5GoldGlovesOF,75

That's f***ing funny -- whoops, sorry if I defended notin

Those '80s Sox, with three division crowns in five years, were loaded with young homegrown regulars, stars and borderliners; the '88 Morgan Magic squad started an all-homegrown nine in the playoffs. Nothing like rooting for and watching your own progenies as they develop into winners. Back to the title of the thread: by my count, it's currently 8-1 for the 2000s. That's about the ratio I expected, as nostalgia will never end for the monumental greatest choke of all-time by the '04 Yankees. I'm still curious if there are any other talksox posters or lurkers who give a slight edge to this current decade? There may be someone with a more personal connection or a younger poster who could better appreciate fandom in the Teens, or maybe even an old-schooler who favors four first place clubs over one first and five Wild Cards...

Well, Marte wound up playing seven years in the bigs and hit .218. That fact doesn't detract from his status while he was #9, but maybe it should give perspective to fans who think there's just no possible way that any club under no circumstances would dare part with -- oh, say, the #32 and #33 prospects for an MLB All-Star.

Again, I wasn't clear, but I was focused on trading established position players -- since Betts' and now Devers' names are getting mentioned here. I'm not totally against a blockbuster, as long as the return is close to equal value, which this winter means prospects with legitimate star potential. Something like Roberto Alomar and Joe Carter for Fred McGriff and Tony Fernandez. All were starting regulars, but Alomar was only 22 at the time and on the verge of exploding into a Hall of Famer.

I was trying to think of regular position players dealt for potential, but thanks for mentioning the most lopsided trade for prospects in Sox history that turned out in Boston's favor... Marte was the best they could get for Renteria, who needed to get gone asap. Though Marte never suited up for Boston, he was flipped in a multi-player that landed Coco Crisp, who never broke out into a star but helped win a ring.

Not just the fans -- I can't think of any trades of note where the Red Sox ever dealt a vet for decent prospects. Best I can come up with was Tony C. for a package that netted second baseman Doug Griffin, who couldn't hit but won a Gold Glove. Nearly all Boston trades are prospects or pre-prime players for vets... Schilling and Brady Anderson for Mike Boddicker helped win two AL East crowns; Cecil Cooper for George Scott was never a good idea (for younger fans, Cooper wasn't quite Bagwell, and Scott wasn't quite Panda, but from '77-87 Coop was third in the AL in total bases, while Boomer 2.0 played two-and-half years in Boston and was done).

My dad died in March ’04 – I’m not going to say ’03 made his illness worse, but it didn’t help. So for me, when the Sox finally won, it was less exultation than exhaustion, more relief than disbelief. I favor the 2010s, because I’ve been able to share this decade with my son. He was almost three when the Sox won in ‘13; I woke him up to see the last out in case they never won again in his lifetime. I got to wake him again five years later.

With 2020 coming soon, now may be time to reflect on the past 10 years. Or 20… Compare both decades of this Red Sox Century. Boston won two world titles in each: ’04 and ’07; ’13 and ’18. The Sox also had MVPs and Cy Young winners in both 10-year spans: Pedroia and Martinez; Betts and Porcello. 2000-2009 Regular: 920-699 .568, seven 90-win seasons, 1 first place, 8 seconds, 1 third. Post: 34-23 .596, 2-2 ALCS, 4-2 ALDS. Notables: 5 Wild Card berths, made Game Seven of the ALCS 4 times. 2010-2019 Regular: 872-748 .538, five 90-win seasons, 4 first place finishes, 3 thirds, 3 fifths. Post: 23-14 .622, 2-0 ALCS, 2-2 ALDS. Notables: 3 straight AL East crowns, 4 in 6 years. Idiots breaking an 86 year-old curse; the greatest comeback in baseball history. David and Manny, Pedro and Schill. DLowe and Wake, Foulke and Tek. Mueller, Millar… OCab and Nomar, Damon and Nixon. Underrated ‘07 champs, dominant from April through October. Dustin and Youk, Beckett and Lowell. Pap and Okie, Coco and Ells. Dice-K Matsuzaka. Boston Strong, Bearded Band of Brothers, this is our f***ing city. Papi, Pedey, Koji… Lester and Buck, Salty and Vic. Gomes and Napoli. Drew brothers. Do Damage, outfield dances, a franchise-record 119 wins. Mookie/Beni/JBJ. Bogie and Rafie. JD, Brockstar, Joe Kelly. Pearce and Eovaldi. Nunez and Moreland: PH WS HRs. Chris Sale. The Owes or the Teens? Which Red Sox decade is your favorite… and why?

Agreed. If I had to pick which was the better bet to have a productive career longterm, it was Beni. Moncada had better tools than just about anyone, but also had to face the usual cultural adjustments and transitions that sometimes hinder development. I admit I was turned off by his expensive car collection with the custom YM hood ornaments, but realize those are spoils of suddenly striking it rich as a teenager. Of course, Mookie showed up in a shiny blue Corvette this year, and that didn't appear to affect his game...

Good to read; I couldn't sleep last night worrying about Noah Song.

Trading prospects is always one big roll of the dice. A lot of guys' worth peaks before they ever play one game in the majors. It's like the game show: would you rather keep the cash or find out what's behind the curtain? In baseball card context, would you rather have an autographed Clemente or an unopened pack with the longshot chance of finding a Mantle rookie? In hindsight, who wouldn't have swapped Swihart for Hammels? For the record, I was totally against trading our number one pitching prospect for Pomeranz, but Espinoza never got out of A ball and hasn't played in three years. I was happy to deal Hanley for Beckett and glad we got Sale for Moncada instead of Benintendi. Control can be overrated, too. After signing Sandoval, Boston "controlled" the Panda for five more years (or was it the other way around?).

I understand why low-paid youngsters with star potential are sought-after. But an established player about to enter his prime has to have more value to GMs trying to boost contending teams to the next level. Any trade is based on speculation, of what could be vs. what will be, with the goal to improve and at least get what you pay for. Baseball is a business, and building a winner is costly. But proven commodities have to be more attractive to a GM whose club can afford to pay for quality. For example, to a team looking for a Gold Glove finalist catcher who can hit, a veteran like Vazquez has to have more value than a teenage power-hitter like Casas who hasn't even made it to Double A. According to the list, Devers is worth 2.5 times on the trade market than Betts. Devers, 23, has had one great year. Betts is 27 and has six good to great years. Young studs like Devers, Soto, Acuna, Torres, etc. may have generational potential, but they still have half a decade to stay clean, stay in shape, and produce before matching Mookie’s output so far (and when most boy millionaires are out at late night parties, how many will be wearing hoodies, trying not to be noticed, while feeding the homeless?). If you're the GM of the Red Sox and you could actually acquire two and half more Mookies, wouldn't you rather trade Rafie?

What the- ? An optimistic Mookie fan on talksox? Attaboy, Moon...

Great, the Boston front office would like to take a poll: all Sox fans in favor of trading our best player and best pitching prospect for Mitch Haniger and Kenta Maeda, please vote with your wallets and order season tickets today.

What a joke, the usual let's-get-some-really-good-players for some-of-our-guys-who-are-not-as-good proposal (typical from a site titled FANsided). Any Red Sox fan who has been following Noah Song the past few months knows he has vaulted to the top of their meager list of pitching prospects. Now if only Uncle Sam would cooperate...

Lowell's only about a half hour far from Boston, as long you're driving there between midnight and morning rush hour. My sister used to drive to a train station, then take the commuter back and forth; still took about three travel hours per day. Ah, notin's right: just watch the big league games on TV...

Do you think the reason Manfred wants to collapse so many minor league teams isn't so much for more consolidated player development (as purported), but to force more hardball fans to attend more big league games by default?

I agree people will always show up in Boston, especially in perspective to the rest of MLB non-contenders. However, attendance will definitely drop if fans aren't getting their money's worth, ie. watching a contender (there are lots of other ways to blow disposable income instead of on Fenway's ridiculous prices of tickets, parking, food and drink). As for tuning to NESN for three or four hours a night, forget it. As for Betts, I have never once thought the Sox can't afford or will choose not to afford him; I just have doubts he wants to stay in New England. But can anyone here ever imagine the New York Yankees not outbidding the entire MLB to extend a lifetime contract to one of their own homegrown superstar faces of the franchise about to enter his prime? Has any Yankee fan favorite ever been allowed to leave the Bronx once he became a free agent?

What I've been saying since I got here... the most difficult question for the suddenly money-conscious Red Sox: how can they possibly save without losing?

Then there's this: Mookie Betts rumors WWW.MLB.COM With Mookie Betts entering the final year of his contract in 2020, the '18 American League Most Valuable Player Award winner will be the focus of plenty of trade talks this offseason. Below is a list of the latest news and rumors surrounding the 27-year-old outfielder.

I'm against trading Eovaldi, especially if he pitches well, because he's the one guy of the big three that I feel hasn't yet hit his peak. He's also getting paid almost half of Price and Sale. I understand that both those reasons make him the more attractive trade target for most markets looking for pitching... so if trading Evo is the best way to keep Betts, than so be it. Forgot to add another reason to keep Nate: He's a righty with success vs. the righty-Yankee batting order (unlike southpaws Price and Sale so much).

A big trade I'd like would mean moving a big name and big contract -- bye Price -- along with a cheaper name with potential to make it palatable for the takers. What we get back would be immaterial (literally/bad pun), as long as the payroll and team culture is altered. Another big trade I'd like would mean moving good or great position players in return for close to the same in on-field value. Both types of changes would be dramatic but in the best interests of still contending in 2020.

I hate to say it, but the quietude may be ominous, a cliche before the winter meetings next week. While A few teams have already made preemptive strikes, for all we know Bloom may be plotting a blockbuster or have several dominoes ready to fall. What are the predictions here: a big deal, a flurry of small though subtly interconnected moves or nada? I vote B.

MLB TV did a bit just yesterday showing origins of position players for World Series champs for the decade. They analyzed how winning teams were built, through draft and development, trades, free agent signings. Most big stars were homegrown, but something like 70% of starting pitching was acquired from other systems.

I was ready to counter with Nick Anderson, the lights-out Ray acquired by Bloom and Co, but... 2nd Half: Anderson 2.28 ERA, .180 BA, 52 Ks in 27.2 IP, 0.75 WHIP 2nd Half: Pomeranz 1.96 ERA, .161 BA, 57 Ks in 36.2 IP, 0.81 WHIP I saw a Pomeranz start in person vs. Washington in the Spring and he was brutal. What a turnaround, even if it was in the NL. The fact that he was bad for over a year-and-a-half should remind both Red Sox and Yankee fans of how quickly change can come for professional pitchers.