Aren't you being a bit harsh? Or are you being sarcastic? So far the offseason isn't going pretty well for the Sox, I'd say. If they do nothing else they'll probably be favored to win the division.

That should say "so far the offseason IS going pretty well."

It's been a weird couple months for Red Sox fans. On the one hand, I agree with WJ that the Red Sox' moves so far have been very solid - the Van Buren move isn't as important as the Beckett trade, but it's a nice piece of creativity.

On the other hand, I completely see where Jim's cynicism comes from. Ever since the trade deadline, the Red Sox have been in a weird state of disarray. The Theo negotiations were a disaster. And when I read stuff like this from the above article:

These are difficult times for Lucchino, who has painted himself into a corner with this GM search. Team sources say Lucchino was poised to name Jim Beattie general manager last week, but received a tepid response from within the organization. The trepidation is understandable. Beattie's recent track record in Baltimore is not what you'd term awe-inspiring. Re-signing Sidney Ponson was a disaster. Ditto for bringing in Sammy Sosa and reliever Steve Kline

Well, it's good Lucky hasn't completely overruled his baseball ops people yet, but on what planet is Beattie a good GM choice?

Nothing horrible has happened yet, but I feel there's this sword of stupid-cles hanging over our heads - eventually, the disorder in the front office is going to lead to us trading Manny for Erstad or something. Just don't know when.

I disagree with Jim about Bowden. Bowden had a chance to lead a high-payroll team with the mid-90s Reds, and he did a very poor job. His results as a low-payroll GM have been similarly weak. This is a guy with a 10-year track record - signs of creativity, to me, are heavily outweighed by the macro picture of his consistent lack of playoff teams.

Bowden?

Guzman and Marlon Anderson demonstrates his lack of understanding of replacement level production and "free" talent avenues for player acquistion. We don't need anymore Offerman like contracts.

At this point I wish they'd name Bill Lajoie Long-Term Acting General Manager or something and keep the multi-headed monster in place to run the team, maybe finding a few more heads for it. The trades with the Marlins and Cubs show us that they aren't incompetent as a group. Lajoie's a respected guy who's been in baseball for 273 years, he seems to be a team player, and the fact that he considered himself one of Theo's guys and resigned (temporarily) when Theo left shows that he's comfortable with the kids. He's perfect as a short-term solution, he'd know he's a short-term solution, and it would be a nice cap to a long career.

At this point the GM search is a hideous mess that I think they just need to give it a rest for a while, maybe even until next October. I can't imagine them hiring anyone in the next two weeks (unless it would be Beattie, which we don't want). Anyone they do hire at a late stage might end up doing a lot of rash and rushed things in a hurry to "put his stamp" on the 2006 team, even though a lot of the time for major offseason activity would be past. That's how stupid mistakes happen.

David Wells heard "plate". He'll step up if it's a chinese buffet.

Now that I RTFA I see that Lajoie-as-GM has been batted about but that his health prohibits it. Oh well.

Um, why not just have Lucchino be the front man, but have the real decision makers stay where they are? At least for the year.

Is Jackie right, that Shapiro longs to GM the Sox?

If so, why doesn't he just interview now? Why does he have to win in Cleveland first?

maybe he's biding his time until lucchino self destructs.

No, Jackie isn't right. Well, that's hyperbole. I don't know for certain that she's wrong. The problem is that Jackie MacMullan seems to be almost invariably wrong when speaking or writing about any sport other than basketball. One of the exasperating things about Jackie MacMullan is her overpowering ignorance of sports other than basketball. Looking for a cliche? You've come to the right woman. Her appearances on the late sunday sports show on channel 7 are painful. She seems to always spout last week's conventional wisdom. She really does seem to know basketball.

I'd like to thank the good lord for the Sox not signing Beattie. If I wanted to watch the muppet show, i could buy the dvd, not follow the sox with him calling the shots

I'd like to thank the good lord for the Sox not signing Beattie.

Is this a sure thing?

Not that I care, since I'm a Rangers fan now, but I sure hope Kapstein doesn't end up GM. I had the misfortune of hearing him interviewed by a certain pair of morning ######### on WEEI, and it wasn't pretty.

He came across as a bad parody of an old school baseball guy. I don't remember many of the specific things he said, but the thing that stuck with me was what he said about Papelbon.

He said he didn't think Papelbon could be a starter, because he only had two pitches.

Now, I'm willing to accept that Papelbon may have trouble as a starter because he only has two pitches. I'd be willing to accept a front office that wouldn't sign a guy because he only has two pitches. I am not willing to accept a front office that won't give a guy a chance because they see some reason why he might fail.

99.999999% of people can't pitch in the big leagues. Therefore, Jon Papelbon shouldn't be allowed to pitch, because he's a person, which means he won't be able to pitchi in the big leagues.

Not sure I understand your reasoning, vi. If 'having only 2 pitches' is a valid reason for concern, shouldn't it be okay to act on it? Isn't it one of the main reasons that guys are moved from the rotation to the pen? Maybe there is some subtler point I'm missing, though.

Didn't Kapstein also say the same thing in some other interview, only to end the interview by saying that Koufax had only 2 pitches, and he did fine as a starter? That concerned me more--Kapstein seemed to be talking in circles, able to convince himself of anything.

Eh, the results this offseason have been pretty good so far.

About 20 years ago, I thought that they ideal GM would have some experience as a player agent. But I think that's around the same time that Kapstein was decertified after marrying Ronald McDonald's daughter.

I really don't know much about what he's done since then, other than the stuff I can Google. I don't think that he was even mentioned in this years media guide. I couldn't find him.

Not sure I understand your reasoning, vi. If 'having only 2 pitches' is a valid reason for concern, shouldn't it be okay to act on it?

NO. Your 5 best pitchers should be your starters unless one or more of them have shown they can't start. Papelbon has yet to show he can't start.

Kapstein is employing the same faulty logic that led the Dodgers to decide Pedro should be a reliever.

I thought that the reason why LA didn't utilize Martinez as a starter was because they questioned his durability, not the effectiveness of his third pitch.

The Dodgers decided, for whatever reason, that Martinez could not be a starter, even though he was a good reliever.

The reason is not important. The only way to find out if the guy can do the job is to give him a chance.

First of all, I don't get you guys saying that Kapstein shouldn't be the GM. He was jerry mcgwire before jerry mcgwire. He went into San Diego and and cleaned up the mess left behind by previous ceo's. I've heard him on weei. He knows the red sox, he has the best credentials of any of the candidates. he should have been named the gm in the first week after theo left.

also, bill lajoie should not be named gm. he is not in good health and wouldn't have the energy to last a year with all the work gm's have to do.

i say, give kapstein the gm job. beattie has no right to even be in this gm search. he is horrible, how did he ever get a gm job in the first place?

if beattie is named gm, lucchino should fire himself.