Sox Pitching Staff Discussion

[Emp9]

So Hellickson is a FA after this season. Any thoughts on Phillies' demands for a trade? Could he solve our #5 SP problem, perhaps? Could still go after Rich Hill and the like...

[Kimmi]

I wanted to go after Fister in the off season, but w/ an incentive-laden contract and way less $ than what he signed for. He had a horrible season. He was just as much a risk as Buch. It really started to look like Fister's career was over the way he pitched last season. I liked Hill too, but his 4 excellent starts w/ the Sox last season didn't make up for a career plagued by injuries & underperformance. Not enough track record to go into a bidding war over anyway. I see why they stuck w/ Buchholz over those guys. Sometimes it's the devil you know too and again, Buch's contract comparatively speaking was worth the risk.

 

^^This.

[Bellhorn04]

You do have to consider how bad Fister was last year. He was removed from the rotation and put in the pen because he was performing so poorly. Also, he was out for a month due to injury. While Clay missed time due to injury as well, he put up much better numbers in his walk year than Fister did.

 

Was Fister worth the risk? At 1yr/$7mil, absolutely. (FTR, he can earn an additional $5 mil based on the number of innings pitched.) Would I have preferred signing Fister over Buchholz? Based on their previous year's numbers, no.

 

You have to at least acknowledge that there were legitimate alternatives to Clay. IMO, all of them including Clay had various levels of risk, factored into their pricing, and none of them reached the assurance level of a 'no-brainer'.

[Bellhorn04]

If you use the following criteria:

 

1) Recent results

2) State of health at the end of the season

3) Price tag

 

Rich Hill was more of a no-brainer than Clay was.

[moonslav59]

If you use the following criteria:

 

1) Recent results

2) State of health at the end of the season

3) Price tag

 

Rich Hill was more of a no-brainer than Clay was.

 

True, but IMO, your criteria is flawed. Your criteria neglects to take into account career norms, injuries and trends.was not a SP'er all of 2015. How is that not a factor in deciding to sign him or not? The guy has been the poster boy for the DL and DFA over his whole career. Like Buch, he's always had nasty stuff when healthy and in form, but his career has been more spotty than anyone I know.

 

Of course, in hindsight Hill was a much better choice. Of course, there were plenty of people who said so last fall/winter, but just because Hill has done better this year, does not prove anything about what criteria should be used by GMs. Your criteria worked this time in history. IMO, the longer view (with more emphasis on recent performance) has a better success rate. Buch was pitching very well last year. That's pretty recent.

 

Note: the no-brainer was to accept Buch's option. To me, even hindsight hasn't changed that. I'd do it again and again under the same circumstances. The part that was not a no-brainer was deciding to keep him, instead of trading the risk/gamble to another team. Had we done that, then signing a guy like Hill, Fister or both would have made more sense.

 

There's a reason Hill

[mvp 78]

So Hellickson is a FA after this season. Any thoughts on Phillies' demands for a trade? Could he solve our #5 SP problem, perhaps? Could still go after Rich Hill and the like...

 

Sure, for Owens straight up.

[Nick]

Whats it going to take to pry Hill away from Oakland for 2 months?

 

A top 5-10 prospect?

 

What do you think DD is thinking? Go all in for 2016? Or add reinforcements here and there (Hill as an example) and hope for the wildcard berth and shoot for the moon during playoffs?

 

I just don't want to clear the minor league prospects deck just for a chance to make the playoffs.

[moonslav59]

Sure, for Owens straight up.

 

How about Owens & Johnson for Hill?

[Nick]

Well if you are going with mental cases why not just pay for Clay B's remaining salary and dump him too?

[mvp 78]

How about Owens & Johnson for Hill?

 

No, that's an overpay.

[jacksonianmarch]

Owens is done as a prospect

[Bellhorn04]

True, but IMO, your criteria is flawed. Your criteria neglects to take into account career norms, injuries and trends.was not a SP'er all of 2015. How is that not a factor in deciding to sign him or not? The guy has been the poster boy for the DL and DFA over his whole career. Like Buch, he's always had nasty stuff when healthy and in form, but his career has been more spotty than anyone I know.

 

Of course my criteria is flawed. But my post is a followup to the Buchholz vs. Fister comparison, where Kimmi focused on the fact that Clay was much better than Fister in 2015. As you say, there are a lot of criteria to take into account.

[Bellhorn04]

Note: the no-brainer was to accept Buch's option. To me, even hindsight hasn't changed that. I'd do it again and again under the same circumstances. The part that was not a no-brainer was deciding to keep him, instead of trading the risk/gamble to another team. Had we done that, then signing a guy like Hill, Fister or both would have made more sense.

 

 

As has been discussed on here at some length, the Sox did reportedly offer Clay to Seattle in the Carson Smith trade, but Seattle preferred Miley. Once Miley was gone we were down another starting pitcher, so they probably decided they should keep Buchholz at that point.

[Nick]

Wake Up Dustin.....could have gotten out with just one run....he's been in fog

[moonslav59]

As has been discussed on here at some length, the Sox did reportedly offer Clay to Seattle in the Carson Smith trade, but Seattle preferred Miley. Once Miley was gone we were down another starting pitcher, so they probably decided they should keep Buchholz at that point.

 

My point was that even after the Miley trade, we could have traded Buch somewhere for something good, then signed someone like Fister and/or Hill. I know many suggested Hill and some suggested Fister, but many other names were floated about that are having awful years. It is very difficult to strike gold on FA pitchers. I commend those who strongly suggested we sign Hill or Fister. Even some of us who thought taking Buch's option was the right move, still thought signing Hill for $8M/1 would have been a good idea, but there looked like plenty of "good ideas" out there as mid-level free agents, and the season is still not over with Hill and Fister. Remember, we wanted someone we could count on for 28-30 solid starts instead of Buch. There's still a half season to go, and Hill has already been on the DL once, and Fister may be faltering down the stretch.

 

We'll see.

[moonslav59]

Years Amount

Brett Anderson 1 $15.800MM

Brandon Beachy 1 $1.500MM

Joe Blanton 1 $4.000MM

Trevor Cahill 1 $4.250MM

Bartolo Colon 1 $7.250MM

Marco Estrada 2 $26.000MM

Doug Fister 1 $7.000MM

Zack Greinke 6 $206.500MM

J.A. Happ 3 $36.000MM

Rich Hill 1 $6.000MM

John Lackey 2 $32.000MM

Mat Latos SP 1 $3.000MM

Mike Leake SP 5 $80.000MM

Colby Lewis 1 $6.000MM

Tim Lincecum 1 $2.500MM

Kenta Maeda 8 $25.000MM

Hector Noesi 1 $1.700MM

Bud Norris 1 $2.500MM

Mike Pelfrey 2 $16.000MM

Jeff Samardzija 5 $90.000MM

Yaisel Sierra 6 $30.000MM

Alfredo Simon 1 $2.000MM

Jacob Turner 1 $1.500MM

Ryan Vogelsong 1 $2.000MM

 

With opt out:

Wei-Yin Chen 5 $80.000MM

Johnny Cueto 6 $130.000MM

Scott Kazmir 3 $48.000MM

Ian Kennedy 5 $70.000MM

David Price 7 $217.000MM

[Nick]

Does anyone have swing and miss stats for Sox versus opposing pitching?

[Bellhorn04]

My point was that even after the Miley trade, we could have traded Buch somewhere for something good.

 

Theoretically we could have. In reality the offers for Buchholz may have been lousy.

 

What about his medical issues? As I said there were numerous comments about him looking like a TJ candidate because of the nature of his injury last year.

[harmony]

No, that's an overpay.

Two months of a 36-year-old lefthander with a 2.31 ERA in 12 MLB starts this year are worth far more than a 25-year-old lefthander who posted an ERA of 5.45 (with 6 walks per 9 innings) in seven Triple A starts before going on the inactive list with anxiety issues, and a 23-year-old lefty who is walking 6.3 per 9 innings in 14 Triple A starts.

 

If Oakland places Rich Hill on the trade block, the Athletics will seek players with promise, not players who have lost their promise.

[mvp 78]

Two months of a 36-year-old lefthander with a 2.31 ERA in 12 MLB starts this year are worth far more than a 25-year-old lefthander who posted an ERA of 5.45 (with 6 walks per 9 innings) in seven Triple A starts before going on the inactive list with anxiety issues, and a 23-year-old lefty who is walking 6.3 per 9 innings in 14 Triple A starts.

 

If Oakland places Rich Hill on the trade block, the Athletics will seek players with promise, not players who have lost their promise.

 

Rich Hill is most likely going on the DL again this year. If he had a better medical history, he'd be worth more.

[Kimmi]

You have to at least acknowledge that there were legitimate alternatives to Clay. IMO, all of them including Clay had various levels of risk, factored into their pricing, and none of them reached the assurance level of a 'no-brainer'.

 

I acknowledge that there were legitimate alternatives to Clay. Perhaps they would have been good signings in addition to picking up Clay's option, but there is no way I'm not picking up that option. Honestly to me, there's not even a discussion about not picking it up.

[moonslav59]

Theoretically we could have. In reality the offers for Buchholz may have been lousy.

 

What about his medical issues? As I said there were numerous comments about him looking like a TJ candidate because of the nature of his injury last year.

 

Many SP'ers signed hefty contracts with recent and/or long standing injury histories. Like I said, I'd have settled on a good single - A prospect.

[moonslav59]

I acknowledge that there were legitimate alternatives to Clay. Perhaps they would have been good signings in addition to picking up Clay's option, but there is no way I'm not picking up that option. Honestly to me, there's not even a discussion about not picking it up.

 

So, you don't want at least a decent single-A prospect for free?

[mvp 78]

Yup, there's really no discussion to be had when you are able to pay $13M for a guy who should never start a game in MLB again.

[moonslav59]

Yup, there's really no discussion to be had when you are able to pay $13M for a guy who should never start a game in MLB again.

 

In hindsight, yeah- end of discussion, but at the time of making the choice on the option, there's no way saying no vs saying yes then trading him was the right choice, and certainly was far from "end of discussion" merit in foresight.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm surprised no one is making any connection between Buchholz's performance this year and possible residual medical issues. He's not an old man. He was pitching great before getting hurt last year. After his 'rehabilitation' he can't pitch for crap. He might be in the same type of condition Lackey was in before his TJ surgery. I have little faith in our medical staff.

[User Name]

Buchholz still has velocity, but no idea where the ball is going. That is a telltale sign of guys with big damage of their flexor mass/UCL.

[Spudboy]

Buchholz still has velocity, but no idea where the ball is going. That is a telltale sign of guys with big damage of their flexor mass/UCL.

 

Is it?

 

Does this condition manifest itself in any painful symptoms? If so, why has Buch been silent about it? Did he know his arm was hurt when he was extended? What did and does the Sox Medical staff know?

[User Name]

For some guys, the wildness starts way before there's actual, pronounced pain. Then there's the snap, and an 18 month recovery period.

[moonslav59]

JF said the other night that Buch still has "his stuff" and that he's "just not placing it in the right place".

 

I'd be more surprised if Buch never puts together another nice stretch of at least a half season before he calls it quits. The problem is, who knows when he may find his groove again. (Certainly, the chance he never does again is significant.)