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 pokeyreesespieces on Nov 19, 2015 0:27:26 GMT -5
We have the pieces to make any trade. If JBJ could be a major piece for Carrasco, I'm all in. Carrasco is worth exponentially more than Gardner. JBJ is worth a lot more than him at this point too. Try Gardner + Judge + Sanchez. Exactly. Gardner is a very good offensive player (if moved to CF), but he has a substantial contract and he's on the wrong side of 30. JBJ has shown at least something offensively, and while he's no sure bet, his salary is negligible for similar years of control (one more actually, I think), and he's just on the verge of entering his prime...while being a markedly better fielder (even though Gardner is still above-average). I'd say Gardner-Judge-Sanchez-Mateo or similar. If Kimbrel took three prospects, a starter will take at least a similar package with a better second piece (Guerra is a better prospect than the stagnated Sanchez) and a major-league contributor. If Cleveland is going to take on salary, they're going to want even more in prospect return, is my guess. Realistically, I don't see them all that interested in Gardner at $15M a year. Well, realistically, he's the only player actually linked to the Indians in reputable reports so far. And the yankees would surely send money and prospects their way, so the money isn't much of an issue at all.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 23:57:56 GMT -5
... IF he stays healthy. Given his history, you'll get no money from me on that one. Hey, I watched Brett Anderson throw 180IP this year. If he can do it, I'm not counting out anybody!
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 22:01:44 GMT -5
What is the gulp for? You're trading a 26 year old CF who steamer projects to give you .730ish with GG defense, and who is a Boras client. That hurts. You're trading a 5th starter with bullpen potential, a third baseman in A who might not stick at third base, and AAAA bullpen prospect. You're getting 4 years of a staff ace talent who is only 26, whose peripherals were outstanding. There's a lot of reason to think Salazar would be better in the AL East than names like Cueto or Zimmerman, and possibly even Price. Why would you pay 7 years and $210 million for a declining Price, if you could just do this, get an ascendant Salazar, and keep the money? If the next 4 years of Salazar and Price are equal: Are 4 more years of Bradley, plus Devers, plus the last 3 years of Price's deal worth anything close to $210 mil? I can see the argument for one guy getting better while the other 'will be' declining at some point during his next contract. Salazaar is showing similar performance to a young Price but a year behind. At this point the Indians likely hope Salazaar turns into the next Price. In 2015 Salazaar was 33rd in FIP and 23rd in xFIP among qualifiers so he's good but not quite on Price's level of 8th in FIP and 16th in xFIP. Also Price has proven to be a workhorse, which Salazaar has yet to do. Salazaar may become an Ace, but so far he's shown to be a #2 with potential while Price is clearly an Ace (however you define it). Due to the uncertainty, I'd go with Price given Boston's financial muscle. (always easier when I'm not signing the check) Well... the interesting thing is that a Salazar acquisition doesn't *really* effect the pursuit of Price. Say they lose something like Devers, JBJ, Kopech in a Salazar trade. And you sign David Price. Price, Salazar, Buch, Porcello, Erod, Miley, Kelly... you can go spin Buch or Miley for a decent OF-er potentially, and move Kelly to the pen as spot starting depth, and your rotation looks pretty good for the next 5 years fronted by Price, Salazar and Erod.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 20:31:57 GMT -5
I think it'd take something like below, just because I don't think JBJ is the OF they are looking for, and the Red Sox are going to have to stretch to avoid their real tops guys (Bogaerts, Betts, Erod, Owens, Swihart, Moncada, Benintendi, Kopech, Espinoza) GULP: Danny Salazar for: JBJ, Joe Kelly, Devers and Matt Barnes What is the gulp for? You're trading a 26 year old CF who steamer projects to give you .730ish with GG defense, and who is a Boras client. That hurts. You're trading a 5th starter with bullpen potential, a third baseman in A who might not stick at third base, and AAAA bullpen prospect. You're getting 4 years of a staff ace talent who is only 26, whose peripherals were outstanding. There's a lot of reason to think Salazar would be better in the AL East than names like Cueto or Zimmerman, and possibly even Price. Why would you pay 7 years and $210 million for a declining Price, if you could just do this, get an ascendant Salazar, and keep the money? If the next 4 years of Salazar and Price are equal: Are 4 more years of Bradley, plus Devers, plus the last 3 years of Price's deal worth anything close to $210 mil? Lol dude I'm the one who threw out the trade. I would do it in a heartbeat, thought honestly it probably doesn't get it done. The GULP is because people on this forum view those four guys as being worth north of 1 billion dollars in estimated surplus value. The very act of dealing them would seemingly cause earth's rotation to screech to a halt, leaving the still-traveling-at-1100mph atmosphere to scour all signs of life off the surface of the planet like a brillo pad against a dirty dinner plate.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 18:31:00 GMT -5
I rate it a 4. I still don't see Margot and Guerra being anything more than decent regulars. If Margot and Guerra both turn out to be "decent regulars" we lost this trade by a mile (because they'll be paid $500k/year to be decent regulars while Kimbrel is being paid $12667k/year.) In late 2005/early 2006, The Sox traded Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez to the Marlins for Josh Beckett. (I'm not considering Mike Lowell because he was a salary dump and they insisted the Sox take him). Did the Sox lose that trade? Beckett had 2 years of control at the time of the deal and threw a 5.01 ERA his first season.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 18:25:01 GMT -5
I think it'd take something like below, just because I don't think JBJ is the OF they are looking for, and the Red Sox are going to have to stretch to avoid their real tops guys (Bogaerts, Betts, Erod, Owens, Swihart, Moncada, Benintendi, Kopech, Espinoza) GULP: Danny Salazar for: JBJ, Joe Kelly, Devers and Matt Barnes If they don't value JBJ as high as other teams, no reason to include him. For the trade you just listed, I would swap Castillo with JBJ and probably pull the trigger. I love Devers, but that is something I could live with. I think they value JBJ, just maybe not as highly as a guy who gives you a little more certainty offensively. And they'd probably value JBJ much higher than Castillo.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 18:20:12 GMT -5
Well yes, they may want offensive value over defensive value in CF, but they would still want a package of similar or equal value to whatever their highest bidder is offering. That was my original point, along with the fact that we could match or best any offer Yankees could in terms of value if we truly wanted to. For sure we COULD match. But we could be getting ourselves into a situation where we are devaluing JBJ because they might not value him as highly as the rest of the league might (or say, a Kansas City). For example, if they are prioritizing OF offense, a deal of Gardner + Severino, might trump a deal of JBJ, Owens, and Devers.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 18:09:07 GMT -5
JBJ is worth more than Gardner in a vacuum. If you're the Indians, and you're looking to compete this year, he might not be. Indians may view JBJ as a defense only player. If their goal in trading Bauer or Carrasco is a ML-ready OF bat with some impact, JBJ may have 0 value to them in this specific trade. We have to consider team NEEDS. We have to use rumors and piece together what teams are clearly looking to do. JBJ is a Big Mac, a great sandwich. But if the Indians aren't looking to eat red meat and instead want a mcchicken, then maybe we don't match up. No matter how bad the Indians need a bat, they're not giving up Carrasco or Salazar for Gardner. Nobody would do that. You can fill your teams needs without giving up more than market value to do so. I get the point you're trying to make with the whole "in a vacuum" thing. And one overpayment in value isn't going to sink us by any means. But if we keep overpaying, we'll run out of chips to play with. We won't be able to fix problems when they arise. Same goes for the Indians. They may want a solid 2-3 win OF, but they're not giving up a 4-5 win pitcher with longer control to get it, it's that simple. Even if they're rotation is way better than their lineup. Umm... in no way was I saying for ONLY Gardner. I'm just saying, it's very easy to imagine and read through the lines that Cleveland is looking for an OF-er with some known offensive attributes. I'm saying that to them, Gardner might be more attractive than JBJ, because he better fills a current need.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 18:04:26 GMT -5
I think it'd take something like below, just because I don't think JBJ is the OF they are looking for, and the Red Sox are going to have to stretch to avoid their real tops guys (Bogaerts, Betts, Erod, Owens, Swihart, Moncada, Benintendi, Kopech, Espinoza)
GULP:
Danny Salazar for: JBJ, Joe Kelly, Devers and Matt Barnes
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 17:59:02 GMT -5
David Carpenter elected free agency today after being outrighted by the Nationals. Exactly the type of arm to buy low on. Clearly wasn't himself this season after two very solid years with the Braves. The velocity is still there though. Good find. Really interesting thought, and I think it's worthy of speculation, especially since Carpenter found some decent success with Atlanta under Frank Wren, and behind Varvaro and Kimbrel.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 17:55:46 GMT -5
I don't agree with that. If he gets 4 years, Chapman will probably want 6? This is just a crazy precedent. Ehh. O'Day is extremely solid, has a great track record, isn't a max effort pitcher, and most importantly, he's the best FA reliever in a bad market. I cannot stress enough how important it is to gauge the market, and a team's individual place in that market. Say a team like the Angels really really wants a reliever, and decide to bid for O'Day, and O'Days camp KNOWS they don't have the bullets on the farm to trade for an impact arm, they will probably end up having to stretch to pay a premium for his services.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 17:42:45 GMT -5
Indians need major league OF help. If they trade Carrasco or Bauer to the yankees, they'll get back Brett Gardner. I don't think the Sox had a player of that caliber to move. JBJ doesn't have the offensive track record, and I don't want to give up Betts. Margot has half season at AA. Just because a guy is available, doesn't mean we have the pieces to make the trade. Also DD checked in on all these starters, he knows the price, and he probably knows when he'll be wildly overpaying in prospects because he doesn't have the ML pieces to deal. If JBJ had hit consistently last year, the Carrasco trade probably would be a realistic scenario. And it still might be. We have the pieces to make any trade. If JBJ could be a major piece for Carrasco, I'm all in. Carrasco is worth exponentially more than Gardner. JBJ is worth a lot more than him at this point too. Try Gardner + Judge + Sanchez. JBJ is worth more than Gardner in a vacuum. If you're the Indians, and you're looking to compete this year, he might not be. Indians may view JBJ as a defense only player. If their goal in trading Bauer or Carrasco is a ML-ready OF bat with some impact, JBJ may have 0 value to them in this specific trade. We have to consider team NEEDS. We have to use rumors and piece together what teams are clearly looking to do. JBJ is a Big Mac, a great sandwich. But if the Indians aren't looking to eat red meat and instead want a mcchicken, then maybe we don't match up.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 16:59:23 GMT -5
I'm not trying to be obnoxious here, but it's now being reported by Morosi that the Indians are in talks with multiple teams about trading a starting pitcher. Dombrowksi looks like a fool and that trade looks worse by the day. Indians need major league OF help. If they trade Carrasco or Bauer to the yankees, they'll get back Brett Gardner. I don't think the Sox had a player of that caliber to move. JBJ doesn't have the offensive track record, and I don't want to give up Betts. Margot has half season at AA. Just because a guy is available, doesn't mean we have the pieces to make the trade. Also DD checked in on all these starters, he knows the price, and he probably knows when he'll be wildly overpaying in prospects because he doesn't have the ML pieces to deal. If JBJ had hit consistently last year, the Carrasco trade probably would be a realistic scenario. And it still might be.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 16:35:20 GMT -5
Based on his quotes to the media after his final start, it seems pretty clear that there will be no hometown discount unless the numbers are so close that the difference is negligible. This is almost certainly going to be his last contract and he knows it. He's going to cash in and good for him for doing so. It's also very clear that the rotation situation will matter, and there would need to be a lot of parts that have already moved in Boston for him to consider signing with the Red Sox. I'd bet good money that he signs anywhere else - the situations just really don't fit. He's not going to sign to be Buchholz insurance when there are teams out there that'll allow him to compete for a spot coming out of camp, if not give him one outright. All spot on. Except for the "certainly going to be his last contract". His stuff really played last year and he's in a huge ballpark. There's a non-zero chance he finds a multi-year deal next year in a weak starter market.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 14:57:54 GMT -5
Definitely steep, and definitely painful for Sox. But I have a feeling they're seriously interested. O'Day is a little different as he's not a flamethrower, so longevity might be a little easier. The trade for Kimbrel surprised me not because of the talent given up, but because there was no monetary savings involved. That deal plus DD coming out and saying they'd be active in the SP starting market makes me think Henry has opened the wallet, which he should. Two bad years, and a team with it's own TV network. We pay 15 more cents per OZ for beer in their park than the next closest. And a quarter more per OZ than the league average haha.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 14:45:29 GMT -5
I rated it a 3, but I think I'm really more of a 3.9. Problem with 4 is the "we won" this trade.
On paper, the trade is an overpay, and if those two guys become everyday regulars then there's no calculating this as a winning trade without a Championship during Kimbrel's tenure, which is never a smart bet.
But the atmosphere of the market lends me to believe that getting a guy of Kimbrel's value and control is paramount. Age is a factor in hoping his productivity continues. The pen was historically bad last year, and Kimbrel is about as elite of a player as you can get. This pen requires a lot of work this year, and especially next year considering Koji and Taz will be free agents. That is two large holes to fill next year.
In a vacuum, it's a "huh?" trade. But with market and future needs in mind, it seems like they paid more for as close to they could get of a sure thing now so they'd be less hamstrung next year when they'll probably be looking for a few more arms.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 0:28:29 GMT -5
I think they see a little Alex Gordon in JBJ. (Gordon survived with the Royals by his elite defense while his bat was all over the place for the first 4 years of his career).
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 19:52:45 GMT -5
If you're going to take the position that none of those options could have been better than overpaying for Kimbrel, well, I'm not going to take the time/effort to argue with you, but suffice it to say that I disagree. If Dombrowski and the rest of the front office really needed to get a deal done ASAP so they could "focus efforts elsewhere", that seems like a pretty damning criticism of their abilities, no? A competent front office needs to be able to keep multiple irons in the fire and evaluate competing opportunities.I don't think so. They have some choices on who they go for as a front end starter. K was the best available closer. If they decided they wanted the best closer but could live with one of the top 2 or 3 choices for starter, it makes sense. [/quote] Again it's people viewing the offseason in a vacuum. No one wants to take into account that when players start coming off the boards, things move quickly and other teams plans change. Things are extremely fluid, and other teams might stretch and do something crazy outbidding you for a guy you thought was your safety net.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 19:51:23 GMT -5
I want to say thanks to the guys who have made more nuanced analysis of the trade. It's informative and interesting for me, not having that kind of background / experience in that kind of review. I really like the trade and have no problem with the talent overpay. As I have thought about it, I would have preferred the Padres pick up some of his salary. In terms of AAV and fielding the club for 2016, any little bit helps, if we are going to stay near the luxury tax threshold. They're poised to blow the luxury tax away haha. Unless DD does some realll heavy salary dumping. I think they're at nearly 177 currently, 12 under the cap. They still need a frontline starter, a 4th OF, maybe another bullpen piece, and some depth signings and minor league deals.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 19:24:15 GMT -5
If you're going to take the position that none of those options could have been better than overpaying for Kimbrel, well, I'm not going to take the time/effort to argue with you, but suffice it to say that I disagree. If Dombrowski and the rest of the front office really needed to get a deal done ASAP so they could "focus efforts elsewhere", that seems like a pretty damning criticism of their abilities, no? A competent front office needs to be able to keep multiple irons in the fire and evaluate competing opportunities. I think the best case scenario for this team would have been waiting out the Padres and getting Kimbrel for Margot and Guerra. I don't think Margot, Allen and Asuaje gets it done, based on how the yankees were bidding. But this deal isn't that far off from what I considered a realistic best case scenario.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 19:21:35 GMT -5
If you're going to take the position that none of those options could have been better than overpaying for Kimbrel, well, I'm not going to take the time/effort to argue with you, but suffice it to say that I disagree. If Dombrowski and the rest of the front office really needed to get a deal done ASAP so they could "focus efforts elsewhere", that seems like a pretty damning criticism of their abilities, no? A competent front office needs to be able to keep multiple irons in the fire and evaluate competing opportunities. You get that they target specific players right? Just because we look at O'Days numbers and say "oh those are good" doesn't mean he's even in the conversation. They've clearly prioritized Chapman and Kimbrel. I.e. big closing arms that can get a key strikeout. I think identifying a guy you view as necessary and going out and getting him is an extremely positive attribute. Some people don't mind going to plan C with 75% of the performance. But that's not what this team needs. And also, would you do Margot for Wilhelmson over the Kimbrel deal? Throw out some trade ideas for these relievers you want. We don't want to move our talent off our ML roster, and our AAA system is basically Johnson, Owens, and Marrero. Barnes has some value, but I don't think he gets you a sub 3.5era pitcher. Barnes and Marrero for Jeffress/Smith? Not sure that gets it done, but I could see a deal like that happening later in the offseason. Then again, we're light on AAA reserves.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 18:59:29 GMT -5
We're also so freaking quick to assign values to EVERY LITTLE PLAYER AND THING, and then sit there and pretend like improving your bullpen to this degree early in the offseason to focus efforts elsewhere and get a focused head start on the rest of work you have to do is value-less. Making the Padres not bring Kimbrel to the winter meetings took balls. And if the rumors are true about Mateo and Gardner being floated, then good on Davey D.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 18:55:22 GMT -5
And actually, I don't know what they would have traded for Wilhelmson. It's clear they wanted OF help.
We don't really have that extraneous OF-er with low control years to trade for him.
Would you prefer Margot for Wilhelmson over the package for Kimbrel?
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 18:53:27 GMT -5
I'm somewhat sympathetic to the argument that it can sometimes make sense to pay more to close a deal now as opposed to holding firm with an offer and hoping that noone trumps it. The free agent/trade markets are imperfect because there are a limited menu of options available and you're competing with others for those options on a first-come first-serve basis, so there is some value to the certainty of knowing you won't be the loser in the game of musical chairs. That said, it's mid-November and the full range of options were available, most of which will remain available for another month-and-a-half. There was no urgency to get a deal done now, and no urgency to do so on terms that have been universally regarded as an overpay. If this was on July 31 and the Red Sox were in playoff contention and needed that elite reliever, I might be OK with it. But analysis shows that deals made early in free agency are substantially more inefficient than deals made late in free agency, and that that rings true to me. That's especially true for the reliever market, where there are always a ton of alternative options who are roughly comparable (Chapman, Melancon, Miller, Papelbon, Storen, Robertson, Herrera, O'Day, Madson, Soria, Wilhelmson, Clippard, Kelley, Lowe, etc.). Unless you think that Kimbrel The rest is just "front offices are smarter than you", which is true but a non-starter. The point of having a discussion forum is to actually discuss the transaction. I think we've done a good enough job of teasing out why they made this deal even though everyone thinks it's an overpay. From my POV, that's (1) overvaluing elite talent, (2) overvaluing relievers, (3) wanting to make the deal now as opposed to waiting, (4) undervaluing Margot/Guerra. Chapman would command a similarly huge deal, with less control and no shot at extending. (Boras and he wants to be a starter). Boston's finest fervent fans would riot if Melancon returned. Would command a big package. Also one year. Does anyone think they want Papelbon back? I doubt it. White Sox want to compete, they have Quintana, Sale, Abreu in their primes. I.e. why Sale would have taken Betts, Bogaerts, Moncada, Swihart, Devers to get. Herrera? Sure if you want to trade JBJ and another prospect for him. I know what JBJ's floor is. And it's a useful player. I don't know what Margot's or Guerra's is. Madson? Really? He's the walking dead. Soria is 1 year removed from being AWFUL. Wilhelmson I'm sure they could have traded for, again, he's a big "all right I guess our 6th inning got better." I saw enough of Clippard this year to know he's not the guy. I think a Lowe/Storen/O'Day/Jeffress/Smith are still in play for this team. But not as the #1 pen acquisition.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 17, 2015 18:42:46 GMT -5
Sorry about Buccholz.......That puts Kelly to the pen I guess as the 6th inning guy (which wouldn't be the worst thing)?.....This scenario has trade written all over it. I still don't think we need to deduct from the overall rotation as most teams go through 8 or 9 starters in a season & we have no one else in Paw or Port to fill in. Not sure if we can carry 2 swingman/long guys in the BP. (Kelly/Wright). Then why not attempt an in season trade of Buchholz paired with one of the depth pieces. Worst case Buchholz is injured and the other team does not pick up his option and the fallback is they still have a solid prospect in Kelly/Owens/Johnson/Wright. Best case he's finally healthy and they win the trade but the Sox finally get a pitcher close to the talent of Buchholz but without the frailty. This is contigent upon Buchholz teasing everyone by being healthy again. Who would be an acceptable target in this case? It would have to be a player about a year and half away from FA and likely a smaller marker team. Is this idea futile, is there someone out there that fits this description?By midseason our SR could be; 1. Acquired Ace via FA (this offseason) 2. Acquired #2 via trade (Acquired in a Buchholz + 1 of Kelly/Owens/Johnson/Wright in season trade next year) 3. Porcello 4. E-rod 5. Miley The depth would be the remaining 3 of Kelley/Owens/Johnson/Wright not traded who would have spent the season either in the pen or the minors. Buch + Prospect for a somewhat better pitcher with an extra year of control would have to fit some extreme circumstances for that other club. It's a weird move, because it sounds like they're adding payroll, and taking back Buchholz on what amounts to the hope they opt out? Why wouldn't they just trade their guy for that prospect and another prospect and leave Buchholz out of it? You don't see trades too often where guys get traded and the return is somewhat comparable guys. If a guy is good, and you're trading him for prospects, you trade him for prospects. More likely: you see Buchholz traded for an OF-er, or another position player, or prospects they then spin somewhere else. In any case, Buchholz will probably be more useful to this team than anyone else's team, and if he's suddenly expendable, then our staff is pitching out of their minds regardless.
|
|
|