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.
Poll: Starting Pitching now and Future
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 10, 2014 10:04:53 GMT -5
With Lester off the table, what do the Sox do to address their SP needs for 2015 and beyond?
A.) Trade high level prospects and/or make offers to FA to acquire established starting pitching in order to make the 2015
postseason?
B.) Considering all the young pitching talent that is either ML ready or on the doorstep, insert those who
stand out in ST as #3,4,5 starters and hope for the best?
C.) Make second tier acquisitions to the starting staff and wait till next offseason when lots of quality arms will be available as free
agents?
I'm curious because there seems to be a divergence of opinion whether the Sox should hoard their young talent, see what t,hey can do in 2015, and weed out those you want to keep and those they need to trade vs. those who feel that the roster, as assembled can win it all this year if the right pitchers are acquired.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 10, 2014 16:37:38 GMT -5
The answer I'd pick, which is the one most often discussed here, is not offered as an option. And that's "Trade surplus and blocked talent for a rental or rentals, possibly sign a shorter term FA, and re-evaluate in a year."
Your option A really only refers to Hamels, because it will not take multiple "high-level prospects" to land even Cueto, not when we have Cespedes to start the offer with.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Dec 10, 2014 16:39:14 GMT -5
The answer I'd pick, which is the one most often discussed here, is not offered as an option. And that's "Trade surplus talent for a rental or rentals, possibly sign a shorter term FA, and re-evaluate in a year." Your option A really only refers to Hamels, because it will not take multiple "high-level prospects" to land even Cueto, not when we have Cespedes to start the offer with. +1 |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 10, 2014 18:58:38 GMT -5
I still and have always thought they sign at least one FA and trade for a second arm on a one-year deal using Cespedes and high-minors surplus. Not sure that's really an option here.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871 
|
Post by danr on Dec 10, 2014 19:14:28 GMT -5
I picked number 1 even though the way the question is worded is a little too vague. What are "high level" prospects? I wouldn't trade Betts, Bogaerts, Swihart, or Devers. There still are quite a few extremely good prospects who could be traded. I would try to trade for Cueto or Zimmermann, and if there still was a match, Porcello. I then would try to sign Shields. The end result of my plan is three exceptional pitchers. I would try to trade Buchholz in one of these deals.
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousle on Dec 10, 2014 19:41:31 GMT -5
It's a bind, but fixable. I plugged option 3, I think you have to sign 1 and trade for 1. I don't think you're going to get an ace now, that may come later in the year, but for now you have to bring in someone like Masterson or Shields (more probable in my view) and then use Cespedes and lower tier prospects to secure Ian Kennedy or Iwakuma from Seattle.
A challenge you still have is that the young arms (De La Rosa, Webster, Raunado, Barnes, Owens) are not known commodities, there's really no knowing how they'll turn out and I don't think you will know until mid next year. (Just for clarity I think Webster has the better potential to be a starter and possibly good enough to be a number 2 due to the number of pitches he can throw, I've been very disappointed in Raunado and I think you have to find him a fly ball park like Oakland, Seattle or San Diego. They still must figure this group out because Buch is going next year and you're going to have to replace him.....they have to make some of these guys count.
Look, TBay is in a mess, Baltimore has taken a huge step back, the MFY have a number of problems....and well Toronto...So the Sox could win the division with less. I hate to say it, but your ace comes next off season if and when they can get their hands on Cueto, Pfister, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousle on Dec 10, 2014 19:43:22 GMT -5
Oh, I don't think any team can afford to trade high level prospects, including the Sox, so no to trading Betts, Swihart, Owens, Margot, Devers.....if you want to trade Raunado, Marrero, Coyle...feel free....but you're not getting an ace for those assets, maybe a 3 or 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjb406 on Dec 10, 2014 20:34:02 GMT -5
C is definately the worst option, you are just creating more roster congestion without the benefit of significantly improving the team. You need to look at each guy and decide if you are willing to give them playing time, and if you are not, then get what you can for them. By stashing them in AAA until they get picked up on waivers, aren't helping anyone except the athletics.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Dec 10, 2014 20:35:11 GMT -5
So be it....Stay the course with our prospects.
|
|
|
|
Post by cambos174 on Dec 10, 2014 20:45:46 GMT -5
Sign Shields 4/84, trade for Fister (prospect package- which, if other deals are the par...can be a pile of crap), and trade for Porcello (Cespedes package).
Move Rubby to the pen.
Shields
Fister
Buch
Porcello
Kelly
Probably not going to light the world on fire, but is plenty good enough and deep enough to be the favorites in the East.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,824
|
Post by nomar on Dec 10, 2014 21:08:18 GMT -5
My gut tells me one of Cueto or Zimmermann end up here
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by ianrs on Dec 10, 2014 21:19:36 GMT -5
I say sign one, trade for one. I'm guessing we sign Shields and trade for one of Cueto/Latos/Porcello/Zimmerman/Fister.
No matter what (unless ridiculous names are involved, such as Trout, Harper, Stanton, Sale, etc.), I hold onto Betts/Bogaerts/Swihart.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 10, 2014 21:39:31 GMT -5
Sign Shields and then take the best deal you can get for a package of Cespedes and three or four non-elite prospects - the Coyles, Marreros, Cecchinis Workmans, Websters,Renaudos. That should leave enough money for Masterson on a pillow contract.
Rotation: Shields, trade acquisition, Masterson, RDLR, Clay.
Kelly goes to the pen and the best of the quadruple A-type pitchers still in the organization is the sixth starter. That could be someone like Wright or Barnes.
That would be a competitive staff and give Owens, Johnson and EdRod another year to develop. It could also snag us a couple of picks in the 2016 draft. The trade acquisition and Masty might merit QOs and bring 1S picks.
|
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 12, 2014 8:19:43 GMT -5
There you have it; 63% voting for option C, acquiring second tier starters while keeping your top prospects. With Miley, Porcello and Masterson added to Buchholz and Kelly you have a five man rotation. And we didn't have to relinquish any of our top prospects. Webster and De La Rosa were graduated prospects.
Sure, we don't have an "Ace", but how many teams do? Baltimore, for example had an outstanding season until the ALCS and didn't have an "Ace" on its roster. Tillman was its best pitcher and I wouldn't characterize him as such. Heck, even until last year, there was a discussion here as to whether Lester is a true Ace. I consider the likes of Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer, Wainwright, Felix, Bumgarner, Cueto, Hamels as true aces, guys you can count on a stoppers, who can win you twenty games or so in a season. Shields was not an ace with Tampa. My point is you can contend without one.
Miley, Buchholz and Porcello all have won sixteen games at one time. No reason why they can't do it again with the lineup the Sox will have. Kelly can win you sixteen. And Masterson, who will be the #5 starter, could rebound and give you 12. So it is wise for Ben to hold onto to his treasure chest of young prospects at least for now. After next season he will have a stable of better developed arms with a full season at AAA and facing a Free Agent class that could potentially have lots of top of the rotation starters.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Dec 12, 2014 8:52:41 GMT -5
There you have it; 63% voting for option C, acquiring second tier starters while keeping your top prospects. With Miley, Porcello and Masterson added to Buchholz and Kelly you have a five man rotation. And we didn't have to relinquish any of our top prospects. Webster and De La Rosa were graduated prospects. Sure, we don't have an "Ace", but how many teams do? Baltimore, for example had an outstanding season until the ALCS and didn't have an "Ace" on its roster. Tillman was its best pitcher and I wouldn't characterize him as such. Heck, even until last year, there was a discussion here as to whether Lester is a true Ace. I consider the likes of Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer, Wainwright, Felix, Bumgarner, Cueto, Hamels as true aces, guys you can count on a stoppers, who can win you twenty games or so in a season. Shields was not an ace with Tampa. My point is you can contend without one. Miley, Buchholz and Porcello all have won sixteen games at one time. No reason why they can't do it again with the lineup the Sox will have. Kelly can win you sixteen. And Masterson, who will be the #5 starter, could rebound and give you 12. So it is wise for Ben to hold onto to his treasure chest of young prospects at least for now. After next season he will have a stable of better developed arms with a full season at AAA and facing a Free Agent class that could potentially have lots of top of the rotation starters. Why the hell are we using wins for predictive value? |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 12, 2014 9:15:33 GMT -5
I like the direction the Sox have taken, option C, so far since we lost out on Lester.
1. Young talent with projectable floors and decent ceilings.
2. Innings eaters who didn't cost too much.
3. Ground ball pitchers in Fenway with a good defensive infield. Hopefully with an improved XB at short with offseason work.
4. Cost affective.
5. Possibly most importantly . Gives Sox the opportunity to pick up an ACE midseason. With all the prospects in the system the Sox can make a big move based on how the season is progressing. If any of the following JBJ, Marrero, Coyle, Cachenni etc. hit well in AAA there value will be higher than what it is right now. Especially JBJ and DM who I feel both will have very good MLB careers. The Sox should have one of the best AAA teams I have ever seen. This all leads to options.
|
|
|
|
Post by geostorm on Dec 12, 2014 10:26:52 GMT -5
I like the direction the Sox have taken, option C, so far since we lost out on Lester. 1. Young talent with projectable floors and decent ceilings. 2. Innings eaters who didn't cost too much. 3. Ground ball pitchers in Fenway with a good defensive infield. Hopefully with an improved XB at short with offseason work. 4. Cost affective. 5. Possibly most importantly . Gives Sox the opportunity to pick up an ACE midseason. With all the prospects in the system the Sox can make a big move based on how the season is progressing. If any of the following JBJ, Marrero, Coyle, Cachenni etc. hit well in AAA there value will be higher than what it is right now. Especially JBJ and DM who I feel both will have very good MLB careers. The Sox should have one of the best AAA teams I have ever seen. This all leads to options. or, worst case, the opportunity. - if able to rehab Masterson, and Porcello continues on his current developemtnal trajectory - if the Red Sox are not contending at the trade deadline, to evaluate whether there's a better return for either, in trade, as compared their valuation of QO and comp pick route. On the comment regarding the 2015 Pawsox - as a native RIer, the projected opening day roster looks as strong on paper, as any AAA Red Sox team I've had a chance to see here in my backyard...and likely not a coincidence Boston reportedly is purchasing the AAA franchise. Probably have to go back to their days when the franchise was Louisville in the 70s to have that depth of talent in their AAA club. I'd actually like to see the Sox work around trading any of the top pitching, this season, and prefer to take a view of how they look at the end of NEXT off-season, towards them setting up their pitching staff for sustained excellence, of 4-6 years or so, going forward. Towards that end, my ideal 2015, would have the Sox contending, w/ balanced rotation, backed by a strong BP, solid defense, and deep balanced hitting attack. That Masterson has a good enough year to qualify for a QO (if that's even possible), or to be flipped at the deadline...Porcello continues his current trajectory, and either is upped, on a reasonable deal at year end, or garners a comp pick...Buchholz pitches well enough to make those option years of his seem good value in trade or hold...Kelly flourishes in his first full year as a SP... ...and that the young arms get a chance to develop further, esp at AAA, and come next off-season, from a pitching evaluation and acquisition perspective, the Red Sox have max options and depth & financial flexibility in a 2015 off-season where there's anticipated significant SP FA depth, another developmental year for ERod/HOwens/BJohnson esp, whether SWright can be a viable SP, and a settling out on Ranaudo/Barnes fit. So I'll of course be pulling for a 2015 playoff run, but I'm also very interested in looking at the narrative, this season through next off-season...IMO, what they do now through then RE pitching will set them up for the 2016-2019-20 or so, and that they're very well positioned to put themselves in a very strong position. I don't know exactly how they'll get there...but they are, IMO, well positioned to be able to accomplish that. |
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 12, 2014 11:12:32 GMT -5
5. Possibly most importantly . Gives Sox the opportunity to pick up an ACE midseason. |
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 12, 2014 11:37:18 GMT -5
There you have it; 63% voting for option C, acquiring second tier starters while keeping your top prospects. With Miley, Porcello and Masterson added to Buchholz and Kelly you have a five man rotation. And we didn't have to relinquish any of our top prospects. Webster and De La Rosa were graduated prospects. Sure, we don't have an "Ace", but how many teams do? Baltimore, for example had an outstanding season until the ALCS and didn't have an "Ace" on its roster. Tillman was its best pitcher and I wouldn't characterize him as such. Heck, even until last year, there was a discussion here as to whether Lester is a true Ace. I consider the likes of Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer, Wainwright, Felix, Bumgarner, Cueto, Hamels as true aces, guys you can count on a stoppers, who can win you twenty games or so in a season. Shields was not an ace with Tampa. My point is you can contend without one. Miley, Buchholz and Porcello all have won sixteen games at one time. No reason why they can't do it again with the lineup the Sox will have. Kelly can win you sixteen. And Masterson, who will be the #5 starter, could rebound and give you 12. So it is wise for Ben to hold onto to his treasure chest of young prospects at least for now. After next season he will have a stable of better developed arms with a full season at AAA and facing a Free Agent class that could potentially have lots of top of the rotation starters. Why the hell are we using wins for predictive value? It's just one factor, sox fan. Number of starts and innings pitched is another. |
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Dec 12, 2014 12:17:26 GMT -5
There you have it; 63% voting for option C, acquiring second tier starters while keeping your top prospects. With Miley, Porcello and Masterson added to Buchholz and Kelly you have a five man rotation. And we didn't have to relinquish any of our top prospects. Webster and De La Rosa were graduated prospects. Sure, we don't have an "Ace", but how many teams do? Baltimore, for example had an outstanding season until the ALCS and didn't have an "Ace" on its roster. Tillman was its best pitcher and I wouldn't characterize him as such. Heck, even until last year, there was a discussion here as to whether Lester is a true Ace. I consider the likes of Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer, Wainwright, Felix, Bumgarner, Cueto, Hamels as true aces, guys you can count on a stoppers, who can win you twenty games or so in a season. Shields was not an ace with Tampa. My point is you can contend without one. Miley, Buchholz and Porcello all have won sixteen games at one time. No reason why they can't do it again with the lineup the Sox will have. Kelly can win you sixteen. And Masterson, who will be the #5 starter, could rebound and give you 12. So it is wise for Ben to hold onto to his treasure chest of young prospects at least for now. After next season he will have a stable of better developed arms with a full season at AAA and facing a Free Agent class that could potentially have lots of top of the rotation starters. Why the hell are we using wins for predictive value? This is an easy one. Using the new highly analytical thought process formula developed for all baseball internet forums. Wins + (replacement cost) = > PO(v) thus > Loss + (RC X PO X(a) Thus formula translation to Many Wins + replacemnt value (throwing hat in the air at bar and losing it for just a pair of kisses of hot chick next to you) which equals making the playoffs thus this total value is greater than many loses which equal no play offs plus the added highly expensive cost of the value of a beer mug in the back bar mirror and the free ride to the hooskow. Italicized for those who don't have much sense > humor.  |
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Dec 13, 2014 12:15:18 GMT -5
Why the hell are we using wins for predictive value? It's just one factor, sox fan. Number of starts and innings pitched is another. No its not 1 factor, it means nothing |
|
|
