There's also the possibility Pomeranz has turned the corner and will be the guy he has been this year. A gamble worth taking. This trade has a lot of upside potential for the Redsox as well.
Red Sox acquire Drew Pomeranz for Anderson Espinoza
- Thread starter johnnywayback
- Start date
Of course you don't have to watch "every start". But that's not what you said. You said you've "hardly seen him".
How much of Espinoza have you seen?
Why is six million a gamble? Were you around when the Masterson deal happened?
Holding a spot for Buchholz wasn't some clear win either...and this was all before Wright demonstrated his value.
You can defend not signing Hill, but acting like it was an absolute no brainer is absurd. The guy would have been cheap and just a one year deal...they could and should have found him a spot and let Kelly go to the pen.
I just heard the news and haven't read this thread yet. I'm going to need someone to talk me down because my initial reaction is disbelief and very grave unhappiness. I can't believe they gave up Espinoza for Pomeranz.
But tonight I'll read the thread and maybe someone here has made the case for why this is a good trade.
But tonight I'll read the thread and maybe someone here has made the case for why this is a good trade.
No. What we (well, I) wanted was for the Red Sox to trade some combination of Chavis, Ball, Dubon, Ockimey, etc. for a starting pitcher who is better than Clay Buchholz, of which there are many available (I think that package might have gotten Hill, but, hey, work your way down the list -- Cashner, Santana, a number of guys).
Then we (I) wanted the Red Sox to be players in the off-season when actual reliable front-line starters might be available. We (I) wanted them to pack up Swihart, Shaw, Devers, and, sure, Espinoza, and see if we couldn't get a Chris Sale or a Jose Fernandez.
I'm glad they got Pomeranz, and I'm excited to watch him, and I hope they win the World Series. But there's no way to look at this deal as anything other than a massive overpay, and there's no reason they had to do it this way. Just like with the Kimbrel trade.
My original point stands DD threw away assets for Kimbrel. He traded two top 80 prospects and threw in a talented left handed to aquire a reliever whose war had declined 3 years in a row. Those assets would of been valuable today. They could of offered a package around a position of strength with Margot as the main piece. Everytime DD makes a trade now the board is going to hold their breath. Instead they had two include one of their three top pitchers.
It's gotten worse. People are saying this is the worst sox trade ever and comparing it to Bagwell
Rhetorical device. No actual need for convincing. There were quite a few good arguments for why this is a good move posted in the thread before I showed up. I don't think I'm ever going to like this trade, but that doesn't mean it's an objectively bad move. I genuinely believe we'll regret it eventually, but if the Red Sox win the World Series this year, and it's not in spite of Pomeranz, it will be hard to call it a bad move.
Love this trade. I'm choosing to believe that Pomeranz has really turned the corner though as losing Anderson stings a little. Really thought DD would end up making a less palatable trade than this. Something that I haven't seen mentioned yet, for those wishing we had signed Hill or traded for another starter, that probably means Wright doesn't make the team out of spring training and may not have had the same season and we end up no better off..
Wasn't it Tommy Pickles? Stu was the father I believe, but I don't think there was a Drew.
I answered that way because I don't think there's anything that will convince you. And I'm not being snarky--you admitted you like the young guys and that's cool.
Now that said, the fact he is just 18 is in fact a very convincing argument
Using reliever WAR to make your point doesn't have the effect that you are hoping. Kimbrel took a step back from other worldly to merely excellent last year and is more or less that same guy this year with some shitty luck mixed in. Meanwhile, Guerra's value as a "top 80 prospect" has completely evaporated. Could Margot have been used this deadline? Sure. But if they didn't have Kimbrel now, they'd still be scrambling for a closer even after the Ziegler trade.
I don't like this trade, but the Kimbrel trade was a good use of resources. This may prove to be as well, when all is said and done.
Why the hell would it matter? I'm not a scout. I'll rely on what I've read from callis,law,speier and anything I could find on him. Im willing to bet most of the industry agrees that they paid a steep price. Hopefully Pomeranz put it all together this year and we get a legitimate three starter and not a back of the rotation filler.
If the turnaround (noted by Fangraphs and Gammons) is real then this deal is great. Thank you Darren Balsley if you've turned Drew Pomeranz into a Lester-esque pitcher.
However, I'm worried about his transition to Boston. There's going to be a ton of pressure on the kid. Lately, pitchers coming over to the Sox haven't exactly lit the world on fire upon reaching Fenway.
However, I'm worried about his transition to Boston. There's going to be a ton of pressure on the kid. Lately, pitchers coming over to the Sox haven't exactly lit the world on fire upon reaching Fenway.
To make your point stronger, you could HAVE at least mentioned the fourth player we traded, who may soon be the Padres starting second baseman, or at least a very decent utility infielder in Carlos Asuaje.
One side effect of this is that they basically have an entire decent roster under contract for the next two years. Assuming Rodriguez is the 5th starter, you could roll into camp with this team and look at least ok.
Depending on arbitration, it looks like they have something like 145-160 million committed against the cap. That gives them about 30-50 to play with, either for extensions, bullpen, a new DH, or whatever other luxury items. So aside from if this was a good trade, they look like a strong team now and have the chance to be the class of the division the next couple years.
Depending on arbitration, it looks like they have something like 145-160 million committed against the cap. That gives them about 30-50 to play with, either for extensions, bullpen, a new DH, or whatever other luxury items. So aside from if this was a good trade, they look like a strong team now and have the chance to be the class of the division the next couple years.
Jesus, the guy hasn't been a "three starter" this year he's been an ace. He's 27, cheap, has 2.5 years of control and a big time pedigree.
If this team had the dearth of ready (or near ready) starting pitching like they did at the start of 2015 (which is why they signed Masterson), then $6M for a Hill flier is no big deal. But they weren't in that position...no amount of hindsight changes that fact.
Let me reiterate again. This guy made four good starts in meaningless September games after being released by four teams in two years. He's 36. He's someone you might offer $1M to compete with Wright, Rodriguez, and Owens for the fifth spot in the Red Sox rotation. Six million is a bit much considering he could have just as easily gotten hurt or turned into the pumpkin that landed him in independent ball just three months prior.
Buchholz was coming off an injury shortened season in which he had a 3.63 ERA and a 130 ERA+. No reason AT ALL to assume that he's going to be as bad as he's been this year. NONE.
But hey, hindsight being 20/20 and all that bull shit, they should have signed him. They also should have gone ahead and signed Johnny Cueto too. Think where they'd be with him instead of entrusting a spot to E-Rod or Joe Kelly.
You're completely ignoring the fact that he wasn't going to sign with any club that didn't have a spot for him to start. The Sox had nine guys lined up in front of him.
No I haven't been staying up to watch the Padres on nightly basis. That doesn't mean I can't look at his career stats and see he's never pitched more than a 120 innings. That he's spent most of his career in pitchers parks and has been incredibly lucky this year with his LOB and BABIP. Maybe I'm completely off on the market and the Rangers offered Gallo or profar. Espinoza to me is an overpay and I think most evaluators agree with laws take that it was a steep price.
On top of that, there's no way a combination of Swihart+ gets those guys. The conversation for one of them starts with Betts, Bogearts, or Moncada, then goes on from there.
I loved how Dombrowski calculated the Kimbrel deal by utilizing players at positions of depth who were blocked either by a franchise cornerstone like Bogaerts or at the time the depth of Bradley, Betts, and Benitendi. In this case he took a top 18-year old prospect, utilized him to stabilize our starting rotation while replacing that prospect with todays signing of Groome.
Yeah, you hate to give up top prospects however to acquire high quality cost-controlled ML pitchers like Kimbrel and Pomeranz you are going to have to give up top prospects. Dombrowski accomplished this without including a single ML player while doing very little damage to the depth of our organization.
I'm not sure why people are expressing such hostility toward Pedroia'sBoys--his point isn't all that unreasonable. If DD pulled a Brian Cashman and acquired Chapman for nothing (Rookie Davis and Eric Jag. aren't real prospects and they are proving that in Double A this year), the Red Sox would have held on to valuable assets that, in turn, could have been used to acquire Pomeranz. DD needed to wait out the closer market for longer than he did. The Padres asking price for Kimbrel was too high but DD didn't demonstrate the flexibility to find another solution.
I like the Pomeranz trade better than the Kimbrel trade. At least the Red Sox acquired a SP this time for a valuable young player versus acquiring a closer for multiple young players.
Except 2012 when he pitched ~145. So you haven't watched him pitch and can't even take the time to read his career stats closely before ranting about how bad this trade is? I don't like this trade either, but you are making it far too easy to dismiss your take as worthless drivel.
The price tag for Chapman had absolutely nothing to do with the closer market
Interestingly, there is no CBA after Dec 1, 2016. I mean, there probably will be, but the CBA is expiring this year. I'd be very surprised if the cap didn't go up by a pretty good amount going into next season.
Unless there's something I'm not understanding (100% possible, likely even), the whole future CBA/luxury tax issue seems quite underreported to me.
Law didn't say anything at all about it being a bad trade for the Redsox and what you "think" other evaluators "might think" is less than worthless.
He had a 3.08 ERA and 3.69 FIP over the previous two years/155 IP coming into this year. He's put the cherry on the sundae in 2016, but it's not like he sucked before this year and came out of nowhere. He was a vaunted prospect who struggled in limited duty in the worst pitchers' ballpark in baseball, and has done nothing but improve since getting out of there. Granted, Fenway is a hitters' park too, but not like Coors.
There's absolutely no reason to expect him to be "back of the rotation filler." Anything is possible for a pitcher changing teams and leagues, of course, but a rational floor would be a mediocre #3/decent #4 type, a 4.20 FIP kind of guy. And there's very good reason to expect better than that.
1--He's pitched 147 innings in 2012
2--Petco plays very similar to Fenway this year and his ERA+ 161 which is adjusted for his park.
3--His BABIP is very good. However, it's almost the same as it was in 2014 and even last year was very good, if higher than this season. His BABIP last year was better than any season Lester ever had, until this one.
Further to that, I'm pretty sure Chapman was the Red Sox first choice and they were the ones that unearthed the domestic violence incident in the first place. They arguably dropped the price for Chapman considerably just by passing on him (and revealing the reason).
I'm okay with this trade - a one for one deal (Steve Adams - MLB Rumors Site). We gave up a valuable prospect, you all knew we had to, for a pitcher who made the AS Game and has 3 years of control (including the remainder of this season). He can step into the rotation and stabilize things after Wright, Price and Porcello.
Am I seriously the only person who's seen Espinoza pitch around here? I mean, I'm an anonymous dude from the internet and my opinion is worthless, but you guys should really watch a low minors game once in a while. It really sharpens your appreciation of the big leagues.
Anyway, Espinoza is young and a ways away from MLB. Like everyone says, he's got a great, low-effort looking delivery with awesome velocity, and that always projects well, but he's still got a ways to go. He's still pretty raw in that he doesn't repeat his delivery so great and some of his pitches went to the backstop. Just crazy wild sometimes. That's not uncommon for an 18-year old. But you know, 18. He really does have a delivery made of dreams, but he still has a lot of stuff to figure out to get to MLB. Barring injury and tons of other stuff, I'm sure he'll get there, but it's a tough road for young pitchers.
That said, I have no idea if this deal is good or not. Dombrowski does have a pretty decent track record in trading prospects, though.
Anyway, Espinoza is young and a ways away from MLB. Like everyone says, he's got a great, low-effort looking delivery with awesome velocity, and that always projects well, but he's still got a ways to go. He's still pretty raw in that he doesn't repeat his delivery so great and some of his pitches went to the backstop. Just crazy wild sometimes. That's not uncommon for an 18-year old. But you know, 18. He really does have a delivery made of dreams, but he still has a lot of stuff to figure out to get to MLB. Barring injury and tons of other stuff, I'm sure he'll get there, but it's a tough road for young pitchers.
That said, I have no idea if this deal is good or not. Dombrowski does have a pretty decent track record in trading prospects, though.
Last edited:
Dude, just stop. Every post is more wrong than the one before it. You admit you haven't seen the guy, and now you're actually screwing up the numbers you are looking at. First of all, if you combine his major league and minor league innings, by using simple addition, you'll realize he's pitched more than 120 innings in a season.
And when the fuck did Coors field become a pitcher's park? You know, the place where the Rockies play like a mile above sea level, and where Pomeranz has spent 3 of his 5 major league seasons? And I'm sure you know that Petco's fences were moved in this year, so it's no longer the pitcher's park it used to be.
And yes, Laws said it was a "steep price," but he didn't say it was a bad move as you're implying. It was a steep price because that's what you have to fucking pay to get a 27 year old ALL STAR starting pitcher, who is cost controlled for the next couple years in today's market. Do you think they could have got Pomeranz or anyone of his caliber for nothing?
With every passing post by the prospect humpers, I'm loving this trade more and more. And I'm a friggin prospect humper.
I wouldn't think he has the ability to maintain a lower than league average BABIP, I would first assume its SSS noise. I don't get all the venom directed toward me. DD in my opinion has overpaid in his two major trades as the general manager. That apparently is an enraging comment.
Your comments aren't followed up by any substance, facts, or even moderately accurate information. You just keep saying shit with the hope something sticks and none of it is. Please stop.