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.
The Rotation Going Forward
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 20, 2014 22:21:38 GMT -5
Part of me thinks we'd be better off with the season falling apart so we can see who can pitch in the majors. I want Webster up too with RDLR and Workman. Maybe all 3 of them can stick. We won't know until they get a chance.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jun 20, 2014 22:26:46 GMT -5
Part of me thinks we'd be better off with the season falling apart so we can see who can pitch in the majors. I want Webster up too with RDLR and Workman. Maybe all 3 of them can stick. We won't know until they get a chance. I'm in the same mindset, though I don't necessarily think the club needs to completely fall out of it to get those guys work. Outside of Lackey/Lester, it's not like any of the opening day starting pitchers have shown much to continue with a rotation spot. I think you give the benefit of the doubt to Buchholz if he continues to perform in AAA. But I really see little reason to not at least give some chances to everyone else in the 4/5 spots At some point they have to get a chance if the Sox FO expects them to be longterm options in the rotation. They've all shown flashes, and I'd rather see what they can bring this season than go into 2015 with the same starting rotation questions The big question is if the FO is willing to give the young guys a chance over the "established" guys in Peavy/Doubront if the club is within 8-10 games of the playoffs
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 20, 2014 22:30:18 GMT -5
Part of me thinks we'd be better off with the season falling apart so we can see who can pitch in the majors. I want Webster up too with RDLR and Workman. Maybe all 3 of them can stick. We won't know until they get a chance. I'm in the same mindset, though I don't necessarily think the club needs to completely fall out of it to get those guys work. Outside of Lackey/Lester, it's not like any of the opening day starting pitchers have shown much to continue with a rotation spot. I think you give the benefit of the doubt to Buchholz if he continues to perform in AAA. But I really see little reason to not at least give some chances to everyone else in the 4/5 spots At some point they have to get a chance if the Sox FO expects them to be longterm options in the rotation. They've all shown flashes, and I'd rather see what they can bring this season than go into 2015 with the same starting rotation questions The big question is if the FO is willing to give the young guys a chance over the "established" guys in Peavy/Doubront if the club is within 8-10 games of the playoffs Your last question is why I'm thinking I'd rather have it be an easy decision for them. Because I still expect Workman and RDLR to be optioned back when Buchholz gets back.
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jun 20, 2014 22:36:11 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 20, 2014 22:37:10 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year. So? That money is spent.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jun 20, 2014 22:42:34 GMT -5
Sunk costs, unfortunately they're routinely ignored in professional sports
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jun 20, 2014 23:01:59 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year. So? That money is spent. So maybe the Sox can ship him off to some NL team at the deadline, but if not, then what? Cut him? Put him in the bullpen? That just isn't going to happen, not till "October" at least.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 20, 2014 23:08:19 GMT -5
So maybe the Sox can ship him off to some NL team at the deadline, but if not, then what? Cut him? Put him in the bullpen? That just isn't going to happen, not till "October" at least. They should put him in the pen now if they can't dump him for a C prospect. Unless they're trying to secure a top 10 draft pick.
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jun 20, 2014 23:42:18 GMT -5
So maybe the Sox can ship him off to some NL team at the deadline, but if not, then what? Cut him? Put him in the bullpen? That just isn't going to happen, not till "October" at least. They should put him in the pen now if they can't dump him for a C prospect. Unless they're trying to secure a top 10 draft pick. Yes they probably should, but you and I both know that they wont.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,925
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 20, 2014 23:50:28 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year. Let me give you a hypothetical. Before the season you pay $39.99 for a 1-year subscription to Baseball Expectus, a famous source for baseball insight, and $4.99 to a newcomer, Baseball Work, which seems promising. After two months it becomes apparent that Baseball Work completely blows Baseball Expectus out of the water and off the very planet. There hasn't been one article at BE that wasn't either preceded by a better, deeper, article at BW, or wasn't taken apart at BW and shown to be incorrect. You are, in fact, learning nothing useful at all from BE. Now you get asked to work overtime, which will limit the amount of time you can spend reading baseball websites. You: A) Give most of your clicks and views to BE because you have invested $39.99 in them. B) Almost never click on BE again, and write off the $39.99 as, to use the technical term, a "mistake." I'm not denying that humans sometimes err by considering sunk costs. But instances where we recognize sunk costs quite easily, and see the need to just accept the losses, do happen. If Ben and the rest of the FO are not sitting around and saying "Geeze, what we do with Peavy? He's not close to being one of our five best starters," then they're incompetent.
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jun 20, 2014 23:55:40 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year. Let me give you a hypothetical. Before the season you pay $39.99 for a 1-year subscription to Baseball Expectus, a famous source for baseball insight, and $4.99 to a newcomer, Baseball Work, which seems promising. After two months it becomes apparent that Baseball Work completely blows Baseball Expectus out of the water and off the very planet. There hasn't been one article at BE that wasn't either preceded by a better, deeper, article at BW, or wasn't taken apart at BW and shown to be incorrect. You are, in fact, learning nothing useful at all from BE. Now you get asked to work overtime, which will limit the amount of time you can spend reading baseball websites. You: A) Give most of your clicks and views to BE because you have invested $39.99 in them. B) Almost never click on BE again, and write off the $39.99 as, to use the technical term, a "mistake." You misunderstand me. I am not defending Peavy or the decision to leave him in the rotation. I would give his spot to Workman or someone else more deserving. BUT, how often does a professional team eat the loss (to both wallet and ego) in a situation like this? I just don't see the Red Sox having the stones to pull the plug on a big name with a big contract, even thought I do believe it is what they should do.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 21, 2014 0:02:46 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year. Let me give you a hypothetical. Before the season you pay $39.99 for a 1-year subscription to Baseball Expectus, a famous source for baseball insight, and $4.99 to a newcomer, Baseball Work, which seems promising. After two months it becomes apparent that Baseball Work completely blows Baseball Expectus out of the water and off the very planet. There hasn't been one article at BE that wasn't either preceded by a better, deeper, article at BW, or wasn't taken apart at BW and shown to be incorrect. You are, in fact, learning nothing useful at all from BE. Now you get asked to work overtime, which will limit the amount of time you can spend reading baseball websites. You: A) Give most of your clicks and views to BE because you have invested $39.99 in them. B) Almost never click on BE again, and write off the $39.99 as, to use the technical term, a "mistake." I'm not denying that humans sometimes err by considering sunk costs. But instances where we recognize sunk costs quite easily, and see the need to just accept the losses, do happen. If Ben and the rest of the FO are not sitting around and saying "Geeze, what we do with Peavy? He's not close to being one of our five best starters," then they're incompetent. Is that the impression that you're starting to get? I started having that suspicion in the offseason. Depth is great, but not at the expense of having the best 25-man roster. They were so worried with getting value for Carp, that they declined going with any backup plan for JBJ and Victorino. Plus the repeated ignorance of platoons, sending Nava down so they could hold onto Carp + Sizemore, etc. I get this sinking feeling that if they don't tank this year and see what they have in Workman/RDLR/Webster/Ranaudo, they're going to go with 5 veteran starters next year just because they all have options and can stay in AAA.
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jun 21, 2014 0:18:02 GMT -5
I have that same sinking feeling about it. I am worried that Pawtucket next year might have a 7 man rotation of Workman, RDLR, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, Owens, and Johnson. Just kidding...sort of.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jun 21, 2014 0:25:59 GMT -5
The pitching riches at AAA at the start of 2015 should and I think will force their hand to insert at least one of them in the rotation
Unless they decide to go with two of the young guys in the bullpen instead, there just won't be enough space in Pawtucket, and I can't imagine they keep guys in Portland just for that sake, given that all either already have mastered AA or will have mastered AA by the end of the season. Hope to maybe package one of them in a deal to get an impact bat? otherwise, they'll be in Boston
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jun 21, 2014 4:39:00 GMT -5
I don't disagree about Peavy, but the reality is that he is making about 15 million dollars this year. Let me give you a hypothetical. Before the season you pay $39.99 for a 1-year subscription to Baseball Expectus, a famous source for baseball insight, and $4.99 to a newcomer, Baseball Work, which seems promising. After two months it becomes apparent that Baseball Work completely blows Baseball Expectus out of the water and off the very planet. There hasn't been one article at BE that wasn't either preceded by a better, deeper, article at BW, or wasn't taken apart at BW and shown to be incorrect. You are, in fact, learning nothing useful at all from BE. Now you get asked to work overtime, which will limit the amount of time you can spend reading baseball websites. You: A) Give most of your clicks and views to BE because you have invested $39.99 in them. B) Almost never click on BE again, and write off the $39.99 as, to use the technical term, a "mistake." I'm not denying that humans sometimes err by considering sunk costs. But instances where we recognize sunk costs quite easily, and see the need to just accept the losses, do happen. If Ben and the rest of the FO are not sitting around and saying "Geeze, what we do with Peavy? He's not close to being one of our five best starters," then they're incompetent. C) Eat my $39.95 and trade my BE clicks to a friend who doesn't have BW for a subscription to Baseball Lingerie an up an coming magazine about minor league players which I can review after the overtime is done.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jun 21, 2014 5:54:12 GMT -5
Lester, Lackey, and Peavy (for better or worse), are the clear 1,2,3 of the rotation. After that you have a group of Buch, Doubront, RDLR, Workman, Ranaudo, Webster, and Barnes. You got Johnson and Owens creeping up quickly right behind. I think this summer at least two of these guys gotta go so that the others can keep moving forward. Thoughts? No.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 21, 2014 9:02:42 GMT -5
I'm going to push back against the "DFA Peavy right now" crowd. For one thing, it's not totally clear that Peavy is clearly a worse pitcher than Workman or RDLR right now. Here are the RoS projected ERAs (h/t mgoetze) for the back-end guys: Steamer Peavy: 4.12 Workman: 4.19 Buchholz: 4.39 Doubront: 4.41 De La Rosa: 4.42 ZiPS Buchholz: 3.93 Peavy: 4.18 Workman: 4.43 Doubront: 4.60 De La Rosa: 5.37 Even if you think the Workman/De La Rosa projections are a little high, I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue that they're going to be much better than 4.00 ERA-type guys going forward, which at best would still be not much better than what Peavy projects to give them. Yeah, Peavy has been awful this year, but pitchers have awful half-seasons all the time and bounce back from it, and pretty much all the research out there says to trust the projections. Indeed, Peavy has been better of late. In his last 7 starts, he has a 4.21 FIP/4.09 xFIP/4.17 SIERA with a 5.91 K/9 and a 1.77 BB/9. Even if you still think that Workman/RDLR are better than Peavy going forward, there's an argument for keeping Peavy in the rotation ahead of them another few weeks. For instance, if noone is willing to trade for Peavy now (and so you'd have to DFA him to get him off the roster), but you think someone will take on at least part of his contract in a month (both because that time will have done more to separate the contenders from the wannabes, and because a few more good starts from Peavy will help his perception around the league), it makes sense to option those guys and keep Peavy around, because the money you'd save would be worth four slightly-worse starts you'd get in the meantime. We also have to consider the fact that De La Rosa will almost certainly be on an innings-limit this year and probably won't be able to spend the rest of the season making every start in the major league rotation. He's never pitched more than 100 IP in his career, and only threw 91 innings last year. I imagine they don't want him throwing much more than 120-130 innings this year, and he's at 75 innings already with more than half the season ahead of him. He's either going to be shut down early, spend some time in a bullpen, or get a few starts skipped. Now might be a good time to give him a little breather.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 21, 2014 9:12:29 GMT -5
Here's what I'd do:
Doubront is guy you want to bump from the rotation first. He's probably worse than Peavy, he has had bullpen experience, and he might actually have a future in that role. When Buchholz returns, move Doubront to the bullpen and option De La Rosa to Pawtucket (with the un-suspended Workman taking his turn in the rotation). To make room in the bullpen, I DFA Capuano (who has no future with Boston beyond this year and has been pretty bad lately) with an eye towards trading him (to the Angels, who have no lefties in their BP?), but releasing him if necessary.
I desperately try to convince a team to take on, say, $3m of Peavy's salary. If he gets moved, RDLR takes his rotation spot. If noone's willing to do that, I try to give him away for free up until the trade deadline, and if that still doesn't work, I DFA Peavy August 1st and call up De La Rosa to take his rotation spot.
I call Owens up to AAA after the Eastern League All-Star Game (July 16th). After that, the Pawtucket rotation is RDLR, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, and Owens, with Wright and Hernandez piggybacking. Wright gets first crack to the rotation when RDLR is called back up to Boston. I leave Johnson in Portland all year-- he could use the stability and innings (not to mention the trade value boost), and it's not like he'll be a candidate for starts in Boston until late-2015 at the earliest. I've never been a big Keith Couch fan, and he's not going to crack the Boston rotation anytime soon, nor is he good enough to be anything but a throw-in in a trade. Maybe convert him to the bullpen and see if he can be a Scott Atchison-esque strike thrower/long man.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Jun 21, 2014 9:55:38 GMT -5
Agree 100%. Also, team can clear every last member of the current rotation after 2015 if they choose, so I'd like for them to not look at moving any of the SP prospects, other than possibly Ranaudo and Johnson, guys I don't see as MLB successful.
Then this year, if the Chances of a Lester deal keep looking on the expensive side? Change course and go toward Lackey with a 2y Guarantee, 3rd team option that tears up his 2015 deal, makes the 2 guaranteed years worth 12.5m and 3rd option at another 12.5m. Little older than Lackey, but he's been as solid as Lester since returning from surgery.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jun 21, 2014 17:09:55 GMT -5
Even if you think the Workman/De La Rosa projections are a little high, I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue that they're going to be much better than 4.00 ERA-type guys going forward, which at best would still be not much better than what Peavy projects to give them. Yeah, Peavy has been awful this year, but pitchers have awful half-seasons all the time and bounce back from it, and pretty much all the research out there says to trust the projections. Indeed, Peavy has been better of late. In his last 7 starts, he has a 4.21 FIP/4.09 xFIP/4.17 SIERA with a 5.91 K/9 and a 1.77 BB/9. I'm OK with trusting the projection on Peavy. I would submit, however, that RDLR is one of the hardest players in the majors for a projection system to get right. With the Dodgers he skipped AAA entirely. Then you can't tell whether he might have been pitching a bit injured in his first stint in the majors, just before his TJS, and the 2013 sample was not all that large. So I would say it's not unreasonable to think that Rubby will be a sub-4.00 ERA pitcher, in spite of the projections. Of course trusting the projection is also perfectly reasonable. On the other hand, I do agree that Peavy shouldn't be DFAed. He is still a legitimate #4-#5 starter on a 2nd division team, and if you trust his ZiPS RoS projection of 1.2 WAR then he is pretty much being payed market value exactly. So it should in fact be possible to trade him for $1. Of course I'll happily eat his salary ... if we get an actual prospect in return (I'm thinking #101-#200 type prospect).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,925
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 21, 2014 18:38:58 GMT -5
I can see the wisdom of waiting on a Peavy trade, and optioning Workman for the time being. I started this thread after RDLR had started just three times, and I said he was in the rotation to stay, and I think that's increasingly obvious*: 2.51 ERA, 2.90 xFIP, figures that rank him 10th to 15th among 163 MLB starters with 30+ IP, and FIP down to 3.18. But the downgrade from Workman to Peavy is unlikely to cost them 0.5+ WAR over the course of a handful of starts.
*Let's worry about innings later. This kid has worked very hard to get where he is, and optioning him when he might be the best pitcher on the staff can't possibly send a good message.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 21, 2014 18:47:22 GMT -5
De La Rosa sounds like a mature guy, and he's had bigger obstacles than an unjustified demotion, so my feeling is that he could handle that aspect. But what's the point? He's one of the three best pitchers on the team right now. There's nothing specific I can see that more Triple-A innings would do for him. He has three major league pitches, he's efficient, and his approach on the mound seems excellent. He has game scores of higher than 70 in three of his five starts. Doubront's high this season is 61, and he has only four 70+ games in his three years as starter.
Again, so that I'm clear - De La Rosa's median game score this season is 71. Doubront's best game score is 61.
The only argument for keeping Doubront over De La Rosa is that he was there first.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 21, 2014 19:06:36 GMT -5
If we pay all of Peavy's salary he becomes a more valuable trade chip. We're in no position to pick up salary. Just get something in return.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,020
|
Post by cdj on Jun 21, 2014 20:16:45 GMT -5
And just think, Doubront's velocity could even play up in the bullpen. He could be a useful piece there.
I'd move him out before Peavy. It's not like Peavy has been terrible, he just gets zero run support and he is not a good enough pitcher to overcome that. That said, if there is a decent offer out there for him by all means take it...but I highly doubt that at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jun 21, 2014 21:25:58 GMT -5
I think you guys have this backwards with regards to a trade... Peavy doesn't have much value with his contract, but Doubront absolutely does. I think with his last three years, youth and cheapness he'd have very good value to a team like the Cubs, Padre's, hell even some contenders. Think about what Doubront when healthy could do in the NL. He should be swapped for a B+ prospect or better as soon as he proves he's healthy and I think that's why he's getting a stint over Workman etc. now.
Peavy might have some value to a contender who needs a back-end guy to soak up innings at slightly above replacement. I think that the sox could trade Doubront and some decent surplus pen arms (Capuano, Britton, Breslow, possibly even Miller these lefties have value) for prospects. Then see where your at come the deadline and flip some of this prospect pool (including our own AA-AAA surplus prospects)for a bat if you're contending or just keep stocking up for an offseason overhaul.
|
|
|