shredder tastiness: Mailbag: Valentine just what Red Sox need

Boston manager is a polarizing figure, but is smart and will force change

MLB EXPERT MAILBAG

updated 7:03 p.m. ET Nov. 30, 2011

Tony DeMarco

Baseball Expert Tony DeMarco has been covering the big leagues since 1987, and been casting Hall of Fame ballots for the last 12 years. He answers questions weekly here:

Q: Do you expect the Bobby Valentine/Red Sox combination to work?
? Dwight Williams, Boston

A: Valentine certainly has been a polarizing figure throughout his career, a real love-him-or-hate-him type. From Texas to Queens to Japan, there is no denying both the positive and negative feelings he has evoked.

He's as smart as anybody in the game, and a quarter-century ago as its youngest manager, succeeded in resurrecting ? albeit temporarily ? a terrible Rangers franchise. He then went on to win two wild cards and get to one World Series with the Mets, and win a championship with a previously unsuccessful Chibe Lotte franchise. So he knows how to win.

In fact, he's one of those great-at-anything-he-does types ? everything from football (turned down a scholarship to play tailback at USC to sign with the Dodgers) to ballroom dancing to the restaurant business to embracing the Japanese culture and even learning the language during his long tenure there.

He reached the big leagues as a 19-year old, and the only reason he didn't have a long and successful playing career was the broken lower leg bone he suffered when his spike got caught in an outfield wall on an attempted catch. The bone never healed properly due to botched medical treatment, and left him with a grotesque lump on his shin.

He can be arrogant and condescending, and maybe that stalled playing career and relatively small size (5-9) left him with a chip on his shoulder. And you can understand why opponents would dislike ? some, back in the day, even hated ? the wrist-band wearing and self-promoting side of him, and why they referred to him as a 'top-step' manager ? up where the cameras easily could find him.

Valentine's personality also has divided his own clubhouses, as well as the media contingents covering him. As being part of that dynamic a long time ago in Dallas-Fort Worth, I admit to being on the pro-Bobby V. side of things.

But the truth is, much of this is ancient history. It's been a decade since he's been in an MLB dugout, and haven't we all matured and grown wiser in the last decade ? and certainly in the last quarter-century? So for the all strong opinions both pro and con that you can find on the internet now, the fact is, he's not going to handle things exactly the same this time around.

So as for what will happen in Boston, Valentine is much different than his predecessor, Terry Francona, who fell victim to players taking advantage of his easygoing, players'-manager mentality. That's not going to be the case with Valentine, and maybe that's just what the Red Sox ownership and general manager Ben Cherington are looking for.

Valentine will force change, and those who don't like it, likely will be shipped elsewhere. He will play a major part in the re-shaping of the roster this winter, as the Red Sox ? for all their financial wherewithal ? do have some question marks to address.

It's going to be fascinating to watch, but put me in the camp thinking that after an adjustment period, the Red Sox will remain consistent threats to win another World Series in Valentine's tenure.

Q: Where do you think is the ideal landing spot for Jose Reyes?
? Caroline Rollins, San Francisco

A: Fortunately for Reyes, his timing couldn't be better, as a handful of top contenders need an elite-level shortstop. Just in the NL, you can name the Phillies (if Jimmy Rollins leaves), Braves, Giants, Cardinals and possibly the Brewers. And in the AL, you possibly could include the Tigers and Red Sox.

Money being relatively equal ? and don't kid yourself, that's almost always the determining factor ? there really isn't a wrong choice in that bunch.

The Phillies are the likeliest to win short-term, although their window for doing so is closing. The Braves, with all their young talent and more quality arms about to emerge, are the better play for the longer term. The Giants have the pitching and financial resources for a run as NL West contenders for the next several years. And the Cardinals need to keep Albert Pujols, but their track record as perennial NL Central top contender speaks for itself.

You'll notice I didn't include the Marlins, as I'm not buying them as legitimate players in this market ? yet. Yes, they're wining and dining a handful of the top names, but there's not enough substance (read: dollars) in their offers, and I'm thinking they'll get shut out on every major front, but perhaps land a second-tier name who doesn't have another better option.

I'm also not buying that Hanley Ramirez is going to take kindly to a position change. But we'll see what happens at the winter meetings and beyond, as the Marlins could change their current strategy, and end up putting more money into one free agent in order to make that big splash they're looking to make going into their new ballpark.

For Reyes, what it's likely to come down to is which team will be willing to give him the most guaranteed money, given his injury history.

Q: I keep reading that the end of Type A and type B free agents, and the mandatory slotting for the June draft will combine to make it harder for small market teams to compete. Why is that so?
? Ed Horbett, Lemon Grove, Calif.

A: First of all, it should be said that both of those were flawed systems, and needed be to changed. Also, there always are unforeseen consequences with these CBA changes, so nobody knows exactly what all the affects will be at this point.

As for whether smaller-market teams will be hurt by the changes, that certainly isn't the intent of either the MLB/owners side or the players union, and from my understanding of the changes, there appears to be potential positives and negatives for smaller-market clubs.

The free-agent rankings system proved unfair to some players who received high rankings, because teams didn't want to forfeit a draft choice to sign them. Relievers in particular fell victim. The new free-agent compensation system involves qualifying offers to free agents from teams ? and that could limit small-market teams' bids.

The slotting system was ineffective because many teams ? especially in the bigger markets, but even some of the smarter smaller-market teams ? ignored it and paid bigger money than dictated by the slot.

With the institution of a pool of bonus money that teams can't exceed in signing draft picks, the overall affect could be that signing bonuses will be going down, and I don't see how that hurts smaller-market teams.

Clubs also now can trade some draft picks, which could allow a rebuilding team (usually a smaller-market team) to stockpile in an effort to change their fortunes more quickly than in the past.

More news