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.
Peavy traded to SF for LHP Escobar and RHP Hembree
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jul 26, 2014 14:25:18 GMT -5
I don't understand Keith Law's logic on this one. How in the hell is Peavy, a guy who is for better or worse a bottom 10-15 starter in the league to date, going to land you a better haul than what we got. I don't see it. Keith Law is just salty he hasn't ever been offered a GM spot. This isn't the first time I've seen him criticizing a trade for seemingly no reason at all.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jul 26, 2014 14:28:47 GMT -5
Keith Law every year loves the Yankees farm system. He is always pumping there prospects.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jul 26, 2014 14:30:13 GMT -5
He's given up 1 each at: Reno (109) Las Vegas (116) ... Alburquerque (122) Good stuff. Guys and gals, these are aerodromes pure and simple. You have to take what happens in many PCL parks with a grain of salt - and wash it down with tequila. It's hard to ovestate how much these places distort the offensive environment.
|
|
|
Post by 1mpaz10 on Jul 26, 2014 14:34:49 GMT -5
If Law thought that we cleaned up, all the bashers would be saying that he is a sage. It appears to this point that he is something of an outlier and let's hope so. If one looked only at BA pre-season, it would seem that we maxed on Peavy....no real help for us and 2 months to go. But as we know, prospects rise and fall. It appears that we got these 2 because with Hembree, his velocity dropped and with Escobar his performance has not been too good statistically this year. Some reports say that Hembree has one reliable pitch (FB) while others indicate that he also has a sharp slider. Escobar was noted in BA as having a 92-93 FB but as reported above, he was 88-91 without a lot of movement in the Futures game. It would seem that Hembree could help in the BP and Escobar as a back-end starter. Not a mouth-watering haul perhaps but two potentially serviceable pitchers if they aren't traded elsewhere. Don't blink. No one has called them a mouth-watering haul. And people aren't calling out Law for his evaluation of the prospects. People are calling out Law because Jake Peavy sucks. Period. He has been one of the worst pitchers in the league this year. Just horrible. The fact that we got ANYTHING for him is insanity, especially since we were going to lose him for nothing in two months anyway. It's a freaking brilliant haul by Cherington because he was able to use the money at his disposal and get something out of nothing. Jake Peavy ERA by month from 2011-2013 August 4.00 September 4.11 October 3.38 How do you figure he's so bad? Talk about one of the most reliable back end starters in the league with a recent track record of consistency in the latter part of the season. What do you people not understand. Peavy had and still has VALUE. No reason to bash Law for recognizing what some of us couldn't.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jul 26, 2014 14:38:17 GMT -5
No one has called them a mouth-watering haul. And people aren't calling out Law for his evaluation of the prospects. People are calling out Law because Jake Peavy sucks. Period. He has been one of the worst pitchers in the league this year. Just horrible. The fact that we got ANYTHING for him is insanity, especially since we were going to lose him for nothing in two months anyway. It's a freaking brilliant haul by Cherington because he was able to use the money at his disposal and get something out of nothing. Jake Peavy ERA by month from 2011-2013 August 4.00 September 4.11 October 3.38 How do you figure he's so bad? Talk about one of the most reliable back end starters in the league with a recent track record of consistency in the latter part of the season. What do you people not understand. Peavy had and still has VALUE. No reason to bash Law for recognizing what some of us couldn't. No 1. I did not call them a mouth-watering haul or indicate that anyone else used that terminology. No 2. you have just called them "a freaking brilliant haul".....so it seems that you contradicted yourself.
|
|
|
Post by 1mpaz10 on Jul 26, 2014 14:40:36 GMT -5
I was not the one who called it brilliant.... All I ask is for uninformed people to stop referring to Peavy as bad and stop discrediting Law for his comments just because he properly valued a guy like Jake Peavy
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jul 26, 2014 14:58:15 GMT -5
He didn't properly valued Peavy and that's the point people are making. Peavy has some value and is not terrible, he is 5 maybe a 4 (In the NL) in a good rotation but that is mitigated by the fact he is purely a rental for the Giants and isn't worthy of a qualifying offer for the Red Sox to hold out for more. It's completely unrealistic to expect more than they got for Peavy.
If Keith Law really thought Crick was realistic he most not value Crick that highly either.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jul 26, 2014 15:04:18 GMT -5
He didn't properly valued Peavy and that's the point people are making. Peavy has some value and is not terrible, he is 5 maybe a 4 (In the NL) in a good rotation but that is mitigated by the fact he is purely a rental for the Giants and isn't worthy of a qualifying offer for the Red Sox to hold out for more. It's completely unrealistic to expect more than they got for Peavy. If Keith Law really thought Crick was realistic he most not value Crick that highly either. Good point. Crick looked like a potential 2 or 3 when I saw him on TV. Nice arm. Totally unreasonable for us to have a chance to get him for Jake. Taking everything into consideration, Ben did very well for a 2 month rental and someone we would have never brought back.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Jul 26, 2014 15:13:53 GMT -5
It's really OK to disagree with Law and not call him an idiot, or worse, Yankee homer. If he thinks neither Escobar or Hembree will be worth anything in the future then he is right that the return wasn't good. I happen to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Jul 26, 2014 15:14:56 GMT -5
No one has called them a mouth-watering haul. And people aren't calling out Law for his evaluation of the prospects. People are calling out Law because Jake Peavy sucks. Period. He has been one of the worst pitchers in the league this year. Just horrible. The fact that we got ANYTHING for him is insanity, especially since we were going to lose him for nothing in two months anyway. It's a freaking brilliant haul by Cherington because he was able to use the money at his disposal and get something out of nothing. Jake Peavy ERA by month from 2011-2013 August 4.00 September 4.11 October 3.38 How do you figure he's so bad? Talk about one of the most reliable back end starters in the league with a recent track record of consistency in the latter part of the season. What do you people not understand. Peavy had and still has VALUE. No reason to bash Law for recognizing what some of us couldn't. It's impressive that Jake Peavy used to be a good pitcher. I remember those days. Unfortunately for all of us, these players aren't robots. They age and performance declines. Here's a hint though, look beyond the ERA. ERA can be a useful stat, but it is hardly more than a first look at a pitcher. Peavy's career stats don't indicate that he is this super star second half pitcher. In fact his first half stats and his second half stats throughout his career are pretty consistent. In fact, in your time period 2011-2013, Jake Peavy has actually been better in the first half in 2013 and 2012 than he was in the second half and he was pretty consistent throughout the whole season in 2011.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jul 26, 2014 15:16:41 GMT -5
I was not the one who called it brilliant.... All I ask is for uninformed people to stop referring to Peavy as bad and stop discrediting Law for his comments just because he properly valued a guy like Jake Peavy Jake has been a five+ inning pitcher for the last year we had him... he goes deeper than gives up the go ahead run/runs and if Law thinks that is his stud winner in this deal he has another think coming. Jake has been nothing but a "fringy starter for us as he can't produce hardly at all past 5 innings before he gives up that winning home run that makes him prone to HR to boot. 40 in the last year and a half. Where does law see the great production from him... 0.0WAR we got a steal in this deal as his value over the rest of the season is a lottery ticket at best. IMO
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Jul 26, 2014 15:16:48 GMT -5
I was not the one who called it brilliant.... All I ask is for uninformed people to stop referring to Peavy as bad and stop discrediting Law for his comments just because he properly valued a guy like Jake Peavy The uninformed people are the ones suggesting Jake Peavy was anything better than one of the worst 10-15 pitchers in the league this year.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 26, 2014 15:19:07 GMT -5
(I'm looking up (2013) park factors as I type this, so I don't yet know what conclusion I'm going to draw.) He's given up 0 at home (94 park factor for HR). He's given up 1 each at: Reno (109) Las Vegas (116) New Orleans (94) Round Rock (104) Alburquerque (122) And the HR/PA rate in the PCL this year is 25% higher than in the IL to begin with. And of course these park factors need to be doubled to get the rate in the given park (as opposed to the multiplier to adjust for the player playing half of their games there). So, he's given up his HRs in parks where they are roughly 47%, 65%, 10%, 35%, and 80% more common than in the average IL park. Great stuff. Where did you get this info? I just picked up what I read about him, which shows how bad info gets into the blogosphere.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Jul 26, 2014 15:20:46 GMT -5
No 1. I did not call them a mouth-watering haul or indicate that anyone else used that terminology. No 2. you have just called them "a freaking brilliant haul".....so it seems that you contradicted yourself. 1. You may not have used said terminology, but you were the first to tell everyone to temper expectations, when in reality expectations have been pretty damn reasonable in this thread. People understand that these are guys who could wash out in a year or two, but at their best they could have an impact in the majors, not as stars but as solid MLBers. 2. It's a brilliant haul. Not because the prospects are brilliant. But because we were able to pay a few extra dollars of cash and turn a guy who has been one of the worst pitchers in the league this year, who is being paid too much money and whose contract was set to expire in 2 month anyway into two real, albeit pretty average, prospects. Brilliant work by Cherington.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 26, 2014 15:24:50 GMT -5
There were folks demanding Peavy be DFAed immediately as far back as June. However low you are on Escobar and Hembree, getting that package was well worth keeping Peavy another half-dozen starts. Plus, while it is mostly speculation, I still think it's fair to think that this package was not on the table a few weeks ago. Matt Cain has gone on the DL in the meantime-- I don't think Sabean makes this trade if that injury doesn't open up a rotation spot (the other four are ably handled by Bumgarner, Hudson, Lincecum, and Vogelsong). You are taking this too far Jmei. This is already the 3rd or 4th post you made on the last 2 pages of this topic going over the exact same thing and has others trumpeting the same misconceptions, only now it has taken it to a step worse. I remember seeing people wanting Peavy moved, but not DFA'd, just moved in some kind of deal. Maybe I am wrong. Drew? Maybe there. He hasn't performed and salary will have to be eaten (some). Peavy it was rumored the Cards were willing to pay the entirety of his salary, just not give up anything for his services. Some of us (incl. myself) were wanting Pavy moved a few weeks back so Workman could stick in the rotation, 'tis true. Each start would save the team 400k, give Workman (or Ranaudo) more experience at the MLB level at the same time and -0- guarantees either of these kids ever amount to anything they just got. One just blocks either Owens/Johnson from being promoted regardless. It's a good haul, yes. Would have been better to have happened several weeks ago and even then. Is it better than not taking the other 2.5m the Cards offered? My point is just this: considering what the Giants gave up, it is hard to argue that the front office waited too long to trade Jake Peavy and impossible to argue that they should have DFAed him. We don't know for sure what was and what was not on the table a few weeks or months ago, so there's still considerable uncertainty here. But the only cost to waiting was (a) cash (which I would submit doesn't matter a lot to this ownership; they're happy to effectively buy prospects with a move like this one) and (b) giving a few extra AAA starts to Workman and a few extra AA starts to Owens (which has an impact on their development, but a very minor one). I think those costs are easily outweighed by the improved package Boston received for Peavy. Taking this deal seems unambiguously a better result than taking salary relief but no real prospects from St. Louis two weeks ago or DFAing him a month ago. In particular, I've discussed previously why I don't think "blocking" prospects matters very much in the long run. Giving Owens a few extra starts at AA or giving Workman/Webster/etc. a few extra starts in Pawtucket is hardly dooming them to failure. If that's the primary cost of getting prospects like Escobar and Hembree in your system, that's a cost you're willing to bear each and every time. ADD: that said, I recognize I'm rubbing it in a little too much, so for that I apologize and will refrain from doing so going forward.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by ianrs on Jul 26, 2014 15:52:20 GMT -5
Incredible job by Ben. Really excited to see Webster start, as well as Hembree in the bullpen after a few more moves.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 26, 2014 15:54:21 GMT -5
(I'm looking up (2013) park factors as I type this, so I don't yet know what conclusion I'm going to draw.) He's given up 0 at home (94 park factor for HR). He's given up 1 each at: Reno (109) Las Vegas (116) New Orleans (94) Round Rock (104) Alburquerque (122) And the HR/PA rate in the PCL this year is 25% higher than in the IL to begin with. And of course these park factors need to be doubled to get the rate in the given park (as opposed to the multiplier to adjust for the player playing half of their games there). So, he's given up his HRs in parks where they are roughly 47%, 65%, 10%, 35%, and 80% more common than in the average IL park. Great stuff. Where did you get this info? I just picked up what I read about him, which shows how bad info gets into the blogosphere. BA's scouting report mentioned his home / road split, so I went to b-ref and looked up his game log (their minor league game logs are very thorough, and can be summed over any stretch of time just like the MLB logs). I've seen numerous minor league park factors, so I Googled it and chose the top link, the set from MinorLeagueCentral. I calculated the HR/PA ratio from b-ref data. Game logs, by themselves, give you an insane amount of data to consider -- too much, really, in that if you look at every possible split, you'll find at least one that's statistically significant. So I try (not always successfully!) to limit those investigations to instances where I have a hypothesis. That PCL parks are home run havens is very well known, as Oregorm just pointed out (hey, that sounds like a Tolkien character!). BTW, if you do look at every split to see if anything looks interesting, you have to either find multiple splits that point to the same phenomenon, or a split that is both massively significant and can be explained neatly and logically. A good example of the latter is the Kevin Youkilis day / night split that Peter Keating chose to kick off the stats story in the ESPN anniversary issue last May.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 26, 2014 15:56:59 GMT -5
Incredible job by Ben. Really excited to see Webster Wright start, as well as Hembree in the bullpen , after a few more moves. Fixed. As a pointed out elsewhere, he's been better, and in more innings, than Wakefield was in 1995. And Wakefield had a better ERA+ in MLB after his recall than he had had in AAA. (That doesn't prove anything, but it's part of a pattern of the best knuckleball pitchers having an MLE ratio of close to 1.0, as you'd expect from the fact that nobody can hit a good knuckleball, except by luck). Edit: yeah, Webster is starting Sunday, but if they don't give Wright a shot at Lester's slot, objects should be hurled. And that's the guy I'm excited about.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 26, 2014 16:06:40 GMT -5
Game logs, by themselves, give you an insane amount of data to consider -- too much, really, in that if you look at every possible split, you'll find at least one that's statistically significant.
|
|
|
Post by bsout2 on Jul 26, 2014 16:25:35 GMT -5
Keith Law every year loves the Yankees farm system. He is always pumping there prospects. Keith Law has always been a strong Red Sox supporter.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,833
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 26, 2014 17:30:17 GMT -5
I don't like his personality, but Law is impartial. I don't think he gives biased ratings on anybody really besides being stubborn with his opinions occasionally.
|
|
|
Post by curiousle on Jul 26, 2014 18:00:09 GMT -5
The Sox are definitely warming up for something big. That's a great job by Ben, but this deal tells me that Lester will definitely be moved before the deadline, if Ben got this back for Peavy, he'll do very well for Lester. I also expect Miller, Doubront, Breslow and Badenhop to move and maybe a couple of minor league arms.
There have been comments on a pending blockbuster, and I might agree with that....the current headcount can't all stay on the 40 man roster....
I say have a go at Pittsburgh or St. Louis and pick up some of their lumber from the outfield.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 26, 2014 18:11:30 GMT -5
Pittsburgh, LAD, and St. Louis look like the three teams that have the top-end pieces to land Lester and the need for starting pitching. They each could also use relief help.
The Dodgers will feel some pressure to respond to SF adding to their rotation. STL and PIT are tied at 3 games out in the division (1/2 a game out of the wild card) and are therefor that much more incentivized to keep Lester (and potentially miller or koji) from the other.
PIT and LAD have also been the two teams the Sox have worked well with in the recent past to get deals done.
There are a lot of factors that are working in the Sox favor here. If I'm the sox I'm hoping for one of the following - and would be willing to include one of Koji or Miller to make it happen:
Oscar Tavares Seager and Pederson Bell and Glasgow
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jul 26, 2014 18:12:31 GMT -5
I think jmei made a good point about playing Peavy. Some here did call for him to be DFA'ed. You have to play the guys you want to trade. Also, this should be taken into account if Drew and or Gomes aren't moved by the deadline and still get played. They could still make it through waivers and be moved. Not so Lester, he gets moved in the next few days or hits free agency.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 26, 2014 18:37:02 GMT -5
And, some of the know-everything guys think we should have dumped him for nothing just a few days ago Because keeping Jake Peavy a day longer will ruin the 2014 Boston Red SOX!! Those folks who raged every time Peavy made another start: you know who are are, and you were dead wrong on this one. Patience is a virtue, and it was most definitely rewarded this time. <----- totally wrong, raising my hand
|
|
|