Register now to remove this ad

Page 62 of 371 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472112162 ... LastLast
Results 916 to 930 of 5552

Thread: A Realistic View at 2020: Part I

  1. #916
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,320
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    It's very difficult to keep feeding 2-3 solid players a year from your farm when you keep having picks from 24-30 or worse due to tax penalties. The IFA market is also very hard to dominate, these days.

    I'm not saying it can't be done, but we need to get some people in our scouting and talent evaluation area who know what their doing. Management has to set the tone. It's hard to demand accountability from the players, coaches and the manager, if an important area keeps coming up short.

    Gone are the days where we can sign Devers and DHernandez or Bogey, Iggy & Montas in 2 international signing periods. Gone are the days of drafting Betts, Barnes, JBJ, Swihart, Owens and Noe Ramirez in one draft with the help of 4 comp picks or Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lowrie, Hansen & Bowden in another with the help of 6 comp picks.

    Trying to rely on just spending big can never be sustainable.

    So, who can we hope will be the "3 per year?" We'll need a lot of luck to get 3 every year from this group:

    2020:
    D Hernandez (unless you counted him for 2019)
    Dalbec
    Chatham
    Ockimey or Duran

    2021
    Houck
    Duran
    Ward

    2022
    Groome
    Casas
    Mata

    2023
    Jimenez
    Flores
    Lugo
    Decker

    We'll need a hell of a lot of luck!


    Now who’s kidding?

    3 per year is a joke. The Sox called up at least four players for MLB debut this year alone (Chavis, Shawaryn, Lakins, Kelley).

    3 per season is not a lot...

  2. #917
    I think he means 3 impact players.

    Listen, you don’t need 3 all stars per season. But I do think you need to have 3 fill ins who at least can be average coming from within. If your core is intact and you can sprinkle in behind them with farm talent then you’re set. The problem becomes, when you need to go onto the open market to get a 2b or a bullpen or a 4-5 starter that you’re spending exorbitant money for limited return. That ends up killing your bottom line as well. Having your minor league system at least fill in the ancillary pieces can help and is necessary to stay relevant

  3. #918
    Legend S5Dewey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    ME
    Posts
    6,975
    The 3 per year thing is a great concept, but it takes a lot of courage for a championship team because in order to bring up 3 per year a team also has to release 3 per year to keep the roster under 25 players. Suppose that after the 2018 season the Sox brought up Marco, Chavis, and Kelly. Without the benefit of hindsight, would you have released Holt, Moreland, and JBJ to make room for them?

    The Rays aren't a championship team so they can "afford" to release 3 players in order to give an opportunity to 3 Minor Leaguers. They can gamble on players like that because their fans have no expectations.
    It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All-Star game and the Old Timer's game.
    -Vin Scully

  4. #919
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,320
    Quote Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch View Post
    I think he means 3 impact players.

    Listen, you don’t need 3 all stars per season. But I do think you need to have 3 fill ins who at least can be average coming from within. If your core is intact and you can sprinkle in behind them with farm talent then you’re set. The problem becomes, when you need to go onto the open market to get a 2b or a bullpen or a 4-5 starter that you’re spending exorbitant money for limited return. That eup killing your bottom line as well. Having your minor league system at least fill in the ancillary pieces can help and is necessary to stay relevant
    If you expect 3 impact players per year from your farm, that’s probably way too high of an expectation. Especially since many impact players aren’t immediate impact players.

    Really in large markets, you just need the farm to hold the fort for minimum wage at first. If they develop into a player’s who are worth paying heavily, even better

  5. #920
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    If you expect 3 impact players per year from your farm, that’s probably way too high of an expectation. Especially since many impact players aren’t immediate impact players.

    Really in large markets, you just need the farm to hold the fort for minimum wage at first. If they develop into a player’s who are worth paying heavily, even better
    Most teams have 3 guys per year that filled in admirably. There are always injuries. Those fill ins might be 10 innings out of the pen or 4 starts worth or 2 weeks of playing the field. They don't have to be lineup stalwarts or rotation studs. Just enough depth to show the guys that your system isn't entirely dead
    Hal sucks

  6. #921
    Quote Originally Posted by S5Dewey View Post
    The 3 per year thing is a great concept, but it takes a lot of courage for a championship team because in order to bring up 3 per year a team also has to release 3 per year to keep the roster under 25 players. Suppose that after the 2018 season the Sox brought up Marco, Chavis, and Kelly. Without the benefit of hindsight, would you have released Holt, Moreland, and JBJ to make room for them?

    The Rays aren't a championship team so they can "afford" to release 3 players in order to give an opportunity to 3 Minor Leaguers. They can gamble on players like that because their fans have no expectations.
    You don't have to release anyone outside of 3 guys off the 40 man. Usually teams stash some AAAA garbage on the 40 man as depth and jettison when the space is needed.
    Hal sucks

  7. #922
    Also, nobody is saying these guys need to be rookies with their first taste of the bigs. Some of them could be former contributors on minor league deals that perform when your big guys go down
    Hal sucks

  8. #923
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,320
    Quote Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch View Post
    Also, nobody is saying these guys need to be rookies with their first taste of the bigs. Some of them could be former contributors on minor league deals that perform when your big guys go down
    It is hard to find struggling major leaguers on the verge of breaking out, although Cashman did find a few this year.

    #stanislozolinthedrinkingwater

  9. #924
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    Now who’s kidding?

    3 per year is a joke. The Sox called up at least four players for MLB debut this year alone (Chavis, Shawaryn, Lakins, Kelley).

    3 per season is not a lot...
    3 that make a significant impact is- for us.

    Also, I took the 3 number as the minimum significant players needed per year to sustain competitiveness.
    Sox 4 Ever

  10. #925
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch View Post
    I think he means 3 impact players.

    Listen, you don’t need 3 all stars per season. But I do think you need to have 3 fill ins who at least can be average coming from within. If your core is intact and you can sprinkle in behind them with farm talent then you’re set. The problem becomes, when you need to go onto the open market to get a 2b or a bullpen or a 4-5 starter that you’re spending exorbitant money for limited return. That ends up killing your bottom line as well. Having your minor league system at least fill in the ancillary pieces can help and is necessary to stay relevant
    Let's assume it's 3 impact players- maybe not all stars but also not 0 to 0.5 WAR guys either. Let's say they stay for their full team control years, including their arbs, which may become expensive but won't reach FA value, unless you're JBJ. Let's say that's 5 years. That means those 3 are "cycled out every 5 years with the new 3 coming in. That's just 15 players at any given time giving meaningful value to the 25 and soon to be 26 man roster. The rest would have to be free agents. 3 is actually too low a number. 4 would mean we'd have around 20, at all times, and would only need 5-6 free agents- maybe some at a low cost.

    While Chavis, DHern, Taylor, Shawaryn, Kelley & Lakins might total 6, but let's not kid ourselves. How many of these guys from this years "crop" will become meaningful players over the 5 years fo their team control? Maybe 2? That might be generous.
    Sox 4 Ever

  11. #926
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,320
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Let's assume it's 3 impact players- maybe not all stars but also not 0 to 0.5 WAR guys either. Let's say they stay for their full team control years, including their arbs, which may become expensive but won't reach FA value, unless you're JBJ. Let's say that's 5 years. That means those 3 are "cycled out every 5 years with the new 3 coming in. That's just 15 players at any given time giving meaningful value to the 25 and soon to be 26 man roster. The rest would have to be free agents. 3 is actually too low a number. 4 would mean we'd have around 20, at all times, and would only need 5-6 free agents- maybe some at a low cost.

    While Chavis, DHern, Taylor, Shawaryn, Kelley & Lakins might total 6, but let's not kid ourselves. How many of these guys from this years "crop" will become meaningful players over the 5 years fo their team control? Maybe 2? That might be generous.
    I'd say 3, as long as we remember Taylor will exceed expectations as a role player...

  12. #927
    Legend Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6,997
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    You’re kidding, right?

    Maybe Moncada, Kopech, Allen, Margot, Buttrey, Anderson, Dubon and Quiroz.

    But why would we want 7 or 8 minimum wage players when we can sign a bunch of free agents and price Mookie’s way out of town..,
    Since you're being snippy....No I'm not FUCKING kidding you.

    You don't thing acquiring Chris Sale was a good move? You're FUCKING kidding me right?

    You think you can acquire a Chris Sale and HIS CHEAP CONTRACT with bunch of fucking nobodies?

    I didn't realize Buttery is now a candidate for Cy Young.

    I'm pretty sure that this board was ecstatic with our outfield trio of Beni, JBJ and Betts.

    You probably want to trade JBJ for Mike Trout.

    DD came in to do the job asked. Sox came in dead fucking last three of four years prior to his arrival.

    He won three straight Division titles and a World Series.

    Knowing stand up guys that play for Red Sox, I'm sure every single one of them including Sale, JD and Porcello are pointing fingers at DD for screwing up this season. Yeah, that's it. It's all DD's fault.
    Last edited by Nick; 09-21-2019 at 10:56 AM.

  13. #928
    The math is pretty simple, no? The average career for an MLB player is 5.6 years. Let's just say you have a 25 man roster (even though it's effectively higher than that). Looks to me that you need 4-5 players from the farm even to keep a minimum roster. So just to have an average farm, you need all your first five picks eventually to become part of your roster.

  14. #929
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    5,715
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Let's assume it's 3 impact players- maybe not all stars but also not 0 to 0.5 WAR guys either. Let's say they stay for their full team control years, including their arbs, which may become expensive but won't reach FA value, unless you're JBJ. Let's say that's 5 years. That means those 3 are "cycled out every 5 years with the new 3 coming in. That's just 15 players at any given time giving meaningful value to the 25 and soon to be 26 man roster. The rest would have to be free agents. 3 is actually too low a number. 4 would mean we'd have around 20, at all times, and would only need 5-6 free agents- maybe some at a low cost.

    While Chavis, DHern, Taylor, Shawaryn, Kelley & Lakins might total 6, but let's not kid ourselves. How many of these guys from this years "crop" will become meaningful players over the 5 years fo their team control? Maybe 2? That might be generous.
    I was assuming several of the star players would hang in there for 10 years. Guys like Bogie, Devers, Betts and E-Rod are likely to last well more than 5 years so the real number needed would be about 5 or 6 FA's on the 26 man, and some of those fill-in players on 1 to 2 year contracts. No doubt the roster needs to be brought into conformance with some sort of ideal as the way intelligent posters have talked here, we could lose 20 of the 40 man roster players. Hard to replace that many, even from a top farm system.

  15. #930
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Nick, your point wasn't about the trades being good or bad. You asked about what players we traded would be wanted now, and it seemed like you were implying none.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •