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 mredsox89 on Feb 6, 2016 16:13:02 GMT -5
Anecdotally, I feel people see Ranaudo and his good AAA stats (despite poor advanced metrics) and then don't want to see another prospect who put up decent+ MILB numbers and the Sox come up with relatively nothing.
IDK if Owen's upside is as high as we thought it might be, but as many have said, even a mediocre starter at pennies at the back end of the rotation is really valuable. Sure, there are things for him to work on and things that he needs to improve on to make that his floor, but the front of the rotation is good enough that he shouldn't have too much pressure on him, though there are multiple guys competing for the same spot and he may/likely have to put in some time in Pawtucket before he gets another shot in Boston
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 6, 2016 17:48:00 GMT -5
If Owens can get regularly get into the low 90's with his fastball this conversation can totally change. I'm hoping it does and Owens will fill out in his mid 20's like every other young guy does. I don't need much velocity. Just give me something better than a four seam high 80's fastball.
Unlike the overated Hanley and Pablo weight issues, Owens' weight and strength is something I have kept an eye on for a while. If he just improves by a tick or two, then he could easily become a number 2 or 3 type of pitcher. I do hold out hope that happens.
There is weight to be gained in that pencil like frame of his. I just wish someone was feeding this guy 5 protein shakes a day or something.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 6, 2016 17:55:04 GMT -5
(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.) This, to me, was the biggest news of Owens's season last season. When I looked at the effectiveness of his pitches back in October, I was surprised at just how good his change really fared in his first season. He doesn't just have a good change, he has a truly elite pitch, one of those "best in baseball" pitches that makes everything else work. That's a foundation to build on that's a lot more relevant than raw FB velocity readings. Frankly, Henry Owens last season was everything I hoped he'd be. Mentally, I have him penciled into the rotation in 2017 and for 5-6 years after. I could change that with some unexpected step back - and he still does need to sharpen his FB command and consistency on his breaking ball - but I have him mentally penciled into the rotation in 2017 and for a few years after that at short money. He's highly unlikely to be any kind of ace pitcher, and there's still some downside risk if he somehow is unable to sharpen up the rest of his game, but I think his 50% projection is pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 6, 2016 18:31:13 GMT -5
If Owens can get regularly get into the low 90's with his fastball this conversation can totally change. I'm hoping it does and Owens will fill out in his mid 20's like every other young guy does. I don't need much velocity. Just give me something better than a four seam high 80's fastball. Unlike the overated Hanley and Pablo weight issues, Owens' weight and strength is something I have kept an eye on for a while. If he just improves by a tick or two, then he could easily become a number 2 or 3 type of pitcher. I do hold out hope that happens. There is weight to be gained in that pencil like frame of his. I just wish someone was feeding this guy 5 protein shakes a day or something. Owens was up to 220 last spring. He was 160ish when he was drafted. He's doing quite well with working out and adding muscle and weight. Owens' changeup is so good, I'm convinced that he could throw only the change as a relief pitcher and be better than McGee right now.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 6, 2016 18:57:54 GMT -5
If Owens can get regularly get into the low 90's with his fastball this conversation can totally change. I'm hoping it does and Owens will fill out in his mid 20's like every other young guy does. I don't need much velocity. Just give me something better than a four seam high 80's fastball. Unlike the overated Hanley and Pablo weight issues, Owens' weight and strength is something I have kept an eye on for a while. If he just improves by a tick or two, then he could easily become a number 2 or 3 type of pitcher. I do hold out hope that happens. There is weight to be gained in that pencil like frame of his. I just wish someone was feeding this guy 5 protein shakes a day or something. Owens was up to 220 last spring. He was 160ish when he was drafted. He's doing quite well with working out and adding muscle and weight. Owens' changeup is so good, I'm convinced that he could throw only the change as a relief pitcher and be better than McGee right now. Owens might throw harder as a reliever too but I'm hoping that he continues to gain more strength like you mentioned. He just has a little ways to go to get me in the conversation of keeping him versus seeing what the Sox can get for him. Of course none of what I think really matters but I think the same applies to Dombrowski. It's a wait and see kind of thing. If he can get a tick or two back up on that fastball, I'll be in the "keep him" group all over again.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Feb 6, 2016 19:36:21 GMT -5
If Owens can get regularly get into the low 90's with his fastball this conversation can totally change. I'm hoping it does and Owens will fill out in his mid 20's like every other young guy does. I don't need much velocity. Just give me something better than a four seam high 80's fastball. Unlike the overated Hanley and Pablo weight issues, Owens' weight and strength is something I have kept an eye on for a while. If he just improves by a tick or two, then he could easily become a number 2 or 3 type of pitcher. I do hold out hope that happens. There is weight to be gained in that pencil like frame of his. I just wish someone was feeding this guy 5 protein shakes a day or something. I think that Owens right now is a mid-rotation starter, maybe an average #3 but probably more of a borderline #3/#4 (the #3/#4 borderline is precisely MLB average). (I think that part of his tremendous DRA- was hitter unfamiliarity). You're correct in thinking that he could conceivably add a couple of mph, but I think that if he does, how much better does that make him? I'm not sure it lifts him an entire rotation slot. OTOH, there's no doubt that he can improve his FB command. And given that he has an elite changeup, one that will be in the conversation for best-in-baseball (and already is if you trust the SSS), and a very good and strange slider (it's slow, and he drops down a bit and gets big movement to his glove side), developing some kind of above average FB command (e.g., 55 on the 20-80 scale) will, I believe, go a lot further than an extra 1 or 2 mph of velocity. And I think it's more doable as well. Now, he also has an inconsistent curve that he can continue to develop. He has yet to try throwing a two-seamer/sinker* or a cutter, two pitches that are actually relatively easy to learn and that Eduardo Rodriguez added last year. Those are all additional paths of improvement to becoming an ace. But the big one is improving the FB command, and there's reason to believe he might be able to make a significant, discrete step forward with that -- one I just discovered and is in the footnote. I actually think that adding any velocity is last on the list -- if it happens, it's gravy. *BrooksBaseball classifies about half of his fastballs as sinkers, but a look at the individual games shows no bimodal division between his fastballs at all. They're just a big cluster of 4-seamers with more variation than is usual, so much so that their classification algorithm (different from MLB.com's) is arbitrarily dividing them in two. That his spin angle and rotation speed is so variable is very likely connected to his inconsistent command; it suggests that the latter is as much or more about the pitch coming out of his hand inconsistently than his mechanics being inconsistent. Which would make sense given that his mechanics throwing the changeup, and hence his command, are just fine. I don't think this insight will escape new pitching analytics guru Brian Bannister, who seems to have been responsible for the strong finishes of Porcello and Kelly. It's possible that no coach has ever worked with him on his grip and release. Tweaking his FB grip might be a quick fix for his command. I really like his chances of becoming a top-of-rotation starter.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,977
|
Post by jimoh on Feb 6, 2016 21:15:27 GMT -5
Owens was up to 220 last spring. He was 160ish when he was drafted. He's doing quite well with working out and adding muscle and weight. Owens' changeup is so good, I'm convinced that he could throw only the change as a relief pitcher and be better than McGee right now. www.overthemonster.com/2011/6/6/2210457/henry-owens-2011-mlb-draft-red-sox-picksBy Ben Buchanan @overthemonster on Jun 6, 2011, 10:33p "18-year-old Owens, at 6-foot-6 and 190 pounds....."
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 7, 2016 0:19:24 GMT -5
Sheesh. I went off to BR to check out his game logs, and that stuff is now linked on a game-by-game basis to the datamine at Brooks Baseball and its flood of visuals. This stuff still leaves me constantly amazed. It's a no-brainer, except when you realize what's had to come together to make this happen. Great stuff.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 7, 2016 0:22:02 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. You are clearly incredibly confused as to what I'm providing examples of. You call them "bad," but actually they're **exactly** what I'm intending: My examples: Excellent pitchers who were that way despite middling fastballs. ***What you seem to have convinced yourself my examples are: pitchers Henry Owens will become.*** This is a ridiculous induction on your part. This is in your head, it's not anything I ever said. What I said was: Henry Owens's fastball velocity does not preclude him from being a successful MLB pitcher. Not a single other person on here, not a single scouting report you can find **anywhere** other than in the fabrication station in your own mind, would describe Johnson as having an "elite" curveball. At absolute best, it might be a 55 or possibly 60-grade (solid average to plus), with 60 being a stretch. He is essentially universally described as having good command of four **average** pitches. You can keep making up things, like Keuchel's FB velocity, or Johnson's curveball quality, but in the end, you've never provided any proper evidence that refutes my idea that high FB velocity is not required for MLB success. Now, if you can somehow provide such evidence, I'd love to see it.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 7, 2016 0:25:45 GMT -5
If Owens can get regularly get into the low 90's with his fastball this conversation can totally change. I'm hoping it does and Owens will fill out in his mid 20's like every other young guy does. I don't need much velocity. Just give me something better than a four seam high 80's fastball. Unlike the overated Hanley and Pablo weight issues, Owens' weight and strength is something I have kept an eye on for a while. If he just improves by a tick or two, then he could easily become a number 2 or 3 type of pitcher. I do hold out hope that happens. There is weight to be gained in that pencil like frame of his. I just wish someone was feeding this guy 5 protein shakes a day or something. Owens was up to 220 last spring. He was 160ish when he was drafted. He's doing quite well with working out and adding muscle and weight. Owens' changeup is so good, I'm convinced that he could throw only the change as a relief pitcher and be better than McGee right now. It certainly worked for Trevor Hoffman. Although dirtywater would've traded him for a sack of potatoes and a couple old ticket stubs, because closers also need fastball velocity to be successful too. That's why Koji's been such a bum.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 7, 2016 0:32:35 GMT -5
If Owens can get regularly get into the low 90's with his fastball this conversation can totally change. I'm hoping it does and Owens will fill out in his mid 20's like every other young guy does. I don't need much velocity. Just give me something better than a four seam high 80's fastball. Unlike the overated Hanley and Pablo weight issues, Owens' weight and strength is something I have kept an eye on for a while. If he just improves by a tick or two, then he could easily become a number 2 or 3 type of pitcher. I do hold out hope that happens. There is weight to be gained in that pencil like frame of his. I just wish someone was feeding this guy 5 protein shakes a day or something. I think that Owens right now is a mid-rotation starter, maybe an average #3 but probably more of a borderline #3/#4 (the #3/#4 borderline is precisely MLB average). (I think that part of his tremendous DRA- was hitter unfamiliarity). You're correct in thinking that he could conceivably add a couple of mph, but I think that if he does, how much better does that make him? I'm not sure it lifts him an entire rotation slot. OTOH, there's no doubt that he can improve his FB command. And given that he has an elite changeup, one that will be in the conversation for best-in-baseball (and already is if you trust the SSS), and a very good and strange slider (it's slow, and he drops down a bit and gets big movement to his glove side), developing some kind of above average FB command (e.g., 55 on the 20-80 scale) will, I believe, go a lot further than an extra 1 or 2 mph of velocity. And I think it's more doable as well. Now, he also has an inconsistent curve that he can continue to develop. He has yet to try throwing a two-seamer/sinker* or a cutter, two pitches that are actually relatively easy to learn and that Eduardo Rodriguez added last year. Those are all additional paths of improvement to becoming an ace. But the big one is improving the FB command, and there's reason to believe he might be able to make a significant, discrete step forward with that -- one I just discovered and is in the footnote. I actually think that adding any velocity is last on the list -- if it happens, it's gravy. *BrooksBaseball classifies about half of his fastballs as sinkers, but a look at the individual games shows no bimodal division between his fastballs at all. They're just a big cluster of 4-seamers with more variation than is usual, so much so that their classification algorithm (different from MLB.com's) is arbitrarily dividing them in two. That his spin angle and rotation speed is so variable is very likely connected to his inconsistent command; it suggests that the latter is as much or more about the pitch coming out of his hand inconsistently than his mechanics being inconsistent. Which would make sense given that his mechanics throwing the changeup, and hence his command, are just fine. I don't think this insight will escape new pitching analytics guru Brian Bannister, who seems to have been responsible for the strong finishes of Porcello and Kelly. It's possible that no coach has ever worked with him on his grip and release. Tweaking his FB grip might be a quick fix for his command. I really like his chances of becoming a top-of-rotation starter. Eric, my thinking is that, if he does add velocity, it will be because he's taking a little off his FB now to get it over. If I recall, historically, pitchers' fastball velocity peaks at 22-24 and drops slightly around 26, then again more significantly from 30-32. Obviously that doesn't hold true across the board, it's an average, but given how much stronger Owens has gotten, without a bump in velocity, it seems unlikely to occur now due to strength, although still possible due to release/mechanics/effort. Regardless, for all of the reasons you mention, I'm quite convinced he's capable of being a solid 3 and certainly growing into a 2.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 7, 2016 3:17:16 GMT -5
For all of Owens' ability to get swings and misses, he didn't actually strike that many guys out (at least in part because he was in so many hitters' counts), walked a bunch of guys, and have up too many hard-hit balls in the air. I think he's more of a fourth/fifth starter right now, with the ability to be a third starter if his command continues to improve.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 7, 2016 6:17:09 GMT -5
Owens was up to 220 last spring. He was 160ish when he was drafted. He's doing quite well with working out and adding muscle and weight. Owens' changeup is so good, I'm convinced that he could throw only the change as a relief pitcher and be better than McGee right now. It certainly worked for Trevor Hoffman. Although dirtywater would've traded him for a sack of potatoes and a couple old ticket stubs, because closers also need fastball velocity to be successful too. That's why Koji's been such a bum. Right because Jake MgGee is a bum? Stop acting like I don't think anything of the guy. A trade of MgGee wouldn't exactly be a sack of potatoes. You're freaking ridiculous and borderline childish.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 7, 2016 6:28:39 GMT -5
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. You are clearly incredibly confused as to what I'm providing examples of. You call them "bad," but actually they're **exactly** what I'm intending: My examples: Excellent pitchers who were that way despite middling fastballs. ***What you seem to have convinced yourself my examples are: pitchers Henry Owens will become.*** This is a ridiculous induction on your part. This is in your head, it's not anything I ever said. What I said was: Henry Owens's fastball velocity does not preclude him from being a successful MLB pitcher. Not a single other person on here, not a single scouting report you can find **anywhere** other than in the fabrication station in your own mind, would describe Johnson as having an "elite" curveball. At absolute best, it might be a 55 or possibly 60-grade (solid average to plus), with 60 being a stretch. He is essentially universally described as having good command of four **average** pitches. You can keep making up things, like Keuchel's FB velocity, or Johnson's curveball quality, but in the end, you've never provided any proper evidence that refutes my idea that high FB velocity is not required for MLB success. Now, if you can somehow provide such evidence, I'd love to see it. I never said he couldn't be a major league pitcher. Not once. In fact I threw the best comp compared to anything you have put out there- Jamie Moyer. Johnson has a really good curveball, the thing is ridiculous. He can change speeds with it, he can locate it both sides of the plate, and he can put batters away with it. He can also change direction with it, instead of always being 1-7, he can drop it 12-6. The trade of MgGee for Owens would give the Sox immediate impact at the deadline. It would be filling a potential need in the middle of contention while taking out the risk of seeing what Owens could develop into. Sure they would also risk future starting pitching depth but the Sox have options right now with Wright, Elias, and Johnson along with Kopech and Espinoza in a year or two. It's a risk versus reward deal. Something Dave Dombrowski does a lot of.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 7, 2016 8:23:00 GMT -5
You are clearly incredibly confused as to what I'm providing examples of. You call them "bad," but actually they're **exactly** what I'm intending: My examples: Excellent pitchers who were that way despite middling fastballs. ***What you seem to have convinced yourself my examples are: pitchers Henry Owens will become.*** This is a ridiculous induction on your part. This is in your head, it's not anything I ever said. What I said was: Henry Owens's fastball velocity does not preclude him from being a successful MLB pitcher. Not a single other person on here, not a single scouting report you can find **anywhere** other than in the fabrication station in your own mind, would describe Johnson as having an "elite" curveball. At absolute best, it might be a 55 or possibly 60-grade (solid average to plus), with 60 being a stretch. He is essentially universally described as having good command of four **average** pitches. You can keep making up things, like Keuchel's FB velocity, or Johnson's curveball quality, but in the end, you've never provided any proper evidence that refutes my idea that high FB velocity is not required for MLB success. Now, if you can somehow provide such evidence, I'd love to see it. I never said he couldn't be a major league pitcher. Not once. In fact I threw the best comp compared to anything you have put out there- Jamie Moyer. Johnson has a really good curveball, the thing is ridiculous. He can change speeds with it, he can locate it both sides of the plate, and he can put batters away with it. He can also change direction with it, instead of always being 1-7, he can drop it 12-6. The trade of MgGee for Owens would give the Sox immediate impact at the deadline. It would be filling a potential need in the middle of contention while taking out the risk of seeing what Owens could develop into. Sure they would also risk future starting pitching depth but the Sox have options right now with Wright, Elias, and Johnson along with Kopech and Espinoza in a year or two. It's a risk versus reward deal. Something Dave Dombrowski does a lot of. I would hope that Dombrowski wouldn't do a lot of this. Owens right now is a depth option they need and there's a decent chance that he can be a valuable starter under the Red Sox control for six years at a minimal cost. That's a lot of value. It's not like he's "blocked" or that the Sox have many better options coming up immediately than him. More than a middle reliever, and I like McGee a good deal but I wouldn't give up six years of Owens for a year and a half of McGee. I know you like Johnson more. That's fine. I prefer Owens ceiling to the highness of Johnson't floor. We all know it hinges on Owens gaining command. You get that with experience, and he should get more AAA experience this year. In my mind Owens is hardly a finished product. I would expect him to be a very viable option in the rotation for 2017 and beyond. I would say, given the uncertain state of Buchholz and Kelly's fragility the Sox will need both Johnson and Owens going forward. You see what young cost controlled #3 type starters are costing in the trade market. As much as I like McGee I don't deal Owens for him. The Sox bullpen is pretty good as is right now. Kimbrel is dominating at the end of the game. Koji, Tazawa, and Carson Smith comprise a strong trio in front of Kimbrel while Ross pitched very well last season, particularly in the second half. He's kind of like an Alan Embree lefty. Meanwhile it's hard to pitch better against lefties than Layne did. The problem is that last year he was way overexposed against righties. That should not happen this year. Could McGee still help the pen? Sure, but given the rate of attrition for starting pitching throughout the season and the need for young pitching in the future, I would only deal Owens as part of a starting pitching upgrade and at the moment I'm not sure it's absolutely necessary.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Feb 7, 2016 9:22:11 GMT -5
Yeah, unless someone gets hurt or is incomprehensively ineffective, I don't see the need to trade for McGee. As redsox0407champs pointed out, we have a deep pen, how deep do you want it. One criticism of the Yankees pen right now is there are just aren't enough high leverage innings to go around for all 3 guys, all of whom could be closers - at least relative to the cost. I just don't understand the obsession with McGee.
Let's just see what unfolds and where the team's weakest areas are and whether they can addressed for reasonable a cost. The Sox will have the chips to make a move at the deadline if they need/want to.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Feb 7, 2016 9:39:26 GMT -5
For all of Owens' ability to get swings and misses, he didn't actually strike that many guys out (at least in part because he was in so many hitters' counts), walked a bunch of guys, and have up too many hard-hit balls in the air. I think he's more of a fourth/fifth starter right now, with the ability to be a third starter if his command continues to improve. But DRA says the lack of strikeouts was essentially an illusion or distortion created by confounding variables or context. When I get a chance I'll look into both the metric and his deeper numbers and try to determine exactly what DRA claims was going on.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Feb 7, 2016 11:13:30 GMT -5
For all of Owens' ability to get swings and misses, he didn't actually strike that many guys out (at least in part because he was in so many hitters' counts), walked a bunch of guys, and have up too many hard-hit balls in the air. I think he's more of a fourth/fifth starter right now, with the ability to be a third starter if his command continues to improve. Yup. I agree with this. I suspect that he will have very good games and ones that are forgettable...not a great amount of low scoring consistency. A walk or two, a long ball and suddenly we're scrambling.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 7, 2016 12:12:34 GMT -5
For all of Owens' ability to get swings and misses, he didn't actually strike that many guys out (at least in part because he was in so many hitters' counts), walked a bunch of guys, and have up too many hard-hit balls in the air. I think he's more of a fourth/fifth starter right now, with the ability to be a third starter if his command continues to improve. Yup. I agree with this. I suspect that he will have very good games and ones that are forgettable...not a great amount of low scoring consistency. A walk or two, a long ball and suddenly we're scrambling. That describes about 99% of pitchers who have made the majors that young, including ERod.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 7, 2016 12:28:24 GMT -5
For all of Owens' ability to get swings and misses, he didn't actually strike that many guys out (at least in part because he was in so many hitters' counts), walked a bunch of guys, and have up too many hard-hit balls in the air. I think he's more of a fourth/fifth starter right now, with the ability to be a third starter if his command continues to improve. True, he didn't get a lot of Ks and certainly gave up hard contact, but like you said, it's about his command. To me those swings and misses tell me he has building blocks to become a guy who can strike batters out consistently. Like you said, he needs to get ahead in the count. If - and that's the big IF - he can get ahead consistently in the count he has the ability I think to put hitters away. I think he needs experience. Maybe he never gets there, but if he does, then the Sox have a cost controlled starter for six years, who's left-handed and can be a solid #3 on a post-season caliber team. That's a very valuable commodity. I think that the Sox owe it to themselves to find out next year, if not later this season. Sure he could be dangled as trade bait if Rodriguez steps back, Buchholz gets hurt, Porcello doesn't bounce back, Kelly doesn't improve, but all of that would have to happen and the bullpen would have to be kind of suspect for the Sox to make that kind of a move, and who know's who's available and if it would be worth it.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 7, 2016 13:32:05 GMT -5
I never said he couldn't be a major league pitcher. Not once. In fact I threw the best comp compared to anything you have put out there- Jamie Moyer. Johnson has a really good curveball, the thing is ridiculous. He can change speeds with it, he can locate it both sides of the plate, and he can put batters away with it. He can also change direction with it, instead of always being 1-7, he can drop it 12-6. The trade of MgGee for Owens would give the Sox immediate impact at the deadline. It would be filling a potential need in the middle of contention while taking out the risk of seeing what Owens could develop into. Sure they would also risk future starting pitching depth but the Sox have options right now with Wright, Elias, and Johnson along with Kopech and Espinoza in a year or two. It's a risk versus reward deal. Something Dave Dombrowski does a lot of. I would hope that Dombrowski wouldn't do a lot of this. Owens right now is a depth option they need and there's a decent chance that he can be a valuable starter under the Red Sox control for six years at a minimal cost. That's a lot of value. It's not like he's "blocked" or that the Sox have many better options coming up immediately than him. More than a middle reliever, and I like McGee a good deal but I wouldn't give up six years of Owens for a year and a half of McGee. I know you like Johnson more. That's fine. I prefer Owens ceiling to the highness of Johnson't floor. We all know it hinges on Owens gaining command. You get that with experience, and he should get more AAA experience this year. In my mind Owens is hardly a finished product. I would expect him to be a very viable option in the rotation for 2017 and beyond. I would say, given the uncertain state of Buchholz and Kelly's fragility the Sox will need both Johnson and Owens going forward. You see what young cost controlled #3 type starters are costing in the trade market. As much as I like McGee I don't deal Owens for him. The Sox bullpen is pretty good as is right now. Kimbrel is dominating at the end of the game. Koji, Tazawa, and Carson Smith comprise a strong trio in front of Kimbrel while Ross pitched very well last season, particularly in the second half. He's kind of like an Alan Embree lefty. Meanwhile it's hard to pitch better against lefties than Layne did. The problem is that last year he was way overexposed against righties. That should not happen this year. Could McGee still help the pen? Sure, but given the rate of attrition for starting pitching throughout the season and the need for young pitching in the future, I would only deal Owens as part of a starting pitching upgrade and at the moment I'm not sure it's absolutely necessary. Now that's a fair argument. Just because I would trade Owens for MgGee, that doesn't mean I expect the Sox to. Starting pitching depth is important too but if the Sox are fine in that area come end of July, it's something we could all look out for. I don't see a lineup upgrade coming in July (unless it's a rental type, maybe a Carlos Gonzalez) and I don't see a rotation upgrade because of the price to get that kind of upgrade (unless it's a pitcher on a expiring contract). So lefty reliever is a obvious option from my point of view as of now (all of that can change quickly however). As the bullpen is constructed now, they don't need MgGee. I actually think the Sox bullpen is better than the yankees because they have more quality depth. I was just thinking along the lines of future needs of this club down the road if everything breaks right. Of course the Sox rotation could break down with Buchholz going down or being ineffective and Kelly being terrible. In which case the Sox might actually be in the market for starting pitching depth (though I personally think the Sox are okay depth wise rotation and bullpen wise). The Sox have 8-9 starters in aaa and the majors and they have an extra 2-4 arms in the bullpen as options too (Light, Hembree, Barnes maybe workman at the end of the year).
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 7, 2016 14:22:12 GMT -5
I would hope that Dombrowski wouldn't do a lot of this. Owens right now is a depth option they need and there's a decent chance that he can be a valuable starter under the Red Sox control for six years at a minimal cost. That's a lot of value. It's not like he's "blocked" or that the Sox have many better options coming up immediately than him. More than a middle reliever, and I like McGee a good deal but I wouldn't give up six years of Owens for a year and a half of McGee. I know you like Johnson more. That's fine. I prefer Owens ceiling to the highness of Johnson't floor. We all know it hinges on Owens gaining command. You get that with experience, and he should get more AAA experience this year. In my mind Owens is hardly a finished product. I would expect him to be a very viable option in the rotation for 2017 and beyond. I would say, given the uncertain state of Buchholz and Kelly's fragility the Sox will need both Johnson and Owens going forward. You see what young cost controlled #3 type starters are costing in the trade market. As much as I like McGee I don't deal Owens for him. The Sox bullpen is pretty good as is right now. Kimbrel is dominating at the end of the game. Koji, Tazawa, and Carson Smith comprise a strong trio in front of Kimbrel while Ross pitched very well last season, particularly in the second half. He's kind of like an Alan Embree lefty. Meanwhile it's hard to pitch better against lefties than Layne did. The problem is that last year he was way overexposed against righties. That should not happen this year. Could McGee still help the pen? Sure, but given the rate of attrition for starting pitching throughout the season and the need for young pitching in the future, I would only deal Owens as part of a starting pitching upgrade and at the moment I'm not sure it's absolutely necessary. Now that's a fair argument. Just because I would trade Owens for MgGee, that doesn't mean I expect the Sox to. Starting pitching depth is important too but if the Sox are fine in that area come end of July, it's something we could all look out for. I don't see a lineup upgrade coming in July (unless it's a rental type, maybe a Carlos Gonzalez) and I don't see a rotation upgrade because of the price to get that kind of upgrade (unless it's a pitcher on a expiring contract). So lefty reliever is a obvious option from my point of view as of now (all of that can change quickly however). As the bullpen is constructed now, they don't need MgGee. I actually think the Sox bullpen is better than the yankees because they have more quality depth. I was just thinking along the lines of future needs of this club down the road if everything breaks right. Of course the Sox rotation could break down with Buchholz going down or being ineffective and Kelly being terrible. In which case the Sox might actually be in the market for starting pitching depth (though I personally think the Sox are okay depth wise rotation and bullpen wise). The Sox have 8-9 starters in aaa and the majors and they have an extra 2-4 arms in the bullpen as options too (Light, Hembree, Barnes maybe workman at the end of the year). I hear you. It's just that when it comes to getting out lefties Robbie Ross held them to around a .650 OPS. Carson Smith and Koji Uehara held them under a .600 OPS. Tommy Layne dominates lefties. How much better is McGee going to be to make it worth giving up a guy who probably has a good future in Owens? I just don't see it. Between Ross, Uehara, Smith, and Layne, the Sox should be able to handle lefties. I didn't even check the splits, but I'm sure Kimbrel handles them, too and you know he has the 9th inning. Anything can happen, but I doubt it will be the ability to get LH batters out in the 7th or 8th that would be their undoing. For that to happen, Farrell would have to get overly stubborn about keeping Tazawa in. This year he has better established options.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 7, 2016 14:40:35 GMT -5
It certainly worked for Trevor Hoffman. Although dirtywater would've traded him for a sack of potatoes and a couple old ticket stubs, because closers also need fastball velocity to be successful too. That's why Koji's been such a bum. Right because Jake MgGee is a bum? Stop acting like I don't think anything of the guy. A trade of MgGee wouldn't exactly be a sack of potatoes. You're freaking ridiculous and borderline childish. I apologize for getting on your case. I'm frustrated because my original point was this: Owens does not need a better fastball. Good fastball velocity is not a requirement for major league success. I gave examples. That's it...that's all I'm talking about. You've tried to take to conversation all over the map, claiming that I'm citing those pitchers as Owens comps, extrapolating my statements, and misrepresenting things like the velocity of Keuchel's fastball or the quality of Johnson's curveball. You invoke Jamie Moyer, then tell me I'm the one doing it and using "another bad example," and then you backtrack on what was intended to be a disparaging comp for Owens because, you know, Moyer was actually pretty good. You haven't provided a single scouting report or bit of data to back up your claims, and you haven't acknowledged when you've misrepresented things, even doubling down on the idea that Johnson has an "elite" curveball, without showing anything other than your description. And in the end, you're still dancing around my actual point: Owens's fastball velocity has little to do with determining his MLB success. That's it. You're free to call me childish if you like, but you haven't provided a scrap of evidence to argue that statement.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 7, 2016 15:26:48 GMT -5
Right because Jake MgGee is a bum? Stop acting like I don't think anything of the guy. A trade of MgGee wouldn't exactly be a sack of potatoes. You're freaking ridiculous and borderline childish. I apologize for getting on your case. I'm frustrated because my original point was this: Owens does not need a better fastball. Good fastball velocity is not a requirement for major league success. I gave examples. That's it...that's all I'm talking about. You've tried to take to conversation all over the map, claiming that I'm citing those pitchers as Owens comps, extrapolating my statements, and misrepresenting things like the velocity of Keuchel's fastball or the quality of Johnson's curveball. You invoke Jamie Moyer, then tell me I'm the one doing it and using "another bad example," and then you backtrack on what was intended to be a disparaging comp for Owens because, you know, Moyer was actually pretty good. You haven't provided a single scouting report or bit of data to back up your claims, and you haven't acknowledged when you've misrepresented things, even doubling down on the idea that Johnson has an "elite" curveball, without showing anything other than your description. And in the end, you're still dancing around my actual point: Owens's fastball velocity has little to do with determining his MLB success. That's it. You're free to call me childish if you like, but you haven't provided a scrap of evidence to argue that statement. Of course you don't need fastball velocity (hence I love what Johnson brings to the table) to have success but it is hindering Owens potential ceiling. It'd be nice to have a "Moyer" at the back end but if Owens turns into that then I'll kind of look back and wished Owens could of been more than that. You'll see what I'm talking about with Johnson's curveball soon. It's a plus pitch. I don't think the scouting reports give that pitch he has enough credit. It has tremendous break on it.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Feb 7, 2016 15:52:53 GMT -5
Also would like to hear what everyone else thinks about the new idea I had on this concept on the trade proposal forum under the "Carlos Gonzalez" thread. Didn't want to take away from this thread talking about Owens.
|
|
|