2016 Red Sox Hot Stove Discussion Thread

[Bellhorn04]

Well you hoard them to get a starter, not a "proven closer" ... runs counter to how teams have been sourcing that position i.e. their own pitchers, sifting through other team's garbage, converting failed starters

 

If we had been doing a better job of finding good relievers that way, this wouldn't have happened.

 

I think there are different ways to get what you need, and no guaranteed formula either way. Signing the proven closer Foulke worked pretty well in '04.

 

Cherington tried his darndest to acquire a proven closer for us - Melancon, Bailey, Hanrahan - before he finally had some good fortune with Koji.

[sk7326]

If we had been doing a better job of finding good relievers that way, this wouldn't have happened.

 

I think there are different ways to get what you need, and no guaranteed formula either way. Signing the proven closer Foulke worked pretty well in '04.

 

Cherington tried his darndest to acquire a proven closer for us - Melancon, Bailey, Hanrahan - before he finally had some good fortune with Koji.

 

Glad you mentioned Foulke. Foulke pitched 105, 89, 81, 77 and 86 innings in the years before he got to Boston. (and yes, this might have been causal to his arm troubles, but flags fly forever). He pitched 83 innings for Boston. All of those numbers are more than any season Kimbrel has pitched. Foulke was used to get 8th inning saves, and the reason he was the choice was because he could pitch (and was called on, all the time) in very high leverage spots. Kimbrel has been dynamite in the 9th inning, 0 runners inherited spot that is 2015 closing. He has excelled at a far easier gig than Foulke had. And indeed, Foulke excelled in multiple obscenely difficult spots.

[Meh]

Rip me apart if you must, but if I were the Red Sox I'd sign O'Day 3/23 million, he'll likely get around that in this market. Convert Joe Kelly into a bullpen arm and hope you get a power arm you can turn into a lights out BP arm. Trade JBJ for Paxon from the M's. Sign Jordan Zimmerman for 6/90 million.

 

Zimmerman

Porcello

Buchholz

Paxon/ERod

Miley

 

You'll have some depth at SP with Paxon, ERod, and Miley. If Buchholz or Porcello were to get hurt or ERod or Paxon deal with growing pains.

I think Price and Grienke will get an absurd amount of money and I'm not being mean but I can't see the Sox having a 200 million dollar payroll this year. You're already at about 169 million before anymore additions. I doubt anyone is going to take Panda's or HRam's deal off your hands without you adding in money. You could deal Buchholz though to make room. I think you'd have a pretty good rotation, a top 5 bullpen, and a really exciting lineup that has potential.

[sk7326]

Rip me apart if you must, but if I were the Red Sox I'd sign O'Day 3/23 million, he'll likely get around that in this market. Convert Joe Kelly into a bullpen arm and hope you get a power arm you can turn into a lights out BP arm. Trade JBJ for Paxon from the M's. Sign Jordan Zimmerman for 6/90 million.

 

Zimmerman

Porcello

Buchholz

Paxon/ERod

Miley

 

You'll have some depth at SP with Paxon, ERod, and Miley. If Buchholz or Porcello were to get hurt or ERod or Paxon deal with growing pains.

I think Price and Grienke will get an absurd amount of money and I'm not being mean but I can't see the Sox having a 200 million dollar payroll this year. You're already at about 169 million before anymore additions. I doubt anyone is going to take Panda's or HRam's deal off your hands without you adding in money. You could deal Buchholz though to make room. I think you'd have a pretty good rotation, a top 5 bullpen, and a really exciting lineup that has potential.

 

Honestly converting Kelly made more sense than trading all that stuff for Kimbrel.

[Bellhorn04]

Honestly converting Kelly made more sense than trading all that stuff for Kimbrel.

 

Kelly seems to me like a lesser version of Buchholz-a total wild card. Last year he started off by pitching so badly they had to send him to the minors. When he came back he pitched much better, then ended the year on the DL. Giving him a tryout in the pen makes sense; counting on him to be able to close games seems like a shot in the dark.

[a700hitter]

Kelly seems to me like a lesser version of Buchholz-a total wild card. Last year he started off by pitching so badly they had to send him to the minors. When he came back he pitched much better, then ended the year on the DL. Giving him a tryout in the pen makes sense; counting on him to be able to close games seems like a shot in the dark.

Yep.

[Dojji]

Honestly converting Kelly made more sense than trading all that stuff for Kimbrel.

 

That's three times you've committed the false dilemma fallacy in this thread alone.

 

Acquiring a proven starter and a proven closer are not mutually exclusive unless you make the bizarre assumption that we have to acquire a starter in a trade and can do so in no other way.

 

We still have tons of potential minor league talent, so the choice of whether to make big trades or to build the farm system is your second false dilemma (in fact the only guy I'm even worried about losing is Margot and he's by no means a lock to be a superstar).

 

And pretending that doing ANYTHING with Joe Kelly in the offseason would be a sufficient move to form an alternate to bringing in battle-proven relief arms is the kind of ridiculous ersatz substitute thinking that got us in this trouble in the first place. Nothing we do with the retreads will make the top arms unnecessary. That's why they're retreads. pretending you can use retreads instead of proven arms in key late innings situations is exactly the kind of failthought that got Ben fired.

[sk7326]

That's three times you've committed the false dilemma fallacy in this thread alone.

 

Acquiring a proven starter and a proven closer are not mutually exclusive unless you make the bizarre assumption that we have to acquire a starter in a trade and can do so in no other way.

 

We still have tons of potential minor league talent, so the choice of whether to make big trades or to build the farm system is your second false dilemma (in fact the only guy I'm even worried about losing is Margot and he's by no means a lock to be a superstar).

 

And pretending that doing ANYTHING with Joe Kelly in the offseason would be a sufficient move to form an alternate to bringing in battle-proven relief arms is the kind of ridiculous ersatz substitute thinking that got us in this trouble in the first place. Nothing we do with the retreads will make the top arms unnecessary. That's why they're retreads. pretending you can use retreads instead of proven arms in key late innings situations is exactly the kind of failthought that got Ben fired.

 

I am amazed you are making the "battle proven, 9th inning, grumble grumble" thing - I thought you were smarter than that. Wade Davis was a retread - so was Koji Uehara. They were just retreads who were either old or did not have the third pitch required to make a competent starter. Arms are proven by proving. Craig Breslow was a retread also.

 

There was no real need for a proven closer - there is a need for a starter. Now, signing a starter via free agency was always available. But a trade puts you in play to get a younger, cheaper starter. Every free agent of any stripe outside of Jason Heyward, you are carrying significant "other side of the mountain" risk - but you knew that. I don't even care if Margot turned out to be a superstar - it is that a quality position prospect who is close to the bigs (like inside of 2 seasons) is worth more than any single reliever. If he was in a Chris Sale deal, then you shrug and say "that's the price". You seem to be thinking I am against trading prospects - heck no. I am against trading premium prospects for so little major league value.

[Bellhorn04]

There was no real need for a proven closer - there is a need for a starter.

 

There was a need for better pitching both in the rotation and the bullpen. Our major league team just got better, didn't it?

[Kimmi]

I am amazed you are making the "battle proven, 9th inning, grumble grumble" thing - I thought you were smarter than that. Wade Davis was a retread - so was Koji Uehara. They were just retreads who were either old or did not have the third pitch required to make a competent starter. Arms are proven by proving. Craig Breslow was a retread also.

 

There was no real need for a proven closer - there is a need for a starter. Now, signing a starter via free agency was always available. But a trade puts you in play to get a younger, cheaper starter. Every free agent of any stripe outside of Jason Heyward, you are carrying significant "other side of the mountain" risk - but you knew that. I don't even care if Margot turned out to be a superstar - it is that a quality position prospect who is close to the bigs (like inside of 2 seasons) is worth more than any single reliever. If he was in a Chris Sale deal, then you shrug and say "that's the price". You seem to be thinking I am against trading prospects - heck no. I am against trading premium prospects for so little major league value.

 

Bingo.

[Kimmi]

There was a need for better pitching both in the rotation and the bullpen. Our major league team just got better, didn't it?

 

You are right on both counts. Our major league team got better, but at an awfully steep price.

[Bellhorn04]

You are right on both counts. Our major league team got better, but at an awfully steep price.

 

The price was appalling, I won't argue that.

[Kimmi]

The price was appalling, I won't argue that.

 

Dave Cameron at Fangraphs gave some nice perspective on this. In his opinon, he felt that trading Margot alone for Kimbrel would have been a deal worth making for the Padres.

 

He goes on to compare the Kimbrel trade with the trade the Angels made for Simmons. In his opinion, the Sox gave up quite a bit more for a one inning reliever than the Angels gave up for a 26 year old above average SS. Simmons was a 3.2 WAR player last year, and he is under contract until 2020 at a very reasonable price.

[a700hitter]

You are right on both counts. Our major league team got better, but at an awfully steep price.

Was it shudder-worthy?

 

Notice the wink. It is called kidding. There is no need to go to war when our team just got better. LOL!!!

[Spudboy]

Bingo.

 

Yeah bingo if that is your opinion.

 

I have not seen any support of this opinion. No data or stats.

 

I am wondering why sk thinks Kimbrel is on the decline? Yes, I saw his major stats that fell off a little least year. K/9, ERA, HR.

 

But how is that indicative of a decline? Isn't a decline something we reserve for a trend? What advanced stats can demonstrate that Kimbrel is in decline? Fatboy was in decline when Ben went out and signed him. He had been trending down for 3 years ( offensively ). That is definitely decline.

 

I expect that Kimbrel may not have the 1.77 era again because of the change in league and division. Otherwise, I say he'll be really productive. I see no reason not to believe so.

 

Yet.

[Spudboy]

Dave Cameron at Fangraphs gave some nice perspective on this. In his opinon, he felt that trading Margot alone for Kimbrel would have been a deal worth making for the Padres.

 

He goes on to compare the Kimbrel trade with the trade the Angels made for Simmons. In his opinion, the Sox gave up quite a bit more for a one inning reliever than the Angels gave up for a 26 year old above average SS. Simmons was a 3.2 WAR player last year, and he is under contract until 2020 at a very reasonable price.

 

But is it possible that the Sox needed a closer more than the Angels needed a SS????

 

3.2 WAR sure sounds nice.

 

But I will take one of the 4 best closers for my team and be prepared to pay a premium because the demand is greater than the supply.

[a700hitter]

I don't even care if Margot turned out to be a superstar - it is that a quality position prospect who is close to the bigs (like inside of 2 seasons) is worth more than any single reliever. If he was in a Chris Sale deal, then you shrug and say "that's the price". You seem to be thinking I am against trading prospects - heck no. I am against trading premium prospects for so little major league value.

There is no way that Chris Sale is going for prospects that are 2 years away-- not even a boatload of them. Sale is a young, very cheap top 5 starting pitcher. He will bring back a much higher price. You are way off the beaten path thinking that Margot would be a key component of a package that could land Sale. This is Sale not Discount.

[a700hitter]

But is it possible that the Sox needed a closer more than the Angels needed a SS????

 

3.2 WAR sure sounds nice.

 

But I will take one of the 4 best closers for my team and be prepared to pay a premium because the demand is greater than the supply.

Plus the Angels included Aybar in the trade. He was a 2.3 WAR player in 2015 and 3.9 WAR All Star in 2014.

[Palodios]

Looking at the resources the Red Sox have available this year..

 

 

$154.5 M already in signed contracts to 12 players.

 

MLBTR arbitration estimates:

3M to Tazawa

3M to Kelly

.7M to Varvaro

1.1M to Robbie Ross

 

12 Million more to fill the 40 man roster (24 * .5M)

10 million more in player benefits.

 

 

We're already around 185 million. If Craig stays outrighted, 176M. That's only 13 million under the salary cap. If this team wants Price/Cueto they will need to trade Buch or find some space somewhere else.

[a700hitter]

Looking at the resources the Red Sox have available this year..

 

 

$154.5 M already in signed contracts to 12 players.

 

MLBTR arbitration estimates:

3M to Tazawa

3M to Kelly

.7M to Varvaro

1.1M to Robbie Ross

 

12 Million more to fill the 40 man roster (24 * .5M)

10 million more in player benefits.

 

 

We're already around 185 million. If Craig stays outrighted, 176M. That's only 13 million under the salary cap. If this team wants Price/Cueto they will need to trade Buch or find some space somewhere else.

A fine fix that BC left to DD.

[Bellhorn04]

Looking at the resources the Red Sox have available this year..

 

 

$154.5 M already in signed contracts to 12 players.

 

MLBTR arbitration estimates:

3M to Tazawa

3M to Kelly

.7M to Varvaro

1.1M to Robbie Ross

 

12 Million more to fill the 40 man roster (24 * .5M)

10 million more in player benefits.

 

We're already around 185 million. If Craig stays outrighted, 176M. That's only 13 million under the salary cap. If this team wants Price/Cueto they will need to trade Buch or find some space somewhere else.

 

I would not assume the tax threshold is an issue. I think John Henry is going Walter White.

[Palodios]

A fine fix that BC left to DD.

 

DD had 40 million to work with, which should have been enough to sign an ace, and two bullpen arms. He's already shot his load on Buchholz and one bullpen arm.

[Bellhorn04]

DD had 40 million to work with, which should have been enough to sign an ace, and two bullpen arms. He's already shot his load on Buchholz and one bullpen arm.

 

The consensus has been that exercising Buchholz's option was a no-brainer.

[Kimmi]

Yeah bingo if that is your opinion.

 

I have not seen any support of this opinion. No data or stats.

 

I am wondering why sk thinks Kimbrel is on the decline? Yes, I saw his major stats that fell off a little least year. K/9, ERA, HR.

 

But how is that indicative of a decline? Isn't a decline something we reserve for a trend? What advanced stats can demonstrate that Kimbrel is in decline? Fatboy was in decline when Ben went out and signed him. He had been trending down for 3 years ( offensively ). That is definitely decline.

 

I expect that Kimbrel may not have the 1.77 era again because of the change in league and division. Otherwise, I say he'll be really productive. I see no reason not to believe so.

 

Yet.

 

Let me first say again that I do agree that our team is better with Kimbrel, and that it's not just in the closer's role, but that it lengthens the bullpen to the 7th inning. I have no issue with having Kimbrel on our team. I am happy with that.

 

As far as Kimbrel's decline goes, there has been a slight downward trend since 2012. It is not one that I am overly concerned with, but it does exist.

 

Here are some of his stats from 2012 to 2015:

 

ERA: 1.01, 1.21, 1.61, 2.58

 

FIP: 0.78, 1.93, 1.83, 2.68

 

WAR: 3.3, 2.2, 2.2, 1.5

 

K%: 50.2, 38.0, 38.9, 36.4

 

BB%: 6.1, 7.8, 10.7, 9.2

 

HR/9: .43, .54, .29, .91

 

BAA: .126, .166, .139, .185

 

WHIP: .65, .88, .91, 1.04

[Kimmi]

But is it possible that the Sox needed a closer more than the Angels needed a SS????

 

3.2 WAR sure sounds nice.

 

But I will take one of the 4 best closers for my team and be prepared to pay a premium because the demand is greater than the supply.

 

I'm not convinced that the Sox needed a closer. They needed a lot of BP help, but Koji and Tazawa would probably be fine in their closer and set up roles. Even if they did need a closer, I think we could have found one who is would be just as effective as Kimbrel for much cheaper.

[Kimmi]

Plus the Angels included Aybar in the trade. He was a 2.3 WAR player in 2015 and 3.9 WAR All Star in 2014.

 

I'm sure Dave Cameron is fully aware of exactly who the Angels gave to the Braves, including major league players. His opinion is that the Sox still paid quite a bit more for a reliever than the Angels paid for Simmons, even with including Aybar.

 

The consensus in the baseball world is pretty much that the Sox paid a steep price. Mind you, that doesn't mean that everyone is against the trade, just that the price was very steep.

[Spudboy]

Looking at the resources the Red Sox have available this year..

 

 

$154.5 M already in signed contracts to 12 players.

 

MLBTR arbitration estimates:

3M to Tazawa

3M to Kelly

.7M to Varvaro

1.1M to Robbie Ross

 

12 Million more to fill the 40 man roster (24 * .5M)

10 million more in player benefits.

 

 

We're already around 185 million. If Craig stays outrighted, 176M. That's only 13 million under the salary cap. If this team wants Price/Cueto they will need to trade Buch or find some space somewhere else.

 

Or go above the threshold or even try to trade the two stiffs while eating any portion that they can as long as room is created. Who cares what they spend to get themselves out of the mess they alone created?They have my monthly cable money and a lot more.

[Spudboy]

Let me first say again that I do agree that our team is better with Kimbrel, and that it's not just in the closer's role, but that it lengthens the bullpen to the 7th inning. I have no issue with having Kimbrel on our team. I am happy with that.

 

As far as Kimbrel's decline goes, there has been a slight downward trend since 2012. It is not one that I am overly concerned with, but it does exist.

 

Here are some of his stats from 2012 to 2015:

 

ERA: 1.01, 1.21, 1.61, 2.58

 

 

 

FIP: 0.78, 1.93, 1.83, 2.68

 

WAR: 3.3, 2.2, 2.2, 1.5

 

K%: 50.2, 38.0, 38.9, 36.4

 

BB%: 6.1, 7.8, 10.7, 9.2

 

HR/9: .43, .54, .29, .91

 

BAA: .126, .166, .139, .185

 

WHIP: .65, .88, .91, 1.04

 

He's ready for the scrap heap.

[sk7326]

Looking at the resources the Red Sox have available this year..

 

 

$154.5 M already in signed contracts to 12 players.

 

MLBTR arbitration estimates:

3M to Tazawa

3M to Kelly

.7M to Varvaro

1.1M to Robbie Ross

 

12 Million more to fill the 40 man roster (24 * .5M)

10 million more in player benefits.

 

 

We're already around 185 million. If Craig stays outrighted, 176M. That's only 13 million under the salary cap. If this team wants Price/Cueto they will need to trade Buch or find some space somewhere else.

 

It's not a salary cap - just a lifestyle choice.

 

That said, this was too much for a single reliever - even a good one.

[Dojji]

The consensus has been that exercising Buchholz's option was a no-brainer.

 

In the sense that only someone with no brain would do it....

 

Seriously, I do not get the cult of Buchholz in the front office. The man is practically a sunk cost at this point. He's completely unreliable to actually give you innings and his quality of performance isn't even that good anymore. Over the last 2 years he's given you a 4.51 combined ERA and less than half the innings he should have, and now he's over 30 I don't see that improving.

 

Due to his now-legendary fragility you frequently have to wind up overpaying at the deadline to get someone to do the innings Buchholz was supposed to be dependable for, every single year, and they just keep walking into the punch over and over and over again when it comes to this guy. His constant tenure on the DL costs you more money than he actually earns and talent into the bargain just to find ways to get those innings pitched bercause these guys just can't seem to learn from history when it comes to Clay Buchholz.

 

You had an opportunity to make him someone else's problem simply by not exercising the option, why not do exactly that and bring in an actual durable pitcher for the same money? The only answer I can come up with is that either someone's got some ego in play with this kid, or they're still seeing stars based on his "potential." The man's 31, he is what he's always going to be and I'm not happy with what that means for him.

 

If I had my druthers he'd break camp in the bullpen just to see if that might help us get a full year out of him. As it is the best news I can say about Buchholz is that we know there will be about half a season's worth of innings that some rookie is going to need to pitch.

Edited November 15, 2015 by Dojji