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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My question in all this is, what is the goal if not to win a chanpionship? You can't depend on prospects that may or may not pan out in the future. Trying to limit signings to 2 or 3 years nets you the kind of players we got, guys who are just not impact players.

    Like I said before, either play the kids now or trade them for some stars who can win a championship. And completely revamp the SP. If anyone thinks the 5 we have now will win 70-75 games, there better be a whole lot run support.

    [/QUOTE]


    Regardless of what you may think or expect, you're not going to win a championship every year. Not even the Yankees can manage that. So given the reality that you're not going to win it all every year you really have two choices. A) try to buy your way into a chance to win it all every year or B) try to have a smart plan in place so that when you have most of the pieces in place it's not a big stretch to get the few pieces you need to put you over the top. Choice A is the one that Theo ended up falling into that we needed the Dodgers to bail us out of last summer. Ben is obviously trying to implement choice B. Whether he's successful in that remains to be seen. But one key element in implementing a strategy like that is to limit the length of contracts you're handing out in free agency. Because the long year contracts are the ones that hamstring you when there are moves to be made. Ben is actually doing almost exactly what I said he should do back in August. Except I would have waited until later in free agency to sign anyone.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    How many stars on the SF Giants?

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    bootlickers are in hysterics....these signings are a joke - when the best thing you can say about the whole lot is that they are only three year deals at most and because of it they had to overpay, you are in sorry territory...

    we needed an ace, and a first basemen with pop...we got a thirtysomething neverwas and a guy who hasnt played a lot of either catcher or firstbase....the other outfielders? they will make JD Drew look like a bargain...Wily Mo Gomes & Victorino for 26 mil combined? why didnt we just sign hamilton or grienke for 25 million and skip on DrewII and the wrong Ross and we have there just about the entire difference......

     

    i know why, because ben is a ball less wonder who fears what could go wrong more than he can committ to what the team truly needs...leadership...

     

    good news is that he's done after 2013

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My question in all this is, what is the goal if not to win a chanpionship? You can't depend on prospects that may or may not pan out in the future. Trying to limit signings to 2 or 3 years nets you the kind of players we got, guys who are just not impact players.

    Like I said before, either play the kids now or trade them for some stars who can win a championship. And completely revamp the SP. If anyone thinks the 5 we have now will win 70-75 games, there better be a whole lot run support.

    [/QUOTE]


    its not depending on prospects. its buying them time. no one will dispute that most of our prospects will not pan out. but we now have a 2-3 year window to allow them the best chance to get all the time and experience needed to suceed and be ready to make an instant impact. something they can/will not do if you started them now. say from our top prospects only MB, XB and at least 1 sleeper prospect who turns into a quality ML player. all will be ready in 3 years when our recent FA aquisitions come off the books. that leaves us a large chunk of money to spend when our new crop comes up. meaning we will have cash flow to fill the holes our prospects were expected to take over.

    for example. many are touting JBJ as our CF'er of the future, he is likely 2 1/2 - 3 years away (i see him as a mid-endseason call up in the 2014 season at the earliest). if he doesn't pan out we will know for sure by the time SV's contract runs out and can use that money to fill the spot JBJ was expected to cover.

    face it, doing nothing and just bringing up the kids will not help us and in fact, hurt us. by wasting our top prospects service time by letting them hone their skills in the majors instead of the minor leagues like every other prospect in a big market system. by the time we are actually ready to contend on a serious level they will be gone or soon-to-be gone. with BCs plan we are buying them time to develop while putting a competitive team on the field and establishing a good culture that will hopefully be enstilled into our upcoming players.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    bootlickers are in hysterics....these signings are a joke - when the best thing you can say about the whole lot is that they are only three year deals at most and because of it they had to overpay, you are in sorry territory...

    we needed an ace, and a first basemen with pop...we got a thirtysomething neverwas and a guy who hasnt played a lot of either catcher or firstbase....the other outfielders? they will make JD Drew look like a bargain...Wily Mo Gomes & Victorino for 26 mil combines? why didnt we just sign hamilton or grienke for 25 million and skip on DrewII and the wrong Ross and we have just about the entire difference......

     

    i kniw why, because ben is a ball less wonder who fears what could go wrong more than he can committ to what the team truly needs...leadership...

     

    good news is that he's done after 2013

    [/QUOTE]


    yes, because a guy with drug addiction who btw has never been known to be a leader AND a pitcher with social anxiety issues would come to boston and provide leadership.. the only thing they would provide is a toilet to flush 150Mil down (more if either one gets injured or underperforms).

    glad your not running the show geo.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    bootlickers are in hysterics....these signings are a joke - when the best thing you can say about the whole lot is that they are only three year deals at most and because of it they had to overpay, you are in sorry territory...

    we needed an ace, and a first basemen with pop...we got a thirtysomething neverwas and a guy who hasnt played a lot of either catcher or firstbase....the other outfielders? they will make JD Drew look like a bargain...Wily Mo Gomes & Victorino for 26 mil combined? why didnt we just sign hamilton or grienke for 25 million and skip on DrewII and the wrong Ross and we have there just about the entire difference......

     i know why, because ben is a ball less wonder who fears what could go wrong more than he can committ to what the team truly needs...leadership...

     good news is that he's done after 2013

    [/QUOTE]

    Why are the signings a joke??? Assuming Napoli deal is completed, isn't this likely everyday lineup in 2013 better than what we ended with in 2012?:

    • Ellsbury - no change
    • Victorino - replaces Kalish
    • Pedroia - no change
    • Ortiz - replaces Lavarnway
    • Napoli - replaces Gomez
    • Middlebrooks - replaces Ciriaco/Aviles
    • Drew - replaces Iggy/Ciricao
    • Gomes/Kalish - replaces C Ross
    • Salty/Ross - no change

    Regarding the SP - so please explain where these ace starters are sitting just waiting for Cherington to sign them?? Signing Greinke to the contract he got was too risky for my liking, and he was really the only ace-type available via free agency.

    The OP cries for more pitching when the rotation is currently 6 deep:

    • Lester -  hopefully will return to 2010 form under Farrell
    • Buccholz - ditto
    • Lackey - was an ace-type in LA when he was healthy
    • Doubront - another year of experience, an was effective in 2012
    • Dempster - Average signing considering the marketplace - at least he has a history of being healthy and pitching close to 200 innings.
    • Morales - An effective 6th starter if someone goes down with an injury.

    Bringing in any other pitchers for major level contracts would result in a roster issue and potential logjam. So unless Marcum, Jackson, Liriano or any of these other FA's want a Aaron Cook type deal, don't expect them to be acquired unless there is a trade brewing...which I doubt is going to happen.

    Considering the 2013 FA marketplace, the acquisitions by BC were about as good as you could do to revamp the line-up to improve from 68 wins.

    The way I look at it...let's give these guys a chance, they will be better than 2012 and just might pull a rabbit out of their hats, if the chemistry gods follow the Sox like they did Baltimore and Oakland in 2012.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Name one transaction......

    Right now I am just hoping they can trade 2-3 relievers + Mauro Gomez for a decent prospect (starters please).  If there's something available, obviously we should be open to trading Doubie + relievers &/or prospects (below #5 ranking) for a better young pitcher.  Seems like it is hard to do quantity for quality trades though.  Wonder what the A's would need as sweeteners for a Doubie/Anderson swap?  Brentz and ...?

     

    Mef - FWIW, JBJ is projected for a Sept. 2013 call up ... 2014 is the "latest" people expect him to debut in MLB.  Similar timeline to Pedroia.  It's a minor point because I agree with everything else you are saying, though.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My question in all this is, what is the goal if not to win a chanpionship? You can't depend on prospects that may or may not pan out in the future. Trying to limit signings to 2 or 3 years nets you the kind of players we got, guys who are just not impact players.

    Like I said before, either play the kids now or trade them for some stars who can win a championship. And completely revamp the SP. If anyone thinks the 5 we have now will win 70-75 games, there better be a whole lot run support.

    [/QUOTE]

    But Ike, the only two presumed "impact players" were high risk, damaged goods that still cost nearly $300m over 5-7 years!  Very bad bets, IMO. 

    You've got it backwards:

    The Sox didn't get impact players because they only offered 1-3 years!  They were only willing to go 1-3 years because no impact players - other than the above referenced damaged goods - were available. 

     

     

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to 111SoxFan111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mef - FWIW, JBJ is projected for a Sept. 2013 call up ... 2014 is the "latest" people expect him to debut in MLB.  Similar timeline to Pedroia.  It's a minor point because I agree with everything else you are saying, though.

    [/QUOTE]

    he has less than 300 ABs in AA and got off to a slow start when making the jump. I don't think he will make it through AA AND AAA in one season (especially if he gets off to a slow start to the season and/or  the jump to AAA). obviously his performance dictates how fast he moves through the ranks but that is just my opinion. September call up? sure, especially if we are very much out of it when that time rolls around. but i don't think he will really stick until late 2014.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 111SoxFan111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mef - FWIW, JBJ is projected for a Sept. 2013 call up ... 2014 is the "latest" people expect him to debut in MLB.  Similar timeline to Pedroia.  It's a minor point because I agree with everything else you are saying, though.

    [/QUOTE]

    he has less than 300 ABs in AA and got off to a slow start when making the jump. I don't think he will make it through AA AND AAA in one season (especially if he gets off to a slow start to the season and/or  the jump to AAA). obviously his performance dictates how fast he moves through the ranks but that is just my opinion. September call up? sure, especially if we are very much out of it when that time rolls around. but i don't think he will really stick until late 2014.

    [/QUOTE]


    It's a bit of a quibble I know, but JBJ was off to quite a hot start at AA and ran into some injury issues which cooled him off a bit. That and it being his first full season of professional baseball, he probably hit a little bit of a wall not very long into his Portland stint.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to carnie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 111SoxFan111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mef - FWIW, JBJ is projected for a Sept. 2013 call up ... 2014 is the "latest" people expect him to debut in MLB.  Similar timeline to Pedroia.  It's a minor point because I agree with everything else you are saying, though.

    [/QUOTE]

    he has less than 300 ABs in AA and got off to a slow start when making the jump. I don't think he will make it through AA AND AAA in one season (especially if he gets off to a slow start to the season and/or  the jump to AAA). obviously his performance dictates how fast he moves through the ranks but that is just my opinion. September call up? sure, especially if we are very much out of it when that time rolls around. but i don't think he will really stick until late 2014.

    [/QUOTE]


    It's a bit of a quibble I know, but JBJ was off to quite a hot start at AA and ran into some injury issues which cooled him off a bit. That and it being his first full season of professional baseball, he probably hit a little bit of a wall not very long into his Portland stint.

    [/QUOTE]


    i didn't follow him game by game but i remember taking a peek at his stats a few weeks in and the numbers weren't too good. I just don't see him keeping his pace throughout the developmental stages which is why i pegged him for a later arrival than most. it is certainly plausible he continues at his breakneck pace and i hope he does. i just don't see it happening IMO

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    bootlickers are in hysterics....these signings are a joke - when the best thing you can say about the whole lot is that they are only three year deals at most and because of it they had to overpay, you are in sorry territory...

    we needed an ace, and a first basemen with pop...we got a thirtysomething neverwas and a guy who hasnt played a lot of either catcher or firstbase....the other outfielders? they will make JD Drew look like a bargain...Wily Mo Gomes & Victorino for 26 mil combines? why didnt we just sign hamilton or grienke for 25 million and skip on DrewII and the wrong Ross and we have just about the entire difference......

     

    i kniw why, because ben is a ball less wonder who fears what could go wrong more than he can committ to what the team truly needs...leadership...

     

    good news is that he's done after 2013

    [/QUOTE]


    yes, because a guy with drug addiction who btw has never been known to be a leader AND a pitcher with social anxiety issues would come to boston and provide leadership.. the only thing they would provide is a toilet to flush 150Mil down (more if either one gets injured or underperforms).

    glad your not running the show geo.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes youre right MEF, thats why both guys went to the largest media center in the planet and were paid a combined 300 million dollars by their teams to play for them....but a team like Boston that won 69 games last year DOESNT NEED THEM....

    i guess being the first and second ranked free agents in all of baseball isnt important to ben or you. is that your logic?

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    bootlickers are in hysterics....these signings are a joke - when the best thing you can say about the whole lot is that they are only three year deals at most and because of it they had to overpay, you are in sorry territory...

    we needed an ace, and a first basemen with pop...we got a thirtysomething neverwas and a guy who hasnt played a lot of either catcher or firstbase....the other outfielders? they will make JD Drew look like a bargain...Wily Mo Gomes & Victorino for 26 mil combines? why didnt we just sign hamilton or grienke for 25 million and skip on DrewII and the wrong Ross and we have just about the entire difference......

     

    i kniw why, because ben is a ball less wonder who fears what could go wrong more than he can committ to what the team truly needs...leadership...

     

    good news is that he's done after 2013

    [/QUOTE]


    yes, because a guy with drug addiction who btw has never been known to be a leader AND a pitcher with social anxiety issues would come to boston and provide leadership.. the only thing they would provide is a toilet to flush 150Mil down (more if either one gets injured or underperforms).

    glad your not running the show geo.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes youre right MEF, thats why both guys went to the largest media center in the planet and were paid a combined 300 million dollars by their teams to play for them....but a team like Boston that won 69 games last year DOESNT NEED THEM....

    i guess being the first and second ranked free agents in all of baseball isnt important to ben or you. is that your logic?

    [/QUOTE]


    So you want to go right out and spend the team into the same mess the Dodgers had to bail them out of. Is that your logic?

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    bootlickers are in hysterics....these signings are a joke - when the best thing you can say about the whole lot is that they are only three year deals at most and because of it they had to overpay, you are in sorry territory...

    we needed an ace, and a first basemen with pop...we got a thirtysomething neverwas and a guy who hasnt played a lot of either catcher or firstbase....the other outfielders? they will make JD Drew look like a bargain...Wily Mo Gomes & Victorino for 26 mil combines? why didnt we just sign hamilton or grienke for 25 million and skip on DrewII and the wrong Ross and we have just about the entire difference......

     

    i kniw why, because ben is a ball less wonder who fears what could go wrong more than he can committ to what the team truly needs...leadership...

     

    good news is that he's done after 2013

    [/QUOTE]


    yes, because a guy with drug addiction who btw has never been known to be a leader AND a pitcher with social anxiety issues would come to boston and provide leadership.. the only thing they would provide is a toilet to flush 150Mil down (more if either one gets injured or underperforms).

    glad your not running the show geo.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes youre right MEF, thats why both guys went to the largest media center in the planet and were paid a combined 300 million dollars by their teams to play for them....but a team like Boston that won 69 games last year DOESNT NEED THEM....

    i guess being the first and second ranked free agents in all of baseball isnt important to ben or you. is that your logic?

    [/QUOTE]


    my logic is learning from your mistakes. taking the best 2 players in a weak FA class and commiting 300 Mil to them is not the solution. throwing money at a problem will not make it go away as we learned the last few years..... its time to move away from that idea and only spend big money like that on guys without such HUGE question marks. the dodgers and angels just got new TV deals and can afford to recklessly spend money like that if they want. if it doesn't work out then its no skin off their nose. they can burn 500Mil and not think twice.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    we needed the best players to upgrade our team and win...we got retreads...what part of that do you dispute?

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    we needed the best players to upgrade our team and win...we got retreads...what part of that do you dispute?

    [/QUOTE]


    I dispute that signing players with huge question marks to lucrative long term deals would have been good for the ball club. Didn't we just go through that? I seem to recall you carrying a pitchfork at the front of the Beckett lynch mob.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    we needed the best players to upgrade our team and win...we got retreads...what part of that do you dispute?

    [/QUOTE]

    AGon and Crawford were 'best players' too.  Is history one of the subjects you teach?

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to carnie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    we needed the best players to upgrade our team and win...we got retreads...what part of that do you dispute?

    [/QUOTE]


    I dispute that signing players with huge question marks to lucrative long term deals would have been good for the ball club. Didn't we just go through that? I seem to recall you carrying a pitchfork at the front of the Beckett lynch mob.

    [/QUOTE]


    exactly. ban is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. if he doesn't sign those guys people like geo and the crybaby brigade bash him for the lack of star power. if he did sign those guys people like geo and the crybaby brigade would bash him for spending all that money we just free'd up from the mega-deal...

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    News Flash; It's begining to look at lot like Christmas...meaning that the roster is still a work in progress and likely will remain in flux until the begining of February...As we stand today we're a better team than the one that finished 2012 season. However we're a long ways from the promise that was the roster entering the 2011 season. A team that was supposed to win 100 games and deliver another championship banner, only to crumble under the weight of expectations. Which culmanated in an historic collaspe that cost Francona his job and it was due to the toxic nature of the clubhouse and the dysfuction that was the team entering the 2012 season. That Cherington was charged with dismantling the worst team money could buy...

    With that as the backdrop and the lessons learned by the organization. We fast forward to today and although the current team lacks "buzz" and in impact hitter or two...What Cherington has done is sign guys that embody the type of character that makes for a winning ball club with the hopes of the new guys coming in and helping to change the culture in the clubhouse. Synergy is a powerful tool when everyone on the team buys into the concept that together they are greater than the sum of the parts. Personally I'm looking forward to the coming year if for no other reason than I don't have to read or be reminded of the drama that was the clubhouse the last three years.

    I say we give Cherington some time and if we don't see marked improvement in the manner in which the team carries itself which should manifest itself with victories on the fiel, then we can hang him in effigy...til then, we may not be the best team on paper and we may struggle to win 80 games in 2013...If we lose becasue we lack talant vs effort while I too will be disapointed I'll give ben his due and look for him to continue to retool the club with 2014 being another year of adding to the mix...Make no mistake about it what this club lacks is a couple of impact middle of the order bats (Manny & Ortiz) and a top of the rotation starter (Clemens- Pedr-Schlling). I know it, Ben knows it and most of you know it...each of them are valuable commodities that once the nucleaus of the team is place can be added to the mix and be the cherry on top...trust me when I say that if players that fit that profile come to market Cherington and the Red Sox will be players in the game.

    First things first...we have clean up was is percieved by most of the top players as a place that is toxic and if given an option will pass...

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to Ben Cheringtom's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ....that Cherington has made since he has been GM, that has actually helped this team get better. The only one that most of you will cite is Cody Ross. If that is the case, why wasn't he re-signed?

    After jettising Becket, Crawford and Agon, everyone assumed he had the payroll to acquire some good young talent to rebuild this team. Instead he goes out and gets a bunch of old guys, only one of which has had a decent career, but age is catching up to him. Not only that, but he way overpaid for these guys.

    He never addressed the real problem which is the SP. There were several FA starters that were far better than Dempster but that is who he wanted all along. This GM is using his crystal ball to assemble a team to put on the field in 2017. He covets prospects like there will never be any more of them, hoping to be able to use them in two or three years. Unfortunately, two or three years never comes.

    [/QUOTE]


     

     

     

    You should be dealt to a Cubs booard.

    [/QUOTE]


    LOL!

    We wouldn't wouldn't get a used equipment bag for him.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    While Ben has made more than his share of head-scratcher moves, I count at least 11 decent to good moves:

     

    1) The Dodger trade was one of the best trades this club has ever made. The fact that he ruined the blank slate later does not take away from the tremendous value that traded added to this team.

    2) The Scutaro for Mortensen trade gave us several years of team control of Mort and gave up 1 year of control for Scoot. Aviles was a better SS than Scoot, and the money saved in the trade allowed us to sign Ross, Shoppach and Padilla.

    3) Cody Ross signing made us better.

    4) Shoppach signing made us better and brought Beato in return.

    5) The Ciriaco signing made us better in 2013 and beyond.

    6) The Pods purchase from the Phillies made us better.

    7) The trade of Pods and Albers for Breslow was a very good trade.

    8) The re-acquiring of Pods later was good.

    9) The signing of Mauro Gomez was good.

    10) The signing of Uehara was good for the team.

    11) Padilla helped us in 2012.

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to carnie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My question in all this is, what is the goal if not to win a chanpionship? You can't depend on prospects that may or may not pan out in the future. Trying to limit signings to 2 or 3 years nets you the kind of players we got, guys who are just not impact players.

    Like I said before, either play the kids now or trade them for some stars who can win a championship. And completely revamp the SP. If anyone thinks the 5 we have now will win 70-75 games, there better be a whole lot run support.

    [/QUOTE]


    Regardless of what you may think or expect, you're not going to win a championship every year. Not even the Yankees can manage that. So given the reality that you're not going to win it all every year you really have two choices. A) try to buy your way into a chance to win it all every year or B) try to have a smart plan in place so that when you have most of the pieces in place it's not a big stretch to get the few pieces you need to put you over the top. Choice A is the one that Theo ended up falling into that we needed the Dodgers to bail us out of last summer. Ben is obviously trying to implement choice B. Whether he's successful in that remains to be seen. But one key element in implementing a strategy like that is to limit the length of contracts you're handing out in free agency. Because the long year contracts are the ones that hamstring you when there are moves to be made. Ben is actually doing almost exactly what I said he should do back in August. Except I would have waited until later in free agency to sign anyone.

    [/QUOTE]


    We managed to trade AGon and CC after 2 years, and got rid of Beckett in the process. How did we get hamstrung? Reegardless of length of contract, there is always a way to move players....some better than others.

    I don't expect to win a championship every year, but I do expect the team to be able to legitimately compete for one. it was a mistake to trade away Gonzalez, IMO, and I really don't think we gave Crawford a real chance to be successful in Boston before we pulled the plug on him.

    Like I said before, I prefer we play the youngsters over this "bridge" idea that hasn't worked well. i wanted Iglesias to start last year but we acquired Aviles instead. So what did Ben do? Got Drew to replace Aviles, just as he got Aviles to replace Scutaro. The SS revolving door needs to stop!

     

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

    Re: Name one transaction......

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My question in all this is, what is the goal if not to win a chanpionship? You can't depend on prospects that may or may not pan out in the future. Trying to limit signings to 2 or 3 years nets you the kind of players we got, guys who are just not impact players.

    Like I said before, either play the kids now or trade them for some stars who can win a championship. And completely revamp the SP. If anyone thinks the 5 we have now will win 70-75 games, there better be a whole lot run support.

    [/QUOTE]

    But Ike, the only two presumed "impact players" were high risk, damaged goods that still cost nearly $300m over 5-7 years!  Very bad bets, IMO. 

    You've got it backwards:

    The Sox didn't get impact players because they only offered 1-3 years!  They were only willing to go 1-3 years because no impact players - other than the above referenced damaged goods - were available. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You are talking strictly FAs. Trades could be made to get the guys that would make a difference. The problem with thast though, is that Ben would have to part with prospects or draft picks, which he refuses to do. To me, that is just ignorant.

     

Share