Let’s take a look in at the latest out of the AL East:
- Interim Red Sox skipper Torey Lovullo has acquitted himself nicely since taking over for John Farrell, who is battling cancer, as WEEI.com’s Rob Bradford writes. While it certainly isn’t an audition he’d have asked for, Lovullo has successfully guided the team to an 18-10 record under difficult circumstances. That performance certainly does not hurt as he looks ahead to another offseason of managerial vacancies. As Bradford notes, Lovullo has frequently had opportunities to interview with other teams, but has yet to be offered a permanent job to run a team’s dugout.
- The Red Sox’ rotation has been a source of fascination all season long, and that has continued down the stretch. In addition to improved work from several key long-term pieces, there are other storylines worth watching. As Bradford writes, righty Clay Buchholz — whose club option for next year represents a key decision for president of baseball operations Dave Dombrowski — still has his sights set on returning late this year to pitch from the pen. And then there’s Rich Hill, the journeyman reliever who has suddenly morphed into an interesting swingman or rotation candidate on the upcoming free agent market (story also via Bradford).
- One of the best developments this year for the Red Sox has been the emergence of young lefty Eduardo Rodriguez, acquired at last year’s trade deadline from the Orioles for ace reliever Andrew Miller. As ESPNBoston.com’s Gordon Edes writes, Baltimore knew what it was parting with when it chose to go all-in for 2014, though that won’t necessarily make it easier to watch Rodriguez blossom with a division rival. Edes speaks to Calvin Maduro, one of the first Baltimore scouts to identify Rodriguez as a youngster, about his incredible development into a top-flight arm. Somewhat ironically, the inclusion of Rodriguez is reportedly what swayed Boston to divert Miller to Baltimore; otherwise, he’d have ended up with Dombrowski in Detroit.
The Sox have 125 million committed to 10 players. If DD is going to want to add a top tier pitcher via FA, declining Buchholz’ option should at least be considered unless Henry is willing to let this team go past the luxury tax.
A third of that is wasted on Hanley and Pablo… sickening to think where that money could’ve gone.
Sandoval may go down as Cherington’s worst Red Sox move. I’ve hated it since it was announced.
I might have to go with Porcello extension. Yes he has pitched better as of late but giving a pitcher who has had an at best average career $20+ million for 4 years without throwing a single pitch for his new team was and still is a huge risk
If I added it all correctly, 13 pitchers in MLB history have had or will be making $20+ million in a season. 11 of those 13 had an ERA+ of 112 or higher when they were given those contracts. The others are Tanaka (null) and Porcello (97)
Worst FA signing ever might be more like it. There never was any real upside to the deal, just hoping the guy wouldn’t bottom out 100% until he had played another 2-3 years, instead? he did so on year one.
of course, you’re forgetting Chan-Ho Park, Shin Soo-Choo, Josh Hamilton, Barry Zito and Milton Bradley.
Picking up Buchholz’s option is a no-brainer so long as he is healthy. He would be pretty easy to trade, especially if they had to eat a bit of money. I think they will keep him though because the rotation would still be no better than average if you had to replace him with an ace. I think they need to at least go into 2016 with a rotation fronted by an ace and Buchholz, otherwise we will be setting ourselves up for disappointment once again.
I agree with you about Buchholtz but who is an “ace”…in your opinion? I would put Price in that category but not Leake, Cueto or Zimmermann.
I would consider Cueto and Greinke aces, just on a lower level when compared to Price. I view Zimmermann as a great front of the rotation starter, and maybe a #1, but not necessarily an “ace”. To me, Price is a step above all the other pitchers on the market as the others come with much more risks. Grienke is probably the second safest option so long as the contract is only 5 years.
Cueto sure hasn’t helped his marketability. Maybe he’ll pay off in the playoffs but so far, he’s been a bust for KC.
Rich Hill has one good start and suddenly hes an interesting soon-to-be FA?
That’s one of the few points you’ve made that I 100% agree with lol
What an absurd thought that is. Rich Hill only start in six years. The Ray arnt exactly killing the ball.
Relatively speaking. With good MiLB numbers, too.
This is what’s happening in today’s news, okay? Rich Hill made himself marginally relevant to teams that may need innings next year.
He’ll get a non roster invite to ST (once again) then be sent to MiLB camp, just before the regular season starts with some team. Sound familiar?
Francona even gave up on him, one of his buddies, so 25 man roster jobs for him on that merit in 2016. Hard to find a job these days when guys are wrong side of 35 with the arm trouble history Hill has, piled onto the career mediocrity he has added to it. Minor league depth piece all the way, then September call up IF he’s lucky next year and every other year he decides to pitch. Just like has been happening for him the last few years. Hill pitches good at AAA? he gets a few innings in at the big time again.. MAYBE..
I like the idea of Boston giving him a shot in the bullpen but I don’t think that any team would give him much of a shot in the rotation.
I think Lovullo has done a great job and should be the manager next year if Farrell cannot return.
Agree 100%. I can’t see any reason why Lovullo wouldn’t be given the position. His faith in Jackie Bradley alone warrants his chance to run the team in 2016.
Still the most fascinating team in all of baseball, and so very worthy of reporting every little detail of their operations.
That may change somewhat, now that Dombrowski is there. He tends to play things close to the vest, and there were few rumors when he was with Detroit. Not so with the past regime. It was like watching a train wreck, just couldn’t help but look.
We get it you don’t like the Red Sox. Perhaps you should skip their articles because your one note song is getting old.
I do not dislike the Red Sox. I simply note how hugely they are over-reported here.
As above, I’d be delighted if you could point me to coverage of other stories that are equally or more interesting than these. It’s a slow time of the year in the transactional world, so we do what we can with what is out there.
I used to submit links more frequently but gave that up when they were run so rarely as to make it not worth the effort. So maybe you can see why it seems any story about the Red Sox or the Yankees is treated as inherently more interesting than events happening on other teams. The highly unbalanced reporting of teams in MLB is really the only blemish on an otherwise excellent site (if you think it’s anywhere close to balanced, I urge you to count articles). Honestly, I don’t think it’s the responsibility of readers to create balance.
I would say it was the responsibility of readers to read what interests them and not make passive aggressive comments about things that do not.
Major League Baseball interests me. Nice insult though.
It’s not an insult. It’s an observation of your behavior. That’s at least the third time you’ve made the exact same comment on a Red Sox article instead of saying what you really mean. It’s the very definition of passive aggressive. Instead of being happy to have a site like this you’re critical of the people busting their butts to present the content here. Just because they don’t do it exactly how you would like it.
I said exactly what I meant every time and it is apparently a point being taken serious. So nice talking to you, it was almost a conversation.
Could it be that national baseball writers that are frequently referenced, write a lot about the Red Sox.
All these stories came from a Red Sox reporter, fwiw.
I don’t think so. A lot of the Red Sox references are from the Boston media. Does it really make sense that the Red Sox are covered 2-3 times more by the national media than, say, the Cardinals? Of course not, but you might guess so if you counted the articles here because that’s been the ratio whenever I’ve checked. The eastern divisions are generally covered about half again more than the other two. This is true in the slower or busier times in the season or offseason. It’s been pretty consistent.
I just moved to LA two months and having lived in Boston for four years, can’t really say there’s much comparison in the local coverage. Boston and New York sports writers pretty much blow everyone else out of the water.
And yet, when I’ve submitted links to articles from the LA media they are rarely run. I could find something of interest every day about the local teams in the Times, at least as interesting as the dissected minutia of the inner workings of the Red Sox. Still, compared to most of the teams in the two central divisions, the Dodgers are actually pretty well covered here so I am not making them an example. You can’t tell me the Chicago media ignores the White Sox or the DC media doesn’t report on the Nationals.
Life isn’t fair. Just like how payroll or attendance is different so will be coverage. Baseball is entertainment. People are not going to care to read about a small market team that goes years with a meddling record, in a city the average fan knows little about or will go too. New York, Boston, and LA are huge cites, cites where all the movies and big events take place and where they never sleep. Thats life. Your a dodgers fan. Be happy. You have a storied team with tons of legends who have an ownership group willing to outspend everyone and a nice farm system.
I appreciate your thoughts, honestly. I’m not brushing them off. And I don’t mean to suggest at all that it should be your job to find content.
You are probably right that those teams get more coverage (along with some others, like the Dodgers), but that’s largely a function of the added scrutiny and media attention they receive year in and year out. Those teams’ reporters have to come up with more (and more detailed) stories to distinguish themselves in their markets. So there’s more for us to write on them as a result.
It isn’t due to lack of care or attention on the part of our writers, none of whom have any particular interest in the teams you mention. And I can assure you we are under no directives from Tim to push those teams.
Exactly. The media is far more interesting in those markets.
Thanks for listening. I wasn’t suggesting it was intentional, but it is consistent, for whatever reason. Boston might be an especially lively (if not over the top) market for sports media, but then, that isn’t an especially good reason to cover them far more than the others. I used the example of St. Louis for a reason. That’s another baseball mad city, yet their coverage here is about a third of what you run for Boston, or New York. The media in all the baseball cities report on their teams. It might take a special effort to find stories of interest in the local press, but with few exceptions, they are there to be had.
Money is a good reason to cover teams more. The Red Sox have more fans than most teams in baseball. MLBTR is a business last time I checked. Boston sports writers supply them with interesting stories that fans like to read.
That isn’t what Jeff is saying. Quite the opposite, if I don’t misunderstand his response. I honestly think MLBTR hasn’t assessed the evenness their coverage of the teams in the way I have suggested they might. BTW & FWIW, the top fan draw in MLB year after year is the Dodgers. Not that I believe coverage here should reflect those numbers. We all have our home teams, but it’s a 30-team game.
Maybe he wants more articles on the Bridgeport Bluefish. I would second this notion.
Bluefish games are pretty fun.