Offseason rumors
- Thread starter opes
- Start date
- Status
Just read the entire thing. Please tell me what in that article adds up to corroborating anything from MassLive. I mean, I’d really appreciate you citing a couple of passages.
The clear implication of your posts is that the article in some way paints the Red Sox in a negative light, and that this in some way invalidates criticism here of the recent work of McAdam and Cotillo. Can you please point to these passages?
This quote here from Jon Daniels pretty much sums up the contents of the entire article, which appears to pretty much amount to a rundown of how difficult it is on a person to run baseball operations for a club. He calls the Sox gig one of the most appealing in the game.
Help me understand what I’m getting wrong here.
Are you sure you read it? Because it says the Red Sox, currently, are not willing to engage in long term deals.
Which is what has been reported by various outlets, including Masslive, for months now.
I don't have a Globe subscription so I can't read it, can you quote what you are referencing here?
I reached out to them this morning and let them know that SoSH is profoundly apologetic.
They said that it's okay, they will survive, but they really want to let @SouthernBoSox know how thankful they are for your support.
Can we move on now? Fucking hell.
They said that it's okay, they will survive, but they really want to let @SouthernBoSox know how thankful they are for your support.
Can we move on now? Fucking hell.
LOL. That is legitimately laughable. THAT’S why you are posting the article in multiple threads? Because of your belief that the article states that the Red Sox won’t sign players to long term deals?
Let’s take these in order:
1. That is NOT what people have objected to in the MassLive coverage. It is indisputable that the Red Sox are not willing to engage in long term deals right now. The club has all but said as much recently. They are going with their young players and aren’t going to invest in big, long term contracts right now. Breslow also said the Sox will invest in those contracts as this core develops. But you already know that.
2. What people have objected to in the MassLive coverage, particularly Cotillo’s recent work, is the declaration that the Sox are no longer acting like a big market club. As you already know, his implication has been that the current rebuilding strategy of the Red Sox is actually some kind of course correction and will be its standard operating procedure. He has been implying that the Red Sox are just cheap.
3. Based on your certainty, I reread the piece. I couldn’t find anything in it supporting your contention when you asked me if I was sure I’d read the article, that it states the Sox won’t entertain long term contracts. Just to be certain, I have pasted the article below for your ease of review. I’m probably just missing it, but where is that statement?
Who wouldn’t want to be a baseball general manager? As it turns out, plenty of people.
Certainly, the contours of the job matter. When at least 10 potential candidatesturned down the chance to pursue the job of leading the Red Sox baseball operations department in the fall, many perceived the pattern as an indictment of the particular job the Sox were offering.
Candidates and potential candidates did have plenty of questions about both the frequent turnover among leaders of the Sox baseball operations department as well as some of the working dynamics of the position. Yet for some, the decision not to interview was driven less by the team than by the inherent nature of the job or what they’d be leaving behind.
“I’m sure hundreds or thousands of people would love to run the Red Sox or any of these teams,” said A’s general manager David Forst. “But it is more than just the job. It’s the lifestyle.”
In 2001, Jon Daniels, a couple years removed from college, was working in Randolph for Allied Domecq, the parent company to Dunkin’ Donuts. But his passion was baseball, and he’d have done just about anything to work for the Red Sox.
The opportunity nearly presented itself. Daniels was one of two finalists for an internship in the team’s baseball operations department for the 2002 season, but the position went to Jed Hoyer.
Daniels landed an internship with the Rockies in 2002, the start of a front office career that has spanned more than two decades and included a run from 2005-22 as Rangers GM and president of baseball operations. Still, he and his wife, Robyn, thought back to their Dunkin’ days last fall, when the Red Sox offered Daniels a chance to interview for their head of baseball operations job — and he declined.
“[Robyn] was like, ‘Could you imagine 22-year-old you saying no to this opportunity?’ ” Daniels recounted. “No chance.”
Likewise, as a kid growing up in Durham, N.H., Sam Fuld wouldn’t have envisioned turning down a chance to explore working for the Red Sox. Yet that’s just what the Phillies GM did when the Sox asked him to interview.
“I certainly grew up a Red Sox fan and there probably was a version of me that would have never imagined that I would have bypassed an opportunity like this, but that’s OK,” said Fuld. “There are a lot of things that have happened in my life that a 10-year old version of me would have never imagined.”
Why would a baseball executive turn down a chance to lead a baseball operations department?
Daniels, now a senior adviser to the Rays, described the Red Sox job (which ultimately went to Craig Breslow) as one of the most appealing in the game. Yet after 17 years of running a baseball operations department, he’s grateful for the engagement in family life afforded by working in a support role under Rays president of baseball operations Erik Neander.
“There is a dramatic difference [between jobs] when you slide one seat over to your left or to your right,” said Daniels. “None of these are 9-to-5 jobs. We’re all taking it home to some degree. We’re all thinking about it, if not 24/7, then certainly the majority of the time. That’s part of the fun of professional sports. You’re constantly looking for an edge. But that No. 1 job comes with a different level. You can’t turn it off.”
The stresses of that position can be thrilling, but also exhausting. Within baseball circles, plenty of people view well-paid No. 2 positions, particularly on winning teams, to be among the choicest gigs in the game, coming with better job security and typically a healthier work/life balance.
Family was very much a consideration for Fuld. The oldest of his four children is in eighth grade, the youngest in second. They’ve been in Philadelphia since 2017, and Fuld and his family feel happily rooted in their community and team, and hope to be part of bringing them a title.
“For me, this was really all about the sort of gratitude and appreciation for what my life is like here in Philadelphia, and that’s both with respect to the professional situation and family situation,” said Fuld. “I certainly didn’t take and don’t take that opportunity, the Boston opportunity, lightly. I was absolutely flattered by the concept. But I think that ultimately the decision was centered around all the joy that I have currently in my life.
“I certainly value being part of a really good team and being part of a winning environment and part of a great organization. Those things are as important and likely more important than being a No. 1 in any particular organization. If you ask any player, they’d rather be the No. 2 starting pitcher on a World Series team than No. 1 on a team that doesn’t win the World Series. You’d rather hit seventh on a World Series team as opposed to hitting fifth on a non-World Series team.”
Because of the consuming nature of these jobs, the people who pursue and thrive in them typically need a special alignment of timing and circumstance. That said, while the demands and responsibilities of the job mean that they are not for all people at all times, the payoff remains considerable.
“There’s 30 of these jobs. None of them are perfect,” said Daniels. “But they’re all dream jobs. Sure, some are more appealing than others, but they’re all great.”
What's the quote from the stats tweet even coming from? I don't see it in there.
Does this mean they weren't really in on Yamamoto? Heck, I thought Breslow confirmed that they were. What a confusing offseason this is.
It’s a notes column. You have to keep scrolling to find the “extra bases” section that Stats excerpted.
I believe the offseason discussion train is sufficiently off the track to the point where the advice in my sig, from dcmissle's final post, might be useful:
"I refuse to yield to anger or impatience ... This is a season for deep thoughts and great courage."
I’m trying to treat your posting on the board with respect. You should try doing the same for others. Breslow has been clear that Yamamoto was a unicorn of youth and talent and that the Sox legitimately pursued him. I suspect that you know this. The team’s recent comments have been made in the context of their being no other such unicorns available this offseason. I suspect that you know that, too. I think you should take your posting here more seriously. There are times when you add to the discussion. But there are also even more times when you do not.
Yeah, but Yamamoto's deal will include about 7 years when he is over 30, and the Red Sox are still in rebuild mode the next year or two or three and all that.
No, I’m someone who posts here, and learns from the posts of many others. And you really aren’t adding much.
Those 7 years will also come 5 years from now, when who knows how much a typical starter salary will look like.
I've been getting along fine with a lot of other posters here. You're the only one who's trying to lecture me. Please refrain from now on. Thanks.
How is that a mod post? He is being honest with you about how he feels because he respects you enough to do so. I explained to you privately that that's perfectly OK. There is a difference between thread policing and the board self-policing. This is an example of the latter.
I think Yamamoto's contract is incredibly risky, one of the riskiest, if not the riskiest, baseball has ever seen. Just my take.
He seems to be picking on me for some reason. I've seen a lot of posts here that are more negative than mine. He's basically saying my posts that are critical or cynical about the Sox front office "don't add to the discussion". To me it's clearly thought policing.
It's not about negativity. It's about how it's expressed. Plenty of really, really, really good negative leaning posts. It's about rejecting all contradictory responses and using examples that just don't hold up to scrutiny. And you're not alone in getting pushback to support what you claim. That means people who are coming from a positive slant are having their feet held to the fire as well.
I’m not picking on you. There are lots of good posters here who have negative feelings toward the Red Sox. A good and reasoned debate over these things is why we come here.
But too often, you are not adding to the debate. You are either making throwaway comments that are unsupported by any kind of fact, or you are misrepresenting what someone else is saying in order to attempt to score a cheap point—as just happened with the Breslow/Yamamoto post.
I’m not lecturing you. I’m telling you that it sucks when you do that. And though you may not realize it, it also sends a message to others that you are not a serious poster whose opinions are worthy of consideration. It had been my hope that you might improve in your posting but given your comments here, I will agree to simply ignore your posts and refrain from anything that could be interpreted as lecturing you.
From my experience on SOSH…. It is difficult sometimes to not take things personally… many times it’s best to just look at it from a slightly different angle and/or not to engage when feeling defensive or irritated.
New voices are definitely needed for this place to continue to provide valuable learning and perspectives. The last couple weeks of extreme negativity have been tough but it feels like we’re turning the corner.
New voices are definitely needed for this place to continue to provide valuable learning and perspectives. The last couple weeks of extreme negativity have been tough but it feels like we’re turning the corner.
Thanks for this clarification. I dove further in and found the passage you were referring to. It’s basically nothing we didn’t already know: Sox still seems unwilling to give a long term contract to Montgomery. Here is the quote…the second part is more interesting to me—if the Sox want to move Yoshida, they are probably going to have to pick up some of his salary. Nobody in baseball wants that contract. Yikes.
Is the part about Yoshida a surprise to anyone though? The Sox gave him a monster deal and apoarently pegged his value at much higher than anyone else- and then he had a 1 win season. Of course his value is lower than it was a year ago, seems likely that they’d have to eat half that deal to move him.
It's the recurring rumor that the Red Sox aren't interested in Montgomery or Snell that touched this off.When you guys are done, post some rumors if you have any.
Probably not a surprise, but I think some of us had been hoping that he’d rebound nicely and earn the contract going forward. That the rest of baseball seems skeptical probably says a lot about the perception of his defense. Anyway, I don’t know about half, but it sure looks like the Sox would have to pick up a substantial portion of the contract.
OK here's a positive note about Yoshida:
His OPS+ in his first season with the Sox was 109.
Hideki Matsui's OPS+ in his first season with the Yankees was 109. He went on to have 5 seasons of at least 142 games with an OPS+ of 123 or higher.
And, similar to Yoshida, his 2nd half split was worse than his 1st half (but not as pronounced). 805 to 760 OPS.
I haven't given up on a much improved sophomore season, and we've discussed that transitions can be a huge factor, he was seemingly out of gas toward the end of the season, which I find understandable. I wouldn't trade him now.
Sort of what I was getting at. And that's a good post not because it's positive or negative, but because it allows for discussion of the larger picture and doesn't just assume there's one simple reason for his struggles.
Last edited:
The TV of Yoshida (and perhaps Jensen) might improve toward the deadline, if either or both get off to good starts. Since's Bloom's handling of it was widely seen as a failure, I'm very curious how Breslow & Co approach the deadline, given that the youth influx could be ready to arrive
With number 1, it is playing with fire that there is just an assumption from up top that the young core including Mayer/Anthony/Teel will turn out to be as good as they seem to think they will. As a fan, I sure as hell hope it does. But an executive can not just sit back and wait to see how they turn out before they decide to add some long-term veteran help. There needs to be more of a base of veteran help to strengthen whatever comes out of that young core when they start to arrive. It is putting a ton of pressure on these guys to perform right away. We all saw how guys such as Pedroia and Bogaerts started their careers out. It's not as simple as they come to the big leagues and perform to their capabilities. There will be bumps in the road in everybody's development.
With number 2, this offseason they are acting like a small market club. There is a clear opportunity to both develop the young guys and also compete for a playoff spot if they would add one of the top SP available along with a righty bat. If they don't want to trade top prospects nor spend money, where are the upgrades coming from?
@BringBackMo
I agree that I’d rather hold on to him if a trade means subsidizing his contract. Good points about Matsui. Let’s hope for a similar development with Yoshida.
There are a good amount of posters still saying that the Sox are in on Montgomery and Snell so that portion is definitely not something that everybody already knows. It’s another log to the fire that the Sox don’t want to give out long term deals by a very respected author (Speier) which is why @SoxStats quote tweeted it.
What it says, verbatim, is that "every indication remains that the Sox won't be pursuing long-term deals for Montgomery and Snell."
Jumping off this point, the variable that's often been overlooked this miserable offseason is that these reporters gotta file something. If they don't have news, they repackage what's already been reported or report on "an impression" from some unknown source or sources.
Similarly, isn't this just one of many angles drummed up by the press (and in this case, a blog)? All the Sox are guilty of here, from what I'm seeing, is bringing these three guys to Winter Weekend. The "pressure" narrative stems from the reports that they're (apparently) unwilling to trade one or more of them for a player, like Corbin Burnes, who would "sacrifice future wins for exclusively (2024) wins."
Seems smart of Breslow not to do that. Seems normal and unremarkable, actually, and I'm glad my team's GM isn't the sort who will. Cotillo, god love him, spun that into a narrative that the Sox are "lowering expectations."
Cotillo:
That statement isn't a lie. But it doesn't seem charitable to its subjects, given the context and quotes from team officials. My problem with it is that it completely ignores the idea that trading a top prospect for an ace under team control for one year is an incredibly bad baseball move.
Anyway, it's from that whole dynamic that emerged the new angle that the Sox were putting undue pressure on Mayer, Anthony and Teel. On the one hand, sure. Gotta write about something! But I have no idea why people have decided to be so worked up about it.
Industry officials opined that the Red Sox are the best fit for Montgomery, but every indication remains that the Sox won’t be pursuing long-term deals for Montgomery or Snell . . . The Red Sox have remained open to dealing outfielder Masataka Yoshida this offseason, but there’s been virtually no interest from teams in assuming the remaining four years and $72 million he’s owed
I don't view the statement from Speier above as definitive on whether they would or would not entertain Montgomery on a multi-year deal (not sure what constitutes a "long-term deal" - 5 years? 6? 7?) I could certainly still see them offering a four or five year deal to Montgomery. The bolded "every indication remains" seems like a bit of a hedge. So there's no evidence that they will, but also no real evidence that they won't. I suspect that the market will dictate whether they will or won't make an offer to Montgomery. But I don't expect them to make an offer to Snell unless his market completely collapses (and I wouldn't either).
As for Yoshida, I would hold onto him if the market for him is tepid. I think they are plenty of reasons to expect a better second season, and that he'll be worth the $18m price tag.
I don't view the statement from Speier above as definitive on whether they would or would not entertain Montgomery on a multi-year deal (not sure what constitutes a "long-term deal" - 5 years? 6? 7?) I could certainly still see them offering a four or five year deal to Montgomery. The bolded "every indication remains" seems like a bit of a hedge. So there's no evidence that they will, but also no real evidence that they won't. I suspect that the market will dictate whether they will or won't make an offer to Montgomery. But I don't expect them to make an offer to Snell unless his market completely collapses (and I wouldn't either).
As for Yoshida, I would hold onto him if the market for him is tepid. I think they are plenty of reasons to expect a better second season, and that he'll be worth the $18m price tag.
None of this thinking is "drummed up by the press". It's common sense. If they're going to put all their eggs in the prospect basket before adding significant upgrades from the outside, then what's their plan if the core does not pan out or it takes longer than they would like? Yes, there will be pressure on all these guys to perform if the front office's plan is to wait for them to come up and see how they do. Again, that's common sense if you've ever played sports or been around it.
It's normal to try to add pieces both as they're getting close or coming up and after they arrive.
Guys, points have been made, no reason to keep going. Bob is certainly not alone in earning some feedback, and it really doesn't have anything to do with positivity or negativity.
Make supportable points and be amenable to criticism, and anyone should do fine here, wherever they start from.
There’s definitely a very small part of me that thinks they’ll sign Montgomery and Turner and we will all take one big group hug together and laugh about the last 3 months.
Unfortunately I think that’s like a 1% chance.
I do think that, despite how frustrating and polarizing this off-season has been, the passion appears to be as strong as ever within this forum.
It’s something we should appreciate.
Amen to the bolded. And soon we'll have actual baseball. The roster will be set, good, bad, or ugly. That will be a huge help, at least for a while.
And I have this crazy hope that however the Sox do on the field, we spend more time analyzing that, than analyzing who was right, wrong, or crazy.
Notice I said more time. This place has always had fun with who said what, but a lot of that kind of discourse here has ceased to be fun. We've seen too many character judgments and too much real, sometimes toxic dislike for each other based on a simple difference of opinion. The Bloom thing personified that, never mind that guy who used to play here five years ago. But yes, the passion is awesome. I hope we can harness it.
None of us knows nothin', and we can only start from where we are today. Truck day is a week from Monday. Maybe we can even get @BoSoxLady to Christen the season for us.
February 5
Truck Day Takes Place Monday, February 5; Pitchers and Catchers Hold First Workout February 14; First Full Squad Workout February 19.
Giddyup.
It’s a new CBO and business is business, but I found Masa’s at bats in the first half of the season to be appointment viewing. I like appointment viewing. I’m bullish on his bat this season, and I really hope it’s with the Sox. A subsidized trade now would seem to be a very questionable business move, in addition to being a very disappointing one to me.
Oh, yeah. I can hardly wait. And @Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat and I feel the same way about Masa. I'm looking forward to seeing him, Casas, Bello, et al and the new guys.
- Status