Sox Pitching Staff Discussion

[Kimmi]

BR has Buchholz's WAR at -0.9 in 2016

 

Buchholz has been terrible this year.

 

Fangraphs doesn't like him either.

[mvp 78]

Buchholz has been terrible this year.

 

Fangraphs doesn't like him either.

 

Ok.

[Kimmi]

It took no brains to re-sign him and not have a fallback plan. Brainless indeed.

 

The lack of a viable Plan B was a mistake. I can agree with that.

 

Again, this is where ERod's injury and underperformance really hurts.

[mvp 78]

The lack of a viable Plan B was a mistake. I can agree with that.

 

Again, this is where ERod's injury and underperformance really hurts.

 

And I said they needed to grab another pitcher when he went down. It never happened. They didn't get a #2 and relied on ERod coming back from injury and outperforming his rookie season. Bad bets made all around.

[Kimmi]

And I said they needed to grab another pitcher when he went down. It never happened. They didn't get a #2 and relied on ERod coming back from injury and outperforming his rookie season. Bad bets made all around.

 

You did say that and you were once again proven correct.

[moonslav59]

I disagree about buch, his "quality" has varied greatly over the years. It certainly was a bet on both quality as well as quantity.

 

Buch's top quality has been near off-the-charts good. That was the gamble that (so far) has been lost.

 

I've mentioned this before, and maybe this isn't the best stat or sample size IP to demonstrate greatness. It's cherry-picked, but still real.

 

Since 1971 (45 years), 6,127 times a SP'er has reached 80 or more IP in a given season. Here's where Buch's best seasons rank out of 6,127:

 

ERA-

3) Pedro 35 (2000)

7) Buchholz 42 (2013)

8) Pedro 42 (1999)

40) Buchholz 54 (2010)

699) Buchholz 77 (2015)

1090) Buchholz 82 (2011)

So, in summary, using this cherry-picked group of 6127 instances of great pitching stretches, Buch has 2 in the top 40 That's like top 1/2 percent! He's also had 3 top performances out of 699 (top 11%) and 4 out of the top 1090 (top 18%)--all since 2010.

 

That's 4 awesome stretches in the 6 years (2010-2015) prior to the extension being offered. That's about as top quality as you can get.

 

With Buch, it's almost always been about quantity.

 

Now, one can argue quantity AND quality, because theo nly two seasons Buch pitched over 28 startsand 170 IP were 2012 and 2014--the only two years not listed on my chart.

 

So, last 6 years...

 

Basically 4 of the best half seasons of pitching since 1971 (top 18%) and the only two full seasons were blah (107 and 133 ERA-).

 

[moonslav59]

I disagree that not trading him was a mistake in foresight.

 

There was risk in keeping him, but there was also a good chance that he pitched well for us.

 

I'm positive he could have been traded for at least a decent single-A prospect. The money "saved" could have or could not have been spent more wisely, but anyone you get for under $13M is a gamble. In hindsight, trading Buch and signing Fister and Hill looks to be much better right now, but I was sick and tired of praying for Buch to finally put some quantity (IP) with quality in the same year.

 

It was not a no-brainer to pass on his option.

 

As you pointed out, had we kept him there was still a chance...(yeah right)...

 

but I think it was a bad choice to keep him around- not to take the option.

[moonslav59]

I disagree that not trading him was a mistake in foresight.

 

There was risk in keeping him, but there was also a good chance that he pitched well for us.

 

I'm positive he could have been traded for at least a decent single-A prospect. The money "saved" could have or could not have been spent more wisely, but anyone you get for under $13M is a gamble. In hindsight, trading Buch and signing Fister and Hill looks to be much better right now, but I was sick and tired of praying for Buch to finally put some quantity (IP) with quality in the same year.

 

It was not a no-brainer to pass on his option.

 

As you pointed out, had we kept him there was still a chance...(yeah right)...

 

but I think it was a bad choice to keep him around- not to take the option.

[moonslav59]

BR has Buchholz's WAR at -0.9 in 2016

 

THat's the reason I wanted to trade him.

 

Let others take the gamble. I'll take the prospect and use the savings for new fresh gamble.

 

Even when Buch appears to be healthy, there's still the downside chance he'll repeat 2012 or 2014.

[Nick]

At some point you have to move on and away from Buch...it doesn't mean that he won't turn around and pitch great for someone else....it's the randomness to his pitching that's most frustrating.

 

We have pretty good idea what we'll get from Wright right now....absolutely no idea with Buch.....

 

He's that kid that never understood there's a purpose to this game....to win. He seems more concerned with the artistry of pitching.. He values throwing a great curve for third strike over inducing a ground ball to short.

 

Telling a manager he shouldn't come out because he only gave up 3 earned runs out of 6 while the manager is concerned about winning the game?

Edited July 5, 2016 by Nick

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Buch's top quality has been near off-the-charts good. That was the gamble that (so far) has been lost.

 

I've mentioned this before, and maybe this isn't the best stat or sample size IP to demonstrate greatness. It's cherry-picked, but still real.

 

Since 1971 (45 years), 6,127 times a SP'er has reached 80 or more IP in a given season. Here's where Buch's best seasons rank out of 6,127:

 

ERA-

3) Pedro 35 (2000)

7) Buchholz 42 (2013)

8) Pedro 42 (1999)

40) Buchholz 54 (2010)

699) Buchholz 77 (2015)

1090) Buchholz 82 (2011)

So, in summary, using this cherry-picked group of 6127 instances of great pitching stretches, Buch has 2 in the top 40 That's like top 1/2 percent! He's also had 3 top performances out of 699 (top 11%) and 4 out of the top 1090 (top 18%)--all since 2010.

 

That's 4 awesome stretches in the 6 years (2010-2015) prior to the extension being offered. That's about as top quality as you can get.

 

With Buch, it's almost always been about quantity.

 

Now, one can argue quantity AND quality, because theo nly two seasons Buch pitched over 28 startsand 170 IP were 2012 and 2014--the only two years not listed on my chart.

 

So, last 6 years...

 

Basically 4 of the best half seasons of pitching since 1971 (top 18%) and the only two full seasons were blah (107 and 133 ERA-).

 

 

Doesn't change my statement, he was a gamble on both quality and quantity.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

BR has Buchholz's WAR at -0.9 in 2016

 

THat's the reason I wanted to trade him.

 

Yeah, him and the prospects traded for kimbrel might have brought back a solid starter.

[mvp 78]

Yeah, him and the prospects traded for kimbrel might have brought back a solid starter.

 

Doubtful. Mariners wanted no part of Buchholz, why would someone else?

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Doubtful. Mariners wanted no part of Buchholz, why would someone else?

 

Well, him plus the prospects.

[Bellhorn04]

Well, him plus the prospects.

 

Pretty hard to find a team that would match up in that kind of proposed trade.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Pretty hard to find a team that would match up in that kind of proposed trade.

 

How so? Those were some pretty good prospects that were given up for kimbrel.

 

Or at least that's what moon has told us a thousand times.......

[Bellhorn04]

How so? Those were some pretty good prospects that were given up for kimbrel.

 

Or at least that's what moon has told us a thousand times.......

 

I'm talking about throwing Buchholz and his 13 million salary on top of the prospects. A rebuilding team would just want prospects, and a contender wouldn't trade a good pitcher.

[Slasher9]

The lack of a viable Plan B was a mistake. I can agree with that.

 

Again, this is where ERod's injury and underperformance really hurts.

 

hey Kimmi. i think plan b was wright / owens / kelly. to me that was a solid plan B. except all 3 imploded. and kneE-Rod got hurt. hopefully osully can put together a few good starts when needed.....

[Slasher9]

How so? Those were some pretty good prospects that were given up for kimbrel.

 

Or at least that's what moon has told us a thousand times.......

 

there was. and you are right (and you know that is not easy for me to type). clay (we may have had to sweeten the deal by eating some salary) + what we gave up for Kimbrell should have netted a decent SP.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

I'm talking about throwing Buchholz and his 13 million salary on top of the prospects. A rebuilding team would just want prospects, and a contender wouldn't trade a good pitcher.

 

Read slushie's post above, it may have required eating some of buch's contract.

[Bellhorn04]

Read slushie's post above, it may have required eating some of buch's contract.

 

I get the idea, I just don't think Buch would have added a whole lot to the package. My guess is that any teams we asked about good starters were asking Betts or Bogaerts.

[harmony]

Pretty hard to find a team that would match up in that kind of proposed trade.

Would anyone trade Clay Buchholz straight up for 38-year-old Seattle reliever Joaquin Benoit, who sports an ERA of 5.03 in 20 appearances this year in his final season before free agency?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/benoijo01.shtml

 

This season Benoit will be paid $7.5 million while Buchholz is paid $13 million (and a $500,000 buyout of his 2017 option). Benoit was stellar in 2010, his only season in the AL East.

 

The Mariners have groomed 22-year-old phenom Edwin Diaz to take Benoit's set-up role.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

I get the idea, I just don't think Buch would have added a whole lot to the package. My guess is that any teams we asked about good starters were asking Betts or Bogaerts.

 

I'm sure there are some teams that think he may perform better away from beantowne.

[moonslav59]

Yeah, him and the prospects traded for kimbrel might have brought back a solid starter.

 

Stop presenting only part of my argument, and then incorrectly.

 

1) I never said the package we sent for Kimbrel would have gotten us a top quality starter. Those prospects sent for Kimbrel would have been the "rest of the package" attached to Swihart and/or Devers.

2) The idea was to avoid parting with 1 of our top 3 prospects (Moncada, Benintendi & Espinoza) by giving up just about all of the rest of our quality prospects.

3) Another major factor was that Kimbrel is a closer. I know closers are important, but they are so fickle from year to yea,r AND they only pitch 55-65 IP a season. That's about 1/3 the IP of a solid SP'er.

4) Kimbrel's contract was near FA market value. I'm never onboard with paying top prospects to basically sign a FA.

 

Look, I'm done with this argument. We have Kimbrel now. I'm over it, but if you want to keep bringing up my past rants, at least get them correct.

 

BTW, how's Kimbrel doing for us so far?

 

I'd say good but not great.

[moonslav59]

Would anyone trade Clay Buchholz straight up for 38-year-old Seattle reliever Joaquin Benoit, who sports an ERA of 5.03 in 20 appearances this year in his final season before free agency?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/benoijo01.shtml

 

This season Benoit will be paid $7.5 million while Buchholz is paid $13 million (and a $500,000 buyout of his 2017 option). Benoit was stellar in 2010, his only season in the AL East.

 

The Mariners have groomed 22-year-old phenom Edwin Diaz to take Benoit's set-up role.

 

I would, and I'd pay the salary difference.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Stop presenting only part of my argument, and then incorrectly.

 

1) I never said the package we sent for Kimbrel would have gotten us a top quality starter. Those prospects sent for Kimbrel would have been the "rest of the package" attached to Swihart and/or Devers.

2) The idea was to avoid parting with 1 of our top 3 prospects (Moncada, Benintendi & Espinoza) by giving up just about all of the rest of our quality prospects.

3) Another major factor was that Kimbrel is a closer. I know closers are important, but they are so fickle from year to yea,r AND they only pitch 55-65 IP a season. That's about 1/3 the IP of a solid SP'er.

4) Kimbrel's contract was near FA market value. I'm never onboard with paying top prospects to basically sign a FA.

 

Look, I'm done with this argument. We have Kimbrel now. I'm over it, but if you want to keep bringing up my past rants, at least get them correct.

 

BTW, how's Kimbrel doing for us so far?

 

I'd say good but not great.

 

Where did I say that you claimed that the kimbrel package would have netted a top quality starter??!!

 

If you are going to accuse me of something at least get your facts straight.

 

As far as "how's kimbrel doing for the sawx so far?"

 

Meh, mediocre performance for top closer money. He's no Andrew Miller.

[mvp 78]

If they didn't want Buchholz on the opening day roster, they wouldn't have re-signed him. The fan theory of picking up the option just to trade him was dumb from day 1. Why keep rehashing it?

[mvp 78]

Would anyone trade Clay Buchholz straight up for 38-year-old Seattle reliever Joaquin Benoit, who sports an ERA of 5.03 in 20 appearances this year in his final season before free agency?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/benoijo01.shtml

 

This season Benoit will be paid $7.5 million while Buchholz is paid $13 million (and a $500,000 buyout of his 2017 option). Benoit was stellar in 2010, his only season in the AL East.

 

The Mariners have groomed 22-year-old phenom Edwin Diaz to take Benoit's set-up role.

 

How does that trade help us? Trading garbage for garbage is a waste of time.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

If they didn't want Buchholz on the opening day roster, they wouldn't have re-signed him. The fan theory of picking up the option just to trade him was dumb from day 1. Why keep rehashing it?

 

Why exactly was it dumb?

[mvp 78]

Why exactly was it dumb?

 

Because trades like that are basically fanfiction.