A total rebuild was the better long-term option

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Damned if they do and damed if they don't.....

    [/QUOTE]


    This is NOT true. 

     

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No not really. 

    I only have one rule.  If you have two players of similar ability and on eof those players is 22 while ethe other is 31; play the 22 year old.

    22 year old players get better and 31 year old players do not. 

    I also think a team should have a plan in the off season - and not just a plan like "let's sign some slobs so the fans think we care.  The fans are dumb and we have plenty of apologists"

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Not unreasonable, but who are the 22 y.o.s that are ready to take over?

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You can't go with an all-youth team, especially in Boston where people have such little patience.  The youth need veterans to lean on and learn from.  An all-youth team could be a disaster.

    [/QUOTE]


    The 1975 team.  Look at the ages on that team sometime and then re-read your post.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So you point is that we should promote 2 HOFers and 2 near-HOFs in a relatively short frame of time.

    Oddly enough, as impractical as that idea is, how many times did we make the playoffs back then?  Once in 18 years?  Is that your grand plan?

    Once in 18 years?

    [/QUOTE]


    1.  The current Sox management would have left those players in the minors and signed scrubs.  Go look at the roster.  Try a google search.

     

    2.  Also, you may want to look into the playoff format back in the "old days" before writiing foolish comments like "how many times did they make the playoffs"

    There were TWO divisions and TWO playoff teams from the AL

    Embarrassing that you didn't know that.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There were 6 teams in the division.  If we picked players at complete random, we'd have made the playoffs 3 times.  Embarrassing that you didn't know that.

    But if once every 18 years works for you, then so be it.

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Damned if they do and damed if they don't.....

    [/QUOTE]


    This is NOT true. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Says the bastion of argumentative consistency. Let me briefly re-hash last year's Reddick argument

     

    SG: Reddick is putting up 25% of the offense for a post-season team.

    notin: No he isn't.

    SG (pots a link about Reddick's % of WAR): Learn to use the Internet

    notin: Umm.. that page is WAR. It includes defense.

    SG: Don't waste my time with that sabermetric stuff!

    notin: ???????? You posted it...


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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No not really. 

    I only have one rule.  If you have two players of similar ability and on eof those players is 22 while ethe other is 31; play the 22 year old.

    22 year old players get better and 31 year old players do not. 

    I also think a team should have a plan in the off season - and not just a plan like "let's sign some slobs so the fans think we care.  The fans are dumb and we have plenty of apologists"

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No not really.

    I only have one rule. If you have two players of similar ability and on eof those players is 22 while ethe other is 31; play the 22 year old.

    22 year old players get better and 31 year old players do not.

    I also think a team should have a plan in the off season - and not just a plan like "let's sign some slobs so the fans think we care. The fans are dumb and we have plenty of apologists"

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Funny story - the Sox agree with that plan more than I do. They are the team jettisoning guys like Crisp, Loretta, Youkilis to lettheir kisd play.

    My thouights are = not every 22yo gets better, not every 31yo falls apart. EVERYTHING is case-by-case and no sweepeing generalities with regards to players.  Although the higher level stuff is prety much all sweeping generalities.)

     

    Oh, and someday, learn to read my stuff more closely.  I have actually spent very little time defending Cherington. I have offered explainations, but explaining is NOT defending, and the only people who think it is are paranoid "with us or against us" types.  

    I actually attack the posts by the whiny ones much more often.  There is a major difference...

    [/QUOTE]

    Broad generalizations are generally insensible.  I'd be the first one to say let Ellsbury walk and let bring up JBJ next year.  But if we did that 100%, we'd have 3-4 decent/good every day players, and a bunch of dreck.

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    Unless JBJ does nothing in 2013...

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No not really. 

    I only have one rule.  If you have two players of similar ability and on eof those players is 22 while ethe other is 31; play the 22 year old.

    22 year old players get better and 31 year old players do not. 

    I also think a team should have a plan in the off season - and not just a plan like "let's sign some slobs so the fans think we care.  The fans are dumb and we have plenty of apologists"

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    BTW, that an interesting position.  How do you feel about what another Schumpeter said-

    I want to keep Ellsbury because he is the best player on the team.

    Not that hard to understand.

    Ellsbury will be 31 in his first season of his next contract, so by your standard, he will not get better.  JBJ, his assumed replacement, will be 23 to start the season in 2014, so he will presumably improve.

    So are you the Schumperter that wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, or are you the Schumperter that wants to go with the younger Bradley?

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In the business of baseball, fielding a team and having a stadium with eminities capable of capturing the casual fan is the name of the game. However ticket sales and concessions merely cover the cost of doing business.

    John Henry and the group that owns the Red Sox Baseball Club of the American League can ill afford to allow the team to wallow in the abiss. In the end it's about the net value of the franchise. Year over Year the real moneys are made through sponsorship of the team, which is driven by the demand for tickets, which is predicated on Fenway being full. Which drives the TV ratings and viewership of the games on the NESN Sports network. All are part of the overall success of the brand, but it starts and ends with the team being competitive on the field and having players that we the fans can identify with and more importantly voluntarily spend of hard earned disposable income on in support of.

    Not sure that any of us were proud of the what the team had become and while the transistion won't be easy, I'm on boardwith what Cherington has done to date and will give him time to remake the club in an image befitting the history of one of sports greatest storied franchises. I trust that all involved want nothing more than for the Boston Red Sox to once again be seen as a ball club that is derserving of our loyalty.

    Here what I want from the 2013 Red Sox...

    >I want ownership commited to giving Cherington & Farrel the resources to field the best club within budgeted guidelines. What ever the number is!

    >I want Cherington to sign players that come to the park everyday and want to see thier name in the lineup!

    >I want the players to show up day one, ready to play hard and leave it on the field.

    I don't think that's too much to ask....

     

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Damned if they do and damed if they don't.....

    [/QUOTE]


    This is NOT true. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Says the bastion of argumentative consistency. Let me briefly re-hash last year's Reddick argument

     

    SG: Reddick is putting up 25% of the offense for a post-season team.

    notin: No he isn't.

    SG (pots a link about Reddick's % of WAR): Learn to use the Internet

    notin: Umm.. that page is WAR. It includes defense.

    SG: Don't waste my time with that sabermetric stuff!

    notin: ???????? You posted it...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What do you mean by argumentative inconsistency.

    He wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, but replace all the aging players with youger players.  Seems pretty consistent to me, assuming you have a fountain of youth.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Damned if they do and damed if they don't.....

    [/QUOTE]


    This is NOT true. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Says the bastion of argumentative consistency. Let me briefly re-hash last year's Reddick argument

     

    SG: Reddick is putting up 25% of the offense for a post-season team.

    notin: No he isn't.

    SG (pots a link about Reddick's % of WAR): Learn to use the Internet

    notin: Umm.. that page is WAR. It includes defense.

    SG: Don't waste my time with that sabermetric stuff!

    notin: ???????? You posted it...

     

    [/QUOTE]


    It is hysterically funny that you are still championing that trade and simultaneously claiming you are not an apologist for the Sox.  Reddick is better than both Gomes and Victorino - and of course you aren't going to admit that because you wear Red Sox underoos and agree with whatever they do.

    We all get it - you think the Sox can do no wrong.

    Okay - now you own the results of your blind allegiance.  own it this season.

     

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    BTW, that an interesting position.  How do you feel about what another Schumpeter said-

    I want to keep Ellsbury because he is the best player on the team.

    Not that hard to understand.

    Ellsbury will be 31 in his first season of his next contract, so by your standard, he will not get better.  JBJ, his assumed replacement, will be 23 to start the season in 2014, so he will presumably improve.

    So are you the Schumperter that wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, or are you the Schumperter that wants to go with the younger Bradley?

    [/QUOTE]


    I worry about you.  Are you drooling oin the keyboard while typing?

    Ellsbury is the best player on the team and performs at a high level - so you keep him.  he is an elite talent player.

    When you have a choice between Gomes and kalish - only a complete idiot thinks Gomes is the better option.  He has proved that he is mediocre for YEARS and will not improve.

    Kalish could at least improve.  reddick certainly did and at 25 is not done inproving.  Gomes and victorino are done - no longer improving and at best you will get lousy (gomes) and mediocre (victorino).

     

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    notin and joey have literally never seen a  sox move they didnt like....its part of their MO....i guess the see/hear/speak no evil applies.....it defies common sense imho...our team was terrible at the end of 2011 and the entire 2012...what we needed was serious help in the rotation...we didnt get it...we needed a big bopper to bring in rbis - is Napoli the man? Im not feeling it (but i do like him/sort of) did we improve enough to reach the postseason? abso not).....

    so we get the "short term contracts" and the "kids are being readied" arguments that basically mean...

    we sukc.....

    but Ghost, if you think those guys are going to own that, dont hold your breath....

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What do you mean by argumentative inconsistency.

    He wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, but replace all the aging players with youger players.  Seems pretty consistent to me, assuming you have a fountain of youth.

    [/QUOTE]


    Again, you simply are too dimwitted to understand a very simple point.

    I said when you have two players of similar ability the rule should be go with the younger guy

    There aren't many players with similar ability to Ellsbury, genius.

    The sox consistently go with the old mediocrity.  Gomes over Kalish.  Great idea.  Waste of money.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    notin and joey have literally never seen a  sox move they didnt like....its part of their MO....i guess the see/hear/speak no evil applies.....it defies common sense imho...our team was terrible at the end of 2011 and the entire 2012...what we needed was serious help in the rotation...we didnt get it...we needed a big bopper to bring in rbis - is Napoli the man? Im not feeling it (but i do like him/sort of) did we improve enough to reach the postseason? abso not).....

    so we get the "short term contracts" and the "kids are being readied" arguments that basically mean...

    we sukc.....

    but Ghost, if you think those guys are going to own that, dont hold your breath....

    [/QUOTE]


    Oh I know.

    The best scenario for these guys is that Napoli and Gomes have great Aprils and then go on the DL.  Then they can claim the plan was awesome if not for "bad luck"

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    Exactly. It's not as romantic as some of these loopy "total tebuild" things but that's clearly what management is trying to do. And to some extend it looks like they have done it. You can quibble with who they signed, sure. And you can quibble with the prices as long as you take into account they overpaid in order to ensure short term deals. 

    The risk comes down to "the kids". If the kids are not very good, then this plan ends up being an extended exercise in mediocrity.....

    [/QUOTE]

    The New York Mets never went for the loopy, "total rebuild"!

    2009   70 - 92

    2010  79 - 83

    2011  77 - 85

    2012  74 - 88

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    Gomes is not going to have a great anything

     

    let me be the first to call him

     

    Willie Mo Gomes

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    notin and joey have literally never seen a  sox move they didnt like....its part of their MO....i guess the see/hear/speak no evil applies.....it defies common sense imho...our team was terrible at the end of 2011 and the entire 2012...what we needed was serious help in the rotation...we didnt get it...we needed a big bopper to bring in rbis - is Napoli the man? Im not feeling it (but i do like him/sort of) did we improve enough to reach the postseason? abso not).....

    so we get the "short term contracts" and the "kids are being readied" arguments that basically mean...

    we sukc.....

    but Ghost, if you think those guys are going to own that, dont hold your breath....

    [/QUOTE]


    Oh I know.

    The best scenario for these guys is that Napoli and Gomes have great Aprils and then go on the DL.  Then they can claim the plan was awesome if not for "bad luck"

    [/QUOTE]

    yes the dreaded "bad luck/injury excuse"  even though i think they used that up til it was dry with beckett in september 2011....

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    notin and joey have literally never seen a  sox move they didnt like....its part of their MO....i guess the see/hear/speak no evil applies.....it defies common sense imho...our team was terrible at the end of 2011 and the entire 2012...what we needed was serious help in the rotation...we didnt get it...we needed a big bopper to bring in rbis - is Napoli the man? Im not feeling it (but i do like him/sort of) did we improve enough to reach the postseason? abso not).....

    so we get the "short term contracts" and the "kids are being readied" arguments that basically mean...

    we sukc.....

    but Ghost, if you think those guys are going to own that, dont hold your breath....

    [/QUOTE]

    I advocated for Victorino since before he was ever discussed.  Unlike you and SG, I am not going to say it is a bad move for no other reason than the RS signed a guy I like.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    i like cody a lot better for lesser money...but where is our pitching help?

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What do you mean by argumentative inconsistency.

    He wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, but replace all the aging players with youger players.  Seems pretty consistent to me, assuming you have a fountain of youth.

    [/QUOTE]


    Again, you simply are too dimwitted to understand a very simple point.

    I said when you have two players of similar ability the rule should be go with the younger guy

    There aren't many players with similar ability to Ellsbury, genius.

    The sox consistently go with the old mediocrity.  Gomes over Kalish.  Great idea.  Waste of money.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So then the inconsistency of your logic is that there is no reason to keep an older that can be replaced by a younger player.

    Unless YOU like the player.

    In that case, it is okay to keep the older players.

    That is an epic failure of inconsistent logic.

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    No doubt, we have spent big $$$$ on several aging & injury prone players, albeit with a bit of pop impact offensively.

    I will hope for the best, & pray that these guys have a second act in them, but I have serious doubts.  This has to be the worst time for these stop-gap signings, as the market is seriously over-inflated, & has consequently led the Sox to significantly overpay for some low second tier players.  I pray that I'm wrong, but I think we're in for some Salty like play.  Guys with a big stick, who strike out at epic paces, & play marginal defense. 

    Obviously pitching is still the big hole, & Dempster gives me little hope of shoring up the SR.  I'm not familiar with his character, so I will hope he is a veteran who can impart a bit of wisdom with our remaining bone-heads.  Lester is my #1 concern.  Can somebody get through to him, & teach him the ins & outs of PITCHING again.  I think having Farrall back could go a long way in this happening????  I still say we need at least one more TOP second tier veteran SP on a two year deal.  I have serious doubts about Dempster.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What do you mean by argumentative inconsistency.

    He wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, but replace all the aging players with youger players.  Seems pretty consistent to me, assuming you have a fountain of youth.

    [/QUOTE]


    Again, you simply are too dimwitted to understand a very simple point.

    I said when you have two players of similar ability the rule should be go with the younger guy

    There aren't many players with similar ability to Ellsbury, genius.

    The sox consistently go with the old mediocrity.  Gomes over Kalish.  Great idea.  Waste of money.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So then the inconsistency of your logic is that there is no reason to keep an older that can be replaced by a younger player.

    Unless YOU like the player.

    In that case, it is okay to keep the older players.

    That is an epic failure of inconsistent logic.

    [/QUOTE]


    The introductory clause is "when you have two players of similar ability"

    It's not that hard to understand - except for simpletons like you. 

     

     

     

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Damned if they do and damed if they don't.....

    [/QUOTE]


    This is NOT true. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Says the bastion of argumentative consistency. Let me briefly re-hash last year's Reddick argument

     

    SG: Reddick is putting up 25% of the offense for a post-season team.

    notin: No he isn't.

    SG (pots a link about Reddick's % of WAR): Learn to use the Internet

    notin: Umm.. that page is WAR. It includes defense.

    SG: Don't waste my time with that sabermetric stuff!

    notin: ???????? You posted it...

     

    [/QUOTE]


    It is hysterically funny that you are still championing that trade and simultaneously claiming you are not an apologist for the Sox.  Reddick is better than both Gomes and Victorino - and of course you aren't going to admit that because you wear Red Sox underoos and agree with whatever they do.

    We all get it - you think the Sox can do no wrong.

    Okay - now you own the results of your blind allegiance.  own it this season.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Again you miss the point.  That post was not about Reddick. Ot wad about you.

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

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What do you mean by argumentative inconsistency.

    He wants to keep the aging Ellsbury, but replace all the aging players with youger players.  Seems pretty consistent to me, assuming you have a fountain of youth.

    [/QUOTE]


    Again, you simply are too dimwitted to understand a very simple point.

    I said when you have two players of similar ability the rule should be go with the younger guy

    There aren't many players with similar ability to Ellsbury, genius.

    The sox consistently go with the old mediocrity.  Gomes over Kalish.  Great idea.  Waste of money.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So then the inconsistency of your logic is that there is no reason to keep an older that can be replaced by a younger player.

    Unless YOU like the player.

    In that case, it is okay to keep the older players.

    That is an epic failure of inconsistent logic.

    [/QUOTE]


    The introductory clause is "when you have two players of similar ability"

    It's not that hard to understand - except for simpletons like you. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Like I said, you want to go with the younger guys.

    Unless you like the older guy.

    I like Ellsbury as much as anyone, but there is very little chance he will out-perform JBJ on a WAR/$ basis.

    I happen to like Kalish as well.  But the idea that Kalish deserves a chance, but JBJ doesn't, is ludicrous.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A total rebuild was the better long-term option

     

    Do any of you think that Cherington will sign Marcum?  At this point, I just want the Red Sox to be competitive in 2013 and move forward towards 2014.  I do not want to see this team get beat up by the AL East teams (and pretty much everyone else except the Twins and Astros) throughout the season.   

     

Share