A total rebuild was the better long-term option

  1. 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 hill55's comment:

    The Red Sox organization gets more and more interesting with each passing year.

    2013 should be no exception.

     



    Most interesting off-season that I can remember.

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

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

    You find disasters interesting, I guess.

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

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

    Victorino is the RF'er until Jacoby gets traded or walks, then he will move to CF (unless Bradley rises quickly).

    As for Victorino being "decent until 2012" vs RHPs, I guess that depends on what you call "decent" vs RHPs (65% of games) and at $13M a year.

    2011: .787

    2010: .681

    2009: .787

    2008: .762

    If he can repeat .787 while still hitting lefties very well, I wouldn't be too upset. Maybe hitting in Fenway will help.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Mid-high 700s OPS for a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"?  Career platoon splits:

    Yaz vs lefties:  .692

    Rice vs righties:  .836

    Papi vs lefties:  .824

    Tris Speaker vs lefty starters:  .777

    Fred Lynn vs lefties:  .710

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We were talking offense. I have already praised our uptick on defense.

    No, mid .700s vs 65% of the leagues pitchers is not decent. If it was vs LHPs (35% of the games), it can sometimes be absorbed.

    [/QUOTE]

    I just gave you 5 offensive, top of the head, random examples of (negative) platoon splits ranging from HOF 1920s CFs, to modern DH clydesdale sluggers but all elite players.  the first and only 5 I checked......the two whose (negative) platoon splits exceeded Vic were DHs or liabilities at the two simplest positions.

    I was talking offense too....obviously failed to make my glove/running reference an add-on.

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

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

    I was wishing for more of a commitment to rebuild.  But we haven't sacrificed our strong farm, still have a lot of payroll flexibility and no Crawford-esq contracts.

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

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

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    I was wishing for more of a commitment to rebuild.  But we haven't sacrificed our strong farm, still have a lot of payroll flexibility and no Crawford-esq contracts.




    Hugh - Me too.  And that's exactly what Ben/the Sox have done.  They obviously signed players that cost no draft picks.....they obviously paid to minimise their long term financial timeline....they obviously traded no prospects for veterans....they obviously have left open key positions (2, 5, 6) for unproven MLB players -  with upside - buttressed by huge budget flexibility to upgrade if/when desired.  And they obviously made no "good investments" (as if!), on middle-to-late aged damaged goods.

    I think you and I are on the same wavelength.  What kills me is the "Ben has no plan" brigade idiocy.....when obviously, Ben has a wildly transparent strategy that only an idiot, a.k.a. a SoBilIkAD, can or will miss.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  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 Softlaw1's comment:

    how highly rated two of them are.....

    There was nothing "highly rated" about Webster and De La Rosa and the other farm scrap. If there was, they would be in the top 2 or 3.

    You applauded the Crawford offer, and have been applauding the "deal of the century". You are irrelevant, even in your rage.



    Webster is rated #95.  DLR was rated #90 before his promotion.

     
  8. 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 Joebreidey's comment:

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:

    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"

     

     



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



    BTW, did I miss your list of 22 year olds ready to take over?



    Still waiting for the list of all the 22 year olds that are ready to take over.

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

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

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    Victorino is the RF'er until Jacoby gets traded or walks, then he will move to CF (unless Bradley rises quickly).

    As for Victorino being "decent until 2012" vs RHPs, I guess that depends on what you call "decent" vs RHPs (65% of games) and at $13M a year.

    2011: .787

    2010: .681

    2009: .787

    2008: .762

    If he can repeat .787 while still hitting lefties very well, I wouldn't be too upset. Maybe hitting in Fenway will help.

     



    Mid-high 700s OPS for a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"?  Career platoon splits:

    Yaz vs lefties:  .692

    Rice vs righties:  .836

    Papi vs lefties:  .824

    Tris Speaker vs lefty starters:  .777

    Fred Lynn vs lefties:  .710

     



    We were talking offense. I have already praised our uptick on defense.

    No, mid .700s vs 65% of the leagues pitchers is not decent. If it was vs LHPs (35% of the games), it can sometimes be absorbed.



I just gave you 5 offensive, top of the head, random examples of (negative) platoon splits ranging from HOF 1920s CFs, to modern DH clydesdale sluggers but all elite players.  the first and only 5 I checked......the two whose (negative) platoon splits exceeded Vic were DHs or liabilities at the two simplest positions.

I was talking offense too....obviously failed to make my glove/running reference an add-on.



Oh, so if some guys like Yaz had bad splits, we have nothing to worry about vs RHPs.

I feel so much better now.

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

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

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    how highly rated two of them are.....

    There was nothing "highly rated" about Webster and De La Rosa and the other farm scrap. If there was, they would be in the top 2 or 3.

    You applauded the Crawford offer, and have been applauding the "deal of the century". You are irrelevant, even in your rage.




    Your lying is so funny:

    • I was never a big fan of Crawford even during his big Tampa years, and certainly didn't want to pay $140m+ for a non-slugging LEFTfielder.  I have never advocated paying big money for leftfielders and first basemen...waste of resources.
    • Webster in all prospect lists is equivalent to your precious JBJ, and both would be below de la Rosa if he hadn't just exceeded the qualification ceiling.  What's your next move, denounce every prospect list as part of a liberal conspiracy?
    • What rage?  I think you're a jerk, but also a clown that amuses me....but no rage, mate.
     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

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

    2009: .787

    2008: .762

    If he can repeat .787 while still hitting lefties very well, I wouldn't be too upset. Maybe hitting in Fenway will help.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Mid-high 700s OPS for a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"?  Career platoon splits:

    Yaz vs lefties:  .692

    Rice vs righties:  .836

    Papi vs lefties:  .824

    Tris Speaker vs lefty starters:  .777

    Fred Lynn vs lefties:  .710

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We were talking offense. I have already praised our uptick on defense.

    No, mid .700s vs 65% of the leagues pitchers is not decent. If it was vs LHPs (35% of the games), it can sometimes be absorbed.

    [/QUOTE]

    I just gave you 5 offensive, top of the head, random examples of (negative) platoon splits ranging from HOF 1920s CFs, to modern DH clydesdale sluggers but all elite players.  the first and only 5 I checked......the two whose (negative) platoon splits exceeded Vic were DHs or liabilities at the two simplest positions.

    I was talking offense too....obviously failed to make my glove/running reference an add-on.

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh, so if some guys like Yaz had bad splits, we have nothing to worry about vs RHPs.

    I feel so much better now.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's surprisingly unfair coming from you.  You criticised my use of the word "decent" when describing Victorino's pre-2012 splits vs RHP.  Not "great", "decent".  I gave you 5 examples off the top of my head of three Sox sluggers - not CF, sluggers - and two Sox CFs all at or near HOF level and their platoon splits to validate "decent" when describing Victorino's career splits vs RHP.

    Put another way, if a mid .700s negative split OPS from a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"....what would be "decent"?  Mid-800s alongside a presumed 1.000 vs lefties?  So that would be Willie Mays that you expect?  That is "decent" in your opinion?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from boborielly224. Show boborielly224's posts

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

    In response to ADG's comment:

    In response to boborielly224's comment:

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

    http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/alex-speier/2012/12/13/caution-flag-napoli-offers-red-sox-early-warni

    It would have taken courage and caused friction with sponsors, fans, and radio/tv networks, and a well run PR sell would've been needed to placate the fans.  Lowering ticket prices a lot would have been a good start as a rebuild would've saved Henry a fortune, but few would've cared if it meant a stronger future with always popular homegrown talent.   A majority of fans , would have accepted the move rather than what we have, a $150M+ mediocre club. 

    Health questions abound.

    As Speier points out, the Napoli physical debacle is an early warning sign of the problem with the 2013 Sox.  Only two palyers played ove 140 games last year and Pedroia was foolish to play hurt.  It would be wonderful if health and form returned but expecting it is foolish.  The new CBA rules have ended the Sox old paradigm and accepting rebuilding cycles is the way forward.

    Age (2012 games played)

    DH: David Ortiz (36, 90)

    C: Jarrod Saltalamacchia (27, 121)

    1B: Mike Napoli* (30, 108)

    2B: Dustin Pedroia (28, 141)

    3B: Will Middlebrooks (23, 99)

    SS: Jose Iglesias (22, 115)

    LF: Jonny Gomes (31, 99)

    CF: Jacoby Ellsbury (28, 82)

    RF: Shane Victorino (31, 154)

    BENCH

    C: David Ross (35, 62)

    UT: Pedro Ciriaco (26, 130)

    OF: Ryan Kalish (24, 69)



    Lets take a quick look at a potential youth/ platoon players batting line up for the Sox:

    Bradley Jr. CF

    Nava LF

    Ciriaco 2B

    Gomez 1B

    Lavarnway DH

    Kalish RF

    Iggy SS

    Boagaert 3B

    Butler C

    other fill Sands, Brentz, Hassan

     

     

     

     

     

     

     


    1. You are missing one big poing. Given that they signed all these guys, there's no room for any of them on the roster.

    2. Please don't include Gomez and Nava. They aren't youthful and they aren't prospects




    I don't see where I typed prospect. But I did mention platoon. I am making comment about rebuild not that this will be the line up, just stating a fact what players the sox have in the system. These players can play,regarding injuries etc.

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

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

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    2009: .787

    2008: .762

    If he can repeat .787 while still hitting lefties very well, I wouldn't be too upset. Maybe hitting in Fenway will help.

     



    Mid-high 700s OPS for a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"?  Career platoon splits:

    Yaz vs lefties:  .692

    Rice vs righties:  .836

    Papi vs lefties:  .824

    Tris Speaker vs lefty starters:  .777

    Fred Lynn vs lefties:  .710

     



    We were talking offense. I have already praised our uptick on defense.

    No, mid .700s vs 65% of the leagues pitchers is not decent. If it was vs LHPs (35% of the games), it can sometimes be absorbed.



  • I just gave you 5 offensive, top of the head, random examples of (negative) platoon splits ranging from HOF 1920s CFs, to modern DH clydesdale sluggers but all elite players.  the first and only 5 I checked......the two whose (negative) platoon splits exceeded Vic were DHs or liabilities at the two simplest positions.

    I was talking offense too....obviously failed to make my glove/running reference an add-on.



    Oh, so if some guys like Yaz had bad splits, we have nothing to worry about vs RHPs.

    I feel so much better now.



    That's surprisingly unfair coming from you.  You criticised my use of the word "decent" when describing Victorino's pre-2012 splits vs RHP.  Not "great", "decent".  I gave you 5 examples off the top of my head of three Sox sluggers - not CF, sluggers - and two Sox CFs all at or near HOF level and their platoon splits to validate "decent" when describing Victorino's career splits vs RHP.

    Put another way, if a mid .700s negative split OPS from a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"....what would be "decent"?  Mid-800s alongside a presumed 1.000 vs lefties?  So that would be Willie Mays that you expect?  That is "decent" in your opinion?



    Sorry, even if you take away the gross overpay out of the equation, Victorino is not a "decent hitter" vs RHPs. That was my point.

    The fact that his poor split is vs RHPs makes it harder to accept, since we fave righties abut 65% of the time.

    I love his fielding. Although his base-running may decline a bit over the term of the contract, it's a nice plus.

    I have said that Victorino will help us get better as compared to last year, but in my opinion, and it is just an opinion, all of our deals should have been with 2014 and beyond in mind. 

    I get the argument that all these shorter deals do just that, but I disagree. These deals take money from a resricted budget both this year and some over the next year or two. They may prevent us from getting a great FA next season or trading for a high-priced player over the next year or more. 

    In general, I had hoped we would have signed younger FAs that have upside potential or look to get better over the next 2-3 years and not decline. I don't feel we did this. Again, I have never pretended to smarter than our GMs, but this is a discussion board, and giving opinions is what we are all here for (except softy, of course).

    As for the HOF'ers with bad splits, that was a different era. When you go back and look at Yaz's splits and the team we had back then, there really was no choice to platoon for him (not that they would have either- lest they bruise his ego). There were no bench players with a consistently better OPS vs LHPs to play instead of Yaz anyway. I went through the same argument with CC (vs LHPs), but at least CC's weakness was exposed in only 35% of the games.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

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

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    I was wishing for more of a commitment to rebuild.  But we haven't sacrificed our strong farm, still have a lot of payroll flexibility and no Crawford-esq contracts.




    Hugh - Me too.  And that's exactly what Ben/the Sox have done.  They obviously signed players that cost no draft picks.....they obviously paid to minimise their long term financial timeline....they obviously traded no prospects for veterans....they obviously have left open key positions (2, 5, 6) for unproven MLB players -  with upside - buttressed by huge budget flexibility to upgrade if/when desired.  And they obviously made no "good investments" (as if!), on middle-to-late aged damaged goods.

    I think you and I are on the same wavelength.  What kills me is the "Ben has no plan" brigade idiocy.....when obviously, Ben has a wildly transparent strategy that only an idiot, a.k.a. a SoBilIkAD, can or will miss.



    I call them the crybaby brigade because if they weren't crying about Ben, I can guarantee they would find something to cry about. Most of them anyway. moonslav and tom-uk are usually very good posters who seem to be unhappy with the moves this offseason. But guys like softlaw, alibiike and ADG have been whining as long as I've seen them posting on this forum.

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

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

    I call them the crybaby brigade because if they weren't crying about Ben, I can guarantee they would find something to cry about. Most of them anyway. moonslav and tom-uk are usually very good posters who seem to be unhappy with the moves this offseason. But guys like softlaw, alibiike and ADG have been whining as long as I've seen them posting on this forum.

    I'm upset. I had great hopes when the slate was wiped clean by the big trade. 

    I see little to hope for in 2013, but I supposed greater miracles have happened before. I'm mostly upset about the fact that I don't see any of these moves helping us in 2014.

    Since I don't know what offers Ben has made, it's hard for me to fault him for not getting the players I liked, but I am not impressed with the players he has signed so far. Naps is a good fit. Victorino will help us. Uehara was my favorite signing, and D Ross will work out OK.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

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

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I call them the crybaby brigade because if they weren't crying about Ben, I can guarantee they would find something to cry about. Most of them anyway. moonslav and tom-uk are usually very good posters who seem to be unhappy with the moves this offseason. But guys like softlaw, alibiike and ADG have been whining as long as I've seen them posting on this forum.

    I'm upset. I had great hopes when the slate was wiped clean by the big trade. 

    I see little to hope for in 2013, but I supposed greater miracles have happened before. I'm mostly upset about the fact that I don't see any of these moves helping us in 2014.

    Since I don't know what offers Ben has made, it's hard for me to fault him for not getting the players I liked, but I am not impressed with the players he has signed so far. Naps is a good fit. Victorino will help us. Uehara was my favorite signing, and D Ross will work out OK.



    I totally get that moon my friend. All I can say about 2013 so far is that the team should be fun to watch. Hopefully Lester can get some of his mojo back and we can at least be in the chase for a good part of the year. Other than that, the Sea Dogs might be very good, and it will be interesting to see how the Pawtucket rotation fares. I personally would rather have seen Linares in the outfield than Gomes, but judging by what I've been reading you, me and jimedfred might be the only ones that think that.

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

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

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I call them the crybaby brigade because if they weren't crying about Ben, I can guarantee they would find something to cry about. Most of them anyway. moonslav and tom-uk are usually very good posters who seem to be unhappy with the moves this offseason. But guys like softlaw, alibiike and ADG have been whining as long as I've seen them posting on this forum.

    I'm upset. I had great hopes when the slate was wiped clean by the big trade. 

    I see little to hope for in 2013, but I supposed greater miracles have happened before. I'm mostly upset about the fact that I don't see any of these moves helping us in 2014.

    Since I don't know what offers Ben has made, it's hard for me to fault him for not getting the players I liked, but I am not impressed with the players he has signed so far. Naps is a good fit. Victorino will help us. Uehara was my favorite signing, and D Ross will work out OK.



    I totally get that moon my friend. All I can say about 2013 so far is that the team should be fun to watch. Hopefully Lester can get some of his mojo back and we can at least be in the chase for a good part of the year. Other than that, the Sea Dogs might be very good, and it will be interesting to see how the Pawtucket rotation fares. I personally would rather have seen Linares in the outfield than Gomes, but judging by what I've been reading you, me and jimedfred might be the only ones that think that.



    I'll be in Maine this summer to catch a Sea Dogs game. I may avoid Boston this year.

    I will be seeing the Sox in Houston though. I look forward to that. I may road trip to dallas again.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

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

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I call them the crybaby brigade because if they weren't crying about Ben, I can guarantee they would find something to cry about. Most of them anyway. moonslav and tom-uk are usually very good posters who seem to be unhappy with the moves this offseason. But guys like softlaw, alibiike and ADG have been whining as long as I've seen them posting on this forum.

    I'm upset. I had great hopes when the slate was wiped clean by the big trade. 

    I see little to hope for in 2013, but I supposed greater miracles have happened before. I'm mostly upset about the fact that I don't see any of these moves helping us in 2014.

    Since I don't know what offers Ben has made, it's hard for me to fault him for not getting the players I liked, but I am not impressed with the players he has signed so far. Naps is a good fit. Victorino will help us. Uehara was my favorite signing, and D Ross will work out OK.



    I totally get that moon my friend. All I can say about 2013 so far is that the team should be fun to watch. Hopefully Lester can get some of his mojo back and we can at least be in the chase for a good part of the year. Other than that, the Sea Dogs might be very good, and it will be interesting to see how the Pawtucket rotation fares. I personally would rather have seen Linares in the outfield than Gomes, but judging by what I've been reading you, me and jimedfred might be the only ones that think that.



    I'll be in Maine this summer to catch a Sea Dogs game. I may avoid Boston this year.

    I will be seeing the Sox in Houston though. I look forward to that. I may road trip to dallas again.




    You and I and southpaw will have to get together in Portland.

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

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


    That's surprisingly unfair coming from you.  You criticised my use of the word "decent" when describing Victorino's pre-2012 splits vs RHP.  Not "great", "decent".  I gave you 5 examples off the top of my head of three Sox sluggers - not CF, sluggers - and two Sox CFs all at or near HOF level and their platoon splits to validate "decent" when describing Victorino's career splits vs RHP.

    Put another way, if a mid .700s negative split OPS from a great fielding, great running CF isn't "decent"....what would be "decent"?  Mid-800s alongside a presumed 1.000 vs lefties?  So that would be Willie Mays that you expect?  That is "decent" in your opinion?

    [/QUOTE]

    Sorry, even if you take away the gross overpay out of the equation, Victorino is not a "decent hitter" vs RHPs. That was my point.

    The fact that his poor split is vs RHPs makes it harder to accept, since we fave righties abut 65% of the time.

    I love his fielding. Although his base-running may decline a bit over the term of the contract, it's a nice plus.

    I have said that Victorino will help us get better as compared to last year, but in my opinion, and it is just an opinion, all of our deals should have been with 2014 and beyond in mind. 

    I get the argument that all these shorter deals do just that, but I disagree. These deals take money from a resricted budget both this year and some over the next year or two. They may prevent us from getting a great FA next season or trading for a high-priced player over the next year or more. 

    In general, I had hoped we would have signed younger FAs that have upside potential or look to get better over the next 2-3 years and not decline. I don't feel we did this. Again, I have never pretended to smarter than our GMs, but this is a discussion board, and giving opinions is what we are all here for (except softy, of course).

    As for the HOF'ers with bad splits, that was a different era. When you go back and look at Yaz's splits and the team we had back then, there really was no choice to platoon for him (not that they would have either- lest they bruise his ego). There were no bench players with a consistently better OPS vs LHPs to play instead of Yaz anyway. I went through the same argument with CC (vs LHPs), but at least CC's weakness was exposed in only 35% of the games.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is much ado about nothing.  I believe a weak OPS split in the mid-.700s from a great fielding and running CF is "decent".  That was the small, initial and only point I made that you are disputing.  You don't agree.  What would a "decent" weak split be in your opinion?  .800?  .900?  The latter is a HOF slam dunk performer, right?  Can you name a few modern CFs with a weak side split in excess of .800?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

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

    There is zero reason in this madness other than they think that by fielding a .480-.520 team they can keep interest. Both Dempster and Drew are 100% unnecessary signing, they block younger players. 

    Napoli's dilemma continues to make my case on him more complete.... what a joke.

    Victorino and Ross are the only ones that make sense and that is only if Elles and Salty are destined to be traded.

    Cherrington continues to prove more and more that Luchino calls the shots or that Ben was very much indeed trained by Theo.

    Loser team (and I am okay with that if we are building for the future) .... I expect ownerships has its head up its azz further than I thought possible.

     

    Like the Orioles fans trying to give McPhail credit for 2012 I have to wonder if Duke was more responsible for 2004 than anyone else FO wise.

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

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

    Cheer up Enchilada, man...personally I think the future of the team is looking a lot better although it might not really look that way until 2014.  If a few of our prospects work out we're going to have some cheap young talent which is crucial...plus we'll have a lot of money in reserve for acquisitions.

    2013 might stink tough...

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

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

    I hope Iglesias gets another year in AAA, and Drew puts up a 5.1 WAR like he did in 2010.  Then the Sox get the pick when he turns down $13.5m one year deal in Nov. 

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from iamme17. Show iamme17's posts

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

    They ended the season in the same boat as the jays both talent wise and salary wise but look at the two teams now.The jays boat looks like a fancy speedboat while the sox boat looks like a dinghy.Fire everybody in the FO including the entire scouting dept.

     
  • 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 Seeger88's comment:

    Cherrington's stategy is obvious. The short signings are bridging the gap until the blue chip prospects are ready. Yes he had to overpay to get the FAs to sign short and has admitted that. I fail to see why he is being criticized  for overpaying when he has admitted to it. It is necessary as part of his overall plan.




    inform us about the blue chip pitchers we have again that are such a sure thing that we have to sign retreads for the next three years????  the only plan ben has is risk aversion....he is a sackless wonder...the good news is that he will be fired before 2014

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share