Define the Future

[tdawg87]

1 minute ago, Dochalo said:

I am guessing he'll have arm issues for the remainder of that new deal.  Be afraid.  Be very afraid.  

Oh I'm not doubting that. But at 11 million a year? I'd take that chance.

[Second Base]

2019: 70-92

2020: 91-71 and a WC2 spot. Eliminated in WC game.

2021: 95-66 and WC1 spot. Eliminated in ALCS.

2022: 97-64, AL West champions, World Series champions.

2023: 95-66 Lose in the World Series

2024: 96-65 World Series champions.

[Angelsjunky]

53 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

I wouldn’t want to be a Red Sox fan the next few years. They’re gonna be a mess.

They were a mess in 3 out of 4 years from 2012-15; in one of those years they won the World Series. Then in 2016, they bounced back to contention and won the WS again in 2018.

My point being, even if they go through a rough patch for a couple years--which I'm not assuming--they'll bounceback, or at least that's what their track record says. They remain the only franchise to win four WS in the 21st century. I'd love to be a fan of a franchise that wins the WS every few years.

[Docwaukee]

49 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Yes, although the legitimate criticism of Eppler is that he hasn't done a great job at bridging that gap with free agents. He did spend a solid amount in the last offseason, with overall poor results as the majority of his acquisitions were duds.

Overall I think his positives out-weigh his negatives, but there are some big holes in his performance so far and questions around his ability to assess free agent talent. He seems good at going after the big talents--from the Trout extension to the Simmons trade to the Ohtani coup to upside prospects--but it is in the middle-ground that he seems to lack discernment, as evinced by his bucket of free agent duds from last offseason (with a couple exceptions).

Regardless, this offseason and following year are huge for him.

yet the only residual of that mess is Cozart.  So he got to shake the etch-a-sketch and set himself up for a clean slate.  That wasn't by accident.  And the guys he did add who were worth keeping are still going to be around like La Stella, Goodwin, Robles, Simmons etc.  I agree that the big nit is whether he can pull from those mid range guys to the point that he's still able to do a better job of bridging, but let's all bear in mind that he's still actually bridging.  It's not like he's got some pre-existing core that came up through the minors.  He's essentially had to build an entire major league club around Trout with only like two other guys who were in the org when he started (Fletch and Heaney) and it's not like those two guys are franchise level players.  There a couple other role type players here and there but everything we have is what he's built outside of 3 guys.  

Literally 3 guys.  And that's not three guys who were on the major league club, but three guys in he entire org.  People talk about how he's had 4 years but tell me a team that's been successful that only has 3 guys in the org left from 4 years ago.  Oh, there's also one more guy left in Jam Jones from 4 years before as well.  And it's not like he traded away anyone that would be helpful right now or even has the potential to be helpful very soon.  

We should all take a look at other rosters an what it took the good teams to get to where they're at.  

 

[Angelsjunky]

Doc, you don't have to defend Eppler's merits, or point out the mess he inherited - I agree on all of that. And I also realize that Cozart is the only "gift that keeps on giving" (although Upton is still TBD). He earns credit for being savvy enough to offer only one year contracts to last offseason's free agents.

But I also find that these conversations tend to get polarized in an either/or manner, which some characterize as "nutswingers" vs "failos." I just think that we should shoot for a more well-rounded perspective, one that sees the lights and the darks. So far I think there are more positives than negatives with Eppler, but the negatives are there as well and can't be rationalized away as merely bad luck or outliers. I'm not saying his judgement is poor, just far from perfect - and he's now got a solid track record of some pretty bad signings, mixed in with some really great moves that, in toto, still make for a good resume.

All things tolled, my GM grade for him would be in the B to B+ range. Before this season it would have been A-, but the overall failure of his offseason acquisitions puts a bit of tarnish in the armor.

Now if I were in Arte's shoes, I might have given him a two-year extension, just because I think we need another two years to really judge the Eppler Plan. But I also get why he's going year-to-year. I'm sure Arte wants to make sure that Eppler doesn't repeat last year's gaffs, and I can't blame him for that.