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 acquire LHP Drew Pomeranz for RHP Anderson Espinoza
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 29, 2016 12:13:31 GMT -5
My original comment you were responding to was a comparison between trading for Montgomery vs trading for Miller (since here in the Chicago area everyone keeps bringing up that name and Theo himself brought up that name). So was it unreasonable for me to expect that even if you did not mention Miller I would think there was a mutual understanding that by "proven closer" we meant Miller? The second point is where you and I differ in opinions significantly. See, even if I "felt" Miller was the missing piece to winning a title, I would not give up Schwarber for Miller. Mainly, because I'm in the camp that the postseason is a big crapshoot (even if not entirely) and it's better to have several good chances to win it all than to have one great chance. And yes, Arrieta being so good right now and only under control for one more year I can see why some people around here think their window is closing. Sorry to everyone else that we've gone so off-topic here. In your original post you said Theo could have gone after proven closer or something of that ilk. So no I don't think it's fair to just assume you were talking about Miller. Miller could help give you three good chances at title. While Cubs have a lot of talent your Ace is going to be a free agent in a year, Lester is getting older and Lackey is old. This could easily be your best chance at title. I really hate the attitude of not wanting to go for it. "Going for it" doesn't have nearly the success rate you seem to think. It's actually kind of like cashing in your retirement account, paying the 10% penalty plus the hit in income tax, and taking it to the casino, figuring you'll be set for life. Usually you go home with empty pockets and a whole new set of problems in the future.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 29, 2016 12:18:54 GMT -5
Why do you think the Red Sox got a steal? It's fine to think they do, but why? Isn't it possible Pomeranz is just so-so, and not very impactful and Espinoza blossoms into a very good pitcher down the road? Do you think Espinoza is nothing more than a lottery ticket and Pomeranz is the next Kershaw waiting to happen? Why is it a steal? We gave up one prospect 3-5 years away from the big leagues who's not even having a good year for a lefty who was an all star this year. We didn't have to add anything else to this deal. 1 prospect for an all star. You don't make the all star team in your prime age as a fluke. Dude has the 4th highest spin ratio on his pitches in all of baseball. He's a stud who needed to add a pitch which he did a cutter. He's tall and has a smooth delivery. His curveball is untouchable at times and makes his fastball look like its 100mph. He's only making 1.4 million. He's proven. He can help this team now and next year. AE might be a bust he might be stud but we needed another starter so badly and we got one who was just in the all-star game heads up for our 3rd best prospect who is still in A ball. Based on the going rate for starters, Dombrowski got a "steal." Now, I'm sure there were a lot of Dutch noblemen in the 1600s who thought they were getting a "steal" when the bought rare tulips at wildly inflated prices. So only time will tell whether or not this deal was a "good" one. But DD certainly looks to have struck quickly and avoided the market premium.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 29, 2016 12:21:52 GMT -5
We gave up one prospect 3-5 years away from the big leagues who's not even having a good year for a lefty who was an all star this year. We didn't have to add anything else to this deal. 1 prospect for an all star. You don't make the all star team in your prime age as a fluke. Dude has the 4th highest spin ratio on his pitches in all of baseball. He's a stud who needed to add a pitch which he did a cutter. He's tall and has a smooth delivery. His curveball is untouchable at times and makes his fastball look like its 100mph. He's only making 1.4 million. He's proven. He can help this team now and next year. AE might be a bust he might be stud but we needed another starter so badly and we got one who was just in the all-star game heads up for our 3rd best prospect who is still in A ball. Based on the going rate for starters, Dombrowski got a "steal." Now, I'm sure there were a lot of Dutch noblemen in the 1600s who thought they were getting a "steal" when the bought rare tulips at wildly inflated prices. So only time will tell whether or not this deal was a "good" one. But DD certainly looks to have struck quickly and avoided the market premium. I also think he has greatly helped set the market to its current ridiculous level.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Jul 29, 2016 12:23:43 GMT -5
Based on the going rate for starters, Dombrowski got a "steal." Now, I'm sure there were a lot of Dutch noblemen in the 1600s who thought they were getting a "steal" when the bought rare tulips at wildly inflated prices. So only time will tell whether or not this deal was a "good" one. But DD certainly looks to have struck quickly and avoided the market premium. I also think he has greatly helped set the market to its current ridiculous level. It's been a genius preamble to our next rebuild.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 29, 2016 14:51:10 GMT -5
Based on the going rate for starters, Dombrowski got a "steal." Now, I'm sure there were a lot of Dutch noblemen in the 1600s who thought they were getting a "steal" when the bought rare tulips at wildly inflated prices. So only time will tell whether or not this deal was a "good" one. But DD certainly looks to have struck quickly and avoided the market premium. I also think he has greatly helped set the market to its current ridiculous level. Almost guaranteed. If Pomeranz pitches well tonight, can they flip him for double the return?
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jul 29, 2016 14:58:35 GMT -5
“@jonheyman: orioles would have had to give up gausman to get pmoeranz. can see why they said no. still looking for SP.”
|
|
fenwayfaithful
Rookie
A prospect is fun to watch, but trading him for a sure thing in the Majors is never a losing deal.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fenwayfaithful on Jul 29, 2016 17:10:08 GMT -5
I still can't believe why people are not happy with this trade. I really can't fathom. An 18 year old who's not even shutting down single A ball for an all-star lefty 27 years old in his prime who was once a first round pick. STRAIGHT UP! This is highway robbery and I'm sure San Diego fans are pissed off and we arnt even thankful. So annoying.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on Jul 29, 2016 17:24:00 GMT -5
I still can't believe why people are not happy with this trade. I really can't fathom. An 18 year old who's not even shutting down single A ball for an all-star lefty 27 years old in his prime who was once a first round pick. STRAIGHT UP! This is highway robbery and I'm sure San Diego fans are pissed off and we arnt even thankful. So annoying. At least the Padres got someone you can dream on. You know who should be really pissed? The Indians fans for giving up Steven Wright for Lars Anderson. You know who else should be pissed? The O's fans for giving up ERod for two months of Andrew Miller. See, those are what I consider a true "highway robbery".
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 29, 2016 19:22:08 GMT -5
I still can't believe why people are not happy with this trade. I really can't fathom. An 18 year old who's not even shutting down single A ball for an all-star lefty 27 years old in his prime who was once a first round pick. STRAIGHT UP! This is highway robbery and I'm sure San Diego fans are pissed off and we arnt even thankful. So annoying. First off, being 18 and in A ball is a rarity in itself. Youngest player in the league. Much better FIP/xFIP (the real indicators of how he's pitched) than ERA. For an "All-Star" (Scott Cooper was one, too), who's had a couple of OK seasons in relief and a good half-season as a starter. "Former first-round pick?" That's as important as "highest bonus given to a pitcher in his IFA class." And he's only got two years of control after this one. Not a terrible trade, but not an especially great one, either. I don't like it, but they've made worse.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 29, 2016 20:39:27 GMT -5
In your original post you said Theo could have gone after proven closer or something of that ilk. So no I don't think it's fair to just assume you were talking about Miller. Miller could help give you three good chances at title. While Cubs have a lot of talent your Ace is going to be a free agent in a year, Lester is getting older and Lackey is old. This could easily be your best chance at title. I really hate the attitude of not wanting to go for it. "Going for it" doesn't have nearly the success rate you seem to think. It's actually kind of like cashing in your retirement account, paying the 10% penalty plus the hit in income tax, and taking it to the casino, figuring you'll be set for life. Usually you go home with empty pockets and a whole new set of problems in the future. For a team like the Cubs it makes sense. I never mentioned anything about success rate. Miller improves your chance, fixes their biggest issue with one if not best reliever in game.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 29, 2016 20:56:23 GMT -5
Based on the going rate for starters, Dombrowski got a "steal." Now, I'm sure there were a lot of Dutch noblemen in the 1600s who thought they were getting a "steal" when the bought rare tulips at wildly inflated prices. So only time will tell whether or not this deal was a "good" one. But DD certainly looks to have struck quickly and avoided the market premium. I also think he has greatly helped set the market to its current ridiculous level. Let's play your game, what is your problem with that? Are you reserving your right to criticize the move down the road? After the panic on the board here that was shameful I'd like to think the masses have come to see what it was, a good present move that has the possibility to hurt down the road, aka a move you make.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 29, 2016 23:38:33 GMT -5
"Going for it" doesn't have nearly the success rate you seem to think. It's actually kind of like cashing in your retirement account, paying the 10% penalty plus the hit in income tax, and taking it to the casino, figuring you'll be set for life. Usually you go home with empty pockets and a whole new set of problems in the future. For a team like the Cubs it makes sense. I never mentioned anything about success rate. Miller improves your chance, fixes their biggest issue with one if not best reliever in game. In addition to Chapman? I mean, Miller over Chapman makes sense because he's got a couple extra years. But there's a point of diminishing returns. I guess I'd agree with you in certain circumstances, and the Cubs are probably one. A great team with basically no holes but the one they're trying to fill makes more sense than a solid but flawed team (like the Sox) giving up big pieces for a better chance at contending. In that instance (an outstanding team with a great young core and a loaded minor league system), "going for it" makes more sense to me. That's kind of why I'd wished the Sox had followed the '15 Cubs blueprint and stood pat. I think they were one year (and one offseason) from getting there. But, again, at some point it's just time to trust the guys you have. Trade away too much talent, and if something catastrophic happens, like a major injury, it's a killer for the next season, too.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 29, 2016 23:47:15 GMT -5
I also think he has greatly helped set the market to its current ridiculous level. Let's play your game, what is your problem with that? Are you reserving your right to criticize the move down the road? After the panic on the board here that was shameful I'd like to think the masses have come to see what it was, a good present move that has the possibility to hurt down the road, aka a move you make. Maybe. I still am not convinced that it really helps them all that much, even in the present. Like the Kimbrel trade, I think there were better alternative courses of action. But, if Pomeranz pitches well and one of Kopech/Owens/Johnson emerges in two years, the Sox get either a comp pick or a big trade return. I still don't like the trade, but I don't entirely disagree with your reasoning, either. At the very least, it (along with Rodriguez getting back in form) answers their rotation questions and gives them a solid to potentially outstanding rotation, and some roster certainty going into the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 30, 2016 0:14:21 GMT -5
The talk about Miller was before Chapman trade.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 30, 2016 0:15:33 GMT -5
"Going for it" doesn't have nearly the success rate you seem to think. It's actually kind of like cashing in your retirement account, paying the 10% penalty plus the hit in income tax, and taking it to the casino, figuring you'll be set for life. Usually you go home with empty pockets and a whole new set of problems in the future. For a team like the Cubs it makes sense. I never mentioned anything about success rate. Miller improves your chance, fixes their biggest issue with one if not best reliever in game. This article argues for your case: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-relievers-correction-or-bubble/
|
|
fenwayfaithful
Rookie
A prospect is fun to watch, but trading him for a sure thing in the Majors is never a losing deal.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fenwayfaithful on Jul 30, 2016 3:32:21 GMT -5
Teams are trading top prospects for rental relief pitchers we traded one for a starter that we desperately need!!!
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on Jul 30, 2016 6:45:31 GMT -5
I still can't believe why people are not happy with this trade. I really can't fathom. An 18 year old who's not even shutting down single A ball for an all-star lefty 27 years old in his prime who was once a first round pick. STRAIGHT UP! This is highway robbery and I'm sure San Diego fans are pissed off and we arnt even thankful. So annoying. First off, being 18 and in A ball is a rarity in itself. Youngest player in the league. Much better FIP/xFIP (the real indicators of how he's pitched) than ERA. For an "All-Star" (Scott Cooper was one, too), who's had a couple of OK seasons in relief and a good half-season as a starter. "Former first-round pick?" That's as important as "highest bonus given to a pitcher in his IFA class." And he's only got two years of control after this one. Not a terrible trade, but not an especially great one, either. I don't like it, but they've made worse. I mean, it's one thing to call the trade a good one. But to call it a "highway robbery" (by the Red Sox) is just swinging the pendulum way too far in the other direction.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,981
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 30, 2016 7:26:50 GMT -5
First off, being 18 and in A ball is a rarity in itself. Youngest player in the league. Much better FIP/xFIP (the real indicators of how he's pitched) than ERA. For an "All-Star" (Scott Cooper was one, too), who's had a couple of OK seasons in relief and a good half-season as a starter. "Former first-round pick?" That's as important as "highest bonus given to a pitcher in his IFA class." And he's only got two years of control after this one. Not a terrible trade, but not an especially great one, either. I don't like it, but they've made worse. I mean, it's one thing to call the trade a good one. But to call it a "highway robbery" (by the Red Sox) is just swinging the pendulum way too far in the other direction. Exaggeration in one direction or another (usually the other) has become the default on this site.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Jul 30, 2016 11:18:43 GMT -5
Thanks for the article telson. I do see on many sites WAR being used on relievers a bit too much. That doesn’t mean I believe WAR isn’t very important. But for a guy like Chapman you’re paying for a degree of assurance. In the article the writer says “Chapman doesn’t help them that much.” But “that much” is the difference between winning playoff games and a world series. Who wins in a deal of value if a team wins a world series? Even getting to the W/S is tremendous.
And while I like many of us thought we gave up too much for Kimbrel – and even now I think he is very overrated and we’d probably need to get lucky to win with him in playoffs as a closer because of his lousy control—but he’s darn good when we’re ahead in the 9th. I’m not a fan of Koji anymore and Taz I thought we should have moved him / not signed him a year ago. Thus we had nothing in the bullpen without Kimbrel. How much value is worth getting into the playoffs and maybe winning one round maybe two while giving up probable non-all -star players like we did?
What I didn’t agree with a small portion in the article is the Pomz deal. He was looking at Pomz “in the moment” in one brief stretch similar to someone looking at relievers value “in the moment.” Looking back at last few champs they had a dominant 1 or a tremendous backend bullpen or a combination such as two to 3 strong starters. The Red Sox past two champs had at least 2 strong starters and an amazing 9th inning closer and a very good 8th inning reliever. While I don’t believe in Kimbrel- that is just a gut feeling due to his lousy control and his too-often meltdowns. But he could be terrific.
But in regards to our starters- Pomeranz gives us another player in-the-mix to be a significant post-season pitcher like we have had in 2013 and 2007 and 2004. Looking at the 2013 team and 2007 team vs this team - we now have four potential top-tier starters. We’ve now increased our chances of having at least two top-tier guys to pitch in the post season. If Pomeranz is a 3 in the mold of Dereck Lowe in 2004 post season and sox make a huge run this year and potentially the next 2, that is bad because of “potential long-term future value trumps the 2-3 years?”
For those of you that hate the trade what’s you answer to the postseason? Steven Wright you have to rely on the weather. How confident are you with ERod as a post season upper tier 1-2-3 starter? So with no Pomeranz we’d have to rely on no hiccups with Price and Porcello. That might be good enough but right now through the acquisition of Pomz we’ve just increased our chances of having a strong postseason staff “even if it rains or is humid.” Plus, more than likely, we can now move ERod post season to the pen. So-- potentially having a very strong starting staff over the next 2 plus years and being a potential contender is “awful/worth hating?”
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 30, 2016 14:48:26 GMT -5
Teams are trading top prospects for rental relief pitchers we traded one for a starter that we desperately need!!! A deserving All-Star whose making peanuts this year and for the next 2 yrs.
I keep hearing people foolishly refer to him as a journeyman. That narrative chooses to ignore facts and comes across as trolling.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jul 30, 2016 22:31:03 GMT -5
Teams are trading top prospects for rental relief pitchers we traded one for a starter that we desperately need!!! A deserving All-Star whose making peanuts this year and for the next 2 yrs.
I keep hearing people foolishly refer to him as a journeyman. That narrative chooses to ignore facts and comes across as trolling. He's really helped the team thus far. He's been on 5 teams and was a pretty big bust. He started this year and had a fantastic half season, and that's it.
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 30, 2016 23:39:22 GMT -5
I mean, it's one thing to call the trade a good one. But to call it a "highway robbery" (by the Red Sox) is just swinging the pendulum way too far in the other direction. Exaggeration in one direction or another (usually the other) has become the default on this site. And it's literally the worst thing in the world.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 31, 2016 9:40:07 GMT -5
I still can't believe why people are not happy with this trade. I really can't fathom. An 18 year old who's not even shutting down single A ball for an all-star lefty 27 years old in his prime who was once a first round pick. STRAIGHT UP! This is highway robbery and I'm sure San Diego fans are pissed off and we arnt even thankful. So annoying. First off, being 18 and in A ball is a rarity in itself. Youngest player in the league. Much better FIP/xFIP (the real indicators of how he's pitched) than ERA. For an "All-Star" (Scott Cooper was one, too), who's had a couple of OK seasons in relief and a good half-season as a starter. "Former first-round pick?" That's as important as "highest bonus given to a pitcher in his IFA class." And he's only got two years of control after this one. Not a terrible trade, but not an especially great one, either. I don't like it, but they've made worse. Are you really comparing Scott bleepin Cooper to Pomeranz, shame on you. Cooper was an all star for one reason and one reason alone, someone had to represent that awful Red Sox team at the game. Pomeranz had been among the top 2 or 3 pitchers in the NL this year and rightly deserved to be there and you know that. That comment is someone either trolling or trying to manipulate the narrative, either way it doesn't belong here. Also pointing out where he got drafted, btw ahead of Sale & Harvey, does have merit. It shows that people whose jobs depend on it and with their own respective pedigrees in baseball valued Pomeranz higher than those other prospects, Sale & Harvey. Does that make it right, no, nor does it make it wrong, the point is people who know more about the game than you or I thought highly enough of him to pick him 5th in the draft. He's 27 not 30, 31 and some players do take longer than others to put it all together. He added a pitch which has turned him into an all-star. Read the Brian Bannister piece about him comparing him highly to Rich Hill except he's 10 years younger and under control for 2 more years. Hill had less of a track record then Pomeranz yet everyone was on board with that move. It was a good move even if AE becomes an ace because of where we are as a team and how far away for MLB AE is. And all the tangibles that go along with those points that have been listed here by many others. You can think that losing AE stinks, I have no problem at all with that (I in fact agree with that), but by now most should have realized it is a move as a GM you should make.
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on Jul 31, 2016 9:56:05 GMT -5
This trade is looking shaky ain't it ?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,665
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 31, 2016 10:08:01 GMT -5
First off, being 18 and in A ball is a rarity in itself. Youngest player in the league. Much better FIP/xFIP (the real indicators of how he's pitched) than ERA. For an "All-Star" (Scott Cooper was one, too), who's had a couple of OK seasons in relief and a good half-season as a starter. "Former first-round pick?" That's as important as "highest bonus given to a pitcher in his IFA class." And he's only got two years of control after this one. Not a terrible trade, but not an especially great one, either. I don't like it, but they've made worse. Are you really comparing Scott bleepin Cooper to Pomeranz, shame on you. Cooper was an all star for one reason and one reason alone, someone had to represent that awful Red Sox team at the game. Pomeranz had been among the top 2 or 3 pitchers in the NL this year and rightly deserved to be there and you know that. That comment is someone either trolling or trying to manipulate the narrative, either way it doesn't belong here. Also pointing out where he got drafted, btw ahead of Sale & Harvey, does have merit. It shows that people whose jobs depend on it and with their own respective pedigrees in baseball valued Pomeranz higher than those other prospects, Sale & Harvey. Does that make it right, no, nor does it make it wrong, the point is people who know more about the game than you or I thought highly enough of him to pick him 5th in the draft. He's 27 not 30, 31 and some players do take longer than others to put it all together. He added a pitch which has turned him into an all-star. Read the Brian Bannister piece about him comparing him highly to Rich Hill except he's 10 years younger and under control for 2 more years. Hill had less of a track record then Pomeranz yet everyone was on board with that move. It was a good move even if AE becomes an ace because of where we are as a team and how far away for MLB AE is. And all the tangibles that go along with those points that have been listed here by many others. You can think that losing AE stinks, I have no problem at all with that (I in fact agree with that), but by now most should have realized it is a move as a GM you should make. It all depends on how much you buy of what he did over the first few months of the season. He has a track record of being a good left handed reliever. Check. He had a promising first three months with the Padres. So if he is indeed an emerging ace, then the Sox did well to make the trade. If he is a guy who cannot make it past the sixth inning, then it's fair to question how good he is. So far he's been bitten by the long ball which hadn't been an issue. We know his command is spotty. Therefore high pitch counts, and fewer innings pitched, and more bullpen innings than you'd like to see. He's 27 and evolving. Fine, but how much better is his command going to get because at this point? Whether you like to admit it or not, it's a fair question. If I would have told you before the season the Sox should trade Anderson Espinoza for Drew Pomeranz, I would think you would have responded, "Are you crazy?!" Then he had three good months for the Padres, and suddenly he's a must have. Maybe you're right, and it's a move all GMs make now - as it seems like open season to really overpay for talent (unless you're Dave Stewart). I mean, people here were gagging at the quantity if not quality of what the Red Sox gave up for Kimbrel, but since then we've seen a lot of GMs give up their best prospects for talent in moves I don't think we would have seen awhile back. Like I said before I was actually ok with the Kimbrel move because the Sox give up very little that can actually come back and bite them in the butt, but Espinoza can really come back to haunt the Sox if he develops into what the scouts think he can become (and relying very heavily on a stat line for an 18 year old kid in A ball where he's the youngest in the league is a bit much - not saying he doesn't need to work on things, but at 18 he has plenty of time and talent to fix them). The one thing I see from you is this arrogance that everybody on this board should think one way or another on this AE/Pomeranz deal. I understand why people here, if they were GMs, would make this deal, but it's hardly crazy to me to imagine why some here, including myself, would not have made this deal. Just like I understand why a majority of this board would not have made the Kimbrel deal, yet I would have made it (and be aggravated that Kimbrel, young in his prime and established with a long track record) hasn't pitched like the closer I was trading for). It comes down to how do you view Pomeranz and how do you view Espinoza? I view Pomeranz as a guy who'll rarely make it into the 7th inning because his command isn't good enough to allow him to, so I see him as a #3 guy at best who had a great stretch of 3 months in SD pitching in a ballpark that's good to pitch in (and yeah, I know he pitched well on the road, too) and I question if he'll even necessarily be a solid middle of the rotation starter with the Red Sox. I don't like having that question in an acquisition when I'm trading the best pitching prospect the Red Sox have had in a long time, one that scouts believe will either front a rotation or pitch toward the top of one, especially when one of the biggest and costliest failures of the Red Sox is to develop good young pitching so they don't have to trade for it or have to spend $217 million on it.
|
|
|