Over the Monster: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: College Football Rankings - BlogPoll Top 25

For once, the Epstein's puzzle pieces do not fit

Theo Epstein has always had a knack at making the right moves. Granted, it doesn't work all the time -- because really, how can it? -- but nine times out of 10, you can count on Epstein making a move that will undoubtedly help the club.

I'm starting to think 2009 may be his worst year yet.

Star-divide

It seems like every year since, say, 2004 or so, the Red Sox have just needed to acquire the "puzzle pieces" to cap off a great team. It's getting that one middle piece with a sliver of blue on it and a chunk of a red -- kinda looks like a flower -- to put it all together and complete that 25-piece puzzle.

This year's puzzle pieces have that blue and red, but they just ain't the right shapes.

Since the Sox have started to make mid-season moves, there's been a lot of head scratching.

First there was Adam LaRoche. That was an understandable move for the most part because the Sox needed offense -- even more-so than they do now.

LaRoche was still a wonder though because he's a starting-caliber first baseman and the Sox, no matter how bad the offense was, couldn't start him. Unless there was an injury, LaRoche would find a lot of his time occupied by spitting sunflower seeds from the top bench in Fenway.

That fact that puzzle piece did not fit was quickly realized as he was traded nine days later for Casey Kotchman. That's where we find another oddly-shaped puzzle piece.

Kotchman is an upgrade over LaRoche in terms of fitting in the offense, but it's still not a great solution. Kotchman is considered a better "bench player," per se, because the word is he'd take to that better than LaRoche. OK, sure. He automatically is a better fit in the roster, even if he isn't a better hitter than LaRoche.

I want to point out that just because a player isn't regarded better than another, it doesn't mean that it's a worse fit. Remember the greatest puzzle piece in Red Sox history? Sure you do, because now he's one of the hardest-to-listen-to broadcasters in Sox history.

Dave Roberts. Roberts didn't do anything too amazing, but he was fast. He played solid defense, but he couldn't really hit too much. But he worked in the offense just beautifully. And while I'm on it, thanks again for '04, D-Rob.

So Kotchman is a better fit, but it's still not a great fit. With Kotchman on board July 31, plus the addition of Victor Martinez on the same day, an instant logjam is created at first base.

As of right now, the Sox have four players on the current roster that can feasibly play first base: Kevin Youkilis, David Ortiz, Martinez and Kotchman. While Youkilis and Martinez have versatility, that's still too many damn first basemen.

We can also talk about players like Brian Anderson, Chris Woodward and Alex Gonzalez (while they do seem to fit a tad better), the bottom line is that Epstein is making moves and they don't seem to be panning out.

So why is our genius GM making these moves? The only thing I can really think of is that someone's desperate.

The Sox have struggled all season long, really. I can only remember one really good stretch and that came at the beginning of the season. But it seems like once one thing got off on the wrong foot (maybe that could be the LaRoche-Kotchman situation), everything else just followed slipping down the hill.

Moves like trading for Gonzalez or designating John Smoltz for assignment could, in some way, cry of desperate measures. Epstein is trying to build a winning team, but it seems like everything that he's tried has had no effect on the club.

It's like having 10 dumb kids all in the same class -- it doesn't matter where they sit in the classroom, because they're still 10 dumb kids.

Epstein can shuffle the lineup all he wants. He can call up whomever from Pawtucket to try and make a spark. But at this point in the season, nothing has worked. This, of course, doesn't rule out the fact that a combination could work. While it's possible -- and has seemed to work in previous years -- I just don't think it's very likely.

However, there's still time. I want to see Epstein use his magical powers to somehow bring a shortstop to the team that can hit the ball. I'm sure he has a magic wand or something that can do that. Maybe he could bring in a starting pitcher that pitches like Josh Beckett and Jon Lester, but isn't Beckett or Lester.

Just maybe.

In the meantime, I say we jam those freakin' puzzle pieces in and make them fit.

1 recs  |  Comment 83 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Good post, have to agree.

The 10 dumb kids line is pretty hilarious.

If Brian Anderson, Kotchman and Alex Gonzalez are ever all in the lineup again at the same time I’m going to burn all my Sox gear on a funeral pyre.

by upCHUCK on Aug 17, 2009 6:55 AM EDT reply actions  

Agreed

I mean what the hell we are playing the Rangers for Wild Card position and we have those instant outs at the bottom of the lineup. Come on.

Someone needs to tell Tito those guys are our bench players.

by drabidea on Aug 17, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

Who do you start instead?

Obviously Drew if you could, but apparently he couldn’t.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

Why

do we even have Gonzalez? While this is not the biggest issue to discuss-it annoys the hell out of me. CC Sabathia is a much better hitter than Gonzalez.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

problems are

1)team seems not to view him as the backup (!!!!!!!)
2)plays only ss.

I am fearful that since they got him he has started both games. Don’t they see he has a .230wOBA?

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

Seriously????

Anyone. Gonzalez should in no way start two games in a row unless Green is injured. It seems they think he is the starter, which is really scary.

Brian Anderson, shouldn’t be in the game ever. Put in Reddick or Duncan even Chris Carter is probably better then him right now.

Kotchman isn’t as bad as the other two. With Youk out he is our best defensive 1B. However if he slotted into the 7 spot in our lineup, things need to change. I would have rather had Tek in the 7 spot then Kotchman. Put VMart at 1B and Tek at C.

If we expect to put up enough runs with a black hole at the bottom of the lineup to beat the Rangers we are dreaming.

by drabidea on Aug 17, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Anderson was up because he is good defensively.

Reddick needs consistent playing time, so unless Drew was going on the DL, he had to be sent down to AAA (which he skipped anyway, so he should probably get a few PA’s there just to make sure he’s ready).
Duncan and Carter are both defensive stiffs – there bats aren’t good enough to make up for the runs they’d allow in the field. Anderson could at least get an XBH every once in a while (SLG heavy OPS makes that clear).
Kotchman’s actually a decent OBP bat and we can’t have VMart playing 1B every game. Tek needs days off – and VMart too, I guess.

by bdalebs on Aug 17, 2009 8:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Bad Communication

Reddick played CF 3 games ago and then they had Anderson play RF the next two games. They should have had Reddick playing those games and when Drew is ready to play bring up Anderson and send Reddick back down.

Kotchman is a decent OBP guy and would not protest to him being in our lineup once in a while however not on the same day that Drew, Youk, and Green are out. It just kills our lineup.

by drabidea on Aug 18, 2009 8:34 AM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed to both.

I think Reddick’s slump (he was like 1 for 20 or something) scared Theo.

by bdalebs on Aug 18, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

More Bad Communication

If Theo was so scared, why did Tito put him in the leadoff spot? Seriously, are you trying to give away ball games??

Those two just seem to be on different pages, but I agree with what you said.

by drabidea on Aug 18, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wouldn't be surprised.

Tito doesn’t strike me as a big stat guy, while Theo’s obviously a Moneyball believer. Then again, not sure how Theo would let Tito get away with making mistakes if he’s not using the data that Theo’s planning on.

by bdalebs on Aug 18, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agree

to be honest I think I would feel this way even if the Sox were in first place. To me the one that make the least sense is Gonzalez. It is as if Theo has forgotten to look at the very same metrics that even the Boston Globe staff now quotes. Gonzalez is, at this stage, not superior to Green in the field and hoas a wOBA of 230. To be giving up 60 wOBA points with our offense without increase in flexability (Woodward) or glove makes completely no sense. Who wouldn’t want Kotsay instead of Anderson, as much as people moaned about him? We have, in some ways less postion options, a glut of 1bs, and we gave up players to make these, at best, lateral moves. Lastly it seems like a disruption to have this kind of revolving door at this time of year.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 7:00 AM EDT reply actions  

Honestly, Theo hasn't ever done too well with FA signings so far.

He really has been hesitant to drop the hammer and spend a lot on one guy, probably because he’s been burned when he has.

Which is not to say he’s a bad GM. Names like Papelbon, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Buchholz, Bard, and Masterson that have already made it to the MLB, not to mention all the guys in the top-prospects list like Kelly, Bowden, Reddick, Lars, etc. This is a team that, before 2001 (Kevin Youkilis, 8th round) had maybe 3 names to its credit in 8-9 years of drafting, and 1 huge black mark in passing on a guy like Mark Teixeira because prospects apparently weren’t worth their signing bonuses.

Still, Theo has to realize that now that the production machine has been set up and oiled nicely, it’s time to start making splashes. 2010 isn’t an easy year to do it in, but there are moves to be made, just like there were last year. It’s time to leave the reclamation projects to the minor leagues and make moves on sure things.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 7:19 AM EDT reply actions  

It’s time to leave the reclamation projects to the minor leagues and make moves on sure things.

I don’t fully agree. Ortiz, Millar, Mueller were dramatically successful reclamation projects, and lesser reclamation projects like Williamson, Wells and Tavarez that had utility from time to time. The Smoltz-type reclamation projects have been failures, but this would have been less problematic if Dice-K and Wakefield had been healthy. Health is hard to predict, and at the time it looked like Smoltz would be option #7 in the rotation, seemingly lower risk than he was. I agree that we can likely get as much or more from our system. As for Teixiera, we did not “pass” on him, right? We made a very strong offer. We can debate all we want that if Henry didn’t open his big mouth, etc he would have come. But looking back at the history here, and with the Yankees involved, it is plain wrong to say we passed. Theo really tried on that one, and the offer would have made Teix by far the highest paid player on the team. I would expect that the Sox will try again on the FA market when the target is right, and hopefully they will be more successful than they were with Teix.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

With Teixeira, I'm refering to drafting history.

When we drafted him in ’98 but had tried to talk his value down to other teams and sign him for less than he presumably deserved. The black mark was on Duquette.

As for Millar, Muelle, they were very different kinds of signings. They were the bargain bin revelations of the newly found OBP market who had performed very well if underwhelmingly according to the ol’ BA/RBI/HR slash line. Ortiz was a 27 year old with burgeoining power and good discipline. The fact that he’s always considered to’ve been signed out of obscurity bothers me.

The Smoltz and Penny deals were not the same. They were injured players who hadn’t put up numbers in a year or two who we took a gamble on on the cheap, but were ultimately costly because it prevented us from building any higher-quality depth. It was Theo seeing if maybe injuries were the new market. Clearly they’re not.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

I see (about Teix).

About the others, it is sort of splitting hairs. Sure, Penny and Smoltz were a different kind of player, but I don’t think those signings were dumb ones. Penny has not been a disaster (although he has not been good) but he was picked up to be a 5th starter who could be dumped if Clay picked up. The problem is Dick-K essentially didn’t pitch, and Wake has missed the entire 2nd half to date. It is not clear to me that Tazawa, for example, would be any more successful than Penny at this stage and certainly at the start of the year. Same for Bowden. Perhaps we could have had Caly as the 5th starter, but we saw what that did to us last year, and indeed you were the biggest detractor of this idea. We should differentiate moves that didn’t work out from dumb ones. If thse were dumb ones, what would you have done differently with regard to our rotation?

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

Accepting this rotation at the beginning of the year:

Beckett
Lester
Dice-K
Wakefield
X

I would’ve gone after a mid level guy like Randy Wolf. Looked for guys either in FA or being dealt who had a significant ERA and FIP difference for value (See: Javier Vazquez). Maybe tried our hand at rehabbing Mark Prior (which I think we should do anyways. Better than giving Enrique Gonzalez starts) or Andruw Jones on the cheap. Buchholz and Bowden and Masterson provide depth for the #5 spot while our actual #5 is able to pass himself off as a #4.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

The Prior and Jones things being exactly what I was talking about with reclamation projects in the minors.

Though I think I’m remembering now that Andruw had an out if he wasn’t in the majors by a certain date.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

Vazquez

would have been great. Prior seems like even more of a risk. Andruw Jones does not pitch (;)). So, sure there may have been some better options (if you go back to when we signed Penny you will see I was never a big fan) but it was not so dumb.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

Prior's not a risk

Because he’s purely a random shot in the dark that you stash away in the minors unless he starts producing. As compared to Penny who pitches every 5th game. Wolf and Vazquez are the 2 main goals. 1 guy who is a fairly consistent ~4-4.5 ERA guy. And one guy whose results were bad last year despite a great process.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

Brad Penny's

FIP (for us) is 4.57 So how different is he than Wolf? Wolf is a career 4.30 pitching entirely in the NL where there are 8 hitters (and for which straight up FIP does not correct for). I don’t see this as a huge difference. Vasquez sure…

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

Randy Wolf's fip is 3.98

tRA of 4.30 vs. Brad Penny’s 5.25
ERA+ of 123 vs. Brad Penny’s 90
xFIP of 4.39 vs Brad Penny’s 4.97

Just watching them both, Penny is noticeably worse. And the numbers back it up.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

this year

but you didn’t know Wolf’s numbers for this year before the year started. Wolf’s career FIP is basically the same as Penny’s this year (in the AL East) without the adjustment for the difference between ALEast and NLWest. Maybe you could have said that Wolf turned it around last year, but that would have been risky too-his tRAs going bact to 05 before that are 5.52, 5.94, 4.43, and 5.46. What I dont understand is Vazquez-he was really good all 3 years for the White Sox-with a consistent 3.8 FIP-why was there no discussion?

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

Good question.

I wasn’t here till after the season started.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

And I think Penny's FIP is very much deflated

By low walk counts. He throws plenty of strikes, sure, but so do BP guys.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

Good post, Randy

I agree totally.

Here’s a little salt in the wound. LaRoche is hitting .372 AVG/.491 OBP/.605 SLG (1.096 OPS/.464 wOBA) for the Braves.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Aug 17, 2009 9:09 AM EDT reply actions  

And Lugo is killing for the Cards

Not a big believer in “If not there, then here” logic.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

Are you a big believer

in a player’s career stat line as a predictor? As much as LaRoche is not loved by the fans of the Pirates and Braves, he has a career 112OPS+, a career ISO of .217 and a career slugging of 488. He is decent with the glove and is 29.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

In the NL

And I consider the trade off to be him for Victor more than him for Kotchman. The idea was he wouldn’t put up with a bench role once Victor came over and basically took his place as the versatlie bat of choice.

Plus, Martinez can play catcher.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

Martinez's value to the Sox is only at catcher

Otherwise a Lowell/Youk/LaRoche platoon is just as good as a VMart/Lowell/Youk platoon. However, it’s hard to learn a pitching staff in an August pennant drive.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Aug 17, 2009 9:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

there is little evidence

that players who come from the NL have trouble hitting in the AL. Teix was the same or worse in the NL, Bay the same in the NL, Lowell had his best year ever on the Sox, etc. Here is what I would have done-while I like VMart, he is a marginal upgrade at 1b or hittin-wise over LaRoche. His career hitting numbers are a bit better. He is significantly more valuable in that he switch hits (LaRoche struggles against LHP) and he can catch. Regardless, if the Sox had kept LaRoche and made a play for Cliff Lee (say what we offered for VMart +one additional prospect) we would be in a better position. You can’t really argue that VMart > Lee +LaRoche. It would have made more sense. The Phils got Lee without offering any of their top 4 guys (as they account for them).

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 9:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree

I would rather have LaRoche and Lee than VMart and Kotchman.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Aug 17, 2009 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

I would've prefered Lee to Martinez too, sure.

But our offer for Victor would not likely have gotten the job done.

Still, annoyed that we didn’t pursue him aggressively.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions  

But our offer for Victor would not likely have gotten the job done.

which is why I said an addtional prospect. Maybe VMart deal +Reddick would do it.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'm not sure I'd do that though.

Power hitting center fielders are not exactly dime a dozen.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

Then again, I have dreams in my head of

Reddick in Right
Westy in Center
And Kalish in Left

Each putting up 20 homers a year while playing plus defense. So I might be a tad biased.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

I would

Cliff Lee is a 30 year old #1 starter. Reddick may be special, but more likely is David Murphy (who is decent, but not so hard to come by).

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

Ignore age

Gone after next year.
And he’s no Murphy if only for his range.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

why gone?

I agree he would cost, but he projects to have 4 very quality years left in him. I think we could have resigned him at high but not crazy cost.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

No

because he will demand at least a 4 year-which at 32 makes little sense. We will have missed out on 1.5 of his best service, which matters, especially for this year.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

Why do you want those 4 years if he's with us for the 2 earlier

But not if he’s not?

I don’t think he’s gonna give us a huge home-team advantage.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

it all matters

I mean I would be for it for 30-34 much more than 32-36.
It is a big difference. We are talking about cutting out 30-40% best time and adding at the end 40% older time.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions  

You think he's signing a 2 year contract extension?

I wouldn’t if I were him. You come on the market at 32 and you’re going to get that 4-6 year contract at 16-20 per.

You come on the market at 34, and you’re getting 3 years at 15 probably.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

yes

bad math on my part-you are probably right.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

well

for one what do we do with Ellsbury? Secondly seems a lot of scouts project him more as a RF than a CF.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

Ellsbury sticks in CF until Westmoreland is ready.

By then he’s on the cusp of FA. Let him walk unless Manifest DOESN’T end up projecting out like he really should. Westmoreland is Ellsbury + power.

And Reddick’s been proving himself in CF in the minors this year. It was a question at the beginning of the year, but by and large he’s shifted the opinions more towards CF than right.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

then

by your estimation he never plays CF for us-Ells does then Westy does. So he is a defacto RF for us.

by Buzzy on Aug 17, 2009 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

Oh, yeah, definitely. But he's got the range to be one.

Don’t underestimate the value of CF range in RF. Look at what Tampa’s been doing with it’s outfield defense. They’ve got plus guy after plus guy out there. That’s a big part of why powerful CFs are becoming so valuable. A powerful left fielder can’t really take the place of a quick CF, but a powerful CF can take the place of a powerful RF.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

He's played a lot of CF this year

Started in Portland, now he’s the CF in AAA. He’s really played all over the OF this year.

by South Coast Ghost on Aug 17, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don’t see why you’re writing Ellsbury out of our long term plans.

by Gnick on Aug 17, 2009 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Because we've got two power-hitting CF coming up through the system

Including one who is faster. If Westmoreland pans out, keeping Ellsbury would be a poor use of assets.

by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Also

Ells is a Scott Boras client. That doesn’t bode well for the Sox long-term.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Aug 17, 2009 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good points

But you really can’t count on Reddick or Westmoreland being able to play CF. So why give up a solid player for an unknown? I could much more easily see Bay and Drew being gone in 2013 rather than Ells.

by Gnick on Aug 17, 2009 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Both will, likely.

But at that point Ells will probably start costing more money than we’d prefer to pay him.

by bdalebs on Aug 17, 2009 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

I can't really see Bay or Drew in our OF in 2013

I think Reddick, with his arm strength, profiles better as a RF, so he probably won’t be knocking Ells off his position, but I don’t think you can just dismiss his ability to play CF.

And if by 2013 Westmoreland has lived up to the (already growing) hype, and is knocking on the door, it would behoove Theo to, at the least, listen to offers on Ells.

by South Coast Ghost on Aug 17, 2009 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Sox...

have a SS that can hit(Lowrie),unfortunately he’s been injured most of the season. Getting another one at this point in the season would probably be an exercise in futility. Better to hope that Lowrie returns soon and stays reasonably healthy the rest of the way.

by havildar on Aug 17, 2009 10:46 AM EDT reply actions  

Theo

I vommited in my mouth when I saw that lineup yesterday. Most national league teams have a better lineup than that. I think Red Sox fans love Theo a little too much I know he has won two world series but he has also screwed up a lot of things and he has let players get to the yankees that the red sox should have had. He is a decent GM but nothing more than that. If I see the lineup that was out on the field yesterday again I might just quit on this team I am so tired of them and not being able to score runs

by Bigpapi34 on Aug 17, 2009 1:37 PM EDT reply actions  

Let players get to the Yankees?

At some point you just can’t beat their pocketbook.

by upCHUCK on Aug 17, 2009 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

And

Damon has been a LF for 3 of his 4 years in NY. In those years, the Sox had Manny and Bay in LF. Both are better than Damon. I can’t think of anyone else of value who we “let” the MFY get. Doug Mientkiewicz? Alan Embree? Mike Myers? Yep, they were big losses.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Aug 17, 2009 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Other players

What about Orlando Cabrera and the awful shortstops they have had the last four years. The whole Manny situation was awful and Theo could have handled that much better. Not getting a big name this offseason that is three things right there

by Bigpapi34 on Aug 17, 2009 7:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

OC isn't that good, and ...

He didn’t go to the MFY, which was the criticism of Theo I was responding to. Anyway, OC has played on 4 teams since 2004. If he’s so valuable, why can’t he stick anywhere?

As for Manny, I’m a huge fan. However, he wanted out. The Sox accommodated him. They really had no choice. Theo was under the gun with Manny and still managed to get a pretty good player in return, Jason Bay.

What big name did you want? Theo wasn’t going to overpay for Sabathia or Burnett. I’m OK with that. Those are awful contracts that the MFY may very well regret in a few years. There was no way the Sox were going to sign Mark Teixeira for less than $25 million (minimum). Teix wanted to go to the MFY and the MFY wanted him. The Sox would have had to overpay to get him.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Aug 17, 2009 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yup, it would've taken, at least $200m to sign Teix I would bet

And while people who see our current team might be willing to hate the fact that Theo didn’t just hand Mark a blank check, there ARE limits to how much a player is worth. Who knows how many wins he’ll be worth in 7 years.

by South Coast Ghost on Aug 17, 2009 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree with you

I totally agree with you I was just saying Theo isn’t perfect

by Bigpapi34 on Aug 17, 2009 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Of course he's not.

But he’s put us in a position to be in the playoffs every year – not much you ask for past that.

by bdalebs on Aug 17, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Theo tends to be focus with a shortstop..

that has a higher OBP than the league average. I think he is willing to spend more than getting a hockey goalie like shortstop like Omar Vizquel..

 If you look at Theo’s signings of Renteria and Lugo. On paper, they looked like good signings. They were signed in their prime years, in which their stats should improve or remain steady. The problem for both of them, they weren’t leaders in the infield and had way too many errors for their position. For shortstops, they have to have their fundamentals down, and too many errors not only screws up tight games, but it can wear out starting pitchers and then wear out the bullpen more.

 Lugo was signed as well to be a table setter/leadoff hitter. He blew both jobs. I think the Sox would had like to keep his bat,if it wasn’t that his defense got worst this season.

by superferret on Aug 23, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Theo couldn't handle the Manny situation, it was out of his control..

  Two main instigators for the Manny antics in 2008 were Manny and Scott Boras. The Sox pretty much bend over backwards for Manny through the years. Once he refused to be part of the team, he had to go..

 Theo did the best he could do in a bad situation, giving up Manny and two players for Bay.

For Manny and Boras, what they didn’t forsee in their antics was the Global Credit Crisis in Sept-Oct 2008, which teams weren’t willing to throw $25 million for enfant terrible ballplayers.

by superferret on Aug 23, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

"The whole Manny situation was awful and Theo could have handled that much better."

Yeah? How?

As far as the “awful shortstops” over the past four years, there was Edgar Renteria, who was a “big signing” who didn’t happen to pan out, Alex Gonzalez, who was a phenomenal fielding shortstop, Julio Lugo, who also didn’t happen to pan out. I don’t think you could predict that Lugo and Rent-a-Wreck would under perform like that. It’s easy to piss and moan about how shitty the decisions were in hindsight.

Man I love that tuna casserole.

by Bloggy on Aug 17, 2009 7:58 PM EDT reply actions  

Whoops.

Missed the thread. Sorry.

Y’all know where I was goin’ with that….

Man I love that tuna casserole.

by Bloggy on Aug 17, 2009 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

I blame...

…the WBC.

Rock me, sexy Jesus...

by nuthinboutnuthin on Aug 17, 2009 10:18 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Over the Monster, an SB Nation community that delivers news and analysis while encouraging discussion regarding everything Boston Red Sox. OTM was founded Feb. 22, 2005.
Start posting about the Red Sox »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
What we lost... what we "gained"
Tardy_001_small
The negativity
Small
OTM Fantasy Football?
Tatersox_small
I Demand Blood

Recent FanPosts

Small
Fantasy league looking for managers
Hpim0626_small
Facts Of the Season
Tatersox_small
PLAYOFFS?? We talkin' 'bout playoffs? (Yahoo Fantasy)
Small
Killing Paps value
Small
Trade With Dodgers
Spokedb_onblack_1600x1200_small
Minor League Rankings
Spokedb_onblack_1600x1200_small
It's Not Over Yet,  But....

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SBNation.com Recent Stories

SEATTLE - JULY 10:  Starting pitcher Felix Hernandez #34 of the Seattle Mariners celebrates after defeating the New York Yankees 4-1 at Safeco Field on July 10 2010 in Seattle Washington. (Photo by Otto Greule Jr/Getty Images)

MLB Power Rankings: On The Challenge Of Identifying A League's Best Pitcher

ANAHEIM CA - SEPTEMBER 08:  Jeff Mathis #5 of the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim is mobbed by teammates after hitting a  walk off sacrifice fly to score Torri Hunter form third base against the Cleveland Indians in the 16th inning on September 8 2010 at Angel Stadium in Anaheim California.   The Angels won 4-3 in 16 innings.  (Photo by Stephen Dunn/Getty Images)

Mathis' 16th-Inning Sac Fly Lifts Angels Over Indians 4-3

Philadelphia Phillies' Jimmy Rollins, left, slides into home to score past the tag of Florida Marlins catcher Brad Davis on a single by Carlos Ruiz in the third inning of a baseball game, Wednesday, Sept. 8, 2010, in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum) +2 updates

Phils Top Marlins 10-6, Jimmy Rollins Leaves Game With 'Hamstring Tightness'

More from SBNation.com >


Managers

20136_562469370037_32603605_33253497_5601129_n_small Randy Booth

Editors

Master_shake_small Allen Chace

Rorscach_small 0157H7

Red_seat_small Ben Buchanan

Authors

Zissou551_small SoxDevil

Red_sox_logo_small Logan Lietz

Red-sox-yankees_small BerkshireFan

Photo_small wolf9309