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.
Jeff Samardzija
|
Post by mgoetze on May 23, 2014 16:01:36 GMT -5
An excellent article on Samardzija and how he has adjusted this year, giving up strikeouts in favour of more groundballs (and less HRs): www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jeff-samardzija-in-the-name-of-efficiency/I for one am convinced and think we should make a run at him, the question of course being what should we be willing to pay. Assuming we can get some sort of extension worked out as part of the trade, I would be willing to offer Swihart, one of Webster/Barnes and one of Buchholz/Doubront. Not sure that gets it done, depends whether the Cubs think they can get Buchholz or Doubront back on the right track I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 23, 2014 16:19:55 GMT -5
Anyone but Betts and Swihart
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on May 25, 2014 8:06:14 GMT -5
...... or Rijo.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on May 25, 2014 8:26:02 GMT -5
According to Rosenthall the Cubs asked Toronto for Hutchinson and one of either Sanchez or Stroman.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on May 25, 2014 9:21:09 GMT -5
Although Samardjia would be an upgrade to the ML staff, why give up valuable prospects who are close to ready, when the Sox have so many good young pitchers who are 4 months to a year away? (DeLaRosa, Owens, Barnes, Webster, to name a few). This team needs to score runs.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on May 30, 2014 13:25:55 GMT -5
I'm not sure whether those guys are ever going to be ready. We'll know more about De La Rosa soon... of course, so will the rest of the league.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jun 1, 2014 10:59:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jun 1, 2014 14:38:14 GMT -5
I'd rather let De La Rosa, Ranaudo, Webster pitch instead of trading them.
|
|
|
Post by tomricardo on Jun 1, 2014 15:35:05 GMT -5
I'd rather let De La Rosa, Ranaudo, Webster pitch instead of trading them. They are all not going to make the rotation. Right now you have Owens, Barnes, De La Rosa, Webster, Ranuado and Workman. All could be starters in mlb. Workman will probably end up a reliever. I rather trade two of them (not Owens) and Vasquez or Butler for Samardzijia who we know is a major league pitcher. You don't want to end up with a bunch of Michael Bowdens on your hand.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 1, 2014 15:42:30 GMT -5
I'd rather let De La Rosa, Ranaudo, Webster pitch instead of trading them. They are all not going to make the rotation. Right now you have Owens, Barnes, De La Rosa, Webster, Ranuado and Workman. All could be starters in mlb. Workman will probably end up a reliever. I rather trade two of them (not Owens) and Vasquez or Butler for Samardzijia who we know is a major league pitcher. You don't want to end up with a bunch of Michael Bowdens on your hand. You also don't want to trade a couple Anibal Sanchezes.
|
|
|
Post by tomricardo on Jun 1, 2014 22:14:44 GMT -5
I would trade two 2005 Anibal Sanchezes knowing what he did in his time in FLA for Jeff Samardzjia now.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 2, 2014 7:05:51 GMT -5
I would trade two 2005 Anibal Sanchezes knowing what he did in his time in FLA for Jeff Samardzjia now. Really? Go look again. Samardzjia hasn't had one season as good as 3 different seasons that Sanchez had in Miami yet.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Oct 1, 2014 9:46:52 GMT -5
I can't help but think Oakland deals a starter this offseason since Griffin and Parker will be coming back from TJ. Both Samardzija and Kazmir are obvious candidates since they will be making over $10 million.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 1, 2014 9:57:36 GMT -5
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Oct 1, 2014 11:03:52 GMT -5
Doubt we get either but I don't even want Samardzija. Really doubt he keeps his BB/9 this far down and don't think he's more than an overrated 3 without it staying under 2.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 1, 2014 11:47:44 GMT -5
Only half-facetious: I'd probably trade Cespedes for Samardzija, if Billy wants a do-over.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 1, 2014 11:49:31 GMT -5
Only half-facetious: I'd probably trade Cespedes for Samardzija, if Billy wants a do-over. I was thinking along those lines, but Beane realizes that Cespedes is overrated. He could do better. And Samardzija has the comp pick so there's that.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Oct 1, 2014 12:44:17 GMT -5
One of the things Billy called out on his willingness to make the Samardzija trade was the extra year of team control. Samardzija was going to be involved in trade rumors this offseason regardless of how the A's finished. I don't however think that the A's are giving up on the win now philosophy, not yet at least. Any trades for Samardzija (or Donaldson) would have to give the A's some upgrade on their current team.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonsterwhalers on Oct 1, 2014 22:47:33 GMT -5
Only half-facetious: I'd probably trade Cespedes for Samardzija, if Billy wants a do-over. This is very intriguing. If we sign Lester and get Samardzija, we would be set in the rotation, though going after a buy-low candidate like Justin Masterson wouldn't hurt. Because of the way things played out after the Lester trade, I think we're in a position to ask for something on top of Samardzija. We could take it a step further and offer to pay a chunk of Cespedes' salary too, if we get something substantial in return in addition to Samardzija, like a good reliever or maybe a good prospect who falls into the gap we have in our system (Triple-A is loaded, but is there anything at all in Double-A?). Taking on part of Cespedes' salary might increase the chances that they can afford Kazmir, etc., and thus they can go for it one more time in 2015 instead of blowing it up. That seems pretty valuable to me. Here's my question though: how do you plan on replacing Cespedes' offense? I think even with Cespedes they need another hitter (probably at third base) because they didn't exactly light it up after the Cespedes trade, and we need insurance because we can't count on Papi being unbelievable forever. I think a lineup with Bogaerts, Castillo, and Vazquez as the bottom three is a very good lineup in terms of depth. Having said that, Bogaerts didn't have a good year, Castillo is still unproven, and we can't count on Vazquez for much offensively in his first full season in the majors. Because of those things combined, a lineup with a fourth question mark would make me nervous. After a season like this one, I think it would make management and ownership nervous too. As good as he's been, Mookie has only been in Boston for a few months and almost all rookies have an adjustment period where the league catches up to them. Victorino has his injury issues. Craig is coming off an awful season. JBJ needs to at least start the year in Pawtucket, which is where he should have started this year frankly. Nava has become a valuable piece but he can't hit lefties (by the way, why not try hitting lefty vs. lefties? I know it's not easy but he's not getting on the field as a righty hitter). All of these guys have good upside but they're still question marks in some way. So back to the question: how would you replace Cespedes' offense and/or replace it plus more?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 2, 2014 11:08:15 GMT -5
I think the difference between Cespedes and their next best option is much smaller than you might think. Since Cespedes entered the league, Nava has been a much, much hitter versus RHP, in a pretty large sample. You then just have to find a right-handed-hitting complement for Nava, and between Craig, Victorino, or even Brentz or Hassan, I think you can come up with someone who fits the bill. There's also the fact that you can use the cash you've freed up (since Cespedes for Samardzija (or another pitcher) is a lateral move in terms of AAV) to sign a good third baseman (Headley is my preference there).
|
|
|
Post by greenmonsterwhalers on Oct 2, 2014 14:06:11 GMT -5
I think the difference between Cespedes and their next best option is much smaller than you might think. Since Cespedes entered the league, Nava has been a much, much hitter versus RHP, in a pretty large sample. You then just have to find a right-handed-hitting complement for Nava, and between Craig, Victorino, or even Brentz or Hassan, I think you can come up with someone who fits the bill. There's also the fact that you can use the cash you've freed up (since Cespedes for Samardzija (or another pitcher) is a lateral move in terms of AAV) to sign a good third baseman (Headley is my preference there). I agree that the difference between Cespedes and someone like Nava isn't as big as it seems. I'm a big Nava fan. I don't think we can deny that Big Papi got better pitches to hit with Cespedes behind him though, and trading Cespedes without getting a replacement who doesn't have significant questions marks would make our lineup seem very similar to what it was before we got Cespedes, aka not very good. I think it's not a matter or Cespedes vs. Nava because they could both play in the same outfield. I think it's more Cespedes vs. Victorino/Betts/Craig, all of whom have significant question marks. I'll finish with a few questions: Do you think Oakland is going to blow it up this offseason, next offseason, or sometime later? Would you be willing to take on a medium/big chunk of Cespedes' salary if it would allow us to get a good reliever in return (along with Samardzija)? Does Oakland have a good reliever who you think they'd be willing to deal in exchange for salary cap relief? Also, why don't switch hitters who have serious splits (like Nava) try batting from their stronger side all the time? (Again, I know it's not easy but he's getting zero playing time as a RHB now, so there's nothing to lose.)
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 2, 2014 17:26:47 GMT -5
I don't think we can deny that Big Papi got better pitches to hit with Cespedes behind him though, and trading Cespedes without getting a replacement who doesn't have significant questions marks would make our lineup seem very similar to what it was before we got Cespedes, aka not very good. I actually do think we can deny that, or at least cast skepticism about the extent to which Cespedes' presence resulted in Ortiz getting better pitches to hit. Here are some of Ortiz's stats, both before and after Cespedes' acquisition:
| Pre-YS | Post-YS | Zone% | 45.2% | 45.6% | Fastball% | 51.4% | 51.5% |
And here are Ortiz's zone charts, both before Cespedes... ...and after Cespedes: I'm not sure I really see any difference-- if anything, he actually got fewer pitches in the middle of the zone after Cespedes was acquired. Ortiz did hit better after Cespedes was acquired, but it looks like it wasn't because he got pitched differently, but just plain ol' BABIP regression, most likely attributable to mostly luck:
| Pre-YS | Post-YS | Line
| .250/.345/.500
| .299/.386/.567
| BB% | 12.4% | 12.7% | K% | 15.3% | 17.1% | ISO | .250 | .269 | BABIP
| .250
| .300
|
Given the above, I'm not particularly wedded to Cespedes as necessary to protect Ortiz. Lineup protection in general is not an effect that there's a ton of evidence for, and there's not a lot of evidence that Ortiz benefited from it this year. ADD: as for your other questions: - I think it is an issue of Nava/RHH vs. Cespedes, as Castillo is penciled in CF and Betts is penciled in RF. If Cespedes is retained, I think he's a full-time player who is not getting too many days off, which means Nava isn't getting much playing time.
- No clue what Oakland does this offseason, though this is a good primer on some of the questions they face: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/whats-next-for-the-athletics/
- I don't actually think Oakland would seriously consider a Cespedes-for-Samardzija swap-- it would open up their first Cespedes trade to too much second-guessing. My initial comment was mostly a joke.
- Some guys do quit switch-hitting (Victorino tried to do so, for instance), but it's easier said than done. When you haven't had any lefty-on-lefty at bats in literally a decade, it's not exactly easy to train yourself to be a major-league-caliber L/L hitter in one offseason.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonsterwhalers on Oct 2, 2014 23:21:25 GMT -5
I rest my case. Very impressive analysis, jmei. Would Betts necessarily get the nod over Nava (assuming Betts isn't traded)? Again, there's that rookie wall, whereas we pretty much know what we're getting with Nava and it's pretty good, plus he's a lefty. Also, what would you do with Victorino and Craig?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 3, 2014 11:31:45 GMT -5
Because he projects to be the better overall player (once you take into account defense and baserunning), Betts should get first dibs on starting in RF. If Betts struggles (which I don't think he will, but there's always a possibility), Nava or Victorino/Craig can fill in. Craig and Victorino start the season as the fourth/fifth outfielders. They'll immediately get platoon reps with Nava in LF, and if they start looking like the players they were in 2013, they'll push Castillo/Betts for CF/RF playing time.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Oct 4, 2014 18:57:35 GMT -5
|
|
|