Dojji

Or you could look at it another way. With a large number of data points from a diverse period of his career, the cross section problem is minimized and we get a better idea about what Cabrera can be in October than we could if we had just one relatively large sample size. In other words, trends you can identify from smaller samples at a large number of different times in a player's career will tend to hold true throughout said career.

While that's true, not being able to talk a very reasonable owner (Henry is widely regarded as one of the better, more openminded owners in all of North American professional sports) and make the case from a baseball standpoint isn't the mark of a great GM. The more you blame ownership for things going wrong under Cherington, the more you admit that Cherington was not up to one of the crucial aspects of a GM's job -- managing his relationship with ownership and higher execs. And I just have to ask the question, why couldn't Cherington convince Henry to make an exception for a fan favorite, 2x world series champion with no known health issues, a proven record as a rock-solid and extremely durable starter, and one of the most well known and iconic pitchers of the recent Red Sox era who Red Sox fans would absolutely travel far and wide for the chance to see? You can make the argument based on conventional baseball wisdom, medical infomation AND love of money. Not to mention that Jon actually got a late start to his career thanks to the cancer treatment back in 06 and has a lot less wear and tear on his arm than a conventional power lefty. Why can't the most consistently effective Red Sox starter since Pedro Martinez (Sale's working on beating him here, but will need a few years to lock it down), with, again, absolutely no known health issues, get an exception to a rule that should only ever be followed in general, and evaluated on a case by case basis? While I agree with that policy as a general rule, not being flexible enough to make exceptions when it makes sense does not reflect well on either ownership or the GM that can't talk them into it.

Epstein was never going to be on the job market for very long. Everyone knew he was good at his job, and he usually had the Red Sox at the forefront of their division even in the years they didn't win anything, with fluky exceptions in 2006 and 2011. Cherington was completely unproven before coming to Boston, bracketed a World Series win that clearly had a ton of luck behind it with 3 last place finishes despite huge budgets, and didn't really demonstrate any knowledge or concrete plan of how he might rectify the situation. I honestly think that if anything, and I do mean ANYTHING, Cherington was doing to try to help the pitching staff was working at all, he'd still be here. His plan was showing great progress on the offensive side of the ball, but the combination of failing to develop SP prospects and refusing to meet the market to import them, was simply unacceptable, and doesn't reflect well on Cherington as a top baseball executive. Even if your plans fail, as a GM, you have to know what to do to try to right the ship. When Cherington failed to develop a top starter in 4 years of trying, he was unable to think of anything else to do to solve the problem. (if he'd even spent the money he blew on Pablo and Hanley, on a SP, he'd probably also still be here. Ownership understand trying and failing to patch key areas of the team. They don't have much understanding for failing to try)

What's that? DD has a clue how to draft and develop prospects? Wow! To listen to this forum you'd think that such things would be so much Urdu to him.

Ownership loved Jon Lester. As far as I'm concerned any GM who couldn't convince ownership to open up their wallets to retain the services of a power ace and one of the most dependable starters in all of major league baseball, and a beloved hometown hero who had played a role in not one but two Championships and was beloved by the fans, for a price tag that it would turn out was still under market for a man of his talents, didn't do his job very well. A GM has to have the smarts and persuasive ability to prevent ownership and upper management from backing him into a corner. Even if lowballing Lester wasn't Cherington's idea, as general manager he has to be able to stop ownership from screwing up his rotation with their own bad ideas. It the goal was to maintain competitive teams in 2015 and onward, there was no reason for Cherington to let himself get pushed around when it came to Jon Lester's salary. The contract Lester got proved to be an absolute bargain, substantially less than other top pitchers have commanded since, and I have no doubt that if we'd been in on Lester for similar money, either before the trade or in free agency, he'd be here right now. The inability to challenge or change ownership directives when they're destructive to the team is the sign of a GM who can't command the respect of ownership and lowballing Lester to that extent shows that either he doesn't have a finger on the pulse of the free agency market, or is unable to argue against someone in the organization who doesn't understand free agent pitchers. And even if it was ownership's doing, or Lucchino's you have to think that DD or Theo would have been able to talk them out of it. We certainly know Theo was willing to go to great lengths to try to change ownership's mind on what he felt was a bad idea, if you remember his reaction to the Beckett trade. That's part of a GM's job, to make his call and stand his ground. Needless to say, if Cherington did value Lester's role as a dependable top of the rotation starter, he didn't defend it properly. Whether through lack of understanding of the free agent pitching market, or simple lack of balls, either way it shows the lack of a skillset a good GM needs to have. Lester was the lynchpin of the rotation, it was always going to be easier to rebuild the rotation with him than without him, and getting him for an under-market deal in which he'd easily pay for himself should have been more than feasible. You absolutely CAN make that sales pitch to an owner if you're willing to make a game effort to wear the pants in the relationship. If Cherington couldn't do that, if he couldn't talk back to ownership and change their minds on key areas of team construction, then he wasn't actually a GM at all, much less a good one, and we're better off without him. General manager is considered an executive position for a reason, if Cherington was treating the job as advisory only, then he was overpromoted and is now back at an appropriate level for his talents.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/FLA/1997.shtml

Lowballing Lester was unforgivable. I have no doubt we could have landed Porcello in another trade. Having Lester and Porcello would have been a great start at rebuilding the rotation. It was a total whiff to lose out on a steady dependable ace starter. There was no reason to lowball the man. He was worth the money he was asking. Imagine having Lester instead of Price right now, and for far less money. Yeah, that one's directly on Cherington.

The thing about a 5 year plan in a major media market is that you never GET 5 years. Cherington chose the wrong plan and then executed it poorly -- or did I miss that rush of young promising stud arms we had that were about to break through to the big league roster in the following 3 seasons and take the universe by storm? He'd had 4 years of that 5. and despite the fluky WS we were not particularly close to a revolutionary youth movement in the rotation where we needed it most. Not were we close to winning that next World Series that is always ownership's goal. Quite frankly the 5 year plan failed so spectacularly that ownership didn't need the fifth and final year to know that this wasn't going to turn around. The youth movement was nowhere to be seen on the pitching side of the ball. We had some nice ballplayers on the offensive side, but you can't win a 5 year plan by only staffing your positions. If you can't develop pitchers from the farm, and Cherington's track record of doing this is very, VERY bad, then you can't develop from the farm and you NEED to be a buyer in free agency. Cherington was refusing to do that. He was failing to crap and refusing to get off the pot. He was replaced by someone who saw reality rather than being blinded by a failed plan. It's really just that simple.

He's had several chances to have that one good season and it hasn't happened for him. Quite frankly Cabrera's had more chances than most athletes ever get to produce in the postseason and he can't seem to make that happen. I wouldn't consider it damning, but if considering Cabrera vs another option I would be somewhat swayed by it.

For the record, DEFINITELY not saying I wouldn't do the trade, I'd take that deal a thousand times over. We HAD to have an ace. We needed one desparately. I was predicting we wouldn't get him at the time mostly because I was resigned to the fact that we wouldn't go to the mat to bring great talent to Boston. I've never been happier to be wrong.

oWAR is 1.3, dWAR is 0.6, bWAR is 1.6

you mean except for Moncada who by all measures is right now an above average big league second baseman with plenty of room to grow?

Not sure where you're getting that Cabrera is signed through 2019. Baseball Reference has his contract ending this year. And I'm not against Cabrera, in fact I think it might be a solid idea, but I never got the impression he was an elite defender, and in fact B-R has him below replacement level. WHich might not be terrible combined with his bad, except that I'd like one solid defender in that middle infield, and Bogaerts is also below replacement. LeMahieu on the other hand has always been a solid positive dWAR producer. The difference in defensive wins between LeMahieu and Cabrera is usually more than 2 wins in LeMahieu's favor. Add in that LeMahieu can also hit reasonably well, and I do tend to favor the Rockie over the Met. and these rumors about a bad attitude keep leaking out around the guy -- nothing official or damning, but enough to wonder whether there's fire under all the smoke. Never heard anything like that about LeMahieu. LeMahieu is also 3 years younger Then there's Cabrara's career .545 OPS in the postseason, which is very relevant on the subject of renting him for the second half and the postseason. LeMahieu is an unknown, but at least he's not known to have issues producing in October the way Cabrera seems to be.

Well it is a stark transition, as him who passed the sentence swung the sword.

If you don't pay what the market will bear, you don't get the player. Simple as that.

Oh agreed

That would be very foolish. He needs to function as a competent backup to boost his value and his durability. I wouldn't be surprised if he was catching at least 2 out of 5 games from now to the deadline. I also wouldn't be surprised if Vaz isn't exactly rushed back. We have the luxury of taking our time here. Let him have some time to recover not just from the broken finger but from the ordinary aches and pains of catching regularly. A Vazquez with healthy knees in October could be a huge asset.

VP of baseball operations is an advisory position rather than an executive position. He knows a ton about prospect development, and it is a job he can definitely contribute to his team in, but it's a big step down from GM.

On the other hand, I do actually feel that way. DD spent big but he hit on most of his spending. I'll take a guy who spends big, but accurately, over a guy who won't spend.

BTW I mentioned this in another thread but my ideal trade target is DJ LeMahieu. So far it looks like the Rockies are hoping to keep him, but he's a multiple gold glove winner with some offensive ability. I much prefer that to trying to shoehorn a hitter into a middle infield position. Defense first, especially with an offensive guy like Bogaerts on the other side of second base.

I fully expect the Sox to work hard to get something done with Bogaerts. Even at his worst he's been a solid shortstop and he has the potential for so much more.

No one is saying differently. Personally I'm excited to have him on the bench, when you can have a player like that and NOT have to push him into situations he's uncomfortable with or unable to play effectively, that's a very nice luxury.

Tell ya what, I'm gonna call him Jar Jar Beeks from now until he starts attacking the strike zone like a professional.

He's not a GM. He has a vanity job where he's basically a glorified scout and opinion giver with no decision making power. The reason is speculative, the fact that no one trusted him to run a baseball team is not. Thanks. I do try

Then he'd better start attacking the strike zone more. If he can't trust his stuff and avoid nibbling he has no place in the major leagues