Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
The Red Sox traded Edgar Renteria to the Braves today for third base prospect Andy Marte. In the process they have basically overhauled their entire starting infield. They now have newcomers Mark Loretta (2B) and Mike Lowell (3B) plus two players to be named later at short (Alex Cora?) and first (Roberto Petagine or David Ortiz?).
Of the players on the current Red Sox roster, only 11 wore the Boston uni two years ago when they won the World Series. Two of those are Abe Alvarez and Lenny DiNardo, pitchers who are long shots to make the opening day roster. The rest are Jason Varitek, Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, Kevin Youkilis, Trot Nixon, Curt Schilling, Tim Wakefield, Keith Foulke, and Mike Timlin. And there are rumors that Foulke and Ramirez—aren't there always?—won't be on the team by opening day.
There were 50 men on the Red Sox in 2004. That's at best a 22% retention rate two years after winning a crown, which seems a bit low to me.
Let's see how it compares…I ran the numbers for all World Series champs. Here are the ten lowest assuming that all 11 Sox make (or at least play for) the team this year:
| Yr | Team | 2 Yrs Later | Total | % |
| 1918 | Boston Red Sox | 6 | 32 | 18.75% |
| 1997 | Florida Marlins | 9 | 43 | 20.93% |
| 2004 | Boston Red Sox | 11 | 50 | 22.00% |
| 1914 | Boston Braves | 8 | 34 | 23.53% |
| 1992 | Toronto Blue Jays | 12 | 40 | 30.00% |
| 2000 | New York Yankees | 14 | 46 | 30.43% |
| 1942 | St. Louis Cardinals | 10 | 32 | 31.25% |
| 1996 | New York Yankees | 15 | 48 | 31.25% |
| 1922 | New York Giants | 12 | 37 | 32.43% |
| 2003 | Florida Marlins | 13 | 40 | 32.50% |
Wow, the 2004 Sox are already the third lowest and would drop to second lowest if they lose just one more of the remaining eleven by opening day, a likely event. Of course, no matter how many they lose a Red Sox team will have the lowest retention rate. Since the 1918 team (of course) is number one now. If the current Sox lose two players, they wrest the crown away from their forebears.
By the way, here are the teams that retained the highest percentage of players two years after a World Series crown:
| Yr | Team | 2 Yrs Later | Total | % |
| 1917 | Chicago White Sox | 19 | 26 | 73.08% |
| 1907 | Chicago Cubs | 16 | 24 | 66.67% |
| 1971 | Pittsburgh Pirates | 23 | 35 | 65.71% |
| 1938 | New York Yankees | 18 | 28 | 64.29% |
| 1923 | New York Yankees | 16 | 25 | 64.00% |
| 1927 | New York Yankees | 16 | 25 | 64.00% |
| 1915 | Boston Red Sox | 19 | 30 | 63.33% |
| 1935 | Detroit Tigers | 17 | 27 | 62.96% |
| 1979 | Pittsburgh Pirates | 21 | 34 | 61.76% |
| 1910 | Philadelphia Athletics | 17 | 28 | 60.71% |
| 1936 | New York Yankees | 17 | 28 | 60.71% |
The 1917 White Sox and the 1907 Cubs? I think we all know how these guys turned out (the Cubs started their current ring-less, Bartman-filled streak two years later and the White Sox's high retention rate perhaps led to too much comradery two years later—get my drift? Nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more?)
Maybe player turnover isn't such a bad thing after all.(by the way, the average retention rate two years later is 48% on the nose.)
Did you look at the numbers for 3 years later at all? I suspect these current Marlins may have just set an unbreakable record, and they might not be finished...
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.