example1

You know I disagree about the GM. As others have said, (I think Jacko put it best) Theo has been at the helm for 2 WS and the best decade in any of our lifetimes. I'm in no hurry to watch him go to the Cubs or anywhere else. Manager, meh... maybe. Coaches... probably. This team needed to be ready to play at the beginning of the season (even an average start and they're sitting at 92-94 wins right now) and they weren't. As for next year, it sounds like we agree on Ortiz. If he takes, say, 8m/yr for two years, he can stick around. Otherwise, I think he's too risky--especially at more years. It isn't his fault, he's had a great year, but it is time to move on. I think Lavarnway would be mostly a DH, but he COULD catch (more valuable than 1B, which is what Ortiz offers) and he's RH. I suspect it is too early to just give him the position, but I think his bat is the real deal. What I think about Kalish is that if he can come back healthy he should be the RF of the future. If he can come back healthy, I would think about making him the CF of the future and trading Ellsbury. He is one of the most valuable pieces on this team and could entice another team to move a pitcher. The biggest problem I see is that there is no good pitching on the market for the forseeable future, and only a handful of elite pitchers on teams that might move them. I think Theo (or the next GM) will need to be really, really aggressive to get one. With Lackey, Dice-K and Buchholz all being question marks, that has to be a top priority IMO. Also, Crawford was brought here to be what Ellsbury has been this year. Move Ells, put Crawford at the top of the lineup, find another 7th hitter, and have a rotation with another ace-caliber pitcher at the top. Seems like the only way to move forward, to me. Of course, I don't even know who that pitcher would be... so that's a non-starter too.

The Yankees won the WS that year after a horrible end of the season in which their play didn't warrant a post-season appearance at all. They had the 5th best record in the AL that year, but got in anyway. (the Central and West both had 2 teams with better records). Hey, it's ONE story of a team that was ultimately successful totally blowing at the end of the season.

First of all, as a social worker, there's nothing wrong with social work! Also, I think that the house cleaning that the FO would do is probably the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you would want. Papi? Gone. Paps? Gone. (in my opinion). They aren't likely to pay Ortiz the millions of dollars he wants for multiple years because he's old and had a freakish rebound (especially against LHP) after a few years. Also, they are highly aware of the problems of being overly-invested in bad contracts. Paps is very good, but unless he will settle for a decent contract, we can expect him to go. Now, I have enough confidence in Theo to think that he can stock the rest of the roster with players who make the team very, very good, but I envision an offseason of freaking out when these guys are released. Guys like Kalish, Lavarnway etc., will/should get a serious shot at regular ABs.

I'm breaking this out from tonights game thread (I think that's where Coco posted it): If you remember, at the beginning of the season I did a B-R search to see which teams had ever started that poorly to have success at the end of the season. I found a few that made it to the playoffs and a couple that won the WS. I tried to do the same thing for this type of finished and really struggled to find one. In fact, I think there is only one comparable recent example that offers any optimism: 2000 NY Yankees That Yankees team went 5-16 in its last 21 games. They won the division by 2.5 games over the Sox. They won only 87 games. They lost their last 7 games. They ended up winning the World Series. It is little hope, I realize. In order for the Sox to match that last 21 games the Yankees had, they would need to go 2-4 the rest of the way. Given that, I wouldn't say it is out of the realm of possibility. The Yankees played better ball in September than the Red Sox have this year, despite their s***** finish. However, the Sox already have more wins than that Yankees team had at the end of the season, so maybe that equals out? :dunno:

Crawford has an OBP hovering just above .300 for the last few months. He can complain all he wants, but if he's not getting on base he doesn't deserve to bat very often. Hopefully he's turning it around.

I'm not giving up on the game threads. Don't care who is pitching. f*** the Orioles. Go Sox. Go Yankees. Sit down Orioles. f*** the Rays.

I don't think I attributed anything to luck in this post. You should read what I'm writing. I'm merely disputing your bold claim that you don't believe in luck. Luck can be used poorly as an excuse--which I'm not doing now--but to deny its existence seems absurd. Of course I know you're not a simpleton. There's plenty of legitimate, tangible things to blame this season on.

That's either a statistical fact, or a bold claim based on nothing in particular. Did luck play ANY role in the Sox recent woes? Absolutely. Did it play a role in the Yankees finding starting pitching off the scrap heap? Yep. Would it be intellectually dishonest to say that it is the main reason they succeeded? Yes.

This seems to be a play on language more than anything else. --If they hold onto a playoff spot they will need some good fortune (luck in everyone else's book) --If they advance you would reject the notion that they were lucky That doesn't make sense. Either they had good fortune at some point in time (were lucky) or they were not. Having bad luck later does not make luck suddenly not-luck. In any case, all luck is random, that's what makes it 'luck'. What Branch Rickey was talking about is those things you can prepare for and his statement was an attempt to remind people that you can prepare for more things than most people believe. I suspect that Theo is just as thorough in his view of what can and cannot be prepared for. What we (I think) are talking about are things you cannot prepare for. That's the very definition of what I would refer to as luck. Luck: "The chance happening of fortunate or adverse events; fortune".

I reject your rejection. Unless you have omniscience then luck or probability plays a big role in everything. Continually explaining problems as being due to "bad luck" IS a weak excuse. However, highlighting bad luck as a contributer--or even a significant contributer--to poor results is sometimes valid. You don't attribute the 2004 championship to the good luck of Posada's ground-rule double hopping into the stands, do you? You should. No amount of preparation, planning or anything else makes that ball hope into the stand and strand the runner at 3rd. Luck goes both ways, it is a factor, but it isn't an all encompassing excuse. Expecting that any mortal human can overcome the random nature of the world seems like an unreasonably high expectation to me.

You don't believe in luck? That seems like a pretty bold claim. What would you call winning the lottery? Good preparation? The Sox wiped the floor with the Yankees head to head this year. Clearly in retrospect the Yankees made good decisions (out of necessity, mind you) on their pitchers. I hope they stick with this pitching staff moving forward because it isn't that good.

I will definitely root for the Yankees. That said, if the Sox can just kick some ass over the rest of this season we could happily root for the Rays to beat the Yankees (maybe 6 out of 7) and for the Sox to overtake the Yankees. Assuming that doesn't happen, I will happily root for the Yankees. I imagine like everything else Yankee-related in my life, I will be disappointed.

Can Beckett just pitch every game for the rest of the season?

Who would they replace Theo with? I was actually thinking about it today, wondering if you (and your agreers) are right who would they want instead? I suppose they would want someone who could really spend a shitload of money on established players because I don't think they will find someone who runs a much better minor league development shop. They aren't going to steal TB's FO (or draft picks) away from them... Just like I didn't see better trade deadline options on 7/31, I don't see better FO options either. Yes, there will be some retooling, but my hope is that they aggressively pursue a 5th starter. Spend a shitload of talent for another legitimate arm, starting at the top with Felix and going right down the list until they land someone. Treat Lackey like a #5 and just eat his cost. I'm also pretty okay with them letting Ortiz walk. He's inexplicably had a great season and it worries me.

Does it? Where is this coming from? I just don't see it. It might be worth noting that inside the franchise they are aware of how many of Theo's "chosen" guys have left and how many new faces he is working with. Is there another franchise that has had as many departures from the FO over the past 4-5 years? It isn't an excuse, but it is a variable that very few people make note of. I expect ownership to be less reactionary than the fanbase on this website, particularly because injuries can be blamed and next year will likely bring ticket sales and general interest regardless of how they finish. They still have a beast of a team. Also, I'm still waiting for people to produce a list of players who could have/should have been acquired at the deadline to mitigate the pitching woes this club has right now.

Theo's fault.

This is just ********. Theo isn't losing the games on the field. He's not throwing the ball away at 3B, he's not injuring Youkilis, and he's not walking leadoff hitters. All of these guys are professionals and they should do better than they are. Period. Lester shat it upon the mound yesterday. I think Wakefield shouldn't be anywhere near a mound (that may rest on Theo) but otherwise this is a team that is good enough to hold onto this lead and it should win 95 games or so. They f***ing suck right now. Pathetic.

f*** the Rays. Go Sox.