David Price Done With Boston Media

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Should be a fun year-and-a-half with a big chunk of the fan base openly rooting for him to opt out of his contract. Has the potential to be really nasty unless he pulls a Lackey and recovers his game soon.

Tuesday at Fenway is going to be ugly if he gets hit hard.

Recovers his game?

38 starts, 247 innings, 243 K, 4.08 ERA, 3.87 FIP, 1.20 WHIP in a Red Sox uniform. He's been fine. Not otherworldly, but certainly not bad enough to compare him to 2011-2012 Lackey and suggest he needs to recover his game.

I've never been a big Price fan, but all this stuff with the media of late has seemingly had the opposite effect on me as it has many others. I'm pulling for the guy more now than ever. I hope he pitches great the rest of his time in Boston and I hope he doesn't opt out at the end of next season.

 

[mauidano]

Flashbacks to this guy.

 

[MikeM]

Flashbacks to this guy.

IDK, for me it's a pretty big jump between crying that a guy isn't living up to his contract, and sitting around complaining that we'd be better off replacing waste-of-a-roster-space-X with random scrub player Y.

Overall disappointment aside, I still don't see us being anywhere near that latter atm.

 

[PayrodsFirstClutchHit]

Recovers his game?

38 starts, 247 innings, 243 K, 4.08 ERA, 3.87 FIP, 1.20 WHIP in a Red Sox uniform. He's been fine. Not otherworldly, but certainly not bad enough to compare him to 2011-2012 Lackey and suggest he needs to recover his game.

I've never been a big Price fan, but all this stuff with the media of late has seemingly had the opposite effect on me as it has many others. I'm pulling for the guy more now than ever. I hope he pitches great the rest of his time in Boston and I hope he doesn't opt out at the end of next season.

It has more to do with Price being the 3rd highest paid player in the majors at $30 million per season. Being "fine" is not the expectation level for a player making those kind of dollars.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

It has more to do with Price being the 3rd highest paid player in the majors at $30 million per season. Being "fine" is not the expectation level for a player making those kind of dollars.

The money for David Price doesn't matter. The Red Sox can afford him and if they didn't pay for him, you wouldn't be getting less expensive tickets. If there's a person who should be pissed about his performance (which was B average last year), it should be John Henry, since he signs the checks. Whether Price makes $300M a year, $30M or $30 a year should have zero effect on what you think of him.

I'm not saying that you should automatically like David Price, far from it (he sucked last night). But he's pitched two good games this year, one bad one. And last year, he had a solid year. Should he pitch better? I don't think so, but YMMV based on the metrics you want to use. But one number should be left out, and that's his price tag.

Flashbacks to this guy.

This silly. David Price is a better pitcher (and fit for this team) than Carl Crawford was as a hitter.

 

[jon abbey]

It's a career thing too. In 226+ innings he has a 4.69 vs. the Yanks. I remember he also had a 45 pitch first against them when he was pitching for the Tigers in 2015. Girardi and his coaching staff have clearly figured out the attack plan.

It's actually more complicated than that, that early season 2015 game for DET had horrendous weather as I recall, and after he was traded to TOR, he had a 1.71 ERA in four starts against NY in August and Sept 2015, helping TOR win the division.

But the only overlap between those lineups and the one NY used last night is Gardner, Headley and Didi. Didi and Ellsbury (currently on the concussion DL) have always hit Price really well, but add Sanchez to that (4 HRs now against Price in 7 career ABs over 3 games) and there are specific matchup issues against some of the current NY hitters. Last night was almost all Sanchez's two HRs, that was five of the six runs Price allowed.

 

[Captaincoop]

The money for David Price doesn't matter. The Red Sox can afford him and if they didn't pay for him, you wouldn't be getting less expensive tickets. If there's a person who should be pissed about his performance (which was B average last year), it should be John Henry, since he signs the checks. Whether Price makes $300M a year, $30M or $30 a year should have zero effect on what you think of him.

I'm not saying that you should automatically like David Price, far from it (he sucked last night). But he's pitched two good games this year, one bad one. And last year, he had a solid year. Should he pitch better? I don't think so, but YMMV based on the metrics you want to use. But one number should be left out, and that's his price tag.

The money does matter. Even the Red Sox do not have an unlimited budget for salary. If they spend $30 million annually on a player, he needs to produce better results than Price has, or it's a problem for the Red Sox, and by extension, for those who root for the Red Sox.

And as for your final paragraph...where do I sign up for you to do my performance reviews at work?

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

And as for your final paragraph...where do I sign up for you to do my performance reviews at work?

I think you missed the part where I said "if there's a person who should be pissed about his performance it should be John Henry since he signs the checks."

The money does matter. Even the Red Sox do not have an unlimited budget for salary. If they spend $30 million annually on a player, he needs to produce better results than Price has, or it's a problem for the Red Sox, and by extension, for those who root for the Red Sox.

The Sox can easily trade David Price if they want to get out from under his salary. Easily. And Price has been good to very good in his Red Sox tenure. The idea that he "sucks" or needs to "recover his game soon" is simply wrong. Like Red(s)Hawksfan pointed above, his numbers are good to very good.

One question: heading into the 2015 offseason, the Red Sox desperately needed a front-of-the-line starter. Their rotation at the end of the year was: Wade Miley, a busted up Rick Porcello, Joe Kelly, Clay Buchholz and a young Eduardo Rodriguez. Who do you think that they should have a. signed or b. traded for that is better than David Price?

 

[Leather]

No..I think he's showing some balls by being a prick to the media...at least it some f-ing enthusiasm, I mean he did yell at Drellich. Next, Id like to see Pomeranz get on Carrabis (is that a restaurant?) for calling him "Dwew Pomewanz"

Why does "showing some balls" equate to being a better pitcher?

Should Greg Maddux have "shown some balls?"

 

[Captaincoop]

The Sox can easily trade David Price if they want to get out from under his salary. Easily. And Price has been good to very good in his Red Sox tenure. The idea that he "sucks" or needs to "recover his game soon" is simply wrong. Like Red(s)Hawksfan pointed above, his numbers are good to very good.

One question: heading into the 2015 offseason, the Red Sox desperately needed a front-of-the-line starter. Their rotation at the end of the year was: Wade Miley, a busted up Rick Porcello, Joe Kelly, Clay Buchholz and a young Eduardo Rodriguez. Who do you think that they should have a. signed or b. traded for that is better than David Price?

Could they trade David Price right now without eating any salary? I'm not so sure.

On your other point, that's a false choice. There were a bunch of free agent options, all of which would have been cheaper. They also could have explored trades. I have no idea who was available on the trade market, but outbidding the field by ~$30M for David Price on a 7-year deal was not even close to my first choice at the time.

 

[Comfortably Lomb]

Why does "showing some balls" equate to being a better pitcher?

Should Greg Maddux have "shown some balls?"

Given what we have learned post-retirement about his clubhouse behavior he may have...

 

[jon abbey]

Could they trade David Price right now without eating any salary? I'm not so sure.

Yeah, IMO there's no way, he has this year plus 5/157 after this (assuming he doesn't opt out), for a 31 year old with possible arm issues. If they put him on waivers in August a la Manny Ramirez in October 2003, no one would pick up that deal IMO.

 

[grimshaw]

It's actually more complicated than that, that early season 2015 game for DET had horrendous weather as I recall, and after he was traded to TOR, he had a 1.71 ERA in four starts against NY in August and Sept 2015, helping TOR win the division.

But the only overlap between those lineups and the one NY used last night is Gardner, Headley and Didi. Didi and Ellsbury (currently on the concussion DL) have always hit Price really well, but add Sanchez to that (4 HRs now against Price in 7 career ABs over 3 games) and there are specific matchup issues against some of the current NY hitters. Last night was almost all Sanchez's two HRs, that was five of the six runs Price allowed.

Ya - I was aware of the lack of overlap which is why I credited the coaching staff.

Regardless of match up issues though, the bottom line results aren't there and it's a big sample.

 

[chrisfont9]

There were a bunch of free agent options, all of which would have been cheaper. They also could have explored trades. I have no idea who was available on the trade market, but outbidding the field by ~$30M for David Price on a 7-year deal was not even close to my first choice at the time.

Choices that winter: Zach Greinke, Jordan Zimmerman, Hisashi Iwakuma, Johnny Cueto, John Lackey, Doug Fister, Wei-Yin Chen, JA Happ... stop me when you see a front of the rotation starter. Greinke sure, but I believe it was agreed upon at the time that he had no interest in Boston.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2015-free-agents.shtml

 

[Captaincoop]

nm

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Could they trade David Price right now without eating any salary? I'm not so sure.

Probably not, but maybe. But I don't think that it would kill the Sox to include some cash, with the way the Sox practically print money. Including cash would hamstring a team like the A's or the Rays, but not Boston, the Yankees or the Dodgers. I mean Carl Crawford was traded. Prince Fielder was traded. Mike Hampton was traded. Manny was traded essentially twice: in the completed Jason Bay deal and in the Magglio Ordonez deal that never happened. All were deemed completely "untradeable" at the time due to their lack of production and salary, all were ultimately dealt.

Aside from Manny, David Price is better than any of those players at the time of their trades.

If they put him on waivers in August a la Manny Ramirez in October 2003, no one would pick up that deal IMO.

That turned out to be a really dumb move for all involved, no? Anyone could have used Manny's bat from 2004-2009.

On your other point, that's a false choice. There were a bunch of free agent options, all of which would have been cheaper. They also could have explored trades. I have no idea who was available on the trade market, but outbidding the field by ~$30M for David Price on a 7-year deal was not even close to my first choice at the time.

How is this a false choice? The Sox needed to upgrade their rotation, Price was the best man for the job. Chrisfont9 listed the free agent pitchers that year, all of them (aside from Grienke, and he wasn't coming here) are worse than Price. They had to overbid, no question about that, but it's just money and he was the best prize that season. Whether it was YOUR first choice at the time is completely irrelevant. You don't make talent decisions.

 

[tims4wins]

Jen McCaffrey‏ @jcmccaffrey

Farrell spoke to Price about the clubhouse blowup in NY. Also said, "So much is made of player accountability...That's a two-way street."

Brian MacPherson‏Verified account @brianmacp 8m8 minutes ago

Replying to @brianmacp

Farrell called Twitter "a medium of unaccountability" and implied that the Price tirade represented Price holding the reporter accountable.

Edit: while this is probably what JF should do - protect his players - it makes me dislike him even more. Can't wait until he is finally canned. Topic for another thread, I know.

 

[jon abbey]

Probably not, but maybe. But I don't think that it would kill the Sox to include some cash, with the way the Sox practically print money. Including cash would hamstring a team like the A's or the Rays, but not Boston, the Yankees or the Dodgers. I mean Carl Crawford was traded. Prince Fielder was traded. Mike Hampton was traded. Manny was traded essentially twice: in the completed Jason Bay deal and in the Magglio Ordonez deal that never happened. All were deemed completely "untradeable" at the time due to their lack of production and salary, all were ultimately dealt.

Aside from Manny, David Price is better than any of those players at the time of their trades.

It's a different financial climate now than it was at the time of any of those moves, with talent skewing younger all the time. It's not just the big contract, it's the loss of roster flexibility: if a guy like Price or Tanaka struggles, there's really nothing to do except keep running them out there or maybe put them on the phantom DL. I'd argue that this has changed a lot even in the 18 months since BOS signed Price, we saw it somewhat in last winter's FA market and I think we'll continue to see it even more going forward. It only takes one willing/desperate team to make a trade, but I'd be surprised.

 

[Captaincoop]

Probably not, but maybe. But I don't think that it would kill the Sox to include some cash, with the way the Sox practically print money. Including cash would hamstring a team like the A's or the Rays, but not Boston, the Yankees or the Dodgers. I mean Carl Crawford was traded. Prince Fielder was traded. Mike Hampton was traded. Manny was traded essentially twice: in the completed Jason Bay deal and in the Magglio Ordonez deal that never happened. All were deemed completely "untradeable" at the time due to their lack of production and salary, all were ultimately dealt.

Aside from Manny, David Price is better than any of those players at the time of their trades.



That turned out to be a really dumb move for all involved, no? Anyone could have used Manny's bat from 2004-2009.



How is this a false choice? The Sox needed to upgrade their rotation, Price was the best man for the job. Chrisfont9 listed the free agent pitchers that year, all of them (aside from Grienke, and he wasn't coming here) are worse than Price. They had to overbid, no question about that, but it's just money and he was the best prize that season. Whether it was YOUR first choice at the time is completely irrelevant. You don't make talent decisions.

In support of your argument that David Price's deal is just fine, you're citing the Mike Hampton trade from 2002. Wherein the Rockies had to include so much money that Hampton was effectively making less than the league average for a SP. So are the Sox are going to throw in, what, $100 million dollars in this hypothetical deal?

And while I'm aware that I don't make the personnel decisions for the Red Sox, they did not need to sign an "ace" that offseason. They had a desire to upgrade their rotation, and could have done it any one of several other ways. They could have paid less money for less years for Cueto or someone of that ilk. They could have upgraded the Buchholz and Miley slots in the rotation instead, and allowed Rick Porcello (who ended up winning the Cy Young) to be their nominal ace for a year. Lots of things. They did not "have to" sign Price. That's the kind of rationale that leads to things like paying full sticker price for a car, or spending $30M more than the next highest bidder for David Price.

edit: Here's the contemporaneous thread from when these options were being discussed, in case anyone is interested in revisiting:

http://www.sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/dombrowski-sp-likely-from-fa-which-should-we-sign.11814/

 

[chrisfont9]

... they did not need to sign an "ace" that offseason. They had a desire to upgrade their rotation, and could have done it any one of several other ways. They could have paid less money for less years for Cueto or someone of that ilk.

I think this argument would have been correct if we had Sale on board by then. But the essential choice was "do we need a so-called ace?" something the players themselves raised with those "he's the ace" tee shirts. The club has bought the notion, the Globe types were never going to let it go, and all the sabermetricians in the world weren't talking them out of the "we need an ace" thing. The premise is debatable, but once you accept it, as so many did, then your only real choice was to sign David Price.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

It's a different financial climate now than it was at the time of any of those moves, with talent skewing younger all the time. It's not just the big contract, it's the loss of roster flexibility: if a guy like Price or Tanaka struggles, there's really nothing to do except keep running them out there or maybe put them on the phantom DL. I'd argue that this has changed a lot even in the 18 months since BOS signed Price, we saw it somewhat in last winter's FA market and I think we'll continue to see it even more going forward. It only takes one willing/desperate team to make a trade, but I'd be surprised.

The Yankees sent Brian McCan to the Astros paying a portion of his deal in November. These deals still happen.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

In support of your argument that David Price's deal is just fine, you're citing the Mike Hampton trade from 2002. Wherein the Rockies had to include so much money that Hampton was effectively making less than the league average for a SP. So are the Sox are going to throw in, what, $100 million dollars in this hypothetical deal?

And while I'm aware that I don't make the personnel decisions for the Red Sox, they did not need to sign an "ace" that offseason. They had a desire to upgrade their rotation, and could have done it any one of several other ways. They could have paid less money for less years for Cueto or someone of that ilk. They could have upgraded the Buchholz and Miley slots in the rotation instead, and allowed Rick Porcello (who ended up winning the Cy Young) to be their nominal ace for a year. Lots of things. They did not "have to" sign Price. That's the kind of rationale that leads to things like paying full sticker price for a car, or spending $30M more than the next highest bidder for David Price.

edit: Here's the contemporaneous thread from when these options were being discussed, in case anyone is interested in revisiting:

http://www.sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/dombrowski-sp-likely-from-fa-which-should-we-sign.11814/

The Hampton example was to show that despite being told over and over again that a player is "untradeable" or that a contract is "too big to be moved", that's a fallacy.

Your Porcello comment is 100% hindsight. In December 2015, no one thought that Rick Porcello would win the 2016 Cy Young. In fact, most people cited the Porcello trade as a Cherington blunder.

I really think that you're forgetting how bad the Red Sox rotation looked in 2015. They needed a front of the rotation guy no matter the cost.

 

[jon abbey]

The Yankees sent Brian McCan to the Astros paying a portion of his deal in November. These deals still happen.

HOU is paying McCann 2/23, I'm sure if BOS picked up almost $20M per year on Price, they would have no problem moving him. So if that was your point, conceded. My point was that in a vacuum (meaning without BOS adding accompanying talent to sweeten the package), no one is agreeing to pick up his entire deal, IMO obv.

Edit: Also, FWIW (nothing), I thought that the Price signing was a solid move for BOS at the time, but it's amazing how many big money deals go badly so quickly in recent years (for every team, I mean).

 

[redsoxstiff]

All you should demand from sports or any reporter for that matter is the unvarnished facts in a reasonable environment.

The reported has the right to proffer his opinion pro or con..
Much too common sad to say...

Emotion laden comments, bias, axes to grind etc. should turn readers away in droves.

Price carries $30m stone around his neck.His decision,his consequences...Oth the reporters write about a swollen man mis-
sharpen , impossible to encompass him or his deeds

A $75 k reporter or the various economic levels of fans can' t walk a foot in his shoes but the results of his performance are unerstandable off Maybeonly on the surface...$30m...gee what would I do ?...
A reporter reports what he sees ...price reacts with his views...
Shit happens...Teddy Ballgame walked into the office and wanted to give some Monet back because he had a bad year.
How much should Price give back if he sucks this year?

In the end this tempest is a fart in a hurricane.

 

[MikeM]

It's a different financial climate now than it was at the time of any of those moves, with talent skewing younger all the time. It's not just the big contract, it's the loss of roster flexibility: if a guy like Price or Tanaka struggles, there's really nothing to do except keep running them out there or maybe put them on the phantom DL. I'd argue that this has changed a lot even in the 18 months since BOS signed Price, we saw it somewhat in last winter's FA market and I think we'll continue to see it even more going forward. It only takes one willing/desperate team to make a trade, but I'd be surprised.

While true in a general sense, I think this is still left under-estimating both the market's always expanding inflation rate on top end guys, and the constant in-demand appeal that tends to surround front line starter types.

The opt out risk a team would have to take on without getting those first 1.5 years in the process is the only real killer there imo. Otherwise there is little chance a pitching well enough in August David Price is making through waivers without somebody picking up that remaining 5/$157m. Whether it be some GM who's looking ahead on what the market rate is likely to be on the next crop of quality starters, the Arizona type scenario where they have to make a Greinke type reach to secure themselves a talent like that, ect ect.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

The Hampton example was to show that despite being told over and over again that a player is "untradeable" or that a contract is "too big to be moved", that's a fallacy.

Your Porcello comment is 100% hindsight. In December 2015, no one thought that Rick Porcello would win the 2016 Cy Young. In fact, most people cited the Porcello trade as a Cherington blunder.

I really think that you're forgetting how bad the Red Sox rotation looked in 2015. They needed a front of the rotation guy no matter the cost.

It looked just as bad in 2014 and I wish cherington had gone after Scherzer. That's not even hindsight, I thought and said it at the time. Especially with the deferments, that contract is looking to be on of the better FA deals handed out to a SP.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Wasn't the Hampton trade finalized before the Luxury Tax was part of the CBA? That changed the landscape quite a bit.

It's bad enough to pay close to $1 of every dollar for one of your players to play for another team, but quite another to pay $1 + X%. One of the goals of the tax was to prevent a rich team from fobbing off bad contracts that drove the labor prices up for the other 29.

 

[MikeM]

It looked just as bad in 2014 and I wish cherington had gone after Scherzer. That's not even hindsight, I thought and said it at the time. Especially with the deferments, that contract is looking to be on of the better FA deals handed out to a SP.

Cherington's conservative decision to show a complete disinterest in paying a premium on Max, while he was just turning around to flush $100m down the toilet on Sandoval, was certainly a debatable blunder that winter. No doubt imo.

You could argue that in a more perfect world we sign Scherzer, Hanley spends 2015 having his LF adventures at 3B, and the Price signing never has to happen. Although I guess there is also the chance that with Max in hand Cherington doesn't make the reach on the Porcello extension either.

 

[twibnotes]

I really think that you're forgetting how bad the Red Sox rotation looked in 2015. They needed a front of the rotation guy no matter the cost.

This.

The Red Sox somehow managed to build an excellent farm system without developing a good starting pitcher over a very long period. The Price deal was not made from a position of strength, and that's why it was an ugly deal from day one.

Even those of us who thought Price would be a Cy Young contender out of the gate knew the deal would eventually be pretty ugly. That Price is already struggling means the best we can hope for is Lackey part 2 (a deal no GM would do over, the WS notwithstanding).

 

[redsoxstiff]

in brief , I expect that what ever has driven Price to to the level he performed at and the time and the savvy he put into the skills honed will return him to the
excellence achieved before the"Boston fiasco"

 

[redsoxstiff]

If the fans here are spoiled brats , the press and most media are narcissistic twits ,above their station and pay scale.
The press are mostly trash and in at least one case should wear diapers...the one and ,hopefully ,only Jerry callahan...
I am sure that most thankfully not all would be shocked if they used the interview to seek players' insights...

When Boston ad seven papers hitting the streets and naturally computing was intense...The Spelended Splinter was carved up daily...
Some can't be treated poorly enough..
Price has failed to pitch anyway near our expectations and the pirhranhas are feasting.
He has the gelt ...if Price turns around we all benefit.If not ,we blow and he's outrageously rich...The media can rest assured that mor fodder is coming...

 

[lexrageorge]

What's missing in the angst in Price's start is that it was only his 3rd start of the season, and he did not have anything resembling a "normal" spring training. It's not completely unexpected to have a rough start or two given the situation.

And the mediots can all go to hell.... When it's gotten to the point when they've even swayed posters here to pile on Price, then it's time to call it what it is: piling on.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Flashbacks to this guy.

I mean Price didn't pitch bad last year. He's got a much better chance of living up to his contract over Crawford. Price was a necessary evil but Crawford was a luxury item.

 

[reggiecleveland]

I mean Price didn't pitch bad last year. He's got a much better chance of living up to his contract over Crawford. Price was a necessary evil but Crawford was a luxury item.

I expect this picture was posting to refer to two former Rays that had a negative view of playing in Boston.

 

[Hank Scorpio]

I expect this picture was posting to refer to two former Rays that had a negative view of playing in Boston.

Yes, but on the other hand - Price has been here a little over one season, and is already finished with the Boston media.

Carl Crawford, however, hasn't been here for nearly five years, and he's not even remotely done with it.