Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

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

    Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    The Sox are going to clinch the division against the Blue Jays, hopefully tonight.

    This is a symbolic referendum.

    Team first vs. top heavy.

    Anthoupolis went all-in on the latter day Theo Epstein approach to competing in the AL East:  stock-pile superstars with bloated contracts and pray they stay healthy and productive.

    This is a psychotic approach fueled by irrational Yankee fear:  To compete, you must match star power/payroll.

    But the Orioles and the Rays have already dismantled this notion.  Cherrington was stuck with it for a year but found the Trojan Horse to move on.  And now he has done this absolutely awesome job doing the obvious, but oft-overlooked, thing:  putting together a complete TEAM.

    Tonight, this series, is a referendum on these models.  The Jays were every pundit's, including the vast majority of smart folk here on our esteemed board, paper champ pre-season pick to run away with the division.

    But, a couple guys got injured and a couple guys underperformed.  And when that happens to a top-heavy club, they get exposed (see 2012 Sox).  So, we stand at the end of September with a complete reversal of fortune.  

    The Sox have had significant injuries this year.  But we hardly noticed because the depth was so amazing and the across-the-board contributions so solid.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    Nice post, Space, but I don't think I see tonight or this series as a referendum on anything...if there is a referendum between these two teams, it's already been had, as the wreckage of Toronto's 2013 season is available for all to see.

    Now, out west there is a team that seems to be doing pretty well (for now, at least) by stocking up on $20 million players. A Dodgers-Red Sox World Series? That would be some referendum.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

    Nice post, Space, but I don't think I see tonight or this series as a referendum on anything...if there is a referendum between these two teams, it's already been had, as the wreckage of Toronto's 2013 season is available for all to see.

    Now, out west there is a team that seems to be doing pretty well (for now, at least) by stocking up on $20 million players. A Dodgers-Red Sox World Series? That would be some referendum.



    They are 3-9 their last 12. Let's hope that continues.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

    Nice post, Space, but I don't think I see tonight or this series as a referendum on anything...if there is a referendum between these two teams, it's already been had, as the wreckage of Toronto's 2013 season is available for all to see.

    Now, out west there is a team that seems to be doing pretty well (for now, at least) by stocking up on $20 million players. A Dodgers-Red Sox World Series? That would be some referendum.



    You are right Flapjack.  I ammend:  less a symbolic referendum, more a symbolic death knell to the Al East of the naughts.

    As for the stock-piling Dodgers: a. you can stock-pile on top of an already stacked club, thats the true Yankee model.  And, I am referring specifically to an AL East approach.  The Dodgers just Yankee'd up on a mediocre NL West.

    Now about that possible Sox-Dodgers WS:  I will be going if that is the case.  And when I go, I will be soporting, irony fully-intended, the Adrian Gonzalez home jersey I bought as soon as the Sox signed him.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    Ancient history.  We have already had numerous threads about the wisdom of dumping salary in 2012 and finding good but not great/expensive players for 2013. 

    Two further thoughts.  1. In the movie Moneyball John Henry, then and now the Sox owner, offers Billy Beane a contract for $12.5M a year.  At the end of the movie it says the Sox won the WS in 2004 by using sabermetrics.  They still are.  Nowhere is it written that rich clubs are required to make dumb acquisitions.  2. That said, a rich club can't simply say that "cheaper is always better."  Sometimes you spend for quality. Sometime last fall/winter they Sox--Ben Cherington--opted to bring back an oldish DH with an achilles problem and offered him I think $27M for two years, which made Big Papi far and away the most expensive DH in MLB.  Victorino also did not come cheap.  Pedroia got a long term contract for very good money. 

     

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    Ancient history.  We have already had numerous threads about the wisdom of dumping salary in 2012 and finding good but not great/expensive players for 2013. 

    Two further thoughts.  1. In the movie Moneyball John Henry, then and now the Sox owner, offers Billy Beane a contract for $12.5M a year.  At the end of the movie it says the Sox won the WS in 2004 by using sabermetrics.  They still are.  Nowhere is it written that rich clubs are required to make dumb acquisitions.  2. That said, a rich club can't simply say that "cheaper is always better."  Sometimes you spend for quality. Sometime last fall/winter they Sox--Ben Cherington--opted to bring back an oldish DH with an achilles problem and offered him I think $27M for two years, which made Big Papi far and away the most expensive DH in MLB.  Victorino also did not come cheap.  Pedroia got a long term contract for very good money. 

     



    Yes, well said, as always, Max.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    Lot of these guys they brought in were winners everywhere they have been.
    No sabermetrics for attitude and desire.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

     

    The Sox have had significant injuries this year.  But we hardly noticed because the depth was so amazing and the across-the-board contributions so solid.


    Enjoyed this thread narrative. But all credit for this team goes to John Ferrell, in my book. Massive payroll again, but different results. 

    Agree that value and fit are a foreign concept to a lot of clueless GM's. 

    I think the Dodgers and the Red Sox would be good theatre and baseball, but I think the Cards, Bravos and Tigers and confident returning to the playoffs again with improved team A's will have something to say about that.'

    Good points made with this thread, though. Nothing about Jays said 2014 success. I had the Red Sox for 91 wins bubble playoff team that might or might not get in. I gave myself an F for that projection. But for the massive payroll Red Sox, earning the money time is just now starting. Comes with the territory. This seaosn is going to be more entertaining than recent MLB seasons.

    Cardinals middle management is the gold standard, in my recent MLB book. 

    I'd like to see Cardinals and Dodgers, and Red Sox and Tigers. I like the confidence the A's are bringing, with an old Red Sox team leader now at 21 homers for 2013 season, but they still will be underdogs.

     



    As Max points out, massive payroll does not mean anything in and of itself.  You can spend big money stupidly, or wisely.

     

    2011-2012 Sox, 2013 Jays:  Stupid.  2013 sox:  Brilliant

    But, as you say, money earning time, indeed, starts now.  I have repeatedly asserted, and you have repeatedly mocked, my usage of the admittedly ephemoral term "hard-nosed gamers". Hard-nose gamers have gotten the Sox this far.  But a hard-nosed gamer, by subjective, ephemoral deifinition, gets it done when the money is on the table.  So, here we go ...

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

    Lot of these guys they brought in were winners everywhere they have been.

    not that anyone else doesn't, but imo Victorino and Napoli stand out in that regard..


     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

    Ancient history.  We have already had numerous threads about the wisdom of dumping salary in 2012 and finding good but not great/expensive players for 2013. 

    Two further thoughts.  1. In the movie Moneyball John Henry, then and now the Sox owner, offers Billy Beane a contract for $12.5M a year.  At the end of the movie it says the Sox won the WS in 2004 by using sabermetrics.  They still are.  Nowhere is it written that rich clubs are required to make dumb acquisitions.  2. That said, a rich club can't simply say that "cheaper is always better."  Sometimes you spend for quality. Sometime last fall/winter they Sox--Ben Cherington--opted to bring back an oldish DH with an achilles problem and offered him I think $27M for two years, which made Big Papi far and away the most expensive DH in MLB.  Victorino also did not come cheap.  Pedroia got a long term contract for very good money. 

     

     




    solid post max

     

    but I have 2 disagree with 1 word


    the Sox won the WS in 2004 by using sabermetrics.  They still are.

     

    let's go with 'again' instead of 'still'

    a case could be made, one that would certainly support the OP,

    stating the sox got away from bill james

    and did as they said they would

    by going back to james more last winter

     

     

    I not saying I agree 100% with the OP

    but I doubt spacemen expected anything less ;-)

     

     

     

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

    Ancient history.  We have already had numerous threads about the wisdom of dumping salary in 2012 and finding good but not great/expensive players for 2013. 

    Two further thoughts.  1. In the movie Moneyball John Henry, then and now the Sox owner, offers Billy Beane a contract for $12.5M a year.  At the end of the movie it says the Sox won the WS in 2004 by using sabermetrics.  They still are.  Nowhere is it written that rich clubs are required to make dumb acquisitions.  2. That said, a rich club can't simply say that "cheaper is always better."  Sometimes you spend for quality. Sometime last fall/winter they Sox--Ben Cherington--opted to bring back an oldish DH with an achilles problem and offered him I think $27M for two years, which made Big Papi far and away the most expensive DH in MLB.  Victorino also did not come cheap.  Pedroia got a long term contract for very good money. 

     

     




    solid post max

     

    but I have 2 disagree with 1 word


    the Sox won the WS in 2004 by using sabermetrics.  They still are.

     

    let's go with 'again' instead of 'still'

    a case could be made, one that would certainly support the OP,

    stating the sox got away from bill james

    and did as they said they would

    by going back to james more last winter

     

     

    I not saying I agree 100% with the OP

    but I doubt spacemen expected anything less ;-)

     

     

     



    Conversely, I agree 100% with your notion that it is a case of the sox getting away and then returning to sabremetrics.  I guess that was the point the OP though I missed the mark somewhat.  Our sad birds north of the border need to come through the money-alone-buys-pennants approach and start crunching some better numbers and including better analysis on the intangibles.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    Great posts.....Having a big Salaried team definitely guarantees nothing......the Dodgers have obviously used their enormous spending to turn that franchise around, but the window will be short for them....dont win a championship this year or next and it will start getting shaky in Dodgerland again. One more thing on the Dodgers....MLB Network was talking about the Frank McCord days and how different the Dodger are after McCourt almost ruined them.....and it always seems like people portray McCourt as a Buffoon.....he piad 430MM for the Dodgers and sold them 8 years later for 2 Billion.....he might not have known anything about Baseball but he sure knows how to make Money

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    A lot of things have go right to make a championship season. Spending the money , provided it is spent wisely , is not a detriment. The small money teams don't win very many championships. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach


    A Dodgers/Red Sox world series...that would be interesting. I bet MLB goes to bed at night wishing for THAT to happen.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Javi60. Show Javi60's posts

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    The Sox are going to clinch the division against the Blue Jays, hopefully tonight.

    This is a symbolic referendum.

    Team first vs. top heavy.

    Anthoupolis went all-in on the latter day Theo Epstein approach to competing in the AL East:  stock-pile superstars with bloated contracts and pray they stay healthy and productive.

    This is a psychotic approach fueled by irrational Yankee fear:  To compete, you must match star power/payroll.

    But the Orioles and the Rays have already dismantled this notion.  Cherrington was stuck with it for a year but found the Trojan Horse to move on.  And now he has done this absolutely awesome job doing the obvious, but oft-overlooked, thing:  putting together a complete TEAM.

    Tonight, this series, is a referendum on these models.  The Jays were every pundit's, including the vast majority of smart folk here on our esteemed board, paper champ pre-season pick to run away with the division.

    But, a couple guys got injured and a couple guys underperformed.  And when that happens to a top-heavy club, they get exposed (see 2012 Sox).  So, we stand at the end of September with a complete reversal of fortune.  

    The Sox have had significant injuries this year.  But we hardly noticed because the depth was so amazing and the across-the-board contributions so solid.



    Correct!...THIS A WHOLE TEAM MVP

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    Great post and a great, even amazing year for our team. I felt great about the Dodgers trade the moment it happened. I don't believe that massive payroll gives the same advantage as it once did - in the post-roids era (kind of), you can't sign the veterans to lucrative deals without huge organizational risk. 

    Yes, having big payroll helps you to get some great pitchers and cover up mistakes but it's not the advantage it was ten years ago. 

    Except: if you invest it in the farm system which I expect will be the approach of the smart big payroll teams. Fortunately, not only is our team fun to watch and competitive but our farm system is really good. 

    It's been such a great ride this year and I look forward to the playoffs. Thanks to the Sox for coming so far so quick and hats off to Cheery and Farrel for giving us such a rootable and competitive team

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    Great post and a great, even amazing year for our team. I felt great about the Dodgers trade the moment it happened. I don't believe that massive payroll gives the same advantage as it once did - in the post-roids era (kind of), you can't sign the veterans to lucrative deals without huge organizational risk. 

    Yes, having big payroll helps you to get some great pitchers and cover up mistakes but it's not the advantage it was ten years ago. 

    Except: if you invest it in the farm system which I expect will be the approach of the smart big payroll teams. Fortunately, not only is our team fun to watch and competitive but our farm system is really good. 

    It's been such a great ride this year and I look forward to the playoffs. Thanks to the Sox for coming so far so quick and hats off to Cheery and Farrel for giving us such a rootable and competitive team

         



    U don't see any critics of those 2 now.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to SpacemanEephus's comment:

    The Sox are going to clinch the division against the Blue Jays, hopefully tonight.

    This is a symbolic referendum.

    Team first vs. top heavy.

    Anthoupolis went all-in on the latter day Theo Epstein approach to competing in the AL East:  stock-pile superstars with bloated contracts and pray they stay healthy and productive.

    This is a psychotic approach fueled by irrational Yankee fear:  To compete, you must match star power/payroll.

    But the Orioles and the Rays have already dismantled this notion.  Cherrington was stuck with it for a year but found the Trojan Horse to move on.  And now he has done this absolutely awesome job doing the obvious, but oft-overlooked, thing:  putting together a complete TEAM.

    Tonight, this series, is a referendum on these models.  The Jays were every pundit's, including the vast majority of smart folk here on our esteemed board, paper champ pre-season pick to run away with the division.

    But, a couple guys got injured and a couple guys underperformed.  And when that happens to a top-heavy club, they get exposed (see 2012 Sox).  So, we stand at the end of September with a complete reversal of fortune.  

    The Sox have had significant injuries this year.  But we hardly noticed because the depth was so amazing and the across-the-board contributions so solid.




    Top notch, Spaceman.

     

    Yanqui fear IS dominant and we have been a strong part of that conversation, the equivalent of silver back chest beating.  Sooner or later the old ape goes down, it is inevitable.  One forgets that the Bombers core group came up through their farm system.  With Mo retiring and the Captain injured most of the season, that group is about to become a single aged, injured player.  Sure, they signed big, but they built from within.

    I was not impressed with the signing of Reyes, who is talented as few are but is injured so often he never makes a long term impact.  In fact, he takes away from the whole, IMO, because the organization has to plan for his injury history, specifically.  And any substitute is going to be a lesser star.  As much as I loved Nomah, his ability to get injured by sneezing too hard always made the season a questionable quest.  Same with Reyes. 

    Back to the positive.  WHO WOULD THINK THAT NAPOLI WOULD BE SUCH A KEY PLAYER - with no apparent sour grapes for having his health taken apart down to individual mitochondrian and loosing two years and $26 million?  Seriously, so many players are easily hurt or disrepected (even our great Pedro ...) when not given down pillow treatment and the highest dollar.  He has been TEAM centic .... as so many of the other now "great" signings. 

    Kudos to the baseball and human insight that the FO developed. 

    And thanks for a well said post.

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

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The Sox are going to clinch the division against the Blue Jays, hopefully tonight.

    Done! to the victors go the spoils..

    This is a symbolic referendum.

    Team first vs. top heavy.

    Anthoupolis went all-in on the latter day Theo Epstein approach to competing in the AL East:  stock-pile superstars with bloated contracts and pray they stay healthy and productive.

    While Epstein was part of the problem the ownership group led by Henry, Luccino and Werner each played a significant role in the demise of the franchises values. Which led to some very questionable roster decisions. 

    This is a psychotic approach fueled by irrational Yankee fear:  To compete, you must match star power/payroll.

    The Yankees dominance of the division certainly played a role in some of our questionable roster moves. I also think that NESN ratings and the need to feed the monster was at play too. 

    But the Orioles and the Rays have already dismantled this notion.  Cherrington was stuck with it for a year but found the Trojan Horse to move on.  And now he has done this absolutely awesome job doing the obvious, but oft-overlooked, thing:  putting together a complete TEAM.

    The Orioles and Rays model doesn't work unless you're willing to lose 100 games for half a decade to stockpile prospects. Which is dependent on having a very good infrastructure in place with a solid player development and scouting program. Then trading established players for prospects while spending moneys wisely on free agents or trading prospects for proven vets to round out your squad. In both cases they had success and to your point have assembled rosters with players that fit their organizational pylosophies. Therein lyes the true value. "Defining your organizational values and building teams with players and field managers that fit. 

    The 2011 Red Sox were flawed roster and the deal with the Dodgers was the catalyst to allow Cherinton to right the ship. I too think he deserve a ton of credit, but so to does the Sox ownership for recognizing they'd strayed from their original blueprint that netted them two championships. 

    Tonight, this series, is a referendum on these models.  The Jays were every pundit's, including the vast majority of smart folk here on our esteemed board, paper champ pre-season pick to run away with the division.

    But, a couple guys got injured and a couple guys underperformed.  And when that happens to a top-heavy club, they get exposed (see 2012 Sox).  So, we stand at the end of September with a complete reversal of fortune.  

    The Sox have had significant injuries this year.  But we hardly noticed because the depth was so amazing and the across-the-board contributions so solid.

    Pre-season rankings are always flawed because you can't accurately predict injuries and underperformance. My recollection was that they were picked by many of the pundits to be in the mix in what promised to be a 5 team race. unfortunately someone forgot to tell  the jays...

    In the case of the Blue jays much of the buzz was due to their acquisition of three top of the rotation pitchers and an All Star SS who if healthy and performed to career norms were supposed to lead them to the promise land...the flaw was was that both Reyes and Johnson fall into the oft injured category. So to me the refferendum is that one can't buy a championship club by acquiring players with pre-existing chronic injuries in hopes that they stay healthy and return to peak performance. 

    If you use the Dodgers as the example of a team spending lavishly to field a championship team as the model. They already had a solid nucleus in place with Kershaw and Kemp then went out and acquired and signed players who addressed needs led by a manager and a new ownership group who's sole purpose was to send a message to their players and avid fans that they were back in the business of winning baseball games. 

    One final thought the hope is that Red Sox ownership group has learned a valuable lesson from the dysfunction of a divided leadership team. Collectively moving forward continue to be mindful of the impact of the types of players they acquire not just the character of the individual or the back of his baseball card but the sum of his parts. 

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Promise4you2. Show Promise4you2's posts

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    This maybe the top Intellectual post of the year on BDC! Great stuff by all posters!

    I dont like facts, they cloud my irresponsible Judgement!

    I often go back to read what i wrote only to find out it's not what I said!

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: Tonight: A referendum on organizational approach

    Not so sure if Sabermetrics has been the cause of this turn around. Everyone of that big Dodger trade was replacable. A-Gone was the only challenge, coming close to his overall production, but was no way near impossible. The 2004 team was not this full-blown Sabermetric machine, they did use some of that theory in weaker areas of the team and it worked, no question did it work. It's smart baseball. There isn't a "one way & one way only" path to build a winning team, but you have to use all your resources wisely. Some teams obviously have more resources than others. And the resources won't matter if you make bad decisions In the first place. 

    "Don't you worry about blank, let me worry about blank"

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share