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.
How do you improve the Red Sox
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on May 27, 2016 15:29:54 GMT -5
we should also adjust for league ('cause the DH); does SIERA do that already? I believe Eric has at times added his own league adjustment to SIERA but it doesn't have one by default. Not doing it this year because so far the NL is winning interleague play to the tune of 4.9 wins of schedule strength per season, whereas it's been 8 for the AL in the past. I'm waiting until we get more data, as it still fluctustes a lot from day-to-day.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 27, 2016 17:18:06 GMT -5
I wish there were an additional adjustment for division as well as league. Pitching approximately 110 games in Boston, NY, Baltimore or Toronto has to be much harder than playing most games in the AL West.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on May 27, 2016 19:48:07 GMT -5
We are deep in the bullpen and it's vital to the success but they depth took a huge hit worth the loss of Carson Smith (TJS) so one more injury and we are back to last years bullpen. Cannot let that happen with this starting pitching the way it is. It's not like the team can only make one move and they have to choose. That better be hyperbole. Kimbrel with a healthy Uehara, the emergence of Hembree, the growth of Barnes and Pat Light lighting it up hitting 101 down below makes this bullpen much better than last year. Carson made it a filthy dominate bullpen. His numbers right from the beggining of his career have been Kimbrelish.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on May 27, 2016 20:07:17 GMT -5
I would stand pat. I would give ERod some time to heal his knee more. The Sox have plenty of options to replace Smith. They have so far. I'm going the opposite of Eric here, while your overall point may be fine, no one replaces C. Smith. He was one of the top relievers in all of baseball last year, roughly in the top 6, even as a rookie. When the trade was made it was noted that part of the reason he was available was because his throwing motion was likely to lead to an injury. I figured if he was missed a year due to TJ that the other 4 years under team control would be worth it and I was higher than most on Wade Miley here. It was a good trade regardless of the injury. Uehara and Tazawa both are FA and could be gone next year so acquiring a need before it actually is a need is always the smart way to do business. Edit: for sloppy writing
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 27, 2016 21:30:10 GMT -5
We are deep in the bullpen and it's vital to the success but they depth took a huge hit worth the loss of Carson Smith (TJS) so one more injury and we are back to last years bullpen. Cannot let that happen with this starting pitching the way it is. It's not like the team can only make one move and they have to choose. That better be hyperbole. Kimbrel with a healthy Uehara, the emergence of Hembree, the growth of Barnes and Pat Light lighting it up hitting 101 down below makes this bullpen much better than last year. Carson made it a filthy dominate bullpen. His numbers right from the beggining of his career have been Kimbrelish. I know Light's velocity is extremely impressive, but I wouldn't count on his control being there. I could see him walking a lot of guys. Hard to rely on a late inning guy who walks too many guys.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on May 27, 2016 21:54:13 GMT -5
The starters for the Sox have an ERA of 4.62, 22 out of 30 teams. That's about a third of a run below average. Simply because the positional players have been great hardly qualifies the team as a "super" or uber team short a starting pitcher. Clearly SP is the teams achilles heal and DD should be doing everything within reason to resolve this. In fact not at least seriously exploring this team weakness and you my as well be sticking your head in the sand to escape your enemies. 1) Pretty clever, posting as if it were still 1986, when the fact that the team had played 60% of its games in Fenway Park might be ignored when evaluating the staff. Whereas nobody today would make that mistake. They're 17th in park-adjusted ERA. 2) I'm not sure I get the point of posting as if it were 2000 or so, when ERA would be considered a good way to judge the stuff. The starters rank 12th in SIERA, our best predictive stat. And that's despite the fact that SIERA uniquely underrates Steven Wright. 3) Eduardo Rodriguez is about to replace the guy with the worst ERA. So, you want to replace the guy with the second worst as well? First your anointed field goal was this, " We can start talking about trading for a pitcher when two of the following three things have happened: -- E-Rod has suffered a physical setback that makes his 2016 contribution questionable -- Buchholz has failed to break out after another 3 or more starts -- Kelly has turned back into a disappointing mediocrity over a decent stretch of starts, at least a handful Until at least one of things has happened, talking about acquiring another starter seems ... crazy." Well even playing by your rules it's not so crazy now is it? In fact not exploring the idea is what would be crazy. Even by your own set of rules; 2 of the 3 events not happening was not worth gambling on as Buchholz is now in the pen and Kelly continues to follow Buchholz maddening inconsistency. And as I stated I believe E-Rod could end up being an ace or more likely a #2 pitcher but he has not pitched this year nor ever pitched a full major league season. Putting to much on his shoulders or any pitcher during their first 2 season is never a sure bet nor anything even close to it, even if in the end he live up to expectations. I stated my case from the start, that I believe the SP will improve and can as constituted get us the dance but likely cannot get it done when we get there, hardly ground breaking nor trying to create your perceived uber team. The team is well above average except in the most important category come playoff time, starting pitching. The KC argument against having a strong SP core is not valid. It has worked ONCE. Depending on the exception to the rule is fool hardy even if it does indeed work again. Trying to strengthen what is the obvious weakness of the team is hardly a vain attempt at creating an uber team but it is in fact common sense approach to increase the chances the team wins the last game of the year. Sure the cost may very well be prohibitive on that I can agree with but we as a group are surprised every year with the perceived value of trades. It can be done and rest assured whatever response you have with stats padded with this clause or that, DD will be exploring the exact need I've claimed. Did I do a quick and dirty look at the starting pitching, yes I did. It was not clever for 1986 but it is all that was needed even for today. Even your conditioned numbers hardly proved the point your were attempting to make, that the SP didn't quite suck if it was viewed under the right black light but that it was about average, I feel a lot better about it now. This team has a fantastic core that should contend for years, it does not need much to have a legitimate shot at perhaps even multiple championships except for it's SP. The SP may do it if everthing breaks right. But if Swihart or one of of Devers or Benintendo could be the foundation for trading to a team with deep SP such as NYM or Cleveland for a legit # 2 /#3 pitcher with more than one yr left on their deal why wouldn't you do it? I think the only valid response is you don't think the other team would ever do it. We'll see.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 27, 2016 21:58:59 GMT -5
How to improve the Red Sox?
Bring up Roenis Ellias and send Joe Kelly to AAA.
Roenis Elias is a little bit better looking at the stats since 2015.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on May 28, 2016 1:08:57 GMT -5
1) Pretty clever, posting as if it were still 1986, when the fact that the team had played 60% of its games in Fenway Park might be ignored when evaluating the staff. Whereas nobody today would make that mistake. They're 17th in park-adjusted ERA. 2) I'm not sure I get the point of posting as if it were 2000 or so, when ERA would be considered a good way to judge the stuff. The starters rank 12th in SIERA, our best predictive stat. And that's despite the fact that SIERA uniquely underrates Steven Wright. 3) Eduardo Rodriguez is about to replace the guy with the worst ERA. So, you want to replace the guy with the second worst as well? First your anointed field goal was this, " We can start talking about trading for a pitcher when two of the following three things have happened: -- E-Rod has suffered a physical setback that makes his 2016 contribution questionable -- Buchholz has failed to break out after another 3 or more starts -- Kelly has turned back into a disappointing mediocrity over a decent stretch of starts, at least a handful Until at least one of things has happened, talking about acquiring another starter seems ... crazy." Well even playing by your rules it's not so crazy now is it? In fact not exploring the idea is what would be crazy. Even by your own set of rules; 2 of the 3 events not happening was not worth gambling on as Buchholz is now in the pen and Kelly continues to follow Buchholz maddening inconsistency. And as I stated I believe E-Rod could end up being an ace or more likely a #2 pitcher but he has not pitched this year nor ever pitched a full major league season. Putting to much on his shoulders or any pitcher during their first 2 season is never a sure bet nor anything even close to it, even if in the end he live up to expectations. I stated my case from the start, that I believe the SP will improve and can as constituted get us the dance but likely cannot get it done when we get there, hardly ground breaking nor trying to create your perceived uber team. The team is well above average except in the most important category come playoff time, starting pitching. The KC argument against having a strong SP core is not valid. It has worked ONCE. Depending on the exception to the rule is fool hardy even if it does indeed work again. Trying to strengthen what is the obvious weakness of the team is hardly a vain attempt at creating an uber team but it is in fact common sense approach to increase the chances the team wins the last game of the year. Sure the cost may very well be prohibitive on that I can agree with but we as a group are surprised every year with the perceived value of trades. It can be done and rest assured whatever response you have with stats padded with this clause or that, DD will be exploring the exact need I've claimed. Did I do a quick and dirty look at the starting pitching, yes I did. It was not clever for 1986 but it is all that was needed even for today. Even your conditioned numbers hardly proved the point your were attempting to make, that the SP didn't quite suck if it was viewed under the right black light but that it was about average, I feel a lot better about it now. This team has a fantastic core that should contend for years, it does not need much to have a legitimate shot at perhaps even multiple championships except for it's SP. The SP may do it if everthing breaks right. But if Swihart or one of of Devers or Benintendo could be the foundation for trading to a team with deep SP such as NYM or Cleveland for a legit # 2 /#3 pitcher with more than one yr left on their deal why wouldn't you do it? I think the only valid response is you don't think the other team would ever do it. We'll see. I don't think we differ as much as it seems. Let me clarify my position. The only thing I object to is saying that acquiring another SP is an inevitability or a necessity. And not only are people saying that a lot, half the time they add that DDo will sell the farm. Neither of those is remotely rational. OTOH, I wholeheartedly support the idea of talking about who we might want to acquire, and what the price might be, if it should so happen that we need to get another SP.Why do I think this is a big difference? Because if you're not being rational now about the likelihood of needing another SP, you're not going to be rational about how much we ought to be willing to pay for one. And I prefer rational discussions to less rational ones. Furthermore, I even more wholeheartedly support the notion of speculating now about who we might trade for in a best-case scenario where we actually have more talent than we can use, and it actually makes the best sense to overpay for another frontline starter. To check out that scenario, go to the trade subforum and read my last post about Trout. Just substitute your favorite SP target for Trout, and a pretty good but not great Joe Kelly for Benintendi. But the logic is the same. In terms of the present situation, yes, the unexpected back-to-back stinkeroos by Buchholz and Kelly (I think both ranked in the bottom third of likely outcomes, so it was close to a 10-1 bad case scenario) have increased the odds that we'll need to trade for a SP at the deadline. The odds are still against it, but it bears watching more closely. Again, I have no problem following those odds rationally. It's the sky-is-falling attitude I object to.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on May 28, 2016 1:14:10 GMT -5
I wish there were an additional adjustment for division as well as league. Pitching approximately 110 games in Boston, NY, Baltimore or Toronto has to be much harder than playing most games in the AL West. I have that data, but have never bothered to go into that much detail. Current division strengths, BTW: .544 AL East .531 NL West .530 NL Central .513 NL East .458 AL Central .451 AL West
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on May 28, 2016 7:55:02 GMT -5
I don't think we differ as much as it seems. Let me clarify my position. The only thing I object to is saying that acquiring another SP is an inevitability or a necessity. And not only are people saying that a lot, half the time they add that DDo will sell the farm. Neither of those is remotely rational. OTOH, I wholeheartedly support the idea of talking about who we might want to acquire, and what the price might be, if it should so happen that we need to get another SP.Why do I think this is a big difference? Because if you're not being rational now about the likelihood of needing another SP, you're not going to be rational about how much we ought to be willing to pay for one. And I prefer rational discussions to less rational ones. Furthermore, I even more wholeheartedly support the notion of speculating now about who we might trade for in a best-case scenario where we actually have more talent than we can use, and it actually makes the best sense to overpay for another frontline starter. To check out that scenario, go to the trade subforum and read my last post about Trout. Just substitute your favorite SP target for Trout, and a pretty good but not great Joe Kelly for Benintendi. But the logic is the same. In terms of the present situation, yes, the unexpected back-to-back stinkeroos by Buchholz and Kelly (I think both ranked in the bottom third of likely outcomes, so it was close to a 10-1 bad case scenario) have increased the odds that we'll need to trade for a SP at the deadline. The odds are still against it, but it bears watching more closely. Again, I have no problem following those odds rationally. It's the sky-is-falling attitude I object to. I've been very clear since I started the thread. I do not nor ever have shared the chicken little mentality. This team has a window to contend for 3 to 4 years (and more depending on a lot of factors). I think that without any moves this team should be a playoff team. Hell I predicted 88 wins and winning the Wild card before the year began and I wouldn't be surprised if you had them winning more. From the start of the thread I stated the team as it is could make the playoffs but I did not have nearly as much confidence it can win it all. Price if he learns to pitch in the playoffs as well as he does during the regular season would help alot. If Wright can continue this Tim Wakefield 95 or 02 like season, If Porcello can reach the heights he has yet to reach but several predicted, and if Erod also can reach the heights he has yet to reach but most predicted, than yes they could pull it off. But there is 4 IFS for guys who either have never done it for a full season, not done it in the playoffs or simply never done IT before for anyone to boldly predict they will do it. I love stats to, and only needed to take a few more course to minor in mathematics ,and they can indicate whether or not someone has the ability or not but that does not account for the rigors of a full season, the glass bowl of the playoffs etc, and the experience often needed to reach the levels they can. I do believe we could make a trade (the Carson Smith trade came out of now where, or at least it did to me I had no idea who he was before the trade) and only give up 1 of the four top Prospects (I would make Espinoza and Moncada nearly untouchable) and only move Benintendi (I'd rather keep him) or Devers for the right pieces. I also would consider moving Swihart. If I could make either of of those three the foundation of a trade for another strong SP whose under team control for at least 1+ years then I would do it. 1 of the foundation pieces I mentioned and either Marco Hernandez and/or Maurico Dubon, and other pieces could flesh out the deal from our end and make such a deal a realistic endeavor worthy of pursuit. Adding another SP would also give us the needed depth that is more often than not required. BJohnson's and Henry Owens issues have thinned us out a little there as well.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 28, 2016 11:49:01 GMT -5
I wish there were an additional adjustment for division as well as league. Pitching approximately 110 games in Boston, NY, Baltimore or Toronto has to be much harder than playing most games in the AL West. I have that data, but have never bothered to go into that much detail. Current division strengths, BTW: .544 AL East .531 NL West .530 NL Central .513 NL East .458 AL Central .451 AL West That is unbelievably huge. But it's not just the strength of the teams, it's also the ballparks. But I guess that's built in. I'd also guess that skews just about all league adjusted stats and makes them less accurate. I have to imagine that teams are using this internally when deciding on possible acquisitions.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on May 28, 2016 12:21:46 GMT -5
I don't think we differ as much as it seems. Let me clarify my position. The only thing I object to is saying that acquiring another SP is an inevitability or a necessity. And not only are people saying that a lot, half the time they add that DDo will sell the farm. Neither of those is remotely rational. OTOH, I wholeheartedly support the idea of talking about who we might want to acquire, and what the price might be, if it should so happen that we need to get another SP.Why do I think this is a big difference? Because if you're not being rational now about the likelihood of needing another SP, you're not going to be rational about how much we ought to be willing to pay for one. And I prefer rational discussions to less rational ones. Furthermore, I even more wholeheartedly support the notion of speculating now about who we might trade for in a best-case scenario where we actually have more talent than we can use, and it actually makes the best sense to overpay for another frontline starter. To check out that scenario, go to the trade subforum and read my last post about Trout. Just substitute your favorite SP target for Trout, and a pretty good but not great Joe Kelly for Benintendi. But the logic is the same. In terms of the present situation, yes, the unexpected back-to-back stinkeroos by Buchholz and Kelly (I think both ranked in the bottom third of likely outcomes, so it was close to a 10-1 bad case scenario) have increased the odds that we'll need to trade for a SP at the deadline. The odds are still against it, but it bears watching more closely. Again, I have no problem following those odds rationally. It's the sky-is-falling attitude I object to. I've been very clear since I started the thread. I do not nor ever have shared the chicken little mentality. This team has a window to contend for 3 to 4 years (and more depending on a lot of factors). I think that without any moves this team should be a playoff team. Hell I predicted 88 wins and winning the Wild card before the year began and I wouldn't be surprised if you had them winning more. From the start of the thread I stated the team as it is could make the playoffs but I did not have nearly as much confidence it can win it all. Price if he learns to pitch in the playoffs as well as he does during the regular season would help alot. If Wright can continue this Tim Wakefield 95 or 02 like season, If Porcello can reach the heights he has yet to reach but several predicted, and if Erod also can reach the heights he has yet to reach but most predicted, than yes they could pull it off. But there is 4 IFS for guys who either have never done it for a full season, not done it in the playoffs or simply never done IT before for anyone to boldly predict they will do it. I love stats to, and only needed to take a few more course to minor in mathematics ,and they can indicate whether or not someone has the ability or not but that does not account for the rigors of a full season, the glass bowl of the playoffs etc, and the experience often needed to reach the levels they can. I do believe we could make a trade (the Carson Smith trade came out of now where, or at least it did to me I had no idea who he was before the trade) and only give up 1 of the four top Prospects (I would make Espinoza and Moncada nearly untouchable) and only move Benintendi (I'd rather keep him) or Devers for the right pieces. I also would consider moving Swihart. If I could make either of of those three the foundation of a trade for another strong SP whose under team control for at least 1+ years then I would do it. 1 of the foundation pieces I mentioned and either Marco Hernandez and/or Maurico Dubon, and other pieces could flesh out the deal from our end and make such a deal a realistic endeavor worthy of pursuit. Adding another SP would also give us the needed depth that is more often than not required. BJohnson's and Henry Owens issues have thinned us out a little there as well. The thing is, you're overrating the importance of a great rotation to winning the WS. These rankings do not fully reflect trade deadline acquisitions, but those wouldn't change things too much. Rank in SIERA and Win Probability Added of recent WS winners: 2015: 28, 21 (KC) 2014: 6, 25 (SF) 2013: 17, 5 (Bos) 2012: 11, 14 (SF) 2011: 11, 19 (StL) 2010: 4, 2 (SF) 2009: 12, 16 (NYY) 2008: 18, 14 (Phi) 2007: 4, 2 (Bos) 2006: 20, 20 (StL) Only twice in the last decade has the WS winner had an elite rotation. Just as often, it's been below average. Three more were average, one a bit above, and two had very different deep and surface results and are hard to classify, but were average when both are taken together. Now, to do this properly you'd look at the stats of the pitchers who actually started the post-season games, and you'd adjust for strength of schedule. But that's not going to change the overall pattern that much, especially since the 6 NL champions will get downgraded by the SoS adjustment. One of the likely conclusions of the better study, however, would be that the quality of your 5th starter has no correlation at all with winning the WS. Is it entirely premature to be talking about acquiring someone who would bump Wright, Porcello, or E-Rod out of the post-season rotation? Yes. It would demonstrably be foolish to overspend to get a guy who would do that, if E-Rod is anything like what we think he is, by season's end.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on May 28, 2016 23:48:18 GMT -5
I've been very clear since I started the thread. I do not nor ever have shared the chicken little mentality. This team has a window to contend for 3 to 4 years (and more depending on a lot of factors). I think that without any moves this team should be a playoff team. Hell I predicted 88 wins and winning the Wild card before the year began and I wouldn't be surprised if you had them winning more. From the start of the thread I stated the team as it is could make the playoffs but I did not have nearly as much confidence it can win it all. Price if he learns to pitch in the playoffs as well as he does during the regular season would help alot. If Wright can continue this Tim Wakefield 95 or 02 like season, If Porcello can reach the heights he has yet to reach but several predicted, and if Erod also can reach the heights he has yet to reach but most predicted, than yes they could pull it off. But there is 4 IFS for guys who either have never done it for a full season, not done it in the playoffs or simply never done IT before for anyone to boldly predict they will do it. I love stats to, and only needed to take a few more course to minor in mathematics ,and they can indicate whether or not someone has the ability or not but that does not account for the rigors of a full season, the glass bowl of the playoffs etc, and the experience often needed to reach the levels they can. I do believe we could make a trade (the Carson Smith trade came out of now where, or at least it did to me I had no idea who he was before the trade) and only give up 1 of the four top Prospects (I would make Espinoza and Moncada nearly untouchable) and only move Benintendi (I'd rather keep him) or Devers for the right pieces. I also would consider moving Swihart. If I could make either of of those three the foundation of a trade for another strong SP whose under team control for at least 1+ years then I would do it. 1 of the foundation pieces I mentioned and either Marco Hernandez and/or Maurico Dubon, and other pieces could flesh out the deal from our end and make such a deal a realistic endeavor worthy of pursuit. Adding another SP would also give us the needed depth that is more often than not required. BJohnson's and Henry Owens issues have thinned us out a little there as well. The thing is, you're overrating the importance of a great rotation to winning the WS. These rankings do not fully reflect trade deadline acquisitions, but those wouldn't change things too much. Rank in SIERA and Win Probability Added of recent WS winners: 2015: 28, 21 (KC) 2014: 6, 25 (SF) 2013: 17, 5 (Bos) 2012: 11, 14 (SF) 2011: 11, 19 (StL) 2010: 4, 2 (SF) 2009: 12, 16 (NYY) 2008: 18, 14 (Phi) 2007: 4, 2 (Bos) 2006: 20, 20 (StL) Only twice in the last decade has the WS winner had an elite rotation. Just as often, it's been below average. Three more were average, one a bit above, and two had very different deep and surface results and are hard to classify, but were average when both are taken together. Now, to do this properly you'd look at the stats of the pitchers who actually started the post-season games, and you'd adjust for strength of schedule. But that's not going to change the overall pattern that much, especially since the 6 NL champions will get downgraded by the SoS adjustment. One of the likely conclusions of the better study, however, would be that the quality of your 5th starter has no correlation at all with winning the WS. Is it entirely premature to be talking about acquiring someone who would bump Wright, Porcello, or E-Rod out of the post-season rotation? Yes. It would demonstrably be foolish to overspend to get a guy who would do that, if E-Rod is anything like what we think he is, by season's end. That's where we disagree. In the playoffs you can get away with 3 pitchers but having 4 to choose from as inevitably one will not be pitching well at the time is more often than not needed. The fifth starter as you stated is entirely not needed in the playoffs other than perhaps pitching mop-up to save the rest of the staff in a blowout win or loss. In the very least I would like the option to bump one of Wright, Porcello or Erod for all the reasons I stated which you have not addressed. A lack of a track record (which actually includes Price too but for the sake of this thread we have to assume he'll come through otherwise we are pretty much screwed anyway). So we are automatically making one assumption which again is a big if and those other ifs are still if's and you have not addressed that side of it. Others have mentioned the 2013 staff as coming out of now-where and to that I reply, they're full of crap. That staff was littered with current aces or pitchers that within recent season had been aces. That is far more comforting come playoff time. A lot of people say we were lucky to win that year, bull **** we were, unless they mean players played to their current or former capability (and not over exceeded). Again this staff could do it but haven't to date shown it for a full season. We are counting on 2 starters who have not even pitched the equivalent of a major league season in E-Rod (who hasn't even thrown a pitch this season and Wright. How many wins did this staff even have last season? or how many total playoff victories among the staff? Only Price has any and he's noted for struggling in the playoffs. Honestly your argument is one based on wearing rose colored glasses. Wright and E-Rod have never even completed a full major league season so any stat you can come-up with has to be taken with a grain of salt and I think you understand that. Even Porcello ony has a total of 16 IP in the playoffs and has never won a game, has a career era+ of 97 and a FIP of 4.03. E-Rod is still scratching the surface of what he can be and that often takes a few years for that potential to be realized, these points are outside of stats they are truths that you have not addressed. Wright is getting his first real chance at being a starter and has 20 GS for his career, his next one will be the first time he's even reached 10 in a MLB season. Bottom line is that the teams biggest need is clearly another starter and nearly everyone know that and I'm surprised, shocked even, that you disagree.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on May 29, 2016 3:43:54 GMT -5
Bottom line is that the teams biggest need is clearly another starter and nearly everyone know that So you're saying that half the people on this forum are just intentionally trolling by claiming otherwise? Cool theory, bro.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 29, 2016 8:19:01 GMT -5
Multiple studies have shown that prior playoff experience or success is not predictive of future playoff success (see, e.g., here or here). I think it's a fair point that Wright and Rodriguez (and Kelly) do not have as much track record as we'd like, but Price and Porcello do, and they're a decent enough one-two punch.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,336
|
Post by radiohix on May 29, 2016 9:43:06 GMT -5
I came to the conclusion that "old school fans" are the ones who will always be the advocates of trading prospects for "proven veterans" and you can't convince them otherwise. I mean look at it: They think that ERA is predictive, Win-Loss record of a pitcher is important (he's pitching to the score bro!), RBIs is a skill etc etc...Do you think a guy who believe in this kind of crap will care about aging curve, roster construction or future value? Of course not! This guys would've sold the farm system to get Stanton or Hamels or Gray or whatever the Cafardos of the Boston media tell them are available. I mean, they're using statics from a century ago! so naturally they believe in "clutch" and "pitching wins championships" and "prospects don't pan out so trade them" and naturally they're immune to the changes that affected baseball in the post PED era where veterans decline in a more pronounced fashion, that young talent is the hottest commodity in the sport and things like that. They won't see how this team is built around young talent and even if they don't win it all this year, they have the core to own this division for years to come. They don't understand the randomness of winning in the playoffs. Frankly, it's a waste of time trying to persuade them otherwise and I don't understand why they comment on a frigging prospects forum! They can go to the bleacher report or WEEI or Boston Herald comments section and trade all they want.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 29, 2016 9:54:01 GMT -5
An u under the radar RHH OF who could possibly be had on the cheap at the deadline or perhaps in August even is Ichiro. Yea he's old as dirt but the man can still hit, play some Defense and run. He needs to play limited but he could help the bench come play off time when u carry more. He might not be the idea Dave Roberts type as far as on the bases goes but he brings more. Big game and runners on base, Vasquez comes to the plate... Who wouldn't mind seeing Ichiro up there?
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on May 29, 2016 10:00:14 GMT -5
Big game and runners on base, Vasquez comes to the plate... ...and John Farrell's still the manager so there will be no pinch hit no matter who's sitting on the bench.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 29, 2016 10:01:12 GMT -5
Big game and runners on base, Vasquez comes to the plate... ...and John Farrell's still the manager so there will be no pinch hit no matter who's sitting on the bench. I'm not a miracle worker
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 29, 2016 10:02:10 GMT -5
Maybe we can send mosquitos with Zika to Farrell's home and get luovo back in charge.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 29, 2016 10:40:48 GMT -5
If they do go after an 8th inning-type reliever, we've all seen how the prices go up at the deadline. Given that, and depending on the price, it'd probably be reasonable to target one who is more than a 3-month rentall. Though Andrew Miller would be among the best options, a trade with that New York team isn't happening. A few intriguing options may be:
Huston Street (currently on the DL with an oblique strain) Arodys Vizcaino Ryan Madson David Hernandez
There are prob a few more whom I'm missing here. Personally I hate overpaying for relievers more than any position, but if no internal option surfaces and this team wants to reach and do anything in the playoffs, I really believe they will need another "guy" back there.
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on May 29, 2016 12:19:31 GMT -5
Pitching help sits in San Diego.
2 lefties throwing well in Hand or buchter, Rodney, and of course Shields.
Enough viable prospects to find help. You over pay so be it.
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on May 29, 2016 12:47:42 GMT -5
Pitching help sits in San Diego. 2 lefties throwing well in Hand or buchter, Rodney, and of course Shields. Enough viable prospects to find help. You over pay so be it. Given the Red Sox trade history for relievers, I don't think I'm comfortable overpaying prospects for a reliever. Relievers are crap shoots. Yes, I understand that prospects are as well, but given the price and subsequent performance of relievers, I'd almost always rather be on the selling side. Not to mention that relievers cost more money, are controllable for fewer years, and often are involved in a much smaller % of team innings than prospects. I'd definitely buy hard on a top half of the rotation starter, but I'd be hesitant to include top prospects on a LF or a RP. Of course money is a factor too. Just off the top of my head, here are some recent Boston trades for relievers: Mark Melancon (Jed Lowrie + Kyle Weiland) Joel Hanrahan + Brockstar (Mark Melancon + Stolmy Pimentel + Ivan Dejesus + Jerry Sands) Andrew Bailey + Ryan Sweeney (Josh Reddick + Miles Head + Raul Alcantara) Eric Gagne (Kason Gabbard + David Murphy + Engel Beltre) Edit: And of course, uh Craig Kimbrel (Manual Margot + Javier Guerra + Carlos Asuaje + Logan Allen) I think it's reasonable to argue that we lost all 4 of those trades. Now it's difficult to evaluate Melancon's Pittsburgh performance against his performance in Boston, but it is disconcerting that he performed considerably better while Joel Hanrahan went to hell in a hand basket. In addition, if you look back to one of the best trades in recent Red Sox history (and what will likely remain such) we did the exact opposite of trading prospect(s) for a reliever. We got E-rod for Andrew Miller, and E-rod has already given us more than what Miller would have for the rest of that season. I know that this is cherry picking, but does trading Slocumb to Seattle for Varitek and Lowe also count as a great trade for Boston when they did exactly the opposite of trading prospects for a reliever? I also think that Baltimore was happy to get Chris Davis and Tommy Hunter by sending Koji to the Rangers. But hey, we may have won the Billy Wagner (Chris Carter + Eddie Lora) deal. So there's that. Also Billy Wagner netted us the picks which we selected Kolbrin Vitek and Anthony Ranaudo.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 29, 2016 13:02:50 GMT -5
That better be hyperbole. Kimbrel with a healthy Uehara, the emergence of Hembree, the growth of Barnes and Pat Light lighting it up hitting 101 down below makes this bullpen much better than last year. Carson made it a filthy dominate bullpen. His numbers right from the beggining of his career have been Kimbrelish. I know Light's velocity is extremely impressive, but I wouldn't count on his control being there. I could see him walking a lot of guys. Hard to rely on a late inning guy who walks too many guys. Yeah, look what happened to Giles this year. I agree that Light's radar gun readings are eye candy...now, if he can put that 101 where he wants, that's another story. However, one need look no further than Kimbrel to see that *some* wildness can be strong-armed around. Then again, he hasn't exactly gone unscathed this year, either.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 29, 2016 13:07:35 GMT -5
Pitching help sits in San Diego. 2 lefties throwing well in Hand or buchter, Rodney, and of course Shields. Enough viable prospects to find help. You over pay so be it. That's not a viable plan for any business that plans to stay open. The Sox have been playing baseball for 100+ years, and probably plan on playing indefinitely. Trading prospects for relievers (or grossly overpriced starters whose pitching style is the worst possible match for Fenway) is a quick road back down to the basement, coupled with excessive payroll, reduced gate earnings, and rotten margins.
|
|
|