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 jchang on Nov 19, 2018 15:18:15 GMT -5
I would favor a Lackey type deal, 4 yrs + team option if he injured
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Nov 19, 2018 19:07:27 GMT -5
I think the only way that Eovaldi comes back, with the interest being shown in him, is with a 4 year deal. Money needs to be in the ballpark (I think he wants to come back and therefore will give a bit of a discount on the dollars), but I can't see less than 4 years getting it done. How they structure it is another thing, might have to get creative...
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 19, 2018 22:35:53 GMT -5
We have the inside track and the intoxicating afterglow. He pitched his career best here under the Sox tutelege. He became a hero and fan favorite. He'll stay here with a championship caliber team things being near equal. If we can pay Porcello 20+, we can pay this starter/playoff power reliever the market price.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 19, 2018 22:46:31 GMT -5
does he really have 4 years left on that arm as a starter?
As a reliever, maybe, but as a starter it is hard to see.
Maybe we could use those funds on other options.
Happ might be a better option for example.
|
|
|
Post by soxpatsceltics on Nov 19, 2018 23:02:51 GMT -5
A long-term deal for Eovaldi is one of those cases where it's either going to be a disaster or an absolute steal. High risk, high reward. I wouldn't mind spending the money elsewhere on less volatile resources.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 20, 2018 7:03:50 GMT -5
does he really have 4 years left on that arm as a starter? As a reliever, maybe, but as a starter it is hard to see. Maybe we could use those funds on other options. Happ might be a better option for example. Ok what's wrong with that arm?Yes he has had two surgeries, but the damage has been repaired, the injuries have 'saved' the arm, shoulder, elbow from the stress of otherwise having thrown more pitches to date. Wasn't it the Yankee team doctor who recently gave a hearty thumbs up to the overall structure and health of Eovaldi's right wing? And, forgetting the salary cap, don't we carry insurance? At base, do his two prior injuries make him more prone to a third? It's hard not to chase the lightning when future titles are currently within the grasp.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by mobaz on Nov 20, 2018 8:18:51 GMT -5
I feel like one of the biggest problems with an Eovaldi deal is it starts to tie the teams hands in 2020+. There's such a wide range of options and desired outcomes on Sale/Boegarts/JBJ and then Mookie shortly after. I like Eovaldi as a Porcello replacement buying a year early, but Eovaldi has a similar range of outcomes without the durability to match. 3/50 with a vesting option is much more palpable than 4/80. I like the idea of 2020 rotation baseline with Price/E-Rod/Eovaldi better than Price/E-Rod/TBD
It was interesting to hear DDo saying he things the rotation is fine as-is; we've learned to take him at his word so maybe that's where they end up. Any interesting AAAA fliers or MiLB deals with opt outs that folks like?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 20, 2018 8:26:06 GMT -5
I feel like one of the biggest problems with an Eovaldi deal is it starts to tie the teams hands in 2020+. There's such a wide range of options and desired outcomes on Sale/Boegarts/JBJ and then Mookie shortly after. I like Eovaldi as a Porcello replacement buying a year early, but Eovaldi has a similar range of outcomes without the durability to match. 3/50 with a vesting option is much more palpable than 4/80. I like the idea of 2020 rotation baseline with Price/E-Rod/Eovaldi better than Price/E-Rod/TBD It was interesting to hear DDo saying he things the rotation is fine as-is; we've learned to take him at his word so maybe that's where they end up. Any interesting AAAA fliers or MiLB deals with opt outs that folks like? Source ? I've only seen him saying he thinks the position players are set.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by mobaz on Nov 20, 2018 9:08:34 GMT -5
I feel like one of the biggest problems with an Eovaldi deal is it starts to tie the teams hands in 2020+. There's such a wide range of options and desired outcomes on Sale/Boegarts/JBJ and then Mookie shortly after. I like Eovaldi as a Porcello replacement buying a year early, but Eovaldi has a similar range of outcomes without the durability to match. 3/50 with a vesting option is much more palpable than 4/80. I like the idea of 2020 rotation baseline with Price/E-Rod/Eovaldi better than Price/E-Rod/TBD It was interesting to hear DDo saying he things the rotation is fine as-is; we've learned to take him at his word so maybe that's where they end up. Any interesting AAAA fliers or MiLB deals with opt outs that folks like? Source ? I've only seen him saying he thinks the position players are set. Per Speier Tweet of Dombro interview. Don't watch video so I didn't listen to the interview. Alex Speier @alexspeier Dombrowski says Sox are comfortable with where the rotation stands, with four established pitchers plus perhaps Wright along with Johnson, Velazquez, though he said Sox are open-minded about adding to rotation. 3:22 PM - Nov 19, 2018 nesn.com/2018/11/dave-dombrowski-details-red-soxs-approach-to-rotation-bullpen-this-offseason/
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,641
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 20, 2018 9:49:14 GMT -5
Source ? I've only seen him saying he thinks the position players are set. Per Speier Tweet of Dombro interview. Don't watch video so I didn't listen to the interview. Alex Speier @alexspeier Dombrowski says Sox are comfortable with where the rotation stands, with four established pitchers plus perhaps Wright along with Johnson, Velazquez, though he said Sox are open-minded about adding to rotation. 3:22 PM - Nov 19, 2018 nesn.com/2018/11/dave-dombrowski-details-red-soxs-approach-to-rotation-bullpen-this-offseason/To me it sounds like he's hedging and giving wiggle room. It's not much different from what was being said in February, how they'd be comfortable with their offense as is but they could have a need for a guy who can DH and play the OF if one should arise. So it sounds similar to what he said before the Sox got JDM. Also kind of similar to what he said about being comfortable with his pen, that Braser wasn't a household name but was as good as anybody out there or that Thornburg was back and could help, yet he was very close to sealing a deal for Kelvin Herrera and in the back of his mind he already knew that Eovaldi might be a candidate for double duty in the post-season. I guess the point is that Dombrowski does a good job saying things in a way so you don't feel that's he's ever really lying. So if they don't bring back Eovaldi and don't add anybody it will be we're very comfortable with our rotation, we think Brian Johnson can contribute and perhaps Wright later in the season and Velazquez could play a bigger role.... Or if they bring back Eovaldi we'll hear that he was comfortable but the opportunity to bring back a guy with the ceiling potential of Eovaldi, who is already a post-season hero and an excellent fit on the club with the way he balances out the rotation giving the Sox a power righty to balance out their lefties in the rotation was just too good a fit to pass up. I'm hoping we hear the latter.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 20, 2018 11:13:25 GMT -5
I'm hoping for Thanksgiving at the Eovaldi's.
Lasagna anyone?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 20, 2018 11:24:58 GMT -5
I think Eovaldi is as overrated now as he was underrated back when Jalen Beeks was too high of a price to pay for his services (which was like five minutes ago).
If the MLBTR projections are anything close to accurate, and Charlie Morton ends up getting half of Eovaldi's contract... just sign Charlie Morton. Charlie Morton has better projections than Eovaldi, and there's nothing crazy about that if you look at the track records or even their stuff. I'd be super bummed to lose Eovaldi after how everything has played out with him, but if those really are the respective costs of those two pitchers... it's like not even a decision, really.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 20, 2018 12:27:00 GMT -5
I think Eovaldi is as overrated now as he was underrated back when Jalen Beeks was too high of a price to pay for his services (which was like five minutes ago). If the MLBTR projections are anything close to accurate, and Charlie Morton ends up getting half of Eovaldi's contract... just sign Charlie Morton. Charlie Morton has better projections than Eovaldi, and there's nothing crazy about that if you look at the track records or even their stuff. I'd be super bummed to lose Eovaldi after how everything has played out with him, but if those really are the respective costs of those two pitchers... it's like not even a decision, really. I've mentioned Morton before, but it seems like he's only willing to consider Houston or somewhere near Delaware where his wife's family lives which I guess includes Philly, Washington or Baltimore.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,914
Member is Online
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 20, 2018 12:53:52 GMT -5
To me it sounds like he's hedging and giving wiggle room. It's not much different from what was being said in February, how they'd be comfortable with their offense as is but they could have a need for a guy who can DH and play the OF if one should arise. So it sounds similar to what he said before the Sox got JDM. Also kind of similar to what he said about being comfortable with his pen, that Braser wasn't a household name but was as good as anybody out there or that Thornburg was back and could help, yet he was very close to sealing a deal for Kelvin Herrera and in the back of his mind he already knew that Eovaldi might be a candidate for double duty in the post-season. I guess the point is that Dombrowski does a good job saying things in a way so you don't feel that's he's ever really lying. So if they don't bring back Eovaldi and don't add anybody it will be we're very comfortable with our rotation, we think Brian Johnson can contribute and perhaps Wright later in the season and Velazquez could play a bigger role.... Or if they bring back Eovaldi we'll hear that he was comfortable but the opportunity to bring back a guy with the ceiling potential of Eovaldi, who is already a post-season hero and an excellent fit on the club with the way he balances out the rotation giving the Sox a power righty to balance out their lefties in the rotation was just too good a fit to pass up. I'm hoping we hear the latter. There's no question that Sale, Price, E-Rod, Porcello, and the combo of Wright, Johnson, and Velazquez is good enough to win a WS next year. That's what DDo is talking about.
There are four reasons to sign Eovaldi anyway.
1) He'll sign here for below market value. You don't have to outbid the Brewers, Phillies, and Braves; you just have to be in their ballpark.
2) In 2019 he turns a great rotation into a stupid good one.
3) In 2020 - 2022 (you'd have a team option for a 4th year) he can provide a high percentage of Sale's value at half the price. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that if you offer Sale a QO and then are below the limit next year, you get the best possible compensation pick instead of a mediocre one.)
4) If you re-sign Sale next year instead of Eovaldi this year, you'll have to trade JBJ and do some other stuff to reset the tax penalty. Whereas a reset with Eovaldi and JBJ instead of Sale should be very doable. The 2020 club is actually better.
People have argued that a reset is not necessary, and technically that's true. You could afford it. But a reset makes it much easier to spend like crazy the next two years. You are much better off having a reset every third year and one of the top two payrolls otherwise, than being the 3rd highest every year and never resetting. You spend less total money and on average, your team is better.
The Dodgers and Yankees are likely to pursue the same strategy. We had a huge advantage this year because they were both resetting simultaneously. We can have that again in 2021, but you can spend a lot more money if you've just done a reset yourself.
I think Eovaldi is as overrated now as he was underrated back when Jalen Beeks was too high of a price to pay for his services (which was like five minutes ago). If the MLBTR projections are anything close to accurate, and Charlie Morton ends up getting half of Eovaldi's contract... just sign Charlie Morton. Charlie Morton has better projections than Eovaldi, and there's nothing crazy about that if you look at the track records or even their stuff. I'd be super bummed to lose Eovaldi after how everything has played out with him, but if those really are the respective costs of those two pitchers... it's like not even a decision, really. The consensus projections have Morton getting a higher AAV ($16M instead of 14 to $16M), but for 2 years instead of 3 (since he's 35). Lower AAV is good. More years of control for a guy who's 29 is good.
People have to stop looking at projections, when there's better data out there that they're not using. Charlie Morton allowed a .282 xwOBA and Eovaldi a .284. Add the post-season and adjust for quality of opposition and Eovaldi was clearly better. If you remove a couple of insanely slow hooks he had pitching for a team that didn't have enough SP to fill out a rotation, and consider that he was slow to ramp up to form after his TJ surgery and that his apparent dead-arm period after his first 2 starts for us represented a disproportionately large portion of his season, he was probably quite a bit better than his xwOBA.
He's rated as highly now as I had him when we got him. I was either lucky or correct.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 20, 2018 12:55:19 GMT -5
I'm hoping for Thanksgiving at the Eovaldi's. Lasagna anyone? ...'nother glass of Chianti please..
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 20, 2018 14:32:21 GMT -5
I think Eovaldi is as overrated now as he was underrated back when Jalen Beeks was too high of a price to pay for his services (which was like five minutes ago). If the MLBTR projections are anything close to accurate, and Charlie Morton ends up getting half of Eovaldi's contract... just sign Charlie Morton. Charlie Morton has better projections than Eovaldi, and there's nothing crazy about that if you look at the track records or even their stuff. I'd be super bummed to lose Eovaldi after how everything has played out with him, but if those really are the respective costs of those two pitchers... it's like not even a decision, really. The consensus projections have Morton getting a higher AAV ($16M instead of 14 to $16M), but for 2 years instead of 3 (since he's 35). Lower AAV is good. More years of control for a guy who's 29 is good.
People have to stop looking at projections, when there's better data out there that they're not using. Charlie Morton allowed a .282 xwOBA and Eovaldi a .284. Add the post-season and adjust for quality of opposition and Eovaldi was clearly better. If you remove a couple of insanely slow hooks he had pitching for a team that didn't have enough SP to fill out a rotation, and consider that he was slow to ramp up to form after his TJ surgery and that his apparent dead-arm period after his first 2 starts for us represented a disproportionately large portion of his season, he was probably quite a bit better than his xwOBA.
He's rated as highly now as I had him when we got him. I was either lucky or correct. Did I miss some sort of memo that went out about xwOBA obviating all projection systems?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 20, 2018 14:38:43 GMT -5
Projection systems are terrible for guys like Eovaldi. They cannot or will not account for real changes that have been made and instead gives more weight to what happened 2-3 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 20, 2018 15:18:14 GMT -5
If I'm DD and I think Eovaldi change is real and want him back. I'm still drawing the line at 3 years 15 to 17 million. Either that or I'm putting in a lot of protections in the deal. Starting pitching is the opposite of the reliever market, it lacks a ton of options and will likely have the top guys getting overpaid. If Dombrowski absolutely believes that these changes are real and wants him back and thinks he's a strong #3 starter with a chance of being better, then giving him that offer is a good way to lose a guy who you believe made real changes and want back. Those offers are going to be blown out of the water. If the Sox think he's a guy who will be capable of throwing 175 - 200 inning - practically nobody is going far above 200 innings these days, and they think he's capable of say holding an ERA of about 3.5 or better, then why wouldn't the Sox offer more? They're paying Porcello a lot more and he's only had one season where he kept his ERA that low and was a top starter rather than a 3/4 starter. There's not a lot better on the market and the Sox are going to need starting pitching, especially if Sale doesn't come back or isn't healthy. I don't think this is an area they can cut costs. In the bullpen, yes, they can and if they do it correctly they can still thrive. Losing Eovaldi, especially if Sale isn't 100%, that's a lot tougher. If the Sox really want him back I think they'd be willing to go 4, even with his past injuries. Well just because the change is real doesn't mean the injury issues go away. Which was the whole point of my offer. Going 4 year or heck even more is believing the change is real and the injury issues are now gone. I can see the change being real, I just can't see 4-5 years of him giving 175 to 200 innings. He's never once pitched 200 innings. I kinda look at how many years do you think he can give 150 to 160 innings? That's why I stop at 3 years. If you go 4 there better be some major protections in that contract. Like the Lackey deal or vesting years based off of innings or starts. A good amount of guys can get better as they get older, not many guy that have a ton of injury issues have them just all go away as they get older. Everyone is worried about Sale who has a long history of giving you big innings, yet Eovaldi has only pitched over 150 innings twice in 7 years. Yea he was lights out in the playoffs after only 111 regular season innings. Sale is always lights out after 111 innings. He wears down the last two months most years when he starts going over 150 innings. Even then the real spike in his numbers using WHIP is September. We just have to be careful about a contract to Eovaldi and thinking about what is arm will be like down the road after major innings, not when its well rested in limited innings. Unless your OK with maybe a few good years and a ton of problems on the backend of that deal. It will be crazy interesting to watch how he does long-term with us or on another team.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 20, 2018 15:22:38 GMT -5
Broken record here just to point out that change being real is different than change being sustainable. Pitching better for two months might not be a small sample variation - it very well mean that some change actually made him better for those two months. But even real change isn't always sustainable change.
This message is brought to you by Joe Kelly's performance history and upcoming three-year contract.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 20, 2018 17:07:07 GMT -5
Broken record here just to point out that change being real is different than change being sustainable. Pitching better for two months might not be a small sample variation - it very well mean that some change actually made him better for those two months. But even real change isn't always sustainable change. This message is brought to you by Joe Kelly's performance history and upcoming three-year contract. Well, Eovaldi can control whether he throws a cutter or not and how much he uses it. He didn't throw it much at all until he became a good pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Nov 20, 2018 19:57:05 GMT -5
Broken record here just to point out that change being real is different than change being sustainable. Pitching better for two months might not be a small sample variation - it very well mean that some change actually made him better for those two months. But even real change isn't always sustainable change. This message is brought to you by Joe Kelly's performance history and upcoming three-year contract. Well, Eovaldi can control whether he throws a cutter or not and how much he uses it. He didn't throw it much at all until he became a good pitcher. IMO the key to Eovaldi is that he fits the bill as a RH power pitcher, which is what was lacking on the opening day roster. Finding a replacement will be difficult and/or costly. Given his post season performance I am 100% behind extending him. While his stuff is more like Kelly's his demeanor seems more like Schilling. I want to repeat. Eovaldi (or Kluber or Greinke or Buehler) would fit the bill. I'm inclined to go with Eovaldi. Post WS euphoria notwithstanding.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Nov 20, 2018 23:02:30 GMT -5
Eovaldi, and there's nothing crazy about that if you look at the track records or even their stuff. Yeah he went through a stretch mid to late year where lets just say he was very hittable, which everyone seems to have forgotten.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,914
Member is Online
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 20, 2018 23:03:52 GMT -5
The consensus projections have Morton getting a higher AAV ($16M instead of 14 to $16M), but for 2 years instead of 3 (since he's 35). Lower AAV is good. More years of control for a guy who's 29 is good.
People have to stop looking at projections, when there's better data out there that they're not using. Charlie Morton allowed a .282 xwOBA and Eovaldi a .284. Add the post-season and adjust for quality of opposition and Eovaldi was clearly better. If you remove a couple of insanely slow hooks he had pitching for a team that didn't have enough SP to fill out a rotation, and consider that he was slow to ramp up to form after his TJ surgery and that his apparent dead-arm period after his first 2 starts for us represented a disproportionately large portion of his season, he was probably quite a bit better than his xwOBA.
He's rated as highly now as I had him when we got him. I was either lucky or correct. Did I miss some sort of memo that went out about xwOBA obviating all projection systems? The "when" in that sentence was hedged between two possible meanings ("because nowadays" and "in cases where"). So let me state my full position:
1) Projection systems are terrific for when you have no reason to believe that a player's change in performance from year-to-year was something other than random, in the broad sense of not having predictive power, and when the underlying data that the projection is based on accurately represented the performance.
2) Use everything at your disposal (data and scouting-based insights) to try to figure out if a player's last three years include real changes in performance, and adjust your projection accordingly.
3) Use everything at your disposal to try to figure out whether the data that underlies a projection actually represented his performance, and adjust your projection accordingly.
Looking at xwOBA versus bottom-line result metrics is always a good step.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Nov 28, 2018 10:04:33 GMT -5
Bad news....the Astros are probably the biggest threats to sign Eovaldi since he's from Texas and all.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,641
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 28, 2018 11:35:57 GMT -5
Bad news....the Astros are probably the biggest threats to sign Eovaldi since he's from Texas and all. Not surprising they'd be interested. They saw him very close up. I figure he either goes to Houston or stays with the Sox if the money is highly comparable. The Red Sox aren't going to get some huge discount. They're going to have to pay very close to market value to keep him.
|
|
|