Got to figure that they will be making some sort of big splash with Christmas at Fenway on Saturday.
Beyond Lester: Building a Rotation
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
dynomite said:
Sign me up for Cliff Lee. I'd rather have him than any of the aforementioned FA's or 1 year trade targets.
Gathering momentum -
Pete Abraham @PeteAbe 7m7 minutes ago
James Shields lives in this area and the #RedSox are believed to have met with him personally.
Pete Abraham @PeteAbe 7m7 minutes ago
James Shields lives in this area and the #RedSox are believed to have met with him personally.
bosockboy said:
Two years. Wouldn't stop the Sox from being able to make a splash in a very pitching rich FA class next year.
Don't forget that Theo owes the Sox that PTBNL for Doubront later today:
https://twitter.com/ESPNChiCubs/status/542865802765295616
This could be the basis for a permanent acquisition of my Rule V binky for today, Andrew McKirahan, if he is available to the Sox with their Pick 6:
The Sox will have 2 open roster spots after the Miley trade. While everyone will want them to break the bank to bring in free agents for those spots, the Rule V draft is today. I was looking at eligible players and found a lefty bullpen arm with a nice K-BB ratio in the minors who has reached AA. He has been a reliever his entire career but ought to be relatively mature as an age 24 former college player with good size. A player like this could conceivably make the leap to a major league bullpen. While it was a no brainer for Theo to prefer Lester on the Cubs 40 man roster, here is my candidate for a Rule V flyer with potential to stick on the 25 man roster if he shows potential to fill a lefty bullpen role in spring training:
http://www.baseball-...id=mckira000and
With the Sox prospect depth, it's possible that they could send someone to the Cubs in order to send him back to the minors rather than return him to the Cubs.
https://twitter.com/ESPNChiCubs/status/542865802765295616
This could be the basis for a permanent acquisition of my Rule V binky for today, Andrew McKirahan, if he is available to the Sox with their Pick 6:
The Sox will have 2 open roster spots after the Miley trade. While everyone will want them to break the bank to bring in free agents for those spots, the Rule V draft is today. I was looking at eligible players and found a lefty bullpen arm with a nice K-BB ratio in the minors who has reached AA. He has been a reliever his entire career but ought to be relatively mature as an age 24 former college player with good size. A player like this could conceivably make the leap to a major league bullpen. While it was a no brainer for Theo to prefer Lester on the Cubs 40 man roster, here is my candidate for a Rule V flyer with potential to stick on the 25 man roster if he shows potential to fill a lefty bullpen role in spring training:
http://www.baseball-...id=mckira000and
With the Sox prospect depth, it's possible that they could send someone to the Cubs in order to send him back to the minors rather than return him to the Cubs.
Part of me wonders if this is the 2013 approach to roster construction all over again with SPs. I'm sure they're still pursuing a #1/2 but worst case scenario they've built a staff of 3s and 4s that have reasonable upside. If they can't make a big move that makes sense I can see them riding 2015 out with the current staff. If things go well during the season they can probably make a trade and be strong going into the playoffs. If things go poorly, well, nobody is expensive and signed long-term. Next year they can make a play for Price or someone else.
Scott Lauber @ScottLauber 9s10 seconds ago
Source told me 2 hours ago that #RedSox weren't done acquiring starters after Porcello. Strongly believe that's still true after Masterson
Source told me 2 hours ago that #RedSox weren't done acquiring starters after Porcello. Strongly believe that's still true after Masterson
amarshal2 said:
Oh God, please not Price.
I think they are now in a position where other teams won't feel like they can bend the Sox over a barrel on trade negotiations. They have a serviceable, if not very impressive, rotation as of right now.
drleather2001 said:
OK - I sincerely don't get this. I get universally condemned for wanting to give our kid pitchers a serious chance - why ? because they are "unproven" or "No serious contender employs rookie starters" or similar arguments. But then you guys turn around and say its perfectly acceptable to make similar plans for washed up hasbeens or reclamation projects that have just as much, if not more uncertainty.
Sure - if you are unsure about your young players I can understand wanting to bring in guys with a better chance of succeeding. But Justin Masterson? Trade for Hamels or Zimmerman or Cueto - great idea. Sign Shields or Scherzer - terrific - but cluttering up the roster with mediocrities is not my idea of building a team.
I'm a bit leery of Masterson too, but calling him a "washed up hasbeen or reclamation project" is comical hyperbole for a guy who is not yet 30 and is just one injury-plagued year removed from a three-year run where he averaged 205 innings a year with a FIP of 3.60. He's no ace, and as the rotation is currently constituted he's probably our fourth starter, but he's no scrap heap pickup either.
Do you seriously think the FO is going to let Miley shit the bed every fifth day, or they're going to let Masterson get hammered on a regular basis if Owens or EdRod are pitching lights out in Pawtucket? The guys they're signing aren't going to block anyone, and the guys you seem to want to hand a spot to aren't ready.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
dynomite said:
Agreed. One of the biggest concerns that many of us had (myself included) was that ownership would overreact to losing Lester and overpay for some big name to make a splash. Instead, Cherington clearly had Plans B, C, and D through M or N ready to go and has coolly executed deals to retool the staff. The rotation is at least solid and may be better than that, which should be enough to be competitive and could be much more if good Buchholz shows up in 2015. They also have room to add a top-name starter at the trading deadline or next winter, as well as having slots available should one of the kids knock the door down. I've continued to have faith in Ben Cherington throughout the Lester debacle and I'm feeling a heck of a lot better right now about this team.
P'tucket said:
I wanted to have RDLR or Webster start the season as the 5th starter. I have never claimed that I wanted Owens or Rodriguez in the rotation out of the gate. I agree completely that they aren't ready.
But it's moot. The Sox are basically saying they have no plans - at least in the rotation - for RDLR, Webster , Ranaudo, Barnes or Wright. Two are gone and the roster opportunities gone as well. Wright might be in the bullpen. Ranaudo will be back in AAA and I bet Barnes will be traded.
BC and Co. may have come to the completely reasonably conclusion that these guys have/had no future on the Sox. If that's what their collective eyes told them then I'm OK with that. But if they are having a knee jerk reaction to last year's rookie failures then I think it's very shortsighted.
RedOctober3829 said:
That's a capitol idea, Gordon.
Play connect the dots with Jayson Stark's report of a roof-blower coming out of D.C., and Washington's rumored desire to sign Scherzer ... and perhaps there's a Zimmermann or Fister on the horizon
I will say the Masterson signing is a little bit of a head scratcher, but the value is incredible.
My theory: they plan to go into the year with the veterans starting (??-Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-Kelly-Masteron) and see how things are and who's pitching well/healthy in July 2015 and how the kids (Barnes/Wright/Owens/etc.) are progressing.
If someone is dominating AAA or the Sox are out of it again, dump one of the vets at the trade deadline for some prospects and bring up the kid.
Edit: Obviously there's still room for a big trade, too.
My theory: they plan to go into the year with the veterans starting (??-Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-Kelly-Masteron) and see how things are and who's pitching well/healthy in July 2015 and how the kids (Barnes/Wright/Owens/etc.) are progressing.
If someone is dominating AAA or the Sox are out of it again, dump one of the vets at the trade deadline for some prospects and bring up the kid.
Edit: Obviously there's still room for a big trade, too.
If there is a "blow the roof off deal, I would think it would have to be greater than that. I started that Harper thread asking why would they want to go to a nasty arbitration hearing with Harper? Him in a deal with Zimmerman and the return it would take to acquire them would be a blow the roof off kind of deal.E5 Yaz said:
I don't think this signals that the Sox have written off Workman, Ranaudo, Barnes, Wright, let alone Owens, ERod or Johnson.
If not dealt, one or two will be in the pen, the others at PAW, waiting for one of the veteran starters to suck, or get injured. If we are out of it in July all of the SPs are candidates to be traded to be replaced by the kid(s) who earned it. The only scenario where these guys get blocked is if the team is in the hunt and the vets and the kids are all pitching well. Not something to worry too much about IMO.
At the same time, I think I would rather watch one of the kids go every 5th day, but I am likely in a minority among Sox fans in that respect.
On a different topic, looking at big picture, as we sit now: if we assume Lester would have come back at 6/150 and that the Porcello deal was there in any event, we have gone from a contemplated Lester-Porcello-Buchholz-Kelly-RDLR/Webster rotation to a Miley-Porcello-Buchholz-Kelly-Masterson slate, saving approx 14.5M in 2015 payroll. Lester/RDLR/Webster for Miley/Masterson is a pretty clear 2015 downgrade I think, but who knows in the end.
Re 2016 and 17 and years of control, we go from speculative Lester-Buch-Kelly-RDLR-Webster to Miley-Buch-Kelly. Presumably the Sox are expecting one of the kids at least to slot into the 2016-17 rotation.
Tho the Clay options complicate matters, going the non-Lester route, provides an additional 20M or so in payroll flexibility thru to 2017, increasing to 25M to 2020, with other shoes still to drop it seems.
If not dealt, one or two will be in the pen, the others at PAW, waiting for one of the veteran starters to suck, or get injured. If we are out of it in July all of the SPs are candidates to be traded to be replaced by the kid(s) who earned it. The only scenario where these guys get blocked is if the team is in the hunt and the vets and the kids are all pitching well. Not something to worry too much about IMO.
At the same time, I think I would rather watch one of the kids go every 5th day, but I am likely in a minority among Sox fans in that respect.
On a different topic, looking at big picture, as we sit now: if we assume Lester would have come back at 6/150 and that the Porcello deal was there in any event, we have gone from a contemplated Lester-Porcello-Buchholz-Kelly-RDLR/Webster rotation to a Miley-Porcello-Buchholz-Kelly-Masterson slate, saving approx 14.5M in 2015 payroll. Lester/RDLR/Webster for Miley/Masterson is a pretty clear 2015 downgrade I think, but who knows in the end.
Re 2016 and 17 and years of control, we go from speculative Lester-Buch-Kelly-RDLR-Webster to Miley-Buch-Kelly. Presumably the Sox are expecting one of the kids at least to slot into the 2016-17 rotation.
Tho the Clay options complicate matters, going the non-Lester route, provides an additional 20M or so in payroll flexibility thru to 2017, increasing to 25M to 2020, with other shoes still to drop it seems.
As long as we get:
2012 Wade Miley
ERA - 3.33
WHIP - 1.18
ERA+ - 122
FIP - 3.15
K/9 - 6.7
2013 Joe Kelly
ERA - 2.69
WHIP - 1.36
ERA+ - 140
FIP - 4.01
K/9 - 5.7
2013 Clay Buchholz
ERA - 1.74
WHIP - 1.03
ERA+ - 237
FIP - 2.78
K/9 - 8.0
2013 Justin Masterson
ERA - 3.45
WHIP - 1.20
ERA+ - 110
FIP - 3.35
K/9 - 9.1
2014 Rick Porcello
ERA - 3.43
WHIP - 1.23
ERA+ - 116
FIP - 3.67
K/9 - 5.7
We should be good to go. No need to bother ourselves with one of these silly "aces".
2012 Wade Miley
ERA - 3.33
WHIP - 1.18
ERA+ - 122
FIP - 3.15
K/9 - 6.7
2013 Joe Kelly
ERA - 2.69
WHIP - 1.36
ERA+ - 140
FIP - 4.01
K/9 - 5.7
2013 Clay Buchholz
ERA - 1.74
WHIP - 1.03
ERA+ - 237
FIP - 2.78
K/9 - 8.0
2013 Justin Masterson
ERA - 3.45
WHIP - 1.20
ERA+ - 110
FIP - 3.35
K/9 - 9.1
2014 Rick Porcello
ERA - 3.43
WHIP - 1.23
ERA+ - 116
FIP - 3.67
K/9 - 5.7
We should be good to go. No need to bother ourselves with one of these silly "aces".
I wonder whether the success of the Royals and Orioles this year, with Shields and Tillman as their "#1", plays into their strategy at all. Hell, you could argue the Angels don't have a true ace either. Not saying its right, but MLB tends to be copycat league.
I definitely think this is part of it.Merkle's Boner said:
I also think the Red Sox (from the Orioles and their own experience) learned the value of having many reliable, solid MLB starters in the rotation.
For example, I think Savin did a great job in the other thread demonstrating how rare it is to have an SP throw 200 IP with a 3.90 ERA.
It's an advantage to not have to hand the ball to below average starters a couple of times a week.
I don't think so. I think it's the pitching application of the 2013 strategy of making sure your worst regulars are decent.Merkle's Boner said:
It's a tremendous regular season strategy but less so for the post season. Of course, with the extended post season, where you might have to fight through four rounds, it's easy to argue that regular season strategies trump post season strategies.
I still think the Sox are going to add a good arm either in the off season or at the deadline.
I like the strategy of having enough to contend then reevaluate come the trade deadline. If we have a bad year with a ton of injuries then off goes Masterson and Porcello to a GFIN team for some nice prospects. If we're in contention then we become buyers for Cueto, Shark etc.
Of course, this also gives time for our four really good young starters in AAA to develop. If one of them blossoms then we have ourselves an ace in the hole. I know people are down on Barnes but he was better to end the year and I'd say it was a lost year due to injury. His potential is still there. The other three have great track records and I believe we'll be able to bring up at least one this year.
Of course, this also gives time for our four really good young starters in AAA to develop. If one of them blossoms then we have ourselves an ace in the hole. I know people are down on Barnes but he was better to end the year and I'd say it was a lost year due to injury. His potential is still there. The other three have great track records and I believe we'll be able to bring up at least one this year.
Maybe they just don't want to wait through the growing pains? I mean, it's not like any but the most high end prospects just show up and are immediately lights out at the ML level. For most it is a steady maturation process. RDLR and Webster are just beginning that process at the ML level while being 26 and 25 respectively. Miley has three years of success under his belt and is only 28. He's looking to take the next step as a pitcher while Rubby and Webster are looking to just figure it out.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Barnes and Ranaudo right now profile as bullpen arms to me. Barnes has a major league fastball but not much else to play off it. Ranaudo has a very effective curve but his fastball/changeup combo fools no one. Maybe a move to the 'pen helps Ranaudo pick up the velocity he needs to gain some deception there, while Barnes could live on his fastball and make his weak off-speed stuff play up much better in shorter stints.
I also wouldn't be surprised if the FO's evaluation of their pitchers suggests that Owens, Rodriguez, and Johnson are as likely (or more likely) to figure it out by 2016 as Rubby/Webster/Barnes/Ranaudo, so they'd rather have more quantifiable assets already in the rotation and skip to the far more promising lefties for late 2015/early 2016.
Drek717 said:
I thought along these lines too. A cheap homegrown bullpen with them, Workman, Hembree, Britton and Escobar (who has been lights out in winter ball as a reliever after a terrible opening outing) limits the exposure of unproven pitchers, builds their confidence with success in shorter outings, manages innings for young pitchers and sends a message to the organization that they will find a place for you in the majors (sometimes by a trade to another team where they can pitch) when they reach the point that they have little left to prove in the minors.
Fangraphs updated the Depth Charts. The Red Sox are projected to be the best team in baseball by 2 Wins. The Rotation is projected to be the 6th best rotation in baseball.
Interesting.
Interesting.
Interesting sure..........but what does it really mean at a time when dozens of pitchers/players are still FA's ?GilaMonster said:
GilaMonster said:
Kelly, Miley, Rodriguez, Owens and Johnson are all under team control into the future. Porcello, entering his prime, younger and with Vermont/grandfather legacy ties to the team, will be worth market price to extend if he continues his progression with the Sox. With Masterson, Napoli and Victorino coming off the books, there will be money freed for both him and, if needed, a missing ace. The 2016 rotation could well be Zimmerman, Miley, Porcello, Buchholz (if he isn't traded) or Kelly (if he doesn't move to the bullpen) and one or two from among Rodriguez, Owens and Johnson. They could get there without giving up their bluechip rookies, second years and even one of their top 10 prospects (all untouched at the winter meetings) by virtually standing pat through July. They could keep this powder dry until the trade deadline, deal one of their studs from their greatest depth to the Nationals and, because they are in contention, rent Jordan Zimmerman for the stretch run and post season. Boras is tough to negotiate with when he has a premier free agent but Zimmerman will still be just age 29 to start next season. He has a work ethic and history that will make a top dollar 6 years contract a relatively reasonable risk.
Green Monster said:
How many players really move the needle though now? 3? Scherzer,Shields, and Headley.
And you think Washington won't be in contention? Or that in contention, they would deal him if they still have him? Or that having traveled that far down the road, Zimmerman would not explore FA?The Boomer said:
I just don't understand the wish casting regarding the Nats. And we hear of nothing big brewing on the home front.
https://twitter.com/adamjones985/status/543459058830036993
I'll clean out his house and drive him to the airport personally if this could be done.
dcmissle said:
Zimmerman, Cueto (who might be on a non-contender) or a future possible Ace almost always is available at the trade deadline. This wasn't "wish casting". If the Sox don't perform as well as hoped for, they might not be buyers again later this season either.
If the Phillies want Clay for Hamels, that'd be the best case scenario. I'm not completely sure it makes sense, but he's cheap for the next 2 seasons and if he's on, he can be one of the best pitchers in the game. Barring that, I'm not completely sure I see another fit for an ace, though obviously it'll take more than Clay to get a deal like that done.
Yes, Clay would be the centerpiece of a package like what was posted by Pepin. Clay has been great and he has been awful. When he's great, yes he's one of the best pitchers but what can you expect from him? Again, if you can keep Bogaerts/Betts/Swihart/Owens AND get Hamels in the process you do whatever you have to do in order to get the deal done.MakMan44 said:
RedOctober3829 said:
The question is what team shopping an ace would be interested in Buchholz? Buchholz deal is fairly team friendly. He is owed $12M this season and then has options with buyouts in 2016 and 2017 for $13M and $250k and $13.5M and $300k, respectively.
He doesn't seem to fit in a trade with the Reds for Cueto b/c he's more expensive than Cueto and the Sox aren't a fit to eat any of the Reds bad contracts and acquisition cost in terms of prospects to take on the contracts of both Chapman and Cueto is likely far higher than the Sox want to pay.
I'm not sure he fits in with Philly, because Philly's rebuilding. Accordingly, they are probably looking for players in their pre-arb years. Unless Ruin Tomorrow is expecting their turn around to be shorter than everyone else.
Not sure how he fits in with SDP for Ross. They seem like a team that would prefer cost controlled players due to their payroll limitations. Any offer would likely have to include cash and prospects to make it worth their while.
The Nationals could be an interesting match. Trading Buchholz for Fister straight up almost makes sense. Nats would have a younger player with a higher upside in Buchholz and he is cost controlled for 3-seasons. The Sox would get a more reliable guy with a lower ceiling who is going into free agency. There may even be a match there for Zimmerman, granted the Sox would have to likely add Owens/ERod to even get the conversation started.
Not sure where else he would be a fit. Unless they were to trade him to a contender looking to round out their rotation for some prospects that the Sox could fold into a deal for a top of the rotation pitcher. However, I'm not certain the prospect haul would be substantial enough to justify trading him, rather than taking a shot that we get good Clay.
Clay's contract is peanuts too. He doesn't need to do much to earn it, and he won't be old when it ends. He's a good fit for any NL team in the hunt with a good 1 and 2 already. Pirates? Cards? Giants could use multiple pitchers as well.
Philly doesn't make asmuch sense to me since he wouldn't really help much in the rebuild process
Philly doesn't make asmuch sense to me since he wouldn't really help much in the rebuild process
dcmissle said:
The Nationals wish-casting comes from a combination of bits and pieces that may add up to less than the sum of its parts.
-- Rizzo drafted Max Scherzer originally and has a decent working relationship with Boras
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/wp/2014/11/21/could-the-nationals-make-a-play-for-a-free-agent-starter-such-as-max-scherzer/
-- Talks on a Zimmermann extension have not progressed, leading to some speculation that they could deal him and make a run at Scherzer. Article above and this one
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/wp/2014/12/11/mike-rizzo-meets-with-jordan-zimmermanns-agent-bryce-harpers-grievance-hearing-and-other-notes/
-- Red Sox speculation, once Lester signed with Cubs (one of several DC-based links)
http://www.masnsports.com/nationals-pastime/2014/12/how-the-lester-deal-could-impact-the-nats.html
-- Nationals need either a 2B or a 3B, depending on where they ultimately play Rendon, and the Sox certainly have players blocked at 3B and, under extreme circumstances (granting a negotiating window), the best 2B prospect in the majors, that could be the prime piece in a potential trade.
-- Jayson Stark's comment during the Meetings that the Nationals were working on a trade that would "blow the roof off the place" if it were done.
-- Recent MLBN comments from Rosenthal and Cafardo that the Red Sox are indeed thinking about making a run at Zimmermann.
That's a lot of noise and maybe it doesn't add up to anything more than noise. But it is out there at some base level
The deal makes sense for Philly for 3 reasons: the salary relief from Hamels' contract(saving anywhere from $70 to $97.7 million in this deal), getting a major league starter that if good you can use the club option years at reasonable prices or if he stinks you pay him $12.245 million for 1 season plus the buyout, and getting some high-ceiling prospects from the Red Sox if players like Margot/Devers are involved.jasail said:
Would Buchholz, Owens, Checchini/Coyle be the start of a package for Zimmermann? The Sox would obviously acquire a top of the rotation arm, while jettisoning the enigma that is Clay. The Nats get a cost controlled MLB pitcher who can slide into their rotation and keep them competitive at present filling out a rotation featuring Strasburg, Gio and Fister and may (at best) potentially provide Zimmermann like production. As the Nats would be giving up the best player in the deal, they would also get a cost-controlled starting pitcher with 3 options and a top of the rotation upside who could potentially replace Fister as soon as 2016 and a near MLB ready position player to fill their hole at 2B or 3B.
Rizzo has two other pressing Boras clients that will require attention. Strasburg and Harper. Not to mention other non-Boras clients that will require attention before them. Scherzer would only add to the problem, as he is likely to command 200. Boras does business with the Nats -- at market prices.
Clay for Fister ( the Nats most dependable pitcher for stretches of last season) is wish casting on steroids.
Clay for Fister ( the Nats most dependable pitcher for stretches of last season) is wish casting on steroids.
RedOctober3829 said:
They would be getting about $10M in salary relief per season for the next 3 seasons and then $43.5 over the last two seasons. So that is a fair point. However, I have to imagine that a rebuilding team like the Phils is looking not only for salary relief but for the major chip being sent back to be cost controlled to a point that they will be part of a core group when the Phils rebuilding is done. Not saying that they wouldn't take the deal, just that they may hold out for a deal that better suits their needs.
If Devers or Margot are involved, they will be cost-controlled by the time the Phillies are theoretically back in contention. Also, you can't just count the years that Buchholz would be under contract. You need to count Hamels' entire contract including the option year in his when you calculate the savings.jasail said:
RedOctober3829 said:
I did count all the years of the contract. Re-read my post. It's ~$10M per in savings through 2017 (assuming the Phils pick up his options) and then $43.5 over the last two years, which covers his last year and the option year that will likely have to be picked up. I'm not doubting the payroll dump is a substantial consideration. I conceded that as a fair point.
As for Devers and Margot, they would be the pieces for the future that the Phils should be looking form. I'm just not sure Buchholz plus them is enough for Ruin Tomorrow to pull the trigger. He may (and may correctly) think he can get a better prospect haul with more salary relief, than the Sox can offer in a package around Buchholz. I suppose my bottom line point is that it may be a fit, but it's not an ideal fit; therefore, I'm not certain Ruin Tomorrow pulls the trigger.
Edit: If Ben can get Cole on a package based around Clay and someone like Margot, then I'd be as pleased as pie.