A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Amp, I think Valentine has had managerial experience in the majors as well.  I've said I don't think they'll hire him and sometimes he irritates me, but I do think he might be a good choice at this time.  He is sometimes cocky and arrogant which might equate to confident, prepared, and knowledgable.  He reminds me of Dick Williams, Earl Weaver, and Whitey Herzog--showing my age, huh?  I think it might not be all bad if the team plays with the manager's personality.  I think players would hit cut off men, bunt or hit to the right side in certain situations, run the bases correctly--or hit the bench for a little time out.  Anyway, we'll see.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Burrito, Wake seems to be wearing a catcher's mit.  He must be modeling for his catcher how to handle the knuckler.
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]


    I believe so...  I played catch when I was kid once with a 4 finger glove from that era... it was freaky.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Burrito, Wake seems to be wearing a catcher's mit.  He must be modeling for his catcher how to handle the knuckler.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I remember as a kid, say 7 thru 8 years of age, we had one of the larger yards in the neighborhood. It was the only yard where we could have a reasonable baseball game (with a real ball not a tennis ball), or soccer.  The garage provided the first base line and a hit off the side was automatic foul - one through the window was frowned upon by the parents, and the woods covered the entire outfield so one into the trees was a homerun (unless you could catch the ball without leaving the grass).  Center was fairly deep, right the shortest distance to the trees. The 3rd base line had two maple trees... it was okay at that age, really only needed 6 players per team. 

    Of course after the game we would hit the freezer for ice cream sandwiches....

    By the time we were 9 every hit was a homer so we finally moved on up to the schoolyard.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I


    Crit,

    I think Williams and Weaver managed with 'fear'.  I'm not sure about Herzog.  What about Stengel?..*Laugh*.  To me, I think that type of managing is passe, especially with todays breed of player.  Like in an earlier post, I said that I wish we had some old-style, no-nonsense type etc.   I still believe it, but I don't think fear is the answer.

    To me, Joe Madden doesn't project fear, yet he certainly gets the job done.  I sense there is that barrier between him and his players, yet he still manages to 'get close' with his hair dying and pajama parties etc.  So, I guess that type is a that super rare individual. I only wish he were available.

    Perhaps we should be concentrating on the type(character and salary) of player that the GM yearns.  I don't know the info, but I'll bet that lots of slacking came from high priced trades or free agency(I think Lester was contaminated by other sources). For this reason, I agree with Boomer to cultivate and use as much of our own product as possible. 

    I don't know about you guys, but I'd sacrifice a mediocre year for hustle, desire, and good basics.   Besides, what the heck, we've come in 3rd place two years in row anyway.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    We definitely need to work on fundamentals. It's hard to know what type of manager would work best with this team.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

     The new manager will be a recently retired player, someone who has topical experience to the team. Valentine is not that guy. Bobby V may be the disciplinarian the fans crave, but the FO wants a guy that can relate to the players, and the computer. When he gets named, you will be surprised at who it is.
     
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    "Relate to players" is a loaded phrase. There are several ways to "relate" to players. Personally, I think we need a manager that is not so much a "player's manager" who coddles them and is afraid to hurt their feelings, but I also don't want someone who goes to the other extreme. I'd prefer a guy who doesn't strongly adhere to some of the old paradigms in baseball that I have mentioned in the Tito debates, but my guess is, it will be more of the same.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]"Relate to players" is a loaded phrase. There are several ways to "relate" to players. Personally, I think we need a manager that is not so much a "player's manager" who coddles them and is afraid to hurt their feelings, but I also don't want someone who goes to the other extreme. I'd prefer a guy who doesn't strongly adhere to some of the old paradigms in baseball that I have mentioned in the Tito debates, but my guess is, it will be more of the same.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon,
    In the end a good manager in one that get's the most out of his players...To do that it starts with earning the players respect and to be seen as a leader of men.

    Not sure what the old paradigms are you're refering too? Whomever the new manager is will be someone that Henry, Luccino's & Cherington see as a good match and I doubt that they'll somehow reinvent who they are...Whomever the new manager is he'll be a guy that brings many of the same traits as Francona did and in an ideal world that's not an old school guy, but someone that brings the same level of respect for time honored X's and O's but is also adept at and embraces the new aged tools of todays game...

    Though cleary there will be subtle changes with Cherington in place. I don't see them reinventing the wheel...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon,
    In the end a good manager in one that get's the most out of his players...To do that it starts with earning the players respect and to be seen as a leader of men.

    Not sure what the old paradigms are you're refering too? Whomever the new manager is will be someone that Henry, Luccino's & Cherington see as a good match and I doubt that they'll somehow reinvent who they are...Whomever the new manager is he'll be a guy that brings many of the same traits as Francona did and in an ideal world that's not an old school guy, but someone that brings the same level of respect for time honored X's and O's but is also adept at and embraces the new aged tools of todays game...

    Though cleary there will be subtle changes with Cherington in place. I don't see them reinventing the wheel...

    I agree. I don't think management had any serious issues with the way Tito called a game or played his players. I also don't think they disapproved of the way he handled his players, except maybe at the very end. I do see a similar Tito-type as a replacement... a "player's manager".

    As for the pardigms, I don't want to turn this thread into a debate over my differing philosophies, but here's a quick summary:
    1) I thought Tito went overboard with the lefty-righty-lefty line-up thing.
    2) I thought Tito was too rigid in keeping players in their customary batting slots.
    3) I'd never have put DMac in RF. I'd have put VMart at 1B more often and Vtek at catcher when Youk got hurt.

    Don't get me wrong, I liked Tito. I did not have any major issues on how he handled the staff and in-game pitching moves. He was the best manager we had in many many years. I don't pretend to know more than him or Theo or Ben. I just have some views about baseball philosophies that differ from the norm.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Moon, In the end a good manager in one that get's the most out of his players...To do that it starts with earning the players respect and to be seen as a leader of men. Not sure what the old paradigms are you're refering too? Whomever the new manager is will be someone that Henry, Luccino's & Cherington see as a good match and I doubt that they'll somehow reinvent who they are...Whomever the new manager is he'll be a guy that brings many of the same traits as Francona did and in an ideal world that's not an old school guy, but someone that brings the same level of respect for time honored X's and O's but is also adept at and embraces the new aged tools of todays game... Though cleary there will be subtle changes with Cherington in place. I don't see them reinventing the wheel... I agree. I don't think management had any serious issues with the way Tito called a game or played his players. I also don't think they disapproved of the way he handled his players, except maybe at the very end. I do see a similar Tito-type as a replacement... a "player's manager". As for the pardigms, I don't want to turn this thread into a debate over my differing philosophies, but here's a quick summary: 1) I thought Tito went overboard with the lefty-righty-lefty line-up thing. 2) I thought Tito was too rigid in keeping players in their customary batting slots. 3) I'd never have put DMac in RF. I'd have put VMart at 1B more often and Vtek at catcher when Youk got hurt. Don't get me wrong, I liked Tito. I did not have any major issues on how he handled the staff and in-game pitching moves. He was the best manager we had in many many years. I don't pretend to know more than him or Theo or Ben. I just have some views about baseball philosophies that differ from the norm.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I very much enjoy debating the merits of differing phylosophical approaches...In my mind there's really no right or wrong, rather you see it one way and I, in some cases, see it differently. So please feel free to fire away and don't ever feel like you gotta hold back with me.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I very much enjoy debating the merits of differing phylosophical approaches...In my mind there's really no right or wrong, rather you see it one way and I, in some cases, see it differently. So please feel free to fire away and don't ever feel like you gotta hold back with me.

    Maybe you missed it, but I've started threads about each of the issues I summarized above. People tend to think I am bashing Tito or Theo by stating my views, but it's not that at all.

    Basically, I put a lot of weight in constructing the best line-up. I heavily weigh a player's splits vs LHPs and RHPs, and if the sample sizes are large enough, individual splits vs particular pitchers. The whole idea that you need to alternate lefties with righties is geared towards the outside chance that late in a game, for one PA, the opposing manager may bring in a lefty to face 2-3 lefties in a row. To me, sacrificing a better line-up for 3-4 PAs before that possible end game scenario is not worth the trade-off. Just make the best line-up you can each day. If it's a close call between two players, then yes, alternate; otherwise, go with the best.

    This leads to my next issue. Locking players into one line-up slot so they "feel comfortable" is sometimes foolish. For example, Crawford should not even be in the line-up vs most LHPs, but Tito not only kept him in, but didn't ever bat him 9th in front of Jacoby. Guys like AGon and Papi hit RHPs better than lefties, and Youk hits lefties better. I'd have flipped them around in the line-up in certain games. I do not think moving AGon from batting 3rd to 4th then back to 3rd should upset him. I do think some managers take it to an extreme, but I think our manager could be a little more flexible and open-minded. I think Papi should have batted 3rd some games and AGon 4th. Vs. LHPs, I'd have had Youk up 3rd most of the time. I'd also have no issue moving Pedeya round. This whole batting 2nd only thing is way overblown. He has done better batting 4th anyways, and could do well up 3rd or 5th too.

    I value fielding a lot, especially at SS. I have explained my position on how much a great fielding SS can rob the opponents of maybe 80-100 hits over the average MLB SS over a season, and how that off-sets low offensive output, but I'm happy with Scutty being back this year, even if at an inflated cost.

    You know my position on CERA and catcher intangibles. I'd rather not turn this thread into a CERA debate, but I value what a guy like VTek has done for this team more than Tito did. When the game counted, he dropped his in season philosophy and went with the better hitting catcher every time. I'm not blaming our losses on that one move (as harness did), but I do think it was wrong.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I


    Moon,

    You're so right about the L-R thing.  The problem, obviously, that Tito had was his fear of bruising some over-paid and over-stroked egos.

    Like I said earlier, I'm tending more and more for the home-grown talent and let the free agents go anywhere else.....win or lose.

    I just hope the new manager isn't some front-office sycophant.
     
  14. 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:
    [QUOTE]Moon, You're so right about the L-R thing.  The problem, obviously, that Tito had was his fear of bruising some over-paid and over-stroked egos. Like I said earlier, I'm tending more and more for the home-grown talent and let the free agents go anywhere else.....win or lose. I just hope the new manager isn't some front-office sycophant.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    I am not sure it would really bruise AGon's feelings to flip him from 3rd to 4th. It would bruise CC's to bat him 9th, but it should have been done numerous times. 
     
  15. 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:
    [QUOTE]On the Redsox side, iggy might be the most valuable commodity we would be offering in that trade. I don't think Cincy makes that trade either. My point on Iggy is that I don't think it is necessary that he hit over .260 to be a valuable MLB SS. It appears the Sox do. That being said, they should just deal him then, since I do not think he will "get there" before his contract runs out. I don't want to trade him, but if we are not going to give him a chance, then get the most we can for him in trade. I think many other teams still have him rated high and realize the true value of a great fielding SS..
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon, I have to admit that you make a great point here. As much as I hate to see Iglesias go. I and you have both wanted strong fielding SS in Boston for many years but it may be that we can't go through the growing pains only to lose him when he starts producing. I do think there are ways around that though. I'm hoping we come up with a solution which enables him to be with us for a long time. Either an extension or having control of him in some way after this contract ends.
     
  16. 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:
    [QUOTE]We definitely need to work on fundamentals. It's hard to know what type of manager would work best with this team.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I don't think more than 2-3 players on this team can even bunt. We absolutely need more work with fundementals. 

    I've heard that Sverum ( or whatever his name is ) is the front runner. I'm convinced that I don't know enough about these guys to make a good decision regarding the manager. I thought Tito was probably a bad choice originally!
     
  17. 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:
    [QUOTE]Moon, You're so right about the L-R thing.  The problem, obviously, that Tito had was his fear of bruising some over-paid and over-stroked egos. Like I said earlier, I'm tending more and more for the home-grown talent and let the free agents go anywhere else.....win or lose. I just hope the new manager isn't some front-office sycophant.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    Amp...you just lost 2/3 of the forum on the word sycophant! What are you doing man!

    I admit. I had to look it up!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I am not sure it would really bruise AGon's feelings to flip him from 3rd to 4th. It would bruise CC's to bat him 9th, but it should have been done numerous times. 
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    You're right.

    Somehow, I feel that since Cherington played baseball himself at Amherst, he'll be more flexible to these changes if the new manager thinks in that direction.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Amp...you just lost 2/3 of the forum on the word sycophant! What are you doing man! I admit. I had to look it up!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Laugh....not bad for a pharmacy major, huh?  It's a beautiful word for 'brown-noser'.  Actually sycophants exist in any industry.  And, don't ever forget their philosopy "when there's one nose up there, there's always room for one more..regardless of the quantity"
     
  20. 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:
    On the Redsox side, iggy might be the most valuable commodity we would be offering in that trade. I don't think Cincy makes that trade either. My point on Iggy is that I don't think it is necessary that he hit over .260 to be a valuable MLB SS. It appears the Sox do. That being said, they should just deal him then, since I do not think he will "get there" before his contract runs out. I don't want to trade him, but if we are not going to give him a chance, then get the most we can for him in trade. I think many other teams still have him rated high and realize the true value of a great fielding SS..
    Posted by moonslav59


    Moon, I have to admit that you make a great point here. As much as I hate to see Iglesias go. I and you have both wanted strong fielding SS in Boston for many years but it may be that we can't go through the growing pains only to lose him when he starts producing. I do think there are ways around that though. I'm hoping we come up with a solution which enables him to be with us for a long time. Either an extension or having control of him in some way after this contract ends.

    I know it's hard for you to see the benefit in trading one of our top kids. I think it would be hard to extend him with so much unknown. I really don't see how his value to us as an injury to Scutty back-up this year and then MAYBE a chance to start in 2013 as being worth more than what we can get for him in trade right now.

    I'd have loved to see him start this year, but it won't happen, so let's get what we can without giving him away.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Thoughts have been sinking in some for me regarding the DH situation. If Papi does go, which I do admit is way up in the air considering all that he has done, the numbers he put up last year and the fan appeal, I think we should strongly consider adding a strong power hitting OF who could also double as a DH. Especially as a platoon DH. 

    I'd go with Lavarnway but I'd also have a power hitting reserve OF / DH to assist him and maybe give us another option if needed. If we can replace Papi with a reserve OF and also have Lavarnway and others available to slot there it enables us to carry an extra reliever or a guy like Wake for cheap starter depth. I'd vote for the extra reliever but the point is that roster flexibility offers real advantages.
     
  22. 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:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : On the Redsox side, iggy might be the most valuable commodity we would be offering in that trade. I don't think Cincy makes that trade either. My point on Iggy is that I don't think it is necessary that he hit over .260 to be a valuable MLB SS. It appears the Sox do. That being said, they should just deal him then, since I do not think he will "get there" before his contract runs out. I don't want to trade him, but if we are not going to give him a chance, then get the most we can for him in trade. I think many other teams still have him rated high and realize the true value of a great fielding SS.. Posted by moonslav59 Moon, I have to admit that you make a great point here. As much as I hate to see Iglesias go. I and you have both wanted strong fielding SS in Boston for many years but it may be that we can't go through the growing pains only to lose him when he starts producing. I do think there are ways around that though. I'm hoping we come up with a solution which enables him to be with us for a long time. Either an extension or having control of him in some way after this contract ends. I know it's hard for you to see the benefit in trading one of our top kids. I think it would be hard to extend him with so much unknown. I really don't see how his value to us as an injury to Scutty back-up this year and then MAYBE a chance to start in 2013 as being worth more than what we can get for him in trade right now. I'd have loved to see him start this year, but it won't happen, so let's get what we can without giving him away.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I'm not a complete convert yet Moon! I do see the merit of your concept though. I don't think many teams would give Iglesias the starting slot right now. They all are in the same boat to some degree. He did finish the year strong though. We only effectively spent $4.5 mil bringing Scut back so I can see him being a super utility guy / saftey option before year end. I think Lowrie is as good as gone in 2012. He's out of options and I think he is even more likely to be trade bait. Maybe to a team in the bay area for some pitching for example? He is mainly a gap hitter and played at Stanford. It wouldn't be a bad fit for one of those teams even though both are more into defense generally. Lowrie could be a decent 3rd baseman or 2nd baseman though or a valuable back up for any team.  

    I don't know if bringing up Iglesias now is any more risky than it was for Texas to bring up Andrus from AA ball a few years ago. It could even happen early in the year. Again, I think Lowrie is gone. I don't see Aviles as a starter at SS. He's a future infield sub forever to me. I think Iglesias will get more opportunity next year than people think. My biggest worry is can he stay healthy for a full year. So far that hs been a big problem. Scutaro may end up as a super sub before year end.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Thoughts have been sinking in some for me regarding the DH situation. If Papi does go, which I do admit is way up in the air considering all that he has done, the numbers he put up last year and the fan appeal, I think we should strongly consider adding a strong power hitting OF who could also double as a DH. Especially as a platoon DH. 

    I think Ben may go after Beltran or a RH'd slugger (hopefully not at the expense of building up our staff), but I think Lava and Youk could cover DH nicely, and we could get by with Aviles, Lowrie, Middlebrooks and maybe even some Scutty at 3B (Igyy at SS) when Youk DHs.
    I'd go with Lavarnway but I'd also have a power hitting reserve OF / DH to assist him and maybe give us another option if needed. If we can replace Papi with a reserve OF and also have Lavarnway and others available to slot there it enables us to carry an extra reliever or a guy like Wake for cheap starter depth. I'd vote for the extra reliever but the point is that roster flexibility offers real advantages.

    If Lava is going to DH for 100+ games, I'd say a 3rd catcher would work well. We could even go with a guy like Doumit who can play OF, but that would not be my choice.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I


    I think Lavarnway played quite a bit in right field at Yale and also played outfield in high school.  And, he does has a laser arm....  So, he really wouldn't be chopped liver out there.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    RF is tough in Fenway for even the best of the best. He'd be better in LF, but I don't see CC in RF with his noddle arm.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share