sk7326

Well part of it is how much leeway he has (or whether it really mattered) to hold on to guys and not make a big splash. The Cubs ownership made a big splash to sign him (as opposed to the Red Sox who promoted him from within) so he should have more freedom to not make moves based on TV ratings. His free agent evaluation was not great (although almost all free agent signings are negative return) but he can build systems. Certainly his staffs have all been among the best - at the end of the day a lot of this is ownership priority. If ownership says NESN needs us to sign Carl Crawford, then all the talent evaluation doesn't matter.

I thought that might have been true about sign and trades ... but I could not find anything online. I think the QO would make it hard for Drew to find another suitor - which is why he would undoubtedly accept his 1 year/14M. If the Red Sox - the luxury tax conscious Sox - are cool with paying $14M for a potential part timer, then the decision is easy. But I don't think that is a simple decision at all. My guess is he WON'T get extended a QO, and that the front office had planned for this to be a marriage of convenience all along. There is enough of a chance Drew will not get the QO on the market - and limiting his market does not actually get anything accomplished for anybody.

With a QO, it becomes interesting - it could severely hamper his market. At the same time, I am not sure the Red Sox would want him accepting it - not if they really want to give Bogaerts a spin. If Drew accepts, the Red Sox have a $14 million (last year was $13.3M, so just a guess on the value of it this year) guy signed - and probably a tough contract to deal. (like what the Braves had to do with Rafael Soriano).

It would have happened anyway. Football's attachment to gambling (and I include fantasy here) and what a perfect game it is for television - both (as well as how little it requires of fans) made its appeal kind of inevitable. Baseball did not help itself - although mostly by not selling the things that are appealing about the game now (as well as getting wood bats into kids hands across the board). But baseball was going to have a hard time regardless - fewer playing it younger, and it is hard to have a good "game of the week" culture when virtually every game is on television.

Drew will get years from somebody - shortstop is a terrible position in the bigs these days (though lot of fascinating names on the farm like Lindor, Russell). After all Drew's 3 win season is going to put him 5th in the AL among non-peralta SS's and with a 20 game disadvantage. Drew has rebuilt his value and the industry is drowning in money ... the decision on him is all about organizational priorities - and I'd really rather not block Bogaerts. Also, the possibility of Drew taking a QO is significant - large enough that I am not sure I'd want to do it considering the variables.

Infield could be a radical change next year - could also be fairly modest. Middlebrooks I think is safe at 3B. He is not September Will good - few are - but he is at least as capable as he was in his 2012 tour. He can be an above average 3B with below average on base skills but good power - which is a solid starter. Bogaerts has a 50-50 chance to win the starting job - and I think the Sox might be committed to it. Hard thing to project is his body, but we already knew that. 1B is the position I worry about the least - easiest job opening to fill, no reason you can't find an average guy or a good platoon without breaking the bank.

I wouldn't be surprised at the calculation - but it was also a 32 year old who is on the "decline" phase of his career (on average) and had shown an inability to hit righties that was pronounced enough to raise questions about whether he could be an everyday player by year 3 of the deal. I guarantee nobody expected him to be a 5 win player who'll probably get a couple of downballot MVP votes. One of the funny things which has helped him though how it happened was unfortunate - is that he stopped switchhitting. His hamstring won't let him hit lefty, but when you look at his recent splits, he probably should not have been hitting lefty anyway.

Most teams are awful in the 5th and 6th ... look at the garbage the Yankees wheeled out. Your best bet is always get the starters to the 7th - see what happens. Tazawa had a rough Thursday night in New York, but his splits do not really support any sky is falling scenario. He has had problems with leaving balls high in the zone all season - but has largely been very effective. Workman uncorked the wild pitch yesterday but he has shown that he can be relatively useful in the bullpen. All of this is a million miles from really what has changed since the break - the offense. The Sox pitching has been pretty consistent. 3rd in FIP in August, 4th in July. The offense in July dipped to 5th in wOBA, and up to 2nd if August (and obviously shattering the scale in September). Napoli has climbed out of his slump and "above average third baseman" Will Middlebrooks has had an inordinately huge impact on the offense since his return, since the guys he was replacing were so useless.

Nap has been fine - clearly our strongest hitter (his homeruns have gone the farthest, just rating raw sheer strength). He swings at strikes for the most part and has gotten on base despite a shaky BA. Defensively he has not even been that bad. I'd bring him back if no substantial term upgrade is available at 1B.

"It seemed like" ... and also given the information one had on Victorino (age, recent performance, platoon splits), committing 3/39 to him was a shaky idea. He has been terrific in a way that vindicates the signing - but one that was pretty unlikely to take place given the dossier.

Victorino was a bad signing at the time - age, declining performance in Philly, lot of reasons to be skeptical ... but he has been terrific here and Farrell has used him well. He still should decline in the next 2 years but he probably will do enough in 2 years to justify the contract. Victorino by war has probably given the Sox $35M worth of value (Boston's $$/WAR is higher than most) ... although you have to offset it with what the Red Sox would ACTUALLY replace him with, not the normal "replacement player" benchmark.

He deserves some blame - although considering ownership concerns about NESN ratings and buzz ... one wonders how much of the "sign the top free agents of each class" strategy was driven by the baseball operation. Ownership basically decided to fix something that wasn't broken because the team was not sexy enough. Fortunately 2012 was enough of a disaster that they seem to be going back to the 2004-6 playbook, which clearly is an improvement. The trade helped organize their books - and certainly some wallets. And the guys who have been their stalwarts are back to being stalwarts - uninjured stalwarts.

This is true - although in a more long run sense. Rebuilding seasons are ok - as long as the plan is clear and the purpose is there. Theo in Chicago has had a couple of rough seasons - but the team was barren in the farm and bloated in the big league club. Moves so far have been turning Paul Maholm, Matt Garza, trading guys who were not going to be part of the next decent Cubs team - particularly good hauls for both. I severely doubt that the ND receiver gets much - still an average big league starter. Not like he is going to help a contender the way Garza projected to. Running stuff in Boston is a tough gig. On some level, ownership sees the Red Sox as a TV channel and Tourist attraction that fields a baseball team. There are always those sorts of pressures from both the fans and the front office. A baseball operation sacrificing sexy moves for good baseball decisions is tougher here at times. Certainly in 2011-12 the team's management succumbed to those temptations - after the best decade in modern Red Sox history. How would I rate the FO - can this team churn out 90 win seasons every year (assuming normal injury luck) ... can't really use "titles" as a criteria - since a FO can't control that? We are close to being there again. In some ways, the minors is like college basketball. You can have an amazing group of dudes, some of them graduate via trade or promotion - and then your system is bare except for guys in short season ball, if that. Cherington's team - and to be fair the final vestiges of Epstein drafts - have been able to restock the system with both guys who could help us, as well as help land veteran help. For Boston in particular, it is the ability to augment the financial advantages with the prospect inventory so that the Red Sox can fill virtually any hole on the big league roster. We are more or less there now. What I have seen good from Cherington so far is that he is not going to just sit on prospect depth - moving Iglesias for Peavy was a smart move which required some proactiveness. What I have seen bad is that he has done this to acquire "proven closers" - P U. Next offseason will be fascinating - because the Sox will have the money and the prospect depth to makeover the team as radically (knock on Seattle and King Felix' door) or as conservatively as they want (give Nava some platoon help, add some bullpen help). They have more pieces than they have had in quite some time.

The approach has been a problem - yeah at his age it is time to make a contribution. I am not sure if he will start, or if he can be a credible righty caddy for a Nava - I'd settle for the latter.

Like most lineup things - I imagine long run it doesn't matter. But for the playoffs - we stop caring about that sort of thing. It does help I think to take a platoon advantage off the table. Forces you to use good pitchers. Fortunately the Red Sox bullpen has been fairly solid against either. No classic matchup lefty like Coke or Boone Logan (Breslow is not extreme delivery-wise) but Breslow, Tazawa, Uehara are pretty good against whomever.

More like arguing the odds vs how a single game (and all the noise that comes with any data point). Holding over Uehara to a point where he might not have impacted an important game of bullpens is low percentage. Would I concede that Breslow against a lefty is a fair reason to let Uehara sit until it gets hairy? That is a fair argument. But playing the percentages here - in a tie game in the 9th (10th, 11th whatever), what is your first job - to not lose and to keep the game going? Who is best equipped to keep the game going? Your best pitcher. Means you have to figure out a way to negotiate the part after we take the lead - but that's a good problem to have. The bad problem is the one where the other team is piling up on the plate while your best pitcher is ready in the bullpen. Tonight was overcoming adversity - some of our own creation. It's a hell of a team.

Well, depends on the game - but yes. If you can't get revved up about tonight or that Rangers-Cardinals Game 6 (or the David Ortiz moment of glory in the 2004 ALCS) ... as Louie Armstrong noted, "if they don't know, you can't teach em"

The team has terrific spirit - survived a lot of adversity - a lot of it self inflicted. But it's Sox-Yankees. Getting close to tracking magic number time.

Because the Red Sox were lucky enough to have Soriano run into an out - that life turned out as it should have? I am amazed you are arguing to use inferior pitchers for a more important situation. Uehara did the setup job earlier this year quite well - there is no magic in the 9th and the score - just baseball. Farrell has some weird habits at times - treating Uehara like he is good at his job is not one of them.

Feel on splitter off with Overbay ...

It is not a bad idea - you have to be ready to swing or do something ... he is around the plate so much.

And Tazawa works harder to get hitters out than Uehara - this is not really a relevant comparison. I worry about Uehara's durability too - but it's not a back-to-back situation and Uehara barely broke a sweat the last time out. This is a moot point now in this game ... but the games are more important now right? Nothing wrong with treating them like they are when you have an opportunity (12 pitches in 3 days is an opportunity).

Great break for Victorino - he probably swung at that - way to take advantage.

Of course you can - he's the 9th inning guy - it's the 9th inning. This is what the Yankees have done with Rivera throughout history. It becomes an issue in the 10th or 11th ... not like Koji is not pitch efficient. It's like that game in San Francisco where Farrell let Uehara on the vine for some random flotsam. This is a guy coming off of a day off who threw 12 pitches the night before. He hasn't been overworked. At that point I don't want to lose the game in regulation because I wanted to wait for an A+ situation to use my best guy (as opposed to an A- one).

Should have been picked off twice - lucked out once.