What would you sign up for right now?

[BaseballJones]

If you went into any five year period and said to Red Sox fans, "You can have two last place finishes, two division titles where they get eliminated in the ALDS, and one division title that leads to a World Series victory, how many Red Sox fans would say no to that? Here are the most successful 5-year periods in Red Sox history since divisional play began nearly 50 years ago...

2003-2007
- 2 WS titles (2004, 2007)
- 4 trips to the playoffs (2003, 2004, 2005, 2007)
- 3 trips to the ALCS (2003, 2004, 2007)
- 2 trips to the WS (2004, 2007)
- 1 division title (2007)
- 470-340 (.580)

2004-2008
- 2 WS titles (2004, 2007)
- 4 trips to the playoffs (2004, 2005, 2007, 2008)
- 3 trips to the ALCS (2004, 2007, 2008)
- 2 trips to the WS (2004, 2007)
- 1 division title (2007)
- 470-340 (.580)

2013-2017
- 1 WS title (2013)
- 3 trips to the playoffs (2013, 2016, 2017)
- 1 trip to the ALCS (2013)
- 1 trip to the WS (2013)
- 3 division titles (2013, 2016, 2017)
- 432-378 (.533)

2002-2006
- 1 WS title (2004)
- 3 trips to the playoffs (2003, 2004, 2005)
- 2 trips to the ALCS (2003, 2004)
- 1 trip to the WS (2004)
- 0 division titles
- 467-343 (.577)

2005-2009
- 1 WS title (2007)
- 4 trips to the playoffs (2005, 2007, 2008, 2009)
- 2 trips to the ALCS (2007, 2008)
- 1 trip to the WS (2007)
- 1 division title (2007)
- 467-343 (.577)

1986-1990
- 0 WS titles
- 3 trips to the playoffs (1986, 1988, 1990)
- 3 trips to the ALCS (1986, 1988, 1990)
- 1 trip to the WS (1986)
- 3 division titles (1986, 1988, 1990)
- 433-379 (.535)

1995-1999
- 0 WS titles
- 3 trips to the playoffs (1995, 1998, 1999)
- 1 trip to the ALCS (1999)
- 0 trips to the WS
- 1 division title (1995)
- 435-381 (.537)

1999-2003
- 0 WS titles
- 2 trips to the playoffs (1999, 2003)
- 2 trips to the ALCS (1999, 2003)
- 0 trips to the WS
- 0 division titles
- 449-361 (.554)

1975-1979
- 0 WS titles
- 1 trip to the playoffs (1975)
- 1 trip to the ALCS (1975)
- 1 trip to the WS (1975)
- 1 division title (1975)
- 465-345 (.574)

Clearly the 2003-2007 and 2004-2008 clubs were very similar, covering a very similar time frame. Interesting that on either end, 2003 and 2008 had the same exact finish. 95-67, and a 4-3 loss in the ALCS.

Depending on how you measure it, this last 5-year period is the third most successful 5-year stretch in Sox' history since they went to divisional play (obviously when they won 3 WS titles in 5 years when Babe Ruth was on the team was a better stretch than anything that's happened since). 2002-2006 would be close (and in some ways, better). Same with 2005-2009.

The question is: What is reasonable to expect in the next 5-year period? Would we all be thrilled with one WS, three division titles, and two last-place finishes? If you could sign up for that RIGHT NOW, would you? If not, what would be your measure of "success" for this organization over the next five years?

 

[grimshaw]

I think this is a true talent 95+ win team through 2019 by virtue of Chris Sale, David Price, Mookie Betts and an above average core. Beyond that, it is impossible to speculate.

For the first time since new ownership came over, the 5 year plan is tough to read.

 

[johnnywayback]

I just always want to feel like the team consists of likable, talented players; that it's competently run in order to maximize its potential in terms of competing for a championship every year; and that, to the extent they fall short, there's reason to hope that next year will be better. That's my measure for success, and it can be met regardless of how many World Series or division titles come with it.

I feel good about the first piece of that equation going forward: there is a core here I will be excited to root for. I am less certain about the other two pieces.

 

[BaseballJones]

I find it fascinating that we have just been through maybe the third best five year period since Babe Ruth and it seems that not many people are happy. I think in any five year period moving forward, if we could have what we've just had, we should be doing cartwheels.

 

[Bosoxen]

I find it fascinating that we have just been through maybe the third best five year period since Babe Ruth and it seems that not many people are happy. I think in any five year period moving forward, if we could have what we've just had, we should be doing cartwheels.

Is it perhaps a function of the post-Papi blues? Knowing he was going to retire sucked. Getting swept in his last postseason series sucked a little more. Confronting the cold reality that life after Papi is actually harder than many had anticipated sucks a lot more.

There's a David Ortiz-sized hole in the middle of the soul of this team and that kind of drains a little bit of the joy and confidence out of the whole endeavor. Maybe it was the combination of that and the mid-afternoon games but I didn't feel myself nearly as invested in this playoff series as I have been in the past.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I find it fascinating that we have just been through maybe the third best five year period since Babe Ruth and it seems that not many people are happy. I think in any five year period moving forward, if we could have what we've just had, we should be doing cartwheels.

That's because you're looking at the final static numbers. And I know that we're all about the numbers around this place, but sometimes it means more than that. There seemed to be a lot of wins, more playoff games left on the table.

Let's say in a five-year stretch, the Sox won 100 games three times and between 85-90 victories the other two years. And they do it with a pretty stacked team. However, for some reason the Sox can't get out of the ALCS all five. Would you consider that a success? In this completely made-up scenario they "won" 476 games. Which is slightly more than the first two teams you mentioned but they really have nothing to show for it except a few division banners.

Is that a success?

The Farrell-led Sox won one World Series, which is difficult and I'm not putting it down, that counts for something. But they finished in last place for two years and limped out of the ALDS the other two years. And both times, the opposing teams beat the crap out of the Sox pretty convincingly. This wasn't seven games of Bill Buckner-like errors. Combine that with the last weeks of the regular season where the team backed into clinching, it doesn't look great.

To say that we should be doing cartwheels after living through the John Farrell experience is a bit much. The guy wasn't Bobby Valentine, but he wasn't Terry Francona either.

 

[Kielty's Last Pitch]

I find it fascinating that we have just been through maybe the third best five year period since Babe Ruth and it seems that not many people are happy. I think in any five year period moving forward, if we could have what we've just had, we should be doing cartwheels.

I think there's two reasons why most of us aren't doing cartwheels (well, three reasons if you include our lack of gymnastic abilities).

1) I don't want to write off 2 out of the next 5 years. And that's exactly what we'd be doing with two last place finishes. It's no fun going through an entire last place season. Nobody wants to pay hundreds of dollars per game to attend meaningless contests in which our beloved Sox are most likely going to lose.

2) The advent of the Wildcard has rendered Division Titles meaningless. We've seen it time and time again, a team like the Indians loses to a Wildcard that won 11 fewer games. Division Titles used to be a big deal, back when it was the only way to get into the postseason. Now, 1 out of every 3 teams makes it to the postseason. If your payroll is among the Upper Third in the league, you damn well better make the postseason.

So for me to be happy during the next 5 seasons, there can be no last place finishes and at least two LCS appearances and at least one World Series appearance. That's not too much to ask of a big market team.

 

[dcmissle]

That is an extravagant ask. See Atlanta Braves. We have become incredibly spoiled.

Big market teams -- there are probably 10 of them.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

That is an extravagant ask. See Atlanta Braves. We have become incredibly spoiled.

Big market teams -- there are probably 10 of them.

What does the bolded mean, exactly? You want your team to win all the time, right? When is it fun to hope that your team ends up in last place, so you won't be "incredibly spoiled"? If I could, I would love it if the Red Sox cruised to a World Series win every year from now until the day that I die. Mostly because I love the Red Sox and I like watching my team win.

Sports isn't some sort of zero-sum game. Like, you don't get bonus points for watching your team suck and being a long-suffering fan. Think of all of the people who died without seeing the Red Sox or the White Sox or the Cubs win the World Series. Watching shitty teams isn't fun, it's just watching a bad product.

You know what, for the most part, it sucked watching the New England Patriots play football for the majority of my lifetime. At the very best, you'd hope that they wouldn't embarrass themselves out there. Now, it's a joy to watch the Pats. They're one of the have's and it's nice to sit down on a Sunday and be confident that your team is going win. Not only that, but it's great to know that you're not the Jets or the Browns or the Chargers and you've got a shot to win the Super Bowl year after year after year.

If that's spoiled, call me a three-week old ham sandwich.

 

[grimshaw]

I find it fascinating that we have just been through maybe the third best five year period since Babe Ruth and it seems that not many people are happy. I think in any five year period moving forward, if we could have what we've just had, we should be doing cartwheels.

I will do cartwheels if they sign Martinez to a reasonable 5 year deal, find a way to move Hanley off the roster, and add a manager who the players like and is well read in sabremetrics.

This isn't an indictment of DD, but he has had two of the easiest off seasons in Red Sox history. He inherited as big a combination of cash and chips as any GM in baseball and he used them exactly how we thought and hoped he would. His in season trades have been excellent too.

This is more of a finesse off season, so I'm nervous since I don't know how he'll do with a short stack.

 

[Kielty's Last Pitch]

That is an extravagant ask. See Atlanta Braves. We have become incredibly spoiled.

Since 1999 the Braves, Mets, Phillies, Cubs, Cardinals, Giants, Rangers, Angels, Tigers, Royals, Red Sox and Yankees have done it. And the Dodgers may soon be joining them. Granted, the Cubs did have a last place finish.

 

[Dr Manhattan]

I dont know what the underlying point of the question is, it's either an obvious finger to point at "hey we have it really good" (which should be obvious to anyone being rational), or otherwise what? I'm not being snarky I just don't see the point being made.

in the hypothetical universe presented
You can have two last place finishes, two division titles where they get eliminated in the ALDS, and one division title that leads to a World Series victory, how many Red Sox fans would say no to that?

anyone saying no that is not being honest with themselves, or rational.


Of course anyone would be happy with a WS every 5 years, there are 30 teams in the league. If they win the WS every 5 years, a more interesting question would be would you put up with 4 last place finishes inbetween, or would you put up with just paying 20 billion dollars and buying the best player in the league every 5 years on one year contracts and then putting your minor league team up inbetween.


It would be more interesting also to consider the general principles of, do you want the team to jettison its farm in the pursuit of possibly overpaid big names every few years in the hope of "Pushing to the top" even if it only works every 5 years or so. 2004/7/13 has definitely spoiled me, because I'm leaning towards being more receptive to "oh well" if they cant find a good match at a good price, then so be it, if 2018 isnt going to be "the year", lets see how the kids develop and not panic buy contracts we will regret later in the hope they will take us to the "next level". It SHOULD be hard to win the WS, and teams SHOULDNT really expect to win even every 5 years. I'd love to see the young kids develop and improve, and for the team to look like they are doing everything they can to perform the best they can when they're on the field, even if they don't quite do as well as we would hope (one of the problems with this ALDS was the first 2 games it felt like they weren't really on the ball and didn't get their heads into the game enough, but probably Houston just didnt let them off the hook).

They should be better next year just due to upward "regression" (hitting at least), a big bat would be nice, but I don't know if JD Martinez is the answer. No chance of landing Stanton, and no chance of outbidding yankees on Harper, starting pitching looks dodgy to me, the next few years could easily go either way. I guess I am happy to take whatever happens, but yes please, sign me up for 1 WS, 1 ALDS loss and 2 last place finishes please.

 

[Toe Nash]

First, I'll note that using five-year periods conveniently leaves out the Bobby V year. This stretch is more like 3 last-place years, 1 WS title and two division titles. If you want to be more negative, you can point out the flukiness of 2013, and also note that they're 1-6 in the playoffs since then.

To me, it's not just the results on the field. I like to have confidence that the management of the team knows what it's doing and is making smart decisions for the right reasons. Before Theo this wasn't the case. Under Theo I basically felt this way and that's why it was so exciting to be a fan. Since Tito was fired, and especially since Cherington left, I have felt this way less often.

Part of what I liked about Theo and what I thought they had under Cherington was the ability and desire to re-tool the core so that they never had to do a total teardown. That is a huge challenge, but one that the team basically accomplished for ten years. They never had a year where they were totally out of it and could send away short-term assets for futures. And while they had plenty of resources, they also didn't fall back entirely on Yankees-style spending in order to sustain the success. It's like what Belichick has accomplished but almost more impressive since there is no one Red Sox player as important to team success as Brady.

The three last place finishes are big as they show major errors for the team all the way down -- there is no way they expected to lose more than 80 games any year. It's not like the Astros who did a full rebuild and didn't try to field a real team for four years (for the record, that also sucks and would sour me as a fan).

Right now they're at a crossroads. DD is obviously in charge and will now get to pick his manager, so we'll find out soon if the success of the last two years will continue. That's definitely better than LL being in charge or Cherington being nominally in charge but being undermined, or whatever was going on previously. I'm not a believer in DD yet -- he has been able to rebuild teams that he was allowed to tear down, but never been able to sustain a successful team for more than a few years (some of this is not his fault), but time will tell.

 

[BaseballJones]

To answer Dr Manhattan's question, the reason for the OP is twofold: (1) to help us gain just a little appreciation for what's happened under Farrell. How much HE had to do with it, we'll never know, and there's absolutely NO way to tell. But whatever frustrations we've had, we just experienced one of the best 5-year stretches this organization has ever had since the days of Babe Ruth. Not THE best, but one of the best.

And (2) to gain some perspective moving forward. The Dodgers, for example, have had an amazing 5-year stretch. And this year isn't finished, of course. But in these 5 years, they've:

- Won 5 division titles
- Gone to 3 NLCS
- Been to the playoffs 5 times (obviously)
- Gone 473-337 (.584)

But in all that time, they've not won a single World Series, or even a single NLCS. Now there's still a chance for it this year, of course. But let's say they get taken out by the Cubs again. I'd rather have the Sox' last 5 years than LA's last 5 years.

It's REALLY hard to win the World Series. So if we could get, in the next 5 years, what we just got the past 5 years, that would be incredible. And frankly, the odds are not high that the Sox will have, in the next 5 years, the kind of success that they just enjoyed these past 5 years.

 

[Kielty's Last Pitch]

First, I'll note that using five-year periods conveniently leaves out the Bobby V year. This stretch is more like 3 last-place years, 1 WS title and two division titles. If you want to be more negative, you can point out the flukiness of 2013, and also note that they're 1-6 in the playoffs since then.

Pretty sure a 5-year-period was selected because it's about what Farrell accomplished in his 5 years as manager.

And there was nothing fluky about 2013. They had the 4th-highest payroll in MLB, arguably the best postseason starting pitcher in the game, the best postseason hitter in the game, arguably the best #2 starter in the game, a closer whose WHIP was under 0.73 each of the prior two years, a CF'er who was MVP runnerup just 2 seasons earlier, and a healthy Pedroia. That's a lot of core talent for one team.

 

[Toe Nash]

It's been discussed...but they got a ton of career years from guys and got lucky that they were all in the same year. That's the fluke...sometimes that happens and it's great, and every championship team has some of that, but it wasn't a core built to contend for multiple years, as evidenced by the team performance in the years before and after.

Their top players in bWAR in 2013, with their 2012, 2013 and 2014 bWARs:
Pedroia: 5.1, 6.3, 4.9
Victorino: 2.6, 6.1, 0.6
Ellsbury: 1.1, 5.7, 3.3
Papi: 3.2, 4.4, 2.9
Buchholz: 1.0, 4.3, -1.6
Napoli: 1.8, 4.0, 3.3
Koji: 1.5, 3.6, 1.7
S Drew: 0.1, 3.0, 0.3
Lester: 0.7, 3.0, 2.7
Saltalamacchia: 1.5, 2.9. 0.0

So yeah, some of these were shrewd acquisitions and I'm sure the coaching staff and chemistry helped. But it took a good amount of luck for say, Victorino to stay healthy for the last time in his career, or Koji having the best season ever instead of just a very good one, or Buchholz stringing together 108 great innings instead of having negative value.

 

[Plympton91]

I think this is a true talent 95+ win team through 2019 by virtue of Chris Sale, David Price, Mookie Betts and an above average core. Beyond that, it is impossible to speculate.

For the first time since new ownership came over, the 5 year plan is tough to read.

Why are you assuming David Price is going to pitch even 1 inning in 2018? I really hope they aren't planning on waiting until this problem recurs next spring training before getting TJS.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Why are you assuming David Price is going to pitch even 1 inning in 2018? I really hope they aren't planning on waiting until this problem recurs next spring training before getting TJS.

It's certainly scary, but apparently Dr. Andrews says he doesn't need surgery. He's got the same issue Nolan Ryan had where the arm did its own calcification repair of the ligament.

Link