example1

It is the move to make. Of course it is. The budget isn't just about one season. If they don't offer arb and he rejects a one year deal they get nothing. If he takes it they get ortiz for another year without having to commit longterm. If they think his top priority is years not AAV (which it certainly could be) then they get two top picks. If one of those picks turns into an MLB regular then it was a cost-wise move. There IS a difference between 12/yr and 20/2yr. It's 8m and another year of employment. As much as everyone likes to assume the FO is stupid about this stuff, I think they know what they are doing with arb offers. Thie new CBA is going to create a lot of seemingly weird situations like this with fewer arb worthy players overall.

I honestly don't know that one way or the other. Do you? They are both veterans but otherwise I don't know what differentiates them.

Although we agree that sooner is better than later, I think there is more significance to a manager than you do. The manager matters.

And all three have the potential to add near all-star play at their respective positions. The more I think about it, the less interested I am in locking up a RF longterm because Kalish and Reddick have something to add there. Of course, Kalish offers Ellsbury insurance in CF too. If funds are limited I would rather they nail down the rotation than freak out with a CP or RF. They have both on their team right now.

A fair assessment jacko. Garcia isn't good against good teams, so he's not really good at all. In this market and with the need for MLB-caliber depth, he's ok to have on the roster though.

As much as I'm skeptical of CJ Wilson, I would rather they spend the papelbon dollars (plus more, obviously) on a SP like him. Nobody would complain about Beckett, Lester, Wilson, Buchholz, Aceves in the regular season.

So the Sox might be interested in trading for Gio Gonzalez and/or pursuing CJ Wilson. Gio certainly has good stuff. Does anyone else ever watch highlights of these players and just have a hard time imagining them pitching in Boston? Watching Gio, I see him striking out Mariners, Royals, more Mariners, Diamondbacks, etc.,. I see day games in a sunny (short-sleeved) Oakland stadium. ...I just can't help but think of the difference between that and watching the Sox. Chilly and blustery days in May or September, against the Yankees or Rays, in a small ballpark, with all eyes focused on his performance. I'm not saying Gio can't do it. His stuff and delivery really remind me of Eric Bedard in his prime. That's not a bad thing. I just don't know if the guy is an ace. Same thoughts about CJ Wilson and the other name I've seen floated, Jair Jurrjens.

I'm pretty sure the Beckett move happened during Thanksgiving too, didn't it?

For the right price, that 59/8 K/BB ratio looks pretty good. If the Rockies will give him up for a bag of balls (or flesh) then he might be worth a shot. If he were a FA people would likely be open to the Sox giving him 7.5, given the going rate/quality of relievers on the open market. The Sox need pitchers who won't hurt themselves with walks. This is all with the caveat that Bard, not street, is the closer.

Yeah, it's amazing how one persons management style with a manager who has no interest in using data to inform decisions is so easily transposed on Theo and Francona, who was hired because he was open to and interested in that approach. This isn't f***ing witchcraft or sorcery or dark arts. It is using the data available to you to inform decisions. It recognizes that computers are capable of storing information very efficiently and can help a manager know what happened in the past. Some people treat data like it's a weird cult-like belief system and it boggles my mind.

honestly, I don't think any of us know how good he is. There's plenty of hype. I sure like the video. The Sox need a RF. He's RH and seems to be a plus athlete. If he's "worth" the cost then I would give him a lot of money. Say he's a better player than Beltran and he's a lot younger... then he should get more money and longer than Beltran (or Cuddyer) get. If he's not as good as those guys, or if there are questions, he should get less. If they think he's in that former class then I would think a 3-4 year deal at JD Drew money would be the top, TOP end of what anyone should ever pay him. I'd probably offer less. Given how little I actually know about him, and because of the risk involved, I'd say 4 years/8m would be about as high as I could go; but again, I know nothing about him.

Bard can close. Any questions you have about his "make up" should be mitigated by his "stuff" which is markedly better than any other closer on the market, including Papelbon. As for the 8th inning guy, sure, they should get someone who is a lock-down, guaranteed not to fail set-up man. Baring that (because those guys don't exist on the market, they become closers for the team they were previously setting up for) they either need to go the existing closer route (Madsen, Bell, etc.,) or the middle reliever route. Anyone remember a guy named Okijima? He was an unknown in 2007 and ended up being the setup man. They don't need to identify the guy right now. They just need to have enough options. I wouldn't be shocked if Alex Wilson or Kyle Weiland or even Michael Bowden played a significant role in the pen--hell, Wilson could be a setup guy. If you're one of the folks who wishes that the Sox had Andrew Friedman running the team, you better believe those are exactly the types of moves he would be exploring. Benoit, Farnsworth, etc., were not bonafide closers or setup men when he relied on them. And if you think that with a newfound financial advantage suddenly Friedman would be putting his money into MR and SU pitchers, think again. Even a team with the Sox financial advantage needs to budget and figure out where to allocate funds. With another MVP season people will be wishing the Sox could sign Ellsbury and take back the $10m paid to a setup man (the most volatile position in the sport). Ideally they will get a "name" to placate the fans at closer, keep Bard in the 8th inning role, and add another bullpen arm of two. No need to reinvent the wheel.

He won't. The better a player he is, the more willing he might be to go for a shorter term deal. If he's going all in on the longterm and expensive contract then any team has to be hesitant. The Sox should do what they always do: set a value based on what they project for him and their current level of need, and then stick to that value.

Is he? I just don't know enough about him. He seems clever, at times, a bit impulsive. It would be very interesting to see how it would work for him combined with all of the baseball analysis that the organization does. I don't get the sense of him being overly smart. Of course, I never got that sense from Francona either; or Girardi, or Ron Washington, or really a whole number of managers. Smart in the traditional sense doesn't really matter. Really, he has to be able to evaluate and utilize baseball talent to win baseball games. That's about it.

There is something likeable about Valentine. I have no doubt he will be entertaining for a few years. Also, since he hasn't won a WS I can see the Sox banking on him having plenty of fire left to do it right and get a WS. I just hope this guy isn't a perpetual loser. He sounds like on on TV sometimes...

Can't that really only end one of two ways? I mean, either Valentine retires or he is fired. If we are all assuming that there will be a day 4-5 years from now where we are wishing our manager gone (again) then maybe this isn't the right guy. I was hoping for a bit longer than that before thinking that it is inevitable. I'm thinking about Luvello at this point...

There will be new opportunities now. For instance, it appears that many fewer RPs will reach Type A status, meaning that most good RPs who would currently cost a pick will not in the future. Which types of teams do you think could benefit from that? Teams with the money to sign the top tier of relievers. In the past giving up a draft pick for a Joaquim Benoit seemed really painful. Now it won't. I suspect there will be other benefits to this too and I'm convinced the Sox will exploit anything that is exploitable.

I think the minor tweaks need to come on the field. The coaching stuff etc., is not what I have been referring to when I talk about changes. If ou get a new manager then you're going to get a new coaching staff. That's a given. The strength and conditioning guys, etc., are not major changes IMO--certainly not when compared to the changes some people here were advocating earlier: trade Beckett, trade Ellsbury, etc., Those would be MAJOR changes in my opinion. They might make the team better, if done correctly, but they shouldn't be done for the sake of doing something. From what I've seen, just about every component of the Sox current situation has people writing about it on both sides: Managerial search: 1) It's a disaster, the FO totally backstabbed Ben the Boob! vs. 2) Cherington and Lucchino both met with Valentine earlier in the process. They have not been presenting some of the bigger names they've met with. It's an over-reaction to say that Cherington is totally out of the loop. Papelbon: 1) It's a disaster. They didn't even make an offer. vs. 2) Everyone knew this was coming and, frankly, this is the biggest contract in history for a RP. Even some people in Philadelphia don't love this deal. Very risky. Theo: 1) He's out. They didn't want him back and used many layers of trickery to get him out. vs. 2) John Henry probably wanted him back. Theo said, independent of this situation, that he really didn't want to be around for more than 10 years and that is a legitimate business view. You can find opinions on both sides of those coins. Those who say that the sky is falling are people who are picking low-hanging fruit related to all points #1 and this is a pattern for most of them.

Nope. Tito, I am okay with going a new direction. However, I think the cubs got a very good baseball mind. I also think the Sox didn't want Theo to leave. It makes things more complicated than they needed to be. But, if "the perception" is based on what people write in the paper, then you are basing that perception on the view of a very select group of people. "The perception" should really be based more on what the general population thinks. A better way to put it is that "for people who only think based on what people in the media write, the perception is..." but I don't really care about them and I don't think the FO should either. Because my perception is that the organization is not in a HUGE amount of trouble, it is also true and cannot be disputed that the perception is out there that the Red Sox are not the Titanic, sinking with a goofy, incapapble and stupid front office seeking more icebergs to hit. See how this works? I don't care what the reactionary boston media writes. If anything they are only increasing interest in the Sox and in people who will tune in next year to see how they do with the moves they make. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Do you usually solicit your insults? Sorry (again) that I insulted you by ripping Shaughnessy and then linking him to you. If you agree with my ripping of shaughnessy then maybe you shouldn't post his hyperventilating rantings as aligned with your own thoughts so closely? I think the organization is in a period of flux. They are not dysfunctional. If this team makes the playoffs next year and has an overall good season people are going to look really, really silly for all the bluster and freaking out from this offseason.