Red Sox Thread Version 5.0

[S2]

Well, right now Teixeira has more value than Shorty McBrokefoot and Ugly LaThumby combined.

Yeah, eddy already used the "more valuable by default" line.

[Casey at the Bat]

Well, right now Teixeira has more value than Shorty McBrokefoot and Ugly LaThumby combined.

Even if he didn't, his team is in first place (I think), and the sox are setting up their tee times.

[False1]

What does this have to do within the context of the 2010 season? Because that is what I was saying.

There's my post. At no point to I refer to 2009, 2011 or 2020. Just 2010. I was talking about 2010, I thought that was pretty clear. At no point did I reference his contract, his salary or what his value is to the Yankees. Just that in 2010, he has not produced to a level that makes me lose sleep. I said it in the last line of that post and I'll say it again - unless he was a shutdown (or even just above average) reliever in his spare time, his presence on the 2010 Boston Red Sox would not have thrust them into the Playoffs. Not the 2011 Playoffs, the 2010 Playoffs.

What his value to the Yankees and, in contrast, to the Red Sox going forward is another argument - not the one I was making.

OK well then I guess I don't understand the point of your post in the context of the discussion that's taking place before it.

And you ignore the fact that if the Sox had signed Tex it could have enabled other moves... perhaps they would have been able to unload Lowell in '09, moved Youk to 3rd and invested Lowell and Beltre's '10 money in ways that would have helped this year.

[ieddyi]

OK well then I guess I don't understand the point of your post in the context of the discussion that's taking place before it.

And you ignore the fact that if the Sox had signed Tex it could have enabled other moves... perhaps they would have been able to unload Lowell in '09, moved Youk to 3rd and invested Lowell and Beltre's '10 money in ways that would have helped this year.

I don't think his point was well thought out. He was talking solely about Tex's production this year- ignoring the fact that any team signing him would have had to have gone at least 8 years- and that he has a well established record of production throughout his whole career. Offensive production- barring injury- is a lot more consistent than pitching and you rightly point out the other moves it might have affected

At least he scores points for originality

[S2]

OK well then I guess I don't understand the point of your post in the context of the discussion that's taking place before it.

And you ignore the fact that if the Sox had signed Tex it could have enabled other moves... perhaps they would have been able to unload Lowell in '09, moved Youk to 3rd and invested Lowell and Beltre's '10 money in ways that would have helped this year.

You ignore the fact that if the Sox had signed Tex it would have not enabled them to make other moves. After Teixiera signed with the Yankees, the Red Sox re-upped Youkilis and Lester for around $72M combined. Does that happen if they sign Teixeira? Or do they let Youkilis and Lester play out arbitration? Would they have been able to take on the $7M option that Victor Martinez had for 2010? Or would they have been stuck with Jason Varitek behind the plate for the remainder of 2009? Would they then have had to trade Clay Buchholz for Jarrod Saltalamacchia? How much of the remaining $24 M would the Red Sox had to have eaten in order to move Mike Lowell?

[THEBOSS84]

You ignore the fact that if the Sox had signed Tex it would have not enabled them to make other moves. After Teixiera signed with the Yankees, the Red Sox re-upped Youkilis and Lester for around $72M combined. Does that happen if they sign Teixeira? Or do they let Youkilis and Lester play out arbitration? Would they have been able to take on the $7M option that Victor Martinez had for 2010? Or would they have been stuck with Jason Varitek behind the plate for the remainder of 2009? Would they then have had to trade Clay Buchholz for Jarrod Saltalamacchia? How much of the remaining $24 M would the Red Sox had to have eaten in order to move Mike Lowell?

If they signed Tex, I doubt V-mart would even be on the Sox to begin with.

[S2]

If they signed Tex, I doubt V-mart would even be on the Sox to begin with.

Yeah, I know. I'm playing the "other moves it might have affected" game. No V-Mart, more Varitek, more likely to deal Buccholz for a catcher.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Yeah, I know. I'm playing the "other moves it might have affected" game. No V-Mart, more Varitek, more likely to deal Buccholz for a catcher.

Of course, their payroll was relatively low last year. Maybe they make all the moves they did, and they just don't add the ill-advised Lackey contract b/c they aren't looking for a good PR move after Theo's bridge comment.

[S2]

Of course, their payroll was relatively low last year. Maybe they make all the moves they did, and they just don't add the ill-advised Lackey contract b/c they aren't looking for a good PR move after Theo's bridge comment.

That sets off another chain of "woulda coulda shouldas". No Lackey contract (hey don't look now but he's almost league average ... is there a smiley that shoots itself in the head with the brains go flying out the back?) means who is the last starter? Tim Wakefield? Michael Bowden? Hell, who would be the 4th starter if not for Buchholz? Michael Bowden? Tim Wakefield?

However before we go any further down this stupid road I would just like to know what about my original post - in which I stated he was not having a great year and therefore would not have added any value over the likes of those gentlemen in which he would be replacing - is so confusing?

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

That sets off another chain of "woulda coulda shouldas". No Lackey contract (hey don't look now but he's almost league average ... is there a smiley that shoots itself in the head with the brains go flying out the back?) means who is the last starter? Tim Wakefield? Michael Bowden? Hell, who would be the 4th starter if not for Buchholz? Michael Bowden? Tim Wakefield?

However before we go any further down this stupid road I would just like to know what about my original post - in which I stated he was not having a great year and therefore would not have added any value over the likes of those gentlemen in which he would be replacing - is so confusing?

I didn't read your original post -- sorry -- arrived in this conversation much too late. Was just having fun with the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" part.

Now that I see what you are actually talking about, it's a fair point, although it's pretty hard to know what the Sox would even look like had they acquired Tex. Truthfully, even with the injuries, offense probably wouldn't be a problem if Lackey/Beckett had pitched to where they were supposed to this year.

[S2]

I didn't read your original post -- sorry -- arrived in this conversation much too late. Was just having fun with the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" part.

Now that I see what you are actually talking about, it's a fair point, although it's pretty hard to know what the Sox would even look like had they acquired Tex. Truthfully, even with the injuries, offense probably wouldn't be a problem if Lackey/Beckett had pitched to where they were supposed to this year.

See I could have made that last part a little less confusing. The second paragraph was out there for anybody to answer, it wasn't directed at you.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

See I could have made that last part a little less confusing. The second paragraph was out there for anybody to answer, it wasn't directed at you.

Oh, no problem. I'm actually much more interested in some opinions on what the Sox do in the offseason. I think we've rehashed a lot of this stuff enough, but I think they need to show their fans that they can compete again.

[Steve Dalkowski]

Sox only 6 out of the WC!

[Mr Coffee]

Sox only 6 out of the WC!

Too bad for you guys this didn't happen in July.

Oh wait-- it did.

[THEBOSS84]

Oh, no problem. I'm actually much more interested in some opinions on what the Sox do in the offseason. I think we've rehashed a lot of this stuff enough, but I think they need to show their fans that they can compete again.

The Beltre situation is going to be very interesting to watch. Do they lock him up knowing that doing so would likely cause a problem in going after the Fielder/A-Gonz/Pujols triumvirate the following offseason? Beltre has been the 2nd best position player in the majors according to WAR (FG version) this season.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

The Beltre situation is going to be very interesting to watch. Do they lock him up knowing that doing so would likely cause a problem in going after the Fielder/A-Gonz/Pujols triumvirate the following offseason? Beltre has been the 2nd best position player in the majors according to WAR (FG version) this season.

Absolutely no one thinks they are going to sign him. It feels to me like they are trying to pump up the value of their prospects by playing them in the last month, but I am not convinced they have enough to land an impact bat, short of trading Buccholz -- which I doubt happens. And I'd be really surprised if they signed Crawford or Werth.

[THEBOSS84]

Absolutely no one thinks they are going to sign him. It feels to me like they are trying to pump up the value of their prospects by playing them in the last month, but I am not convinced they have enough to land an impact bat, short of trading Buccholz -- which I doubt happens. And I'd be really surprised if they signed Crawford or Werth.

Really? I'm guessing due to the Boras factor.

I agree with you - the Sox currently do not have one stud trade chip that would land them an impact bat, short of trading Buchholz, which would be idiotic.

[Steve Dalkowski]

Too bad for you guys this didn't happen in July.

Oh wait-- it did.

It's crazy that the Sox actually have a better record since the beginning of August than the Yankees. Even crazier is that Baltimore has been the best team in the East.

[blumj]

Absolutely no one thinks they are going to sign him. It feels to me like they are trying to pump up the value of their prospects by playing them in the last month, but I am not convinced they have enough to land an impact bat, short of trading Buccholz -- which I doubt happens. And I'd be really surprised if they signed Crawford or Werth.

You really think it helps them for other teams to see their prospects get overmatched by major league pitching? I think they're playing them mostly because they already were on or needed to be added to the 40 man roster, anyway, and the other alternatives are as bad or worse or hurting themselves, and it gives them the experience. I mean, why wouldn't you just play Lars Anderson at 1st some when the alternative is more Lowell, or play Kalish/Reddick when the alternative is more Eric Patterson?

FWIW, I'd be less surprised if they re-signed Beltre and/or Martinez, or signed Werth, than made a big trade.

[NerfBall55]

I think they will sign Werth.

[THEBOSS84]

I think they will sign Werth.

They have Drew and Cameron under contract, though. I don't think they'll want to sell low on Ellsbury.

[blumj]

They have Drew and Cameron under contract, though. I don't think they'll want to sell low on Ellsbury.

There are worse things than juggling 4 OFers for a year when 2 of them missed most of the previous season injured and the 3rd one is Drew.

[4bronxbombers]

It's crazy that the Sox actually have a better record since the beginning of August than the Yankees. Even crazier is that Baltimore has been the best team in the East.

Thanks to Buck. It's amazing how different they look since he's on board.

[False1]

That sets off another chain of "woulda coulda shouldas". No Lackey contract (hey don't look now but he's almost league average ... is there a smiley that shoots itself in the head with the brains go flying out the back?) means who is the last starter? Tim Wakefield? Michael Bowden? Hell, who would be the 4th starter if not for Buchholz? Michael Bowden? Tim Wakefield?

However before we go any further down this stupid road I would just like to know what about my original post - in which I stated he was not having a great year and therefore would not have added any value over the likes of those gentlemen in which he would be replacing - is so confusing?

What's confusing about it is that you started by saying you wished the Sox would have signed him - which is what was being debated when you made your original post - but then started talking about how that would have taken a player with a higher '10 OPS out of the lineup. Why are you so bent about the woulda/coulda/shouldas? All the recent posts in this thread deal with woulda/coulda/shoulda, and you introduced a new one in your post when pointing out his signing "woulda" taken some production out of this year's lineup.

It's a bit myopic to say that signing in him in '09 would have completely eliminated any opportunity to make other corresponding moves. Perhaps they defer their decision to extend Youk or Lester (although I certainly think those are good deals for the Sox), or perhaps they don't give Beckett an extension at all, perhaps they pass on Lackey, perhaps they move some players, perhaps if they win it all in '09 instead of the Yankees they become more willing to increase the payroll. Who knows.

Unless you're saying that the Sox should have signed Tex to a one year deal, how does looking at '10 in isolation mean anything? What were you trying to say? Perhaps you could clarify without being so defensive.

[Rice14]

What's confusing about it is that you started by saying you wished the Sox would have signed him - which is what was being debated when you made your original post - but then started talking about how that would have taken a player with a higher '10 OPS out of the lineup. Why are you so bent about the woulda/coulda/shouldas? All the recent posts in this thread deal with woulda/coulda/shoulda, and you introduced a new one in your post when pointing out his signing "woulda" taken some production out of this year's lineup.

It's a bit myopic to say that signing in him in '09 would have completely eliminated any opportunity to make other corresponding moves. Perhaps they defer their decision to extend Youk or Lester (although I certainly think those are good deals for the Sox), or perhaps they don't give Beckett an extension at all, perhaps they pass on Lackey, perhaps they move some players, perhaps if they win it all in '09 instead of the Yankees they become more willing to increase the payroll. Who knows.

Unless you're saying that the Sox should have signed Tex to a one year deal, how does looking at '10 in isolation mean anything? What were you trying to say? Perhaps you could clarify without being so defensive.

I think what S2 was trying to day is that the timing of the original article "Red Sox still suffering from not signing Tex" is a bit odd because the Red Sox current struggles have nothing to do with not having Tex, nor would his presence this season have probably changed anything. For all the things that have gone wrong in 2010, production from the corner infield spots is not really one. In fact of the Sox had signed Tex, then Youk would have slid to third and Beltre wouldn't have been signed. Since Beltre has been better than Tex this season, you could make the argument that for this season the Sox were better off in that regard. The problems with the Sox this year have been a poor pen, inconsistent pitching from Beckett and Lackey, and injuries.

Does that mean the Sox are better off in general for not having signed Tex? Of course not. I think you can make a pretty good case that if the Sox had signed Tex (and kept him away from NY), the postseason would have turned out much differently last year. Further, assuming that Beltre is either a one year rental or is resigned but declines considerably--either or which is pretty likely--the Sox will once again be missing a corner infielder who could have matched what Tex could do. The Sox might struggle for the next six years to fill that void and Tex's presence (or absence) may influence some more postseasons.

So I think it's right on the money to say the Sox failure to get Tex was a huge blunder, it just didn't make a lot of sense for the author to bring it up this season.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

You really think it helps them for other teams to see their prospects get overmatched by major league pitching? I think they're playing them mostly because they already were on or needed to be added to the 40 man roster, anyway, and the other alternatives are as bad or worse or hurting themselves, and it gives them the experience. I mean, why wouldn't you just play Lars Anderson at 1st some when the alternative is more Lowell, or play Kalish/Reddick when the alternative is more Eric Patterson?

FWIW, I'd be less surprised if they re-signed Beltre and/or Martinez, or signed Werth, than made a big trade.

It's a calculated risk -- if a guy gets absurdly hot, like Ellsbury did a couple years ago, I absolutely believe it could inflate his value. If they don't succeed, well, they are young guys who got the chance to learn.

If the Red Sox really intend to make Lars Anderson at first base regularly, I am a happy Yankee fan. In fact, I find it amazing they've already built a bridge for the guy:

http://www.charlesriverconservancy.o...sonBridge.html

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Really? I'm guessing due to the Boras factor.

I agree with you - the Sox currently do not have one stud trade chip that would land them an impact bat, short of trading Buchholz, which would be idiotic.

Doesn't mean they won't sign him, but everything I've read up here talks about how he was a bright spot in the season and that people should check him out before he's gone

[NerfBall55]

They have Drew and Cameron under contract, though. I don't think they'll want to sell low on Ellsbury.

Cameron would become an expensive 4th OF for a year or until he got hurt.

[TheoShmeo]

If the Red Sox really intend to make Lars Anderson at first base regularly, I am a happy Yankee fan.

I wouldn't get too happy just yet. Lars hasn't prospered enough in the minors this year to make what's happening right now anything more than a cup of coffee designed to help him with his development/give him a taste of what he might experience if he picks things up. He'll need to show a lot more in order for them to plan around him.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

I wouldn't get too happy just yet. Lars hasn't prospered enough in the minors this year to make what's happening right now anything more than a cup of coffee designed to help him with his development/give him a taste of what he might experience if he picks things up. He'll need to show a lot more in order for them to plan around him.

That was kind of my point. I don't think he'll be their first baseman long-term, and I don't think they're planning on it. I think they'd like to find a way to increase his trade value, though.

[TheoShmeo]

That was kind of my point. I don't think he'll be their first baseman long-term, and I don't think they're planning on it. I think they'd like to find a way to increase his trade value, though.

I'm not sure that's all that possible given the time frame. I think it's more likely that they haven't given up on him just yet and think that he could come around and that giving him some time now might help move that along. Plus, as a practical matter, Lowell is toast, and they need someone who can play the position.

[blumj]

I'm not sure that's all that possible given the time frame. I think it's more likely that they haven't given up on him just yet and think that he could come around and that giving him some time now might help move that along. Plus, as a practical matter, Lowell is toast, and they need someone who can play the position.

Yeah, that last part, it's actually depressing watching Lowell try to play, the effort seems both futile and painful.

[Axon]

Anyone have the pic of Papelbon with the ridiculous nightclub outfit on? Not the one where he's dancing with the woman.