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 Chris Hatfield on Jan 28, 2015 14:52:08 GMT -5
There's a gentleman's agreement not to claim OAW guys, fwiw. Shouldn't be an issue. Stephen Drew last year is one really big example. Scott Atchison in the past was another. Gentleman's agreements have been broken in the past. In the case of Drew had the Red Sox let him go, the claiming team would have been on the hook for his entire salary. Atchison was a fringe player. If there is a player that a team really wants, I would expect the unspoken rule to go out the window. Well, you are certainly entitled to think that, but I don't think it'll be an issue. I don't think Ross is the player that'll buck the commonly accepted practice. Note that optional waivers are revocable. www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/what-is-the-point-of-optional-waivers-stephen-drew-boston-red-sox-052114
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 15:01:39 GMT -5
Gentleman's agreements have been broken in the past. In the case of Drew had the Red Sox let him go, the claiming team would have been on the hook for his entire salary. Atchison was a fringe player. If there is a player that a team really wants, I would expect the unspoken rule to go out the window. Well, you are certainly entitled to think that, but I don't think it'll be an issue. I don't think Ross is the player that'll buck the commonly accepted practice. Note that optional waivers are revocable. www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/what-is-the-point-of-optional-waivers-stephen-drew-boston-red-sox-052114Right I read that article.....people used to say the same thing about August waiver claims. Eventually someone will start claiming players on OAW as well they should. The problem is more that in most cases, players who qualify for optional assignment waivers aren't good enough to be worth the hassle.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Jan 28, 2015 15:22:49 GMT -5
Man what a interesting trade. In one hand im saying Ranuado is overrated and Ross has more value to this team but in the other im saying Ross was terrible last year and Ranuado is worth more then Ross alone. Ross was bad because he went from succesful LHRHP to SP. Bard did the same and he was never the same. Many have and many have failed. Ross when he came up I really liked. Love him in the bullpen and thought it was a matter of time before people are saying hes a top 5 LH RHP. I like Ross but thought he could be had for less. Im ok with this trade like I said I like Ross and thought Ranuado was overrated. But wouldnt be surprised if we lose this trade. We have two highupside LHP that are young to look forward to having in bullpen in the near future with Ross and Escobar.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Jan 28, 2015 15:32:49 GMT -5
As someone who doesn't exactly look deep into the stats can someone tell me if there is actually many, if any MLB starters, who only throw 2 pitches like Ranaudo?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 15:37:29 GMT -5
Man what a interesting trade. In one hand im saying Ranuado is overrated and Ross has more value to this team but in the other im saying Ross was terrible last year and Ranuado is worth more then Ross alone. Ross was bad because he went from succesful LHRHP to SP. Bard did the same and he was never the same. Many have and many have failed. Ross when he came up I really liked. Love him in the bullpen and thought it was a matter of time before people are saying hes a top 5 LH RHP. I like Ross but thought he could be had for less. Im ok with this trade like I said I like Ross and thought Ranuado was overrated. But wouldnt be surprised if we lose this trade. We have two highupside LHP that are young to look forward to having in bullpen in the near future with Ross and Escobar. There's no way that Ranaudo was going to become a good starter for the Red Sox so there's no way they lose this trade. He blew his chance in his major league tryout last year and now Rodriguez, Johnson and Owens were about to overtake him. He wasn't getting another chance to start.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 28, 2015 16:02:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 28, 2015 16:10:41 GMT -5
Man what a interesting trade. In one hand im saying Ranuado is overrated and Ross has more value to this team but in the other im saying Ross was terrible last year and Ranuado is worth more then Ross alone. Ross was bad because he went from succesful LHRHP to SP. Bard did the same and he was never the same. Many have and many have failed. Ross when he came up I really liked. Love him in the bullpen and thought it was a matter of time before people are saying hes a top 5 LH RHP. I like Ross but thought he could be had for less. Im ok with this trade like I said I like Ross and thought Ranuado was overrated. But wouldnt be surprised if we lose this trade. We have two highupside LHP that are young to look forward to having in bullpen in the near future with Ross and Escobar. There's no way that Ranaudo was going to become a good starter for the Red Sox so there's no way they lose this trade. He blew his chance in his major league tryout last year and now Rodriguez, Johnson and Owens were about to overtake him. He wasn't getting another chance to start. This is what I don't understand, how did he blow his chance last year? He was a league average pitcher that had 3 quality starts in seven starts. Sure his numbers were not good but as I have said many times his 40 innings in the majors were 40 more innings then he has ever pitched. So I'm not surprised his stuff wasn't top notch as I am sure he was wearing down. This reason makes no sense to me. I love the fact that he was able to stay healthy and get up to 180 innings. Now if you feel he is more of a NL 4/5 or a second division team I can understand that. But I don't get the he blew his chance last year. He wasn't great, but he wasn't horrible either, he was just about league average, which when looking at his innings isn't a surprise. Unless Ross is a top notch reliever, we are going to lose this trade. You don't trade starters, even league average ones for relievers. You will lose those trades every time. I hope I am wrong, but I don't think I am.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 16:17:58 GMT -5
There's no way that Ranaudo was going to become a good starter for the Red Sox so there's no way they lose this trade. He blew his chance in his major league tryout last year and now Rodriguez, Johnson and Owens were about to overtake him. He wasn't getting another chance to start. This is what I don't understand, how did he blow his chance last year? He was a league average pitcher that had 3 quality starts in seven starts. Sure his numbers were not good but as I have said many times his 40 innings in the majors were 40 more innings then he has ever pitched. So I'm not surprised his stuff wasn't top notch as I am sure he was wearing down. This reason makes no sense to me. I love the fact that he was able to stay healthy and get up to 180 innings. Now if you feel he is more of a NL 4/5 or a second division team I can understand that. But I don't get the he blew his chance last year. He wasn't great, but he wasn't horrible either, he was just about league average, which when looking at his innings isn't a surprise. Unless Ross is a top notch reliever, we are going to lose this trade. You don't trade starters, even league average ones for relievers. You will lose those trades every time. I hope I am wrong, but I don't think I am. Ranaudo wasn't going to start for Boston. And in those 3 quality starts, just look at the xFIP for each of them. He was incredibly lucky in those 3 starts, that's it. And that fits my memory of the starts as well. If Ranaudo's peripherals were good and he was unlucky, we'd be having an opposite conversation. But he wasn't striking anyone out, his control wasn't great and he was an extreme flyball pitcher. His peripherals in AAA were not very good either. His SIERRA in Pawtucket last year was 4.24. He was lucky there too.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 28, 2015 16:38:37 GMT -5
But when do we base the future of any prospect on 40 innings of work his first time through the majors?
I can only image how many good to excellent pitchers had such inauspicious (or worse) first stints in MLB, even after posting good numbers in their advanced minor league campaigns. Off the top of my head, Roy Halladay, Kurt Schilling, Randy Johnson. Not saying Ranaudo is going to be any of these guys but they didn't show much promise in their first few years, either. Ditto Cliff Lee in his first full season as a starter (age 25 as I recall).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 16:42:04 GMT -5
But when do we base the future of any prospect on 40 innings of work his first time through the majors? I can only image how many good to excellent pitchers had such inauspicious (or worse) first stints in MLB, even after posting good numbers in their advanced minor league campaigns. Off the top of my head, Roy Halladay, Kurt Schilling, Randy Johnson. Not saying Ranaudo is going to be any of these guys but they didn't show much promise in their first few years, either. Ditto Cliff Lee in his first full season as a starter (age 25 as I recall). We can use his major league #s, his minor league #s, and his scouting report for that. Not enough control, not missing bats and extreme flyball pitcher is someone who isn't going to start in Boston. He could become a completely different pitcher someday by developing a Curt Schilling splitter or something and prove us all wrong, but that isn't based on anything we've seen to this point. Any other pitcher could theoretically do the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 28, 2015 16:45:44 GMT -5
Also, one thing I don't get about the deal - if they didn't think Ranaudo was a starter, then why not try him out of the pen before you trade him for a pen arm? He has two above average pitches, he's a big body, and if the FB ticks up 2-4 MPH in short stints that's exactly the kind of nasty weapon you want in the 7th/8th inning. I'm also still of the mind that some of these starter candidates should get their feet wet in MLB by coming out of the pen, too. No yo-yoing them, but strictly as pen arms for 2 or 3 months. I wouldn't consider Ranaudo's fastball above-average. It's straight and he struggles to command it, and even by raw velo, it's not that impressive. He averaged 91.6 in his brief MLB time last year, which is basically league-average for a starter (which was 91.4 in 2014). Even if it ticked up some in relief, he's very unlikely to be averaging 95 or anything out of the bullpen, and velo is far from everything.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 28, 2015 16:50:13 GMT -5
I, too, have a problem condemning a pitcher on a brief try out like Ranaudo did. I think John Smoltz was pretty terrible his first season, too.
This doesn't mean that Ranaudo is Smoltz. And the way Webster failed doesn't make anybody "regret" seeing him go.
I think there's some patience required in waiting for pitchers to hit their potential and you have to go through the ineffectiveness to get to the effectiveness part of their career and sometimes you deal with a lot of patience to get to the one or two good years a pitcher has.
All that said, it comes down to a game of numbers, in what the Sox have as Ranaudo's "competition" in Pawtucket and in Portland, and what the Sox think he would be going forward.
And they obviously think that he's far down in the pecking list, below as I would think they'd rank them: Owens, Rodriguez, Barnes, Johnson, Workman, Escobar, and Wright. I would guess that they found Ranaudo to be somewhere in the Workman, Escobar, Wright tier and highly expendable, especially for somebody they deem to be a useful part like Ross.
My hope was that he could have inflated his value to be a piece of a deal that brings back Cueto. The best parallel on a much smaller basis from a few years back was the brief success Kason Gabbard had and it helped him be a part of an Eric Gagne deal, which at the time seemed like a good thing.
I would have thought that Ranaudo could have had a better pedigree and with some better parts like a Marrero, a Brian Johnson, and a rejuvenated Allen Craig, could have helped fetch a 2 month rental like Cueto.
But the Sox went with the real deal that was in front of them, something that you can't really blame them for doing. Hopefully somebody else plays the part of Ranaudo and escalates his value to make himself a chip that can help the Sox get the pitcher they're looking for later on.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 28, 2015 16:56:38 GMT -5
He wasn't great, but he wasn't horrible either, he was just about league average, which when looking at his innings isn't a surprise. Unless Ross is a top notch reliever, we are going to lose this trade. You don't trade starters, even league average ones for relievers. You will lose those trades every time. I hope I am wrong, but I don't think I am. There is basically no way to argue that Ranaudo was league-average last year. His 4.81 ERA was well-below the league-average SP ERA (3.82), and adjusted for league and park, Ranaudo was 21% worse than the league-average pitcher (read: a 121 ERA-). That difference is even more stark when you look at his peripherals. Amongst pitchers who threw 30 or more innings last year, Ranaudo had the worst league- and park-adjusted FIP, the worst league- and park-adjusted xFIP, and the worst SIERA. There's a pretty strong argument to be made that he was the worst pitcher in the major leagues last year. ADD: I want to make clear that my comments are solely directed at the claim that Ranaudo was a league-average starter last year. He just wasn't. I fully understand the argument that he was at a career-high in innings last year and fatigue had significant effects on his performance, and I am somewhat sympthatic to that argument, and I've previously discussed how I think he might become a fine back-end starter. He might even have the potential to become an average starter, which would make him super valuable (league-average starters don't grow on trees). But in 2014? He was most decided not a league-average starter.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 28, 2015 16:59:01 GMT -5
The Red Sox aren't judging Ranaudo on his 40 innings. I'm sure it informs their judgment to some small degree, but there's no way they thought he was good and then 40 bad innings changed their mind. He's had 482 professional innings in the organization. That's plenty of time to start reaching conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Jan 28, 2015 17:01:57 GMT -5
Another thing to note is that Boston could have added their last LH reliever in two other ways. Some average-above average LH relief options remain on the market in Phil Coke, Joe Beimel, Joe Thatcher, and Neal Cotts. They also could have moved Edwin Escobar to the pen, while adding spring training competition via a reclamation project like Paul Maholm.
Addressing the situation by giving up a (somewhat) major league ready starter as opposed to one of the above routes tells me that a) They see Ross as a dynamic reliever, and b) They value Edwin Escobar's starting potential more highly than that of Ranaudo.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 28, 2015 17:10:49 GMT -5
I believe they are viewing Ross as a solution to face right handed batters based on his splits. They are basically replacing Badenhop with him.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 17:13:34 GMT -5
But when do we base the future of any prospect on 40 innings of work his first time through the majors? I can only image how many good to excellent pitchers had such inauspicious (or worse) first stints in MLB, even after posting good numbers in their advanced minor league campaigns. Off the top of my head, Roy Halladay, Kurt Schilling, Randy Johnson. Not saying Ranaudo is going to be any of these guys but they didn't show much promise in their first few years, either. Ditto Cliff Lee in his first full season as a starter (age 25 as I recall). However if you wait too long on a pitching prospect you may end up trading him away for nothing. In many cases major league teams have no choice but to evaluate a player even after 40 major league innings. Throwing up your hands every time and saying you don't know because of the small sample size isn't an option. And I am sure you know that for every Cliff Lee there are at least ten guys who struggle in their first stint in the majors and never make it. I didn't work with Ranaudo personally but if you go through pitch fx it seems fairly obvious that he had a problem throwing his fastball for strikes. Nearly 55% of the time, he failed to do so. When you don't throw your fastball for strikes consistently you won't get swings and misses off of it, and if your fastball isn't respected, no one will swing and miss at your other pitchers either. Ranaudo has talent which is why the Rangers wanted him, but establishing fastball command in the majors isn't easy. The Red Sox had him behind Barnes, Wright, Owens, Rodriguez, and Johnson and given the evidence I can't really say that they were wrong about that.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 28, 2015 17:14:37 GMT -5
He wasn't great, but he wasn't horrible either, he was just about league average, which when looking at his innings isn't a surprise. Unless Ross is a top notch reliever, we are going to lose this trade. You don't trade starters, even league average ones for relievers. You will lose those trades every time. I hope I am wrong, but I don't think I am. There is basically no way to argue that Ranaudo was league-average last year. His 4.81 ERA was well-below the league-average SP ERA (3.82), and adjusted for league and park, Ranaudo was 21% worse than the league-average pitcher (read: a 121 ERA-). That difference is even more stark when you look at his peripherals. Amongst pitchers who threw 30 or more innings last year, Ranaudo had the worst league- and park-adjusted FIP, the worst league- and park-adjusted xFIP, and the worst SIERA. There's a pretty strong argument to be made that he was the worst pitcher in the major leagues last year. ADD: I want to make clear that my comments are solely directed at the claim that Ranaudo was a league-average starter last year. He just wasn't. I fully understand the argument that he was at a career-high in innings last year and fatigue had significant effects on his performance, and I am somewhat sympthatic to that argument, and I've previously discussed how I think he might become a fine back-end starter. He might even have the potential to become an average starter, which would make him super valuable (league-average starters don't grow on trees). But in 2014? He was most decided not a league-average starter. Agreed. But 1) neither was Ross. 2) They traded a guy we both (and several others) agree could likely be a capable 4th/5th starter for a reliever who is certainly no sure thing, either.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 17:24:59 GMT -5
I would not want to cut anyone in favor of adding any of those four veteran names. Ross is ten years younger than all of them. I have talked about Escobar before, but he needs to work on his changeup and that's not going to be possible unless he's in the AAA rotation. They can always use him later if they need to. I do agree that they should sign another lefty to a minor league contract, but Maholm is a soft-tossing lefty with no AL experience who hasn't had an FIP under 4 since 2012.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 17:26:12 GMT -5
Thanks for the slap! I guess I don't count in everyone because there's no way I think this is a 90 win team. Not with its pitching staff it isn't. Nope. Doesn't matter what predicted WAR counts are. Nope. Doesn't matter what the consensus is. Nope. I don't care what era it is, winning teams generally feature strong pitching staffs. Was the reason we won thrice solely hinged on stud one-twos? Who knows, but I'd guarantee you that it we swapped Porcello and Miley with any of those duos we aren't winning squat. We can quibble about 90 wins, but do you really think this team isn't good enough to care about the quality of it's bullpen or backup catcher? If they care about their bullpen this much BC should convert Masterson and Kelly, then grab some real starters. I keed, I keed (we both know Masterson can't retire lefties).
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 17:26:55 GMT -5
I don't think jmei or anyone else said it was "likely". Ross is no sure thing, he at least has a major league track record of success.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 17:32:41 GMT -5
As someone who doesn't exactly look deep into the stats can someone tell me if there is actually many, if any MLB starters, who only throw 2 pitches like Ranaudo? McGee, a reliever and a good one at that, throws one pitch. One.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 28, 2015 17:50:03 GMT -5
So did Mariano Rivera for all intents and purposes.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on Jan 28, 2015 17:51:14 GMT -5
As someone who doesn't exactly look deep into the stats can someone tell me if there is actually many, if any MLB starters, who only throw 2 pitches like Ranaudo? McGee, a reliever and a good one at that, throws one pitch. One. He said starter. But there are a fair amount of SPs that ony throw 2 pitches. Masterson I believe is considered to pretty much be a two pitch guy.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 17:51:16 GMT -5
True, but that one pitch was really like, 4.
|
|
|