Offseason rumors

[Max Power]

Pitching in Fenway in the middle of the steroid era is in no way comparable to being in Dodger Stadium during Dead Ball Era III. Pedro was a better pitcher over his career than Kershaw, even if the stat lines look similar.

I always blindly accepted park factors as easily measurable and reliable components of ERA+ or OPS+, but I'd never really looked into them. I had no idea how variable they are. Just look at Fenway over the last 25 years, especially during Pedro's 99-2002 peak.


There have been a few changes to the place that could have impacted wind patterns, but nothing too major. The field and walls are all exactly where they've been for the last 90 years. How does the runs factor vary so wildly from year to year? Is weather really that big a deal? Or are park factors overall kind of bullshit with pitching performance making the data very noisy?

 

[SirPsychoSquints]

Pitching in Fenway in the middle of the steroid era is in no way comparable to being in Dodger Stadium during Dead Ball Era III. Pedro was a better pitcher over his career than Kershaw, even if the stat lines look similar.

I always blindly accepted park factors as easily measurable and reliable components of ERA+ or OPS+, but I'd never really looked into them. I had no idea how variable they are. Just look at Fenway over the last 25 years, especially during Pedro's 99-2002 peak.

View attachment 77718
There have been a few changes to the place that could have impacted wind patterns, but nothing too major. The field and walls are all exactly where they've been for the last 90 years. How does the runs factor vary so wildly from year to year? Is weather really that big a deal? Or are park factors overall kind of bullshit with pitching performance making the data very noisy?

Small sample size, weather, the changing of other parks around the league (Target Field replaced Metrodome, Citizens replaced the Vet, GAB replaced Riverfront...).

 

[BaseballJones]

Is the argument that hitting was far stronger in Pedro's era? And a lower mound? Because Koufax had a pretty incredible stretch, especially when you look at innings, and complete games.

Yes, that's why Pedro's ERA+ numbers are so much better (even as great as Koufax's were). It takes all that into account.

 

[dynomite]

I’m going with ‘68 Gibson to save us from the aliens.

It's a solid pick, but I'll stick with Pedro. I prefer 99 Pedro, but 00 Pedro edges Gibson in the stat categories as well. Gibson threw more innings, but when adjusted for era I'm betting on Pedro.

68 Gibson: 243 ERA+, 7.9 K/9, 5.8 Hits/9, 0.85 WHIP
00 Pedro: 291 ERA+*, 11.8 K/9, 5.3 Hits/9, 0.73 WHIP

* Note that from what I can tell Pedro's ERA+ in 2000 remains the highest for a full-season MLB staring pitcher in history (and behind only two Negro League pitchers, Bullet Rogan in 1925 and Slim Jones in 1934). And of course Pedro did it in an integrated league, facing DHs, with modern scouting and video and training available to opponents, at the pinnacle of the steroid era. https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/earned_run_avg_plus_season.shtml

Kershaw's entire career is better than Pedro's entire career. So just so I'm clear with everyone...when I talk about Pedro being the best to ever do it, I fully recognize that lots of guys have had better overall careers than Pedro did. I am always just talking about their 5-7 year peaks, and while there obviously have been many incredible 5-7 year peaks, nobody's - not Seaver's, not Clemens', not Koufax's, not Ryan's, not Ford's, not Spahn's, not Randy Johnson's, not Maddux's, not Kershaw's...nobody's - has been better than Pedro's.

I know we're pretty far afield from the "Offseason Thread," so this should probably go in a Kershaw thread, but I'll just add here:

At this risk of offering a talk radio/ESPN hot take, I do think Kershaw's playoff struggles downgrade him slightly for me in comparison to Pedro. A 4.49 ERA in the playoffs is hard to overlook.

 

[soxhop411]

View: https://twitter.com/tylermilliken_/status/1754952743930700258

Heyman on several teams talking to the Red Sox about Kenley Jansen right now. Also mentions that Jarren Duran has been coming up in trade talks. Notes that he hasn’t heard anything on Masataka Yoshida.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Just looked it up. How do you lose 9 games with a 1.12 ERA?

Gibson's 1968 ... some astonishing numbers in there
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=gibsobo01&t=p&year=1968

 

[curly2]

Kershaw's best postseason was 2020, when the pandemic limited him to 58 innings in the regular season. I thought he might take a page out of Rogers Clemens' book and sign during the season, minimizing his innings and keeping him fresh for October.

 

[VORP Speed]

It's a solid pick, but I'll stick with Pedro. I prefer 99 Pedro, but 00 Pedro edges Gibson in the stat categories as well. Gibson threw more innings, but when adjusted for era I'm betting on Pedro.

68 Gibson: 243 ERA+, 7.9 K/9, 5.8 Hits/9, 0.85 WHIP
00 Pedro: 291 ERA+, 11.8 K/9, 5.3 Hits/9, 0.73 WHIP

I don’t really disagree with you, but I’d just like to point out Gibson threw 304 innings! 28 complete games. 13 complete game shutouts. So if Grady is managing against the aliens…..

 

[RS2004foreever]

Gibson's 1968 ... some astonishing numbers in there
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=gibsobo01&t=p&year=1968

In 1968 Yaz led the AL league in hitting - at .301. I have heard 1968 referred to as the revenge of 1930 (when I think one league actually averaged over .300). They lowered the mound in '69.

Pedro's year was significantly better than Gibson's IMHO.

Back to rumors - good to hear some movement. If they move Jansen I hope there is another shoe to drop.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Kershaw's best postseason was 2020, when the pandemic limited him to 58 innings in the regular season. I thought he might take a page out of Rogers Clemens' book and sign during the season, minimizing his innings and keeping him fresh for October.

He can't pitch until at least the all-star break

 

[nvalvo]

Remember that mid-February is when teams can put the long-term injured on the 60-day IL. That could open a few roster spots — do we have anyone for that list right now? — and perhaps prompt a flurry of trades and signings.

 

[Fishy1]

Remember that mid-February is when teams can put the long-term injured on the 60-day IL. That could open a few roster spots — do we have anyone for that list right now? — and perhaps prompt a flurry of trades and signings.

Wyatt Mills comes to mind. Had Tommy John last July. Can't really think of anyone else.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Wyatt Mills comes to mind. Had Tommy John last July. Can't really think of anyone else.

Hes not on the 40, though.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

If Jansen is moved, it had better mean that Montomery/Snell is getting signed and it's a budgetary bullshit reason why they can't have both. If they're just dumping Jansen, then they're really punting and should really start thinking about moving just about everyone not named Casas or Bello (and Devers since he's an unmovable object now)

 

[nvalvo]

It’s of course possible that one of the obvious trades to the Marlins, Mariners, or White Sox for an SP is pending *them* having the 40-man space to make it.

 

[moondog80]

I don't understand the connection between Jansen and Montgomery. I'd think the issue with signing Monty isn't paying him this year, it's the subsequent years.

 

[bosockboy]

If Jansen is moved, it had better mean that Montomery/Snell is getting signed and it's a budgetary bullshit reason why they can't have both. If they're just dumping Jansen, then they're really punting and should really start thinking about moving just about everyone not named Casas or Bello (and Devers since he's an unmovable object now)

Thus far, they have pocketed the 10 million they saved on Sale. Wouldn’t bet on it being spent.

 

[Salem's Lot]

If Jansen is moved, it had better mean that Montomery/Snell is getting signed and it's a budgetary bullshit reason why they can't have both. If they're just dumping Jansen, then they're really punting and should really start thinking about moving just about everyone not named Casas or Bello (and Devers since he's an unmovable object now)

Or they’re paying his contract to “buy” a prospect.

 

[nvalvo]

Thus far, they have pocketed the 10 million they saved on Sale. Wouldn’t bet on it being spent.

Well, if Sale netted $10m, and Jansen ~$16m, and Montgomery costs $25m…

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

If Jansen is moved, it had better mean that Montomery/Snell is getting signed and it's a budgetary bullshit reason why they can't have both. If they're just dumping Jansen, then they're really punting and should really start thinking about moving just about everyone not named Casas or Bello (and Devers since he's an unmovable object now)

Assuming we're just talking about the MLB roster, whom else could they even move outside of Jansen, Martin and probably Pivetta.

Offensively, none of Casas, Grissom or Devers really make sense to move. From the pitching side, the only guys that have value and could be moved are likely Bello and Crawford.

Focused just on the MLB roster, outside of those pieces, I can't imagine anyone else really has "trade" value, Duran might have a little based off the Heyman nugget earlier, but outside of that... I mean to "sell" you have to be offering something that another team wants, right?

 

[TomRicardo]

Assuming we're just talking about the MLB roster, whom else could they even move outside of Jansen, Martin and probably Pivetta.

Offensively, none of Casas, Grissom or Devers really make sense to move. From the pitching side, the only guys that have value and could be moved are likely Bello and Crawford.

Focused just on the MLB roster, outside of those pieces, I can't imagine anyone else really has "trade" value, Duran might have a little based off the Heyman nugget earlier, but outside of that... I mean to "sell" you have to be offering something that another team wants, right?

I could see a team being interested in Whitlock or Houck though you would probably have to attach money to Whitlock for any return. Refsnyder could get you a piece as well but outside of that nothing really has any value.

 

[chrisfont9]

I don't understand the connection between Jansen and Montgomery. I'd think the issue with signing Monty isn't paying him this year, it's the subsequent years.

Not that related, though I suppose if Jansen goes, maybe Whitlock is designated as the closer and the need for another starter becomes more acute.

 

[kazuneko]

Soler played 32 games in the OF in 2023 and and 57 games in 2022. Not the "definition of a dedicated DH", unlike JDM afaic. One of things that makes Soler attractive I think is his ability to play some OF, at least at a Schwarber level of incompetence.

I think the fact that he might play the outfield at a Schwarber level of incompetence is exactly the issue. Because you're right, his -5 OAA in 32 games was Schwarberian.
I don't think "could be the worst defender in the league if you give him a chance" is the standard Breslow is looking to meet when he says he doesn't want a dedicated DH.

 

[Jimbodandy]

Just looked it up. How do you lose 9 games with a 1.12 ERA?

There were six other guys under 2 ERA. The #10 guy was 2.08.

 

[chrisfont9]

I think the fact that he might play the outfield at a Schwarber level of incompetence is exactly the issue. Because you're right, his -5 OAA in 32 games was Schwarberian.
I don't think "could be the worst defender in the league if you give him a chance" is the standard Breslow is looking to meet when he says he doesn't want a dedicated DH.

You can just bring back Franchy!

 

[jon abbey]

Interestingly in the context of the Gibson discussion, Blake Snell had a 1.20 ERA in his final 23 starts last year, remarkably just 18 ERs allowed in 135 innings.

SD went ‘just’ 16-7 in those games though, Snell’s own record in those was 13-3.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Interestingly in the context of the Gibson discussion, Blake Snell had a 1.20 ERA in his final 23 starts last year, remarkably just 18 ERs allowed in 135 innings.

SD went ‘just’ 16-7 in those games though, Snell’s own record in those was 13-3.

Pedro-esque. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=martipe02&t=p&year=2000

 

[snowmanny]

Gibson's 1968 ... some astonishing numbers in there
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=gibsobo01&t=p&year=1968

June and July were pretty special. 12-0 0.50 ERA and 8 shutouts in two calendar months....is ridiculous, no matter the circumstances. 11-0 with a 0.27 ERA after the first win.

 

[HfxBob]

If Jansen is moved, it had better mean that Montomery/Snell is getting signed and it's a budgetary bullshit reason why they can't have both. If they're just dumping Jansen, then they're really punting and should really start thinking about moving just about everyone not named Casas or Bello (and Devers since he's an unmovable object now)

I too question the very rationale of trading Jansen. If you hold onto him he might help you make the playoffs, or you can trade him at the deadline. Trading him now makes little sense if the team actually intends to compete this year. They're comfortably under the tax threshold, so why would they need to shed more payroll?

 

[SouthernBoSox]

I too question the very rationale of trading Jansen. If you hold onto him he might help you make the playoffs, or you can trade him at the deadline. Trading him now makes little sense if the team actually intends to compete this year. They're comfortably under the tax threshold, so why would they need to shed more payroll?

You would need either…

A) Something interesting in the return or
B) The fund set up to be better allocated elsewhere

 

[HfxBob]

You would need either…

A) Something interesting in the return or
B) The fund set up to be better allocated elsewhere

What do you think A) might be?

 

[chawson]

I too question the very rationale of trading Jansen. If you hold onto him he might help you make the playoffs, or you can trade him at the deadline. Trading him now makes little sense if the team actually intends to compete this year. They're comfortably under the tax threshold, so why would they need to shed more payroll?

They don’t need to shed payroll, and that’s not what it’s about. The reason is the same as it was for Verdugo, Sale, and Urias, and the same idea as proffered in today’s Speier aritcle. He’s on a one-year contract, and we have capable replacements (honestly, Campbell is my pick).

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I too question the very rationale of trading Jansen. If you hold onto him he might help you make the playoffs, or you can trade him at the deadline. Trading him now makes little sense if the team actually intends to compete this year. They're comfortably under the tax threshold, so why would they need to shed more payroll?

Why is the assumption that the Sox are actively trying to move Jansen as opposed to being willing to listen as multiple interested teams inquire about his cost?

 

[BeantownIdaho]

Pedro's year was significantly better than Gibson's IMHO.

28 CG.... 13 shutouts.... 300+ innings....1.12 era.... 22-9... and Pedro's season was "significantly" better?

 

[HfxBob]

They don’t need to shed payroll, and that’s not what it’s about. The reason is the same as it was for Verdugo, Sale, and Urias, and the same idea as proffered in today’s Speier aritcle. He’s on a one-year contract, and we have capable replacements (honestly, Campbell is my pick).

Speier is talking about deadline trades. Jansen is an obvious candidate for a deadline trade, sure. That's completely different from trading him now.

 

[chawson]

Speier is talking about deadline trades. Jansen is an obvious candidate for a deadline trade, sure. That's completely different from trading him now.

Is it?

 

[curly2]

He can't pitch until at least the all-star break

Damn, how quickly they—OK, me—forget.

 

[nighthob]

Gibson's 1968 ... some astonishing numbers in there
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=gibsobo01&t=p&year=1968

On the other hand, could you picture Y2K Pedro throwing from a pitching mountain? I swear to god that if I ever invent a time machine I'm going back to Y2k, kidnapping Pedro, and setting sail for 1967 to let Pedro go 32-0 and lead Boston to the title.

 

[nighthob]

28 CG.... 13 shutouts.... 300+ innings....1.12 era.... 22-9... and Pedro's season was "significantly" better?

Yes, it was. Pedro was throwing from a lower mound at the height of the steroid era. And rolling up deadball era pitching numbers.

 

[Yo La Tengo]

Speier is talking about deadline trades. Jansen is an obvious candidate for a deadline trade, sure. That's completely different from trading him now.

Agreed. Trading Jensen now makes no sense (unless the Sox receive a fantastic offer, which is true for everybody on the 40 man, who are presumably available if they get blown away with an impossible to refuse trade).

There is a ... non-zero chance that Giolito returns to his 2021 form, Bello takes the leap, Whitlock's new Hulk body turns him into Jake Peavy 2.0, Houck learns a dominant 3rd pitch, Pivetta recreates his second half performance, Crawford is as good as last year's stats looked, Casas becomes an All-Star, Duran picks up where he left off, Yoshida extends his May-July performance over the whole season, Devers finally has that season we've all been waiting for, Story roars back at 90% of his old self, Grissom is a league average second baseman, the bullpen lives up to its potential, and Wong throws out 100% of basestealers. It would make no sense to trade Jansen/Martin now for a likely underwhelming return and then send out 2 top-20 prospects at the deadline to find an "established closer" and/or an 8th inning guy.

The team can trade those guys mid-season if they are not in contention.

EDIT: should have mentioned Rafaela becoming the modern day Tony Phillips, ONeill goes on the TB12 flexibility program and plays the whole season as a gold glover, and Abreu hits like his namesake Bobby.

 

[HfxBob]

Is it?

You seriously don't see a difference? 4 months of Jansen has no possible value to the 2024 Red Sox?

 

[tims4wins]

The NL league ERA in 1968 was 2.99. Gibson's was 1.12, or 37.5% of the league average.

The AL league ERA in 2000 was 4.91. Pedro's was 1.74, or 35.4% of the league average. That would project to 1.06 in 1968.

It's pretty close from that standpoint.

That said, if you transported Y2K Pedro to 1968, he might not have given up a baserunner.

WHIP:

Gibson: .853
NL: 1.201
Gibson: 71% of league average

Pedro: .737
AL: 1.490
Pedro: 49.5% of league average
Projected to 1968: .594

For fun: Koji 2013: .565

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

What do you think A) might be?

I would like to see Le Brez pay down Kenley’s contract so we can get Kyle Hurt (25yo and WAAAY down the pecking order).

CBS Sports (yes they are terrible) put him on their 2024 All-Rookie Team but he’s mostly under the radar it seems:

Alternate: Kyle Hurt, Dodgers
With his 14.9 K/9 and 20 percent swinging-strike rate in the minors last year, Hurt is well worth testing in a starting role, but he's so far down the pecking order at age 25 that he may get pigeonholed as a multi-inning reliever before he gets that chance.

He was fourth in all the minor leagues in K% at 39% and tops in SWST% at 28.6% (200 min batters faced). He has a diverse arsenal but relies on his two-seamer, which is up to 97 MPH, and his nasty double-plus change-up with a 60% whiff rate. His breaking pitches do not have high spin rates. Instead, he relies on horizontal run to fool batters. It worked in 2023 very well. The biggest question is whether he’ll start or pitch out of the bullpen.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Why is the assumption that the Sox are actively trying to move Jansen as opposed to being willing to listen as multiple interested teams inquire about his cost?

Because its been reported that they were trying to move him for months?

 

[SoxJox]

Pitching in Fenway in the middle of the steroid era is in no way comparable to being in Dodger Stadium during Dead Ball Era III. Pedro was a better pitcher over his career than Kershaw, even if the stat lines look similar.

I always blindly accepted park factors as easily measurable and reliable components of ERA+ or OPS+, but I'd never really looked into them. I had no idea how variable they are. Just look at Fenway over the last 25 years, especially during Pedro's 99-2002 peak.

View attachment 77718
There have been a few changes to the place that could have impacted wind patterns, but nothing too major. The field and walls are all exactly where they've been for the last 90 years. How does the runs factor vary so wildly from year to year? Is weather really that big a deal? Or are park factors overall kind of bullshit with pitching performance making the data very noisy?

Have we taken into account atmospheric rivers? [ducks]

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Why would the Dodgers trade for Jansen when they already have Phillips as closer?

It’s hard to trade a closer in February, especially one who makes a lot of money. But, it’s only a matter of time before a contender loses their closer, so I think you wait for that.

 

[SoxJox]

I'm just sitting on the sideline and soaking up the great discussion regarding Pedro and others. I will add only this: the supposed "Gibson Rule", which resulted in the mound being lowered 5 inches to a height of 10 inches after 1968. This, to me, makes Pedro's case even stronger, at least relative to Gibson and others being mentioned from that era (e.g., Koufax).

 

[PapnMillsy]

It could be that they didn’t like how Bloom was evaluating talent and managing the rebuild, so they made a change. Now they are hoping that they have the right guy in Breslow. That doesn’t mean that they’re going to hand him a blank check. They’ve obviously set a budget, and don’t want to add any more payroll, so Breslow’s job is to figure out a way to build a team with what he has. The best path to that is to make the pitching that is already in the organization better through coaching. Is it going to work? Probably not. But that’s where we are at currently it seems.

I do find it pretty funny how they fired Bloom for not being the right guy or whatever, yet the organization is hitching their ENTIRE FUTURE to three unproven players who were brought into the organization by Chaim Bloom.

 

[chrisfont9]

I do find it pretty funny how they fired Bloom for not being the right guy or whatever, yet the organization is hitching their ENTIRE FUTURE to three unproven players who were brought into the organization by Chaim Bloom.

I liked Bloom OK but it seems like they've put out a reason why he was fired and it wasn't EVERY SINGLE THING HE DID. Also the org consists of guys from, what, three GMs now? Not that weird.

 

[RS2004foreever]

28 CG.... 13 shutouts.... 300+ innings....1.12 era.... 22-9... and Pedro's season was "significantly" better?

1968 MLB .237/.299/.340
2000 MLB .270/.345/.437 (the slugging % is the highest in major league history I believe)
1968 was an outlier year - the OPS was the lowest in any year since the dead ball era - 1917.
Gibson was great, but doing what Pedro did in a league that slugged nearly .100 points higher IMO is significantly better in the context of their times.
In fact putting up a WHIP of .737 in FENWAY in the best slugging year is major league history is like Bob Beamon's long jump in the Olympics. Well not that good buy you get the idea.
Sorry for hijacking the thread.