sk7326

The org had a distinct surplus of Luis A Basabes.

Moncada has struck out in 30% of his PAs in Portland. If they don't think he can hit big league pitching in a PH role, then if he comes up it's as a PR specialist (which I think is possible).

Hedge against Benintendi - and if they can get him for a relative sack of potatoes, worth a look.

I think they can do both without much difficulty. The Price signing was solid - you pay a bit more to win an auction (it is why almost all UFA deals are losers), and the contract is written in a way that the commitment is much less than the headline number (especially if Price pitches well). And Price has had a tricky transition year which while uneven has not done anything to reasonably lower optimism that he will perform well in 2017 or 2018 (at least). The Kimbrel trade was not one I liked, but one I got. The prospects were blocked to a degree, and Kimbrel was best in class with some team control. Now personally, I don't think the marginal difference between Kimbrel and somebody average was all that much (a commentary on the job, not the pitchers) - but they got a good pitcher back. The Pomeranz trade is one I thought was expensive, but again - low level (on the farm) pitching is so volatile compared to crackerjack position players that if you can help get young quality controlled talent to the major league level, you have to listen. San Diego had to love the deal because you just don't get Espinoza's sort of ceiling every day, and that is fine when you are as far from being good as they are. There is a chance this ends up like the Beckett deal where Espinoza ends up an elite guy by 2020, and people on forums this will whine about how we can't develop quality pitching and let good guys go - although the major league value Pomeranz could deliver might end up being quite good. I've mellowed on this deal some for sure.

Budgets are budgets - money allocated on the Red Sox (as opposed to media properties, or Six Flags Fenway or whatever). And like any business, the Sox operate with a budget in mind - the number that corresponds to the amount of money the owners want to spend on the team. Now in their business evaluation, Lester was just not worth the money, and Scherzer was not either (now these evals were made before Dombrowski took the wheel). Now if they wanted those pitchers, they could have looked to raise the budget. The revenue streams that a team with a low debt ballpark and a TV channel that is available anywhere someone has cable - are vast and can support a budget increase. If the Red Sox make decisions not to sign someone - or not to pay luxury tax - it is a choice. It is not because it would put the ownership to the felt or anything even close.

Moncada has also struck out in 30% of his plate appearances in Portland. I suspect if you want a stat that is what is keeping him from being a serious option for the rest of this season (and maybe not even opening day 2017). I think there is a good chance he gets added as a Quintin Berry-Dave Roberts pinch runner though. His numbers at AA were better than Benintendi - but the other indicators are that a lot of that has been done with athletic superiority and not necessarily craft.

Best era in Red Sox history that involved non-white players being eligible. Anything else?

You are right - I misread. I was still thinking about whether it "lost the game", which (technically) it didn't.

August has been rough - but the other months have been fine - I would bet against a .237 BABIP persisting

I think Dombrowski had enough clout that he would not have arrived without some significant assurances in that direction. I suspect Cherington had far less of a mandate ... and obviously Epstein had his own turf wars

Inning ended tied. And the Sox left runners at 2nd in the 9th and 10th. It is a micro version of the 1986 thing - despite the horror, there was still another chance to save the season. (and as 1975 showed, it's certainly possible to recover from such a stomach punch)

I agree with your argument (I was pro firing Grady for it). But even with that, the Red Sox never lost the lead ... and stranded runners in scoring position in each of the next 2 innings.

He has done it both ways (raising kids, doing big money things) - ultimately he will use the levers ownership gives him access to. He will trade anything he does not see as a star - which is exactly how a big market team should act. Now, I have individual quibbles with his judgment calls on prospects and what they got in return, but his larger philosophy is sound. And - unlike the previous regime, we know exactly who is making the final call.

if you pick up his option - it is not to be a trade chip, you have to hope he can help us. And I do think he can largely.

If you were around for the Mike Napoli Experience, this should be entirely unsurprising. Bradley is very streaky - but the end product is super valuable. If he were guy who had that hitting streak, he'd be the best player in baseball. Bradley is a sort of three true outcomes sort of player offensively (with less power). Walk, strikeout, do something really good.

As MVP noted, the roster is finite. As I noted - the budget is a choice. There is no salary cap, there is no someone being threatened at gunpoint. The budget is based on what ownership wants to pay. They made business decisions on Lester or Scherzer - nobody is asking them to be stupid or not make business decisions. But I am deeply cynical about claims that they "cannot afford" any given player. It is one of things that made the ARod negotiations in 2003 so icky (and obviously things worked out for us) ... the Red Sox were being cheap. (but had the public on their side because fans side with owners 99% of the time)

What is annoying about Buchholz is that the option is such a low price - that bringing him back won't really impact their budget at all. Now he burns a major league roster spot - which might make you sad. But the team is going to carry 12 or 13 pitchers next season anyway. If Clay just managed to be a pretty good swingman - the Sox'd get a perfectly reasonable return on the salary.

LOL - I do blame managers a lot - but it tends to be in big picture ways ... and also if the mistakes reflects a serious trend ... it is hard to get to the "actively hurting his team" threshhold (Matt Williams in Washington did that last year) A lot of time I don't blame players either (it's not either/or) - just "baseball happens". I mean Papi hit into two double plays Sunday - but he hit the ball on the screws both times. I'd take those at-bats, but baseball happened.

The TV revenue for teams like the Yankees and Sawx are such that a trained seal could turn profit. Not paying luxury tax is not a matter of affordability - but desire. And I get that, tax is money that is buying nothing. But the budget is based on essentially how much toy money Henry wants to allocate to the Sox. Fenway is (like Wrigley) essentially printing money.

one hopes there will be a chance for him to make some "rehab" starts at the major league level ... but that is dependent on the Sox doing their part

That was a specific, unsupportable decision. 99% of managerial decisions do not work that way. And even in that game - that decision did not actually cost the Red Sox the game (though for fans spiritually it sure did - don't get me wrong).

No - 15-2 means the guys weren't ready to play ... the 4-3 games (long run) are basically coin flips. Some moves are questionable - some are even doubtful ... but the players can always bail a decision out.

Probably. I do expect Farrell to be more aggressive with a larger roster - he managed the playoffs pretty aggressively on this front in 2013.

Yes - although if they lose that 15-2, that could change things.

With Vasquez, his hitting was awful. But his receiving was not differentiating ... it might have been fine, but we weren't getting amazing results from the pitchers. I am not blaming him 100%, but noting he was not bringing that much to the party marginally. Leon has outplayed him (and any realistic expectation) by such a degree it's gotta be respected. And who knows? The framing and receiving skills for Vasquez are great, but perhaps the working with pitchers squishy part of it wasn't - and could use more work.