A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I'm with you boom. I think we will depend on some kids in 2012. It makes a lot of sense that Lava be one of them. To me, the Papi decision is the key. I'm not saying Lava can't be a 60 game catcher (and some more at DH) in 2012 for the Sox, but I just do not think it is the right thing to do to a rookie. Playing in Boston as we contend for a ring puts a lot of pressure on a catcher... not so much for a DH (even though he'd be filling in Papi's shoes).
    Posted by moonslav59


    Moon, you responded to my 7:44 post at 6:57. That is pretty fast!

    i guess the system has delays sometimes. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : That is a key comment. When we look at the numbers, how are we going to bring back either Papelbon or Ortiz? If we do bring back either, we may need guys from the farm to step up or have to sign more guys like Bedard to incentive laden deals rather than sign blue chip talent for starting pitching. One or both of them are probably gone. We are going to have to do it if we want to keep under the luxury tax limit. I've got to believe we need to sign or trade for at least one starting pitcher.  It seems like we can replace both Papelbon and Ortiz quite well with internal options, but of course we will probably get a dip in performance from their slots on the team. That move, though, would enable us to supplement the team in areas of more intense need, plus give us the picks which Ortiz and Papelbon probably represent. We don't even know for sure if either would decline arbitration. Sometimes the winter doesn't go as planned.  We had no choice but to pick up Scutaro's option since we couldn't afford to replace him. My guess is that Wheeler is gone also. We might end up missing him before we are through. I hope they do bring him back but it's got to be done by tomorrow right, or he is open for bidding by others.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom
    This seems to me a sensible way to frame what's at stake. It's hard to imagine that the Sox will retain both Ortiz and Papelbon, but not hard to imagine that both will walk. A starting pitcher is a matter of some urgency -- by hook or by crook -- at least one, at least middle of the rotation. The depth is not there in-house, and amongst the top three there will be missed starts. Maybe, as you say, Bedard will sign an incentives-laden contract.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    By my figures, after taking the Scutty option, we now have about $22-25M to spend on... SP4 SP5 Closer Set-up DH perhaps... back-up C RH'd RF'er
    Posted by moonslav59


    That is a key comment. When we look at the numbers, how are we going to bring back either Papelbon or Ortiz? If we do bring back either, we may need guys from the farm to step up or have to sign more guys like Bedard to incentive laden deals rather than sign blue chip talent for starting pitching.

    One or both of them are probably gone. We are going to have to do it if we want to keep under the luxury tax limit. I've got to believe we need to sign or trade for at least one starting pitcher. 

    It seems like we can replace both Papelbon and Ortiz quite well with internal options, but of course we will probably get a dip in performance from their slots on the team. That move, though, would enable us to supplement the team in areas of more intense need, plus give us the picks which Ortiz and Papelbon probably represent. We don't even know for sure if either would decline arbitration. Sometimes the winter doesn't go as planned. 

    We had no choice but to pick up Scutaro's option since we couldn't afford to replace him. My guess is that Wheeler is gone also. We might end up missing him before we are through. I hope they do bring him back but it's got to be done by tomorrow right, or he is open for bidding by others.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Do you think we can expect resolutions with Tek, Wake, and Ortiz over the next week? Will things just start rolling?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Do you think we can expect resolutions with Tek, Wake, and Ortiz over the next week? Will things just start rolling?
    Posted by BurritoT


    It's almost a sure bet we offer Papi and Paps arb if we don't sign them. It could take a while to come to a decision before the actual arb hearing... if there ever is one.

    If Papi stays VTek is gone. If Papi goes, chances are still great that VTek is gone. We'll get a sandwich pick when another teams signs him.

    Wake is likely gone as well, but ti's hard to know what Ben thinks. If he does bring him back, it won't be for "the record". It will be for a quality 6/7 starter at about $1M with incentives.

    I know you may find it hard to believe, but I won't be upset if both are gone. I am not fans of either, but have merely been defending their records against the negative propaganda, lies, and personal attacks that has gone on for over 3 years now.

    There are many other choices, but not many at their low cost. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Thanks. I just figure with Tek and Wake the FO has known what they will do since September. Ortiz is more complicated and could take some time to work itself out; Ortiz staying can be a good thing and his leaving can be too.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    You are right, bottom line is they ALREADY know what they are going to do with Tek and Wake... there are not options with them, it's either stay or go... you know this.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Thanks. I just figure with Tek and Wake the FO has known what they will do since September. Ortiz is more complicated and could take some time to work itself out; Ortiz staying can be a good thing and his leaving can be too.
    Posted by BurritoT


    Both the Papi and Paps decisions are at the top of the flow chart of decisions. I'm sure they already have several alternative choices mapped out. It should be an interesting winter.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, I want to cry when I think about Masterson.  Actually, sometimes I do cry about him.  Can you tell me if that's one of the reasonable possibilites or not? 

    If it's a choice between Papi and Paps, I think I go with Paps.  I would hate to lose either but I think Papi could lose it at any time and he, though hard to replace, might be easier to replace.  Plus I would like some draft picks.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Getting a draft pick for Wheeler would be nice. Do you guys think he declines arb. It looks like that would make some sense. I had forgotten he was a type b.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Moon, I want to cry when I think about Masterson.  Actually, sometimes I do cry about him.  Can you tell me if that's one of the reasonable possibilites or not?  If it's a choice between Papi and Paps, I think I go with Paps.  I would hate to lose either but I think Papi could lose it at any time and he, though hard to replace, might be easier to replace.  Plus I would like some draft picks.
    Posted by Critter23


    I agree with you about Masterson.  It was a shame to trade him for Victor who didn't remain with the Red Sox for very long.  I also agree with you about Papelbon.  I have already posted this about 20 times or so, but resigning him should be the # 1 priority for the Red Sox.  I believe it would be a big loss for the Red Sox.  They need to add to their pitching depth and he would be difficult to replace. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, I want to cry when I think about Masterson.  Actually, sometimes I do cry about him.  Can you tell me if that's one of the reasonable possibilites or not? 

    I have never cried about Masterson or even worried about the deal afterwards. I was never very high on Masterson like you and others. I thought he'd be nothing more than a good long man. He actually started off badly for a year and a half, but really had a good year this year (3.21 & 1.278 WHIP). His overall totals in CLE are 19-30  3.97 & 1.405. I'd love have him back here now, but I don't see a trade in the works.

    If it's a choice between Papi and Paps, I think I go with Paps.  I would hate to lose either but I think Papi could lose it at any time and he, though hard to replace, might be easier to replace.  Plus I would like some draft picks.

    I think I am leaning this way as well, although I do not want to overpay bigtime for a closer, espeically if it is for 4 years.

    I have a lot of faith in Lava at DH in 2012, and think we can get more out of Youk and AGon by resting them in the DH slot a few games. I hate to see Papi go, but I think a few teams will bid up te price out of range for us when you factor in the comp pick value to the Sox by letting him walk.

    I do think both could walk, and we could get 2-3 relief pitchers and maybe a starter by trade.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

     Boom, as to Papi you talk about a "dip in performance" if he goes.  Yet it may go the other way if we look at the big picture.  Having Youk playing more DH and staying healthier may help us; having a baserunner who can go from 1st to 3rd on a single or score from second, not clog up the bases, etc. may help us too.  Having a two way player may help us in certain situations and against the NL.  And with those two draft picks, think what you might be getting on the farm...I love Papi but I'm for analyzing everything in the offseason and making wise decisions going forward.  I'm a little for getting younger and hungrier too.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, I know you have defended Wake and Tek nobly and effectively.  I believe much of the criticism in the past has been unfair.  And if they both are back next year I will root for them as always.  I am extremely worried about losing Tek's expertise as a game caller.  I defended Tek ardently three years ago when people were calling to dump him.  Having said all that I really hope we can get younger and these might be two places to do it.  I think we need some young blood.  An argument that resonated with me in the last week or two, one poster here said Tek couldn't finish the last two years because of injuries. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Crit, while it's possible that Youk does better than Papi's 2011 season RBI total of 96 as a DH, who's going to replicate Youk's offensive numbers at 3B?

    He had an .833 OPS in an "off year".
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Papelbon has no chance of getting 4 years at market base value of 13 to 14M. Unlreasitic to submit such a possiblity exists.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, I knew you'd call me out.  No doubt, Papi is a tough man to replace,  but I'd go with Aviles and Lowrey at 3rd and Youk at DH until they prove they can't do it.  Maybe then we bring up Middlebrooks.  Let me ask this, I think you are of the school that Youk is going to take a pounding at 3rd unless we do something about it.  It's either DH or trade, right?  He's not playing a full year at 3rd anymore.  I
    think our defense may be better, we don't need as much offense if our pitching is better, and don't we take Papi's money and get pitching?

    Or do you want to just keep Youk at 3rd and go with Lava at DH?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I have mentioned I am fine with Aviles/Lowrie/Middlebrooks at 3B and Youk playing many games at DH, if and only if, we spend the money saved on pitching and a cheap RF platoon guy.

    Also, while I loved the AGon trade and extension, I mentioned at the time the one big negative was forcing a fragile Youk to play a more demanding position as he aged. I hope he can transition to DH. I do think he might prefer to play in the field, and so a trade to a team needing a 1stbaseman could be possible... maybe StL or Milw if they lose their big guns.  Maybe SF or ATl looking to upgrade offense.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    He might be the best fielding (uummm at 1B, not 3B or LF) DH in history
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It looks like Steven has actually seen Youk play LF! There were some here who thought he should be our SS last year!

    I've gotta say, I'm not going with Aviles and Lowry at 3rd. Ain't happening!

    Heh..I'm from Maine like Crit and we use those sorts of words sometimes!

    Cool

    Now I'm from San Diego! AHHHH!

    Cool

    Sorry guys. I heard it's been pretty bad up there lately!

     
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Hopefully Youk can play 3rd next year. I'm not convinced we have another good solution there. I'm not convinced that Middlebrooks will help us at all next year. He has steadily improved over the years. He looks the part. He still doesn't get on base much though. Pitch selection is going to be a problem, just like it has been with Reddick. It may take years to get good value from Middlebrooks, if ever.

    OK. This one is WAY, WAY out there. Middlebrooks almost definitely makes the majors before Cecchini but I think Cecchini will be nipping at his heals before he secures that slot in mlb. Cecchini should move fast. He could probably hit in Salem right now. Needs work on his fielding. That guy is going to hit though. Within 2 years we probably see him as a September call up. He's a stud. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Remember when Theo talked about that bridge. It was intended as the bridge to Kelly, Westmoreland, Rizzo, Iglesias. Every one of those guys would have been knocking on the door in 2012 and we would have benefited from it if things had gone as projected. And Westmoreland was the best of that bunch.
    Ryan, we are still rooting for you dude!

    Now, we might have a similar situation from all those great prospects in A ball or below this year. Cecchini, Bogaerts, Jacobs, Brentz, Ranaudo, Hernandez, Swihart, Barnes, Coyle...etc. We probably have several stars from that group.  

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It looks like Steven has actually seen Youk play LF! There were some here who thought he should be our SS last year!

    I've gotta say, I'm not going with Aviles and Lowry at 3rd. Ain't happening!

    I'd rather not count on that Youk/Aviles/Lowrie/Middlebrooks rotation in 2012 either, but I am convinced we "go light" somewhere, and having 3 guys that can spell Youk at 3B as he DHs seems like one of the top positions to go light at.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Remember when Theo talked about that bridge. It was intended as the bridge to Kelly, Westmoreland, Rizzo, Iglesias. Every one of those guys would have been knocking on the door in 2012 and we would have benefited from it if things had gone as projected. And Westmoreland was the best of that bunch. Ryan, we are still rooting for you dude! Now, we might have a similar situation from all those great prospects in A ball or below this year. Cecchini, Bogaerts, Jacobs, Brentz, Ranaudo, Hernandez, Swihart, Barnes, Coyle...etc. We probably have several stars from that group.  
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom


    I agree boom, but now the "bridge" date is 2013-2014, not 2012.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Inepstein does not know how to construct a bridge. Cubs will find out.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share