Y2Jimmy0 Posted June 20, 2015 Author Share Posted June 20, 2015 QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 09:21 AM) This is not true. KW drafted safe players such as Broadway and McCullough and people on this board comolained and wanted him to draft the high risk but high reward players to try to get a superstar. His draft phiosophy changed a d now people complain about it. The bottom line is that its just bad drafting with the wrong platers regardless of philosophy. Okay but J.R. was opposed to taking advantage of market inefficiencies. There was no penalty to spend a ton before. There was absolutely no excuse to not draft guys that fell and sign them for big $$ to deals to fuse the system with talent. My biggest problem was not doing things that a team like the Red Sox used to do all the time. He never took the draft seriously. He didn't allocate the resources that could have been allocated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 11:22 AM) Okay but J.R. was opposed to taking advantage of market inefficiencies. There was no penalty to spend a ton before. There was absolutely no excuse to not draft guys that fell and sign them for big $$ to deals to fuse the system with talent. My biggest problem was not doing things that a team like the Red Sox used to do all the time. He never took the draft seriously. He didn't allocate the resources that could have been allocated. I would disagree thathat ththat there was no excuse. He was attempting tl bring other owners in line with bei g fiscally responsible for the greater good of baseball. He had said many times that he was concerned for the viability of mlb if the signing bonuses for players who may never make the mlb continued to rise and there was no cap. Eventually he wonand there is the slot and penalty system thethey hthey have today. It is not a hard cap but at least it somewhat limits the whoever can spend the most philosophy. Now did that hurt the sox in the short term, yes. However, it did help the viability and competitive balance of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 05:59 PM) I would disagree thathat ththat there was no excuse. He was attempting tl bring other owners in line with bei g fiscally responsible for the greater good of baseball. He had said many times that he was concerned for the viability of mlb if the signing bonuses for players who may never make the mlb continued to rise and there was no cap. Eventually he wonand there is the slot and penalty system thethey hthey have today. It is not a hard cap but at least it somewhat limits the whoever can spend the most philosophy. Now did that hurt the sox in the short term, yes. However, it did help the viability and competitive balance of the game. and all that is good, but in doing so, completely weaken the sox system. now, after this cap situation is somewhat resolve, he could completely go all in on this yr int'l draft and infuse the system, and pay the penalty of the act. which is still within the CBA new rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 11:22 AM) Okay but J.R. was opposed to taking advantage of market inefficiencies. There was no penalty to spend a ton before. There was absolutely no excuse to not draft guys that fell and sign them for big $$ to deals to fuse the system with talent. My biggest problem was not doing things that a team like the Red Sox used to do all the time. He never took the draft seriously. He didn't allocate the resources that could have been allocated. He did give Borchard the highest bonus ever at the time. I do think his failure spooked the team. Edited June 20, 2015 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILMOU Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 Unfortunately, what the article fails to mention is that NONE of the Hawks changes happen without the old set-in-his-ways owner kicking it. Folks who've lived a life like JR's don't change lanes as they approach 80. This will be a long, painful wait, I'm afraid. I will need to pay less attention to the proceedings just to get through it sanely. My eternal optimism has never been lower, so this point in time isn't much fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 09:54 PM) He did give Borchard the highest bonus ever at the time. I do think his failure spooked the team. it like the little kid who burns himself, did he learn from his playing around with fire. the analogy is wrong, but the idea is there. just b/c they fell flat on their face, you pick yourself up and try again. the sox org does not pick themselves up....... they kinda of wither in pain on the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 04:54 PM) He did give Borchard the highest bonus ever at the time. I do think his failure spooked the team. I always wonder if this was another brought up too soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 06:15 PM) Unfortunately, what the article fails to mention is that NONE of the Hawks changes happen without the old set-in-his-ways owner kicking it. Folks who've lived a life like JR's don't change lanes as they approach 80. This will be a long, painful wait, I'm afraid. I will need to pay less attention to the proceedings just to get through it sanely. My eternal optimism has never been lower, so this point in time isn't much fun. Same here. I can't stand how this organization does things. I'm not even close to begin bitter at the roster and managers as much as the organization keep it in the family philosophy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Jun 20, 2015 -> 06:58 PM) I always wonder if this was another brought up too soon. I don't think so. I think Borchard just hit a level and peaked early; he had plenty of minor league AB's. I think he had 4-5 years in minors with over 100 K's. Edited June 21, 2015 by oldsox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.