S5Dewey

That's kind of an irrational request since I don't know what he'd accept. I'd offer him a one year contract to try to rebuild his reputation for $10-$12M. Whether he'd accept it would be up to him. I'd save that by taking the $5M we're not paying Pablo next year and adding in the $6.25M we're not paying Steve Pearce.

?? I had no comments about the farm after the Peavy trade.

This all sounds very easy when sitting in front of a keyboard but there are some things that have to happen that are very difficult to do in real life. First of all, if you're going to build a winning team through drafting your scouts and coaches have to be a lot better than anyone else's. The scouts need to be able to recognize the talent that still available down in the draft because, remember, it's a winning team so your draft picks are lower every year. At the same time the coaches have to be able to develop that talent. Second, and this may be even more difficult, everyone, the fans, the FO, everyone has to be willing to sell high on players. You have to be willing to trade players when they're playing well and are contributing to the team - and that's difficult to do especially after a WSC. By selling high you avoid paying them a lot of money for past performance, but you take the risk of losing good players. IOW you have to be willing to become the Tampa Bay Rays.

That's three of us now.

Maybe it's me but I fail to get all the crying, whining, and hand wringing about the state of our farm. Yes, it's weak. But there's a reason it's weak. We can speculate all we want about the return we could have gotten for our minor leaguers and whether or not they were "good trades" but there's only one thing that's not speculation. The Sox won the WS in 2018. I know that because I've got the t-shirts, sweatshirts, and caps to prove it! We might have won with different players or we might have won with different trades but those are just 'might's. Yes, the farm is weak and there aren't the players we'd like to have to fill positions in the next couple of years but I'll live with that every day for the 2018 season and the World Series Championship. I much prefer that to a t-shirt that says: "BOSTON RED SOX. We continue to have the best farm system in the majors".

Whether it was designed to stir up trouble or not, it's spot-on. Everything about who we could (or could not) have traded for the players on the WSC team is now pure speculation. It's equally as easy to speculate that had the FO done things exactly as they did we wouldn't have that banner flying. Some people can't enjoy anything. :-(

There are a couple of things worth pointing out from the above posts. First, saying Porcillo is a 5.5 ERA pitcher is a bit disingenuous. Yes, 5.52 in 2019 but his career ERA is 4.36. 2019 was also the first time in his career that his ERA was over 5.00. It's like saying JBJ is now a 20 HR/yr guy because he hit 21 in 2019 - even though it was the 2nd best year in his career. Also, there's a big difference between the contribution of a 5 ERA pitcher who pitches 6 innings and one who pitches 4 innings. The guy who pitches six innings is giving up 3.3 R/P Outing in 6 innings while the 5.0 ERA guy who's only pitching 4 innings is giving up 6 runs in his 4 innings. ERA is a nice stat if one considers the number of innings pitched but obviously all 5.0 ERA pitchers aren't created equal. While I'm not trying to make a case that Poricllo is worth $20M at the same time a starter who only gives up 3.3 runs in 6 innings is a pitcher who's keeping his team in the game. That's worth quite a lot to a team that scores runs like the Red Sox do.

I have to admit that this is disappointing. I thought (hoped?) the FO would see the talent on the team and give it another shot, then reset the tax after the big contracts became unmanageable. Now we may be looking at another season like this one, only without the talent to turn it around quickly.

It would make sense. If DD was looking for an extension while in the afterglow of the WSC and JH refused to give it to him, THEN the team went into the swoon... that would explain it.

Aside from the LT and salary issues, I found this quote to be interesting: "The circumstances of Dombrowski’s departure remain a hot topic, ..... Henry explains that differences arose in the immediate aftermath of last year’s World Series win and couldn’t be bridged throughout the ensuing campaign."

If we reset and lose any three of Betts, Bradley, Moreland, JDM, and Price it doesn't matter what the pitching staff looks like. We're going to suck again unless this new GM pulls a HUGE rabbit out of his hat.

The big deal isn't the ERA, it's the innings. The Sox can score enough runs to cover 3.3 runs every six innings. As I said earlier, I don't see him getting $20M next year from the Sox or anyone else, but if he likes it here he may take $10-12M to reestablish himself. He may even take less than that if performance bonuses are included. I'm not ready to close the door on Porcillo yet.

For the sake of clarification, Porcillo has a lifetime ERA of 4.36 which ballooned up to 5.52 in 2019 but "for the sake of argument" I'll accept that he's "essentally a 5 ERA pitcher for us" even though 2019 is the only year it got to 5.00. That having been said, IMO ERA is another of those stats that has to be considered with other factors. In Rick's case he's averaged almost exactly 6 innings per start over his career. If you take that 5 ERA and calculate what it means over 6 innings you learn that he's given up 3.33 runs per six innings. That doesn't make him an Ace or even a #2 on anybody's team but he's a very respectable #4 or guy on the Red Sox. That doesn't mean I'd pay him another $21M to pitch in 2020 but I certainly wouldn't low-ball him at $5-7M either. He's been an upfront guy who's worked hard to come back from the start he had, and he's always shouldered the blame for his bad performances. He appears to me to be the kind of guy who'd entertain an offer in the $10-12M range to try to reestablish himself. I could do that.

There's that too.

It's early yet but that's the post of the day already!

It's not only about putting out the effort, it's also about being successful in that effort. Regardless of how much a Pats player is trying, if he's not successful he's gone. It's that little extra incentive that makes the difference. Belichick has his own psychological ways of making statements. Remember when a running back (whose name I forget at the moment) fumbled the ball twice in the same game a few years ago, and Belichick had him on the sidelines holding a football for the entire next game? If you listen to the Pats pregame and postgame shows you hear that the analyists there are amazed (and that's not too strong a word) that the Pats have been as dominant as they are for as long as they have been. It seems like each year the Pats "lose" key players and the next year they're back winning again. That's not just Tom Brady. Winning is in the culture of that team, Belichick is the head of it and he knows the psychology of motivation. IMO that and Tom Brady are the reasons why the Pats are so successful, but you also can't rule out the "Belichick effect" on Brady.

LOL.. Ok, but outside of that, you have to admit that the Pats have a way of picking up players who haven't been performing up to their abilities and then getting the most out of them. There's got to be some kind of psychological thing involved in that..knowing which buttons to push with those players. If so it'd be great to see the Sox emulate it.

I just edited that for you. I hope you don't mind. That does seem to be the hallmark of the Pats though. They bring in players who 'don't fit' (for one reason or another) in their past system and these players become important pieces of the team. It makes me think that other New England teams should take a hard look at the how's and why's of that workings and try to emulate the Pats. Often times it's about more than the skills.

Maybe that's not always a coincidence.

Many years ago I read of a survey taken across the country regarding earnings. Almost every person surveyed said that they could be much better off and happier if they made 10% more than they already made.

IMO this is a question none of us can answer because we can't relate to someone who's making $25/M/year. I am fairly certain that if someone were making, say, $80,000/year with a family of four cutting that to $64K would hurt badly. It would cut into the ability to pay the mortgage and buy food, and it would certainly cut into 'available income', that money that's used for vacations, etc., as well as trips to Fenway Park. It would be a huge impact. Now let's look at someone making $25M/Year and getting their income cut to $20M/year. They'd continue to eat as well as they did and could certainly still provide better than adequate housing for their family. In fact, they could probably have two or three 'adequate' homes spread throughout the world. That $5M reduction in play might make them choose between having a nice yacht or their own jet...but it's hard for me to work up much sympathy for that. More than that, though, that $20M/year for even 5 years would allow them to invest a good portion of it so they'd never have to work again at the end of the contract and continue an opulent lifestyle. OTOH, the person making $64,000 is probably destined to work until he's at least 55 and more likely at least until he's reached the minimum age to collect Social Security and even then only if he's invested wisely. That's not to mention that 'investing wisely' when raising a family is a difficult thing to do while providing for that family. What I've said doesn't begin to address Moon's point about the players wanting a bigger piece of the pie but it does address the original question of how would you feel if you got a 20% pay cut. We can't address that because we have no way of relating to someone who's 'cut' for one year amounts to more than most of us will make in a lifetime. Edit- afterthought: It would be interesting to know what the average (or the mean) income for ticket buyers at Fenway Park is. Maybe that's why the players don't get a lot of sympathy when they want millions to play baseball.

The 3 per year thing is a great concept, but it takes a lot of courage for a championship team because in order to bring up 3 per year a team also has to release 3 per year to keep the roster under 25 players. Suppose that after the 2018 season the Sox brought up Marco, Chavis, and Kelly. Without the benefit of hindsight, would you have released Holt, Moreland, and JBJ to make room for them? The Rays aren't a championship team so they can "afford" to release 3 players in order to give an opportunity to 3 Minor Leaguers. They can gamble on players like that because their fans have no expectations.

It's nice to see ERod coming around, but in reality he's "coming around" to be a respectable #3-4 pitcher. The good news is that he's 18-6 and averaging just a skrid under 6 innings per start. The mediocre news is that his ERA is about 3.50 and his WHIP is 1.300. The bad news is that he leads the league in walks. If you look at his advanced metrics he's just about the same pitcher he's always been but his BB's and K's are up. That might be because he's also pitched more innings in 2019 than he ever has. He's not going to be anybody's Ace but he can be a respectable #3 or 4 guy. However, in order for him to be a #3 he's going to have to have two very good pitchers ahead of him in the rotation. I'm not putting him down, just being realistic. He's one of the few bright spots on this team, but being a bright spot is a fairly low bar this year.

Speaking of selling/auctioning memorabilia... At JBPark there's always a table set up with a so-called 'silent auction' going on. You enter your bid for different items on a clipboard and bidding stops after the 6th inning. What they don't tell you is that after the sixth inning the auction becomes a LIVE auction with the starting price being whatever the highest amount previously bid is. If you're ever there and are tempted to enter an early bid remember that in actuality you're bidding against yourself. All you're doing is driving the starting price up, which will probably be reflected in the final sale price.

I don't totally disagree with you. I have very few people on Ignore and all of them are obvious trolls except one. However, Jax isn't one of them. I agree that he has some good posts so I'll usually start reading what he's posted but once he starts his trolling routine it's ... and I move on. However, his trolling has become more and more prevalent now that the Yankees are being successful and (probably more important) the Sox aren't. Even his 'good' posts seem more and more like 'click bait'. As someone said here recently, Yankees fans are good losers but horrible winners.