SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Red Sox agree to trade for Joel Hanrahan
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,824
|
Post by wcp3 on Dec 26, 2012 16:19:10 GMT -5
Anytime you can get a closer with a 1.9/1 SO/BB ratio, you have to do it.
Hopefully the Red Sox haven't already decided on Hanrahan over Bailey because I think AB will prove to be the superior pitcher in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 26, 2012 16:21:48 GMT -5
I don't mind Hanrahan pitching the 9th. If Bailey is the better pitcher, you can still use him in high leverage situations.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 26, 2012 16:28:49 GMT -5
Hanrahan is no Jon Papelbon - they won't offer Hanrahan a qualifying offer. At least, that seems fairly implausible.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Dec 26, 2012 16:36:17 GMT -5
I think it really depends on how the market for closers shakes out. If Closers come up with a rash of injuries or ineffectiveness druing this season then there could be a much higher demand for experienced closers next season. If that is the case then you definitely offer Hanrahan a qualifying offer. Ben C. will have a much better read on that going into the off season next year. It also depends on how Hanrahan pans out. If it's some kind of magical season and Hanrahan's massive fastball and massive beard becaome fan favorites, then the sox would have every reason to want to sign him. If they are going to try and compete for his services anyway it'd be stupid not to offer a qualifying offer in case some one throws in the sink for him.
Having both Bailey and Hanrahan could work out well if they both are "team" first guys. If they both pitch great you either keep them or trade them for a haul in July.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 26, 2012 16:41:27 GMT -5
One thing to note - it's entirely possible that the Sox are buying low on Hanrahan here and could sell high on him at the deadline at little to no detriment to the team given how stacked the bullpen is going to be. That could be the thinking. Hanrahan apparently told reporters that pitching with an ankle brace bothered him last year, leading to a spike in walks and HR allowed. If he bounces back, they'll get more in return for him from a contending team than they gave up here.
|
|
|
Post by lancect on Dec 26, 2012 16:42:47 GMT -5
I like the trade.
Sands was buried behind Napoli, Gomes, Gomez, Kalish, Nava and hadn't shown he could hit in MLB.
Melancon couldn't pitch in Boston. He will do fine in Pittsburgh, just as AJ Burnett did fine this year for them. So many people believe he was too much to give up but if he has another bad stretch in higher leveraged situations like last year, he would be gone anyhow because he has no options left.
Stolmy is a wild card who will probably continue to be up and down as he has been the past few seasons. And last option is this year.
DeJesus has done well in Winter Ball and is stronger defensively but Holt seems an obvious upgrade offensively and as another character in the clubhouse. Although he might never see much time on the 25 man, he has at least 2 options remaining while DeJesus has none. They are both minus shortshops as well.
Hanrahan will be better than Melancon in Boston and gives us a real closer. It also means that the FO is serious about this season. Yes it is a one season rental but now I believe that if he does well, they have nothing to lose in giving him a QO if they do not have an obvious closer for 2014 (if Bailey still is a questionable choice). They can offer the QO and he can return, just as Papelbon kept being signed for one year contracts. Or he can go. It is also possible that because of the Soriano situation, this part of the CBT gets fixed next year.
And they did not give away Morales, Iglesias, Doubront, or anyone of real value
Go Red Sox!
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 26, 2012 16:45:19 GMT -5
Anytime you can get a closer with a 1.9/1 SO/BB ratio, you have to do it. Hopefully the Red Sox haven't already decided on Hanrahan over Bailey because I think AB will prove to be the superior pitcher in 2013. What elguapo said. Have Hanrahan close BECAUSE Bailey will be the better pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Dec 26, 2012 16:55:47 GMT -5
So we basically got back a Daniel Nava type hitting utility infielder in Holt... some quality depth for Pedroia and Drew is welcome in my book. Can he backup play at third as well?
|
|
|
Post by lancect on Dec 26, 2012 17:04:22 GMT -5
He's only played short and 2nd in minors
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 26, 2012 17:13:07 GMT -5
Melancon wasn't being used as much more than a mop-up man or in situations where the team was trailing. Rarely was he brought into situations of high leverage after the recall. I get what you are trying to say about the games having meaning for the team, but if you look through the game logs Melancon was being used in low leverage/ low pressure situations as the guy to chew up some innings when the score was wider for either side. The Red Sox lost 8 of the 14 games you mentioned in that stretch for Melancon and the wins were lopsided. You're right and I agree-- even after coming back and pitching well, Melancon rarely pitched in high-leverage innings. And Hatfield is right that there were questions about Melancon's mental state at the time of his original trade to Boston. But this is a pitcher than Cherington and the FO thought highly enough of twelve months ago to trade a high-upside position player for (Lowrie) and now are going to give up on because of four appearances in April. The Red Sox bought high on a player who has the "proven closer" tag and sold low on a player who was allegedly mentally weak, even though they had comparable performance on the field (last three years by xFIP, Melancon: 3.30, Hanrahan: 3.25). Hanrahan is probably slightly better, true-talent-wise, but it's very, very close, especially once you take into account Hanrahan's recent injury history. This is a trade based on old-school baseball archetypes rather than objective sabermetric analysis, which is disappointing for fans of the latter (read: me). Teams like the Rays have shown that you don't need a "proven closer" to build a strong bullpen, and Cherington has shown a disappointing tendency towards overpaying for that type of player. You obviously shouldn't GM based solely on the numbers, and maybe his one year in Boston gave the FO more insight on Melancon's psychological profile, but based on the information available to me, it's a bad trade. If this was last year and the Sox desperately needed a closer, maybe I could buy into the "proven closer" narrative (in fact, that's exactly why I was on board with the trade for Bailey). But this year, with this team? It's not like the Red Sox desperately needed a high-leverage reliever in their bullpen, either-- you have at least four right-handed relievers who have done so at some point in the last two years already (Bailey, Uehara, Aceves, Bard) and one more who was elite in a lower-leverage situation (Tazawa). Moreover, even if Melancon maxes out as a very good 6th/7th inning reliever, his four years of team control give him much, much more value than one expensive year of Hanrahan. I'm one of the more optimistic posters on the board, but even I think the 2013 team is a best-case-scenario fringe contender, and trading four cheap years of a good 7th inning reliever for slightly better odds at a Wild Card spot is a bad tradeoff. Finally, I don't really understand the angle of "we needed to do this to clear 40-man space." There's this nifty thing called a "Designated For Assignment" that we can use to clear space on the 40-man roster. Pimentel might have cleared waivers, and I'm not sure whether anyone outside the FO thinks Hassan would have stuck had he been taken in the Rule 5 draft. This isn't an independent reason we should have done the trade since players who would have otherwise stuck on the roster were traded as well.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Dec 26, 2012 17:25:22 GMT -5
I like this trade. Holt is better than De Jesus (a lot better) and he has options remaining. Sands was depth guy, and Pimentel was a DFA candidate with the ceiling of a number 4/5 starter.
Melancon should be better than his 2012, but Hanrahan should also be better than his 2012.
Hanrahan: 2010: 2.62 FIP; 2.64 xFIP; 2.15 SIERA; 2011: 2.18 FIP; 2.98 xFIP; 2.73 SIERA
Melancon: 2010: 3.50 FIP; 3.54 xFIP; 3.12 SIERA 2011: 3.25 FIP; 3.14 xFIP; 2.93 SIERA
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Dec 26, 2012 18:16:13 GMT -5
Like Holt a lot to end up as the backup middle infielder on this team in short order.
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Dec 26, 2012 18:24:41 GMT -5
Can we please stop about Melancon now. He has now pitched for both the Red Sox and Yankees and alot was expected from him in both spots. What did both teams do? Shipped him off after a short stay.
It's pretty clear either his mental make-up or stuff greatly worried the sox after a one year stay back in the AL East.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 26, 2012 18:33:57 GMT -5
I cringed when I read the quotes from the assistant GM. He talks about how great it is to "add a two time All Star closer", how "those types of guys don't usually become available very often" (seriously that was the quote). Does he really believe that? Literally every year you can land a "proven closer" if you decide you want to allocate the resources to pay for one. It's just disappointing to read that type of analysis from O'Halloran, it's what Joe Haggerty would say on Sports Tonight.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Dec 26, 2012 19:12:15 GMT -5
Melancon wasn't being used as much more than a mop-up man or in situations where the team was trailing. Rarely was he brought into situations of high leverage after the recall. I get what you are trying to say about the games having meaning for the team, but if you look through the game logs Melancon was being used in low leverage/ low pressure situations as the guy to chew up some innings when the score was wider for either side. The Red Sox lost 8 of the 14 games you mentioned in that stretch for Melancon and the wins were lopsided. You're right and I agree-- even after coming back and pitching well, Melancon rarely pitched in high-leverage innings. And Hatfield is right that there were questions about Melancon's mental state at the time of his original trade to Boston. But this is a pitcher than Cherington and the FO thought highly enough of twelve months ago to trade a high-upside position player for (Lowrie) and now are going to give up on because of four appearances in April. it is one thing to be blaming the FO for trading last year for Melancon and then quite another for getting rid of him this year after seeing him in the pen. Last year Cherington was restricted by luxury tax and the amount of money that Lucky and the owners made available to him while picking up his winter player needs. Thus he had to have at least one low cost reliever that on paper could close if he wanted to have any leverage to trade for Bailey. The set up Ben ended up using last year was in fact Meloncon and his "on paper stats" (rightly or wrongly). Now take the salary of Meloncon 500K and dump the salary of Lowrie who was often hurt and never had more than 309 Ab in a season for us 1.1M plus Weiland 481K for a net saving of around a million that could go to get another fielder say a third of Cody. No where does that say that the Sox FO thought highly of Meloncon. It should also be noted that Lowrie didn't get much more than the 300 Ab's ... 340 or so (for Houston) and Weiland spent the year in rehab too. This year though they have quite a bit of flexibility to spend money therefore spending on a better bullpen appears to be in the cards. Appears to me Ben said he needed leverage after he traded for Bailey for that deal to go. But weather he did or not it sure seems like that very well is likely.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Dec 26, 2012 19:14:10 GMT -5
I cringed when I read the quotes from the assistant GM. He talks about how great it is to "add a two time All Star closer", how "those types of guys don't usually become available very often" (seriously that was the quote). Does he really believe that? Literally every year you can land a "proven closer" if you decide you want to allocate the resources to pay for one. It's just disappointing to read that type of analysis from O'Halloran, it's what Joe Haggerty would say on Sports Tonight. In all honesty what do you expect him to say though? He has a job to do and telling the truth about the situation isn't what people want to hear. The average fan could care less about the 40 man and all they know is a two time all star just got added to the team.
|
|
|
Post by pbgallag on Dec 26, 2012 20:17:38 GMT -5
f Hanrahan puts up All Star numbers similar to Paps, Sox could trade him at deadline, resign him or extend qualifying $13M offer for 2014 first round draft pick compensation. Sox were happy going year to year with Paps as long as they were in contention. BC needed to package up excess non-essential talent that wasn't in 2013-2014 plans and trade for proven player which he did. My only question is whether he could have packaged similar talent for young cost controlled first baseman. No, he couldn't have packaged similar talent for a young, cost controlled first basemen. Not one with any hope of even being average. Those players require giving up significant talent in return. This was essentially a salary dump for Pittsburgh. Which is also why Hanrahan won't get a qualifying $13.3M offer. A player who is dumped at $7M doesn't get offered $13.3M.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 26, 2012 20:25:09 GMT -5
I cringed when I read the quotes from the assistant GM. He talks about how great it is to "add a two time All Star closer", how "those types of guys don't usually become available very often" (seriously that was the quote). Does he really believe that? Literally every year you can land a "proven closer" if you decide you want to allocate the resources to pay for one. It's just disappointing to read that type of analysis from O'Halloran, it's what Joe Haggerty would say on Sports Tonight. In all honesty what do you expect him to say though? He has a job to do and telling the truth about the situation isn't what people want to hear. The average fan could care less about the 40 man and all they know is a two time all star just got added to the team. I'd rather him give a good reason for the trade instead of catering to Joe Fan. I'm not asking him to call Melancon fragile or to criticize the guys heading out, but maybe talk about why Joel had a down year last year and how it will be better this season. Or he could be vague in a Belichickian way and just say they made the move to improve their team and not add fluff. His job isn't to convince causal fans they won a trade in December, if anything his job should be to convince the more passionate fans about a seemingly questionable trade. Suggesting Hanrahan is some rare commodity is either a tactic to excite casual fans, or a poor organizational judgement. O'Halloran shouldn't be worried about "selling" the team to fans, leave that to Sam Kennedy and Dr. Charles. If baseball ops executed better I wouldn't care about media quotes. Unfortunately they've had a poor run lately, so adding headscratching quotes to a headscratching move annoys me as a fan.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 26, 2012 22:17:36 GMT -5
Anytime you can get a closer with a 1.9/1 SO/BB ratio, you have to do it. Hopefully the Red Sox haven't already decided on Hanrahan over Bailey because I think AB will prove to be the superior pitcher in 2013. What elguapo said. Have Hanrahan close BECAUSE Bailey will be the better pitcher. I've watched all three pitch - Bailey the most since he was out here on the West coast - and there's no doubt in my mind that he's better than either Hanrahan or Melancon. When he's healthy - and that's the rub - his stuff is devastating and he controls all of it. He was lights out in Oakland till he got hurt. Hanrahan is going to give a few folks heartburn I believe. He can be maddeningly frustrating with his inability to put guys away and close out the game. I'm willing to believe him when he says he wasn't comfortable, but I'll also bet that the Farrell won't hesitate to move guys around if there are any questions about effectiveness. Given the ridiculous depth at this point, I don't think Melancon is all that great a loss. I do think he's still building his pitching chops and will probably be better later in his career. It hardly matters given the way the pen is stocked. Honestly, Tazawa may have the best and most diverse pitch repertoire of any of them, and if Bard comes back? The Sox are really lining it up to give the starters all the pitching support they need to succeed, enough so that I'm willing to ignore the silly chatter about the Proven Closer©.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 26, 2012 23:17:50 GMT -5
In all honesty what do you expect him to say though? He has a job to do and telling the truth about the situation isn't what people want to hear. The average fan could care less about the 40 man and all they know is a two time all star just got added to the team. I'd rather him give a good reason for the trade instead of catering to Joe Fan. I'm not asking him to call Melancon fragile or to criticize the guys heading out, but maybe talk about why Joel had a down year last year and how it will be better this season. Or he could be vague in a Belichickian way and just say they made the move to improve their team and not add fluff. His job isn't to convince causal fans they won a trade in December, if anything his job should be to convince the more passionate fans about a seemingly questionable trade. Suggesting Hanrahan is some rare commodity is either a tactic to excite casual fans, or a poor organizational judgement. O'Halloran shouldn't be worried about "selling" the team to fans, leave that to Sam Kennedy and Dr. Charles. If baseball ops executed better I wouldn't care about media quotes. Unfortunately they've had a poor run lately, so adding headscratching quotes to a headscratching move annoys me as a fan. That is what he said. fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2012/12/26/some-things-we-learned-after-talking-to-john-farrell-red-sox-assistant-general-manager-brian-ohalloran-and-new-closer-joel-hanrahan/
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Dec 27, 2012 7:13:20 GMT -5
I'm still amazed the stat boys refuse to admit mop-up duty isn't as important as closing games. As soon as you start typing, I start dis-regarding "everything" else you say when you state that. Give me the 97mph fastball and wipe-out slider to close games. Every manager and player I've ever seen interviewed says that it's a totally different animal. But, many of us geeks(self included) who weren't good enough to play outside of high school refuse to admit it.
Melancon has a fastball with no movement and has to rely on a curve to close out games. Just what I want. A rhp coming into Yankee Stadium or Camden Yards and hanging a curve.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Dec 27, 2012 7:46:53 GMT -5
Based on this trade how does everybody see the remaining bullpen roles fall into place? A trade is definitely possible at the break as has been noted but is one imminent this offseason? Also, what is the impact on the rotation? Does Aceves or Morales have first shot on sliding into the rotation due to injury, ineffectiveness or need based on schedule or would that be Webster or Rubby?
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Dec 27, 2012 8:16:01 GMT -5
Based on this trade how does everybody see the remaining bullpen roles fall into place? A trade is definitely possible at the break as has been noted but is one imminent this offseason? Also, what is the impact on the rotation? Does Aceves or Morales have first shot on sliding into the rotation due to injury, ineffectiveness or need based on schedule or would that be Webster or Rubby? With Hanrahan, Bailey, Tazawa and Uehara filling out the 7th, 8th and 9th inning roles, I see Aceves and Morales in longer inning roles and a LOOGY filling out the bullpen, health-permitting. I see Bard in AAA and Mortensen likely off the roster (unless Aceves is traded, in which case he could slot in as the mop-up/longman). There are a glut of LHRPs on the roster with Breslow, Miller and Morales. I would expect a ST trade of at least one. I would think Morales gets first shot at the #6 starting spot, with Aceves working as the long man in ST. Unless they are overpowering AAA, I don't think Rubby or Webster get a sniff of the major league roster until August or September. Both could use the AAA innings.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Dec 27, 2012 8:24:56 GMT -5
Based on this trade how does everybody see the remaining bullpen roles fall into place? A trade is definitely possible at the break as has been noted but is one imminent this offseason? Also, what is the impact on the rotation? Does Aceves or Morales have first shot on sliding into the rotation due to injury, ineffectiveness or need based on schedule or would that be Webster or Rubby? I think that as of today the rotation is; Buchholz Lester Lackey Doubront Dempster On the 40 Man in the Minors; Webster De la Rosa Wright Britton Bullpen; Morales Miller Breslow Aceves Mortenson Uehara Bailey Hanrahan On the 40 Man in the Minors; Bard - ( because he has options ) Tazawa - ( because he has options ) Wilson Carpenter If no more moves are made I think the rotation is set with Aceves & Morales both available to spot start. Bard & Tazawa both start in the minors because they are the only ones with options. Things could shake out differently during Spring Training due to competition & health. But if no other moves are made that's what it looks like to me at this time. It means an 8 man Bullpen & a 3 man bench so I would think that somehow there is more to come + the roster is at 40 again & the team still needs to add a 1B - be it Napoli or someone else.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Dec 27, 2012 8:44:56 GMT -5
I think Rubby starts at Pawtucket and is there till we get a good understanding of where his health/endurance are at. Webster needs probably a full season starting in AAA.
Aceves is the swiss-army knife jack of all trades role that he excelled at in 2011
Morales comes to ST ready to start in case of injury and to alleviate the strain on Lackey's surgically repaired elbow. He becomes the long man/2nd lefty in the pen if all starters are healthy.
A lot of the bullpen slotting will be determined based on where Bard is. If he is still wild then he goes to XST to see if there is anything left to try and help. If back to form he'd go right back to his elite reliever/set-up role with Bailey.
Breslow is the 1st lefty, Uehara, Bailey and Tazawa set up.
Miller and Mortenson are the odd men out so a trade would happen barring a rash of injuries.
I imagine there will also be minor league signings in camp to compete
|
|
|