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.
Red Sox sign Chris Capuano for $2.25m with incentives
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 22, 2014 22:58:05 GMT -5
I don't think he's arguing it so much as the numbers are. Given the age disparity, he's not as valuable as Jimenez of course. But given the disparity in salary, the similarity of those numbers is glaring.
Jimenez has been wildly inconsistent and that's produced both within season and between season variability that makes him look like two different pitchers. It results in those mundane stats. It also produces very divergent opinions of who he is. That's understandable.
I still think it's a coin toss for which guy shows up.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 22, 2014 23:33:34 GMT -5
Ubaldo and Capuano really aren't comparable though. Ubaldos talent is far superior to Capuano and Ubaldo's projections are thrown out of whack by a piss poor year and a half. The chances of these guys having similar years is low. Capuano may have a similar floor but his ceiling is no where close to Jimenez.
Eric, do you really think a guy who was just signed for. 2.25m is going to hold any real trade value in 3 months by being used out of low leverage bullpen situations and a couple spot starts? There is a reason why he got 1 year and $2.25m.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 22, 2014 23:37:05 GMT -5
Ubaldo is better. But he's not $48m (plus a draft pick) better.
ADD: and as the projections I posted earlier suggest, I'm far from the only one who thinks so.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 22, 2014 23:45:12 GMT -5
For Baltimore he mist certainly is. He has a decent chance to be a top of the rotation starter for solid money, which is extremely valuable for a team like Baltimore. Capuano wouldn't change their chances much. Of course, it's a dumb conversation because it wasn't one or the other.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 22, 2014 23:52:03 GMT -5
Jimenez also has a far, far lower floor. You can't just evaluate signings based on upside.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 23, 2014 0:06:38 GMT -5
Far far is a bit of an exaggeration. There's a reason Capuano couldn't land a starting gig at that low a salary. Regardless, you can't judge a signing by anything but results. That being said, team needs are most important and Baltimore has a need to take the risk on Jimenez. The Red Sox do not. What is good for one team isn't necessarily good for another.
Capuano would be a good sign for both teams. Jimenez would have been awful for Boston, but I think it's a good gamble for Baltimore.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,944
|
Post by ericmvan on Feb 23, 2014 2:13:58 GMT -5
Eric, do you really think a guy who was just signed for. 2.25m is going to hold any real trade value in 3 months by being used out of low leverage bullpen situations and a couple spot starts? There is a reason why he got 1 year and $2.25m. Sure. Teams passed on Capuano for two reasons: they had doubts about him, and, more importantly, they liked their cheaper internal options better. Pitching really well erases the doubts. And, again, more importantly, some contender will be in a position of need because of injuries and prospect flameout. I'm not saying they're going to recoup Iglesias' value, but there will be a real chance to grab an interesting C+ sort of prospect.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Feb 23, 2014 7:04:40 GMT -5
Sean McAdam?@sean_McAdam Capuano can earn as much as $500K in roster bonuses; as much as $1.25M for starts, beginning at 12; & as much as $1M for IP, starting at 70.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 23, 2014 20:17:33 GMT -5
Ubaldo is better. But he's not $48m (plus a draft pick) better. ADD: and as the projections I posted earlier suggest, I'm far from the only one who thinks so. First off rjp is right. It's a false comparison. No one is suggesting that the Red Sox should have signed Jimenez to be their swing man. Further, unless I am wrong, you aren't suggesting that the Orioles should have signed forgone Jiminez in favor of Capuano. As far as the projections go, Ubaldo Jimenez made an adjustment in, after that adjustment, he was his old dominant self. The projections do not consider this. Chris Capuano is a left handed sinkerballer who will be pitching in a park with a wall practically on top of home plate and right above his throwing arm. The projections don't consider that either. Most of the projections are made by computers. So yes, you aren't the only "one" who believe that Jimenez and Capuano deserve to be mentioned in the same breath. But you ARE as far as I know, the only actual person, who thinks so. Let's just hope that he isn't facing Nelson Cruz at Fenway with runners on base, because if he does, you can probably chalk that game up as a loss.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 23, 2014 21:13:36 GMT -5
As far as the projections go, Ubaldo Jimenez made an adjustment in, after that adjustment, he was his old dominant self. The projections do not consider this. I'll let Jeff Sullivan handle this one: His velocity bounced back a little in that stretch, and he started using his split-fingered fastball more often, so it certainly wasn't just that he was facing weaker opponents. He probably did improve his mechanics somewhat, and maybe those improvements will carry over to 2014. But a large part of his stellar finish to 2014 can be explained by the well below-average competition he faced over that period, and so emphasizing that stretch above his full-season line may be a mistake. Oh, and there are more than a few other people who think Capuano is an underrated player and a cheap alternative to the bigger-name pitchers on the market.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 23, 2014 22:04:37 GMT -5
You know, it's totally hypothetical, but I'm not sure that Cherington wouldn't choose Capuano over Jimenez even if the Sox *did* have a rotation spot open. It's not that Capuano's a better pitcher than Jimenez ... it's that he's probably less likely to be as bad as Jimenez is. I think it's clear by now that Cherington does not go around - as a lot of people do, probably most people - and make the analysis, "Which of these guys has the best chance of being good?' He looks around and thinks, "Which of these guys has the least chance of being bad?" And then he looks at upside after that.
Humans are notoriously bad at weighing downside risks rationally. If we were good at it, there would be no lottery because it's just a waste of money to buy a ticket. A lot of GMs and almost all media types look at a signing as, "How likely is that to pay off?" And, for the Orioles, "pay off" means, "a guy who can be a very good or better starter." And, in that lens, sure, I guess Jimenez makes sense if you look at it that way because he is more likely to be that than Capuano. But as jmei mentioned earlier, you have to take downside risk into account here, and, by the Wisdom of Ben, not just as an afterthought, but at the core of the analysis, possibly the first factor to consider.
Cherington would probably sign Capuano and a couple other guys for the cost it took to sign Jimenez and have an overall better chance of stitching together average-or-better innings over a longer portion of the season.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 24, 2014 6:29:05 GMT -5
First off you are completely wrong. Capuano who is a left handed sinkerballer facing better competition in Fenway has a lower floor than Jimenez. He's much more likely to be killed and thus more likely to be worth zero or worse. You leave the sinker up against punch and judy righties in Dodger stadium you might get away with it. You do that versus Edwin Encarcion in Fenway it's a souvenir.
Secondly, think of the implications of your argument. There are plenty of teams that have openings in their starting rotation. Not one them was interested in giving Capuano a job. The logical extension of your argument therefor is that somehow Cherrington and his staff have some sort of magical evaluation powers that other teams do not. Do you really think that's true?
Your paragraph on downside risk is somewhat ironic. You are absolutely correct but I think that you are analyzing Capuano's downside risk based on his past performance. A past performance that was heavily influenced by factors that are no longer in effect.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 24, 2014 9:08:48 GMT -5
So this discussion is a bit all over the place as people are coming from different angles. The whole Capuano vs Jimenez talk is somewhat nonsensical as no one was choosing between the two. They also have two completely different profiles as players so when Baltimore was looking at both players it was for two different purposes.
Jimenez is only 30 and signed for just 12.5m a year. In this market, where Dempster was set to make more then that, all he needs to do is make his starts and not suck for 180IP and he's earned it and then some. Which he has done plus a lot more, every year but 2012. Baltimore has a team team teetering on contention and what they really needed was stability in the rotation and innings, so to get those from a guy who also has the chance to be infinitely more then that is well worth the pick for a franchise that has had years and years of crappy teams. There weren't exactly a ton of options for them. If you want to say they should've gone harder at Garza or Nolasco, then an argument can be made but there's a good argument for this direction also. This isn't a crappy Blue Jays or White Sox team giving up a first for Ubaldo. It also made signing Cruz a possibility.
I guess I don't understand the point people are trying to make with the comparison as they are apples and oranges. It's almost like comparing one team signing a second baseman and the other an outfielder.
Ubaldo Jimenez was never an option for the Red Sox and Capuano wasn't an option for the Orioles (or any other team) in the role they signed Jimenez for.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 24, 2014 9:41:35 GMT -5
If you are using Dave Cameron, ihe man who told us that Jeremy Reed wasn't as valuable as Papelbon and Lester put together, That's some straight deflection, and it's also an exaggeration. I remember him saying he wouldn't want Papelbon OR Lester for Reed. That ended up being wrong, but Cameron was pretty far from being the only one wrong about Reed. As if being wrong about Jeremy Reed means he's obviously wrong about Chris Capuano.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 24, 2014 12:27:29 GMT -5
Capuano who is a left handed sinkerballer facing better competition in Fenway has a lower floor than Jimenez. He's much more likely to be killed and thus more likely to be worth zero or worse. You leave the sinker up against punch and judy righties in Dodger stadium you might get away with it. You do that versus Edwin Encarcion in Fenway it's a souvenir. Fenway Park doesn't actually inflate home runs to RHB-- it plays relatively neutrally in terms of HRs to RHB, and the advantage that RHB have in Fenway is instead because it massively inflates doubles (it does so to both lefties and righties). Indeed, the difference in RHB HR park effects between Fenway (103) and Dodger Stadium (96) is not all that great, and Capuano has recently pitched in several home parks that inflate RHB HR more than Fenway (including Miller Park (108), where he spent the bulk of his career, and Citi Field (105), where he pitched the year before last). Anyways, this is getting pretty eristic. My original point was just that Capuano has pitched pretty damn well when he's been on the field over the past few years, and that this deal is a terrific bargain in light of that. But, you know, haters gonna hate and all that.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 25, 2014 4:47:49 GMT -5
This is once again a chance to remind you of the limitations of statistical analysis. Park and league effects are NOT linear and this is especially true of Fenway. Just because Fenway is neutral for home runs to righties in the aggregate does not mean that it will be neutral for home runs when Capuano faces righties, especially the pull power ones like Cruz. And his pitching was greatly effected by factors that are no longer in effect. That might very well get him killed. Sure and maybe you might actually watch a game this year it is actually kind of enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Feb 25, 2014 5:32:07 GMT -5
If you are using Dave Cameron, ihe man who told us that Jeremy Reed wasn't as valuable as Papelbon and Lester put together, That's some straight deflection, and it's also an exaggeration. I remember him saying he wouldn't want Papelbon OR Lester for Reed. That ended up being wrong, but Cameron was pretty far from being the only one wrong about Reed. As if being wrong about Jeremy Reed means he's obviously wrong about Chris Capuano. That was 10 years ago. I said some dumb things 10 years ago (and yesterday). Cameron did so and will continue to do so at the same rate as the rest of us. Though I will continue to derive pleasure from that Jeremy Reed comment.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 25, 2014 6:16:49 GMT -5
I took another look at Cameron's article on Capuano and it didn't say what I thought it said. I should have read it more carefully and I apologize. The article did not as Jmei implied compare Jimenez to Capuano. Nor did it analyze the idea of Capuano pitching in the AL East for the Red Sox. I have deleted all of my comments that relate to Mr. Cameron as a result.
The article discussed the idea of Capuano pitching for the Mariners which is entirely different. As the competition, and ballparks would be a better fit with his type of pitching.
The article in my opinion does not support Jmei's argument.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Feb 25, 2014 9:22:50 GMT -5
I took another look at Cameron's article on Capuano and it didn't say what I thought it said. I should have read it more carefully and I apologize. The article did not as Jmei implied compare Jimenez to Capuano. Nor did it analyze the idea of Capuano pitching in the AL East for the Red Sox. I have deleted all of my comments that relate to Mr. Cameron as a result. The article discussed the idea of Capuano pitching for the Mariners which is entirely different. As the competition, and ballparks would be a better fit with his type of pitching. The article in my opinion does not support Jmei's argument. I don't see where jmei ever tried to spin Cameron's article as a comparison of Capuano and Jimenez. In showing how much of a steal the Capuano signing was for the Sox, he posted some relevant data comparing him to Santana, Nolasco, Vargas, and Ubaldo. There was no mention of Cameron's article in that post, and you questionably responded with a shot at him, snipping, "Right only Jimei could possibly argue with a straight face that Chris Capuano belongs in the same conversation with Ubaldo Jimenez," thus spurring a conversation focused on direct comparison between the two. Come on now, moonstone. ADD: Can someone point me to this referenced Cameron article? I can only find Capuano stuff on FG and USSM from Sullivan.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 25, 2014 10:29:09 GMT -5
That's some straight deflection, and it's also an exaggeration. I remember him saying he wouldn't want Papelbon OR Lester for Reed. That ended up being wrong, but Cameron was pretty far from being the only one wrong about Reed. As if being wrong about Jeremy Reed means he's obviously wrong about Chris Capuano. That was 10 years ago. I said some dumb things 10 years ago (and yesterday). Cameron did so and will continue to do so at the same rate as the rest of us. Though I will continue to derive pleasure from that Jeremy Reed comment. I'm not a big Dave Cameron fan, but if you judge baseball analysts by their worst misses on prospects, then roughly no one is qualified to say anything about the sport. Sox Prospects itself (not to mention like 80% of the people on this board) had Lars Anderson as a future star. Just shut the site down, I guess...
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 25, 2014 11:31:46 GMT -5
The article in my opinion does not support Jmei's argument. Um, my argument has never been that the Red Sox should have signed Jimenez instead of Capuano or that the two would perform comparably in Fenway Park. It has always been that compared to the other free-agent signings this offseason, the Red Sox got themselves a bargain. But please, continue to strawman away. Remember, this whole thing started when you said I was crazy and literally the only person who would compare Jimenez to Capuano (notwithstanding the fact that their three-year splits are extremely similar, as are their 2014 projections). Well, I linked to an article which did just that, comparing Capuano to Santana/Jimenez/Garza and arguing that he's a cheaper alternative to those three. I posted a couple other articles making a similar point, one of which (written by the apparently controversial Dave Cameron) presented Capuano as a much cheaper mid-rotation alternative to a possible Mariners run at Tanaka, the other of which favorably compared Capuano to Bronson Arroyo. But of course, your response is to throw some ad hom attacks at Cameron.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 25, 2014 11:40:25 GMT -5
The projections for Jimenez are irrelevant because he pitched like a Cy Young candidate for the second half of last season. Therefore some teams will take a bigger risk, hoping there is a chance he becomes that pitcher. Capuano isn't going to pitch like a Cy Young candidate ever.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Feb 25, 2014 11:45:58 GMT -5
If you are the Orioles, you probably are going to shoot for the fences with some players. They need some luck because they probably are never going to have the cash needed to become a top team more than occasionally any other way. They need Davis to continue to be an animal and maybe get one or 2 of their young pitchers to hit big as well. I like the Feldman trade. They are trying to go for it now with a limited budget.
The AL east looks pretty strong this year with all the teams potentially.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 25, 2014 12:15:08 GMT -5
The projections for Jimenez are irrelevant because he pitched like a Cy Young candidate for the second half of last season. Therefore some teams will take a bigger risk, hoping there is a chance he becomes that pitcher. Capuano isn't going to pitch like a Cy Young candidate ever. Not sure if you're talking to me here, but I never argued that the Orioles should have signed Capuano instead of Jimenez and in fact agreed with this sentiment multiple times in this page of this thread alone. Jimenez absolutely has a higher ceiling and is far less of an injury risk (having never missed a start due to injury in his career), and the Orioles got him at a reasonable price to boot (I actually kind of liked that signing for them and wondered why a team like the Blue Jays didn't beat them to the punch). But also remember that Jimenez's dominant streak came against very weak competition, his fastball velocity has declined four years in a row, and he was arguably the worst everyday starter in baseball as recently as 2012. He certainly has upside, but when you're trying to craft a median projection, you can't really assume he'll pitch to his ceiling, and there's plenty of downside risk.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 25, 2014 13:01:43 GMT -5
First off you are completely wrong. Capuano who is a left handed sinkerballer facing better competition in Fenway has a lower floor than Jimenez. He's much more likely to be killed and thus more likely to be worth zero or worse. You leave the sinker up against punch and judy righties in Dodger stadium you might get away with it. You do that versus Edwin Encarcion in Fenway it's a souvenir. Secondly, think of the implications of your argument. There are plenty of teams that have openings in their starting rotation. Not one them was interested in giving Capuano a job. The logical extension of your argument therefor is that somehow Cherrington and his staff have some sort of magical evaluation powers that other teams do not. Do you really think that's true? Your paragraph on downside risk is somewhat ironic. You are absolutely correct but I think that you are analyzing Capuano's downside risk based on his past performance. A past performance that was heavily influenced by factors that are no longer in effect. I was being deliberately hyperbolic by making it a one-to-one comment, but I do think Ubaldo Jimenez is a much worse gamble than people are portraying. His downside is bad, and unlike Capuano, he's being put in a position that could hurt his team over the long haul. The Capuano comparison's a bit of a hyperbolic red herring, I admit, to make the broader point that downside risk is a lot more important than people generally consider, and it's *aggregate* downside risk that's the point, not individual. It's not just comparing one player to another, but comparing approaches. I think Ben Cherington would rather sign 3 mediocre guys with limited downside than one Ubaldo Jimenez because it exposes the team to a lot less downside risk overall, even if it limits the upside potential (and even if any individual pitcher has a downside as bad as Jimenez). And I do think that Cherington's understanding of the relative importance of upside vs downside potentials is special. It's not magical, but everyone's got ways of processing information, and I think this is an exceptional ability of Cherington's. But, let's also be realistic, this works for Cherington because he's got a lot of money to work with and a good core of upside guys already in the system.
|
|
|