Red Sox President of Baseball Operations Craig Breslow: "We Are Taking Meaningful Steps"

I like Breslow, but some of this stuff strikes me as nothing more than artful BS.  Whereas with Kennedy you get the clumsy BS.

In my opinion, if we don't get that RH bat and we don't get another back end reliever, the only plausible  explanation is - you guessed it, money.  FSG likes having it more than spending it.    

Because a number of RH bats and back end relievers have been readily available in return for one thing - money.

After a while, telling us you failed, even in a well-articulated and accountable way, just ain't good enough.

One thing I would ask Craig is, if he really does have plenty of financial resources available, why is he having so much trouble getting these deals across the finish line, as he puts it?

9 minutes ago, notin said:

“It’s not a question of available resources.  We operate using an internal valuation for each player and then follow up accordingly.  Using this methodology we feel gives our team the best chance at success.”

 

Whatcha think, on a scale of 1 - 10?

Frighteningly plausible.  9.5.

3 minutes ago, Hitch said:

I'm talking against myself as much as anyone else here as I've mentioned a few times they should be more clearer and honest with their talking, but also, there's not a lot more the guy can say. He can't go into too much detail as he's not allowed, and yet fans will attack management for not standing up and being held to account. 

A lot of the podcast guys are constantly complaining that not enough news is coming out, and that they're not opening themselves to questioning, but really what they're moaning about is - we need more content for our subscribers, please give us more to talk about.

Yeah, Breslow is in a no-win situation.  He doesn't want to outright lie but he can't really tell the whole truth, either.   

2 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Is it? I think the obvious thing is that Henry and others are obsessed with winning through maximum efficiency. They're numbers and stats guys. They want the perfect team at a good price and believe it should be possible. 

And they have the numbers on their side when it comes to long term/high risk contracts for aging pitchers (and even position players).

They're cheaper and more reserved than they should be, but I don't think saving money is their concern. It's outthinking the rest of the league and being seen as smarter. That's what seems to drive them more than anything.

We're all just speculating.

The thing is we're being run by a conglomerate called Fenway Sports Group now.  Henry doesn't even own a majority of the shares anymore.  It's probably safe to assume there are shareholders who care more about their return on investment than the Sox W-L record.  

23 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I like Breslow, but some of this stuff strikes me as nothing more than artful BS.  Whereas with Kennedy you get the clumsy BS.

In my opinion, if we don't get that RH bat and we don't get another back end reliever, the only plausible  explanation is - you guessed it, money.  FSG likes having it more than spending it.    

Because a number of RH bats and back end relievers have been readily available in return for one thing - money.

I don't think they really liked the RHB on the market and they didn't want to sign relievers to deals longer than one year. The guys that got one year deals were potentially not seen as upgrades. That's my only guess on the matter. 

There's nothing new to be found here and nothing enlightening. We already know what the CBO is going to say before he says it. Breslow may just be a little more artful than Bloom was. 

14 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Frighteningly plausible.  9.5.

Agreed. They've been running their internal value system out there since the Lester days. It has less to do with trying to save a buck and more to do with trying to look smart in front of other owners. Henry COULD outspend everyone else, but that just wouldn't be sporting of him. He still worries about revenue sharing to smaller clubs (unlike other bigger clubs) and wants to win the same way he made all his money back in the day. I've said it over and over again, but just rewatch the Henry scene in Moneyball. It's all you need to know. I would bet everything that he looks at the '25 Dodgers and Mets the same way he looked at the Yankees 20+ years ago.

John Henry: For forty-one million, you built a playoff team. You lost Damon, Giambi, Isringhausen, Pena and you won more games without them than you did with them. You won the exact same number of games that the Yankees won, but the Yankees spent one point four million per win and you paid two hundred and sixty thousand. I know you've taken it in the teeth out there, but the first guy through the wall. It always gets bloody, always. It's the threat of not just the way of doing business, but in their minds it's threatening the game. But really what it's threatening is their livelihoods, it's threatening their jobs, it's threatening the way that they do things. And every time that happens, whether it's the government or a way of doing business or whatever it is, the people are holding the reins, have their hands on the switch. They go bat s*** crazy. I mean, anybody who's not building a team right and rebuilding it using your model, they're dinosaurs. They'll be sitting on their ass on the sofa in October, watching the Boston Red Sox win the World Series.

23 minutes ago, Hitch said:

To add to the proof of this - Liverpool has a much smaller payroll than other teams in the EPL and way lower spending threshold, and yet, apart from the odd season, has vastly outperformed the other teams (bar Manchester City who are a juggernaut and managed by possibly the greatest manager to have ever lived). They are routinely held up an ultra smart and brilliantly run football team, defined by their use of data and analytics.

They currently have three of their best players running down their contracts. Two of them are two of the best players to have ever played for the club, and the fans cannot understand why they are not signed up already. One is 33, the other is 32,

The patterns are the same, they're just having much more success with Liverpool than the Red Sox. And there's still Liverpool fans that want them out of the club (due to not spending enough in their eyes and ticket prices).

With Liverpool, they are still in the Sox 2016-18 golden age. Eventually, their time will run out and other teams will catch up. The lack of spending will come back to bite them. 

48 minutes ago, Hitch said:

To a degree. But Henry still owns 40% of the shares. Werner is in second, estimated somewhere between 12 and 15% I believe. Third place is Red Bird Capital with 11% and then a whole host of smaller investors, so it's still very much driven by the top two. 

And winning is still the biggest way to increase your value which brings with it ever increasing $$$ sponsorships and partnerships. 

Does anyone really believe they don't care if they win or not? I think it's obvious they want to win, but while being seen as the smartest kid in the room. To me it's their arrogance that is killing us, not their thriftiness. 

You'd think missing the playoffs 5 out of the last 6 years would knock some of the arrogance out. 

20 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Possibly, but the same thing has been leveled at them since 2018, and they continue to outsmart financially bigger clubs. They have a young squad and an outstanding new manager. They're in a very good place.  Of course, replacing VVD, Salah and Trent all in one summer will take some doing if that's what needs to happen, but they've been mostly excellent since 2018. They are a brilliantly run club. 

Of course, Henry has next to no involvement in how the club is run, and we don't have a Sam Kennedy at the helm. but the pattern of operation remains the same. Liverpool just has smarter people running it than the Red Sox.

I'm not sure Sam impacts anything with the Red Sox except the PR spin. 

4 minutes ago, notin said:

Actually what you said - which I believe to be absolutely true and well-stated - is a fancy way of stating “they want to save money.”

Yes they want to win cheaply, but recent history has shown they will sacrifice winning before they sacrifice cheaply…

We're seeing it right now.  Not even 3 straight years of .500 and under baseball has motivated them to spend.

Obviously the revenues and profits are not being affected in a noticeably damaging way by the mediocre/poor results.

8 minutes ago, notin said:

Actually what you said - which I believe to be absolutely true and well-stated - is a fancy way of stating “they want to save money.”

Yes they want to win cheaply, but recent history has shown they will sacrifice winning before they sacrifice cheaply…

I don't think it has to do with Henry being cheap. I bet he lives a luxurious lifestyle and would pick up the tab if we all went out. I think he just wants to look smart and to do that he can't be uncouth and simply buy players by outspending everyone else. Winning is important, but he wants to be seen as the brainiac who won, rather than the billionaire who paid for a championship.