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.
2019-20 Red Sox offseason
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 4, 2019 9:31:18 GMT -5
Agreed. The Sox would need to pay about 2/3 of Price's annual salary for another team to have interest. That would save them $10 million/year as would dealing JBJ and signing a Hamilton type until Duran is ready - although that's risky. More likely Betts would move to CF in that scenario and the Sox could have an easier time finding a scrap heap corner OF who doesn't cost much but will provide as much if not more offensive value than JBJ which would be offset by the hit on defense. But still that would save $20 million and might allow them to bring back both Betts and JDM. However, losing Price puts another big hole in the rotation. Which would be selling low, I think. If he's healthy and pitching anything like he was this year before the wrist injury, you could probably clear $20M or more of that contract and maybe even get a chip-in prospect back. Really, I think that's the strategy I'd be pushing as the new GM. Go for it next year and THEN if it doesn't work you trade everyone at the deadline and do the Yankees style quick rebuild. There's a risk that you end up not competing AND not getting under the cap because you got caught in the middle, or all the expensive guys got hurt and weren't tradable, but all your available options have a lot of risk when you're proposing to cut salary and fill multiple holes on the roster at the same time. I think if Price was coming off his 2018 season that would be selling low. But coming off his 2019 season, another year older, missing a number of starts - and yes I know the cyst is not arm or shoulder related, it would be hard for me to see another team paying half or more for him, I don't think another team would pay the majority of his salary for the next three years, but I won't dismiss it out of hand either, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 4, 2019 9:36:34 GMT -5
Which would be selling low, I think. If he's healthy and pitching anything like he was this year before the wrist injury, you could probably clear $20M or more of that contract and maybe even get a chip-in prospect back. Really, I think that's the strategy I'd be pushing as the new GM. Go for it next year and THEN if it doesn't work you trade everyone at the deadline and do the Yankees style quick rebuild. There's a risk that you end up not competing AND not getting under the cap because you got caught in the middle, or all the expensive guys got hurt and weren't tradable, but all your available options have a lot of risk when you're proposing to cut salary and fill multiple holes on the roster at the same time. I think if Price was coming off his 2018 season that would be selling low. But coming off his 2019 season, another year older, missing a number of starts - and yes I know the cyst is not arm or shoulder related, it would be hard for me to see another team paying half or more for him, I don't think another team would pay the majority of his salary for the next three years, but I won't dismiss it out of hand either, I suppose. That's the definition of selling low.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 4, 2019 9:55:43 GMT -5
If I'm a buying team, I'd love to take Price for 3 years at $20 million per. Wouldn't give up much for him, but to say he'd only get 3/$30 on the open market is pretty light IMO. The cyst doesn't sound like anything to worry about moving forward and before it became an issue, he was one of the best pitchers in the league this year.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 4, 2019 10:27:54 GMT -5
You are acting like Wilson is the only name I was coming with when all I was doing was trying to promote discussion throwing out a few names. You make think it’s stupid, but the idea came from an Alex Speier article to subsidize 2/3 of Price’s contract including a prospect. If the alternative is that or trading Betts or losing JD then it’s something to consider. The discussion was becoming centered around Wilson and my argument is that Wilson isn't enough. You can promote discussion, but please understand that when someone disagrees with you that it isn't a personal attack. We've gone through that enough here recently. I'm not arguing that people that think the Red Sox might sell Price are stupid, I'm arguing that the Red Sox are being stupid if they sell low on Price. They're not immune to doing stupid things. In fact, they've been kinda telegraphing it for a month now.
|
|
|
Post by jbsox on Oct 4, 2019 10:41:40 GMT -5
You are acting like Wilson is the only name I was coming with when all I was doing was trying to promote discussion throwing out a few names. You make think it’s stupid, but the idea came from an Alex Speier article to subsidize 2/3 of Price’s contract including a prospect. If the alternative is that or trading Betts or losing JD then it’s something to consider. The discussion was becoming centered around Wilson and my argument is that Wilson isn't enough. You can promote discussion, but please understand that when someone disagrees with you that it isn't a personal attack. We've gone through that enough here recently. I'm not arguing that people that think the Red Sox might sell Price are stupid, I'm arguing that the Red Sox are being stupid if they sell low on Price. They're not immune to doing stupid things. In fact, they've been kinda telegraphing it for a month now. If you look at my original statement I didn’t throw out just Wilson’s name, I mentioned a few names, so I don’t know why it became an argument against me about Wilson. I’m really too old to deal with this crap so I won’t bother discussing it anymore. IMO it comes down to being the lesser of 3 evils to get under the 208 threshold trading Betts, letting go of JD, or possibly trading low on a 34 year old Price which if I had to choose it would be door number 3 with Price.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 4, 2019 11:33:40 GMT -5
All this talk of moving Price and paying the majority of his deal, then including a decent prospect to boot just makes no sense in an attempt to get under the salary cap. price doesn't fit the bill of any previous salary dump type player i can remember. He's still going to provide typical #3 type starter numbers (at the worst) if he's healthy and nothing points to him being anything otherwise headed into 2020.
Questions over the elbows of both Sale and Eovaldi this coming spring, Porcello leaving and Rodriquez being the only returning starter who put up numbers I'm not sure he can reproduce. Who else does they system have to step in? Not Brian johnson, not Hector Velazquez either and it seems Mr Wright may never make it back all the way.
I really doubt the Sox FO is troubling themselves with the fantasy of moving Price. why are some here?
|
|
|
Post by jbsox on Oct 4, 2019 11:43:44 GMT -5
All this talk of moving Price and paying the majority of his deal, then including a decent prospect to boot just makes no sense in an attempt to get under the salary cap. price doesn't fit the bill of any previous salary dump type player i can remember. He's still going to provide typical #3 type starter numbers (at the worst) if he's healthy and nothing points to him being anything otherwise headed into 2020. Questions over the elbows of both Sale and Eovaldi this coming spring, Porcello leaving and Rodriquez being the only returning starter who put up numbers I'm not sure he can reproduce. Who else does they system have to step in? Not Brian johnson, not Hector Velazquez either and it seems Mr Wright may never make it back all the way. I really doubt the Sox FO is troubling themselves with the fantasy of moving Price. why are some here? For me personally I’d rather not trade Price in a vacuum but if the owners are strongly suggesting they want to reset the tax, well there are only so many ways to do it and the other options aren’t ideal either. Any way we slice it I think it’s going to hurt to reset the tax, and I wish ownership wouldn’t do it.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 4, 2019 11:48:57 GMT -5
David Price is owed 3 years 96 million for his age 34-36 seasons. Last five years;
220.1 innings 1.076 whip, 6.2 bwar 230 1.204 3.0 74.2 1.192 1.6 176 1.142 4.4 107.1 1.314 1.8
Dallas Keuchel couldn't get a long-term good deal going into his age 31 season after pitching 200 plus innings in 2018. 5 year bwar 6.7, .4, 4.2, 2.6, 2.1
So what is the market rate for an aging former #1 pitcher who has health issues, yet he was awesome for the second half of 2018? It doesn't seem close to 3 years 96, that's going to be close to half of what it takes to sign Cole. Take off 10 million per and 3 years 66 million remain. That's still a ton when almost every team is staying under 208 million in salary. That's over 10% of payroll on a guy that isn't close to a lock to be 1\2 or even give you innings. How's his UCL going to look on an MRI if you try and trade him? Teams can overlook a slight issue if he's pitching well, not so much coming off an injured year.
You want a bridge year, which I think is being designed so they don't have to pay Betts and Martinez. I hold on to Price unless someone really wants him. If we are sellers and he's pitching well you could get a really good deal. I wouldn't mind eating money then if it meant getting a better package. I'd gamble that sometime over the next three years he'll have a lot more value. Nevermind even as risky as he is and as expensive we need more pitching not less.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Oct 4, 2019 12:13:00 GMT -5
Agreed. The Sox would need to pay about 2/3 of Price's annual salary for another team to have interest. That would save them $10 million/year as would dealing JBJ and signing a Hamilton type until Duran is ready - although that's risky. More likely Betts would move to CF in that scenario and the Sox could have an easier time finding a scrap heap corner OF who doesn't cost much but will provide as much if not more offensive value than JBJ which would be offset by the hit on defense. But still that would save $20 million and might allow them to bring back both Betts and JDM. However, losing Price puts another big hole in the rotation. Which would be selling low, I think. If he's healthy and pitching anything like he was this year before the wrist injury, you could probably clear $20M or more of that contract and maybe even get a chip-in prospect back. Really, I think that's the strategy I'd be pushing as the new GM. Go for it next year and THEN if it doesn't work you trade everyone at the deadline and do the Yankees style quick rebuild. There's a risk that you end up not competing AND not getting under the cap because you got caught in the middle, or all the expensive guys got hurt and weren't tradable, but all your available options have a lot of risk when you're proposing to cut salary and fill multiple holes on the roster at the same time. I agree with this, and I think it's the best solution to the Mookie Betts conundrum. Nonetheless, there is a pretty substantial danger here: suppose the Red Sox are somewhere around the second wild card position, or a couple games back of that, at the trade deadline, like they were this season. Given the playoff structure, and the talent level of the team, that's a very plausible scenario. So then what do you do - go all in with a good chance that it's all for naught and you get no compensation for Betts nor a jump start on a rebuild? Or do you sell off some of your best players despite having a good chance at making the playoffs? Bearing in mind that a wild card team has only a 1/16 chance of winning the World Series, which is probably lower than the chances of the Red Sox winning the World Series will be as of opening day, I think I'd go with this bold plan: be prepared to sell off at the deadline unless the team is competing for the division. Strong chance you'd piss off the fandom and the media and the players themselves if you went with this plan, but I think it would be the most rational approach.
|
|
duda
Rookie
Posts: 15
|
Post by duda on Oct 4, 2019 12:43:11 GMT -5
Every system has guys like Wilson. In a big deal he gets thrown in as a lotto ticket. He doesnt get on base at all, and has huge swing and miss history all throughout his minor league career. I think if he hits his full upside he is a 4th outfielder maybe a fringe starter on a second division team. The system has some exciting underrated guys in my opinion in the lower minors, and is not as bad as most pundits suggest, but Wilson, even with some late season progress is a long ways away. Sox system needs some high end pitching development. That is the difference between the Sox system and the Yankees system. the Yankees are either drafting better pitching prospects, or developing them at a better rate than the Sox. Would be nice to get Groome back to a full season and see what he looks like
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 4, 2019 13:47:14 GMT -5
Maybe I'm wrong, feel free to let me know if I am, but isn't the Yankees system mostly one magical trade deadline and a huge international class before the rules changed?
I don't really see a developmental issue because no one like Owens, Webster, Ranauldo, De La Rosa have developed elsewhere.
If you look at the big four we traded and add them to the system it sure seems we have brought in good talent. Yet the top three guys all had Tommy John surgery. Pitching is hard to develop and it sure seems like you need a good amount of luck. Look at Anderson and Allen, both had very good stretches in the minors, yet really struggled in the majors. Will be interesting to see if we really hate trading those guys or they become the latest Red Sox pitching prospects to not pan out.
|
|
|
Post by wrangler713 on Oct 5, 2019 22:52:36 GMT -5
Maybe I'm wrong, feel free to let me know if I am, but isn't the Yankees system mostly one magical trade deadline and a huge international class before the rules changed? I don't really see a developmental issue because no one like Owens, Webster, Ranauldo, De La Rosa have developed elsewhere. If you look at the big four we traded and add them to the system it sure seems we have brought in good talent. Yet the top three guys all had Tommy John surgery. Pitching is hard to develop and it sure seems like you need a good amount of luck. Look at Anderson and Allen, both had very good stretches in the minors, yet really struggled in the majors. Will be interesting to see if we really hate trading those guys or they become the latest Red Sox pitching prospects to not pan out. They didn't hit on any of those big IFA guys they signed in that big class. The trades they made at the deadline yielded nothing of note other than Torres. Fraizer looks okay but he'll never play for the Yankees after this season. Yanks just got lucky, but I'll give them props they stole Gil from the Twins and he looks like a future ACE. Garcia is small and will probably get hurt like every other small pitcher. Florial looks like a 4th OF, Dominguez is 10 years away lol dude is 16 years old! Schmidt is hurt all the time. Seigler hasn't hit. The punted their draft this year for some reason too. They got lucky with guys like Gio, Tauchman, Voit, Ford, Maybin.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 7, 2019 14:31:02 GMT -5
Maybe I'm wrong, feel free to let me know if I am, but isn't the Yankees system mostly one magical trade deadline and a huge international class before the rules changed? I don't really see a developmental issue because no one like Owens, Webster, Ranauldo, De La Rosa have developed elsewhere. If you look at the big four we traded and add them to the system it sure seems we have brought in good talent. Yet the top three guys all had Tommy John surgery. Pitching is hard to develop and it sure seems like you need a good amount of luck. Look at Anderson and Allen, both had very good stretches in the minors, yet really struggled in the majors. Will be interesting to see if we really hate trading those guys or they become the latest Red Sox pitching prospects to not pan out. They didn't hit on any of those big IFA guys they signed in that big class. The trades they made at the deadline yielded nothing of note other than Torres. Fraizer looks okay but he'll never play for the Yankees after this season. Yanks just got lucky, but I'll give them props they stole Gil from the Twins and he looks like a future ACE. Garcia is small and will probably get hurt like every other small pitcher. Florial looks like a 4th OF, Dominguez is 10 years away lol dude is 16 years old! Schmidt is hurt all the time. Seigler hasn't hit. The punted their draft this year for some reason too. They got lucky with guys like Gio, Tauchman, Voit, Ford, Maybin. My point being it was those trades and that international class that got the Yankees a top ranked farm system. It wasn't they were just elite at drafting and developing players. They also used a bunch of those guys to get guys like Britton and Paxton. They are basically a few years behind us. They are going to have the same issues with paying everyone and they won't have a top rated system.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 8, 2019 11:46:02 GMT -5
How is this for optimism, I truly believe that Price, Sale and Eovoldi will have a combined WAR of + 14. And ERod will bring the top 4 starters to a total of +19, how do you like them apples. I am serious!!
That is all of them pitching to their ability.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Oct 8, 2019 11:51:34 GMT -5
If ownership is so hell bent on getting under the tax, then how on earth does it justify extending a Chris Sale draped in red flags?
If a tough decision has to be made, I’d have to start with JD. As great as he is at the dish, we can spend more efficiently on guys who impact the game defensively, too.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 8, 2019 12:50:02 GMT -5
I'm not sure how this fits in with the offseason, but Shogo Akiyama looks like he'll be posting. He's a 31 year old CF with a very good hit tool, amazing speed (consistent sub 4 seconds to 1B) and defense and possibly has 20 HR pop so he's not like a poor man's Ichiro (though that would be pretty good too lol). He could be JBJ's replacement. I have no idea what he'll get for money.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 8, 2019 13:59:27 GMT -5
If ownership is so hell bent on getting under the tax, then how on earth does it justify extending a Chris Sale draped in red flags? If a tough decision has to be made, I’d have to start with JD. As great as he is at the dish, we can spend more efficiently on guys who impact the game defensively, too. Now say that again, only in a 2012 mindset and substituting “Big Papi” for JD. I think JD is the glue for the offense. He was also the difference in their performance between 2017 and 2018. I think the toughest decision is trading Mookie and his $30M+ in arb money. Maybe ownership thinks they can pull a Chapman and trade Mookie for valuable assets and then buy him back after next year? It still all goes back to Sale. If they didn’t extend him they’d be starting out the off-season under or almost under. What’s done is done, though. There are no good answers here, and I am still mystified why they are doing this now instead of playing it out to 2020. The penalties seem negligible in exchange to going for it completely with such an offensively gifted team - unless, of course, they don’t believe their own BS that they’ve been shoveling at us about the starters being “fully healthy” for the beginning of the 2020 season. It still all goes back to Sale. If they didn’t extend him they’d be starting out the off-season under or almost under. What’s done is done, though.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 8, 2019 17:07:21 GMT -5
If ownership is so hell bent on getting under the tax, then how on earth does it justify extending a Chris Sale draped in red flags? If a tough decision has to be made, I’d have to start with JD. As great as he is at the dish, we can spend more efficiently on guys who impact the game defensively, too. Now say that again, only in a 2012 mindset and substituting “Big Papi” for JD. I think JD is the glue for the offense. He was also the difference in their performance between 2017 and 2018. I think the toughest decision is trading Mookie and his $30M+ in arb money. Maybe ownership thinks they can pull a Chapman and trade Mookie for valuable assets and then buy him back after next year? It still all goes back to Sale. If they didn’t extend him they’d be starting out the off-season under or almost under. What’s done is done, though. There are no good answers here, and I am still mystified why they are doing this now instead of playing it out to 2020. The penalties seem negligible in exchange to going for it completely with such an offensively gifted team - unless, of course, they don’t believe their own BS that they’ve been shoveling at us about the starters being “fully healthy” for the beginning of the 2020 season. It still all goes back to Sale. If they didn’t extend him they’d be starting out the off-season under or almost under. What’s done is done, though. JDM isn't a clutch hitter at all though, the complete opposite of Papi. He was ranked 2nd to last in the majors for 135 qualified batters for Fangraphs' Clutch metric. You could see it every time, with him swinging at sliders out of the strike zone in important spots.
|
|
|
Post by jimmydugan on Oct 8, 2019 18:08:52 GMT -5
Now say that again, only in a 2012 mindset and substituting “Big Papi” for JD. I think JD is the glue for the offense. He was also the difference in their performance between 2017 and 2018. I think the toughest decision is trading Mookie and his $30M+ in arb money. Maybe ownership thinks they can pull a Chapman and trade Mookie for valuable assets and then buy him back after next year? It still all goes back to Sale. If they didn’t extend him they’d be starting out the off-season under or almost under. What’s done is done, though. There are no good answers here, and I am still mystified why they are doing this now instead of playing it out to 2020. The penalties seem negligible in exchange to going for it completely with such an offensively gifted team - unless, of course, they don’t believe their own BS that they’ve been shoveling at us about the starters being “fully healthy” for the beginning of the 2020 season. It still all goes back to Sale. If they didn’t extend him they’d be starting out the off-season under or almost under. What’s done is done, though. JDM isn't a clutch hitter at all though, the complete opposite of Papi. He was ranked 2nd to last in the majors for 135 qualified batters for Fangraphs' Clutch metric. You could see it every time, with him swinging at sliders out of the strike zone in important spots. After reading this, I was curious, so I looked at Clutch from 2014-2019. JDM was dead last by a mile with -7.17. No one else registered a -6 or lower. I'm sure part of that is that he probably faced a lot of really good bullpen arms because of how good a hitter he is and I'm not saying it's predictive. But it is interesting. Xander and Moreland were in the top 3.
|
|
|
Post by RedSoxStats on Oct 8, 2019 18:09:26 GMT -5
Alex Gordon and Jose Iglesias were in the top 3 of that clutch stat this year.
The clutch stat compares what you do in 50 at bats vs. what you do in the other 650, so if you are a dominant hitter, if you are only very good in clutch situations you're getting a negative value. It's a comparison against yourself, not against the league.
In 2018 JDM hit .447/.551/.737 in high leverage situations. The year before .333/.393/.708.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 9, 2019 8:04:01 GMT -5
There have been a couple of articles out, one by Alex Speier and one by Rob Bradford discussing the disconnect between the analytics dept of the Red Sox and pitching coach Dana Levangie, which helped contribute to his reassignment within the organization, which was the crux of Speier's article.
Bradford's article talked about the philosophy which lead to too many times the Red Sox pitchers were behind in the count and the thought of let's make the batter think it's a strike and hope they swing, and then expand the zone even further versus the idea of pounding the strike zone, getting ahead, and then expanding the strike zone, the fear of throwing a strike due to the way the ball has taken off this year, and the results that the Red Sox walked way too many batters.
The hope is that the Red Sox pitchers go back to attacking the strike zone. Of course dejuicing the rabbit ball might help quell that fear of any strike you throw that isn't perfect will wind up over the wall.
The two articles were interesting and shed some light on some of the pitching problems. But of course, if you don't have a healthy Chris Sale or David Price, those problems become magnified.
My main take away was the dissension between the analytics dept and the coaching staff, which Speier said led to a lot of internal issues and less time for the players to be coached as much. I know Levangie had big backers in Varitek and Pedro from within in the organization...and as always, it seems to come down to analytics versus the scouts and when the two aren't in alignment issues can arise.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 9, 2019 8:49:38 GMT -5
But if you step back and look at the Red Sox pitchers who were walking batters, it's hard to figure that it was an approach issue. Porcello, Sale, and Price all had good walk rates--in Porcello's case, he gave up eight homers in 0-2 or 1-2 counts, so maybe he was going the opposite way and trusting his stuff too much. Rodriguez was right in line with both the league average and his career numbers. Eovaldi walked more guys than he ever had but he was also hurt and also more generally ineffective. It was the relivers who walked a lot of people - Barnes has always had control issues, Brewer's control was bad, and Workman... well, it's hard to take issue with Workman's approach, right? And then when the injuries were hitting, the control of people like Cashner, Johnson, Velazquez, and Shawaryn were all bad, and it's hard to have pinpointed that as an approach malfunction. They walked too many guys because they had too many pitchers who walk guys, and at least a couple who have shown an ability to be effective despite walk rates they are higher than you'd like.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 9, 2019 11:13:09 GMT -5
In order to control the strike zone - to get ahead of those theoretical hitters - you have to know where the ball is going, so yes, that was one part of the problem. The Sox had to scour the minors and hit the trade discount market for Cashner. It all comes back to the damaged rotation. There was so much reliance on relievers that they had to work through a big pile of them.
Barnes in particular can be very frustrating. He still has episodes where his rhythm goes right out the window. And Cashner pushed his BB rate to just about 5/9 in his time with the team! That's a long way from command or control.
There's a lot of hype about the young pitchers and with good reasoan, but they need to work with them before they get to the majors. Guys like Hernandez and Mata are not finished products and pushing them up too soon isn't going to do them or the team any good. I notice that Bannister got reassigned to work with the minor league teams. Maybe that's a start.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Oct 9, 2019 17:22:26 GMT -5
Walks don't hurt half so bad if your pitcher has a good split or sinker. The Sox don't have those pitchers in their arsenal. Instead they have guys like Barnes and Pocello. Sox had the 3rd fewest DP's in the league. They also lead the league in batters faced and number of pitches thrown. Botton line, they need a minimum of 650 quality IP from Sale, Eovaldi, ERod and Price in order to be in contention for the playoffs. In 2019 they got 475 not so quality IP from this quartet. Long way to go. They need a surprise acquisition (or emergence) to give them 160+ quality IP next year. I don't care who gets credit (scouts or stat geeks), the fan in me wants this to happen. After a delirious season with 108 wins, 80 something feels like last place.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 11, 2019 14:21:19 GMT -5
Bob Nightengale of USA Today is reporting that the Red Sox (and the Phillies) have a guy "with significant interest" in the vacant pitching coach job: Curt Schilling.
Somehow, I just don't see this one happening, but I thought I'd pass on what I read in a WEEI article.
|
|
|