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.
Anthony Ranaudo traded to TEX for Robbie Ross Jr
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 8:58:10 GMT -5
Ross was moved back and forth between starting and the bullpen last year, which I think might be the source of his issues. His fastball dropped in velocity which I bet was because he was stretched out and that was likely a problem when he went back to the pen. He was a great exclusive relief pitcher the two prior years.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 9:11:30 GMT -5
What would have Webster, De La Rosa, and Ranuado earned a year ago? Opinion: Prospect huggers suck. The majority of these kids fail, anyway, so you really need to drop that kick. Counterpoint: Mookie Betts. But Betts hasn't proven anything yet. I assume he's going to be fine but I thought the same about Xander. Besides, trading Betts is not what I'm talking about because he fills a position of need. I'm talking about moving some of the most impressive redundancy in the game for at least one quality starter, and doing it before that redundancy is traded for another reliever. Cause ultimately that's what is going to happen anyway.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 9:27:54 GMT -5
Workman, Barnes, Owens, Johnson, Rodriguez, Escobar, Wright - 7 guys who project as pitchers who will be just as good/better than Ranaudo and who need a spot in AAA or the majors. Ranaudo also seems like a terrible fit for the bullpen, which drops his floor below guys like Escobar. The Sox needed to get rid of some of the surplus and they chose the guy with the lowest floor/ceiling combination. I have no problem with it. I have no problem with trading him, its the fact that we traded him for a reliever that I have a problem with. I would bet that a ton of teams would have traded you young prospects that are years away for him. That's what I would have done. Also think people are selling Ranaudo short. As a starter I think he is better then Workman, Escobar and Wright. Yup. If you're not going to play them, if you're not going to move them for ML pieces, trade them for stronger talent more years away. Only Beane does this, though, afaik.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Jan 28, 2015 9:29:57 GMT -5
Counterpoint: Mookie Betts. But Betts hasn't proven anything yet. I assume he's going to be fine but I thought the same about Xander. Besides, trading Betts is not what I'm talking about because he fills a position of need. I'm talking about moving some of the most impressive redundancy in the game for at least one quality starter, and doing it before that redundancy is traded for another reliever. Cause ultimately that's what is going to happen anyway. You're not wrong, but there's only so long you can hoard assets before they get pushed out of the way. Boston was dealing from a position of strength, and got the final piece of their offseason in return. I think you're undervaluing lefty relievers. From 2012-2013 Ross posted a 1.9 WAR (Fangraphs). During that same timeframe, only 6 other lefty relievers bested that (Aroldis Chapman, Sean Doolittle, Glen Perkins, Jake McGee, Rex Brothers, and Sean Marshall). The added value Ross brings to this team is greater than any added value Ranaudo would have provided over Johnson/Owens/Rodriguez/Barnes/Escobar. ADD: And in regards to your above post, how often do contending teams trade MLB assets for distant prospects? I can't remember the last time. It'd be foolish to trade for someone 2-3 years away from the bigs when you can improve your World Series-caliber roster now. Chances are that the (pitcher) you're dealing for would end up in the pen anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 28, 2015 9:31:56 GMT -5
I have no problem with trading him, its the fact that we traded him for a reliever that I have a problem with. I would bet that a ton of teams would have traded you young prospects that are years away for him. That's what I would have done. Also think people are selling Ranaudo short. As a starter I think he is better then Workman, Escobar and Wright. Yup. If you're not going to play them, if you're not going to move them for ML pieces, trade them for stronger talent more years away. Only Beane does this, though, afaik. The "young prospects" you're going to get for Ranaudo are the Myles Smith types. You're not getting Manuel Margot for Anthony Ranaudo. Also, Billy Beane was getting crushed earlier this offseason for making trades that made no sense, so let's not pretend that he's infallible.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 9:40:24 GMT -5
But Betts hasn't proven anything yet. I assume he's going to be fine but I thought the same about Xander. Besides, trading Betts is not what I'm talking about because he fills a position of need. I'm talking about moving some of the most impressive redundancy in the game for at least one quality starter, and doing it before that redundancy is traded for another reliever. Cause ultimately that's what is going to happen anyway. You're not wrong, but there's only so long you can hoard assets before they get pushed out of the way. Boston was dealing from a position of strength, and got the final piece of their offseason in return. I think you're undervaluing lefty relievers. From 2012-2013 Ross posted a 1.9 WAR (Fangraphs). During that same timeframe, only 6 other lefty relievers bested that (Aroldis Chapman, Sean Doolittle, Glen Perkins, Jake McGee, Rex Brothers, and Sean Marshall). The added value Ross brings to this team is greater than any added value Ranaudo would have provided over Johnson/Owens/Rodriguez/Barnes/Escobar. ADD: And in regards to your above post, how often do contending teams trade MLB assets for distant prospects? I can't remember the last time. It'd be foolish to trade for someone 2-3 years away from the bigs when you can improve your World Series-caliber roster now. Chances are that the (pitcher) you're dealing for would end up in the pen anyway. I know how valuable they are, as are young starters with decent arms. And just because Ross looked fine 2 years ago when he was strictly relieving, does not mean he isn't his '14 season. What appears as a failed experiment (his starting) may not be so, so there's plenty of risk with him.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 9:43:31 GMT -5
Yup. If you're not going to play them, if you're not going to move them for ML pieces, trade them for stronger talent more years away. Only Beane does this, though, afaik. The "young prospects" you're going to get for Ranaudo are the Myles Smith types. You're not getting Manuel Margot for Anthony Ranaudo. If Renaudo takes another step forward this year, becomes a solid looking 3-4, he wouldn't get a Margot who's 3 years away? Nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jan 28, 2015 9:50:33 GMT -5
So if you're running an MLB organization, you'd trade Margot to get Anthony Renaudo?
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Jan 28, 2015 9:52:22 GMT -5
You're not wrong, but there's only so long you can hoard assets before they get pushed out of the way. Boston was dealing from a position of strength, and got the final piece of their offseason in return. I think you're undervaluing lefty relievers. From 2012-2013 Ross posted a 1.9 WAR (Fangraphs). During that same timeframe, only 6 other lefty relievers bested that (Aroldis Chapman, Sean Doolittle, Glen Perkins, Jake McGee, Rex Brothers, and Sean Marshall). The added value Ross brings to this team is greater than any added value Ranaudo would have provided over Johnson/Owens/Rodriguez/Barnes/Escobar. ADD: And in regards to your above post, how often do contending teams trade MLB assets for distant prospects? I can't remember the last time. It'd be foolish to trade for someone 2-3 years away from the bigs when you can improve your World Series-caliber roster now. Chances are that the (pitcher) you're dealing for would end up in the pen anyway. I know how valuable they are, as are young starters with decent arms. And just because Ross looked fine 2 years ago when he was strictly relieving, does not mean he isn't his '14 season. What appears as a failed experiment (his starting) may not be so, so there's plenty of risk with him. Sure, but the same can be said for Ranaudo. Just because he has had a strong minor league track record doesn't mean it'll translate to the bigs. Ben Cherington seems to be thinking along these lines. I happen to think that Ranaudo will turn into a valuable #4/5 starter, but Cherington clearly doesn't. You're assuming that he's going to blossom into just that, which is unreasonable. If Ranaudo were to struggle during the first couple months of the season, chances are he would fall to 10th or 11th on the SP depth chart. He probably wouldn't get another shot in the rotation, and his trade value would sink. Sometimes you need to trade a guy before "sell low" turns into simply dumping him (see Middlebrooks & Doubront).
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 9:58:06 GMT -5
Boras isn't a dummy. He knows that MLB starters make far more money than AAA starters. (Also: I don't think Ranaudo being a Boras client has a single thing to do with this.) I've been thinking about this for a bit; I going to say I don't agree. One, Borass is one of the more powerful dudes in the game. Two, he has a pretty good eye for talent. I could be wrong but I don't think he's an agent to jags who want his consul. If so, that means at least one top talent evaluator thought BC nuts to not have Renaudo start over our flotsam five. Three, assuming TX also needs valuable lefty relievers (they do), this assumed objection he had with the treatment of Renaudo makes the most sense to why the trade occurred.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 10:00:06 GMT -5
So if you're running an MLB organization, you'd trade Margot to get Anthony Renaudo? If I was short on arms, and preferred a young, cost controlled one? of course I would.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Jan 28, 2015 10:23:20 GMT -5
The move makes sense in the short term. But I highly doubt Ross will be anything more than a Breslow-type for a couple seasons and leave. His only good season was his rookie season, thats4 years ago now. The ERA, GB/FB, walk rate HBP, ERA, FIP everything has fluctuated. Blame it on Pierzinski all you want, but AJ never really got the "pitcher stat killer" moniker before Boston. There goes 4 years of grooming our #1 pick, Triple A pitcher of the year award winner and selling low on him because he gassed out, or as someone else alluded to earlier "selling low before they get to Doubie or WMB level". Which I think is a stretch to compare "renaudo" to WMB or Doubie, as Ranaudo didn't get 3 or 4 years of opportunities
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 10:27:01 GMT -5
The "young prospects" you're going to get for Ranaudo are the Myles Smith types. You're not getting Manuel Margot for Anthony Ranaudo. If Renaudo takes another step forward this year, becomes a solid looking 3-4, he wouldn't get a Margot who's 3 years away? Nonsense. If he doesn't take huge steps forward (at the age of 25), he's not in the major leagues and gets released for nothing. And spell his name right. And aren't you the one saying prospect huggers suck? They did what you want and traded one.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 10:44:43 GMT -5
For an okish looking reliever! which is why prospect hugging is a losing game. If BC didn't like Ranaudo, he should have dumped him last year. Instead he's all like, nope, nope, nope, ain't trading him (too much value).
One year later...
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 28, 2015 10:46:31 GMT -5
I know how valuable they are, as are young starters with decent arms. And just because Ross looked fine 2 years ago when he was strictly relieving, does not mean he isn't his '14 season. What appears as a failed experiment (his starting) may not be so, so there's plenty of risk with him. Sure, but the same can be said for Ranaudo. Just because he has had a strong minor league track record doesn't mean it'll translate to the bigs. Ben Cherington seems to be thinking along these lines. I happen to think that Ranaudo will turn into a valuable #4/5 starter, but Cherington clearly doesn't. You're assuming that he's going to blossom into just that, which is unreasonable. If Ranaudo were to struggle during the first couple months of the season, chances are he would fall to 10th or 11th on the SP depth chart. He probably wouldn't get another shot in the rotation, and his trade value would sink. Sometimes you need to trade a guy before "sell low" turns into simply dumping him (see Middlebrooks & Doubront). Looking at his 7 starts from last year when he was at almost 180 innings which is 40 more innings then he had ever pitched before he sure liked look a number 5 starter. Sure a team like the Sox might want more of a sure thing, but a lot of teams would love to have a young starter for 6 years like Ranaudo. Where are all the posters that love surplus value? Not sure why you think it won't translate to the bigs as it already has. As to his value dropping, it's not like we got a great return now. I mean look at Ross stats from last year, they were awful. Now I know he did have two good years as a reliever, but we all now how most relievers very wildly from year to year also. Would much rather we got a raw prospect to help stock them system down the line like a Wendell Rijos type player. We have a ton of good young arms that we could put in our pen. I hate that this team won't convert some of its young starters into relievers!
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jan 28, 2015 10:48:11 GMT -5
The move makes sense in the short term. But I highly doubt Ross will be anything more than a Breslow-type for a couple seasons and leave. His only good season was his rookie season, thats4 years ago now. The ERA, GB/FB, walk rate HBP, ERA, FIP everything has fluctuated. Blame it on Pierzinski all you want, but AJ never really got the "pitcher stat killer" moniker before Boston. There goes 4 years of grooming our #1 pick, Triple A pitcher of the year award winner and selling low on him because he gassed out, or as someone else alluded to earlier "selling low before they get to Doubie or WMB level". Which I think is a stretch to compare "renaudo" to WMB or Doubie, as Ranaudo didn't get 3 or 4 years of opportunities He was pretty good in 2013 as well, where he actually posted a better fWAR, FIP, BB%, K%, and higher fastball velocity than in his rookie season. His GB% tanked, but it didn't really hurt his ability to keep the ball in his park. It looks like a 52 point BABIP spike is what led to the high ERA. It is a bit interesting that the GB% drop coincided with a BABIP increase. So his last good season was really 2 years ago, and it was the last one where he wasn't being jerked between the bullpen and rotation.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 10:50:12 GMT -5
For an okish looking reliever! which is why prospect hugging is a losing game. If BC didn't like Ranaudo, he should have dumped him last year. Instead he's all like, nope, nope, nope, ain't trading him (too much value). One year later... You expect him to take steps forward and if he did, we'd want to keep him not trade him. Why do you expect Ranaudo to take steps forward but blame Ben for thinking he might have last year? You cannot expect the ability to know the future 100% of the time and blame Ben because he didn't trade Ranaudo last year for a Margot-type. No one was going to ever trade anything close to that value for Ranaudo at any point of his development.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 10:52:09 GMT -5
Is that a new feature of proboards? Can just post links to tweets now and they show up?
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Jan 28, 2015 10:55:12 GMT -5
If Renaudo takes another step forward this year, becomes a solid looking 3-4, he wouldn't get a Margot who's 3 years away? Nonsense. If he doesn't take huge steps forward (at the age of 25), he's not in the major leagues and gets released for nothing. And spell his name right. And aren't you the one saying prospect huggers suck? They did what you want and traded one. So unless Ranaudo takes "huge steps", not a couple steps, or even a step (like not gassing out in triple A before his Major league cup of coffee thus ending his career) ill take that as winning 15 games, 200 innings, learns the gyroball, etc. He's out of baseball? He's released? Are you talking about on your Ps3 or have you forgotten about the NL bottom dwellers.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 10:56:52 GMT -5
For an okish looking reliever! which is why prospect hugging is a losing game. If BC didn't like Ranaudo, he should have dumped him last year. Instead he's all like, nope, nope, nope, ain't trading him (too much value). One year later... You expect him to take steps forward and if he did, we'd want to keep him not trade him. Why do you expect Ranaudo to take steps forward but blame Ben for thinking he might have last year? You cannot expect the ability to know the future 100% of the time and blame Ben because he didn't trade Ranaudo last year for a Margot-type. No one was going to ever trade anything close to that value for Ranaudo at any point of his development. Massgrad has been pretty clear as to why we shouldn't use last year to judge Ranaudo. I happen to agree with him, regardless of what Ben thinks. For that matter, Ben doesn't exactly have a good track record on this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Jan 28, 2015 11:08:39 GMT -5
The move makes sense in the short term. But I highly doubt Ross will be anything more than a Breslow-type for a couple seasons and leave. His only good season was his rookie season, thats4 years ago now. The ERA, GB/FB, walk rate HBP, ERA, FIP everything has fluctuated. Blame it on Pierzinski all you want, but AJ never really got the "pitcher stat killer" moniker before Boston. There goes 4 years of grooming our #1 pick, Triple A pitcher of the year award winner and selling low on him because he gassed out, or as someone else alluded to earlier "selling low before they get to Doubie or WMB level". Which I think is a stretch to compare "renaudo" to WMB or Doubie, as Ranaudo didn't get 3 or 4 years of opportunities He was pretty good in 2013 as well, where he actually posted a better fWAR, FIP, BB%, K%, and higher fastball velocity than in his rookie season. His GB% tanked, but it didn't really hurt his ability to keep the ball in his park. It looks like a 52 point BABIP spike is what led to the high ERA. It is a bit interesting that the GB% drop coincided with a BABIP increase. So his last good season was really 2 years ago, and it was the last one where he wasn't being jerked between the bullpen and rotation. I stand corrected, he had a great season his rookie year, and a good one his sophomore. However, what I was I was trying to point out that it seems his calling card is the groundball, that's all people can talk about. Hes not a lefty specialist. He's not a setup guy, he's a guy with average stuff getting outs with groundballs. And you caught something I missed on the BaBIP/GB thing. which is the reason Badenhop gives up his fair share of hits. My concern is there's no sense of stability in any of his statlines that im looking at. The walk rate from last year scares me, as when teams see a pitcher enough times they start to lay off his pitchers pitches and take the walks, also the 7 HBP in 70 IP?. All that could be being in the rotation, but he spent years in the rotation in the minors, about 250 IP to be exact and performed quite while albeit in A ball. My point was I see no consistency between his two good years (IE his GO/AO) and you mentioned velocity, but does that small of an uptick really mean something? I just don't see an upgrade over a guy like Badenhop or an Albers if you want to hit the time machine
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 11:15:19 GMT -5
If he doesn't take huge steps forward (at the age of 25), he's not in the major leagues and gets released for nothing. And spell his name right. And aren't you the one saying prospect huggers suck? They did what you want and traded one. So unless Ranaudo takes "huge steps", not a couple steps, or even a step (like not gassing out in triple A before his Major league cup of coffee thus ending his career) ill take that as winning 15 games, 200 innings, learns the gyroball, etc. He's out of baseball? He's released? Are you talking about on your Ps3 or have you forgotten about the NL bottom dwellers. Slight exaggeration, but not much. If he continues to walk more batters than he strikes out and his only good pitch doesn't continue to get hit at a 96.3% rate in the strike zone, he won't be in the major leagues.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 28, 2015 11:16:33 GMT -5
LOL, for the velocity guys, Drake Britton likely has the highest velocity in the pen.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 11:18:36 GMT -5
He was pretty good in 2013 as well, where he actually posted a better fWAR, FIP, BB%, K%, and higher fastball velocity than in his rookie season. His GB% tanked, but it didn't really hurt his ability to keep the ball in his park. It looks like a 52 point BABIP spike is what led to the high ERA. It is a bit interesting that the GB% drop coincided with a BABIP increase. So his last good season was really 2 years ago, and it was the last one where he wasn't being jerked between the bullpen and rotation. I stand corrected, he had a great season his rookie year, and a good one his sophomore. However, what I was I was trying to point out that it seems his calling card is the groundball, that's all people can talk about. Hes not a lefty specialist. He's not a setup guy, he's a guy with average stuff getting outs with groundballs. And you caught something I missed on the BaBIP/GB thing. which is the reason Badenhop gives up his fair share of hits. My concern is there's no sense of stability in any of his statlines that im looking at. The walk rate from last year scares me, as when teams see a pitcher enough times they start to lay off his pitchers pitches and take the walks, also the 7 HBP in 70 IP?. All that could be being in the rotation, but he spent years in the rotation in the minors, about 250 IP to be exact and performed quite while albeit in A ball. My point was I see no consistency between his two good years (IE his GO/AO) and you mentioned velocity, but does that small of an uptick really mean something? I just don't see an upgrade over a guy like Badenhop or an Albers if you want to hit the time machine It's hard to put much stock in a season where he went back and forth between starting and relieving. Especially as a 24/25 year old.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 28, 2015 11:19:57 GMT -5
|
|
|