Re: Are the Sox contracts REALLY that bad???
posted at 1/9/2013 11:46 AM EST
In response to tom-uk's comment:
Why is the next WS further away? The FO made a strategy decision, yes. You call it mediocrity; I call it treading water. In that strategy, they signed platoon player veterans to 1-3 year deals. So, when any of the kids are ready to answer the bell, no problem, move over grizzled platoon vet. And, when the free agent market looks good again a couple years down the road, the club has some flexibility. And, its not like they could just "play the kids" and stockpile the money saved on payroll. To me, treading water makes a lot of sense.
Why is the next WS further away?
My reasoning Space is backed up by the Vegas oddsmakers. IMO a 2013 Sox WS is a pipe dream, I hope I am wrong and funny things can happen in sport.
The Sox should have unloaded Lester, Papi, Salty, Ellsbury, and any bullpen pitcher who will be a FA anytime soon. The propects the Sox have look good on paper, adding 3 or 4 more would have increased the odds of developing a cost controlled core. A rebuild would have made a WS win within the next decade a much more realistic possibility.
Instead, LL has created a mediocre team for business reasons. I have no concern about blocking prospects, I feel the half-hearted rebuild was the path the Mets took and they have been poor for 4 straight years. If enough of the 2012 under-performers (JL, CB, MN, SV, DP, JE, AA, DB, AB) rebound the 2013 team will be a PO contender. Even then the pitching looks ill-suited to make a long PO run.
Oh, OK. I assumed when you are talking about "next WS further away" we were talking about how the moves of this off-season hurts the club in 2014 and beyond. I think we can all agree that it will take a great confluence of luck, health, performance rebounds, and smiles from the baseball gods for the sox to contend in 2013.
2013 WS would be a pipedream no matter how this off-season played out and unloading Lester et al surely would do nothing to remedy that. Going forward, I just disagree that the current tread-water strategy hurts the club's chances to develop into a bona fide contender again. All the signings for this year are short, moveable, flexible position-wise. Sure, unloading Lester et al might net some draft picks. But this organization is not the Rays. The farm is solid. And there is no need to rely soley on youth. When worthy free agents come around, the club has the wherwithal to sign said worthy free agent. It will always be a mix.
In the meantime, and i understand that there are clear camps of thought on this, I am of the camp that does not think it good strategy to rush Bogaerts, Brentz, Ranaudo, Bradley, et al into major league service just for the sake of shaking things up and having a 'youth movement'. First off, and many scoff at this, I am not into wasting control years on a guy if he is not ready. Second, none of these guys are ready. I mean, at least show me a year of good performance at AAA before we say Let The Kid Play! The current signings are placeholders. I don't see how they negatively affect the long-term, or even short term, success of this ballclub. In fact, allowing 'the kids' to develop a little more helps the long-term prognosis.