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.
Which FA Starter Would You Sign?
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 29, 2015 1:07:05 GMT -5
To clarify, use the excess from the rotation to acquire a number of A-ball/SS ball high risk/reward players and at least one or two blue-chip top-50 prospects.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 29, 2015 2:08:41 GMT -5
Punting a draft in a year in which their IFA single-player max bonus is 300K would basically leave a complete hole in the system unless they stumbled into a few incredible value picks. If they don't trade anyone else from the farm, and use the excess created from additions to the rotation, it's semi-reasonable, although they'd be adding a lot of payroll, which would hurt their ability to extend Betts, Bogaerts, etc in 2-3 years, unless Samardzija was on a 2-year (and could maybe be offered a QO, if performance dictated...). Still, I'm not a huge fan of the idea. I get what you're saying about the value of that pick, and I agree, it's best they avoid losing it if they can, but I don't really think "complete hole" is the right term. Moncada, Devers, Espinoza, Benintendi, Kopech, Chavis are all fairly significant pieces that are in the low minors and will probably all start somewhere in A ball, and all of those guys would be top 10 guys in most mlb systems. So yeah, it sucks to lose a chip, but the relative strength of their system, and the lower levels, still has the Sox fairing quite well. It is far far far more likely that the Sox will feel the impact of losing Margot more than they ever will that 12th pick if they do indeed lose it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 29, 2015 14:39:11 GMT -5
For the AAV arguments, the Fangraphs crowdsourced numbers (which are usually a little low) were as follows: Price: 7/196 (28M AAV) Greinke: 6/156 (26M AAV) Cueto: 6/132 (22M AAV) Zimmermann: 6/126 (21M AAV) Samardzija: 4/64 (16M AAV) Leake: 4/56 (14M AAV) Gallardo: 4/56 (14M AAV) Chen: 4/52 (13M AAV) Kazmir: 3/42 (14M AAV) Iwakuma: 3/42 (14M AAV) Kennedy: 3/36 (12M AAV) Happ: 3/33 (11M AAV) Lackey: 2/30 (15M AAV) Latos: 2/22 (11M AAV) Fister: 2/20 (10M AAV) Dickey: 2/20 (10M AAV) Pelfrey: 2/16 (8M AAV) Colon: 1/10 Simon: 1/7 Lincecum: 1/6 Young: 1/6 Guthrie: 1/4 K. Kendrick: 1/3 www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fangraphs-crowd-the-top-82-free-agents/FWIW, Hill was 1/6 to the degree anyone can pretend he's predictable. So to revisit, on Zimmermann, FG's list was close on AAV, but one year long (which probably accounts for the money, in part).
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 29, 2015 22:49:15 GMT -5
Punting a draft in a year in which their IFA single-player max bonus is 300K would basically leave a complete hole in the system unless they stumbled into a few incredible value picks. If they don't trade anyone else from the farm, and use the excess created from additions to the rotation, it's semi-reasonable, although they'd be adding a lot of payroll, which would hurt their ability to extend Betts, Bogaerts, etc in 2-3 years, unless Samardzija was on a 2-year (and could maybe be offered a QO, if performance dictated...). Still, I'm not a huge fan of the idea. I get what you're saying about the value of that pick, and I agree, it's best they avoid losing it if they can, but I don't really think "complete hole" is the right term. Moncada, Devers, Espinoza, Benintendi, Kopech, Chavis are all fairly significant pieces that are in the low minors and will probably all start somewhere in A ball, and all of those guys would be top 10 guys in most mlb systems. So yeah, it sucks to lose a chip, but the relative strength of their system, and the lower levels, still has the Sox fairing quite well. It is far far far more likely that the Sox will feel the impact of losing Margot more than they ever will that 12th pick if they do indeed lose it. I agree 100% on Margot, simply based on his success in AA at age 20. And yes, they do have quality in A ball, so it could be worse. But losing 12/50(give of take) is a big one-year hit. Of course, they could make up for it next year with a good IFA period, but they're unlikely to have a 12 overall again for a while (hopefully). I don't think it would be a critical hit, but it would likely leave the GCL-Lowell crop very thin next year, and a hole when this year's Greenville crop moves to Salem/Portland...especially with Allen gone in the Kimbrel overpay. Maybe someone steps up, but a bad draft the next year could create a 2008-2010 situation. I agree with what I think is your point-at the moment, their system is so well-stocked, they seem pretty inured against one wasted draft. But attrition/failure/injury can change that quickly (Vitek/Anderson/Place) and I don't see the benefit of signing a pair of QO FAs as worth it in terms of both the short-term and long-term. They'd really need to sign an excellent pitcher to upgrade *significantly* over, say, Miley, who would probably become the trade bait. That's not likely with any QO pitcher save Grienke, who's going to get 5/150 or so. Kazmir's numbers are Coliseum-inflated and he doesn't go deep in games. Shark is probably going to get upwards of 15M/yr if he's on a short deal. He's certainly capable of pitching like a 2, but if he's more 3 than 2, he's probably not much of an upgrade. Thankfully, Zimmerman is off the table.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 29, 2015 23:03:17 GMT -5
Oops, forgot Kazmir is unqualified. He'd make a great 4 on this team if he signed a relatively cheap deal. He's someone who would have a lot of in-season value if Owens/Johnson/Kelly pushed their way into the rotation. Buchholz and Miley are in that category, too. Hopefully the Sox get Price or Grienke, have Rodriguez-Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-Kelly-Owens-Johnson to fill 2-8, and can deal from excess to add to their low-A prospect inventory, maybe with a middle-of-the-order potential bat and afew power arms.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 29, 2015 23:16:47 GMT -5
Oops, forgot Kazmir is unqualified. He'd make a great 4 on this team if he signed a relatively cheap deal. He's someone who would have a lot of in-season value if Owens/Johnson/Kelly pushed their way into the rotation. Buchholz and Miley are in that category, too. Hopefully the Sox get Price or Grienke, have Rodriguez-Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-Kelly-Owens-Johnson to fill 2-8, and can deal from excess to add to their low-A prospect inventory, maybe with a middle-of-the-order potential bat and afew power arms. They're not dealing established talent to restock low-A inventory. They can load up on low A guys in the next draft regardless. And A ball is the only place they have inventory currently.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Nov 30, 2015 1:31:50 GMT -5
Oops, forgot Kazmir is unqualified. He'd make a great 4 on this team if he signed a relatively cheap deal. He's someone who would have a lot of in-season value if Owens/Johnson/Kelly pushed their way into the rotation. Buchholz and Miley are in that category, too. Hopefully the Sox get Price or Grienke, have Rodriguez-Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-Kelly-Owens-Johnson to fill 2-8, and can deal from excess to add to their low-A prospect inventory, maybe with a middle-of-the-order potential bat and afew power arms. They'd be so close to an all lefty rotation if they add Price and Kazmir. Price, Rodriguez, Miley, Kazmir, Owens, Johnson. Looks like Buchholz and Porcello have to go.
|
|
|
Post by mannofsteele on Nov 30, 2015 9:22:08 GMT -5
Price, Chen, Grienke, and Leake are the four of the remaining guys that I have faith in. I'm a Cueto fan, but for the money that he's going to get I don't believe it's feasible to get him with the arm trouble that he's had. Whether it's a forearm strain or something wrong in his shoulder or elbow there's too much to wager when he just rejected $120 million.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 30, 2015 10:01:52 GMT -5
For the AAV arguments, the Fangraphs crowdsourced numbers (which are usually a little low) were as follows: Price: 7/196 (28M AAV) Greinke: 6/156 (26M AAV) Cueto: 6/132 (22M AAV) Zimmermann: 6/126 (21M AAV) Samardzija: 4/64 (16M AAV) Leake: 4/56 (14M AAV) Gallardo: 4/56 (14M AAV) Chen: 4/52 (13M AAV) Kazmir: 3/42 (14M AAV) Iwakuma: 3/42 (14M AAV) Kennedy: 3/36 (12M AAV) Happ: 3/33 (11M AAV) Lackey: 2/30 (15M AAV) Latos: 2/22 (11M AAV) Fister: 2/20 (10M AAV) Dickey: 2/20 (10M AAV) Pelfrey: 2/16 (8M AAV) Colon: 1/10 Simon: 1/7 Lincecum: 1/6 Young: 1/6 Guthrie: 1/4 K. Kendrick: 1/3 www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fangraphs-crowd-the-top-82-free-agents/FWIW, Hill was 1/6 to the degree anyone can pretend he's predictable. So to revisit, on Zimmermann, FG's list was close on AAV, but one year long (which probably accounts for the money, in part). And actually, Happ got 3/36, so that's another one that was close. Thinking more about Zimmermann, one would think that by coming down to 5 years, he'd get closer to $23-24M or so. Remember, with a season more in line with his career numbers, he was in line to get about the Lester contract, perhaps a bit less because of the pick. I think he left the chance at more money on the table in order to avoid being the last guy left in the musical chairs game. Meanwhile, the Tigers give up a pick that'll probably be in the 50s to sign a guy who might actually be a bargain if he returns to his 2011-2014 form (and it's not even like his 2015 was THAT bad).
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 30, 2015 23:49:49 GMT -5
Oops, forgot Kazmir is unqualified. He'd make a great 4 on this team if he signed a relatively cheap deal. He's someone who would have a lot of in-season value if Owens/Johnson/Kelly pushed their way into the rotation. Buchholz and Miley are in that category, too. Hopefully the Sox get Price or Grienke, have Rodriguez-Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-Kelly-Owens-Johnson to fill 2-8, and can deal from excess to add to their low-A prospect inventory, maybe with a middle-of-the-order potential bat and afew power arms. They're not dealing established talent to restock low-A inventory. They can load up on low A guys in the next draft regardless. And A ball is the only place they have inventory currently. You can't load up on high-end picks to fill your low-A inventory if you don't have a first- or second-round pick, unless you get very lucky. Also, I don't think many of those prospects you're talking about (Benintendi, Moncada, and probably Espinoza) are long for A ball. Without a 1/2 in the 2016 draft, they're completely reliant on someone from their 2014/15 IFA signings stepping up. Possible, but it's still going to leave a relative dearth of talent in the system for 2019-20 ETA (and thus a trade chip deficiency as well in 18-19). I wouldn't be remotely surprised to see a number of the start-the-year-in-Salem crowd to be in Portland mid-season. Like I said, not a crippling hole in the pipeline, but a potentially problematic one. Also, I'm not talking about dealing MLB talent solely for A-ball players. Unless they're extremely (supremely?) talented, those types of players essentially never headline deals. But I can see them squeezing two or three Frank Montas-type guys (as in the Peavy trade) as second and third pieces and hopefully hitting on one. I imagine if they took prospects back for Miley or Buchholz, the headliners would have to be considered a year or less away from MLB: AAA or higher-upside in AA.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 1, 2015 10:12:23 GMT -5
Even if their system has a dip from 2018-2020... It's probably theoretically a good time for that, if there ever were one. At that point their theoretic core (I know all these guys won't work out or still be here) would be in their primes and young enough to go a couple years without high level reinforcements coming:
Bradley (28-30) Betts (26-28) Bogaerts (26-28) Swithart (26-28) Vasquez (28-30) Rodriguez (25-27) Devers (22-24) Moncada (23-25) Benintendi (24-26) Espinoza (20-22) Porcello (29-31) Johnson (27-29) Owens (26-28)
A lot of this perceive future gap is due to players being better than and moving faster than expected. That's not a bad thing. People forget how young this team is now and in a way it's still getting younger.
For example, when Espinoza was signed a normal projection would have had him scratching the marjors in 2020. So now that some think that will be his third ear doesn't make us weaker for 2020, makes us stronger.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 1, 2015 10:15:30 GMT -5
Even if their system has a dip from 2018-2020... It's probably theoretically a good time for that, if there ever were one. At that point their theoretic core (I know all these guys won't work out or still be here) would be in their primes and young enough to go a couple years without high level reinforcements coming: Bradley (28-30) Betts (26-28) Bogaerts (26-28) Swithart (26-28) Vasquez (28-30) Rodriguez (25-27) Devers (22-24) Moncada (23-25) Benintendi (24-26) Espinoza (20-22) Porcello (29-31) Johnson (27-29) Owens (26-28) A lot of this perceive future gap is due to players being better than and moving faster than expected. That's not a bad thing. People forget how young this team is now and in a way it's still getting younger. For example, when Espinoza was signed a normal projection would have had him scratching the marjors in 2020. So now that some think that will be his third ear doesn't make us weaker for 2020, makes us stronger. I agree with you for the most part, but what you're leaving out is that they wouldn't have quantity/quality trade chips, unless they're trading from the major league team. That's a difficult position to be in.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 1, 2015 10:24:56 GMT -5
Rosenthal reported this a.m. that Greinke is looking for $30M a year. If you could get him for 5 yrs, I'd do that over Price for 7 or 8 in a heartbeat. But I think someone else may go the 6th year. In the past Greinke has made no secret that he's a max money guy, but he may realize that as he ages, his skill set will play better in the NL, anyway (as long as the union doesn't say the the DH in the NL is a must have in the next collective bargaining agreement, which, sadly, is highly unlikely).
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,828
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 1, 2015 11:05:33 GMT -5
Rosenthal reported this a.m. that Greinke is looking for $30M a year. If you could get him for 5 yrs, I'd do that over Price for 7 or 8 in a heartbeat. But I think someone else may go the 6th year. In the past Greinke has made no secret that he's a max money guy, but he may realize that as he ages, his skill set will play better in the NL, anyway (as long as the union doesn't say the the DH in the NL is a must have in the next collective bargaining agreement, which, sadly, is highly unlikely). What's the difference between Greinke for 5 and Price for 7? Greinke is 2 years older and slightly worse. Price also isn't attached to a draft pick and is proven in our division. No reason to give Greinke that much from age 32-37
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 1, 2015 11:22:06 GMT -5
Rosenthal reported this a.m. that Greinke is looking for $30M a year. If you could get him for 5 yrs, I'd do that over Price for 7 or 8 in a heartbeat. But I think someone else may go the 6th year. In the past Greinke has made no secret that he's a max money guy, but he may realize that as he ages, his skill set will play better in the NL, anyway (as long as the union doesn't say the the DH in the NL is a must have in the next collective bargaining agreement, which, sadly, is highly unlikely). 5 years with a sixth vesting option. I don't agree that Greinke is worse. I think they are very comparable and Greinke should age well and pitch well with decreased velocity. Price should be ok but concerns me more in that regard. Prices issues in the playoffs are real and I'd gamble on it but would prefer Greinke even with the draft pick. Plus, I want the right handed pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 1, 2015 12:07:54 GMT -5
Rosenthal reported this a.m. that Greinke is looking for $30M a year. If you could get him for 5 yrs, I'd do that over Price for 7 or 8 in a heartbeat. But I think someone else may go the 6th year. In the past Greinke has made no secret that he's a max money guy, but he may realize that as he ages, his skill set will play better in the NL, anyway (as long as the union doesn't say the the DH in the NL is a must have in the next collective bargaining agreement, which, sadly, is highly unlikely). What's the difference between Greinke for 5 and Price for 7? Greinke is 2 years older and slightly worse. Price also isn't attached to a draft pick and is proven in our division. No reason to give Greinke that much from age 32-37 I believe the analysis that says Greinke will age better. I am at the point, however, where I would - HERESY ALERT - deal Mookie (whose game I love) for one of Thor, Gray, Sale or Carrasco (if possible) and go buy Hayward on an 8 year deal. He presents a unique opportunity in the market based on his age and skill set, still has potential to improve, and his decline will be more incremental and easier to predict than pitchers over 30. My sense is Hayward's AAV will be less than either Price or Greinke, as well, and with those pitchers' salary structures you save a few mil (or more) a year overall.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 1, 2015 13:43:32 GMT -5
What's the difference between Greinke for 5 and Price for 7? Greinke is 2 years older and slightly worse. Price also isn't attached to a draft pick and is proven in our division. No reason to give Greinke that much from age 32-37 I believe the analysis that says Greinke will age better. I am at the point, however, where I would - HERESY ALERT - deal Mookie (whose game I love) for one of Thor, Gray, Sale or Carrasco (if possible) and go buy Hayward on an 8 year deal. He presents a unique opportunity in the market based on his age and skill set, still has potential to improve, and his decline will be more incremental and easier to predict than pitchers over 30. My sense is Hayward's AAV will be less than either Price or Greinke, as well, and with those pitchers' salary structures you save a few mil (or more) a year overall. I know the current thought process is you don't trade an everyday position player for a pitcher, but I think I'd do it for Thor or Sale. Wouldn't do it for Gray or Carrasco as I think they are a notch below Sale, & Thor has more control. Bogaerts leading off?
|
|
|
Post by xanderdu on Dec 1, 2015 15:04:58 GMT -5
I believe the analysis that says Greinke will age better. I am at the point, however, where I would - HERESY ALERT - deal Mookie (whose game I love) for one of Thor, Gray, Sale or Carrasco (if possible) and go buy Hayward on an 8 year deal. He presents a unique opportunity in the market based on his age and skill set, still has potential to improve, and his decline will be more incremental and easier to predict than pitchers over 30. My sense is Hayward's AAV will be less than either Price or Greinke, as well, and with those pitchers' salary structures you save a few mil (or more) a year overall. I know the current thought process is you don't trade an everyday position player for a pitcher, but I think I'd do it for Thor or Sale. Wouldn't do it for Gray or Carrasco as I think they are a notch below Sale, & Thor has more control. Bogaerts leading off? Not a fan of trading Betts for anybody. He's still got so much upside.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 1, 2015 16:41:48 GMT -5
I know the current thought process is you don't trade an everyday position player for a pitcher, but I think I'd do it for Thor or Sale. Wouldn't do it for Gray or Carrasco as I think they are a notch below Sale, & Thor has more control. Bogaerts leading off? Not a fan of trading Betts for anybody. He's still got so much upside. So does Syndergaard.....I think you can somewhat replicate what Betts does in the next 5 years in another player, Dexter Fowler for example, than to try to replicate a dominate young pitcher for 6 years. Fowler + Thor > Betts...Again, this is just my opinion.
|
|
|