A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    We don't know what is being offered. He's probably costing $10 mil or so after arb, which turns off a lot of teams right there. He's coming off a sub par year which involved a major injury. The Redsox might actually get more for him if he does prove healthy at the begining of the year but it does appear that they are just going to keep him and hope for a top pick, or extend him. I have no problem with eaither choice. It may end up that they get neither unfortunately, and I certainly do understand your perspective Moon. If we could get a good return I'd trade him also. 

    Another thing to consider is that my wife hasn't seemed as inclined to watch the games since Papelbon left. I imagine Ellsbury has a lot of appeal with women and girls also. He may just be worth a lot in attendance and TV revenue. Part of the reason they kept Ortiz also. Why not just have let Ortiz go, in following your perspective, and even more clear example? It's not just about winning every year. There are business factors also. How many more tickets do we sell if keeping Ellsbury and Ortiz keeps us in the pennant race an extra month or 2? What if they get us into the playoffs? The FO doesn't want to lose what they have built in terms of fan appeal. That explains a lot in terms of this year's moves.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We don't know what is being offered. He's probably costing $10 mil or so after arb, which turns off a lot of teams right there. He's coming off a sub par year which involved a major injury. The Redsox might actually get more for him if he does prove healthy at the begining of the year but it does appear that they are just going to keep him and hope for a top pick, or extend him. I have no problem with eaither choice. It may end up that they get neither unfortunately, and I certainly do understand your perspective Moon. If we could get a good return I'd trade him also. 

    Another thing to consider is that my wife hasn't seemed as inclined to watch the games since Papelbon left. I imagine Ellsbury has a lot of appeal with women and girls also. He may just be worth a lot in attendance and TV revenue. Part of the reason they kept Ortiz also. Why not just have let Ortiz go, in following your perspective, and even more clear example? It's not just about winning every year. There are business factors also. How many more tickets do we sell if keeping Ellsbury and Ortiz keeps us in the pennant race an extra month or 2? What if they get us into the playoffs? The FO doesn't want to lose what they have built in terms of fan appeal. That explains a lot in terms of this year's moves.

    [/QUOTE]

    I totally understand the reasons why these moves have been made, but I really think Sox fans are smart enough to understand doing some things to build for the future, but that would also have made us better in 2013 than 2012 (not hard to do). In fact, I think the fans would have been more excited had we not signed all these one to 3 year bridge players and had gone out and gotten younger players (B Anderson, Myers, Stanton or Upton) and maybe one 5 year guy (Sanchez or Hamilton). Maybe we'd be slightly worse on paper for 2013 than we are now, but our future would be brighter. 

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    2013 PAYROLL (LUXURY TAX THRESHOLD: $178 MILLION)

    Guaranteed deals

    John Lackey, $16.5 million
    Ryan Dempster, $13.25 million
    David Ortiz, $13 million
    Mike Napoli, $13 million
    Shane Victorino, $13 million
    Stephen Drew, $9.5 million
    Clay Buchholz, $7.4 million
    Dustin Pedroia, $6.80 million
    Jon Lester, $6 million
    Jonny Gomes, $5 million
    Koji Uehara, $4.25 million
    David Ross, $3.1 million
    Jose Iglesias, $2.1 million

    TOTAL GUARANTEED: APPROX $113 MILLION

    Arbitration eligible

    Jacoby Ellsbury
    Jarrod Saltalamacchia
    Andrew Bailey
    Alfredo Aceves
    Craig Breslow
    Andrew Miller
    Daniel Bard
    Franklin Morales

    PROJECTED TOTAL: APPROXIMATELY $30 MILLION-$35 MILLION

    Pre-arbitration eligible

    Junichi Tazawa
    Mark Melancon
    Felix Doubront
    Ryan Kalish
    Daniel Nava
    Will Middlebrooks
    Clayton Mortensen
    Pedro Ciriaco

    PROJECTED TOTAL: APPROXIMATELY $5 MILLION

    Additional expenses

    Benefits, $10.8 million
    40-man roster members, $1.2 million
    Dodgers subsidy, $3.9 million

    APPROXIMATELY $16 MILLION

    ESTIMATED 2013 TOTAL COMMITMENTS: $169 MILLION (AS MEASURED FOR LUXURY TAX PURPOSES) ” APPROXIMATELY $9 MILLION UNDER THE THRESHOLD assuming Naps signs for $13M this year.

    (Sorry lost the credit citation in cut n paste)

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We don't know what is being offered. He's probably costing $10 mil or so after arb, which turns off a lot of teams right there. He's coming off a sub par year which involved a major injury. The Redsox might actually get more for him if he does prove healthy at the begining of the year but it does appear that they are just going to keep him and hope for a top pick, or extend him. I have no problem with eaither choice. It may end up that they get neither unfortunately, and I certainly do understand your perspective Moon. If we could get a good return I'd trade him also. 

    Another thing to consider is that my wife hasn't seemed as inclined to watch the games since Papelbon left. I imagine Ellsbury has a lot of appeal with women and girls also. He may just be worth a lot in attendance and TV revenue. Part of the reason they kept Ortiz also. Why not just have let Ortiz go, in following your perspective, and even more clear example? It's not just about winning every year. There are business factors also. How many more tickets do we sell if keeping Ellsbury and Ortiz keeps us in the pennant race an extra month or 2? What if they get us into the playoffs? The FO doesn't want to lose what they have built in terms of fan appeal. That explains a lot in terms of this year's moves.

    [/QUOTE]

    I totally understand the reasons why these moves have been made, but I really think Sox fans are smart enough to understand doing some things to build for the future, but that would also have made us better in 2013 than 2012 (not hard to do). In fact, I think the fans would have been more excited had we not signed all these one to 3 year bridge players and had gone out and gotten younger players (B Anderson, Myers, Stanton or Upton) and maybe one 5 year guy (Sanchez or Hamilton). Maybe we'd be slightly worse on paper for 2013 than we are now, but our future would be brighter. 

    [/QUOTE]

    How would our future be brighter if we got all these guys and had NOTHING left on the farm? Everyone of these player will HAVE to live up to, or surpass expectations  to be even remotely worth it. 2 are OF'ers with question marks and one pitcher who has pitched 227 innings the last 3 years and has a high of 175IP...Gotta give you one thing Moon, your quite the risk taker...

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We don't know what is being offered. He's probably costing $10 mil or so after arb, which turns off a lot of teams right there. He's coming off a sub par year which involved a major injury. The Redsox might actually get more for him if he does prove healthy at the begining of the year but it does appear that they are just going to keep him and hope for a top pick, or extend him. I have no problem with eaither choice. It may end up that they get neither unfortunately, and I certainly do understand your perspective Moon. If we could get a good return I'd trade him also. 

    Another thing to consider is that my wife hasn't seemed as inclined to watch the games since Papelbon left. I imagine Ellsbury has a lot of appeal with women and girls also. He may just be worth a lot in attendance and TV revenue. Part of the reason they kept Ortiz also. Why not just have let Ortiz go, in following your perspective, and even more clear example? It's not just about winning every year. There are business factors also. How many more tickets do we sell if keeping Ellsbury and Ortiz keeps us in the pennant race an extra month or 2? What if they get us into the playoffs? The FO doesn't want to lose what they have built in terms of fan appeal. That explains a lot in terms of this year's moves.

    [/QUOTE]

    I totally understand the reasons why these moves have been made, but I really think Sox fans are smart enough to understand doing some things to build for the future, but that would also have made us better in 2013 than 2012 (not hard to do). In fact, I think the fans would have been more excited had we not signed all these one to 3 year bridge players and had gone out and gotten younger players (B Anderson, Myers, Stanton or Upton) and maybe one 5 year guy (Sanchez or Hamilton). Maybe we'd be slightly worse on paper for 2013 than we are now, but our future would be brighter. 

    [/QUOTE]

    How would our future be brighter if we got all these guys and had NOTHING left on the farm? Everyone of these player will HAVE to live up to, or surpass expectations  to be even remotely worth it. 2 are OF'ers with question marks and one pitcher who has pitched 227 innings the last 3 years and has a high of 175IP...Gotta give you one thing Moon, your quite the risk taker...

    [/QUOTE]

    I didn't say get "all these guys", I said "Sanchez or Hamilton" and 1 of the trade guys listed (see the word "or"). 

    Also, I was not for signing Sanchez or Hamilton, I only said "I'd rather have one of them than 2 of Victorino/Napoli/Dempster plus Drew. Same cost, but longer term benefit with the 5 year guy.

    Yes, our longterm future would be brighter with Myers or Stanton. Our 3 year future would have been brighter with Upton or Anderson.

    The "risk" taken by Ben was pretty significant. Many want to minimize it by saying nobody is signed for more than 3 years, but 3 years of mediocrity at $13M/yr is very significant, and it will effect future signings and team building efforts.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    The business dictates that we have to keep the fanbase. And that costs money in this instance. I'm not saying all the signings were perfect but a strong case could be made that these signings were worth it for this team, this year. If we went into next year with no Ellsbury and the guys which have been talked about in place of the ones we signed I don't think there is a significant difference long term for us in terms of our future success even in a limited 3-5 year time frame. We have to make sure the business model is still successful in 2 years or we will not have the cash to spend as needed going forward. 

    I think we have probably discussed this enough. I can move on.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The business dictates that we have to keep the fanbase. And that costs money in this instance. I'm not saying all the signings were perfect but a strong case could be made that these signings were worth it for this team, this year. If we went into next year with no Ellsbury and the guys which have been talked about in place of the ones we signed I don't think there is a significant difference long term for us in terms of our future success even in a limited 3-5 year time frame. We have to make sure the business model is still successful in 2 years or we will not have the cash to spend as needed going forward. 

    I think we have probably discussed this enough. I can move on.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think I've covered just about all I can think of on the sunject as well. People here know my views. I'm ready to move on.

    I will watch every pitch of every game again this year, and I'm excited about quite a few of our players. I will also be tracking our prospects moire than I normally do, and looking forward to this year's draft as well. I hope our top prospects don't pull a "Lars" on us, or we'll be sorry we didn't make moves when their stock was high. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hope our top prospects don't pull a "Lars" on us, or we'll be sorry we didn't make moves when their stock was high. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Prospects can go either way, that's for sure.  I was thinking about this when we were going through some of our past big ticket trades.

    Pedro trade - lost nothing of note

    Schilling trade - lost nothing of note

    Beckett trade - lost Hanley and Anibal Sanchez

    AGon trade - lost Rizzo (looked good last year) and Casey Kelly (too soon to say)

    Going further back, we lost most of Schilling's career when we traded for Mike Boddicker  

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hope our top prospects don't pull a "Lars" on us, or we'll be sorry we didn't make moves when their stock was high. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Prospects can go either way, that's for sure.  I was thinking about this when we were going through some of our past big ticket trades.

    Pedro trade - lost nothing of note

    Schilling trade - lost nothing of note

    Beckett trade - lost Hanley and Anibal Sanchez

    AGon trade - lost Rizzo (looked good last year) and Casey Kelly (too soon to say)

    Going further back, we lost most of Schilling's career when we traded for Mike Boddicker  

    [/QUOTE]

    We lost Bagwell for 15 games by Larry Anderson.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I hope our top prospects don't pull a "Lars" on us, or we'll be sorry we didn't make moves when their stock was high. 

     



    Prospects can go either way, that's for sure.  I was thinking about this when we were going through some of our past big ticket trades.

     

    Pedro trade - lost nothing of note

    Schilling trade - lost nothing of note

    Beckett trade - lost Hanley and Anibal Sanchez

    AGon trade - lost Rizzo (looked good last year) and Casey Kelly (too soon to say)

    Going further back, we lost most of Schilling's career when we traded for Mike Boddicker  




    I dont think Casey Kelly is going to be anything special. mid to back of the rotation arm. Now Rizzo? He still has work to do, but I think can be an above average 1b with good numbers and defense.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I hope our top prospects don't pull a "Lars" on us, or we'll be sorry we didn't make moves when their stock was high. 

     



    Prospects can go either way, that's for sure.  I was thinking about this when we were going through some of our past big ticket trades.

     

    Pedro trade - lost nothing of note

    Schilling trade - lost nothing of note

    Beckett trade - lost Hanley and Anibal Sanchez

    AGon trade - lost Rizzo (looked good last year) and Casey Kelly (too soon to say)

    Going further back, we lost most of Schilling's career when we traded for Mike Boddicker  

     




    I dont think Casey Kelly is going to be anything special. mid to back of the rotation arm. Now Rizzo? He still has work to do, but I think can be an above average 1b with good numbers and defense.

     



    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to moonslav59's comment:


    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.




    Yes, you really have to follow these things through the whole string of transactions that follows.  Another example of this was the Arroyo-Wily Mo Pena trade.  Most people aren't going to know that Epstein eventually turned Pena into two draft picks.  (Pena traded for Chris Carter/Carter traded for Billy Wagner/Wagner's free agency brought the two draft picks.)

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     


    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.

     




    Yes, you really have to follow these things through the whole string of transactions that follows.  Another example of this was the Arroyo-Wily Mo Pena trade.  Most people aren't going to know that Epstein eventually turned Pena into two draft picks.  (Pena traded for Chris Carter/Carter traded for Billy Wagner/Wagner's free agency brought the two draft picks.)

     



    Those draft picks turned into Vitek & Ranaudo.

    Here's one for you...

    Many feel the Nomar for cabrera deal won us a ring in 2004 (myself included), but we also ended up getting Ellsbury & Lowrie as comp for losing Cabby to free agency. We then got Melancon for Lowrie and Hanarahan for Melancon (along with other players).

    For those who hated us letting the aged Pedro go: we got Buch as comp.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     


    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.

     




    Yes, you really have to follow these things through the whole string of transactions that follows.  Another example of this was the Arroyo-Wily Mo Pena trade.  Most people aren't going to know that Epstein eventually turned Pena into two draft picks.  (Pena traded for Chris Carter/Carter traded for Billy Wagner/Wagner's free agency brought the two draft picks.)

     




    i forgot about billy wagner!! man i liked that dude

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     


    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.

     




    Yes, you really have to follow these things through the whole string of transactions that follows.  Another example of this was the Arroyo-Wily Mo Pena trade.  Most people aren't going to know that Epstein eventually turned Pena into two draft picks.  (Pena traded for Chris Carter/Carter traded for Billy Wagner/Wagner's free agency brought the two draft picks.)

     

     



    Those draft picks turned into Vitek & Ranaudo.

     

    Here's one for you...

    Many feel the Nomar for cabrera deal won us a ring in 2004 (myself included), but we also ended up getting Ellsbury & Lowrie as comp for losing Cabby to free agency. We then got Melancon for Lowrie and Hanarahan for Melancon (along with other players).

    For those who hated us letting the aged Pedro go: we got Buch as comp.




    deep stuff moon. youd have to have an entire room with red string draped from one side to the other to track this stuff lol

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    And Sparky Lyle netted us Danny Cater, not sure there was any silver lining after that;)

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    (Sorry lost the credit citation in cut n paste)


    It's from Alex Speier at WEEI:

    http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2012/12/13/still-money-to-spend-red-sox-payroll-2013-15/

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to jidgef's comment:

    And Sparky Lyle netted us Danny Cater, not sure there was any silver lining after that;)



    Cater was traded to St. Louis in the offseason after 1974 for one Danny Godby.  Godby never played a game for Boston, nor any other ML team after 1974.  But he did play 124 games for Pawtucket.

    There's a trivia answer not too many people are gonna know. :-)

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    Im pretty sure the Sox arent going 3/39 with Naps anymore...

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.



    One other point on AGon, maybe a bit of a stretch, but if we hadn't made that trade we might have re-signed Beltre.  When Beltre was signed as a free agent we got two picks that we used to take Bradley and Swihart.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.

     



    One other point on AGon, maybe a bit of a stretch, but if we hadn't made that trade we might have re-signed Beltre.  When Beltre was signed as a free agent we got two picks that we used to take Bradley and Swihart.

     



    So many permutations involved here.

    Another alternative to the AGon trade was to re-sign VMart.

    The 2 picks we got for VMart were Barnes and Owens.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I still think the trade helped us. In a sense getting AGon helped us dump CC, Beckett and Punto and brought in 2 of our current top pitching prospects. Sands also helped us get Hanrahan.

     



    One other point on AGon, maybe a bit of a stretch, but if we hadn't made that trade we might have re-signed Beltre.  When Beltre was signed as a free agent we got two picks that we used to take Bradley and Swihart.

     

     



    So many permutations involved here.

     

    Another alternative to the AGon trade was to re-sign VMart.

    The 2 picks we got for VMart were Barnes and Owens.

     



    Yep fan paralysis through analysis. How true. Our grandfathers who followed the team were so much luckier who could enjoy the team and be happy without being obsessed with their Internet ego.  The good old days - just enjoy rooting for the team that the owner dealt you. No bickering, bashing, or petty catfights - just enjoyment. No obsession to blame, scapegoat, or be the King of the hill on a forum. It is way too much serious now.  Enjoy the Sox but don't be obsessed over them.

     



    I don't know about that. I seem to remember long traditions of bashing Sox management, players, and actions on street corners, water coolers, and family gatherings.

    It just seems more serious now that we shed the lovable bumbling personna as perennial losers.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    Something from another thread that might be of interest...

     

    ...they haven't signed any guys that will handcuff their ability to spend money in the future.

     

    The future is now. We are already close to the luxury tax limit. We have Victorino signed until 2015. Certainly his $1`3M/yr is going to effect who we can sign the next 2 winters. Dempster will do the same for one more winter. Naps may or may not depending on the final resolution.

    Sure, when compared to CC, Beckett and AGon's long term commitments, the new ones we made are not as bad looking on the surface due to shorter terms, but they will "handcuff" us for the next year or two. Neither SV or RD are likely to net us a draft pick when their term is up, and neither is so good that they will "block a prospect" (I love this silly one!), but the overall view is that nobody we signed this winter look to significantly help us get over the top in 2014 or 2015. Their best attributes, according to some posters here, are that they will be gone soon and we didn't lose any prospects to get them. 

    Their skill level seems secondary to some here, and the pink glasses used to view our signings are quickly taken off when judging alternative plans put forth by some of us that are not too excited by the overall direction this winter has taken us. For example, Justin Upton has been torn to shreads on this site, while Shane V has been glorified to no end. Posters point to no lost prospects and how we are looking good for 2014 and beyond, but then bash the notion that we could have gotten some nice prospects for players we will be losing anyways after the lost season of 2013: Ellsbury, Salty and Breslow. Holding onto these 3 guys should fly in the face of "the youth movement" and the "great longterm plan", but instead some posters are clinging to the hopes of a 2013 miracle as a reason to not trade these guys, while at the same time blasting anyone with a plan to trade a couple prospects or players who will be walking soon for a player that helps us now and maybe the next 2+ years as well (as in Upton or Myers). I'm just seeing a lot of selective reasoning that flips and flops to match up positively with whatever Ben move was made. If Ben had traded for Upton, the some of the same guys bashing the suggested trades to get him would have been hailing it as brilliant had he made the move 5 weeks ago.

    I realize there are many posters here who will bash Ben for everything he has done, is doing and will do, but there are also several who do exactly the opposite. I am neither. I am giving Ben a chance to prove me wrong, and I hope I am wrong.

    I was so happy after the Dodger trade. Perhaps, I let my hopes get too high, and I don't mean in the sense that I expected to seriously compete this year, in fact, it was quite the opposite. I had hoped for   a total rebuild that would have made us better in 2013 (perhaps only slightly), but would clearly had made us look to get stronger as we neared 2015. That hasn't happened, despite the pleas that not trading any kids has somehow made us stronger. At best, it kept us the same looking forward. The flip side could have been to make 1-2 bold big splash signings and try to at least have a legitimate sliver of hope in 2013, while locking up a player that rates to be helpful in 2015 and 2 more years afterwards, even if on a decline in productivity. I understand the risk, but at least it would have given us a real chance this year, without effecting the future negatively any more than what has been done this winter already.

    Ben has played it half way, and in my opinion he did neither enough to win now or to help us win later. I will say the players he signed could all come together and give me a shock in 2013, or perhaps they could even help more than I project in 2014 and 2015, but I can't help but think we could have done more with all this money we spent. 

    We chose the weakest FA market in memory, the most overpaid FA market in memory to make the most signings in memory. What part of that makes sense. No amount of rationalizing that they are "short term deals" takes away from the stark reality that we spent like never before at the worst time ever. That's the bare bones reality of this winter. Pleasant surprises may occur, and I'll be rooting for them to happen every pitch of every game, but I have to stay true to my beliefs based on realism and facts and my philosphical baseball positions that are largely based on breaking some paradigms, building a strong starting rotation, and having a superb fielding SS as the foundation of building a team that can compete for years and years. All is not lost; our kids can rise up like Lynn & Rice and shock the world. A future trade or signing may tip the balance to the good. A bunch of little things can all come together to creat a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts, but to tell you the truth, I'm tired of wishing on 15 miracles to all happen at once, and trying to minimize the fact that we have not addressed losing Schilling (or Pedro) and Manny, and until we make steps in that direction, we will not be taken seriously by objective baseball people.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    I know you are a Freidrich Nietzsche kind of guy Moon but we need to instill some Soren Keirkegaard into you in the meantime, with a well placed "leap of faith" approach!

    There are no supermen available in this year's FA class. Sorry, couldn't resist! Par of me wishes I could though! Probably not funny huh.

    I read somewhere today that with the Dodgers deal, our luxury tax issue was reset. We didn't hit the luxury tax limit in 2012 so it wouldn't impact us much if we happen to go over it this year. That is good news.

    I also read a few days ago somewhere that our committed contracts for 2015 are less than $60 mil. We have tons of salary flexibility still even as early as 2015. I'm sure there are some arb deals and such which will inevitably increase that but we clearly still have tons of luxury tax flexibility available, including quite a bit even next winter.

    We are $8 mil or so under the luxury tax limit right now. That is not bad.

    The FO is just trying to put a decent product on the field in 2013 and have still saved a lot of powder for a free agent explosion in the next 2 winters. It is maybe just a short term business decision. I agree that probably you and I and some other faithful fans here would probably prefer it if they completely retooled this year by moving guys like Salty and Ellsbury and other one year contracts for prospects or for players with more years of controllability. Overall though, they appear to have made a business decision that the fans might not stay faithful if we went into the tank again in 2013. Guys like SV and the other free agents they signed are just an insurance policy to keep the fan base as secure as possible until the calvalry arrives.

    I think they are probably right. The need to make decisions based not upon the wishes of avid fans. We are going to wath the games anyway. They need to generate new business and retain the fickle masses they have reached in the past few years of success.

     

     

Share