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.
2014-15 Offseason Non-Sox thread
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 17, 2014 12:28:58 GMT -5
If the Cardinals do not resign Heyward, is this still a good deal for them? This is pretty reductive, but it depends how well they do in 2015. If Heyward helps them to a World Series then sure.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Nov 17, 2014 12:31:05 GMT -5
If the Cardinals do not resign Heyward, is this still a good deal for them? This is pretty reductive, but it depends how well they do in 2015. If Heyward helps them to a World Series then sure. I'm just trying to illustrate that it is not such a clear cut win for Cardinals and loss for Braves. Braves cut payroll, traded a player they probably wouldn't have retained in a year they probably wouldn't compete, and addressed a long term need. I think it makes sense for both teams.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 17, 2014 12:31:43 GMT -5
If the Cardinals do not resign Heyward, is this still a good deal for them? It's the Cardinals. There's like a 98% chance they're going to re-sign him.
|
|
|
Post by youngbillrussell on Nov 17, 2014 12:32:08 GMT -5
Don't like Russell Martin signing with the blue jays as a sox fan, that's a huge pick up for them.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 17, 2014 12:34:07 GMT -5
They traded from depth and added one of the 20 best players in the game. If the Cardinals start Carlos Martinez in Miller's rotation spot the deal may even help them long term. I could buy an argument that it's an ok deal for the Braves, but it's definitely a deal that makes sense for the Cardinals.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Nov 17, 2014 12:39:52 GMT -5
Miller is two and a half years younger than Joe Kelly. Heck, he's four months younger than Matt Barnes. Also, 2013 counts. Miller met some resistance in his second pro season, but he's a 24-year old who is already an established starter, who has stayed healthy enough to throw 350 innings the last two years, and still has the stuff that made him the #16 prospect in baseball two years ago. His walk rate is significantly lower than Kelly's. They aren't close. They have the same exact career BB% at 8.7. What makes him an established starter? One highly impressive season as 22-year-old followed up by a very lousy one that saw him post the 7th worst ERA-FIP and FIP in the game? I'm not trying to say Joe Kelly is a better pitcher, but you're exaggerating the difference between them. Miller has a lot of promise, and the two year age difference means a lot, but he hasn't shown enough yet to guarantee that he'll be a significantly better pitcher than Kelly over the next few years.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Nov 17, 2014 12:45:12 GMT -5
If I'm the Braves I'm trading both Heyward and J. Upton, as they are not going to resign them and they are probably not going to compete in the year left they have them. Getting back Shelby Miller who is a young, high potential pitcher is a good return. As always we don't know what was on the table, but we sure as hell could speculate. For example, what deal would the Red Sox have to make to beat this?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Nov 17, 2014 12:45:51 GMT -5
Even if Atlanta thinks that Kelly and Miller have the same value, I'm not sure why the Red Sox would push for that trade. We then would be looking to add 3 SPs in the offseason, probably overpaying and get an OF, which isn't our need. If we would trade a young SP like Webster or Ranaudo along with Nava, it would make more sense to me.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,434
|
Post by nomar on Nov 17, 2014 13:07:42 GMT -5
If I'm the Braves I'm trading both Heyward and J. Upton, as they are not going to resign them and they are probably not going to compete in the year left they have them. Getting back Shelby Miller who is a young, high potential pitcher is a good return. As always we don't know what was on the table, but we sure as hell could speculate. For example, what deal would the Red Sox have to make to beat this? Considering the similar-to-better production you'd get out of Hanley Ramirez, I wouldn't give up real pieces for Upton when he'll get roughly the same contract Ramirez would, and we would have to give up prospects for him. If you want a Justin Upton, and Ramirez is willing to play LF if needed, I think he's the play. I will concede the fact that Upton has stayed healthier in recent years, but I'd expect Ramirez would too in LF. Ramirez is making more and more sense IMO being as versatile as he is.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 17, 2014 13:17:57 GMT -5
Miller is two and a half years younger than Joe Kelly. Heck, he's four months younger than Matt Barnes. Also, 2013 counts. Miller met some resistance in his second pro season, but he's a 24-year old who is already an established starter, who has stayed healthy enough to throw 350 innings the last two years, and still has the stuff that made him the #16 prospect in baseball two years ago. His walk rate is significantly lower than Kelly's. They aren't close. They have the same exact career BB% at 8.7. What makes him an established starter? One highly impressive season as 22-year-old followed up by a very lousy one that saw him post the 7th worst ERA-FIP and FIP in the game? I'm not trying to say Joe Kelly is a better pitcher, but you're exaggerating the difference between them. Miller has a lot of promise, and the two year age difference means a lot, but he hasn't shown enough yet to guarantee that he'll be a significantly better pitcher than Kelly over the next few years. Miller's 2014 FIP was only .32 higher than Kelly's, and their xFIP is even closer. Given that Miller threw more than twice as many innings, that he is two an a half years younger, that Miller was undoubtedly better in 2013, and that Miller was considered a top prospect coming up, and that he has the much better stuff according to scouts... I can't give a guarantee that Miller is better than Kelly, but I can guarantee that every single GM in baseball would value Miller more. Since the start of 2013, among pitchers with 200+ innings who are 26 or younger, Kelly has the third lowest fWAR and the second worst K/BB. Miller has struck out 19.9% of batters over the last two years, Kelly is at 15.3%. Arguing that Miller and Kelly are similar in value based on 2014 would be the equivalent of arguing that Bogaerts and Ruben Tejada are similarly valued because they hit similarly this year. Fortunately, we have more information than that. And sure, maybe Bogaerts busts and Tejada ends up more valuable over the next five years. But I really don't have any reason to predict that, just like I don't have any reason to think Kelly is as good as Miller.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Nov 17, 2014 13:35:24 GMT -5
They have the same exact career BB% at 8.7. What makes him an established starter? One highly impressive season as 22-year-old followed up by a very lousy one that saw him post the 7th worst ERA-FIP and FIP in the game? I'm not trying to say Joe Kelly is a better pitcher, but you're exaggerating the difference between them. Miller has a lot of promise, and the two year age difference means a lot, but he hasn't shown enough yet to guarantee that he'll be a significantly better pitcher than Kelly over the next few years. Miller's 2014 FIP was only .32 higher than Kelly's, and their xFIP is even closer. Given that Miller threw more than twice as many innings, that he is two an a half years younger, that Miller was undoubtedly better in 2013, and that Miller was considered a top prospect coming up, and that he has the much better stuff according to scouts... I can't give a guarantee that Miller is better than Kelly, but I can guarantee that every single GM in baseball would value Miller more. Since the start of 2013, among pitchers with 200+ innings who are 26 or younger, Kelly has the third lowest fWAR and the second worst K/BB. Miller has struck out 19.9% of batters over the last two years, Kelly is at 15.3%. Arguing that Miller and Kelly are similar in value based on 2014 would be the equivalent of arguing that Bogaerts and Ruben Tejada are similarly valued because they hit similarly this year. Fortunately, we have more information than that. And sure, maybe Bogaerts busts and Tejada ends up more valuable over the next five years. But I really don't have any reason to predict that, just like I don't have any reason to think Kelly is as good as Miller. As do I. Trust me, I was as disappointed as anyone that it was Kelly coming back in the Lackey trade instead of Miller. I'm just under the belief that Miller, despite the obvious appealing characteristics he has over Kelly, seems like no sure thing to develop into an effective #2 starter, where as Kelly, in my opinion, seems like a reliable-enough #4 type with some untapped potential for improvement. My first post was merely trying to say they performed quite similarly in 2014. But honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see Kelly once again trump Miller in fWAR in 2015 (OK, maybe trump isn't the best word when we're comparing 0.6 to 0.2).
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Nov 17, 2014 13:43:37 GMT -5
Yeah, basically this. Heyward was a perfect fit here. Damn......
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 17, 2014 13:48:58 GMT -5
Kelly, who couldn't get to 100 innings last year, a "reliable-enough #4 type", while the former top prospect who had an excellent 2013 but a weak 2014 in 183 innings is "no sure thing." Miller has a 111 ERA+ in 370 career innings and is headed into his age 24 season.
Miller's downside is probably a #4 and his upside is a legit #2. Again, over the last two years he he's averaged 178 innings, has a K/BB of 2.28, and a 19.9% strikeout rate. Kelly's upside is a #3 an his downside is a long reliever. My initial question was asking who the Red Sox have who has a similar value to Miller. So, back to my hypothetical - If you post on a Mets forum, and the Red Sox traded Bogaerts for someone excellent, and people were all "why didn't the Mets act here." And the response was "well, the Mets don't have an equivalent to Bogaerts." And the reply to THAT was "Ruben Tejada, look at how he had a similar 2014." And in terms of rate stats he did, in less playing time. But Ruben Tejada is almost certainly worse than Xander Bogaerts. Just like Joe Kelly is almost certainly worse than Shelby Miller.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 17, 2014 13:49:48 GMT -5
If the Cardinals do not resign Heyward, is this still a good deal for them? It's the Cardinals. There's like a 98% chance they're going to re-sign him. Agreed. The team has modest financial commitments long term sitting at 85.3 mil + arb (Cots) before this trade and 72.7 mil + arb in 2016. Holliday has 17 mil owed this season and next before he becomes a free agent. He will be 35 before the 2015 season and enter free agency as a 37 year old. This deal makes great sense as Heyward is still cheap this season at 8.3 mil and can be extended at a time where Holliday's contract is all but off the books in effect taking over his designated payroll. Heyward becomes the everyday RF and Piscotty now looks to become the everyday LF replacement for Holliday. St Louis continues to show why they have perhaps the top front office in all of baseball. This is a move that provides consistent offensive production in RF which they have lacked and upgrades the defense which just helps the St Louis pitching staff all the more. For me I'd take St Louis over the field to represent the NL in the World Series in 2015.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 17, 2014 14:03:14 GMT -5
Even if Atlanta thinks that Kelly and Miller have the same value, I'm not sure why the Red Sox would push for that trade. We then would be looking to add 3 SPs in the offseason, probably overpaying and get an OF, which isn't our need. If we would trade a young SP like Webster or Ranaudo along with Nava, it would make more sense to me. I like Heyward a lot and I can see why people want him on the Red Sox, but it's a huge stretch to think the Red Sox missed an opportunity here. The Red Sox don't need outfielders and they desperately need pitching. The Braves where trading an outfielder and looking for pitching. So... yeah. It was probably never going to happen and that's fine. Not everything has to be about the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Nov 17, 2014 14:20:08 GMT -5
There are definitely some overreactions here. I think Heyward will decide to test out free agency, meaning we still have a shot of adding him to our team at a time when it makes more sense (Victorino & Cespedes off the books).
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Nov 17, 2014 15:34:00 GMT -5
So basically undwinding the JD Drew trade. This time St.Louis gets the OF with a year to free agency (Drew/Heyward), Atlanta gets the young pitching prospect (Wainwright/Miller).
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Nov 17, 2014 15:56:04 GMT -5
Yeah, basically this. Heyward was a perfect fit here. Damn...... I doubt Boston was going to give up Tazawa, the closest thing in the Sox pen (currently) to him (Walden) since the Cardinals looked to be after someone who can give them shut down innings late in games and be under club control for a couple of years. This seems to have gotten lost through the volley of posts here.. Boston wasn't going to give up Taz and head into ST, or later in the off season with just Koji, the inconsistent Mujica and BP of to be named.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Nov 17, 2014 16:38:52 GMT -5
Kelly, who couldn't get to 100 innings last year, a "reliable-enough #4 type", while the former top prospect who had an excellent 2013 but a weak 2014 in 183 innings is "no sure thing." Miller has a 111 ERA+ in 370 career innings and is headed into his age 24 season. Miller's downside is probably a #4 and his upside is a legit #2. Again, over the last two years he he's averaged 178 innings, has a K/BB of 2.28, and a 19.9% strikeout rate. Kelly's upside is a #3 an his downside is a long reliever. My initial question was asking who the Red Sox have who has a similar value to Miller. So, back to my hypothetical - If you post on a Mets forum, and the Red Sox traded Bogaerts for someone excellent, and people were all "why didn't the Mets act here." And the response was "well, the Mets don't have an equivalent to Bogaerts." And the reply to THAT was "Ruben Tejada, look at how he had a similar 2014." And in terms of rate stats he did, in less playing time. But Ruben Tejada is almost certainly worse than Xander Bogaerts. Just like Joe Kelly is almost certainly worse than Shelby Miller. That's not a fair way to quote me. I said that Miller is "no sure thing to develop into an effective #2," not that he's no sure bet to be a successful MLB starter while Kelly is. No one, myself included, doubts that Miller is a more valuable asset than Joe Kelly, and that he has a higher ceiling. But you're mentioning Kelly having a "significantly higher" BB%, when he doesn't at all, and his 111 ERA+, when Kelly has the exact same career numbers for both stats. Yes, Miller is still quite young and has an impressive career innings showing under his belt, while Kelly has neither quality. Yes, Miller has struck out more guys (although his K% plummeted this season). I'm simply saying that, thus far, they've performed similarly (in addition to the ERA+, I'll add that Kelly's career FIP- is 109 and Miller's is 110). Also, not sure it's fair to dock Kelly's durability because of a hamstring injury. I'm excited to see what he can do in his first full-time season of starting. Out of curiosity, James -- forget value and age, what are your projections for each of them in 2015?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 17, 2014 16:51:15 GMT -5
Let's see, at last count there was Betts, Bradley, Brentz, Castillo, Cespedes, Craig, Hassan, Nava, and Victorino, that's the outfielders listed alphabetically so I can keep them straight. And the Sox were supposed to pick up Heyward also?? That's before we look at need. Not the Sox' need, but the Cards and the Braves.
The Braves got killed last year when the bulk of their pitching staff fell down the injury rabbit hole just as the season got rolling. As for the Cards, their right fielder was (actually) killed in a car wreck. Solution: Braves get a major league starter with good potential, the Cards get a year's worth of a talented right fielder, a guy who has his own bag full of potential. Hard to imagine a more natural fit.
The notion that the Sox somehow missed an opportunity is such a stretch it's laughable. The team is looking for ML-ready starting pitching, not trying to sell what little they have off. Yet that's exactly what the Braves need (and still need). They found a ready solution to their problem and the Cards got, at the very least, a very good stop-gap and maybe more, along with a good setup man.
This was never going to be the Sox' dance, all the wish-casting aside.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Nov 17, 2014 17:02:01 GMT -5
Let's see, at last count there was Betts, Bradley, Brentz, Castillo, Cespedes, Craig, Hassan, Nava, and Victorino, that's the outfielders listed alphabetically so I can keep them straight. And the Sox were supposed to pick up Heyward also?? That's before we look at need. Not the Sox' need, but the Cards and the Braves. The Braves got killed last year when the bulk of their pitching staff fell down the injury rabbit hole just as the season got rolling. As for the Cards, their right fielder was (actually) killed in a car wreck. Solution: Braves get a major league starter with good potential, the Cards get a year's worth of a talented right fielder, a guy who has his own bag full of potential. Hard to imagine a more natural fit. The notion that the Sox somehow missed an opportunity is such a stretch it's laughable. The team is looking for ML-ready starting pitching, not trying to sell what little they have off. Yet that's exactly what the Braves need (and still need). They found a ready solution to their problem and the Cards got, at the very least, a very good stop-gap and maybe more, along with a good setup man. This was never going to be the Sox' dance, all the wish-casting aside. Exactly. He'd have been a nice piece to add in this offseason if the cost was down, which it appears to be. But the Sox still didn't have what looks like a piece that fit the main goal of ATL, a very young, experienced SP. Sure, maybe Kelly could qualify, but I doubt it. STL didn't give up a ton to the point where it would be a disaster of a deal if they don't sign Heyward long term. And if he doesn't sign an extension, I fully expect the Sox to be big players, with more than $20M coming off the books in the outfield alone.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 17, 2014 19:13:40 GMT -5
Who wants to chip in with me to buy Cansecos finger?
“@josecanseco: maybe I will make it a package the chrome 45 caliber Remington with the finger both for sale a package deal”
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 17, 2014 19:45:32 GMT -5
Also, not sure it's fair to dock Kelly's durability because of a hamstring injury. I'm excited to see what he can do in his first full-time season of starting. Out of curiosity, James -- forget value and age, what are your projections for each of them in 2015? I'd project Miller to be slightly above average. Atlanta tends to be pretty friendly to fly ball pitchers, his velocity maintained all year despite his command inconsistency, and he was a 23 in his second full season. Call it 190 innings and a 3.50 ERA (maybe about 2.5 bWAR) but with the potential for it to be in the 3.10-3.30 range and a downside of his 2015 ERA matching his 2014 FIP. Kelly's lack of innings and inefficiency make him harder to figure out. Even given that his ability to suppress BABIP might be something a skill - he's a superior athlete and a good fielder, I'd guess something closer to 150 innings, a 4.15 ERA and a FIP a touch worse than that. His upside probably would come in the form of improved durability, and he gets to 170 innings with a sub-4.00 ERA. His downside is that he isn't a major league starter.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Nov 17, 2014 23:38:22 GMT -5
Let's see, at last count there was Betts, Bradley, Brentz, Castillo, Cespedes, Craig, Hassan, Nava, and Victorino Lot of complementary pieces listed.....for a team that lacks difference makers. Heyward had a chance to be a difference maker for this team, that's all. With Heyward off the board, here's hoping Betts - Bradley - Castillo can support a rotation that upgrades significantly (re: two major pieces) this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 18, 2014 0:11:59 GMT -5
Let's see, at last count there was Betts, Bradley, Brentz, Castillo, Cespedes, Craig, Hassan, Nava, and Victorino Lot of complementary pieces listed.....for a team that lacks difference makers. Heyward had a chance to be a difference maker for this team, that's all. With Heyward off the board, here's hoping Betts - Bradley - Castillo can support a rotation that upgrades significantly (re: two major pieces) this offseason. My own opinion is that Betts will complement no one, he'll be the main dish. He outhit Heyward in his 200+ PAs last year and outslugged him by 100 points. Where the latter really stands out is on defense. Betts is nowhere near the right fielder that Heyward is. And I'm going to wait to see who Castillo is, I think the jury is still out on him. But overall, there seems to be plenty of talent to choose from in center and right. I agree, the team should focus on pitching (and that hole at third base). It was just too good a fit for Atlanta and the Cards, especially after the death of Tavarez. St. Louis could give Atlanta what they really needed, a proven starter. That's what they did.
|
|
|