Sox offseason starting pitching target

[finnVT]

 
Not so weird.  Top CFers will generally have more dWAR that than the best LFers.  I assume it's because the more plays and area that a CF has as his responsibility, the more chances he has to excel and separate himself from the pack.  And, to use a stat that isn't positionally adjusted, if you look at the b-ref Total Zone Runs, you'll see that the CFers are the leaders in that category.
 
Putting Betts or JBJ in left field, particulary in Fenway, minimizes the advantage of their speed and ball tracking. A CFer will make 25% more plays than a corner outfielder, in Fenway, it's even more than that, I suspect, vs LFer, not as much compared to the RFer.  JBJ is probably as good as anyone in the game -- maybe Kiermaier is better.  Castillo has the arm, and the range for RF in Fenway.  Betts will be a great LFer, I suspect, but he'll be under-utilized.

I think you're general point along these lines is fine-- whichever OF the sox end up putting in LF would have more value to another club (in CF) than they do to the Sox (in LF).  The problem is that in practice, I'm not sure there's a good trade fit that ends up being a net + for both teams.  Presumably, a trade like this would be (let's say) Betts for a better hitting OF that can't play CF (so the Sox get extra hitting value with minimal defensive value lost since it's LF, whereas other team loses some hitting value but gains it in defensive value).  But, for this to really work, everything else (notably contract and potential for improvement) needs to be similar between the two, which makes it exceedingly difficult to find a good potential match.
 
If we look at OF 26yo and younger this season to see whether there's a way the Sox could get a better corner OF bat, here's the top of the list by OPS:
Harper 1.091
Trout .971
Pedersen .794
Heyward .790
Betts .771
 
I think we can all agree Harper and Trout aren't going anywhere, and Pedersen isn't a fit in this scenario because he's also an excellent CF.    Which basically leaves Jason Heyward as a guy that potentially satisfies this situation: a corner OF who (probably) hits better than Betts, but is still pretty young.  Of course, he'll be a FA this offseason.  
 
You could conceivably sign someone like Heyward, and then try to trade Betts for similar production elsewhere, but you'd have to get enough extra production to cover the cost of Heyward's contract.  Maybe there's a SP out there that would work, but you'd be going from Betts + Miley/Kelly -> Heyward + Betts trade return.  So the SP you get back has to be enough better than Miley/Kelly to justify the entire contract given to Heyward, which seems like a tough another sell.  But you're still losing out on the possibility that Betts is going to get better.

 

[Drek717]

Except Heyward is probably the best RF in all of baseball (on nights Jackie Bradley isn't there at least), and he would also be giving up a ton of positional value playing LF in Fenway.
 
If they trade an OF to help at another spot I doubt going after a young LF would be critical with Benintendi and Margot moving up the ladder.  They'll want maximum current production and rely on either one of the young guys to step up or another acquisition at the time of need to fill the hole.
 
CarGo is probably the best trade target to fill that need.  Two years of contract left at a high dollar rate but much lower AAV.  Colorado moving Tulo mid-season signals that they're going full rebuild this winter.  A reasonable prospect package could probably get him.  Still not sure if it would be worth moving Betts for pitching though, since I don't think many teams would just do a 1:1.  Betts for Harvey or Gray makes sense for the Red Sox but it isn't like the Mets and A's don't still need starting pitchers too.  They would be shuffling deck chairs to make the Red Sox a better club.

 

[nvalvo]

A lot of these questions are wheel-spinning until we have a sense of the budget.
 
If Henry and friends have decided that they can't endure what another non-contending season would do to their $2 billion dollar brand and have accordingly turned the 2016 budget knob up to "Dodgers" (possibly with the knowledge that the LT threshold is heading in that direction anyway) then maybe dealing one or two of our infield prospects (Wendell Rijo? — Chicago's infield situation is a travesty) for David Robertson makes sense, along with adding another setup type in free agency, and maybe Johnny Cueto. 
 
That would work wonders, moving a bunch of people down depth charts into roles where they make more sense (and Uehara to situational relief ace, where he could be deadly). It would also cost something like $180m in assumed payroll, and like $45m in AAV. So more economical options might be more likely. 

 

[WenZink]

I think you're general point along these lines is fine-- whichever OF the sox end up putting in LF would have more value to another club (in CF) than they do to the Sox (in LF).  The problem is that in practice, I'm not sure there's a good trade fit that ends up being a net + for both teams.  Presumably, a trade like this would be (let's say) Betts for a better hitting OF that can't play CF (so the Sox get extra hitting value with minimal defensive value lost since it's LF, whereas other team loses some hitting value but gains it in defensive value).  But, for this to really work, everything else (notably contract and potential for improvement) needs to be similar between the two, which makes it exceedingly difficult to find a good potential match.
 
If we look at OF 26yo and younger this season to see whether there's a way the Sox could get a better corner OF bat, here's the top of the list by OPS:
Harper 1.091
Trout .971
Pedersen .794
Heyward .790
Betts .771
 
I think we can all agree Harper and Trout aren't going anywhere, and Pedersen isn't a fit in this scenario because he's also an excellent CF.    Which basically leaves Jason Heyward as a guy that potentially satisfies this situation: a corner OF who (probably) hits better than Betts, but is still pretty young.  Of course, he'll be a FA this offseason.  
 
You could conceivably sign someone like Heyward, and then try to trade Betts for similar production elsewhere, but you'd have to get enough extra production to cover the cost of Heyward's contract.  Maybe there's a SP out there that would work, but you'd be going from Betts + Miley/Kelly -> Heyward + Betts trade return.  So the SP you get back has to be enough better than Miley/Kelly to justify the entire contract given to Heyward, which seems like a tough another sell.  But you're still losing out on the possibility that Betts is going to get better.

 
I agree, recognizing a situation where a player is worth more to another team, and finding a way to take advantage of it, are two different things. But you're restricting yourself to swapping one outfielder for another.  You could also trade Betts(as part of a package) for a top cost-controlled Ace pitcher, and then sign a FA corner outfielder (similar to De Aza) to a one or two year deal, waiting to see how Margot or Benintendi develop.
 
It's theoretical, at this point, because I'm not sure what the Sox project JBJ's offense to be, except that he's a good bet to at least be that .240/.700 OPS hitter to justify starting in CF, and I assume what Castillo has done over the last month is confirmation of what they saw in him when they signed him for $72 mil last summer.
 
And this whole discussion started as an offshoot, where I said there was "no way" the Sox would keep both a (fully recovered) Vazquez and Swihart to share the catcher's spot.  I was told by some posters that its always good to have two good catchers in case one went down, and things like that.  Nonsense.  If you have two starting catchers you trade one and improve the team.  And you don't waste too much time over it, since every month you waste is one less month of pre-arbitration salary.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

 
So do the Yankees have to build a bullpen this offseason?  Do the Royals?  The Astros?  
 
...The best way to build a pen with a high degree of confidence is to spend money -- lots of it.  

 
What are you talking about? The 3 teams you referred to:
 
Royals
 
Greg Holland: Drafted in the 10th round 2007
Kelvin Herrera: Amateur Signing 2006
Wade Davis: Part of the Shields package (which included Myers and Odorizzi) 2013 - 3 yrs at $14.6 ($2.8, $4.8, $7.0, then options in 2016)
Franklin Morales: FA 2015 @ $1.85 
Ryan Madson: Picked up for 1 year @ $850,000
 
 
Astros
 
Luke Gregerson: FA 2015 - 3 yrs at $18.5
Will Harris: Waivers @ $514,000
Pat Neshak: FA 2015 - 2 yrs at $12.5
Tony Sipp: FA 2015 - 1 yr @ $2.4
Chad Qualls: Drafted 2nd round 2000
 
Yankees
 
Andrew Miller: FA 2015 - 4 yrs @ $36.0
Adam Warren: Drafted 4th round 2009
Dellin Betances: Drafted 8th round 2006
Chasen Shreve: Traded for Banuelos 2015 - 1 yr @ $500,000
Justin Wilson: Traded for Cervelli 2015 - 1 yr @ $556,000
 
No, you don't have to spend "tons of money" for a good bullpen. Even the Yankees only went crazy for one guy.

 

[WenZink]

 
...[snip]
 
No, you don't have to spend "tons of money" for a good bullpen. Even the Yankees only went crazy for one guy.

 
Hey, you edited my post to make it look like I was claiming that the Astros and Royals spent a lot of money on their bullpens.  Stop with that BS.
 
You can end up with a great bullpen, by developing your own guys and then getting lucky with Darrin Oliver or a Dan Wheeler.  But you never know, at the start of the season, what you're going to have.  So the best way to build a bullpen, with a high degree of confidence is to spend money.
 
And since we're talking about assured of a good bullpen to before bringing in an expensive FA starter, the Sox would have to spend a a lot of money.

 

[jtn46]

 
There's no sense debating further, the fantasy that the Sox will sign Price or another expensive FA starter, so I'll just address the point about Shaw.

I don't see why it's fantasy at all. Dombrowski will, in his tenure with the Red Sox, acquire an elite starter because the team needs it and he was brought in to make the team better. It may not be this offseason, it may be via trade, but if Dombrowski covets Price in particular he likely only has 1 chance to get him, and as a bonus he costs nothing but cash in an offseason with a lot of available pitchers.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
Hey, you edited my post to make it look like I was claiming that the Astros and Royals spent a lot of money on their bullpens.  Stop with that BS.

 
He did nothing of the kind. He edited your post to point out a contradiction in your argument. When you say that "the best way to build a bullpen with a high degree of confidence is Strategy X," then it's a reasonable assumption that the teams you present as examples of successful bullpen-building should have employed Strategy X. But they didn't.

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

 
What are you talking about? The 3 teams you referred to:
 
Royals
 
Greg Holland: Drafted in the 10th round 2007
Kelvin Herrera: Amateur Signing 2006
Wade Davis: Part of the Shields package (which included Myers and Odorizzi) 2013 - 3 yrs at $14.6 ($2.8, $4.8, $7.0, then options in 2016)
Franklin Morales: FA 2015 @ $1.85 
Ryan Madson: Picked up for 1 year @ $850,000
 
 
Astros
 
Luke Gregerson: FA 2015 - 3 yrs at $18.5
Will Harris: Waivers @ $514,000
Pat Neshak: FA 2015 - 2 yrs at $12.5
Tony Sipp: FA 2015 - 1 yr @ $2.4
Chad Qualls: Drafted 2nd round 2000
 
Yankees
 
Andrew Miller: FA 2015 - 4 yrs @ $36.0
Adam Warren: Drafted 4th round 2009
Dellin Betances: Drafted 8th round 2006
Chasen Shreve: Traded for Banuelos 2015 - 1 yr @ $500,000
Justin Wilson: Traded for Cervelli 2015 - 1 yr @ $556,000
 
No, you don't have to spend "tons of money" for a good bullpen. Even the Yankees only went crazy for one guy.

And it's not like we don't have the guys who could imagine stepping up and being solid performers out of the bullpen next year, especially if we add depth to the rotation: Owens, Johnson, Kelly. Personally, I'm a believer in the "invite a dozen guys with upside to spring training and see who looks good" strategy to building a bullpen, although I can be persuaded to give out a medium sized contract periodically to guys who have done well but have never been anointed closer.
 
There's relatively small correlation between bullpen salaries and overall team performance:
 

 

In our sample, the average team spent 18.2 million on relievers who made 10 or more appearances. Interestingly, teams who spent more than 18.2 million averaged 81 wins, and teams who spent less than 18.2 million on relievers averaged 81 wins. When bullpen salary is plotted against overall team wins, as the previous factoid suggests, there’s very little correlation between an increase in spending and an increase in wins as the best fit line had an R2 of 3.6%. For reference, R-squared represents the percentage of the response variable that is explained by a linear model. In an excellent summation of the entropy surrounding relievers, teams over 90 wins spent anywhere between 6.0 million (the 2013 Pirates) and 35.9 million (the 2014 Dodgers), with the vast majority of teams falling between about 12 and 25 million. Outside of perhaps the very extremes, there’s very little parallel between raw bullpen salary and team wins.
 
 

There is negative relationship between % of payroll devoted to bullpen and team performance:

The bullpen is the most foolish place to spend money on a roster, assuming of course that teams are sensible enough not to spend big money on their positional player bench. 

 

[WenZink]

 
He did nothing of the kind. He edited your post to point out a contradiction in your argument. When you say that "the best way to build a bullpen with a high degree of confidence is Strategy X," then it's a reasonable assumption that the teams you present as examples of successful bullpen-building should have employed Strategy X. But they didn't.

 
The first part of my post was in response to PrometheusWakefield's claim that teams have to rebuild their builpens most every year, and I gave the Yankees, Royals and Astros as examples of teams that won't have to do that this offseason.  He then took out 2 paragraphs and 6 sentences of my post, without any indication it was being edited.  That's bullshT,

 

[WenZink]

The bullpen is the most foolish place to spend money on a roster, assuming of course that teams are sensible enough not to spend big money on their positional player bench. 

 
 I agree it's foolish, but not nearly as foolish as bringing in a David Price to a 73-win team with a bullpen that's trashed and a rotation that has nothing but 5 question marks and Wade Miley.  My point was, since you can't assume a competent bullpen (without spending a ton of money), see what you have in mid-season before you spend close to $200 mil.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Personally I also just like having CF depth at the corners too.  If DD takes Zinwink's advice here and trades Betts for Gray and then JBJ  eats a chunk of the monster making a play and is  out for a month- we've suddenly gone back to Hanley in LF, Castillo in CF and Brock Holt in RF.  That just takes us back to the dark days of this season.  Pass.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

 
 I agree it's foolish, but not nearly as foolish as bringing in a David Price to a 73-win team with a bullpen that's trashed and a rotation that has nothing but 5 question marks and Wade Miley.  My point was, since you can't assume a competent bullpen (without spending a ton of money), see what you have in mid-season before you spend close to $200 mil.

Wait... so it's fine to add Sonny Gray to the same equation and he would turn the team around despite greatly weakening the outfield defense and a potential .800 OPS All Star outfielder that can step in to any outfield position and play it at a plus level?  Cool.

 

[Drek717]

 

 
Hey, you edited my post to make it look like I was claiming that the Astros and Royals spent a lot of money on their bullpens.  Stop with that BS.
 
You can end up with a great bullpen, by developing your own guys and then getting lucky with Darrin Oliver or a Dan Wheeler.  But you never know, at the start of the season, what you're going to have.  So the best way to build a bullpen, with a high degree of confidence is to spend money.
 
And since we're talking about assured of a good bullpen to before bringing in an expensive FA starter, the Sox would have to spend a a lot of money.

Except what he highlighted in your post isn't altered in any meaningful way by the section he removed.  You claimed that developing your own guys or spending big money was the only solution.  The Royals have one draftee and one amateur FA signing.  The Astros have only one draftee in their top 5.  The Yanks have two draftees.  Otherwise there is only one big money FA and everyone else among those three bullpens are low dollar FA fliers, waiver wire guys, and buy low trade targets.
 
Spending money on bullpen arms is what they have been doing.  Like giving $5M to Mujica, or before that the Bobby Jenks and Brad Penny types of the world.  Unless you're buying an elite closer type for elite level money the mid-tier bullpen guys are every bit as volatile as the bottom end guys.
 
The one general rule of thumb that consistently works is to get young guys with live arms who aren't massively deficient at striking people out, avoiding walks, or serving up meatballs that leave the park.  Get a bunch of them, have a pitching coach and manager who can work with them, and work quickly through them to identify the ones who have it from the ones who don't.

 

 
 I agree it's foolish, but not nearly as foolish as bringing in a David Price to a 73-win team with a bullpen that's trashed and a rotation that has nothing but 5 question marks and Wade Miley.  My point was, since you can't assume a competent bullpen (without spending a ton of money), see what you have in mid-season before you spend close to $200 mil.

 
The only way this team is back in the same boat is if:
Buch is back and relied on to start at the front end of the rotation, but gets hurt yet again for another 1/2 to 2/3rds of the year.
Porcello really hasn't figured anything out and turns back into a pumpkin as soon as 2016 starts.
Joe Kelly hasn't finished anything out and turns back into a pumpkin as soon as 2016 starts.
Wade Miley's last four months or so of good production was all a mirage and he falls into the same rut to start 2016 that he started 2015 in.
They yet again fail to find a single bullpen upgrade.
Hanley Ramirez sets a new high water mark for defensive failure at the easiest position on the diamond.
Hanigan, Swihart, and Vazquez all miss significant time and we watch Jordan Weems play catcher by about mid-June.
Two of Bradley/Castillo/Betts fall on their faces and play absolutely horrible baseball until August 2016.
Pedroia, one of the historically most durable players around, is hurt for another half season.
Pablo Sandoval goes back to hitting LHP from the right side, shows up at least as fat as he is now for next ST, and fouls another ball hard off his foot early in the season.
 
I mean, you say "73 win team" like this team went into 2015 as a bottom tier club and played exactly to expectations.  In reality they were projected to be a WS contender with an elite offense and mid-tier pitching.  Nearly everything went wrong, the front office failed to react in a timely fashion, and the coaching staff did very little to turn the tide while meaningful games were still being played.  We're talking top to bottom failure that got a GM who won a title in 2013 shown the door before the end of 2015.
 
I'd say there's some pretty reasonable signs pointing towards a regression to the norm for many of these worst case outcomes in 2016.  You take that, add a few key additions, supplement with some additional help from the farm, and you've got a pretty solid setup to roll forward with.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
 I agree it's foolish, but not nearly as foolish as bringing in a David Price to a 73-win team with a bullpen that's trashed and a rotation that has nothing but 5 question marks and Wade Miley.  My point was, since you can't assume a competent bullpen (without spending a ton of money), see what you have in mid-season before you spend close to $200 mil.

 
You do realize that Price would be pitching in Boston for more than just the 2016 season in this scenario, right? And as far as I'm aware, they plan to have a 2017 season, and probably one in 2018.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

 
And this whole discussion started as an offshoot, where I said there was "no way" the Sox would keep both a (fully recovered) Vazquez and Swihart to share the catcher's spot.  I was told by some posters that its always good to have two good catchers in case one went down, and things like that.  Nonsense.  If you have two starting catchers you trade one and improve the team.  And you don't waste too much time over it, since every month you waste is one less month of pre-arbitration salary.

Yes, you've spent quite a lot of time and space arguing about how to maximize a player's value, and how to avoid wasting that value, in the context of WAR ratings.

But the point of building a team isn't to maximize WAR. It's to win games. Games that are actually played by real baseball players who sometimes get hurt.

Unfortunately, you haven't once during this effort showed why trading away the Red Sox' exciting young players (Betts, Owens, Swihart, etc.), to obtain another team's exciting young players is a better idea, in the context of winning games, than any other viable offseason option for actual team building. Especially when there are so many good starting pitchers hitting free agency in the same offseason.

Nonsense.

If you want your ideas to be taken seriously, then show your work and lay out the team you want to build your way. With actual trade suggestions, lineups, payrolls, etc. Explain why you expect your trade targets to be available and for whom, and how their addition would make the Red Sox more likely to win more games.

As for me, no way do I trade any of Betts, Swihart, or Vazquez this offseason. I'd pick up Cueto and some bullpen arms.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

 
The first part of my post was in response to PrometheusWakefield's claim that teams have to rebuild their builpens most every year, and I gave the Yankees, Royals and Astros as examples of teams that won't have to do that this offseason.  He then took out 2 paragraphs and 6 sentences of my post, without any indication it was being edited.  That's bullshT,

Others have pointed out your disconnect.

I recommend you compose your posts better or stand by what you write. It would also be useful to back some of your theories with more data.

Opinions are fine, but don't get bent out of shape when they're challenged.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

And it's not like we don't have the guys who could imagine stepping up and being solid performers out of the bullpen next year, especially if we add depth to the rotation: Owens, Johnson, Kelly. Personally, I'm a believer in the "invite a dozen guys with upside to spring training and see who looks good" strategy to building a bullpen, although I can be persuaded to give out a medium sized contract periodically to guys who have done well but have never been anointed closer.
 
There's relatively small correlation between bullpen salaries and overall team performance:
 

 
There is negative relationship between % of payroll devoted to bullpen and team performance:

The bullpen is the most foolish place to spend money on a roster, assuming of course that teams are sensible enough not to spend big money on their positional player bench. 

 
Those charts are impressive because if you take out the 51 win Astros team you get two sets of data that appear to have literally zero correlation. That's really hard to do.

 

[nothumb]

 
 I agree it's foolish, but not nearly as foolish as bringing in a David Price to a 73-win team with a bullpen that's trashed and a rotation that has nothing but 5 question marks and Wade Miley.  My point was, since you can't assume a competent bullpen (without spending a ton of money), see what you have in mid-season before you spend close to $200 mil.

 
This is so incredibly bad. Holy christ.
 
Spend a ton of money on the bullpen for a bad team (which would make it merely an ok team) in order to then buy a starter at the worst possible time, in a seller's market when they can't be had for just cash, when you've already spent half the season being a mediocre team and made it that much harder to make the playoffs. We should deliberately make the team worse for half of 2016 and then increase the difficulty of acquiring the piece that we all agree we probably need, all in order to make sure of... what exactly? That we don't waste half of one season of that contract on a team that isn't making the playoffs?
 
This is basically like saying we should take a road trip from New York to LA, but instead of buying a nicer car now, we should slap new brakes on our Yugo and drive it to, I dunno, Topeka or something, and then when we get to Topeka we should consider buying a nice new BMW from the one dealership there in the two days we will spend there before we have to leave. I'm sure they'll give us a good price.
 
Aside from how staggeringly stupid this plan is, it's also based on a faulty premise, which is that this is a 73 win team. The 2016 Red Sox will not be giving ABs to the corpses of Mike Napoli and Shane Victorino, they will not be putting a tackling dummy dressed up like Hanley Ramirez in LF, they will not be sending Justin "Dan Haren without the location or deception" Masterson to the mound at any point, etc. I'm not saying this is a playoff team as currently constructed, but the nice thing about being rich and having a gazillion prospects is that you can make more than one move in the offseason.
 
We know the rotation needs to get better. We also know that it's easier to add a front-line SP in the offseason because we can spend money AND prospects. So make the rotation better now, either by signing someone or trading for someone. Also make the bullpen better, and maybe have a plan B for 1B / corner OF. Then go play baseball.

 

[tomdeplonty]

This is basically like saying we should take a road trip from New York to LA, but instead of buying a nicer car now, we should slap new brakes on our Yugo and drive it to, I dunno, Topeka or something, and then when we get to Topeka we should consider buying a nice new BMW from the one dealership there in the two days we will spend there before we have to leave. I'm sure they'll give us a good price.

 
Agreeing completely and to put it another way: if you already know the team needs starting pitching to be competitive, it is just dumb to wait to obtain it when it is scarce and more expensive than when it is more plentiful and can be had cheaper in the offseason. And not only does this improve the rotation (which you already know is needed), as others have pointed out above, it improves the bullpen too, by pushing everybody down the depth chart.
 
Waiting on starting pitching just fails to make basic sense, unless you (WenZink) think they're competitive if you just stand pat and improve the bullpen. But if you really believe it's a 73 win team - how can you compete just by improving the bullpen? You're going to add (what) sixteen to twenty wins just by doing that - to get you to a place where a starter available at deadline puts you over the top?
 
Hell - even if you believe they really are that bad, it makes more sense to buy starting pitching when it's cheaper. It's just hard to get past this basic problem with the idea.

 

[timlinin8th]

 
Not so weird.  Top CFers will generally have more dWAR that than the best LFers.  I assume it's because the more plays and area that a CF has as his responsibility, the more chances he has to excel and separate himself from the pack.  And, to use a stat that isn't positionally adjusted, if you look at the b-ref Total Zone Runs, you'll see that the CFers are the leaders in that category.
 
Putting Betts or JBJ in left field, particulary in Fenway, minimizes the advantage of their speed and ball tracking. A CFer will make 25% more plays than a corner outfielder, in Fenway, it's even more than that, I suspect, vs LFer, not as much compared to the RFer.  JBJ is probably as good as anyone in the game -- maybe Kiermaier is better.  Castillo has the arm, and the range for RF in Fenway.  Betts will be a great LFer, I suspect, but he'll be under-utilized.

Is it possible though that a CFer on an average ML team makes more plays because he has to compensate in some way for a less adequate LFer? In other words, because you have corners with higher than average range, can you then play your CFer deeper (esp important with Fenway's triangle) and play your corner OFers closer to the lines to steal XBHs.

I think the best way to look at dWAR in that scenario is taking the entire OF as a whole. On the AVERAGE team the CFer has a higher dWAR than the corners, but because of how they are positioned is that CFer "stealing" dWAR away from his corners because you're positioning him in a way to make plays you know the corners can't? By having better corners, you can then position the entire OF more aggressively to steal XBHs and end up with a higher aggregate dWAR across your entire OF.

Its a good "problem" to have.

 

[Wake's knuckle]

Actually, I think there are a lot of times where the CF and one of the corner fielders could both get to the ball. By and large, though, the CF never says "You got it!" -- and he's the one who makes that decision most of the time.

 

[Al Zarilla]

Actually, I think there are a lot of times where the CF and one of the corner fielders could both get to the ball. By and large, though, the CF never says "You got it!" -- and he's the one who makes that decision most of the time.

I've read that Ted Williams would often say "Get it Dommy" or "it's your's Dom." But, he was a left fielder and wanted to get back to practicing his swing.

 

[Devizier]

Getting back to the subject at hand, if the Red Sox are not in -- for whatever reason -- on Price or Zimmerman, are there any free agent starters that they would seriously consider? I'm thinking not. Maybe someone off the reclamation pile for a minor league contract?

 

[ehaz]

Getting back to the subject at hand, if the Red Sox are not in -- for whatever reason -- on Price or Zimmerman, are there any free agent starters that they would seriously consider? I'm thinking not. Maybe someone off the reclamation pile for a minor league contract?

I'd be willing to see if Latos has anything left on a 1-year deal. Still looking for an ace in that scenario

 

[O Captain! My Captain!]

Getting back to the subject at hand, if the Red Sox are not in -- for whatever reason -- on Price or Zimmerman, are there any free agent starters that they would seriously consider? I'm thinking not. Maybe someone off the reclamation pile for a minor league contract?

 
Here's who Cot's has as FA SP
 
Starting Pitchers
Brett Anderson 
Bronson Arroyo * 
Clay Buchholz *
Mark Buehrle 
A.J. Burnett 
Trevor Cahill * 
Chris Capuano 
Jhoulys Chacin 
Wei-Yin Chen 
Bartolo Colon 
Johnny Cueto 
Ross Detwiler 
R.A. Dickey * 
Marco Estrada 
Doug Fister 
Gavin Floyd 
Yovani Gallardo 
Jaime Garcia*
Zack Greinke (opt-out) 
Jeremy Guthrie * 
J.A. Happ 
Dan Haren 
Tim Hudson 
Hisashi Iwakuma 
Scott Kazmir 
Ian Kennedy 
John Lackey 
Mat Latos 
Mike Leake 
Colby Lewis 
Tim Lincecum 
Kyle Lohse 
Justin Masterson
Brandon Morrow 
Bud Norris
Mike Pelfrey 
David Price 
Jeff Samardzija 
Alfredo Simon 
Jerome Williams 
Jordan Zimmerman 
 
I'm not sure how accurate the list is, since it had Boston's own Rick Porcello on it. Nobody outside the top tier I'd go hard after, but I could see signing Kazmir or Chen if their market falls through and the value's right.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

I'd be willing to see if Latos has anything left on a 1-year deal. Still looking for an ace in that scenario

 
Mediocre as a Marlin, terrible as a Dodger. I'd pass - sounds like Justin Masterson the sequel.
 
I would be willing to consider Doug Fister as a flyer, though, if the medicals check out. 

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Getting back to the subject at hand, if the Red Sox are not in -- for whatever reason -- on Price or Zimmerman, are there any free agent starters that they would seriously consider? I'm thinking not. Maybe someone off the reclamation pile for a minor league contract?

 
Why wouldn't the Red Sox be in on Shark or Cueto?
 
I think they'll seriously consider everyone on the market, but focus primarily on getting a "staff ace" RH starter, considering how much LH potential they already have in EdRo and Owens.

 

 

[Green Monster]

 

..........are there any free agent starters that they would seriously consider?

 

I would be interested in Leake, Chen, and Iwakuma.  However, I don't see any of those as ACEs, but rather a quality alternative to Buchholz in the event they don't pick up his option or decide to trade him. 

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
Mediocre as a Marlin, terrible as a Dodger. I'd pass - sounds like Justin Masterson the sequel.
 
 

This year, Latos has been roughed up by the likes of Atlanta (twice), Arizona, Cincinnati, San Diego... I agree, Paso Robles. Besides, Sox fans would be all over him for his pig face, worse than the Lackey face, when he did poorly, . 

 

[ehaz]

 
Mediocre as a Marlin, terrible as a Dodger. I'd pass - sounds like Justin Masterson the sequel.
 
I would be willing to consider Doug Fister as a flyer, though, if the medicals check out. 

He hasn't pitched well this season but neither has Fister. At least Latos has improved his velocity over the course of the season and might be getting over the injury hump. Fangraphs has his xFIP under 4 for the season despite the ineffectiveness. He's had his share of injuries, but Latos' numbers have been consistent and hasn't struggled like this since he was 21.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

He hasn't pitched well this season but neither has Fister. At least Latos has improved his velocity over the course of the season and might be getting over the injury hump. Fangraphs has his xFIP under 4 for the season despite the ineffectiveness. He's had his share of injuries, but Latos' numbers have been consistent and hasn't struggled like this since he was 21.

 
Right, but Fister has the excuse of an injury to explain his poor performance this year. Latos, to my knowledge, has just been not good. And obviously if Fister's arm is in bad shape, you wouldn't sign him.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

(1) I wouldn’t trade Swilhart for an SP.  In an era of slumping offense, I want a catcher who can hit and Swilhart has the potential to develop into a middle-of-the-order bat (to go along with plus defense).  I like Vazquez—he is superior defensively to Swilhart but he will never hit like Swilhart.  Many organizations covet catch-and-throw catchers who excel in pitch framing and so the Red Sox can get fair value for Vazquez in a trade, while retaining the better overall player (Swilhart).
 
(2) 2016 starting staff:
Price (FA)
Trade
Miley
Porcello
Wright and Kelly compete for the 5th spot -- the loser moves to the bullpen.
 
I would use Brian Johnson and Margot as trade chips for a starter.  I’m not expecting someone as good as Sonny Gray, but I am expecting a quality SP in return.
 
Buchholz: pick up the option and trade him, maybe for a relief arm.  His injuries have been more arm-related than ever before (shoulder/neck in 2013 and elbow in 2015) and thus I believe a significant decline in performance level is right around the corner.
 
Rodriguez and Owens: Triple A.  Both pitchers have things they can work on--Rodriguez works on his slider while Owens works on developing his breaking pitches and better overall command.  Injuries happen, and so I’m expecting at least one of the two to play a large role in the major league rotation. 
 
The Red Sox have a lot of options with the 2016 starting staff.  The decisions they make will determine if they are competitive again or not.  Fortunately, Dombrowski will be making these crucial decisions instead of Cherington. . . .

 

[chrisfont9]

 
Right, but Fister has the excuse of an injury to explain his poor performance this year. Latos, to my knowledge, has just been not good. And obviously if Fister's arm is in bad shape, you wouldn't sign him.

Fister is also well acquainted with life in the AL. I think if you're talking about expensive FA SPs who aren't sure things, an AL resume like Fister's or Chen's should provide some indicator of reliability. Some NL guy with an OK record is much more likely to tank here. We've had enough trouble with extended adjustments this year.

 

[Mike F]

I've read that Ted Williams would often say "Get it Dommy" or "it's your's Dom." But, he was a left fielder and wanted to get back to practicing his swing.

Another story about the same left fielder.
Apparently after a long run into left left center to catch a ball just short of the wall, Jimmy Piersal
Purportedly told TSW, "If you want me to cover
both positions, get the **** outta the way."

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Fister is also well acquainted with life in the AL. I think if you're talking about expensive FA SPs who aren't sure things, an AL resume like Fister's or Chen's should provide some indicator of reliability. Some NL guy with an OK record is much more likely to tank here. We've had enough trouble with extended adjustments this year.

If ever there was an offseason to avoid any FA SPs who aren't sure things, this is that one.

10 SPs who aren't sure things are already on the 40-man roster...plus Miley.

No mas.

 

[chrisfont9]

If ever there was an offseason to avoid any FA SPs who aren't sure things, this is that one.

10 SPs who aren't sure things are already on the 40-man roster...plus Miley.

No mas.

Agreed. I'm still in the Cueto camp, but watching closely as he adjusts to the AL (on KC's dime, thankfully)

 

[geoduck no quahog]

I'm looking forward to SoSH Baseball doing an analysis of the big FA's, assessing their stuff and projecting how well their stuff would play in (a) the American League East and (b) Fenway Park. 
 
Of course, if I had any idea of what I'm talking about I'd lend a hand.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

If ever there was an offseason to avoid any FA SPs who aren't sure things, this is that one.

10 SPs who aren't sure things are already on the 40-man roster...plus Miley.

No mas.

 
There's no such thing as a sure thing SP, but I think the valid point you're making is that there's no point in making any more medium risk/medium reward bets; we have a lot of those on the table already. We need to either go big or stand pat.
 
At least, that's one point of view. The other point of view is that if we see the poor result of last winter's strategy as largely bad luck, then repeating that strategy is likely to yield a better result this time.

 

[Rasputin]

 
There's no such thing as a sure thing SP, but I think the valid point you're making is that there's no point in making any more medium risk/medium reward bets; we have a lot of those on the table already. We need to either go big or stand pat.
 
At least, that's one point of view. The other point of view is that if we see the poor result of last winter's strategy as largely bad luck, then repeating that strategy is likely to yield a better result this time.

If the Red Sox do nothing but stand pat, there's a decent chance they're a playoff team.

I don't want to stand part. I don't want a decent chance. I went to get a starting ace and a relief ace and kick the ever living shit out of the AL East, ushering in a ten year era of dominance where we win the world series at least five times.

 

[Montana Fan]

Another story about the same left fielder.
Apparently after a long run into left left center to catch a ball just short of the wall, Jimmy Piersal
Purportedly told TSW, "If you want me to cover
both positions, get the **** outta the way."

 
Love that story Mike.  Can imagine the look on Ted's face when he heard that.

 

[ArgentinaSOXfan]

Another horrible outing for Cueto:
 
VS ChiSox:
 
 
3 IP
7H 
5 ER
4 K
2 BB

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

He's gotta be hurt. Would have loved him, but no thanks with a pending TJ.