Kimmi

I agree that they share part of the responsibility for 2014. They did not have a decent back up plan for Bogaerts/Middlebrooks and for JBJ should they get injured or underperform. Depending on three unproven kids with no viable back up plan did indeed contribute to the horrendous offensive year. That said, the fact that all 3 of them struggled, along with most of the rest of the line up is bad luck. No one could have foreseen the offense being as bad as it was. As far as either 2013 or 2014 being flukes or not, all I'm saying is that out of the 2 years, I would say that the outcome of 2013 was more expected than the outcome of 2014. So, if either of those years is to be considered a fluke, it would be the latter.

I consider some of his moves to be genius, though he has not earned his "Theo" status yes. ;-)

Koji indeed had a great year, but it's not like he sucked before that and the great year came out of nowhere. In 2012, his BB/9 and K/BB rates were better than they were in 2013. In other words, the great year should not have been unexpected or considered lucky.

I don't know why those things would be so unexpected. Nava, ok. Maybe his performance was unexpected. For the most part, the rest of the guys did what the FO knew they were capable of doing. Except for Middlebrooks.

That to me is good planning on the part of the FO. While I thought the 2014 team was going to be a true contender as well, what the team lacked was some quality depth on the left side of the infield and CF. Even so, I would say that 2014 was kind of the perfect storm of just about everything that could go wrong offensively. Bad luck in 2014.

I'm not saying the planets aligned. I'm saying that it was not a fluke that the Sox won the WS in 2013. I'm saying it was more of a fluke that the Sox came in last place in 2014. And if the Sox win the WS this year without an "ace", it won't be a fluke. A lot of things worked out well in 2013, but at the same time, many things did not work out as planned. Credit the FO for building a team with enough depth to overcome the bad breaks.

The problem I have with people saying that the stars aligned perfectly, etc. is that it makes it sound like winning the WS was just dumb luck. This team won the WS because they were a good team with good depth, not because they were lucky. Again, the team had a lot of things go right, but IMO, not any more so than most teams that win the WS. Give Ben and the FO some credit. It was a managerial stroke of genius that Ben assembled a BP that had enough depth to withstand the injuries/ineffectiveness of Bailey and Hanrahan.

It sounds like a great idea. Unfortunately, for a multitude of reasons, I would probably be unable to make it. I have always thought it would be cool to meet the people that you've known on a forum.

Wow, I thought I was bad going to bed at 10. Are you one of those guys who is up at like 3 am?

Well, if the stars had aligned perfectly, wouldn't Hanrahan and Bailey have worked out? When you have to go to your #3 guy on the depth chart to be your closer, everything is not going right for the team.

Any team that wins the WS has more things go right for them during the season than they have go wrong. Baseball is such a random game that you need to have "luck" on your side if you're going to win it all. The 2013 Sox certainly had their share of good breaks. That said, I disagree that the "stars were perfectly aligned" or that winning it all in 2013 was a fluke. Did I expect a 97 win team? No, but I thought it was very much within the realm of possibility for them to win in the low 90s. The 2013 was a well constructed team with depth. They were fortunate in that most players stayed relatively healthy and performed to expectations. Because of their depth, they were able to overcome what adversity they did face. I think that could be said any team that goes deep into the postseason. I would like to see another pitcher added before this season starts. But ace or no ace, this year's team will have to stay relatively healthy and have more good breaks than bad in order to play into October. IMO, the depth is there, provided that the injuries/underperformances do not get ridiculous.

I really like the 6pm start time. It fits in nicely with my pre-summer 10 pm bed time.

Thank you for the welcome. I don't know Emmz, but I hope she returns. Baseball forums need more female posters, IMO. Of course, sometimes it's hard to know who is male and who is female by a poster's user name. I've been posting for a while (since 2009) on other forums. I used to post with Bellhorn and Fred at Sawxheads until that forum kind of fell apart. Bellhorn is one of my favorite posters. Fred, OTOH, I almost never agree with. LOL But I have nothing personal against him.

He played a little before my time, so I never got to see him play. He sounds like a genuinely good man, along with being a great baseball player. RIP

Sure his defense makes up for the decline in his offense. Pedroia was a 4.4 WAR player last season, well worth his AAV.

LOL Much more direct and to the point than my response.

Maybe I missed your point. I just think that if you're going to make some claims, you should be able to back them up. I don't mean you personally, but you in the general sense. Maybe that doesn't always mean with stats, but I think it usually does. For instance, if someone claims that Jeter was a decent defender, I'm going to disprove that with stats. He was horrible defensively. The response I usually get is something along the lines of "why don't you try watching a game sometime?". Sorry, but I have to call BS on that.

If the big arm panned out and the Sox flourished, then yes, the fans would eventually come to embrace the move. I still think it would be a PR nightmare for a while though. It's a move I just can't see happening. Pedroia means too much to the Sox and their fans. I don't necessarily think Pedroia is in decline either. Just that the possibility is a valid concern. At this point it's hard to know how much injuries played a part. I wouldn't bet against him. Regardless, his defense will be much needed this season.

This team is as much a contender as any other team in the division. More so than most.

There are some legitimate concerns about Pedroia's decline and health, but trading Pedroia right now would be a PR nightmare. As you said, Pedroia is the heart and soul of this team. After losing out on Lester, another home grown player, the last thing the Sox want to do is trade Pedroia. Besides, Pedroia is on a mission to once again prove his doubters wrong. You tell Pedroia that he is in decline, he will do everything he can to show you that he's not.

Baseball is a very numbers driven game. Much more so than other sports. IMO, you need stats, and in particular, the saberstats, to tell the whole story. Also IMO, when someone says "I don't need stats, I know what my eyes see", that is a cop out on so many levels. And FTR, I do not have a small penis.

Sorry, I should have said "acquire" a top pitcher, not "sign". Shields is the only top free agent left, but there are still other options available via trade.

It is a crapshoot, to a certain extent. There is risk involved in any move, but obviously, some moves are much riskier than others. It's very easy to judge a move based on hindsight, but IMO, that's usually unfair. It's much more difficult to anticipate a move going in. Often, at the time of the move, the move is considered to be a great move by most fans and analysts. If the move does not pan out, for whatever reason, I don't understand all the criticism the FO then receives. Just because a move doesn't work out doesn't mean that it was a bad move. As you said, there is no certainty.

I will also be surprised if the Sox don't sign a top pitcher. That said, right handed power (and offense in general) was another need, right behind pitching, so it's not that surprising that Hanley and Panda were signed. But I agree. It would be surprising that they spent big bucks on their offense, and stopped a little short on the pitching front.

Good info Bellhorn. I did not know that. Were his teams really bad?