Aug 25, 2012|
Now that the Red Sox have essentially started over and begun the new era, what does it mean for the future of Bobby V? Are the Sox going to start completely fresh with a new manager next year, or is this trade a sign that the Sox brass does not blame Bobby and will give him a second chance? Dale and Alex give their thoughts.
Transcript - will not be 100% accurate
Again you a couple of tidbits. From the Dodgers beat reporter from the LA times Dylan Hernandez. I he tweeted out a few moments ago first of all that the trade is now official and as we said when the Dodgers sent a plane to pick up until. Gonzales and back it is sort of figured that was probably the case it's a trade with -- -- drop them off a little energy like Minneapolis. That. But what -- to say I found this at this interesting the Dodgers turned their attention to Adrian Gonzales. After they failed to land Justin Morneau last week first I've heard of that. That they'd even pursued Justin Morneau but they've been known to be pursuing a bunch of guys on the leading up to the trade deadline. Upgrade to first base including morneau upgrades and their in their rotation including -- stern pay based on -- missed and so. They started swinging again pilots let's. Go back to one other part of this whole thing and I promise we haven't forgotten you guys tonight I -- -- lined up on trying to get as much information out in front of -- as I can. Oh with a guy who knows what this stuff is is all about. Let's talk about Bobby Valentine. There's a part of me and efforts some callers to the station make the the the theory perfectly valid theory. That they decided to change the players and not the manager in the Bobby Valentine will in fact be back for the second year of his two year contract next year. Perfectly valid way of looking at this. I on the other hand look at this and say this seems to be a bench Harrington move. -- the entire model here seems to go away from the organizational model this seems to be a baseball ops kind of trade. And if if you are -- if you believe. The vote the theory out there that this was not bench Harrington choices manager of the Red Sox. And if you in fact think that. Maybe bench Harrington has slightly more power to -- and he had two days ago because of this. That I could see where in fact Bobby Valentine would be moving on at the end of this year the year your thoughts on either of those scenarios. So to begin with I think that I think. Obviously there's been the premise the -- time that dogged the managerial choice was in the face of was defied what cheering him on I think that's always been missed portrayed I do you think it. I I actually do think that he is a consensus builder who was on board. With Bobby Valentine thought that four in thinking about the way in which you'd been to the organization based on. You know review process he was going to be the ideal fit he was going to be the best -- that was out there. I I think -- that's not proven to be the case but I think that's how it felt about it. I also believe. Did the entire organization was probably very much on board with making a move to get rid of packet I think that from you know that's not just a baseball ops. Type of decision I think that's probably an ownership level decision and that there were people. You know can you imagine them what they were the Red Sox are going to build their sales marketing pitch for 2013. Beckett Lackey is still love them right now that wasn't going to work so I think that there was probably a lot of incentive. Outside of baseball ops by forces other than just wins and losses make this decision I think this was. I think that I can't imagine anyone in the organization. Unless they felt like Adrian Gonzales with the right person to build around going forward. Who wasn't for the steel and in the case of you know in the case of the model they were working with it was plainly apparent to everyone. It wasn't working you know they've gotten subsequently worse over the course of time -- where they were much further away from contention this year than they were last year. In that is only going to be accelerated over the course of the years of decline of these guys are right do you have an opinion on whether or not Bobby Valentine will serve the second year of his two year contract it would only be opinion I -- make sure that it's -- that that part is clear because I don't know anything about you know people have been in the organization have been pretty good about not doubt about not tipping their hand when where's the other even -- You would think that because they haven't tipped their hand that's kind of a writing on the wall that the guys in serious serious jeopardy -- Based on the fact that it would not be good organization that made this decision as a referendum. On its on its manager. So I don't think that I don't think that this so called power struggle or anything like that has changed at all at this trade. This was a trade that was made on its own roster merits. And I don't think they've -- that we can say when or the other. What that means for the future Bobby down. Although I will say this if the Red Sox wanted to make a managerial change. This would be the easiest time in the world sweep it all out right now say we made this mistake with Crawford we made this mistake with back. Gonzales was kind of I was kind of collateral damage in nicely -- and Bobby Valentine was also mistake let's get all of the mistakes out of the way move forward as an organization. -- the right footing. We own up to the fact that there were a number of missteps is an organization where now all unified were on the same page regarding everything in our operation. And that the kind of blow back -- you would have from isolating a Bobby Valentine firing. Would be lost. I will say this in the last 24 hours the unanimity of positive opinions about the Steelers. It's baffling to me I mean and and I understand that in a couple of these guys you really wanted them out. -- especially I think people they just want him gone and they wouldn't care how. Cottam -- just get an ally here I understood that. Opt in you gave up a guy in Gonzales who is still up pretty good player and who I think is going to be a very good player for the LA Dodgers and yet almost universally. The reaction and I'm sure the Red Sox front office knows this is. Extremely positive. All three of those guys could well thrive in LA it was still the right move for the Red Sox even if Gonzales -- returns to career form even if Beckett actually in the NL west in bigger ballparks can thrive. In and somehow prove healthy. And even if Carl Crawford whenever he returns from Tommy John surgery. Becomes a very good player once again. They're still going to be a lot of dead weight on those contracts. And the Red Sox still didn't have the ability to make the necessary moves in order to address what album. I -- calls you guys -- Newton Europe first on Sports Radio sports Saturday. Good afternoon -- I stick my call -- area. Great thanks Bob so many points to storied history. It looked up the Red Sox but. I think it's it breaker -- -- bogus money they're truly trying to like a bankruptcy that they got -- very very cheap they got rid of a lot of debt. It's. I think it's just that the beginning. All like -- are eroding or another major move to come and I would want to see Tony La -- coming here. I think they're gonna clean slate are. No ballot on a nice guy but you're right -- sweep it all now it would the past and and I thank I. In annoying little Austin is actually that's gone on the last 24 hour tormented. -- what -- into. Its. I've heard Bruce's name brought up in the past I I've I've actually asked. Other people about that in their seems to be no indication that these mining for an opportunity to return to -- -- yeah absolutely not I think that he's feels great about where he left the game and the legacy that he leaves in it he left. In in perfect fashion. And why mess that up by going into potential hornet's nest. So I think that he wouldn't be the guy but that they have other you know but it will be interesting to see what else they end up doing Greg's in Manchester hey Greg -- you don't. -- -- Itself toward the great. Well -- that I am looking for negative like eager to talk about the insane or are they act like beat Palmer children's children -- helpful so doctors for sole. A look at the something negative. And -- Eric Eric -- work is. What John Henry now sell the if it in other words he unloads all of that now they can unload all recently contract. And accused the new prospective owner. Or the ability to really -- -- -- there. Yet the only the only problem with your scenario is that I see no indication that they have any desire itself. And moreover I think that there are they're about to embrace a model on which they continue to have significant commitments but they're going to be. -- they're going to be shorter term and they're going to be. You know there are going to be the 29 dollars a year's CeBIT. You know so that those wouldn't beacons even if the trade scenario or -- this all the teams scenario was at all accurate which I don't think it is. And then. The respect any prospective owners would still see. A pretty lean product the could be reshaped quickly sell or I just think that their belt they're they're building a better business model. Going forward Matt I don't think that there competitive him like Lucchino is not going to strip down a team he's just too competitive. Brinkley like even though they're more mild mannered -- Werner and and Henry. Over the course and I have a bit you know the Red Sox a couple of middle Oracle's long term contracts but is that not the cost of doing business now in -- and I'll be with. Acquiring superstar players. To a degree but you have to you know yes but they probably made the wrong long term commitments in the -- made two long term commitments into onerous of commitments so. You know fifteen to eighteen million dollar a year guys you know the Adrian Beltre contracts. They look a lot more appealing if there at five years and whatever it is ninety -- ninety ish million for Beltre. Then does a a seven and 142 for Crawford. I AM I I feel obligated here to have to make myself clear on this senate. -- seems to wanna call you out as well at same time so that I make myself clear night I was pretty clear on this. I don't think Bobby Valentine should be back next year I didn't think they should -- hired him to begin with and I think Terry Francona to have gone by the way. I thought Valentine was the wrong -- the wrong guy at the wrong time. On an eight techsters saying Alex. You didn't answer the question do you think he should be back next year. I say I don't think that he should be back next year I think -- its I think -- after seeing the way in which it's it's happened it's just taking too long I would have given there. If there'd been two months. In order to find some kind of a working fit and I think that would have been. Understandable to endorse some -- but some bombs but the turbulence remain so dramatic after the evidence of five months is in. It's still everything that we were led to believe about Bobby Valentine about. NB a polarizing figure which we thought you know maybe you know give people the benefit of the doubt they can change that can evolve over time. It's still occurring and he seems more polarizing and I thought I think that the public Valentine was that everyone said oh Terry Francona failed so they need to go with the go in the opposite direction I feel like what they did was they had a cavity and they treated it with a bullet.