example1

He is behind Teixeira considerably offensively. Youk's 08 was a great year. He hasn't done that before and he certainly didn't do it at ages 24-28 like Teixeira did. Youk will deserve a nice payday, maybe as much as 14-15m/year (5 years, $75m?), but he doesn't have Teixeira's track record of production.

1. My point isn't that the Sox are crying poverty. They are saying "enough" when bidding gets absurdly high on guys solely because the Yankees are involved. If it was the Sox and the Nationals and the O's they wouldn't cry poverty. There's a difference between crying poverty and saying an investment wouldn't be money well spent. 2. I couldn't agree more. Whenever the Sox want someone that the Yankees don't want, they seem able to land them. That's why I don't get mad when they lose out to the Yankees and blame the FO. It simply isn't worth going to the mat with a team that is willing to pay 20m more than their nearest competition. Again, it isn't crying poverty it is seeing a limit to how much they are willing to pay for someone--whether or not they have an intended target. 3. I actually don't think my post overreacted at all. I think this team likely can compete with the players it has, I think Lowell is one of the top 3B in the AL and Youk is clearly one of the top 1B. Even if they "only" get the 2nd best player at a position in FA, that player is likely to be very good. Florida or USC may be able to recruit the best players in football, but that doesn't mean that LSU and Texas can't compete. Perhaps that's a stretch, but you get my point. Thanks for the feedback folks!

I am shocked that you favor a salary cap but I largely agree with you. I'm not just trying to knock the Yankees of a pedestal either, I think fairness in salary would improve the chances of random teams winning. I also think it would be interesting for different teams to end up with higher draft picks. Personally, I don't think the Yankee ownership could win with a cap. They would have to understand how to win with a budget.

So I've been trying to come up with a way to understand exactly what happened with the Teixeira signing debacle, where the frustration lies among other great Sox fans here, and I think the title of this thread is a solid summary. An article kind of provoked my thinking on this issue too: http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view/2008_12_25_Free_agency_not_worth_it_for_Red_Sox:_Pulling_out_of_Mark-et/ I'm going to put down my thoughts and see what others think. The Red Sox and Yankees take two very different approaches to constructing teams. They both value the things that teams should value when constructing a team: youth, OBP, SLG, OPS. This was the crux of the moneyball on field approach: get guys who don't make outs. Get guys who have power. It seems obvious, but the switch from AVG to OBP over the past 15 years or so has been a monumental one in baseball and I think we all know it is theoretically correct. The other substantial part of Moneyball was the way that a team can exploit an unappreciated asset to make their team better without breaking the bank. The A's were able to replace the production of big time FA's like Damon and Giambi without literally replacing them with a FA star. So my thinking is that the Red Sox FO has structured itself to be the pure moneyball machine. They believe in the Jamesian approach to not making outs, devaluing defense when possible, and drafting and signing young players to improve the farm system and the talent pool. Drafting and developing players, or signing them from abroad, has proven to be very useful, as they often get players for cheap, for a longer period, and without having to do the FA dance. They have also done much of this without regard for the reaction of their fan base. Throughout this process of reshaping how the Sox manage their team, many fans here have come to appreciate the teams the Sox put together, as well as some of the artistry involved in doing so. My sense is that the loss of Damon was tough on many Sox fans (myself included), but the loss of Teixeira to the Yankees was too much to handle. The reason for this difficulty seems to be that those of us who have come to understand the philosophy could justify keeping or signing these guys even if they went outside the bounds of that approach. In other words, even with a moneyball approach to player development, guys like Damon and to a much larger degree Teixeira seemed to still fit the model, even if they cost a s***-ton of money to sign. Teixeira, as a switch hitting, high OBP, high SLG, gold-glove defensive 1B would have cemented the Sox lineup for a long time, given them another trading chip or two (Lowell and possibly Anderson) and appeared to be not just a good fit, but a perfect fit. Additionally, there is a sense that the Duquette Sox FO would not have let him get away. They would have overspent on 10 players previously, but they also would have landed the guy that they needed. I guess that my sense is the Red Sox are still learning how to manage this machine, and that the Teixeira negotiations may turn out to be a good learning opportunity for them--one way or another. They may find that the Yankees landing Teixeira makes them virtually unbeatable, and that they eliminate the Sox ability to compete. Or, they may learn that with some intelligent moves and wise allocation of resources, even acquisitions like Teixeira and CC and Burnett can be countered and overcome on the field. The Red Sox certainly handled these negotiations like a moneyball team, trying to maxamize every dollar they spent while still making a strong push--they didn't want Boras to play them and, frankly, they didn't. I think the reason so many of us loved that philosophy in the past is that the Sox do have a financial advantage over most other teams in the game, so with some wisdom they should be able to dominante, even over teams like the Yankees. The perfect combination of wealth and intelligence. That combination of wealth and savvy are what allowed this team to get to the playoffs in 03, 04, 05, 07 and 08, got them two WS victories, two 7th game ALCS losses, a division championship (07) and to beat the Yankees a second time in 08, forcing them to miss the playoffs. My point is that this signing is where the moneyball truly meets the road. The front office may learn that in order to get the guy they really want, they need to throw their philosophy out the window and just say "Scott, whatever your player wants, he can get here". They haven't done that yet, but I wonder if Teixeira will represent a high water mark in spend thriftiness. Or, they could still field a good team for around 100m, get to the playoffs, and be completely reinforced in their philosophy. We're about 6 or 7 years into this philosophy and so far I see no reason that the Front Office would have to believe it isn't the correct approach. Teixeira asking for 23 million or whatever is A LOT of money. And when people say the Sox can't complain for lack of resources, I take it with a grain of salt. Yes, they have the money to perpetually have a payroll in the low-to mid-100m range (between 110 and 135 I would say). But that doesn't mean they have the same payroll strength as the Yankees. The Yankees have the payroll strength of the Sox franchise PLUS the Guardians franchise, not an insignificant difference. Part of that may be a choice by the ownership to not reinvest every dollar in the club, but part of that may be their belief that to field a competitive team every year a club doesn't have to pay what the Yankees do. Long story short, I don't think losing out on Teixeira was as much about getting burned at the negotiating table as it was about a clashing of philosophies. Teixeira wanted the A-Rod contract, he wanted the Manny contract. He wanted a deal that would be sky high and considerably better than just about everyone else... additionally, he wanted to be a Yankee and saw value in that alone. I believe if the Sox had offered him 30m he would have taken their offer, but I don't think we should realistically expect that from Henry and co., any time soon, not when 5 million a year can buy two top draftees and their first 3 years of MLB service. The article above says the Sox might just swear off of top FAs altogether, and that doesn't shock me in the slightest. It will be interesting to see how this works out. Should the Sox drop their moneyball approach for cases like Teixeira, or do we know that answer yet? I don't think we know yet because I don't think they have encountered a situation like this yet. In fact, I think the data available to them about signing the very best player available tells them to NOT get caught up in it: they didn't land A-Rod and managed to win the division, a WS, and then get to a game 7 while the Yankees were watching at home. My guess is that until they are embarassed by their approach, they won't change it--even if the perfect fit is staring them in the face. Until they have a season where they don't make the playoffs (with a healthy team) I don't see any reason that they would change their approach. In other words, we could have more Teixeira moments in the future.

It wasn't for $12 million Kilo. Once you get that you will be much more at ease, I think. He. Didn't. Want. To. Be. A. Red. Sox. Perhaps he wanted to go to the Yankees AND screw the Red Sox over. You say he's the ultimate businessman, well, might he also remember his experience with the Sox when they drafted him? He might. I don'tknow one way or the other, I just think it is myopic to say "the Sox didn't land Teixeira, he's what they needed" when there appear to have been other factors involved. Also, I'm pretty sure the Yankees will be paying about 31m for Teixeira's services with their cap tax.

I think you're projecting Kilo. I feel like the hissy fits are actually coming from the people who are posting the same thing over and over, either pulling random quotes of Theo's to throw in the FOs face, or claiming that the team hasn't improved over and over, or complaining about losing out to the Yankees and rehashing all the old times that the Sox didn't get their way. Hissy fits, to me, are when people complain about the FO not spending as much money as they wanted and suddenly losing their usually cool heads. Until I see JH screaming and banging his shoe on the podium, I will keep my eyes open for hissy fits on the part of the FO. Not ten days ago you wrote: Then the Yankee fans are able to come here and gloat and suddenly I see hissy fits left and right. I miss the 12-15-08 Kilo, not the one who is accusing others of hissy fits when they have made a total of 3 public sentences over the past 4 days. How is "I think it's fair to expect this team to be close to the same next season" suddenly flipped on it's head? If it is still the case then who, exactly, is having hissy fits?

What changed? They were the second best team in MLB last year according to RS/RA, and they should have some healthier players back (we hope). Teixeira would have been a benefit, but they still have a great team.

I guess I would ask why you think that the Yankee mode of spending money is the correct one? Or, why do you think that they have to spend all of this money in the first place and keep spending it over and over again? I mean, on one hand they should put a comptetitve team out there. On the other hand, as far as I know they arent a non-profit agency so making a profit seems allowed. Furthermore, it seems like you would be happier if they had a bunch of cumbersome contracts under their belt so you could say they are both competitive and have spent their money. Would it be better if they had signed Jason Schmidt (15.6m), Vernon Wells (18m)and Fukudome (12m), so they had respent their money? I don't think so. So they have low paid players in key positions currently: 1B, 2B, CF, LF, SP1, SP2, SP3. Beckett isn't in the top 18 of pitchers, Dice-K isn't either, and neither is Lester. Pedroia is a steal as the 6th highest paid player at his position, Youk makes 1/7th of what Teixeira will make next year, and Ellsbury is making virtually the MLB minimum. There are many players who they could spend money on, but aside from Teixeira I didn't hear many people here advocating for them getting Burnett or Sabathia at the prices they were asking for. Maybe so, maybe not. Youkilis could resign to a lucrative deal eventually, Bay could do the same. Holliday is not as good as Teixeira and unfortunately I don't see a spot for him on this team unless Drew can play 1B. Not the fault of the FO, right? I don't think there are 10 Pedroia's out there. If they want to get the money that may mean they choose one of the other teams. Didn't you start the "Apparently Opening Day is Tomorrow Thread?"

Boras invited them to come to Texas, ostensibly to seal the deal. Then he tried to get them to raise their price, what, $20m, telling them there was a 200m offer? Jesus, only one team ended up paying what he wanted and it was the f***ing Yankees. I agree with Kilos sentiment that they need to make some improvements, but honestly I think the security of the pitching staff would be a fine way to improve. Flex some of that big money for Sheets and Smoltz and add two veterans to the rotation for one year, two if certain IPs are reached. Sheets put up nearly 200IP last year and Smoltz is still a very good pitcher when healthy. I would feel better knowing that those guys were on the bump every 5th day than dealing with Wakefield, etc., I acknowledge that if the Sox aren't going to maxamize their positions in every spot (1B and 3B, for instance) they have to take advantage of the weaker spots and I think the old 200IP for a slightly better than 500 pitcher line should be dropped. Thanks Wake, it was nice, time for a higher upside pitcher. s***, pay wake to sit on his ass and pitch when he is needed.

I'm curious, what would hold this team back from going out and purchasing Ben Sheets or John Smoltz, or both, for next year in incentive laden deals? Beckett Dice-K Lester Sheets Smoltz Wake- long relief? short retirement? Don't we think those two guys could be had for the combined total of one year of Teixeira? Use Wakefield or Buchholz for long relief? I haven't heard much talk about Sheets, so either he is too injured to be interesting, or he is being ignored. When healthy he's pretty damn good, no? He pitched 198 IP last year, and (for SOME REASON) pitched 5 complete games. Couldn't he be attracted with a 10m deal and some incentives, or a team option, or something like that? He's been an all-star the past two years... Smoltz had 36k's in 28 IP last year. He's 41, going on 42, but his numbers have been impressive, even in the NL East: 2005: 35 GS, 14-7, 229.7 IP, 169 K, 53 BB, 3.06 ERA, 138 ERA+, 1.145 WHIP 2006: 35 GS, 16-9, 232.0 IP, 211 K, 55 BB, 3.49 ERA, 127 ERA+, 1.190 WHIP 2007: 32 GS, 14-8, 205.7 IP, 197 K, 47 BB, 3.11 ERA, 137 ERA+, 1.182 WHIP He says he's healthy, he says he's open to pitching in Boston, he could be had on a short contract. I see no reason why the Sox can't land some of these veterans for not much and have a pretty damn good pitching staff. John Smoltz as any team's #4 or #5, if healthy, would be effective. Ben Sheets could fit the same category and also seems to be available. If the FO is worried about long term commitments I think these are the guys to look at, if they're not looking at guys like Lowe and Peavy.

First, I think we should prepare for the Sox to be "screwed" if Ortiz and Lowell don't bounce back. They could be screwed if they DO bounce back. I don't think it will necessarily happen, I just think it is always good to be prepared. Teams don't win every year, and although it is easy to say that teams who spend as much as the Sox do should win every year, it simply isn't realistic. That said, I feel confident that over the next 5 years the Sox will be in good shape overall and should be competitive with the Yankees and the Rays, though I don't put them head and shoulders better than either team at this point. Things I would consider doing: Find a catcher on the FA market. Hopefully Varitek for two seasons. Hope Boras shows up and wants to get Tek's deal out of the way. Don't worry too much about offensive production and don't worry about getting a young catcher like Salty or Teagarden right away. They are likely to get fleeced if they try to get one of those young studs during the off-season, they may be able to get another catcher in the next few years, or could develop one of the many catchers that they have drafted in that time. Set longterm goals and specific objectives re: potential available players. I think the Sox have a 'deep' farm system, but not one that is overly stacked with high level, high caliber talent presently. Masterson, Buchholz, Bowden and Anderson are all pretty much top tier, but beyond that they have a lot of high upside guys who still need some improving: Bard (100mph, little to show for it), Almanzar (big, projectable frame), Lin (potential 5 tool player, not there yet). In other words, they can't go trading away all their talent to get guys they want, but I would think they have the talent to get some very good pieces back, and they seem to have the strategy for developing more talent in the years ahead. Currently, they don't have two or three Hanley-for-Beckett kind of moves in them, the probably have about one, so they will need to pick carefully. My personal preference would be to talk to Seattle about Felix Hernandez, but I don't quite know how that would work logistically. Seattle is f***ed, they need a lot of help but I think short of trading a package of something like Anderson + Buchholz I can't see the Sox getting him and now that there' sno Teixeira, Anderson is looking more and more valuable. Otherwise, look into getting Jake Peavy, possibly with some of the players saved by not dealing for a catcher. He's owed 15, 16, 17 and 22m over the next 4 years, and may cost a pretty penny in talent. However, I get the sense that the Padres are eager to move him. I also think that the Sox getting Peavy would be a really big boost to their team. There is disagreement on this board about that, but my personal view is that he would be the Sox #2 for the next few years. If he can be had for someone not named Buchholz, Bowden or Anderson then do it, even if that means dealing Masterson (who may be the key piece). If he can be done for Buchholz + someone else, I think strongly about making it happen. He's signed for 4 more years (with that option) and I think he makes them a pretty sick team in all games that he pitches. He will cost a little more than D-Lowe, but he's a better pitcher and he's younger (28 next year). Beyond that I like the idea of Ben Sheets or John Smoltz, or both for a few years. s***, it's just money and they probably won't require a no trade clause or anything like that and can save them some prospects for a LATER move on FA eligibles like Felix, etc., in the next few years. Of course this team needs the standard 4th OF, and probably a corner infielder or something. I'm not sure who fills those roles. I bet someone turns up. It isn't anything perfect, and none of my suggestions will probably happen, but it's the best I could come up with tonight.

I guess... Newsflash: The Yankees have had all the chances they've needed to get involved. Do you think that Boras has told the Yankees "sorry Cashman family, Mark Teixeira is only availble to the Angels, Red Sox, Nationals and Orioles. Your money is no good here" ? Personally, when I heard Henry say he didn't think they were in the running I figured there was another team with a better offer on the table. The more time that goes on the less that seems to be the case. I was initially concerened that it was the Yankees, but if it were the Yankees I think he would be signed by now, or at least their offer would be made public. Obviously. K-Rod is a closer so he is easily overrated by fans who think he's the only person who can do the job. Garland's 4.90 ERA last year was as impressive as his 1.505 WHIP, Garret Anderson had a .758 OPS last year, and the Angels looked like one of the best teams in baseball without Teixeira last year. Now, granted, I think they could use a guy like Teixeira too, but that hasn't ever been the Angels' M.O. He's also a great way to spend money, so he would be perfect for them in that regard as well. Maybe they did. Perhaps they said "take it or leave it by New Years", but if they want the player they can be patient and still get what they want. Again, the Yankees aren't living on a desert island, unable to realize who is available on the FA market. Boras contacting the Yankees means nothing to anyone. If the Yankees sign Teixeira then it is because they wanted to sign Teixeira, not because Boras called and said there was bargain, going out of business sale going on and that the Yankees are his prefered customers. Because the Bronx is where unwanted enormous contracts go to die? Sounds like a pretty scarry thing to me. Again, whatever. I sense a whole lot of fandom and whole lot of mastubatory glee when you talk about the Yankees ability to sign anyone they want to.

Sounds about right. Manny the spoiled douchebag who quits on teams whenever he feels like it will sign for $25m with the team whose fans don't care about how much money their players cost. A match made in heaven. *Gom, how does this fit with your comment that the Yankees are the giant, throbbing, Elephant in the room that Sox fan can never forget about lest they be silly and naive, with regards to Teixeira and every other deal ever proposed? The Yankees are not only on the verge of signing Manny, but they are also the negotiating with Teixeira to sweep in and take him from the Red Sox, thanks to the error that John Henry made by leaving the door open... the error that only you were smart enough to envision. There is no limit to their greatness, all hail the Yankees! Rack 'em up! A-Rod: 32m Manny: 25m Jeter: 20m Sabathia: 14m (23 paid 10-15) Burnett: 16.5 Rivera: 15m Posada: 13.1m Damon: 13m Matsui: 13m $161.6m on 9 players.

So being anti-Yankee is now being anti-New York? Disliking New York is like disliking America for crying out loud. Let's start gathering up the Met's fans then...

I know we've been joking about Johjima, but I actually think he would bean okay option. My sense is that we end up with Varitek again, but Johjima would be a suitable second plan.

Okay, I got carried away on the Peavy talk in the Teixeira thread, so I figured I would move it over here too, in case people wanted to discuss Peavy in a non-Teixeira context. Now, about Peavy. I think there are two factors that have to be taken into account: 1. How good is he 2. What would he cost 1. How good is he: I agree with most that it would be crucial to take away some of his numbers in a move from the NLW to the ALE. No doubt. Any pitcher suddenly gets worse facing the Sox, D-Rays, Jays or Yankees over and over. I disagree with most that that transformation would make him not valuable to the Sox. He's still relatively young and his numbers still count, even if they are against NL competition. Furthermore, many of his outs come by K, which is him single handedly getting the hitter out and wouldn't be benefited from a pitchers park. Here are the top 21 (just to include Beckett) AL pitchers in VORP in 2008, 2007 and 2006: 2008: Cliff Lee 76.5 Roy Halladay 70.6* Jon Lester 59.6 John Danks 53.3 Ervin Santana 52.8* Daisuke Matsuzaka 51.4* Joe Saunders 46.6 Justin Duchscherer 45.7 Mike Mussina 45.1* Zack Greinke 44.3 Scott Baker 44.2 James Shields 43.3* Felix Hernandez 42.8 Jeremy Guthrie 41.8* Gil Meche 38.9* Shaun Marcum 37.9 Mark Buehrle 37.2* Scott Kazmir 36.8* John Lackey 35.3* Matt Garza 35.2 Josh Beckett 34.6* 2007 CC Sabathia 65.2* Fausto Carmona 64.0 John Lackey 60.7* Josh Beckett 58.6* Johan Santana 57.7* Dan Haren 56.4* Eric Bedard 54.9* Javier Vazquez 51.1 Roy Halladay 50.6* Kelvin Escobar 49.9* Mark Buehrle 49.3* Chien-ming Wang 48.5* Scott Kazmir 47.2* Gil Meche 47.1* Joe Blanton 46.3 Justin Verlander 45.9* James Shields 45.4* Jeremy Guthrie 38.2* AJ Burnett 37.5* Daisuke Matsuzaka 37.0* Andy Pettitte 36.8* 2006: Johan Santana 79.6* Roy Halladay 68.0* Chien-ming Wang 54.6* Barry Zito 49.9 Curt Schilling 48.6 Justin Verlander 47.5* John Lackey 47.1* CC Sabathia 46.5* Mike Mussina 44.9* Nate Robertson 42.4 Dan Haren 41.4* Kenny Rogers 40.6 Erik Bedard 40.2* Jeremy Bonderman 39.8 Jake Westbrook 35.6 Kelvin Escobar 33.9* Jose Contreras 33.1 Kevin Millwood 32.9 Jon Garland 32.4 Freddy Garcia 32.3 Ervin Santana 30.2* Okay, given those 3 lists, there are 27 players who were either in the top 20 in AL VORP for at least 2 seasons of the past 3, or who seem to have enough talent to be there for the next few years (IMO). That list is (in no particular order)(players in () appeared only on 2008 list, players in [ ] are now in the NL: [J. Santana] R. Halladay CC. Sabathia J. Lackey J. Beckett E. Santana, Matsuzaka, *Mussina, Shields, Guthrie, Meche, Kazmir, [Haren], *Bedard, Escobar, Buehrle, Wang, Kazmir, Verlander, Burnett, *Pettitte, (Lee), (F. Hernandez%), (Lester%), (Saunders), (Greinke), (Garza) So to me, the question is: a) does Peavy belong on this list, if he were in the AL and if so where? I think that the answer to a) is obvious. Yes. He has been the 3rd or 4th most valuable pitcher by VORP avg over the past 3 years taking both leagues into account. To I would be willing to place him at least solidly in the middle of this list, perhaps at the bottom of the top 1/3rd. AL Pitchers from above list I would definitely rank above Peavy: [J Santana] Halladay Sabathia Pitchers I have a hard time saying one way or the other: Lackey Beckett--amazing stuff, too inconsistent to be top tier Matsuzaka Shields [Haren] Buehrle Wang Kazmir Verlander Burnett E. Santana *Bedard I would rather have Peavy than: *Mussina Guthrie Meche Escobar Pettitte Lee Saunders Greinke Garza Pitchers for whom it is too early to tell, but I would probably rather have than Peavy: (Lester) (F. Hernandez) --So, this absurdly tedious look at the pitchers who are actually pitching in the AL and who are established, and have had some success as SPs, tells me that at worst Peavy is at the bottom of that second group, which, if you remove J Santana and Haren (both of whom are in the NL now) and if you ADD Felix Hernandez and J. Lester (just to be conservative), means he would be one of the top 15 pitchers in the AL IMO. In my opinion, to say that he would "only be a #4 or #5 pitcher in the ALE" vastly over estimates the quality of pitchers in the AL, and under represents the fickle nature of pitcher quality from year to year. The fact that Peavy's track record is considerably better than many on that list and that he has consistently been one of the NL's top pitchers, tells me he would probably bring that consistency to the AL and would probably find pretty good success. Personally, I think he stuff would make him a top 10 pitcher in the AL in a good year, and would be near this top 21 list in an off year. I may be overstating it a bit, but I think people are also overstating the difference between AL and NL, and pitchers park and hitters park. What would he cost? He would probably cost too much because the Padres don't have a bunch of other guys who would fit on any "top player in the league" lists, so they will milk it for all he's worth. That is in addition to his 17m AAV over the next few years. To me (and I've said it before) I think the Sox should set their eyes firmly on Felix Hernandez, and look to score him in a year or two with a significant prospect package similar to their Beckett deal. They should expect to pay a heavy price, including taking veteran $$ from Seattle if need be, but they will benefit from Seattle having 'babied' him over the past few years and his extremely young age. Aside from Felix, I don't see many realistic big name young option out there who the Sox could expect to possibly land. Sorry to ramble, but it was a worthwhile thought experiment for me... I hope someone else sees it as valuable too. I wouldn't be totally upset if the Sox pursued Peavy, if the price were right. I don't expect them to break the bank, but if the LAA are indeed the team that goes after Teixeira, I doubt they'll be psyched to pay 17m a year for Peavy with their already-solid pitching staff, and San Diego ("a whale's vagina") will still be looking for suitors.

First of alll, this "the Yankees spend all this money and it's really charity!" s*** is just BS. It's a nice story that you can tell yourself, but would YOU run a business like that? Why not try to maxamize profits by spending as little as possible while also trying to maxamize your income? Secondly, I can't speak for every other baseball fan. But personally I have a hard time respecting their franchise because I don't think what they do requires any skill or knowledge or study of the game. I respect players who play hard, and I like it when I see guys playing hard no matter how much money they get. The Yankees get those guys, just like other teams do. Who wouldn't respect a guy like Joba pumping his fist, or Jeter diving headlong into the stands? As for their management though, there's no art to it, no real development involved. On a purely aesthetic level that's why I appreciated them not trading Hughes et al to get Santana last year. It seemed like they were trying to pull off the ally-oop instead of the easy layup, and sometimes that's a more magnificant thing. I don't respect the teams they put together--especially since about 2000 on--because I don't think their approach requires any nuance or depth of knowledge about the game. This is the team that played in the house that Ruth built, with its great lore of amazing players. There was a mystique about the Yankees that had much more to do with finding that 'yankee type' of player, than it did with buying the hottest new thing only to have that thing break down in a few years. You'll notice I'm not whining about payroll, and I say over and over again that the Red Sox spend a lot of money. I'm merely explaining why I don't get excited about any detailed explainations about signing CC Sabathia or AJ Burnett; the nuances of whether they should sign Manny or Cameron. It's not like they had to choose Sabathia from a number of options. If there weren't a limit on the number of roster spots I'm convinced they would sign Cameron and Manny and Pettitte, and they would sign Sheets and give Clemens a few million to pitch two games a year. They simply take the most obvious good player and offer them more money than any other team would. It's like they play on the playstation without payroll restrictions. They will offer that money even if they have to pay an extra 40% on it (or whatever the luxary tax is). It just doesn't matter to them. I don't complain about it as if it is unfair per-se. Why would I? The Yankees haven't won particularly more than their best competition, and baseball has its own way of evening itself out. I just complain about their approach to managing their business as boring, uninnovative, and pretty uninteresting overall. In terms of the game and team management, I'm much more intregued by the intellectual work done by teams that do it without going well over the luxary tax threshold... teams that don't spend money on players because they see it as potentially a bad idea, teams that set a value on a guy based on what he will do on the baseball field. I'm not poo-pooing your love for the Yankees. I understand that you genuinely like them, and I think that's great. I agree that the Yankees give lots of money to the s***** teams in baseball, and I'm a firm believer in a minimum payroll more than anything like a maximum payroll. Teams like KC and MN have absurdly wealthy owners, but don't spend their money. That sucks just as much. So I personally have plenty of reasons that I think are good, to explain why I dont like what the Yankees do economically, and why I'm not impressed by their results. I don't feel jealousy toward their fans when they win, because, frankly, they should win. When they don't I think its kind of pathetic. If they could have the same results with a payroll of 150m, but they go over 200m, that's just being lazy IMHO. Of course, I'm a Red Sox fan so I might be biased. :dunno: As I've come to love this game I've really come to love how it is analyzed and the work that teams do to choose who to sign, how long to sign them, and when not to go 'all in'.

I appreciate the effort to post new information. Perhaps you can learn something from this board and I know I will try to stay open to learn something from you. It seems like you might be a beginning baseball fan, because the first part of understanding baseball is that most of the time the best players make outs, and the best teams win 6 games out of 10. That's not having low standards, that's just the reality. The best teams in history have been over .700, but generally if you get to .600 you make the playoffs (that's 97.2 wins). During a long season, any team approaching .700 W% will start resting players, and generally won't care about getting as many wins as possible. There are plenty of pessimists on this board, but most of them are at least realistic about the parameters of baseball as a game. Guys like a700hitter always have something negative to say about the way the Sox are run, but they also take outs and losses and misplaced trades with a grain of salt. It's a long season and an even longer offseason sometimes. I suggest you start by reading some Bill James, maybe the book "Moneyball" and just spend some time trying to learn from people who actually try to look at how the game works--both the monetary part and the statistics part. I can assure you, you will impress your friends and make more allies on this board if you do that. Long story short, take a deep breath. Don't treat this like the NFL, because it's not, and have some faith. This front office is not s*****, they are some of the best minds in the game (including Bill James himself). Nearly every other club would love to have the Red Sox braintrust, and many teams are trying to take the same approach. I'm not saying the Sox are infallable, but in a game of probabilities they generally give the Sox the best chance to win. Luck and chance take care of the rest.

They're spending less money this year because they couldn't possibly spend more money if they flushed it down the toilet in $100 increments. I mean, seriously Gom, they are getting rid of horrible contracts. Contracts that no self-respecting team would ever re-up. They couldn't make up for the amount of s***** contracts if they wanted to, and it sure seems like they're trying to spend money as if they have to have a payroll over $200m. I would really like to hear them say "we are trying to not spend as much money as we have in the past", but I haven't heard it yet. They merely happen to be spending less money this year, after signing the most expensive AAV pitcher in history, and the 6th highest AAV pitcher in history, and talking about signing another guy for 20m+. It's just silly.

I don't care what the post says. Everything you have said so far, except for this post, was some sort of personal attack on the front office and their seeming inability to do anything right. Perhaps your 'source' has value, but that person clearly hasn't been able to talk any sense into you while they've been hanging out with front office personell and being right on every trade for the past 30 years. I need a consistent period of worthwhile posts from you before believing some unreliable "he said, she said" post from your neighbor. I wouldn't be shocked if Teixeira signed with the Sox, but it would still get you no credibility given that you won't even praise the FO for having sent this team to the playoffs in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007 and 2008. If you don't realize how impressive that is then you're not worth trading ideas with. if you do realize how impressive that is, then you're clearly just talking out of your ass to mess with the integrity of this board. Many on this board suspect that you are BOY. I'm not sure you are, frankly, I don't care. So far you have been pretty unimpressive intellectually. Hopefully this is a sign that you're getting things together, as at least this wasn't filled with hateful distaste for the team you claim to support in your avitar.

And yet his seeming allegiance to the front office hasn't rubbed off on you at all? Let's get this straight... You've known him 30 years, you're a Red Sox fan, and he knows someone "he won't say" in the front office? Huh. If I had been a friend with someone for 30 years, actively discussing the Red Sox, and he claimed to have known someone in the FO (someone who has been there consistently for 30 years nonetheless) I would damn well know who that person is. Your story is as shaky as an OJ Simpson alibi.