ouch man. lowell’s been really good when healthy for three years

But do you think Holliday will sign here? I guess what I’m saying is I’d rather not risk it.

completely, except that I wouldn’t be surprised to see the sox keep Bay (albeit at less than $17 million/year), I wouldn’t be surprised to see him sign with the sox for just a bit over the 4 year/$15 million. Also, I’ve always seen Bay as a very smart baserunner, if not incredibly fast, I don’t see that as one of his issues (one less SB than Holliday, but 4 less CS)

But the part I completely agree with the fact that they will “go for it.” Theo has repeatedly stated that his goal is to win 95 games every year, and he will probably end up making minor moves that will help towards that end. There’s no reason the 2010 team should be worse than the 2009 team. Keep in mind also that in 2009 we spent less than we intended to (as we had intended to sign Teixiera) which points to more money being available.

Personally, I’m skeptical about signing an outfielder until he’s 37 for a lot of money and based on that, I’d rather have Bay.

As far as CF, Ellsbury is too useful to the team to replace, just because he provides another skill set that no one else on the team (or MLB at the moment) can stand up to. Defensively, he does need to work on his reads and routes, but having watched him, I think the awful UZR is not completely accurate- I don’t believe he was that bad defensively.

Lugo’s play is no longer here, but neither is the $9.45M we owe for his care.

Historically, 3B that have hip/leg/back issues in their 30’s seldom recover to peak batting or fielding performance.

VM worth a few wins? At what position? His fielding is a negative, and as nicely as he did with the bat last year, his career OBP is about .045 lower then last year.

Your list reads a lot like hopeful fans list did in ‘09. If this, and that, and this, oh yeah, and that all work out right – we will be all set. I don’t believe in tooth fairies, and happy endings. I believe in reality, and statistical projections based on previously gathered data as a starting point.

on all of it this time :)

Basing predictions on how Ortiz will bat is useless if you jsut look at the best ERA pitchers because the red sox will not just be facing those pitchers, besides the ridiculous small sample size.

for Drew, he had one of his best OPS years of his career in 2009. Assuming that his bat will decline because you think his arm was not as good is just plain ridiculous.

if it is a 5 year deal, he will turn 36 at the very end of the year- check your math. Holliday to a seven year deal will be 36 his whole last year- not awful, personally I just don’t like the idea of contracts that long term to players older than 28 or so, too many variables. I do think that Bay for 5 years is questionable, I would be surprised if Theo offers anything really above 4 with a buyout option for a 5th year.

One point I agree with Tony is that winning 95 games isn’t a “plan” but that’s semantics. Winning 95 games a year is his stated goal, and he’s going to ty to do it again in 2010- whether you would or not is a different thing, but I can’t see Theo budging from that goal.

Also, Lugo provided no positive value while he was on the sox, he was a -1.1 WAR player and we still played him. That means that we actually improve just by not having him there playing, despite the fact that we’re still paying him.

Lowell is a big question mark, I hope he improves but no faith in that.

I also realize that when Drew leaves if we cannot come up with a suitable replacement in RF that Holliday might actually do OK there for a bit of time – arm and all, whereas Bay would would be straight laughable/horrible in RF.

Also, last I check we only play 81 games a year at Fenway.

It’s not a matter of vastly better. It’s a matter that we have money tied up in clearly below average players (lets say in aggregate to avoid arguments): Lugo, Ortiz, Lowell, Tek). Yes, these players will have to be replaced, and hopefully by better players at the same cost or less cost. But meanwhile they are on the payroll and on the roster – which gets in the way.

Meanwhile, our farm which is a little tapped out now will have room to recover (perhaps Anderson will start to bash, etc.) which gives us more to trade and/or more to plug into gaps. More on March 1, 2011, then March 1, 2010.

Didn’t look at any metrics regarding Drew’s arm, just relying on my own eyes. Accuracy is still good, but the distance seems to be fading a bit. BTW, I’m a big Drew fan.

Saito is gone, until he is not. He made $6M last year, if we sign him to two years at $3M a year, and he has makeable incentives for $3M more each year, I would say that is OK, but not a bargain. There were times he looked pretty weak out there.

Look, for casual or even semi-serious fans, using the phrase “95 wins” makes perfect sense. But 95 wins is a result of planning and execution. People can choose to focus on “95 wins”, but I prefer to focus on the means of execution.

I must have mis-wrote something earlier. SD itself has no need of an expensive closer. That’s obvious. However, Philly certainly seems to need one, and for a team with a large budget that might have won the WS with such a closer this year, he has value. They dealt quite a package to get Lee. Papelbon as a two year rental yielding 2 sandwich picks is not “worth little”, it’s worth a fair amount – not Lee, but if the Sox are going to hold some point in salary, a trade is theonly other avenue open. Given our paucity of ready items to trade, a major leaguer is liable to have to be dealt. Who better then the one established vet we have that we have tried to get into a long deal that refuses, at probably the least long lasting star role in baseball – a closer. Not to mention, we could have a closer to cover the gap (Wagner and/or Saito) for our closer in waiting – Bard. It’s really the only part of the ML roster then has enough depth to deal a starting player.

Obviously the Sox will make moves, but these moves will not result in a team that can win the WS in 2010 IMO. I hope whatever moves of a serious nature they do make, will be for 5+ years, not stopgap moves like 1-2 year deals for reclamation project pitchers for instance.

There will be a turnover of dead wood after 2010, allowing more FA moves or more promotions of players from the minors that have made the grade. And more ammunition for trades as well. So I think the team has a better chance in 2011-12 in competing for the WS then 2010. Not due to lack of brains or willpower, simply because the FA class for 2011 should be better (even if Mauer and Pulojs get wrapped up before that), we will have more money for moves and probably more guys in the minors to move.

The problem I see with more stats developing is people look too broadly at players. They started looking at UZR and OPS and wOBA which are useful, but you need to look at the individual stats that comprise them. Now people are starting to just reference WAR, which, while useful, is a very broad stroke for a stat and a slightly arbitrary combination of stats. Referencing just WAR when discussing players is just about as scientific as saying “but he didn’t make any errors and had so many assists!” as his genius agent did.