Kimmi
-
Posts
27,857 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Kimmi
-
Jung, I have to agree with this bolded part. You obviously are free to post however you want, but since I am not going to write a thesis to respond, I'm more likely not to respond at all. Maybe that's your intention?
-
The fact that Dombrowski only added a #1 starter and 2 back end relievers to make this team a contender in 2016 is proof that the team was not in that bad of shape to begin with.
-
This is an excellent post.
-
Do you really think that the stat geeks don't look at how the player is suited for Fenway?
-
I don't recall any anaylysts, much less 'many' of them, who predicted failure for the Nationals going into the season based on poor team chemistry. They were the overwhelming favorites to win their division and heavy favorites to win the World Series. Honestly, I don't recall one word about poor team chemistry. Sure, once the Nationals started losing, then people started speculating about poor team chemistry, but that's usually the case when a team is losing. It's like the chicken and beer thing. It was a huge issue, only because the team was losing. If the team were winning, that would have been looked at as a team chemistry type of thing amongst the pitchers.
-
They probably did rely more on stats than they did on human factors, but scouting has always been an important part of both Theo's and Ben's team building process. And is it coincidence that during that period from 2003-2015, the Sox were arguably one of the most successful teams in baseball, having won 3 World Series Championships in that span after not winning one in 86 years? I think not!
-
FTR, when I say a team looks good on paper, I don't mean just by their stats. The large majority of analysts, including writers who are not stats people, favored the Sox for the division. When the Sox are heavy favorites to win the division, whether you're talking about by computer projections systems or by the people who do baseball for a living, both stat gurus and non, I am confident that the GM did his job during the offseason. And if you think the 2015 team was assembled based on stats alone, you're only fooling yourself.
-
You are absolutely correct YOTN.
-
Because no one can predict the future, the GM's job is to assemble a team that looks good on paper, because a team that looks good on paper is supposed to translate to a team that performs well. Of course, that doesn't always happen for a multitude of reasons. But the GM cannot control how the players perform on the field.
-
I'm not happy about it either. The Yankees were able to regain "Best BP" status (not by much) at virtually no cost. Considering what we paid for Kimbrel, it's even more of an ouch.
-
So, if Larry is running the Red Sox, why is Ben being blamed for the past two years? Larry should be blamed for all of those terrible signings. And if that's the case, then Henry has no one to blame but himself for the past two years because Ben, like Theo, could do a much better job if given the autonomy to do so. I have no doubt. And I'll refer to the quote from an article that said that several baseball excutives have more or less confirmed my opinion.
-
IMO, there was far more bad luck in both 2014 and 2015 then there was good luck in 2013. People always want to say 2013 was a fluke or pure luck, which is definitely not the case.
-
Suffice it to say that I pretty much disagree with this entire post.
-
I would expect A to be better also. As far as B being good enough to keep the team in contention, keep in mind that Vazquez and the defense were supposed to help the pitching. The staff took a huge blow when both starting catchers were injured early in the season, and having Pablo forget how to play defense didn't help.
-
It wasn't just the computer projections that had the Sox winning the division. The majority of analysts did too. Yes, Henry lost confidence in Ben. That doesn't mean that Ben was a bad GM. It means that Henry was ready to move in a different direction, very much like the Tigers were ready to do when they fired Dombrowski.
-
My understanding is that Lackey was not at all happy about the way the FO dealt with Lester in their attempt to re-sign him. The rumors followed that Lackey would rather retire than play for league minimum for the Sox. All speculation, I know. But if there is truth to that, then it wouldn't have made any sense for the Sox to keep Lackey. In hindsight, I agree with everyone that it has been a terrible trade so far.
-
Fair enough about the Phillies job. Most of the farm system (not the graduated players) is Ben's doing. IMO, having a good farm system is the backbone of any good franchise, and far more difficult to achieve than throwing the most money at a free agent. Trying to create a contending team while building a strong farm deserves a lot more credit than you are willing to give.
-
Domestic abuse issues aside (which I have a real problem with), this is a good move for the Yankees from a purely baseball standpoint. They got one of the best closers in the league for virtually nothing. The draft pick that they are likely to get when Chapman walks pretty much makes up what the Yankees are losing in prospects. Chapman's price came way down, and Cashman jumped. Good for him and the Yankees. I think this move swings the BP matchup back in the Yankees favor, but not by a great amount. Both teams should be able to shorten games to 6 innings, maybe even 5.
-
I can agree with your statement that Ben's 3 major acquisitions were more likely to underperform than are Price and Kimbrel. OTOH, would anyone expect all 3 of them to underperform to the extent that they did? Hanley and Pablo were both worse than replacement level. Hanley was arguably the best hitter in the free agent market that year, and the Sox were in need of an offensive upgrade. The team had a need, and Ben filled it with the best available free agent option. It's the same thing Dombrowski did this offseason, but with pitching. Even if we expected his defense to be poor, his offense should not have been. Pablo's signing was not the best move, but even so, to go from a 3.1 WAR player to a -2.0 WAR player at the age of 28 is highly unexpected. The pitching staff was not expected to be the team's strength. They were expected to be mediocre, with the offense carrying them in most games. Not the plan I would have gone with, but on paper, it should have worked.
-
I won't argue with you about whether they were good moves or not, but not re-signing Lester before last season was a major, major clusterbeep. No question about that. IMO, once Lester left, the Sox really had no choice but to trade Lackey.
-
You seem to forget that it was also Ben who created that championship team from a last place team. Despite the question marks that this team had, no one denied that the team was after Hanley and Pablo were signed than they were before. Most analysts, old school and new, along with computer projection systems, picked the Sox to win the division last year and to be a contender in 2014. That speaks volumes for the merit of Ben's offseason work.
-
Not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm just responding to the posts in here about the expensive ticket prices.
-
Cherington was offered an interview for the #1 job with both Seattle and Philly. He declined for reasons unknown to either of us. For you to state as fact that he declined the interviews because he knew he would not be offered the #1 job has no merit. It's your opinion, which the evidence does not support. Nothing more. It's interesting to note that Dipoto is very similar to Cherington, not only in philosophy, but also in the success that their respective teams had. The Angels bad seasons were not as bad as the Sox, but the Angels also did not win a World Series during Dipoto's tenure. It's also interesting to note that Dipoto, as an independent advisor, raved about the Red Sox farm system.
-
Another very reasonable response. I understand that when a team fails, the GM is the one who will wear it. And in fairness to Ben, he owned it. My argument is that a team's failure does not necessarily equate to the moves being bad or the GM being incompetent. Sometimes the right moves end with the wrong results. This is true of in game management decisions as well. Everyone agrees that signing Price (cost aside) was the right move for this team. Dombrowski is a genius. If Price fails miserably, that wouldn't change the fact that signing Price was the right move to make, and it doesn't suddenly make Dombrowski incompetent.
-
Ben saw the big picture very well. If anything, it was the "small picture" that was his weakness, key words here being "if anything".
