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.
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 |
83 comments
|
Comments
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.
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.
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.
Better defensively than Woodward
Who else do we put as a backup MI?
by Ben Buchanan 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?
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.
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.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
Agreed to both.
I think Reddick’s slump (he was like 1 for 20 or something) scared Theo.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
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.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
Anderson can play all the OF positions better than Kotsay, who was actually costing us wins (check the WAR).
And we don’t really need another 1B with Kotchman and VMart covering it while Youk’s manning 3B.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
Yes.
And Kotsay really only had the value of being a body out there.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
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.
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?
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.
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…
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?
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
I don't really know why we didn't discuss Vazquez...
He does seem to have issues with the spotlight though.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
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.
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).
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.
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).
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.
We can sign him at that point anyways then.
by Ben Buchanan on Aug 17, 2009 10:27 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.
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.
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
well
for one what do we do with Ellsbury? Secondly seems a lot of scouts project him more as a RF than a CF.
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.
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
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.
Both will, likely.
But at that point Ells will probably start costing more money than we’d prefer to pay him.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
Esp. when we have decent replacements already.
No need to give up MORE for marginal increases.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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
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
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
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.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
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.
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.
Please quit.
We need less fair-weather fans.
@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation
"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.
I blame...
…the WBC.
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Aug 17, 2009 10:18 PM EDT reply actions

by 

























