Sox Pitching Staff Discussion

[Nick]

When did Pablo become a part of Sox pitching staff discussion?

[Bellhorn04]

When did Pablo become a part of Sox pitching staff discussion?

 

Yeah, things went a little off topic there. Oh well, there's a first time for everything.

[Spudboy]

This - also with his age and his spray charts - there was a reasonable (i.e. not one you had to agree with, but one which was defensible without sounding crazy) basis for optimism.

 

Yet absolutely no justification for paying him twice what he had earned in SF. Especially with no other suitors other than his current team.

 

DUMB.

[Bellhorn04]

Yet absolutely no justification for paying him twice what he had earned in SF.

 

But that kind of increase is the norm for the top free agents every year.

[sk7326]

Yet absolutely no justification for paying him twice what he had earned in SF. Especially with no other suitors other than his current team.

 

DUMB.

 

The suitors I don't know - and the salary was in line with the market value (a bit on the high side of normal, but whatever). There are very very few FA deals which are "value" because of the winners curse thing - i.e. how a high bidder in an auction is almost always "overpaying".

[Spudboy]

So doubling the pay of an obese 29 year old mediocre player without the market demanding it is a good idea.

 

If the Sox had offered him 4/56 -4-60 it would have been a stretch because his numbers were not that good and the probability of him improving as he aged was close to nill. Not to mention the likelyhood of decline and injury.

 

I guess if one totally buys into WAR as being an accurate means by which to assign a dollar value the deal may have been justified. I don't.

 

Pablo was a bad investment for many reasons.

[Nick]

So doubling the pay of an obese 29 year old mediocre player without the market demanding it is a good idea.

 

If the Sox had offered him 4/56 -4-60 it would have been a stretch because his numbers were not that good and the probability of him improving as he aged was close to nill. Not to mention the likelyhood of decline and injury.

 

I guess if one totally buys into WAR as being an accurate means by which to assign a dollar value the deal may have been justified. I don't.

 

Pablo was a bad investment for many reasons.

 

Too often what player does over 7 game playoffs gets overblown. Damn what they did over 162 game season. Ben ultimately paid a heavy price for his mistakes.

[moonslav59]

So doubling the pay of an obese 29 year old mediocre player without the market demanding it is a good idea.

 

If the Sox had offered him 4/56 -4-60 it would have been a stretch because his numbers were not that good and the probability of him improving as he aged was close to nill. Not to mention the likelyhood of decline and injury.

 

I guess if one totally buys into WAR as being an accurate means by which to assign a dollar value the deal may have been justified. I don't.

 

Pablo was a bad investment for many reasons.

 

I totally agree, but unfortunately I think his post season heroics reminded Sox management of someone on the team who was close to retiring.

 

He was also only 28, when we signed him. Like Porcello, the Sox seemed to put a high priority on age with longer term deals. Pablo's contract paid him to play for us from age 28 to 32. Almost all those years are within normal prime. I know "prime" might be different for fat blobs, but the theory and philosophy was sound. The execution of the theory was a disaster.

 

I can't believe I'm sounding like I'm trying to defend the signing. I'm not. I hated the deal from day one. I'm just trying to explain that to me, the mind-set was right. Pitching was going to be abundant before the 2016 season, and offense was not. It made sense to sign a projected helpful bat to age 32. It is kind of rare to have a FA at age 28 not looking for 6-10 year deals.

[Nick]

I totally agree, but unfortunately I think his post season heroics reminded Sox management of someone on the team who was close to retiring.

 

He was also only 28, when we signed him. Like Porcello, the Sox seemed to put a high priority on age with longer term deals. Pablo's contract paid him to play for us from age 28 to 32. Almost all those years are within normal prime. I know "prime" might be different for fat blobs, but the theory and philosophy was sound. The execution of the theory was a disaster.

 

I can't believe I'm sounding like I'm trying to defend the signing. I'm not. I hated the deal from day one. I'm just trying to explain that to me, the mind-set was right. Pitching was going to be abundant before the 2016 season, and offense was not. It made sense to sign a projected helpful bat to age 32. It is kind of rare to have a FA at age 28 not looking for 6-10 year deals.

 

Pablo wanted early retirement.....and I mean by age 28.

[moonslav59]

Too often what player does over 7 game playoffs gets overblown. Damn what they did over 162 game season. Ben ultimately paid a heavy price for his mistakes.

 

Pablo has played in 39 post season games and has a .935 OPS.

 

He didn't start off doing well in the post season, but his last 6 series went like this:

 

2012 NLCS .941 (2 HR and 6 RBI in 7 gms)

2012 W. S. 1.654 (MVP with 3 HRs and 4 RBI inh 4 gms)

2013: NLWC 1.100 (1 gm)

2013: NLDS .513 (1 RBI in 4 gms)

2013: NLCS 1.028 ( RBI inh 5 gms)

2013: W. S. 1.002 (0 HR 4 RBI in 7 games)

 

Career

3 World Series: .426 3 HR 8 RBI in 12 games and 50 PAs (.460 OBP/.702 SLG/ 1.162 OPS

3 NLCS: .333 2 8 (15 games and 63 PAs) .941 OPS

WC play-in game is huge with a 1.100 OPS

 

His .677 OPS (4 RBI in 11 gms) is Div series is not good, but it's not horrible either.

 

[Eddy Ballgame]

So doubling the pay of an obese 29 year old mediocre player without the market demanding it is a good idea.

 

If the Sox had offered him 4/56 -4-60 it would have been a stretch because his numbers were not that good and the probability of him improving as he aged was close to nill. Not to mention the likelyhood of decline and injury.

 

I guess if one totally buys into WAR as being an accurate means by which to assign a dollar value the deal may have been justified. I don't.

 

Pablo was a bad investment for many reasons.

 

He supposedly had a higher offer from San Diego and the Giants were willing to match the Sox offer, but insisted on a weight clause.

 

The Sox have outbid teams by quite a bit in the past when they've wanted a player, as have many other clubs, but it wasn't the case with Sandoval.

Edited August 19, 2016 by Eddy Ballgame

[a700hitter]

He supposedly had a higher offer from San Diego and the Giants were willing to match the Sox offer, but insisted on weight clause.

 

The Sox have outbid teams by quite a bit in the past when they've wanted a player, as have many other clubs, but it wasn't the case with Sandoval.

For the weight clause, he would have taken less money. Sold!

[Nick]

Should we entertain the thought of bringing up Kopech to pitch out of bullpen?

[Spudboy]

He supposedly had a higher offer from San Diego and the Giants were willing to match the Sox offer, but insisted on a weight clause.

 

The Sox have outbid teams by quite a bit in the past when they've wanted a player, as have many other clubs, but it wasn't the case with Sandoval.

 

I read no reports of San Diego being in on the slob. But assuming that they were, do you think that they offered him 22 mil for 5 years? You know, after he had been making only less than half of that in San Fransisco?

 

The reports that I read at that time said that SF "Matched" the Sox offer. Meaning that the Sox offered him 22 mil for 5 years without having to. They appear to have been bidding with themselves.

[User Name]

Too often what player does over 7 game playoffs gets overblown. Damn what they did over 162 game season. Ben ultimately paid a heavy price for his mistakes.

 

I see what you did there.

[User Name]

I totally agree, but unfortunately I think his post season heroics reminded Sox management of someone on the team who was close to retiring.

 

He was also only 28, when we signed him. Like Porcello, the Sox seemed to put a high priority on age with longer term deals. Pablo's contract paid him to play for us from age 28 to 32. Almost all those years are within normal prime. I know "prime" might be different for fat blobs, but the theory and philosophy was sound. The execution of the theory was a disaster.

 

I can't believe I'm sounding like I'm trying to defend the signing. I'm not. I hated the deal from day one. I'm just trying to explain that to me, the mind-set was right. Pitching was going to be abundant before the 2016 season, and offense was not. It made sense to sign a projected helpful bat to age 32. It is kind of rare to have a FA at age 28 not looking for 6-10 year deals.

 

This is exactly where I stand on the Pablo signing, to a T. The problem is, why sign Hanley then? This is a question MVP and I have been posing for a while.

[Kimmi]

Granted, he sucks and most people questioned the move when it was made. Was his career light years better in SF? Yup. Should the Sox have expected him to completely flat line when he came to Boston? Nope.

 

^^This.

[Kimmi]

This - also with his age and his spray charts - there was a reasonable (i.e. not one you had to agree with, but one which was defensible without sounding crazy) basis for optimism.

 

This too. I preferred Headley, but there is certainly some solid rationale for signing Pablo.

[Kimmi]

There was a fair basis for it - he made tons of contact, he had a spray chart and inside out swing which made it look like he could do Boggs-ish things with the Monstah. He also was young enough that you were buying less decline than your average premium FA.

 

Obviously none of this worked - but anybody who said the Sox should have seen this level of disaster coming are being disingenuous.

 

Thank you.

[Kimmi]

Too often what player does over 7 game playoffs gets overblown. Damn what they did over 162 game season. Ben ultimately paid a heavy price for his mistakes.

 

I can 99.9% guarantee you that Ben was not fooled by Pablo's 7 game playoff numbers.

[a700hitter]

Should we entertain the thought of bringing up Kopech to pitch out of bullpen?

That is an interesting thought -- a guy coming out of the pen that can hit 105

[Dojji]

So doubling the pay of an obese 29 year old mediocre player without the market demanding it is a good idea.

That is plain and simply the wrong way to look at UFA signings. Pablo was making what he was making because of price controls built into the MLB system for young players, which is a built in incentive to encourage teams to develop young players in the first place. He had reached a point in his career where those price controls went away. Expecting him not to make more money in that environment, in the first year he could FINALLY be allowed to ask for what the market would bear rather than being forced against his will to settle for less money, is either ignorant or literally insane -- take your pick.

 

It's a pity that the moment he started earning a market value for a person of his skillset, the skills went away, but comparing cost-controlled years (or buyout years that young players agree to to get the money rolling early) to UFA years and expecting UFA's to earn no more than the money they settled for only because they were forced to, is ludicrious. The market simply does not work that way, no market does, no market should.

 

UFA's make what baseball players are really worth That's why they are called UFA's, Unrestricted Free Agents. Everyone else makes less because the CBA robs them of their bargaining power. Expecting UFA's to act like RFA's just sets you up for disappointment -- it almost never happens that a player will sign a deal that team-friendly unless they have literally no choice, the only obvious exception I can think of off the top of my head is Tim Wakefield and his perpetual $4M option.

Edited August 19, 2016 by Dojji

[a700hitter]

Even if he maintained the same level of downward trajectory that he had during his SF days, he would still have been a terrible signing.

[Slasher9]

Should we entertain the thought of bringing up Kopech to pitch out of bullpen?

it should be a discussion going on within the FO.

[Dojji]

Even if he maintained the same level of downward trajectory that he had during his SF days, he would still have been a terrible signing.

 

On that, I agree. I didn't like the Pablo signing. I also don't like sheer pigheaded ignorance of how the UFA system works, but Pablo was never one of my faborites, I'd thought he was overrated for years before he was signed here.

[Station 13]

Ben Taylor (AA) is probably more fitted to make the jump to the MLB club than Kopech.

[User Name]

That is plain and simply the wrong way to look at UFA signings. Pablo was making what he was making because of price controls built into the MLB system for young players, which is a built in incentive to encourage teams to develop young players in the first place. He had reached a point in his career where those price controls went away. Expecting him not to make more money in that environment, in the first year he could FINALLY be allowed to ask for what the market would bear rather than being forced against his will to settle for less money, is either ignorant or literally insane -- take your pick.

 

It's a pity that the moment he started earning a market value for a person of his skillset, the skills went away, but comparing cost-controlled years (or buyout years that young players agree to to get the money rolling early) to UFA years and expecting UFA's to earn no more than the money they settled for only because they were forced to, is ludicrious. The market simply does not work that way, no market does, no market should.

 

UFA's make what baseball players are really worth That's why they are called UFA's, Unrestricted Free Agents. Everyone else makes less because the CBA robs them of their bargaining power. Expecting UFA's to act like RFA's just sets you up for disappointment -- it almost never happens that a player will sign a deal that team-friendly unless they have literally no choice, the only obvious exception I can think of off the top of my head is Tim Wakefield and his perpetual $4M option.

 

This post is flawless.

[Eddy Ballgame]

This too. I preferred Headley, but there is certainly some solid rationale for signing Pablo.

 

I read no reports of San Diego being in on the slob. But assuming that they were, do you think that they offered him 22 mil for 5 years? You know, after he had been making only less than half of that in San Fransisco?

 

The reports that I read at that time said that SF "Matched" the Sox offer. Meaning that the Sox offered him 22 mil for 5 years without having to. They appear to have been bidding with themselves.

 

Sox management didn't just pull that number out of their ass. That wasn't a quick signing. You can say that the signing sucks, but it wasn't a clear overpay.

 

In most cases, teams have a sense of where they need to be. Well, except for the Sox & Jon Lester. Their initial offer was so clueless and ignorant, that I'm certain that it's a big reason why Lucchino is no longer involved with ops at all.

[a700hitter]

Sox management didn't just pull that number out of their ass. That wasn't a quick signing. You can say that the signing sucks, but it wasn't a clear overpay.

 

In most cases, teams have a sense of where they need to be. Well, except for the Sox & Jon Lester. Their initial offer was so clueless and ignorant, that I'm certain that it's a big reason why Lucchino is no longer involved with ops at all.

It was pretty clear that Pablo was in decline over the last few seasons and his #'s right handed were in free-fall.

[mvp 78]

That is an interesting thought -- a guy coming out of the pen that can hit 105

 

"105"

 

Scouts are saying he's still at least a year away.