Skip to content

When did the Red Sox get all thrifty?

Dec 14, 2011, 6:04 PM EDT

Larry Lucchino, Ben Cherington, Bobby Valentine, John Henry Getty Images

Nick Punto? A closer making the minimum? Nick Punto? NICK PUNTO?!?

And no Yu Darvish, in case you were wondering.

Now we know why the Red Sox were ticked off the White Sox sent Sergio Santos to the Blue Jays without ever shopping him around first.

Picking up Mark Melancon from the Astros in return for Jed Lowrie and Kyle Weiland did make sense for Boston. Lowrie may yet turn into a fine regular at second base, but his glove doesn’t quite cut it at shortstop and his injury history is truly worrisome. The Astros will play him at short for now, but they may end up putting him at third base for the long haul. Weiland profiles better as a reliever than as a starter, though he may turn into a quality setup man in time.

I’m a believer in Melancon, having had him projected for a 3.13 ERA and a 62/22 K/BB ratio in 69 innings next season. Anyone pointing to his walk rate as a reason to be nervous should take note that six of the 26 walks he issued in his 74 1/3 innings last season were intentional. Melancon will never be Jonathan Papelbon, but he should be a nice asset, particularly while he’s making the minimum these next two years.

The Punto signing, on the other hand, is pretty gruesome. Punto is a lot more likely to revert to 2010 form (.238/.313/.302) than he is to match the 2011 line (.278/.388/.421) that he acheived in limited action for St. Louis (133 at-bats). His signing makes one wonder just why the Red Sox are holding on to Mike Aviles. Aviles has some offensive ability, but if he’s not going to be trusted to backup the infield spots, there’s not much sense to keeping him around. If it’s going to be Punto, not Aviles and certainly now not Lowrie, getting the call at third base when Kevin Youkilis is banged up next season, the Red Sox will be taking a big hit at the bottom of the lineup.

But then the Red Sox are starting to get used to taking big hits.

  1. proudlycanadian - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:13 PM

    In Nestor Molina, the White Sox got a player in trade for Santos who has much more upside than Lowrie and Weilland. The Red Sox had no reason to complain. Their arrogance knows no bounds.

    • Matthew Pouliot - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:48 PM

      It’s not as though they really complained. I’m not sure they deserve the arrogance comment.

      And, yeah, Molina is worth more than a Lowrie+Weiland package. But the Red Sox likely would have been willing to part with more in return for Santos. It certainly wouldn’t have hurt the White Sox to see if there were other interested parties. But they’re obviously pretty high on Molina.

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:07 PM

        Point taken Matthew. The Jays were also very high on Molina. I thought that he was untouchable.

      • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:20 PM

        Matthew, sorry but the Red Sox usually do deserve the arrogance label. Always whining about the Yankees’ spending, yet they always outspend everyone else besides New York. Pot calling the kettle black (and the old “We have to do it to keep up” excuse is nothing more than BS).

        They were also arrogant when the Mitchell Report came out and no Red Sox stars were on it…until it was leaked that both Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz had tested positive in the 2003 test (out of 104 total players who had tested posiitive for PEDs). Then it was “everyone did it”, etc. So yes, the arrogance comment is usually deserved when it applies to Boston.

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:42 PM

        You’re talking about certain Red Sox fans, not the organization.

      • uyf1950 - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:13 PM

        baseballsboring – I think you can certainly add Larry Lucchino to that list. He certainly represents the “organization”. And after all it was him that coined the phase “evil empire”.

      • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:37 AM

        No, I’m talking about the organization AND the fan base.

    • phillyphreak - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:33 PM

      But the Sox gave up a lot of cheap team control over Santos for a starter who is projected to have the ceiling of a 3 at most (from what I read/heard).

      I agree with Matthew, the arrogance label was not justified there.

      • phillyphreak - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:33 PM

        Sox = White Sox

        Arrogance refers to Red Sox.

        Edit function!

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:40 PM

        I was also thinking of Boston’s attempt to hire Toronto’s manager even though he had a contract with the Jays.

  2. evanwins - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:17 PM

    I actually wrote about this earlier today. I think the last two years have affected the Red Sox in a profound way. I think they have stopped everything and are going to take at least a year off to evaluate and decide on a course of action.

    Look at it this way: Firing Theo Epstein was an admission that they were doing things wrong. However, getting rid of him does not automatically undo everything that he had done (Carl Crawford et al). Their past few moves have been low-cost, very safe acquisitions.

    The fact they aren’t signing Madson should signify a lot. Look how they went about filling their closer role.

    Look for them to unload at the trade deadline big-time (Ortiz, maybe even Youkils).

    Business-wise it won’t matter that much. No one is going to give up their season tickets and they will still sell out every game.

    • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:32 PM

      I don’t get it. Take a year off? The Sox missed the playoffs by one game last year, they’re not going into rebuilding mode. They’ve made low-cost/safe acquisitions because most of their core is in place already and they’re already close to the luxury tax. No reason why they wouldn’t be trying to compete this year…if Madson is still looking for $44MM then surely they wouldn’t be interested. And I doubt if Melancon is the last addition they make to the ‘pen.

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:26 PM

        Copying what the Yankees did? Like, low-cost acquisitions? You think the Yankees invented that?

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:53 PM

        You have to admit though, that the Sox are well behind their roster from last year. Papelon/Bard > Melancon/Bard, you lost 2/5 of the rotation to TJ surgery, wakefield might be gone, who knows what you’ll get from Buchholz and/or Youk leaving Andrew Miller as your possible 3rd starter.

        However, no way Crawford is that bad again right? Does Ellsbury put up another MVP worthy season? There are a lot of questions with this team and unless everything goes their way, they won’t finish a game behind the Rays this year.

      • evanwins - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:01 PM

        You are not taking into account what they have lost when you say that “they’re core is in place” Every piece that left was replaced with the absolute lowest cost alternative.

        They replaced Papelbon with Melancon when they could have replaced him with Madson. Think about that.

        They have made no attempt to fill ANY of the wholes they had last year (starting pitching, relief pitching, outfield).

        If you think they are not taking a step back, you are crazy.

        And by the way, they will be WAY MORE THAN ONE GMAE OUT OF THE PLAYOFFS THIS YEAR.

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:14 PM

        Why is everyone assuming they’re done making moves on December 14th? I wouldn’t assume Melancon is our closer yet. I think as it stands, having Buchholz back healthy and taking Dice K and Lackey out of the rotation is, yes, an upgrade. I don’t want a 6.00 ERA in the rotation just cause they have a recognizable name. There’s still all sorts of options out there…Darvish, Kuroda, Jackson to bolster the rotation, I think they end up signing one of them, but I don’t know what their game plan is. Neither does anyone else. They haven’t even *attempted* to fill the holes they had? What have they been doing in the front office this whole time then, playing Words With Friends?

        And let’s not forget, one bad month took them from 10 games up to one game out of the playoffs. What do you think is more indicative of their talent level, the first five months or the last one? Their roster isn’t constructed yet. It’s not fair to assume that they’re gonna take a step back, OR take a step forward, or anything. I’m just saying, they don’t have *that* many holes. Fix the back end of the rotation and it’s at least a 90 win team again. That doesn’t guarantee them anything in the AL East, I’m aware of that.

      • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:40 AM

        baseballisboring – Dec 14, 2011 at 7:26 PM
        Copying what the Yankees did? Like, low-cost acquisitions? You think the Yankees invented that?

        _
        Never said that they “invented” that…said that they were copying the Yankees’ latest trend. Just like they copied the Yankees’ high spending in previous years.

        Face it…Boston is not a leader, only a follower. They will always be second best to New York or LA.

    • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:24 PM

      They are merely copying what the Yankees did last year when New York signed players like Freddy Garcia, Bartolo Colon and the like…instead of trading away their prospects in order to make big splashes through free agency and/or trades. Yes, the Yankees fell short but they are farther ahead than the Red Sox right now…both in the makeup of their farm system and in the overall makeup of their team.

      Boston will be worse than they were last year, while New York will get closer to returning to the top of the heap. Once their young pitchers make the transition to the bigs, the Yankees will have what it takes to compete with anyone. Boston doesn’t have that kind of firepower coming up from the minors.

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:28 PM

        Shit…responded to the wrong post.

        “Copying what the Yankees did? Like, low-cost acquisitions? You think the Yankees invented that?”

      • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:45 AM

        There IS a “cancel reply” button, doofus. Then again, you are a mentally challeged Red Sox fan (a tautology if I’ve ever seen one) so that’s not surprising.

    • markfrednubble - Dec 14, 2011 at 9:12 PM

      evanwins, I think you could hardly be more wrong about the Red Sox’ approach and their 2012 prospects.

      Your first mistake is assuming the offseason is over and they are going with Melancon as their closer. I highly doubt he will be their closer when the season opens. They are in the opportunistic position of letting the market settle down now that the teams who like to spend big money all have their closers. I’ll bet the price of a guy like Madson will fall to the point of the Red Sox signing him for less than he has been seeking.

      The rest of the team is deep and talented. They still need more arms in the bullpen and another RH bat to play some games in RF. A rotation of Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Bard and maybe Aceves is very competitive and could be outstanding. The offense will again be among the best in the league. Crawford has to be closer to his Rays level than what we saw in his first year in Boston.

      They are tweaking instead of making big moves because that’s what this roster needs. They are obviously hoping the new manager and coaching staff have a major role in fixing whatever dysfunctional elements (beyond injuries) that led to their collapse.

      When I look at the AL East, I see an aging Yankee team that will have trouble repeating the Colon/Garcia/Nova results of last year, a Tampa team rich in pitching that may not be able to win 90 games with that offense, and an improving Toronto team that could be the dark horse. There is no objective reason for the Red Sox to look at 2012 as anything other than a great chance to win the World Series — the way they look at every season.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Dec 14, 2011 at 10:24 PM

        I see an aging Yankee team that will have trouble repeating the Colon/Garcia/Nova results of last year

        Average Ages:

        Starting Lineup
        Yankees – 29.7
        Red Sox – 29.3

        Pitching
        Yankees – 29.7
        ReD Sox – 28.4

        As presently constituted, there really isn’t a difference. Why people seem to think the Yankees have zero young guys is beyond me.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Dec 14, 2011 at 10:27 PM

        A rotation of Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Bard and maybe Aceves is very competitive and could be outstanding

        Bard’s career high in IP is 77. There’s almost no chance the Sox let him start and finish the season in the rotation. Aceves pitched 114IP last year, are you going to count on him for 180+? Buccholz is starting his 5th full year in the pro’s and has only 1 healthy year on his resume. That’s a lot of wishful thinking for everything to go right.

      • evanwins - Dec 15, 2011 at 12:56 AM

        I think there are a lot of people who WANT to believe what I said isn’t true…the old “wait and see what they do NEXT” instead of looking at what they have done so far.

        Is everyone’s thinking that the big moves happen later in the offseason? Cause that is really contrary to every other offseason…ever.

        What was the Red Sox biggest problem last year? (Pitching)

        How have they approached fixing that? (Not at all; even lost a massive piece of their pitching puzzle and replaced it with financially controllably no one.)

        We’ll see…but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that big move…at least the one that makes this a BETTER team.

      • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM

        markfrednubble

        “There is no objective reason for the Red Sox to look at 2012 as anything other than a great chance to win the World Series — the way they look at every season.”

        2 for the last 92 only shows that your team is the epitome of FAIL.

      • markfrednubble - Dec 15, 2011 at 4:18 PM

        In reply to church,

        The Yankees have a bunch of young guys. By “aging Yankee team” I am referring to core players like Jeter, ARod and Rivera. Clearly you have Cano, Granderson, Swisher, Teixeira, Gardner, Sabathia and Robertson in their primes and some good young talent on the verge. But I believe the left side of the infield will increasingly become a problem as those two keep slowing down. It is the reason the Yankees have not gone out to sign a bat for the DH role — they need to keep that spot fairly open so Jeter and ARod can get enough days when they don’t have to play the field.

        The only Red Sox core player who is in that category is Ortiz. So whatever the roster numbers compute to, the Red Sox are a younger team in terms of their core, most important players.

        None of that is to suggest the Red Sox look better than the Yankees right now. My point is that the division does not look to me like it did a few years ago, when you knew at least two teams would win about 95 or more games every year. I believe the rise of the Angels and Rangers makes the AL West no longer a weak division, and the East is not as daunting as it was a few years ago.

      • markfrednubble - Dec 15, 2011 at 4:27 PM

        church again,

        (me) A rotation of Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Bard and maybe Aceves is very competitive and could be outstanding

        (you) Bard’s career high in IP is 77. There’s almost no chance the Sox let him start and finish the season in the rotation. Aceves pitched 114IP last year, are you going to count on him for 180+? Buccholz is starting his 5th full year in the pro’s and has only 1 healthy year on his resume. That’s a lot of wishful thinking for everything to go right.

        You can raise questions, for sure. The first three guys have all been all-star caliber when healthy in recent years, and none of them is old. Lost in the Beckett September crap is that he had a phenomenal year until the final weeks. We’ll see. Bard was a starter in college and people seem to think he has the stuff and the arsenal to make the transition. CJ Wilson is just the latest case of many good arms who make that switch successfully. Beyond Bard and Aceves they clearly need to have rotation depth, whether it’s Matsuzaka returning, Miller, whomever. My point is that this rotation could be very good and does not cry out for a high-priced free agent addition. Like the bullpen, I expect there to be a couple of signings of veteran SPs, below the marquee level, as insurance. Not because the Sox have become cheap but because that’s all they need with the current roster.

      • markfrednubble - Dec 15, 2011 at 5:36 PM

        bozosforall,

        (me) “There is no objective reason for the Red Sox to look at 2012 as anything other than a great chance to win the World Series — the way they look at every season.”

        (you) 2 for the last 92 only shows that your team is the epitome of FAIL.

        I said they way they approach it, not the results. Some teams know that, barring an unpredictable miracle, they won’t compete for the championship, so they makes the moves they can afford and hope they sell some tickets and stay in contention for a few months. The Red Sox are one of a handful of teams who sit there every winter and try to figure out how to become good enough to have a realistic shot at the World Series. For pretty much every year under the current ownership, an objective Red Sox fan could enter the season with the idea that winning it all is a realistic goal. Same for a Yankee fan. My point is that I see this offseason no differently — they are trying to field a team that can win it all. The reason that they are not spending big on free agents is not that they’ve become cheap and stopped trying to win it all, it’s that they’ve spent a ton in recent years, some of it badly, and they have a core of talent that is good enough and young enough that they don’t need huge moves. Kepping Papelbon would have been utterly stupid at the price the Phillies paid, and Philly fans will learn this over time. Pujols, Fielder, Wilson, Buehrle, Reyes — all huge money but none of them the right fit for Boston or NY this offseason.

        Are people saying “When did the Yankees become cheap” because they haven’t gone hog wild for free agents this winter? Of course not. The premise is the same for the Red Sox.

    • randygnyc - Dec 15, 2011 at 10:43 AM

      The crawford, lackey and dice K signings have essentially emasculated the red sox. However I’ll advised (in retrospect) these signings were taken for granted by the Players in their clubhouse, IMO. It’s my guess that ownership must feel, on some level, that they’ve invested heavily on their payroll commitments and in return, have had their team underachieve (and that’s being kind), their manager disappear (for whatever reason) the clubhouse devolved into a softer incarnation of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the general manager who decided to quit, again.

      Can’t blame ownership for being a little gun-shy.

  3. dondada10 - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:19 PM

    Maybe the Brewers wanted a Melancon type for K-Rod. Just saying: Let’s let the dust settle before we call the Sox thrifty.

  4. xpensivewinos - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:28 PM

    Wait a minute…….hold the phone!

    Sorry Dude, can’t have it both ways. If the Red Sox throw tons of money at someone, they’re the new Yankees and solve their problems by spending ridiculous amounts of money. If they don’t spend tons of money, now they’re cheap or dumb or some insinuation that the only way to get really good players is to spend ridiculous amounts of money for them.

    WTF??????

    The tone of this article is bullshit.

    At some point, when your payroll is what the Red Sox is, shouldn’t you exercise some semblance of financial restraint? At some point, that’s what scouting is for and finding some diamonds in the rough.

    It’s December……….no guarantee Punto makes it out of spring training and it’s two months until pitchers and catchers report. You really think the Boston Red Sox are done making moves?

    • sknut - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:37 PM

      While I get what your saying, keep in mind Punto is gauranteed his money and really they could have waited and probably gotten him on a one year deal. Its a curious move at this juncture.

      • bloodysock - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:49 PM

        Punto is an also an insurance policy at shortstop after Scutaro’s contract expires after the 2012 season and if Iglesias is still not ready.

      • Matthew Pouliot - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:11 PM

        There will be a dozen Puntos available again next winter, and if Punto is really Boston’s No. 1 shortstop a year from now, their 2012 will have gone even worse than their 2011 did.

        I shouldn’t make such a big deal of the Punto signing: it’s not a difference maker one way or the other. It’s just that I’m very anti-multiyear deals for generic bench players, and this is the kind of thing the Red Sox shied away from for the duration of the Theo era.

    • Matthew Pouliot - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:50 PM

      How am I trying to have it both ways? Have I ever bashed the Red Sox for spending? Maybe you’re confusing me with someone else? One of the voices in your head, perhaps.

      Punto got a two-year deal, so, yeah, I’d say it’s a pretty good bet he makes it out of spring training.

    • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:26 PM

      Turnabout is fair play. Red Sox fans have been spewing the same criticism on the Yankees for years. Don’t cry now that it’s getting served right back at you whiners now.

  5. mojosmagic - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:47 PM

    Anyone know the Sox payroll as it stands today?

    • uyf1950 - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:01 PM

      According to my best calculations for the guaranteed players including the ones just signed today about $136MM adding in those players that have been tendered like Ellsbury and estimating their arbitration awards another $18MM that does NOT include Ortiz award when he submits his number.that should be about $14MM more. That total comes to about $168MM and they still need to sign another starting pitcher even assuming Bard takes one of the slots and possibly a closer and decide what to do with RF. Even looking at signing 3 players on the cheap for those positions the Sox could be looking at a payroll of about $180MM + unless they unload someone. That’s only for the 25 man active roster add about $5MM plus to round out the 40 man roster which is what the luxury tax is based on and the total anticipated Sox payroll for 2012 as it looks now for luxury tax purposes is about $185MM plus.

      • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:27 PM

        Can’t wait to see it rocket past the Yankees’ payroll. Tons of crow will be served on that fateful day. LMAO

      • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:04 PM

        According to a major league source, the Red Sox expect to exceed the $178 million payroll threshold that would trigger luxury tax payments for the 2012 season.

        http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2011/12/13/source-red-sox-expect-to-go-over-luxury-tax-threshold/

  6. baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 6:52 PM

    I also don’t see why they wouldn’t have room for both Punto and Aviles on the roster at the same time. We still have him, we have room for both of them on the bench, and Aviles can be the backup in case of injury. I mean, they did score the most runs in the majors last year with JD Drew, Crawford’s bad year (which I think he’ll bounce back from), etc. Even if you have to stick Punto at 3rd base for 30 games we’ll be OK.

    • Matthew Pouliot - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:13 PM

      There is room for both. I’m more saying that if they’re looking at Aviles as more of an outfielder at this point, they should have just non-tendered him and gotten a real outfielder (Spilborghs maybe).

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:20 PM

        Does he play any outfield? I thought he was all SS/maybe 3B.

      • Matthew Pouliot - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:33 PM

        That was the Red Sox’s big idea upon acquiring him. He’s playing right field in winter ball. He might be handy on a team with three left-handed hitting starters (of course, RF is still pending), but I just think that if they’re not intending to use him as an infielder, then they might as well have replaced him with a legitimate outfielder.

    • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:31 PM

      Crawford MAY bounce back, but there is no guarantee that your assumption (and yes I know it’s there) that every single Red Sox player will have as good as or a better year than last year will happen either. So, even if Crawford progresses, others will regress. Count on it…everyone is a year older and with the aging players on that roster, the net effect will be less wins. Particularly since the Yankees will be bringing more youth in as the year goes by…and with that, more production, particularly as it relates to pitching (Banuelos and Betances).

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:39 PM

        No, you don’t know it’s there, cause it’s not. I’m saying we had the best offense in the league last year and Punto’s not gonna affect it much one way or the other, as bad as he is offensively.

      • baseballisboring - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:44 PM

        Oh yeah by the way, everyone on the Yankees roster will be a year older too. That’s how time works in most cases.

      • bozosforall - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:02 PM

        Except that instead of old Posada, we get young Montero
        Instead of old Colon, we get young Banuelos or Betances (or both)
        Instead of old Chavez, we get young Nunez

        ALL who are just going to get better with experience.

        Meanwhile, the depleted Red Sox farm system has nothing to offer.

      • cmcgly - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:15 PM

        speaking of assumptions, you are assuming that the yankees much hyped “killer b’s” are going to live up to the enormous expectations that yankee fans have of them. Which, news flash, does not always happen.

      • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:54 AM

        Never said that it WOULD happen but after the failed experiment with Hughes/Kennedy/Joba, rest assured that the Yankees will take their good old sweet time with Banuelos and Betances. And even if they are mediocre this year, they won’t be any worse than the production that the Yankees got from Garcia and Colon. So, even worst case scenario isn’t any worse than last year…when the Yankees still won the AL East.

        Meanwhile, the depleted Red Sox farm system has nothing to offer.

      • randygnyc - Dec 15, 2011 at 11:16 AM

        Bozo, I usually agree with most of what you say, but as far as the killer B’s are concerned, I don’t think we’ll see either of them this year, at all (except as token additions in september), unless something catastrophic happens. I think Cashman has said recently that he has no intention of bringing either up this year.

      • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 1:03 PM

        Maybe not, Randy…but they are there if they are needed. They have already gotten a taste of it last year and could be ready, as you say, if needed. However, I’d say that one or the other could fill the #5 spot on most teams, including the Yankees. Not anything nearly like the Hughes/Kennedy/Joba fiasco of a couple of years ago. Cashman could easily change his mind depending on the situation next season.

  7. Tim's Neighbor - Dec 14, 2011 at 7:23 PM

    Your commentary is far superior when you’re not talking about the Red Sox.

  8. mojosmagic - Dec 14, 2011 at 8:34 PM

    Thanks Uyf, hardly a cheap organization. Bottom line is the Red Sox are at or near their spending limit and need to keep a small reserve for the mid season trade deadline.

  9. thamel37 - Dec 14, 2011 at 11:06 PM

    Didn’t the Red Sox just drop a ton of money last year on A.Gon and Crawford? And the have Pedroia and Youk locked up for a couple more years. They have invested heavily in the rotation with Beckett, Lester, Lackey, Buchholz, DiceK (not that the performance has been great for all). The point is the core of the team is taken care of and it has taken a lot of money to accomplish that. The money hasn’t always been spent wisely which is even more cause for concern. Since the new GM doesn’t want to start off on the wrong foot he could be picking his spots.
    Its not like this free agent class was great for what they need! 1B was the best position and they’re set there for a long time. Who was the standout RF, SS, C? Closers are way overpaid. Look how many just blow up out of nowhere! Maybe they are planning to start talking to Elsbury about an extension and that will take a lot of money to get done.
    The biggest issue with this article is it’s ONLY DECEMBER 14TH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Last I checked the season isn’t starting tomorrow. There’s still time to sign, trade, salary dump, etc.
    What have the Yankees done this year? Are they out of money/being thrifty, or are they working on trades, waiting for the trade deadline, or not impressed with whats available???
    It looks like someone had a slow work day so someone needed to create a story.

    • bozosforall - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:57 AM

      The Yankees are building through the farm, just like last year. And will be better than the Red Sox as a result going forward.

  10. cintiphil - Dec 15, 2011 at 9:43 AM

    I am going official here and saying that all of this stuff is for nothing. The Tigers, Angels and Rangers, are going to fight for the pennant in the AL. And, I pick the TIGERS! However, good luck to the rest.

  11. fredverd - Dec 15, 2011 at 12:24 PM

    As a Yankee fan, I could not believe how day-in,day-out bad Carl Crawford was! Maybe one year of bad Crawford is the price Sawx had to pay for trying to bury Ortiz’ stuff in new Yankee Stadium cement. I will continue to cringe every time Crawford comes to the plate–knowing that he can kill you in so many ways. I could only hope Cashman could somehow swing a trade for him after his down year…I would take him in a heartbeat.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Managers get easier path to Cooperstown
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Street (4043)
  2. C. Lee (2983)
  3. H. Ramirez (2921)
  4. T. Tulowitzki (2871)
  5. C. Headley (2747)
  1. Y. Puig (2736)
  2. B. Belt (2546)
  3. J. Soria (2517)
  4. R. Howard (2293)
  5. T. Walker (2272)