The Red Sox let go of several longtime coaches, scouts & instructors

[soxhop411]

From Alex Speier

With new chief baseball officer Craig Breslow nearing the end of his first season with the Red Sox, changes across the organization are underway. According to multiple industry sources, the team has informed a number of longtime instructors and scouts that their contracts aren’t being renewed for 2025.

As part of an overhaul of the team’s pitching development efforts, three longtime pitching coordinators were informed they won’t be back: Pitching development advisor Ralph Treuel, who’d been with the organization since 1996 (including a brief stint as the big-league pitching coach in 2001 and as an interim bullpen coach in 2006); Latin America pitching and rehab coordinator Walter Miranda, who’d been with the organization since 2000; and pitching coordinator Chris Mears, who’d been with the organization since 2007.

Jimmy González, who managed the Sox’ rookie ball team in the Florida Complex League for the last four seasons, also was not renewed.

The Sox further declined to renew the contracts of three pro scouts: Anthony Turco, who’d been with the organization since 2003; and Blair Henry and Matt Mahoney, both of whom had been with the organization since 2006. Turco, Henry, and Mahoney had all spent several years in the team’s amateur scouting department before moving to the pro side.

The Sox already informed three members of their amateur scouting department — Mark Wasinger, Willie Romay, and Paul Fryer — that they wouldn’t be back.

Breslow declined to discuss or confirm any front office personnel changes Friday. However, he acknowledged that he’d spent his first full season in the organization examining potential changes to the baseball operations department.

“This is kind of the time of year when everyone in baseball goes through a similar exercise, whether it’s formal and structured or not, and especially in the case when there’s a new GM or CBO or No. 1 decision-maker trying to evaluate not just the people but the work that’s being done,” said Breslow. “I’m still kind of working through that. I think there will be an appropriate time to kind of more formally discuss any potential changes.

“But I think on the surface, what I see is a lot of really talented people who have done great work and contributed significantly to this organization over time. And the task that I have been handed is to ensure that I and we are doing everything possible to position ourselves not to have been successful, but to stay on the leading edge of all that represents a modern baseball operation and gives us the best chance of winning as many baseball games as possible.”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/09/17/sports/red-sox-scouting/?event=event25
Kind of insane that some of these folks had been with the sox since Dan Duquette (and the previous ownership) was in charge!

I was three years old when Ralph Treuel was hired by the Sox!

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Wasn’t Ralph Treuel the pitching coach for the Sox at one point? Talk about a survivor (until now).

(Yep, he is mentioned as having been the PC in 2001! Guess I should have read what you posted first…)

 

[soxhop411]

Wasn’t Ralph Treuel the pitching coach for the Sox at one point? Talk about a survivor (until now).

(Yep, he is mentioned as having been the PC in 2001! Guess I should have read what you posted first…)

its kind of insane TBH, I am curious when all is said and done, if this might be the season with the most turnover within the FO in a single season...


Usually turnover is a bad thing, but the opposite is also true (stagnation)

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Turning over coaching and scouting when you aren't winning makes sense but the main problem for this organization is the roster.

If your season plan is some kids plus retread arms plus whatever misfit toys are laying around you can have the best coaches in the world and it likely won't matter.

Can we replace ownership?

 

[Van Everyman]

Can we replace ownership?

They’ve been with the team since @soxhop411 was 9!!!!

 

[astrozombie]

I am torn on this. On the one hand, the Sox have not really developed many pitchers (Lester, Bucholz, Houck) in the last 20 years or so. I trust Breslow, or at least give him enough leash, to have evaluated the organization and determined that these areas need to be improved. Frankly, it's the kind of thing I expected Bloom to do. And pitching development has been an issue for this team. For others too, but the Sox seem to have a lot of trouble figuring it out.
On the other hand, this sort of feels like scapegoating. I highly doubt that the reason the Sox were so bad in 2024 (and 2023. And 2022.) is because Willie Romay was below average at his job. (note: I don't actually know Romay and he might be a great person who is great at his job, but I am going to assume he was let go because of performance issues). There are much larger structural problems than this. And maybe this is a step in the right direction towards fixing those issues. But it also feels like this was another bad year, someone needs to take the heat and it won't be Cora/Breslow/Bailey/ownership.

 

[curly2]

I highly doubt that the reason the Sox were so bad in 2024 (and 2023. And 2022.) is because Willie Romay was below average at his job. (note: I don't actually know Romay and he might be a great person who is great at his job, but I am going to assume he was let go because of performance issues). There are much larger structural problems than this.

Romay is mentioned as the man behind drafting Triston Casas, Roman Anthony and Kutter Croawford (a massive success for an 18th-rounder). Seems that's the kind of guy you'd want to keep .

 

[mauf]

Turning over coaching and scouting when you aren't winning makes sense but the main problem for this organization is the roster.

If your season plan is some kids plus retread arms plus whatever misfit toys are laying around you can have the best coaches in the world and it likely won't matter.

Can we replace ownership?

It always sucks to see someone let go who worked for an organization for a long time, but the Red Sox have not been good at developing pitching for a long time. That’s not necessarily the fault of the people being let go, but someone has to go to make room for new people bringing in new ideas. I hope the departing employees are being treated generously by ownership on their way out.

I don’t know enough about the scouting organization to opine on the changes there.

 

[astrozombie]

Romay is mentioned as the man behind drafting Triston Casas, Roman Anthony and Kutter Croawford (a massive success for an 18th-rounder). Seems that's the kind of guy you'd want to keep .

Thanks for correcting - I meant to write Fryer, but I get your larger point. Which brings up the point which is why are they being let go?

 

[jon abbey]

It's a specific thing but also an industry-wide trend, in person scouts are being let go all over MLB as their skills are not as necessary these days.

 

[TomRicardo]

Can we replace ownership?

"Hey we own our sports network while more than half the league has no idea what they are going. What we should do is kill the living shit out of the television by saving money and not funding the roster. That we we can extract maximum ROI with a mediocre but cost effective team. Winning is for suckers." - Business Super Genius Sam Kennedy.

 

[lexrageorge]

There were reports of an organizational audit earlier this season, so it doesn't seem unexpected that Breslow intends to do a full overhaul. As noted, it's not a trend limited to the Red Sox either. And it's not like these folks necessarily did a bad job or were incompetent. It's really about keeping the people that the management wants to keep going forward and adding the type of new talent the team wants in these departments.

I don't know enough to judge whether the organization was working well or not, and not sure any of us really do, so have no choice but to go along for the ride. It's possible this restructure could be a huge mistake; it's also possible it could make the organization the envy of MLB; time will tell.

 

[ShaneTrot]

We know nothing what these guys do but the Sox have reaped what they sow when it comes to investing in pitching. Ian Cundall at Sox Prospects has a great write up showing the Sox are dead last in draft money spent on pitchers from 2018-2023.

 

[Fishy1]

We know nothing what these guys do but the Sox have reaped what they sow when it comes to investing in pitching. Ian Cundall at Sox Prospects has a great write up showing the Sox are dead last in draft money spent on pitchers from 2018-2023.

The attitude was, I think, that top drafted pitching prospects have a much higher flameout rate than top position players. So it's better to spend that money on the sure bet.

But clearly that's led to an untenable situation.

 

[moondog80]

The attitude was, I think, that top drafted pitching prospects have a much higher flameout rate than top position players. So it's better to spend that money on the sure bet.

But clearly that's led to an untenable situation.

Except that high ranked hitting prospects can be exchanged for pitchers. Or, if you keep them on the roster, their presence makes it easier to afford high cost pitchers in free agency.

I think everyone is very, very happy with the way the last few drafts have worked out. If you could guarantee that kind of success, you would do it every single time and figure out the pitching later. And FWIW, the Red Sox team ERA+ this year is 106, the same as the Mariners, whose staff we all want to raid.

I'm not saying the situation can't be improved. But the draft approach has not been the problem.

 

[simplicio]

Right, we just swapped 2020 #17 Nick Yorke ($2.7m signing bonus) for 2019 #18 Quinn Priester ($3.4m) and bypassed a substantial portion of burnout/injury risk.

 

[AlNipper49]

These guys are also older. It's a reasonable assumption that a portion of this is Breslow adding processes or expectations that are more friendly towards coaches who can be more mobile, use technology differently, speak multiple languages, etc.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Right, we just swapped 2020 #17 Nick Yorke ($2.7m signing bonus) for 2019 #18 Quinn Priester ($3.4m) and bypassed a substantial portion of burnout/injury risk.

That's one example, but how often will Breslow be able to repeat such a trade or get an established MLB arm? Sandy Alderson back in his Oakland days talked about a cadre of strong pitching prospects in your system being money in the bank to get you whatever you need (or put them on your MLB roster).

 

[grimshaw]

Except that high ranked hitting prospects can be exchanged for pitchers. Or, if you keep them on the roster, their presence makes it easier to afford high cost pitchers in free agency.

I think everyone is very, very happy with the way the last few drafts have worked out. If you could guarantee that kind of success, you would do it every single time and figure out the pitching later. And FWIW, the Red Sox team ERA+ this year is 106, the same as the Mariners, whose staff we all want to raid.

I'm not saying the situation can't be improved. But the draft approach has not been the problem.

They also drafted 4 of their top 6 picks as pitchers this season. I'm fine with the approach since they finally have that surplus to trade from.

 

[moondog80]

That's one example, but how often will Breslow be able to repeat such a trade or get an established MLB arm? Sandy Alderson back in his Oakland days talked about a cadre of strong pitching prospects in your system being money in the bank to get you whatever you need (or put them on your MLB roster).

The Orioles traded a SS prospect for Corbin Burnes.

The whole "but it's all hitters" thing is a case of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the very good. Yes, in a perfect world they might have had the Kristian Campbell and Franklin Arias equivalents of pitchers blow up this year instead of those two. But 25+ teams would be happy to trade farm systems with the Red Sox. Enjoy it for what it is.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

The Orioles traded a SS prospect for Corbin Burnes.

The whole "but it's all hitters" thing is a case of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the very good. Yes, in a perfect world they might have had the Kristian Campbell and Franklin Arias equivalents of pitchers blow up this year instead of those two. But 25+ teams would be happy to trade farm systems with the Red Sox. Enjoy it for what it is.

DL Hall was also part of the package; former first round pick who had a 13 k rate in AAA before traded; he was a top 100 prospect at the team and major league ready. Granted, he wasn’t very good this year after the trade.

 

[moondog80]

DL Hall was also part of the package; former first round pick who had a 13 k rate in AAA before traded; he was a top 100 prospect at the team and major league ready. Granted, he wasn’t very good this year after the trade.

Fair enough, but I stand by my overall point. Would anyone be happier if Kyle Teel was instead a significantly lower ranked prospect, but a pitcher?

 

[8slim]

These guys are also older. It's a reasonable assumption that a portion of this is Breslow adding processes or expectations that are more friendly towards coaches who can be more mobile, use technology differently, speak multiple languages, etc.

Suspect this is a big factor. Plus, these older guys are likely making more than what their replacements will make. Anyone who’s middle aged and spent 5 minute in a large business knows how that goes.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

"...we are doing everything possible to position ourselves not to have been successful..."

Yup

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

"Hey we own our sports network while more than half the league has no idea what they are going. What we should do is kill the living shit out of the television by saving money and not funding the roster. That we we can extract maximum ROI with a mediocre but cost effective team. Winning is for suckers." - Business Super Genius Sam Kennedy.

Here is an interesting fact about part of the Sox ownership group:

His RedBird vehicle now has $10bn of assets under management, according to the private
equity group, with 70 per cent of its investments in sports, media and entertainment and the
rest focused on insurance and asset management. According to people briefed about the
matter, it has to date returned investors 2.5 times gross multiple of capital and 33 per cent
gross internal rate of return

I am rooting for the wrong laundry. The Sox are retail - go RedBird!!!

In case you were wondering where the roster savings is going.

Link for those with FT access

 

[Humphrey]

Wasn’t Ralph Treuel the pitching coach for the Sox at one point? Talk about a survivor (until now).

(Yep, he is mentioned as having been the PC in 2001! Guess I should have read what you posted first…)

Which means he replaced Joe Kerrigan as PC when Kerrigan's brief Reign of Error as manager started.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

IIRC, John Cumberland, the tomato growing bullpen coach, replaced Kerrigan. But he didn’t last long; apparently he hated Joe like pretty much everyone else.

 

[SemperFidelisSox]

Zack Scott, who was with the organization for 16 years before going to the Mets, mentioned in a Tweet today that others are being asked to take pay cuts.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Zack Scott, who was with the organization for 16 years before going to the Mets, mentioned in a Tweet today that others are being asked to take pay cuts.

So basically they’re cheaping out on the scouting staff? Awesome.

 

[Harry Hooper]

So basically they’re cheaping out on the scouting staff? Awesome.

After going along with MLB's reduction in farm teams which eliminated positions (staff and players) and one of the advantages for the wealthier clubs.

 

[lexrageorge]

Makes me wonder if this is a trend across the league.

 

[Salem's Lot]

The “asking people to take pay cuts” part of it is really disturbing to me. I could see firing people that are underperforming or redundant, but keeping some people around at a lower number indicates to me that this is all about saving money.

If they’re so concerned about saving a couple million dollars on the scouting staff, it would seem unlikely that they’ll be adding player payroll.

 

[sezwho]

The “asking people to take pay cuts” part of it is really disturbing to me. I could see firing people that are underperforming or redundant, but keeping some people around at a lower number indicates to me that this is all about saving money.

If they’re so concerned about saving a couple million dollars on the scouting staff, it would seem unlikely that they’ll be adding player payroll.

Agreed, but I’m kind of hoping against hope that it means the opposite?

That consulting engagement he green lit confirmed (and provided air cover for the resulting purge) the bloated overlapping of overpaid staffers, seemingly with minimal accountability.

Im guessing that freed up literally millions of dollars to hopefully plow back into something which can actually deliver value to the Red Sox organization. I think that a lot of those people were just putting on a suit and going to work and delivering Jack shit…certainly on the pitching side.

I’m sure a lot of fine and talented people just got laid off too and they’ll find jobs.

The pay cut thing is tricky, and I’ve wondered what would happen if my employer came to me? Ultimately if you are actually being assigned to a different role, not just pay cut across board, then you are kind of presented with the choice of accepting that role and its corresponding pay are going to find something else to do.

 

[Fishy1]

Agreed, but I’m kind of hoping against hope that it means the opposite?

That consulting engagement he green lit confirmed (and provided air cover for the resulting purge) the bloated overlapping of overpaid staffers, seemingly with minimal accountability.

Im guessing that freed up literally millions of dollars to hopefully plow back into something which can actually deliver value to the Red Sox organization. I think that a lot of those people were just putting on a suit and going to work and delivering Jack shit…certainly on the pitching side.

I’m sure a lot of fine and talented people just got laid off too and they’ll find jobs.

The pay cut thing is tricky, and I’ve wondered what would happen if my employer came to me? Ultimately if you are actually being assigned to a different role, not just pay cut across board, then you are kind of presented with the choice of accepting that role and its corresponding pay are going to find something else to do.

You don't hire a consulting firm, after all, unless you're looking to lay people off.

I think this is a bummer, I never like seeing people lose their livelihood. On the other hand, I have no idea what the staff/scouts were delivering and if they were actually any good at their jobs or whatever.

 

[ookami7m]

After going along with MLB's reduction in farm teams which eliminated positions (staff and players) and one of the advantages for the wealthier clubs.

I don't think they had the option to say "nah, we want to keep the extra two teams" - it was overwhelmingly voted on by the owners to re-align/downsize. One standout would not have likely made a difference especially when more (poorer) clubs benefit this way.

 

[gammoseditor]

Breslow’s moratorium on hiring Cubs front office staff is ending soon. I think part of this is clearing room for his guys.

 

[simplicio]

Was the moratorium a one year thing?

 

[sezwho]

You don't hire a consulting firm, after all, unless you're looking to lay people off.

I think this is a bummer, I never like seeing people lose their livelihood. On the other hand, I have no idea what the staff/scouts were delivering and if they were actually any good at their jobs or whatever.

For the record, I definitely don’t like to see this either and have suffered for unemployment in the recent past myself, but I think some kind of continued significant change was needed.

There is certainly the chance, especially in this new ownership incarnation, that it’s purely about squeezing more margin, which would be really sad.

Breslow’s moratorium on hiring Cubs front office staff is ending soon. I think part of this is clearing room for his guys.

That’s a great take, makes sense.

 

[NickEsasky]

Until ownership proves otherwise, I am just going to assume this is just about the bottom line and value for Redbird's capital investors. Cutting payroll, hiring consultants to review the organization's structure, cutting staff and scouts. It's all looking like a trend right now that scares me.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Until ownership proves otherwise, I am just going to assume this is just about the bottom line and value for Redbird's capital investors. Cutting payroll, hiring consultants to review the organization's structure, cutting staff and scouts. It's all looking like a trend right now that scares me.

This is where I’m at as well. Nothing that they’ve done since Redbird got involved in 2021 has led me to believe otherwise, with the exception of locking up Devers. Let’s see if they spend to the tax threshold this off-season.

 

[RS2004foreever]

Everyone who has worked in corporate America saw this coming when they hired the efficiency consultants earlier this year.
ChatGBT could write the memo:
"All, as I am sure you have learned this morning, we have made the difficult decision to reduce staff. Change is never easy, but we must align our human resource strategy to the overall mission of the organization.
We thank those who have been let go and we wish them the best of luck in their future endeavors."
When I was at PwC you could set your clock by these memos - which came out about every 2 years.

 

[Benj4ever]

I was three years old when Ralph Treuel was hired by the Sox!

I was three...plus 30...

 

[Fishy1]

Everyone who has worked in corporate America saw this coming when they hired the efficiency consultants earlier this year.
ChatGBT could write the memo:
"All, as I am sure you have learned this morning, we have made the difficult decision to reduce staff. Change is never easy, but we must align our human resource strategy to the overall mission of the organization.
We thank those who have been let go and we wish them the best of luck in their future endeavors."
When I was at PwC you could set your clock by these memos - which came out about every 2 years.

I had a dream the night before I got laid off that the memo said "Some of our employees will be transitioning to a new role of being unemployed."

Needless to say that was not what they actually said.

Anyways, I think Breslow angling to bring in his own staff from the Cubs organizations makes as much sense as them simply trying to cut weight. I think this org still plans to spend money. If they continue not winning, attendance is going to suffer, and that obviously is bad for business. While winning, going to the playoffs,etc., is obviously good for business.

I also expect them to be back in the top 5-8 payrolls next year. They've got a ton coming off the books between Sale, Jansen, etc., and they've got a ton of young, cost-controlled guys squared away. I think they're going to spend pretty big this offseason to push them over the top. At least one more deal in the Devers-range and a number of other small deals.

 

[Midnight Ryder Jones]

When you start asking people to stay on but with reduced salaries, it's kind of hard to claim that this is actually about improving the baseball team. This is about shareholder return.

 

[Midnight Ryder Jones]

Breslow’s moratorium on hiring Cubs front office staff is ending soon. I think part of this is clearing room for his guys.

How many of "his guys" are there? I'm pretty sure he never even left Newton the entire time he worked for the Cubs and it's not clear that he ever did any hiring. Obviously it's still possible to build relationships when you work remotely, but this probably isn't a situation where Breslow has a bunch of trusted lieutenants who have been at his side for years, like Theo.

 

[Fishy1]

When you start asking people to stay on but with reduced salaries, it's kind of hard to claim that this is actually about improving the baseball team. This about shareholder return.

Definitely possible. But it can be that, and I think it's also likely they didn't want to fire the whole staff but want to encourage some others to find new roles so they can replace them with their own guys.

I can definitely see a world where Breslow wants to rework the staff from top to bottom because he's not happy with performance, especially in development. Which makes sense, because the production of pitching talent has been putrid.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Over the past half decade it really feels like the organization has moved towards operating efficiently for its ownership which is entirely their prerogative. However, that's typically at odds with winning and they haven't been doing much of that.

As I noted upthread, a mid organization probably needs to revamp scouting and coaching however if you look at the context, this does feel like cost cutting.

I don't know how one arrives at a conclusion that this group will increase payroll significantly. They seem to sell tickets and merchandise just fine by being a potential playoff team + the Fenway experience. Why should they mess with that?

 

[AlNipper49]

When you start asking people to stay on but with reduced salaries, it's kind of hard to claim that this is actually about improving the baseball team. This is about shareholder return.

No, it's about the role and the value that it delivers. If a scout making $100k a year isn't delivering $110k of value then it's time to reassess the needs and the personnel.

Are you suggesting that the Red Sox are a charity and that dead weight needs to be carried just because? What competitive advantage has this group of scouts brought? I don't see this team doing much different than any other team tbh - about the biggest variance between now and the previous regimes has been how to use this talent - keep or sell.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Over the past half decade it really feels like the organization has moved towards operating efficiently for its ownership which is entirely their prerogative. However, that's typically at odds with winning and they haven't been doing much of that.

As I noted upthread, a mid organization probably needs to revamp scouting and coaching however if you look at the context, this does feel like cost cutting.

I don't know how one arrives at a conclusion that this group will increase payroll significantly. They seem to sell tickets and merchandise just fine by being a potential playoff team + the Fenway experience. Why should they mess with that?

I would be happy if they stayed at the level that they are at this year, but I think they are actually going to have a lower player payroll next year. Everything that they’ve done has signaled that they are looking to cut costs across the board.

 

[joe dokes]

I don't know how one arrives at a conclusion that this group will increase payroll significantly. They seem to sell tickets and merchandise just fine by being a potential playoff team + the Fenway experience. Why should they mess with that?

Even assuming that maximizing shareholder return is now their #1 priority (which I don't, but so what) a reason they might "mess with it" is that a payroll increase combined with what is (mostly) an indisputable influx of young (and cheap) talent means that an increase in spending has a much more realistic chance of increasing the ROI by being a much better team. I have no idea, of course, if that's what's actually happening or going to happen, but I think it goes to the question of "why might next year be different for spending"? (And I am assuming that a deep playoff run is a profit-generating experience. Is it?)