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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 27, 2019 14:37:28 GMT -5
Arizona seems a little high and LA seems a little low... Miami is the story here by far, right? The disconnect between the talent that's come through that organization and the quality of the teams they've fielded is astounding. It's called strip-mining. They've been really good at it. They did have some misfortune with Fernandez, but they've also been unwilling to properly value the talent that did come through the system. Have they even done that, though? Look at what the As have done without really spending more and while developing far less talent. Plus, they've done a far better job of tricking all us baseball nerds into actually believing that a team from the Bay Area is a scrappy small market underdog. You're not wrong about the strip mining thing, it's just that even under those circumstances they should have put together a couple decent teams.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 27, 2019 11:21:24 GMT -5
White Sox may be out on the starting pitching market. Trading for Price would most likely turn one of their bad starters into a good reliever. Bringing in a starter when you already have a full rotation isn't like bringing in a first baseman when you already have a first baseman; adding a starter to the top of a "full" rotation just makes your staff deeper and better and displaces your worst pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 26, 2019 13:03:52 GMT -5
Arizona seems a little high and LA seems a little low... Miami is the story here by far, right? The disconnect between the talent that's come through that organization and the quality of the teams they've fielded is astounding.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 26, 2019 9:06:05 GMT -5
The White Sox have 6 starters.With Kopech behind the 5 starters of Giolito, Cease, Khechul, Gonzalez, and Lopez. No need for Price. Give this one rumor up Gammons and hopeful Red Sox fans. Cease was bad in the majors, Lopez is confirmed bad in the majors, Gonzalez is near the end of his career (he had less value on the market than Perez), Kopech was last seen two years ago looking like a guy with an amazing fastball and a questionable ability to remain a starter... it doesn't really matter that they've nominally filled all their slots when Price would still be pretty clearly their #2. If anything there's more pressure for them to get more depth in that rotation because a lot of guys currently on the fringes of it would probably be a lot better out of the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 25, 2019 6:41:50 GMT -5
The White Sox have 5 starters. They're probably done for now. One would think that Hahn rejected that trade idea altogether. David Price is much better than four of them.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 24, 2019 12:28:15 GMT -5
So a team shouldn't have to give something up to acquire a "properly valued" player? Something maybe, not much though unless there's a major bidding war. If a player projects to be worth $60m, a good baseline for what a team would be willing to pay for him would be... $60m. No one's going to want to pay $60m on the contract and kick in another $20m worth of prospects.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 21, 2019 17:10:05 GMT -5
Once you have him, you keep him. Mookie Betts is probably going to become the first 400 million dollar baseball player ever for 10+ years. Would you want to keep him knowing how big this contract is going to be? I don't see a better way to spend $400m on baseball player(s), which the Red Sox are going to do one way or another.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 21, 2019 14:44:38 GMT -5
Porcello only looks like he's declining using Fangraphs, using Baseball Reference he's doing the same thing he has for six years now. Good season followed by a bad one. Which is a very interesting thing to look at because Fangraphs just about doubles his career war over Baseball reference and that is rather shocking considering bwar is usually the one that helps guys like Perez. Just something to consider because his value is really different depending on which war you use, that really isn't the case for Porcello. For the zillionth time, using WAR like this is like using a chainsaw for your appendectomy.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 20, 2019 8:55:00 GMT -5
I don't want Mookie traded, but the Dodgers are probably the perfect team to make a swap. #1 They are desperate to win NOW. #2 They have a much better chance of resigning him over other teams that are interested. They have the money and fan base. Even their weather may appeal to Betts. But #3 is reserved for those special cities that have 2 teams, and there are not many. # 3 The Dodgers, more than usual, are now competing with the Angels for who puts the most exciting product on the field. Trout is the best player of our generation, and with Rendon signing, they have become even more a media darling. What better way to attempt to match up with the almighty Mike Trout, then bring in arguably the 2nd best player in baseball? The Dodgers are one of the few teams that check pretty much every box. They have the prospects, the money, the will, the desire, and quoting the Cowardly Lion...."the nerve". LA, with Betts being traded for, would become the baseball universe. Yeah the Yankees are loaded, but Trout and Betts in the same city? WOW! This is motivated logic.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 19, 2019 21:56:26 GMT -5
Price's contract is underwater and Betts is expensive and a one-year rental. It's becoming clear to me that pretty much everyone who wants to see a Betts trade is wildly unrealistic about the return. That one year rental should return about $30m in excess value to the team that gets him. Price alone offsets most of that value if you're talking about packaging them together.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 19, 2019 20:54:24 GMT -5
Kendall does not make enough contact to be considered any sort of significant asset. He’s a borderline non-prospect. Jordan Sheffield is a borderline non-prospect at this point. Pollock is fine I guess. Santana is trending in the wrong direction. Stripling might be an ok back of the rotation guy. In other words that’s an awful return for the 2nd best player in baseball and your #2 starterPrice's contract is underwater and Betts is expensive and a one-year rental. It's becoming clear to me that pretty much everyone who wants to see a Betts trade is wildly unrealistic about the return.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 19, 2019 12:59:07 GMT -5
I doubt the Dodgers would agree to either of those deals. But I could see Stripling and Downs for Betts. From the Dodgers perspective they'd get an upgrade in RF and no downgrade at SS if they feel Lux is the better player. Or we get Lux if they think Seager is better. Either way they're dealing from surplus to go for it now, and we have a hole to fill. A very DDo approach on their side to get to a championship. EDIT: I'd also be willing to add someone on the level of Lin/Hernandez/Chatham to help the Dodgers preserve their middle infield depth (albeit at a downgrade from Seager/Lux). Sorry, but you're not really looking at this from Dodgers perspective at all. The Dodgers value depth as much as anyone, and if they keep both Lux and Seager they can play one at 2b, make Muncy a full time 1B, and Bellinger a full time CF. In other words, if they really think Lux is better than Seager, then they have an amazing team offensively and defensively without doing anything. Yeah, they have the depth to deal Seager and I'm sure they'd be willing to, but not at a discount. There's no reason for them to do that. The idea that they're going full Dombro because they got bounced in the NLDS is wishful thinking.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 19, 2019 7:27:49 GMT -5
So if we got word that Noah Song was having TJ surgery tomorrow, he'd miss all of 2020 and be rehabbing by late 2021 and he'd still be a Top 20 - maybe Top 10 prospect in the system. Jay Groome was drafted in 2016 and has barely pitched and he's ranked ahead of Song. This isn't ideal, but he's healthy and will probably be on some sort of throwing regimen. It's going to be a lot of work and it might derail him, but I'm not going to go all gloom and doom on him if he does have to fulfill the commitment. Right, it is a little silly how stressed we're getting over the idea of a pitcher missing two whole years. Granted that's longer than most pitchers with some kind of major arm injury are away from the game, but... also he doesn't have a major arm injury. I feel like the absolute most pessimistic you can be is that after two years, he's something like a position player conversion, where you develop him as a two pitch reliever just to move him along as fast as possible. In that scenario you still probably expect him to be a good reliever, which still makes him a great pick.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:35:50 GMT -5
The report names those three as players who've been discussed. It does NOT suggest a trade of Betts for all three, because that's truly absurd. Right? Only DDom would give up that package for someone. Not even. Dombrowski traded prospects, all those guys are currently good MLB players.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:18:30 GMT -5
Fantastic. I can't get enough of this. Hope it never ends.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:15:31 GMT -5
If they end up trading Betts, the last thing on my mind would be filling needs via that trade. Get the best return you can. Period. True. Seager, Verdugo and Smith would be quite a haul though for a player who is about to hit free agency and command some serious $. The report names those three as players who've been discussed. It does NOT suggest a trade of Betts for all three, because that's truly absurd.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:00:23 GMT -5
Yes, but in this specific point you could've used un-adjusted RA9 (a not-outstanding for Dodger Stadium but still solid 3.80) and had the same takeaway. RAA (and RAR) just take RA9 and compare it to ExpectedRA9, which is what is adjusted for park, league, etc. Buehler was just kind of unlucky this year in terms of allowing runs. How much WAR should account for that can go back and forth forever - using RAA you'll end up with blips (like Buehler this year) where a guy's peripherals are great but the bWAR is mediocre because some extra runs scored for one reason or another. Using FIP or Expected ERA or another similar stat as the basis for WAR ends up missing out on guys with a skill to outperform their peripherals consistently (Tom Glavine, Mark Buehrle, etc). I guess the point is that both systems of WAR will occasionally get a guy wrong for one reason or another, so it's helpful to note the reasons why someone's WAR numbers seem out of sorts. Broader point, WAR is not an analytic tool for pitchers, period. You can talk about a pitcher's WAR like it means something when he's giving his acceptance speech at Cooperstown.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 11:21:11 GMT -5
The risk of Betts leaving applies even moreso for the team trading for him, which would be giving up players to acquire him. It'd be one thing if the Red Sox weren't trying to win this year (which I say hoping not to open that Pandora's Box) and the value he provides in 2020 is meaningless, but it's not meaningless. I'm skeptical they'll get an offer that is worth more than his 2020 production + the potential draft pick if he walks + what I figure to be the decreased likelihood he'd re-sign.There is risk to keeping Betts. There is more risk to trading for him. On top of all that, they also retain the option to trade him in season. They probably get less of a return, but how much less really? Like maybe it's the difference of one 45 FV guy in the deal?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 15, 2019 13:02:16 GMT -5
Kluber trade indicates the return won't be as much as we'd hope for Price, but the Sox can definitely move him. Rangers weren't probably in the mix for Price, so that just made even more competition for whatever quality pitching is left. The Rangers gave up a no-name reliever and a bench outfielder for one year of Kluber at $17.5m, and the option to retain him for another year at $18m. I don't see how this is anything but bad news for a Red Sox team looking to move a pitcher who's attached to over four times as much guaranteed salary. Like, the most optimistic interpretation of this is that if the Red Sox pay down Price's salary to the $17-18m a year range, they too can acquire two very mediocre players of no real consequence? This is the future Red Sox fans want?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 15, 2019 12:31:05 GMT -5
Wow, you read way to much into my post. Literally your post: What exactly do you expect people to "read into" stuff like this?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 13, 2019 15:32:53 GMT -5
Do they? They have Xander and Devers as true long term studs, and then Sale and JDM who are both excellent but getting to a point where injury and general decline are becoming real concerns. Well we still have Betts, Benny is a lot more like 2018 than 2019 in my book. ERod is a darn good pitcher. So yes we do. Umm: Mata, Groome, and Ward all have a legit chance to become decent starters if not better. Houck could easily become a Barnes type bullpen arm. Dalbec looks like a guy that can play 1B and DH. Who knows about Duran and Chatham. This team has plenty of star power, we need the depth to surround those guys. Presumably you're not counting on Mata, Groome and Ward next year, so what are we talking about here?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 13, 2019 15:25:11 GMT -5
Perez' xwOBA for 2019 was .304. David Price's was .308. Chris Sale's was .285. Speaking of bad stats, it's not clear that pitcher xwOBA is useful for literally anything.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 13, 2019 14:32:04 GMT -5
One back-end-of-the-top-100 prospect and a bunch of guys this site projects as bench/utility players. Definitely makes sense to punt on this season and trade Price, who "sucks," when you've got this bevy of world-beating talent waiting in the wings... Mata, Groome, and Ward all have a legit chance to become decent starters if not better. Houck could easily become a Barnes type bullpen arm. Dalbec looks like a guy that can play 1B and DH. Who knows about Duran and Chatham. This team has plenty of star power, we need the depth to surround those guys. Do they? They have Xander and Devers as true long term studs, and then Sale and JDM who are both excellent but getting to a point where injury and general decline are becoming real concerns.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 13, 2019 14:20:11 GMT -5
How Smart is our new GM? He wanted this guy and seemed to overpay to get an option year. Compared to Porcello this deal doesn't look that great. He has to see something or I'm hoping he does. Everybody has their stats they prefer, but mine is whip for a pitcher. Last four years 1.414, 1.535, 1.781, and 1.518. He now moves into the AL East and he allows a ton of base runners every inning. Still see a #6 guy on a very good team, but the scary thing is if you trade Price he's your #4. So let's hope our new boy wonder is right. We need him to nail moves like this. WHIP doesn't account for defense at all so it's a really simple stat. It's barely better than ERA. The Rangers and Twins have had bad defenses and those parks also give up a lot more home runs than Fenway. The true measure of how a pitcher pitches is adjusted for defense and park factors. WHIP is a bad stat, but hey, Martin Perez is a bad pitcher, so I guess it's appropriate in that regard. I don't know, he did have a apparent breakout early in the season before totally giving it all back deeper into the season, maybe they think they can manage his innings a little more strictly and help him sustain deeper into the season. I can't say I'm optimistic, though.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 13, 2019 14:18:34 GMT -5
As far as Cole himself, I looked at his numbers a little more closer. He has an extreme K/BB ratio. I think he's going to be good for quite awhile. I don't think he's going to turn 32 and just suddenly lose it. With injuries you never do know and pitchers are the riskiest creatures on earth, but if you're going to give that kind of money to a pitcher, he's the guy. His 2019 results weren't a fluke. The one thing that gets me with this deal (or maybe the one solace I can find, considering) is that both he and Verlander joined the Astros and immediately got better and he's not the only one. I've done some cursory digging and couldn't say whether my hare-brained speculation holds up but I'd be interested. Whether it's their coaching staff or -ahem- something else what says the Yankees get the Houston version of Cole and not the Pittsburgh version?
Don't get me wrong the Pittsburgh version is still a wonderful pitcher to have but he's not the world beating damn-near-7-bWAR pitcher they're paying for.
Cole's Fangraph's player comment coming into the 2019 season: www.fangraphs.com/players/gerrit-cole/13125/stats?position=PThe short story is, Pittsburg loved sinkers and pushed Cole to use his a lot despite it being his worst pitch, and once the Astros told him to stop he immediately became the pitcher he was supposed to be all along. The Yankees basically take a similar approach to pitching as the Astros, and I expect Cole to be a similar pitcher next year.
|
|
|