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.
|
Post by dcb26 on Mar 6, 2024 11:05:43 GMT -5
I was going to say "between rage at mentioning Criswell's name and the ridiculous conversation about releasing Giolito, things are really getting silly around here right now" - and then I realized it was the same person. Not saying this is outright trolling, but probably easier to just not engage further.
|
|
|
Post by strike23 on Mar 6, 2024 12:03:57 GMT -5
What's he supposed to say? Let's see anything but Cooper Criswell. He could say we still have some guys that we feel really good about and are still looking outside. Cmon there's 10000 things he could say and he said Cooper Criswell. Bello Whitlock Pivetta Crawford Houck that's 5 with Winckowski at 6. Cooper Criswell. Thats a joke. Have you seen Criswell throw a single pitch, or are you just assuming he's bad? Breslow should be showing belief in his players, always. There are only downsides in negativity for the sake of negativity. I would not be surprised if Breslow adds a Clevinger, or a Lorenzen, or a Hill to add some depth. He should still show belief in his players regardless. I saw his first spring outing and his movement and location were both sharp, its not surprising at all to hear he's in the conversation. He's also one of the first guys Breslow's team saw something in and signed, its good to have more guys in the conversation not bad.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Mar 6, 2024 15:59:53 GMT -5
The Giolito injury sucks. There is no brightside to it, however I am excited to see Crawford, Whitlock and Houck get another extended opportunity to start, if even 2 of them succeed in that role it will be a win for the Red Sox going forward, if all 3 make the most of the opportunity it will change everything for Breslow & Co. moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Mar 7, 2024 15:48:53 GMT -5
If the Sox have indeed decided to go with what they have in the rotation (Pivetta Bello Crawford Houck Whitlock Winchowski) the biggest issue I see is rotation depth, it is inevitable that the 7th, 8th and even 9th starter will be needed and right now those pitchers look to be Criswell, Fitts, Walter. It seems to me adding someone with MLB experience who would start the year in AAA would really help, one guy who might do this that is very intriguing and controversial is Trevor Bauer. I know there are a lot of reasons to stay away from him, but he would be a great fit for the Sox current situation if he'd take a deal where he'd start the year in AAA with an opt out out if he is not on the MLB roster by then end of May or June it would give the Sox time to evaluate the guys they have in the rotation and also to evaluate who Bauer is now (out of the MLB spotlight) as a pitcher and a person.
Add: Jake Odorizzi might be another guy who'd go for a similar type opportunity.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,694
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 7, 2024 16:18:34 GMT -5
The Giolito injury sucks. There is no brightside to it, however I am excited to see Crawford, Whitlock and Houck get another extended opportunity to start, if even 2 of them succeed in that role it will be a win for the Red Sox going forward, if all 3 make the most of the opportunity it will change everything for Breslow & Co. moving forward. I keep seeing this thrown out, the extended opportunities for Houck, Whitlock, and Crawford. They did this last year with varying degrees of success and still had a mediocre last place team. All they're really doing is running back the same rotation minus Sale and Paxton and hoping for better results, that the change in pitching coaches will make everything work out. Well that and having a major league shortstop. I have my concerns about this to out it mildly.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Mar 7, 2024 17:52:27 GMT -5
The Giolito injury sucks. There is no brightside to it, however I am excited to see Crawford, Whitlock and Houck get another extended opportunity to start, if even 2 of them succeed in that role it will be a win for the Red Sox going forward, if all 3 make the most of the opportunity it will change everything for Breslow & Co. moving forward. I keep seeing this thrown out, the extended opportunities for Houck, Whitlock, and Crawford. They did this last year with varying degrees of success and still had a mediocre last place team. All they're really doing is running back the same rotation minus Sale and Paxton and hoping for better results, that the change in pitching coaches will make everything work out. Well that and having a major league shortstop. I have my concerns about this to out it mildly. I don’t think anybody thinks it’s ideal, but those guys have all shown flashes of being very solid starting pitchers. I’d rather see what these guys can do than watch them trot someone like Martin Perez out there every fifth day. Losing Giolito is undeniably a big blow, but things haven’t gone belly up quite yet. As far as the new pitching coach goes, I was also worried that we were overestimating the potential impact, but it seems that a big part of the Rays’ secret sauce is convincing guys to trust their stuff enough to throw strikes. Apparently that’s far more difficult than it sounds, but it also seems to be a key part of Bailey’s success in San Francisco, so maybe it’ll actually work. Who knows, hopefully the guys we aren’t sold on will prove us wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time in Red Sox history.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Mar 7, 2024 17:55:29 GMT -5
I keep seeing this thrown out, the extended opportunities for Houck, Whitlock, and Crawford. They did this last year with varying degrees of success and still had a mediocre last place team. All they're really doing is running back the same rotation minus Sale and Paxton and hoping for better results, that the change in pitching coaches will make everything work out. Well that and having a major league shortstop. I have my concerns about this to out it mildly. I don’t think anybody thinks it’s ideal, but those guys have all shown flashes of being very solid starting pitchers. I’d rather see what these guys can do than watch them trot someone like Martin Perez out there every fifth day. Losing Giolito is undeniably a big blow, but things haven’t gone belly up quite yet. As far as the new pitching coach goes, I was also worried that we were overestimating the potential impact, but it seems that a big part of the Rays’ secret sauce is convincing guys to trust their stuff enough to throw strikes. Apparently that’s far more difficult than it sounds, but it also seems to be a key part of Bailey’s success in San Francisco, so maybe it’ll actually work. Who knows, hopefully the guys we aren’t sold on will prove us wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time in Red Sox history. The issue isn't as much watching those guys, it's that inevitably not all of your starting pitchers will be healthy and they have really no depth beyond the top 5 guys (who I agree I am interested in looking at). For my taste they didn't have sufficient depth when Giolito was still part of the mix.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Mar 7, 2024 18:16:14 GMT -5
I don’t think anybody thinks it’s ideal, but those guys have all shown flashes of being very solid starting pitchers. I’d rather see what these guys can do than watch them trot someone like Martin Perez out there every fifth day. Losing Giolito is undeniably a big blow, but things haven’t gone belly up quite yet. As far as the new pitching coach goes, I was also worried that we were overestimating the potential impact, but it seems that a big part of the Rays’ secret sauce is convincing guys to trust their stuff enough to throw strikes. Apparently that’s far more difficult than it sounds, but it also seems to be a key part of Bailey’s success in San Francisco, so maybe it’ll actually work. Who knows, hopefully the guys we aren’t sold on will prove us wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time in Red Sox history. The issue isn't as much watching those guys, it's that inevitably not all of your starting pitchers will be healthy and they have really no depth beyond the top 5 guys (who I agree I am interested in looking at). For my taste they didn't have sufficient depth when Giolito was still part of the mix. I get that, and depth definitely looks a lot worse without Giolito, but I think you’re really overestimating how good the average team’s seventh or eighth man on the starting pitching depth chart is. There just aren’t enough starters to go around. Someone who’s decent like Lorenzen isn’t gonna go for that, and I don’t think the rotation is in a spot where you can guarantee a low-upside guy like that a starting spot over Houck or Whitlock. Realistically, I don’t think there’s a significant difference between having a Jakob Junis around in case of emergency and piecing together innings from the likes of Winck/Criswell/Murphy/Walter piggybacking each other. If you’re down three starters for an extended period of time, your options for the fifth rotation slot are gonna be a guy who sucks, a scrap heap find who you somehow make serviceable, whatever you have laying around in AAA, or bullpen/piggyback games. Any theoretical pitcher who you’re comfortable with starting games for you in that scenario is probably already on another team that could give him a more concrete roll (and a salary commensurate with that role).
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Mar 7, 2024 18:24:40 GMT -5
The issue isn't as much watching those guys, it's that inevitably not all of your starting pitchers will be healthy and they have really no depth beyond the top 5 guys (who I agree I am interested in looking at). For my taste they didn't have sufficient depth when Giolito was still part of the mix. I get that, and depth definitely looks a lot worse without Giolito, but I think you’re really overestimating how good the average team’s seventh or eighth man on the starting pitching depth chart is. There just aren’t enough starters to go around. Someone who’s decent like Lorenzen isn’t gonna go for that, and I don’t think the rotation is in a spot where you can guarantee a low-upside guy like that a starting spot over Houck or Whitlock. Realistically, I don’t think there’s a significant difference between having a Jakob Junis around in case of emergency and piecing together innings from the likes of Winck/Criswell/Murphy/Walter piggybacking each other. If you’re down three starters for an extended period of time, your options for the fifth rotation slot are gonna be a guy who sucks, a scrap heap find who you somehow make serviceable, whatever you have laying around in AAA, or bullpen/piggyback games. Any theoretical pitcher who you’re comfortable with starting games for you in that scenario is probably already on another team that could give him a more concrete roll (and a salary commensurate with that role). My personal preference would be not to guarantee Whitlock and Houck rotation spots, understanding inevitably they will be thrust there at some point (or injured in which case all the better that you signed someone). Now at this point I'm not pumped about having Lorenzen over them, but there were lots of guys available at reasonable prices that I would have been happy with.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Mar 7, 2024 18:32:21 GMT -5
I get that, and depth definitely looks a lot worse without Giolito, but I think you’re really overestimating how good the average team’s seventh or eighth man on the starting pitching depth chart is. There just aren’t enough starters to go around. Someone who’s decent like Lorenzen isn’t gonna go for that, and I don’t think the rotation is in a spot where you can guarantee a low-upside guy like that a starting spot over Houck or Whitlock. Realistically, I don’t think there’s a significant difference between having a Jakob Junis around in case of emergency and piecing together innings from the likes of Winck/Criswell/Murphy/Walter piggybacking each other. If you’re down three starters for an extended period of time, your options for the fifth rotation slot are gonna be a guy who sucks, a scrap heap find who you somehow make serviceable, whatever you have laying around in AAA, or bullpen/piggyback games. Any theoretical pitcher who you’re comfortable with starting games for you in that scenario is probably already on another team that could give him a more concrete roll (and a salary commensurate with that role). My personal preference would be not to guarantee Whitlock and Houck rotation spots, understanding inevitably they will be thrust there at some point (or injured in which case all the better that you signed someone). Now at this point I'm not pumped about having Lorenzen over them, but there were lots of guys available at reasonable prices that I would have been happy with. Seth Lugo would be pretty nice to have around right about now, wouldn’t he? I think I’m just higher on what Houck and Whitlock can turn into than most, so I certainly won’t argue with that. I spent too much time on the B-Pro/FG/Statcast leaderboards this winter trying to find the sleeper guys they could fill out the rotation with and I just never really came away from that exercise feeling like I’d found a clear improvement on those guys.
|
|
|
Post by carmenfanzone on Mar 8, 2024 15:31:49 GMT -5
Too bad we don't have 2 or 3 of Sale, ERod, Paxton, Eovaldi, or Wacha to go with Bello. Would feel a lot better about this year if we did.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Mar 8, 2024 16:37:39 GMT -5
It’s crap or get off the pot for Whitlock now. Since he will definitely open the season as a starter. If he struggles there we need to permanently move him to the bullpen in future seasons
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Mar 8, 2024 17:41:42 GMT -5
Too bad we don't have 2 or 3 of Sale, ERod, Paxton, Eovaldi, or Wacha to go with Bello. Would feel a lot better about this year if we did. Can we invoke the lemon law and send Grissom back?
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Mar 8, 2024 19:34:13 GMT -5
I know I said I was done checking in on any Montgomery news but I just read that according to jon Heyman Montgomery is asking for a 7 year deal. He can't honestly be thinking there's any chance of that right?..
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Mar 8, 2024 19:48:57 GMT -5
I know I said I was done checking in on any Montgomery news but I just read that according to jon Heyman Montgomery is asking for a 7 year deal. He can't honestly be thinking there's any chance of that right?.. Alright Jordan, I'll bite. 7/70 - that's 7 years and 70 BIG ONES, okay. Just like you wanted.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Mar 8, 2024 20:16:52 GMT -5
Yeah let’s just move on at this point let’s just save all of our bullets until next offseason and beyond
Plus at this rate Jordan Montgomery will still be an FA by then
|
|
|
Post by patford on Mar 8, 2024 22:03:41 GMT -5
Yeah let’s just move on at this point let’s just save all of our bullets until next offseason and beyond Plus at this rate Jordan Montgomery will still be an FA by then Snell would be a better choice. Montgomery has some injury history, is coming off a career high in inning pitched and has always been dependent on getting by on getting the calls on the black. A handful of those calls going the other way makes a massive difference.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Mar 9, 2024 8:44:23 GMT -5
Yeah let’s just move on at this point let’s just save all of our bullets until next offseason and beyond Plus at this rate Jordan Montgomery will still be an FA by then Snell would be a better choice. Montgomery has some injury history, is coming off a career high in inning pitched and has always been dependent on getting by on getting the calls on the black. A handful of those calls going the other way makes a massive difference. I worry about Montgomery with robo umps for this exact reason. If you're worried about injury history Snell isn't exactly the greateat option, though, since he usually misses a quarter of the year. Edit: And I do have some level of concern about Monty breaking down under the workload. His fastball velocity has gone up six years in a row (kind of wild) while he's also been racking up big innings... Still interested if the market crumbles but not for 7 years like he wants and not over $100 million
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 9, 2024 8:56:29 GMT -5
Snell would be a better choice. Montgomery has some injury history, is coming off a career high in inning pitched and has always been dependent on getting by on getting the calls on the black. A handful of those calls going the other way makes a massive difference. I worry about Montgomery with robo umps for this exact reason. Supposedly Wong is an atrocious pitch framer too, which would also be relevant to this point.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Mar 9, 2024 9:11:57 GMT -5
Sorry if this is very old news - I completely missed this though, so figured I'd share in case others did too. I had only heard that Montgomery was still looking for 7+ years. “Definitely a strange market this year," Chapman said Monday morning, “and the free agent market was a little abnormal. Our goals were to either get a long-term contract that we felt that I was worth. If not, get the short-term contract with opt-outs and bet on myself. …
“If I was going to do something long-term, I was going to get the value I’m worth."
The same mantra applies for two-time Cy Young winner Blake Snell and Texas Rangers postseason hero Jordan Montgomery, the two prized pitchers still on the free-agent market.
They each wanted lucrative long-term deals when free agency began, with Snell seeking in excess of $250 million and Montgomery more than $170 million. Now, Boras is informing teams that each is amenable to short-term contracts with opt-outs similar to Chapman and Cody Bellinger’s three-year, $80 million deal with the Chicago Cubs.www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2024/03/04/giants-matt-chapman-bets-on-himself-short-term-contract/72844042007/If this is true, I'd be very open to it. I keep hearing Chris and others say it doesn't make sense to sign him for a year, but I feel the exact opposite. I don't think he's good enough or at the right age to help much long term, and as mentioned above I'm worried about him with robo umps in the back half of a long-term deal. He could help this year, though, and has a decent chance to opt out and bring back a pick. Yes, it would be hilarious and bad if he pulled a Giolito, but I think the risk here is way lower than on a 5-7 year deal. It's hard to get someone in this tier with less risk too.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 9, 2024 9:39:19 GMT -5
If this is true, I'd be very open to it. I keep hearing Chris and others say it doesn't make sense to sign him for a year, but I feel the exact opposite. I don't think he's good enough or at the right age to help much long term, and as mentioned above I'm worried about him with robo umps in the back half of a long-term deal. He could help this year, though, and has a decent chance to opt out and bring back a pick. Yes, it would be hilarious and bad if he pulled a Giolito, but I think the risk here is way lower than on a 5-7 year deal. It's hard to get someone in this tier with less risk too. I'm with you on this. Though they only have $23 million left under the LTT and I don't know if that's enough, assuming that's a hard limit for them this year.
I also still don't think it makes sense for Montgomery to do a Chaplinger type contract; it's very unlikely he'd have more value a year from now with a QO attached. He should have just gotten the biggest contract available this offseason. But it may be that the window for getting that contract has already closed.
|
|
|
Post by asm18 on Mar 9, 2024 11:38:35 GMT -5
Lou Merloni tweeted in response to the Heyman “Monty wants 7 years thing” that he had heard Monty had dropped the 7 year ask already, which makes sense. No one was giving him that long of a deal, and it’s been pretty clear for a while.
I don’t have hopes that the Sox will sign him (not there’s anywhere else that’s a clear and obvious fit the moment) but Giolito getting hurt would be an annoying factor to base the signing decision on Montgomery or not. Like imagine if we signed Montgomery tomorrow, but then this upcoming Monday we found out about Giolito’s elbow instead of having found out last week. I would think people’s first thought would be, “Oh man, thank God we also got Montgomery!” - as opposed to being like, “Wow, without Giolito this Monty signing is useless. Now I’m annnoyed that we did it.”
If he’s willing to sign for what the team considers reasonable, just do it. There’s no need to overthink about “is now the right time to spend/does he fit the timeline?” All I care about is the price.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Mar 9, 2024 15:22:10 GMT -5
I'm with you on this. Though they only have $23 million left under the LTT and I don't know if that's enough, assuming that's a hard limit for them this year. I also still don't think it makes sense for Montgomery to do a Chaplinger type contract; it's very unlikely he'd have more value a year from now with a QO attached. He should have just gotten the biggest contract available this offseason. But it may be that the window for getting that contract has already closed.
I agree with you that Montgomery should take the long term deal, but if the CBT (assume that's what you mean by LTT) is the issue, the Red Sox could simply push the Bello contract into the following year without the 2024 salary to free up space (assuming it isn't finalized with the league yet). Also, the number you're using, presumably from Red Sox Payroll, is about 5mil high due to the 40-man/bonuses he has plugged in. Cots has them at 30mil under the CBT currently. That said, it was reported that last year their available opening day player budget was 8mil under the CBT to allow for in-season additions, it's possible they're working under the same restraints this year.
|
|
|
Post by sxfan on Mar 9, 2024 16:51:18 GMT -5
I'm with you on this. Though they only have $23 million left under the LTT and I don't know if that's enough, assuming that's a hard limit for them this year. I also still don't think it makes sense for Montgomery to do a Chaplinger type contract; it's very unlikely he'd have more value a year from now with a QO attached. He should have just gotten the biggest contract available this offseason. But it may be that the window for getting that contract has already closed.
I agree with you that Montgomery should take the long term deal, but if the CBT (assume that's what you mean by LTT) is the issue, the Red Sox could simply push the Bello contract into the following year without the 2024 salary to free up space (assuming it isn't finalized with the league yet). It's official. The Sox are paying Bello real money starting this year.
|
|
|
Post by asm18 on Mar 10, 2024 20:14:40 GMT -5
From Alex Speier on Montgomery stuff, after the usual “they’ve stayed in contact” line: “Bello’s deal, however, takes effect this season. It will thus represent a $9.2 million hit for this year — pushing the team’s payroll (including a $10 million pad for in-season moves) as calculated for luxury-tax purposes to roughly $215 million. The Sox — who’d already suggested their payroll would likely be lower than last year’s $225.7 million — would not only have to go beyond that figure, but also likely edge toward this year’s $237 million luxury-tax line this year to sign Montgomery. Given the team’s ongoing hopes of signing more young players to extensions, such a prospect makes it seem unlikely that the Sox would reel in one of the top remaining free agents. That said, those dynamics come with a “never say never” disclaimer. If Montgomery’s market collapses and if he becomes open to a contract that the Sox would see as ideal, then the team might reassess its budget and even reconsider its stance on staying under the threshold.“ That last line made me do a double-take. www.bostonglobe.com/2024/03/10/sports/red-sox-brayan-bello-homegrown-contract/?event=event25
|
|
|