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.
Is Rich over the Hill?
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,751
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Oct 2, 2015 13:09:38 GMT -5
I had the exact same thought. We're talking about a guy who wanted to be a starter so bad that he turned down promising minor league deals (with a real likelihood of being called up to the majors as a LOOGY-type) and played independent league ball to get the opportunity to start. He's likely going to prefer teams that give him a legitimate chance to win a spot in the rotation. Now, the Red Sox could carve out that sort of opportunity (e.g., a spring training competition between him, Owens, Wright, and Johnson for the fifth spot in the rotation), but other teams will be able to provide a clearer shot at a starting pitcher spot. He's also a guy who will be 36 next year and has only earned something like $3 million over the course of his career. He's almost certainly going to take the contract which offers him the best combination of guaranteed money and reachable incentives, and I'm skeptical that he gives the Red Sox any sort of hometown discount. Hill is definitely appealing on an incentive-laden deal with minimal guarantees, but once you get into the $5m+ range (which is what I think it might end up being; teams have been willing to drop real cash on reclamation projects), the risk/reward balance starts becoming a real question. I actually disagree here. The Hills are from Mass, are huge Sox fans, and Rich has gone through some serious personal/family troubles with his son passing recently. I could certainly see him wanting to be close to his family. One of the nicest athletes you'll ever meet, and I think he truly wants to be here. I could see him taking a bit less to stay here, and I could also see us willing to match any reasonable offer on the flip side of this too. I think the odds of him being here next year are at least 50/50, personally.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Oct 2, 2015 13:53:58 GMT -5
Well lets give Rich the opportunity to speak: "I'm looking forward to it," said the pitcher regarding the offseason. "It's just that body of work. You can't look at that and deny what's going on. Anybody in baseball who knows the game, if you're looking at it you have to acknowledge there's a lot there. I think for me, I have to be a proponent of myself and go out there and continue to fight off the field as much as I did off the field. The four games I pitched aren't four games you look at and say, 'That was just dumb luck.' I faced the best hitters in the American League, and doing it in the American League East is something that can't be denied."
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 2, 2015 14:37:22 GMT -5
Keith Law chat
Enad: If you were a GM would you offer Rich Hill a guaranteed, incentive-filled, $2M MLB contract with a top end of, say $12M based on starts or or $5M based on appearances?
Klaw: I like your thinking. But i bet someone guarantees him more than that. I truly don’t know what to make of his September. It has to be fool’s gold, right? Right? Who’s with me here?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 2, 2015 14:38:17 GMT -5
Well lets give Rich the opportunity to speak: "I'm looking forward to it," said the pitcher regarding the offseason. "It's just that body of work. You can't look at that and deny what's going on. Anybody in baseball who knows the game, if you're looking at it you have to acknowledge there's a lot there. I think for me, I have to be a proponent of myself and go out there and continue to fight off the field as much as I did off the field. The four games I pitched aren't four games you look at and say, 'That was just dumb luck.' I faced the best hitters in the American League, and doing it in the American League East is something that can't be denied." That pretty much seals it. Bye Rich Hill. I hope he gets a big contract to set him up for the rest of his life.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 2, 2015 15:52:10 GMT -5
I had the exact same thought. We're talking about a guy who wanted to be a starter so bad that he turned down promising minor league deals (with a real likelihood of being called up to the majors as a LOOGY-type) and played independent league ball to get the opportunity to start. He's likely going to prefer teams that give him a legitimate chance to win a spot in the rotation. Now, the Red Sox could carve out that sort of opportunity (e.g., a spring training competition between him, Owens, Wright, and Johnson for the fifth spot in the rotation), but other teams will be able to provide a clearer shot at a starting pitcher spot. He's also a guy who will be 36 next year and has only earned something like $3 million over the course of his career. He's almost certainly going to take the contract which offers him the best combination of guaranteed money and reachable incentives, and I'm skeptical that he gives the Red Sox any sort of hometown discount. Hill is definitely appealing on an incentive-laden deal with minimal guarantees, but once you get into the $5m+ range (which is what I think it might end up being; teams have been willing to drop real cash on reclamation projects), the risk/reward balance starts becoming a real question. I actually disagree here. The Hills are from Mass, are huge Sox fans, and Rich has gone through some serious personal/family troubles with his son passing recently. I could certainly see him wanting to be close to his family. One of the nicest athletes you'll ever meet, and I think he truly wants to be here. I could see him taking a bit less to stay here, and I could also see us willing to match any reasonable offer on the flip side of this too. I think the odds of him being here next year are at least 50/50, personally. For all these reasons, he'll probably be a NESN analyst by 2018. But next year he'll probably want to be somewhere he knows he's going to be a starter.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,751
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Oct 2, 2015 17:26:40 GMT -5
That's fair... And absolutely, the analyst thing is only a matter of time FTH.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 2, 2015 17:38:40 GMT -5
I'm not big on guys that don't stay healthy. No interest in Clay, or Hanley. Hill can be had for much less money. I'd go for it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 2, 2015 18:32:14 GMT -5
I'm not big on guys that don't stay healthy. No interest in Clay, or Hanley. Hill can be had for much less money. I'd go for it. Er... Hill is not exactly the paragon of health, either. His inability to stay healthy, more than anything else, is what derailed his career and why he's trying to make a comeback at the age of 35.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 2, 2015 18:35:28 GMT -5
I'm not big on guys that don't stay healthy. No interest in Clay, or Hanley. Hill can be had for much less money. I'd go for it. Er... Hill is not exactly the paragon of health, either. His inability to stay healthy, more than anything else, is what derailed his career and why he's trying to make a comeback at the age of 35. I thought I made it clear , that I get the risk. I like the cost.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,920
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 6, 2015 1:09:53 GMT -5
Hill wants to start and any club that signs him has to want him to start. And both sides will be equally aware of the danger of trying to have him throw 200 regular-season innings (and hopefully some more). I think anyone who gives him an option for 2017 is going to stipulate that he can't end 2016 on the DL. So it may well be in his best interest to limit his innings. The question then becomes, do you start him in the rotation and move him to the pen, vice versa, or do a sandwich? One thing to keep in mind (as I pointed out in a game thread) is that a team with Steven Wright in the bullpen has no issue with stretching a guy out on the job. You just piggyback Hill and Wright for two starts. You can even option Shaw for 10 days and add an extra bullpen arm while you do so. If I were the Sox, I'd get an expert medical opinion guess as to the best number of IP for Hill, and then try to sell him on a plan where he starts the year in the rotation, takes a pen breather in the middle, and comes back to the rotation later -- the idea being that he gets to make his new big-time bucks for two years or even three that way, whereas the team that lacks our SP depth and wants to ride him as hard as possible may well blow his arm back out. Combine that and the fact that he almost certainly will take a little less to stay in his home state with teammates he already knows, and I like our chances of signing him. The Sox also have two or three LHP already in their rotation. It seems unlikely to me that they'd be willing to go with another one. If you sign Hill, you're definitely trading Miley (you're probably trading him anyway), and Owens is either traded, too, or in AAA. Not a problem. And note that signing hill as a starter makes Owens tradeable in terms of SP depth, and that could make a big difference in how good a starter you can trade for, if you go that route.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 6, 2015 4:59:02 GMT -5
[...] Combine that and the fact that he almost certainly will take a little less to stay in his home state with teammates he already knows, and I like our chances of signing him. What indication do you have that Hill will value staying in his home state and with teammates he know rather than maximizing his earning potential in this his only chance to do that? I'm really startled by the words "almost certainly."
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Oct 6, 2015 7:32:17 GMT -5
A couple of questions:
(1) If you were doing a prospect description of Hill like those for the pitchers on this site, what would it be?
(2) Do we know Dombrowski's history on building a staff regarding quantity versus quality of pitchers? Does he generally look to have an actual starting staff of 8 or 9, with a few parked in AAA for insurance? With Owens being a candidate for a little more seasoning at AAA, and with Johnson probably being handled with kid gloves early next year, there will probably be plenty of LH backup in the minors to cover for Hill if he does break down. The Sox are now in the teens of millions with Buchholz, and he's always breaking down.
(3) I wonder how many years Hill is expecting on a contract? I can't believe anyone would give him a long-term deal, but maybe if he were offered more years (3 or 4) one could get away with a little lower base salary and a sequential series of year-to-year incentives.
I'd like to see the Sox try to land this guy. But as much as Hill wants to sell what he did at the end of the year, (and he DID do his work against legitimate lineups rather than end-of-season dross) it IS easier to focus your energies and your concentration when you're coming in at the end of the season and you know you only have 4 starts to make. The end of the tunnel is in sight from the very beginning. I really don't know how much the Sox or anyone else for that matter is going to want to invest in that.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 6, 2015 7:37:10 GMT -5
[...] Combine that and the fact that he almost certainly will take a little less to stay in his home state with teammates he already knows, and I like our chances of signing him. What indication do you have that Hill will value staying in his home state and with teammates he know rather than maximizing his earning potential in this his only chance to do that? I'm really startled by the words "almost certainly." This might just be semantics insofar as if the contracts were literally equal, I agree that Hill probably chooses to stay in Boston. But if another team offers so much as, say, $1m more in guaranteed money and/or significant more or more reachable incentives and/or a significantly better shot at a rotation spot, I think he's gone.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 6, 2015 7:59:51 GMT -5
What indication do you have that Hill will value staying in his home state and with teammates he know rather than maximizing his earning potential in this his only chance to do that? I'm really startled by the words "almost certainly." This might just be semantics insofar as if the contracts were literally equal, I agree that Hill probably chooses to stay in Boston. But if another team offers so much as, say, $1m more in guaranteed money and/or significant more or more reachable incentives and/or a significantly better shot at a rotation spot, I think he's gone. If it's just an issue of money, and the Sox want Hill back, I don't think he needs to take a discount. The Red Sox can afford to match whatever other offers he's likely to get. What the Red Sox can't offer him is the opportunity he'd have with, say, the Phillies. He's got his whole life to live and work near his hometown and his family, but he's pitching on borrowed time.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Oct 6, 2015 9:01:56 GMT -5
And note that signing hill as a starter makes Owens tradeable in terms of SP depth, and that could make a big difference in how good a starter you can trade for, if you go that route. I disagree with that last part. A problem with this team is that they have zero starting pitching prospects between Owens/Johnson and Espinoza/Kopech. That's a good 3 years without a hope of any starting pitching help, probably, plus you never really know with guys who have only pitched in low-A. So Owens is really important as a guy who can develop, get optioned, and act as starting pitching depth for the next couple of years (unless he develops into a really good pitcher quickly and just cements his spot in the rotation, which is also good). Rich Hill does not change that reality either way. It's *possible* that a trade changes that reality, but Rich Hill doesn't. It seems like a major trade has to center around a big league pitcher (Buchholz or Miley, with lesser chance of Porcello or Kelly), plus an outfielder like Margot or Benintendi, plus, if needed, a lower-tier prospect (a weak spot in the Sox system). I don't think the Sox have the young pitching depth to deal Owens (and Rodriguez goes without saying).
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 6, 2015 9:58:59 GMT -5
If it's just an issue of money, and the Sox want Hill back, I don't think he needs to take a discount. The Red Sox can afford to match whatever other offers he's likely to get. What the Red Sox can't offer him is the opportunity he'd have with, say, the Phillies. He's got his whole life to live and work near his hometown and his family, but he's pitching on borrowed time. It is literally true that the Red Sox can afford to match whatever offers he'll get, but whether it would be advisable to do so is another question. If someone offers him, say, a 2/$16m deal, I'm skeptical that it makes sense for the Red Sox to match that as opposed to spending it on bullpen help or a good fourth outfielder.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Oct 6, 2015 9:59:10 GMT -5
Agree on the depth....though I think Kopech & Espinosa are maybe 2 years away....It seems like we're top heavy with infield prospects especially 2B SS & 3B & Sam Travis....OF seems to be set too If we don't trade them....Pitching prospects feel a little thin......Keep the 2 big lefty's in Pawtucket for depth.
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,645
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 6, 2015 16:02:44 GMT -5
Agree on the depth.... though I think Kopech & Espinosa are maybe 2 years away....It seems like we're top heavy with infield prospects especially 2B SS & 3B & Sam Travis....OF seems to be set too If we don't trade them....Pitching prospects feel a little thin......Keep the 2 big lefty's in Pawtucket for depth. That is exceptionally accelerated, regardless of talent level. But even if the talent proves out, I believe teams add 15-20 innings a year in workload. Even with fall instructs, that puts Kopech at approximately 105 or so in two years, Espinosa at 90ish. Even in 3 years we're taking maybe 130 for Kopeck at the outside limit, right?
|
|
Guidas
Veteran
Posts: 14,645
Member is Online
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 6, 2015 16:03:40 GMT -5
Keith Law chat Enad: If you were a GM would you offer Rich Hill a guaranteed, incentive-filled, $2M MLB contract with a top end of, say $12M based on starts or or $5M based on appearances? Klaw: I like your thinking. But i bet someone guarantees him more than that. I truly don’t know what to make of his September. It has to be fool’s gold, right? Right? Who’s with me here? I am all over this thinking. Maybe even $3M guaranteed if that gets him to stay.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 6, 2015 16:15:54 GMT -5
Agree on the depth.... though I think Kopech & Espinosa are maybe 2 years away....It seems like we're top heavy with infield prospects especially 2B SS & 3B & Sam Travis....OF seems to be set too If we don't trade them....Pitching prospects feel a little thin......Keep the 2 big lefty's in Pawtucket for depth. That is exceptionally accelerated, regardless of talent level. But even if the talent proves out, I believe teams add 15-20 innings a year in workload. Even with fall instructs, that puts Kopech at approximately 105 or so in two years, Espinosa at 90ish. Even in 3 years we're taking maybe 130 for Kopeck at the outside limit, right? Owens is probably the best recent example and he went 101.2, 135, 159, 185.1 in his age 19-22 seasons. That's not including anything outside of regular season play.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 6, 2015 23:00:40 GMT -5
Agree on the depth.... though I think Kopech & Espinosa are maybe 2 years away....It seems like we're top heavy with infield prospects especially 2B SS & 3B & Sam Travis....OF seems to be set too If we don't trade them....Pitching prospects feel a little thin......Keep the 2 big lefty's in Pawtucket for depth. That is exceptionally accelerated, regardless of talent level. But even if the talent proves out, I believe teams add 15-20 innings a year in workload. Even with fall instructs, that puts Kopech at approximately 105 or so in two years, Espinosa at 90ish. Even in 3 years we're taking maybe 130 for Kopeck at the outside limit, right? That's a little conservative. Owens went 102-135-159-185, with the 185 limited to some extent by performance/efficiency. With the DSL/GCL/instructs, Espinoza probably is around 75-80 this year and maybe 100-110 next year, then roughly 140-170-200, if his performance dictates. If he's throwing 5-6 innings efficiently (70-80 pitches), I don't see why 105-120 wouldn't be a reasonable target for 2016. I've seen 25-30% workload increase per year quoted as the point where kids can be advanced without arm troubles cropping up. Kopech obviously hurt his development a bit this year. But it is a good point in that, even if Espinoza or Kopech is MLB performance-ready in 2 years, there's a substantial innings shortage (figure 175 on the high end) there that would require some mid-season skips and some short starts, especially if the team's playoff-bound.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 6, 2015 23:03:29 GMT -5
D'oh! Note to self...read last post.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,920
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 7, 2015 1:08:12 GMT -5
[...] Combine that and the fact that he almost certainly will take a little less to stay in his home state with teammates he already knows, and I like our chances of signing him. What indication do you have that Hill will value staying in his home state and with teammates he know rather than maximizing his earning potential in this his only chance to do that? I'm really startled by the words "almost certainly." Because he's a (non-sociopathic) human being.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 7, 2015 6:39:46 GMT -5
Er... Hill is not exactly the paragon of health, either. His inability to stay healthy, more than anything else, is what derailed his career and why he's trying to make a comeback at the age of 35. I thought I made it clear, that I get the risk. I like the cost. Sorry, but there's nothing at all to suggest that Hill has been or will be a better pitcher than Buchholz, all things considered. Some needy team is going to make him an offer that takes him to a much higher pay grade. The one thought is that he might take something less, but with lots of incentives that would make it worth his while, say if he pitches 100 innings. Realize that's an enormous stretch, and needy-team may forgo any such constraints to bring him onboard. He has a lengthy track record and little to indicate he can reach that goal. Law's angst is shared by many on this board. It would be a hometown discount, a favor to the team that, after all, helped revive his career. As Eric intimates, such things are not unheard of. There's no one who understands the promise and limitations better than Hill himself. He's going to have to decide.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Oct 7, 2015 7:28:23 GMT -5
What indication do you have that Hill will value staying in his home state and with teammates he know rather than maximizing his earning potential in this his only chance to do that? I'm really startled by the words "almost certainly." Because he's a (non-sociopathic) human being. Wanting to maximize your earnings on what's likely to be your last opportunity doesn't make one a sociopath. He might prefer to stay here, but someone else offers him a bunch more money and a better opportunity to start, why on earth would he stay here for 1/2 the money (as an example) and with a stacked depth chart of starters? He'd be foolish.
|
|
|