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.
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 4, 2016 5:16:36 GMT -5
What if the Sox extended MgGee? Actually, McGee is two years from free agency, so you'd be getting 1 1/3 years of him (about 2 - 2.3 bWAR). I think Owens is likely to have that value each year you have him and he pitches. And maybe more. You would never extend a reliever a full year before you had to, so we'll assume he signs the extension in mid-2017. In which case, instead of trading 5 or 6 years of Owens for 1 1/3 years of McGee, you are trading 5 or 6 years of Owens for 1 1/3 extra years of McGee. Plus a slight savings on his next contract, beginning at age 31. Okay I was just thinking in terms of a Robbie Ross Jr for Ranaudo kind of thing. I loved that deal even though it was a reliever for a starter. Ranaudo looks like a bust at this point. Hopefully Owens turns out to be more. At least he's a lefty, so that holds out some hope for me. The lack of velocity is really glaring though. I really do hope he can at least work in the lower 90's with his fastball instead of the upper 80's soon. I do still like him and I'm not proposing trading him for nothing either. MgGee is pretty nasty. |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 4, 2016 23:22:57 GMT -5
Actually, McGee is two years from free agency, so you'd be getting 1 1/3 years of him (about 2 - 2.3 bWAR). I think Owens is likely to have that value each year you have him and he pitches. And maybe more. You would never extend a reliever a full year before you had to, so we'll assume he signs the extension in mid-2017. In which case, instead of trading 5 or 6 years of Owens for 1 1/3 years of McGee, you are trading 5 or 6 years of Owens for 1 1/3 extra years of McGee. Plus a slight savings on his next contract, beginning at age 31. Okay I was just thinking in terms of a Robbie Ross Jr for Ranaudo kind of thing. I loved that deal even though it was a reliever for a starter. Ranaudo looks like a bust at this point. Hopefully Owens turns out to be more. At least he's a lefty, so that holds out some hope for me. The lack of velocity is really glaring though. I really do hope he can at least work in the lower 90's with his fastball instead of the upper 80's soon. I do still like him and I'm not proposing trading him for nothing either. MgGee is pretty nasty. Adam Wainright averages 90-91 with his fastball. Cliff Lee was about the same. Glavine was, too. Maddux. Kershaw only averages about 92 from the left. Average velocity for a lefty is right around 90-91 and 91-92 for righties. Owens is **marginally** under average, about as much as Wainright is. Owens also has a plus-plus CH and a *very* good swing-and-miss rate. Velocity is the single most overrated attribute in baseball, IMO. Good velocity allows for a bigger velocity spread across pitches, but even low-A hitters will destroy high-90s velocity without command and good secondaries (see Light, Pat and Montas, Francellis during their seasons in Greenville). |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 5, 2016 5:18:50 GMT -5
Okay I was just thinking in terms of a Robbie Ross Jr for Ranaudo kind of thing. I loved that deal even though it was a reliever for a starter. Ranaudo looks like a bust at this point. Hopefully Owens turns out to be more. At least he's a lefty, so that holds out some hope for me. The lack of velocity is really glaring though. I really do hope he can at least work in the lower 90's with his fastball instead of the upper 80's soon. I do still like him and I'm not proposing trading him for nothing either. MgGee is pretty nasty. Adam Wainright averages 90-91 with his fastball. Cliff Lee was about the same. Glavine was, too. Maddux. Kershaw only averages about 92 from the left. Average velocity for a lefty is right around 90-91 and 91-92 for righties. Owens is **marginally** under average, about as much as Wainright is. Owens also has a plus-plus CH and a *very* good swing-and-miss rate. Velocity is the single most overrated attribute in baseball, IMO. Good velocity allows for a bigger velocity spread across pitches, but even low-A hitters will destroy high-90s velocity without command and good secondaries (see Light, Pat and Montas, Francellis during their seasons in Greenville). No offense but you named 4 former ace pitchers and 2 of them are in the hall of fame. All of those guys also have impeccable control. Owens doesn't to say the least. Even still you just mentioned how all those guys had a low 90's fastball and Owens doesn't. If he can increase the speed of his average fastball it will probably increase his K rate and allow more seperation between his good change up. Velocity is overrated until you're not hitting 90 with a average fastball. At that point if you're not perfect with your control, you become batting practice. Until Owens gains some strength, I'm not going to call him anything more than a number 4 starter at best. I like Brian Johnson a lot better for that reason alone. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 5, 2016 7:40:22 GMT -5
The thing is, the plus-plus change is what you dream on. It's just as good as an elite fastball. And just like with an elite fastball, you hope the command/control comes at some point. He's still super young and hasn't stagnated yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Feb 5, 2016 8:52:21 GMT -5
The other thing about Owens is that if he misses or the hitter guesses right, the ball goes a long way. Historically Owens gives up few hits/9 but a good deal of hard contact from observation....
|
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 5, 2016 12:16:04 GMT -5
Adam Wainright averages 90-91 with his fastball. Cliff Lee was about the same. Glavine was, too. Maddux. Kershaw only averages about 92 from the left. Average velocity for a lefty is right around 90-91 and 91-92 for righties. Owens is **marginally** under average, about as much as Wainright is. Owens also has a plus-plus CH and a *very* good swing-and-miss rate. Velocity is the single most overrated attribute in baseball, IMO. Good velocity allows for a bigger velocity spread across pitches, but even low-A hitters will destroy high-90s velocity without command and good secondaries (see Light, Pat and Montas, Francellis during their seasons in Greenville). No offense but you named 4 former ace pitchers and 2 of them are in the hall of fame. All of those guys also have impeccable control. Owens doesn't to say the least. Even still you just mentioned how all those guys had a low 90's fastball and Owens doesn't. If he can increase the speed of his average fastball it will probably increase his K rate and allow more seperation between his good change up. Velocity is overrated until you're not hitting 90 with a average fastball. At that point if you're not perfect with your control, you become batting practice. Until Owens gains some strength, I'm not going to call him anything more than a number 4 starter at best. I like Brian Johnson a lot better for that reason alone. A number four starter, if that's all he is, is still light years more valuable than a late-inning reliever, a guy who's accumulated a handful of wins in 5+ seasons. While I understand that those guys are the flavor-of-the-month, it makes zero sense to do that. It's also foolish to pigeon-hole a starting pitcher who just turned 23 and has had success throughout the minors, someone who's had all of 63 innings of ML experience. We have almost no idea who he is. Even if he turns into a league average starter, that's someone who'll be worth a minimum of 15 wins over a ten year period. That's being very conservative. Trade him for a guy the Sox have no need for? I can't see it. |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 5, 2016 19:30:01 GMT -5
Adam Wainright averages 90-91 with his fastball. Cliff Lee was about the same. Glavine was, too. Maddux. Kershaw only averages about 92 from the left. Average velocity for a lefty is right around 90-91 and 91-92 for righties. Owens is **marginally** under average, about as much as Wainright is. Owens also has a plus-plus CH and a *very* good swing-and-miss rate. Velocity is the single most overrated attribute in baseball, IMO. Good velocity allows for a bigger velocity spread across pitches, but even low-A hitters will destroy high-90s velocity without command and good secondaries (see Light, Pat and Montas, Francellis during their seasons in Greenville). No offense but you named 4 former ace pitchers and 2 of them are in the hall of fame. All of those guys also have impeccable control. Owens doesn't to say the least. Even still you just mentioned how all those guys had a low 90's fastball and Owens doesn't. If he can increase the speed of his average fastball it will probably increase his K rate and allow more seperation between his good change up. Velocity is overrated until you're not hitting 90 with a average fastball. At that point if you're not perfect with your control, you become batting practice. Until Owens gains some strength, I'm not going to call him anything more than a number 4 starter at best. I like Brian Johnson a lot better for that reason alone. That was my point. It's possible to be a great pitcher without great velocity. In fact, it's fairly common. Dallas Keuchel is another very good pitcher with poor velocity. Saying "well they had terrific command..." is redundant. Of course they had to have terrific something, and if it's not velocity it has to be something else. Several (Lee, Glavine, Wainright) developed that command as MLB pitchers. I never claimed Owens was going to be in that class. I'm saying that presuming that he has a low ceiling simply because he lacks velocity is an irrational concern. Using velocity as a surrogate for upside is a fallacy of logic. Owens has deception and a great change. Joe Kelly throws 98. Both need to develop their command and sequencing to be effective. Simply put, velocity does not preclude a pitcher from success nor does it guarantee it. I think you're putting WAY too much emphasis on Owens's radar gun readings. |
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 5, 2016 20:23:04 GMT -5
Being a great pitcher without velocity is like being a great hitter without power. Yeah, it's possible, and there's plenty of examples of it, but come on.
|
|
|
|
Post by aardsmacarta on Feb 5, 2016 21:21:35 GMT -5
That's not a very good analogy. A pitcher can be just as effective without velocity as with velocity. A hitter without power is by definition less effective than the one with power.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 5, 2016 22:51:02 GMT -5
No offense but you named 4 former ace pitchers and 2 of them are in the hall of fame. All of those guys also have impeccable control. Owens doesn't to say the least. Even still you just mentioned how all those guys had a low 90's fastball and Owens doesn't. If he can increase the speed of his average fastball it will probably increase his K rate and allow more seperation between his good change up. Velocity is overrated until you're not hitting 90 with a average fastball. At that point if you're not perfect with your control, you become batting practice. Until Owens gains some strength, I'm not going to call him anything more than a number 4 starter at best. I like Brian Johnson a lot better for that reason alone. That was my point. It's possible to be a great pitcher without great velocity. In fact, it's fairly common. Dallas Keuchel is another very good pitcher with poor velocity. Saying "well they had terrific command..." is redundant. Of course they had to have terrific something, and if it's not velocity it has to be something else. Several (Lee, Glavine, Wainright) developed that command as MLB pitchers. I never claimed Owens was going to be in that class. I'm saying that presuming that he has a low ceiling simply because he lacks velocity is an irrational concern. Using velocity as a surrogate for upside is a fallacy of logic. Owens has deception and a great change. Joe Kelly throws 98. Both need to develop their command and sequencing to be effective. Simply put, velocity does not preclude a pitcher from success nor does it guarantee it. I think you're putting WAY too much emphasis on Owens's radar gun readings. Trust me you don't have to tell me about Joe Kelly. He's still learning how to pitch at the age of 27/28. He's a thrower, not a pitcher. Dallas Keuchel is a bad example too though because he has a sinking fastball with a ton of movement. Even Dallas throws to the lower to mid 90's with his fastball. You say you don't put Owens in that class but then you keep naming ace type pitchers as examples. Give me a better example because until he gains velocity on his fastball, he's Jamie Moyer. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 5, 2016 23:31:09 GMT -5
If you trade Owens for McGee (or another reliever) now, you're trimming your starting pitcher depth in order to add to your reliever depth, and I'm not sure that makes sense. If it's midseason and your rotation is going strong while your SP depth (Johnson, Elias, etc.) also look good but your bullpen looks like it could use a nasty lefty, sure, maybe you consider it. But right now, that starter depth is just as or more valuable to your projected 2016 team than McGee is. Remember, the sixth/seventh/eighth starters on your depth chart almost always end up pitching a combined 200+ innings by the end of the year, so the fact that Owens won't start the season in the rotation doesn't make him expendable. That's why I posed the question at the deadline. Who knows how many starters you need in the middle of the season. By late July, the team should know where they stand in terms of depth. This hypothetical was about thinking along the lines of maximizing Owen's trade value versus and filling a potential team need. The Sox best chance to maximize Owen's full value probably came 2 years ago when he was striking minor league players like crazy while being really young. Hindsight is 20/20. You're not getting a player close to even Quintana or Carlos Carrasco in a deal for Owens anymore. Unless there's a name that includes Devers in that group or something. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 5, 2016 23:37:57 GMT -5
Everyone assumes Owens is a "15 war player" throughout the course of his control with the Sox but then they don't take into account of the fact that he could flame out (with the little velocity he does have) or take huge steps back in the course of his career and Owens turns into Anthony Ranaudo. I hope this doesn't happen, but I'm not ruling it out either.
|
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 6, 2016 2:16:47 GMT -5
That was my point. It's possible to be a great pitcher without great velocity. In fact, it's fairly common. Dallas Keuchel is another very good pitcher with poor velocity. Saying "well they had terrific command..." is redundant. Of course they had to have terrific something, and if it's not velocity it has to be something else. Several (Lee, Glavine, Wainright) developed that command as MLB pitchers. I never claimed Owens was going to be in that class. I'm saying that presuming that he has a low ceiling simply because he lacks velocity is an irrational concern. Using velocity as a surrogate for upside is a fallacy of logic. Owens has deception and a great change. Joe Kelly throws 98. Both need to develop their command and sequencing to be effective. Simply put, velocity does not preclude a pitcher from success nor does it guarantee it. I think you're putting WAY too much emphasis on Owens's radar gun readings. Trust me you don't have to tell me about Joe Kelly. He's still learning how to pitch at the age of 27/28. He's a thrower, not a pitcher. Dallas Keuchel is a bad example too though because he has a sinking fastball with a ton of movement. Even Dallas throws to the lower to mid 90's with his fastball. You say you don't put Owens in that class but then you keep naming ace type pitchers as examples. Give me a better example because until he gains velocity on his fastball, he's Jamie Moyer. Henry Owens has a 70+ change up. He has a pitch that is the equivalent of a 98-mph fastball. Moyer threw in the low-80s, Owens averages a hair under 90...similar to Wade Miley. Only, again, Owens possesses, you know, one of the best change-ups in baseball. And Moyer was a 20-game winner. Im not sure what you're missing here. I'll say it again: A BIG FB IS NOT A PREREQUISITE FOR MLB SUCCESS. I keep naming "ace" types because I'm citing examples of how A BIG FB IS NOT A PREREQUISITE FOR MLB SUCCESS. Owens has a true plus-plus pitch. His FB is fringe-average (less than one mph below league average for a lefty) in terms of velocity but plays up a little due to some deception and his height, which lets him release the ball closer to the plate and thus create a higher "effective" velocity. Owens needs better command and an improved third pitch, not a better fastball. That's because for starters, a three-pitch mix and good command are more important than simply velocity, since A BIG FB IS NOT A PREREQUISITE FOR MLB SUCCESS. Brian Johnson averages about 1mph more than Owens on his FB. If you genuinely think that that makes him a better prospect, I would say that you're confused. Johnson has plus command and four average pitches. I would argue that Owens has more upside, because he has a true elite pitch. But either way, neither of their upsides is related to FB velocity. Some other lefties who threw high-80s and were pretty OK: Hurst, Tudor, Ojeda, Sid Fernandez, Fernando Valenzuela (whose screwball was the elite pitch that Owens's change is). Mark Buerhle isn't bad, either, and he's got really fringy to average stuff but mixes well and has great command. Big velocity can give a pitcher a weapon, but there are lots of different weapons out there, and it's changing speeds, not absolute velocity, that keeps hitters off balance. |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 6, 2016 2:21:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 6, 2016 2:28:25 GMT -5
That "bum" Jamie Moyer, who won 269 games and, during one seven-year period at the height of the steroid era, had seven straight winning seasons with between 13 and **21** wins. He also had more 20-win seasons than Mike Mussina. www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1091&position=PI'm 100% certain that every Sox fan on this site would be thrilled if Owens had Moyer's career (and roughly 50 WAR) playing for the Sox. |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 6, 2016 2:42:28 GMT -5
Everyone assumes Owens is a "15 war player" throughout the course of his control with the Sox but then they don't take into account of the fact that he could flame out (with the little velocity he does have) or take huge steps back in the course of his career and Owens turns into Anthony Ranaudo. I hope this doesn't happen, but I'm not ruling it out either. Ranaudo has a wholly average (to fringy) repertoire. Owens has a truly outstanding change up. And Owens has shown very clear and consistent swing-and-miss capability in MLB. He also had much better BAA numbers and K rates in the minors than Ranaudo. There's nothing to indicate they're headed for similar fates. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 6, 2016 7:23:31 GMT -5
If you trade Owens for McGee (or another reliever) now, you're trimming your starting pitcher depth in order to add to your reliever depth, and I'm not sure that makes sense. If it's midseason and your rotation is going strong while your SP depth (Johnson, Elias, etc.) also look good but your bullpen looks like it could use a nasty lefty, sure, maybe you consider it. But right now, that starter depth is just as or more valuable to your projected 2016 team than McGee is. Remember, the sixth/seventh/eighth starters on your depth chart almost always end up pitching a combined 200+ innings by the end of the year, so the fact that Owens won't start the season in the rotation doesn't make him expendable. That's why I posed the question at the deadline. Who knows how many starters you need in the middle of the season. By late July, the team should know where they stand in terms of depth. This hypothetical was about thinking along the lines of maximizing Owen's trade value versus and filling a potential team need. The Sox best chance to maximize Owen's full value probably came 2 years ago when he was striking minor league players like crazy while being really young. Hindsight is 20/20. You're not getting a player close to even Quintana or Carlos Carrasco in a deal for Owens anymore. Unless there's a name that includes Devers in that group or something. I don't think it is true that Owens is a significantly worse prospect now than he was two years ago. He probably has less upside (his velo never improved much, and while he's improved his command, it could have improved more), but he's also continued to improve while staying healthy and reaching MLB-ready status. His BA ranking has held steady in the 40s the last two years, and if he were eligible this year, I don't think it'd be that much lower. You also seem to be implying that Owens' trade value now is higher than it will be midseason. I don't think that is a fair assumption. His trade value could well improve, and I don't really think you're trading high if you trade him right now. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 6, 2016 8:51:53 GMT -5
That "bum" Jamie Moyer, who won 269 games and, during one seven-year period at the height of the steroid era, had seven straight winning seasons with between 13 and **21** wins. He also had more 20-win seasons than Mike Mussina. www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1091&position=PI'm 100% certain that every Sox fan on this site would be thrilled if Owens had Moyer's career (and roughly 50 WAR) playing for the Sox. I'm not saying Moyer is a bum. You just keep throwing out bad examples. Moyer is the best case scenario Owens will live up to but probably won't. Now you're listing Fernando Venezuela? C'mon. Brian Johnson also has a pretty "elite" curveball depending upon who you ask and has way better command. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 6, 2016 8:54:31 GMT -5
Dallas throws a sinking fastball. It's totally different than the straight fastball Owens throws. His movement alone grades out as elite. It's different when it's not a traditional fastball. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 6, 2016 8:59:36 GMT -5
That's why I posed the question at the deadline. Who knows how many starters you need in the middle of the season. By late July, the team should know where they stand in terms of depth. This hypothetical was about thinking along the lines of maximizing Owen's trade value versus and filling a potential team need. The Sox best chance to maximize Owen's full value probably came 2 years ago when he was striking minor league players like crazy while being really young. Hindsight is 20/20. You're not getting a player close to even Quintana or Carlos Carrasco in a deal for Owens anymore. Unless there's a name that includes Devers in that group or something. I don't think it is true that Owens is a significantly worse prospect now than he was two years ago. He probably has less upside (his velo never improved much, and while he's improved his command, it could have improved more), but he's also continued to improve while staying healthy and reaching MLB-ready status. His BA ranking has held steady in the 40s the last two years, and if he were eligible this year, I don't think it'd be that much lower. You also seem to be implying that Owens' trade value now is higher than it will be midseason. I don't think that is a fair assumption. His trade value could well improve, and I don't really think you're trading high if you trade him right now. It could be the best time to sell on him before he reaches "bust" status. Hopefully he can keep a era in the 3's in the minors this year so his perception won't change by midseason. The Sox should of sold high on him 2 years ago but nothing they can do will change that now. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 6, 2016 9:22:52 GMT -5
I'm not saying Owens is a total lost cause either but he's behind Johnson and Rodriguez at this point. He DOESN'T have good control. Who knows if that'll ever change either? At this point he has little margin for error, DESPITE having a great change up.
That's why selling on him soon COULD be a good idea.
The only two things I hold out hope for is that he DOES gain strength and gains improvement in his command WHILE he's still young. To me this has been one of the biggest stories I've been looking out of spring training the past two years every time I have been tuning into spring training. How does Owens fastball look? Did he gain strength? It's always the number one thing I hope for each year because I do want him to be a good option for this team going forward. Having a iffy fastball completely changes the conversation unless you have elite command. Which Owens doesn't have either.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 6, 2016 9:46:50 GMT -5
I'm not saying Owens is a total lost cause either but he's behind Johnson and Rodriguez at this point. He DOESN'T have good control. Who knows if that'll ever change either? At this point he has little margin for error, DESPITE having a great change up. T hat's why selling on him soon COULD be a good idea. The only two things I hold out hope for is that he DOES gain strength and gains improvement in his command WHILE he's still young. To me this has been one of the biggest stories I've been looking out of spring training the past two years every time I have been tuning into spring training. How does Owens fastball look? Did he gain strength? It's always the number one thing I hope for each year because I do want him to be a good option for this team going forward. Having a iffy fastball completely changes the conversation unless you have elite command. Which Owens doesn't have either. Selling on him soon COULD be a bad idea. You talk about him like he's a finished product. I don't know that he'll ever be what we hope he turns into. But let's look at what we do know. He has pitched well at every level, and has flirted with no-hitters meaning he's tough to hit even if his stuff isn't eye-popping. We know he gets a lot of swings and misses. That to me bodes well. Minor leaguers have trouble putting the bat on the ball and in the majors that carried over some. His work ethic is good. That's no guarantee, but it does tell us he'll continue to work at his craft, and what he needs is better command. He's still young, so I don't think it's really that hard to believe that he'll find it. What else do we know? We know that he doesn't have E-Rod's ceiling and likely won't be as effective. We don't know that Johnson will necessarily be better than him. We do know that Buchholz is injury prone and Kelly's innings are a question mark and that the Sox need quality depth in the rotation. I suspect of Wright, Johnson, Elias, and Owens, it will be Owens that could be good enough to make a post-season rotation if there are injuries that open the door. You could be right and Owens' command never improves and he's nothing more than a bottom of the rotation type starter, but with his age and his ability to make batters swing and miss, and his impressive track record in the minors, to go a long with his age and makeup, I'd take the gamble on Owens. I do think Owens will become a solid #3 type starter. The only question I really have is when. Will he figure it out at some point this year, next year, or a few years in the future after some failed attempts (the way some other pitchers do)? As it is, the Sox do have a real need for him. His only job right now is to get better at Pawtucket and be a quality option when injuries hit and the Sox need him. There is a lot of value in that. |
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Feb 6, 2016 11:07:56 GMT -5
If you trade Owens for McGee (or another reliever) now, you're trimming your starting pitcher depth in order to add to your reliever depth, and I'm not sure that makes sense. If it's midseason and your rotation is going strong while your SP depth (Johnson, Elias, etc.) also look good but your bullpen looks like it could use a nasty lefty, sure, maybe you consider it. But right now, that starter depth is just as or more valuable to your projected 2016 team than McGee is. Remember, the sixth/seventh/eighth starters on your depth chart almost always end up pitching a combined 200+ innings by the end of the year, so the fact that Owens won't start the season in the rotation doesn't make him expendable. That's why I posed the question at the deadline. Who knows how many starters you need in the middle of the season. By late July, the team should know where they stand in terms of depth. This hypothetical was about thinking along the lines of maximizing Owen's trade value versus and filling a potential team need. The Sox best chance to maximize Owen's full value probably came 2 years ago when he was striking minor league players like crazy while being really young. Hindsight is 20/20. You're not getting a player close to even Quintana or Carlos Carrasco in a deal for Owens anymore. Unless there's a name that includes Devers in that group or something. Agree you don't get a top starter in a deal built around Owens without including a big time prospect. I disagree on Owens trade value being maximized two years ago. I've been watching, and playing baseball for 50 years, and one thing I've learned is to wait out tall lanky lefties with great stuff. They just take longer to gain the control needed to win consistently. As I mentioned in the Swihart to LF thread, there's little reason to do anything at the moment except let this play itself out. The patience exhibited by BC, while resulting in 3 last place finishes in 4 years, is paying off now. We need a little more patience with some of these kids like Owens and Johnson. IMO, this is the year both take that step forward and give DDo something to think about next trading window. |
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Feb 6, 2016 12:10:18 GMT -5
That "bum" Jamie Moyer, who won 269 games and, during one seven-year period at the height of the steroid era, had seven straight winning seasons with between 13 and **21** wins. He also had more 20-win seasons than Mike Mussina. www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1091&position=PI'm 100% certain that every Sox fan on this site would be thrilled if Owens had Moyer's career (and roughly 50 WAR) playing for the Sox. I'm not saying Moyer is a bum. You just keep throwing out bad examples. Moyer is the best case scenario Owens will live up to but probably won't. Now you're listing Fernando Venezuela? C'mon. Brian Johnson also has a pretty "elite" curveball depending upon who you ask and has way better command. Keep in mind that, if we didn't trade Jaime Moyer, Digger Phelps son-in-law, we never would have gotten Darren Bragg.  |
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Feb 6, 2016 15:55:16 GMT -5
(Maybe one more Owens post will get all of them moved to the appropriate thread!)
Lost in this discussion is that Owens graded out well last year in advanced metrics. In fact, the more advanced the metric, the better he grades.
Baseball Prospectus has cooked up DRA-: "DRA does a very good job of measuring a pitcher’s actual responsibility for the runs that scored while he was on the mound—certainly better than any metric we are aware of in the public domain. And only DRA gives you the assurance that a pitcher’s performance is actually being considered in the context of the batter, catcher, runners on base, as well as the stadium and stadium environment in which the baseball game occurred."
There were 174 MLB pitchers last year who threw 60 or more IP as a starter. Owens was in a 6-way for 42nd with an 88 DRA-. For a point of comparison, Lester was 91. And maybe that's not a surprise given that he was in a 3-way tie for 17th in Swing-and-miss %.
And most of that was done in the zone. Here is the Z-Contact% Leaderboard:
.790 Scherzer
.783 Sale
.806 Kershaw
.811 Owens
.820 Price
.827 Estrada
.830 Gausman
.836 Harvey
.837 de Grom
.839 Fernandez
.839 Dickey
There is, of course, an insanely significant statistical correlation between Z-Contact and ERA-, and .811 predicts an ERA- of 82.
Steamer's projection knows nothing of such advanced analysis, and it has Owens with 2.0 RA9-WAR per 30 starts, which would have ranked him 77th last year out of 150 MLB starters.
So, he's a longtime near-elite pitching prospect who everyone acknowledges is still very much a work in progress, and he made 11 starts last year and was better than MLB average and quite possibly quite a bit better, with some indications of elite ability. And we have the luxury of sending him back to AAA to work on his one missing skill, plus FB command.
Who are we trading him for again?
(If you're wondering how he did this despite ranking 156th out of 173 in FB effectiveness [raw Pitch/fx data, combining FA, FT, and SI], he ranked 3rd in changeup effectiveness, and 1st among guys who threw it often [more than than a standard deviation above average]. Hamels was second. And yes, there's a relationship between FB effectiveness and CH effectiveness, but last year, among the 81 guys who threw the change more often than average, the former explained just 8.5% of the latter. When you adjust for that, Owens ties Greinke for the 2nd best change. Adam Warren was second unadjusted, first adjusted.)
|
|
|
