A Realistic View at 2019: Part I

[sk7326]

Lucchino was in baseball for a billion years - and was super experienced building a front office. He clearly was well heeled in EVERY aspect of the baseball business. Remember, Lucchino was Epstein's mentor - he discovered him, and helped pay for Theo to go to law school. I think at a certain point Lucchino could not let go - he was the president, he wanted his say on moves. This was not an unreasonable belief - and so it resulted in some moves which there might not be 100% agreement on. This obviously also applied to Cherington, who also came up the same way.

 

Now Epstein has every incentive to spin his side of the story - it's easy to say ex post that "hey, I would have taken a different approach". But - he was part of a collaborative process, and some of those moves didn't work. Also, I'll submit that all of the moves were not ex ante bad moves. I mean the Red Sox ended up in one offseason signing the top rated pitcher and the top rated position player. And then they made a trade for one of the best power hitters in the league squarely in his prime. Basically injuries (and the ability of the players to deal with them) caused all three moves to be sub-optimal, but all of them made sense. Crawford's failure was obviously more than that (specifically that one of the league's best defensive players went straight into the tank on THAT end).

 

The one thing Dombrowski did (and Henry allowed) was that he is clearly where the buck stops in the front office. Given how accomplished a baseball guy he is, that is not a bad thing. And - by all accounts - he did not just willy nilly destroy the business processes that were already here. (a front office which was the envy of the league) After all, on paper he should NOT have been attracted to Cora - or anybody from the Astros shop - but there you go.

[Bellhorn04]

Call it ironic or whatever you want, but with the Cubs Theo has sort of replicated the Lackey and Crawford signings with Darvish and Heyward.

[sk7326]

Call it ironic or whatever you want, but with the Cubs Theo has sort of replicated the Lackey and Crawford signings with Darvish and Heyward.

 

Heyward was an interesting calculated risk - getting him cheap-ish with a short opt out period. Unfortunately Heyward has been a one way player largely. Darvish has been terrible in a predictable way - that was always a risky signing.

[moonslav59]

If you looked at Crawford's splits with the Rays, as I did at the time of the signing, you'd see he was only a FT player for a team like the Rays but not the Sox.

 

Yes, his defense fell off a cliff, but that was the least of his issues after the signing.

 

I called Crawford "nothing more than a glorified platoon player ...who would drag us down for years to come." I'm not trying to make any superiority claim here, we all know I've been wrong enough to dispel that, but to me, Crawford & Pablo both showed major warning signs.

 

[Dojji]

I think he pushed this...

 

Hey, Theo, we have the money, we want to keep fans interested, keep us good through your so-called "bridge year(s) by signing someone big.

 

Maybe, Theo got to choose who the big signing was, but he was pushed into doing something big for the fans and the marketing.

 

Not sure, if that applied to Ben & Pablo/

 

I think it almost had to. The problem with the BC era is that unlike Theo, BC just didn't have the pull to resist a big, ill advised marketing move.

 

Once again, it comes down to the core thing I've been saying in this thread -- if your priority is anything other than winning, be it marketing or farm development or skimming cash off the top, then you won't win. Sooner or later you will have to sacrifice every other priority to achieve the primary goal, and if your primary goal isn't to win, winning will come second -- simple logic.

 

Lucchino's primary goal was the overall financial health of the franchise. He advocated for moves that were as much about keeping franchise value as strong as he could make it rather than building the best 25 man roster or making a solid 5 year plan. And since Lucchino was so much more senior than the GM in the Cherington era, it created a mismatch that allowed him to win arguments when he shouldn't have won them.

[Nick]

I don't think James expressed himself very well, and I don't think he meant it to come out as callously as it did. Certainly, the players are the game, and certainly, you want to put a good product on the field to keep fan interest.

 

That said, I still think his overall point stands.

 

Take Mookie, for instance. If it's going to take a 10 year deal to re-sign him, I'm letting him walk. He can be replaced. Not necessarily by a single player, but with the money it would take to keep him, the Sox can certainly replace his production. And, I'm guessing that the fans would be just as happy if the team continued to be a playoff contender.

 

I completely agree on Mookie. I just think it's not prudent to give 10 year contracts.

 

I'd like to see the Sox 'go all out' again 2019 and I think they will.

 

We need to do a reset at some point. Would it make sense to explore the trade value of Mookie after 2019 season? Can we not garner a cost controlled young starting pitcher for Mookie?

 

2018 win was all about team effort. Had we solely depended on Betts and JD we would have been toast. It's better to have 25 solid major leaguers as opposed to say a Machado or Harper.

[S5Dewey]

Fair enough.

 

As I said, I don't think James meant for his tweets to sound as callous as they did.

 

He probably regrets saying what he said.

IMO he regrets how what he said was interpreted rather than regretting saying it.

 

I've read it more than once and here's my take on it FWIW:

The game of baseball has been around for 100+ years and it's bigger than any player. If every player got their unconditional release before next season, none of them were re-signed, and the 2019 rosters were comprised of A, AA, & AAA players the game would still go on.

There have always been stars and there always will be but a star becomes a star by being better than his peers. Even if the stardom bar was lowered fans would still come and watch the games to see the game played and the players play because the game is the game.

 

James may be right or he might be wrong. We'll never know, but his position (If I've interpreted it correctly) is worthy of consideration.

 

That's just IMO. Yours may differ and that's fine.

[Bellhorn04]

The problem with the BC era is that unlike Theo, BC just didn't have the pull to resist a big, ill advised marketing move.

 

What's the difference between BC not resisting Pablo and Theo not resisting Crawford? Crawford was an even more expensive bust, in fact.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Bellhorn04

[moonslav59]

What's the difference between BC not resisting Pablo and Theo not resisting Crawford? Crawford was an even more expensive bust, in fact.

 

Plus, Theo apparently had 2 forced on him- Lackey & CC.

[sk7326]

If you looked at Crawford's splits with the Rays, as I did at the time of the signing, you'd see he was only a FT player for a team like the Rays but not the Sox.

 

Yes, his defense fell off a cliff, but that was the least of his issues after the signing.

 

I called Crawford "nothing more than a glorified platoon player ...who would drag us down for years to come." I'm not trying to make any superiority claim here, we all know I've been wrong enough to dispel that, but to me, Crawford & Pablo both showed major warning signs.

 

 

His OPS vs lefties in 2009 and 2010 was .696 and .704. Not very good, but not disastrously bad considering what else he did. There was reason to bet on him - obviously it didn't work out.

Edited November 10, 2018 by sk7326

[jacksonianmarch]

Crawford made absolutely no sense and to me, was not a Theo move. Every offensive move Theo made seemed to have OBP and pitches per AB factored in and the sox were mostly a plodding team without big time speed aside from Ellsbury. Crawford didn't take pitches. Crawford didn't walk at all. Crawford was getting to an age where his speed was slowing. CC, to me, couldn't have been made by Theo. It has no hallmarks of a money ball approach

[sk7326]

Plus, Theo apparently had 2 forced on him- Lackey & CC.

 

It definitely behooves Epstein to say that.

[sk7326]

Crawford made absolutely no sense and to me, was not a Theo move. Every offensive move Theo made seemed to have OBP and pitches per AB factored in and the sox were mostly a plodding team without big time speed aside from Ellsbury. Crawford didn't take pitches. Crawford didn't walk at all. Crawford was getting to an age where his speed was slowing. CC, to me, couldn't have been made by Theo. It has no hallmarks of a money ball approach

 

Crawford had solid OBPs most of his career - he did not walk a ton but made a ton of contact. He was not a bad OBP guy. If you look at the moves Theo made in 2010/11 - he was shifting away from the early 2000s Moneyball valuation (basically a glorified slo-pitch team) to one where defensive value was premium. Mike Cameron and Carl Crawford were two attempts to address that.

[Nick]

Positives

 

6 more years of team control...Poyner, Lin

5 more years of team control...Devers, Johnshon, Hector, Brasier, Maddox, Scott

4 more years of team control...Price, Beni, Marco, Swihart

3 more years of team control...E Rod, Barnes, Vaz, , Pedey, Hembree

2 more years of team control...Betts, JBJ, Wright, Workman, Sandy

1 more year of team control.... Porcello, Sale, Xander, JD, Moreland, Holt, Nunez, Thornburg

 

What if Betts was the only player we don't sign? Can we afford everyone else? Including Pearce and Eovaldi?

[Nick]

Can we also take a different approach with FA signing? Suppose DD says to his baseball staff.

 

I want to sign Eovaldi to a four year contract. The goal is to win in 2019. We will trade him at the end of 2020, hopefully he'll help us go back to back, and hopefully his trade value is high. Let's see what young players we can get in a trade?

 

I think what I'm getting at is find a value in Free Agents signing a good contract and flip them before the contract expires.

 

What can we get for JD right now?

[moonslav59]

Can we also take a different approach with FA signing? Suppose DD says to his baseball staff.

 

I want to sign Eovaldi to a four year contract. The goal is to win in 2019. We will trade him at the end of 2020, hopefully he'll help us go back to back, and hopefully his trade value is high. Let's see what young players we can get in a trade?

 

I think what I'm getting at is find a value in Free Agents signing a good contract and flip them before the contract expires.

 

What can we get for JD right now?

 

He's not trading any big name this winter. I'm skeptical about next winter, too, but we may trade one big name then and try to keep a young core to go forward with and rebuild around. I doubt we ever blow everything up.

[Bellhorn04]

Can we also take a different approach with FA signing? Suppose DD says to his baseball staff.

 

I want to sign Eovaldi to a four year contract. The goal is to win in 2019. We will trade him at the end of 2020, hopefully he'll help us go back to back, and hopefully his trade value is high. Let's see what young players we can get in a trade?

 

I think what I'm getting at is find a value in Free Agents signing a good contract and flip them before the contract expires.

 

What can we get for JD right now?

 

Now you're getting a little too creative LOL

 

We needed JD going into this season. We're going to need him again to make a run in 2019.

[notin]

Now you're getting a little too creative LOL

 

We needed JD going into this season. We're going to need him again to make a run in 2019.

 

Well earlier this month Nick suggested trading Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, Devers, ERod, and anyone else of value . So cut him some slack. This is his reeled-in version...

[moonslav59]

I had double hernia surgery a few years ago. It’s a very routine and simple operation followed by a relaxing recovery period...

 

How long does it take to recover from a hernia operation?

 

BTW, I'm home now. Feeling good.

[harmony]

How long does it take to recover from a hernia operation?

 

BTW, I'm home now. Feeling good.

That's good news, my friend.

[Nick]

Well earlier this month Nick suggested trading Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, Devers, ERod, and anyone else of value . So cut him some slack. This is his reeled-in version...

 

I don't remember that but I can get pretty stupid at times.

[Ghost of the Bloody Sox]

First time poster here, but been a Sox fan since I was 9 in 1986 (I'm 41 now, born & raised and still live in Illinois) anyways I've been seeing from a lot of the Sox fans I follow on Twitter that DD & the Sox might be in on Harper??? Please god no! No player is worth 10 years 400 mil, especially a sort of injury prone one like Harper who isn't even the best player in the game. I've been reading here for awhile and this is a very knowledgeable level headed board for the most part. Please tell me you guys don't think DD will try to sign Bryce Harper? That would be way worse then the Yankee's signing a often injured Jacoby to a massive deal after he gave all his best years in the game to Boston.

[sk7326]

First time poster here, but been a Sox fan since I was 9 in 1986 (I'm 41 now, born & raised and still live in Illinois) anyways I've been seeing from a lot of the Sox fans I follow on Twitter that DD & the Sox might be in on Harper??? Please god no! No player is worth 10 years 400 mil, especially a sort of injury prone one like Harper who isn't even the best player in the game. I've been reading here for awhile and this is a very knowledgeable level headed board for the most part. Please tell me you guys don't think DD will try to sign Bryce Harper? That would be way worse then the Yankee's signing a often injured Jacoby to a massive deal after he gave all his best years in the game to Boston.

 

Never say never - though I'd be surprised if the Sox really were going to do that.

[S5Dewey]

First time poster here, but been a Sox fan since I was 9 in 1986 (I'm 41 now, born & raised and still live in Illinois) anyways I've been seeing from a lot of the Sox fans I follow on Twitter that DD & the Sox might be in on Harper??? Please god no! No player is worth 10 years 400 mil, especially a sort of injury prone one like Harper who isn't even the best player in the game. I've been reading here for awhile and this is a very knowledgeable level headed board for the most part. Please tell me you guys don't think DD will try to sign Bryce Harper? That would be way worse then the Yankee's signing a often injured Jacoby to a massive deal after he gave all his best years in the game to Boston.

 

If you've been reading here for a while you know that there's very little (any?) support here for signing Harper. For one thing it's too much money and for another we've got three guys in our outfield now who are better defensively than Harper.

 

Unfortunately the FO doesn't always listen to the posters on TalkSox so anything can happen.... but I'd bet against it.

[Bellhorn04]

First time poster here, but been a Sox fan since I was 9 in 1986 (I'm 41 now, born & raised and still live in Illinois) anyways I've been seeing from a lot of the Sox fans I follow on Twitter that DD & the Sox might be in on Harper??? Please god no! No player is worth 10 years 400 mil, especially a sort of injury prone one like Harper who isn't even the best player in the game. I've been reading here for awhile and this is a very knowledgeable level headed board for the most part. Please tell me you guys don't think DD will try to sign Bryce Harper? That would be way worse then the Yankee's signing a often injured Jacoby to a massive deal after he gave all his best years in the game to Boston.

 

I'd say the chances are less than zero. We already have a fairly talented right fielder named Betts we might need to open the wallet for.

[Dojji]

As a former catcher harper has a better than average chance to successfully transition to first base

.

[cp176]

If you've been reading here for a while you know that there's very little (any?) support here for signing Harper. For one thing it's too much money and for another we've got three guys in our outfield now who are better defensively than Harper.

 

Unfortunately the FO doesn't always listen to the posters on TalkSox so anything can happen.... but I'd bet against it.

 

lol - I normally agree with you about most things but have to tell you that if DD was taking much direction from talksox posters it might turn me green and not with envy. I know that for sure they don't need any advice from me but I have just a limited amount of ego.

[Bellhorn04]

As a former catcher harper has a better than average chance to successfully transition to first base

.

 

He seems to have become a lousy outfielder. Maybe he's just a glorified DH. And as a hitter he's a pale shadow of J D Martinez. And J D Martinez only got 110 million. The only thing Harper offers vs. J D Martinez is youth.

 

(Looks like I'm in the mood for trashing Harper today. )

[Bellhorn04]

Still on the topic of Harper, it's being reported that the Nats had a deadline deal in place to move him to the Astros for prospects, but ownership nixed it.

[sk7326]

He seems to have become a lousy outfielder. Maybe he's just a glorified DH. And as a hitter he's a pale shadow of J D Martinez. And J D Martinez only got 110 million. The only thing Harper offers vs. J D Martinez is youth.

 

(Looks like I'm in the mood for trashing Harper today. )

 

He had to play a lot of CF - and that is not optimal. RF he is probably fine - and has a cannon. Now I think this is all moot. I don't think Boston is in on any of those top top guys.