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.
Acquiring an Ace: FA or Trade?
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 9, 2015 9:52:14 GMT -5
I know he is not an "ace," but James Shields seems like the perfect guy to target to bolster the rotation this offseason. He is durable, he has experience in the AL East, and not only will he not cost anything of value, but the Red Sox can also probably dump some salary in exchange for him. Moreover, his lackluster performance in the pitching Nirvana that is Petco strikes me as fluky - there seems like a chance for a rebound performance there. I'd be fine with that if the Pads take some of the dollars. It has been mentioned before, but moving Sandoval there may have some legs. A swap of those 2 with a little salary relief sounds good. Shields is a great role model for the young pitchers like Owens, Rodriquez, Johnson, and even Barnes. His impact would be felt several ways. His heater still hits 92, and he has a great change.....but his command has slipped over the last couple of years. Great competitor and teammate, it may be worth looking into. But don't expect an ace.....he is an innings eater.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Oct 9, 2015 9:57:35 GMT -5
This forum hypes Gray up so much it's crazy. He's got similar peripherals to McHugh, and he's worse than someone like Quintana, yet people group him in with Harvey, Fernandez, Sale, DeGrom, etc. ESPN may love him because he keeps his ERA nice and pretty in Oakland, but I'd stay away from him at this point because he's got the connotation of a monster when he's no more valuable than guys like Swihart who we talk about trading in a package for him. And Andrew Cashner would be absolutely terrible in the AL East. Like Porcello before the all star break bad, except it would never end. He has upside but he's about to be 30 and I see little reason to believe he improves much more. As has been mentioned, Gray pitches in arguably the most pitcher friendly ballpark in the majors with acres of foul territory, where flyballs die in the twilight mist. He's at his best where he is, or in Petco, but definitely not in Fenway or Coors.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 9, 2015 9:58:50 GMT -5
Given his struggles, is Fister a potential "buy low" option this off season? Definitely. Not an ace, but if healthy, a solid 3 or a poor man's 2. For 1 year, I'd be all over him (if healthy). He's nowhere near that for the last 2 seasons. I don't even think he'd be an upgrade over any starter on the team now.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Oct 9, 2015 10:16:35 GMT -5
Agreed, not an ace. Probably should have posted in the roster thread instead.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Oct 9, 2015 11:00:17 GMT -5
Honestly, as Lou Merloni said, I wouldn't feel too uncomfortable running out the same starters this year & concentrate on the bullpen....Don't want to give Price 7/210...don't trust Zimmerman @ 6/120 + loss of high draft pick....don't like Cueto @ what, 7/180....Did anyone but me watch games in the second half & have our OF run down flyball after flyball & say to myself, there is no way Hanley/Craig/Nava gets to that....How many outs, long innings & extra runs did they save....It was all a trickle down effect...shorter outings from starter....bullpen overload, ect...The only FA I would even consider would be Greinke (shorter deal). There is no way Grienke is taking a short deal and by that I mean 2 to 3 years or less. But I still think he'd be a good FA to target. Years ago the concern was he couldn't handle Boston because of his past and emotional difficulties. Well that was obviously unfounded. Becuase he's 32 I would try to stay away from anything more than 4 to 5 years. His build, control and feel for pitching leads me to believe he'll age well. His age might scare off some potential suitors and because of his age it might limit him to a 5 year deal. It's worth exploring.
|
|
|
Post by SlugLife on Oct 9, 2015 11:36:28 GMT -5
There is no way Grienke is taking a short deal and by that I mean 2 to 3 years or less. But I still think he'd be a good FA to target. Years ago the concern was he couldn't handle Boston because of his past and emotional difficulties. Well that was obviously unfounded. Becuase he's 32 I would try to stay away from anything more than 4 to 5 years. His build, control and feel for pitching leads me to believe he'll age well. His age might scare off some potential suitors and because of his age it might limit him to a 5 year deal. It's worth exploring. I think you can to this to the bank: Greinke will get 5 years/$150 million. He will want to reach the $30 million mark per season, and he will want to top the total value of his last deal ($147 million). The Dodgers will probably pay that, and if they don't someone else will. A 1.66 ERA is not sustainable over the next five seasons, but some GM will pay for it anyway. So I agree, a "short-term" deal is not happening. Shorter, yes.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 9, 2015 11:49:11 GMT -5
There is no way Grienke is taking a short deal and by that I mean 2 to 3 years or less. But I still think he'd be a good FA to target. Years ago the concern was he couldn't handle Boston because of his past and emotional difficulties. Well that was obviously unfounded. Becuase he's 32 I would try to stay away from anything more than 4 to 5 years. His build, control and feel for pitching leads me to believe he'll age well. His age might scare off some potential suitors and because of his age it might limit him to a 5 year deal. It's worth exploring. I think you can to this to the bank: Greinke will get 5 years/$150 million. He will want to reach the $30 million mark per season, and he will want to top the total value of his last deal ($147 million). The Dodgers will probably pay that, and if they don't someone else will. A 1.66 ERA is not sustainable over the next five seasons, but some GM will pay for it anyway. So I agree, a "short-term" deal is not happening. Shorter, yes. I really have no interest in giving up the #12 pick either. If you had the choice between Cueto and Price at whatever they need to be signed, is the #12 overall pick worth the difference between them and Greinke at his contract?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 9, 2015 12:09:49 GMT -5
I think you can to this to the bank: Greinke will get 5 years/$150 million. He will want to reach the $30 million mark per season, and he will want to top the total value of his last deal ($147 million). The Dodgers will probably pay that, and if they don't someone else will. A 1.66 ERA is not sustainable over the next five seasons, but some GM will pay for it anyway. So I agree, a "short-term" deal is not happening. Shorter, yes. I really have no interest in giving up the #12 pick either. If you had the choice between Cueto and Price at whatever they need to be signed, is the #12 overall pick worth the difference between them and Greinke at his contract? Yeah, I think Grienke's a great pitcher, and if he opts out is worth exploring, but if you pay 5/150 for him or 7/150 for Price, you're paying the extra 2/60 for Price for his **prime** years. Those age 30-31 and 31-32 seasons are where the contract is actually most likely to be worth it. On top of it, you keep your 12th overall pick (Nomar redux?). In the end, either way you're paying the guy to pitch through his age 37 season. Why not keep the draft pick and get two years of likely quality pitching on the front end? That is, if FA is your method of choice...
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,922
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 9, 2015 12:12:25 GMT -5
In ten minutes I'm going to go downstairs and attempt to watch and score four entire baseball games. So here's the short version of the conclusions I reached last night:
Sign Rich Hill, whom you have at least a small inside track on, and who represents the best bang-for-buck option out there.
And If you do that, you have the following rotation. The numbers indicate 2015 performance (50% bWAR/GS, 50% adjusted SIERA) where 1.0 is the best pitcher in MLB, 2.5 is an average #2 starter, and so on (Kuechel was a 1.3, Price was a 1.6). Porcello and Kelly are good estimates based only on what they did after their sabbaticals.
1.9 Clay Buchholz, but risky in terms of both performance and innings. 2.3 Rick Porcello 2.? 1.? Rich Hill. Risky in innings. More on how good he really is next week. 2.9 Eduardo Rodriguez 3.7 Joe Kelly 3.8? Steven Wright. This is just a guess, because SIERA doesn't work for him and he improves the next day's pitcher and should get credit for that. 3.9 Wade Miley 5.0 Henry Owens. Certainly projects as a 4.something next year.
What you want to do is protect yourself against Buchholz and Hill both being unable to pitch at the same time, so you do need another reliable, really good arm. And you want a young guy because Hill and Buchholz won't be around for long.
If you were to trade Miley and obtain a reliable young cost-controlled starter who projects to be anywhere between 2.0 and 3.0 or even 3.5, you're fine. Find the guy who fits that description and has the most bang-for-buck in terms of acquisition price and upside. You don't need an ace. Get that guy and you have 5 number 2 or borderline 2/3 starters, all of whom have ace potential, plus a pair of 3rd starters pitching out of the pen as backup for injuries, and one or two (depending on whether Owens is traded) 4th / 5th starters at Pawtucket.
And this is also playing to DDo's strengths as a talent evaluator. So all the people saying he'll be looking for the next Scherzer are dead-on.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 9, 2015 12:17:55 GMT -5
Or you're using dubious arguments to support absurd conclusions. Maybe you're trying to communicate something different from what you wrote, but 2013 Lester (the #1) and Lackey (#2 after Buchholz got hurt) put up 3.5 and 2.4 fWAR respectively, with ERA- tallies of 90 and 84. Their FIP/xFIP numbers were pretty much in line with their ERAs. Those are second-division #2/first-division #3 starter numbers. You avoided mentioning Doubront's (2.2, 103, or first-division #4) and Dempster's (0.5/109, a reasonable #5) performances. But, you did bring up Dempster's 6-year prior career season as evidence of how good he was. You also used Buchholz's *half*-season and Peavy's *one-third*-season with the Sox as evidence, too. So, again, explain to me again how a team led by two 2/3 starters, that got a fantastic **first half** performance from Buchholz and had two back end starters performing exactly as back-end performers should, was "stacked." Maybe that term means something different to you. Frankly, when the crux of your argument is that 3 of 5 starters were once their team's #1 (including Dempster on some awful Cubs/Marlins teams), "making them a #1 at least," I see a huge false equivalency. Maybe if their 2007 versions had all shown up, but not their 2013 versions. Regardless, I maintain that if this team obtains a pitcher who can reproduce the combo of 2013 Buchholz/Peavy, they'll have as good a rotation as 2013, if not better. More depth, too. I think that's feasible either through FA, or a trade from excess without selling the farm. You've convoluted this so much I don't understand the point. Reading some of your post is like listening to a Glen Ordway on the radio, you make a point on 1 side of the fence then the other and back and forth until you no longer no what your real point is. Hahaha! OK pot, have fun with kettle. I'm still waiting on the "stacked" rationale, btw.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 9, 2015 12:25:32 GMT -5
In ten minutes I'm going to go downstairs and attempt to watch and score four entire baseball games. So here's the short version of the conclusions I reached last night: Sign Rich Hill, whom you have at least a small inside track on, and who represents the best bang-for-buck option out there. And If you do that, you have the following rotation. The numbers indicate 2015 performance (50% bWAR/GS, 50% adjusted SIERA) where 1.0 is the best pitcher in MLB, 2.5 is an average #2 starter, and so on (Kuechel was a 1.3, Price was a 1.6). Porcello and Kelly are good estimates based only on what they did after their sabbaticals. 1.9 Clay Buchholz, but risky in terms of both performance and innings. 2.3 Rick Porcello 2.? 1.? Rich Hill. Risky in innings. More on how good he really is next week. 2.9 Eduardo Rodriguez 3.7 Joe Kelly 3.8? Steven Wright. This is just a guess, because SIERA doesn't work for him and he improves the next day's pitcher and should get credit for that. 3.9 Wade Miley 5.0 Henry Owens. Certainly projects as a 4.something next year. What you want to do is protect yourself against Buchholz and Hill both being unable to pitch at the same time, so you do need another reliable, really good arm. And you want a young guy because Hill and Buchholz won't be around for long. If you were to trade Miley and obtain a reliable young cost-controlled starter who projects to be anywhere between 2.0 and 3.0 or even 3.5, you're fine. Find the guy who fits that description and has the most bang-for-buck in terms of acquisition price and upside. You don't need an ace. Get that guy and you have 5 number 2 or borderline 2/3 starters, all of whom have ace potential, plus a pair of 3rd starters pitching out of the pen as backup for injuries, and one or two (depending on whether Owens is traded) 4th / 5th starters at Pawtucket. And this is also playing to DDo's strengths as a talent evaluator. So all the people saying he'll be looking for the next Scherzer are dead-on. How long would it take Hill to get stretched out in that scenario and would that possibly be harder on his arm? I think they'd have to get creative with a contract offer or guarantee more money than another team to get him to agree to a deal, assuming another team is giving him incentives based on innings pitched or starts.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 9, 2015 12:39:52 GMT -5
This thread is a terrific read. Many good ideas. Lots of intelligent thought.
I am not satisfied with the present SP staff. There is this saying that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. The Sox have to get an ace, and maybe two of them.
The pitcher with the best stuff is Buchholz, but he cannot be counted on. And if he goes down, the entire pitching staff goes down a notch or two. Hill also is very risky.
Porcello and Kelly are unpredictable. Kelly probably would be a better RP than starter but he does not want to be a RP. He is very definite about that. I think Porcello will do better next year - a solid number 3. Miley is very reliable and predictable but not outstanding, a solid number 5. Rodriguez is next to Buchholz with his stuff and may pass him next season. But he is very young and it is too risky to make him the ace. I like Owens a lot, and I think he will do better next year, but not enough better to be the ace. Johnson now is a wild card concerning durability and he hasn't had a chance yet to show that he is a major league starter. I think that he will be one, but in terms of effectiveness about like Miley. Wright is, at best, a number 5, and he makes life miserable for the catchers.
Price is my first choice for all the obvious reasons. I think Greinke will stay with the Dodgers. I am concerned about Cueto and would want to know a lot more than I possibly can to advocate for him. I'm not big on Zimmerman and he will cost a draft choice. If Price cannot be signed, then it becomes much more likely that it will take a big trade to get an ace. The Sox have the resources to make such a trade and I think that they will use them to do so, if they have to.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Oct 9, 2015 12:40:26 GMT -5
If I'm Rich Hill, I can't realistically be relied on to be even a #5 starter, more of a long man/spot starter....I can't see ANY team looking @ him & say, yes he's our #5 knowing he can only go about 100 IP...This is why (if I were him) he should take a fair offer from the RS knowing that Buchholz will need a caddy. He then wouldn't be crucified in another city when his arm falls off in early Aug.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Oct 9, 2015 15:42:31 GMT -5
If you were to trade Miley and obtain a reliable young cost-controlled starter who projects to be anywhere between 2.0 and 3.0 or even 3.5, you're fine. Find the guy who fits that description and has the most bang-for-buck in terms of acquisition price and upside. You don't need an ace. Get that guy and you have 5 number 2 or borderline 2/3 starters, all of whom have ace potential, plus a pair of 3rd starters pitching out of the pen as backup for injuries, and one or two (depending on whether Owens is traded) 4th / 5th starters at Pawtucket. I was with you until you proposed trading Wade Miley for....a slightly younger Wade Miley. (2.5 bWAR / 2.6 fWAR in 2015) Keeping Hill and trading Miley makes sense to me - but only if you're shopping top-shelf for the replacement.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2015 18:39:14 GMT -5
Gotta find the next Jake Arrieta... Theo already got him. His name is Kyle Hendricks.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 9, 2015 20:05:54 GMT -5
I think you can to this to the bank: Greinke will get 5 years/$150 million. He will want to reach the $30 million mark per season, and he will want to top the total value of his last deal ($147 million). The Dodgers will probably pay that, and if they don't someone else will. A 1.66 ERA is not sustainable over the next five seasons, but some GM will pay for it anyway. So I agree, a "short-term" deal is not happening. Shorter, yes. I really have no interest in giving up the #12 pick either. If you had the choice between Cueto and Price at whatever they need to be signed, is the #12 overall pick worth the difference between them and Greinke at his contract? It's a good question. I don't know , but I want one of those three throwing for my team next year. No, I want all 3, but will be happy with one.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,754
|
Post by nomar on Oct 9, 2015 20:48:00 GMT -5
Gotta find the next Jake Arrieta... Theo already got him. His name is Kyle Hendricks. I don't know if I trust his K% (his stuff is meh but his mix is solid), but if it's legit he's a great #3. Theo is really pulling these guys out of nowhere.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 9, 2015 22:44:08 GMT -5
I don't know if I trust his K% (his stuff is meh but his mix is solid), but if it's legit he's a great #3. Theo is really pulling these guys out of nowhere dear old Dartmouth. Fixed that for you. Love the Ivy League guys.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,922
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 10, 2015 1:57:31 GMT -5
If you were to trade Miley and obtain a reliable young cost-controlled starter who projects to be anywhere between 2.0 and 3.0 or even 3.5, you're fine. Find the guy who fits that description and has the most bang-for-buck in terms of acquisition price and upside. You don't need an ace. Get that guy and you have 5 number 2 or borderline 2/3 starters, all of whom have ace potential, plus a pair of 3rd starters pitching out of the pen as backup for injuries, and one or two (depending on whether Owens is traded) 4th / 5th starters at Pawtucket. I was with you until you proposed trading Wade Miley for....a slightly younger Wade Miley. (2.5 bWAR / 2.6 fWAR in 2015) Keeping Hill and trading Miley makes sense to me - but only if you're shopping top-shelf for the replacement. You guys (I'm including the folks who liked the rebuttal) were just skimming, right? Because I never quoted a WAR figure in that post. Those numbers are rotation slot numbers, the metric I just invented, where Miley's a 3.7 (70% of the way from the 2nd / 3rd starter border to the 3rd / 4th starter border, i.e., a somewhat below average 3rd starter). And he'll never, ever get any better. I want to trade him and obtain an average #2 starter (2.5) with really good upside, or a borderline 2/3 starter (3.0) with great upside, or maybe even an average 3 starter (3.5) with crazy, mouth-watering upside. An upgrade from Miley to an average 2 starter would be 1.4 bWAR per 30 starts. Plus more years of control. And did I mention upside? I want a guy that DDo thinks may well become an ace. The point is that that doesn't have to happen next year.
Breakdown of the origin of the top 15 pitchers in MLB last year: 8 Homegrown 3 Traded as prospects (Carrasco, Kluber, Archer) 2 Traded as non-aces (Arietta, Scherzer) 2 Traded as aces (Greinke, Price)
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Oct 10, 2015 8:53:13 GMT -5
I was with you until you proposed trading Wade Miley for....a slightly younger Wade Miley. (2.5 bWAR / 2.6 fWAR in 2015) Keeping Hill and trading Miley makes sense to me - but only if you're shopping top-shelf for the replacement. You guys (I'm including the folks who liked the rebuttal) were just skimming, right? Because I never quoted a WAR figure in that post. Those numbers are rotation slot numbers, the metric I just invented, where Miley's a 3.7 (70% of the way from the 2nd / 3rd starter border to the 3rd / 4th starter border, i.e., a somewhat below average 3rd starter). And he'll never, ever get any better. I want to trade him and obtain an average #2 starter (2.5) with really good upside, or a borderline 2/3 starter (3.0) with great upside, or maybe even an average 3 starter (3.5) with crazy, mouth-watering upside. An upgrade from Miley to an average 2 starter would be 1.4 bWAR per 30 starts. Plus more years of control. And did I mention upside? I want a guy that DDo thinks may well become an ace. The point is that that doesn't have to happen next year.
Breakdown of the origin of the top 15 pitchers in MLB last year: 8 Homegrown 3 Traded as prospects (Carrasco, Kluber, Archer) 2 Traded as non-aces (Arietta, Scherzer) 2 Traded as aces (Greinke, Price) This explains why I think the Red Sox will have a very difficult time trading for a pitcher without seriously compromising their future. If you trade for that younger, slightly better Miley, you will be adding one to two WAR, but the trading team will be expecting compensation for three to four WAR. When you add in that the return on prospects is typically 1/2 that on veterans, you're overpaying. By a lot. It will be very difficult/costly to make the 2016 Red Sox more than a wild card team. There are a lot of potential/ probable two WAR players, but only two likely four WAR players. However, by 2018, when the second wave of young talent arrives, the Red Sox should have a real core of 4 to 6 WAR players to build a half decade of strong contenders.
|
|
|
Post by thegoo13 on Oct 10, 2015 11:35:02 GMT -5
Too early in the process to make real judgements but when you look at the past it is really hard to argue with the Sox stance of not awarding big FA contracts to top of the rotation starters. Occasionally it has worked out. Scherzer might, but mostly it has been a really bad idea. The fact that Sox missed the chance to get Lester prior to 2014 season and then bombed last year with among league worst rotation probably makes signing of a David Price or Johnny Cueto even more tempting.
However Sox have plenty of prospects to deal and a team like the Mets have enough high end starting pitching and enough need for offense/position players to justify making a trade. Teams might not be a fit alone but with guys like Margot, Guerra, C. Vazquez, Miley, Kelly, Holt, Johnson might have enough to swing a deal with 3rd or maybe even 4th team involved? Not going to make specific proposals, those are like throwing darts drunk across the entire bar but my point is there is so much depth here Sox could really deal from a position of strength. Get a younger top of the rotation guy and not even deal any of Devers, Mocada or Espinoza, Benintendi.
Mets ace now is clearly DeGrom. If they were willing to deal either Harvey or Syndergaard or Zach Wheeler would the above players be enough is worked within multiple team deal? Mets would still have crazy good rotation of DeGrom, Harvey or Syndegaard, Matz, Wheeler coming back from TJ and Niece. And could add a Miley and/ro Kelly for backend and/or BP depth as part of deal too.
Mets may hate this. Other teams I have dreamed up may be just that, but on paper something like this works. Last point. Mets are big market/small payroll club. They would not deal Wheeler for Tulo because of salary. Well they are not going to be able to afford all those pitchers in time (yeah I know they don't have to act now on that). Looks like they may already lose their second baseman though? Brock Holt anyone? What if they resign Cespedes somehow?
One of those guys and my personal preference would be Syndegaard, ERod, Buch, Owens, Porcello. AAA SP depth becomes an issue if ALL those guys above are traded but probably at least one stays plus Wright and maybe R Hill and should be okay there. Looking at 2015 playoff teams rotations for most started season no better way than this.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 619
|
Post by alnipper on Oct 10, 2015 11:52:11 GMT -5
If they sign a FA who costs the Sox a first round pick it'll create issues. The Sox will lose more than a first round pick. The Sox will also lose the slot money for the 12th pick. There will be a loss of financial draft flexibility. Who is worth signing considering the ramifications of losing the first round pick? In my opinion it would only be Grienke. I see him being an ace for years to come. He has very good stuff, but also knows how to pitch as good as anybody in baseball. He will earn 5years/150mil plus and be worth it.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 10, 2015 12:36:35 GMT -5
If they sign a FA who costs the Sox a first round pick it'll create issues. The Sox will lose more than a first round pick. The Sox will also lose the slot money for the 12th pick. There will be a loss of financial draft flexibility. Who is worth signing considering the ramifications of losing the first round pick? In my opinion it would only be Grienke. I see him being an ace for years to come. He has very good stuff, but also knows how to pitch as good as anybody in baseball. He will earn 5years/150mil plus and be worth it. Good point and I agree. One Mets pitcher I'd be all over is the least experienced Steve Matz. Wonder what he may take to trade for?
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Oct 10, 2015 13:07:01 GMT -5
You guys (I'm including the folks who liked the rebuttal) were just skimming, right? Because I never quoted a WAR figure in that post. Those numbers are rotation slot numbers, the metric I just invented, where Miley's a 3.7 (70% of the way from the 2nd / 3rd starter border to the 3rd / 4th starter border, i.e., a somewhat below average 3rd starter). And he'll never, ever get any better. I want to trade him and obtain an average #2 starter (2.5) with really good upside, or a borderline 2/3 starter (3.0) with great upside, or maybe even an average 3 starter (3.5) with crazy, mouth-watering upside. An upgrade from Miley to an average 2 starter would be 1.4 bWAR per 30 starts. Plus more years of control. And did I mention upside? I want a guy that DDo thinks may well become an ace. The point is that that doesn't have to happen next year.
Breakdown of the origin of the top 15 pitchers in MLB last year: 8 Homegrown 3 Traded as prospects (Carrasco, Kluber, Archer) 2 Traded as non-aces (Arietta, Scherzer) 2 Traded as aces (Greinke, Price) This explains why I think the Red Sox will have a very difficult time trading for a pitcher without seriously compromising their future. If you trade for that younger, slightly better Miley, you will be adding one to two WAR, but the trading team will be expecting compensation for three to four WAR. When you add in that the return on prospects is typically 1/2 that on veterans, you're overpaying. By a lot. It will be very difficult/costly to make the 2016 Red Sox more than a wild card team. There are a lot of potential/ probable two WAR players, but only two likely four WAR players. However, by 2018, when the second wave of young talent arrives, the Red Sox should have a real core of 4 to 6 WAR players to build a half decade of strong contenders. You guys are half nuts. Now that the team is being run by pros excellent player personnel people people who actually know how to build a team anyone but Ben Cherrington, if you really believe that enough can not be done between now and spring training to supplement the team's already burgeoning talent, you're fooling yourself. I expect the Sox to carry the East next year, easily.
|
|
|
Post by Nick Rabasco2 on Oct 10, 2015 13:34:17 GMT -5
Lots of good discussion here. I'll just throw my opinion out there. I'm not sure that signing Price, Cueto, Greinke is the answer. I'd rather go the trade route to add somebody. Would love Carrasco, but I don't see why Cleveland would want to give him up. I love the idea of going after Quintana. I don't see a reason not to love what he'd bring. 200+ innings three consecutive years, he'll be 27 on OD, he's under contract for a good price until 2018 plus two option years, consistent batted ball data, ERA, xFIP, etc.
Another thing I love is that he was third in all of baseball last year in first pitch strike percentage at 69%. (the top 11 of that list goes Scherzer, Lackey, Quintana, Chen, Harvey, Kershaw, deGrom, Zimmerman, Sale, Carrasco, Price). He's also been consistently above 65% with that the past three years. Obviously he doesn't get as many swinging strikes as most of those guys, but getting ahead consistently is important.
His curveball was 13 runs above average last year according to Fangraphs, which was fourth in MLB behind Felix, Kluber, Kershaw. He was 11th in that category in 2014, using it about 6% less of the time.
I think a rotation, in no particular order, of Buchholz, Quintana, Rodriguez, Porcello, Miley would be fine. I really think the defense hurt the staff so much last year, as the big gap between ERA (4.39) & FIP (3.92) shows. Pedroia's metrics were down at the start of the year, Napoli was not as good as he'd been previously, and obviously Hanley and Sandoval really hurt them. An improved outfield defense (Red Sox allowed the 4th most fly balls in baseball last year) will help a lot.
So, I just think the four we have in Buchholz, Rodriguez, Porcello, and Miley will work out, and adding Quintana instead of, like, Kelly or Owens, is certainly an upgrade.
|
|
|