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.
Red Sox to sign David Price
|
Post by jmei on Dec 2, 2015 10:20:55 GMT -5
Actually, performance in the last three years says a lot about future performance for the next four years. If I know that Price was healthy and productive from ages 31-33, I'm much, much more confident in his age 34-37 seasons than I am right now. Drop-off can happen quickly though, e.g. Cliff Lee & Roy Halladay I understand, but, as jimed pointed out earlier, the odds of Price precipitously declining the year after he opts out are low. Even after you price in the risk of precipitous decline, teams are still clamoring for older starters like Greinke, Lackey, Kazmir, etc.
|
|
|
Post by steeplechasr41 on Dec 2, 2015 10:25:16 GMT -5
The opt out is a horrible thing!!! I wanted to get excited about this signing but instead I ended up reading 14 pages of discussions about opt outs. That is an absolute worst case scenario. The opt out ruined my morning.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by nomar on Dec 2, 2015 10:26:18 GMT -5
Halladay, Lee, and Sabathia all looked great going into their age 33 season, which is all we should care about.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 2, 2015 10:26:54 GMT -5
The opt out is a horrible thing!!! I wanted to get excited about this signing but instead I ended up reading 14 pages of discussions about opt outs. That is an absolute worst case scenario. The opt out ruined my morning. Honestly, the opt-out is one of two interesting things about this signing (the other being the timeline of negotiations, including the alternate possibility of signing Greinke). Otherwise, it's a pretty boring transaction-- they paid market prices for the best pitcher available. Ho-hum, really.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by nomar on Dec 2, 2015 10:28:20 GMT -5
The opt out is a horrible thing!!! I wanted to get excited about this signing but instead I ended up reading 14 pages of discussions about opt outs. That is an absolute worst case scenario. The opt out ruined my morning. Lol how is the discussion of the best part of a huge signing "an absolute worst case scenario"? This actually made me chuckle out loud at my desk because your last two sentences are so hyperbolic it seems like a joke.
|
|
|
Post by akiva on Dec 2, 2015 10:30:29 GMT -5
Don't really care about the opt out. He probably won't use it anyway because by then there will be a larger surplus of free agent arms available, including Kershaw. It's doubtful he'd get more money than to stay on in Boston.
We got our ace.
|
|
|
Post by steeplechasr41 on Dec 2, 2015 10:31:31 GMT -5
The opt out is a horrible thing!!! I wanted to get excited about this signing but instead I ended up reading 14 pages of discussions about opt outs. That is an absolute worst case scenario. The opt out ruined my morning. Lol how is the discussion of the best part of a huge signing "an absolute worst case scenario"? This actually made me chuckle out loud at my desk because your last two sentences are so hyperbolic it seems like a joke. It was a joke. But the opt out isn't really that interesting in my opinion. It's an negative for the team, but worth it to get this deal done.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 2, 2015 10:31:48 GMT -5
Actually, performance in the last three years says a lot about future performance for the next four years. If I know that Price was healthy and productive from ages 31-33, I'm much, much more confident in his age 34-37 seasons than I am right now. Drop-off can happen quickly though, e.g. Cliff Lee & Roy Halladay Or it can happen at age 31. Or 38. The point is that a decline at age 34 is a lot less likely if he doesn't decline by age 33 than it is now. You also know what the starting point is at if he makes it through 3 years, whereas you don't now.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcgillstatue on Dec 2, 2015 10:39:53 GMT -5
So, what number is on Price's back when they have him model his Red Sox uni on Friday? No. 14 is up on the RF facade and there's no need for Rice to "unretire" it for Price. Perhaps 12 (Napoli's old one), but I'm thinking Vic's old 18 might be the favorite. Or maybe 41, which is available with Ogando's release. I'm sure they want to sell some Price shirts for the holidays.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 2, 2015 10:42:52 GMT -5
Whew ... the opt-out is a concession to the player, it's not that big a deal. People seem dug into positions on a fairly clear point of contractual negotiations.
Meanwhile, as a baseball fan, the Sox now have a rotation you can really dream on. One minor IF (if Porcello pitches better than last year) and one big IF (if Buchholz stays reasonably healthy), and the Sox have a pretty killer starting pitching staff.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by nomar on Dec 2, 2015 10:43:09 GMT -5
So, what number is on Price's back when they have him model his Red Sox uni on Friday? No. 14 is up on the RF facade and there's no need for Rice to "unretire" it for Price. Perhaps 12 (Napoli's old one), but I'm thinking Vic's old 18 might be the favorite. Or maybe 41, which is available with Ogando's release. I'm sure they want to sell some Price shirts for the holidays. I think it would be cool if he just went with 11. Not too many prominent 11s in baseball.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 2, 2015 10:59:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 2, 2015 11:00:02 GMT -5
Just a few random thoughts after reading 14 pages....Guerra's RF pull power won't fit @ Fenway is odd as his home ballpark in Greenville has the exact dimensions as Fenway. In regards to this opt-out, Price would have to throw up Arrieta/Grienke numbers for a team to sign him for MORE than 4/127 at that age. I think either way, he's here for 7 yrs. Also, don't you think there is a small chance he will pitch better for 3 years knowing he can possibly cash in again? I can't help but think of a LONG list of players once they sign that big deal with no opt out, their performance doesn't live up to their salary.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Dec 2, 2015 11:00:16 GMT -5
So, what number is on Price's back when they have him model his Red Sox uni on Friday? No. 14 is up on the RF facade and there's no need for Rice to "unretire" it for Price. Perhaps 12 (Napoli's old one), but I'm thinking Vic's old 18 might be the favorite. Or maybe 41, which is available with Ogando's release. I'm sure they want to sell some Price shirts for the holidays. 217
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 88
|
Post by brisox on Dec 2, 2015 11:05:41 GMT -5
So here's what I am hearing 1) while this deal put us in a much better bargaining position, this is not it for the revamp of the staff there is one more deal which we almost closed early this fall for a young cost controlled pitcher who will slot in very well at #2 but will cost us outfield surplus (most likely JBJ) and one more guy that will be an unpopular add on. 2) Then we may look to shed some of our surplus pitching for prospects to restock, although 8 viable starters at 2 levels is what they want to get through 2016 and may just hold pat. 3) meetings will be basically an open Market everyone will be up for discussion that isn't named Mookie ,Xander or Papi. If someone blows us away we could be looking at a very different team. 4) we can't give Hanley away for a bag of balls. Expect to see him at 1B 5) Clay will be on the team in 2016 , if he reestablishes himself early, we will look for prospects for him. one way or another we will look to restock youth. 6) lots of excitement about #12 pick, its a good year to pick that high. 6) everyone wants Joe Kelly in the Pen someone needs to tell him.
As always YMMV
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 2, 2015 11:16:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 2, 2015 11:23:17 GMT -5
I guess my point is that its kind of odd to just assume the opt out means the Red Sox re-sign him into a longer and worse deal. Thats an odd assumption to factor into the analysis in my opinion. The point is that if he's good enough to opt-out, they do not benefit from him continuing to be worth his contract or to exceed the worth of his contract. There is no upside to a contract with an opt-out, but the team keeps all of the downside. In an extreme example - it's like buying a lottery ticket for $1 with a $1 payout. You can lose, but not really win. The best you can do is break even. That's what the opt-out does. There is almost no chance for the team to have the benefit of excess value. You are assuming (along with many others) because he's worth it for the first three years that he'd be worth it for the last 4. I hope he pitches real well opts out and the Sox let him walk. The only problem as I see it is if he shows signs of aging before the first 3 years even if it's the third year and he decides not to opt out. The Sox have no control over that, which is the downside. But him opting out is fine even if he pitches well the first year or two of the "final" four.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Dec 2, 2015 11:25:13 GMT -5
So here's what I am hearing 1) while this deal put us in a much better bargaining position, this is not it for the revamp of the staff there is one more deal which we almost closed early this fall for a young cost controlled pitcher who will slot in very well at #2 but will cost us outfield surplus (most likely JBJ) and one more guy that will be an unpopular add on. 2) Then we may look to shed some of our surplus pitching for prospects to restock, although 8 viable starters at 2 levels is what they want to get through 2016 and may just hold pat. 3) meetings will be basically an open Market everyone will be up for discussion that isn't named Mookie ,Xander or Papi. If someone blows us away we could be looking at a very different team. 4) we can't give Hanley away for a bag of balls. Expect to see him at 1B 5) Clay will be on the team in 2016 , if he reestablishes himself early, we will look for prospects for him. one way or another we will look to restock youth. 6) lots of excitement about #12 pick, its a good year to pick that high. 6) everyone wants Joe Kelly in the Pen someone needs to tell him. As always YMMV On Clay: This team is going for it, I think DD just established that. I'm not a Buch fan, but when he's healthy, he's ace-like. Why would you want to trade him? You can't give $217 to Price, then turn around and trade a healthy Buch for prospects. As has been said around this thread, you can trade one of Miley or Kelly. On Kelly: I for one want Kelly in the rotation. I like the stability that Miley brings, but there may be something in Kelly to see what he can do as the fifth starter. He showed something in his last 7-8 starts. This is really where I talk to my scouts and ask them. I keep the pitcher with the most upside (unless you can get a Shelby Miller for Kelly + JBJ or something) and I trade the other one. Then you have Owens/Johnson/Wright as back-ups in case the #5 falters. But I'd also be ok with keeping Miley as the #5 and put Kelly in the bullpen if the trade market is not attractive enough.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 2, 2015 11:33:56 GMT -5
So here's what I am hearing 1) while this deal put us in a much better bargaining position, this is not it for the revamp of the staff there is one more deal which we almost closed early this fall for a young cost controlled pitcher who will slot in very well at #2 but will cost us outfield surplus (most likely JBJ) and one more guy that will be an unpopular add on. 2) Then we may look to shed some of our surplus pitching for prospects to restock, although 8 viable starters at 2 levels is what they want to get through 2016 and may just hold pat. Is there really OF surplus? I can't think of anyone I'd want in the OF for more than a few innings outside of the guys on the major league roster already ... And, yeah, I'm definitely in the "never enough pitching" camp. Especially when one of those pitchers is named "Clay Buchholz"
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 2, 2015 11:39:30 GMT -5
The point is that if he's good enough to opt-out, they do not benefit from him continuing to be worth his contract or to exceed the worth of his contract. There is no upside to a contract with an opt-out, but the team keeps all of the downside. In an extreme example - it's like buying a lottery ticket for $1 with a $1 payout. You can lose, but not really win. The best you can do is break even. That's what the opt-out does. There is almost no chance for the team to have the benefit of excess value. You are assuming (along with many others) because he's worth it for the first three years that he'd be worth it for the last 4. I hope he pitches real well opts out and the Sox let him walk. The only problem as I see it is if he shows signs of aging before the first 3 years even if it's the third year and he decides not to opt out. The Sox have no control over that, which is the downside. But him opting out is fine even if he pitches well the first year or two of the "final" four. I'm not assuming that he'd be worth the last 4 years. I'm saying it was a possibility, which no longer exists because of the buyout. There is downside and upside risk on deals without opt-outs. With an opt-out, it's almost all downside.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 2, 2015 11:41:16 GMT -5
I thought about this a little more-- here's the simplified version of the above. You're approaching it from the POV of "how likely is it that he's worth $127m in years 4-7?" That's the wrong question to ask-- it should be instead "considering that he's pitched well enough to opt out, how likely is it that he's worth $127m in years 4-7?" The answer to the latter question seems more likely than not, and perhaps significantly more likely than not. I'd argue that it only tempts you more to bid against yourself. This is highly debatable without any sure answers
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 2, 2015 11:43:23 GMT -5
An unrelated note from a long time ago - why did Arod get such a ridiculous contract after he opted out? No team was bidding against the Yankees.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 2, 2015 11:47:59 GMT -5
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 88
|
Post by brisox on Dec 2, 2015 11:51:56 GMT -5
So here's what I am hearing 1) while this deal put us in a much better bargaining position, this is not it for the revamp of the staff there is one more deal which we almost closed early this fall for a young cost controlled pitcher who will slot in very well at #2 but will cost us outfield surplus (most likely JBJ) and one more guy that will be an unpopular add on. 2) Then we may look to shed some of our surplus pitching for prospects to restock, although 8 viable starters at 2 levels is what they want to get through 2016 and may just hold pat. Is there really OF surplus? I can't think of anyone I'd want in the OF for more than a few innings outside of the guys on the major league roster already ... And, yeah, I'm definitely in the "never enough pitching" camp. Especially when one of those pitchers is named "Clay Buchholz" Maybe Surplus is the wrong word but we have some guys that teams want and will give us a solid arm. no such thing as too much pitching
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 88
|
Post by brisox on Dec 2, 2015 12:00:23 GMT -5
So here's what I am hearing 1) while this deal put us in a much better bargaining position, this is not it for the revamp of the staff there is one more deal which we almost closed early this fall for a young cost controlled pitcher who will slot in very well at #2 but will cost us outfield surplus (most likely JBJ) and one more guy that will be an unpopular add on. 2) Then we may look to shed some of our surplus pitching for prospects to restock, although 8 viable starters at 2 levels is what they want to get through 2016 and may just hold pat. 3) meetings will be basically an open Market everyone will be up for discussion that isn't named Mookie ,Xander or Papi. If someone blows us away we could be looking at a very different team. 4) we can't give Hanley away for a bag of balls. Expect to see him at 1B 5) Clay will be on the team in 2016 , if he reestablishes himself early, we will look for prospects for him. one way or another we will look to restock youth. 6) lots of excitement about #12 pick, its a good year to pick that high. 6) everyone wants Joe Kelly in the Pen someone needs to tell him. As always YMMV On Clay: This team is going for it, I think DD just established that. I'm not a Buch fan, but when he's healthy, he's ace-like. Why would you want to trade him? You can't give $217 to Price, then turn around and trade a healthy Buch for prospects. As has been said around this thread, you can trade one of Miley or Kelly. On Kelly: I for one want Kelly in the rotation. I like the stability that Miley brings, but there may be something in Kelly to see what he can do as the fifth starter. He showed something in his last 7-8 starts. This is really where I talk to my scouts and ask them. I keep the pitcher with the most upside (unless you can get a Shelby Miller for Kelly + JBJ or something) and I trade the other one. Then you have Owens/Johnson/Wright as back-ups in case the #5 falters. But I'd also be ok with keeping Miley as the #5 and put Kelly in the bullpen if the trade market is not attractive enough. you missed point one solid #2 starter should be acquired and he is a horse , that pushes Buch to 4 or 5, if he shines . Awesome . If not we have lots of #4 or 5 Starters we can plug in. The phrase "a healthy Buch " actually made me chuckle, clap your hands if you believe in Fairys and he will be healthy this year ! We can not build a team around that hope. Also we can't trade him till he shows he can stay healthy so it wont be till June Miley is a horse and everyone loves him, but he is a guy teams will be beating down our door for this winter and may be our best bet to restock some youth. We still need one more arm in the Pen , if we get this #2 guy it pushes Kelly further down We will start him in the spring as a starter , but he could be a stud in the pen probably hit high 90's for short stints. If not we will pick up a pen arm late in the winter there are lots of options.
|
|
|