Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

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

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    And just to add a few more successes of Theo's:

    -  extending Ortiz (despite April slumps, he got him to take a home team discount and we got well more than our money's worth)
    -  extending Youk, Pedroia, Lester, Bucholz.  Young, talented players who will be in boston for years to come, at bargain prices.  That is our core, and we have them on our team at FAR under their market values.
    -  STICKING with Pedroia in his rookie season.
    -  the countless number of impact role players Theo has pieced together over the years:  lowrie, mcdonald and bill hall last season, everyone in the 2004 nomar trade, etc.


     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe--1. Show --The--Babe--1's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good..... : He said name something he's done that others couldn't.  It's like saying anyone could've won 6 titles w/ Jordan.  It's a way of putting a winner down but it's unprovable.  Plenty have had $ to spend and not won anything. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPGDfjPjdWg

    Posted by CTJake14[/QUOTE]

    But the fact is that another GM has been able to do it.

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

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    Blah - of course he gets credit - but the days of a great GM on a big market team are gone, if they ever existed at all.

    Getting AGON was nothing short of awesome, but how we got him had NOTHING to do with Theo's abilities.  Rizzo or no, we bought Gonzales.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from the-yazzer. Show the-yazzer's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    THEO is a "back of the baseball card" GM.
    LUGO, CRAWFORD, LACKEY, DREW. prime examples of not improving the team, but being swayed by statistics. the SOX would be better served with THEO out of the loop when signing free agents. heck, give him the job of directing the minor league system.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from WCPatsFan. Show WCPatsFan's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    No he isn't because lets bash Theo and Fancona, after all there were SO many managers and GM's before them that brought is 2 world series victories and kept us competitive.... oh wait were you born in 1918? what were your experiences with coaches and gm's then? ST FU
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    "brought" 2 WSC?  Don't you mean "brought 1 and bought 1"?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from the-yazzer. Show the-yazzer's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    hey burrito,

    the theo chicks are getting quite angry.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from lvanDrago. Show lvanDrago's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]Blah - of course he gets credit - but the days of a great GM on a big market team are gone, if they ever existed at all. Getting AGON was nothing short of awesome, but how we got him had NOTHING to do with Theo's abilities.  Rizzo or no, we bought Gonzales.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Uh, Rizzo was drafted by Theo, in the 6th rd no less. Without a strong farm, as built by Theo, we could have never "bought" Gonzalez.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    WCPatsFan quintessential tool - The 1967-1978 Red Sox would school Theo all day long.

    If you want a true definition of successful Gm look up Dick O'Connell.  
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from lvanDrago. Show lvanDrago's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]"brought" 2 WSC?  Don't you mean "brought 1 and bought 1"?
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    At the end of the day, does it really matter how the WS were won? did you enjoy 1 less than the other because one was "brought" and one was "bought"? Should yankee fans not enjoy their WS rings because they won them in big part due their financial superiority?

    Now you're just being an absolute moron.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]hey burrito, the theo chicks are getting quite angry.
    Posted by the-yazzer[/QUOTE]

    ahhh yes, when a good bash session gets mitigated by alternate perspectives, it is always best to drag out the tried-and-true "Theo Chick" and "Pink Hat" slurs.  Well played Yazzer.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    Yes well played - My mom wheres a pink RS hat... she thought Manny was adorable.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]Yes well played - My mom wheres a pink RS hat... she thought Manny was adorable.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    FWIW, I thought Manny was adorable too.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe--1. Show --The--Babe--1's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good..... : Why do you say this?  There are probably a dozen clubs who would have paid more than we did for Gonzalez, both in talent and dollars.

    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Really? Care to name them??

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

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    Yes but we had Jed Hoyer in the bag - and 11 of the 12 (dozen) clubs you mention never would have written the big check for the contract extension - the sooner we all admit we are copying the Yankees now the sooner we can all be on the same page.

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

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]Blah - of course he gets credit - but the days of a great GM on a big market team are gone, if they ever existed at all. Getting AGON was nothing short of awesome, but how we got him had NOTHING to do with Theo's abilities.  Rizzo or no, we bought Gonzales.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]
     Actually it does have a bit to do with Theo's abilities.  He didn't sign him as a free agent.  If this was the case, sure, its just about the big dollars.  But this was a trade in which the Padres required top-flight prospects to give up Gonzo.  The Sox happened to have top flight prospects.  They happened to have top flight prospects becuase theo has run a very strong player development program.  The club's drafting (which Theo controls) has been shrewd and the farm system is very good at developing young talent.  Rizzo wasn't even the centerpiece.  It was Kelly.  This speaks, not only to their value but to the depth of the Sox system.  this has a lot to do with Theo's abilities.

    But, in any case, it makes no sense to say that the Sox bought him.  If Theo hadn't of gotten the jump, you don't think there would be a handful of clubs lining up to throw the farm and a whole bunch of dollars around come the trade deadline when the Padres would inevitable be unloading him?  Theo got the jump.  And that, more than anything, says this deal had ALOT to do with his abilities.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from lvanDrago. Show lvanDrago's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    Right, because smaller teams have NEVER given out big contracts before. Let’s see.

     
    LoweHeltonC. LeeFielder ZitoV. WellsM. YoungWerth

     
    These are all players given huge contracts by “smaller” teams, and the Brewers even offered Fatso around 5/100 to stay with them and the Rangers offered Lee another similar contract just this past offseason.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe--1. Show --The--Babe--1's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good..... :  Actually it does have a bit to do with Theo's abilities.  He didn't sign him as a free agent.  If this was the case, sure, its just about the big dollars.  But this was a trade in which the Padres required top-flight prospects to give up Gonzo.  The Sox happened to have top flight prospects.  They happened to have top flight prospects becuase theo has run a very strong player development program.  The club's drafting (which Theo controls) has been shrewd and the farm system is very good at developing young talent.  Rizzo wasn't even the centerpiece.  It was Kelly.  This speaks, not only to their value but to the depth of the Sox system.  this has a lot to do with Theo's abilities. But, in any case, it makes no sense to say that the Sox bought him.  If Theo hadn't of gotten the jump, you don't think there would be a handful of clubs lining up to throw the farm and a whole bunch of dollars around come the trade deadline when the Padres would inevitable be unloading him?  Theo got the jump.  And that, more than anything, says this deal had ALOT to do with his abilities.

    Posted by SpacemanEephus[/QUOTE]

    Not really. There aren't many teams that could afford a $150M++ extension and a couple of the few that could were already set at 1st base.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tc25. Show tc25's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]I think the greatest accomplishment during the Theo era has been player development and evaluation.  Look at how much of the team has been developed from within - Youk, Pedroia, Lester, Buch, Papelbon, Lowrie, Ellsbury, Bard.  With very few exceptions, every highly-regarded Sox prospect pans out.  I think it's a really amazing record.  Contrast that with the Yankees, where every player falls miserably short of his expectations. As far as specific trades or signings in recent history, the Gonzalez deal jumps out, obviously, because the Sox paid incredibly little for this caliber of player.  Beyond that, they gambled and won on the extension delay, which allowed them to shore up the bullpen and put together a championship caliber team immediately.  I think we over-paid for Crawford, but this could be something you take a long-term view on - we have redundant skills in the OF now, so maybe the Crawford deal is an indication the Sox have decided to move Ellsbury, or at the very least give Boras less leverage in negotiations. Going back to the 2003 / 2004 years, as Katz points out, Theo pretty much built the team, and did so around a new philosophy of OBP over aggressiveness.  He's the only GM that had Thanksgiving dinner with the Schillings, and I believe he was the first GM in history to claim a player (Millar) off waivers who was headed to Japan. You point to Drew and Lackey as his failures, but the truth is Fangraphs is going to evaluate Drew's worth at just about what the Sox paid for him.  Lackey was worth about 80% of what he was paid last year (again according to FanGraphs) and there is still plenty of time to turn his Sox career around.  Regardless of how it looks in hindsight, Lackey was the best pitcher available in his FA class.  Whatever you think of Fangraphs value system, it's an objective measure we can use to compare to other FA signings - Jeter, A-Rod, Carlos Lee, Beltran, Zambrano, Alfonso Soriano, Bay, Burnett, Vernon Wells, Ryan Howard.  Really, of all the "blank checkbook" GMs, who has a better record than Theo right now? Last thought - I think people give too much credit to organizations like the Royals and Rays.  To their credit, they have very strong farm systems, but they got there by sacrificing many years rather than trying to field competitive teams.  They kept hording the high draft picks until they had enough talent to field a competitive team with spending any money.  They will have a run of a few years or maybe even a decade when they are formidable, but when it's over, their farm systems will be depleted and they will go back into sacrifice mode.  In my mind, it's far more difficult to simultaneously develop MLB-ready talent and field a championship-caliber team, which is what the Sox have done consistently during the Theo era.  
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]
    Theo didn't draft or sign lester or youk
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    I've said it before (*cough* responding to Showalter *cough*) and I'll say it again, you can't fairly criticize a GM who runs a high-revenue team for having an imperfect record with FAs.

    It's a known fact that free agency is an ineffecient way to accumulate talent, but teams that wish to compete EVERY year (which is what high-revenue team owners demand from their GMs) need to sign imperfect players at times to fill holes to ensure they have high playoff chances on an annual basis.

    When the Sox won it all in 2004, do you think Theo really wanted to sign guys like Wells and Renteria? He had a veteran laden, somewhat overpriced team that (thanks to players it was losing to free agency) had a lot of holes and NO minor league talent to speak of. If the Sox were a low or mid revenue franchise, Theo would have bitten the bullet for a couple of years, used value signings to tide the major league team over, and set about rebuilding the minor league system. However, because ownership demanded a shot at a repeat, he signed a number of overpriced veterans (while being smart enough to let his own FAs go...without the draft pick compensation, it would have taken far longer to rebuild the minor league system, as the Yankees have learned the hard way), many of whom proved to not be worth the money. Such is the price of aiming for annual playoff appearances.

    People like to give the Rays credit for "developing" a lot of their "homegrown" players, but keep in mind that a lot of their talent comes from high first round picks that successful teams never had a shot at. Would Boston ever allow the Red Sox to go through 5+ years of last place finishes in order to turn into a completely "homegrown" team? And do you seriously think the Rays deserve credit for "developing" someone like Evan Longoria (a virtual sure thing who would have been successful for any franchise)? The current Ray ownership DOES deserve credit, not for the high draft pick players, but for how well they've filled in the rest of their roster will savvy signings. Signings that the Boston media would have a field day with (calling it things like a "bridge year").

    As for whether Theo deserves credit as a quality GM, to sum up his success with the Nomar trade is the height of stupidity or bias. He took a franchise that had been in "win now" mode for a decade (leaving a shallow minor league system and a major league team of aging players, the worst type of assests for a GM), made the right moves over two years to make it a legitimate championship contender (and winner), and once he gave Boston the championship is yearned for he had the balls to let a number of popular players walk because he knew they would be overpaid and because he needed the draft pick compensation. Within THREE years, the team was full of high upside, cost controlled young players who either filled in the major league roster (Pedroia, Ellsbury, Bard, Buchholz, etc) or were used to acquire key pieces like Josh Beckett, AND that led to another championship!

    Once Theo succeeded in creating a fantastic minor league system, especially considering Boston's lack of top draft picks due to the team's success, he assured that the team was an annual playoff contender (good minor league system + high payroll = flexibility to fill your roster every year and always compete). When it came to signing players like Lackey and Crawford, perhaps Theo got greedy, or perhaps ownership gave him a new task: build an annual CHAMPIONSHIP contender (not just a playoff contender) in the mold of the Yankees...but with at least 25% less payroll. We can't be sure if Theo really wanted to make those moves or not, but keep in mind that the core success of any GM, Yankee GMs aside, comes from their ability to scout, evaluate, and develop minor league talent, and Theo has shown himself to be quite good at that.

    His stature as a strong GM is certain. Is he the best? It depends on the criteria, and chances are he is not. Is he top 5, or even top 10? Given how subjective such a question is, there is no sure answer, but he might not even be ranked there. But he's definitely not a BAD GM, or even a mediocre one...which makes this thread pretty silly.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe--1. Show --The--Babe--1's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good..... : After the 2010 season ... Angels, Cubs, White Sox, Mets, Rangers, Nationals, Dodgers & Orioles. If he had stayed in SD and become a FA in 2012, you could add Rockies, Astros, Cardinals (if Pujols signed elsewhere) & Brewers (if Fielder signed elsewhere)

    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Maybe the cubs, angels or the white sox...but I'm not even sure they had the prospects to get it done.

    As for the "if" part....if a frog had a parachute it wouldn't slap it's azz on the ground every time it hopped.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]THEO is a "back of the baseball card" GM. LUGO, CRAWFORD, LACKEY, DREW. prime examples of not improving the team, but being swayed by statistics. the SOX would be better served with THEO out of the loop when signing free agents. heck, give him the job of directing the minor league system.
    Posted by the-yazzer[/QUOTE]

    Drew is the opposite of a "back of the baseball card" player...he's actually MORE valuable than his card statistics make him appear. Truth be told, he was still a bit overpaid, especially considering that he's more of a secondary offensive force than a top 1 or 2 hitter in a lineup, but he was a FAR fairer signing than people made it out to be...and apparently still think.

    Crawford as well...he's ONLY a premiere player because of what he offers beyond stats. The problem with the Crawford contract (and to a lesser extent, the Drew contract) is not that Theo paid for statistics, but rather than he paid the price for the non-statistical things they offered.

    In order for a signing to be a "value" signing, you have to know you're getting some skills or pluses from a player that will not be included in the player's salary. In Crawford's case, there is little doubt that all his skills have been included in his salary. So, if Crawford does over the next 7 years what he did in the previous 7 years, he will be worth every penny of his big contract. But that also means there's essentially no upside to the contract...he either earns his pay, or he falls short. The "upside" is that the contract breaks even, and the downside is infinite (injury, drop in performance, and so on), so the Sox took on a lot of risk here.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from lvanDrago. Show lvanDrago's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    Man, 571 just pwned Burrito.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good..... : Not really. There aren't many teams that could afford a $150M++ extension and a couple of the few that could were already set at 1st base.
    Posted by --The--Babe--1[/QUOTE]

    OK, teams lining up was overstatement.  There are a few though.  nevertheless, the point stands: if it was just about dough, as Burrito implies, Adrian would still be a Padre at this juncture.  The Sox being able to afford him is a very important given circumstance, but he is a Red Stocking now because of a high profile trade in which the Sox parted with two blue chip prospects.  Being able to make that happen has much to do with Theo's skill.  The "buying" part of it was just a steep ante to get in the game, which of course ownership provided for him.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Your-Echo. Show Your-Echo's posts

    Re: Let us ADMIT it, our GM really is not all that good.....

    Yazzer = Babe
    Both are here to create havoc.
     

Share