Hugh2

If a lot of these guys hold out until after the June draft, I wonder if they might be a possibility to Boston then?

Groome doesn't strike me as the type you bring up from A ball and mess up his development. He doesn't have that one stand out tool that might be able to help a team down the stretch, like an elite 101 MPH fastball. The dude has all the potential in the world but he has a long road developmental wise. I've been called crazy for even more rational thoughts.

First off, I don't any player, coach, gm, or anybody truly deserves blind allegiance without any question. If there was such a level to be attained, Dave D certainly hasn't reached Bill Belichick status. This guy has what is it, one championship? twenty years ago? I think he's fine, and very well could put together what amounts to a WS winning team here, but people are batshit crazy if they think none of his moves should be criticized.

Is this suppose to be the potential game 1,2 and 3 starters for this year? If so, I think we can take Jay Groome out of the pen.

He also had the overall #2, and then the overall #1 pick in the draft when he drafted those guys. There's a huge difference between draft with the first pick and drafting in the back of the first round. Also, I'd like to add that I think we as fans give too much credit to the G.M. for draft results. There are countless scouts, directors, and crosscheckers putting in thousands of hours within the organization that go into making these decisions. I'd actually be willing to be that after the first round pick, most G.M.s don't even make another pick

I'm not against Swihart making the roster, and I'm going to be excited if he does and rooting for him but...BUT (but usually precedes something stupid, eh?). But he's out of options. My point is, I'm not going to be crying foul if they decide to keep him in Pawtucket. If Swihart is struggling at the MLB by the time Pedroia comes back the Sox are going to have a tough decision to make.

I'm fine with guys like Johnson as depth options, but there isn't really an argument against trying to increase your depth. Pitching, pitching, and more pitching. Dumpster diving can't hurt anyone if you're paying a guy peanuts in Pawtucket with an opt-out. The difference between those guys and has-beens is potential. Sometimes you catch a guy who has something left, and when you do that you're going to get much better production than a guy whose ceiling is a BOTRS up/down guy.

Trade away existing talent? Like who? we're already losing Kimbrel and Pomeranz at the end of this year, Sale and Porcello the year after next. There's no way we replace all this talent without staying over the luxury tax. ....Which I'm totally fine with by the way.

when calculating future payroll costs, keep in mind there are going to be pretty big arbitration jumps the next couple years.

It's really hard to attribute a certain level of credit to a G.M. Obviously there is more credit/blame to go there than anywhere else in the organization but it's still more complex than usually presented. Ben, for all his faults built up a good farm, and even Theos guys came into the system when he was assistant G.M. what level of influence did he have in those decisions? His biggest folly, whether you want to blame him or the organization has a whole has been drafting and developing pitching. I'm not the biggest DD guy but one thing he has done is use the assets within this organization to build up the rotation and the bullpen. Yes, we have zero depth now, but that's because we have Sale, Pomeranz, Kimbrell, Smith etc. The farm is important but sometimes the point of having assets is to trade them for what you need. I have no idea what DD's plan is, or to what level he has a plan this year but if you step back and look at this team as a whole it's blatantly obvious what he's done. He took a team that was rich in talent on one side of the ball and kept the young cost controlled MLB ready players, and he moved other assets to build up the other side of the ball. The results have been two straight division wins, and it looks like this team should be just as strong for at least another 2-3 years.

...

Alternatively, how would you build depth in AAA? in the absence of MLB ready talent I think mediocre and has-beens are pretty much all you got. Can't hurt the MLB team in Pawtucket, and you might catch lightening in a bottle. Depth can make a big difference by the time you tally up 162 games at the end of the year.

I have zero issues about Mookie, it's not just spring training....it's the first week of March. If he's slumping 30 days into the season moving into May I'll start to wonder if he's hiding an injury but I'm not worried about Mookie performing.

I agree, I actually think JDMs value can be maximized in such a way. I'm also hoping his presence in the lineup helps these guys as well.

The good old days, when you could sign a 1.000 OPS, 40+ HR 130+RBI guy for 4 years and $52 million dollars.

I think the bullpen depth will go a long way if Smith comes back healthy and compliments Kimbrel at the back of the bullpen. Looks like Johnson, and Valesquez might get some starts early this season. Beeks might be an option at some point too, some potential in his arm but he's not ever going to be a TOTR guy (doesn't need to be). Things would feel a lot better if the Sox added another depth option or two.

I'm hoping David Price has a bounce back year, I think he's a strong candidate to do so. Sale + Price at the top of the rotation is going to be a pretty lethal 1 2 punch.

Yeah I guess it sounds pretty dumb when you put it like that. I blame myself for conveying my point rather poorly. JDM value is highly tied up in his bat, which holds a lot of value. Pretty obvious point so I guess you can call me captain obvious.

I suppose this is a highly subjective question that everyone might interpret differently. I took it as imagining the MLB equivalent of an NBA player, you're taking on a physical tools level, which immediately probably better serves the original question better than I did. From that perspective, you bring up a good point that many NBA players might struggle, BUT a lot of MLB players got height too. Stanton is 6'6" JDM and Machado are 6'3" Miguel Cabrera is 6'4" and Aaron Judge is 6'7" and that was just 2 minutes of research. I'm sure I could find a few more sluggers past and present who are tall. Russel Westbrook and Kyrie Irving are only 6'3" You don't have to be 6'10" to be elite in the NBA....unless perhaps you're a C C/F.

This is a thought exercise, I probably should have stated that with THAT particular point I'm assuming Ortiz could play LF. If he could play left field he'd probably have the body to play LF, and if he had the body to play LF he'd probably be less injury prone out there. In which case, Manny money would be an excellent comp as they played around the same time. I think the main take away from this is if David Ortiz put up the same offensive numbers and was athletically gifted enough to sustain a job in the field even on an average level he could easily command the highest pay day in his day.

I'd give Buchh a minor league deal. Whats the worse thing that can happen? he gets injured and costs you almost nothing? best case scenario someone goes down and you get a 1/2 a year out of him.

Jordan, on the other hand, had relative success in professional baseball. He didn't reach the majors but he did play in AA and hit 3 HRs. He might not of had the sexiest stat line but when you consider he had not played the sport in over a decade at 31 and jumped over rookie ball, low A and high A it was actually pretty impressive. It makes you wonder what could have been if he pursued a baseball career and got some prime development during his younger years. It's hard to argue he didn't make the right choice however.

From a statistical perspective, you could say Lebron James. He has a slightly higher FG% and FG3%, slightly lower PPG, more rebounds and assists. This is obviously an insanely objective thought experiment so I'm kinda playing two different angles here. Assuming how a players skill sets would look as a baseball player opposed to an NBA player, and I'm also looking at this from the perspective that baseball is much less dependent on one player opposed to basketball. Arguably a pitcher can have the same impact on a game as one NBA player (perhaps even more) but a starter will only go every 5 days for you. I'd take the team player who all across the board looks like a 5 tool, sefless player. But if we really want to dive deep into this, you could argue Jordan would be the better player for your team in the playoffs. He'd be like......David Ortiz 2013.

Admittedly, I have very little clue how often a guy is able to make over his swing and be successful. But I know some have done it, and others were not. I guess a little optimism can't hurt, it's spring training after all.

If we're talking about an NBA player being equally good at baseball I'd choose Lebron James in a heartbeat, over and over again. The irony is I would never want him on my NBA team but I think his selfless, all around, star powered personality would be a better fit for baseball believe it or not. Lebron James might be that guy who passes the ball in the 4th quarter and is a little less reluctant to take over a game like other elite players but the baseball manifestation of James to me is a guy who does it all. A guy who can hit .300, hit 30 HR's, steal 30 bases, and play elite defense. And his primadona attitude is the kinda attitude baseball might need right now and believe me.....I'm the biggest James hater out there. On the other hand, he might be demanding 40 million a year.