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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by thursty on Dec 17, 2015 11:57:22 GMT -5
I don't think its a certainty that Bogaerts is the #3 hitter. He's got 20 HR in 1300 PA; that's not an ideal #3 hitter
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 16, 2015 17:20:42 GMT -5
As far as Frazier fitting the Dodgers: - Turner is already a better player at 3B than Frazier - He's played a bit of 2B, but his defensive metrics there are abysmal, and so they probably weren't willing to live with a Seager/Turner middle infield
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 16, 2015 13:44:29 GMT -5
Just FYI: The trade is:
White Sox: + Todd Frazier - Frankie Montas, Trayce Thompson, Micah Johnson
Reds: + Jose Peraza, Scott Schebler, Brandon Dixon - Todd Frazier
Dodgers: + Frankie Montas, Trayce Thompson, Micah Johnson - Jose Peraza, Scott Schebler, Brandon Dixon
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 16, 2015 9:18:48 GMT -5
A point that I made way earlier in the thread, that I'd like to expand on. Yes, Kimbrel has been great. But for those of you who haven't seen much of him (which is probably near everyone), he's not an *efficient* closer, and he's max-effort pitcher.
This is almost certainly a large part of why he's been almost exclusively a 1 IP pitcher (last 4 years, 7 times (all 1.1 IP) has he pitched more than 1 IP). For comparison, I looked at Koji's magical 2013 season, and in that season alone he went more than 1 IP *9* times, including 3 times 2 IP.
I think you'll be surprised how laborious Kimbrel's outings are - he walks too many guys (career BB/9 over 3.3) and given his stuff, there are less swings and misses than you think; to wit:
Swinging Strike %:
Kimbrel Uehara 2013 13.8 18.6 2014 16.7 19.1 2015 15.7 18.6
Strike %: Kimbrel Uehara 2013 64 74 2014 65 71 2015 63 68
I wouldn't say he's a heart-attack closer by any means, but if you're expecting making quick work of the bottom of the 9th - you're going to be disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 16, 2015 8:10:00 GMT -5
That goes back to whether it's worth it to pay a premium for "elite". I and others don't think you should. That's been talked to death, though. That's partly because elite has no true definition. Are Sandoval and Hanley elite because they got big contracts? Cueto and Samadzija? Keeping in mind there are no true guarentees, you're not paying for elite you're paying for the guarantee with guys like Kimbrel and Price. It's easy to say they could have gotten any of 5 guys instead of Kimbrel and chances are a couple of those guys will put up approximate value and the others won't. But that's the rub - there are no guarantees, and even less so wrt to pitchers, Verlander was more of a sure thing than Price is now when he signed his extension after 2012
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 15, 2015 21:04:33 GMT -5
What he said. Whenever someone here says they think prospects are worth more than an MLB player, I always think to myself, are they valuing the certainty/uncertainty of future wins over that of present wins. But as a baseball executive, you can lose your job (and look bad) pretty quickly for squandering present wins from one year to the next (alas poor Cherington, we hardly knew ye). You may not lose your job until sometime in the future, or at all, if you squander future wins but by the time the future arrives, the picture has gotten messy, because in the meanwhile your team has been winning. Actually that's not what I said. It's pretty clear that teams take the uncertainty associated with prospects into consideration when they make trades. They demand enough prospects that their LIKELY return in future wins is double what they are paying in present wins. I did my homework on this one. A month ago I posted the results of what I believe to be the 45 biggest prospect for veteran swaps of the John Henry era, and they seem to validate what I am saying. When you trade prospects for veterans, you are on average trading two future wins to acquire one present win. That is on average. Because of the uncertainty the return varies from trade to trade, but if you do it enough your rate of return will be about two to one. There is an argument to be made that a present win is worth more than a future win -- no question. But it is also clearly not a long-term sustainable strategy. Finally, if you think about it long enough, you realize that this is exactly how you would expect this market to operate -- it' actually makes sense. I heard Arizona is looking for some FO help
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 12, 2015 17:10:32 GMT -5
Giles will be paid for 5 years as much as Kimbrel for one. No question, Giles is the better value even if you consider Kimbrel the better pitcher
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 11, 2015 13:37:51 GMT -5
I wouldn't even trade Mookie for him. Three years of control with an innings limit isn't enough. I have Mike Trout in a keep-six twelve team mixed league, and of course many people have proposed trades for him. And, of course, I haven't come close to accepting any of them. But what's more significant is that I don't think I've ever made a counter-offer. Given the structure of the league, I literally cannot come up with any possible trade that even comes close to making sense for both parties. This is basically the situation with Betts. A young, cost controlled hitter is the holy grail of player development. He's the thing everyone wants; the thing that has the most possible value in baseball as it presently exists. The only thing you could possibly want to trade him for is another player just like him, and then what's the point? It's hard to believe that someone who works in baseball thinks you could get him AND MORE for a pitcher, any pitcher, is insane. What about Mookie for Sale? 4 yrs/$50 of arguably the 2nd best pitcher in MLB in his prime. From a purely baseball perspective, that might be difficult to say no to.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 11, 2015 11:30:04 GMT -5
Is there any evidence that BABIP and HR/FB are uncorrelated? It seems to me that they're both (potentially) indications of a weak contact skill
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 23:19:43 GMT -5
if you're into schadenfreude I love seeing the reaction to the news change as the details leak out
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 23:16:48 GMT -5
Thing I just realized: This isn't even the worst trade Dave Stewart has made with the Braves of his most recent top draft choice. although I'm not one to scruple over piling on Stewart, LaRussa is the ultimate decision-maker in the desert.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 23:03:15 GMT -5
I can't imagine having the 1.1 pick in the draft, and six months later deciding its value is no more than a compensatory piece to obtaining Shelby Miller. Insane. If they did indeed sour on Swanson after they drafted him, then thats just poor drafting. You should be so sure about who you select at 1.1, that you shouldn't possibly have a change of heart after short season ball. what about 1.7?
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 13:42:17 GMT -5
Well then, why don't you go ahead and make that spreadsheet? Consider that a guy like Mookie Betts has an excess value (compared to free agent prices) north of $100m. If you think a prospect has a 10% chance of being as good as Betts, that's $10m right there, and then you add the other 90% of outcomes. While you're at it, if you could explain to me why the Sox spent $63m on Moncada, that would be swell. 100m doesn't even approach it. Assume Betts averages 4.5 WAR/season for the next 5 years (that's probably a floor, since he exceeded that at age 22 in 2015) @8m/WAR -> 180m of value assume ~ 30m in salaries (including 3 years of arbitration) that's $150 of surplus value Mookie Betts is a gold mine
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 13:21:48 GMT -5
Curious: Would anyone here trade Espinoza straight up for Fernandez? Is there anyone who wouldn't? NB: Well, at least if it didn't cost Steven Wright
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 12:21:34 GMT -5
I wouldn't trade Mookie Betts straight up for Fernandez
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 8, 2015 12:16:24 GMT -5
"First of all, with the bullpen we've built, you're really interested in GS, not IP"
That is so wrong, and any "analyst" worth his salt knows it
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 19:32:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 18:35:23 GMT -5
Certainly should dampen the over the top reaction - traded 180 IP of league average performance for a late inning reliever. The Red Sox have one (2 if you count Porcello), reliable innings-eaters starters now, that's less than ideal What happened to Elias? He's been buried in the thread already? Miley wasn't traded for Smith, not at all. And Elias isn't a throw in either. Yeah, that's fair. I'm not impressed by Elias - he's 27 and hasn't had even an average year in the majors. But his splits indicate there's real possibility as a reliever. Certainly better than Aro. But as typical here, way too much rose-colored glasses; if you were to read some of the posts you'd think he's just a tick below Kershaw
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 15:54:24 GMT -5
Certainly should dampen the over the top reaction - traded 180 IP of league average performance for a late inning reliever. The Red Sox have one (2 if you count Porcello), reliable innings-eaters starters now, that's less than ideal
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 15:41:23 GMT -5
I think we're buying high on Carson Smith and his true talent level isn't as good as his 2015 (he was never a highly-rated prospect, and his velo noticeable dropped as the year went on). The years of control are nice, but because reliever performance is volatile, it matters less for those guys than it does for a position player or starting pitcher. I also really, really liked Miley. Agree with jmei here. There were two very different Carson Smiths, the one before, and the one after a four-out save on Aug. 11. The one before was great, the one after was bad: www.lookoutlanding.com/2015/8/20/9182691/carson-smith-has-hit-a-wallWhich Carson Smith did the Sox get? that article's date 20th August runs allowed in September? ZERO
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 15:30:37 GMT -5
Smith had one good year. He could easily end up as Burke Badenhop in a year or two. Come on, that's just asinine. Badenhop's best K-BB is 12%,Smith was at 25% in 2015. Sure, he could blowup or out, but there's no comparison
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 15:13:44 GMT -5
Yeah, this doesn't look bad at first blush; Aro is nothing. Elias isn't much, but Carson Smith is a stud: 25% K-BB, 1.01 WHIP, looks real
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 13:16:11 GMT -5
you put 2 and 2 together and it sure seems Dombrowski is looking to trade a starter for a reliever
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 12:47:37 GMT -5
Ken Rosenthal @ken_Rosenthal 12s12 seconds ago Sources: #Mariners talking to #RedSox about trade for starting pitcher. Target is Buchholz or Miley, not clear. who does the Mariners have that you'd want? other than starters, but that wouldn't make sense. Carson Smith?
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 7, 2015 12:45:22 GMT -5
Pure speculation, but I really hope this doesn't mean trading for (subsidized) Choo, then flipping Bradley and others for Salazar. Why on earth would we want Choo to replace JBJ? How about literally anyone else? because Choo is way better
|
|
|