OT- All Purpose Red Sox Thread

**Underdog** · 04-05-2012, 08:25 PM

I blame Francona.

**The Q** · 04-06-2012, 01:46 AM

Trading Scutaro should've at least let them bring back Bedard.

Hell half a season of Bard and Bedard in the 4 spot and this team would be sweet as candy.

**ItIsWhatItIs** · 04-06-2012, 01:21 PM

The odds of Bedard pitching more than 5 starts again in a big market were about 50:1.

**Lester** · 04-06-2012, 04:07 PM

ha! didn't take long for Dan Shaughnessy to take his usual shots today at the red Sox. He knows what his audience expects. I didn't expect them to beat Verlander. Beckett v Fister saturday.
on a lighter note, it was about 39 degrees at the Reno Aces opener last night vs. the Colorado Springs Sky Sox. Glad I didn't go. but will go saturday!

**Lester** · 04-07-2012, 09:43 PM

3 Tiger HR's given up by big Josh!

**AlexPKeaton** · 04-08-2012, 03:32 AM

The Orioles magic number is 160.

**Lester** · 04-08-2012, 05:22 PM

am starting to think the Red Sox organization lost it's focus a few years ago. They seem stale as 3 week old bread. Where's the new talent like kalish coming in? That dudes always injured. Seeing Masterson and Beltre kick ass for other teams makes me a little queasy.

**Lester** · 04-08-2012, 09:55 PM

Mark Melancon = tomato can. Wow! That's some serious suck-age.

**MKHawk** · 04-09-2012, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by Lester

am starting to think the Red Sox organization lost it's focus a few years ago. They seem stale as 3 week old bread. Where's the new talent like kalish coming in? That dudes always injured. Seeing Masterson and Beltre kick ass for other teams makes me a little queasy.

I don't think you can blame them for Beltre. If they keep Beltre you don't have Gonzalez.

**Underdog** · 04-09-2012, 01:19 PM

And Masterson was the cost of having VMart for a year and a half. I can live with that one, too, even though I was in the minority of people who saw him as more than a righty setup guy. There has been a definite dry spell in the player development pipeline the last couple years, though...he's right about that. And it doesn't help when you take the few guys your system has produced and either trade them for JAG's, or hold them on the farm in favor of other JAG's you signed.

**TheSeyMonsta** · 04-09-2012, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by MKHawk

I don't think you can blame them for Beltre. If they keep Beltre you don't have Gonzalez.

Or they could have got rid of Youkilis and had Beltre at 3rd and Gonzales at 1st...

**ItIsWhatItIs** · 04-09-2012, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by TheSeyMonsta

Or they could have got rid of Youkilis and had Beltre at 3rd and Gonzales at 1st...

No, they could not have......they would not have been able to afford it. They're already at/above the luxury tax. Adding Beltre would've put them WAY over. The ownership has stated they can't sustainably pay over the luxury tax, especially with the new punitive structure for teams that repeatedly go over the threshold.

The problem with the Sox has not been player development - they had more WAR than any other team in baseball but the Rays I believe last year from players that they drafted themselves. The problem has been a complete inability to assess the free agent market, and only a slightly better track record via trade. When Marco Scutaro is your best FA signing over $3MM/year in the last 5+ years, and you then ship him out for literally nothing, you know something is going wrong with trade/FA evaluation.

**TheSeyMonsta** · 04-09-2012, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by ItIsWhatItIs

No, they could not have......they would not have been able to afford it. They're already at/above the luxury tax. Adding Beltre would've put them WAY over. The ownership has stated they can't sustainably pay over the luxury tax, especially with the new punitive structure for teams that repeatedly go over the threshold.

Well, they could have done something intelligent and pass on Lackey and sign Beltre long term, so yes, THEY COULD HAVE, they chose not to.

**The Q** · 04-09-2012, 03:06 PM

Beltre was never designed to be a long term plan. He was projected to be a short term gap filler FA who maximized his efficiencies in fenway and also improved the infield defense.

Moving to texas has also helped his offense. But giving a guy like that a 5 year deal, when his only 2 monster years were contract years (2004 w/ LAD and 2010 w/ BOS) was highly risky.

I never wanted Lackey and pointed out his declining numbers when the Sox signed him, but that's neither here nor there.