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.
Should we trade 2-3 starting pitching prospects?
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 14:36:23 GMT -5
The Sox clearly intend to contend in 2015. They just committed an $18 mil / 2 year deal to Koji and their acquisition of major league ready talent in several July deadline deals confirms this right? So how do they optimize their chances to win in 2015 with roughly $50 mil to spend and holes in quite a few slots. Multiple starting pitching slots, 3rd base, reserve catcher, relievers. We have a need for left handed bats. I don't think $50 mil is going to get that task accomplished on it's own.
We can trade someone like Cespedes, to fill a hole and maybe free up more cash. And we can trade from other areas of excess talent.
I'm not thrilled with trading starting pitching prospects but if they want to win in 2015 I think they should absolutely consider it. We have some starting pitching prospects who will be of strong value to other teams. Should we trade some starting pitching prospects this year?
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 1, 2014 16:22:36 GMT -5
They are not in a spot where they "need" to do everything possible to win in 2015. In fact, I believe they should be more focused on 2016 and build than simply 2015. That doesn't mean you don't build a strong team to contend next year or you don't trade prospects. It just means you're smart about it and you try to build your next long term core.
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Nov 1, 2014 16:41:05 GMT -5
Yes, I think this is the year to cash in on some of our cost controlled starting pitching. We have a wealth of pitchers that need to start in AAA, but aren't quite good enough (yet) to all start in the MLB rotation. Figure that starting spots are going to (hopefully as the 3, 4 and 5 starters) Kelly, De La Rosa and Buchholz. That leaves Webster, Workman, Owens, Rodriguez, Johnson, Barnes, Ranaudo, Escobar, Wright and Couch battling for 5 slots in the PawSox rotation or to displace the other three. None of our young pitchers (or Buchholz) at this point project to be a number 1 or number 2 starter. This is the season to, in some capacity deal three to four of these pitchers to fill holes at other areas.
Personally, I'd be looking to acquire a top of the rotation starter from a cash-conscious team with some of these players as the prospects involved in the deal. For guys that could reasonably be available, think guys with just one year or two years of control left whom we could look to extend or those who may become expensive through arbitration - so among others Latos, Leake, Samardzija, Zimmerman, maybe Porcello if Detroit signs Scherzer or tries to extend Price. Those type of players.
If we could acquire a similarly controlled LH bat for a corner outfield spot or 3rd base for one or two of these players, that would also be - my opinion - a good use of resources if we're able to find pitching we can afford on the Free Agent market. Obviously one would expect different levels of return based on the pitcher traded (far more for someone like Webster, Owens, Rodriguez; less for someone like Barnes, Ranaudo, etc). Cash in on some of these players, but still have plenty of options for depth, the bullpen and potential rotation help down the road.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 19:02:18 GMT -5
I'd rather see them build for 2016 also but their actions make it clear they intend to go for it in 2015. I even want them to use Mookie or Cechinni at 3rd but they have obviously decided they prefer more of a win now approach.
So, if that is the paradigm it would seem that one way to do that would be to cash in some of these starting pitcher prospect chips. Fortunately we have a lot of them. And that option opens up a whole lot of trade possibilities....Lot's of teams want cost controlled starting pitching prospects. They are a valuable commodity. If we are willing to trade 3-4 of these guys we should be able to solve the 3rd base and reserve catcher needs, or combine them to land a solid starting pitcher for a year or 2 of control. That is like having another $15 mil of money available on the FA market.
Teams like the Reds should absolutely be looking to move a Leake or Latos. There are a ton of guys out there with 1 year of control who should be available. 1 year control players are the new black so to speak, the new popular trading commodity. Most teams should now be in Rays mode and move that sort of player given the new CBA.
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Nov 1, 2014 21:18:13 GMT -5
I think that even trading several pitching prospects is the right move to build toward 2016 and further into the future. Even when you consider trading several young pitchers, you're still including a very good and prospect rich prospect rotation of (lets just say) Owens, Rodriguez, Johnson, Escobar and Wright in Pawtucket. Making a move for a guy like Latos, Leake, Zimmerman or any of those mentioned above, I'd want to go for someone that could reasonably be extended at a decent cost.
With any group of prospects, be it ours or another team's, a good number of them are not going to pan out. So when you have as much depth as we do, and can trade them for an established pitcher that you could extend (lets say Mike Leake) there is a lot of value in that for a team like Red Sox. At the current age of 26, he could be extended and counted on as a big part of the rotation not only next year but in future season's as well, while not drastically depleting prospect depth in the minors.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 1, 2014 22:10:27 GMT -5
I have no objections to such a trade dependent upon who the targeted return is expected to be. For me this is a very limited group. In fact in regards to starters I personally only have one true target and that is Jordan Zimmerman. I'd have no issue swapping one of Owens, Rodriguez, Johnson along with Marrero and a pitcher like Ranaudo, Workman, Mercedes or Noe Ramirez. I'd also like to have a window to work out an extension first before consummating the deal. I agree trading for players with one season remaining is the easiest group to target as teams understand it is the last point they can obtain a return value much greater than a QO pick. And Zimmerman is the best of this bunch to me.
Zimmerman is entering the year with less control than Samardzija had before he was traded along with Jason Hammel for Russell and McKinney. I'd like to think that sets the ceiling for what should be expected. As for a floor we obviously look at the Lester trade which returned a year of Cespedes and a comp B draft pick. The cost for obvious reasons should be expected to be closer to the Samardzija deal considering it is a full year vs a half year left on the deal and he is also two years younger then Lester and one year younger than Samardzija making him a more attractive long term extension candidate. He is also over a full two years younger than Cole Hamels. I think Washington would consider it having both young starters in Gioloto and Meyer in the system to go along with whichever top arm they get in this deal to fill the hole the loss of Zimmerman creates long term and obtain Marrero who can play SS, if Desmond isn't resigned, or one of the two could fill their 2B opening while Washington also adds what would amount to a cost controlled relief arm to complete the deal. It would allow the Nationals to free his current 16.5 mil salary and future dollars towards extending any of Strasburg, Fister, Desmond or signing a free agent 1B.
I'd have no problem locking up Zimmerman by adding an additional 5 or 6 years to the deal taking it into the 2020 or 2021 season at 24 to 25 mil per year. He would make an ideal complement in a 1/2 punch to a starter like Lester or even Shields creating a stability at the front end of the rotation that balances the youth and inexperience at the back end of the rotation. Zimmerman has also just entered his prime years and has a relatively light workload, 892 innings, on his arm for a 28 year old.
Essentially if I am parting with multiple prospects in which at least two are top 10 in our system I'm going to be extremely picky about who they're being moved for. It would need to be a player who is currently under 4 plus years of control or one who we are certain is open to being extended for 4 or more additional years. This way while they are building for 2015 they are also locking in a starter for 2016 and beyond. Cole Hamels is an acceptable alternative but I believe the cost would be much greater. As for bats there are numerous targets I like including Stanton and Seager but whether they would ever be available is another question in addition to how much more the cost would be.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 2, 2014 1:02:06 GMT -5
I see the Red Sox with three major holes left to fill. And several minor holes to fill, backup catcher and relievers.
Major holes
1.) top of the rotation starter. 2.) # 2 pitcher for the rotation. 3.) a third baseman
To fill these holes we have free agency and trades. If cherrington signs sandavol for six years at 100 million we filled hole #3.
If he trades 3 or 4 minor leaguers for hamels, we have hole #1 filled.
If we sign Lester or shields or trade for Ross or the Seattle Japanese pitcher that I can not spell, then we have hole # 2 filled.
We can sign Hundley to be the backup catcher and sign any number if relieves.
This should give us a playoff team in 2015.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 2, 2014 7:08:58 GMT -5
There is the rub though. If we sign Sandoval for $16,5 mil a year, and obtain Hamels at $22.5 mil per year, Lester at $26 mil even and we are at $65 mil and effectively well over the luxury tax limit with no backup catcher, no relievers etc. Factor in that we have already spent quite a bit of our cash on Koji ($9 mil per year), I don't see how we do this sort of scenario. I think we need to trade Cespedes for a player who fills a hole, and 2-3 starting pitching prospects. My guess is that even with these moves we probably only have the cash for one premium starting pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Nov 2, 2014 9:10:05 GMT -5
I'm absolutely with you, Taft, in regards to valuation of prospects influencing whom the target would be. I suppose I should have said this, but I wouldn't trade Owens in a package for someone like Latos, Leake or even Samardzija. With a window, I'd probably make the move for Zimmerman too. So it was more along the lines of your idea of something like Owens, Barnes and Marrero (good call) for Zimmerman and the window, but Ranaudo and Escobar for Leake, if that makes sense. As Larry pointed out, that takes care of #1 area of need.
The other thing being, even after making that deal and extending Zimmerman (lets guess at 5yrs / $100M gets tacked on to his one year) that would still leave the Sox with about $25M left under the luxury tax this year. It also leaves them to address either 3b or the other SP role with guys like Workman, Webster, Ranaudo, Escobar, Rodriguez, Wright, Johnson and Couch. I suppose there I would go with a deal of Ranaudo, Escobar and someone like Mercedes to get Leake, and extend him (buying out his arb year) to a 6yr / $84M contract. Fills in #2 area of need.
That leaves them $11M to address 3b. I'd make a move there for the highest salary relief I could get from Victorino and take back the literal bag of sunflower seeds. Lets say someone agrees to pay $6M of his salary - based on a guess that last year the Mets gave an inferior player in Chris Young coming off an awful season $7.25M - and then I go after Headley instead of Panda. I do think that you could "overpay" in dollars to "underpay" in years, and get Headley right around 4/$60M taking him through his age 34 season.
That leaves a rotation for 2015 with Zimmerman, Leake, Kelly, De La Rosa and Buchholz (all of whom are under control through at least 2017 if Buchholz somehow pitched well enough for enough innings to pick up his option). It also still gives a very high upside, but also deep group of something like Webster, Rodriguez, Johnson, Wright and Couch as your AAA rotation while moving Workman and Hernandez to the pen. Put another way, I think we use the money we have ear-marked to spend in free agency instead on extending acquired pitchers, and 3b of course, then I fill out the rest of the pen with the kids.
The bullpen is Uehara, Tazawa, Mujica, Workman, Hembree and Layne.
Also gives a very solid and more balanced line up of Betts(R) in RF; Bogaerts(R) at SS; Pedroia(R) at 2b; Ortiz(L) at DH; Cespedes(R) in LF; Napoli(R) at 1b; Headley(S) at 3b; Castillo(R) in CF and Vazquez(R) at C. Bench of Nava(L - because that's how he should be used, but gets about 400AB); Craig(R); Holt(L); and re-signed Ross(R).
I wouldn't be at all opposed to dealing Cespedes (hypothetically to the Reds with someone like Couch) to acquire Leake and holding on to the prospects, or jettisoning Craig at full salary instead of Victorino, but I just picked the deals I think would be of greatest interest to both the Sox and to other teams we're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 2, 2014 9:47:33 GMT -5
There is no doubt that young, cost-controlled starting pitchers is a strength in this organization. The question is whom to keep and whom to trade. Webster, DeLaRosa and Workman and Wright didn't do very much to enhance their value in the market off their ML performances. Couch is getting lit up in the AFL and is not much of a prospect anyway.
The temptation is there for Cherington to make bold moves to improve the team's competitiveness . I'd prefer to wait a year, to see which pitching prospects emerge as legitimate ML starters for this team; or, to build their cache for trade. With a Cespedes trade, a Lester re-signing and some minor adjustments, the 2015 edition of Red Sox may be able to contend for a WC anyway.
|
|
|
Post by plantierforever on Nov 2, 2014 10:23:41 GMT -5
To respond directly to the title of the post: yes, they should. I believe the Sox should actively be shopping as many of their AAAA pitching prospects as they can.
Frankly, we have so many of these guys that the marginal value of each extra guy to us is very little, but for many national league teams, one of our AAAA pitchers might immediately become the 6th or 5th or 4th best starting pitcher on the roster. These guys have more value in the NL than the AL anyway. I'm fairly sure that at least a couple of our guys will have long and productive careers as SPs, but it could take many years for them to get there. Boston isn't the kind of place where you have time for that kind of seasoning. This is what an extended apprenticeship in the NL is for. In fact, if I'm somebody like Allen Webster or Anthony Ranaudo, I'd love to get traded to a place like San Diego or San Francisco (but not Colorado!). If they stay with the Sox, they are looking at future careers at the back of a bullpen; if they go to the NL, they could hang around a long time as 3rd/4th/5th starters and make tons more money over the length of their careers.
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Nov 2, 2014 10:24:27 GMT -5
Agree with you completely on Workman and Wright, Sibby, but I'd have to disagree a lot when it comes to De La Rosa. He pitched 60 very good innings at AAA, followed up by 90ip (15 starts) that were very good in Boston. In his last four "starts" covering 12ip he got hit around very hard, but the 150ip was already his career high (combined) by a large amount and 60ip higher than the 90ip he got all of 2013. It seemed fairly evident that he ran out of gas, which a lot of people were expecting - including the organization who said they'd limit his innings pitched down the stretch. With Webster, he certainly struggled, agree, but his value is still fairly high across baseball base on his stuff and projection on if he can harness that completely, he can be the 2.63ERA pitcher he was the last month of the year. Those two still have a lot of value, but I do think that De La Rosa is (realistically) off the table and in the rotation plans for next year already anyway - with Webster slated as the first man up from Pawtucket.
Keep in mind, I don't want us to trade any of these guys for "go for it in 2015" options like Scott Kazmir or even Adrian Beltre (just to give an offensive and defensive example). However, if we can package them for something we don't have on the major league roster or reasonably projected from our minor league system - a number one starter like Zimmerman, for instance, who is young enough to be a great extension candidate, I think that's a great use of resources.
It still leaves, as mentioned, three very good prospects fronting the Pawtucket rotation like Webster, Rodriguez and Johnson. Players like Zimmerman, Leake, Latos could be parts of the team in 2015, but more importantly for several years following that.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 2, 2014 19:31:37 GMT -5
I lean towards making Workman and Barnes relievers even next year. Having RDLR, Webster, Rodriguez. Owens, Wright as starter depth. Ranaudo, Escobar, Johnson, as trade options. Trade Cespedes for a good reliever and a prospect or 2. That solves a lot of problems next year and keeps our cash available to sign a Lester, Panda, Liriano type combination in free agency. That spends $55 maybe, has 8-$10 mil left for July deals and probably solves our reliever issues and back up catcher issue, Say Jaso for Ranaudo, Escobar and Hembree ( at most ).
Starters:
Lester Buchholz Liriano Kelly Webster/RDLR
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Nov 2, 2014 20:21:06 GMT -5
Agree LavaGuy, in that also I'm quite certain that if he isn't traded, Workman is going to be transitioned to the bull pen next season. On Barnes I think it's a bit early to move him there. He seemed to have turned a corner mid-way through the season in Pawtucket last year, and we should certainly see if that is sustainable.
You mentioned trading Cespedes, and while I'm not opposed to that, I'd be very upset if we traded him for so little a return of a relief pitcher, unless it was a very good reliever with many years of control, or more likely the prospects we got coming back were very high level. Same thing to be said of dealing Ranaudo and Escobar for a back up catcher. Specifically when we could simply re-sign Ross for (likely) less than Jaso would even earn in arbitration next season.
We watched Ranaudo, and saw some of his warts, but he is still roughly a 100-125 prospect in the game, and his floor is very high as a guy who could be a 5th starter or better, particularly in the NL. That is far more valuable in the game than a back up catcher. As an example Jesse Hahn and Alex Torres, both of whom were considerably lower ranked prospects to Ranaudo and Escobar at the time got four years control of Logan Forsythe, six years control of a very good reliever in Brad Boxberger and three other minor league players. Based on their rankings in the game, guys like Ranaudo, Escobar, Barnes, and Webster should return far more than that.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 3, 2014 0:17:27 GMT -5
Agree LavaGuy, in that also I'm quite certain that if he isn't traded, Workman is going to be transitioned to the bull pen next season. On Barnes I think it's a bit early to move him there. He seemed to have turned a corner mid-way through the season in Pawtucket last year, and we should certainly see if that is sustainable. You mentioned trading Cespedes, and while I'm not opposed to that, I'd be very upset if we traded him for so little a return of a relief pitcher, unless it was a very good reliever with many years of control, or more likely the prospects we got coming back were very high level. Same thing to be said of dealing Ranaudo and Escobar for a back up catcher. Specifically when we could simply re-sign Ross for (likely) less than Jaso would even earn in arbitration next season. We watched Ranaudo, and saw some of his warts, but he is still roughly a 100-125 prospect in the game, and his floor is very high as a guy who could be a 5th starter or better, particularly in the NL. That is far more valuable in the game than a back up catcher. As an example Jesse Hahn and Alex Torres, both of whom were considerably lower ranked prospects to Ranaudo and Escobar at the time got four years control of Logan Forsythe, six years control of a very good reliever in Brad Boxberger and three other minor league players. Based on their rankings in the game, guys like Ranaudo, Escobar, Barnes, and Webster should return far more than that. I agree with most of this. However I also think it is time to move Barnes into the bullpen with the intention that he can start sometime down the road. Aka the cardinal plan. As for ranaudo, like holt, he is at max value and should be unloaded this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 3, 2014 6:47:23 GMT -5
Ranaudo is not at max value. If anything, his scuffle in the majors probably means he's a little underrated.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 3, 2014 9:00:44 GMT -5
If he's not at max value he should be. If he did not have a hiccup with the ML team at .481 era and a 4 - 3 w/l record, and, instead lit the place up, he'd be off the table and we'd be debating whether he's the #4 or #5 starter for 2015.
He was IL pitcher of the year for 2014 (.261 era, 14 - 4 w/L) and an All Star selectee. He was also EL pitcher of the year for 2013. That said, I believe he would bring more back if he were traded than, say a Workman or Webster or Barnes. He would be attractive to teams such as CIN, ATL or SDO, to name a few, who are looking for ML ready, cost-controlled starters to slide into the rotation. The Reds, for example, will probably lose one or two regular starters this off-season.
My point is that Ranaudo has a lot of value in the market at this time.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Nov 3, 2014 9:53:13 GMT -5
If he's not at max value he should be. If he did not have a hiccup with the ML team at .481 era and a 4 - 3 w/l record, and, instead lit the place up, he'd be off the table and we'd be debating whether he's the #4 or #5 starter for 2015. He was IL pitcher of the year for 2014 (.261 era, 14 - 4 w/L) and an All Star selectee. He was also EL pitcher of the year for 2013. That said, I believe he would bring more back if he were traded than, say a Workman or Webster or Barnes. He would be attractive to teams such as CIN, ATL or SDO, to name a few, who are looking for ML ready, cost-controlled starters to slide into the rotation. The Reds, for example, will probably lose one or two regular starters this off-season. My point is that Ranaudo has a lot of value in the market at this time. Those numbers you list weren't the problem at all. It's the grotesque 6.89 FIP, and the stats that make up its components: 3.7 BB/9 3.4 K/9 2.3 HR/9 The K/9 was the worst in the majors (30 innings minimum), and the HR/9 was "worsted" only by Ernesto Frieri. He also had the 14th lowest BABIP (.225) of 413 pitchers. That's a small sample size, for sure, and it was at the end of the longest season of his life, but come on. He looked awful, and got lucky with the results. How can you say he has more value than Barnes, and even Webster? Ranaudo could find some success in a massive NL ballpark, maybe, but there are plenty of reasons to doubt his potential as a successful mid-rotation starter.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 3, 2014 10:45:17 GMT -5
Also, being POY means little. Ask Charlie Zink.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 3, 2014 11:00:12 GMT -5
If he's not at max value he should be. If he did not have a hiccup with the ML team at .481 era and a 4 - 3 w/l record, and, instead lit the place up, he'd be off the table and we'd be debating whether he's the #4 or #5 starter for 2015. He was IL pitcher of the year for 2014 (.261 era, 14 - 4 w/L) and an All Star selectee. He was also EL pitcher of the year for 2013. That said, I believe he would bring more back if he were traded than, say a Workman or Webster or Barnes. He would be attractive to teams such as CIN, ATL or SDO, to name a few, who are looking for ML ready, cost-controlled starters to slide into the rotation. The Reds, for example, will probably lose one or two regular starters this off-season. My point is that Ranaudo has a lot of value in the market at this time. Those numbers you list weren't the problem at all. It's the grotesque 6.89 FIP, and the stats that make up its components: 3.7 BB/9 3.4 K/9 2.3 HR/9 The K/9 was the worst in the majors (30 innings minimum), and the HR/9 was "worsted" only by Ernesto Frieri. He also had the 14th lowest BABIP (.225) of 413 pitchers. That's a small sample size, for sure, and it was at the end of the longest season of his life, but come on. He looked awful, and got lucky with the results. How can you say he has more value than Barnes, and even Webster? Ranaudo could find some success in a massive NL ballpark, maybe, but there are plenty of reasons to doubt his potential as a successful mid-rotation starter. Taking your analysis into account, would his value be increased by retaining him in the system? He has a high floor due to his MiL productivity and his ceiling may not get any higher. I'd actually prefer to keep Webster and Barnes and sell high on Ranaudo.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 3, 2014 13:26:10 GMT -5
Sell high on Ranaudo if anyone is buying high, you mean. Because they probably aren't. I'd put him in pen. His stuff could play up if he was sitting 94.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 3, 2014 14:25:13 GMT -5
Sell high on Ranaudo if anyone is buying high, you mean. Because they probably aren't. I'd put him in pen. His stuff could play up if he was sitting 94. As long as he continues to pitch up in the zone, it does not matter where you pitch him, he is going on the dl with sprained neck from turning to watch all the taters.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 3, 2014 22:07:33 GMT -5
I think the Cardinals approach has a lot of merit. It saves a lot of money, which can be used in other areas. It gives prospects some development time, and maybe saves their arms a little. They can always move back into the rotation next year. I'd put RDLR there also but we need some starter depth if we are going to trade a Ranaudo, a Johnson...etc to fill a need in another area. It may well be appropriate to start Barnes in AA (EDIT: AAA) stretched out as well, and sign a Badenhop type just to increase our depth a little more if we are going to trade 2 starters.
Overall, if we are going to optimize 2015 for a win, I really think we have to trade some prospect talent. $50 mil is not going to get it done.
|
|
|
Post by marshaevelyn on Nov 3, 2014 22:34:57 GMT -5
I concur with the idea of trading some of the farm, and current roster talent for proven upgrades. But I do not see Lester in the rotation, because his pink slip was handed out when his agent was offered 4 years @17.5mil per. Otherwise the Sox brass will look foolish signing him for 6 @ 26 mil per. Cherington will put on a bidding "dog and pony show" for the fan base, but I don't see Jon returning.
|
|
|
Post by supersquid on Nov 4, 2014 7:01:53 GMT -5
Personally I see Johnson and Owens as the only potential ''sell high" arms in our stable (excluding RDLR)
|
|
|