|
Post by notstarboard on Mar 12, 2024 22:49:24 GMT -5
This surgery was supposed to happen this afternoon, correct? No reports of even what kind of surgery he had?
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Mar 12, 2024 23:41:27 GMT -5
Chris knows..But he won't tell us.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 13, 2024 8:46:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Mar 13, 2024 8:50:49 GMT -5
Good news that it was the brace that should give him a normal offseason. Will possibly set up some weird rooting incentives on his innings next year though.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Mar 13, 2024 8:55:41 GMT -5
Has a pitcher ever got the brace procedure done before? I don't recall hearing one getting it before but then again I'd never heard of it being a thing until last year with Story either so it seems like it's a relatively new procedure?
Hopefully this means a full healthy offseason for Giolito and he can come back for 2025 as a member of the rotation from day one.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Mar 13, 2024 9:05:34 GMT -5
Has a pitcher ever got the brace procedure done before? I don't recall hearing one getting it before but then again I'd never heard of it being a thing until last year with Story either so it seems like it's a relatively new procedure? Hopefully this means a full healthy offseason for Giolito and he can come back for 2025 as a member of the rotation from day one. I think Rich Hill had it done. I am not sure though.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2024 9:05:55 GMT -5
Good news that it was the brace that should give him a normal offseason. Will possibly set up some weird rooting incentives on his innings next year though. How did that clause work again? I think it's that a 1/14 team option for 2026 vests with fewer than 140 IP. But there's also the possibility of offering the QO if he's good next year. So it seems like the only bad possibility is that he pitches more than 140 innings but is bad enough that you wouldn't want to give him the QO. But it's a pretty narrow range of scenarios where you wouldn't want to offer the QO but would want him on 1/14.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Mar 13, 2024 9:14:42 GMT -5
Has a pitcher ever got the brace procedure done before? I don't recall hearing one getting it before but then again I'd never heard of it being a thing until last year with Story either so it seems like it's a relatively new procedure? Hopefully this means a full healthy offseason for Giolito and he can come back for 2025 as a member of the rotation from day one. Shohei had some form of elbow surgery but, unless I missed it, I don't think they fully disclosed what he had done.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 13, 2024 9:14:56 GMT -5
Has a pitcher ever got the brace procedure done before? I don't recall hearing one getting it before but then again I'd never heard of it being a thing until last year with Story either so it seems like it's a relatively new procedure? Hopefully this means a full healthy offseason for Giolito and he can come back for 2025 as a member of the rotation from day one. Kenta Maeda came back from it last year. Zach Kelly had one a few years ago.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 13, 2024 9:17:04 GMT -5
Good news that it was the brace that should give him a normal offseason. Will possibly set up some weird rooting incentives on his innings next year though. How did that clause work again? I think it's that a 1/14 team option for 2026 vests with fewer than 140 IP. But there's also the possibility of offering the QO if he's good next year. So it seems like the only bad possibility is that he pitches more than 140 innings but is bad enough that you wouldn't want to give him the QO. But it's a pretty narrow range of scenarios where you wouldn't want to offer the QO but would want him on 1/14. Lucas Giolito rhp 2 years/$38.5M (2024-25), plus option 24:$18M, 25:$19M player option ($1M buyout), 26:$14M club option if Giolito exercises 2025 option (2026 becomes $19M mutual option with $1.5M buyout if Giolito pitches 140 innings in 2025) annual performance bonuses for 2024-25: $250,000 each for 150, 160, 170, 180 innings pitched
Might be like a 5% chance he turns down the 2025 option too
|
|
|
Post by ephus on Mar 13, 2024 9:17:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by asm18 on Mar 13, 2024 9:25:39 GMT -5
Wow. Was mentally ready for Giolito to basically not pitch for us at all (who knows if the Sox would have even exercised their possible club option in 2026 - they didn't with Paxton). Hopefully he can have a reasonably full and productive season in 2025, and we just look at this as a two year deal where things just went to hell for Year 1.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2024 9:33:51 GMT -5
How did that clause work again? I think it's that a 1/14 team option for 2026 vests with fewer than 140 IP. But there's also the possibility of offering the QO if he's good next year. So it seems like the only bad possibility is that he pitches more than 140 innings but is bad enough that you wouldn't want to give him the QO. But it's a pretty narrow range of scenarios where you wouldn't want to offer the QO but would want him on 1/14. Lucas Giolito rhp 2 years/$38.5M (2024-25), plus option 24:$18M, 25:$19M player option ($1M buyout), 26:$14M club option if Giolito exercises 2025 option (2026 becomes $19M mutual option with $1.5M buyout if Giolito pitches 140 innings in 2025) annual performance bonuses for 2024-25: $250,000 each for 150, 160, 170, 180 innings pitched
Might be like a 5% chance he turns down the 2025 option too
The "$19 million mutual option" seems kind of weird. It's so close in value to a QO; if the team would want to keep him at that rate, wouldn't they just decline the option and offer the QO?
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Mar 13, 2024 9:51:58 GMT -5
Lucas Giolito rhp 2 years/$38.5M (2024-25), plus option 24:$18M, 25:$19M player option ($1M buyout), 26:$14M club option if Giolito exercises 2025 option (2026 becomes $19M mutual option with $1.5M buyout if Giolito pitches 140 innings in 2025) annual performance bonuses for 2024-25: $250,000 each for 150, 160, 170, 180 innings pitched
Might be like a 5% chance he turns down the 2025 option too
The "$19 million mutual option" seems kind of weird. It's so close in value to a QO; if the team would want to keep him at that rate, wouldn't they just decline the option and offer the QO? I don't understand mutual options even without the QO being so close. Like, if the team and player are both agreed on the X dollars and Y years from the mutual option, in theory the team could have just signed them to an X/Y deal in free agency instead, so I don't see what value the mutual option provides. In almost every other case the mutual option will be declined by one side or the other, so it's even more pointless. I don't think it impacts AAV in prior years either so I don't even think it has value as an accounting trick.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Mar 13, 2024 11:42:42 GMT -5
Good news that it was the brace that should give him a normal offseason. Will possibly set up some weird rooting incentives on his innings next year though. How did that clause work again? I think it's that a 1/14 team option for 2026 vests with fewer than 140 IP. But there's also the possibility of offering the QO if he's good next year. So it seems like the only bad possibility is that he pitches more than 140 innings but is bad enough that you wouldn't want to give him the QO. But it's a pretty narrow range of scenarios where you wouldn't want to offer the QO but would want him on 1/14. I feel like there's plenty of scenarios where you'd want him on the QO deal but he wouldn't accept that. So with the team option you get to have him at less than the QO for a year.
|
|
|
Post by yuchangclan on Mar 13, 2024 11:47:40 GMT -5
If Giolito is able to pitch 140 innings next season, that is most definitely a good sign. Hopefully he heals over the next 13 months and comes back strong and productive. The competitive window should open in 2025 anyway. He should/could be a nice asset by then.
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Mar 13, 2024 11:59:47 GMT -5
I don't understand mutual options even without the QO being so close. Like, if the team and player are both agreed on the X dollars and Y years from the mutual option, in theory the team could have just signed them to an X/Y deal in free agency instead, so I don't see what value the mutual option provides. In almost every other case the mutual option will be declined by one side or the other, so it's even more pointless. I don't think it impacts AAV in prior years either so I don't even think it has value as an accounting trick. It's a meaningful kind of thing if towards the end of the contract he's worth <19M/year but could be looking for a multi-year contract. Both sides can walk away happy.
|
|
|
Post by wOBA Fett on Mar 13, 2024 12:31:34 GMT -5
I don't understand mutual options even without the QO being so close. Like, if the team and player are both agreed on the X dollars and Y years from the mutual option, in theory the team could have just signed them to an X/Y deal in free agency instead, so I don't see what value the mutual option provides. In almost every other case the mutual option will be declined by one side or the other, so it's even more pointless. I don't think it impacts AAV in prior years either so I don't even think it has value as an accounting trick. It's a meaningful kind of thing if towards the end of the contract he's worth <19M/year but could be looking for a multi-year contract. Both sides can walk away happy. There is also a world where he pitches 160 innings with a 5+ ERA and the Red Sox are forced to give him another $1.5MM when they decline the option. That would make the Red Sox total investment into Giolito equal $39.5MM for 160 innings of 5+ ERA baseball.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2024 12:51:49 GMT -5
How did that clause work again? I think it's that a 1/14 team option for 2026 vests with fewer than 140 IP. But there's also the possibility of offering the QO if he's good next year. So it seems like the only bad possibility is that he pitches more than 140 innings but is bad enough that you wouldn't want to give him the QO. But it's a pretty narrow range of scenarios where you wouldn't want to offer the QO but would want him on 1/14. I feel like there's plenty of scenarios where you'd want him on the QO deal but he wouldn't accept that. So with the team option you get to have him at less than the QO for a year. For sure; I was just thinking that in those scenarios, a) he's healthy and pitching well for the team in 2025, and b) they get the draft compensation if he rejects the QO. So that wouldn't be something I'd be rooting against.
The weird case is just if he pitches well but misses some time on the IL and is at like 130 IP in mid-September. Admittedly, that is the sort of "two games out of the last wild card at the trade deadline"-type scenario that this team has specialized in in the last couple of years...
|
|
|
Post by bishop on Mar 13, 2024 13:31:22 GMT -5
It's a meaningful kind of thing if towards the end of the contract he's worth <19M/year but could be looking for a multi-year contract. Both sides can walk away happy. There is also a world where he pitches 160 innings with a 5+ ERA and the Red Sox are forced to give him another $1.5MM when they decline the option. That would make the Red Sox total investment into Giolito equal $39.5MM for 160 innings of 5+ ERA baseball. Oh come on, if we're looking for worst case scenarios we can get more creative than that. Maybe he blows out his elbow again and we get 0 innings from him, maybe he gets suspended for the season, maybe he starts a fight in the locker room and Rafael Devers gets hurt breaking it up. There are much worse scenarios than 30 starts of below average but not atrocious pitching from him in 2025!
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Mar 13, 2024 14:14:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 13, 2024 14:55:38 GMT -5
It's a meaningful kind of thing if towards the end of the contract he's worth <19M/year but could be looking for a multi-year contract. Both sides can walk away happy. There is also a world where he pitches 160 innings with a 5+ ERA and the Red Sox are forced to give him another $1.5MM when they decline the option. That would make the Red Sox total investment into Giolito equal $39.5MM for 160 innings of 5+ ERA baseball. Your insistence to let us know that every baseball player has a downside is admirable.
|
|
|
Post by asm18 on Mar 13, 2024 15:04:46 GMT -5
For those with more a medical/science bent, are we going to be seeing the bracing procedure become the more likely option for elbow surgeries going forward? I.e - if your elbow is only kinda screwed up you get brace, and if it’s REALLY screwed up you get TJ? My limited understanding is it’s in reference to the extent of the UCL tear, but this is also still a newish procedure?
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Mar 13, 2024 15:16:49 GMT -5
For those with more a medical/science bent, are we going to be seeing the bracing procedure become the more likely option for elbow surgeries going forward? I.e - if your elbow is only kinda screwed up you get brace, and if it’s REALLY screwed up you get TJ? My limited understanding is it’s in reference to the extent of the UCL tear, but this is also still a newish procedure? My understanding from before the bracing procedure was an option was that partial tears were often worse (e.g. more complicated for TJ surgery) than full tears as the full tear was a more simple ligament replacement procedure. The bracing procedure seems to be used (at least primarily) for partial tears. So you're likely looking at TJ for full tears and bracing for partial tears going forward, so the surgery is dependent on the type of injury, which is also why they don't disclose the surgery until after the procedure, as the doctors don't know which procedure they will perform until they open up the arm. PRP injections have had some success as well, but more often than not lead to surgery anyway. It will be interesting to see if that science progresses, cutting into the number of bracing procedures.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Mar 13, 2024 15:18:39 GMT -5
For those with more a medical/science bent, are we going to be seeing the bracing procedure become the more likely option for elbow surgeries going forward? I.e - if your elbow is only kinda screwed up you get brace, and if it’s REALLY screwed up you get TJ? My limited understanding is it’s in reference to the extent of the UCL tear, but this is also still a newish procedure? Maybe someone else can chime in, but it sounds like the brace procedure works well when it’s a clean injury - a partial tear or the ligament just ripped clean off the bone (end avulsion). If the ligament is really screwed up and it’s chronically unstable or it’s started to turn into bone (ossification), they need to replace it the old way. So I would not be surprised if it starts to become the first-line treatment for UCL tears. Keep in mind it’s a relatively new procedure - the guy who did Giolito’s surgery (Dr. Dugas) is an author of the paper linked above. So I would expect a lot of the surgeons who do Tommy John would have to train on it, become comfortable with it, etc.
|
|