Jays get Price

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
blue jays are closing in on d. price. would be huge get for them. needed pitching. he's one of best.
 
https://twitter.com/JonHeymanCBS/status/626785619176488960
 
Nuts dude, absolutely nuts. 
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,008
Portland
Perfect time for them to pounce with no one dominating the division for once.  They've got a good shot in a short series.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
43,178
“@Ken_Rosenthal: Expectation among rival executives is that Norris and Alford will be in package for Price going from #BlueJays to #Tigers.”


That's a lot to give up
 

rembrat

Member
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,345
grimshaw said:
Perfect time for them to pounce with no one dominating the division for once.  They've got a good shot in a short series.
 
Oh don't let jon abbey hear you trashing the division.
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
Really good trade for both teams. I would think the jays plan on trying pretty hard to lock Price up when the season is finished.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
7,848
Who would have thought 2 years ago that 4 of the AL playoff teams could be the Royals, Astros, Twins and Blue Jays?
 

rembrat

Member
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,345
It would be horrific if the Jays finished the year underperforming their pyth by 9 freaking games. 
 
May 30, 2014
388
As depressing as this trade deadline is for the Red Sox (even more than last year), you have to love, love the Jays going for it. They're close enough, and are going for the jugular. There'll be a lot of second-guessing about giving up the farm system if this doesn't work, but sometimes, you just have to do it. Gotta love the brass balls on AA.
 

Ale Xander

doesn't like to back it in
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
57,426
RedOctober3829 said:
Good to add an ace, but the rest of the Jays rotation is terrible.  I hope they have another deal up their sleeve to add a legit #2 guy behind Price.
Osuna and change for Porcello?
 
I hope so too.
 
They just need to make the playoffs and outslug everyone for 2/5 or 1/4 games.
 

glennhoffmania

a 20 on all 5
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,408,972
NY

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
65,744
glennhoffmania said:
 
Oh well in that case what a horrible move by Toronto.
 
Well, he's only signed for this season and they have 13 games remaining head-to-head against NY, the team they're trying to catch. I was just mentioning it, no reason to be a dick unnecessarily. 
 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
6,063
Saskatchestan
My son is excited for this trade.

Sounds like Price still wants to take BP at Camden in a couple hours, no matter the trade. Hope he doesn't tweak something and kill this trade.
 

hbk72777

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,945
glennhoffmania said:
 
Oh well in that case what a horrible move by Toronto.
 
 
They still have 13 games against the Yankees.
 
And the Kill isn't even the word, it was almost record breaking the way the Yankees hit Price
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Rudy Pemberton said:
Two prospects, including a top 20 guy, for less than half a year of Price makes the return on the Lester / Lackey deals look even more disgusting.
 
You are chronically incapable of considering context. First, Price is better than Lester, so the return should be better. Second, the Red Sox got Cespedes and a comp pick and then spun Cespedes for a full season of a young pitcher who had been growing in exactly the way you want to see a young pitcher grow. No one in the world thought Porcello was going to have a season like this.
 
As for Lackey for Craig and Kelly, all of the indications we saw were that Lackey wasn't interesting in pitching in Boston for the league minimum. The Sox got a young pitcher with great stuff but command issues and took a chance on a former All Star hitter rebounding and providing some value. That didn't happen and Kelly has work to do before he'll be providing any real value, but they weren't getting a great return for Lackey in the first place, and it's too early to write Kelly off as a waste of that resource anyway.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
65,744
Snodgrass'Muff said:
 
You are chronically incapable of considering context. First, Price is better than Lester, so the return should be better. Second, the Red Sox got Cespedes and a comp pick and then spun Cespedes for a full season of a young pitcher who had been growing in exactly the way you want to see a young pitcher grow. No one in the world thought Porcello was going to have a season like this. As for Lackey for Craig and Kelly, all of the indications we saw were that Lackey wasn't interesting in pitching in Boston for the league minimum. The Sox got a young pitcher with great stuff but command issues and took a chance on a former All Star hitter rebounding and providing some value. That didn't happen and Kelly has work to do before he'll be providing any real value, but they weren't getting a great return for Lackey in the first place, and it's too early to write Kelly off as a waste of that resource anyway.
 
Not to mention TOR seems to be especially desperate currently, did they give up more today for two months of Price than DET gave up last year for a year and two months of him? Not sure, but it seems close at least.
 

hbk72777

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,945
Brian McCann vs David Price , 9 for 16, 3 homers 7 RBIs
 
Ellsbury  is hitting 353 against him in 51 ABs
 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
6,063
Saskatchestan
hbk72777 said:
Brian McCann vs David Price , 9 for 16, 3 homers 7 RBIs
 
Ellsbury  is hitting 353 against him in 51 ABs
And...

Why are we cherry picking stats? Price will pitch against other teams than the Yankees. Toronto needs a good starting pitcher and they got one.
 

glennhoffmania

a 20 on all 5
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,408,972
NY
santadevil said:
And...

Why are we cherry picking stats? Price will pitch against other teams than the Yankees. Toronto needs a good starting pitcher and they got one.
 
Thank you. 
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
65,744
santadevil said:
Price will pitch against other teams than the Yankees. Toronto needs a good starting pitcher and they got one.
 
 
Both of those things are certainly true. Jack Curry projects that if he stays on 5 days rest, 3 of his 13 starts will be against NY, 10 against other teams, FWIW. 
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Rudy Pemberton said:
We can agree to disagree.
 
No, you're just wrong.
 
Price, ERA/FIP/xFIP last 5 years:
 
2011 - 3.49/3.32/3.32
2012 - 2.56/3.05/3.12
2013 - 3.33/3.03/3/27
2014 - 3.26/2.78/2.76
2015 - 2.53/3.00/3.28
 
Lester leading into his trade:
 
2010 - 3.25/3.13/3.18
2011 - 3.47/3.83/3.62
2012 - 4.82/4.11/3.82
2013 - 3.75/3.59/3.90
2014 - 2.52/2.62/3.00
 
They're not really that close even when you go back far enough to include some of Lester's excellent early years. There is no way Lester was worth as much last year as Price is worth this year.
 

TheYaz67

Member
SoSH Member
May 21, 2004
4,712
Justia Omnibus
Well, on the flip side of that Lester's postseason numbers are considerably better than his career numbers, and Price's are considerably worse than his career numbers....
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,145
What GM's look at 5yr trends when deciding what price they should spend on a pitcher at the deadline?
For better or worse the vast majority look at what the pitcher is doing at that point in time.
 
Lester was actually pitching better than Price in his walk year 14/15, that has a hell of a lot more weight when it comes to trade value then what they each did in 2011.  When you trade for a rental you are trading for 2+ months of performance.  3yrs ago has close to zero value to that equation.  We aren't talking about signing someone up to a 5yr contract and trying to estimate future value, we are talking about what can they do this instant.
 
People defending the Lackey and Lester trade returns need to take off the rose colored glasses.  The trades sucked then and they suck now.  It was well known at the time that Craig couldn't turn on a fastball anymore and 1yr of Cespedes over 7yrs control of a few top prospects is terrible value.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,284
Snodgrass'Muff said:
As for Lackey for Craig and Kelly, all of the indications we saw were that Lackey wasn't interesting in pitching in Boston for the league minimum. The Sox got a young pitcher with great stuff but command issues and took a chance on a former All Star hitter rebounding and providing some value. That didn't happen and Kelly has work to do before he'll be providing any real value, but they weren't getting a great return for Lackey in the first place, and it's too early to write Kelly off as a waste of that resource anyway.
 
I thought this was acknowledged as being a load of media bullshit and rumors rather than 'all indicative"?  There was never any attributable quote from Lackey suggesting he wouldn't honor is contract, and he sure is pitching for the minimum in STL right now.  We can talk all day about how the front office "took a chance" on the Cardinal's version of Rubby De la Rosa and an absolutely cooked (and expensive) Allen Craig but plenty people hated the trade when it went down and everyone hates it now.  That is absolutely deserving of criticism.
 
May 30, 2014
388
That and there's something to be said for being the top starting pitcher available at the trade deadline, which pretty much equates perceived value beyond the slash lines, I think. I don't see how you can quibble that in hindsight, those trades look quite terrible - and I speak as somebody who bought into their broad logic. The issue was probably the approach, with the Sox going for major leaguers they thought they could fix, or who would have an impact in 2015. That's the predicament of being a team that does eschews rebuilding like the plague, and prefers "retooling".   
 

SoxLegacy

lurker
Oct 30, 2008
629
Maryland
Rudy Pemberton said:
They would have been better off giving Lackey his outright release than that trade.

Lester was pitching as well as Price this year, and had a pretty good track record- think they could have done better than Cespedes.

I think they boxed themselves into a corner by focusing on deals for "major leaguers".

We can agree to disagree.
So the Red Sox should have just given Lackey his walking papers and not even got two potentially good players in return? I realize the disappointment level in the performances of Craig and Kelly, but that's no way to run a baseball team.
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
j44thor said:
What GM's look at 5yr trends when deciding what price they should spend on a pitcher at the deadline?
For better or worse the vast majority look at what the pitcher is doing at that point in time.
 
Lester was actually pitching better than Price in his walk year 14/15, that has a hell of a lot more weight when it comes to trade value then what they each did in 2011.  When you trade for a rental you are trading for 2+ months of performance.  3yrs ago has close to zero value to that equation.  We aren't talking about signing someone up to a 5yr contract and trying to estimate future value, we are talking about what can they do this instant.
 
People defending the Lackey and Lester trade returns need to take off the rose colored glasses.  The trades sucked then and they suck now.  It was well known at the time that Craig couldn't turn on a fastball anymore and 1yr of Cespedes over 7yrs control of a few top prospects is terrible value.
Who were these top prospects available? From what I remember, the Pirates came in second on Lester and were refusing to offer any of their top prospects. As much as we loved Lester, he just wasn't in as high demand as Price was in a trade package or as a free agent.
 

rembrat

Member
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,345
It's funny when people rewrite history. Last year's trade deadline was notorious for GMs bitterly hanging on to their prospects.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,145
LuckyBen said:
Who were these top prospects available? From what I remember, the Pirates came in second on Lester and were refusing to offer any of their top prospects. As much as we loved Lester, he just wasn't in as high demand as Price was in a trade package or as a free agent.
 
Jeff Samardizja went for a top 5 prospect last season.  Granted he had an extra year on his contract but you mean to tell me only one other team was willing to trade prospects for starting pitching last season?  What is more likely, that last year there were not prospects available in trade or that BOS refused to accept prospect only packages for Lackey and or Lester because they weren't "rebuilding"?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,008
Portland
I had thought the same thing about Price coming back east where teams have already gotten a good look at him. But they did grab Tulo first who they have long term security with, so the rental on top of that I'm ok with. They've probably added 4 extra wins in a short period of time without the Yankees countering so far.  I'm sure this is going to sell them a lot of extra fannies too.
 

glennhoffmania

a 20 on all 5
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,408,972
NY
LuckyBen said:
Who were these top prospects available? From what I remember, the Pirates came in second on Lester and were refusing to offer any of their top prospects. As much as we loved Lester, he just wasn't in as high demand as Price was in a trade package or as a free agent.
 
That's all fine and good but his point, and I think Rudy's point, was that Lester was just as good as Price at the times of their respective trades.  What they each did three years ago was, at most, a minor factor.  Oakland and Toronto were looking for someone to get them over the hump for two months.  You're never going to find a perfect comp but Lester and Price were pretty damn close when it comes to trade value.  So comparing the returns of the two trades seems pretty reasonable to me.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Rudy Pemberton said:
 
Last year, when traded, Lester had a 2.62 FIP, 155 ERA+ in 143 IP. This year, when traded, Price had a 3.00 FIP, 156 ERA+ in 146 IP.  Looks pretty close to me.
 
I don't really think what they did 3-4-5 years ago is relevant to their value for the rest of the season in which they are traded, but career wise, Lester has a 3.53 FIP, 121 ERA+ to Price's...3.24 FIP, 124 ERA+....
 
It's not surprising in the slightest that you are refusing to look at anything but the narrowest possible slice of data that can support your position.
 
 
j44thor said:
What GM's look at 5yr trends when deciding what price they should spend on a pitcher at the deadline?
For better or worse the vast majority look at what the pitcher is doing at that point in time.
 
Lester was actually pitching better than Price in his walk year 14/15, that has a hell of a lot more weight when it comes to trade value then what they each did in 2011.  When you trade for a rental you are trading for 2+ months of performance.  3yrs ago has close to zero value to that equation.  We aren't talking about signing someone up to a 5yr contract and trying to estimate future value, we are talking about what can they do this instant.
 
Care to back this up? Track record matters. Do you really think the fact that Price has always been this good and Lester was pitching this well in the run up to his hitting free agency, but sucked for a good year plus before that had no bearing on their respective values? It's not like he sucked in 2010 and was dominant after that. He was terrible in 2012 and was bad enough in the first half of the year before he was traded that many people here didn't think the Sox had a shot in the playoffs with him leading the way.
 
j44thor said:
People defending the Lackey and Lester trade returns need to take off the rose colored glasses.  The trades sucked then and they suck now.  It was well known at the time that Craig couldn't turn on a fastball anymore and 1yr of Cespedes over 7yrs control of a few top prospects is terrible value.
 
And people writing Joe Kelly off already are wearing blinders. He's got great stuff and didn't start pitching until he got to college. He may not pan out, but that doesn't mean he was a bad bet to make. Hell, when you look past his ERA, he hasn't even been that bad this year. 4.37 FIP and a 4.19 xFIP, which are pretty well in line with his 2014. If he ends up being a solid middle of the rotation pitcher, the Lackey trade ends up being pretty good value.
 
Also, if you can provide us with a list of the prospects they passed on to take Kelly and Craig or Cespedes, I'd appreciate it. We have no idea what was available and what they turned down, so your claim that 1 year of Cespeds (1.5 actually) wasn't as valuable as cost controlled prospects rings a bit hollow to me.
 
May 30, 2014
388
ehaz said:
 
I thought this was acknowledged as being a load of media bullshit and rumors rather than 'all indicative"?  There was never any attributable quote from Lackey suggesting he wouldn't honor is contract, and he sure is pitching for the minimum in STL right now.  We can talk all day about how the front office "took a chance" on the Cardinal's version of Rubby De la Rosa and an absolutely cooked (and expensive) Allen Craig but plenty people hated the trade when it went down and everyone hates it now.  That is absolutely deserving of criticism.
 
Not to derail the thread, but this comes back a lot, and I get puzzled by it.
-The Sox FO isn't stupid, I don't think (they make bad deals, but each and everyone generally has a defensible logic to it)
-At the time he was traded, Lackey was your second best starter
-The chances of getting Lester back were tenuous, due to the 4/$70 screw-up
-It was fairly obvious that the Red Sox were going to need to rebuild their rotation the following year, whether Lackey was there or not. Even with Lackey there, they were going to need to fill at least two spots: Lester's, and replacing the RDR/Webster flotsam. People were already wailing about getting an "ace" to replace Lester.
-They have a philosophy that is fairly rigid towards FA pitching, which makes find said starter difficult
 
And yet, despite the above, they go ahead and trade their second best starter, who had been instrumental in the World Series the year before, and one who was scheduled to make less than a million the following year? That just makes no sense to me. I can't see Kelly and Craig so appetizing, and the FO so full of hubris that they purposely decided to weaken the 2015 team to get those two. It just doesn't compute.
 
The only logical explanation I can see is that Lackey let it known that he wasn't going to play in Boston any more. Sure, there's no "attributable quote" to that effect (not sure why there has to be for that theory to hold water- So that is speculation, but some anecdotal data (e.g. refusing to talk about playing for the minimum in Boston, then saying it's all good when he got to St-Louis) would seem to support something along those lines. I otherwise can't explain why they would trade Lackey when they did. The alternative is that the FO are full of themselves, which I suppose is a possibility.
 
What I see here is that they had an asset they felt they had to deal by the deadline, and made the (in hindsight wrong) call of going for struggling major leaguers rather than prospects with upside.
 
 /End of hijack.
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,809
Northern Colorado
The Blue Jays are the only team other AL East team I can stomach.  Now that they have Tulo, in particular, I hope they make a strong run and top the MFY.  I also hope they do well in the playoffs.  They will be fun to watch.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,381
Lackey tied Ben's hands by letting it be known that he was unwilling to play in Boston at the league minimum. 
 
Ben is also the same guy who turned two months of Andrew Miller into EdRod, so I find it hard to believe that he was turning down prospect-laden offers for Jon Lester.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,145
Snodgrass'Muff said:
 
It's not surprising in the slightest that you are refusing to look at anything but the narrowest possible slice of data that can support your position.
 
 
 
Care to back this up? Track record matters. Do you really think the fact that Price has always been this good and Lester was pitching this well in the run up to his hitting free agency, but sucked for a good year plus before that had no bearing on their respective values? It's not like he sucked in 2010 and was dominant after that. He was terrible in 2012 and was bad enough in the first half of the year before he was traded that many people here didn't think the Sox had a shot in the playoffs with him leading the way.
 
 
And people writing Joe Kelly off already are wearing blinders. He's got great stuff and didn't start pitching until he got to college. He may not pan out, but that doesn't mean he was a bad bet to make. Hell, when you look past his ERA, he hasn't even been that bad this year. 4.37 FIP and a 4.19 xFIP, which are pretty well in line with his 2014. If he ends up being a solid middle of the rotation pitcher, the Lackey trade ends up being pretty good value.
 
Also, if you can provide us with a list of the prospects they passed on to take Kelly and Craig or Cespedes, I'd appreciate it. We have no idea what was available and what they turned down, so your claim that 1 year of Cespeds (1.5 actually) wasn't as valuable as cost controlled prospects rings a bit hollow to me.
 
If only there was a comparable pitcher to Lester who was pitching considerably better in 14 than he had in his decent but certainly not illustrious career to that point.  Someone say with a FIP in the mid 3's 2010-2013 who suddenly had a 3.09 FIP in 2014.  Granted he had one extra year of control but he brought back a top 5 prospect in baseball.
 
As for Kelly, I mean if you are defending his 2015 season then really what is there to discuss?  He is averaging 5.18 IP per start and putting up terrible #'s while in there.  So not only does he put the team behind when he starts but he also burns the bullpen just about every start.  It would be one thing if he was going 6+ per start with a poor FIP of 4.4.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,145
JimD said:
Lackey tied Ben's hands by letting it be known that he was unwilling to play in Boston at the league minimum. 
 
Ben is also the same guy who turned two months of Andrew Miller into EdRod, so I find it hard to believe that he was turning down prospect-laden offers for Jon Lester.
 
When did Lackey say he would only go to STL?  Lackey didn't have a NTC that forced Ben to take the STL offer.
 
The Miller/Erod trade just makes this all the more frustrating. When it comes to minor league players this regime has a very strong track record.  I have a hard time believing that they couldn't have put this team in a better position today given the trade capital they had at this time last season.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
j44thor said:
 
If only there was a comparable pitcher to Lester who was pitching considerably better in 14 than he had in his decent but certainly not illustrious career to that point.  Someone say with a FIP in the mid 3's 2010-2013 who suddenly had a 3.09 FIP in 2014.  Granted he had one extra year of control but he brought back a top 5 prospect in baseball.
 
As for Kelly, I mean if you are defending his 2015 season then really what is there to discuss?  He is averaging 5.18 IP per start and putting up terrible #'s while in there.  So not only does he put the team behind when he starts but he also burns the bullpen just about every start.  It would be one thing if he was going 6+ per start with a poor FIP of 4.4.
 
That extra year of control is an enormous factor. You can't just brush it aside and scream "Top 5 prospect!" You also can't just assume that because one team was willing to move a top prospect for another pitcher with a very different set of criteria surrounding him, that Ben was tripping over top prospects to get to Craig and Kelly.
 
As for Kelly specifically, the numbers speak for themselves. His results have been awful, but the underlying peripherals suggest he's not a terrible pitcher, even now. There's plenty of time and room for him to end up a good enough pitcher that the Lackey trade won't go down as a failure. If you're refusing to acknowledge the possibility that we don't look back at this deal in 6 or 7 years with disdain, then no, there's nothing more to discuss.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,008
Portland
j44thor said:
 
If only there was a comparable pitcher to Lester who was pitching considerably better in 14 than he had in his decent but certainly not illustrious career to that point.  Someone say with a FIP in the mid 3's 2010-2013 who suddenly had a 3.09 FIP in 2014.  Granted he had one extra year of control but he brought back a top 5 prospect in baseball.
 
As for Kelly, I mean if you are defending his 2015 season then really what is there to discuss?  He is averaging 5.18 IP per start and putting up terrible #'s while in there.  So not only does he put the team behind when he starts but he also burns the bullpen just about every start.  It would be one thing if he was going 6+ per start with a poor FIP of 4.4.
He's got Matt Barnes on his fantasy team. There's no arguing with him about cost controlled pitchers on the Red Sox.
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
j44thor said:
 
If only there was a comparable pitcher to Lester who was pitching considerably better in 14 than he had in his decent but certainly not illustrious career to that point.  Someone say with a FIP in the mid 3's 2010-2013 who suddenly had a 3.09 FIP in 2014.  Granted he had one extra year of control but he brought back a top 5 prospect in baseball.
 
As for Kelly, I mean if you are defending his 2015 season then really what is there to discuss?  He is averaging 5.18 IP per start and putting up terrible #'s while in there.  So not only does he put the team behind when he starts but he also burns the bullpen just about every start.  It would be one thing if he was going 6+ per start with a poor FIP of 4.4.
You bring up Samardzija, but he came along with another pitcher and was probably one of the worst( or best for the Cubs) trades in the past few years. A better example would be to look at Price last year, which netted Smyly and Nick Franklin. Many people were questioning why the Rays took so little. Id take the Tigers haul this year over the Rays last year.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,381
j44thor said:
 
When did Lackey say he would only go to STL?  Lackey didn't have a NTC that forced Ben to take the STL offer.
 
He didn't say he would only go to STL, but he definitely was not committed to playing just anywhere for $500k:
 
"Lackey reaffirms that he will honor contract and pitch next season for ML minimum. Said his decision partially hinged on where he landed."
 
[twitter]https://twitter.com/LangoschMLB/status/495331906498867200[/twitter]
 
Ben's trade leverage would have dropped had he let the 2014 deadline pass (I believe Lackey's 10/5 rights would have also kicked in at the end of last season, giving him an effective NTC).