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.
possible Red Sox and Braves blockbuster
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 29, 2016 13:27:58 GMT -5
Also, for all of the Teheran talk re: his outperformance of FIP/xFIP, I'll leave this here again: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/is-julio-teheran-an-ace/Spoiler alert: he's not that good, and would be a disaster with Fenway as his home park and frequent visits to the launching pads of Camden and Rogers, and the short porch of the Stadium. That article says chances are Teheran will most likely continue to out perform his peripherals for next 3 years. I don't think anyone on this board thinks we would be getting an ACE. Not sure how you think that article says he's not that good, just that's he's not an ACE. The likelihood of him continuing to do so to the extent that he has thus far, though, is unlikely (at least based on historical comps). Sarris also makes a rough estimation of "around 4" in the AL, but I would argue that an *extreme* flyball pitcher who depends on popups for his BABIP skill and FIP-beating is the worst possible match for Fenway, which has very limited foul territory, and a left field configuration that turns a very high number of completely routine fly balls into (extra-) base hits. In Oakland, he's probably a legitimate #2 some years, though more solidly a 3. In Fenway (and facing the small parks and power-laden lineups in Toronto and Baltimore, and the short porch in NY), he's more likely to be a soft 3/good 4. His current year's performance is the product of a confluence of luck factors (startlingly low BABIP, high strand rate, and a division full of weak offenses, particularly Philly, but also FL and NY). I don't equate "not that good" with bad, and anyone genuinely calling him an ace (most, including you, aren't) is sorely mistaken. Or delusional. But he's not a 1a or a true 2, either. He's a good (NL) 3 having a great (lucky) year. He's got mid-rotation written all over him. 3 or 4, depending on his home park. I think he's more likely a 4 than a 3 in Fenway. The data support that. Now, I'd be fine with them acquiring him, but not for anyone in the top-5 prospects (or my sleeper binky Pennington, who's added yet more velo this year it seems). I like Michael Chavis, but he's from Marietta, just north of Atlanta. He'd be my max centerpiece, meaning a trade would not happen, which I'm fine with.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 29, 2016 13:37:04 GMT -5
FWIW, Matt Cain and Jake Peavy have been used as comps, and both relied on big ballparks for their success. Peavy struggled in Chicago and badly in Fenway. It doesn't mean they were ever "bad" pitchers, but like Travis Shaw in Fenway, some players have skill sets ideally suited for certain parks that make them awful fits for others. I think we all notice it more for hitters (Nick Esasky, Boggs, Mo Vaughn, Jason Bay, etc.) when they change parks, but it's the same for pitchers. I think Porcello is a good "generic" comp for overall performance...put him and Teheran in a neutral park with uniform dimensions, and they'd probably be roughly equivalent. But Porcello is much better suited to reduce the negative effects of his home park (and inter-division away parks) than Teheran, who would see them exacerbated.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 29, 2016 14:01:49 GMT -5
The article says he'd be about a 4.00 ERA guy in the AL and describes him as "a quality mid-rotation arm." This whole line of discussion started when you reacted to my calling Teheran a "mid-rotation arm." Well article clearly states 3.6 era in NL going forward and closer to 4.0 era in AL. Using your xFIP- of 98, so 2% better than average era of 4.18, so 4.10. Now factor in the .30 article says he should beat era by and you get 3.80 era, AL only would predict an era of 3.86. That puts him in top 20 in AL, right next to Porcello who everyone keeps telling me has been a number # 2 pitcher for years. So yea I don't see a mid rotation arm, hence a #3 by league average statistics. Compare those numbers to Miley's last year and Teherans predict to be a lot better. So if you call Miley a #3 I don't see how you call Teheran one.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 29, 2016 14:56:46 GMT -5
The article says he'd be about a 4.00 ERA guy in the AL and describes him as "a quality mid-rotation arm." This whole line of discussion started when you reacted to my calling Teheran a "mid-rotation arm." Well article clearly states 3.6 era in NL going forward and closer to 4.0 era in AL. Using your xFIP- of 98, so 2% better than average era of 4.18, so 4.10. Now factor in the .30 article says he should beat era by and you get 3.80 era, AL only would predict an era of 3.86. That puts him in top 20 in AL, right next to Porcello who everyone keeps telling me has been a number # 2 pitcher for years. So yea I don't see a mid rotation arm, hence a #3 by league average statistics. Compare those numbers to Miley's last year and Teherans predict to be a lot better. So if you call Miley a #3 I don't see how you call Teheran one. The 4.00 AL ERA projection cited in the article already takes into account his ability to outperform his peripherals, so you can't double-count that. Teheran's xFIP- in the last 2.5 years is 103, not 98 (you need to look at more than just three months' worth of data); compare that with Porcello's 94 xFIP- and Miley's 99 xFIP- in that same timeframe. Teheran is probably a better pitcher than Miley going forward (largely because of his ability to get lots of popups and outperform his peripherals), but, in the same league/park, I think they're close. I would call Teheran a good third starter, Miley a bad third starter, and Porcello a borderline second/third starter (due to his tendency of underperforming his peripherals).
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 29, 2016 15:47:03 GMT -5
Well article clearly states 3.6 era in NL going forward and closer to 4.0 era in AL. Using your xFIP- of 98, so 2% better than average era of 4.18, so 4.10. Now factor in the .30 article says he should beat era by and you get 3.80 era, AL only would predict an era of 3.86. That puts him in top 20 in AL, right next to Porcello who everyone keeps telling me has been a number # 2 pitcher for years. So yea I don't see a mid rotation arm, hence a #3 by league average statistics. Compare those numbers to Miley's last year and Teherans predict to be a lot better. So if you call Miley a #3 I don't see how you call Teheran one. The 4.00 AL ERA projection cited in the article already takes into account his ability to outperform his peripherals, so you can't double-count that. Teheran's xFIP- in the last 2.5 years is 103, not 98 (you need to look at more than just three months' worth of data); compare that with Porcello's 94 xFIP- and Miley's 99 xFIP- in that same timeframe. Teheran is probably a better pitcher than Miley going forward (largely because of his ability to get lots of popups and outperform his peripherals), but, in the same league/park, I think they're close. I would call Teheran a good third starter, Miley a bad third starter, and Porcello a borderline second/third starter (due to his tendency of underperforming his peripherals). There is no 4.00 AL ERA projection in article, again it says 3.6 NL ERA and closer to 4.00 ERA in AL, not 4.0 ERA in AL. So I took his xFIP- for this year and took off the .30 the article says he should out perform his ERA by and got the 3.86. Which I clearly outlined step by step. I wasn't taking .30 off of projections in article, because they don't give us an exact ERA for AL, like they do in NL. Now the 3.86 ERA falls right in line with what article says, 3.86 is closer to 4.0 than 3.6 ERA. Again your going to use xFIP to state your case without adjusting it by .30??? Fangraphs own article says it's own advanced stats are off with Teheran and should continue to be so for at least another 3 years if not longer because he is only 25. Why would I use 103 for last 2.5 years? I looked at trying to predict his numbers this year in AL, if you wanted to a better outlook look at career. Now last 2.5 years is 102 not 103, the 103 is his career mark. Even using his career mark it would translate to 4.07, which would make him 22nd in AL this year. Now his career mark includes his bad rookie year and last year that looks like an outlier when looking at his career. I would also argue that saying his era will be better by only .30 is a very conservative projection because over last 4 years he has beat his projections by .77 on average per year.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 29, 2016 16:20:31 GMT -5
Teheran's xFIP- since the start of 2014 is 103 ( link), as is his career mark. It is a well-established principle that you should use more than the current season's stats in projecting a player forward. The AL-average ERA this year is 4.25; 103% of that is 4.38; subtract .30 runs per nine and you get 4.08. The article you linked showed that players who outperformed their peripherals by roughly the degree Teheran did in the prior three years will outperform their peripherals by roughly .22 runs per nine in the next three years, so .30 is actually on the aggressive side (the author rounded up because of Teheran's youth). A guy who is 22nd best in his league is just about the spitting image of a good number three starter, both statistically (you'd estimate about seven number ones and 15 number twos per league, using Eric's methodology) and feel-wise (it puts him between Ian Kennedy and Carlos Rodon).
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 29, 2016 17:06:43 GMT -5
Teheran's xFIP- since the start of 2014 is 103 ( link), as is his career mark. It is a well-established principle that you should use more than the current season's stats in projecting a player forward. The AL-average ERA this year is 4.25; 103% of that is 4.38; subtract .30 runs per nine and you get 4.08. The article you linked showed that players who outperformed their peripherals by roughly the degree Teheran did in the prior three years will outperform their peripherals by roughly .22 runs per nine in the next three years, so .30 is actually on the aggressive side (the author rounded up because of Teheran's youth). A guy who is 22nd best in his league is just about the spitting image of a good number three starter, both statistically (you'd estimate about seven number ones and 15 number twos per league, using Eric's methodology) and feel-wise (it puts him between Ian Kennedy and Carlos Rodon). Teherans xFIP is 102.33 for last 2.5 years, basic math says you round down not up. Fangraphs must have it set to just round up for some reason. I used ERA of 4.24 that I had up from yesterday, hence the slight difference. Article again clearly states a bunch of those guys were at end of careers or lost ability to get pop ups. Said Cain and Peavy the two best comps went on to have stellar ERAs for next three years. Why do you insist on using last 2.5 years of xFIP and then list him 22nd this year between Kennedy and Rondon? That's makes little sense, if you wanna compare him to pitchers this year you use his numbers from this year. So now you believe Eric's methodology? Because not long ago you didn't.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 29, 2016 17:17:38 GMT -5
I wanted to add that .30 better on ERA is about 7% better. Take his 103 for last 2.5 years and take off the 7% and it's 96. Take this years number of 98 and you get 91. In that context he's much better than a #3 and clearly a 2/3 like Porcello. Who some people feel is clearly a #2. He's not an ACE, but is a lot better than Wade Miley and what his 4.56 ERA from last year.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jun 29, 2016 17:37:43 GMT -5
I wanted to add that .30 better on ERA is about 7% better. Take his 103 for last 2.5 years and take off the 7% and it's 96. Take this years number of 98 and you get 91. In that context he's much better than a #3 and clearly a 2/3 like Porcello. Who some people feel is clearly a #2. He's not an ACE, but is a lot better than Wade Miley and what his 4.56 ERA from last year. That wasn't Miley's ERA last year, and it's not super plausible to go from xFIP-/fielding independent stats to ERA just for the convenience of your argument. Either way, just look at the batted ball data/peripehrals: Miley spent his entire career pitching in hitters havens for his home parks, and still has relatively comparable advanced stats to Teheran. Teheran also gives up more hard contact and allows more flyballs than either Miley or Porcello, and Porcello has beaten Teheran's (career best) walk rate from this season each of the past two years. Sure, he's consistently produced better results than Miley, but that's context dependent, and it's a pretty well-reasoned bet that were he to pitch in the AL East with half his starts in Fenway for a year, his numbers would look pretty similar to Miley's, even if he does have a skill at inducing pop-ups, because even if you take that into account, it doesn't get rid of concerns about hard contact, non-pop up flyballs, park factors, quality of opponents, abnormally high strand rates or low HR/FB rates. I'd bet on Porcello 10 times out of 10 going forward because he's a groundball guy with better command/control and isn't dependent on incredibly fluky babip numbers (which Teheran has this year, and has had in his best years in the past, even accounting for above average pop-up rates) to be an above-average starter
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 30, 2016 6:16:24 GMT -5
Teherans xFIP is 102.33 for last 2.5 years, basic math says you round down not up. Fangraphs must have it set to just round up for some reason. This changes everything.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 30, 2016 22:44:09 GMT -5
So here's the deal for Teheran that the Braves propose (Spoiler alert: quite a bit more than what Bowden, et al have speculated about): Moncada plus Brian Johnson or Michael Kopech, plus Andrew Benintendi or Rafael Devers.
Travis Shaw can be substituted for the choice of pitchers.
To add Vizcaino will take a top five prospect; To add Krol or Cervenka will require a 6-10 prospect.
|
|
|
Post by kyla13 on Jun 30, 2016 22:55:59 GMT -5
So here's the deal for Teheran that the Braves propose (Spoiler alert: quite a bit more than what Bowden, et al have speculated about): Moncada plus Brian Johnson or Michael Kopech, plus Andrew Benintendi or Rafael Devers. Travis Shaw can be substituted for the choice of pitchers. To add Vizcaino will take a top five prospect; To add Krol or Cervenka will require a 6-10 prospect. So Moncada, Benintendi, Neo and Kopech for Teheran and Vizcaino. That's all it takes? Wohooo! Let's go for it. Red Sox Dynasty, baby.
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Jun 30, 2016 23:09:15 GMT -5
I was watching mlb network this afternoon and Dave Dombrowski was on High heat with Chris "mad dog" Russo and was asked about trades and simply said right off the bat that everybody was asking for moncada benintendi and espinoza so...
|
|
|
Post by pasadenasox on Jun 30, 2016 23:27:19 GMT -5
It's nice to want things.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jun 30, 2016 23:41:23 GMT -5
It's nice to want things. At least teams appear to have stopped asking for betts or bogey. I would hope dombrowski has put benintendi in that same untouchable pile.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Jun 30, 2016 23:49:40 GMT -5
I was watching mlb network this afternoon and Dave Dombrowski was on High heat with Chris "mad dog" Russo and was asked about trades and simply said right off the bat that everybody was asking for moncada benintendi and espinoza so... Of course they ask. You aren't doing your job as a GM if you don't.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 1, 2016 2:06:18 GMT -5
So here's the deal for Teheran that the Braves propose (Spoiler alert: quite a bit more than what Bowden, et al have speculated about): Moncada plus Brian Johnson or Michael Kopech, plus Andrew Benintendi or Rafael Devers. Travis Shaw can be substituted for the choice of pitchers. To add Vizcaino will take a top five prospect; To add Krol or Cervenka will require a 6-10 prospect. So Moncada, Benintendi, Neo and Kopech for Teheran and Vizcaino. That's all it takes? Wohooo! Let's go for it. Red Sox Dynasty, baby. Well, I kind of read it, in the "best" light, as: For Teheran #1 Moncada plus #7Johnson/#2Benintendi OR #6Kopech/#4Devers. And then add Vizcaino requires Sam Travis Krol or Cervenka requires a 6-10 prospect. So, Espinoza is safe. Travis Shaw can be substituted to keep Kopech and Johnson safe.
|
|
|
Post by pasadenasox on Jul 1, 2016 2:49:32 GMT -5
Well, if the Red Sox make that kind of deal, they'll deserve what they have coming to them.
|
|
Smittyw
Veteran
Posts: 1,286
Member is Online
|
Post by Smittyw on Jul 1, 2016 5:48:52 GMT -5
So here's the deal for Teheran that the Braves propose (Spoiler alert: quite a bit more than what Bowden, et al have speculated about): Moncada plus Brian Johnson or Michael Kopech, plus Andrew Benintendi or Rafael Devers. Travis Shaw can be substituted for the choice of pitchers. To add Vizcaino will take a top five prospect; To add Krol or Cervenka will require a 6-10 prospect. So Moncada, Benintendi, Neo and Kopech for Teheran and Vizcaino. That's all it takes? Wohooo! Let's go for it. Red Sox Braves Dynasty, baby. FTFY
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jul 1, 2016 6:10:28 GMT -5
I'd only go for a Tehran deal if it looked like this-
Julio Tehran Freddie Freeman Aroldlys Viscaino (spelling?)
For-
Devers Hanley Ramirez Sam Travis (can be traded if put on the 60 day DL) Eduardo Rodriguez Maybe a couple lower level prospects like Basabe and Chavis or Ball.
-The Braves save money long-term by getting rid of the Freeman contract -The Braves get a top 20 prospect for Tehran -The Braves get a controllable young starter who they can flip if they want -The Braves get a cheaper replacement going forward for Freeman -The Braves can pay half or more of the contract to get rid of Hanley next off-season. -The Braves also get some wild cards in the deal.
-The Sox get a better first baseman, bullpen help, and a much needed starter.
The only way a deal like this makes sense to me is in a package. Trading for Tehran straight up is borderline asinine when trying to get fair value. Imo Freeman and Viscaino would have to be part of the deal in order to make a trade work.
The problem is that the Braves probably think another Shelby Miller deal is coming. So I rather not deal with the Braves at all if they even think about going to the table thinking they're getting even a sniff at that kind of package they got for Miller. Everyone in baseball knows that Arizona got hosed, if that's how the Braves do business with the Sox then no freaking thanks Atlanta and have fun rebuilding around Tehran.
|
|
|
Post by jayhawk on Jul 1, 2016 6:16:54 GMT -5
So Moncada, Benintendi, Neo and Kopech for Teheran and Vizcaino. That's all it takes? Wohooo! Let's go for it. Red Sox Dynasty, baby. Well, I kind of read it, in the "best" light, as: For Teheran #1 Moncada plus #7Johnson/#2Benintendi OR #6Kopech/#4Devers. And then add Vizcaino requires Sam Travis Krol or Cervenka requires a 6-10 prospect. So, Espinoza is safe. Travis Shaw can be substituted to keep Kopech and Johnson safe. You could maybe.... MAYBE... talk me into that package for Chris Sale. Not a chance I'm trading Moncada or Benintendi for Teheran or Vizcaino, let alone both of them.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 1, 2016 6:42:54 GMT -5
So here's the deal for Teheran that the Braves propose (Spoiler alert: quite a bit more than what Bowden, et al have speculated about): Moncada plus Brian Johnson or Michael Kopech, plus Andrew Benintendi or Rafael Devers. Travis Shaw can be substituted for the choice of pitchers. To add Vizcaino will take a top five prospect; To add Krol or Cervenka will require a 6-10 prospect. Do you actually think that's worth talking about or are you just trolling? Or maybe you left Freeman out.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 1, 2016 9:08:10 GMT -5
So here's the deal for Teheran that the Braves propose (Spoiler alert: quite a bit more than what Bowden, et al have speculated about): Moncada plus Brian Johnson or Michael Kopech, plus Andrew Benintendi or Rafael Devers. Travis Shaw can be substituted for the choice of pitchers. To add Vizcaino will take a top five prospect; To add Krol or Cervenka will require a 6-10 prospect. Do you actually think that's worth talking about or are you just trolling? Or maybe you left Freeman out. No, I mean this is the actual proposal that the Braves have made and will accept. It's just up to DDo to pick the options he wants. You could see this trade announced later today, with these terms. I didn't post this here, jmei did. But I think this is the wrong forum, since it's not a proposal I'm making, it's one the Braves made. But no, I don't know if many people here will even want to talk about it, given the endearing, but mostly monolithic prospect love that goes on.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 1, 2016 9:19:09 GMT -5
Do you actually think that's worth talking about or are you just trolling? Or maybe you left Freeman out. No, I mean this is the actual proposal that the Braves have made and will accept. It's just up to DDo to pick the options he wants. You could see this trade announced later today, with these terms. I didn't post this here, jmei did. But I think this is the wrong forum, since it's not a proposal I'm making, it's one the Braves made. But no, I don't know if many people here will even want to talk about it, given the endearing, but mostly monolithic prospect love that goes on. You look at Betts, Bogaerts, Shaw, JBJ and there's a reason why people love prospects. You look at the awful trades and free agent signings that go on these days and there's a reason why people love prospects. Especially elite ones. It's pretty ridiculous to criticize that. We're screwed as a baseball team if we do not continue to develop our own prospects and refuse to trade them away. You should be the one chastised for not loving prospects enough. How many Shelby Miller trades does it take to ruin your franchise for a long time?
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 1, 2016 9:26:55 GMT -5
No, I mean this is the actual proposal that the Braves have made and will accept. It's just up to DDo to pick the options he wants. You could see this trade announced later today, with these terms. I didn't post this here, jmei did. But I think this is the wrong forum, since it's not a proposal I'm making, it's one the Braves made. But no, I don't know if many people here will even want to talk about it, given the endearing, but mostly monolithic prospect love that goes on. You look at Betts, Bogaerts, Shaw, JBJ and there's a reason why people love prospects. You look at the awful trades and free agent signings that go on these days and there's a reason why people love prospects. Especially elite ones. It's pretty ridiculous to criticize that. We're screwed as a baseball team if we do not continue to develop our own prospects and refuse to trade them away. You should be the one chastised for not loving prospects enough. How many Shelby Miller trades does it take to ruin your franchise for a long time? But see, if you look again, I didn't criticize anything. I said it was mostly monolithic (as in mostly one-sided) and endearing (as in understandable and a view I have empathy for). Interesting, right? Think about that.
|
|
|