Josh Hamilton

[Soxfan85]

.Very good read on why Boston should pursue JH.

http://blog.masslive.com/redsoxmonst..._the_case.html

[RedSoxtober]

That's what I'm thinking: why sign Hamilton if the BRS won't likely contend till year 3 of his deal?

I like the Victorino signing for CF though. Ellsbury won't net an elite SP 1 for 1, but it makes sense to move him now.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "contend," honestly. I could see the Sox "contending" in the sense of making a decent run at a WC spot by 2014. That, of course, hinges on the development of De La Rosa, Webster, JBJr, and possibly Bogaerts.

Retrospectively, I think fans are beginning to come around to the fundamental reality: that much of the hype around this team over the past 2-3 years has due to a miscalculation of how stable, consistent and reliable its core is (most notably the pitchers). Why, for example, anyone -- including myself -- considered Buchholz money in the bank is beyond comprehension in hindsight. Actually translating raw talent into consistent performance is perhaps what defines the elite, cornerstone players from the rest (something Red Sox fans have vastly underrated IMO: just because CB has the best 'stuff' on the staff doesn't really mean anything if we're wondering each off-season what he'll do each proceeding year).

+1000. LIKE. Whatever, I completely agree. I know that this comparison could create a firestorm but I think it serves as a decent example. Mark Sanchez may well be a good quarterback by lots of objective standards but during the 60 minutes that count he's been a relative failure. By contrast, Tim Tebow has a terrible throwing motion and his teammates don't care for him -- but he wins.

Stuff/talent/etc count for nothing if you can't translate to winning performance.

[tc2deuce]

Either we get him or he kicks our ***** in NY

[penuch]

Either we get him or he kicks our ***** in NY

You can't do deals that way.

[elements1985]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "contend," honestly. I could see the Sox "contending" in the sense of making a decent run at a WC spot by 2014. That, of course, hinges on the development of De La Rosa, Webster, JBJr, and possibly Bogaerts.


+1000. LIKE. Whatever, I completely agree. I know that this comparison could create a firestorm but I think it serves as a decent example. Mark Sanchez may well be a good quarterback by lots of objective standards but during the 60 minutes that count he's been a relative failure. By contrast, Tim Tebow has a terrible throwing motion and his teammates don't care for him -- but he wins.

Stuff/talent/etc count for nothing if you can't translate to winning performance.

But it just goes to show, I think, that rebuilding by way of internal player development is perhaps as risky as shelling out 6-7 year deals. I obviously prefer the former -- like Theo said: who wouldn't want a stacked roster of all homegrown talent? -- but players like Buchholz make me equally somewhat cautious of that strategy as well.

[EEasyA]

.Very good read on why Boston should pursue JH.

http://blog.masslive.com/redsoxmonst..._the_case.html

That link doesn't work.

[ricomactaco]

But it just goes to show, I think, that rebuilding by way of internal player development is perhaps as risky as shelling out 6-7 year deals. I obviously prefer the former -- like Theo said: who wouldn't want a stacked roster of all homegrown talent? -- but players like Buchholz make me equally somewhat cautious of that strategy as well.

Its definately more making good decisions (and a little luck) in free agency and knowing which prospects are for real. The guys thinking our prospects are gonna carry us in the coming years are foolish. Reminds me of a few years ago when Yankee fans thought the "killer B's" were gonna carry them to the promised land and where are they now? Not a single one of them have made it.

[bagwell368]

Its definately more making good decisions (and a little luck) in free agency and knowing which prospects are for real. The guys thinking our prospects are gonna carry us in the coming years are foolish. Reminds me of a few years ago when Yankee fans thought the "killer B's" were gonna carry them to the promised land and where are they now? Not a single one of them have made it.

It's always a mix:

1. home grown
2. trades
3. FA - both generic/lesser guys and big time ones

Ever since FA started every team that is a contender has some combo of that mix. The more you hit the nail on #1 the easier and cheaper the other two steps can be. If #1 is weak, unless you are the Yankees you are probably talking an also ran team.

Plus even if home grown is good in an era - like the Pedroia/Lester/Ellsbury/Buchholz/Paps group, when they mature they become pretty expensive.

Most of the problem the Sox have had since 2007 can be laid directly at the feet of the failure of the farm to produce nearly enough since Bard. They compensated by spending too much on FA's and hence the garbage signings of CC, Lackey, Cameron, and re-upping Beckett.

Even Napoli/Gomes/Victorino are in part due to holes as well as feeding the monsterous pink hats while we wait for the next big crop to make an impact.

[chomaru]

It's always a mix:

1. home grown
2. trades
3. FA - both generic/lesser guys and big time ones

Ever since FA started every team that is a contender has some combo of that mix. The more you hit the nail on #1 the easier and cheaper the other two steps can be. If #1 is weak, unless you are the Yankees you are probably talking an also ran team.

Plus even if home grown is good in an era - like the Pedroia/Lester/Ellsbury/Buchholz/Paps group, when they mature they become pretty expensive.

Most of the problem the Sox have had since 2007 can be laid directly at the feet of the failure of the farm to produce nearly enough since Bard. They compensated by spending too much on FA's and hence the garbage signings of CC, Lackey, Cameron, and re-upping Beckett.

Even Napoli/Gomes/Victorino are in part due to holes as well as feeding the monsterous pink hats while we wait for the next big crop to make an impact.

I see them more as zombies being fed, NESN is the real monster.

What if grabbing Gomes early actually lowered the market for Hamilton? Having the Red Sox and Yankees involved usually means good news for the player/agent but neither team has a desperate need.

[Soxfan85]

That link doesn't work.

This is another one saying we need another Outfielder

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/b...osition=recent

[ne3xchamps]

This is another one saying we need another Outfielder

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/b...osition=recent

It says in the article that its unlikely hamilton ends up in boston, and I tend to agree. I just hope he signs somewhere soon so we can get off this subject.

[Soxfan85]

http://blog.masslive.com/redsoxmonst..._the_case.html

Josh Hamilton free agency 2012: Why the Boston Red Sox should make a strong run at the slugger

Heres the other link that didn't work

[bagwell368]

This is another one saying we need another Outfielder

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/b...osition=recent

Silverman (not the brightest bulb in the box) says Hamilton is unlikely to come to Boston)). I see you left that out.

He also thinks we "need" another OF here and then names off Swisher (NFW he comes here) and Ross (possible).

Then he goes on to discuss SP's we need - which is true.

What? We are all set at SS? Come on Silverman, wake up.

[EEasyA]

Silverman (not the brightest bulb in the box) says Hamilton is unlikely to come to Boston)). I see you left that out.

He also thinks we "need" another OF here and then names off Swisher (NFW he comes here) and Ross (possible).

Then he goes on to discuss SP's we need - which is true.

What? We are all set at SS? Come on Silverman, wake up.

The other link is better. I just skimmed through it, but its much better than the Boston herald one.

[Soxfan85]

Silverman (not the brightest bulb in the box) says Hamilton is unlikely to come to Boston)). I see you left that out.

He also thinks we "need" another OF here and then names off Swisher (NFW he comes here) and Ross (possible).

Then he goes on to discuss SP's we need - which is true.

What? We are all set at SS? Come on Silverman, wake up.

Where does he say "We are all set at SS?" I read the entire article and didn't see it.