The off-season

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
2,933
Florida
Name that pitcher. Please. Is there a better pitcher than Buchholz on the free agent market this year? One that will be cheaper than $13.5M? Buchholz as a free agent probably gets at least that if not more on the market this winter, so picking up the option is really a no-brainer. Picking up the option doesn't mean he is on the 2017 team though. He can always be flipped for "something useful". That assumes, of course, that they can adequately replace him on the pitching staff.
Probably makes sense there to also include a hypothetical example of the stated "something useful". Since the other half of the assumption being made there implies that any return to be had on Buchholz, in the event that option was being picked up with little surrounding intention of actually keeping him, would be worth taking on the risk of a winter/spring injury or sacrificing any potential benefit of DD simply keeping the money in hand and readily available to spend on something he actually did want.

If the value gap between a team having a just cash interest and a cash + giving up assets interest in Buchholz is a C level level prospect or fungible_piece_X, does that even play out to be worth the effort in reality and outside of min/max message board theory? I personally have my doubts, and of all outcomes here, this seems the most unlikely of the three atm/imo.

I mean I ultimately agree with the logic of it being a no-brainer if DD ends up picking it up with a fairly solid belief already in place that Clay is going to be our #5 guy coming out of ST. It gets little less so if you are paying that out while projecting him to come out of our pen though. Or if say, DD is already sitting there with the same David Price'like mentality in his head on the idea of adding another arm this winter to better solidify our rotation.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
17,559
St. Louis, MO
With Greinke's strong connection to Bannister, and Hazen presumably going to blow up the DBacks, that seems like a decent possibility.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
With Greinke's strong connection to Bannister, and Hazen presumably going to blow up the DBacks, that seems like a decent possibility.
Why would he blow up that roster? They'll have Greinke, Pollock, Goldschmidt, Castillo, , Segura, Lamb and Tomas all with a reasonable expectation of playing well going forward with the potential for bounce backs from Corbin and Shelby Miller, and a decent chance they're going to be able to bring back Ziegler. That's a pretty good core to work with.

Their awful year was as much due to injuries and bad luck as anything else. There's no reason to assume they'll be having a fire-sale.
 

PTC

lurker
Nov 10, 2006
28
Why would he blow up that roster? They'll have Greinke, Pollock, Goldschmidt, Castillo, , Segura, Lamb and Tomas all with a reasonable expectation of playing well going forward with the potential for bounce backs from Corbin and Shelby Miller, and a decent chance they're going to be able to bring back Ziegler. That's a pretty good core to work with.

Their awful year was as much due to injuries and bad luck as anything else. There's no reason to assume they'll be having a fire-sale.
Yeah I agree here. I don't love their roster, but you could do much worse than that core of players. Their runs scored went up last year enough to make a difference....the problem was that they gave up 180 more runs due to a total collapse in pitching that was spearheded by Shelby Miller and the bizarre deal that brought him to Arizona.
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
20,901
The gran facenda
Pitchers are so streaky in Boston that unless you're talking about a strong #1, does it even make practical sense to deal him for a pitcher? I mean for this to make sense you have to believe that:

A) Benintendi can play very good CF
B) That we have someone who is at least 2-ish WAR who can play LF
and
C) Believe that the pitcher we're going to get can make a real difference

That pitcher, by the way, would need to put up a better line than Price did in '16 for the deal to make much sense. Now, history says the odds of C. happening in the first year are low (See: Beckett, Josh; Porcello, Rick; Price, David). So at that point you're making a deal assuming it's not going to start being beneficial until at least year 2?

Thanks, but no thanks.
I guess what I meant to say was that Boston is a place where a lot of decent pitchers come and get totally exposed. And unless we're dealing JBJ for a bonafide (don't-matter-where-he-plays) kind of guy, I think it's a bad move. And you add that to the fact that we're seeing it can sometimes take a year here to get into the swing....it only makes that kind of deal worse.
True, you didn't say more exposed, you said totally exposed. I realize you're pretty new around here, but either way, you need to show your work instead of just offering up your opinion without anything to back your opinion up. "Because I said so" means nothing on the board. You were asked politely to show your work, and you neglected to do so. I would recommend that you do so before you post any more opinions.
This type of response
I didn't say that.
doesn't cut it.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,246
Scituate, MA
You keep saying this but you've done nothing to back it up. Show your work. Provide data that shows that an inconsistent pitcher who is excellent on one side, and awful on the other is no more or less valuable than a mediocre pitcher over the long haul.
One of the first names I cited was Wade Miley. A decidedly "mediocre" pitcher. Compare him to Clay Buchholz over Miley's career and I'd take the last 5 years of Miley over the last 5 years of Buchholz every time. With Buchholz you get much lower lows.

FWIW, Fan Graphs dollar values:
Miley from 2012-2016: $26.8, $13.0, $12.2, $21.4, $12.2
Buchholz from 2012-2016: $5.2, $20.8, $11.9, $25.7, $3.9

Either way, I think it's a ridiculous premise that Buchholz's option is a no brainer. If you pick up his option you are guaranteeing him a spot on this roster and considering the price point ($13.5 million) that's far too much for a #6 starter or a middle reliever/long man. I said the same thing last year and I was right then too.
 

PapaSox

lurker
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
I'm not convinced that the RS need to add a DH type. Does anyone really know whether or not Hanley wants to DH? He played well a 1B and other than trying to fill Ortiz's shoes there is no need to tag him as DH. If he wants the role then give it to him and stick Travis at 1B. There are plenty of bats that could keep the DH spot interesting - Young, Swihart, Panda & Travis. Keep their bats warm rather than going cold on the bench waiting for opportunities to play. Young could be real interesting in the DH role.
 

PapaSox

lurker
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
If DD goes for Sale then we have to expect Moncada & EDRod to be part of the trade. Chicago isn't going to give up an arm like Sale with a good contract for anything less.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
One of the first names I cited was Wade Miley. A decidedly "mediocre" pitcher. Compare him to Clay Buchholz over Miley's career and I'd take the last 5 years of Miley over the last 5 years of Buchholz every time. With Buchholz you get much lower lows.

FWIW, Fan Graphs dollar values:
Miley from 2012-2016: $26.8, $13.0, $12.2, $21.4, $12.2
Buchholz from 2012-2016: $5.2, $20.8, $11.9, $25.7, $3.9

Either way, I think it's a ridiculous premise that Buchholz's option is a no brainer. If you pick up his option you are guaranteeing him a spot on this roster and considering the price point ($13.5 million) that's far too much for a #6 starter or a middle reliever/long man. I said the same thing last year and I was right then too.
Wade Miley has two years left on his contract so why is he being discussed?

There are no Free Agent pitchers who are obvious upgrades over Clay. You don't have to like it and there is a distinct possibility that it won't be worth it but I'd say there is next to no chance that Clay's option isn't exercised. It is possible he would then be traded but I think they will hang on to him and he'll be in the rotation to start the year.

Edit: I just looked closer and Miley has one year and an option left on his contract not two years. His option is for $12M so if he is healthy he will likely have it picked up.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
82,381
Oregon
Salary arbitration projections: Red Sox
All estimates via Matt Swartz and MLB Trade Rumors' projection model:
Fernando Abad - $2 million
Robbie Ross Jr. - $1.8 million
Joe Kelly - $2.6 million
Drew Pomeranz - $4.7 million
Josh Rutledge - $1 million
Brock Holt - $1.7 million
Xander Bogaerts - $5.7 million
Bryan Holaday - $900,000
Brandon Workman - $600,000
Jackie Bradley Jr. - $3.3 million
Sandy Leon - $1.3 million
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
One of the first names I cited was Wade Miley. A decidedly "mediocre" pitcher. Compare him to Clay Buchholz over Miley's career and I'd take the last 5 years of Miley over the last 5 years of Buchholz every time. With Buchholz you get much lower lows.

FWIW, Fan Graphs dollar values:
Miley from 2012-2016: $26.8, $13.0, $12.2, $21.4, $12.2
Buchholz from 2012-2016: $5.2, $20.8, $11.9, $25.7, $3.9

Either way, I think it's a ridiculous premise that Buchholz's option is a no brainer. If you pick up his option you are guaranteeing him a spot on this roster and considering the price point ($13.5 million) that's far too much for a #6 starter or a middle reliever/long man. I said the same thing last year and I was right then too.
Repeating that you prefer mediocrity over a pitcher who is excellent and terrible in equal measure over a season isn't providing evidence to back up the very specific claim you've made.
 

PTC

lurker
Nov 10, 2006
28
True, you didn't say more exposed, you said totally exposed. I realize you're pretty new around here, but either way, you need to show your work instead of just offering up your opinion without anything to back your opinion up. "Because I said so" means nothing on the board. You were asked politely to show your work, and you neglected to do so. I would recommend that you do so before you post any more opinions.
This type of response

doesn't cut it.
You twice tried to misrepresent my statements with some subtle twisting. I owe you exactly nothing.

I made a statement which you're free to disagree with. Several pitchers including Pedro, Beckett, Porcello, Price, Lester, Lackey, etc either raised their WAR directly after leaving (with Lackey it was his first full year gone), or they lowered their WAR the first year they got here.

And that tells me that:

A) The transition cost of coming to Boston is real, and
B) That being in Boston has a price. A price that often gets remedied when you leave

Now, let's be very clear where you pulled your crap:

I said:

"Pitchers are so streaky in Boston.."

You said:

"What makes you think that pitchers are streakier in Boston than anywhere else?"

Notice how you twist what I said? I, in fact, DIDN'T say that pitchers are streakier in Boston than ANYWHERE else. You, actually, said that. But ok, I let that go because I did misspeak on a certain level. So I cleared it up and then said:

"I guess what I meant to say was that Boston is a place where a lot of decent pitchers come and get totally exposed."

And you said:

"What makes you say that decent pitchers get more exposed in Boston than elsewhere?"

You notice again how I didn't say the thing you said I said? So look, you have some kind of agenda and Id rather you not be cute about it. So, say what you mean and represent me properly, or simply know that I'm going to ignore you.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
You twice tried to misrepresent my statements with some subtle twisting. I owe you exactly nothing.

I made a statement which you're free to disagree with. Several pitchers including Pedro, Beckett, Porcello, Price, Lester, Lackey, etc either raised their WAR directly after leaving (with Lackey it was his first full year gone), or they lowered their WAR the first year they got here.

And that tells me that:

A) The transition cost of coming to Boston is real, and
B) That being in Boston has a price. A price that often gets remedied when you leave

Now, let's be very clear where you pulled your crap:

I said:

"Pitchers are so streaky in Boston.."

You said:

"What makes you think that pitchers are streakier in Boston than anywhere else?"

Notice how you twist what I said? I, in fact, DIDN'T say that pitchers are streakier in Boston than ANYWHERE else. You, actually, said that. But ok, I let that go because I did misspeak on a certain level. So I cleared it up and then said:

"I guess what I meant to say was that Boston is a place where a lot of decent pitchers come and get totally exposed."

And you said:

"What makes you say that decent pitchers get more exposed in Boston than elsewhere?"

You notice again how I didn't say the thing you said I said? So look, you have some kind of agenda and Id rather you not be cute about it. So, say what you mean and represent me properly, or simply know that I'm going to ignore you.
So your point is that pitchers are streaky and exposed everywhere?

Because if not, then he didn't twist anything you said, he read it and pointed out that you're singling out Boston.

Or the alternative, what you said is completely devoid of any value.

I'm going with both.
 
Last edited:

PTC

lurker
Nov 10, 2006
28
I didn't single it out.

My overall point is that there are places where a pitcher can probably get away with not being, for instance, a true ace. And there are places where it's quite a bit harder. Could be the division you're in; it could be because of the park you play in; it could be the pressure from the city (if you believe in that kind of thing). Boston is a place where a lot of pitchers come and we find out pretty fast if they're a real good pitcher or not. Frankly, I think there are a list of position players that maybe have that same situation happen (I'm thinking about Edgar Renteria here).

What I didn't say was that Boston was the only place. He put those words in my mouth and I reject them.

I want to go back to the comment that prompted this. What I said was that if you're going to trade JBJ, it wasn't enough to bring in somebody elses #2 or a "fake" ace who perhaps had some success in a low pressure/easily navigated ballpark (like say, Milwakee). What I said was that you needed a true blue ace. A guy who wasn't going to implode in Boston and who could pitch in tough environments.

I stand by that comment and people can judge it however they're going to judge it.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Can someone show me Fangraphs' work that has Miley's 2016 worth $12 million and Clay worth $4 million?


Salary arbitration projections: Red Sox
All estimates via Matt Swartz and MLB Trade Rumors' projection model:
Fernando Abad - $2 million [goodbye]
Robbie Ross Jr. - $1.8 million [good buy]
Joe Kelly - $2.6 million [good buy]
Drew Pomeranz - $4.7 million [good buy]
Josh Rutledge - $1 million [goodbye]
Brock Holt - $1.7 million [good buy]
Xander Bogaerts - $5.7 million [good buy but try to lock him up!]
Bryan Holaday - $900,000 [goodbye]
Brandon Workman - $600,000 [good buy]
Jackie Bradley Jr. - $3.3 million [see Xander]
Sandy Leon - $1.3 million [good buy]
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Can we please stop talking about not exercising Buchholz's option.
Why? It's a topic on which informed, reasonable people can disagree. He has only been healthy and effective enough to earn $13 million in two of the past five seasons. He spent a fair chunk of this year in the bullpen, and could easily end up there in 2017 as well. If we were to sign a 32-year-old reliever with a 4.60 three-year ERA to a $13M contract, the board would break. The soundness of that contract is 100% dependent on him being able to start. But he has only been able to make as many as 20 starts in three of the past six years.

I can see the arguments for exercising the option. I might even agree with them in the end. But calling it a "no-brainer" is several bridges too far.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
17,183
Somewhere
If the Red Sox eschewed Buchholz for one of the old guys (Hill or Colon), I could understand, even if I don't agree. Of the (relatively) younger guys available, they all come with huge red flags/risks just like Buchholz does. I wouldn't mind taking a flier on a guy like Colby Lewis, but I don't want the Sox to guarantee a rotation spot to him -- given that, a player of that caliber would get a better deal elsewhere.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,932
Maine
Can someone show me Fangraphs' work that has Miley's 2016 worth $12 million and Clay worth $4 million?
Miley's 2016 fWAR was 1.5, Buchholz was 0.5. It would appear the value of 1 fWAR is $8M.

On the other hand, Baseball Reference had Miley's 2016 at 0.1 WAR and Buchholz at 0.2.

I don't pretend to know the math involved in calculating WAR by either site, but there is definitely a fundamental difference in how they do it to have such different results for the same pitcher.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
Fangraphs mainly uses FIP to calculate pitcher WAR while BR uses runs scored and innings pitched to calculate WAR.
So FG focuses on what should have happened and BR looks more at what did happen.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Miley's 2016 fWAR was 1.5, Buchholz was 0.5. It would appear the value of 1 fWAR is $8M.

On the other hand, Baseball Reference had Miley's 2016 at 0.1 WAR and Buchholz at 0.2.

I don't pretend to know the math involved in calculating WAR by either site, but there is definitely a fundamental difference in how they do it to have such different results for the same pitcher.
I think the main difference is that Fangraphs uses FIP to represent runs allowed, where BBref uses actual runs allowed. And I seem to recall that FIP has been shown to correlate better with future performance, so if we're using WAR as a yardstick for judging a hypothetical future contract, FG's version seems like the better choice.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,999
Portland
Thanks, guys. I was looking at BR's WAR numbers and couldn't figure this out.
Quoting nearly verbatim from baseball reference from here: http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/war_explained_pitch.shtml

This is the actual formula: Customized park factor * (xRa -xRA_sprp_adj)

xRA - involves average runs per out for each team adjusted into a neutral context using park factors. This determines what the average number of expected runs would be for set of teams faced. 

Interleague has a built in factor to account for the DH. 

xRA_def is contemplated and uses Defense-Independent Pitching Stats (DIPS) which measures the actual value rather than luck (FIP). That is calculated using overall defensive runs (Runs saved and Total Zone). Then the number of balls in play allowed by the team, and also the number of balls in play by the pitcher (strikeouts are a big factor which is probably part of the reason Price's WAR was as high as it was and Miley/Buchholz are lower since they keep the ball in play a lot). It's a cumulative stat as well and Clay threw 27 fewer innings than Miley which is basically 4 starts. If good Clay had those 4 starts I'm sure he would have probably caught or equaled Miley.

The formula used is (Balls in play allowed by the pitcher/balls in play by the team times the Team Defensive Runs Saved).
 
Then there is a factor adjusting the averages for starters and relievers due to ERA differences (xRA-sprp). Kenley Jansen going 1 inning as a reliever would not be as good as Kenley Jansen going 6 innings as a starter since with his stuff he'd be gassed early.

Then there are custom park factors added in. 
 
Last edited:

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
18,780
Henderson, NV
Salary arbitration projections: Red Sox
All estimates via Matt Swartz and MLB Trade Rumors' projection model:
Fernando Abad - $2 million
Robbie Ross Jr. - $1.8 million
Joe Kelly - $2.6 million
Drew Pomeranz - $4.7 million
Josh Rutledge - $1 million
Brock Holt - $1.7 million
Xander Bogaerts - $5.7 million
Bryan Holaday - $900,000
Brandon Workman - $600,000
Jackie Bradley Jr. - $3.3 million
Sandy Leon - $1.3 million
My guess is the only non-tenders on this list are Rutledge and Holaday, because they are redundant parts that aren't needed to be kept for anything over the minimum. I'm sure someone will make the argument that Abad isn't worth more than Ross, but look at what lefty relievers get and his price is reasonable.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,246
Scituate, MA
Repeating that you prefer mediocrity over a pitcher who is excellent and terrible in equal measure over a season isn't providing evidence to back up the very specific claim you've made.
What claim do you disagree with then? I'm not understanding your objection.

I maintain that Buchholz is too inconsistent to guarantee a spot in the rotation and the Red Sox agree by dropping him from the rotation when they had 5 other starters they felt were better. As such, paying $13.5 million for a guy that doesn't have a spot in the rotation seems pointless. A better approach to this never ending back and forth is to find a #2 or #3 starter that would push someone already under contract (like Pomeranz) to the role that many here envision for Buchholz.
 
Last edited:

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
That a mediocre pitcher who is consistent all year is worth as much as a pitcher who is inconsistent but is both excellent and terrible in that same span.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
What claim do you disagree with then? I'm not understanding your objection.

I maintain that Buchholz is too inconsistent to guarantee a spot in the rotation and the Red Sox agree by dropping him from the rotation when they had 5 other starters they felt were better. As such, paying $13.5 million for a guy that doesn't have a spot in the rotation seems pointless. A better approach to this never ending back and forth is to find a #2 or #3 starter that would push someone already under contract (like Pomeranz) to the role that many here envision for Buchholz.
So you are suggesting they not sign Clay and trade for a #2 or #3 starter? If so which one and who are you giving up for him?
A guy like Teheran might fit the bill, he should only cost you something like Moncada and Bradley. I assume that is probably too rich so who is it that would make sense?
You brought up Miley earlier but he doesn't fit that description of a 2 or 3 he is more like a 4 or 5 and it's doubtful the Orioles would have any interest in trading him to the Sox.

If you want to stand pat that means Owens and assuming he is healthy Johnson are your 6 and 7 starters. That also means you are counting on Wright coming back and being in the rotation and I know some people love him but I'm still not sold on him. I'm much more comfortable with him being your 6th guy and slotting those other guys down.

I doubt anyone is crazy about another year of Clay, but he is available for only money and while it is lots of money it's only for one year. Calling bringing him back a "no-brainer" may be a touch strong but I'd be surprised if they don't do it.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
So you are suggesting they not sign Clay and trade for a #2 or #3 starter? If so which one and who are you giving up for him?
A guy like Teheran might fit the bill, he should only cost you something like Moncada and Bradley. I assume that is probably too rich so who is it that would make sense?
You brought up Miley earlier but he doesn't fit that description of a 2 or 3 he is more like a 4 or 5 and it's doubtful the Orioles would have any interest in trading him to the Sox.

If you want to stand pat that means Owens and assuming he is healthy Johnson are your 6 and 7 starters. That also means you are counting on Wright coming back and being in the rotation and I know some people love him but I'm still not sold on him. I'm much more comfortable with him being your 6th guy and slotting those other guys down.

I doubt anyone is crazy about another year of Clay, but he is available for only money and while it is lots of money it's only for one year. Calling bringing him back a "no-brainer" may be a touch strong but I'd be surprised if they don't do it.
Honest question. Its probably rhetorical but think the DBacks would do some type of Panda Buchholz for Greinke swap? Throw in a prospect here and there. Greinke did have a rough year and has more term left than Panda.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,902
Picking up Buchholz' option is indeed a no-brainer. Wait a month, and if he still fits into he plans you keep him, if not you trade him for some non-negative return.
 
Last edited:

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,932
Maine
Honest question. Its probably rhetorical but think the DBacks would do some type of Panda Buchholz for Greinke swap? Throw in a prospect here and there. Greinke did have a rough year and has more term left than Panda.
Not a chance. Remember who the D-Backs just hired to be their new GM...unless he's an embedded operative, I can't see Hazen doing that deal.

Besides, I think the D-Backs are set at the corner infield spots for the foreseeable future with Lamb and Goldschmidt. Why would they want to take on Sandoval?
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
20,901
The gran facenda
You twice tried to misrepresent my statements with some subtle twisting. I owe you exactly nothing.

I made a statement which you're free to disagree with. Several pitchers including Pedro, Beckett, Porcello, Price, Lester, Lackey, etc either raised their WAR directly after leaving (with Lackey it was his first full year gone), or they lowered their WAR the first year they got here.

And that tells me that:

A) The transition cost of coming to Boston is real, and
B) That being in Boston has a price. A price that often gets remedied when you leave

Now, let's be very clear where you pulled your crap:

I said:

"Pitchers are so streaky in Boston.."

You said:

"What makes you think that pitchers are streakier in Boston than anywhere else?"

Notice how you twist what I said? I, in fact, DIDN'T say that pitchers are streakier in Boston than ANYWHERE else. You, actually, said that. But ok, I let that go because I did misspeak on a certain level. So I cleared it up and then said:

"I guess what I meant to say was that Boston is a place where a lot of decent pitchers come and get totally exposed."

And you said:

"What makes you say that decent pitchers get more exposed in Boston than elsewhere?"

You notice again how I didn't say the thing you said I said? So look, you have some kind of agenda and Id rather you not be cute about it. So, say what you mean and represent me properly, or simply know that I'm going to ignore you.
Well, aren't you special! You seem to have mixed me up with another poster on the site, and a Canadian to boot! No offense Ian.
That was my first post since your original post. I actually said none of the things you think I did. Reading comprehension is a required skill around here. And asking people to show how they came to the conclusion they posted is also very common. So is adding substance/evidence when you post and showing your work when necessary. That is if you want to have an actual conversation instead of just posting your opinion, and having conversations is what makes the board work. The only person out of line here and pulling crap is you.

If you just want to post your opinion, do it somewhere else. It's your decision to make.

The over/under is set at 26.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,246
Scituate, MA
So you are suggesting they not sign Clay and trade for a #2 or #3 starter? If so which one and who are you giving up for him?
A guy like Teheran might fit the bill, he should only cost you something like Moncada and Bradley. I assume that is probably too rich so who is it that would make sense?
You brought up Miley earlier but he doesn't fit that description of a 2 or 3 he is more like a 4 or 5 and it's doubtful the Orioles would have any interest in trading him to the Sox.

If you want to stand pat that means Owens and assuming he is healthy Johnson are your 6 and 7 starters. That also means you are counting on Wright coming back and being in the rotation and I know some people love him but I'm still not sold on him. I'm much more comfortable with him being your 6th guy and slotting those other guys down.

I doubt anyone is crazy about another year of Clay, but he is available for only money and while it is lots of money it's only for one year. Calling bringing him back a "no-brainer" may be a touch strong but I'd be surprised if they don't do it.
I fully expect them to pick up Clay's option and I fully expect to be annoyed by it. I understand the argument that free agent options this offseason suck, so does Clay. I suspect that if they pick up Clay's option he will be the #5 starter and Pomeranz will be in the pen.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
I fully expect them to pick up Clay's option and I fully expect to be annoyed by it. I understand the argument that free agent options this offseason suck, so does Clay. I suspect that if they pick up Clay's option he will be the #5 starter and Pomeranz will be in the pen.
I have very little doubt that Pomeranz will be in the rotation and there's really not much argument for a lay over him, unless there's an injury. The money is sunk cost if they keep him. Clay's hope to be in the rotation will be how Wright recovers and performs in spring training. If both pitch well, Clay will be most likely be traded. The return won't be great, but assuming they add a bullpen piece or two there's no downside. If they rely on him for any kind of responsibility in the rotation I will light things on fire.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,932
Maine
Assuming everyone is healthy and there are no trades this winter, there are four locks for the 2017 rotation and those are Price, Porcello, Rodriguez and Pomeranz. The fifth spot will be up for grabs among Wright, Buchholz, Owens, Johnson, and anyone else they bring into the mix.

Pomeranz threw a career high in innings this year to the tune of a 3.32 ERA/3.80 FIP. It's folly to think he's headed for the bullpen next season.
 

PapaSox

lurker
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
Why? It's a topic on which informed, reasonable people can disagree. He has only been healthy and effective enough to earn $13 million in two of the past five seasons. He spent a fair chunk of this year in the bullpen, and could easily end up there in 2017 as well. If we were to sign a 32-year-old reliever with a 4.60 three-year ERA to a $13M contract, the board would break. The soundness of that contract is 100% dependent on him being able to start. But he has only been able to make as many as 20 starts in three of the past six years.

I can see the arguments for exercising the option. I might even agree with them in the end. But calling it a "no-brainer" is several bridges too far.
I succeed the floor to you. It just seemed to make sense to take the option and hope for the best. He can be effective and there is always the chance he can return to something of his prior self. I agree based on his numbers this season he'd be a hard sell on the board for $13.5million. I'm not sure having him start is all that essential. Having him do good work out of the pen and providing spot starts or extend run if someone goes down can be valuable ... think Wakefield.
 

PTC

lurker
Nov 10, 2006
28
Well, aren't you special! You seem to have mixed me up with another poster on the site, and a Canadian to boot! No offense Ian.
That was my first post since your original post. I actually said none of the things you think I did. Reading comprehension is a required skill around here. And asking people to show how they came to the conclusion they posted is also very common. So is adding substance/evidence when you post and showing your work when necessary. That is if you want to have an actual conversation instead of just posting your opinion, and having conversations is what makes the board work. The only person out of line here and pulling crap is you.

If you just want to post your opinion, do it somewhere else. It's your decision to make.

The over/under is set at 26.
It does indeed look like I confused you with iayork, so apologies there.

I actually don't mind the questions about showing work. What I object to was the misrepresentation of my comment because at that point he moves the goal posts regarding the work I have to show. As far as posting my opinion, it's a message board that I've followed for a long time. Some posts shows the work, some posts don't. Some posters just post opinions. Luckily, I don't feel the need to run around gaining your approval....so you're free to disregard my posts.

I feel fine with the comment I made. I feel fine with folks pressing me on the issue. But one should be upfront about it, and part of that is not misrepresenting my position.

As an aside, you may want to check into your sense of elitism- it's a bit much. It's a message board for a baseball team, man. This isn't high school and you're not part of the cool clique.

My advice is to relax and appreciate that we're all on a journey of fandom and not everyone is at the same place you're at on that journey. But again, feel free to disregard my posts. I promise I won't go into the bathroom and start self harming!
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
20,901
The gran facenda
It does indeed look like I confused you with iayork, so apologies there.

I actually don't mind the questions about showing work. What I object to was the misrepresentation of my comment because at that point he moves the goal posts regarding the work I have to show. As far as posting my opinion, it's a message board that I've followed for a long time. Some posts shows the work, some posts don't. Some posters just post opinions. Luckily, I don't feel the need to run around gaining your approval....so you're free to disregard my posts.

I feel fine with the comment I made. I feel fine with folks pressing me on the issue. But one should be upfront about it, and part of that is not misrepresenting my position.

As an aside, you may want to check into your sense of elitism- it's a bit much. It's a message board for a baseball team, man. This isn't high school and you're not part of the cool clique.

My advice is to relax and appreciate that we're all on a journey of fandom and not everyone is at the same place you're at on that journey. But again, feel free to disregard my posts. I promise I won't go into the bathroom and start self harming!
Your posts are now being disregarded. . . by everyone here.

Just look at the flowers...
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,246
Scituate, MA
I have very little doubt that Pomeranz will be in the rotation and there's really not much argument for a lay over him, unless there's an injury. The money is sunk cost if they keep him. Clay's hope to be in the rotation will be how Wright recovers and performs in spring training. If both pitch well, Clay will be most likely be traded. The return won't be great, but assuming they add a bullpen piece or two there's no downside. If they rely on him for any kind of responsibility in the rotation I will light things on fire.
So Clay is worth $13.5 milion, but won't get much in return (And we'd likely have to subsidize his contract). But that option is still a no brainer? Re-signing Buchholz cannot preclude them from improving the bullpen. Our bullpen needs to be better than it was, and $13.5 million can go a long way to solve that.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Did I say "won't get much in return" or did I say "the return won't be great"? You can probably read the post you quoted in your response.

Beyond that, yes, it's worth picking up the option even if you don't intend to keep him. For the simple fact that your options are:

A. Paying him a $500k buyout and letting him go
B. Finding a team willing to take a one year flier on him for short money

Most every GM will tell you there's no such thing as a bad one year contract. And $13M isn't what it used to be.

So yes. He's most likely worth $13M on the open market - in a year with virtually nothing on the market - and some team would likely be willing to pay a prospect price in order to avoid the competition of signing him and/or taking the risk they could flip him at the deadline for a better prospect.

Assets have value, small or large. His option is one. I don't want to see him in the rotation next year, but as a long man/reliever I'd swallow it. If they could get a decent prospect all the better. But the option will almost definitely be picked up, even if he's relegated to mop up. And it won't preclude them from adding a bullpen arm if they so desire.
 

I Miss Maalox

lurker
Nov 1, 2013
8
Leaving aside the unknowable question of whether we would get good Clay or bad Clay (or both) if the Sox exercise their option, it should be clear, if history has taught us anything, that you're going to need more than 5 starting pitchers to make it through 162 games. It's not unusual to have 6, 7, even 8 guys make a significant number of starts. When you combine the frequency of pitchers' injuries with the likelihood that one or more starters will have some stretch of ineffectiveness, how can anyone argue that 6 starters is too many? In 2014, the Red Sox had 9(!) guys make 10 or more starts. Even in 2004, the only year in my memory when all 5 starters were nails, the Sox needed the likes of BK Kim, Pedro Astacio and Abe Alvarez (who still deserves a domestic beer and half a pizza) to step up and start.

You want Henry Owens back in the rotation? Of course not. Clay will be at Jet Blue Park next March. You can debate the exact meaning of "no brainer" but there's no way in hell DD doesn't pick up that option.