Rethinking 2013

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to CTChris's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Lackey is a tough call JB. I don't have any insight into his specific situation, but I can share what my expectations of him are.

    To the best of my knowledge, most pitchers coming off TJ surgery go thru....let's call it an adjustment period before things begin to click for them on a consistent basis.

    Therefore, I don't expect we'll see the best Lackey has to offer in April. My guess would be that we'll see what he has to offer by late June or sometime into July.

    Regarding his ERA, who knows? That's a real stab in the dark, but if you want a guess (which is all this can be), I'll go with an ERA of 4.30 - 4.40 on the season with his 2nd half numbers being better than that.....let's say in the high 3's. 3.80-3.90.

    But as always, a pitchers ERA isn't a direct reflection on how they soley performed. There are other variables involved that go on behind him in the field that influence those numbers. However, I'm guessing your trying to keep it simple with the folks your talking to so, I'll stick with the above ERA predictions just for giggles.

    [/QUOTE]

    CT,

    I think you're analysis and projections for Lackey is close to what I believe he and the Red Sox see as well. While 3.8 might be on the low end, given that he'll pitch half of his games in Fenway, if healthy one needs only to look at John Lackey's resume and see that he's certainly capable of posting those numbers...

    The key for him is his ability to throw the slider again. Which was his outpitch in Anahiem against righties with late life downward tilt in combination with the two seamer and change. It was that combination that made him tough and he also would mix in a 12-6 breaking ball that froze hitters too...

    One thing that I can say with conviction is the guy knows how to pitch and those that doubt his desire to take the ball every fives days and compete don't understand what drives of athletes.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    moon,

    I believe that Ben made most of his acquisitions this off-season with 2014-2015 in mind.  What he did was leave roster and financial flexibility for those two years (especially 2015) to fit in new players.  Some will come from the the Sox farm system (Barnes, Owens, De LaRosa, Webster, perhaps Light, and Bogaerts, Bradley, perhaps Cecchini, Brentz or Marrero).  Some will come from future trades and FA signings.  To ask him to signand trade now for 2015 means hoping that what he does today works out two years down the line.  (The Sox have not had much luck with that kind of prognostication in recent years.)  And in order to do that he would have had to forfeit some of the available chips that will make his decisions in 2014 and 2015 easier.  Meanwhile he would not have been able to field as competitive a team for 2013.

    Yes.  Ben has gone half way.  Not all in for 2013 and not all in on a total rebuild.  But I actually like his approach to the future better than trying to go all in on a total rebuild and hoping he is right about which prospects will and which will not pan out--very risky business that if he is wrong about means he has to blow it up and start over again in two or three years time.  At least this way, the 2013 team will be more fun to watch, and the anticipation for what the future holds provides all of us here plenty to argue over.  

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    Yes.  Ben has gone half way.  Not all in for 2013 and not all in on a total rebuild.  But I actually like his approach to the future better than trying to go all in on a total rebuild and hoping he is right about which prospects will and which will not pan out--very risky business that if he is wrong about means he has to blow it up and start over again in two or three years time...

    Yes, it is all risky business, but I see nothing doen this winter that adresses our future other than these guys will be gone before long.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    which allows farm players to move up on cue and financial and roster flexibility to add veterans as needed.  Precisely the situation Ben did NOT have last season because of the signings of true impact players that Theo made in 2009 and 2010 with the hopes the Sox would compete in 2011, 2012 and beyond.  How did that work out?

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    I totally understand what Ben did and why. It was still the wrong plan. We are not going to win in 2013, and we are not positioned any better in 2014 and beyond. Just because some of the guys we signed will be gone by 2014 and 2015 allowing us to sign someone else, doesn't change much. It just pushes back the choice to maybe a better FA class next winter.

    It depends one's definition of winning, as comprised before and after the trade of Beckett, Gonzalez and Crawford the nucleus of the team was not of championship mettle...Thus adding to that core would have yielded the same less than results...Also what I've yet to see you speak to is the need to field a team that also keeps the fan base engaged and the TV audience tuned in...The Sox given their resources don't need to blow up the team and start over like they do in smaller markets.

    We already "blew up" the team and had a near clean slate going into one of the worst FA winter classes in memory. Yes, we need to keep the fans happy, but under these circumstances, I really find it hard to believe so many here think that Ben's "halfway" plan was the best or near best we could do.

    I know several posters here do not like J Upton, but he'd bring more fan excitement to the 2013 team than Victorino. The cost of prospects would have been partially offset by trading free-agents-to-be for lesser prospects. Signing Sanchez would have been a risk, but having him for 5 years would almost certainly be better for this team in 2014, 2015 and beyond than the $80+M spent on combinations of Naps, Victorino, Dempster and Drew. Yes, 5 years is a long contract if Sanchez gets hurt or decline, and I trust he passed the Tiger physical to be signed for that much. Most pitchers have had arm trouble at some point intheir career, but Sanchez is only 28, has low mileage, and has pitched over 195 IP for 3 straight years. That's pretty secure as risk assessment can be.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    Show me your projected rotation that delivers to this level in 2015 and I'll be more than glad to send your resume to John Henry...

    2014

    1) A Sanchez

    2) B Anderson

    3) Lester

    4) Buch

    5) Lackey

    6) 1 from Doubront, Morales, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Mortensen (some may be gone in Anderson trade)

     

    2015 (assuming Lester bolts as a FA)

    1) Sanchez

    2) Anderson

    3) Buch

    4) Lackey

    5-6) (Morales gone as FA) 2 from Doubront, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Barnes, Owens, Britton, Mortensen or others.

    I'll be waiting for a call from Henry's office soon.

     

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    Defense; far too often an overlooked aspect in terms of the sucess of a team..."strength up the middle" includes the pitching staff but refers to the defensive ablity of the catcher, 2B, SS & CF.

    We have question marks at all but one of these positions with Pedrioa the only "long term" 2015 guy on the current roster...show me whom you see as our everyday guys in 2015 and if Lavarnway is part of that group then I'd say we'd still need to find a catcher...sorry but I'm not bulish in him...

    For two years I have been saying Iggy should start at SS, and if we weren't going to play him we should just trade him. SS defense is so important and often neglected by the Sox.

    I like the D Ross signing and think Salty should be extended or traded this winter. Lava has a long way to go to be a legitimate ML catcher. I see him more as a possible DH, but now Papi, if healthy, will be blocking him for 2 years. I'm fine with trading Lava (but not both Lava and Salty) and looking to Swihart as our future catcher.

    Victorino should help improve our defense, but Gomes, Drew, and whoever we have at 1B are not likely to help in this area.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    Timely Hitting; What made Manny, Manny (aside from his antics), was that he hit good pitching. When teams are building thier rosters the goal is to do so with players that are complimentary and excell hitting in certain spots of the lineup...In an ideal world you'd have a line-up with 6 guys capaple of hitting .280 with 20 homers with a couple of proven run producers in the middle of the lineup that "hit good pitching"...Typically the positions where that level of production is the expected norm. Are the corner outfielders and the corner infielders (In the AL the DH)...What separates the deeper lineups are teams where they get that level of production from one or more of the strength up the middle group (CF, SS, 2B and Catcher)...

    Today as comprised given the players on the current market place that don't require us to find a willing "trade partner". The Red Sox have only 1 proven core element of the above "under the teams control" locked up to any length and that's Pedrioa. Middlebrooks shows promise, but has yet to prove that he's capable of playing at a high level for an entire season. As we're retooling this team none of our current players nor were any of the free agents on the market (aside from Hamilton) that profile as legit middle of the order threats. We need two...no disrespect but Papi's not that guy anymore and hasn't been since 2007.

    As with our pitching staff I'd love to see your 2015 lineup that factors in the above and delivers a championship level team.

    Timely hitting is not something easily identified and acquired. It is also a "skill" that is not sustainable. It is largely luck and circumstance. 

    A line-up with J Upton in the peak of his prime in 2015 would be better than what we are looking at right now.

    I'd have liked to see us get Myers. Stanton would be a goldmine, but would likely cost 2 gold mines to get.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    4) Bench & Depth

    Always plays a role in helping teams to navigate the long marathon of a season and should be manned with players that both accept the role and are complimentary to the starters..

    Our bench and in-season pick up players did very well last year. With the depth of our farm right now, I am not worried about our bench by 2015.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to parhunter55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    which allows farm players to move up on cue and financial and roster flexibility to add veterans as needed.  Precisely the situation Ben did NOT have last season because of the signings of true impact players that Theo made in 2009 and 2010 with the hopes the Sox would compete in 2011, 2012 and beyond.  How did that work out?

    [/QUOTE]

    I was not for the CC signing. 

    How did it work out? Poorly, but I was gushing with praise for Ben after the Dodger trade. I called it "perhaps the best deal this team has ever made." I am not always critical, in fact, I was in a minority defending Ben last year.

    Yes, Ben had roster flexibility this winter, and for the most part, he kept that intact going forward by not signing anyone to more than 3 years or more than $13M a year. In theory, I can see how this could be applauded, but looking at the full picture that includes these top priorities (not in order of importance) we missed the boat...

    1) Be highly competitive by 2014 or 2015.

    2) Improve for 2013 and bring excitement to the fan base (keep viewership).

    3) Avoid 6+ year contracts or 5+ year contracts for players who are over age 29 or 30 (4+ year contracts for players over 30 or 31).

    4) Improve our starting rotation.

    5) Obtain a solid 3/4 hitter, hopefully in his prime and under team control to 2015 or beyond.

     

    We may have met #2 to some extent.

    We met #3.

    We missed #1, #4, and #5.

    We spent millions and millions and missed #4 and #5, both for the now & the future. (BTW, Naps is, at best, a 5 slot hitter vs LHPs and 6 slot vs RHPs)

     

     

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Show me your projected rotation that delivers to this level in 2015 and I'll be more than glad to send your resume to John Henry...

    2014

    1) A Sanchez

    2) B Anderson

    3) Lester

    4) Buch

    5) Lackey

    6) 1 from Doubront, Morales, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Mortensen (some may be gone in Anderson trade)

     

    2015 (assuming Lester bolts as a FA)

    1) Sanchez

    2) Anderson

    3) Buch

    4) Lackey

    5-6) (Morales gone as FA) 2 from Doubront, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Barnes, Owens, Britton, Mortensen or others.

    I'll be waiting for a call from Henry's office soon.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't see either an upgrade over our existing rotation? Sanchez is hardly a top of the rotation starter. Solid #3 on a championship level team. 

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Defense; far too often an overlooked aspect in terms of the sucess of a team..."strength up the middle" includes the pitching staff but refers to the defensive ablity of the catcher, 2B, SS & CF.

    We have question marks at all but one of these positions with Pedrioa the only "long term" 2015 guy on the current roster...show me whom you see as our everyday guys in 2015 and if Lavarnway is part of that group then I'd say we'd still need to find a catcher...sorry but I'm not bulish in him...

    For two years I have been saying Iggy should start at SS, and if we weren't going to play him we should just trade him. SS defense is so important and often neglected by the Sox.

    I like the D Ross signing and think Salty should be extended or traded this winter. Lava has a long way to go to be a legitimate ML catcher. I see him more as a possible DH, but now Papi, if healthy, will be blocking him for 2 years. I'm fine with trading Lava (but not both Lava and Salty) and looking to Swihart as our future catcher.

    Victorino should help improve our defense, but Gomes, Drew, and whoever we have at 1B are not likely to help in this area.

    [/QUOTE]

    I would agree that the Sox haven't placed as high a value on SS defense and I too would like to see Iggy given a shot. clearly the Sox don't think he's ready....We have to keep his development and age in perspective. Drew's a one year bridge to him. 

    Salty showed improvement last year. If he shows the incremental improvement this season then I'm on aboard with signing him. Hopefully Ross will play enough to keep him fresh and be a mentor...Lavarnway's simply not athletic enough to catch in the big league much like Montero with the Mariners. Swiihart is still a few years away but represents our closet thing to an impact catcher we've had in our system since Fisk. 

     

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Show me your projected rotation that delivers to this level in 2015 and I'll be more than glad to send your resume to John Henry...

    2014

    1) A Sanchez

    2) B Anderson

    3) Lester

    4) Buch

    5) Lackey

    6) 1 from Doubront, Morales, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Mortensen (some may be gone in Anderson trade)

     

    2015 (assuming Lester bolts as a FA)

    1) Sanchez

    2) Anderson

    3) Buch

    4) Lackey

    5-6) (Morales gone as FA) 2 from Doubront, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Barnes, Owens, Britton, Mortensen or others.

    I'll be waiting for a call from Henry's office soon.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't see either an upgrade over our existing rotation? Sanchez is hardly a top of the rotation starter. Solid #3 on a championship level team. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Sanchez is much better than Lackey, Doubront or Dempster.

    B Anderson could be the next Gio Gonzalez. 

    These rotations are light years better than what we have now and going forward.

    A Sanchez has the 16th best WAR among starters from 2010-2012, which is better than J Shields, J Cuerto, A Wainwright, Y Gallardo, and more.

    Starters with 550+ IP since 2010:

    22nd in ERA  3.70

    15th in tERA 3.73

    19th in SIERA 3.67

    18th in K/9  8.1

    19th in xFIP  3.63 (tied with Dickey)

     

    Brett Anderson is highly regarded by many baseball experts as one of the best young pitchers in MLB.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Timely Hitting; What made Manny, Manny (aside from his antics), was that he hit good pitching. When teams are building thier rosters the goal is to do so with players that are complimentary and excell hitting in certain spots of the lineup...In an ideal world you'd have a line-up with 6 guys capaple of hitting .280 with 20 homers with a couple of proven run producers in the middle of the lineup that "hit good pitching"...Typically the positions where that level of production is the expected norm. Are the corner outfielders and the corner infielders (In the AL the DH)...What separates the deeper lineups are teams where they get that level of production from one or more of the strength up the middle group (CF, SS, 2B and Catcher)...

    Today as comprised given the players on the current market place that don't require us to find a willing "trade partner". The Red Sox have only 1 proven core element of the above "under the teams control" locked up to any length and that's Pedrioa. Middlebrooks shows promise, but has yet to prove that he's capable of playing at a high level for an entire season. As we're retooling this team none of our current players nor were any of the free agents on the market (aside from Hamilton) that profile as legit middle of the order threats. We need two...no disrespect but Papi's not that guy anymore and hasn't been since 2007.

    As with our pitching staff I'd love to see your 2015 lineup that factors in the above and delivers a championship level team.

    Timely hitting is not something easily identified and acquired. It is also a "skill" that is not sustainable. It is largely luck and circumstance. 

    A line-up with J Upton in the peak of his prime in 2015 would be better than what we are looking at right now.

    I'd have liked to see us get Myers. Stanton would be a goldmine, but would likely cost 2 gold mines to get.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think you missed the greater point I was trying to make...Stanton is the type of hitter that we need to aquire to build the lineup around..Upton is still a complimentary hitter not a player you build a lineup around...Myers a prospect nothing more, nothing less. I get that Upton has potential and so too does Myers...neither are Miguel Cabrera....Stanton has a chance to be that type of hitter...

    I disagree that timely hitting is not sustainable. There's plenty of data available to measure a players ability to hit based on who's pitching, the inning etc. The term protecting the hitter in front of you speaks to building a lineup where a pitcher can't pitch around the middle of the lineup...that's exactly the type of lineup we had in 2004 and what they've tried to build this season. From 2003 until they blew it up last year we've tried to field teams with lineups that are 9 deep with professional hitters that make the pitcher throw strikes.

    This years lineup is pretty deep 1-9 and we should score our share of runs....what we lack are proven middle of the order impact bats...Napoli and Ortiz both are 5 hole guys...Add Stanton and now were a team capable of scoring 800 plus runs....

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Defense; far too often an overlooked aspect in terms of the sucess of a team..."strength up the middle" includes the pitching staff but refers to the defensive ablity of the catcher, 2B, SS & CF.

    We have question marks at all but one of these positions with Pedrioa the only "long term" 2015 guy on the current roster...show me whom you see as our everyday guys in 2015 and if Lavarnway is part of that group then I'd say we'd still need to find a catcher...sorry but I'm not bulish in him...

    For two years I have been saying Iggy should start at SS, and if we weren't going to play him we should just trade him. SS defense is so important and often neglected by the Sox.

    I like the D Ross signing and think Salty should be extended or traded this winter. Lava has a long way to go to be a legitimate ML catcher. I see him more as a possible DH, but now Papi, if healthy, will be blocking him for 2 years. I'm fine with trading Lava (but not both Lava and Salty) and looking to Swihart as our future catcher.

    Victorino should help improve our defense, but Gomes, Drew, and whoever we have at 1B are not likely to help in this area.

    [/QUOTE]

    I would agree that the Sox haven't placed as high a value on SS defense and I too would like to see Iggy given a shot. clearly the Sox don't think he's ready....We have to keep his development and age in perspective. Drew's a one year bridge to him. 

    I understand that the Sox don't think Iggy is "ready". I may be wrong, but I keep getting the feeling that you think I don't understand why the decisions have been made that I disagree with, and that if you could just make me "understand", then I might agree with the moves. (Just a feeling I keep getting).

    I would rather have given Iggy his chance last season, but I don't see how paying Drew $9.5M helps that much. That $9.5M could have been spent on adding to a contract of a player that would be here longer than 1 year.

    Salty showed improvement last year. If he shows the incremental improvement this season then I'm on aboard with signing him. Hopefully Ross will play enough to keep him fresh and be a mentor...Lavarnway's simply not athletic enough to catch in the big league much like Montero with the Mariners. Swiihart is still a few years away but represents our closet thing to an impact catcher we've had in our system since Fisk. 

     I agree here, but will add that if Salty continues to improve, his pricetag will be much higher than if we extend him now. I realize the opposite could occur and Ben would like like a fool for extending Salty before knowing for sure if he has the endurance to be a FT catcher and the ability to continue to grow defensively and as a game-caller/pitcher handler.

    Victorino does give us CF depth defensively and is a huge upgrasde in RF over C Ross, AGon and some others we had out there in 2012.


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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Show me your projected rotation that delivers to this level in 2015 and I'll be more than glad to send your resume to John Henry...

    2014

    1) A Sanchez

    2) B Anderson

    3) Lester

    4) Buch

    5) Lackey

    6) 1 from Doubront, Morales, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Mortensen (some may be gone in Anderson trade)

     

    2015 (assuming Lester bolts as a FA)

    1) Sanchez

    2) Anderson

    3) Buch

    4) Lackey

    5-6) (Morales gone as FA) 2 from Doubront, Tazawa, de la Rosa, Webster, Barnes, Owens, Britton, Mortensen or others.

    I'll be waiting for a call from Henry's office soon.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't see either an upgrade over our existing rotation? Sanchez is hardly a top of the rotation starter. Solid #3 on a championship level team. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Sanchez is much better than Lackey, Doubront or Dempster.

    B Anderson could be the next Gio Gonzalez. 

    These rotations are light years better than what we have now and going forward.

    A Sanchez has the 16th best WAR among starters from 2010-2012, which is better than J Shields, J Cuerto, A Wainwright, Y Gallardo, and more.

    Starters with 550+ IP since 2010:

    22nd in ERA  3.70

    15th in tERA 3.73

    19th in SIERA 3.67

    18th in K/9  8.1

    19th in xFIP  3.63 (tied with Dickey)

     

    Brett Anderson is highly regarded by many baseball experts as one of the best young pitchers in MLB.

    [/QUOTE]

    Let's see where Sanchez ranks after a season of pitching in the AL....Anderson has potential to be...enough said. both are good pitchers neither are #1's 

    Lackey before we acquired him had 6 seasons of 200 innings with a sub 4 ERA. I'll give him the benefit of doubt and wait to see how he's throwing the ball now that he's fixed his elbow...Doubront has the stuff to be as good or better than all of them. 

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    I think you missed the greater point I was trying to make...Stanton is the type of hitter that we need to aquire to build the lineup around..Upton is still a complimentary hitter not a player you build a lineup around...Myers a prospect nothing more, nothing less. I get that Upton has potential and so too does Myers...neither are Miguel Cabrera....Stanton has a chance to be that type of hitter...

    Upton has been a 5 slot profile, but he is just nearing the beginning of his prime, so I expect him to improve to become a 3/4 hitter. I could be wrong though: his away splits are troublesome.

    Stanton is about the best "risk" to bet on.

    Myers is a prospect, yes, but so are Bogaerts, Bradley and others so many here are pinning all their hopes on and insisting we not trade away for the likes of Upton. (BTW, I think Myers is a surer bet to become a top ML hitter than anyone we have in the minors.) KC not only gave up Myers for Shields and davis, but they gave up other top prospects. I'd love to know what they offered us for Lester and possibly another pitcher. It would have been a tough deal to decide.

    I disagree that timely hitting is not sustainable. There's plenty of data available to measure a players ability to hit based on who's pitching, the inning etc. 

    No hitter in MLb has consistently been "clutch" over a long period of time. Papi might have come closest in my memory, but he too has hit a prolonged dry spell, perhaps influenced greatly by the hitters around him.

     

    The term protecting the hitter in front of you speaks to building a lineup where a pitcher can't pitch around the middle of the lineup...that's exactly the type of lineup we had in 2004 and what they've tried to build this season.

    Napoli (even if 100% healthy for the whole contract) will not "protect" Papi any more than Papi protected AGon. In fact, replacing AGon with Naps is a downgrade in the "protection" department.

    From 2003 until they blew it up last year we've tried to field teams with lineups that are 9 deep with professional hitters that make the pitcher throw strikes.

    Our line-up on paper last winter was better than this one. Top 3. Top 4. Top 6. 1 to 9. Anyway you look at it. 

    I realize a returning Ellsbury & Middlebrooks can and should have a big impact, but losing AGon and the inevitable injuries or unexpected declines elsewhere are bound to happen.

    This years lineup is pretty deep 1-9 and we should score our share of runs....what we lack are proven middle of the order impact bats...Napoli and Ortiz both are 5 hole guys...Add Stanton and now were a team capable of scoring 800 plus runs....

    I agree, but it might cost us 5-7 of our top prospects and young ML'ers.

    I don't think Hamilton was the answer, but I'd rather have him than 3 of Naps, Victorino, Dempster and Drew. If we had signed Hamilton and A Sanchez or traded for B Anderson, we'd be better off in 2013, and have players still helpful in 2014 and beyond. I realize the risk of the 5 year deal, and signing Hamilton was not my plan, but I will continue to maintain that if spending this much was a given, why not get someone that can make a real impact now and going forward? Even if hamilton is at 80% by year 3 and 60% by year 5, he'd still be a plus.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    moonslav & beantowne, you two are lighting it up here...seriously, good stuff.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    moon,

    First off I respect your knowledge of the game and your well thought out post. you're among my favorites to debate with. I get that your intuitive enough to read between the lines and see the bigger picture of the manner and reasoning behind the moves made by the Red Sox. 

    why I'm engaging you is not to change your opinion Nor to get you to agree with mine or Cherington...We have a fundamental disagreement. I'm arguing my views and challenging yours. What spurred me to do so was the tone of your post of late have been hyper critical written with a glass half empty negetive slant.

    So if I'm trying to do anything it might be to get you to see some of the positive of the roster and to recognize that in remaking the team. Cherington is trying to field a team of players that we can be proud to support. 

     

     

     

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    moonslav & beantowne, you two are lighting it up here...seriously, good stuff.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're welcome to join the fun!

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    moon,

    First off I respect your knowledge of the game and your well thought out post. you're among my favorites to debate with. I get that your intuitive enough to read between the lines and see the bigger picture of the manner and reasoning behind the moves made by the Red Sox. 

    why I'm engaging you is not to change your opinion Nor to get you to agree with mine or Cherington...We have a fundamental disagreement. I'm arguing my views and challenging yours. What spurred me to do so was the tone of your post of late have been hyper critical written with a glass half empty negetive slant.

    So if I'm trying to do anything it might be to get you to see some of the positive of the roster and to recognize that in remaking the team. Cherington is trying to field a team of players that we can be proud to support. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bean, you know I have always respected you and your opinions. 

    We disagree on this winter's overall strategy and choice of plan, but I have not gotten to the point of saying we should dump Ben or Larry. Ben deserves a chance to do his thing and let the results be the judge.

    We will be better than last year and will have a chance to mini- reboot over the next few years, since none of these guys are signed longterm. I see that as advantageous in many ways, but there is a nagging feeling that we just spent a lot of money and a few young players (in the Hanrahan deal) to get no player that opens my eyes and makes me smile about 2014, 2015 or beyond. I think that is a huge hole in the overall plan.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    moon,

    First off I respect your knowledge of the game and your well thought out post. you're among my favorites to debate with. I get that your intuitive enough to read between the lines and see the bigger picture of the manner and reasoning behind the moves made by the Red Sox. 

    why I'm engaging you is not to change your opinion Nor to get you to agree with mine or Cherington...We have a fundamental disagreement. I'm arguing my views and challenging yours. What spurred me to do so was the tone of your post of late have been hyper critical written with a glass half empty negetive slant.

    So if I'm trying to do anything it might be to get you to see some of the positive of the roster and to recognize that in remaking the team. Cherington is trying to field a team of players that we can be proud to support. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bean, you know I have always respected you and your opinions. 

    We disagree on this winter's overall strategy and choice of plan, but I have not gotten to the point of saying we should dump Ben or Larry. Ben deserves a chance to do his thing and let the results be the judge.

    We will be better than last year and will have a chance to mini- reboot over the next few years, since none of these guys are signed longterm. I see that as advantageous in many ways, but there is a nagging feeling that we just spent a lot of money and a few young players (in the Hanrahan deal) to get no player that opens my eyes and makes me smile about 2014, 2015 or beyond. I think that is a huge hole in the overall plan.

    [/QUOTE]

    Perhaps that's because the ideal players that fit that description have not presented themselves. We don't need prospects we need proven impact players...Typically that profile is acquired in free agency. See Manny, Arod or in trades where you pay a premium in talented prospects for established stars see Cabrera and Gonzalez...End of the day if Stanton is indeed on the market. I'd send them a list of our top prospects and tell them to pick any three and any combination of lower level prospects totaling two or they could have Doubrount Or Buccholz....

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    moon,

    First off I respect your knowledge of the game and your well thought out post. you're among my favorites to debate with. I get that your intuitive enough to read between the lines and see the bigger picture of the manner and reasoning behind the moves made by the Red Sox. 

    why I'm engaging you is not to change your opinion Nor to get you to agree with mine or Cherington...We have a fundamental disagreement. I'm arguing my views and challenging yours. What spurred me to do so was the tone of your post of late have been hyper critical written with a glass half empty negetive slant.

    So if I'm trying to do anything it might be to get you to see some of the positive of the roster and to recognize that in remaking the team. Cherington is trying to field a team of players that we can be proud to support. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bean, you know I have always respected you and your opinions. 

    We disagree on this winter's overall strategy and choice of plan, but I have not gotten to the point of saying we should dump Ben or Larry. Ben deserves a chance to do his thing and let the results be the judge.

    We will be better than last year and will have a chance to mini- reboot over the next few years, since none of these guys are signed longterm. I see that as advantageous in many ways, but there is a nagging feeling that we just spent a lot of money and a few young players (in the Hanrahan deal) to get no player that opens my eyes and makes me smile about 2014, 2015 or beyond. I think that is a huge hole in the overall plan.

    [/QUOTE]

    Perhaps that's because the ideal players that fit that description have not presented themselves. We don't need prospects we need proven impact players...Typically that profile is acquired in free agency. See Manny, Arod or in trades where you pay a premium in talented prospects for established stars see Cabrera and Gonzalez...End of the day if Stanton is indeed on the market. I'd send them a list of our top prospects and tell them to pick any three and any combination of lower level prospects totaling two or they could have Doubrount Or Buccholz....

    [/QUOTE]

    Sometimes a player is not a big named player. Last winter, when I suggested we trade Reddick and others for Gio Gonzalez, I was met with the same arguments I am hearing now about Anderson, McCarthy, J Upton, Myers...

    There will always be risk.

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

    Re: Rethinking 2013

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Beantowne's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    moon,

    First off I respect your knowledge of the game and your well thought out post. you're among my favorites to debate with. I get that your intuitive enough to read between the lines and see the bigger picture of the manner and reasoning behind the moves made by the Red Sox. 

    why I'm engaging you is not to change your opinion Nor to get you to agree with mine or Cherington...We have a fundamental disagreement. I'm arguing my views and challenging yours. What spurred me to do so was the tone of your post of late have been hyper critical written with a glass half empty negetive slant.

    So if I'm trying to do anything it might be to get you to see some of the positive of the roster and to recognize that in remaking the team. Cherington is trying to field a team of players that we can be proud to support. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bean, you know I have always respected you and your opinions. 

    We disagree on this winter's overall strategy and choice of plan, but I have not gotten to the point of saying we should dump Ben or Larry. Ben deserves a chance to do his thing and let the results be the judge.

    We will be better than last year and will have a chance to mini- reboot over the next few years, since none of these guys are signed longterm. I see that as advantageous in many ways, but there is a nagging feeling that we just spent a lot of money and a few young players (in the Hanrahan deal) to get no player that opens my eyes and makes me smile about 2014, 2015 or beyond. I think that is a huge hole in the overall plan.

    [/QUOTE]

    Perhaps that's because the ideal players that fit that description have not presented themselves. We don't need prospects we need proven impact players...Typically that profile is acquired in free agency. See Manny, Arod or in trades where you pay a premium in talented prospects for established stars see Cabrera and Gonzalez...End of the day if Stanton is indeed on the market. I'd send them a list of our top prospects and tell them to pick any three and any combination of lower level prospects totaling two or they could have Doubrount Or Buccholz....

    [/QUOTE]

    Sometimes a player is not a big named player. Last winter, when I suggested we trade Reddick and others for Gio Gonzalez, I was met with the same arguments I am hearing now about Anderson, McCarthy, J Upton, Myers...

    There will always be risk.

    [/QUOTE]

    it's all in how you frame the aquisions. I too would like to see us make a play for Upton, if Stanton's off the board And he is indeed the best player we can acquire based on the value of the prospects in our system. then I say make the deal. 

    Not sure what you offered in your proposal for Gio along with Reddick but he too would've have been worth trading top prospects for. risk is assumed in almost every deal when your projecting future productivity without having proven track record of success at the big league level. risk is inherent in any deal's involving pitchers, both of injury and underperformance. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share