***Official 2011-12 MLB HOTSTOVE OFF-SEASON THREAD***

Baseball is not football. I don't think that's happening in baseball. First of all because the tickets are much cheaper and secondly because unlike football the live experience is still much better.

 

Because it takes time for the kids they draft to develop to be able to have success at the MLB level. Geez you want everything to happen right away and for teams to be good yesterday but it just doesn't happen like that. Kansas City has tons of talent at the MLB level right now from kids they drafted that are just starting to crack the ML. Eric Hosmer, Dan Duffy, Mike Moustakas, Alex Gordon just to name a few. Plus they still have kids in the minor leagues that are ready to come up in the next few years that will make them a better team. For small market teams that want to compete they're going about it the right way. Hey I'd rather my team spend 17 million on the draft each year than pay that to John Lackey to watch him suck each time out. Free agency at the MLB level doesn't always work out either.

As for their record, yeah they stunk, ditto for Pittsburgh, and hey maybe the prospects will turn out to be busts but at least they're spending team trying to make the future of their franchise better. It's a better strategy then saying hey let's sign Mark Kotsay or Juan Pierre to deals and even if they have career years the team is still going to suck.

Seriously if you ran a small market team what would be your strategy, how would you try make your team good?

 

Difference being the FA is a draw to the ballpark, sinking millons into players who most likely will never amount to much is not much of a business plan RF, add all of those costs are unrecoverable once they leave, after having paid millions to train them, you simply start the whole process over again.

Meanwhile, a generation of fans only know "they suck, why bother"?

And there is one of the core problems with MLB, today's Royals or Pirates children of adult fans do not recall Saberhagen, Brett, Van Slyke or Drabek, they only know their dad's team is bad and boring.

Cannot in this current system RF, this is one of the reasons why I'm in favor of contract caps and a salary cap and or steeper luxury tax, prefer caps though as cheap owners simply pocket the tax receipts rather than improving the team.

The Rangers "get it" they declared bankruptcy, cleared the decks of bad contracts then used MLB like a bank to make it to back to back WS, does that sound like a good business model to you RF? How long until other owners do the same thing?

 

What FA will be a big draw for a small market team? They can't afford to sign the Arods or Albert Pujols of the MLB world. Signing Mark Kotsay or Erik Bedard isn't going to bring fans in. The whole point of drafting players and developing them is to set up a core so you're consistently drafting good players, developing them and putting them in the MLB once a former prospect leaves the team. Carl Crawford left Tampa Bay but they had Desmond Jennings to plug in and play and didn't lose a beat. Just because a player leaves for FA doesn't mean the team is going to automatically stink. Once you start building a strong farm system it doesn't mean you stop once you develop a few players. It's a continuious process.

Ask a Royals fan if they're excited about their future with guys like Hosmer, Montegumary, Myers, Moustakas, Duffy etc coming up. Ditto for Pirate fans with Cole, McCutchen, Alvarez etc. Fans in those cities are starting to get excited about their team and it's because of the potential of these prospects. Without the prospect what do they have to look forward to?

And again once the team starts to win, it will bring the fans in. Fans want winning baseball clubs, once teams start to win fans show up. And I know you're going to throw Tampa Bay back at me for that statement and yes it is sad that TB doesn't draw more fans to games but they are drawing more fans maybe not sell outs but much better than the late 90s, ealry 2000s but they're located in a poor area and the domepark is a dump (worst in the MLB). Yet they continue to draw extremely well in TV and radio ratings. People do care about Tampa Bay now.

Ok but the MLB doesn't have a cap so how would you do things in the current situation? That's my question.

Ummm did you miss the part where they signed a huge TV contract and got a new owner? So they had a bad owner in Tom Hicks, they got rid of him. But because they had a strong and smart FO who drafted, signed international FAs, traded well and developed their players they were able to still become a good team in spite of that. Again it just goes to show that everything starts with the FO building from within. You pretty much proved my point with this. They were able to overcome all of that to become a good team. Again building from within, it works. Simply just drafting players doesn't equal success as every team does it, but you need smart people working in the FO to indentify those players to draft/sign/trade for and develop them.

And yes the Rangers FO has a great business model which is why they have been success thus far, it's not their fault they once had a bad owner. I think it just proves that teams can be good even if they have a bad or cheap owner.

It's really not a hard thing to grasp, not sure why you don't get it.

 

A

...Yanks havent confirmed yet though....

 

As the fan favorite vets leave, and you have no bodies replacing them, do you not quite grasp what that tells the fans of the team?

They look forward to yet another yr of...losing?

I suspect being a BoSox fan, one does not quite understand what it means when a AGone leaves for a couple of players who more then likely, will do jack in MLB.

You are trying to use TB as a model, then ignore the realities of that model.

Impose a cap, this is one of the reasons why I like the cap on amateur's contracts, the NBA/NFL have such caps, why is MLB any different?

And of course their star player was a fmr #1 pick they poured money into, only to watch him crash into drug addicition then star for Rangers, this is your business model?

Rangers used MLB money to make deadline trades for Vets they could not afford otherwise, do you realize how insane that is?

We'll see, so far declaring bankruptcy and using MLB as a creditor appears to have been their model, it will not be long until other owners do the same thing, running a business like an Airline makes no sense long term, but maybe that is just me.

When the WS has ratings smaller then the least important NFL game in a given week, maybe one will understand, right now one is seeing no evil, hearing no evil, and speaking no evil.

In your world, it is not a dorsal fin of a shark, it is charlie the tuna swimming around, no surprise.

This idea of "let's sell fans on our future!"

With guys basic odds say won't make an impact for yrs, if ever, and let's continue selling that hope for a decade, and the fans will come!

Is either naive', or outdated, not sure which.

 

Again let's look at TB, they had an in house replacement when Carl Crawford left. The team didn't miss a beat. Ask a TB fan how he feels about Desmond Jennings. Nappy you want to weigh in on this?

As a Red Sox fan I've watched star players like Pedro Martinez, Manny Ramirez, Johnny Damon, Derek Lowe, Victor Martinez and Jonathan Papelbon leave. But I've seen them replaced by Jacoby Ellsbury, Jon Lester, Clay Buchholz and turned prospects Brandon Moss and Craig Hansen into Jason Bay. And also seen my team use the picks from losing those players via FA to sign players who are already making a difference at the MLB level (i.e. Jed Lowrie, Clay Buchholz etc).

You clearly have zero clue what you're talking about. How can you or anyone possible knock TB as a model. They're in a division with the Yankees AND Red Sox and have made the playoffs 3 out of 4 years and won the division in two of those years. How is that not successful? And they're doing it by not being able to draw fans because of the location of their crappy domepark. The other 29 teams would like to have the model TB has. As a Red Sox fan I wish my FO worked as well as they did and my FO wasn't too shaddy either.

Again clearly you're not informed as to the negative of the new CBA and what it is going to do to small market teams in the draft. Do you realize that if the new CBA was in part in last year's draft the Pittsburgh Pirates who spend 17 million dollars on the draft getting top talent would have to pay a 25 million dollar fee to the teams that didn't go over slot and didn't spend money on the draft? How does that help small market teams when those rules are in place. Believe it or not, the draft with the way it was set up was working.

You do realize that Josh Hamilton wasn't drafted by the Rangers right? The Rangers traded Edinson Volquez (a pitcher they signed and developed) for him. And if you're talking about TB spending millions on him and got nothing in return, isn't he more of the exception of the rule. I mean who else has been like Hamilton in the history of baseball?

The Rangers used MLB money to aquire Cliff Lee at the deadline that's correct, but do you know why they had to? Read up on how Tom Hicks lied to the MLB about his finances and how he screwed the Ranger franchise. They needed the MLB to help them operation or they'd go under, kind of like what's happening to the Dodgers right now. Yes Lee helped but they had the core of the team already in place and last time I checked they didn't have Cliff Lee this year and would probably the 2nd best team in baseball.

It is just you. I'm talking about the FO not the owner. You clearly have clue as to what the Rangers front office has been doing for the past few years in building up their franchise that was crippled from stupid big dollar contracts given out to FAs (Arod, Chan Ho Park to name a few) from the bottom up. If you can't or don't realize that I don't know what to tell you. Almost everyone on that team where either home grown players or players they got from trading prospects they developed. Adrian Beltre was the only big ticket FA they signed recently. So yes I'd say the FO is doing things right.

So now we go from how the CBA isn't helping small market teams to talking about the ratings? Do you even have a point or just keep changing the subject? Would you rather have big MLB playoff ratings but have the Yankees or Red Sox or Mets or Cubs or Dodgers as the only teams that make the playoffs? Or do you want teams to earn their way into the playoffs/WS? And if those big market teams did make the WS you'd probably complain about how they bought their way into it and ignore a good rating? I just don't get what your point is here.

Look bottom line, small market teams are at a disadvantage with the current structure of the no salary cap. We all agree on this. The only way from them to compete is to draft well and sign the young international FA and develop them which teams like TB, Texas etc has been doing. Now because of the new CBA it puts the small market teams at a disadvantage of the only advantage that they had to begin with.

 

On second thought, I'll simplify this further:

-MLB is declining in importance (hence the ratings mention)
-Small mkt models, even when they have success on the field, are lightly supported locally
-As long as there is a mass exodus of FA Stars from those clubs, they will continue to fade in importance
-MLB is the one major sport in the US without a salary cap
-Anything that can be done to control costs should be engaged in to restore competitive balance
-Fans no longer buy into "but the future" thinking
-MLB does very little to promote fan interest effectively

Clear enough>

Now what are your ideas to change things for the better?

 

-The WS ratings were down because there wasn't a big market team involved. St. Louis has a nice following around the US but no one outside of Texas cares about the Rangers. But you fail to mention that game 7 was the highest ranked single WS game since 2004 and Game 6 draw very well just under Game 6 of the 2009 WS between the Yankees and Phillies. And really baseball is declining in importance? What sport besides football has taken over as the #2 watched sport (please don't give me NASCAR or golf).

-This statement is incorrect. Fans support the team when they're winning. Look at Cleveland, they draw almost 500k more fans last year. The fans came out and supported a team that couldn't draw 10k fans the first weekend of the season. Heck even Pittsburgh's attendance was up when they were in 1st/2nd place in the middle of the season. And it's no shock that Milwaukee started to draw 3 million fans once they got good. Yes Tampa Bay's attendance isn't good but you fail to realize or simply ignore that the dome they play in is a dump and the location of the dome is just awful. It's hard for the locals to get to. Yet their TV ratings and radio ratings (another source of revenue for teams) is high and remains strong.

On the flip side, the New York Mets, a big market team, has seen its attendance and ratings drop. Why? Because the team is lousy. I guarantee to you once the Mets start winning baseball games the fans will show up.

-Again TB lost a ton of FAs and yet the team remained successful. The fans didn't show up to the ball park but the TV and radio ratings were very strong.

-MLB is the one sport without a cap yet it has the more parady out of the 4 major sports. Only 4 teams since 2000 haven't made the playoffs and there have been 9 different WS winners in that time frame and only 1 team (Texas) made back to back WS appearances. But I'm not going to argue if there should or shouldn't be a cap. I frankly don't care if there is or isn't. Remember when you claimed only the top spending teams make the playoffs and I proved that statement to be 100% false?

-Fans don't buy into the "this is the future" thinking? Let me give you some numbers:

22,569 -(2010 average)
40,315
32,876 @ CLE (17,181 average)
40,325
31,913
42,889 @ ATL (30,989 average)
39,214
34,723
27,037 @ FL (18,826 average)
37,868 @ CIN (25,439 average)
25,939
21,695
45,266

24,256 (2011 average)
29,092
24,238
33,247
34,615 @ FL (18,942)

Those numbers are the attendance of games Stephen Strasburg pitched in his career. So he not only drew big in Washington but also on the road. You don't think fans in Washington are excited for Strasburg, Bryce Harper, Anthony Rendon etc all on the same team together? If you don't think that then you're not paying attention. Likewise if you don't think fans in KC are excited or even in TB with their next wave of prospects. Heck Yankees fans are giddy to see Jesus Montero, and the B Boys. Most fans are extremely excited to see the future playing at the MLB level. Especially since MLB has done a nice job lately of marketing the draft and putting it on TV>

-I agree the MLB does a poor job marketing, especially towards kids. No argument here.

-As for what I'd change, first I'd have to look into moving both the Rays and A's to a different part of FL and San Jose respectively. Then two if it was possible to add two new teams so each league could have an even 16 teams. I'd get rid of the pitcher hitting. I'd make each league have two divisions so the top 4 teams in each division make the playoffs. I'd have an actual balanced schedule so each team in each division plays each other and the other teams the same number of times. I'd eliminate the new CBA agreement in terms of spending limits on the draft and signing international FAs. I'd include kids from Puerto Rico as part of the international FAs instead of forcing them into the regular draft (seriously this is something that isn't talked about but it hurts power kids have in PR). I'd get rid of losing picks if a team signs a type A FA but would give an extra pick at the end of the first round to the team that lost the player. I'd move up the draft signing deadline. I'd get rid of the whole the All Star game counts crap and just give home field to the team with the best record. Get rid of the stupid hill in CF in Houston. Expand replay. Expand the rosters to 26 men (27 for double headers). The money teams get from luxury tax must be spend on the team payroll if not that team doesn't get it. Market the game better to kids and African Americans in the US. That's the most of what I can think of off the top of my head really.

 

Im not going to weigh in on the entire conversation as I highly agree with Ray and he's doing a damn good job without me.

But my thoughts and the general consensus between knowledgeable Rays fans on the Crawford-Jennings thing was, while it sucked losing Crawford and everyone would of preferred to keep him. Paying him that kind of money wasn't going to happen. Especially when you have a prospect like Jennings who should put up similar numbers minus a few steals and better plate discipline while playing great defense in left just like Carl for, well, let's just say a lot less. Losing a home grown great ball player sucks, but it doesn't suck all that much once your replacement player that you have developed comes in and you don't miss a beat.

 

It drew a 9 or 10 rating, for perspective a football game, even Jags v Colts will draw that many viewers.

"Up" means little when it is still less then 20 k, and we've been through "tickets sold" and attendance, huge difference between the two as even the Dolphins home games will have announced attendance of 50k when there are maybe 35k people there, when a sponsorship is bought, or paid advertisemen purchased, those tickets count as "attendance" even though they are throw in tickets with no one actually in the seat.

SD built a new stadium and attendance is still 17k, building a new stadium typically bumps attendance for a couple of yrs, then it slides backwards.

Sure, but when one considers the Yankees tickets price people out of that market, they should have good attendance as it is.

With a small media deal, that does not help the team very much.

And recall my pointing out that the teams that do spend large $$$ do make the playoffs consistently? A one shot appearance back in the day means nothing RF.

And if/when Strasborg leaves DC, and goes to Boston or LA or whichever large mkt/high payroll team, they benefit from that effect his 33 starts will have, if anything that merely highlights the fact it is hurtful when the name star leaves, the NFL understands this which is why FA movement is restricted.

Especially in terms of how difficult athleticially MLB is, also as Joe Morgan said in MLB you can neutralize the star by taking the bat out of their hands.

-to many borderline franchises tbh, the same issues can be found all over MLB
-MLB should post big play and great players on Youtube, for example once I looked for a vid of Pete Rose pancaking Ray Fosse in the all star game and it was absolutely nowhere to be found, when a game markets itself on the past as heavily as MLB does, they should make the past come to life not just use a stat line for Cap LaJoie or Honus Wagner or Ted Williams.

I think the All Star gaming counting is a good thing, I also could care less about the hill in Houston, imo that is another thing that makes MLB unique.

Hate the luxury tax as it more or less just puts money into the pocket of some owners who are not interested in fielding a competitive team yr in and yr out, think the MLB Draft should be modernized, they still use rules from when...the mid 60's?

I hang out on MLB's Padres forum on occasion, one of the few optimistic times on that place was during the draft, they should expand it, if MLB wants to sell fans on hope that would be a great place to start.

 

What does any of this have to do with hot stove?

 

Not a damn thing at all...

We all love MLB and what to see it prosper though FY.

As for the subject at hand, really much won't happen until the Winter Meetings in a couple of weeks.

 

Tampa traded for a guy convicted of rape and sodomy....

 

...

 

Damn, wanted the Marlins to sign him. Great signing by KC.

 

Bobby V!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www2.turnto10.com/sports/201...-manager-ar-845678/?sc_cid=JAR-BNEWS-Breaking

 

Hmm, I don't think this will turn out very well for the Red Sox.

 

That remains to be seen, they are so freaking talented that all they need is some diclipline, whoever comes in has the luxary or guiding the ship, although I believe the 9th innings are going to be a little dicey...

To me the problem is that with that team Luccino runs that ship, this is by no means a Cherington hire....it says something that the 2 top guys on the Boston (Theo and Pap) wanted out, and didnt even consider come back there....says alot....I very well can picture Elsbury doing the same in a few years....

 

Sort of what my thought process was as well FY, Boston doesn't function like this in my mind.

A crack in the well oiled machine maybe?

Does Bobby V strike you as a disciplinarian?

 

Exactly right about the team being talented, I don't think Valentine is going to help or hurt the Sox chances as manager, I think at the end of the day it's on the players, it always is. I do think having a new voice in the clubhouse will be good for the team though. A little bit of luck won't be bad either and of course keeping guys healthy.

As for Lucchino, yeah I think he does have a big say in what goes on with the baseball ops, whether it's good or bad who really knows but the FO. I think it's fair to speculate that Theo wanted out because of Lucchino (although there's no real proof to that and I actually believe Theo when he said he wanted a new challenge etc) but to say Papelbon left because of it isn't 1000% incorrect. Papelbon left because the Phillies offered him a boat load of money so he jumped at it. I don't blame him for doing that, everyone expected it. If the Sox offered him the same deal Philly did I bet he stays but the Sox didn't even offer him a contract. I think it says more about the Sox not wanting to pay big money for a guy who throws ~70 innings each year than Papelbon leaving because of Lucchino/FO. As for Ellsbury, again if Ellsbury leaves it will be because a team offers him the most money not who's in the FO. I never heard of a player passing up big money because of who was in the FO. That's just silly.

 

Like with anything losing changes things, especially the perception of things. But yes I do think there is a crack in the well oiled machine and yes Bobby Valentine is absolutely a disciplinarian.

Bottom line is if the Sox win all will be forgotten and laughed about next year, if they lose more silly stories will be written about chicken and beer etc.

 

I have no real opinion on the Bobby Valentine hiring. It could be great, it could be bad who knows until you actually see him manage. I really have no clue if he's a good or bad in game manager I can't remember what I did yesterday let alone moves he made with the Rangers or Mets. The one thing that everyone is saying is that he's a very smart guy and good at judging talent so from that aspect I'm happy. As much as I loved Francona, and still do, I remember feeling indifferent about his hiring too back in the winter of 2003. No one knew he'd help the team win 2 WS titles. I know Valentine is getting a lot of hate from the fans and media members but I just urge them to sit back and wait and see, that's what I'm going to do.

Now the Sox need to hire a pitching coach.

 

One thing about Bobby V, he is a good baseabll mind, and he takes no bs with the media.....which is key in Boston....

Sometimes he gets over emotional but what manager doesnt?

Lets put it this way, nobody is filling out the lineup card but Bobby V....

 

we are going to disagree, Papelbon had every bit the leverage if not more than the Sox...he is a champion, and the best closer in baseball not named Mo.....who in some aspects got douched around by the management (alla JE) when the time came he bolted never even talking Boston.....I am sure his agent could have leveraged out deals with other teams, but they didnt wait.....Of course the money has alot to do with it, but for Papelbon to leave the way he did, and as quick isnt shocking at all....I just dont think he wanted to be there anymore for whatever reason...

 

I think that's complete speculation on your part, although kind of irrevelant because I don't think the Sox were going to re-sign Papelbon anyway, especially not for those years and for that dollar amount, they never seemed serious about him and never talked to him about signing a long term deal while they were busy locking up Lester, Pedroia, Buchholz and Youkilis to long term deals. The fact that the Sox never really spoke to Papelbon or his agent after the season I think was telling and that's why neither Papelbon or his agent went to the Sox after the Phillies gave him that offer. Let's face it, no one else was going to give him that contract Philly did so why not just take it? Why drag it out? Plus we don't know what happened behind closed doors it's possible the Phillies told Papelbon's agent look we gave a similar offer to Madsen, whoever says yes first gets it. Who knows, but again I don't think Papelbon's decision had anything to do with the team, the city or upper management. It was all about the money.

And I completely disagree that Papelbon was douched around by management. When was he ever mistreated? Ditto for Ellsbury. Outside of moving Ellsbury to LF for a year (which was a bad idea in retrospect) the FO never mistreated either player so I really don't know what you mean by that. Ellsbury was mistreated by the media and certain Sox players but never the FO.

 

One instance the management openly called out Ellsbury the year he got hurt a few times, even making him go to other doctors....

The feeling was mutual between the team and Paps, but in this instance Paps had alot of leverage as well....thus he didnt stick around

It is just funny how the Sox will spend whatever they want, and in alot of regards compared to the rest of the league vastly overspend, but then for somebody else it is all about a the money and seen as a sound baseball money move, you as a Sox fan cant have it both ways, there are reasons for them not signing him other than the money....if this was Scutaro and we are talking a squabble over money/years then yeah sound baseball move going in another direction......The sound baseball move is signing a closer (given the Red Sox budget)...obviously not to whatever they want, but you cant sit here and tell me that signing Pap to a 3 year deal at say 13-14 a year with a 4th vested year kicked in on something like innings pitched for 3 years total is worth less than say the Crawford signing for more years and money?? And Pap wouldnt have listened to that if he was truly interested in coming back to Boston....

long term deals such as Youk, Dustin, Lester were buying out the arbitration years (thus less money), different than Pap who is a free agent...

IMO Boston>Philly in terms of teams to play for, and yes players do sometimes take less money for the ideal fit.....

Lastly call me crazy but I believe, the Sox use that kid they drafted from UCONN as the closer over Bard sooner than we think...

 

Good signing, I would have taken him over Swisher.....

 

...

 

I'm going to take this one at a time because there's a lot in here I want to discussion but don't want to get it lost in shuffle.

No one in the front office openly called out Ellsbury. It was the media and Youkilis that said anything in public. The Sox made him go to another doctor after Ellsbury requested he see someone else after he didn't feel he was getting better. It turned out Ellsbury was right, the Sox doctors did an awful job with him. And teams send players for 2nd opinions all the time, that doesn't mean there's a disconnect or a riff between the team and player. It's normal.

What leverage did Papelbon have though? The Sox didn't even talk to him about a new contract, I take that as a clear sign that had no intentions of re-signing him. Papelbon had zero leverage with the Sox.

No the sound baseball move is not to lock up a relief pitcher for a long term deal with big money attrached to it. There's been exactly 1 RP in the history of baseball that has ever lived up to a contract like that and it's Rivera. Giving someone 4 years and 50 million for on average 70 innings pitched per year is just dumb. And I'm glad that my FO acknowledges that and even though they have money to spend know that's not a smart baseball move. Plus as good as Papelbon is let's not ignore the fact he isn't perfect nor lights out like Rivera is. And was one year removed from being pretty average.

And there's a huge difference between Carl Crawford and Papelbon. That's not a good example to use.

Just because a team has money to spend doesn't mean you spend it just for the sake of spending it. Heck just look at the Yankees, why not knock them for not going after C.J. Wilson. They have money to spend and rotation needs.

And again all of this stuff is irrevelant as to whether or not Papelbon would have stayed simply because the Sox never offered him anything. It's entirely possible that the Sox didn't want him back because of his cost.

No I was talking about how the Sox never approched Papelbon about buying out his artibitration years or sign him to a long term deal before he hit the FA market. They talked to him once I believe after the 2007 season but never after that. Meanwhile how no problems or issues signing other guys long term.

Really? Which team is better is a non factor really. You think Jayson Werth cared he signed with Washington? If the Pirates offered Papelbon a better contract than Philly, he'd be a Pirate right now.

Name me 5 players that took less money (I'm talking about big money not a million here or there) to play in a place that was a better fit. Hell Johnny Damon threw away his Sox legacy for 8 million dollars total to play for the Yankees. Even Cliff Lee who signed with the Phillies ended up taking 1 less year but a higher salary per year than the Yankees offered him, so while it appeared at first he passed up more money to sign with Philly he really didn't.

You're crazy, it's not happening. Yes Bard was very bad in September but people forget since he first came up in 2009, he's out pitched Papelbon and was put in higher leverage situations that him during that time frame. People forget that after Papelbon blew a playoff game in 2009 and again after the 2010 season people wanted Bard to be the closer instead of Papelbon, funny how that changed over the course of a month. Relief pitchers are extremely risky and unpredictable. I think Bard will be fine in the 9th inning if he's made the closer. Just like I think David Robertson would be too even though neither is a "proven closer". The closer role is the most overrated title in baseball.

 

The 2 that come to mind right off the bat are Josh Hamilton, and actually your very own Josh Beckett, if I had an actual list I could probably pick several examples...and even Evan Longoria too to a certain degree

we just have to disagree that's all, you think certain things/positions have little value or people have no leverage, and I think the opposite, no biggie my friend...

Also on that kid from UCONN I am not saying tomorrow obviously, when I mean sooner I mean in the scope of the timeframe...again an opinion....

 

IDK RF, the Sox are rolling the dice on Bard and Crawford bouncing back this yr?

That doesn't seem very "sox like"

And hiring a Mgr whose largest claim to recent fame was being fired...by the Japanese League?

 

Hamilton and Beckett were never free agents though. Ditto for Longoria, although he had only played in what 12 or so MLB games when he signed his deal. I'm only talking about free agents.

Unless Matt Barnes, kid from UConn, proves he can't start at the MLB level the Sox aren't going to make him their closer. SP is more valuable than a closer.

 

Beckett signed an extension in his walk year...a 4 year extension why? Because he took less to stay with the team he likes, he easily could have gotten more years, and dollars.....he choose to take less....simple as that...

I know this sounds nuts too by Albert may take less money....

 

What evidence is there than Bard and/or Crawford can't bounce back? Or how is it rolling the dice? With Crawford he's been good for over 6 years until last year. Can't a player simply have a bad year? Now it's completely possible that he continues to stink and declines but the guy has a long track record so yes I think he'll bounce back. I'm not very worried about Crawford right now. As for Bard, the guy had one bad month, does that mean he's crap? No. He was good for the previous 2 years before that September, and going into September he hadn't given up a run in 2 months. It could have been numerous factors as to why he pitched poorly but again there's no reason not to believe he won't be good again (of course that's if he's not hurt or anything like that).

As far as Valentine, who cares that his largest claim to recent fame is (although you say it was being fired from the Japanese league but he did win a few championships while he was there too, so he at least has that to hang his hat on, if that's at all meaningful at all). What track record did Terry Francona have before the Sox hired him? Or Joe Torre for that matter? People (fans, media, etc) hammered those hirings, they called Torre "Clueless Joe" and Francona "Francoma" and those hirings turned out ok. On the flip side Lou Pinella was considered a great manager and what did he really do outside of 1990? It works both ways. Really in the end it comes down to the players, if they play well and to their talent and stay healthy the Sox will be fine with anyone managing them.

 

But he wasn't a free agent. I'm simply talking about free agents. Some players don't like to gamble. In Beckett's case he was coming off of 2 so-so seasons where he spend time on the DL, it easily could have got less if he got hurt or didn't perform well (both ended up happening in 2010).