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.
Nathan Eovaldi (re-signed: 4 years/$68 million)
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 9, 2018 14:33:21 GMT -5
I’m not sure why you keep bringing up this Pomeranz idea. Not only is the guy terrible but it doesn’t make sense for him to come back and rebuild value with the Red Sox. He’ll probably go to one of those middling teams like the Twins. I don't know, Pomeranz is what 30 or 31 next year? I could easily see him bouncing back despite him getting crushed all year last year. I love the idea of selling high on Porcello versus getting a low end 4th round pick for him too. It's a 50/50 chance Pomeranz is better than Porcello next year because Porcello stinks every other year it seems. And if he’s throwing 86 in spring training again, then you need a guy like Porcello when you don’t have him anymore. The only thing worse than signing Pomeranz is depending on him to fill out the rotation. And a reminder that the Red Sox are showing that they don’t care about the 2019 budget, so trading Porcello does nothing for the 2019 team except make them worse. I bet you’re the only person who thinks it’s a 50-50 tossup for who is better next year. He’d have about 20 teams in on signing him if that were remotely true.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 9, 2018 14:36:18 GMT -5
I don't know, Pomeranz is what 30 or 31 next year? I could easily see him bouncing back despite him getting crushed all year last year. I love the idea of selling high on Porcello versus getting a low end 4th round pick for him too. It's a 50/50 chance Pomeranz is better than Porcello next year because Porcello stinks every other year it seems. And if he’s throwing 86 in spring training again, then you need a guy like Porcello when you don’t have him anymore. The only thing worse than signing Pomeranz is depending on him to fill out the rotation. You wouldn't be dependent on him, he would just be the first option out of the 5th spot in the rotation. You still have Brian Johnson. Porcello can be just as bad giving up seasons with a ERA well over 4 while leading the league in homeruns given up. Like I said, flip a coin. I'd probably take Pomeranz at 6 million personally.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 9, 2018 14:39:52 GMT -5
I can think of just one scenario where they trade Porcello.
1) David Robertson really wants to be able to drive home to his family and signs a nice contract to be the new closer.
2) Andrew Miller, thirsting for a ring, signs a one-year, re-establish-my-value deal.
3) Joe "Still a Red Sox in My Mind" Kelly signs a team-favorable one-year deal with a two-year team option, with a promise to start at least until Steven Wright is healthy.
I actually really like that, especially if after all the FA and traded starters are taken, there are still a couple of teams who see the difference between Porcello and their #5 as as a possible make-or-break difference. And that's really credible if you're on the post-season cusp and your #5 and beyond are weak. If that's the case, they can get more than Porcello's paper value.
Kelly gets both of the things he really wants: to come back here, and to get one last shot at starting.
I think 1 and 3 are very doable. The key would be 2. But there you can probably overpay and still come out ahead overall. IOW, if overpaying a bit for Miller means you can trade Porcello for a really nice prospect or two and replace him with Joe Kelly for a lot less money, that's an easy win.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 9, 2018 15:11:22 GMT -5
Last 3 years Porcello 7.7 bwar, Pomeranz 7.2 bwar. How one is a guy we shouldn't ever trade and the other one is a guy that sucks and we shouldn't sign is kinda mind boggling stuff.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 9, 2018 15:32:28 GMT -5
Last 3 years Porcello 7.7 bwar, Pomeranz 7.2 bwar. How one is a guy we shouldn't ever trade and the other one is a guy that sucks and we shouldn't sign is kinda mind boggling stuff. So "WAR is reductionist" is often a copout used by people who want to just stick their heads in the sand, but... I find this on the reductionist side. No front office is going to make a decision on their pitching staff based on three-year bWAR. I think there's a pretty good statistical case that Pomeranz is a good buy-low option for someone, and his performance record prior to 2018 (which WAR does a pretty good job showing) would be part of that case. But there are a lot of reasons to think Porcello is a vastly superior investment for 2019. 1. Fangraphs has a much different interpretations of their three year performance. (Porcello 10.0 vs. Pomeranz 5.9). The big difference was that Fangraphs took Porcello's peripherals and saw his bad season in terms of runs allowed in 2017 as being rather flukish (with some Farrell overuse mixed in), and his 2016 and 2018 performances reinforce that as being the correct view. 2. Their 2018 seasons were hugely divergent by any standard possible. 3. Porcello's ability to eat innings limits not only his own downside, but the downside potential of the entire staff 4. Health 5. Cost - Porcello's contract is fine, but there's not a ton of excess value there, so you're not likely going to be getting a prime prospect return. And since he's only signed for this year, potential trade partners are limited to contending teams that are going to want one year of Rick Porcello's inning-eating usefulness. 6. The reasons that Porcello is likely to be better than Pomeranz are compounded when the qualifying offer is taken into account. I'd say it's 60/40 that Porcello is a QO guy at this point. He could certainly go either way, but if he were a free agent today I'd absolutely have offered him one. Pomeranz would need to regain his health and effectiveness to be considered for one, and even then it's not a clear decision. That's before getting into any team chemistry questions. Porello was, by all accounts, a big part of the clubhouse. I don't think team chemistry should be the prime driver of personnel decision (winning leads to chemistry, rather than vice versa), but you hate to shake that up for what would otherwise be a very high-risk (and not particularly high-reward) switch in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 9, 2018 16:30:52 GMT -5
Last 3 years Porcello 7.7 bwar, Pomeranz 7.2 bwar. How one is a guy we shouldn't ever trade and the other one is a guy that sucks and we shouldn't sign is kinda mind boggling stuff. So "WAR is reductionist" is often a copout used by people who want to just stick their heads in the sand, but... I find this on the reductionist side. No front office is going to make a decision on their pitching staff based on three-year bWAR. I think there's a pretty good statistical case that Pomeranz is a good buy-low option for someone, and his performance record prior to 2018 (which WAR does a pretty good job showing) would be part of that case. But there are a lot of reasons to think Porcello is a vastly superior investment for 2019. 1. Fangraphs has a much different interpretations of their three year performance. (Porcello 10.0 vs. Pomeranz 5.9). The big difference was that Fangraphs took Porcello's peripherals and saw his bad season in terms of runs allowed in 2017 as being rather flukish (with some Farrell overuse mixed in), and his 2016 and 2018 performances reinforce that as being the correct view. 2. Their 2018 seasons were hugely divergent by any standard possible. 3. Porcello's ability to eat innings limits not only his own downside, but the downside potential of the entire staff 4. Health 5. Cost - Porcello's contract is fine, but there's not a ton of excess value there, so you're not likely going to be getting a prime prospect return. And since he's only signed for this year, potential trade partners are limited to contending teams that are going to want one year of Rick Porcello's inning-eating usefulness. 6. The reasons that Porcello is likely to be better than Pomeranz are compounded when the qualifying offer is taken into account. I'd say it's 60/40 that Porcello is a QO guy at this point. He could certainly go either way, but if he were a free agent today I'd absolutely have offered him one. Pomeranz would need to regain his health and effectiveness to be considered for one, and even then it's not a clear decision. That's before getting into any team chemistry questions. Porello was, by all accounts, a big part of the clubhouse. I don't think team chemistry should be the prime driver of personnel decision (winning leads to chemistry, rather than vice versa), but you hate to shake that up for what would otherwise be a very high-risk (and not particularly high-reward) switch in the first place. I just never understand the way people look at Fangraphs for pitchers. They are right about 2015 becsuse of 2016, they were right about 2017 because of 2018. Yet in reverse it makes zero sense because 2016 was followed by 2017, 2014 was followed by 2015. It just makes zero sense. We are talking about value, not trying to predict his future performance. Fwar tries to do both and that is a problem when you want just value. You can use whatever you want, but I think it's comical that his 2017 and 2018 season are that close given the numbers and performance. Bwar for me.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 9, 2018 17:25:30 GMT -5
Last 3 years Porcello 7.7 bwar, Pomeranz 7.2 bwar. How one is a guy we shouldn't ever trade and the other one is a guy that sucks and we shouldn't sign is kinda mind boggling stuff. I don’t understand how this is even a question. Pomeranz was overvalued by WAR when he was actually good and last year he wasn’t just bad his stuff disappeared. You can’t ignore that as bad luck.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 9, 2018 17:28:02 GMT -5
they'd be feeding a lot of birds with scones. If I were a moderator, I’d put you on suspension for this comment.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 9, 2018 17:39:51 GMT -5
So "WAR is reductionist" is often a copout used by people who want to just stick their heads in the sand, but... I find this on the reductionist side. No front office is going to make a decision on their pitching staff based on three-year bWAR. I think there's a pretty good statistical case that Pomeranz is a good buy-low option for someone, and his performance record prior to 2018 (which WAR does a pretty good job showing) would be part of that case. But there are a lot of reasons to think Porcello is a vastly superior investment for 2019. 1. Fangraphs has a much different interpretations of their three year performance. (Porcello 10.0 vs. Pomeranz 5.9). The big difference was that Fangraphs took Porcello's peripherals and saw his bad season in terms of runs allowed in 2017 as being rather flukish (with some Farrell overuse mixed in), and his 2016 and 2018 performances reinforce that as being the correct view. I just never understand the way people look at Fangraphs for pitchers. They are right about 2015 becsuse of 2016, they were right about 2017 because of 2018. Yet in reverse it makes zero sense because 2016 was followed by 2017, 2014 was followed by 2015. It just makes zero sense. We are talking about value, not trying to predict his future performance. Fwar tries to do both and that is a problem when you want just value. You can use whatever you want, but I think it's comical that his 2017 and 2018 season are that close given the numbers and performance. Bwar for me. I am opposed to violence of any sort, but I make an exception for bad metrics. fWAR for pitchers should be taken outside and shot.
I'm all for a pitching WAR metric that is predictive rather than descriptive. Preventing hits on balls in play and preventing home runs on fly balls are both real and important pitching skills that are clouded by tons of luck. That's why I use xFIP or SIERA as a starting point and then look at a pitcher's BABIP and HR/FB to try to determine what their skill is.
One thing you wouldn't want to do is construct a metric that regards BABIP as all luck and HR/FB as all skill. It's a relic of a brief time where people didn't believe that BABIP was a skill and hadn't realized how much luck was involved in giving up homers.
A proper descriptive metric would do two things. First, it would adjust BABIP for team defense. bWAR does that incredibly crudely. The data certainly exists to look at the actual defensive performance when each pitcher was on the mound. It would be as sketchy and in need of improvement as the defensive metrics themselves, but there's no reason that when they calculate the DRS or UZR for each fielder, they can't simultaneously calculate the run effect on the pitcher on the mound. But even lacking that, you can calculate the innings played on the field by each player behind each pitcher, adjust for the location of batted balls by the pitcher, and come up with a better estimate than what bWAR does, which is simply take the team DRS and spoon it out over all the pitchers, dividing it by BFP. (Sean Foreman said at this year's SABR conference that they're working on a GB / FB adjustment. So an extreme FB pitcher on this year's Sox would get a very different adjustment from an extreme GB pitcher.)
The second thing would be to do a more granular adjustment of park effects on homers. I do believe that bWAR uses the park factors of each park pitched in, including all the road parks, but I also think that the same park factor is used for each pitcher. GB pitchers will be affected much less than FB pitchers, so an extreme FB pitcher who pitched in bandboxes is getting hosed compared to an extreme GB pitcher, who's getting credit for cheap homers he didn't give up.
A predictive metric factors out two more things. First, there's the actual luck on both balls in play and homers (a lot of the latter is the luck of guys crushing versus fouling off your worst pitches). And the other is sequencing luck. Figuring out how much of that is real is a challenge. Included in that is slow hooks; it's not luck if you're left in once you're already gassed and give up a bunch of hits and runs. That shouldn't count in a predictive stat at all (and I would make the number available for those who want to use it descriptively. In a close CY race, do you really want to give the award to the slightly worse pitcher who had better numbers only because his manager didn't Farrell him a few times?).
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 9, 2018 19:39:09 GMT -5
So "WAR is reductionist" is often a copout used by people who want to just stick their heads in the sand, but... I find this on the reductionist side. No front office is going to make a decision on their pitching staff based on three-year bWAR. I think there's a pretty good statistical case that Pomeranz is a good buy-low option for someone, and his performance record prior to 2018 (which WAR does a pretty good job showing) would be part of that case. But there are a lot of reasons to think Porcello is a vastly superior investment for 2019. 1. Fangraphs has a much different interpretations of their three year performance. (Porcello 10.0 vs. Pomeranz 5.9). The big difference was that Fangraphs took Porcello's peripherals and saw his bad season in terms of runs allowed in 2017 as being rather flukish (with some Farrell overuse mixed in), and his 2016 and 2018 performances reinforce that as being the correct view. 2. Their 2018 seasons were hugely divergent by any standard possible. 3. Porcello's ability to eat innings limits not only his own downside, but the downside potential of the entire staff 4. Health 5. Cost - Porcello's contract is fine, but there's not a ton of excess value there, so you're not likely going to be getting a prime prospect return. And since he's only signed for this year, potential trade partners are limited to contending teams that are going to want one year of Rick Porcello's inning-eating usefulness. 6. The reasons that Porcello is likely to be better than Pomeranz are compounded when the qualifying offer is taken into account. I'd say it's 60/40 that Porcello is a QO guy at this point. He could certainly go either way, but if he were a free agent today I'd absolutely have offered him one. Pomeranz would need to regain his health and effectiveness to be considered for one, and even then it's not a clear decision. That's before getting into any team chemistry questions. Porello was, by all accounts, a big part of the clubhouse. I don't think team chemistry should be the prime driver of personnel decision (winning leads to chemistry, rather than vice versa), but you hate to shake that up for what would otherwise be a very high-risk (and not particularly high-reward) switch in the first place. I just never understand the way people look at Fangraphs for pitchers. They are right about 2015 becsuse of 2016, they were right about 2017 because of 2018. Yet in reverse it makes zero sense because 2016 was followed by 2017, 2014 was followed by 2015. It just makes zero sense. We are talking about value, not trying to predict his future performance. Fwar tries to do both and that is a problem when you want just value. You can use whatever you want, but I think it's comical that his 2017 and 2018 season are that close given the numbers and performance. Bwar for me. 1. Porcello has the better bWar. 2. Porcello was a lot more better by the other advanced metrics, fWAR aside, 3. All of the points I made after the first sentence of my first bullet point, reiterated. The fact that you turned my whole point into some commentary on Fangraphs WAR rather than addressing the underlying issues I stated is inordinately frustrating. EDIT: Here are their three-year performance lines: Porcello; 617.2 IP, 3.99 FIP, 112 ERA+ 560 K, 128 BB, 88 HR; 21.68% K rate, 4.95% BB rate, 3.4% HR rate Pomeranz: 418.1 IP, 4.11 FIP, 115 ERA+ 426 K, 178 BB, 53 HR; 23.83% K rate, 9.96% BB rate, 3.0% HR rate You see the frustration at reducing that to 7.7 bWAR to 7.2 bWAR, yes?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 9, 2018 21:46:32 GMT -5
they'd be feeding a lot of birds with scones. If I were a moderator, I’d put you on suspension for this comment. lol, minor PETA dig, I've seen several tweets that have more or less done the same. What cracked me up was the guy that used his hot dog vendors license to sell hot dogs across the street from a PETA rally. He sold out from the motorists whose path they were blocking.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 9, 2018 23:19:38 GMT -5
Jon Morosi Verified account @jonmorosi
#Padres and #Yankees remain in contact regarding possible Sonny Gray trade, source confirms. @mlbnetwork @mlb
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 10, 2018 4:16:29 GMT -5
It’s fair to speculate if Mejia could potentially head back to the Marlins as part of a package for Realmuto, and the Padres certainly have the overall prospect depth that Miami is demanding for Realmuto’s services. Since Realmuto is controlled only through the 2020 season, his acquisition would indicate that the Padres and GM A.J. Preller are perhaps ready to end their rebuilding process and begin to compete by at least 2020, if not even next season.
Speaking of the Padres and Yankees, the two teams continue to discuss a potential Sonny Gray trade. Morosi noted on the continued talks between the two sides earlier this week, and rumors of the Padres’ interest in Gray date back to last month. Pitcher-friendly Petco Park would seemingly be an ideal place for Gray to rebound from his rough stint in the Bronx, especially since Gray’s drastic home/road splits from 2018 already indicated that his struggles were particularly contained to Yankee Stadium.www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/12/morosis-latest-bumgarner-realmuto-padres-yankees-gray-fiers-graveman-jays-happ.htmlNote that Gray only has one year of control left.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,784
|
Post by mobaz on Dec 10, 2018 8:41:55 GMT -5
It’s fair to speculate if Mejia could potentially head back to the Marlins as part of a package for Realmuto, and the Padres certainly have the overall prospect depth that Miami is demanding for Realmuto’s services. Since Realmuto is controlled only through the 2020 season, his acquisition would indicate that the Padres and GM A.J. Preller are perhaps ready to end their rebuilding process and begin to compete by at least 2020, if not even next season.
Speaking of the Padres and Yankees, the two teams continue to discuss a potential Sonny Gray trade. Morosi noted on the continued talks between the two sides earlier this week, and rumors of the Padres’ interest in Gray date back to last month. Pitcher-friendly Petco Park would seemingly be an ideal place for Gray to rebound from his rough stint in the Bronx, especially since Gray’s drastic home/road splits from 2018 already indicated that his struggles were particularly contained to Yankee Stadium.www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/12/morosis-latest-bumgarner-realmuto-padres-yankees-gray-fiers-graveman-jays-happ.htmlNote that Gray only has one year of control left. I'd rather Gray stay in the Bronx plz.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 10, 2018 8:55:53 GMT -5
That's before getting into any team chemistry questions. Porello was, by all accounts, a big part of the clubhouse. I don't think team chemistry should be the prime driver of personnel decision (winning leads to chemistry, rather than vice versa), but you hate to shake that up for what would otherwise be a very high-risk (and not particularly high-reward) switch in the first place. Team chemistry is one of those things that’s either completely over-rates or completely underrated. We live in a brave new world of analytics and chemistry can’t be measured by a statistic so people want to dismiss it. Teams can win without liking each other or their manager or the front office, but it’s harder and it’s harder to sustain that’s success over time. Baseball, more than any other sport is a grind. 162 games plus playoffs and spring training over the course of 8 months. The sport itself doesn’t take a lot of physical energy out of you, it’s the mental energy of the every day and constant travel. Doing that with people you don’t like wears on you and performance will inevitably suffer. These are people, not simply professional robots, and they need to be treated as such. This is why assets (players) aren’t just juggled around Willy nilly. We all Learned how important Porcello is to all the guys in the room. Trading him in a salary dump (yes any prospect package you got is still a salary dump to free money) would cause a lot of damage to the team. Could they over come it? Yea it’s possible, but it would hurt the team ALOT more than figuring the WAR difference between him and the new 5th starter.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 10, 2018 9:15:46 GMT -5
That's before getting into any team chemistry questions. Porello was, by all accounts, a big part of the clubhouse. I don't think team chemistry should be the prime driver of personnel decision (winning leads to chemistry, rather than vice versa), but you hate to shake that up for what would otherwise be a very high-risk (and not particularly high-reward) switch in the first place. Team chemistry is one of those things that’s either completely over-rates or completely underrated. We live in a brave new world of analytics and chemistry can’t be measured by a statistic so people want to dismiss it. Teams can win without liking each other or their manager or the front office, but it’s harder and it’s harder to sustain that’s success over time. Baseball, more than any other sport is a grind. 162 games plus playoffs and spring training over the course of 8 months. The sport itself doesn’t take a lot of physical energy out of you, it’s the mental energy of the every day and constant travel. Doing that with people you don’t like wears on you and performance will inevitably suffer. These are people, not simply professional robots, and they need to be treated as such. This is why assets (players) aren’t just juggled around Willy nilly. We all Learned how important Porcello is to all the guys in the room. Trading him in a salary dump (yes any prospect package you got is still a salary dump to free money) would cause a lot of damage to the team. Could they over come it? Yea it’s possible, but it would hurt the team ALOT more than figuring the WAR difference between him and the new 5th starter. Yeah, like I said - I don't think it makes sense to let team chemistry to be the primary driver of decision making, but I do think you have to keep it in mind at the margins. If the Red Sox were to get blown away with an offer for Porcello, I don't think you can use chemistry as a reason not to do it. By the same token, if someone is good in the clubhouse but a no-longer-productive player (think Ryan Dempster for example) I think a team shouldn't hesitate to move on. And I don't think most analysts ignore chemistry or think it doesn't matter - it's more that its immeasurable, and you can't let that get in the way of measurable things. On top of that, most players tend to be agreeable when the team is playing well. It's when things are going poorly that things tend to rear their ugliness. Trevor Bauer has been mentioned in a couple places, and I don't mean to pick on him (okay, maybe I mean to pick on him), but I think he's an example here. With Cleveland, who has been playing well for his time there, he seems to have been a good teammate and a hard worker and there haven't been any internal issues. I wouldn't hesitate to add him and then deal with his foibles if I were the Red Sox. But on the Diamondbacks he was a disaster in the clubhouse, and the feud with Miguel Montero was particularly ugly. He even recorded a diss track. (It is bad. If you can find it, I implore you not to listen to it. Seriously, if you find it and listen to it you cannot blame me. I warned you. I listened to it in 2013 so that you don't have to.) So yeah, I don't think team chemistry stands on its own as a reason to hold Porcello, but I do think it's another point in why an already high-risk strategy of replacing Porcello's durable usefulness with tremendous upside potential is even riskier.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Dec 10, 2018 9:53:28 GMT -5
It’s fair to speculate if Mejia could potentially head back to the Marlins as part of a package for Realmuto, and the Padres certainly have the overall prospect depth that Miami is demanding for Realmuto’s services. Since Realmuto is controlled only through the 2020 season, his acquisition would indicate that the Padres and GM A.J. Preller are perhaps ready to end their rebuilding process and begin to compete by at least 2020, if not even next season.
Speaking of the Padres and Yankees, the two teams continue to discuss a potential Sonny Gray trade. Morosi noted on the continued talks between the two sides earlier this week, and rumors of the Padres’ interest in Gray date back to last month. Pitcher-friendly Petco Park would seemingly be an ideal place for Gray to rebound from his rough stint in the Bronx, especially since Gray’s drastic home/road splits from 2018 already indicated that his struggles were particularly contained to Yankee Stadium.www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/12/morosis-latest-bumgarner-realmuto-padres-yankees-gray-fiers-graveman-jays-happ.htmlNote that Gray only has one year of control left. I'd rather Gray stay in the Bronx plz.
I'm sure our entire offense does, too.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 10, 2018 11:08:19 GMT -5
I'd rather Gray stay in the Bronx plz. I'm sure our entire offense does, too.
Agreed but two things are close to certain. 1. Gray will be traded, the Yankees have made that pretty clear and 2. whatever bag of hockey pucks they get in return because the Yankees have no leverage, will be marketed as the best hockey pucks ever.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 10, 2018 11:17:05 GMT -5
Team chemistry is one of those things that’s either completely over-rates or completely underrated. We live in a brave new world of analytics and chemistry can’t be measured by a statistic so people want to dismiss it. Teams can win without liking each other or their manager or the front office, but it’s harder and it’s harder to sustain that’s success over time. Baseball, more than any other sport is a grind. 162 games plus playoffs and spring training over the course of 8 months. The sport itself doesn’t take a lot of physical energy out of you, it’s the mental energy of the every day and constant travel. Doing that with people you don’t like wears on you and performance will inevitably suffer. These are people, not simply professional robots, and they need to be treated as such. This is why assets (players) aren’t just juggled around Willy nilly. We all Learned how important Porcello is to all the guys in the room. Trading him in a salary dump (yes any prospect package you got is still a salary dump to free money) would cause a lot of damage to the team. Could they over come it? Yea it’s possible, but it would hurt the team ALOT more than figuring the WAR difference between him and the new 5th starter. Yeah, like I said - I don't think it makes sense to let team chemistry to be the primary driver of decision making, but I do think you have to keep it in mind at the margins. If the Red Sox were to get blown away with an offer for Porcello, I don't think you can use chemistry as a reason not to do it. By the same token, if someone is good in the clubhouse but a no-longer-productive player (think Ryan Dempster for example) I think a team shouldn't hesitate to move on. And I don't think most analysts ignore chemistry or think it doesn't matter - it's more that its immeasurable, and you can't let that get in the way of measurable things. On top of that, most players tend to be agreeable when the team is playing well. It's when things are going poorly that things tend to rear their ugliness. Trevor Bauer has been mentioned in a couple places, and I don't mean to pick on him (okay, maybe I mean to pick on him), but I think he's an example here. With Cleveland, who has been playing well for his time there, he seems to have been a good teammate and a hard worker and there haven't been any internal issues. I wouldn't hesitate to add him and then deal with his foibles if I were the Red Sox. But on the Diamondbacks he was a disaster in the clubhouse, and the feud with Miguel Montero was particularly ugly. He even recorded a diss track. (It is bad. If you can find it, I implore you not to listen to it. Seriously, if you find it and listen to it you cannot blame me. I warned you. I listened to it in 2013 so that you don't have to.) So yeah, I don't think team chemistry stands on its own as a reason to hold Porcello, but I do think it's another point in why an already high-risk strategy of replacing Porcello's durable usefulness with tremendous upside potential is even riskier. I agree, if you get blown away for any guy you can deal him, but the trades people are talking here have been to shed his salary. Trading a guy like him to shed salary would be a disaster in the clubhouse.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2018 11:35:26 GMT -5
I'm just curious why some think the Red Sox need to shed salary in 2019. Is it because they didn't hesitate whatsoever in signing Pearce and Eovaldi? Because they're worried about team salary?
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,673
|
Post by gerry on Dec 10, 2018 12:31:25 GMT -5
I'm just curious why some think the Red Sox need to shed salary in 2019. Is it because they didn't hesitate whatsoever in signing Pearce and Eovaldi? Because they're worried about team salary? Along this line, the wisdom of signing a healthy Pom to a “show me” contract, as the 6th starter is based on issues that have nothing to do with trading Rick Porcello in 2019. It has everything to with: 1. David Wright, the assumed 6th starter in March, very likely starts the season on the DL or on rehab in Pawtucket. A healthy Pom is a solid replacement. 2. A healthy Pom as 6th starter would be a valuable asset during a 2019 WS drive. This is in line with discussions on this board of openers, rovers, piggy backs, long relief, and modified 6-man rotations. 3. Cora has been clear he plans to deal with the 2018 WS hangover by easing his pitchers gradually ino the 2019 season. Having a healthy Pom in the mix on 3/28/19, with or without a healthy Wright, helps with this strategy ... especially opening the season on an 11 day West Coast road trip. These games are winnable and every win counts. 4. The health of Sale, ERod, Wright, even Eovaldi and Johnson can not be assumed. Above average depth is essential. 5. Although the Sox seem willing to spend to win again in 2019, a low base with incentives won’t cost much unless Pom works back to 2017 form, which would be awesome. 6. An incentized contract should have an option for 2020. 7. If Porcello or Sale are not given new contracts when they expire following 2019, Pom’s option could be a 2020 season saver if the Sox decide to reset. In sum, there is every reason to offer an incentivized pillow contract with option to a healthy Pom, which would take effect if he makes the team following ST. Can anyone see a problem with this?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 10, 2018 12:34:35 GMT -5
I'm just curious why some think the Red Sox need to shed salary in 2019. Is it because they didn't hesitate whatsoever in signing Pearce and Eovaldi? Because they're worried about team salary? Along this line, the wisdom of signing a healthy Pom to a “show me” contract, as the 6th starter is based on issues that have nothing to do with trading Rick Porcello in 2019. It has everything to with: 1. David Wright, the assumed 6th starter in March, very likely starts the season on the DL or on rehab in Pawtucket. A healthy Pom is a solid replacement. 2. A healthy Pom as 6th starter would be a valuable asset during a 2019 WS drive. This is in line with discussions on this board of openers, rovers, piggy backs, long relief, and modified 6-man rotations. 3. Cora has been clear he plans to deal with the 2018 WS hangover by easing his pitchers gradually ino the 2019 season. Having a healthy Pom in the mix on 3/28/19, with or without a healthy Wright, helps with this strategy ... especially opening the season on an 11 day West Coast road trip. These games are winnable and every win counts. 4. The health of Sale, ERod, Wright, even Eovaldi and Johnson can not be assumed. Above average depth is essential. 5. Although the Sox seem willing to spend to win again in 2019, a low base with incentives won’t cost much unless Pom works back to 2017 form, which would be awesome. 6. An incentized contract should have an option for 2020. 7. If Porcello or Sale are not given new contracts when they expire following 2019, Pom’s option could be a 2020 season saver if the Sox decide to reset. In sum, there is every reason to offer an incentivized pillow contract with option to a healthy Pom, which would take effect if he makes the team following ST. Can anyone see anproblem with this? Maybe Pomeranz would see a problem with this. I would think he'd want to go somewhere where he has a better shot at pitching every 5th day. With Sale, Price, Eovaldi, Porcello, and E-Rod, not to mention even Johnson or even Vazquez possibly ahead of him, Boston would not be a place where he has a great shot (with a strong spring training) to pitch every 5th day.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 10, 2018 12:36:34 GMT -5
I'm just curious why some think the Red Sox need to shed salary in 2019. Is it because they didn't hesitate whatsoever in signing Pearce and Eovaldi? Because they're worried about team salary? Exactly, the only reason to deal Porcello would be so they get something for him if they don't/can't bring him back in 2020. This team has no need to shed short-term salary in 2019 whatsoever. And frankly, the Sox aren't going to deal Porcello. They value what he can bring to the table in 2020, which is more certainty than replacements like Johnson or Velazquez or Pomeranz if they brought him back.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2018 12:45:50 GMT -5
I'm just curious why some think the Red Sox need to shed salary in 2019. Is it because they didn't hesitate whatsoever in signing Pearce and Eovaldi? Because they're worried about team salary? Along this line, the wisdom of signing a healthy Pom to a “show me” contract, as the 6th starter is based on issues that have nothing to do with trading Rick Porcello in 2019. It has everything to with: 1. David Wright, the assumed 6th starter in March, very likely starts the season on the DL or on rehab in Pawtucket. A healthy Pom is a solid replacement. 2. A healthy Pom as 6th starter would be a valuable asset during a 2019 WS drive. This is in line with discussions on this board of openers, rovers, piggy backs, long relief, and modified 6-man rotations. 3. Cora has been clear he plans to deal with the 2018 WS hangover by easing his pitchers gradually ino the 2019 season. Having a healthy Pom in the mix on 3/28/19, with or without a healthy Wright, helps with this strategy ... especially opening the season on an 11 day West Coast road trip. These games are winnable and every win counts. 4. The health of Sale, ERod, Wright, even Eovaldi and Johnson can not be assumed. Above average depth is essential. 5. Although the Sox seem willing to spend to win again in 2019, a low base with incentives won’t cost much unless Pom works back to 2017 form, which would be awesome. 6. An incentized contract should have an option for 2020. 7. If Porcello or Sale are not given new contracts when they expire following 2019, Pom’s option could be a 2020 season saver if the Sox decide to reset. In sum, there is every reason to offer an incentivized pillow contract with option to a healthy Pom, which would take effect if he makes the team following ST. Can anyone see a problem with this? I'm not 100% opposed to signing Pomeranz, but I'm 100% opposed to trading Porcello in lieu of Pomeranz. But one of the arguments was that they could use that money saved by trading Porcello and I don't see any indication whatsoever that they can't spend more money anyway so it makes no sense! Hell, if they had another $22 million and didn't have Porcello, they would then want Porcello. The key with him is that they have him for one year. They clearly do not care what their 2019 payroll is but they are being quite careful with spending money beyond 2019. Porcello fits that strategy perfectly.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,673
|
Post by gerry on Dec 10, 2018 12:53:29 GMT -5
Agree on hanging onto Porcello for 2019, and maybe beyond. My post was out of concern that, somehow, offering a pillow contract to Pom meant trading Porc for $$ savings. This is not the case. At all. There is no need to save $$ in 2019. There is every reason, IMO, to hang onto both in 2019 to help repeat. As long as Pom is working back to form and, as Champs says, as long as Pom agrees to the deal. Pom says he loves it here and wants to return, so that’s a good start.
|
|
|