What does Red Sox starting pitching look like in 2024?
- Thread starter JM3
- Start date
I have been saying for months that he’s going to get more than people expect, but I’m still sticking with 12/324.
I was responding to a post mentioning Matt. I'm not sure if BaseballJones realized it or not.
@Devizier he‘s probably going to come close, yeah. At least assuming NYY and NYM are both in on him. But as I’ve mentioned, I gave up on the Sox landing him a long time ago.
Also, regarding Mayer, isn’t the idea that people are trying to get rid of him juuuuuuuust a bit of a strawman argument?
People are - at the most - saying they’d move him for a top half of the rotation starting pitcher with several years of control, and even then it’s really only if the Red Sox are unable to sign them in free agency or unable to trade a combination of lesser prospects for them.
People are possibly looking at the Beckett / Sale deals and understanding that there is nobody on the pitching side like ASanchez or Kopech (not to mention that Mayer isn’t regarded the same way that Moncada was), so the Sox might have to give up Mayer because there is no pitcher like Sánchez, Kopech or even Espinoza to use in a deal.
It is hardly saying anyone “wants” to get rid of Mayer. It is understanding how valuable a resource cost controlled top of the rotation pitching is and understanding that the Sox have no starting pitching prospects inside even the top 150 to possibly include with lesser prospects like Yorke and Bleis to get a deal done. As such, if the decisions are “move Mayer and get a top half of the rotation starter with term” or “keep Mayer and not have said pitcher”, the Sox should consider moving Mayer.
Also, regarding Mayer, isn’t the idea that people are trying to get rid of him juuuuuuuust a bit of a strawman argument?
People are - at the most - saying they’d move him for a top half of the rotation starting pitcher with several years of control, and even then it’s really only if the Red Sox are unable to sign them in free agency or unable to trade a combination of lesser prospects for them.
People are possibly looking at the Beckett / Sale deals and understanding that there is nobody on the pitching side like ASanchez or Kopech (not to mention that Mayer isn’t regarded the same way that Moncada was), so the Sox might have to give up Mayer because there is no pitcher like Sánchez, Kopech or even Espinoza to use in a deal.
It is hardly saying anyone “wants” to get rid of Mayer. It is understanding how valuable a resource cost controlled top of the rotation pitching is and understanding that the Sox have no starting pitching prospects inside even the top 150 to possibly include with lesser prospects like Yorke and Bleis to get a deal done. As such, if the decisions are “move Mayer and get a top half of the rotation starter with term” or “keep Mayer and not have said pitcher”, the Sox should consider moving Mayer.
FWIW, while many of us were speculating on The Dodgers early on the national and international discussion of the final couple of days was nearly all about Toronto. So perhaps there's a shot. Keep your Sox on Kiddo.
Matt, not sure Arnold's can play a gold glove 3rd base. But the again we just don't know.
I say set the market for the two starters and trade Sale for a second baseman. Subsidize Sale if you need to. Keep our prospects, at least the top guys. This team has problems that should be fixed by money.
This is totally fair, and to be clear, the only way he should be moved is for an absolute stud, proven pitcher with multiple years of control (so.. not a guy like Burnes).
I just put Teel and Anthony a peg above. Teel because of the dearth of stud catchers around the league and the success he showed on offense and defense last year. Anthony because he just looks to be an absolutely special talent.
I am NOT advocating moving Mayer.
Sale’s salary really limits the number of trade partners and once you get to the point of paying like, half, it makes more sense just to keep him.
Pivetta for Polanco, however, seems practically perfect.
I think that the plan now could be to try like hell to land one of Yamamoto, Montgomery, Imanaga (or I guess Snell), then do something like Pivetta for Polanco. Bringing Polanco aboard frees up Yorke and/or Valdez for a trade.
If we can’t sign one of those FAs, then there’s probably going to be something much more complicated with Milwaukee or Seattle.
To be competitive in the AL East the Sox need two starters who can average between 6 and 7 innings of high quality pitching. The offense and defense both need serious boosts. The Sox are way behind the rest of the division right now. At least the Jay's did not add Ohtani.
Literally there are like 13 guys who did that last year, but Montgomery was just under 6 IP per start. Kirby and Gilbert were right around 6 IP/start. Burnes just over. That's it for even theoretical options. Guys like Giolito and Snell were a bit closer to 5IP/start. The league leader, Logan Webb, was at 6.5 IP/start.
Yes, I was looking at that list and of 13 there are a few that wouldn't even particularly fit the Sox need as top of the rotation types.
Interestingly, only two of those 13 are in the AL East (Cole and Bassitt). How are those teams competing so well without two starters averaging between 6 and 7 innings of high quality pitching?
Sale will be a salary dump at this point. He's thrown 150 innings since 2020. There is no way we get anything of value for him. We can only hope to be sellers at the DL, him putting together half a season and someone taking the risk he can put together a good few months for a playoff run.
Sale is a sunk cost. They just need to figure out the best way to use him at this point. Maybe as a starter. Maybe as a reliever. At this point I don't care. Just get the most innings from him that are effective innings.
I think Mayer represents a tier of prospect that is very rarely traded for anyone and I’d imagine it’s very unlikely that he goes anywhere. I’m trying to think the last time a top 10 prospect in baseball was moved and the guys I think about are Eloy Jimenez, Yoan Moncada, Dansby Swanson and Will Myers. Given his defense at a premium position and the injury lowering his value (temporarily hopefully), I can’t see him being on the table for any of the pitchers rumored to be an available. We will get a lot more information about Mayer’s evaluation as the sites start releasing their updated rankings but it seems like most of his swing and miss and lack of performance were a mix of shoulder and bad fortune. I’m expecting a resumption of his ascent in April and while I feel the pressure to fix the pitching, it doesn’t feel urgent enough to give up the possibility of potentially 6+ years of a future 4+ fWAR player.
Kirby is probably in that category where you’d consider it, but I don’t really think he’s available. The others? Spencer Strider? Zac Gallen? Those guys would never move.
Problem with all these trades is that those teams want to win now and Mayer can’t help there. A guy like Eury Perez is someone I’d trade Mayer for but the Marlins wouldn’t make that deal without significant additional compensation. The injury-plagued seasons for both Bleis and Mayer hurt in that regard. This is why I don’t see a major trade happening - there just isn’t much supply for what we need.
I was playing with BTV (I know) the other day, and they had Anthony, Duran*, and Crawford as being a slight overpay for George Kirby…
* might have been Abreu in the trade, and not Duran
That said, I don’t think there’s really a trade for a player like Kirby. Who is motivated to trade a 25 year old pitcher that’s under team control until 2029?
Really no one.
The only scenario I can think of is either a) a ridiculous overpay of Prospects (two of Teel/Anthony/Mayer, and two or three of the next tier prospects). Or maybe if Seattle was one player away, and we had 1.5-2 years of a reasonably priced superstar player (think Mookie Betts, 2019 situation) to trade, AND Seatttle was looking at their window slamming shut in this or next season.
* might have been Abreu in the trade, and not Duran
That said, I don’t think there’s really a trade for a player like Kirby. Who is motivated to trade a 25 year old pitcher that’s under team control until 2029?
Really no one.
The only scenario I can think of is either a) a ridiculous overpay of Prospects (two of Teel/Anthony/Mayer, and two or three of the next tier prospects). Or maybe if Seattle was one player away, and we had 1.5-2 years of a reasonably priced superstar player (think Mookie Betts, 2019 situation) to trade, AND Seatttle was looking at their window slamming shut in this or next season.
Grepal is off on the numbers, but I totally agree that the lack of IP from our MLB starters is killing us.
And you may have been going for snark here, but the contrast within the division was pretty stark.
IP by starters in 2023:
5. TOR 894.2
6. BAL 878.1
19. MFY 820.2
26. TBR 783.2
27. BOS 774.1
Being unintentionally worse than the Rays in this category, who have had the lowest starters IP in baseball for the last six years (by over 300 IP) as an organizational philosophy, is really bad news.
I'd put the dividing line more realistically at around 5.5 IP per start. Bello (5.6) was the only guy on the team to surpass that, and Pivetta (5.4) was the only one close; the other six guys ranged from below average to absolutely terrible. We didn't have a single qualified starter this year.
Or, looking at it another way, how were the Yankees so bad with almost 10% of the 6+ inning starters on their team?
BTV values Kirby at 91M and Gilbert at 65M.
Duran 34M, Mayer 44M (or Anthony 42M), and Yorke 13M (or Rafaela 12M) matches up for Kirby.
Duran 34M, Bleis 21M, and Schreiber 9M matches up for Gilbert.
Edit: It was not Abreu -- BTV values him at 8M.
Most teams don't want to trade a quarter for two dimes and a nickel. There are only so many roster spots and players you can put on the field at once. You're going to need to send more total value if the other side is sending the best player in the deal.
I suspect all of us who are longtime fans need to recalibrate the language we use for starters. It wasn’t that long ago when saying a guy was a 6 inning starter was a put down. Now it’s a badge of honor.
But people should also get the point and not be all snarky about it. It’s clear we desperately need many more innings from our starters going forward. The tax on the pen last season was crippling as the season got into its final third.
None of us know what the Mariners would accept in trade, but we all know that teams trade quarters (MLB starters) for two dimes and a nickel (prospects) fairly frequently. Soto has been the quarter in a trade like that twice. So it does happen.
And to be clear, I'm not proposing this trade package, just pointing out what might be close to an equivalent value based on BTV valuations.
But I'll play devil's advocate and argue why the Mariners might accept the Duran/Bleis/Schrieber for Gilbert package. On their side, Gilbert is surplus for them if they sign Snell, which might be the only reason they'd trade him. In return they get a dynamic outfield bat (Duran) to plug in now, a solid relief pitcher (Schreiber) to plug in now, and a buy-low outfield prospect who was injured last year but has the potential to be an Anthony/Mayer level prospect and could be ready for The Show in 2-3 years.
Who would you be willing to deal for Gilbert?
Right, I think if he'd said X number of quality starts, there would have been a fair amount of agreement with that, myself included. Which is why several of us here were coming around a bit more on Montgomery as recently as Friday.
Mariner fans would be down for a trade involving Duran and Bleis if it happens in combination with a Snell signing. They need offense today, and if they can get that without sacrificing pitching (by backfilling Kirby or Gilbert's spot) I'm sure they'd be OK. Mostly they are white hot angry at ownership for appearing to cheap out again, although as with the Sox not all that much has happened yet.
Trading Gilbert or Kirby for Duran and paying Snell seems overly complicated. Couldn’t they just sign a bat better than Duran (who is hardly a sure thing offensively or at all really) for cheaper than Snell and come out ahead?
Sure, that's why Bleis would have to be in there. They can sign additional bats, they need a few of them IMO. Personally I think Duran would be incredible out here, assuming his contact rates remain what they were last year. T-Mob isn't as spacious as it used to be, but still. I'd try to watch every game he plays in Oakland.
A big FA who wants to go to the team is not really something to turn up one's nose at. & not sure there are many FA hitters out there better than Duran right now. Sad state of affairs.
I think both chawson & BPMS have mentioned structures that involve the Mariners dumping Ray's contract along with probably Gilbert for a Duran-based return, which makes a fair amount of sense for both sides if the Mariners get Snell but want to keep to their budget & the Red Sox strike out in the pitching market.
There was a pretty significant turning point in starting pitching usage in 2016. Coincidentally or not, that's the year dugout iPads became legal.
Eno Sarris (one of the creators of Stuff+) was on a recent SABRcast. He said he looked into and found that it was familiarity that was the cause of the drop-off in effectiveness. Velocity and stuff held up over the course of the game, so it could only be that batters who get three looks at the same pitcher get more comfortable. He suggested just using a couple different pitches in a starter's arsenal the first time through the order to give different looks using the rest later. And he said it without a hint of realization that starters have literally been saying that's how you approach a game for the first 100+ years of baseball. It's like the stat guys discovered that water was wet.
He also pointed out that relievers are less effective the more times they're used in a short series for the exact same reason. So if you can't have your starters face someone more than twice and you can't overuse your relievers, how exactly do you fill out those innings? I think things are going to have to transition back to starters trying to go 6 or 7 every time out and pacing themselves, even if it leads to giving up more runs early. Blowing through your entire pen every series is a recipe for a late season collapse.
And Seattle with 3 of those guys finished 3rd in the division and while finishing with the 6th best record in the A.L. they didn't make the playoffs. In theory, everyone would love to have a couple of those types on their staff, but the reality is that there aren't that many of them and with even fewer being available at any given time.
Disagree (usual caveat about who the hell actually knows). Castillo is a workhorse and was a huge statement acquisition for them. Gilbert is a lot more fungible as far as their pitching system is concerned. Also in the current market I love Castillo's contract. It's like slightly cheaper Carlos Rodon if Rodon were healthy and more or less on top of his game year in and year out. If they are truly just pocketing all their money, I'd be very happy for the Sox to move on Castillo. That would help me rationalize feeling bad for all my angry neighbors.
They are. And yet, I think it’s also fair to say that the utilization of analytics to shape pitching patterns have made the game substantially less enjoyable for the fan.
This is why I want MLB to keep pushing rule changes that add more and more action to the game. But that’s for a different thread
From what I have heard around these parts is that they are desperate to get out of the Robbie Ray deal. Maybe that would lower the prospect cost, but that is tough contact to swallow. 3yrs/$73mill left. $24mill AAV. Has an opt-out in 2025, but no way he does that with the $25mill on that season.
Taking on the Robbie Ray contract would be so untenable that attaching him to Kirby would bring back so little that Mariners fans would riot. It's exactly the kind of move the Red Sox should make but I can't imagine they would.
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. I wouldn't think Kirby would be on the table, but if we were paying Logan Gilbert $23.5m for 3 years & Robbie Ray the minimum this year & then arb rates the next 2 years (& then getting a 4th year of Gilbert at his arb rate) that would be a pretty sweet deal & totally tenable.
BTV just being problematic again.
Per FanGraphs Gilbert has been worth $25.1m & $25.4. the last 2 years. & Ray was worth $31.3m in '21 & $13.9m in '22 & at 32 isn't really a completely lost cause once he recovers.
Yeah, they have about $87m of net spend that they can do while paying only financial penalties. No real excuse to not flex at least that far.
Thank you for quantifying @JM3. Think its been broken down in other threads, but also worth noting that any salary spike next year is softened by shedding $50m+ of salaries for Sale, Jansen and Martin in '24. Obviously the production needs replacing, ideally with cheaper arms, which is likely a focus for the brain trust.
Especially in a scenario where you aren't (able to) spend it on elite FA pitching $87m is a lot of money even in todays baseball.