sk7326

Of course it is fair. I think a lot of it has to do with the draft. The draft is not a crapshoot - Price went #2, Kershaw went #7, Grienke went #6, Strasburg went #1, Beckett went #2. Hell, Andrew Miller went #2. Premium arms don't show up often and get gobbled up. The Red Sox have clearly tended towards lower risk strategies with earlier picks - position players up the middle (in other words, high caliber athletes) and college arms (who have a solid amount of probability). Prep arms are historically very risky, but alas it is also where you are going to find the star material. I think the risk aversion in the draft is fair game. Now it has allowed the Red Sox to have a remarkable stockpile of middle of the field talent - which is nearly as hard to amass as pitching. Cubs operated more or less the same way - their stockpile is in position talent ... I think just because of the shortage of arms. Their big coup was straightening out Jake Arrieta, along with landing a quality #2 like Lester clearly. What the Red Sox have done wrong with pitching imo has been not to be as aggressive converting starters at the farm level (which is really the best way to find bullpen talent). It was clear as day that Webster was really a potential bullpen weapon but too much time was spent thinking he could be a quality starter. Ranaudo and Barnes as starters are a little different - less wipeout stuff. Barnes will be a perfect fine starter for somebody - not amazing, but a capable workhorse sort. The development has been ok, but I do think there is question on the ceiling they have gotten in on that.

1. This year Bogaerts has been better by measurables than Jeter was in virtually any of his seasons defensively. Jeter's main contribution (which was considerable) was offensive, full stop. Now it is true that teams are smarter now about positioning fielders, but the Royals are the league's best team at that too. 2. Your logic here basically is blaming Bogaerts for A) not being Ozzie Smith out there and having a crappy 3B next to him, neither which is remotely fair to evaluating him. Now if we moved him to 3B and signed 1985 Ozzie Smith, the defense would be unbelievable - well duh. It would be a deeply suboptimal use of limited lineup spots, especially if the shortstop can't hit enough to justify it. Basically, Bogaerts has been the best SS in the American League, by a considerable margin - but somehow you are blaming him for his third baseman (in 2015) being among the worst.

easy there - taxes still a major issue

Jays have been the sleeping giant here. Largest city in Canada, and a fanbase that will go if the team doesn't suck.

I think they might add seventy pitchers given the fan outcry ... but adding one plus some natural regression from Porcello and what you'd expect a 22 year old with 100 big league innings to do as a 23 year old ... investing in one might help the other stuff fall into place. I don't disagree that two would help more. But of course looking at the pitching strictly in terms of starting is also pretty simplistic. A starters ERA of 4.00 does not mean the pitching staff is necessarily bad (2007 would be a strong datapoint there).

I wasn't defending him - but noting that if somebody had won one title in four years, and left the cupboard frankly sort of bursting - it would look like an amazing tenure. The last place finishes put a damper on it, and make his ouster reasonable. The same way that, say someone with a 3.41 ERA and an 8-13 record looks like he's been a meh starter when he's been one of the best in the league.

now that is entitlement

I would think a ___, Buccholz, Porcello, Rodriguez, Miley or Kelly are your 5. There is more reason to believe in Miley's certainty than Kelly - but more reasons to hope on Kelly. It will be interesting how it gets navigated.

It's more the contract. I have a feeling the hamstring would have cured itself faster if circumstances required it.

They won 89 games in 2010 and were alive until the final week ... despite the crazy amount of injuries. That was a season which should have gone in the toilet. Tito did a remarkable job with that team. This team's run has been marked by some stunning comebacks (2013 the exception). 2004 is obvious, but 2007 was almost as good (the wins were more lopsided, but coming from 3-1 down with Game 5 on the road against the clear 2nd best team in the league). 2008 for me was the forgotten almost one - they were in some ways more comatose than they were in 2004, given how far behind they were in Game 5.

Swihart is going to be a monster. I totally respect the Vasquez camp, and it's a good problem to have. But it's funny what simple reps can do.

Sox system is loaded. It is one of the weird things about the Cherington record. If you did not know the Red Sox finished last in 3 of his 4 seasons (say, all you knew is that they missed the playoffs) ... you'd see what he left and think he did a uniformly amazing job.

Makes sense. He is too young for the Arizona Fall League - Gulf Coast season is over. Sox want him to pitch more.

They can't move Benintendi except as a Player To Be Named Later this offseason. Espinosa is moveable - for the right deal - just because of how young he is and how far from the bigs he is, and the risk associated with pitchers generally. Anybody below AA is moveable for the right deal, but I agree with you that those 4 all have some real promise - although Benintendi is currently conquering competition that was better than what he saw in the SEC.

I don't know - and if you think in terms of 5 men for 162 games, there is a lot of hoping. Basically Miley can deliver a slightly better version of what Ryan Dempster produced - or for that matter Tim Wakefield. That means he probably should not be starting in a World Series game - but he can be invaluable for managing the marathon. As you noted he is a trade asset because he is priced very well.

Not a surprise - what you'd expect (the season AFTER the title is where the bump happens). What is funny is that alternating 1st and last place is probably the most profitable route. If you maintain a level, it becomes passe - see how unfondly seasons like 2008 and 2010 are remembered, for very little reason - aside from not winning a title.

Miley might be a strong bet too ... durable, can miss bats - for a back end, can do a lot worse

If they sign Price, it will have nothing to do with Greinke - separate decisions.

I think Greinke stays in LA. Cueto's elbow is scary. Zimmermann makes sense if the expectations are reasonable. The team could use an ace, but so could everybody else. A Zimmermann sort would help the rest of the rotation fall into place.

It was a decent acquisition. Not well priced, but 3B was so bad that a decent one was a huge improvement. The issue (if there one) was that the upside was not that great. Ramirez as a 3B had (and still has) a lot more ceiling.

Jonah Keri writing at the time had the most sensible take about the time - which I will paraphrase some since I can't find the link ... Ben's legacy is complicated, because there is a lot of losing - but there was a championship. Basically, it's three strikeouts and a grand slam. Also, four years that simultaneously produced a title, leaves the consensus top farm system in baseball - and one which has produced (if August is any evidence) a lot of guys who should be at least decent regular to much more than that (so it's not just speculation). He was also able to keep a lot of the staff and scouting which kept that party going - the smart people did not leave here like they did in Atlanta under Frank Wren (and then all immediately came back once he got canned). Stand that up in contrast to Seattle, which fired its GM, who both presided over less success and left less potential. Dombrowski has considerable work to do with the pitching staff obviously (the bullpen and top of the rotation). The cupboard is well stocked for one of these sort of management changes. Ownership is ultimately the key - if they value the development machine, it will persist because Dombrowski can surely do that. He has shown he can help the major league roster without hurting that much - which will be the big value add.

How are those connected? The post addressed the Gonzalez trade ... I read posts elsewhere about the trade which saved the season, which is a bit silly - the trade might have helped a little. Good players getting healthy help more. Management has a lot to answer for the last two seasons. The fans are spectacularly entitled. Both can exist at the same time. And yes, management really should not worry about what the fans think largely.

what is interesting is all of those crash and burns were (effectively) over one season. Boston is tough - but the franchise has largely cut bait very quickly. As it turned out Renteria (who was the best FA SS in that class) immediately went to being good again after being dealt. Panda there is a legit question at the time whether he was actually that good to begin with.

Rizzo for Gonzalez was a pretty solid deal at the time - the only time you can fairly evaluate a trade (of course Rizzo had a chance to be good, that's why the Padres dealt an elite hitter for him) ... (Rizzo had to be moved before he blossomed). But the pitchforks were out and so the deal that got the 2013 narrative going was made.

Relying on two rookies is tough - relying on a rookie and a 2nd year player is less tough. The issue with putting Rodriguez at AAA is that there is precious little for him to learn there - we know he can get AAA/AAAA guys out - but turning over a big league lineup, being resourceful - that is grown up stuff. The team needs some help externally - but the kids improving the way kids usually do (or for that matter 27 year olds), will cover a solid chunk of that.