In sports, success breeds imitation. When a formula works, it quickly gets copied.
For years, Dave Dombrowski came under criticism for strip-mining the Red Sox minor league system in pursuit of established stars. Dombrowski was willing to sacrifice the team's future to improve on its present.
When the Red Sox won the World Series in October, the criticism suddenly became muted. All of a sudden, the decisions to trade four prospects for Craig Kimbrel, four more for Chris Sale another for Drew Pomeranz -- to say nothing for smaller but still significant deals for Eduardo Nunez, Steve Pearce, Eduardo Nunez, Ian Kinsler and Nathan Eovaldi -- were deemed worthwhile.
After all, nothing validates a strategy like a duck boat parade.
In actuality, Dombrowski's approach wasn't any different than the one he chose in Detroit, where he executed a similar strategy of trading in the promise of tomorrow for the chance to win today. It fell short there -- barely -- as the Tigers won two pennants, only to lose in the World Series on both occasions.
Dombrowski's plan was more fruitful in Boston and the end result was the fourth championship for the franchise in the last 15 years and the cementing of his legacy as a baseball executive. With four pennants and two titles to his credit, it may be enough to someday gain Dombrowski to the Hall of Fame.
But there's also the present-day impact to consider. To wit: will Dombrowski's method soon be adopted by others willing to sacrifice the future for a chance to win now?
In recent years, prospects have taken on an almost absurdly high value, with some executives seemingly more willing to sacrifice a limb than to part with a phenom in Double-A.
It's not hard to understand the attraction -- in addition to their promise to blossom into elite performers, prospects offer the possibility of huge economic savings. Given the choice between overpaying for a 30-something star with plenty of wear-and-tear or a younger, healthier and far cheaper version of the same, the vast majority of baseball executives would choose the latter every time.
Younger stars represent cost control, savings and, in theory at least, athleticism.
And in the (mostly) post-PED, post-amphetamine era, when evaluators fear that players in their 30s will be more susceptible to injuries and recovery is slower, relying on younger players represents far less risk.
But it's possible that the pendulum swung too far in one direction.
It's easy to forget that not every heralded prospect automatically morphs into a major league star. As advanced as scouting has become -- with huge steps forward in video and analytics -- it remains an inexact science. The Red Sox were thrilled at the opportunity to select a high school lefty with the seventh overall pick in the 2013 draft.
More than five years later, Trey Ball has plateaued, unable to move beyond Double-A, and in a desperate attempt to salvage some return for their investment, the Red Sox have converted him to an outfielder.
Here are some of the players the Sox could have chosen when they drafted Ball: Aaron Judge, Sean Manaea, Corey Knebel, Cody Bellinger and Adam Engel.
That's not a criticism solely of the Red Sox. Every draft is something a crapshoot, with every team convinced -- at the time -- that it is making the correct choice. Only occasionally is that the case.
Even after the draft, other factors come into play: coaching, commitment and injuries among them.
At the same time, teams are frequently roasted for doing what Dombrowski did: sacrificing highly-regarded prospects in exchange for already established stars.
Just two years ago, the Twins had two of the Top 10 prospects in the game in outfielder Byron Buxton and third baseman Miguel Sano. They were considered absolutely untouchable, and had the Twins included them in deals to fill more immediate roster needs, fans would have torched Target Field to the ground.
This past season, Sano and Buxton combined to play 98 games at the big league level, mostly restricted to the minor leagues due to a combination of factors: injuries, poor conditioning and underperformance.
Bottom line: prospects may not represent lottery tickets -- with only a minimal chance of coming to fruition -- but future stardom is far from guaranteed. A lot can -- and likely will -- go wrong between the time a player is drafted out of high school or college or signed as a 16- or 17-year old as an international free agent and his expected arrival as a fully-formed star.
So where does that leave us? Already this winter, teams have demonstrated a willingness to move prospects for stars. The Washington Nationals dealt two to Cleveland for catcher Yan Gomes. And the New York Mets are in the process of finalizing a mammoth swap with Seattle that would see them move three prospects -- one of whom they obtained from the Red Sox in exchange for Addison Reed -- to land Robinson Cano and closer Edwin Diaz.
The Nationals' trade is easy to understand: the franchise has been unable to gain any traction in the postseason, and last year, failed to even qualify.
The Mets situation is a little different: they finished 2018 in fourth place, with a losing record, a full 13 games behind division-leading Atlanta. But they have a new GM in Brody van Wagenen who's seemingly intent on quickly making the Mets competitive - —or at the very least relevant.
Is this go-for-it approach about to become commonplace?
"I'm not ready to say that,'' said one executive. "I think every case is different. Most teams are still going to guard their best prospects. But when a team like the Red Sox succeeds (by trading prospects to fill needs) at the very least, it gives pause to others, like, 'Maybe it's worth the risk.'''
That's especially true of teams in win-now mode, with a window closing in the not-to-distant future.
The shrewdest teams will choose the prospects they're willing to part with wisely, as the Red Sox have done. (The Sox wisely refused to put Andrew Benintendi in the Sale deal).
But the Sox recent championship serves as a reminder that it's sometimes better to focus on today rather than the promise of a far-away tomorrow that may never be realized.
__________________
____________________