In response to softlaw2's comment:

Does this harmless turn-of-phrase really require such vitriol?  You are the least Christian Christian I have ever cyber-met.

In response to jasko2248's comment:

 

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

 

In response to SpacemanEephus's comment:

 

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

 

In response to SpacemanEephus's comment:

 

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

 

In response to SpacemanEephus's comment:

 

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

 

In response to selenium-'s comment:

 

Which top pitching studs were available and how could they had been signed without going 5 yrs / $100 mil. when ownership has decided not to go that route anymore. Marcum was considered to be damaged goods. Provide some options.The track record on FA starting pitching acquisitions has been poor over the last decade. Ask Cashman about that? If you wanted to trade then who would you had traded for who? Be specific.

 

None. I was not advocating making the same mistakes this organization has made in the past by handcuffing themselves to long term questionable contracts. What I am saying is that if we are really in a bridge year (or two), then lets jettison, or try to jettison, any player who does not fit in our long range plans, within reason (we still have to field a team). Ellsbury should have been traded for a pitching PROSPECT; we have a plethora of catchers and I would think one of them could bring a decent pitching PROSPECT as well. Stockpiling young pitching prospects is a reasonable way to increase the chances of future success.

 

 

Ellsbury's trade value made it unwise to move him after another wasted year on the DL.  Probably would not have garnered much in return.  And, Webster and De La Rose are pretty good pitching prospects, no?

 

 

Yes, those two were good moves, but they happened in August. I did give Cherington credit for that entire move. Getting rid of the three contracts alone was good; getting pitching prospects in return was gravy. Its unclear what kind of prospect Ellsbury would have garnered and its still possible to move him by the trade deadline if we are out of the race by then. So all is not lost. We also had other chips that could have been traded for our future.

 

 

Not being obtuse, but,  who?  Ellsbury, prior, to injury was the most viable chip the Sox had.  But I am at a loss to come up with who else could have been moved for future pitching?  Youk had no value by the time he was jettisoned.  Reddick was used to get a needed closer.  I can't think of anyone else who was really moveable.

 

 

We have three viable catchers right now and more in the minors. One of those guys could have been moved. And while I admit that I am not as familiar with the bevy of position players in our farms system, some of them could likely have been traded for additional pitching prospect depth. And I wonder if some GM out there might have been willing to take a chance on Daniel Bard in return for another SP prospect. Just for starters.

 

 

Yes, though Napoli is no longer a viable catcher, so we actually only have 2 on the roster.  If Lavarnway gets up to speed, then, ye, definitely one of these Cs will be a good chip.

 

 

My guess is that Lavarnway would also have brought a decent upside SP prospect. I was not considering Napoli as a catcher. As I recall there is a catching prospect in AA or thereabouts who also has a high upside. I don't follow the minor league guys as closely as others here.

 

 

I don't think the Sox were in any hurry to trade Lavarnway for a pitching prospect with "decent upside."  I'm pretty sure the Sox organization values him a lot more than the people on this board.  He made significant strides defensively last year, he's hit at every level in the minors & the Yale grad is clearly intelligent enough to handle the mental aspect of the game.  I don't think that the Sox put a ton of stock in 150 late season at bats.  He very likely hit a wall after catching more games for Pawtucket than any other season and the September Sox atmosphere wasn't exactly condusive to be overly successful.  I wouldn't sleep on this guy just yet...

 

Lav is under team control which makes him a luxury.  I would only consider packaging him if we could really upgrade another position.  Trading him alone wouldn't get us the pitching prospect we need "like a Hultzen or Walker" until he proves himself a bit more and probably not even then. 

 

In response to softlaw2's comment:

You complete me.

This thread is a little silly. Is the point to question the "plan" because no one is penciled in for LF in 2015? Do people really think it works that way?

 

The future will sort itself out and one of the goals this offseason was to hold on to as much potential as possible. .

 

In response to notin's comment:

 

This thread is a little silly. Is the point to question the "plan" because no one is penciled in for LF in 2015? Do people really think it works that way?

 

The future will sort itself out and one of the goals this offseason was to hold on to as much potential as possible. .

 

 

notin, my point is we have had two plans under present management since our last good crop of youngsters came up.

 

#1 Lets bridge our way and see what happens

#2 Lets spend like the Yankees on big name talent to see if we can buy a championship. 

There are many ways of building the farm and we don't seem to have what others did in the past to make that happen.  Yes it could and should work that way, you don't just draft the best possible talent and hope for the best.  You try to address each position on a yearly basis.  At the moment we lack the correct talent in many areas, while having too many prospects in others.

 

In response to craze4sox's comment:

Baseball teams almost always take the best available "talent."  Drafting the "best available 1st baseman" in the first round because the organization "lacks depth" at that position is crazy.  What if the best 1st baseman is a consensus 3rd round pick, do you still take him in the first round?  I have no idea how this team will look THIS SEPTEMBER, and as Notin mentioned, why would you ever try to figure out what this team will look like in 2016? It's literally impossible.  The Sox seem to have as much talent in their farm system as they've ever had.  You can't ask for much more than that.

In response to jasko2248's comment:

Then trade Salty or Swihart. No team is going to GIVE us a pitching prospect for nothing. We will need to give something up in return.

In response to craze4sox's comment:

The fsrm is one way to get players, and not ss common ss you think.

 

Do you know how many AL teams arr likely to start more than 3 position players they drafted? 3.Minnesota and KC with 6 and the Angels with 5.  

 

ThAngels shoould be good. How about the other two?

 

Most teams have 3 or less. Small market Oakland has none...  

This post has been removed.

In response to jasko2248's comment:

 

In response to craze4sox's comment:

 

In response to notin's comment:

 

This thread is a little silly. Is the point to question the "plan" because no one is penciled in for LF in 2015? Do people really think it works that way?

 

The future will sort itself out and one of the goals this offseason was to hold on to as much potential as possible. .

 

 

notin, my point is we have had two plans under present management since our last good crop of youngsters came up.

 

#1 Lets bridge our way and see what happens

#2 Lets spend like the Yankees on big name talent to see if we can buy a championship. 

There are many ways of building the farm and we don't seem to have what others did in the past to make that happen.  Yes it could and should work that way, you don't just draft kids and hope for the best.  You try to address each position on a yearly basis and at the moment we lack the correct talent in many, while having too many prospects in others.

 

 

Baseball teams almost always take the best available "talent."  Drafting the "best available 1st baseman" in the first round because the organization "lacks depth" at that position is crazy.  What if the best 1st baseman is a consensus 3rd round pick, do you still take him in the first round?  I have no idea how this team will look THIS SEPTEMBER, and as Notin mentioned, why would you ever try to figure out what this team will look like in 2016? It's literally impossible.  The Sox seem to have as much talent in their farm system as they've ever had.  You can't ask for much more than that.

 

 

Jasko, what great talent do we have on the farm?  I know you don't want to compare it with the last crop.  Other than two or three hopefuls at SP?  Lav, Bogy, Bradley and Brentz maybe?  How long has it been since a few kids really helped our lineup on a regular basis?      

All I'm saying is there are trades/ways to build up weak areas without drafting the perfect player for our club.  Grabbing the best possible talent is a given, that doesn't necessarily get you anywhere if that talent ends up playing like positions.  In rare cases it may work out to move a player like we did with Youk to IB.  Do we really need to bridge these same weak areas year after year with FA's? 

I'm sure our FO knows best, but do feel they can do a better job addressing our issues.  Again I respectively ask... How long has it been since a few kids really helped our lineup on a regular basis?  I would also love to see draft and trades similar to the NBA allowed at some point.      

 

 

 

 

...Your thoughts are quite parallel to those of Moonslav. You want to sacrifice having a competitive team entirely in 2013 and 2014 and let fans wait it out until the prospects are ready in 2015

 

My plan had us being just as good in 2013 as we are now, but better in 2015 and beyond, so stop the propaganda.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

moon is a respected poster who can speak for himself and debate a subject as well as anyone.  I'm only looking at what we have all seen from our present management. 

The facts are, the last great crop of youngsters that came from the farm wasn't by luck.  They were well thought out picks/moves that addressed our most important needs from year to year and made "for the most part" by people no longer with the organization. 

We need to find/take that type of approach again, otherwise 2007 will extend on to 2015/16 and behond.

 

In response to craze4sox's comment:

 

First of all, you might not realize this but by being ranked number 8, Xander Bogaerts has become the higest ranked position player by Baseball America in the history of the Boston Red Sox.  Unless, of course, you want to count the 2 weeks the Sox had BA #5 Andy Marte back in 2005.

 

Second, you do not seem to understand their draft strategy.  They draft "up the middle players" as early and often as possible.  Very, very common you see the Sox taking C, 2B, SS and CF in the early rounds.  The plus to this is not only stronger players up the middle, but it is easier to move them to the other positins.  It is easier to turn a CF into a RF or a SS into a 3B than the other way around.  This increases the likelihood of draftees making the majors.  The downside is that the Sox miss out on most of the power hitting corner players.  But seeing as to how they have almst always had late picks, the elite ones never made it to them anyway.  They have been using this stragey since 2003, and the only non-pitchers  who were not "up the middle" players taken in the first 3 rounds in that entire timeframe are Bryce Brentz and Hunter Morris.  (Vitek was a 2B in college, but also played 3B.  He is an arguable inclusion.)

 

As a result, the Sox have very good depth in the "up the middle" positions up and down the minors, despite your belief that 2B depth ends with Brock Holt.  (Fangraphs had Mookie Betts in their  top 15 list for Sox prospects this year, by the way.)

 

This might actually be the strongest farm system the Sox have had in a long time.  I could be wrong, but I do not think the Sox have ever had 4 of the top 50 in BA's rankings, which only go back to 1990, but that is far enough to make the point...

This might actually be the strongest farm system the Sox have had in a long time.  I could be wrong, but I do not think the Sox have ever had 4 of the top 50 in BA's rankings, which only go back to 1990, but that is far enough to make the point...

I've been a Sox fan since the early 70's, and I never recall our farm being this good or deep.

Maybe the 72-74 farm was pretty close in top of farm strength: Rice, Lynn, Evans, Burleson, Cooper & Hobson to name the big ones.

I have to say it's really enjoyable to see posters finally challenging Zac's negative comments, instead of laughing at his really not funny at all jabs here.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

In response to craze4sox's comment:

None !!! Don't lose sleep over watching baseball. What happens ,happens......Your Goverment should be your concern..Why worry over Million dollar players who could care less if you have a job or the struggles you might have to overcome. Just enjoy the game ,you have enough on your plate to worry about.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

 

This might actually be the strongest farm system the Sox have had in a long time.  I could be wrong, but I do not think the Sox have ever had 4 of the top 50 in BA's rankings, which only go back to 1990, but that is far enough to make the point...

I've been a Sox fan since the early 70's, and I never recall our farm being this good or deep.

Maybe the 72-74 farm was pretty close in top of farm strength: Rice, Lynn, Evans, Burleson, Cooper & Hobson to name the big ones.

 

moon,

 

I think our farm has some promising young talent just not at many positions.  I also doubt some of our experts ability to evaluate/mentor what they considered our top prospects since our last crop.  Kids like  Hansen, Di Nardo, Anderson, Esposito, Kelly, Iggy, Kalish, Reddick, Rizzo, Masterson, Weiland, Bowden, Navarro and a few others.  I could be wrong but only Clay, Ells, Doub and possibly Middy have made any kind of impact since 2007.

During this time we have also signed a ton of rehabbed pitchers, FA's and other bridge players because of our lack of depth.  Our "lets spend" on everyone method certainly didn't help our cause but we came out of that and right back into the bridge idea.

I just expected a few smarter "less expensive" moves this off season because none of them have changed our club long term.  Here are a few moves at the very least I would have made differently using the same "save our prospects" mindset ....

#1 Signing Ross and Victorino were good moves, our staff ERA and OF has been a mess.

#2 Nap at three years?  No, I would have let Gomez have the 1B position with possibly Overbay as backup but Nap at 1 year is a deal.

#3 Linares in Gomes out against righties - 10mil savings

#4 Offer Salty and Doubront to the Angels for CJ Cron, it would allow Lav to learn behind Ross at the big league level.  Doub is under our control for a good stretch and it may be a lot to give up but it gives us a future cleanup hitter/1B/DH- 5mil savings

#5 Give Taz a shot at Doubronts spot

#6 Offer Brandon McCarthy a three year 22mil contract instead of signing Dempster - 4.5mil savings and a much younger starter.

#7 Give Ciriaco the starting SS position with Iggy as back up for a year to see what we really have.  Bogy isn't far off if we truly intend to play him at SS - 9.5mil savings

 

Total Savings 29mil, a younger "three year" starter and 1B for the future

 

 

 

 

2.  Nap was not signed for 3 years.  He was signed for 1.  Gomez is awful, and has probably alrady maxed himelf out talentwise.  His marginal numbers last year were HEAVILY dependant on luck, and this would deintely even itself out over time.

 

3.  Linares is not better than Gomes (as a hitter).  No ceiling.  He is already 28 and takes too long to adjust to lower level minor league pitching.   He is not exactly stepping in and doing anything.  you might save $10mill, but you easily cost this team over 2 wins, which is the value of $10mill.  Isd the goal a better team or a better financial picture?  And are you related in any way to Jeff Loria?

 

4.  Doubtful Anaheim takes a $4.5mill catcher (when they do not need one) for their top hitting prospect.  Doubront has some trade value, but I would argue (and win) that the $10mill you spent to replace him will allow for a worse team, given where you sauved the money.  I will take Doubront and the guys you replaced Linares and Gomez with over Gomez and Linares and who you replce Doubront with.

 

5.  Taz is a good possibiliy but he will need som stretching.  He has not started since prior to TJ surgery and pluging him in hoping for 150 IP is recipe for disaster physically.   Getting this guy into the bullpen, however, does nothing but make that aspect of the team stronger.  (I do hope he does some stretching in Pawtucket).

 

6.  McCarthy was a possibility but reamins a physical question mark over the course of his, well, life.  I would have signed him over Dempster, though. 

 

7.  While I eould have gone with Iggy. I knlow you will never believe this, BUT CIRIACO IS NOT THAT GOOD.  He is not some sort of "late bloomer" who excels against higher competition.  Those are unsupported cop out answers than ignore a lifetime worth of facts.  He is an imaptient free swinger who got by on ludicrous BABIP and his ability to hit fastballs.  Plug him into a regular starting role, and his imaptience and inability to hit or lay off of sliders low and away will shine through. and when he is not hitting he has no offensive game to speak of.  He needs to hit .285 just to hope to have an OBP.  As much as Iglesias diappointed at the plate, he still has more patience and discipline than Ciriaco, and a better minor league track record to boot.  Hey, maybe Iglesias is one of those guys who "excels against better competition."  I say he deserves the shot, especially with some of his ridiculous defensive skills.

 

The really weird part about your "plan" is that you started this whole thread about minor league depth, and this plan does bvery little to address it, unless you think the only missing piece is CJ Cron.    The rest of it really looks like nothing more than an attempt to rebuild the MLB team using AAAA talent, a formula that has not only never worked, but actually puts together a lineup as bad as the one Miami will be fielding this year.  Do not be fooled by short term success for players with a long, long, long  history of not being successful, although it seems I am a little late with that advice.

 

The only reaminaing question is why you feel you understand th abilities of Gomez, Linares and Ciriaco better than the Sox.  They not only know each player personally (which I am guess you do not), but emply a staff of scouts to evaluate them and others, and see them play far, far more often than you could ever hope to.   They watch these guys in Winter Ball, they watch them in practices and at workouts.  They see every minor league game.  Honestly, how many games have you seen Linares play in his life?  How many times did you see Gomez or Ciriaco play before they got called up?  Did you even hear of either of Gomez and Ciriaco befroe 2012?  (I never heard of Gomez before 2012.)  So why do you think YOU are the guy who knws these players better? 

 

Or are you making snap judgements on small sample sizes?  (Which, by the way, would not be breaking new ground.)

 

 

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

In response to notin's comment:

 

2.  Nap was not signed for 3 years.  He was signed for 1.  Gomez is awful, and has probably alrady maxed himelf out talentwise.  His marginal numbers last year were HEAVILY dependant on luck, and this would deintely even itself out over time.  Read my post, I said one year was a deal

 

3.  Linares is not better than Gomes (as a hitter).  No ceiling.  He is already 28 and takes too long to adjust to lower level minor league pitching.   He is not exactly stepping in and doing anything.  you might save $10mill, but you easily cost this team over 2 wins, which is the value of $10mill.  Isd the goal a better team or a better financial picture?  And are you related in any way to Jeff Loria?  How does anyone know Linares isn't better and cheaper than Gomes against righties if the guy has never been given a chance?  This is supposidly more bridge time correct?  No need to spend 10mil on another one dimensional, mediocre OF.

 

4.  Doubtful Anaheim takes a $4.5mill catcher (when they do not need one) for their top hitting prospect.  Doubront has some trade value, but I would argue (and win) that the $10mill you spent to replace him will allow for a worse team, given where you sauved the money.  I will take Doubront and the guys you replaced Linares and Gomez with over Gomez and Linares and who you replce Doubront with.  Of course, again you don't know, I did say offer

 

5.  Taz is a good possibiliy but he will need som stretching.  He has not started since prior to TJ surgery and pluging him in hoping for 150 IP is recipe for disaster physically.   Getting this guy into the bullpen, however, does nothing but make that aspect of the team stronger.  (I do hope he does some stretching in Pawtucket).  Agreed but again, if Doub was traded I would give him a shot

 

6.  McCarthy was a possibility but reamins a physical question mark over the course of his, well, life.  I would have signed him over Dempster, though.  How the heck does another old man like Dempster help our future?  In the clubhouse maybe?  Get the guys a free puppy!

 

7.  While I eould have gone with Iggy. I knlow you will never believe this, BUT CIRIACO IS NOT THAT GOOD.  He is not some sort of "late bloomer" who excels against higher competition.  Those are unsupported cop out answers than ignore a lifetime worth of facts.  He is an imaptient free swinger who got by on ludicrous BABIP and his ability to hit fastballs.  Plug him into a regular starting role, and his imaptience and inability to hit or lay off of sliders low and away will shine through. and when he is not hitting he has no offensive game to speak of.  He needs to hit .285 just to hope to have an OBP.  As much as Iglesias diappointed at the plate, he still has more patience and discipline than Ciriaco, and a better minor league track record to boot.  Hey, maybe Iglesias is one of those guys who "excels against better competition."  I say he deserves the shot, especially with some of his ridiculous defensive skills.  If you feel Iggy deserves a shot over Ciriaco?  Enough said!

 

The really weird part about your "plan" is that you started this whole thread about minor league depth, and this plan does bvery little to address it, unless you think the only missing piece is CJ Cron.    The rest of it really looks like nothing more than an attempt to rebuild the MLB team using AAAA talent, a formula that has not only never worked, but actually puts together a lineup as bad as the one Miami will be fielding this year.  Do not be fooled by short term success for players with a long, long, long  history of not being successful, although it seems I am a little late with that advice.  I don't feel the only missing piece is CJ Cron but to land a possible 1B, younger pitcher and save 29mil it was worth the risk considering the money we waisted this off season.  That money could have gone towards a FA next season to fill another void.

 

The only reaminaing question is why you feel you understand th abilities of Gomez, Linares and Ciriaco better than the Sox.  They not only know each player personally (which I am guess you do not), but emply a staff of scouts to evaluate them and others, and see them play far, far more often than you could ever hope to.   They watch these guys in Winter Ball, they watch them in practices and at workouts.  They see every minor league game.  Honestly, how many games have you seen Linares play in his life?  How many times did you see Gomez or Ciriaco play before they got called up?  Did you even hear of either of Gomez and Ciriaco befroe 2012?  (I never heard of Gomez before 2012.)  So why do you think YOU are the guy who knws these players better?  First off the Sox now have a higher regard for Ciriaco which you will see again this season as he backs up Drew.  Secondly, if we can keep a useless bat like DMac as long as we did, or give Kalish and Nava an opportunity, Linares deserves his chance to prove us right or wrong.  Lastly, Nap at 1B is a serious defensive liability for three years 30plus mil and AGAIN read the post.  I said he was a good deal for the one year we gave him.

 

Or are you making snap judgements on small sample sizes?  (Which, by the way, would not be breaking new ground.)  Nope just giving my honest opinion!

 

 

In response to selenium-'s comment:

Go with that thought its brilliant :)

Jonny Gomes has the third highest OPS for alll outfielders in MLB vs LHP with at lest 500 PA over the last 3 years.  THAT is how we know he will outhit Linares.  Got any evidence Linares would be among the top 3 in MLB at anything?

 

YOU are the one who keeps bringing up the 3 years for Napoli.  Who cares how anyone feels about a non-existant deal?

 

I did say I would have taken McCarthy over Demsper, butthis does not change the fact thatMcCarthy has along history of injury.

 

Still waiting for why you think you know the abilities of Ciriaco, Gomez, and Linares better than the Sox. I can admit they clearly like Gomez more than I do as I would have released him months ago. The Sox and I appear toagree on Ciriaco (utility infielder at best) and not so much on Linares, who I think is pprobably a waste of AAA roster space and unlikely to ever see more than very limited MLB action.