The Epitaph on the 2017 Season

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
Of course, game logs! The NP through July is pretty crazy. Just a handful of games under 110. My concern with that earlier in the season (one of the few things I laid directly at the feet of the manager) was that he’d already had a history of late fades. I wanted those bullets for last Thursday.

Edit: totally agree on the lineup portion of that post. It needs a tweak, not an overhaul.
It's definitely a tough thing to handle as a manager. Not that I recommend it, but if you go back through the game threads, you'll routinely see many (most?) people wanting Sale to pitch more because he's pitching great and the game is close and why would you remove him from this game when he's only at 93 pitches when the alternative (at the time) is Barnes?? As we saw at the end of the year, every win matters, so it's just as important to get the win in May as it is in September, and using Sale that extra inning in May could just be what gets them that extra win. But then you have to balance that out with not stressing his arm too much.

Ideal world: the offense gets a lot better and Sale routinely wins games 7-2, so he only has to throw 90-95 pitches in a 6-inning start and the bullpen cruises the rest of the way. But....that's not how it worked this year.

For all the crap that Farrell gets...managing all this isn't easy.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Of course, game logs! The NP through July is pretty crazy. Just a handful of games under 110. My concern with that earlier in the season (one of the few things I laid directly at the feet of the manager) was that he’d already had a history of late fades. I wanted those bullets for last Thursday.
It is sort of a fascinating question--how do you lighten Sale's load so he doesn't wear down? Is it fewer pitches/outing or fewer starts/year? How drastic does it have to be, and how much will that affect the team's performance during the regular season. If you give him three weeks off in August--just to throw out a wild ass idea--does the team still make the playoffs?
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Vazquez is a 9th place hitter, Pedroia and Bogaerts are 8th place hitters, Bradley and Ramirez are 7th place hitters, Devers ideally wouldnot be pressed and hit 6th to start, Benintendi is a functional leadoff guy and Betts is a fine #2 hitter. They need to retool the team with 3, 4, and 5 hitters. A missing baseman/DH needs to be fit into the budget for one of those slots. I'd trade Bradley for a corner outfield slugger to fill another one. Then maybe you can gamble that Ramirez or Bogaerts lives upmtheir potential, or Betts returns to 2016 form, allowing even substandard Bogaerts to hit 2nd.
It's somehow heroic that this team of bottom-of-the-order hitters created more runs than the average AL team by quite a bit.

Tautologically-speaking, they can always improve the lineup.

I want Xander to hit more home runs too. I also want a lot of things.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
It was a very weird season in that the Sox both underachieved and overachieved--underachieved on the level of individual performance, for nearly all the position players and a few of the pitchers (Porcello in quality, Price in quantity), and then overachieved on the level of team performance given the meh individual contributions.

For this reason I'm not entirely buying the idea that their main problem this year was declining veterans or albatross contracts. Most winning teams have those things, and make up for them with young talent. The Sox' main problem was the young talent. They rolled the dice on the proposition that they had a core of very good young position players who would, as a group, repeat or even improve on their 2016 performance. And that pretty conspicuously didn't happen. The million-dollar question going into this winter is, what is the true talent level of Mookie Betts, Xander Bogaerts, and Jackie Bradley Jr., and what strategy does the answer to that question imply?

EDIT: that last question also applies to Benintendi and Devers, of course, but less crucially because they are younger, cost-controlled for longer, and in Benintendi's case, didn't underperform as much compared to last year.
I pretty much agree with this, though it's worth noting that this team has depended on a superior DH. Hanley in the neighborhood of a league-average DH leaves a gap, and the young'uns felt some extra pressure as a result. The Nunez infusion to the offense showed how a veteran contribution can help.

Players like Betts and Bogaerts look like they physically need to be topping out at somewhere around 138 games played, and we know Pedroia is going to need a serious caddy. This means the bench needs an unusually good middle IF and an unusually good 4th OF, along with a bat added at 1B/DH. It is very difficult to add bench players of near-starter quality, though, when they might be regulars elsewhere. Maybe that forces you to look at upgrading offense in CF (via Benintendi shifting over from LF and inserting a bopper in LF on at least a part-time basis). Of course, none of this matters if the manager insists on (or feels feels forced into) playing Betts and Bogaerts just about every day.
 

uncannymanny

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
9,081
I think you have to play that by ear and less pitches or less starts are fairly equal. Maybe you have other guys on a run in August and you can skip a start or two. Maybe the relievers are rested and you can lean on them for a couple weeks. Maybe he doesn’t need to throw those last 25 pitches when they’re up 5.

He actually threw 3 less regular season pitches this season, but he also wasn’t pitching for a team sure to miss the playoffs.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,807
Melbourne, Australia
It is sort of a fascinating question--how do you lighten Sale's load so he doesn't wear down? Is it fewer pitches/outing or fewer starts/year? How drastic does it have to be, and how much will that affect the team's performance during the regular season. If you give him three weeks off in August--just to throw out a wild ass idea--does the team still make the playoffs?
This and the post you quoted. The Red Sox must have been aware of the late fade issue for Sale, and they must know that it is important to save bullets for the late season and postseason. And you'd think that Willis et al would know how to keep pitchers healthy, and work on out pitches with them and with the catchers.

Again it makes me think, to quote Valek123 in the Rebuild thread, that new voices are needed.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
I pretty much agree with this, though it's worth noting that this team has depended on a superior DH. Hanley in the neighborhood of a league-average DH leaves a gap, and the young'uns felt some extra pressure as a result. The Nunez infusion to the offense showed how a veteran contribution can help.

Players like Betts and Bogaerts look like they physically need to be topping out at somewhere around 138 games played, and we know Pedroia is going to need a serious caddy. This means the bench needs an unusually good middle IF and an unusually good 4th OF, along with a bat added at 1B/DH. It is very difficult to add bench players of near-starter quality, though, when they might be regulars elsewhere. Maybe that forces you to look at upgrading offense in CF (via Benintendi shifting over from LF and inserting a bopper in LF on at least a part-time basis). Of course, none of this matters if the manager insists on (or feels feels forced into) playing Betts and Bogaerts just about every day.
Holt being injured and seriously underperforming compared to last year ended up hurting considerably. Not that he was great last year, but compare:

2016: 290 ab, .255/.322/.383/.705, 86 ops+, 1.2 bWAR
2017: 164 ab, .200/.305/.243/.548 (!), 47 ops+ (!), 0.0 bWAR

He was actually a useful player last year. This year? He was absolutely miserable at the plate, and decent in the field, but on the whole, either not playing or, when he was, playing awfully.

Maybe Brentz can be that fourth OF once the 40-man clears up. He's certainly not realistic for a starting gig anywhere, but maybe he can be good enough to be solid as a 4th OF, if you pair him with Davis (who I love for speed and defense) or someone like Davis. Upgrade 1b. Maybe re-sign Nunez (if his body heals) to be an all-purpose IF, and that way you can have Pedroia, Bogaerts, Nunez, and Devers cover the three IF spots in some sort of rotation so it keeps people fresh.

Also, if you want, you could get rid of Hanley (eat the cost) and use the DH to "rest" players, like a lot of other teams do at this point.
 

Kielty's Last Pitch

New Member
Oct 6, 2017
118
Only 5 teams had DHs with a wRC+ over 100, which is mind boggling considering the entire purpose of the position is be an offensive contributor.
There were only 7 DH's not named Hanley with a qualifying number of PA's, that's because the DH position has been redefined. Teams are using the slot to "rest" position players without losing their bat, and also using it for players that have an injury which impacts only their fielding. It's also a good place to stick fading position players on the back end of longterm contracts. It's all about flexibility. And with shrinking benches in favor of bigger bullpens, that flexibility is more important than ever.
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
Forget about Nunez. He is getting an everyday job and a starter's paycheck next season. Someone is going to pay for his excellent contract year, and I can't imagine it will be us.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think you have to play that by ear and less pitches or less starts are fairly equal. Maybe you have other guys on a run in August and you can skip a start or two. Maybe the relievers are rested and you can lean on them for a couple weeks. Maybe he doesn’t need to throw those last 25 pitches when they’re up 5.

He actually threw 3 less regular season pitches this season, but he also wasn’t pitching for a team sure to miss the playoffs.
I wonder if there is any research on which causes more fatigue over the course of a season. Or is a pitch a pitch? Don't pitchers in Japan throw once/week but with crazy high pitch counts?
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,075
Concord, NH
There's a boatload of talent on this team. They played with a lot of heart and won some really exciting games. I haven't had too many objective reasons to have doubted this team, but something has just felt "off" all year. Consistently, all season long, I never really thought they had a chance - and my default predisposition is almost always optimistic.

Now, how a team "feels" to me is useless. That's not the point. The point is that I wasn't alone with this, and it was a lot of people that are usually pretty perceptive. And I'm betting those same people felt the opposite about 2013 from spring training on. The stuff some people call luck between the numbers isn't necessarily blind chance. Philosophy, preparedness, attitude, luck, health, confidence, whatever else, are all part of what make up the numbers.

But even if we can't possibly know how much of an effect they have, it's really hard to see the underwhelming offense across the board as random chance. It could of be, but I think it's more likely that this is an issue with non-playing personnel. Maybe that's Farrell. Maybe it's Chili. Maybe it's someone in a cubical somewhere whose name we don't know.

Luckily, I don't have to figure that out. That's DD's job. A lot of times that means hiring a new manager, even if it doesn't seem fair. At the least, it's a new roll of the dice. Maybe they just need a new voice. Maybe they need a better in-game manager (my personal pick). Maybe they still like Farrell, but they need a new bench coach with some ideas. I honestly don't know.

There were a lot of avoidable errors this season. I'm totally on board with being aggressive on the basepaths, but I had a real problem with their lack of situational awareness. That is a lack of preparation and planning. If I had a horse to bet on for what correctable factor has the biggest effect on a player's "luck", it'd be preparation. That's squarely on management. That *is* management.

These are some exciting young players, but they're young. Farrell's management style seems to work better with veterans. I think they should look for someone who will get the most out of our still developing young core while they're still young. I also wouldn't mind if he knew when it is and isn't prudent to be reckless on the basepaths, or when you just should let your star closer only start fresh innings like he's comfortable with when you have a stacked bullpen full of arms capable of making 1 clutch out. But, I'm not greedy.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,630
Springfield, VA
Houston
2011: 106 losses
2012: 107 losses
2013: 111 losses
2014: 92 losses
416 total

Cubs:
2011: 91 losses
2012: 101 losses
2013: 96 losses
2014: 89 losses
377 total

Cleveland:
2009: 97 losses
2010: 93 losses
2011: 82 losses
2012: 94 losses
366 total

Sox:
2012: 93 losses
2013: 65 losses
2014: 91 losses
2015: 85 losses
334 total

There's really no comparison here.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
913
I suspect that the smart play might be to nibble around the edges and run this team back out there. But I don't think Dombrowski (or the talk radio fans) are hardwired that way.

So who goes? I see ERod, Bogaerts, and JBJ as prime candidates to be moved. I'd be ok moving ERod as part of a deal, but I'd hate to move the other two.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I suspect that the smart play might be to nibble around the edges and run this team back out there. But I don't think Dombrowski (or the talk radio fans) are hardwired that way.

So who goes? I see ERod, Bogaerts, and JBJ as prime candidates to be moved. I'd be ok moving ERod as part of a deal, but I'd hate to move the other two.
I think JBJ is going to be dealt. He's a very good defender but so streaky at the plate they may decide to move on, move Mookie to CF and go look for a corner bat with power.

Nice to see you here again, BTW.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I suspect that the smart play might be to nibble around the edges and run this team back out there. But I don't think Dombrowski (or the talk radio fans) are hardwired that way.

So who goes? I see ERod, Bogaerts, and JBJ as prime candidates to be moved. I'd be ok moving ERod as part of a deal, but I'd hate to move the other two.
Who takes over at shortstop if Bogaerts is moved? I don't see him going anywhere.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
Financially, it's going to be an interesting season. According to Cot's, the Sox already have almost $108M committed to just 5 players (Price, Hanley, Porcello, Pedroia and the gift that keeps on giving taking, Sandoval). They have $11M going to Rusney, but it doesn't count against the tax. They have 2 options likely to be exercised (Kimbrel $13M, Sale $12.5M). That gets them to $133M. Then the arb guys. MLBTR has a model that works pretty well, and they just released their numbers, so here's what we can look forward to (number in parentheses is service time):

Robbie Ross (5.099) – $2.0MM
Joe Kelly (5.029) – $3.6MM
Drew Pomeranz (5.013) – $9.1MM
Josh Rutledge (4.090) – $700K
Tyler Thornburg (4.057) – $2.1MM
Brock Holt (4.052) – $2.0MM
Xander Bogaerts (4.042) – $7.6MM
Jackie Bradley (3.150) – $5.9MM
Sandy Leon (3.149) – $2.1MM
Steven Wright (3.089) – $1.2MM
Mookie Betts (3.070) – $8.2MM
Brandon Workman (3.036) – $900K
Christian Vazquez (3.031) – $1.5MM
Carson Smith (3.028) – $1.1MM
Eduardo Rodriguez (2.130) – $2.7MM

Total for arb players (15) - $50.7M
Total for all players (21) - $184M (give or take a few hundred thousand, not including Pablo as an active player, but counting his cash)

There are a couple of possible non-tenders (Rutledge, Thornburg) but for the most part these guys will stay unless traded.

Not a lot of room left to add anyone. Unless they decided to take the tax hit after the reset. Which is definitely possible.
 

plucy

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2006
426
a rock and a hard place
Plus over $15mm for med benefits and 40 man maintenance, plus the pre arb players on the roster.
They are already over the CBT line with Swartz's estimates.
 

pantsparty

Member
SoSH Member
May 2, 2011
554
There were only 7 DH's not named Hanley with a qualifying number of PA's, that's because the DH position has been redefined. Teams are using the slot to "rest" position players without losing their bat, and also using it for players that have an injury which impacts only their fielding. It's also a good place to stick fading position players on the back end of longterm contracts. It's all about flexibility. And with shrinking benches in favor of bigger bullpens, that flexibility is more important than ever.
That's a good point, my thinking about it as a "position" is probably outdated because of David Ortiz when in reality it's become something more than that.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,251
the point of resetting was to avoid a super huge penalty. it won't be that bad a hit when we go over next year.

DD is not going to be frugal this offseason for any reason.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
How valuable do we really think JBJ is? What would we reasonably get for him? I imagine most teams would see him as the 3 WAR player he was this year and not the 5 WAR player he was in his career year. Who would we get for him?

The Marlins already have Christian Yelich in CF, why would they want JBJ? Going off of this season, he was a pretty mediocre player. Lorenzo Cain is older but how big of a deal do we expect him to get? So much higher that a team will trade us a power bat/prospects for JBJ to avoid paying for Cain? I just dont see how he is a valuable trade chip.
 

Erik Hanson's Hook

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2013
1,079
Meanwhile, the Red Sox have to sink $40 million into Sandoval and Rusney Castillo before they even get out of the batter's box. Another $60 million for Pedroia, Hanley and Porcello
Good God. Reading those two sentences sent shivers down my back. $100 million dollars for those five players. Think about that.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
the point of resetting was to avoid a super huge penalty. it won't be that bad a hit when we go over next year.

DD is not going to be frugal this offseason for any reason.
He might not be frugal, but it's also worth noting there that adding somebody like JD Martinez without doing any more subtraction beyond simply trading Bradley away is starting to flirt with the run away payroll ($40m over) possibility/penalties.

Going over the following year beyond this one would probably also be set in stone as well.
 

Detts

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,165
Greenville, SC
Chris Sale turned into a pumpkin.

I am still looking forward to the next Sale day.


It is happening.

Devers IStP HR

Bring on next year
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
6,917
Salem, NH
I think with a new set of eyes on the coaching staff and a strengthened lineup, JBJ is likely to regain his 2016 value. If the Sox can add a stud bat, it takes a lot of pressure off the other guys, and it also makes everyone that much better.

The guy is just one season removed from 26 HR, an .835 OPS, and an all star appearance, all while playing stellar defense at a premium position.

I’d listen to offers or see what’s out there for him if we’re getting JD Martinez to play LF, but I’m not giving him away. I’d rather keep JBJ, stick Martinez at DH, and maybe cycle him into LF to give the B’s a day off (or DH them) here and there.

Bogaerts, SS
Benintendi, LF
Betts, RF
Martinez, DH
Devers, 3B
Ramirez, 1B
Pedroia, 2B
Bradley, CF
Vazquez, C

One player added, lineup is significantly more potent.

(Alternatively, maybe you can go after Votto and keep Hanley at DH, which might be a safer option, but the cost in talent may not be something we’re willing to pay)
 
Last edited:

charlieoscar

Member
Sep 28, 2014
1,339
That still doesn't change the fact that the Astros and Cubs, two of the current darlings of baseball, owe their current roster stars to prolonged (5+ consecutive years) of being one of the 3-4 worst teams in all of baseball.
And from 2010 through 2015 the Red Sox finished 3/3/5/1/5/5. The 2014 WS winners had the second lowest attendance in that period.. They had plenty of time to rebuild but they chose to make some terrible deals and signings instead of trying to do it through their farm system. The impression I got was that the ownership thought they had to contend but given the attendance, it seems they could have taken time to genuinely rebuild.
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,312
Ann Arbor
And from 2010 through 2015 the Red Sox finished 3/3/5/1/5/5. The 2014 WS winners had the second lowest attendance in that period.. They had plenty of time to rebuild but they chose to make some terrible deals and signings instead of trying to do it through their farm system. The impression I got was that the ownership thought they had to contend but given the attendance, it seems they could have taken time to genuinely rebuild.
Do you guys really not see the difference between being last in the AL East and being one of the worst teams in all of baseball? The difference between having a *couple* back-end top-10 picks and multiple consecutive years of being in the top 2-3 overall? When people are saying "last place" for the Cubs and Astros they literally mean one of the worst teams in the entire MLB ecosystem, not teams that faded in August/September to finish a few games behind the Orioles.

If you could go back in time, you'd smack Cherington over the head and just say "suck more, suck more, just lose another 15 games because you'll get Kris Bryant!" but if you did this at the time this board would have been apoplectic. Would you support the Red Sox try to finish last in baseball the next 4 years without trying for a "rebuild?" Where you go into the season with a 5% chance of your team making the wild card game?
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
16,724
We didn't intentionally tank during those last place seasons, we were trying hard to win as many games as possible, which makes it even worse. We finished last but weren't rebuilding, and now is when those chickens are coming home to roost.

When we traded Lester and Lackey, we should have moved them for prospects instead of major leaguers. There's zero percent chance that that concept came from Cherington, who was all about the farm system. That was clearly a decision from the ownership level.

Combine that with this year being the year we needed to stay under the tax line, and the first year without Ortiz-- those are some tough issues that needed to be overcome, and we mostly did. Winning a division title with all that going is really a good season. If this past offseason had been a typical one, we would have signed Encarnacion, which would have made a huge difference to the lineup. We had to pass that up this time.

This team did well this year, considering everything. And we should continue to be good next year. We're going to spend a little more money and bring in a bat. If we do that, we'll be projected to win 90-something games again next year, which is where this organization usually is, and gives you a good shot at the postseason.
 

biollante

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 22, 2001
9,824
Land formerly of Sowheag
They need the big bat that pitchers fear. Not sure it is realistic to hope for another Ortiz, but here is hoping.

I still thought it was strange that for the game Monday there were many empty seats and the bars were quiet before the game. I thought things would be packed for a play off game on a holiday.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I think the crowd got there late given the weather and the uncertainty of the starting time (had the Yankees lost their Game 3 then the game yesterday would have been a night start). By the middle innings the park looked full on TV.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
I think the epitaph reads: HERE LIES THE THIRD-BEST TEAM IN THE AMERICAN LEAGUE...
This thought seems prevalent in this thread...but is it true? As DDB says, the elephant in the room is the Yankees - who have won two games against Cleveland already, and seem primed to improve next year (well, except the starters, maybe) as well.

Does the calculus change if the Sox are playing for a one-game play in, rather than a 5 game first round series?

On topic: the lack of a big bat was really painful this year. Lots more hits than runs, lots of outs on the basepaths trying to steal runs that aren't trotting home on a 4-bagger.

I know the luxury tax reset was important, but Encarnacion would've looked good in a Sox uniform. Hopefully, they can find a reasonable facsimile during the offseason. And a better-than-Holt super ute, capable of splitting time with Pedey if he continues to decline.
 

biollante

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 22, 2001
9,824
Land formerly of Sowheag
Stadium wasn't full at any time. There was plenty of noise though. Maybe it was just the rain ? Fun game to attend. This was my first (and last) game of the season so I haven't been there to check out turnout through the year, I mean actual fannies in actual seats.

The Playoffs are also about getting hot at the right time.
 

trekfan55

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 29, 2004
11,587
Panama
I think that first of all, it is not right to assume that the Sox would have signed Encarnacion. This is a Yankee mentallity of "we want this player, we will pay for him, he will sign with our team". It renains to be seen whether he would have signed with Boston had they wanted him or he would have still signed with Cleveland. John Henry does have a limit.

The Sox were a bad team for a few years but like some said here, not bad enough to draft a Kris Bryant or the like. Now, all that being said, how do they improve?

In the offense, they basically need the 2016 version (or a close approximation) of all their key players to show up. Betts, Bogaerts, and even Hanley were very good to excellent in 2016, and while they were not terrible in 2017, they declined. That is why people here are talking about the Yankees, they had the opposite effect, all their players improved. So are those improvements for real? Are the Sox declines for real? 2018 will tell. Meanwhile, the Sox do need at least one power bat. DD has a job to do.

When we traded Lester and Lackey, we should have moved them for prospects instead of major leaguers. There's zero percent chance that that concept came from Cherington, who was all about the farm system. That was clearly a decision from the ownership level.
I agree. Not only that, but they chose poorly. Lackey for Joe Kelly and Allen Craig was one of the worst deadline trades I remember. That, and the Lester trade was puzzling to say the least. It was one more oportunity to restock the system. That trade set them back big time in 2015 and they had nothing to show for it.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
Ben Cherington was a terrible GM. The money we saved on the Punto trade was promptly thrown at Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval. What a wasted opportunity
 

Dr Manhattan

New Member
Oct 9, 2017
46
Thought it may be better to have a thread where we can talk about what went wrong during the season and the series and what, serious alternatives, can be done to fix issues for 2018 and beyond.

Think that there are too many thoughts hanging around other threads and there can be some serious discussion here. Mods, feel free to close this thread if you think it's unnecessary.

BTW, this is not meant to be a gamethread (so no "F Kimbrel comments" should be posted) but rather an observation as to what happened. This team certainly baffled me this year. There were many occasions where I watched a game and thought: "They are seriously leading the division?"

To start, I think the starting pitching was lacking.
Sale was good but faded the last month.
Porcello was a CYA that gave up multiple runs most of the time.
Price was hurt most of the year.
Pomeranz was consistently good until he gave it up in Game 2.
Then what? Edro was inconsistent, Fister had moments where we wanted to kill him and then he absolutely sacked up (he provided the only win in a 4 game series vs the Yankees). Wright was lost for the year.
Next year: Sale should be better monitored, Price should be healthy, Pom should be a good # 3 and let's hope for the best with Porcello. Not a bad rotation on paper.

The bullpen was good. As proven by that insane extra innings record. I think this area looks even better for next year, Kimbrel meltdown today notwithstanding, with Carson Smith on for a full year and hopefully Thornburg.

I'll get back with more, especially the offense soon.
I don't know that the extra inning record is proof of a great bullpen per se, haven't several statistical analyses showed that luck plays a great part in it?
I saw the piece by dempster on Sale and having his pitches tipped because he started to lag with his knee hitch on the windup on his slider vs fastball and it felt like in Game 1 vs Houston they were doing a ridiculously good job of picking up on pitches to hit or leave. The good news is almost every hitter performed under their expectations so we can look forward to improvement there (and enjoying Devers!). We definitely seemed to miss the "Ortiz" style rock in the lineup to make stuff happen and provide protection (and better pitches to hit) to the guys around him.
 

Dr Manhattan

New Member
Oct 9, 2017
46
The 2017 Red Sox were a very good, and IMO, very likable team. They are no longer able to win the world series, but that is true at the end of most seasons, whereas that they were one of the final 8 is not.

I know that this thread is better served talking about the way ahead, but I can't help stressing that I really enjoyed this season of Red Sox baseball.
I like this post, and I agree with you. I guess it's much easier to think that way after 2004 as well. The plan has always been to try to get into the playoffs as often as possible, and hope you can get those few things just so in conjunction with having that extra bit of performance so you can make a proper run every few years. I can't wait to see how Devers develops, and I think we just need to be patient with the other young guys, and perhaps temper some of our expectations. Bradley is a great defender who can hit a bit but should be down the bottom of the lineup. Betts is fantastic. Benintendi is just a kid but has already shown he can have a bright future. I don't expect Bogaerts t be Nomar so I don't feel the panic about him. I don't think teams can expect to have all starts at every position, thats just fantasy baseball and yankee like entitlement. A big power bat and regression up to the mean could make a huge difference next year, Price & Sale could be very nice starters, I don't know, I am not sure they have the means to get to the "top level" over the next handful of years, but will probably be up there challenging for post season in most of them. As long as they have some fun players to watch, I'm OK with that.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,500
Missing completely on Trey Ball is killing them.
Have you looked at that draft recently? It's not just Trey Ball that is killing them, it's the fact that they've gotten almost nothing from that draft.

In this current era where there are no obvious ways to use a team's financial advantage, the major league draft is the most important component to team building IMO. Can't whiff on an entire draft when the team is picking that high.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,500
Not only that, but they chose poorly. Lackey for Joe Kelly and Allen Craig was one of the worst deadline trades I remember. That, and the Lester trade was puzzling to say the least. It was one more oportunity to restock the system. That trade set them back big time in 2015 and they had nothing to show for it.
The system was already stocked and someone made the calculation that they should be able to return to contention in short order. Frankly, Ben knew that the Red Sox lacked power hitters in the system, which is why he tried to get two (although he missed I think he understood the issue).
 

uk_sox_fan

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,273
London, England
Houston
2011: 106 losses (Carlos Correa, 1st)
2012: 107 losses (Mark Appel, 1st) *traded for Giles
2013: 111 losses (Brady Aiken, 1st - did not sign)
2014: 92 losses (Alex Bregman, 2nd (comp for Aiken); Kyle Tucker, 5th)
416 total

Cubs:
2011: 91 losses (Albert Almora, 6th)
2012: 101 losses (Kris Bryant, 2nd)
2013: 96 losses (Kyle Schwarber, 4th)
2014: 89 losses (Ian Happ, 9th)
377 total

Cleveland:
2009: 97 losses (Drew Pomeranz, 5th)
2010: 93 losses (Francisco Lindor, 8th)
2011: 82 losses (Tyler Naquin, 15th)
2012: 94 losses (Clint Frazier, 5th) *traded for Miller
366 total

Sox:
2012: 93 losses (Trey Ball, 7th)
2013: 65 losses (Michael Chavis, 26th)
2014: 91 losses (Andrew Benintendi, 7th)
2015: 85 losses (Jason Groome, 12th)
334 total

There's really no comparison here.
I've added in the picks for the subsequent MLB draft. Also, don't forget the Nats:

2007: 89 losses (Aaron Crow, 9th - did not sign)
2008: 102 losses (Stephen Strasburg, 1st; Drew Storen 10th (comp for Crow))
2009: 103 losses (Bryce Harper, 1st)
2010: 93 losses (Anthony Rendon, 6th)
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,630
Springfield, VA
Have you looked at that draft recently? It's not just Trey Ball that is killing them, it's the fact that they've gotten almost nothing from that draft.
Have you looked at the whole draft? Other than Kris Bryant and Jon Gray at the top of the draft, there's barely anyone of note until you get down to Aaron Judge at #32. A couple of other prospects that could still pan out (e.g. Clint Frazier, who headlined one of the Andrew Miller trades) but seems like a fairly weak year overall.
 

bob burda

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,549
This thought seems prevalent in this thread...but is it true? As DDB says, the elephant in the room is the Yankees - who have won two games against Cleveland already, and seem primed to improve next year (well, except the starters, maybe) as well.

Does the calculus change if the Sox are playing for a one-game play in, rather than a 5 game first round series?

On topic: the lack of a big bat was really painful this year. Lots more hits than runs, lots of outs on the basepaths trying to steal runs that aren't trotting home on a 4-bagger.

I know the luxury tax reset was important, but Encarnacion would've looked good in a Sox uniform. Hopefully, they can find a reasonable facsimile during the offseason. And a better-than-Holt super ute, capable of splitting time with Pedey if he continues to decline.
Which of the Yankees players do you anticipate improving their performance next year?

- Judge is young, but will he be better than he was this year?
- What about all the 33 yr. old guys (Ellsbury, Gardner, Headley, T.Frazier)?...not likely better, and they will struggle to sustain their current level.
- Hicks seems to have figured out strike zone judgment in a big way, but he was about .150+ above his career OPS....probably a genuine improvement, but maybe a little out over his skis, too.
- Gregorious, Castro and Sanchez all had great yrs and are at ages where they can improve (Sanchez especially, which is scary) or at least sustain the level, but I don't see anybody else like that.
-The bullpen is outstanding; and they may get improvement out of Montgomery as a starter, but who else will be better?

The Yankees will be competitive, which is too bad since we'd all prefer them to be an early 90s style AL East doormat, but I do not see them putting together another 100 win Pythag team with their current personnel. The Red Sox are much more likely to get bounce back years from a team full of 20 somethings and ultimately a 100 win level team, than the Yankees.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,500
Have you looked at the whole draft? Other than Kris Bryant and Jon Gray at the top of the draft, there's barely anyone of note until you get down to Aaron Judge at #32. A couple of other prospects that could still pan out (e.g. Clint Frazier, who headlined one of the Andrew Miller trades) but seems like a fairly weak year overall.
Actually I hadn't. Sucks that the draft was a down year if that ends up being true.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,716
Which of the Yankees players do you anticipate improving their performance next year?

- Judge is young, but will he be better than he was this year?
- What about all the 33 yr. old guys (Ellsbury, Gardner, Headley, T.Frazier)?...not likely better, and they will struggle to sustain their current level.
- Hicks seems to have figured out strike zone judgment in a big way, but he was about .150+ above his career OPS....probably a genuine improvement, but maybe a little out over his skis, too.
- Gregorious, Castro and Sanchez all had great yrs and are at ages where they can improve (Sanchez especially, which is scary) or at least sustain the level, but I don't see anybody else like that.
-The bullpen is outstanding; and they may get improvement out of Montgomery as a starter, but who else will be better?

The Yankees will be competitive, which is too bad since we'd all prefer them to be an early 90s style AL East doormat, but I do not see them putting together another 100 win Pythag team with their current personnel. The Red Sox are much more likely to get bounce back years from a team full of 20 somethings and ultimately a 100 win level team, than the Yankees.
The Yankees aren't done bringing guys up from the minors, Gleyber Torres is their equivalent of Devers (Josh Norris in BA chat this week was asked to compare those two and chose Torres by a touch because of better D) and Miguel Andujar isn't far behind those two. Clint Frazier is a top 20-30 overall prospect who will be the LF at some point, and Estevan Florial is a year or two away behind him. Of the 33 year old guys you mention, Todd Frazier will likely not come back (because of Torres/Andujar), Ellsbury I think will be moved this winter while swallowing the bulk of his salary, and Gardner and Headley will stay to play the final year of their deals, but both will face pressure to keep their starting spots all season.

As for pitchers, they have a ton of potential internal rotation help coming, five guys who ended the year in AA or AAA who could be rotation factors as soon as next year (German, Adams, Acevedo, Sheffield, Tate) and numerous high ceiling arms at lower levels. JJ Cooper from BA said today in chat that he could see as many as five pitchers from NY's Staten Island team make the bigs, that is crazy.

tl/dr: Both Boston and New York have a ton of top young talent in the bigs already, but NY has a lot more on the way.
 

PapaSox

New Member
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
I agree this was a very likable team. IMHO I think adding a bat at 1B would be a solid move. I'm leaning toward Eric Hosmer if he gets away from KC. Moreland did alright but I think they need a little more hitting out of 1B. Hanley can stay in his role as DH. I'm not sure if I'd do more than that. Well maybe resign Fister for long relief & spot starts.
 

SpaceMan37

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2013
225
One of the biggest things they need is to manage Sale's workload including possibly giving him a DL stint over the All-Star break like they used to do for Beckett. They will get Wright back and have both Beeks and Velazquez in AAA with options so they should have better SP depth next year theoretically of course. I doubt Johnson sticks since he's out of options.

It's hard to take Sale out off the mound, but how much better off would they be if he weren't worn down in August, September and October?

I honestly believe this might be part of why Price has been pretty bad in the playoffs. They all just pitch too much.
 

bobesox

New Member
Jul 19, 2005
151
To expand this concept. Use 6 starters. Not a six man rotation. And give 1 starter at a time some time off.
 

Kielty's Last Pitch

New Member
Oct 6, 2017
118
One of the biggest things they need is to manage Sale's workload including possibly giving him a DL stint over the All-Star break like they used to do for Beckett. They will get Wright back and have both Beeks and Velazquez in AAA with options so they should have better SP depth next year theoretically of course. I doubt Johnson sticks since he's out of options.

It's hard to take Sale out off the mound, but how much better off would they be if he weren't worn down in August, September and October?

I honestly believe this might be part of why Price has been pretty bad in the playoffs. They all just pitch too much.
The answer is to reduce Sale's & Price's IP, not their starts. At the very least, they should not be pitching beyond the 5th inning if their team is up or down by 6 or more runs. Sale's 8-inning September performance in Baltimore is a perfect example where he threw at least 2 more innings than he should've. That's the kind of thing that has to stop next year.
 

budcrew08

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2007
8,552
upstate NY
The answer is to reduce Sale's & Price's IP, not their starts. At the very least, they should not be pitching beyond the 5th inning if their team is up or down by 6 or more runs. Sale's 8-inning September performance in Baltimore is a perfect example where he threw at least 2 more innings than he should've. That's the kind of thing that has to stop next year.
Can we remember these are human beings playing a game, please? I love the "Sale pitched an extra 2 innings in Baltimore so that's why he sucked in Game 1" crap. Let me tell you, try taking Sale out in the sixth when he's at 75 pitches just because the Sox have a big lead. Jesus H Christ.