Well, there were articles in major Boston publications about this possibility, so I'd assume a lot of folks.Wow. What set this up? This year is disappointing but who the hell expected this?
Well, there were articles in major Boston publications about this possibility, so I'd assume a lot of folks.Wow. What set this up? This year is disappointing but who the hell expected this?
The Redsox can't control or stop the media. The group in charge does not matter as long as CHB and his ilk are working.He did exactly what he was hired to do. Parlay the farm system into a playoff/World Series run. But they now have to rebuild the system on the fly, decide on Mookie and possibly JD, remain a viable contender, and not blow by the luxury tax. That’s not a job for him. They need to move on, but without the Shank fed smear campaign. Which is already starting unfortunately. Ownership needs to cut the shit once and for all with these dysfunctional, soap opera break ups with players, managers, and GMs. Had really hoped Lucky’s departure would bring an end to that. Also think they need to commit to the next person for several years, and for ownership to make that relationship work.
"More involved" could mean a lot of things, though. Without more info than we have, there's no way to know if it was a legit too-many-cooks gripe or a turf-guarding overreaction.That note about DD walling off Sam Kennedy from baseball decisions. If the leadership wants Kennedy more involved on the baseball side, the attractiveness of the Boston GM job takes another hit.
In practical terms, probably nothing. In terms of optics, though, hanging on even another week, rather than announcing the firing in the immediate wake of a home series loss to the Yankees, might have saved them from the appearance of making an impulsive, knee-jerk move. Maybe JWH feels like he and his group have passed the point where they need to worry about stuff like that, and if so he's probably right.I don't think the timing is weird. It was probably something like DD agreeing just to move on now and it lets the Sox see these three in a different role.
If the team decided to cut bait, what does him hanging on another month get them?
Right. Dombrowski should know that better than anybody. He became GM of the Expos in July, fired the GM and assumed responsibility in Detroit after 6 games in 2002, and took over for Cherington (who was going to be “allowed to keep his job”) in August.I don't think the timing is weird. It was probably something like DD agreeing just to move on now and it lets the Sox see these three in a different role.
If the team decided to cut bait, what does him hanging on another month get them?
Agree to this. If DD wanted clarity about his situation prior to the Twins and JH told him he wasn't going to get an extension, what was the point for either side to continue on?I don't think the timing is weird. It was probably something like DD agreeing just to move on now and it lets the Sox see these three in a different role.
If the team decided to cut bait, what does him hanging on another month get them?
I would guess that DD had some input as to when he was going to be let go. DD has better things to do (I'm sure) that to devote his energies for a team that will very shortly be going in a different direction.In practical terms, probably nothing. In terms of optics, though, hanging on even another week, rather than announcing the firing in the immediate wake of a home series loss to the Yankees, might have saved them from the appearance of making an impulsive, knee-jerk move. Maybe JWH feels like he and his group have passed the point where they need to worry about stuff like that, and if so he's probably right.
Seriously. This is the ultimate "...but what have you done for me LATELY?" move.The Chris Owings call-up was the final straw
I think pointing to WS wins is focusing too much on results and focusing too little on the process. Cherington was too unwilling to trade any of the future away, DD was too willing to. They both won WS though so that "excuses" everything. It really doesn't though.Seriously. This is the ultimate "...but what have you done for me LATELY?" move.
Everywhere else, the GM is too chummy with ownership to get first blame, so it's managers/coaches who become fall guys. Bizarre that DD, who had a great rep before coming here, came here, won the friggen world series after assembling arguably the best Red Sox team of all time, didn't even get one year of slack.
I agree with those saying there's got to be something staggering behind this that we don't know yet, because they were super patient with Theo, and just the right amount of patient with Cherington.
Devils in the details. I expect we're going to hear this a lot, but I think it's fairly evident that DD brought more value to the ML club via the farm system than just sitting on all the prospects and hoping they mature would have. Nobody we traded away was a first rank ML starting pitcher, or looks like they'll become one. In terms of what we got back, it's hard to argue that DD got fleeced. Sure there were injuries, but let's not forget the rotation when DD was hired:He did exactly what he was hired to do. Parlay the farm system into a playoff/World Series run. But they now have to rebuild the system. . .
Seriously. Unless there's more that we don't know, this seems like a huge over-reaction and strange timing.Like they want him gone right this second? There must be more to it than just the baseball product of they couldn't even wait until the season was over.
I agree with your first sentence, but not the second. Cherington was pushed aside partly because he signed Sandoval and Ramirez and Castillo. He wanted to allow their more valuable prospects to become major leaguers, which seems like the right move. We don't know if he would have or would not have traded prospects the following offseason; there is evidence he was prepared to do just that. Most irrelevant, as Henry clearly wanted Dombrowski as soon as he came available. The prospects Dombrowski traded were mostly redundant, and none of them aside from Moncada have done anything.I think pointing to WS wins is focusing too much on results and focusing too little on the process. Cherington was too unwilling to trade any of the future away, DD was too willing to. They both won WS though so that "excuses" everything. It really doesn't though.
DD kept the right prospects, promoted them and played them. He held onto Devers and the Bs. Our homegrown core is what propelled us to 108 wins. And, sure, the WS win is essentially statistical noise in the longer-term evaluation horizon, but the fundamentals of the roster he built are just as impressive. What trade did he make that you would undo if you could?I think pointing to WS wins is focusing too much on results and focusing too little on the process. Cherington was too unwilling to trade any of the future away, DD was too willing to. They both won WS though so that "excuses" everything. It really doesn't though.
Part of it is the price paid for success. Winning teams don't draft high and the wealth that was in the farm system all came up to the big club fairly close together.People keep saying the farm system is in shambles, but who did DD trade away that we’re missing now? Is it just poor drafting?
I think this is close, but I see a different "process" that ownership might have problems with. I don't think DD traded away "too much" of the future. But one of the few times we've heard JWH talk about baseball ops stuff was when he said that signing pitchers over 30 to long-term deals was usually a bad bet. (He was wrong on Lester, of course, but that doesn't change the theory). DD did quite a bit of that.I think pointing to WS wins is focusing too much on results and focusing too little on the process. Cherington was too unwilling to trade any of the future away, DD was too willing to. They both won WS though so that "excuses" everything. It really doesn't though.
I think there is a more than decent chance that Shank is being fed this stuff by ownership. It would hardly be the first time.The Redsox can't control or stop the media. The group in charge does not matter as long as CHB and his ilk are working.
Is that true anymore? The Globe/local staff haven’t really been relevant for years and they probably get more attention here than anywhere. Or maybe they do get traction if they’re still hitting the 55+ demo and those folks are a disproportionate chunk of a baseball fan base?The Redsox can't control or stop the media. The group in charge does not matter as long as CHB and his ilk are working.
Trading away the future isn't all about "trading away prospects". He gave out very big contracts that will handicap this team in future years and had very poor drafts that are affecting the team now and probably the next few seasons.DD kept the right prospects, promoted them and played them. He held onto Devers and the Bs. Our homegrown core is what propelled us to 108 wins. And, sure, the WS win is essentially statistical noise in the longer-term evaluation horizon, but the fundamentals of the roster he built are just as impressive. What trade did he make that you would undo if you could?
Craig Kimbrel for Manuel Margot and dreck
David Price for a lot of money
Chris Sale for Yoan Moncada, Kopech and dreck
Eduardo Nunez for a bag of balls
Hector Velazquez signed from the Mexican League
JD Martinez for a lot of money
Steve Pearce for a bag of balls
Jalen Beeks for Nathan Eovaldi
Ian Kinsler for (thus far) dreck
I mean, you want to get on him for the Kinsler trade? For his first-round draft picks? It's not like there's nothing to criticize, but there's certainly nothing like there was with Cherington.
The Redsox can't control or stop the media. The group in charge does not matter as long as CHB and his ilk are working.
It's a small office (physically). There's enough people in the org chart that know what's going on and are probably happy to leak info to Shank for a free lunch. For all we know, Dombrowski may have pissed off a lot of people. Or maybe he clashed with the limited partners.I think there is a more than decent chance that Shank is being fed this stuff by ownership. It would hardly be the first time.
Not sure where the bolded comes from. Dombrowski hasn't been in position to trade for prospects, and his drafts have been considered decent given the team's drafting position. It will still probably be at least 2 more years before we can start seeing how the recently drafted players develop.Trading away the future isn't all about "trading away prospects". He gave out very big contracts that will handicap this team in future years and had very poor drafts that are affecting the team now and probably the next few seasons.
He did a great job identifying the prospects to trade. He's done an absolute shit job identifying amateur talent to bring in.
Prospects aren't amateur talent. I disagree about the drafts/international drafts.Not sure where the bolded comes from. Dombrowski hasn't been in position to trade for prospects, and his drafts have been considered decent given the team's drafting position. It will still probably be at least 2 more years before we can start seeing how the recently drafted players develop.
Possibly, but this would exist with or without a Redsox leak.I think there is a more than decent chance that Shank is being fed this stuff by ownership. It would hardly be the first time.
This is kinda where I'm at too. The common theme seems to be dumping on him for trading away the farm system, but he traded a bunch of guys that didnt amount to anything while keeping the stars like Devers and Benny. I guess I'd blame him for not identifying new talent through the draft, but drafting in baseball seems to be such a crap shoot. I'm indifferent to him leaving though, I'd prefer to take a different approach moving into the future.I agree with your first sentence, but not the second. Cherington was pushed aside partly because he signed Sandoval and Ramirez and Castillo. He wanted to allow their more valuable prospects to become major leaguers, which seems like the right move. We don't know if he would have or would not have traded prospects the following offseason; there is evidence he was prepared to do just that. Most irrelevant, as Henry clearly wanted Dombrowski as soon as he came available. The prospects Dombrowski traded were mostly redundant, and none of them aside from Moncada have done anything.
But process going forward is important, and if that process wasn't going to work with Dombrowski for whatever reason, then yes it was time to move on.
Actually we do have some idea how the Price and Martinez contracts will play out, because we're well into both of them. Price looks like a moderate, sustainable overpay; he's been paid $120M so far and earned about $85M of it, with the shortfall mostly due to injuries. If he averages 2.5 WAR per year for the last three years of the deal, he'll end up earning about $150M on a $210M contract, which is not good but far short of albatross territory.If DD has done any harm to the Sox, it will be their being saddled with long term contracts: Sale, Price, Martinez, Eovaldi. But we don't yet know how that will play out.
It's not about who he traded away as much as how he has mostly chosen to ignore replenishing. If you look at the Rays, Dodgers, Houston, and yes NYY, there is an absurd amount of depth at all levels. I would argue that all 4 of those teams faced major injuries of multiple players throughout the season without major hits to production. The 2019 Red Sox started off the year crossing their fingers that everyone would stay healthy and that the farm could supplement the bullpen. It wasn't ready to do either. Most of the folks on this forum knew it was a gamble and that you wouldn't be able to trade for reinforcements.People keep saying the farm system is in shambles, but who did DD trade away that we’re missing now? Is it just poor drafting?
Not at all. I'm just saying if CHB thinks its a good idea its probably notTo clarify, are you suggesting that the Sox fired Dombrowski based on something CHB wrote?
I look at the Rays differently given their recent success isn't quite on par with the other teams mentioned. Also due to their financial situation, they were forced to move good young players and I tip my hat to the organization as that has worked out very well for them. They are almost always in a semi-rebuild as it's what they need to do to be competitive and again hats off to them as they have done well with this formula. Is what Houston and LA have sustainable given their success these past couple of seasons? Will we see them have difficulties maintaining their farm systems if they don't move current talent for highly touted prospects? Isn't that where the Sox were a couple of years ago with Betts, Benitendi, Bradley, Bogarets, Vazquez and to a lesser degree Devers and Chavis as they are a couple of seasons removed from the others? Most of this is rhetorical as it's all yet to play out and you very well may be correct, but we'll see. As I have said in other threads, I don't necessarily advocate moving Betts, but that may be the opportunity to begin replenishing the system.It's not about who he traded away as much as how he has mostly chosen to ignore replenishing. If you look at the Rays, Dodgers, Houston, and yes NYY, there is an absurd amount of depth at all levels. I would argue that all 4 of those teams faced major injuries of multiple players throughout the season without major hits to production. The 2019 Red Sox started off the year crossing their fingers that everyone would stay healthy and that the farm could supplement the bullpen. It wasn't ready to do either. Most of the folks on this forum knew it was a gamble and that you wouldn't be able to trade for reinforcements.
Houston and LA don't just have deep systems, that have stars waiting to be called up. The Rays are going to feature a rotation of Glasnow, Snell, Honeywell, and McKay next year. Oakland continues to be an under-the-radar top team who makes smart trades. The Yankees seem to be able to find diamonds in the rough all the time. Meanwhile, the Red Sox got a good streak out Chavis. Sure, Devers is having a breakout year, but so are multiple players on the top teams.
In the old McLaughlin Group mode "CORRECTAMUNDO!" - If you make cars and the market is looking for a fancy design guy, you hire a fancy design guy to come up with fins, new colors, accessories, etc. If the market is crying out for fuel efficiency then you hire the fuel efficiency expert. DD is not the guy to construct a rebuild of the farm system and turn over rocks to find undervalued talent. This is just a very cold, but entirely foreseeable market adjustment. It sucks for him but I have the feeling that somewhere in the near future, with a G&T in his hand and a sunset on display over the horizon, he'll get over it. He deserves thanks and best wishes - he did a great job last year - but that is not the job that needs to be done next year.He came in and did his job: won a title. The job now (partial rebuilding, restocking farm system) is not the job he was hired for, and it's not a job that he's done well in his career. This is IMO the correct move.
Was. And I'd argue that most of the big signings from 2000 to 2010 were thrown on him by leadership. It wasn't until he got full power of the organization that things began to change.Cashman was the model for baseball by checkbook.
I don't think it's necessarily "ownership." It could be one or two people, like subordinates to Kennedy, e.g.I think there is a more than decent chance that Shank is being fed this stuff by ownership. It would hardly be the first time.
It will be interesting to see if HOU, LA, STL, and MFYs can continue their player development streak. Conventional wisdom is that drafting/player development is not a skill - unless a team can leverage a competitive advantage like the big market teams did a decade ago by using payroll to sign multiple overslot guys or more recently as some teams did before the international signings were hard capped.Is what Houston and LA have sustainable given their success these past couple of seasons? Will we see them have difficulties maintaining their farm systems if they don't move current talent for highly touted prospects?
Yeah? Well, you are not doing this right. Beeks for Eovaldi: in the two years Beeks has been with TBR he has an 11-3 record, getting paid just over the MLB minimum (and not eligible for 1st arbitration until 2022) while Eovaldi has gone 4-3 in that time and is signed from 2019-22 for $68 million.Craig Kimbrel for Manuel Margot and dreck
David Price for a lot of money
Chris Sale for Yoan Moncada, Kopech and dreck
Eduardo Nunez for a bag of balls
Hector Velazquez signed from the Mexican League
JD Martinez for a lot of money
Steve Pearce for a bag of balls
Jalen Beeks for Nathan Eovaldi
Ian Kinsler for (thus far) dreck
There's nothing wrong with spending $, it was the Y's one real advantage, and they used it to bludgeon most other teams for years.Was. And I'd argue that most of the big signings from 2000 to 2010 were thrown on him by leadership. It wasn't until he got full power of the organization that things began to change.
Topic for another thread but 1) I didn't make any argument that the Yankees are pioneers and 2) I'm not sure what your point is besides trying to shit on the Yankees.There's nothing wrong with spending $, it was the Y's one real advantage, and they used it to bludgeon most other teams for years.
And they'll use it again to re-up the new core whatever (Judge, Sanchez, Torres, fill-in the blank)
And checkbook baseball was the primary reason they won in 2009, when they loaded up again with CC, and Teixeira, and spent $500 million (whatever)
Cashman won the power struggle with Torre in what 2007, and George was senile. Cashman ran the show for the Steiny kids.
Cashman is a very good (and lucky and fortunate) GM, but to argue that Cashman was a pioneer in baseball analytics is revisionist history.
And we all know the real accounting is 1 championship this century for the Ys.
Pearce has a 6.5 million contract and is gone in 3 weeks. And the ring those two produced isn’t entering into your equation.Yeah? Well, you are not doing this right. Beeks for Eovaldi: in the two years Beeks has been with TBR he has an 11-3 record, getting paid just over the MLB minimum (and not eligible for 1st arbitration until 2022) while Eovaldi has gone 4-3 in that time and is signed from 2019-22 for $68 million.
Espinal for Pearce: got promoted to AA to AAA at the end of this season (.317 AVG in 112 PA). At his age (24), he may not have much of an MLB career ahead of him but Pearce, who has a $13.5 million contract will be 37 next April and has a grand total of 99 PA with the Red Sox. There is a lot more of this that can be done, money-wise and possibly player-wise, from your list but we have to go grocery shopping shortly.
Crow you came here yesterday to troll about DD's firing and tout Cashman and the Ys as models for other teams to emulate. But today when challenged about Cashman's reliance on checkbook baseball, you seem to say the first half of his career he was merely a puppet for Steinbrenner and we should only judge him by his performance since 2010. OK in 10 years he won 1 championship that he spent $500 million to secure.Topic for another thread but 1) I didn't make any argument that the Yankees are pioneers and 2) I'm not sure what your point is besides trying to shit on the Yankees.
If you want the complete list, I will copy and paste my post on an earlier thread. Let me know if there is anyone you would rather have than the 2018 World Series trophy:Yeah? Well, you are not doing this right. Beeks for Eovaldi: in the two years Beeks has been with TBR he has an 11-3 record, getting paid just over the MLB minimum (and not eligible for 1st arbitration until 2022) while Eovaldi has gone 4-3 in that time and is signed from 2019-22 for $68 million.
Espinal for Pearce: got promoted to AA to AAA at the end of this season (.317 AVG in 112 PA). At his age (24), he may not have much of an MLB career ahead of him but Pearce, who has a $13.5 million contract will be 37 next April and has a grand total of 99 PA with the Red Sox. There is a lot more of this that can be done, money-wise and possibly player-wise, from your list but we have to go grocery shopping shortly.
The overall point seems fair, but including Houston in any list like this isn't, given their major league performance from 2009-2014.It's not about who he traded away as much as how he has mostly chosen to ignore replenishing. If you look at the Rays, Dodgers, Houston, and yes NYY, there is an absurd amount of depth at all levels. I would argue that all 4 of those teams faced major injuries of multiple players throughout the season without major hits to production. The 2019 Red Sox started off the year crossing their fingers that everyone would stay healthy and that the farm could supplement the bullpen. It wasn't ready to do either. Most of the folks on this forum knew it was a gamble and that you wouldn't be able to trade for reinforcements.
Houston and LA don't just have deep systems, that have stars waiting to be called up. The Rays are going to feature a rotation of Glasnow, Snell, Honeywell, and McKay next year. Oakland continues to be an under-the-radar top team who makes smart trades. The Yankees seem to be able to find diamonds in the rough all the time. Meanwhile, the Red Sox got a good streak out Chavis. Sure, Devers is having a breakout year, but so are multiple players on the top teams.
Anytime a Yankees fan posts in this forum doesn't mean its a troll. Everyone seems to be capable of having a discussion based around what I said except you, so I'll digress and stop commenting on your posts. The Sox have done an unbelievable job the last two decades but are in a tough position next year. Saying that isn't a trolljob.Crow you came here yesterday to troll about DD's firing and tout Cashman and the Ys as models for other teams to emulate. But today when challenged about Cashman's reliance on checkbook baseball, you seem to say the first half of his career he was merely a puppet for Steinbrenner and we should only judge him by his performance since 2010. OK in 10 years he won 1 championship that he spent $500 million to secure.
And if I wanted to shit on the Ys I would have referred to them as the MFY.
I was being polite in mixed company
Not so sure that the W-L record for Beeks and Eovaldi are what you want to pin your position on. Beeks has had moderate success as a bulk reliever and that role seems to be where he's best suited ATM as The Rays don't see enough there to make him a starter and you don't seem sold on Espinal. IMO the Sox don't win the World series without the regular and post season contributions from Eovaldi and Pearce. I'm more than OK with those to deals. Heading into the season, I can see the Eovaldi deal raising some eyebrows, but not Pearce. We never got to see the 1B platoon we expected due to injuries to both Pearce and Moreland, but I didn't see this as an over pay at all and as mentioned a couple of posts up thread, Pearce was on a one year deal.Yeah? Well, you are not doing this right. Beeks for Eovaldi: in the two years Beeks has been with TBR he has an 11-3 record, getting paid just over the MLB minimum (and not eligible for 1st arbitration until 2022) while Eovaldi has gone 4-3 in that time and is signed from 2019-22 for $68 million.
Espinal for Pearce: got promoted to AA to AAA at the end of this season (.317 AVG in 112 PA). At his age (24), he may not have much of an MLB career ahead of him but Pearce, who has a $13.5 million contract will be 37 next April and has a grand total of 99 PA with the Red Sox. There is a lot more of this that can be done, money-wise and possibly player-wise, from your list but we have to go grocery shopping shortly.
This is spot on - people are focusing on Shank's writings, but Henry's quotes earlier this year about the size of the payroll spoke the loudest. The HanRam and Panda deals got Cherington fired. The 2018 run was amazing but I have no doubt that ownership expected at minimum to be in serious contention through 2020 - DD was brought in as a mercenary IMO despite the past history with Henry and did not have the juice to survive this year's faceplant and worries about wasting the potential last year of the current core in 2020.DD was brought in to build a team that would compete every year. With $150M payroll JH might put up with some volatility in season to season results but for $225M you better compete every year. By that measure he failed, and in pretty spectacular fashion. Not only did they fail to compete this year, he positioned them to be decidedly worse next year.
I did not suggest that anytime a Y-fan posts in a Sox forum its trolling. Thats a bullshit argument on your part.Anytime a Yankees fan posts in this forum doesn't mean its a troll. Everyone seems to be capable of having a discussion based around what I said except you, so I'll digress and stop commenting on your posts. The Sox have done an unbelievable job the last two decades but are in a tough position next year. Saying that isn't a trolljob.
Right, that's the thing with the trades for rental players: you can evaluate it based on how well they were doing that year, whether they kept it up (e.g. Larry Andersen - he helped us get to the playoffs!), and whether what you traded away ended up rising substantially in value. You're only buying a rental, so the question of opportunity cost (as with a major FA signing) is a lot lesser of a concern.Pearce has a 6.5 million contract and is gone in 3 weeks. And the ring those two produced isn’t entering into your equation.
Why? This is the type of thinking that hamstrings you in later years. Also, having extra money to add payroll at the trade deadline is a good thing.Then you need to factor in one additional consideration: teams with a budget like the Red Sox, which is like 5 teams in baseball, have to spend that money somewhere.