And the off season begins (2018-19)

[Dojji]

Not really - Cubs had the same problem. You look at the team scouting ranks and the top is dominated by teams without recent major league track record. The likelihood that a team has put together a serious contender while sustaining oodles of stars at AA-AAA are extremely low. The math just doesn't add up.

 

Farm systems are supremely important ... but I think the "Farm" term is specifically appropriate. There's a harvest, and then a new crop - but there will be lag there. There certainly has not been enough time to judge Dombrowski's replenishment efforts in either direction.

 

What it comes down to is a juggling of priorities. If you have priorities other than consistently winning, you won't win. And if ownership has a priority of consistently winning, and you don't share those priorities, you get fired.

 

You can maintain other secondary priorities to a point, and building a good talent pipeline is a fine secondary goal,. but at some point the secondary goals give way to the primary obligation of giving ownership winning teams. This is where Ben Cherington failed. His #1 goal was something other than winning at the big league level and also something other than the owner's own priorities, and BC was tone-deaf to the concerns of Henry when the team started going off track.

 

Henry was laying a lot of money out for a bad product on the field while Ben Cherington hoarded prospects. That was not what ownership wanted, or what they needed to make money on this team, so he was fired, simple as that. It was an example of misplaced priorities literally putting the cart in front of the horse -- prioritizing the delivery method over the payload, if you will

[Bellhorn04]

Will be interesting to see what Harper gets. Whatever he gets Mookie will get more. $300 million may be Mookie's asking price. gulp.

 

Harper's looking for more like $400 million.

[OH FOY]

This team was so f***ing good this year that nobody is posting the past few days. There is barely anything to talk about since we are all in the afterglow of one of the most dominant MLB teams of all time.

 

Now its time for one of the most Dominant teams in the NFL last 18 years, in New England.

[Slasher9]

I'm kind of feeling like it still hasn't sunk in all the way. Worldly events and concerns have been occupying my mind a lot, too.

.

you texans f***ed up again. god damn it.

florida, TX, & ohio can get bent.

[Slasher9]

Whatever he gets Mookie will get more. $300 million may be Mookie's asking price. gulp.

 

especially since he has a daughter as of yesterday. got to make sure his kids are taken care of.

[kenmeister]

Harper's looking for more like $400 million.

 

How often does a team win when one player makes so much? As good as Betts is, it's a team sport and committing so much to one player, gosh guys I don't know. We clearly screwed up the Lester contract extension, but we shouldn't go too far in the other direction.

[Dojji]

It is possible to build a championship team without decimating the farm system.

 

Not indefinitely. Sooner or later it comes to a head and you have to decide which to sacrifice to sustain the other. Or as it says in the Bible, "no man can serve two Masters." Sooner or later, you do have to choose.

 

It is possible to assemble a core and have reserves to replenish it for a run of 5-10 years, but at the end of the day, attrition, money, mistakes and ordinary random chance is going to deplete your big league roster unless you're pulling out all the stops to sustain it -- and frequently will do so even if you are doing everything within your power to prevent it.

 

We know because this happened to us between 2009 and 2015 and contributed heavily to some of the terrible seasons we experienced at that time, a lot of the blame for which it has to be said goes to St. Theo.

 

This is especially true because MLB has been closing off the ways rich teams can gain advantage in the player development market by saturating their farm with IFAs. It used to be that both big money teams and small market teams that were going all in on player development (pertinent examples of the latter being Tampa Bay and KC) could make a splash in the international market to give their farm system a much needed shot in the arm, but that is much more closely regulated now in favor of parity, the Braves just paid the price for not realizing that the cowboy era of IFA signings is over and the Dodgers might be joining them.

 

It should surprise no one that part of how Theo and BC built their great farm was exploiting the wildcat era in the international free agent market, that's simply where the market inefficiency was at the time. That option is no longer as open as it used to be and the playing field is much more level, making it far harder than it used to be to have your cake and eat it too, as BC found out the hard way.

 

Kimmi, I'm sorry, you still have your head in an era that ended a couple years back and is probably not returning. It is NOT always going to be possible to make a huge splash in IFA to supplement a weak draft like Theo did several times when he was here. The challenge level is going up and if you don't evaluate and stack your proprities to match the current reality, it's going to bite you in the butt like it did for us in the first half of this decade.

 

Short answer -- unless you're prepared to tank, and BC's fate is a pretty good evidence that we are not, setting up the future is what you do after you're built to win now. If you try to do both, you will wind up doing neither.

Edited November 7, 2018 by Dojji

[BillyWilliams]

you texans f***ed up again. god damn it.

florida, TX, & ohio can get bent.

 

You have your head so far up your ass you are using your bellybutton as a porthole window.

[BillyWilliams]

Not indefinitely. It is possible to assemble a core and have reserves to replenish it for a run of 5-10 years, but at the end of the day, attrition, money, mistakes and ordinary random chance is going to deplete your big league roster unless you're pulling out all the stops to sustain it -- and frequently will do so even if you are doing everything within your power to prevent it.

 

We know because this happened to us between 2009 and 2015 and contributed heavily to some of the terrible seasons we experienced at that time, a lot of the blame for which it has to be said goes to St. Theo.

 

This is especially true because MLB has been closing off the ways rich teams can gain advantage in the player development market by saturating their farm with IFAs. It used to be that both big money teams and small market teams that were going all in on player development (pertinent examples of the latter being Tampa Bay and KC) could make a splash in the international market to give their farm system a much needed shot in the arm, but that is much more closely regulated now in favor of parity, the Braves just paid the price for not realizing that the cowboy era of IFA signings is over and the Dodgers might be joining them.

 

It should surprise no one that part of how Theo and BC built their great farm was exploiting the wildcat era in the international free agent market, that's simply where the market inefficiency was at the time. That option is no longer as open as it used to be and the playing field is much more level, making it far harder than it used to be to have your cake and eat it too, as BC found out the hard way.

 

Kimmi, I'm sorry, you still have your head in an era that ended a couple years back and is probably not returning. It is NOT always going to be possible to make a huge splash in IFA to supplement a weak draft like Theo did several times when he was here. The challenge level is going up and if you don't evaluate and stack your proprities to match the current reality, it's going to bite you in the butt like it did for us in the first half of this decade.

 

Short answer -- unless you're prepared to tank, and BC's fate is a pretty good evidence that we are not, setting up the future is what you do after you're built to win now. If you try to do both, you will wind up doing neither.

 

Excellent post.

[mvp 78]

you texans f***ed up again. god damn it.

florida, TX, & ohio can get bent.

 

The hate FL is getting today ignores the fact that yesterday they banned greyhound racing, reinstated voting rights for 1,000,000 people and banned offshore drilling.

 

But NJ is giving us that great human being Bob Menendez.

 

Moral of the story, clean up the s*** in your own yard before complaining about the dogshit down the street.

 

...and that concludes mvp's quarterly political opinion post

[Dojji]

you texans f***ed up again. god damn it.

florida, TX, & ohio can get bent.

 

If electing a Republican to office earns that level of invective, you might have a problem.

 

I prescribe a chill pill and a heavy dose of perspective.

[jacksonianmarch]

You can definitely build a farm and be a good team, but it requires you to hit on your players and supplement with spending, not trading. The Sox minor league system currently suffers from three issues.

 

1. The trades- yes the system was gutted, but the guys dealt off over the last three years would have either surfaced or flames out by now. IE, the only real “prospect” in the 2019 top 100 that the Sox dealt off is Logan Allen. Kopech was in the bigs. Moncada and Margot as well. Espinosa can’t get healthy, etc. the trades this season really didn’t subtract much aside from Buttrey and Beeks, both guys off the radar in terms of impact prospects.

 

2. The drafting. DD has not really found that diamond in the rough that most teams find. Look at the top 100 and roughly half of them weren’t $1.5+ mil INTL or first round picks. Scouting plays into this as does development. They’ve failed in both those areas.

 

3. Injury/bad luck. The Sox has two top 100 prospects. One had TJS, the other did roids. That’s part of the prospect game

 

If you keep your talent in your system, draft/scout/develop well or avoid the big time injury bug or suspensions, you can build a farm from the back end of the draft. DD hasn’t been able to do either of the three

[kenmeister]

Harper's looking for more like $400 million.

 

I just read that he rejected $300 million for 10 years. I can't wrap my head around this.

 

I realize OPS isn't everything, but ...

 

2012 .817

2013 .854

2014 .767

2015 1.109

2016 .814

2017 1.008

2018 .889

 

If he was over 1 every year I'd say maybe, depending on his defense, but he's actually only cracked that level twice, and conversely his other 5 years were all under .900. I just don't see why he's so good to command a 10 year contract. He's a lifetime .279 hitter who has cracked 40 home runs once; this isn't Hank Aaron here. And to think that he actually got offered one, and he turned it down!

[mvp 78]

I just read that he rejected $300 million for 10 years. I can't wrap my head around this.

 

I realize OPS isn't everything, but ...

 

2012 .817

2013 .854

2014 .767

2015 1.109

2016 .814

2017 1.008

2018 .889

 

If he was over 1 every year I'd say maybe, depending on his defense, but he's actually only cracked that level twice, and conversely his other 5 years were all under .900. I just don't see why he's so good to command a 10 year contract. He's a lifetime .279 hitter who has cracked 40 home runs once; this isn't Hank Aaron here. And to think that he actually got offered one, and he turned it down!

He's spent his whole life having people tell him his s*** doesn't stink. He's not worth $30AAV. Any team that pays him that deserves to lose.

[Bellhorn04]

I just read that he rejected $300 million for 10 years. I can't wrap my head around this.

 

I realize OPS isn't everything, but ...

 

2012 .817

2013 .854

2014 .767

2015 1.109

2016 .814

2017 1.008

2018 .889

 

If he was over 1 every year I'd say maybe, depending on his defense, but he's actually only cracked that level twice, and conversely his other 5 years were all under .900. I just don't see why he's so good to command a 10 year contract. He's a lifetime .279 hitter who has cracked 40 home runs once; this isn't Hank Aaron here. And to think that he actually got offered one, and he turned it down!

 

I agree.

 

Here's something truly frightening to consider.

 

Over the last 3 years, Harper's total fWAR is 11.3

 

Over the same period:

 

Trout 26.3

Betts 23.9

 

So if Harper really is worth 400 million, then by extrapolation:

 

Trout is worth 931 million

Betts is worth 846 million

[Kimmi]

I was just thinking this. I don't have anything to add right now. Certain things we can say that maybe will slightly improve the team. But when Boston went 11-3 in the post season and two of those series were against teams with 100 wins or more...... That is a dynamic team. Just enjoying the aftermath right now. I will get my World Series hat today!

 

I have started re-watching the playoff games that I have saved on my DVR. I've only re-watched ALDS Game 1 so far.

 

The games are so much more relaxing to watch after the fact.

 

Also, I have put in my Christmas order for the World Series DVD set.

[Kimmi]

Not indefinitely. Sooner or later it comes to a head and you have to decide which to sacrifice to sustain the other. Or as it says in the Bible, "no man can serve two Masters." Sooner or later, you do have to choose.

 

It is possible to assemble a core and have reserves to replenish it for a run of 5-10 years, but at the end of the day, attrition, money, mistakes and ordinary random chance is going to deplete your big league roster unless you're pulling out all the stops to sustain it -- and frequently will do so even if you are doing everything within your power to prevent it.

 

We know because this happened to us between 2009 and 2015 and contributed heavily to some of the terrible seasons we experienced at that time, a lot of the blame for which it has to be said goes to St. Theo.

 

This is especially true because MLB has been closing off the ways rich teams can gain advantage in the player development market by saturating their farm with IFAs. It used to be that both big money teams and small market teams that were going all in on player development (pertinent examples of the latter being Tampa Bay and KC) could make a splash in the international market to give their farm system a much needed shot in the arm, but that is much more closely regulated now in favor of parity, the Braves just paid the price for not realizing that the cowboy era of IFA signings is over and the Dodgers might be joining them.

 

It should surprise no one that part of how Theo and BC built their great farm was exploiting the wildcat era in the international free agent market, that's simply where the market inefficiency was at the time. That option is no longer as open as it used to be and the playing field is much more level, making it far harder than it used to be to have your cake and eat it too, as BC found out the hard way.

 

Kimmi, I'm sorry, you still have your head in an era that ended a couple years back and is probably not returning. It is NOT always going to be possible to make a huge splash in IFA to supplement a weak draft like Theo did several times when he was here. The challenge level is going up and if you don't evaluate and stack your proprities to match the current reality, it's going to bite you in the butt like it did for us in the first half of this decade.

 

Short answer -- unless you're prepared to tank, and BC's fate is a pretty good evidence that we are not, setting up the future is what you do after you're built to win now. If you try to do both, you will wind up doing neither.

 

Since Henry took over ownership, I have felt like the Sox were contenders every year as we entered the season. Obviously, there were several seasons in which things didn't work out. What happens on the field can't be helped. It's the job of the GM to put together a contending team on paper. Theo, Ben, and Dombrowski have done that for over 15 consecutive years.

 

So yes, IMO, that kind of success can be sustained if the farm system is good enough. It has been good enough until about 2 years ago. Time will tell whether that marks the end of the run of having a contending team as we enter the season.

[oldtimer]

Since Henry took over ownership, I have felt like the Sox were contenders every year as we entered the season. Obviously, there were several seasons in which things didn't work out. What happens on the field can't be helped. It's the job of the GM to put together a contending team on paper. Theo, Ben, and Dombrowski have done that for over 15 consecutive years.

 

So yes, IMO, that kind of success can be sustained if the farm system is good enough. It has been good enough until about 2 years ago. Time will tell whether that marks the end of the run of having a contending team as we enter the season.

 

Our farm system is somewhat depleted, but as far as promotion to the club, how many players do you need per year? I would assume 2 or 3 is all that can move forward. This year relief pitching, starting pitching and maybe one position player is all that would possibly move up. The rest of our guys are trade material and that is how they were used. Now we do have low draft picks, because of our performances the laast few years We just don't get the top picks when making the playoffs.

[Kimmi]

Our farm system is somewhat depleted, but as far as promotion to the club, how many players do you need per year? I would assume 2 or 3 is all that can move forward. This year relief pitching, starting pitching and maybe one position player is all that would possibly move up. The rest of our guys are trade material and that is how they were used. Now we do have low draft picks, because of our performances the laast few years We just don't get the top picks when making the playoffs.

 

I get all that oldtimer. I don't expect all of the prospects to be brought up to the big club. I also know that part of the reason for having prospects is to trade them. My issue is with the magnitude of the prospects traded away in approximately 2 years. Our farm system went from being one of the best to being one of the worst in that short amount of time. I have never questioned or doubted the caliber of the teams that Dombrowski has put on the big league field. I just think there can be the same short term success balanced better with the long term outlook.

 

All that said, I really do not want to take away from the record breaking team that we had this year, not to mention the World Series Championship. Dombrowski set out with a goal, and he very successfully accomplished it. His moves were all worth it. Thanks Dave!

[notin]

Our farm system is somewhat depleted, but as far as promotion to the club, how many players do you need per year? I would assume 2 or 3 is all that can move forward. This year relief pitching, starting pitching and maybe one position player is all that would possibly move up. The rest of our guys are trade material and that is how they were used. Now we do have low draft picks, because of our performances the laast few years We just don't get the top picks when making the playoffs.

 

Teams have 15 extra players on the 40 man roster and typically come close to using all of them at some point in the season. In fact, most teams will add players to the 40 man roster during the season.

 

The 2018 Red Sox called up 13(ish - quick count) players from the minors last year. This does include non- prospects like Dan Butler and Brandon Phillips...

[moonslav59]

Teams have 15 extra players on the 40 man roster and typically come close to using all of them at some point in the season. In fact, most teams will add players to the 40 man roster during the season.

 

The 2018 Red Sox called up 13(ish - quick count) players from the minors last year. This does include non- prospects like Dan Butler and Brandon Phillips...

 

We used 23 pitchers last year, alone, including 17 who had as many or more IP'd as Poyner (22.1 IP).

 

I think we used 44 players in total, including Pearce, Kinsler, Phillips and a brief appearance by Pedey and 7 PAs by Butler.

[moonslav59]

I get all that oldtimer. I don't expect all of the prospects to be brought up to the big club. I also know that part of the reason for having prospects is to trade them. My issue is with the magnitude of the prospects traded away in approximately 2 years. Our farm system went from being one of the best to being one of the worst in that short amount of time. I have never questioned or doubted the caliber of the teams that Dombrowski has put on the big league field. I just think there can be the same short term success balanced better with the long term outlook.

 

All that said, I really do not want to take away from the record breaking team that we had this year, not to mention the World Series Championship. Dombrowski set out with a goal, and he very successfully accomplished it. His moves were all worth it. Thanks Dave!

 

I really feel like I agree with you on all of this, but I'm okay with trading many prospects, if it means giving us a top chance at winning rings. We won a ring, so it's all vindicated, IMO. That's not to say, we can't argue we went farther than we needed to, or that we might have made better trades than the ones we ended up making. That's part of what this site is all about, IMO.

 

I posted thousands of posts suggesting possible trades over the year- most of them including prospects and top prospects. I've never been for hoarding them, and I've argued that Ben was going to trade many top prospects had he stayed on as GM. Who knows, if he'd have done better or worse. It's a futile argument anyways.

 

To me, the argument is rarely about how good did the prospect we trade end up doing, unless it's like Jeff Bagwell, but more about what else might you have gotten, or could you still be highly competitive had you not traded as many or different prospects.

 

The list of DD's traded prospects is massive, and the jury is still long away from being out on some of them, but here is a list of all he traded as ranked by their highest ranking on soxprospects.com (granted, this is deceiving at times, because players might have reached #5 but were traded after theu slipped way down in the rankings- some we might have DFA'd eventually):

 

1 Yoan Moncada

3 Anderson Espinoza

3 Manuel Margot

5 Jalen Beeks

5 Bryce Brentz

5 Deven Marrero

6 Javier Guerra

7 Luis Basabe

9 Mauricio Dubon

12 Travis Shaw (not a prospect at time of deal)

12 Wendell Rijo

13 Logan Allen

18 Luis Basabe

18 Jamie Callahan

20 Carlos Asuaje

21 Jonathan Aro

 

That's a long list, even if you cross many off the list as irrelevant.

[harmony]

In a trade with the Seattle Mariners, what would the Red Sox want in return for catcher Christian Vazquez with his long-term contract coming off a season in which the 28-year-old posted a negative 0.8 fWAR?

 

:)

[Bellhorn04]

In a trade with the Seattle Mariners, what would the Red Sox want in return for catcher Christian Vazquez with his long-term contract coming off a season in which the 28-year-old posted a negative 0.8 fWAR?

 

:)

 

Serious question or just razzing about the negative WAR?

 

Vazquez's 'long-term contract', of course, is only 3 years at about 4.5 mill. You only have to post an fWAR of about 0.6 to earn 4.5 mill these days...

 

Besides which, surely the defensive value of a catcher is one of the most difficult things to measure with WAR...

[notin]

In a trade with the Seattle Mariners, what would the Red Sox want in return for catcher Christian Vazquez with his long-term contract coming off a season in which the 28-year-old posted a negative 0.8 fWAR?

 

:)

 

Tough to answer, as Dombrowski doesn’t post here.

 

But there is a possibility of a deal, since the Mariners now have a need and the Sox have a surplus.

 

I would imagine the only two players on the Mariners’ MLB roster that would intrigue the Sox and not be a massive overpay are Ryon Healy and Alex Colome.

 

However, getting a minor leaguer or two to serve as viable trade chips is always possible...

[jacksonianmarch]

Vasquez has next to no value right now.

[moonslav59]

Serious question or just razzing about the negative WAR?

 

Vazquez's 'long-term contract', of course, is only 3 years at about 4.5 mill. You only have to post an fWAR of about 0.6 to earn 4.5 mill these days...

 

Besides which, surely the defensive value of a catcher is one of the most difficult things to measure with WAR...

 

...and WAR does not factor in a lot of what catchers do.

[moonslav59]

Vasquez has next to no value right now.

 

He may not be quite as valuable as his contract to some GMs and posters, but he has a lot of value.

[Bellhorn04]

Vasquez has next to no value right now.

 

I wouldn't say that.

 

He was the starting catcher for the champs. Cora showed trust in him as a defender, giving him most of the starts in the playoffs.

 

His contract is very reasonable.

 

But his value would depend on how other GM's value his defense.

 

It's all kind of a non-issue anyway...

[notin]

Vasquez has next to no value right now.

 

Oh you say that about all the Sox players. But a player’s true value in a trade depends on only two things, neither of which can be quantified statistically (although they might be justified that way).

 

The only true factors to determine trade value are

 

1) How badly Team A wants to acquire the player, and

2) How badly Team B wants to keep the player.

 

If the Mariners really want Vazquez, they offer more for him. If they don’t want him that much, they offer less and move on if it doesn’t meet the Sox demands...