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
-
This author brings up some very valid points. Even if Rose wasn't conscious of managing differently in games he bet on, probably did subconsciously, to some extent. It appears that he compromised the integrity of the game, so I can understand why his lifetime ban has not been lifted.
-
I agree that if someone breaks a rule or a law, they should face the consequences. Perhaps in this case, the rule needs to be changed? Did Rose bet against his own team and in any way try to throw any games? If so, then that undermines the integrity of the sport and is unforgivable. However, if he was just betting on other games, then I say let the guy back into baseball. I think the guys who cheat by illegally using PEDs are much worse.
-
Well go figure. I don't agree that Farrell is a terrible manager. I'm not saying that he's not terrible. In fact, I questioned the coaching staff several times last year. One does have wonder why there has been such an extent of underperformances that last two seasons. I just think the verdict is still out on Farrell. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
-
I'm not saying that Farrell didn't mismanage the pen, but Palmer is not the good, objective analyst that he used to be. I used to love listening to Palmer. Thorne has somehow rubbed off on him in a bad way, and Palmer has become somewhat annoying. Also, to be fair, Farrell did have his hands tied to a large degree in terms of managing the pen. The starters were not getting deep into games very often, and there wasn't a whole lot in the pen that Farrell could trust.
-
I think the team, as is, can compete for the top spot in the division. I would prefer that Dombrowski sign another #2/3 pitcher, but if he doesn't, I still feel really good about the team. I am encouraged by the way they played the final two months of last year. Add Price and what should be a dominant bullpen to that, and this team should contend. I agree with you about Pedroia.
-
No worries, I am done.
-
My defense of Cherington and Theo before him is really more of a defense of their overall baseball philosophy than it is of the individuals. I am 100% in agreement with their philosophy in terms of building a baseball team, including their opinions of long term free agent contracts and their use of analytics.
-
Of course the Red Sox aren't most teams. They have a killer farm system, thanks to Ben. I agree that Henry wanted to change the philosophy/direction of this team. I have no doubt about that. That doesn't mean that Ben did a terrible job or that he was incompetent. I have not changed my mind about Kimbrel being an overpay. Once again, it's the depth of the farm that allowed the overpay without hurting the system. IMO, Henry should not have replaced Cherington. Ben deserved the chance to see his long term vision come to fruition. If Henry is that adamant about having an ace, all he had to do was give Ben the directive to sign an ace no matter the cost, and Ben could have done it. That said, I'm not heartbroken over Ben, as you suggest. I have no problem with Dombrowski as of now. As I've said many times, I just think he gets an unfair shake.
-
I agree that Henry wanted to change the philosophy/direction of this team. No doubt about that. That doesn't mean that Ben did a terrible job, nor that he was incompetent. Of course the Red Sox aren't most teams. They have a killer farm system, thanks to Ben.
-
Of course we do. We have the best of both worlds. Sox fans are very fortunate. Speaking of which, I read an article on the "misery of fans" yesterday. It ranked all the fanbases in terms of who had the "right" to be the most miserable based on the past 30 years. Rockies fans should be the most miserable, with a score of 103 on a scale that went from 0 to 100. The higher the score, the more miserable the fans had the right to be. The Sox had the 2nd lowest score behind only the Yankees. Our score was 43, if I recall correctly, which fell into the category of "we really have no right to complain". Yet, we know that Yankees and Sox fans probably complain more than any other team's fans. Seriously, other team's fans think we are crazy for complaining when it's only been two years since we won a WS, regardless of how bad we were the past two years. They would love to have it so good.
-
If you can honestly answer that first question with a "no", then there isn't any point in discussing this any further. With respect to every team having prospects, sure. Most teams either do not have the pieces needed to get a player like Kimbrel without gutting their system. You know that's true.
-
Definition of sychophant: a person who acts obsequiously toward someone important in order to gain advantage. synonyms: yes-man, bootlicker, brown-noser, toady, lickspittle, flatterer, flunky, lackey, spaniel, doormat, stooge, cringer, suck, suck-up That is most definitely a derogatory term. You also have the wrong impression of me as being an overly sensitive person. Yes, I find such things insulting and derogatory, and I will call others on it from time to time when such posts are directed at me, just because they need to be called on it. That said, I realize that the reason why people respond in such a way is because that's all they have. They've lost the debate. It's their last resort. I see it as a compliment, actually. I am flattered by being asked if my last name is Cherington. However, I also know that the person asking me that question was being derogatory in asking it. And FTR, I really don't think I am misunderstanding your posts at all.
-
Two simple yes or no questions: 1. Did the fact that the Sox have cost-controlled players on the team right now, with more on the way, affect Henry's decision in giving Price a huge contract? 2. Did we get Kimbrel by trading propsects from the farm, without hurting the overall state of the farm? As far as many of those cost controlled players being signed by Theo, who was Theo's right hand man at the time of the signings? Also, who was adamant about not trading those players away, despite many strong opinions that they should be traded for starting pitching?
-
And this too. The young core that is in place, along with a young core that is 2-3 years away, not only helped persuade Henry to spend the money, it helped Price decide that he really wants to play in Boston. Of course it makes perfect sense, because it's the truth.
-
Of course Henry has to be willing to shell out the money, and in this case go over the luxury tax. However, that willingness stems from the knowledge that the team has several cost controlled players and that one huge contract like this is not likely to handcuff them. The team can absorb this cost because of the low cost players elsewhere on the team. Look at where the Yankees are right now. They have been unwilling to sign a big free this offseason because of the large contracts they still have on the books, and because they are trying to get younger, ie more cost controlled. Once they do that, they will be able to reset the luxury tax penalty and afford that huge contract or two in 2018 when the free agent class is supposed to be elite.
-
I have agreed with you since before the offseason that the preference would be to add 2 starters. Since we traded Miley, that preference becomes even stronger. That said, I think it is going to be a very solid staff, as is. On top of that, we now have a BP which should be better able to absorb some of the not so great starts by our starters.
-
I'm glad that you've finally come around to my way of thinking on this one.
-
I disagree that this is nonsense. For all the times I get the "stats don't tell you everything" defense, here is a case where we actually have something intangible. It's the same thing with Pedroia and his leadership and "grit". I can't prove it, but I have no doubt they make a difference.
-
OK, so let's say for your sake that rest is "interview filler". Does the fact that the Sox have many cost-controlled players now and in the near future have any bearing on them being able to give Price a huge contract? Any at all?
-
Not sure why, but OK.
-
It wasn't you CP. @ a700 - Perhaps the reason that you find Pal's post derogatory, yet you don't find anything derogatory in the posts of those who agree with you is because of that human bias that I have mentioned once or twice? If what Pal posted is derogatory, then so is 'sychophant', as is being called boring, as is being asked if your last name is Cherington.
-
Perhaps because Theo is no longer the GM of the Sox? Here are some excerpts from the meeting that took place between Price, his agent, and the Sox brass:
-
And here's what I posted first about Price's signing being possible because of the state of the farm system: A big reason why ownership OK'd the Price contract was because of the young, cost-controlled players already on the team, with several more 2-3 years away. So no, it's not nonsense. I have acknowledged that the main reason Price signed with the Sox is because of the money. The money was available because of the strong state of the farm system and its recent graduates. That said, the strong farm system WAS a selling point for Price.
-
Point taken.
-
Until he shows otherwise. It may be mid June. It may be later. It may be earlier.
