|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 10, 2014 12:02:11 GMT -5
I wonder how much we would need to give up if we took on Cliff Lee's total contract along with Hamels, call it the reverse Beckett?
I also wonder if the Reds would find Buckholtz contract attractive with so many guys on the last year and little chance of extending any of them?
The sox could offer the Reds the opportunity to essentially rebuild in place, while giving Amaro a unique opportunity to clear out bad payroll and receive back young controllable starters.
Renaudo, and Webster are ready to start at the aaaa level, and along with Marrerro and a major salary dump might be a place Amaro could start with.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 10, 2014 11:44:24 GMT -5
Agreed. And with championship teams in any sport, that will always be the case.
Star players who perform in the post season and then reach free agency will always have more cache to other clubs.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 9, 2014 20:55:19 GMT -5
Moreover the Sox first low-balled and then traded him. I think that he goes with Theo....life is short... new life adventure. Game, set, match IMO. As a psych major, I would say that the single biggest factor here is Lester's preference for familiarity versus novelty. It trumps everything else, really. And we have no way of knowing that, and we tend to project our own preferences onto him. For some people, a new life adventure is not all that appealing, and for others, it's irresistible. I don't think the supposed low-ball and trade factors in at all. The trade did him a favor, given how competitive he seems to be. And in the other thread I argue (apparently convincingly) that they obviously wanted to go to free agency from the beginning. It's funny how we reduce the majors to a nickname... Psychology majors are psych majors, Sociology majors are Soch majors, English majors are jerks... Remember your bartenders and waitresses! I can't see him moving on. His representatives did an excellent job of pushing his chosen team to the max dollars as well. All that happened this spring was his agent's after hearing talk of a home town discount, gave Jon a well versed lesson in the ancient Scottish Marshall art of Phuk yu
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 9, 2014 19:29:32 GMT -5
For a guy who can't hold runners to first he sure is doing a good job containing the free agent market. Good one.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 9, 2014 19:27:05 GMT -5
@verticallychallengedfakeinsider Jon Lester's offers all appear to exceed initial offer from last spring
@verticallychallengedfakeinsider Jon Lester's offers all seem to signal a starting role.
@verticallychallengedfakeinsider Jon Lester's Seems to be talking from both sides of his mouth, unless he isn't.
@verticallychallengedfakeinsider all my bs contacts are with agents and their fake staff so I'm completely a fraud.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 9, 2014 16:28:52 GMT -5
If Lester does sign with the sox, I wonder if Theo goes the full Shilling on Sherzer, keeping him out of pinstripes?
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 9, 2014 11:50:12 GMT -5
First Timer here - Ideally I think Rubby plays much better in the pen right? Power fast ball with power change?? I could see him in the 7th or 8th and have nice success there... Welcome I think this is a good subject, honestly I don't know. I think his profile would suggest that he would be better out of the pen, but personally I would still chalk that up as speculation. It's not unthinkable that he could have more trouble pitching out of the pen, not adjusting to the lack of consistency and reps. From my eyes, I think he had a good year in which he tired towards the end, due to his recovery from TJS. I don't see a reason to move him from a starting position yet. The Masterson offer puzzles me somewhat. I agree the Sox need 2 new SP, but I didn't think 1 of them would be of the rebuild value type. I think Masterson at 1 year less than 10M is a great value sign, but not sure how it fits for our team. If they did sign him I would still want the Sox to acquire 2 new SP, one via trade one via FA. Not sure where that leaves RDL. I'm very high on Rubby. Each time I saw him last year he showed something. Once he stops working on things and just sticks to a heavy fastball, pitches to contact with the braking stuff and uses the change to miss bats on strike three I see him as part of a strong middle and getting post season starts. I realize Kelly is the new toy but I like rdlr more. I'm also all in on Masterson. His upside is a 2, he can eat innings and we have the depth to sit him if he is not healthy. I'm ok with Materson, shields, and go home then pickup one or two last year guys as teams fall out in June. There is no rush here. Ask yourself, what would bb do? (That's billy beane not bill belicheck). Use the first ten weeks to showcase what you have and see what others will offer after they have season tickets paid and injuries incurred.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 9, 2014 8:39:16 GMT -5
Don't forget, we'll need a slot for the PTBNL for Doubront unless the Sox/Cubs increase the ante and end up with an even 40 man swap.. I'm not sure we will need a 40-man spot for the PTBNL. The fact that said player is to be announced after the Rule 5 draft suggests that it's a player who is Rule 5 eligible and thus not on the 40-man. The terms were set so it was essentially a rental of the Cubs slot. In other words, the player the sox felt needed protecting, but the Cubs would need to do it.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 5, 2014 21:44:37 GMT -5
Am I the only one that thinks that Mookie is probably the MOST logical player to trade right now? I mean, his value and hype is about as high as it could ever get, and he plays the same position as the guy with the longest term deal on the team and centerpiece of the team. I mean I wouldn't be actively shopping him, but you can't deny that if you look at it rationally he is the most logical player to trade on the team. Yes you are. This is pretzel logic. Mookies affordability makes Ramirez deal affordable. Between left and right, sox average about 10 mil..in the immortal words of Adam Sandler ' not too shabby'.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 5, 2014 9:21:37 GMT -5
But isn't Boras late when he perceives the market as thin?
I don't think anyone really " knows' anything right now about the pitching market.
If the sox had not jumped on Sanoval and the overpay of Ramirez to get him to move quickly, not much would have happened at all.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 5, 2014 8:31:44 GMT -5
Here is some pure speculation which of course means I should be tweeting it as "sources say'.
The only info right now about contracts must be coming from the agent side as the teams have no reason to leak.
So is it possible that the pitching market is slow to develop with so many available?
It's all based on the Sherzer supposed contract offer and his refusal, as if that should set the market.
Or Greinke's actual deal, which took place in a completely different market and unique situation.
If Lester is actually considering moving on and he sure seems to be, do you think he would walk away form a 7 170 or even 6 150 offer?
Unless they know someone else is sitting on a crazy non dodger or Yankee offer that they think will set the market and the plan is to wait until after Boras makes a deal,.
Who said Lester had to sign first to begin with?
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 4, 2014 20:55:17 GMT -5
Ross or Molina would be fine.
The whole point should be to be able to step in if Vasquez gets seriously hurt.
The backup by July 15 is Swihart.
He gets 1/4 of the at bats through August, 1/2 in sept, then whatever works in October
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 4, 2014 10:16:57 GMT -5
I agree.
I remember last offseason and thinking Navas performance and years of control (uniquely during his prime ages) would hold so much value the sox would have to move him.
I thing many clubs do use advanced stats as a measurement of value but they just are not fully committed to dealing based on that.
Ben does not seem like the kind of guy who gets on the phone and sells his deal, ala say Lou Gorman, nor should he be.
I really like the potential bench if few pieces are moved so this plays along but it does seem as if a Holt, or Nava are still undervalued.
Then again, what do we truly know about what is offered?
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 3, 2014 15:33:43 GMT -5
Agreed.
I'd end up in a heap if Urias was moved by the dodgers .
Heh heh.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 3, 2014 15:29:21 GMT -5
Amen.
My issue is that now Miller seems very locked in and consistent.
He could be a very dominant closer with estremely low wear and tear for a number of years.
His sighing could be a coup for any of the finalists.
In other words, the contract commitment from a sox perspective is risky but a Yankee signing would potentially be damaging.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 3, 2014 13:18:35 GMT -5
Next year is an even better pitchers year as well.
Cueto is the prize to me with 27 starts 2 runs or less. I wonder if we included Cespedes buck and Napoli and took back Votto's albatross contract whether that would work.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 3, 2014 13:09:25 GMT -5
Napoli, buck, Cespedes
Cueto, Votto
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 3, 2014 11:27:05 GMT -5
Somehow i almost liked it better when didn't know anything until heard abut it on the late evening news, or read about it early the next morning in the news paper. Take me back to the days of the midnight trade deadline. Waking up and finding out we got a stud, a la Cliff Floyd, was like Christmas morning in July Or waiting all week for the Sunday globe, finding an early edition, and literally propping up on my elbows to read Gammons notes column while the heavy ink dyed my arm black. Never mind, the iPad/net/twitter verse is actually better.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 2, 2014 14:24:37 GMT -5
I would not move multiple prospects for a shark rental.
Just sign Masterson.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 2, 2014 11:02:00 GMT -5
Those second and third sentences don't really mesh. We're talking about a guy who, between 2011 and 2013, was basically on par with Lester. One injury-ridden down year shouldn't downgrade him to a fifth starter projection. Steamer projects him to be a two win player, which would put him between a third and fourth starter. Maybe could have been more precise with my language, but my point is that it's unrealistic to me to even hope he'll pitch as better than a number 3. He was on par with Lester because they were both good in '11 and '13 and both pretty mediocre-to-not-great in '12. Meanwhile, Lester had a long track record before then that Masterson doesn't. Maybe it's a matter of being more familiar with him than with someone who didn't come up with the Sox, but to me, Masterson is always only going to be as good as he is able to limit other teams' ability to just stack their lineups with LHB to counter him. So far, 2013 is the only season in which he's been able to keep lefties from having very good numbers against him. That's why I'm skeptical. Exactly. And I think the staff in Boston is the most likely place to get the best out of him. Why? What reason do we have to think that Boston's coaching staff is any better with pitchers than Cleveland's or St. Louis's, and will suddenly make him the pitcher he was in 2013? Not better with pitchers in general but better with this pitcher. Farrell was a mentor and Mastersons first pitching coach. Nueves is excellent as well. It seems as if the sox have been trying to get Masterson back since they traded him. I do believe in the young pitchers particularly rdlr but two of the top three and three of the top four best prospects that I expect to be mlb ready in 2015 throw with the correct hand as does the primary free agent targeted as well as a rumored trade target. A rotation that starts with Lester and potentially Hamels and includes Owens and or Johnson could use Masterson in the middle.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 1, 2014 21:13:28 GMT -5
A) I don't think Masterson is even a lottery ticket. He's had a couple seasons where he's pitched like a #2, and that's about it. The team that acquires him should hope for no more than a good #5 and be pleasantly surprised if he's anything more. Those second and third sentences don't really mesh. We're talking about a guy who, between 2011 and 2013, was basically on par with Lester. One injury-ridden down year shouldn't downgrade him to a fifth starter projection. Steamer projects him to be a two win player, which would put him between a third and fourth starter. Exactly. And I think the staff in Boston is the most likely place to get the best out of him. We are looking at Tbd Masterson Rdlr Kelly Buck Then by July 1 Barnes or Johnson or even Owens.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 1, 2014 21:01:59 GMT -5
With beane the thing is he moves players based on his own click and his own evaluations.
He's not wrong often.
HE clearly wasn't crazy for Russell and loves Barreto.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 1, 2014 13:56:52 GMT -5
AJMass reports Masterson getting active and looking for a one year deal to re establish value. This would be an easy 200 plus innings and Farrell and Nueves could help get the best out of him. vine.co/v/O1MIYOHv7mV
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 1, 2014 11:32:45 GMT -5
Cruz to buddy up with Cano in Seattle.
The good is its effect on hurting Orioles. The bad is this takes the Mariners out of the Cespedes or Napoli sweepstakes.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Nov 30, 2014 15:08:13 GMT -5
Google Jonah Keri verdict effect for a great dissection of the innings pitched metric vs max pitches per start as a metric to measure stress on pitchers.
In short, Keri makes the case that acute pitch counts in a game leads to severe injury to arms.
Innings don't matter Iif starters don't throw more than say 110 pitches a game.
Now Boras is attempting to measure long term or chronic risk to arms by total pitches in a career which is a new one to me but no surprise as it is a measure that supports his client.
|
|