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.
Should the Red Sox re-sign Nick Pivetta?
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 29, 2024 12:08:18 GMT -5
Only as a reliever, but that probably won’t happen because he’ll likely get 4/5th starter money from someone who will cite his durability/“ability to take the ball every five days.
Of course, if he signs with LAD, he’ll be in contention for the NL Cy Young next year. 🤣
|
|
|
Post by finaliz3d on Sept 29, 2024 12:47:41 GMT -5
1) We're looking for a guy as I said to be either a #1/#2. There's plenty of those options. And if you think Shane Bieber is the only guy who has #1 potential on the market, I don't know what to tell you. Bieber is the bargain-bin option, Fried and Burnes are both not far removed from better seasons than Bieber ever has had. We need someone atleast at the level of Tanner Houck, and there are guys.
2) I hate the argument that the Red Sox have telegraphed they won't spend money so I guess it's best we settle right now. I'm not going to commit to that. If you want to believe that the Red Sox aren't going to make this rotation better by signing someone decent, that's your prerogative. Even reading into his comments it's just general manager talk, and if you're going to say the Red Sox off-season is going to be a failure because of what the GM said his plans were... I'm sorry, I can't take that opinion seriously in any regard.
3) Again the Red Sox already have Houck, Bello, and Crawford who are all better than Pivetta, meaning he tops out as their 4th or 5th starter. The Red Sox have so much money and flexibility even compared to last off-season, they have a farm system with so much depth. They can get a #1/#2 pitcher, and if they can't, then Breslow goes on to the hot seat because that it was the team desperately needs. Assuming they do, that puts Pivetta down to the fifth spot where they have... Giolito, Fitts, Priester, Whitlock, they have a decent crop of guys who could be fighting for that fifth starter spot already. Why QO a guy for 20m to be in that spot, when you could use that elsewhere?
4) Trade/sign a starter, the Red Sox have logjams in the infield and outfield, it makes sense to deal from that depth. Personally, I would start with Mayer/Abreu as a package and see what the best pitcher you can get is because you can get someone younger than the guys in F/A. I'm not opposed to a F/A starter, trading for one is my first choice
5) As said, all those guys who got the QO and rejected it were either better than Pivetta or coming off of better years than Pivetta has ever had. Pivetta has never been as good as the peak season of any of those players. Those guys didn't accept the QO because they were better than Pivetta or at least were that season. Players at Pivetta's level of performance, we're talking about a guy with 1.9 bWAR/2 fWAR this year, don't usually get the QO. Again, to reiterate, I don't see a word where Pivetta would decline the QO.
6) If you want to re-sign Pivetta, I guess you could do that? It's a waste of resources in my opinion but it's not as bad as giving him the QO? I guess if you try to do a 2y/24m contract and that's probably the highest I go, maybe 1y/14m? 21m for a guy who doesn't have upside beyond what he currently is, or just is currently worth that money is a bit ridiculous.
Anyways I feel like I'm running in circles. I'm probably done talking about this until it happens/doesn't happen, I've yet to hear a good argument for why they should QO him or honestly even re-sign him.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,589
|
Post by asm18 on Sept 29, 2024 13:11:05 GMT -5
2) I hate the argument that the Red Sox have telegraphed they won't spend money so I guess it's best we settle right now. I'm not going to commit to that. If you want to believe that the Red Sox aren't going to make this rotation better by signing someone decent, that's your prerogative. Even reading into his comments it's just general manager talk, and if you're going to say the Red Sox off-season is going to be a failure because of what the GM said his plans were... I'm sorry, I can't take that opinion seriously in any regard. Respectfully, this isn’t my argument. I would very much prefer they throw money (which the team has) at elite players in free agency. But the pre-eminent beat writer for the team - presumably with sources info from Breslow and co - has reported they would rather trade for a guy or find a lower cost free agent who they think could take a step forward. Landing Pivetta on a QO isn’t about settling - it’s about giving you optionality. If you are trying to trade for “Fun Ace from Team X” and their GM is asking for something insane throughout the winter, having Nick Pivetta and his measly 2 WAR is a very nice thing to have in reserve. 1 year 20 mil for a good but not great pitcher in Pivetta is not insane in the current market. Like Frankie Montas made 1 year 16 mil last winter off an inning and a third in 2023 and a bum shoulder. The argument for bringing him back is he’s a good pitcher, and he doesn’t prevent you from getting even better pitchers as well (which they should 100% do). If I am Breslow what keeps me awake at night more is what prospects I should offer in deals this winter rather that if I’m paying Nick Pivetta marginally more than he should be for 1 year. (Which, who knows if Pivetta even accepts a QO)
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,136
|
Post by jimoh on Sept 29, 2024 13:22:31 GMT -5
Can’t risk him accepting the QO. We aren’t sure the Sox will use all of the money they have shaking free anyways, why risk putting all of our eggs in the Pivetta basket? Sounds like they are more likely to address their most expensive need (ace) via trade rather than spending in FA. Thus, they can definitely stomach the risk of Pivetta and TON accepting QO's if they feel it's a close call and worth rolling the dice: Chris Sale - $17M Kenley Jansen - $16M Chris Martin - $8M SUM: $43M QO (NP) + QO (TON) = $43M If they decide to replace Kenley and Martin with Hendriks and Slaten, they can pretty much offset the 2 QO's with Sale/Kenley/Martin falling off the books. But that is the downside scenario. The hope should be they decline and depart, and we maneuver with increased flexibility and draft capital. QO (NP) + QO (TON) = $43M, but shouldn't you subtract the $13.3M they are making in 2024? If you lose Sale, Jansen and Martin and keep Pivetta and O'Neil you save $13.35M
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Sept 29, 2024 13:46:32 GMT -5
No thanks done with him in our rotation
|
|
|
Post by sxfan on Sept 29, 2024 13:56:33 GMT -5
1) We're looking for a guy as I said to be either a #1/#2. There's plenty of those options. And if you think Shane Bieber is the only guy who has #1 potential on the market, I don't know what to tell you. Bieber is the bargain-bin option, Fried and Burnes are both not far removed from better seasons than Bieber ever has had. We need someone atleast at the level of Tanner Houck, and there are guys. www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/93943/the-crooked-inning-corbin-burnes-cutter-is-a-different-pitch-now/It wasn't fangraphs. So I apologize for that part. Bieber had 4 straight seasons of 3.28 or less and averaged 10 strikeouts per nine innings for 3 of them. He's certainly an ACE when healthy, but next season he won't be fully healthy. Point is Burnes might never be the guy he once was with his cutter changed, due to age or wear and tear. Fried has pitched 4 out of the last 6 years healthy, and averages around 8 k's per nine innings. He'll be pitching in his 30's with Burnes on his next deal. Fried grew up a Sox fan I think, so maybe he would want to come here for a little less, but I'm not sure if I'm going to that level if I'm the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Sept 29, 2024 14:18:02 GMT -5
Pivetta is a number 4 starter. Kutter is a number 4 starter. Bello is a 3 or 4 starter. Giolito is a 3. Houck is hopefully a number 2 starter. Pivetta is fine, but he does not address a need. They should be looking to upgrade him. There are in house replacements for his role.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 29, 2024 18:11:59 GMT -5
Reason to keep Nick Pivetta: A solid back-of-the-rotation starter on a 1-year deal for high but non-insane money is not a bad thing to have.
Reason not to keep Nick Pivetta: Uncertain that he's even as good as Criswell, or Fitts, or Priester, who are all effectively free.
By that line of thinking, I prefer not to keep him - but I admit that if they let him go, its not hard to imagine a situation next year where they're desperately wishing for another dependable arm in the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 30, 2024 15:59:56 GMT -5
Reason to keep Nick Pivetta: A solid back-of-the-rotation starter on a 1-year deal for high but non-insane money is not a bad thing to have. Reason not to keep Nick Pivetta: Uncertain that he's even as good as Criswell, or Fitts, or Priester, who are all effectively free.
By that line of thinking, I prefer not to keep him - but I admit that if they let him go, its not hard to imagine a situation next year where they're desperately wishing for another dependable arm in the rotation. I wouldn't get so high on those three this quickly:Fitts has had a few nice starts, which should create optimism, but based on K% (10.6%; 238th), BB% (8.2%; 141st) and GB% (37.3%; 171st) he was arguably the worst starting pitcher in the majors this season (with 20+ IP; out of 242 pitchers). Criswell is one of the softest tossers in MLB (ranked 238th out of 242 SPs with 20+ IP) and was picked up off waivers at the beginning of the season as the Rays didn't feel he was worth a 40-man spot. As he's out options, I could see he or Winck being moved this off-season if the team doesn't want 2 long relievers. Priester has promising potential but was demoted by the Pirates prior to being traded. He has some solid peripherals (14.9% K%; 6.3% BB%; 57.9% GB%) but his K% is far below his AAA rate (25.9% and 26.7%). Definitely the best chance of replacing Pivetta, but even if he can be a 2-win SP next season (he was barely above replacement this season), taking advantage of his option for depth purposes is likely preferable.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingdude on Sept 30, 2024 16:10:32 GMT -5
I’m of the mind that there should be three things at the top of their list that need to be figured out before moving onto ancillary moves, so it’s hard to say whether he should be or not yet. First is top of the rotation arm, next is right handed bat (outfield glut probably comes into play here or the arm), and bullpen help. Say they have to trade away a starter for the bat, then it makes a ton of sense to bring him back. If they sign fried and swap LH hitter for RH hitter i don’t imagine there’s a lot of room for him. Pivetta is good for the role he’s in, but we have guys that can do his job and we have the need for something he likely won’t provide.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Sept 30, 2024 16:12:36 GMT -5
I think he's a no-brainer to offer a QO to with the caveat that, depending on other rotation acquisitions, he is a risk to end up in the bullpen (and, most importantly, that he is made aware of that risk) because I don't think he signs if that's the case.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Oct 3, 2024 6:42:37 GMT -5
I think he's a no-brainer to offer a QO to with the caveat that, depending on other rotation acquisitions, he is a risk to end up in the bullpen (and, most importantly, that he is made aware of that risk) because I don't think he signs if that's the case. The only thing is that the Sox are screwed if he accepts. 20 million for a guy who could also be thrown into the bullpen is too big of a risk for a team that has a pretty strict budget. The actual budget is unclear but they probably have about 50-60 million to spend. If you throw QO to O’Neill and Pivetta that’s 40 of that 50-60 million. That doesn’t leave you room for a top end starter, at least if you give a QO to one of the two it might still be possible. None of us really want him back at that number, even for a year, but the pick is enticing.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Oct 3, 2024 6:57:45 GMT -5
I think there is close to a 0% chance if Pivetta is a member of the 2025 Sox he is in the bullpen, at least to start the year. I'm keeping the door open if I'm the Sox on a Pivetta reunion, he's a viable SP. I don't want him back for the QO money but if they can get him to agree to something like 3-4 years at 15M (then again at that point you could probably make the argument 1 year 21M is more team friendly than 3-4 at 15M) , maybe toss him some escalators. That being said I'm going out and trying to sign one of Burnes/Fried/Snell first. If they strike out with all of them then circle back to Pivetta because I do think he's firmly in that 2nd tier of FA SPs. Some years it feels like they have so many holes that their FA budget is going to go quickly since they sometimes need 2-3 starting caliber players but this year isn't feeling that way to me. Hence why I think they should go big game shopping for an SP before going into that 2nd/3rd tier.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Oct 3, 2024 8:38:34 GMT -5
They absolutely should re-sign Pivetta. Aside from that I am completely mystified as to why there are people who believe the Sox should trade for a #1 type starting pitcher rather than sign a #1 type starting pitcher as a free agent. Yes a free agent will be expensive but any #1 starting pitcher is already expensive or going to be shortly and add in giving up assets. Is there even a number one starter on the free agent market this year? Probably the only one who could be is Shane Bieber, but he's coming off Tommy John surgery. Fangraphs just wrote a article talking about how Corbin Burnes doesn't have the same cutter he had 2 years ago. Max Fried doesn't stay healthy enough and his stuff doesn't scream number one starter either. To me both these guys are really good number 2 starters in a great rotation. They'll be paid like aces the next 6-7 years. That's part of the problem.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Oct 3, 2024 8:45:07 GMT -5
Is there even a number one starter on the free agent market this year? Probably the only one who could be is Shane Bieber, but he's coming off Tommy John surgery. Fangraphs just wrote a article talking about how Corbin Burnes doesn't have the same cutter he had 2 years ago. Max Fried doesn't stay healthy enough and his stuff doesn't scream number one starter either. To me both these guys are really good number 2 starters in a great rotation. They'll be paid like aces the next 6-7 years. That's part of the problem. Burnes is clearly a number one starter. Look at his stats for this year. His strikeouts are down but his ERA is a bit better. He's always strong in September meaning he does not wear down. He doesn't walk anyone and he's the kind of horse #1 teams dream about. Aside from that signing him requires only money and hurts a division rival.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Oct 3, 2024 9:04:04 GMT -5
I don’t know why everybody says Pivetta is a number 4. He was their second best pitcher last season. If you only look at the advanced stats, there’s a decent argument for him being their best pitcher. His pitch modeling numbers are insane. His peripherals suggest he has maybe the most breakout potential of any starter on the market. He’s not a stiff, and replacing him won’t be easy.
I get that he’s been around for a while, he’s in his thirties now and getting older, and he’s always had issues with the home run ball. He’s not perfect, and it would be a major disappointment if their main pitching move this offseason was just bringing him back. But if he finds an adjustment that helps him limit the home runs even a little bit, then he’s gonna have a really good season.
Helping veterans make those adjustments is one of the main ways teams build effective rotations. I think it’s more likely than not that he plays for another team next year, but there is absolutely a spot for him on this team if they can find a deal that works for both sides.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Oct 3, 2024 9:08:27 GMT -5
Is there even a number one starter on the free agent market this year? Probably the only one who could be is Shane Bieber, but he's coming off Tommy John surgery. Fangraphs just wrote a article talking about how Corbin Burnes doesn't have the same cutter he had 2 years ago. Max Fried doesn't stay healthy enough and his stuff doesn't scream number one starter either. To me both these guys are really good number 2 starters in a great rotation. They'll be paid like aces the next 6-7 years. That's part of the problem. The whole the Sox need an "ace" thing is overblown to me, they need another front of the rotation starter which a #2 would suit just fine. One projection I saw on Fried was 6/150 and if that is the case then sign me up all day for that. I'd take the plunge on him for that price, I can understand why many might not but I like the thought of adding a lefty to the rotation and think he can be expected to be reasonably good for at least 3 or 4 years of that contract. By years 4-6 the only committed money on the Sox payroll right now would be Devers so they can handle it if he is more of a backend guy for those final few seasons.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Oct 3, 2024 9:15:48 GMT -5
I don’t know why everybody says Pivetta is a number 4. He was their second best pitcher last season. If you only look at the advanced stats, there’s a decent argument for him being their best pitcher. His pitch modeling numbers are insane. His peripherals suggest he has maybe the most breakout potential of any starter on the market. He’s not a stiff, and replacing him won’t be easy. I get that he’s been around for a while, he’s in his thirties now and getting older, and he’s always had issues with the home run ball. He’s not perfect, and it would be a major disappointment if their main pitching move this offseason was just bringing him back. But if he finds an adjustment that helps him limit the home runs even a little bit, then he’s gonna have a really good season. Helping veterans make those adjustments is one of the main ways teams build effective rotations. I think it’s more likely than not that he plays for another team next year, but there is absolutely a spot for him on this team if they can find a deal that works for both sides. My issue if you can call it that with Pivetta is the bolded part we have basically been saying his whole tenure in Boston. He's never taken that next step and the old adage fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. At some point your results are your results and I'm not saying Pivetta has had bad results he is definitely a viable SP but at this point expecting him to match his peripherals and take a step forward just doesn't seem realistic to me in Boston. I would take Pivetta back but as I said in another post above, I'd go down the avenue of trying to get Fried/Burnes/Snell and if you strikeout then double back.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Oct 3, 2024 11:17:52 GMT -5
I don’t know why everybody says Pivetta is a number 4. He was their second best pitcher last season. If you only look at the advanced stats, there’s a decent argument for him being their best pitcher. His pitch modeling numbers are insane. His peripherals suggest he has maybe the most breakout potential of any starter on the market. He’s not a stiff, and replacing him won’t be easy. I get that he’s been around for a while, he’s in his thirties now and getting older, and he’s always had issues with the home run ball. He’s not perfect, and it would be a major disappointment if their main pitching move this offseason was just bringing him back. But if he finds an adjustment that helps him limit the home runs even a little bit, then he’s gonna have a really good season. Helping veterans make those adjustments is one of the main ways teams build effective rotations. I think it’s more likely than not that he plays for another team next year, but there is absolutely a spot for him on this team if they can find a deal that works for both sides. My issue if you can call it that with Pivetta is the bolded part we have basically been saying his whole tenure in Boston. He's never taken that next step and the old adage fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. At some point your results are your results and I'm not saying Pivetta has had bad results he is definitely a viable SP but at this point expecting him to match his peripherals and take a step forward just doesn't seem realistic to me in Boston. I would take Pivetta back but as I said in another post above, I'd go down the avenue of trying to get Fried/Burnes/Snell and if you strikeout then double back. Thats fair, I wouldn’t argue with someone who preferred a more known quantity. Someone like Fried is a meaningful improvement. But since he moved to the bullpen last year, Pivetta has pitched 248 innings with a 3.73 ERA and 3.74 FIP. He’s given them a lot of good innings over the last season and a half—his 5.0 RA9-WAR is tied with Bello, Flaherty, Musgrove and Bryce Miller for 42nd in baseball over that stretch. He has the highest Stuff+ rating out of any pitcher with at least 200 innings over that stretch. His K-BB% is 4th. His whiff rate is top-30, his chase rate is top-10. He’s a much better pitcher than he was two years ago, and if he can continue to make improvements and keep the ball in the yard a bit more, he can be the next Morton/Lugo/Eflin type who finds a good situation after hitting free agency and takes a major step forward later in his career. The point I’m trying to make is that Pivetta is not a trivial loss this offseason. There isn’t much reason to think Pivetta out/Flaherty in or Pivetta out/Kikuchi in, for example, would be a huge improvement to the rotation. Pivetta out/Priester in is probably a significant downgrade, at least in year 1. That’s what makes getting a true frontline starter so important this offseason—pitchers who are meaningfully better than Pivetta are hard to come by, and they need to be bold if they want to get one.
|
|
|
Post by Darwin's Curve on Oct 3, 2024 14:58:43 GMT -5
The real question is how good is Nick Pivetta going to be over the next year, or the next 2 or 3 if he's open to a longer deal? Obviously, there's a salary point below which you sign him, because even if he gets TJS it's a no-brainer. But I don't think we're going to be anywhere near that.
Absent some reason that Bailey thinks he can fix Pivetta's HR issue, we know exactly what we'd be getting. He's a league average starter with some injury issues who may implode or give you between 20 and 30 starts. Some will be good, others not so good. But a fortunate hot-stretch can anchor the lineup for awhile.
(And I rather think that if Bailey could have unlocked Pivetta's full potential after his hot finish last year, we would have seen it more consistently this year. But there may have been a hidden injury issue or the like - who knows? However, at the end of the day, potential and pretty peripheral-numbers, no matter how promising, don't win actual ballgames.)
Is Average-Pivetta worth $21M while kicking the need for another starting pitcher back a year? Maybe, depending on the internal assessment of developing pitchers. He might be a perfect bridge to someone. What about 2 or 3 years?
There, I'm not so sure. We've got Houck through and including the '27 season, and Duran, Crawford, and Casas through '28. All those guys will be in arb (if not extended) and they'll be more expensive. Do we want to commit to sinking resources for a FA SP in '25, '26, and '27 into Pivetta? For his age 32, 33, and 34 seasons?
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Oct 3, 2024 16:22:13 GMT -5
The real question is how good is Nick Pivetta going to be over the next year, or the next 2 or 3 if he's open to a longer deal? Obviously, there's a salary point below which you sign him, because even if he gets TJS it's a no-brainer. But I don't think we're going to be anywhere near that. Absent some reason that Bailey thinks he can fix Pivetta's HR issue, we know exactly what we'd be getting. He's a league average starter with some injury issues who may implode or give you between 20 and 30 starts. Some will be good, others not so good. But a fortunate hot-stretch can anchor the lineup for awhile. (And I rather think that if Bailey could have unlocked Pivetta's full potential after his hot finish last year, we would have seen it more consistently this year. But there may have been a hidden injury issue or the like - who knows? However, at the end of the day, potential and pretty peripheral-numbers, no matter how promising, don't win actual ballgames.) Is Average-Pivetta worth $21M while kicking the need for another starting pitcher back a year? Maybe, depending on the internal assessment of developing pitchers. He might be a perfect bridge to someone. What about 2 or 3 years? There, I'm not so sure. We've got Houck through and including the '27 season, and Duran, Crawford, and Casas through '28. All those guys will be in arb (if not extended) and they'll be more expensive. Do we want to commit to sinking resources for a FA SP in '25, '26, and '27 into Pivetta? For his age 32, 33, and 34 seasons? I think the home run issues will keep his market from getting too hot. I don’t think he’s getting a QO based on some of the postseason pressers. I could see him getting something like 3/42, which I think would have decent value upside. Kauffman is the only stadium in baseball that Statcast says he would’ve given up fewer homers in than Fenway over the last two years, and his home/road HR splits are pretty stark. That makes me think his market will be stronger with teams that have good HR suppressing parks—teams like the Dodgers and Phillies probably won’t be in on him, but I could see the Tigers or Royals making a play with their postseason revenues. I agree that peripherals don’t substitute for results. But at the same time, after the top 10-15 starters in baseball, there are a few dozen guys who could rank an basically any order in WAR, based mostly on executing a tiny fraction of their pitches better over the course of a season. Those peripherals and Stuff+ numbers don’t guarantee that he’ll be good some day, but they do suggest he’s got more margin for error than the average mid-rotation starter. I am curious why you say he has injury issues. The elbow injury is obviously something to think about, but I’m pretty sure that was the first time he’s been hurt in his career. Regardless, Pivetta is not sufficient to push this rotation forward. He would be a secondary addition at best. But if they land that top-end starter and decide that they could get for Kutter, for example, I think he’s got as much upside as any of the mid-rotation veterans on the market that they would presumably fill that rotation slot with.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Oct 4, 2024 22:15:01 GMT -5
I don't think he comes back and I don't think they extend the QO.
From Nick's side, the Sox have young pitching depth and the odds of BOS bumping him to the bullpen are far greater than any team that signs him to a decent (say, 2/30 or 3/42) deal. The Sox have done it before and he didn't like it and I don't think he's interested in testing those waters again. Another team would look foolish spending that money and then wind up paying $15m for a reliever and Nick and his agent know that. He would really have to face-plant to force a new team to demote him.
From BOS's side, throwing 1y/$20m at a guy who has never consistently put it all together and taken the next step, despite all the coaching they could give him, is a bad use of $20m. I think they would worry that he would accept, since it would ding his FA market value (with a draft pick attached). Plus they have a lot of young arms that they believe in. By the same token, if they do want him back, I think they go QO and anticipate that he accepts, as that limits their risk to one year and they're light-years from the tax threshold. If they tried to negotiate him down to 1/$16m or 1/$17m without the QO, I don't think he accepts, knowing that this may be his only chance at mid-eight-figures.
I think both sides move on and that's also my preferred scenario. He can be so good when he's on but you can never count on it. I can't remember ever thinking, even after a great prior start, "Pivetta's on the hill tomorrow, that should be a win."
|
|
|