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.
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 9:54:12 GMT -5
If Cespedes were a "Jose Ramirez type" he'd be ranked first in baseball. Maybe second. Jose Ramirez (then 2B/SS) was ranked 9th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2013 and 8th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2014. Oh, and he made his debut in 2013. He wasn't starting A-ball. And then he blew the ceiling off his projection. If people thought he would be what he became he would’ve been the highest rated prospect in baseball (or one of the few, don’t remember who else was a prospect at that time)
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 5, 2024 10:31:35 GMT -5
Jose Ramirez (then 2B/SS) was ranked 9th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2013 and 8th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2014. Oh, and he made his debut in 2013. He wasn't starting A-ball. And then he blew the ceiling off his projection. If people thought he would be what he became he would’ve been the highest rated prospect in baseball (or one of the few, don’t remember who else was a prospect at that time) I think I get @nono's point that error bars on prospect rankings, especially for kids just entering Low-A, are so vast as to almost make the whole effort farcical and that there are enough warts (already) on YC's tools to put him firmly in the "touchable" category (ironic as that may sound). If another GM insisted on YC over guys like Meidroth or Yorke, I would be fine with that.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 10:34:26 GMT -5
And then he blew the ceiling off his projection. If people thought he would be what he became he would’ve been the highest rated prospect in baseball (or one of the few, don’t remember who else was a prospect at that time) I think I get @nono's point that error bars on prospect rankings, especially for kids just entering Low-A, are so vast as to almost make the whole effort farcical and that there are enough warts (already) on YC's tools to put him firmly in the "touchable" category (ironic as that may sound). If another GM insisted on YC over guys like Meidroth or Yorke, I would be fine with that. I agree that I’d be open to moving Cespedes in the right deal, just pushing back on the idea that he has to project to be a hall of fame caliber player to justify ranking #7 and/or keeping.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 5, 2024 10:42:10 GMT -5
If Cespedes were a "Jose Ramirez type" he'd be ranked first in baseball. Maybe second. Jose Ramirez (then 2B/SS) was ranked 9th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2013 and 8th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2014. Oh, and he made his debut in 2013. He wasn't starting A-ball. And now he's a borderline Hall of Famer. The problem we all have is that you're reducing Cespedes to needing to be a "Jose Ramirez type" which is both pretty meaningless and is also a compliment, but then also saying that he isn't that so he isn't a prospect? One of the reasons we don't do player comps anymore is because they become overly reductive, and you've kinda taken that to an extreme here.
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Jul 5, 2024 10:43:02 GMT -5
blogs.fangraphs.com/its-time-for-the-red-sox-to-change-gears/Caveat being: 1. Need to see how the next 3 weeks go 2. It's easy to say buy when you don't know who's available/what the prices are But I agree with everything here. This team has just been so passive for so long now. They need to ramp it up a little bit even if they aren't favorites to win the division.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 11:09:42 GMT -5
blogs.fangraphs.com/its-time-for-the-red-sox-to-change-gears/Caveat being: 1. Need to see how the next 3 weeks go 2. It's easy to say buy when you don't know who's available/what the prices are But I agree with everything here. This team has just been so passive for so long now. They need to ramp it up a little bit even if they aren't favorites to win the division. The interesting tid bit here is that the Red Sox have the most to gain in terms of playoff odds from adding incremental wins of any contender. Otherwise it’s just kind of the repetitive “Red Sox need to be more aggressive at the trade deadline” slog we get a lot of. He doesn’t really get into specific candidates all that much, naming two infielders who probably aren’t getting traded and then Fedde and Crochet (who I agree would be nice pick ups, particularly interested in Fedde given the likely relative acquisition cost).
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 5, 2024 11:30:24 GMT -5
I don't really agree with the thrust of that article. Adding two wins to this team would be extremely expensive because you have to improve on decent players. I could be missing one, but since the new format was introduced I don't think there's been a single big deadline add from a team that wasn't fighting for a top two seed. If your metric is Championship % instead of Playoff %, then the teams at the top (even ones that are a lock for a bye) have the most to gain from improving.
|
|
|
Post by wamderingdude on Jul 5, 2024 11:45:54 GMT -5
blogs.fangraphs.com/its-time-for-the-red-sox-to-change-gears/Caveat being: 1. Need to see how the next 3 weeks go 2. It's easy to say buy when you don't know who's available/what the prices are But I agree with everything here. This team has just been so passive for so long now. They need to ramp it up a little bit even if they aren't favorites to win the division. The interesting tid bit here is that the Red Sox have the most to gain in terms of playoff odds from adding incremental wins of any contender. Otherwise it’s just kind of the repetitive “Red Sox need to be more aggressive at the trade deadline” slog we get a lot of. He doesn’t really get into specific candidates all that much, naming two infielders who probably aren’t getting traded and then Fedde and Crochet (who I agree would be nice pick ups, particularly interested in Fedde given the likely relative acquisition cost). I get the premise that teams on the edge of playoff contention benefit the most from moves because of the room to improve but i’m not sure i agree that it applies specifically to the Red Sox this year. To me they don’t have an obvious hole to fill and that’s when i think the boost matters more. Now if Casas is out for the year i think a move at first would provide that, but assuming he’s coming back i don’t see an obvious black hole on the roster. They could always use depth, another starter would be great but trades not involving one of the top 7 prospects doesn’t seem like it would impact that team a ton. If this team is going to make the playoffs, it will be because of the young guys currently on the team continuing to play at a high level or it’s because they trade for a meaningful upgrade, which would cost a ton.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 11:51:26 GMT -5
The interesting tid bit here is that the Red Sox have the most to gain in terms of playoff odds from adding incremental wins of any contender. Otherwise it’s just kind of the repetitive “Red Sox need to be more aggressive at the trade deadline” slog we get a lot of. He doesn’t really get into specific candidates all that much, naming two infielders who probably aren’t getting traded and then Fedde and Crochet (who I agree would be nice pick ups, particularly interested in Fedde given the likely relative acquisition cost). I get the premise that teams on the edge of playoff contention benefit the most from moves because of the room to improve but i’m not sure i agree that it applies specifically to the Red Sox this year. To me they don’t have an obvious hole to fill and that’s when i think the boost matters more. Now if Casas is out for the year i think a move at first would provide that, but assuming he’s coming back i don’t see an obvious black hole on the roster. They could always use depth, another starter would be great but trades not involving one of the top 7 prospects doesn’t seem like it would impact that team a ton. If this team is going to make the playoffs, it will be because of the young guys currently on the team continuing to play at a high level or it’s because they trade for a meaningful upgrade, which would cost a ton. Its just a hypothetical, if they were able to add incremental wins they benefit the most. I agree they’re in a difficult position to add incremental wins, but I do think Fedde or Crochet over Winckowski/Criswell adds a decent amount (and more so if another starter gets hurt). Adding a starter who could be in your top three in the rotation also has an outsized benefit if you do make the playoffs of course. Add: I do agree with the point that the author should’ve mentioned how hard it is for any good team to add 2 wins at the deadline and how the Red Sox construction makes it particularly hard for them
|
|
|
Post by wamderingdude on Jul 5, 2024 11:58:47 GMT -5
I get the premise that teams on the edge of playoff contention benefit the most from moves because of the room to improve but i’m not sure i agree that it applies specifically to the Red Sox this year. To me they don’t have an obvious hole to fill and that’s when i think the boost matters more. Now if Casas is out for the year i think a move at first would provide that, but assuming he’s coming back i don’t see an obvious black hole on the roster. They could always use depth, another starter would be great but trades not involving one of the top 7 prospects doesn’t seem like it would impact that team a ton. If this team is going to make the playoffs, it will be because of the young guys currently on the team continuing to play at a high level or it’s because they trade for a meaningful upgrade, which would cost a ton. Its just a hypothetical, if they were able to add incremental wins they benefit the most. I agree they’re in a difficult position to add incremental wins, but I do think Fedde or Crochet over Winckowski/Criswell adds a decent amount (and more so if another starter gets hurt). Adding a starter who could be in your top three in the rotation also has an outsized benefit if you do make the playoffs of course. Add: I do agree with the point that the author should’ve mentioned how hard it is for any good team to add 2 wins at the deadline and how the Red Sox construction makes it particularly hard for them So I agree that those guys would add meaningful wins for projection purposes, but i think that’s where you get into big trade packages and no longer small buyers. I *think* Crochet would cost one of the big three, i have no idea what Fedde would cost but i’m assuming at least one top 10 prospect since he has another year of control, maybe even two?
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 12:02:40 GMT -5
Its just a hypothetical, if they were able to add incremental wins they benefit the most. I agree they’re in a difficult position to add incremental wins, but I do think Fedde or Crochet over Winckowski/Criswell adds a decent amount (and more so if another starter gets hurt). Adding a starter who could be in your top three in the rotation also has an outsized benefit if you do make the playoffs of course. Add: I do agree with the point that the author should’ve mentioned how hard it is for any good team to add 2 wins at the deadline and how the Red Sox construction makes it particularly hard for them So I agree that those guys would add meaningful wins for projection purposes, but i think that’s where you get into big trade packages and no longer small buyers. I *think* Crochet would cost one of the big three, i have no idea what Fedde would cost but i’m assuming at least one top 10 prospect since he has another year of control, maybe even two? Agree it depends on acquisition cost but I don’t think a top 10 prospect should be a deal breaker for Fedde, like I would send Fitts no problem
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Jul 5, 2024 12:07:25 GMT -5
Jose Ramirez (then 2B/SS) was ranked 9th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2013 and 8th for CLE (not MLB overall) in 2014. Oh, and he made his debut in 2013. He wasn't starting A-ball. And now he's a borderline Hall of Famer. The problem we all have is that you're reducing Cespedes to needing to be a "Jose Ramirez type" which is both pretty meaningless and is also a compliment, but then also saying that he isn't that so he isn't a prospect? One of the reasons we don't do player comps anymore is because they become overly reductive, and you've kinda taken that to an extreme here. You are seeing it that way, but it isn't what I am saying. I am saying YC is our best trade asset because the likelihood of him reaching his ceiling is low and yet the possibility of his ceiling might be enough to get a player who actually could move the needle for us in the playoffs. Otherwise one argument from the go-getters is: 1) We need to try to win today, even if it mortgages our future because it is hard to catch team chemistry lightning in a bottle, and we might currently have it, or from the future is brighter believers 2) We can't do anything to help the 2024 team because it would damage our chances of winning in the future, and our future core is more promising than the core of today I am saying YC is the type of player who, especially given how Campbell and Coffey are trending below the big 3, could be traded as the key asset in a deal for an older playoff tested pitcher who pitches well in Boston. That's what I am saying. The only other thing I am saying is if you thought he was significantly under-ranked (your point about that type of player should be tanked top few in all of baseball), then maybe I am wrong. Since I hear nobody saying with conviction that he is very likely to be a perennial all-star, I would suggest we have enough talent above him to trade him to try to win in 2024 while still retaining the ability to compete for Championships over the next 5-10 yrs. The reason Cherington lost his job here was prospect hoarding. The reason Bloom lost his job was the inability to make bold/difficult decisions. I am simply suggesting we make a bold, but I don't believe truly too difficult, decision if we can bring Eovaldi back. And even if we cannot extend him, I would trade YC for him straight up.
|
|
|
Post by wamderingdude on Jul 5, 2024 12:08:13 GMT -5
So I agree that those guys would add meaningful wins for projection purposes, but i think that’s where you get into big trade packages and no longer small buyers. I *think* Crochet would cost one of the big three, i have no idea what Fedde would cost but i’m assuming at least one top 10 prospect since he has another year of control, maybe even two? Agree it depends on acquisition cost but I don’t think a top 10 prospect should be a deal breaker for Fedde, like I would send Fitts no problem I would too which is why i think it might take two thinking about it. I have no idea what to make of Fedde or his cost
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 5, 2024 12:20:04 GMT -5
I don't think Fitts is going to be very attractive on the trade market. 5.03 xfIP this year and about to eat up a 40 man spot
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 1,385
Member is Online
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 5, 2024 12:22:04 GMT -5
In terms of the starting pitching market (for the Red Sox or for others), was looking into it and this appears to be the current gist of it. Obviously, there are plenty of pitchers not on this list that you could theoretically trade for, but this includes veteran pitchers or shiny objects who are healthy (or are expected to return before the deadline), don’t have onerous contracts or many years of team control, and are on teams that will (or might be inclined to) sell. Tried not to list guys who completely suck. (Sorry Martin Perez!)
I’m sure I’ve missed somebody. Years of control/contract details in parentheses.
AL
White Sox Crochet (2.5 years - ARB) Fedde (1.5 years - 7.5 mil AAV)
A’s Paul Blackburn (IL) - (1.5 years - ARB)
Angels Tyler Anderson (1.5 years - 13 mil AAV) Griffin Canning (1.5 years - ARB) Reid Detmers (AAA) - (3 years - ARb eligible after this year)
Tigers Jack Flaherty (RENTAL)
Blue Jays Kikuchi (RENTAL) Chris Bassitt (1.5 years - 22 mil AAV)
Rangers*** [DEFENDING CHAMPS - could theoretically not sell] Nate Eovaldi (rental*** - it’s a weird contract) not eligible for Qualifying Offer Max Scherzer (rental - FULL NO TRADE CLAUSE) not eligible for Qualifying Offer Lorenzen (rental) Heaney (rental)
Rays Zach Efflin (1.5 years - 18 mil AAV next year) Zack Littell (1.5 years - ARBj
Red Sox Nick Pivetta (rental)*Red Sox could QO him
The NL… is weird. You have some rebuilding teams that don’t have a lot of healthy veterans to offer (Miami. Nats, Pirates). The Cubs have some good pitchers but under control for a while. The Rockies have… Cal Quantril? The teams that you would think would have some interesting trade options (Montas, Snell, Severino?) are currently fighting for the Wild Card. Check back on this in 3 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 5, 2024 12:24:19 GMT -5
Meidroth is the guy that stands out to me as a trade candidate. Don't need to protect him, pretty good chance to be an opening day starter for a bad team next year, and overlaps with the talent we already have.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 12:25:15 GMT -5
Love the idea of Max Scherzer’s one last ride
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 1,385
Member is Online
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 5, 2024 12:36:26 GMT -5
Love the idea of Max Scherzer’s one last ride Jim Bowden finally has a chance to be right this time His full no-trade clause is a huge wild card because he could just decide he doesn’t want to go anywhere - or Scherzer could decide “I only want to play for X or Y” and the asking price is probably depressed as a result.
|
|
|
Post by badballhitter on Jul 5, 2024 12:40:04 GMT -5
In terms of the starting pitching market (for the Red Sox or for others), was looking into it and this appears to be the current gist of it. Obviously, there are plenty of pitchers not on this list that you could theoretically trade for, but this includes veteran pitchers or shiny objects who are healthy (or are expected to return before the deadline), don’t have onerous contracts or many years of team control, and are on teams that will (or might be inclined to) sell. Tried not to list guys who completely suck. (Sorry Martin Perez!) I’m sure I’ve missed somebody. Years of control/contract details in parentheses. AL White Sox Crochet (2.5 years - ARB) Fedde (1.5 years - 7.5 mil AAV) A’s Paul Blackburn (IL) - (1.5 years - ARB) Angels Tyler Anderson (1.5 years - 13 mil AAV) Griffin Canning (1.5 years - ARB) Reid Detmers (AAA) - (3 years - ARb eligible after this year) Tigers Jack Flaherty (RENTAL) Blue Jays Kikuchi (RENTAL) Chris Bassitt (1.5 years - 22 mil AAV) Rangers*** [DEFENDING CHAMPS - could theoretically not sell] Nate Eovaldi (rental*** - it’s a weird contract) not eligible for Qualifying Offer Max Scherzer (rental - FULL NO TRADE CLAUSE) not eligible for Qualifying Offer Lorenzen (rental) Heaney (rental) Rays Zach Efflin (1.5 years - 18 mil AAV next year) Zack Littell (1.5 years - ARBj Red Sox Nick Pivetta (rental)*Red Sox could QO him The NL… is weird. You have some rebuilding teams that don’t have a lot of healthy veterans to offer (Miami. Nats, Pirates). The Cubs have some good pitchers but under control for a while. The Rockies have… Cal Quantril? The teams that you would think would have some interesting trade options (Montas, Snell, Severino?) are currently fighting for the Wild Card. Check back on this in 3 weeks. I hate the idea of trading for a guy they should have just paid for in the first place, but aside from that Eflin does make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Jul 5, 2024 13:18:47 GMT -5
Love the idea of Max Scherzer’s one last ride I can't see them picking up the rest of the deal. I can see the team banking on Casas as their deadline addition. Which I guess is fine, since this isn't the time to trade Teel Anthony or Mayer. However I would like to see a pitcher with term added. Maybe another bat.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 1,385
Member is Online
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 5, 2024 13:24:59 GMT -5
Love the idea of Max Scherzer’s one last ride I can't see them picking up the rest of the deal. I can see the team banking on Casas as their deadline addition. Which I guess is fine, since this isn't the time to trade Teel Anthony or Mayer. However I would like to see a pitcher with term added. Maybe another bat. There is no rest of the deal for Scherzer - he’s an expiring contract, and the Mets and Steve Cohen are paying 70% of his final year (which is this season) after trading him to Texas last trade deadline. The Rangers are on the hook for 1 year, 12.5 million. www.spotrac.com/mlb/player/_/id/5166/max-scherzer/contract/summary
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 5, 2024 13:27:58 GMT -5
Love the idea of Max Scherzer’s one last ride Jim Bowden finally has a chance to be right this time His full no-trade clause is a huge wild card because he could just decide he doesn’t want to go anywhere - or Scherzer could decide “I only want to play for X or Y” and the asking price is probably depressed as a result. Yeah it’s a far-fetched hope that he would pick Boston as the place but would be fun. I have some vague memory of him saying he loved Fenway but I could be imagining that
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jul 5, 2024 13:53:20 GMT -5
Agree it depends on acquisition cost but I don’t think a top 10 prospect should be a deal breaker for Fedde, like I would send Fitts no problem I would too which is why i think it might take two thinking about it. I have no idea what to make of Fedde or his cost Fedde worries me. Wasn't very good before going to the KBO last year. HR/FB% is 4.3% better than career (9.8% vs 14.1%), BABIP is 31 points better than career (.268 vs.299) and LOB% is 7.2% better than career (78.8% vs 71.6%). Even if you buy into his improved command holding, there's a ton of luck-based success. I would guess he's more of a back-end starter going forward, which isn't bad (and an upgrade to the rotation) but he may be a guy the team would look to replace/upgrade in the off-season. Of course Fitts isn't exactly a world-breaker prospect, so I wouldn't argue the above proposal. Crochet seems like the real deal. Rumors say the White Sox are definitely moving him and that he may want a quick extension if he gets moved. Just have to cross your fingers that he can take the workload and his arm doesn't explode. Fills a major short/long term need if he can stay healthy.
|
|
|
Post by wamderingdude on Jul 5, 2024 14:22:14 GMT -5
I would too which is why i think it might take two thinking about it. I have no idea what to make of Fedde or his cost Fedde worries me. Wasn't very good before going to the KBO last year. HR/FB% is 4.3% better than career (9.8% vs 14.1%), BABIP is 31 points better than career (.268 vs.299) and LOB% is 7.2% better than career (78.8% vs 71.6%). Even if you buy into his improved command holding, there's a ton of luck-based success. I would guess he's more of a back-end starter going forward, which isn't bad (and an upgrade to the rotation) but he may be a guy the team would look to replace/upgrade in the off-season. Of course Fitts isn't exactly a world-breaker prospect, so I wouldn't argue the above proposal. Crochet seems like the real deal. Rumors say the White Sox are definitely moving him and that he may want a quick extension if he gets moved. Just have to cross your fingers that he can take the workload and his arm doesn't explode. Fills a major short/long term need if he can stay healthy. Yeah Fedde is such a weird story that i have no idea whether to buy into him or not. Crochet is great but i think the package is going to be way more expensive then i’m willing to trade for a pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Jul 5, 2024 14:43:28 GMT -5
I think I get @nono's point that error bars on prospect rankings, especially for kids just entering Low-A, are so vast as to almost make the whole effort farcical and that there are enough warts (already) on YC's tools to put him firmly in the "touchable" category (ironic as that may sound). If another GM insisted on YC over guys like Meidroth or Yorke, I would be fine with that. I agree that I’d be open to moving Cespedes in the right deal, just pushing back on the idea that he has to project to be a hall of fame caliber player to justify ranking #7 and/or keeping. He is worth keeping of course, absent a very good player who moves the needle in return. I think others currently ranked below him (or to be drafted) are likely to move above him such that when the big 3 graduate, Cespedes is still in the 6-10 range. That suggests he is modestly over-ranked today in my opinion, as it would be odd for a player of his profile to ascend to top 3 or 4 in a strong system. I am not trying to quibble with the ranking. Just suggesting this profile likely doesn't get a lot more valuable over next year or so. If a guy is temporarily overvalued, sometimes that's the right guy to move. He doesn't need to be a hall of famer to keep. But unless people think he really is one, we should probably see him as @johnson said, "touchable."
|
|
|