It’s Not That Red Sox Have Turned Cheap – It’s They Bet Big on Wrong Guys
It has become fashionable for pundits to pick on the Red Sox for their lack of action in free agency this off-season.
For instance, Jon Heyman threw out the theory that ownership’s attention to Liverpool is the reason Boston hasn’t spent big this off-season.
Red Sox brass quickly shot down Heyman’s perspective, saying the Red Sox and Liverpool are run as separate enterprises.
And Larry Lucchino publicly spoke out, noting Boston will have the second highest payroll in baseball.
Jeff Passan wrote in the previous five off-seasons, Boston spent $514,475,500 on free agents, compared to only $7.35 million this off-season.
I agree with Tim Britton who noted calling the Red Sox cheap is unfair.
A more apt description – learning the lessons from the past.
Over the last few years, Boston has spent big on free agents with not much to show for it.
Daisuke Matuszaka ($52 million over six years), John Lackey ($82.5 million over five years) and Carl Crawford ($142 million over seven years) have not paid off – at least so far.
Let’s add in 12-game winner (and September disaster) Josh Beckett ($68 million over four years).
The issue is not the amount of money the Red Sox are spending. It’s who they have spent it on.
Also factor in, the Red Sox farm system has not produced an impact player since Clay Buchholz arrived in 2007.
Lack of farm system results has driven free agent spending – which is not a long-term winning proposition.
Especially when AL East competitors Tampa Bay and Toronto have top farm systems (ESPN subscription required), closely followed by New York.
The Red Sox farm system strength is in the lower minors.
This coming season should provide an indication whether young players – like Xander Bogaerts and Blake Swihart – will move into the elite prospect category.
If they do that may bring some balance to putting a team together – with player development leading the way and free agency filling in the holes.
Albie Jarvis
