sk7326

That was a lot of money for 50+ innings. Bullpens are fickle by definition. Miller served his purpose.

I clearly forgot about Buchholz, and since the kids are Rodriguez and Owens ... that is not a terrible start. If they signed Cueto all the better, but the bleating about an ace as a cure all is misplaced.

Travis has some long term potential. But in the short term a job share would make sense. Now the temptation is to say you owe Craig money so see what happens. That is stupid, and ignores the notion of sunk cost. That money's gone - so make the best baseball decision. Now if you think he can return to the land of .370/.450 slash, wonderful but the burden is on him. I would not bet anything meaningful.

The high performing professionals thing is a bit of a canard. If Sandoval were not a pro, somehow he would not have been a key guy on a few title teams. That analysis is often bent to fit narrative. What we have seen so far from the "string" is that: - There is clearly some there there with Henry Owens - nobody putting him in the Cy Young voting, but there is a foundation there. Owens and Rodriguez are a good place to start. I'd say keep Buchholz - for all the injury warts he is so cheap relative to performance when healthy that it makes sense. - The rotation does not need the sledgehammer - seriously. You take the kiddos, Porcello, Miley and Wright and that is a rotation which can work, of course given Porcello straightens his issues out. Whether or not he is a 4 WAR pitcher is in debate, but that he is better than replacement level shouldn't be. - There are more reasons to keep Cherington than to dump him - and if the front office stops worrying about NESN ratings and just let the baseball operation flow, things will go better. The parts of the org which is outside of the WEEI/NESN purview has been productive. - Not quite the same for Farrell. He has not been the tactical disaster that a Matheny, Matt Williams, Brad Ausmus or Ned Yost have been to varying degrees. But he has not created value the way that Bochy, Francona, Girardi etc do, either tactically or developmentally. And this year's system wide underperformance has to reflect on him first. Fortunately with the increasing use of analytics and such, finding managers with both analytic and ex-baller cred is not as hard as it used to be. Obviously previous managing is a must in whatever context. (doesn't mean big league managing necessarily - but actually doing the job) - 1B is the biggest question in terms of upgrades. You can do it with clever platooning or just aiming high for a guy, but clearly they need more from an offensive position than they have been getting. - Now a good corner bat would be nice, but there is some merit in just riding out Castillo and seeing where it ends up. His performance the next two months is important, if nothing else to keep him in play as an asset. (if a team thinks he can start, he is priced very very well) The path to where the team wants to be is not that daunting. Some good targeted moves (and a managerial change) and it might fly.

Oh that's obvious. But if Nava suddenly looked like a .377 OBP guy over THESE two weeks, nobody should be surprised. His non-performance most likely would have been fixed by just getting regular burn.

Over 67 whole PAs. .372 OBP last year vs righties, .377 career. Strong candidate to bounce back.

a bit??? Toronto is the best offensive team in baseball!

Good claim for the Rays - Nava is limited but he does one thing very well - hit righthanded pitching. For a team chasing a playoff spot it's not so bad - a bench bat who will be especially handy if they can force their way into a playoff game.

Angels opening will be interesting - like the Red Sox there are some "power structure" questions. Basically the GM is stuck with Scioscia. Red Sox have some questions to answer on that front obviously - but they never cheaped out on that stuff, and there is a substantial network of guys with both experience and Red Sox experience, which are both valuable.

Iglesias for Peavy was not a good deal on paper - though entirely defensible by the "flags fly forever" perspective The Lackey deal was probably the worst - not a "worst deal forever and ever and ever" ... but certainly did not turn a significant asset into commesurate return.

Owens was good - got twice through the order nicely. Deception is real and so is the junk. Quite a bit to build on. Third time was dicier - but that is the case for almost every starter these days.

Fielder has had a nice season. Was sort of a sound deal for both sides - Tigers needed a 2B and this move solved a dumpster fire defensively. The evidence of Fielder's slippage was scant - and seemed like something that would bounce back.

Bullpen will not be that hard a fix - just have to be ruthless and keep churning arms. Kimbrel is probably going to cost way too much money and it is a silly way to find a closer to begin with. They need more relief help, but the best way is to throw stuff against the wall.

There is some nature vs nurture here. Clearly the Cardinals and Marlins have some sort of fairy dust competitive advantage in the pitching area which is worth looking at. Otherwise it's mostly about being bad enough to draft them.

I don't mean to imply it's simple ... but there are a lot of guys who are qualified to do it, and it might require a platoon which is ok.

You can staff first base cheaply - this is not a position to worry too much about.

I had a hunch. We'll know how much power Werner has if there is a Bill Cosby day at Fenway next season.

Also the front office talent and whatnot. A lot of guys coming through Boston got gigs elsewhere in baseball. The Sox and Cards have been go-to franchises for teams with job openings and that reflects well, and does bode well for the Sox future too.

That is not difficult ... could be a jobshare

It is tempting, although Cherington has been in the gig much too long for the latter to seem likely ... that side of the house has never really been a clown show since the new ownership took over. Personnel has been pretty first rate (evidence includes how many other teams have poached)

The 2015 performance is almost as bad as that pun.

Yes and no - for the most part winning is the best mousetrap for the $$. At the same time (as someone who lived in Atlanta in 2003-4 I can attest to this), winning a lot also creates drag - especially if the titles don't come with it (obviously moreso in the Braves case). The immediate success trend seems to be better for $$ than success alone. But you are right about the larger point. The Red Sox need a cohesive approach to the baseball operation. Without knowledge of the inside baseball - I think Cherington's powers in that area have not been consistent. That said, the team has a high caliber infrastructure - and if they did not overreact to every WEEI phone call or every Shaugnessy column things would probably be much more sound. Certainly the hyper-reactionary movements of the front office relative to immediate fan/media pressure has been much worse since 2012 than before then - caring about perception instead of what actually matters. This has been particularly striking in how the org has handled playing young guys - an unfortunate departure from what they did in the mid 2000s.

Maybe, maybe not. Like any other person who has been in the game for a very long time, Lucchino had plusses and minuses. He was behind some of the dicier contracts (and to be honest the 2011 debacle really was "Carl Crawford - end of list") and cared more about making his owners a lot of money than the baseball operation specifically. At the same time, he had a terrific eye for executive talent - the Red Sox did not skimp at all on the baseball operation (like say some team in a different borough of New York than the Yankees) and ultimately brought in pieces that led the team to a historically great era. All of it is true. If his ouster will make a better product than what we've seen the last 2 years - lovely. If his ouster will make a better product than what we've seen the last 14 - not so much.

True - although I think in Guerra and Devers cases (and Moncada's too) that being teenagers there is no real rush to promote. Although you'd expect all three to be in Salem soon enough and possibly pushing for Portland. I also imagine there are some off field goals, in terms of maturity and whatnot which impact things too.

It was not a terrible notion, although it was going to be very hard to deliver the necessary bulk over 6 months with that little ML starting experience. But I certainly would have been more aggressive in folding in Owens - although "more aggressive" might have been just before the ASB.