.

[Spudboy]

Velcro belts. They just pop off, but they don’t break. A missed opportunity.

 

Velcro would be a key feature.

 

The standard Panda Power Belt would be pretty normal.

 

But step up and pay $239. ( plus handling fees that bring the total up to about $320. ) and you will get several key features.

 

The upgrade will have a built-in WiFi Hot Spot with booster and auxiliary battery pack for those solo sessions in public stalls. No need to worry about signal strength in a steel stall surrounded by ceramic tile and re-bar reinforced concrete!

 

This belt comes with an endorsement from at least one MLB player and it has been "battle tested" in MLB stadiums.

[notin]

There can be no Panda Belt. No belt is big enough...

[Bellhorn04]

They are selling ”Kimbrel grow a beard“ kits

 

A Kimbrel Beard Chia Pet is an excellent idea.

[Kimmi]

But you could understand the rationale behind 5 years $100 million for Sandoval?

 

Understanding the rationale behind a contract and thinking it's a good thing are two entirely different animals. Sandoval's contract was a bad contract which I would not have done.

 

And while I would never give Kimbrel that kind of contract, I could understand the rationale behind it, as I said in this post:

 

I can see where it's coming from.

 

I can also understand why fans are willing to go there.

 

Convince me that it's the right thing or even okay to do? That's a whole different story.

[Kimmi]

I agree, of course. It is a massive misappropriation of funds. Just stupid.

 

I'm down with 3 years max. I still say 15-17 mil/yr CAN get it done.

 

Another voice of reason.

[cp176]

OK. it took almost 800 posts in this thread but we finally ALL agree:

- DD eviscerated the Farm

- Ben makes a good cup of coffee (but only because he wants to)

- Closers are overrated by fans and should not be given LTC

 

??? - not everybody -

DD did not eviscerate the farm even though he dealt your favorite and someday he may even pitch in a major league game.

I could give a s*** what Cherington is doing now.

Closers I guess might be over rated by some - not by me. Thing is though, elite closers don't come along that often! Kimbrel is elite. You sign him if you can. You don't just let him go and throw s*** at the wall and hope it sticks.

 

What the f*** do I know right slasher - I hate replay. In an effort to get everything right, most people here would have a f***ing robot calling balls and strikes. Maybe even eliminate shifts right. If losing more fans is your gig, lets all just endorse all of the changes coming to the game. My world just isn't perfect - I love this game but oh well I am growing tired of the geniuses who think that they can make it better by continually eliminating the human factor. I really do wonder what the guys who play the game for a living think about all the new wave s*** that clutters the game? I have hunch I know.

 

Is this where some idiot calls me out because I don't name the geniuses or maybe people like me just get written off because we are old school.

[oldtimer]

??? - not everybody -

DD did not eviscerate the farm even though he dealt your favorite and someday he may even pitch in a major league game.

I could give a s*** what Cherington is doing now.

Closers I guess might be over rated by some - not by me. Thing is though, elite closers don't come along that often! Kimbrel is elite. You sign him if you can. You don't just let him go and throw s*** at the wall and hope it sticks.

 

What the f*** do I know right slasher - I hate replay. In an effort to get everything right, most people here would have a f***ing robot calling balls and strikes. Maybe even eliminate shifts right. If losing more fans is your gig, lets all just endorse all of the changes coming to the game. My world just isn't perfect - I love this game but oh well I am growing tired of the geniuses who think that they can make it better by continually eliminating the human factor. I really do wonder what the guys who play the game for a living think about all the new wave s*** that clutters the game? I have hunch I know.

 

Is this where some idiot calls me out because I don't name the geniuses or maybe people like me just get written off because we are old school.

 

I am old school but find it interesting that those who might disagree with you are idiots to your way of thinking. All change is not bad, the shift came in as a change and has changed the game and not for the better. Starting pitchers used to finish games at a much higher rate, but now we have a line of RP's in from the 5th inning on, each throwing 95 mph or greater. We have umpires who invent their own strike zones. The offense has changed to mainly HR's. These are all recent changes by my standards. Give the hitters a break. If it takes some limiting of the shift and standardized ball and strike calling, so be it.

[cp176]

I am old school but find it interesting that those who might disagree with you are idiots to your way of thinking. All change is not bad, the shift came in as a change and has changed the game and not for the better. Starting pitchers used to finish games at a much higher rate, but now we have a line of RP's in from the 5th inning on, each throwing 95 mph or greater. We have umpires who invent their own strike zones. The offense has changed to mainly HR's. These are all recent changes by my standards. Give the hitters a break. If it takes some limiting of the shift and standardized ball and strike calling, so be it.

 

I am officially apologizing for my rant. For the record, I'm not calling everyone who disagrees with me an idiot. There certainly are a few idiots other than myself on here. If your implication is that I am calling anyone who disagrees with me an idiot, then you are wrong.

With respect to shifts, I don't mind them at all. That is the type of strategy that comes about from an actual study (metrically I guess) of the game. I personally think that this gives an advantage to any player who has learned bat control no matter how difficult a skill that is to learn.

[Maxbialystock]

I am old school but find it interesting that those who might disagree with you are idiots to your way of thinking. All change is not bad, the shift came in as a change and has changed the game and not for the better. Starting pitchers used to finish games at a much higher rate, but now we have a line of RP's in from the 5th inning on, each throwing 95 mph or greater. We have umpires who invent their own strike zones. The offense has changed to mainly HR's. These are all recent changes by my standards. Give the hitters a break. If it takes some limiting of the shift and standardized ball and strike calling, so be it.

 

All due respect, but just how, exactly, is "standardized ball and strike calling" going to bring baseball back to a presumed golden age before all these shifts, focus on dingers, relievers coming in early, etc?

 

I'm with cp176 in wanting to keep baseball a human endeavor, which means fallible human umpires. Those superimposed strike zones, which I look at right along with everyone else, are not the reality the robot ump advocates think they are. Reality is standing at that plate--or behind it or looking at it from the mound--and trying to be ready for a wide variety of angles, speeds, etc which will be coming at your or which you are trying to cause happen. Reality is seeing basically the same strike zone be Porcello's friend one night against the vaunted Yankees lineup one night and his enemy five nights later against the Jays. I firmly believe that standardized calls on balls and strikes will not make baseball one iota better. By taking umpires out of the central act of all baseball games, it will render whatever else they do increasingly irrelevant. I am already sick and tired of seeing, several times a game, the umpires all huddled around someone with a phone to experts in NYC who are reviewing replays and making decisions on calls. One recent trend I like is that these days they are less likely to reverse a call that was really close, which will discourage managers from gratuitous challenges.

[Slasher9]

wait...so we dont all agree????

 

FTR - CP you are one of my favorite posters. one day we will agree on....something. ~

[Emp9]

I think the Shift has had a bit of a domino effect on the game recent years. There’s not a lot of incentive for a batter to NOT try to hit a HR and bypass it all together. If hitting a baseball isn’t the hardest thing to do in sports, surely it’s still the hardest thing to do in baseball. Squarely. And that says nothing about hitting it where a defender isn’t. And sure, especially if the game is on the line, i’d love to see more batters try and square-up a bunt to defeat a shift, but that seems like a different argument. That’s a rabbit-hole we can go down too. But if the MLB powers that be want a more exciting game then they have to look at creating some defensive rules that limit the shift. Football & basketball have some sort of illegal defense rules. In baseball its f***ing Vietnam out there. And don’t get me wrong, I think the shift has it’s place but without some rules one better get used to the 28HR, .220 BA .290 OBP Type of hitter. If they do it right it could be fun and even more strategic. Until then, I’ll have keep holding down my lunch when I hear how great world cup soccer is.

[Bellhorn04]

I think the Shift has had a bit of a domino effect on the game recent years. There’s not a lot of incentive for a batter to NOT try to hit a HR and bypass it all together. If hitting a baseball isn’t the hardest thing to do in sports, surely it’s still the hardest thing to do in baseball. Squarely. And that says nothing about hitting it where a defender isn’t. And sure, especially if the game is on the line, i’d love to see more batters try and square-up a bunt to defeat a shift, but that seems like a different argument. That’s a rabbit-hole we can go down too. But if the MLB powers that be want a more exciting game then they have to look at creating some defensive rules that limit the shift. Football & basketball have some sort of illegal defense rules. In baseball its f***ing Vietnam out there. And don’t get me wrong, I think the shift has it’s place but without some rules one better get used to the 28HR, .220 BA .290 OBP Type of hitter. If they do it right it could be fun and even more strategic. Until then, I’ll have keep holding down my lunch when I hear how great world cup soccer is.

 

I agree with you. The relentless shifting has steered the game in a bad direction.

 

I believe that Manfred is definitely going to bring in some rule changes in response.

[Slasher9]

I think the Shift has had a bit of a domino effect on the game recent years. There’s not a lot of incentive for a batter to NOT try to hit a HR and bypass it all together. If hitting a baseball isn’t the hardest thing to do in sports, surely it’s still the hardest thing to do in baseball. Squarely. And that says nothing about hitting it where a defender isn’t. And sure, especially if the game is on the line, i’d love to see more batters try and square-up a bunt to defeat a shift, but that seems like a different argument. That’s a rabbit-hole we can go down too. But if the MLB powers that be want a more exciting game then they have to look at creating some defensive rules that limit the shift. Football & basketball have some sort of illegal defense rules. In baseball its f***ing Vietnam out there. And don’t get me wrong, I think the shift has it’s place but without some rules one better get used to the 28HR, .220 BA .290 OBP Type of hitter. If they do it right it could be fun and even more strategic. Until then, I’ll have keep holding down my lunch when I hear how great world cup soccer is. ����

 

solid post Emp.

[notin]

I agree with you. The relentless shifting has steered the game in a bad direction.

 

I believe that Manfred is definitely going to bring in some rule changes in response.

 

While I hate the shift, I would hate it more if the Commissioner impose regulations against it. It's a defensive alignment and a strategy. Hitters and offenses need to work around it. What's Manfred going to do after that - make it illegal to choke up on a bat?

 

Pace of play? Go for it! Bring the DH to the NL? Should have been done years ago. But the shift? Get real...

[Bellhorn04]

While I hate the shift, I would hate it more if the Commissioner impose regulations against it. It's a defensive alignment and a strategy. Hitters and offenses need to work around it. What's Manfred going to do after that - make it illegal to choke up on a bat?

 

Pace of play? Go for it! Bring the DH to the NL? Should have been done years ago. But the shift? Get real...

 

Offenses already have responded to the shift. Hitters focusing on launch angle, swinging for the fences, if you strike out it's no big deal. That's your response right there.

[Emp9]

While I hate the shift, I would hate it more if the Commissioner impose regulations against it. It's a defensive alignment and a strategy. Hitters and offenses need to work around it. What's Manfred going to do after that - make it illegal to choke up on a bat?

 

Pace of play? Go for it! Bring the DH to the NL? Should have been done years ago. But the shift? Get real...

 

Have the new pace of play rules had any meaningful affect?

 

And what good does allowing the DH to the NL? Sounds like 15 more hitters batting .220 to me.

 

Fine, a defense can do any crazy ass shift they want on ONE condition. They have to sit a player.

[notin]

Offenses already have responded to the shift. Hitters focusing on launch angle, swinging for the fences, if you strike out it's no big deal. That's your response right there.

 

That's actually only one response, and it's not done specifically to the shift. Hitters do that all the time and coaches teach it all the time. There will be other counter-tactics.

[notin]

Have the new pace of play rules had any meaningful affect?

 

And what good does allowing the DH to the NL? Sounds like 15 more hitters batting .220 to me.

 

Fine, a defense can do any crazy ass shift they want on ONE condition. They have to sit a player.

 

Pace of play doesn't appear to be being enforced for some reason. Sunday's Price/Matsuzaka showdown just drove this point home. It's not a bad idea to use these existing rules; and probably better for the game than eliminating the shift.

 

Why do you think the NL DHs would be worse than AL DHs? You don't think teams will get specific players for the position, like everyone does? Having each league operate under a different set of rules is and has always been stupid. Picture if teams in the AFC were allowed 2 point conversions, but teams in the NFC were not. Andd with pitch count data the whole "strategic" element is outdated anyway. Adopt of the DH - which is used in every league around the world except the PCL in Japan and the National League.

 

The idea of not letting teams have defensive freedoms is silly to me. They still only get 9 players. The filed doesn't get smaller. If this shift fad continues, teams will get around it by prioritizing right-handed hitters...

Edited August 10, 2018 by notin

[Bellhorn04]

That's actually only one response, and it's not done specifically to the shift.

 

You think it doesn't have much to do with the shift?

[notin]

You think it doesn't have much to do with the shift?

 

Not at all. It's taught throughout the minors. Special bats are developed to measure laucn angle.

 

This is all part of Stat Cast, which is the next step over and above sabermetrics, and is used universally, not just for left-handed pull hitters.

 

If the shift was banned, do you think you would stop hearing about launch angle and exit velocity?

[Bellhorn04]

Not at all. It's taught throughout the minors. Special bats are developed to measure laucn angle.

 

This is all part of Stat Cast, which is the next step over and above sabermetrics, and is used universally, not just for left-handed pull hitters.

 

If the shift was banned, do you think you would stop hearing about launch angle and exit velocity?

 

I'm talking about the obvious trends of increased home runs and increased strikeouts at the same time as increased shifting. Surely there is some correlation.

[S5Dewey]

It's an interesting conundrum for MLB.

 

Both football and basketball have done things to increase scoring and thereby increase fan interest. Football now protects both quarterbacks and receivers in an effort to get more passing into the game. In basketball a team now is "awarded" half the length of the court late in the game if they can get the ball in-bounds and call time. (How stupid is that? But it promotes scoring late in close games. It's no wonder I don't like the NBA!)

 

Overall scoring in MLB has remained fairly static for the past 20 years (of course 2018 total runs isn't available yet) so the shift hasn't made a big difference in total runs scored. What the shifts have done is create a change in strategy.

 

I don't like the shifts for multiple reasons but this issue would take care of itself if players were instructed in bunting. JBJ is the best (local) example of what could be done. JBJ has this low BAPIP because he's hitting into a shift while the left side of the infield is sitting there almost naked. If he squares around and drops a few bunts down that 3rd baseline he'll get on base more and two things will happen, both of them good. 1) He'll be on base more when Mookie comes up, and 2) it'll force the defense to stop shifting against him giving him more grass to hit to on the right side.

 

Is there a downside to that?

[Bellhorn04]

I don't like the shifts for multiple reasons but this issue would take care of itself if players were instructed in bunting. JBJ is the best (local) example of what could be done. JBJ has this low BAPIP because he's hitting into a shift while the left side of the infield is sitting there almost naked. If he squares around and drops a few bunts down that 3rd baseline he'll get on base more and two things will happen, both of them good. 1) He'll be on base more when Mookie comes up, and 2) it'll force the defense to stop shifting against him giving him more grass to hit to on the right side.

 

Is there a downside to that?

 

There seems to be a school of thought that if you bunt and try to go the other way more, you're doing exactly what the defense wants you to do. I dunno the answer.