Re: Red Sox in Trouble
posted at 4/25/2014 7:29 PM EDT
In response to AL34's comment:
1/3 of the lineup is gone Ellsbury, Saltalamachia's, And Drew. they replaced Ellsbury the best lead off hitter in baseball with Jackie Bradley Junior who cannot hit the baseball, good glove though. They replaced Saltalamachia's with a catcher at the end of his career, and Drew with a shortstop who is an adventure with the glove. The rookies make the major league minimum saving money. Ellsbury was more valuable than Pedroia who still had two years remaining on his contract. This is starting to remind me of the 1997 Marlins when they won the World Series and blew up the team and BTW Henry was the owner of that team.
They still had Bucholtz who has not been the same pitcher and Doubrant who I never know which Doubrant is going to pitch.
They did nothing in the off season but go the cheap route, they passed on McCann and Ellsbury because they were too expensive. They signed Sizemore who I think is going to break down with his history of knee issues. They just low balled Lester on a contract. I am sure the Red Sox players are not stupid and see what's going on with the free agents that left and with the negotiations going on with Lester. If you cannot see that Larry Luchinno is running this team you are naive, Cherrington is just a figurehead and Luchinno was never going to give him the power that Theo had.
I am mad because they made a lot of money up there last year and the product they put on the field is garbage. Are they giving us discounted ticket, parking , and concessions, No. I want to see a competitive team for the prices they charge up there not this product I am currently watching.
I’m all for oversimplifying, but the Marlins comparison is beyond insane.
The 1997 Marlins went on a one season spending spree, won it all, and then traded as many players as possible. Only one Marlin position player was a starter in both 1997 and 1998 (old friend Edgar Renteria). They also had virtually no returning SP and dealt away their closer. Is this REALLY the same as letting 3 free agents sign elsewhere? (OK, technically only 2 of them have signed.) Really? Oh no!! We lost 3 starting players! It was a firesale!!
Reality check. Teams lose 3 starters all the time. Detroit lost 3 starters from last year (Fielder, Infante, Peralta) and gave away one of the most underrated SP in MLB (Doug Fister) for pretty much nothing AND lost their starting LF to injury. AND their only heavy spending was on 39yo Joe Nathan. Other than that, they gave time to two younger players (Castellanos, Smyly) and stopgap solutions (Gonzalez, Romine, Davis). It’s killing them, too. They are only in first place. Are the Tigers cheap?
Fans don’t get it. Spending heavily on aging free agents for long term not only doesn’t guarantee short term success, like it hasn’t in Philadelphia and Anaheim. It DOES guarantee long term struggles. How are the Phillies doing this year? If only we had an ownership team that would duplicate THAT spend-heavy model!
One of the least-discussed matters of the Sox season this year has been the schedule. The Sox have been playing better teams almost exclusively. The combined record of Sox’ opponents this year is 65-45. And they are not exactly building it up against the Sox, since that record is 20 games over .500, while the Sox are 3 games under. Simple math tells you these teams (Baltimore, New York, Texas, Chicago, Milwaukee) are 17 games over .500 against the rest of the league. That is pretty impressive. We all got scared when the Sox were swept by Milwaukee, and feared this team was going nowhere, but really, the Brewers are the best team in MLB right now. They are beating up on a lot of other teams. It must have been that wild spending spree they went on this past off-season, which consisted of Matt Garza and Mark Reynolds.
Conversely, the Yankees have played Boston, Baltimore, Toronto, Houston, Tampa, and the Cubs, basically the AL East and two last place teams. The combined records of those teams is 56-76. The combined records of those teams in non-Yankee games is 47-63. Who has had the tougher road so far? The only team with a winning record the Yankees have played to date is Baltimore, and the Sox have played them over twice as many times.
I know, I know. The old “you have to beat the good teams.” Sure ,at some point. But also bear in mind, even the best teams are going to lose 40% of their games this year. And they aren’t going to have a .600 winning percentage against everyone.
In fact, the only team so far the Sox have losing records against are New York and Milwaukee. And Milwaukee is the surprise of MLB early on, with their insanely hot start. So that leaves all of our fear and loathing over the games against the Yankees. Really, isn’t that what this is all about? That we lost to the Yankees?