|
Post by sarasoxer on Apr 27, 2019 8:18:48 GMT -5
Meanwhile, Pom is Pom in his first four starts. Good for about 5innings of highwire walking. Damn me, I like that dude. But I liked Dice-K too... keeps my blood pressure up. You're lucky that you have hypotension ...but wouldn't a bit more salt on your food be a less stressful solution ...
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Apr 27, 2019 10:59:51 GMT -5
Trading damaged goods to a team and then pursuing a grievance against that team for trading damages goods would be . . . an approach. That being said, my larger point was about the distinction in evaluation points and value versus results. IMO I think you were/and are looking at the trade back then in a negative light because you placed your value on Pomeranz and not what the Sox placed thus you are always going to look at it as bad. For the most part you were right about Pomz. But the Sox had placed a number 2 (maybe a high 3 but I thought it was a 2) value on Pomeranz. Thus their evaluation point of Pomeranz was much higher (not Espinoza being m low) than what you feel as "value." Because if Pomz was a number 2 -- that would be good value wouldn't it? As a result, if someone were to have concern over an A-Ball pitcher - then they would be right too suggesting you give too much value to an undersized A-Ball pitching prospect thus it was right to trade him for a player they felt was a 2. I believe it was Fangraphs and maybe Eric or both that spoke of how he had turned the corner in San Diego and one of the leading talent evaluators on the Sox I believe was quoted as saying he would be a good 2. Thus I think "value points" vs risk of an "A-BAll" pitcher - imo I always felt the trade made sense. You just have a different value of what the correct baseline of at the evaluation point is for an A-BAll pitcher minor league prospect. But again man was I wrong about Pomz in 2018!!!
|
|