SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Potential Free Agent Starter for Next Year?
|
Post by jdb on Sept 20, 2012 17:03:28 GMT -5
Gio Gonzelez has similar stats compared to Doubront at a similar age. He made a big jump after his 23 yr old season that had a similar stats as Felix this year. I know Felix is 24 but he had some injuries that slowed him down. Not saying he is the next Gio but he has a ton of potential and if we can find a coach that can get our young pitchers going in the right direction it would huge.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 20, 2012 18:31:30 GMT -5
This may help you win a division but what about when you go against the Texas and Yankee lineups in the playoffs? Getting to the playoffs just to have your @$$ handed to you doesn't help much. You need at least one 2007 Beckett who can go out there and shut down whatever you throw at them. I dunno, Ron Washington will fail to pinch hit for Colby Lewis in the 6th, use Mike Adams for four pitches, and lose in extras when he runs out of relievers?
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Sept 21, 2012 5:41:18 GMT -5
Why does the team need top-notch, ace-level, A #1 talent? Does Oakland have that? Quick, name all their starting pitchers. The premise is badly flawed. What you need are a decent supply of good, healthy pitchers with repeatable mechanics and a plan for how to integrate them with your bullpen. It doesn't matter whether their reasonably priced free-agent acquisitions or the product of your own farm system. What matters is that they're ready to give you some solid innings, that your offense can back them up, and that your late-inning relievers will hold on to leads. You need a team, and while it's nice to have a "star" - whatever that is - overpaying for talent is what got the team in a hole. Why should they climb back down into that hole? If you had asked me to name any of the Marlins starters before the won the world series against the Yanks, I wouldn't have been able to... but all of them are household names now so we are not talking name recognition... we are talking aces. I believe the makeup of the Red Sox lends itself to needing an ace to go anywhere. We also need a pitcher to emerge as a 1A type of pitcher to go along with that ace. Name me the last three teams that won a world series without one. I sure as hell can't think of them off the top of my head... but I will go through the past decade to see if I have valid logic. 2011 - Carpenter, Jaime Garcia, Kyle Lohse 2010 - Lincecum, Cain 2009 - CC, Pettitte 2008 - Hamels, Meyers 2007 - Beckett, Shilling *2006 - Chris Carpenter (won with ace but no 1 A) - this team wasn't that good to be honest and got hot at the right time... I would consider this the luckiest WS winners in the past decade. ***2005 - (no true ace, but all solid 1 A starters at the time and every starter never got injured and all pitched over 200 innings... flukishly rare) Mark Buehrle, Freddy García, Jon Garland, Jose Contreras 2004 - Shilling, Pedro 2003 - Josh Beckett, Dontrelle Willis, Brad Penny, Pavano (AJ Burnett didn't pitch that post season because of TJ but was on the team too) ***2002 - (no true ace, but some good 1 A's) Jarrod Washburn, John Lackey, Kevin Appier The thing about Oakland is that every single starter with over 90 innings has an era under 3.90 (total of six starters). That is the exception rather than what is typical for playing many young players. The Nats are the other team this year that is doing the same thing, but doing it much better than the A's. There are 11 pitchers on Nationals with over 30 innings. The highest ERA of any of them is 3.89 and the second highest is 3.22... absolutely amazing... can we get that pitching coach? There were two teams in the past decade that won a world series without an ace. At the time the Marlins had some very young stud starters that would go on to be aces and 1A's, but at the time they weren't considered as aces to be fair, but they were stacked. The reason why we need an ace is that we don't have a single pitcher with over 70 innings with an ERA under 4.15. With that ace, we have a good chance of one of the following having a 1A type of season in Lester, Clay, Felix, Lackey. I would say the chances are actually high on that. I would say that the chances of all of those pitcher having an ERA under 4 next year is very very remote. Now I know ERA isn't the best indicator of pitching success, but it is pretty telling. We are not going to magically be able to find four other starters who have a sub 4 ERA. We also don't need that many starters for a playoff series. We need a solid 1 and 1 A pitcher to bring us a solid chance in the playoffs and / or championship as recent history suggests and I posted above. We also need to have a solid number 3 and we can skate by with an iffy back of the rotation. The percent of times a team wins with no ace is very low... about 20% in recent years. Out of all the teams that won with no ace, they all had solid 1 A type pitchers and their teams had the lowest ERA in the league in their given years. To me this translates that you can either win a championship with a top heavy rotation or you can win with a very balanced rotation. It is much harder to field a very balanced rotation that has the best ERA in the league than to have a top heavy rotation. This is why we are seeing the Nationals as the best team in the league this year. They not only have balance, but they also have a top heavy rotation as well. They might be the only team in the league with a chance in the playoffs without their ace because he was shut down... they are that strong in the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Sept 21, 2012 6:40:51 GMT -5
Maybe this guy is more to your liking? White Sox Expected To Decline Peavy’s Option By Ben Nicholson-Smith [September 20, 2012 at 1:08pm CST] The White Sox have signaled to Jake Peavy that they’re unlikely to exercise their $22MM club option for 2013, Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reports. Instead, the team is expected to pay a $4MM buyout in a move that would make Peavy a free agent. I really like the idea of picking up Peavy if this is true. He is injury prone, but he is certainly capable of being an ace and would command far less money and years than Greinke. I wonder why the White Sox wouldn't just sign him for the full salary and trade him so they could get something in return? That might be a red flag since the buy out is 4 mil.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Sept 21, 2012 6:45:11 GMT -5
Why does the team need top-notch, ace-level, A #1 talent? Does Oakland have that? Quick, name all their starting pitchers. The premise is badly flawed. What you need are a decent supply of good, healthy pitchers with repeatable mechanics and a plan for how to integrate them with your bullpen. It doesn't matter whether their reasonably priced free-agent acquisitions or the product of your own farm system. What matters is that they're ready to give you some solid innings, that your offense can back them up, and that your late-inning relievers will hold on to leads. You need a team, and while it's nice to have a "star" - whatever that is - overpaying for talent is what got the team in a hole. Why should they climb back down into that hole? This may help you win a division but what about when you go against the Texas and Yankee lineups in the playoffs? Getting to the playoffs just to have your @$$ handed to you doesn't help much. You need at least one 2007 Beckett who can go out there and shut down whatever you throw at them. As you can tell from my wordy post above... I agree with you fully.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 21, 2012 7:20:28 GMT -5
2011 Chris Carpenter was no ace.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Sept 21, 2012 7:25:44 GMT -5
So next ten years of ace analysis / 1 A analysis of world series winners
2001 - Curt Shilling and Randy Johnson (best 1-2 in the majors) 2000 - Clemens, Pettitte 1999 - Cone, Clemens, Pettitte, El Duque 1998 - Cone, El Duque, Wells, Pettitte 1997 - Kevin Brown, Alexander Fernandez, Livan Hernandez, Al Leiter 1996 - Cone, Pettitte 1995 - Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz (loved that team)
**1994 - strike year, no world series
1993 - Juan Guzman (numbers fell off after first three years, but he was the ace then) They didn't have a 1A that year First team without a real ace or a 1A that won a WS that I can tell in 20 years 1992 - Jack Morris, Juan Guzman, Jimmy Key
So basically in 92-2001, every world series winning team had an ace with at least a 1 A pitcher besides one year where they only had an ace and one more without either an ace or 1A.
So if you want to know why the Sox need an ace... well 20 years of history shows why.
Edit - Guzman and Leiter edits
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Sept 21, 2012 7:27:07 GMT -5
2011 Chris Carpenter was no ace. 3.45 ERA, 237.1 IP, 191 SO his win loss record wasn't great, but he was an ace that year for them and established himself as the ace for them since 2004 besides his injury season
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 21, 2012 7:46:08 GMT -5
Juan Guzman had a 3.99 ERA (109 ERA+), 110 walks and 26 (twenty-six!) wild pitches. That team won with acceptable starting pitching, a very good bullpen, and one of the best lineups I've ever seen. He was 19th in the (14 team) American League in rWAR. The Red Sox, who finished under .500 that year, had two who were more valuable - and that didn't include Roger Clemens, who had the worst year of his career. Instead, it was Danny Darwin and Frank Viola who had a higher WAR than Guzman.
Clay Buchholz is a better pitcher than Juan Guzman was.
Also, Al Leiter is still alive. You scared the heck out of me.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Sept 21, 2012 9:29:49 GMT -5
Juan Guzman had a 3.99 ERA (109 ERA+), 110 walks and 26 (twenty-six!) wild pitches. That team won with acceptable starting pitching, a very good bullpen, and one of the best lineups I've ever seen. He was 19th in the (14 team) American League in rWAR. The Red Sox, who finished under .500 that year, had two who were more valuable - and that didn't include Roger Clemens, who had the worst year of his career. Instead, it was Danny Darwin and Frank Viola who had a higher WAR than Guzman. Clay Buchholz is a better pitcher than Juan Guzman was. Also, Al Leiter is still alive. You scared the heck out of me. Honestly that was before my time but I wanted to do a decade, so I was running just off stats... I was going off of his first two seasons but I will omit Guzman after looking at his WHIP... it was early when I wrote that up and just saw that he was 2nd in ROY, an all star then 7th in Cy Young voting in 1993. When I clicked on it... a single vote was for him... must have been a biased vote because you are right, his numbers weren't that great. I totally whiffed on the Leiter and in my morning stupor, I was thinking of Cory Lidle... need more coffee that early
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 618
|
Post by alnipper on Sept 21, 2012 9:42:51 GMT -5
I'd sign Edwin Jackson to a 2 year contract. Jackson should give us quality innings. I would also sign a few guys like Cook next year. As we all know you can can never have enough pitching depth.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 21, 2012 10:01:55 GMT -5
I totally whiffed on the Leiter and in my morning stupor, I was thinking of Cory Lidle... need more coffee that early Ah, I was actually thinking you might have gotten him confused with Daryl Kile (same era and all). No worries, posting while under-caffeinated is always dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 21, 2012 10:14:08 GMT -5
I'd like to see if we can get Peavy on a one year Beltre contract to see if we can a pick out of him and wonder if we can make a qualifying offer Dice-K without him picking it up. For one year with money to "burn" it could be worth the risk.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,818
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Sept 21, 2012 10:22:21 GMT -5
I'd like to see if we can get Peavy on a one year Beltre contract to see if we can a pick out of him and wonder if we can make a qualifying offer Dice-K without him picking it up. For one year with money to "burn" it could be worth the risk. I'm new to the rules currently in place, but any qualifying offer to a Dice-K must be somewhat substantial....and I'm terrified he would take it. May be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 21, 2012 10:34:02 GMT -5
I'd like to see if we can get Peavy on a one year Beltre contract to see if we can a pick out of him and wonder if we can make a qualifying offer Dice-K without him picking it up. For one year with money to "burn" it could be worth the risk. I'm new to the rules currently in place, but any qualifying offer to a Dice-K must be somewhat substantial....and I'm terrified he would take it. May be wrong. One year at approximately 13 mil I do believe.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 22, 2012 17:24:31 GMT -5
... 2011 - Carpenter, Jaime Garcia, Kyle Lohse 2010 - Lincecum, Cain 2009 - CC, Pettitte 2008 - Hamels, Meyers 2007 - Beckett, Shilling *2006 - Chris Carpenter (won with ace but no 1 A) - this team wasn't that good to be honest and got hot at the right time... I would consider this the luckiest WS winners in the past decade. ***2005 - (no true ace, but all solid 1 A starters at the time and every starter never got injured and all pitched over 200 innings... flukishly rare) Mark Buehrle, Freddy García, Jon Garland, Jose Contreras 2004 - Shilling, Pedro 2003 - Josh Beckett, Dontrelle Willis, Brad Penny, Pavano (AJ Burnett didn't pitch that post season because of TJ but was on the team too) ***2002 - (no true ace, but some good 1 A's) Jarrod Washburn, John Lackey, Kevin Appier ... I don't want to get into it too much, just to say that we are miles apart on definitions. So many of the names in your list are pedestrian. Willis is out of the majors at a relatively young 30, Penny is just about there with him. Pavano has spent much of his career at an average or replacement level of performance. His numbers are no better than Lackey's. Burnett has been wildly inconsistent and couldn't seem to get comfortable in the AL East. Brett Myers, Kyle Lohse - Lohse has never had a field-independent pitching (FIP) stat under 4.00... There are a few very good and one certifiably great pitcher on that list, but it's not the majority by any means. I'm not going to devalue what's already onboard just because the team's had a truly lousy year. The combo of Buchholz and Lester has the potential, next year, to be as good as most of the names on that list. And given that Doubront will be all of 25, he could be in the mix also with a year under his belt. And if Lackey is anywhere near what he was before the injury he also plays - bad habits and all - at least as well as half your list. I know it stinks. But those of us a little older can remember when it stank all the time, year after year. The team can at least have a chance to contend given the vagaries of baseball and their willingness to fill in the blanks. That means adding in pieces both pitching and hitting. But spending lavishly on names because they're names should be out of the question. And no trading away the future, please. Edit: Correction - it's Lohse's xFIP - the experimental version that normalizes for home runs that's never been below 4.00.
On another matter, I've been looking at Cot's contracts - the spreadsheets that have future spending projections. I realized that those projections don't include options picked up. For example, the Angels' Haren and Santana are assigned costs associated with their buyouts. That throws a wrinkle into those projections for me. I expect that, given the cost of good pitching, one or both will be back with the team next year. Certainly it's hard to imagine Haren, who's been very good, hitting the market.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Sept 26, 2012 21:36:02 GMT -5
Jake Peavy is another free agent that should interest the R. Sox. He's had a history of injuries, but this year he logged in over two hundred innings in 30 starts.
His 22m option obviously won't be picked up. He'll be in demand. But a veteran at 31 with his Cy Young Award and resume should draw some interst from Cherington.
|
|
|
Post by bacricher on Sept 26, 2012 22:24:21 GMT -5
For example, the Angels' Haren and Santana are assigned costs associated with their buyouts. That throws a wrinkle into those projections for me. I expect that, given the cost of good pitching, one or both will be back with the team next year. Certainly it's hard to imagine Haren, who's been very good, hitting the market.
I read somewhere on Mlbtr today that the angels don't plan on picking up either one's option..I'd post the link, but I'm on my phone and itd be too painful. Will do it tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 26, 2012 22:58:24 GMT -5
For example, the Angels' Haren and Santana are assigned costs associated with their buyouts. That throws a wrinkle into those projections for me. I expect that, given the cost of good pitching, one or both will be back with the team next year. Certainly it's hard to imagine Haren, who's been very good, hitting the market.I read somewhere on Mlbtr today that the angels don't plan on picking up either one's option..I'd post the link, but I'm on my phone and itd be too painful. Will do it tomorrow. If I remember correctly, after factoring in the buyout, the Haren decision is essentially 1/12m. He's pitched better lately, and he's been an elite and durable pitcher for a while now. I realize this a different pitching environment and he's struggled with back problems this year, but that price still sounds very reasonable. I'd definitely be willing to give up assets to obtain him for that price, I can't see the Angels paying the buyout even if they re-sign Greinke.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 26, 2012 23:00:54 GMT -5
I'll use this as an opportunity to ask that folks post links to original articles, rather than places that link to them like MLBTR. Report was from Alden Gonzalez: aldengonzalez.mlblogs.com/2012/09/25/question-of-the-day-925/Also, Norm, I'm not sure where you're getting that Haren has been very good this year. As a frustrated Haren fantasy owner, believe me when I say that this has been his worst season since 2004 or 2005, although as Beasley says, he has been better lately.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 26, 2012 23:37:11 GMT -5
You're right. I was basing it on the last few games I've watched. He wasn't the same at all for the first few months, though he looked sharp against Oakland and Chicago. So maybe he is on the market. Santana I'm lukewarm on, but I've always liked Haren's stuff. The back problems are a red flag, but maybe that makes him available at a reasonable price.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Sept 27, 2012 6:41:38 GMT -5
I have to wonder; What's a "reasonable price" for a 32yr old SP with "back problems"?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,440
|
Post by nomar on Sept 27, 2012 13:24:35 GMT -5
Choosing between Peavy and Haren is tough. Peavy: Was healthy this year and had better numbers, but would be more expensive and want 2/3 years Haren: Back problems, but has been very good up to this year. Also could be had on a pillow contract, like a pitchers version of the Beltre signing. Hopefully we land one of these guys. I have to wonder; What's a "reasonable price" for a 32yr old SP with "back problems"? Maybe 1/$9M with a mutual/vesting option for 2014? Spitballing
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 27, 2012 13:35:40 GMT -5
I have to wonder; What's a "reasonable price" for a 32yr old SP with "back problems"? Relevant question. Probably not the $15+ million in his option, but if he returns to form it's not far off. Good to remember that as recently as last year, this was a 6.2 WAR player and that's worth a bit if you're anywhere near the playoff cusp. This is a guy who's averaged 4.5 WAR over the last 8 years, even counting this year's crappy 1.6. His peripherals are not that out of line with his past years, though his K rate has seen a decline. The big question is the one you pose about his physical health. This is also a guy who's averaged 220 innings a season! That said, he could be a very good acquisition if the back proves to be a minor issue and if there's a decent team to wrap around his performance.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 27, 2012 13:49:22 GMT -5
Choosing between Peavy and Haren is tough. Peavy: Was healthy this year and had better numbers, but would be more expensive and want 2/3 years Haren: Back problems, but has been very good up to this year. Also could be had on a pillow contract, like a pitchers version of the Beltre signing. Hopefully we land one of these guys. I have to wonder; What's a "reasonable price" for a 32yr old SP with "back problems"? Maybe 1/$9M with a mutual/vesting option for 2014? Spitballing Keep in mind that I don't think we contend next but we do the year after. That out of the way this is what I'm looking for. I admit the only thing I'm looking for this off season is young long term solutions or in this case filler that could possibly net us a future draft pick.
|
|
|