|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 31, 2015 8:41:45 GMT -5
This reminds me of the cripple fight on South Park.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Mar 31, 2015 16:20:29 GMT -5
Hm, I missed that Quintero is on a minor league contract. Does he have an opt-out? Haven't heard of one ... would be shocked if he does. He has no real value unless he's AAA depth (and possible Swihart mentor) with a "break glass in case of emergency" role for the major league team. Well ... color me shocked! From Speier's 108 Stitches today: By the way, the whole dispatch today is classic Speier. I mentioned yesterday how I liked him because he didn't go in for the cheap and easy "controversy" so many writers do. But I also like him for stuff like this headline in today's newsletter:
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 31, 2015 17:53:39 GMT -5
Herald reported earlier today that he accepted the retention bonus. Still has 6/1 opt-out.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 31, 2015 19:06:24 GMT -5
Herald reported earlier today that he accepted the retention bonus. Still has 6/1 opt-out. There seemed to be some consideration of the fact that there were not other teams in need at this time.....and 100K is 100K....but I wouldn't be surprised if there were other guarantees that wont be reported. It seems to me that he could have received....at the very least....more money. Unless the rules don't allow that.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 31, 2015 23:31:30 GMT -5
The whole point is that all players are tradable if the trade improves the organization. In this case the Nationals had two similar players and could only keep one. Though Lobaton is more experienced.....if (Player X + Leon) > than Lobaton you would expect the Nationals to make that trade. Player X is obviously far less valuable than Mike Trout. Trying to trade for the backup catcher of the team projected to have the most wins in baseball is an exercise in futility/stupidity. They aren't going to weaken a spot on the team without another team massively overpaying and that isn't going to happen for any backup catcher. Based on who is offered, there's a point where trading Lobaton instead of Leon becomes smart for the Nationals. And nearly all of the time, that is precisely the point where the trade becomes stupid for the other team. Backup catcher isn't surrounded by enough context to make the player involved have sufficiently different values to the two teams. Now, this instance happens to be an exception. But it's backwards. In order to find a deal that makes sense for both clubs, the upgrade from Leon to Lobaton for us would have to be worth more than the downgrade from Lobaton to Leon would be for the Nats. The only thing that alters their values would be the best AAA alternative. So, if they had Swihart at AAA and we didn't, maybe there would be a deal that would make sense. But since we have Swihart, the delta-value is actually bigger for them than us.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Apr 1, 2015 18:25:53 GMT -5
@jmastrodonato: Vazquez will have TJ surgery tomorrow by Dr. James Andrews in Florida. On the bright side, that puts him on track to be ready for 2016.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Apr 1, 2015 20:13:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 1, 2015 21:50:15 GMT -5
Trying to trade for the backup catcher of the team projected to have the most wins in baseball is an exercise in futility/stupidity. They aren't going to weaken a spot on the team without another team massively overpaying and that isn't going to happen for any backup catcher. Based on who is offered, there's a point where trading Lobaton instead of Leon becomes smart for the Nationals. And nearly all of the time, that is precisely the point where the trade becomes stupid for the other team. Backup catcher isn't surrounded by enough context to make the player involved have sufficiently different values to the two teams. Now, this instance happens to be an exception. But it's backwards. In order to find a deal that makes sense for both clubs, the upgrade from Leon to Lobaton for us would have to be worth more than the downgrade from Lobaton to Leon would be for the Nats. The only thing that alters their values would be the best AAA alternative. So, if they had Swihart at AAA and we didn't, maybe there would be a deal that would make sense. But since we have Swihart, the delta-value is actually bigger for them than us. It's important to note with the Nats isn that the dropoff from Lobaton to Leon is more magnified for a few reasons. First off, the Nationls are a contender, so marginal wins are extremely important. Secondly, Wilson Ramos's health history is pretty spotty. He's gotten to 400 plate appearances just once, an it was back in 2011. To add to that, the Nats don't have a ton of places they can obviously upgrade the big league club. In terms of overall value, sure the Red Sox have plenty of pieces that can make up the difference between Leon and Lobaton. But do they have they piece available that could make up that difference this year? I really don't see it.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Apr 2, 2015 5:57:12 GMT -5
Hey if Jim can make statements without any evidence to back up his claims I am perfectly capable of doing the same. You want me to prove that overpaying for backup catchers on well positioned teams doesn't happen? Nope just present evidence and reasoning to back up your claim as Eric did. As opposed to implying that The Nationals pennant hopes would be crushed if they traded Lobaton which of course isn't reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Apr 2, 2015 6:38:22 GMT -5
Based on who is offered, there's a point where trading Lobaton instead of Leon becomes smart for the Nationals. And nearly all of the time, that is precisely the point where the trade becomes stupid for the other team. Backup catcher isn't surrounded by enough context to make the player involved have sufficiently different values to the two teams. Now, this instance happens to be an exception. But it's backwards. In order to find a deal that makes sense for both clubs, the upgrade from Leon to Lobaton for us would have to be worth more than the downgrade from Lobaton to Leon would be for the Nats. The only thing that alters their values would be the best AAA alternative. So, if they had Swihart at AAA and we didn't, maybe there would be a deal that would make sense. But since we have Swihart, the delta-value is actually bigger for them than us. It's important to note with the Nats isn that the dropoff from Lobaton to Leon is more magnified for a few reasons. First off, the Nationls are a contender, so marginal wins are extremely important. Secondly, Wilson Ramos's health history is pretty spotty. He's gotten to 400 plate appearances just once, an it was back in 2011. To add to that, the Nats don't have a ton of places they can obviously upgrade the big league club. In terms of overall value, sure the Red Sox have plenty of pieces that can make up the difference between Leon and Lobaton. But do they have they piece available that could make up that difference this year? I really don't see it. [ I don't think the difference is all that much. In fact I am not even convinced that Lobaton given his increased age and salary is the more valuable player. One possibility might have been for the Red Sox to use the trade as an opportunity to open up a 40 man spot for Eveland.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Apr 2, 2015 6:41:09 GMT -5
Herald reported earlier today that he accepted the retention bonus. Still has 6/1 opt-out. And I believe he would get another 100k if he were to accept that. 100k to a fringe major leaguer can be a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 2, 2015 8:56:34 GMT -5
This reminds me of the cripple fight on South Park. TIMMAAAY
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 2, 2015 9:04:20 GMT -5
It never happens because it's rare that a team has a third catcher who is out of options and is very similar to their backup catcher. I fail to see how replacing your backup catcher with a similar player creates much of a weakness at all. You make it sound like they are replacing Bryce Harper with Daniel Nava. I love how your stance on this is "just because it rarely if ever happens doesn't mean it won't." Yet your stance on the Sox relying on Owens or Rodriguez to possibly be a fifth starter down the stretch is "no way it's never happened so it won't."
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Apr 2, 2015 9:22:38 GMT -5
I thought we should have some sort of tribute to Vazquez's UCL, you were far too young. We will miss you.
I didn't create that highlight, but it's pretty cool that it came from a 55 game MLB sample size.
Anyways, I find it interesting about all the doubt that surrounds a pitcher who gets TJ, but there isn't much discussion on the effect it may have on Vazquez. As you can see in the above video his arm is a big part of his value.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2015 9:24:32 GMT -5
It's important to note with the Nats isn that the dropoff from Lobaton to Leon is more magnified for a few reasons. First off, the Nationls are a contender, so marginal wins are extremely important. Secondly, Wilson Ramos's health history is pretty spotty. He's gotten to 400 plate appearances just once, an it was back in 2011. To add to that, the Nats don't have a ton of places they can obviously upgrade the big league club. In terms of overall value, sure the Red Sox have plenty of pieces that can make up the difference between Leon and Lobaton. But do they have they piece available that could make up that difference this year? I really don't see it. [ I don't think the difference is all that much. In fact I am not even convinced that Lobaton given his increased age and salary is the more valuable player. One possibility might have been for the Red Sox to use the trade as an opportunity to open up a 40 man spot for Eveland. Well for you, the difference is enough that we're talking about him because you preferred him in a trade. Either there is a big enough difference that it wouldn't make sense for the Nationals to trade him or there is little enough difference that taking Leon for free is the no-brainer move.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2015 9:27:29 GMT -5
You want me to prove that overpaying for backup catchers on well positioned teams doesn't happen? Nope just present evidence and reasoning to back up your claim as Eric did. As opposed to implying that The Nationals pennant hopes would be crushed if they traded Lobaton which of course isn't reasonable. Is that what I'm implying? Or is it that they probably don't want to give up a half win?
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Apr 2, 2015 9:31:06 GMT -5
It never happens because it's rare that a team has a third catcher who is out of options and is very similar to their backup catcher. I fail to see how replacing your backup catcher with a similar player creates much of a weakness at all. You make it sound like they are replacing Bryce Harper with Daniel Nava. I love how your stance on this is "just because it rarely if ever happens doesn't mean it won't." Yet your stance on the Sox relying on Owens or Rodriguez to possibly be a fifth starter down the stretch is "no way it's never happened so it won't." yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Apr 2, 2015 9:32:34 GMT -5
Nope just present evidence and reasoning to back up your claim as Eric did. As opposed to implying that The Nationals pennant hopes would be crushed if they traded Lobaton which of course isn't reasonable. Is that what I'm implying? Or is it that they probably don't want to give up a half win? I sincerely doubt the difference is even that. In fact I think you could argue that there is no real difference between the two players.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Apr 2, 2015 9:40:41 GMT -5
[ I don't think the difference is all that much. In fact I am not even convinced that Lobaton given his increased age and salary is the more valuable player. One possibility might have been for the Red Sox to use the trade as an opportunity to open up a 40 man spot for Eveland. Well for you, the difference is enough that we're talking about him because you preferred him in a trade. Either there is a big enough difference that it wouldn't make sense for the Nationals to trade him or there is little enough difference that taking Leon for free is the no-brainer move. You are assuming that he's equally valuable to both teams and that's almost never true. The Red Sox don't have Ramos, or Dan Butler for that matter so they might have more of a preference for a slightly more experienced player. Had they given up say Hembree for Lobaton to get them some more experience, give the Nats some more pen depth, while opening up a 40 man spot for Eveland, I would have understood that. I can understand why you wouldn't want to do something like too but it's certainly not a no-brainer. Plus how can we forget that this IS that Jose Lobaton.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Apr 2, 2015 9:55:51 GMT -5
I'm wondering, how do you know Lobaton wasn't discussed? I have no insight into how teams actually discuss trades, but I tend to think the Brad Pitt style of 30 second phone calls where they make they make the deal instantly isn't accurate. I lean more towards thinking that the front office discusses internally a very wide scope of possibilities throughout the year. We really don't know if the Sox preferred Leon over Lobaton at the same price. I'd imagine that the Nationals were not the only team the Red Sox talked to, that this wasn't the first time they talked to the Nationals about potential trades, and that during this discussion, Lobatone, Leon, and Butler were all discussed to some extent.
I don't think anyone is trying say that Lobaton was untouchable, I think they are saying that the price for Lobaton doesn't make sense while Leon was available for cash. Altering your equation earlier, the Sox probably thought
(Leon + Player(s)x) > (Lobaton + Cash)
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 2, 2015 10:14:32 GMT -5
This thread has been derailed enough. If you want to continue discussing this Lobaton/Leon counterfactual, please feel free to start a topic in the Throwdown Subforum on the subject. I will be deleting any future posts on that topic in this thread. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 2, 2015 10:18:19 GMT -5
Anyways, I find it interesting about all the doubt that surrounds a pitcher who gets TJ With the rising success rates of TJ surgery, this one almost belongs in the "talking heads gotta talk" category nowadays. Unfortunately I'm not aware of any studies on the effect of TJ surgery on pitch framing. As for throwing runners out, isn't that more a matter of awareness/reaction time, changing stance quickly and accuracy more than sheer throwing strength? For a pitcher, losing 3 mph on his fastball could be career-ending, but for a catcher?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2015 10:21:39 GMT -5
Does anyone know how hard Vazquez throws? I think he relies more on his hand and feet quickness a lot more than the velocity of his throws.
It will be interesting to see what happens next spring in the battle between Vazquez and Swihart.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 2, 2015 10:53:59 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see what happens next spring in the battle between Vazquez and Swihart. Are spring training battles a thing now? Someone tell Shane!
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Apr 2, 2015 11:10:25 GMT -5
Vazquez has such a strong arm I think he'll be fine, even if he loses a little zip in his throws. Losing a year of hitting development is more of a concern to me.
On a one person sample. My nephew is a catcher in college who had Tommy John 2 years ago. They did discourage him from making the snap throws from his knees. Vazquez likes to do that, no idea if they discourage that throw for mlb catcher's with tj.
|
|