A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. 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]

    Wouldn't it be great to see the O's overtake the Yanks and force them to play the wildcard play-in game and use up a quality starter (or is that an oxymoron)?

    [/QUOTE]


    It would be a bright spot in this very dark year for the Sox to see the Yanks lose the division to the O's...

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to Critter23's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Moon et al, does the baseball draft work like the football draft?  For example, if we end up picking 7th in the first round, do we pick 7th in subsequent rounds?  If that is how it goes, then we should be getting higher picks all the way through.

    Where is 5-Katz?

    I am listening to what I think is the basic question under discussion here:  how to handle the next couple of years.  Can we win next year by going minimally into the free agent market,  go for pitchers only, or just go for winning in two years?  It seems this organization is slow at bringing along its young players; maybe it would be best right now to bring up the best young guys and let them go for two years.  That may be what some of you are saying, but would that put us in a better position two years from now rather than bringing in free agents.  I agree with Boom/Prospects, that we are in a building mode.  We may not want to circumvent that healthy process by bringing in too many outsiders--unless as you say Moon, they are young and part of that future.

    Finally, does anyone here think BV will be here next year?  I think we need (for you more mature posters) a "Ralph Houk" type of guy for at least two years and BV is not really that guy.

    [/QUOTE]


    Hey critter...I think BV will be let go within 24hrs of the final pitch of the 2012 season for the Sox. Ok, maybe 48...I think Ben might go after a guy like Brad Ausmus for some reason. Not sure why, just a hunch...Like The Cards did with Matheney(sp?) and the ChiSox did with Ventura...

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    Moon et al, does the baseball draft work like the football draft?  For example, if we end up picking 7th in the first round, do we pick 7th in subsequent rounds?  If that is how it goes, then we should be getting higher picks all the way through.

    Yes, and we may get a sandwich pick if we offer Papi $12.5M and he walks.

    Where is 5-Katz?

    Good question... also expitch and others...

    I am listening to what I think is the basic question under discussion here:  how to handle the next couple of years.  Can we win next year by going minimally into the free agent market,  go for pitchers only, or just go for winning in two years?  It seems this organization is slow at bringing along its young players; maybe it would be best right now to bring up the best young guys and let them go for two years.  That may be what some of you are saying, but would that put us in a better position two years from now rather than bringing in free agents.  I agree with Boom/Prospects, that we are in a building mode.  We may not want to circumvent that healthy process by bringing in too many outsiders--unless as you say Moon, they are young and part of that future.

    I'm fine with going with prospects (or young players with several years of team control), but am just looking towards more quality not quantity.

    Finally, does anyone here think BV will be here next year?  I think we need (for you more mature posters) a "Ralph Houk" type of guy for at least two years and BV is not really that guy.

    Like Jim Leyland?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Hey critter...I think BV will be let go within 24hrs of the final pitch of the 2012 season for the Sox. Ok, maybe 48...I think Ben might go after a guy like Brad Ausmus for some reason. Not sure why, just a hunch...Like The Cards did with Matheney(sp?) and the ChiSox did with Ventura...

    VTek?

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We've freed up a ton of salary while Liverpool has spent a fortune and look like they may be relegated to 2nd division this year. That is unheard of in England and a huge financial disaster if it ends up that way. I'm not convinced our decisions are always separate from those made in England. The world of sports franchises is not so rosy for Henry and company this year. 

    [/QUOTE]


    It's become unusual (for money reasons) but it's not unheard of for big teams to get relegated.  Even if Liverpool haven't recovered to mid-table by January they'll drop £40m into the transfer market which should do it.  I'd be will to bet a lot of money they won't go down to The Championship next season.

    With regard to one team (Sox, Liverpool) being a drain on the other (and Liverpool fans have exactly the same concerns some Sox fans have), I'm not sure how credible a concern that is.  Even if such businesses have operating losses, among amortisation, depreciation, profit transfers to related companies (e.g. NESN), etc. I imagine there is a large positive cash flow.  Liverpool I'd guess less so than the Sox right now but even if that's the case the Sox do not need more money because they are sticking to a budget for player salaries.

    Liverpool is a non-issue for the Sox....some would argue they'd like Mr. John to spend more time on Liverpool and less on the Sox!  ;-)

     

     
  18. 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]

    Moon et al, does the baseball draft work like the football draft?  For example, if we end up picking 7th in the first round, do we pick 7th in subsequent rounds?  If that is how it goes, then we should be getting higher picks all the way through.

    Yes, and we may get a sandwich pick if we offer Papi $12.5M and he walks.

    Where is 5-Katz?

    Good question... also expitch and others...

    I am listening to what I think is the basic question under discussion here:  how to handle the next couple of years.  Can we win next year by going minimally into the free agent market,  go for pitchers only, or just go for winning in two years?  It seems this organization is slow at bringing along its young players; maybe it would be best right now to bring up the best young guys and let them go for two years.  That may be what some of you are saying, but would that put us in a better position two years from now rather than bringing in free agents.  I agree with Boom/Prospects, that we are in a building mode.  We may not want to circumvent that healthy process by bringing in too many outsiders--unless as you say Moon, they are young and part of that future.

    I'm fine with going with prospects (or young players with several years of team control), but am just looking towards more quality not quantity.

    Finally, does anyone here think BV will be here next year?  I think we need (for you more mature posters) a "Ralph Houk" type of guy for at least two years and BV is not really that guy.

    Like Jim Leyland?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Hey critter...I think BV will be let go within 24hrs of the final pitch of the 2012 season for the Sox. Ok, maybe 48...I think Ben might go after a guy like Brad Ausmus for some reason. Not sure why, just a hunch...Like The Cards did with Matheney(sp?) and the ChiSox did with Ventura...

    VTek?

    [/QUOTE]


    Not this year Moon...I would think he is going to explore all his options and see what he likes doing. maybe in a couple years or after the next managers time is up...

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    Hey critter...I think BV will be let go within 24hrs of the final pitch of the 2012 season for the Sox. Ok, maybe 48...I think Ben might go after a guy like Brad Ausmus for some reason. Not sure why, just a hunch...Like The Cards did with Matheney(sp?) and the ChiSox did with Ventura...

    VTek?

    [/QUOTE]


    Not this year Moon...I would think he is going to explore all his options and see what he likes doing. maybe in a couple years or after the next managers time is up...

     

    I agree. I think he'd be a great bench coach and catcher coach this next season, and maybe even our new pitching coach. He certainly knows the opposing hitters well enough.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    'Tek/the players/the club probably needed the 1-year separation from each other, but with the fresh start I think they should use him as extensively as they can for the big club and see if he is willing to manage a winter team somewhere to start developing managerial experience.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    'Tek/the players/the club probably needed the 1-year separation from each other, but with the fresh start I think they should use him as extensively as they can for the big club and see if he is willing to manage a winter team somewhere to start developing managerial experience.

    [/QUOTE]

    The 2013 team will be almost "brand new".

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    'Tek/the players/the club probably needed the 1-year separation from each other, but with the fresh start I think they should use him as extensively as they can for the big club and see if he is willing to manage a winter team somewhere to start developing managerial experience.

    [/QUOTE]

    Tek is a very bright guy.  His future may not be in a uniform, but maybe in a suit. It looks like he'll be getting his feet wet in an office to start. 

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    'Tek/the players/the club probably needed the 1-year separation from each other, but with the fresh start I think they should use him as extensively as they can for the big club and see if he is willing to manage a winter team somewhere to start developing managerial experience.

    [/QUOTE]

    Tek is a very bright guy.  His future may not be in a uniform, but maybe in a suit. It looks like he'll be getting his feet wet in an office to start. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe-maybe not.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I dont see 2-3 years unless they decide to not go out and obtain the players they need. I honestly think they can be competitive next year. Underdogs? for sure. But if we have good health and a good winter, it can be done. 2014 will see more kids coming through while guys like WMB mature more. It really all depends on health and if this ownership is commited to putting a quality product on the field.

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree with yo on that Sothpaw, but there are two caveats.  One if Henry decides to open his wallet this winter and, two, if Cherington is not as inept as I think he is.  My problem is that I feel the GM is very risk averse and really  timid about making big decisions.  I sometimes think he would rather hold onto what he has and hope for the best rather than take a flier on some new blood.  His talk of possibly resigning James Loney stinks to high heaven since the guy can't hit with power, can't hit for average, can't run, can't hit lefthanders and has absolutely no leadership qualities or charisma whatsover.  I live in the LA area and saw this time time and again on the tube.  He is as comatose as he appears.  Also, his belief that Iglesias will hit is so off the mark that even more doubt about Cherington creeps into this.

    Still, if the GM is not as bad as I think he is and goes out and gets the guys we need, like two starters, two relievers, a first baseman with sock, and a solid outfielder we might have a chance next year.  Once you start losing sometimes it is very hard to reverse.

     

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

    Re: A Realistic Look At 2013: Part I

    Fred, you wrote "His talk of possibly resigning James Loney stinks to high heaven".  Two points:

    1)  Can you provide a link to such a statement?; and

    2)  Even if he did, and I hope he is smart enough to have done just that, do you expect Cherington to abuse the guy publically by saying "H3ll no, we don't want him"?  Or would being a bit circumspect and respectful toward one of the 1,000 best baseball players on the planet perhaps make him/the Sox look professional and a desirable boss to other players?

     

     

Share