Re: The future is brite and the Red Sox will be just fine...
posted at 8/28/2012 2:44 PM EDT
In Response to Re: The future is brite and the Red Sox will be just fine...
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: The future is brite and the Red Sox will be just fine... : Pretty obviously I wasn't advocating the Sox becoming the Pirates, Twins, A's or Mariners. My point was that while the Sox have been trading away their prospects in search of FA's they haven't been winning so they should do something different. There's no doubt that the Sox have the money to spend and will spend it. I'm only advocating that they do it more judiciously and keep some of their prospects to enable them to have more money to spend on the FA's who will give them the most value. And thanks for your respect for a differing opinion.
Posted by S5[/QUOTE]
The Red Sox havent had an elite prospect since Clay, so I disagree that the problem has been trading our prospects. A prospect isnt a prospect. They are all individuals. I hate when people lump all prospects together into a single buckett. The last time the Sox had an elite prospect, worth waiting around for was Clay (Middlebrooks came out of nowhere, so its not like we were "waiting for him").
The Red Sox have been successful. Over the past 10 years , they have had more success than most of the teams that follow the small market model. So I am confused why so many people want to change models.
Sure, mistakes were made. But isnt it possible that the mistake was in the execution of the model and not the model itself?
I had no problem with your post. The post , that I did have an issue with, was the original one. Especially when he said that the Yankee model hasnt worked out for the Yankees. I challenge that. The Yankees win the division practically every year and are usually one of the last four teams standing. Their most recent championship was 2009 (not long ago).
We shouldnt be looking to run the team in the complete opposite style as the Yankees. The Pirates do that. Compare the success of the two orgs.
I agree with your points that we need to be more selective about free-agents. Not only the who, but also the when. I dont go for big $$ free agents unless a) I feel that my team is close to competing and the person is the missing piece and b) the free agent himself makes sense.
But there is a time and place when it makes sense to pursue expensive free agents.
My overall point is this: I disagree that the point of this trade was so we can change our philosophy and operate like a small market team. I think that even with this trade, we will continue to operate like a big market team, because that is who we are. The move was more about purging mistakes. But the mistake wasnt the model itself. It was teh execution of the model. We will still go after expensive free agents. Hopefully, we will be more careful now.