DocHolliday

And, their financial advantage is shrinking as teams benefit from favorable local tv contracts and the national TV deals MLB recently signed. We are seeing more and more talented players signed with the teams that drafted them before they hit FA at the latter end of their prime years. Like SFF said, the future of this team will largely depend on how this team's upcoming players and prospects turn out, supplemented by value adding trades and free agents.

All of the possibilities this offseason will make this one of the more intriguing off seasons in terms of discussing ways to improve the team. Hopefully this organization will limit the mistakes they make this offseason better than in recent off seasons.

This is almost exactly what I feel would be an ideal offseason for the Red Sox. Another possible trade partner for Ellsbury besides the Rangers could be the Phillies. He could be included as part of a trade for Cliff Lee with a few prospects or low value players changing hands. I know the Phillies have Mayberry and Domonic Brown in their OF, but Mayberry is Ellsbury's age and hasn't shown near the production that Ellsbury has. Would probably have to be an extension for Ellsbury to make it, or any trade of Ellsbury, happen.

I never compared Murphy and Nava's abilities. We both acknowledge there is a far separation in their abilities and things they can bring to a team. The Murphy deal was an example of a regretful trade involving a young OF. I brought it up to say that in a hypothetical deal in which Nava was one of the players leaving, I would not regret losing him specifically.

Sounds like the type of filler that goes with higher potential players in trades. By comparing him to Murphy, I'm agreeing with your statement that he has little value and the team would not be at a loss for giving him up. I never liked the Murphy deal, and its those types of deals the Red Sox need to stop making unless its for a young, cost controlled, and talented starting pitcher or a young, cost controlled, talented position player.

To me, Nava represents the perfect candidate for a "sell high" type of player. He's certainly a kid who cares a lot and gives his all, but he's certainly no David Murphy, who the Red Sox did not hesitate to part with, for a bullpen piece that was never needed in Gagne.

I think you may be confusing Price and Shields. Price is due to hit arbitration for the 2nd time, and he will almost certainly receive a contract north of $10 M if he gets that far. Shields is due for an option of $9 M or a $1.5 M buyout. Haven't heard anything related to the Rays shopping Price, but I'd be surprised if both are in the Rays rotation next season. If I'm the Rays, I'm looking to deal Shields far before I consider dealing Price. The new national TV deals should help the Rays afford to pay for Price next season - even if he reaches arbitration.

Looking back on this year from a different lens, its sad that all of the pregame celebrations and ceremonies this team has had have been overshadowed by the atrocious play on the field. Even if this team had been able to pull things together and make this a respectable season, it might have been viewed a lot differently as a sort of "coming together" by this organization after what happened last season and the sudden losses of some key representatives of the organization like Johnny Pesky and Carl Beane.

Hopefully a little over a week from now, I will be able to change my signature because V will no longer be with the team.

At long last, the miserable season at home that was 2012 has come to an end. The road record wasn't much better, but as a younger Sox fan, this is by far the worst season long performance at home that I have seen in my life. Lots of work to do that should have already started but will take center stage just 1 week from now.

Up to this point, the Yankees have certainly done a better job at mitigating the issue of getting the most out of their older stars. There is no doubt that, despite their larger quantity of resources, they have been far more efficient with what they have than the Sox. However, given the changes in the landscape of the game, I feel the Yankees will have a harder time managing their resources in the near future if they continue to rely heavily on FA. With more organizations adopting a strong commitment to their farm system and the number of local and national TV contract revenues that are coming to a majority of teams in the league, the quality of players that will make it to FA will not be what it once was. Over the past few seasons, more and more teams are signing their top talent to LT contracts that buy out their arbitration years and thus, their prime years. Several years ago, there were only a handful of teams that could afford to sign their top talent guys once they got late into arbitration or hit free agency. All across the league, we are seeing teams that are making that commitment long before players get the chance to hit FA. If done early enough, it gives the player security and it creates additional value for the team they sign with. The recent national and some organizations local tv contracts will help all teams receive the additional money they need to sign their guys far before they reach FA. If this trend continues, there is little doubt in my mind that the new competitive advantages will be stronger scouting and development personnel/systems than your opponents and better payroll flexibility than your opponents. With the large sums of money the Yankees have committed to aging veterans, they may be forced to keep payroll above the luxury tax or seriously strengthen their scouting/development department to stay at the level they are at now.

Tonight's outcome certainly doesn't change my agreement with this statement. Seems the O's can't make a move on the Yankees division lead and the Yankees won't extend their lead. It's been around a 1 game lead for about a week now with little or no movement from either side.

Edes reporting tonight that Varitek is "close" to accepting a position within the Red Sox organization, rumored to be a special assistant to the GM. Wonder if this is the organization pitching evaluator position LL referenced on D&C recently.

Totally agree with this. In some cases, the Sox have traded away players who had some level of success here at one point (Masterson, Lowrie, Murphy to an extent) for short term fixes who are no longer here and/or have been tremendous busts (V Martinez, Melancon, Eric Gagne). But the market definitely has an effect on player performance from the prospect level all the way up to the established veteran level. Obviously, the organization shouldn't shy away from the players with the highest potential in the draft if there are questions about their ability to play in this market. As draft picks or even international signings, it's very difficult to predict who will be able to play in this market, let alone if they will even make it to the majors. Established veterans on the other hand, should be looked at with much scrutiny if they haven't performed in a high intensity market. As we have seen with the Lackeys, Crawfords, and Gonzalez's, there is just to commit in $ and/or prospects/draft picks for players who might seriously underperform expectations. Instead of committing so much money to other team's players, this organization would do itself a favor to place higher value on their own free agents. After all, these are players who have proven it HERE. Provided it fits with the long term plan, it might be better to overpay our own FA and get slightly less production than to vastly overpay for another team's free agent and get average or below average production.

No worries 700 - I just wanted to reiterate my original point and didn't think anyone was personally attacking me or anything like that. The payroll complaints annoy me as well. Here in Texas, the complaints about payroll were rampant when the Red Sox or Yankees played and beat the Rangers on a regular basis. These days, the Rangers are winning and have raised payroll at a rate higher than any other team in the league and fans look the other way. It wouldn't surprise me if the Rangers had a higher payroll than the Red Sox next season as they currently have more $ committed to players next season than the Sox. But the fact is no matter what your payroll capabilities are, it still goes back to how well you utilize your resources. The past few years have been a ridiculous display of how to manage payroll and resources. Unfortunately, the organization misinterpreted the fans desire for a winning team and tried to show their commitment to the fans desire by buying the most expensive FA on the market over the course of several seasons. It's as if they said to themselves "if we spend the money, they will know we are committed to winning." Instead, they spent to their limits on bad investments to the point where they had no flexibility and the fans, if I can speak for us, are either highly disappointed, embarrassed, furious, or some combination of all at their mistakes. My hope is that something clicked on Yawkey Way at some point in this miserable season where they said "We can have all of the 100 years of Fenway celebrations, the coffee table books, the bricks, and all of the other pomp and circumstance we want, but it all means nothing if our product on the field loses on a consistent basis. This has been miserable for all of us, and we have let the fans down by placing our focus on the ancillary benefits that come from winning. We have to remember this mistake and never again let our primary focus waver from doing what's best for the team to sustain long term winning."

This is the crux of the issue no doubt. The only reason the Sox got into this situation in the 1st place was by committing large sums of money and years to players in FA who turned out to be total busts in this market. My point wasn't to say that the Sox were limited as if they were a small market team. Instead, I was saying that they put themselves into a situation where they had little to no payroll flexibility to make some of the moves last offseason necessary to fill holes for this year's team if problems arised. As we all witnessed, the problems were numerous and they did not have the ability to fill the holes as the Yankees were able to do. Don't be surprised if the Yankees are having similar types of payroll flexibility issues in the next few seasons. Unless there's another Dodgers type of team on the horizon, there's no getting out of an average of $70 M committed to players who will be well past their prime years. In a post performance enhancing drug period, this game should go back to being driven by young players - not by 35 + year veterans. Maybe they will have better luck than the Sox have had the past few seasons at getting the production from FA acquisitions, extending their current younger players, and/or emergence of new young players through trades or the farm. Fact is - the Sox thought they were wisely committing the additional money and it blew up in their face. Who says it can't happen to someone else?

Fair point. I guess I interpreted Kaat's comment as him saying that pitchers in general are relying too much on the cutter and should spend more time refining and controlling their fastball. He went on to say that the fastball should be the pitch that pitchers have the most control over. So I took that as his way of saying that pitchers with the ability to consistently spot a fastball would be more effective than pitchers who rely a lot on the curveball. There's been many issues that have plagued Lester's season. But it seemed like there were several games where he went to the cutter inside and it didn't cut, and he paid the price for it. Maybe part of his offseason and his work in the spring should be focused on reestablishing control and confidence in his fastball so he won't have to rely so much on the cutter.

I listened to a podcast a week or so ago on the extra bases blog and Jim Kaat was the feature guest. By far the biggest highlight of the podcast was when was asked about his thoughts on the cutter and why he thinks it has become so popular. His response was something along the lines of "I think the reason so many pitchers are throwing the cutter today is because of Mariano Rivera and his success throwing the pitch. The problem is, nobody's Mariano Rivera - nobody has a cutter like Mariano Rivera. And, over time, everyone else's cutter can become more recognizable and hittable." Even in the case of Mo, who has had brilliant and unquestionable success, I think part of it has had to do with his role in the 9th inning and only facing batters 1 time. Without the ability to see his primary pitch over a large sample, it makes sense that hitters would be more likely to fail. Of course, the few times he has failed, it seems to have come against teams that have seen him the most. Perhaps the case with other pitchers, particularly starting pitchers, is they are seen 2, 3 times a game for 2 or more games a season. Over the course of a few seasons, it's not hard for the best hitters in their division to have had over 30 PA against them. Maybe this has something to do with Lester's struggles the past 2 seasons?

Can't expect much from the Twins this year. But out of all the teams in the AL, they are probably the biggest culprit for rolling over for the Yankees year in and year out. Doubt they will help the O's out in the standings.

Or, if you do try and go that route, you risk missing on the big money complimentary pieces and you're in the payroll position the Red Sox were before the mega trade. Even if you discount the deals for fill ins like Lowe and Ichiro, these types of deals would be impossible for all teams not named the Yankees to make if the guys they had originally penciled in to do the job become injured or underperform (Gardner as an example). We have learned this season that this was the exact position the Red Sox were put in. And it took an even more desperate club to acquire some of the teams most underperforming assets to get the payroll flexibility back in place. If any team not named the Yankees would be able to acquire even more supporting pieces for an underperforming team, it would have been the Red Sox.

Hopefully the Rangers won't end up with a Jackie Bradley Jr type of prospect if they end up with our 2nd round pick. As much as people lament losing Adrian Beltre, that loss netted us Swihart and Bradley when the old CBA was still in place. Think of the position the Rangers would be in if they had Jackie Bradley in their system right now. They'd almost certainly let Hamilton walk after this season and wouldn't have the dilemma of who would be their future CF.

There is almost no way I see Swisher getting $15-$18 M. At best, he is around a $12 M AAV player. I've been on record saying he would be a good pickup. But that's an outrageous amount to give a guy like him. If someone gives him that type of contract, it better not be the Sox.

It sure does seem like they get the good fortune more times than not. At some point, they will have a season like the 2012 Sox season where their players under perform and everything that could go wrong will. As some others on this forum and the media have discussed, the mega trade the Red Sox pulled off last month gave them tremendous payroll flexibility going forward. Even if the Yankees don't resign Cano or Granderson (which won't happen), they will have an average of $70M committed to aging players like Arod, Jeter, Teixiera, and Sabathia. Who knows? Maybe their run of tremendous good fortune year in and year out could be coming to an end?

After reading Speier's piece this week on next year's draft position, these losses down the stretch are much easier to take. Hopefully, the majority of the remaining losses will come against the Orioles and not the Yankees.

Make it 16 straight in extra innings for the Orioles this season. 1 shy of tying the all time mark.