There's also the possibility Pomeranz has turned the corner and will be the guy he has been this year. A gamble worth taking. This trade has a lot of upside potential for the Redsox as well.
Of course you don't have to watch "every start". But that's not what you said. You said you've "hardly seen him".I don't have to watch every Pomeranz start to know they overpaid. Just like they overpaid for Kimbrel.
Why is six million a gamble? Were you around when the Masterson deal happened?This narrative needs to fucking stop. Signing Rich Hill last fall was never going to happen. Six million dollars for a guy who'd made four (FOUR!!!) good starts two months removed from the independent leagues was a gigantic gamble, and one the Red Sox at the time didn't have the need to make since they had nine possible rotation candidates already in house.
Besides, without guaranteeing him a rotation spot, he wasn't going to sign here anyway. And they did not have the rotation spot to guarantee.
Again, six million dollars for a 36-year-old who'd washed out of four organizations in two years and who they'd picked up off the independent scrap heap to eat some meaningless innings at the end of a lost season. Sorry, but those four stellar starts aren't enough to convince me he had found the Bartolo Colon fountain of youth.
And I'll reiterate, he wasn't signing where he wasn't going to be given a rotation spot. I'd imagine between six million from the Red Sox to maybe start and maybe make the bullpen versus six million from the A's with an assured rotation spot, he's taking the A's offer anyway. So the notion that they could have had him for just the $6M is folly.
No. What we (well, I) wanted was for the Red Sox to trade some combination of Chavis, Ball, Dubon, Ockimey, etc. for a starting pitcher who is better than Clay Buchholz, of which there are many available (I think that package might have gotten Hill, but, hey, work your way down the list -- Cashner, Santana, a number of guys).They wanted the Padres to take Trey Ball
My original point stands DD threw away assets for Kimbrel. He traded two top 80 prospects and threw in a talented left handed to aquire a reliever whose war had declined 3 years in a row. Those assets would of been valuable today. They could of offered a package around a position of strength with Margot as the main piece. Everytime DD makes a trade now the board is going to hold their breath. Instead they had two include one of their three top pitchers.Maybe it is best to post less and read more, just a thought.
I was told there would be no mathInstead they had two include one of their three top pitchers.
Don't go over to Soxprospects. The mood is like the end of Old Yeller.
Rhetorical device. No actual need for convincing. There were quite a few good arguments for why this is a good move posted in the thread before I showed up. I don't think I'm ever going to like this trade, but that doesn't mean it's an objectively bad move. I genuinely believe we'll regret it eventually, but if the Red Sox win the World Series this year, and it's not in spite of Pomeranz, it will be hard to call it a bad move.Espinoza is 18.
I'm going to miss you when you're gone.My original point stands DD threw away assets for Kimbrel. He traded two top 80 prospects and threw in a talented left handed to aquire a reliever whose war had declined 3 years in a row. Those assets would of been valuable today. They could of offered a package around a position of strength with Margot as the main piece. Everytime DD makes a trade now the board is going to hold their breath. Instead they had two include one of their three top pitchers.
Wasn't it Tommy Pickles? Stu was the father I believe, but I don't think there was a Drew.Four cool things about Pomeranz:
1) he has huge vertical movement (-9.1) on his curve; it ranks second among 12 knuckle curves and 6th among 67 curves of both types in this category. What is more fun to watch than a lefty with a big looping curve?
2) From an FG article about how big a deal the addition of the cutter has been for Pomeranz: "Want to know a fun fact? His third time through the order this season, Pomeranz has yielded a paltry .328 OPS. That’s the best mark in baseball by more than 100 points."
3) His great-grandfather was a pretty good pitcher (albeit in a very short career) for the Cleveland Indians, with the insanely perfect name of Garland Buckeye.
4) He and his fellow major leaguer, brother Stu, are namesakes of the Pickles brothers from Rugrats but were born three and seven years before the series aired.
I hope you die in a car crash, you stupid fucking piece of shit.I don't have to watch every Pomeranz start to know they overpaid. Just like they overpaid for Kimbrel.
I answered that way because I don't think there's anything that will convince you. And I'm not being snarky--you admitted you like the young guys and that's cool.Rhetorical device. No actual need for convincing. There were quite a few good arguments for why this is a good move posted in the thread before I showed up. I don't think I'm ever going to like this trade, but that doesn't mean it's an objectively bad move. I genuinely believe we'll regret it eventually, but if the Red Sox win the World Series this year, and it's not in spite of Pomeranz, it will be hard to call it a bad move.
Using reliever WAR to make your point doesn't have the effect that you are hoping. Kimbrel took a step back from other worldly to merely excellent last year and is more or less that same guy this year with some shitty luck mixed in. Meanwhile, Guerra's value as a "top 80 prospect" has completely evaporated. Could Margot have been used this deadline? Sure. But if they didn't have Kimbrel now, they'd still be scrambling for a closer even after the Ziegler trade.My original point stands DD threw away assets for Kimbrel. He traded two top 80 prospects and threw in a talented left handed to aquire a reliever whose war had declined 3 years in a row. Those assets would of been valuable today. They could of offered a package around a position of strength with Margot as the main piece. Everytime DD makes a trade now the board is going to hold their breath. Instead they had two include one of their three top pitchers.
I could of told you there would be.I was told there would be no math
Why the hell would it matter? I'm not a scout. I'll rely on what I've read from callis,law,speier and anything I could find on him. Im willing to bet most of the industry agrees that they paid a steep price. Hopefully Pomeranz put it all together this year and we get a legitimate three starter and not a back of the rotation filler.Of course you don't have to watch "every start". But that's not what you said. You said you've "hardly seen him".
How much of Espinoza have you seen?
To make your point stronger, you could HAVE at least mentioned the fourth player we traded, who may soon be the Padres starting second baseman, or at least a very decent utility infielder in Carlos Asuaje.My original point stands DD threw away assets for Kimbrel. He traded two top 80 prospects and threw in a talented left handed to aquire a reliever whose war had declined 3 years in a row. Those assets would of been valuable today. They could of offered a package around a position of strength with Margot as the main piece. Everytime DD makes a trade now the board is going to hold their breath. Instead they had two include one of their three top pitchers.
Read the thread. It's a good trade but a bad thread.I just heard the news and haven't read this thread yet. I'm going to need someone to talk me down because my initial reaction is disbelief and very grave unhappiness. I can't believe they gave up Espinoza for Pomeranz.
But tonight I'll read the thread and maybe someone here has made the case for why this is a good trade.
Jesus, the guy hasn't been a "three starter" this year he's been an ace. He's 27, cheap, has 2.5 years of control and a big time pedigree.Why the hell would it matter? I'm not a scout. I'll rely on what I've read from callis,law,speier and anything I could find on him. Im willing to bet most of the industry agrees that they paid a steep price. Hopefully Pomeranz put it all together this year and we get a legitimate three starter and not a back of the rotation filler.
If this team had the dearth of ready (or near ready) starting pitching like they did at the start of 2015 (which is why they signed Masterson), then $6M for a Hill flier is no big deal. But they weren't in that position...no amount of hindsight changes that fact.Why is six million a gamble? Were you around when the Masterson deal happened?
Holding a spot for Buchholz wasn't some clear win either...and this was all before Wright demonstrated his value.
You can defend not signing Hill, but acting like it was an absolute no brainer is absurd. The guy would have been cheap and just a one year deal...they could and should have found him a spot and let Kelly go to the pen.
You're completely ignoring the fact that he wasn't going to sign with any club that didn't have a spot for him to start. The Sox had nine guys lined up in front of him.Why is six million a gamble? Were you around when the Masterson deal happened?
Holding a spot for Buchholz wasn't some clear win either...and this was all before Wright demonstrated his value.
You can defend not signing Hill, but acting like it was an absolute no brainer is absurd. The guy would have been cheap and just a one year deal...they could and should have found him a spot and let Kelly go to the pen.
Hopefully not until the wreckage catches fire.I hope you die in a car crash, you stupid fucking piece of shit.
And in this scenario, if one of those guys isn't available? Then what?No. What we (well, I) wanted was for the Red Sox to trade some combination of Chavis, Ball, Dubon, Ockimey, etc. for a starting pitcher who is better than Clay Buchholz, of which there are many available (I think that package might have gotten Hill, but, hey, work your way down the list -- Cashner, Santana, a number of guys).
Then we (I) wanted the Red Sox to be players in the off-season when actual reliable front-line starters might be available. We (I) wanted them to pack up Swihart, Shaw, Devers, and, sure, Espinoza, and see if we couldn't get a Chris Sale or a Jose Fernandez.
.
Drew was Stu's brother and cousin Angelica's father.Wasn't it Tommy Pickles? Stu was the father I believe, but I don't think there was a Drew.
No I haven't been staying up to watch the Padres on nightly basis. That doesn't mean I can't look at his career stats and see he's never pitched more than a 120 innings. That he's spent most of his career in pitchers parks and has been incredibly lucky this year with his LOB and BABIP. Maybe I'm completely off on the market and the Rangers offered Gallo or profar. Espinoza to me is an overpay and I think most evaluators agree with laws take that it was a steep price.So you readily admit you know nothing of Drew Pomeranz, but somehow you can appreciably compare his value to an 18 year old prospect? Must be a nice skill to have.
Did you also know nothing of Kimbrel in the offseason?
On top of that, there's no way a combination of Swihart+ gets those guys. The conversation for one of them starts with Betts, Bogearts, or Moncada, then goes on from there.And in this scenario, if one of those guys isn't available? Then what?
Nonsense. Jae Crowder + Wally would totally get us Fernandez. It is known.On top of that, there's no way a combination of Swihart+ gets those guys. The conversation for one of them starts with Betts, Bogearts, or Moncada, then goes on from there.
I loved how Dombrowski calculated the Kimbrel deal by utilizing players at positions of depth who were blocked either by a franchise cornerstone like Bogaerts or at the time the depth of Bradley, Betts, and Benitendi. In this case he took a top 18-year old prospect, utilized him to stabilize our starting rotation while replacing that prospect with todays signing of Groome.I just heard the news and haven't read this thread yet. I'm going to need someone to talk me down because my initial reaction is disbelief and very grave unhappiness. I can't believe they gave up Espinoza for Pomeranz.
But tonight I'll read the thread and maybe someone here has made the case for why this is a good trade.
My original point stands DD threw away assets for Kimbrel. He traded two top 80 prospects and threw in a talented left handed to aquire a reliever whose war had declined 3 years in a row. Those assets would of been valuable today. They could of offered a package around a position of strength with Margot as the main piece.
I'm not sure why people are expressing such hostility toward Pedroia'sBoys--his point isn't all that unreasonable. If DD pulled a Brian Cashman and acquired Chapman for nothing (Rookie Davis and Eric Jag. aren't real prospects and they are proving that in Double A this year), the Red Sox would have held on to valuable assets that, in turn, could have been used to acquire Pomeranz. DD needed to wait out the closer market for longer than he did. The Padres asking price for Kimbrel was too high but DD didn't demonstrate the flexibility to find another solution.I hope you die in a car crash, you stupid fucking piece of shit.
Except 2012 when he pitched ~145. So you haven't watched him pitch and can't even take the time to read his career stats closely before ranting about how bad this trade is? I don't like this trade either, but you are making it far too easy to dismiss your take as worthless drivel.No I haven't been staying up to watch the Padres on nightly basis. That doesn't mean I can't look at his career stats and see he's never pitched more than a 120 innings.
And Angelica's cat was Fluffy. Loved that show.Drew was Stu's brother and cousin Angelica's father.
The price tag for Chapman had absolutely nothing to do with the closer marketI'm not sure why people are expressing such hostility toward Pedroia'sBoys--his point isn't all that unreasonable. If DD pulled a Brian Cashman and acquired Chapman for nothing (Rookie Davis and Eric Jag. aren't real prospects and they are proving that in Double A this year), the Red Sox would have held on to valuable assets that, in turn, could have been used to acquire Pomeranz. DD needed to wait out the closer market for longer than he did. The Padres asking price for Kimbrel was too high but DD didn't demonstrate the flexibility to find another solution.
I like the Pomeranz trade better than the Kimbrel trade. At least the Red Sox acquired a SP this time for a valuable young player versus trading multiple young players for a closer.
Interestingly, there is no CBA after Dec 1, 2016. I mean, there probably will be, but the CBA is expiring this year. I'd be very surprised if the cap didn't go up by a pretty good amount going into next season.Depending on arbitration, it looks like they have something like 145-160 million committed against the cap.
Law didn't say anything at all about it being a bad trade for the Redsox and what you "think" other evaluators "might think" is less than worthless.No I haven't been staying up to watch the Padres on nightly basis. That doesn't mean I can't look at his career stats and see he's never pitched more than a 120 innings. That he's spent most of his career in pitchers parks and has been incredibly lucky this year with his LOB and BABIP. Maybe I'm completely off on the market and the Rangers offered Gallo or profar. Espinoza to me is an overpay and I think most evaluators agree with laws take that it was a steep price.
He had a 3.08 ERA and 3.69 FIP over the previous two years/155 IP coming into this year. He's put the cherry on the sundae in 2016, but it's not like he sucked before this year and came out of nowhere. He was a vaunted prospect who struggled in limited duty in the worst pitchers' ballpark in baseball, and has done nothing but improve since getting out of there. Granted, Fenway is a hitters' park too, but not like Coors.Why the hell would it matter? I'm not a scout. I'll rely on what I've read from callis,law,speier and anything I could find on him. Im willing to bet most of the industry agrees that they paid a steep price. Hopefully Pomeranz put it all together this year and we get a legitimate three starter and not a back of the rotation filler.
1--He's pitched 147 innings in 2012No I haven't been staying up to watch the Padres on nightly basis. That doesn't mean I can't look at his career stats and see he's never pitched more than a 120 innings. That he's spent most of his career in pitchers parks and has been incredibly lucky this year with his LOB and BABIP. Maybe I'm completely off on the market and the Rangers offered Gallo or profar. Espinoza to me is an overpay and I think most evaluators agree with laws take that it was a steep price.
Further to that, I'm pretty sure Chapman was the Red Sox first choice and they were the ones that unearthed the domestic violence incident in the first place. They arguably dropped the price for Chapman considerably just by passing on him (and revealing the reason).The price tag for Chapman had absolutely nothing to do with the closer market
What? They are not even remotely similar players. In five minor league seasons Gardner hit 10 HRs. AB did that in his first 54 games and at a younger age. Gardner was a slap hitting, base stealing CFer. AB has legit power potential. Other than being small white guys id be curious why you think they are similar profiles.
And AB has far more value than Espinoza. He's a much surer bet with a far less
You do realize that Gardner has 17&16 hr seasons in MLB yes? I'm guessing that was not his projection based on milb stats so what is the point of using them in this context? I don't think AB has a lot of projection at this point. He is small and going on 23 so I'm not sure how much bigger he gets. The Brett Gardner comp wasn't to say he has no future as Brett has had a nice MLB career.What? They are not even remotely similar players. In five minor league seasons Gardner hit 10 HRs. AB did that in his first 54 games and at a younger age. Gardner was a slap hitting, base stealing CFer. AB has legit power potential. Other than being small white guys id be curious why you think they are similar profiles.
And AB has far more value than Espinoza. He's a much surer bet with a far less chance of flaming out. He will prob be in the bugs before the end of the season, while AE is minimum four years away. Every prospect ranking has AB higher if not considerably higher.
I would simply rather have the pitcher with ace potential over the OF with a much higher floor.
Dude, just stop. Every post is more wrong than the one before it. You admit you haven't seen the guy, and now you're actually screwing up the numbers you are looking at. First of all, if you combine his major league and minor league innings, by using simple addition, you'll realize he's pitched more than 120 innings in a season.No I haven't been staying up to watch the Padres on nightly basis. That doesn't mean I can't look at his career stats and see he's never pitched more than a 120 innings. That he's spent most of his career in pitchers parks and has been incredibly lucky this year with his LOB and BABIP. Maybe I'm completely off on the market and the Rangers offered Gallo or profar. Espinoza to me is an overpay and I think most evaluators agree with laws take that it was a steep price.
I wouldn't think he has the ability to maintain a lower than league average BABIP, I would first assume its SSS noise. I don't get all the venom directed toward me. DD in my opinion has overpaid in his two major trades as the general manager. That apparently is an enraging comment.1--He's pitched 147 innings in 2012
2--Petco plays very similar to Fenway this year and his ERA+ 161 which is adjusted for his park.
3--His BABIP is very good. However, it's almost the same as it was in 2014 and even last year was very good, if higher than this season.
That's, like, your opinion, man.I wouldn't think he has the ability to maintain a lower than league average BABIP, I would first assume its SSS noise. I don't get all the venom directed toward me. DD in my opinion has overpaid in his two major trades as the general manager. That apparently is an enraging comment.
Your rationality has no place here!Am I seriously the only person who's seen Espinoza pitch around here? I mean, I'm an anonymous dude from the internet and my opinion is worthless, but you guys should really watch a low minors game once in a while. It really sharpens your appreciation of the big leagues.
Anyway, Espinoza is young and a ways away from MLB. Like everyone says, he's got a great, low-effort looking delivery with awesome velocity, and that always projects well, but he's still got a ways to go. He's still pretty raw in that he doesn't repeat his delivery so great and some of his pitches went to the backstop. Just crazy wild sometimes. That's not uncommon for an 18-year old. But you know, 18. He really does have a delivery made of dreams, but he still has a lot of stuff to figure out to get to MLB. Barring injury and tons of other stuff, I'm sure he'll get there, but it's a tough road for young pitchers.
That said, I have no idea if this deal is good or not. Dombrowski does have a pretty decent track record in trading prospects, though.
Your comments aren't followed up by any substance, facts, or even moderately accurate information. You just keep saying shit with the hope something sticks and none of it is. Please stop.I wouldn't think he has the ability to maintain a lower than league average BABIP, I would first assume its SSS noise. I don't get all the venom directed toward me. DD in my opinion has overpaid in his two major trades as the general manager. That apparently is an enraging comment.