S5Dewey

If we can score within 50 runs of last year and everyone else scores the same we'll still be 50 runs better than anyone else. We'll be ok with that, especially with our pitching staff.

I agree that Beckett was always a dick, and it worked well when it worked in our favor. I can remember watching him take the mound with the obvious attitude of "If you're going to win this game you've got to go through ME, Mo Fu". When he took the mound on those days he was a true leader on the field. Unfortunately when the tide turned and he became unhappy in Boston he turned that same dickish attitude against the Sox and the FO and, ever the leader, he had others follow him. Guys like Beckett are dangerous. They can be your best friend and then become your worst enemy in a heartbeat.

IMO those two things - chemistry and identity - are very closely related but aren't the same thing. Identity is the motivation and the mission. Teams like the Yankees and the Cowboys had an "Us against the world" mentality. Nobody liked them and they knew it, and they fed off it. They put out a little bit extra just to prove everyone else wrong. Then we come to the 2013 Red Sox. I believe they felt it was part of their mission that year to assuage part of the damage done by the bombing and they 'dug a little deeper' to make it happen. Every time they looked at the 617 jersey in the dugout they were reminded of what their mission was that year. Chemistry is the bonding, the need to perform well not only for themselves but for the good of the team. Nothing builds good chemistry like success just as nothing breeds poor chemistry like losing. The two are related because when a team truly feels a common goal it builds chemistry. When a team that believes in the mission starts to win the chemistry follows and so ad infinitum. I know the stat geeks are going to pooh-pooh this, and I don't mind.

I agree with you completely. I still have to shake my head and wonder how the Tigers didn't win it all in 2013 with a playoff rotation of Verlander, Sherzer and Sanchez or in 2014 with Verlander, Scherzer and Price - Price's post-season problems not withstanding. Crazy things happen.

At the end of the day there is no "silver bullet" that guarantees a WSC. There have been teams with CY winners, BA, HR, or RBI champions - and multiple combinations of them - and they didn't win it. But sometimes they did, too. However, one would think that the more of those guys one team can get together the better that team's chances of winning it all are. If you don't think that then one would have to ask why a team would want those guys.

IMO the discussion at that time was about opening day expectations of the pitching staff. The quote I was responding to was: "Didn't the team that won the World Series that year have an opening day rotation of Edinson Volquez, Chris Young, Yordano Ventura, Danny Duffy, and Jeremy Guthrie? Is that really so much better? " I then documented that based on their 2014 performances anyone would believe that the Royal's starters would perform better than the Sox starters would. The fact that the Royals starters had a combined 2014 WHIP of slightly over 6.100 and the Sox starters had a 2014 WHIP of almost exactly 7.00 reinforces my point. So again, yes, their opening day rotation was "so much better". Now having the benefit of 20-20 hindsight we can see that it didn't work out that way, but for the purposes of this discussion that's beside the point. We're now at the point in the winter when pretty soon some scribe is going to come up with the same thing - that it's spring and fans everywhere think their team has a chance to win the WS. That's wishful thinking, just like it was wishful thinking that our 2015 opening day pitching staff was good enough to compete. IMO most of use knew deep down inside that wasn't true but being optimistic fans bought into what was being told to us because it was what we wanted to believe.

2014 records: Kansas City Edison Volquez: 13-7 Chris Young 12-9 Yorlando Ventura 14-10 Danny Duffy 9-12 Jeremy Guthrie 13-11 Total 64-49 Boston Rick Porcello 15-13 Justin Masterson 7-9 (with 2 teams) Clay Buchholz 8-11 Wade Miley 8-12 Joe Kelly 6-4 Total 44-49 Based on their most recent years the KC staff was 20 wins better than the Sox on opening day. IMO that is so much better. It's not all about the rotation, but the rotation certainly is an indicator. There were some of us who were trying to buy into what the FO was saying but I'd guess that most of us were just 'whistling past the graveyard'.

This reminds me of a Julian Tavarez story. After played for five teams in 2008 he eventually signed with the Nats for 2009 - who had lost over 100 games in 2008. During Spring Training he was asked how it felt playing for the Nats after having plaed in MLB for 15 years. "When you go to a club until 4 a.m. and [are] just waiting, waiting, a 600-pounder looks like J-Lo. And to me, this is Jennifer Lopez right here. It's four in the morning. Too much to drink. All the girls look hot. So the Nationals are Jennifer Lopez to me." That's desperation!

Ya.. was BC the one who masterminded the plan of telling the fans that a rotation of Porcello, Masterson, Buchholz, Miley and Joe Kelley would be good enough ? I hate it when someone pisses on my shoes and tells me that it's raining.

Sure, but you're looking at it from "the glass is half empty" perspective. No, he didn't perform as we could reasonably have expected him to. At the same time, from a "the glass is half full" perspective he brought a "4.5 ERA in six innings" year and consistently kept his team in games that he pitched in. How many guys are going to do that for you at the middle/end of the rotation? At the end of the day his contribution was very instrumental in the Sox winning the WS. I don't get people being all wrapped around the axle about how much money he made. I'm more interested in contribution. His salary obviously didn't keep the Sox from picking up someone who could have helped win it - because they DID win it. There were no long term ramifications of his getting that $13M because he walked away from it the next year. (What a classy move, BTW!) What I care about is the contribution he made toward bringing that trophy home - and that contribution was very significant. Whatever they paid him - in comparison to someone else who may have played for less and not had as good a year - was worth it.

I don't understand why you're so down on Ryan Dempster and I'm also not sure how he got relegated to being considered #5. Lester & lackey were at the top followed by Buch (when he was healthy). After that we had Dubront and Dempster - who are essentially the same pitcher. Then we had guys like Workman & Aceves getting spot starts, both of whom weren't as good as Dempster. It would be a lot more reasonable to consider RD as a #3-4 depending on Buch's health at the moment Sure, he was probably the highest paid #3-4 pitcher in the league but (without doing all the research) he may have also been the best #3-4 pitcher in the league if you believe in the intangibles. Which I do.

Men's toys are more expensive.

Ok, and if all of this comes to fruition - we rid ourselves of Hanley's and Pablo's contracts and use the money to sign the B's - we'll have essentially the team we have now minus Pablo and Hanley - with no money to replace them without going over the LT limit. [in a related opinion, that's why the FO is Hell-bent on getting below the limit this year, so they can exceed it next year and the year after before they try to reset it again. I see a cycle coming here.] Let's hope that these guys can pull out at least one WS Championship before they become FA's and while Hanley (and Sandoval?) is still around. As bleak as that sounds, the sliver lining in all of this is that the Sox are better poised to get those Championships while those guys are around because the team probably won't be as good in five years as it is now whether they made those trades or not.

The knock I've heard is that @ $13m he was overpaid for a #5. I see that as more of a testament to our 1-4's that year when a guy with his numbers can be considered a 5. I mean, sure, we could have signed someone else for half that amount, and maybe come in second. IMHO ARod's first AB against Dempster after the suspension was worth the entire $13M anyway!! That's the stuff legends are made of!!

Which brings us back around to Ryan Dempster in 2013 and his ERA of just north of 4.5 in just under 6 innings per game. I'll take that from my #5 guy every day, twice on Sunday, and three times on a Championship season.

Here's what Farrell said when asked about the catching situation: We've got three quality catchers vieing for the catching spot and the only one left with options is Swihart. We're confident that if we place either of the other two on waivers someone will scoop them up immediately. My interpretation of what he said is that Swihart is going to be starting the year in Pawtucket.

When Farrell was asked what his depth chart at 3B looked like he said, "Pablo, Holt, Rutledge".

I don't think they jumped too soon either. Moreland is worth what the Sox are paying him. When a team waits on someone in the hope they can sign him for less there's a real risk of someone else swooping in and picking him up. Moreland is a very good fit for this team so they struck while the iron was hot.

Really? I though he was better last year. IMO O'Brien was able to draw out more of Jerry's knowledge than did Orsillo.

John Farrell was in Maine last night discussing the upcoming season, etc. Here's a link to the story about the third and final (AFAIK) Red Sox event in Maine this winter. https://bangordailynews.com/2017/01/18/sports/red-sox-manager-excited-about-upcoming-season-thanks-to-trades/ Edit: There's a bit of a misstatement in the article regarding signing a big bat. What Farrell actually said was that he didn't see the Sox signing a big middle of the order bat UNLESS, in a couple of weeks, guys like Napoli or Trumbo were still available and scrambling for a place to play in 2017. Also, on the broadcasting front, Jerry Remy is coming back in a multi-year deal. https://bangordailynews.com/2017/01/18/sports/red-sox-broadcaster-jerry-remy-agrees-to-multi-year-deal/

..and a parallel question is how many times does he have to fail in the post season before that "chocker" moniker gets to be credible? If he loses 2-3 more do we begin to think he can't pitch in the post season or do we always dismiss it as being a small sample size? I want the guy to succeed as much as anyone does but at the same time I'm getting tired of the excuses for continued poor post-season performance. I'm sure he knows that he was hired to pitch in the post season so I'm sure he is tired of them too. Just call it like it is - the guy has shown every indication that he's not a good post-season pitcher. I believe that a player's recent performance is a good indicator of what his next performance will be, but until he has a good one or three....

Is there a difference between optimism and hopefulness? Because I'm hopeful but not unduly optimistic.

Naw. It wasn't Slash who started it. I don't think it was a typo - I had the impression that whomever posted it wanted to call someone a "choker" and misspelled it as "chocker". Someone else (emp?) picked up on it and from then on whenever anyone wanted to say "choke" they used "chock" instead. It became somewhat of an inside joke on BDC. Ok.. you had to be there! LOL

There are three big Red Sox events in my neck of the woods over the winter and the most recent one was on Friday night (1/13). The Sea Dogs put on a big charity buffet dinner (1000+ people) with a few Sox guests and this year the guests were Ben Crockett - VP. Player Development, Ryan Court - UIF in Portland and Pawtucket last year, Frank Wren - VP Player Personnel, Carlos Febles - Mgr of the Sea Dogs in 2017, and some guy named Jason Varitek. Crockett talked about how difficult it is to see high school players and trying to predict what they'll become both physically and mentally/emotionally, but he also touched on how much harder is is to try to predict the same things about the Latin American players. Court told about how he felt he was out of baseball a couple of years ago and started playing in an Independent league. Then the Sox offered him a contract and he talked about how happy he was to be in AAA last year. Nice kid, but at age 27 probably isn't going anyplace. Wren discussed the current strategy of trading off prospects to get the established players. According to him the FO is very happy with where they are in that they have a young established team that they feel will carry them through the next four seasons, giving them time to revitalize the minors. He compared it to the Braves (which he was a part of) and how they acquired a few established players when they had Maddocks, Seaver, etc.. He said the situation was the same in Boston only different this year because the Braves had pitching so they traded for position players whereas the Sox had position players so they traded for pitching. But the last two guys, Feebles and 'tek were the best interviews of the evening. According to Feebles he was responsible for two pitchers leaving the game - Heathcliffe Slocum and Jack McDowell. In each situation he hit a HR off of them and they were released the next day! Tek is a great interview and if you get a chance to hear him I highly recommend it. He just kicked back, crossed his legs, and let it fly. He said that even when Kevin Millar was playing he was known as "Red Light". When the red light on the cameras came on he wanted to be right in front of it. There was also a conversation regarding the Sox catchers - he thinks Vaz and Swihart are both the real deal, but he also said that he wouldn't be surprised if Leon becomes a good enough hitter to stick with the team. When asked about his future in baseball he said that when he heard that the Sox had picked up Sale his reaction was, "Wow. I l could lose 30 (lbs) and be the backup for this team!" :-) He also said that he very much likes what he's doing now - working with the catchers in the Sox organization - and sees himself remaining in the organization. The emcee tried to get 'tek to talk about aspirations of being a manager but 'tek refused to go there. That's some of the highlights. Next up is John Farrell on Wednesday. Being a Red Sox fan in Maine in the winter ain't entirely bad!

Unbridled optimism, and not having a history of failing in the post-season. Ok, no history of success either but that's where the optimism comes in.