sk7326

Phillies getting Ruiz is idiotic (for 3 years) ... the Red Sox terms made more sense even if you disagreed with the valuation a 1st rounder for 2 yrs of Beltran does not make sense to me. McCann (though I disagree) would be much more palatable for a QO price.

I think it's more likely they give him a chance at 1B than at C, at least as far as major reps goes.

I think it was the

Well the posting system (which actually resembles the soccer transfer system a bit) is in limbo - apparently NPB has been slow in responding. That said, the Japanese Players Union approved the hardest part, still letting one team (the posting winner) have exclusive negotiating rights. The snag is that some owners want the posting fee to be counted towards the luxury tax. I think things are OK on the Japanese end, though there is some grandstanding by Manfred.

AFL is skewed to offense - lot of time facing pitchers who have had some very serious workloads.

The dropoff from Napoli to Carp is uncertain, and could be large. Remember that Carp was entering this season seen largely as a AAAA sort of guy who was sent away by the Mariners, as offensively starved an org as it is. If you had an in house 1B/DH solution you would not be signing Kendrys Morales. The Red Sox got a lot of production out of him in a limited role - and there is considerable risk that he can actually cut it over 500 PAs or so. Obviously that is why you bring in a righty partner - but you need more than a guy to soak up the 60 or so games a lefty will be out there, you need somebody who could actually win a job. Middlebrooks in a hybrid role could be that guy - Corey Hart could be also.

Clearly we know where Boras' incentives are. But a guy doesn't retain clients by giving them poor counsel or work - and certainly absorbing the PR hit for his client is part of the gig. If Ellsbury wants to go somewhere, it's on him. I tend to be relatively unsentimental here - the Sox will have a quality CF either way.

Ellsbury wants a life changing deal - Boras is the best in the business at delivering one. If Ellsbury wants to take a little less to stay with Boston, it's his prerogative, but I do not expect him to order Boras to go in that direction.

Any change in the bullpen would be almost all "luck based" - that is a good philosophy for staffing the pen (guys who are on their way up, or former washouts like Manny Parra). That would not affect my view of the games won. You'd lose some offensive production in catcher, though defense might be better (enough to offset - I don't know), and increase ceiling and risk with the infield, though I am all for it. The outfield with Berry would weaken the product, especially with the considerable production risk in LF to begin with. But I'd have the same outlook I had for the team entering 2013 - 85ish wins, capability of a lot more with good health and some things going their way. Definitely not a team that'd ruin our summah (ruining the fall is another matter).

He was solid in 2012 - but got hurt. And betting on athletic ability and a decent approach is not a bad thing. After all, we are auditioning for a 4th outfielder not a future stud. And he is a much more useful defender than Gomes, although Gomes makes an adequate LF.

He signed a lot of guys he knew. Farrell, Lovullo, Beyeler were all in the organization the last few years. Butterfield came from Toronto, but one of the top defensive instructors in the league. Nieves was an interesting hire, but a sensible one for Farrell. He worked under Don Cooper - who is one of the best pitching coaches around, and Farrell did not need to outsource that job entirely. There was room to show a guy the ropes there. For what its worth - I think Ben's plan B if Farrell didn't work out (if I recall, signing Lovullo and then hiring an old pro like Gene Lamont to hang around for a year or two) would have also been solid.

If Sveum did a poor job, it would have been an easy choice. After all, Bobby was ownership's choice - so he'd have been even harder to fire than Sveum. But Bobby made it easy for them. Farrell became the obvious choice due to the team's affinity from back in the day along with Toronto not exactly unwilling to make a change. Cherington got some power due to 2012, and I think some validation for the way they did things under the previous leadership ... enough to steer the ship in that way more or less. If healthy, this team is a contender next season (like the outlook this spring largely). You don't predict repeats in baseball - because it is just a very fluky game, and you have to WAY ahead of the rest of the league (like the 1998-2000 Yankees) to really be able to exert that sort of mojo. The best team doesn't win the title quite frequently (unlike say the NBA), and teams can be materially better with lesser results (like the 2013 Orioles). As Billy Beane noted, a GM can only create a team that can get to the playoffs - after that, it's largely up to the 25 guys to figure it out.

Young is, if right (and a big if considering his 2013) is better than Gomes - Three True Outcomes guy with serious power who is a plus defensive CF. He'd make Gomes expendable if anything - or force Gomes to figure out how to use a 1B mitt.

Frankly, my guy has been Chris Young - who probably wants a 400 PA gig at least, so it might not be in the cards. But you want defense, some platoon ABs with Bradley, and somebody legitimately good enough to flat take the LF job ... it might leave Gomes homeless, but dem's the breaks. And yes, if I were Gomes, I'd take reps at 1B this offseason just in case.

Nathan was a better pitcher than Wilson when both were healthy (Nathan had low BABIPs throughout his career, enough to show evidence that he was a part of that), and the Rangers had a bit more need than Boston did. Now the argument for Wilson - and one I do respect - is that last year there were serious concerns about Uehara's durability. (that was why he was able to be picked up on relatively favorable terms after all) He ended up thriving in by far his most grueling season. Can that continue? Wilson will have the same sort of questions - but you do double your odds of getting through the season there. That said, I think if you throw a firehose at the bullpen (Dempster-De La Rosa-Workman-whomever, come on down!) something will emerge anyway. It usually does.

It's not an either/or thing. There was a lot of drama - but as of June 29, the team was 1.5 games out of a playoff spot with the 2nd best run differential in the AL. With all the adversity they were muddling through - but the injuries (especially the Middlebrooks one) were too much to overcome (and then THIS is where the manager's idiocy came in) and no leadership to pull the car out of the ditch. (if it were possible with the Pedro Ciriaco show playing). After the trade, it was just a AAA team being thrown out there. There is a lot of character and toughness and makeup in our leaders, but (as in any labor scenario), you can't be an example when you are not able to show up for work. That is where the manager can pick up some of the slack - like Tito was able to in 2010, and like Bobby failed at thoroughly 2 years later.

Lot of money chasing a lot of age here ... $10M a year for 2 years of a dude who'll be 35 when the season starts coming off of a ghastly year - yes, it's one year but given the expected performance curve 2012 was the outlier (especially the power) Probably want something cheaper (and younger) or just better for a jobshare with Ross. $13M for possibly 3 years of a relief pitcher in his 30s who has pitched 15 innings since 2011. Lot of better options - and multi-year deals to relievers is one of the easiest ways to turn your good payroll bad. It is tempting to turn to "proven answers" in the bullpen, but that is largely a futile quest. Throw more Workman/De La Rosa/Ranaudos at the problem, and 1-years at Jesse Crain or Ryan Madson if you really want to spend some money on guys. The Cards, Dodgers and Tigers did not know who their guys were until the season got going - and that's ok. There is a pretty good chance Holland, who was the 2nd best reliever in the league to Uehara will turn into a pumpkin. Craig Breslow's peripherals were wildly out of line with his actual performance - he is a prime candidate for regression. It happens - that's the nature of the gig. The stuff with the lineup is basically sound, although one can quibble with the chosen guys to fill the roles.

Those factions had a nonzero impact, but a lot of that is theatre for sports radio. Among position players, 20 extra games of Pedroia, nearly 40 extra games of Ortiz (going off the top of my head here), and over 60 extra games of Jacoby Ellsbury mattered - that is 120 games or so from their best players. 144 of the 162 games were started by Lester, Doubront, Buchholz, Peavy, Dempster or Lackey. Every season is a test with adversity to battle etc. But this team had remarkable fortune on the injury front compared to 2012 and the 2nd half of 2011. It is the one thing you can't control for - and you just hope works out, and it did. The team has had contender talent even last year, but just never had the opportunity to field that lineup often enough to make a great go of it. Bobby was simultaneously dealt a crappy hand and played it poorly. It's not an either/or thing here.

Their best players stayed healthy - they let their whiskers grow, but they were able to do it on the field and not on the training table ... that was the biggest key, more than anything else that separated 2013 from 2011-12.

If Napoli leaves - the Red Sox have plenty of options as others have noted, starting with gettiing a guy to platoon with Carp. My own wish would be to sign Corey Hart for something with a lot of incentive built in. We know that at his best he is a better player than Mike Carp, but he clearly has a lot to prove to the market. And if he is not healthy you can always do something else, including just letting Lavarnway take the 1B starts against lefties. (since I doubt the Red Sox see him as a starting catcher, though I think his bat has shown the ability to play if he is focused on it)

Just looking at what he did last year relative to what that production is worth to the Sox, 3/40-50 is a fair price for him to ask. But yeah going deep into his 30s without some assurances is a bad idea.

Oh I don't know. There have not really been that many talented teams who failed - without some sort of more mundane explanation than they didn't get along. (they were old - everybody was hurt, which is our 2012 basically) I don't argue that chemistry matters, but a lot of that just comes from being successful together - and assembling a good team is your best percentage play there. I guess I lean towards, get the players, the chemistry will figure itself out. Evaluating the chemistry (especially since it changes so frequently) is a much dicier thing. Personally, I think some turnover is healthy - because you can't get back 2013's mojo. There is too much luck involved for that to happen.

With Napoli, the key will be entirely in the structure of the offer. If a team offers 3 guaranteed years at his implied value ... something like $40-50 million, that will be very hard to justify matching. Even if he did not have a hip condition, buying a guys 33-35 years (especially with a body which is not a great candidate to age well) is generally poor business. But I suspect all of the bidders for Napoli will want some sort of buyer protection. Whether or not the injury is a problem for him - it IS a thing which is part of his valuation. The question is whether the Sox and Napoli can come to some consensus on a deal which hits all the marks there sufficiently so he doesn't have to shop it around.

Jenks was throwing bodies at the bullpen on a short deal - it didn't work. That is the nature of relief pitching. The trade helped, but the farm was being replenished anyway. The Red Sox got help from the LA deal, no doubt - although the LA deal did not magically make their best players healthy. That can't be underrated. The Crawford deal was a mistake - the Gonzalez deal less so (though certainly a risk). Really in retrospect, the biggest mistakes management made in their planning for their years was severely misreading how broken down Youk was, as well as just not having enough pitching. Although, when you cycle through as much injury on the mound as the Red Sox had, few teams can absorb that.

Some deals are bad on their face - the Larry Andersen-Jeff Bagwell one is ground zero (the prime position prospect for middle reliever = yuck!). But trading your top pitching prospect for Pedro Martinez coming off of his first Cy? That works fine, thank you very much. The Iglesias for Peavy deal rides entirely on the Iglesias valuation. The Beckett deal was a long run loser for the franchise, but they don't win the 2007 title without Beckett or Lowell, so you can't get too teary eyed about it. Flags fly forever. Having a bunch of prospects and budget does not mean you do anything stupid. But if moving a few of your chips means getting an 8-figure star with some prime years left - we aren't the Rays and should not apologize for it.