a700hitter

Any business that is paying for the past is not running their business right or is a union. Experience in certain businesses like mine does get rewarded, but not as a reward for past service. There is a tremendous learning curve and newbies are not hired as they are dead weight for several years. A good employee at my place with 15 years of experience will easily do more than twice the work or someone with 5 years on the job and do it in less time. The veteran gets paid substantially more than the 5 yr person, but a lot less than double. That isn't paying for the past.

We are just talking about relative importance. You would emphasize a different aspect than I would, but both things are necessary to run a successful team or any business. Unlike yourself, others mistakenly think I am making an either/or argument. I am not, but yet they do. Lol!

I think any player conference with a pitcher should be counted as a visit to the mound. After the second meeting, the pitcher must be removed.

A true and ironically funny observation. The only time that I made any money on a bracket pool was in a season where I hardly followed the sport and just picked high seeds and teams that I like.

I have been working for 30 years as an attorney for a Company that was a NY institution for more than 130 years before the U.S. government declared it to be a Systemically Important Financial Institution (aka Too Big to Fail). Of course, you would give more weight to the Juggernaut from a third world country who works out of an internet cafe. LOL!! What I have shared is not merely anecdotal. Of course, we use business analytics, and they are necessary to compete, but the differentiating factor for successful companies is human capital. I"ll paraphrase the statement of our past chairman and CEO who took us public in 2000 after coming to us from Paine Webber. When asked what he knew about running a life insurance company, he said "you need a sales force and an actuary, .... and you can rent the actuary." In our business, the actuary is the epitome of analytics. When that CEO retired from our Company, he was hired by the U.S. Government to save AIG -- the failure of which would have devastated many European banks and economies.

If the analytics which disprove the scouting are the second look, there never would be a need for scouting. Scouting is labor intensive and costly. Analytics are are cost controlled.

Yep, another look is needed, because in the end the visual scouting makes the final confirmation. You said it yourself without using those exact words.

I am sure that is what they are thinking. I was tongue in cheek when I said that he would be the fall guy, but make no mistake, if they do collapse, the fingers will be pointed at Farrell.

Everything that could have gone wrong went wrong in 2014. I really didn't expect the 2014 Sox to be strong contenders for the division title, but I didn't expect the level of futility.

If Buch and Masterson replicate their 2014 seasons, things could go south very fast. Farrell has a track record of several last place finishes-- the perfect fall guy.

Anytime you hand over 3 starting positions to untested rookies, you are asking for trouble. I think a 4th place finish was very foreseeable. The utter futility of the offense was probably beyond most expectations, because in addition to the failure of the rookies, Napoli and Victorino also had terrible seasons.

He needs to keep Farrell in place to be the fall guy.

There's no decrying in baseball.

I fundamentally disagree. Technology and analytics are for the most part "off the shelf" commodities that can be purchased at any time. The Harvard/Wharton MBA consultants will always take your call and show up to train your people. The human talent pool is limited and is not an "off the shelf" commodity. Get the best people with the best skillset for the jobs. The analytics and technologies are not part of the skillset. They are tools like an instrument is to a musician. It's the musician that is more valuable. People tend to be very black and white. I am not at all saying don't use the modern day analytics. Of course, you have to use the tools necessary to do the job. It's a question of emphasis. Not every new business analytic is a winner. Far from it. Once a new method starts to get publicity, it has already been producing some level of success. You don't hear or read about the numerous failures, because organizations don't publicize their failures. That is just a fact. My Company had an investment that was hemorrhaging money -- piling up millions in losses. When the executives went on their traveling road show Town Hall they handed out a nice glossy brochure with bios for each of them including their areas of responsibility for the Company. Curiously, none listed the the losing investment as a responsibility. I guess that business purchased and ran itself. Human capital is the most important and most expensive.

And easily learned and copied so any advantage is short- lived.

I have seen a lot of ideas implemented at my Company that came from Wharton or Harvard MBA consultants that not only didn't add value to or business but that in many ways were detrimental.

You copycat the ones that work and save your money not doing those that don't work.

Every department has a budget for salary and compensation. No team has all the top scouts. If the budget devoted to tech/new fangled corporate business initiatives was redirected to additional scouting budget, they would most certainly be able to upgrade the quality of their scouts.

It also works for every pizzeria and fast food joint in town.

The DHing will extend the life of his knees.

Pieces of Yankee Stadium (1976 ed) started falling a few years before they built the new place.

I like that park, aside from the 50 foot glove. It has great sightlines. The upperdeck seems closer to the field than the lower deck in Oakland. I like Camden Yards too, but my preference is ATT. Of the new parks, the Phillies place is my least favorite. That might be influenced by the fact that Phillie fans are just so unpleasant.

I would be nostalgic for the old park, and someday I will want to take my grandkids to see a ballgame at Fenway, but I would really enjoy a nice new, comfortable ballpark. If anyof you have been to JetBlue park it is the same field inside a new ballpark. Granted that is a much smaller park, but they could do the same thing with a 45,000 seating capacity park.

Eventually most teams have employed some version of moneyball. It really didn't take long. As for scouting evolving, I would disagree. The skillsets to play the game remain unchanged. Scouts have broader reach using technology and there are more readily available stats on more players so they can better utilize their time. The technology and availability of stats I would say have helped scouts be more efficient with their time, but the fundamentals of the job remain unchanged.

The Sox should have had a weight clause in his contract for the kind of money he is being paid. He could hire a top nutritionist, eat tasty food, not be hungry and get to a healthy weight.