moonslav59

I hear you. I guess maybe the 3 plus decades of several "oh-so-close" to making the playoffs and complete playoff futility wore on me more than I realized. I remember telling friends and relatives I'd take 10 last place finishes for just one ring. I meant that, then, but now that we have 3 rings in my lifetime, my views have changed. Yes, I love being in the race every year, and seasons where we are out of it in July suck royally. Despite what dgalehouse says, I'm no where near "content" with trashy teams if the future looks bright. I will say, I'm happier with that scenario than having a trashy team and a weak farm/future. I want us to compete every year, but there's a point where coming close year after year but not winning it all starts to wear on me. Those 2014 and 2015 seasons really put me back in the mode of striving harder for another ring, even if it sacrificed some of our brighter future prospects. I'm fine with what DD did. I probably would not have done quite as much trading of prospects, but he really did commit to getting us highly competitive for a pretty darn lengthy time. I have no beef with his strategy. I'm fine with looking very good for a 4-5 year period and putting at risk maybe a 2-3 year period afterwards to do so. I don't sit around fretting about 2021. I've lived through 33 years of near constant futility. I can handle 2-3 years without feeling anguish or despair. I will be looking for more highly competitive teams after that questionable 2-3 year period being debated forcefully on this site.

With all due respect, you chime in on the issue quite often. When I say "we" I'm speaking for those of us that believe there is a strong possibility we hit a very rough patch starting in 2020 or 2021. I don't want to speak for others, and I'm probably missing a couple names, but myself, Kimmi, notin, jacksonianmarch all seem to have similar beliefs on this subject.

We do have a great need at 2B, at least until June, but I'm looking at us ending up dangerously close to the second penalty phase luxury tax limit (we need an acronym for this term), and Holt's $2M might be enough to put us over or prevent us from signing who we want.

Good point, but within the context of the near constant "have faith" mantra from those who doubt the cliff is probable, it feels that way. We are being criticized for bringing it up. Yes, bringing up what we feel is the probable reality of our beloved team's future on a board dedicated to discussing the future of our beloved Red Sox. We were told that the value of Espi, Margot, Guerra, kopech, Moncada and other could not be counted on for our future, but have been told over and over by some posters to have faith in the idea that our farm will be rebuilt to the point where we will have significant contributing prospects by 2020. Prospects that rae not even named at this point. We are asked to stop being realistic when being called pessimist. We are accused of bringing the subject up 90% of the time- a gross distortion of reality, and then asked to subject ourselves to a popularity contest poll from other posters to see how much of a minority we might be, of how other posters perceive us. Yet, we are the ones being accused trying to force others to believe what we believe and being overbearing with repetition. The righteousness is clearly running both ways. I'm fine with anyone who disagrees with my analysis of our future probabilities. I realize I mention "the window" quite often when discussing trade opportunities and possible free agent, but I've always had a keen sense of our budget- right or wrong- and how any deal will likely affect the now & the tomorrow. This team is not in a situation we have been in too often. We had a core of young players that all came up near the same time and will all be free agents within a short few years. Couple that with the acquisition of other key players like Kimbrel, Pom, Porcello and Sale who also come up for free agency, and it's hard not to recognize the uniqueness of this future outlook. I may be forgetting past situations like this, but when has a Sox team had this type of talent all come up for free agency within a 3 year period? Major Minor after 2018: Pom Kimbrel Kelly (HRam vesting option) 2019: Sale Bogaerts Porcello Thornburg HRam (if not 2018) Holt 2020: Betts Bradley Vazquez Smith Wright Workman (Note: Arb costs will rise a lot during many of these players final arb year(s): Betts Bogey JBJ Smith Vaz ERod (2021 last arb) Thornburg Wright several others

I'm far frfom calling for DD's removal, in fact I have said countless times, I am fine with the totality of his moves AND the strategy to shoot for the stars over a 3-4 year period. It's better than the old Marlins and Twins building up for a 1 or two year shot for a ring. A 3-4 year period, actually 5, if we can stay strong in 2020 (2016-2020) is a great job by any GM. I'm thrilled we have such a strong team on paper. I expected more in the playoffs, and I'm extremely hopeful we advance much farther next year, but I'm not going to sugar coat what I feel is a serious day of reckoning that looms on the horizon. Yes, you are right; we have time to do something about it, and we seem to be off to a decent start with our last two drafts and the international signings of Velazquez, Mata, Danny Diaz, Raudes, D Hernandez, and others, however, we are very far away from having a farm that compares to the one DD inherited. the one we have now might even be worse than the one Ben inherited, but I haven't done a comp on that.

Isn't this trying to force your idea of what a Sox fan should be like on us? What's the difference? Is it okay for your side to use this type of argument, but those of us who disagree with you are not supposed to ever bring up the possibility of a cliff? Everyone around me think of me as being an optimist. Go back and look at all my pre-season projections here and on the "other site". I almost always over projected our wins. I projected 100 wins last spring. I'me super excited about next year and 2019. I'm pretty optimistic about 2020, because I think Henry will allow us to go way over the luxury tax in 2018 and 2020. (Just my opinion) however, I see some very difficult odds being against us after that. The system has changed since the Theo and Ben eras. We don't look to have high draft picks or easy international pickings going forward. DD does not have a track record of finding the Mookie Betts' of the world with lower round picks and a more open free agent marketplace. Now that the system is more difficult, it's almost impossible for a prgmitist like myself, no matter how optimistic I try to be, to have a lot of hope for 2021 and beyond. That does not mean I am without hope. I have said countless times, I am very happy with our recent draft picks and international free agent signings. The lost year of international signings hurt. The death of Flores hurt, but I have not lost hope. I have not stopped mentioning that hope either, but that hope is not based on any tangible evidence. (BTW, we have been told to have faith that the farm will be rebuilt in time for 2020 or 2021. If it's not Groome or anyone in the system already, how likely is it we draft someone next year that will be ML ready and significant enough to help by the time 2020 or 2021 arrives?)

Ben certainly made some major blunders. They directly led to our failures in 2014 and 2015- no doubt in my mind. He deserves the blame for that. I'm not one to try and pin anything on Larry- good or bad. What some of us feel is that Ben is not given enough credit for providing a foundation, including an incredibly strong farm (weak on pitching, yes) that enabled DD to acquire strong pitching (Sale, Pom & Kimbrel) and get us back to the playoffs again. Winning two division titles was very nice as well, yet it seems like Ben is given very little credit for those achievements by us being blinded by the 3 last place finishes. Compare the teams and farms Ben started with vs what DD started with. Yes, Ben had a nice rotation, but their years of team control were dwindling, while Beckett was having a riches to rags issue. The farm Ben was given had a few gems, including the meteoric rise from an unheralded Betts. Maybe we have a Betts or two in the system right now, and we don't even know it, but what are the odds?

I like that definition better than mine, and in that light, some of Ben's last place finishes would not be considered "cliff" worthy, since a fair amount of people felt we'd compete for the playoffs.

Nobody is "requiring" anyone to agree with us. It sounds like some cliff deniers are trying to silence us for not thinking the way you guys do. The condescension and righteousness is running both ways.

We'd be in a lot better shape after 2018, when Kimbrel's deal expires. We'd have also had more money to spend along the way, but of course not enough to replace what Kimbrel gave us. Margot might allow us to trade JBJ, or he could be traded now. Many of us were not against trading prospects. I had suggested trading Guerra many times. His stock has fallen immensly since the trade, making the deal look better in hindsight, aloing with the sharp rise in closer contract costs. Pom did poorly in 2016 and great in 2017, while Espi got hurt. That doesn't make the trade a slam dunk success. While I mostly look at rings won as a guide to success (like with the HRam/Sanchez for Beckett/Lowell trade), it's not always really all that fair for the GM. Unless we win a ring next year, the Pom & Kimbrel trades cannot be fully judged until we see what those prospects amount to, and even if they all fail, they'll always be the "what ifs" on who else we might have acquired-- younger players with more years of team control, a starter instead of reliever and countless other permutations.

Yes, both Ben guys who were acquired through a high draft pick and a more laxed international signing set up. For those who poo-poo'd Espi and Kopech and others as too far away to have any faith in, now want us to suddenly have faith that Groome or some other prospect acquired with lower picks of in a more restricted FA market are going to plug the holes left by a couple or more significant departing free agent vets.

Since when has the local media had any cred on any Sox talk sites?

If that floats your boat, by all means, take a poll. My vote is that nobody even has brought it up 25% of the time- and more likely it's under 20%, so yeah, gross hyperbole.

If "the word 'cliff means' 2-3 consecutive years of missing the playoffs," the Red Sox have accomplished that twice in the last eight seasons. I'm sure others think of "the cliff" as maybe 3 losing seasons in a row or maybe even 3 last places back-to-back. I'm not sure I'd call 3 last places surrounding a championship a cliff, but it does meet the requirement I set in my example. Perhaps I should have said 3 consecutive and not 2-3 years. That's one of the problems discussing things like this; not everyone even agrees on what the term "cliff" means. Add to that the speculative nature of projecting that far into the future, and it's no wonder there are so many differing viewpoints. It's a bit amusing that the discussion has now morphed into a discussion about the discussion and its participants. Man this is a slow time of the year!

Post whatever opinion poll you wish. It proves nothing, except what posters think. I'd say between Kimmi and myself only, I've brought it up about 2 or maybe 3 to 1 vs her only. Throw in everyone else and I'm not even near 50%, and I post much more than just about anyone but you. Why not chime in on my poll?

That would be opinion not fact. Maybe this poll would be more enlightening: Assuming the word "cliff means" 2-3 consecutive years of missing the playoffs (I know others may define it differently, but for argument's sake follow along.) Where would posters here place the odds of this happening starting somewhere between 2020 and 2021? A) 91%+ 75-90% C) 66%-74% D) 50-65% E) 33-49% F) Under 33% I'd choose B, but I'd say the odds are closer to 90% than 75%.

Probable is a better word than possible, but I agree it is not inevitable.

I was going to say the exact same thing!

Matt Adams, Drew Smyly and Mike Fiers were non tendered.

MLB reports Aaron Boone is the man.

So, we're going to pay Holt $2M plus the luxury tax. (I guess we could DFA him after we sign a FA, but does that mean we still owe him $2M, if nobody claims him?)

Gross hyperbole. Even between just Kimmi and myself, nobody is near 90%.

Can we all agree on one thing? Talking about the debate on the cliff is worse than talking about the cliff, potential cliff or cliff denial.

I'm sure I'm near or at the top of the list for most posts on the subject, but as a percent of posts made maybe not number one .

Maybe kimmo brought it up first? I'm not sure who has brought it back up the most.