Red Sox Acquire Drew Pomeranz

[Eddy Ballgame]

In the sense that we could and should have added another quality pitcher over the winter at less cost. We should have known we'd need one. Now everyone needs one and we are forced into a corner and to overpay.

I don't want to sound like a whinner but I don't like the deal.

I do think Pomeranz has a chance to continue nearly as well as his recent tiny sample size of success playing in a big park division, a laid back atmosphere and just 100 IP. He's a good pitcher with some upside potential still there, so I'm going to try to be optimistic.

I'm going to still be a sox fan in 3 to 8 years- God willing!

 

Not so sure it was clear cut that they needed another starter. They signed who they felt was the best one available in Price.

 

Porcello was locked in

 

E-Rod definitely earned a spot

 

The consensus at the time was picking up the Buchholz option was worth any risk

 

Joe Kelly definitely pitched well enough during 2nd half to go in as the #5

 

Rich Hill obviously wanted to come back, but they couldn't even guarantee him a spot in the rotation. Oakland did.

 

They also had Wright, Owens, Johnson, Elias, etc. as depth. Did you see what the Braves got for the likes of Shelby Miller? Who else was available? Not anyone on the Guardians.

 

Francona said last winter that they were looking to add hitting, not trade pitching. There were rumors that Carrasco might be available during last year's deadline, but that's it. I don't think you'll find anything that mentions Cleveland looking to move any of their pitching last winter.

 

Sometimes you have to take a risk with what you have, especially when there is nothing out there. No one goes into a season with 5 sure things in their rotation.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

do you have andy pettitte's doctors fax number?

 

1-800-big-papi

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Literally, 99% of your posts since you've showed up have been to troll Red Sox fans. All you have to do is look at your post history. When you spend more time trolling with dumb posts, no one will ever take you seriously enough to have a real conversation.

 

Incorrect.

 

Most of my posts are baseball related and usually to the thread title.

 

The rest are responding to accusations from you and the like.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Essentially every post you make. You are re-defining the very concept of trolling. Kudos, you are a trolling pioneer!

 

That's rich coming from you.....

[S5Dewey]

Incorrect.

 

Most of my posts are baseball related and usually to the thread title.

 

The rest are responding to accusations from you and the like.

 

Yes, the Babe is most definitely a Victim.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

If espinoza turns into a star we will eventually get him back. He will want big bucks.

 

Isn't that called the jon lester approach?

[Hugh2]

Incorrect.

 

Most of my posts are baseball related and usually to the thread title.

 

The rest are responding to accusations from you and the like.

 

Try reading your own garbage. Just try it....go ahead...

[Emp9]

1-800-big-papi

 

Yeah, that number takes you directly to Dominican Red Bull. I hear it tastes good, but it doesn't make you hit 525 Home Runs.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Yeah, that number takes you directly to Dominican Red Bull. I hear it tastes good, but it doesn't make you hit 525 Home Runs.

 

No that's the Dominican Milkshakes...

[d-money]

Any thoughts on pomeranz's delivery?

[Dojji]

I assume he'll arrive by air like most athletes.

[Slasher9]

Whew

[a700hitter]

The 2013 staff was Lester, trade, trade, trade, Buchholz (who was injured). The bullpen was FA and trades aside from Taz, Doubront and Workman. Less than 50% was homegrown.

And the 2007 staff was Trade, Trade, FA, FA, FA. 0% homegrown.

[a700hitter]

I will be at Fenway on Wednesday to see Pomeranz's first Red Sox start. I am looking forward to it. It will beat seeing one of the battalion of bastards.

[SoxHop]

After the initial phase of losing a guy I really wanted to see come up and throw smoke...... I'm good with this trade.

 

The one thing I'm really worried about in this playoff or bust style atmosphere, it that many new pitching acquisitions struggle the first year in Boston. I'm trying to think back over the last decade what pitcher came in and did well at the start...... and that's not to say year 2 didn't go much much better for some.....

Edited July 16, 2016 by SoxHop

[Nick]

We can all focus on Kopech and his 105 mph fast ball. DD loves big dudes on the mound. Kopech is athletic 6'3". He went 5 innings couple of nights ago, 8 K's, 1 BB, 4 hits and no runs for Salem.

[moonslav59]

Not so sure it was clear cut that they needed another starter. They signed who they felt was the best one available in Price.

 

Porcello was locked in

 

E-Rod definitely earned a spot

 

The consensus at the time was picking up the Buchholz option was worth any risk

 

Joe Kelly definitely pitched well enough during 2nd half to go in as the #5

 

Rich Hill obviously wanted to come back, but they couldn't even guarantee him a spot in the rotation. Oakland did.

 

They also had Wright, Owens, Johnson, Elias, etc. as depth. Did you see what the Braves got for the likes of Shelby Miller? Who else was available? Not anyone on the Guardians.

 

Francona said last winter that they were looking to add hitting, not trade pitching. There were rumors that Carrasco might be available during last year's deadline, but that's it. I don't think you'll find anything that mentions Cleveland looking to move any of their pitching last winter.

 

Sometimes you have to take a risk with what you have, especially when there is nothing out there. No one goes into a season with 5 sure things in their rotation.

 

Well, I certainly was not the only poster thinking our biggest weakness was starting pitching before the season even began. Our next biggest weakness was bullpen depth. I'm not trying to toot my own horn, because it seemed like the majority of posters agreed that our biggest hole was a top quality SP'er.

 

I understand the quantity philosophy- stacking the bottom of the rotation with several guys in hopes that 1-2 or maybe 3 stick. Well, one did - Wright. The rest of the "questionable" to mediocre fizzled, fazzled and skedaddled. I realize the Erod injury/struggles were a bit surprising, but any rotation should be planned around at least one injury to a key starter.

 

Yeah, Porcello was "locked in" and I had more confidence than most here did on him all along, but he still had a serious concern factor. One could say we got two prayers answered out of the 8 we had after Price: Wright and Porcello. Buch was a risk. Kelly was a risk. Wright was not even on many poster's radar. Owens and Johnson were risks. Elias was a risk.

 

I've never bought into the quantity vs quality philosophy of building a rotation. It rarely works. That's also a big reason, I'm almost always against trying to slightly improve your staff by upgrading from a poor 5th starter to a decent 5th starter. All 5th starters are high-risk, or else they wouldn't be 5th starters.

 

I don't count Pomeranz as a 5th starter or even a 4th starter. I'd probably count him as a good number 3 with potential to be a number 2, but with a lot of concern about injury or extended struggles. I'm trying to stay positive, but I don't get why so many here seem to hate Buch, but are gushing over Pomeranz based on 17 starts. Last year, Buch gave us 17 starts equal to or better than JD's this year with the Pahds.

 

The guy has put up some nice numbers in the 250 IP he's pitched over the last 3 years. It's funny that Buch has over 350 IP over that same period, but he's labeled "injury prone" and Pomeranz is a possible savior based on a rather small sample size.

 

I guess a pitcher is "only as good as his last start." I trust the Sox know what they're doing, but why didn't they just trade dirt for him 5 months ago? I'm hoping I'm wrong on this trade. To me, it's more about Espi's upside potential than my worries about Pomernaz's skill set and projected future, even though I've ranted more about JD than AE.

 

We should be a much better team over the next 2.4 seasons with JD aboard. His cost control will also help us fill other key needs over the next two winters, assuming he finishes strong and gives us confidence penciling him in as a solid #2/3 SP'er. I know Espi was a risk as well, but I prefer the 5-6 years of team control and risk on Espi over 2.4 years of risk and control on JD. I'm more of a patient guy than most, but I can see why immediate gratification often tilts the balance on decision-making in the world today.

[Dojji]

 

I don't count Pomeranz as a 5th starter or even a 4th starter. I'd probably count him as a good number 3 with potential to be a number 2, but with a lot of concern about injury or extended struggles. I'm trying to stay positive, but I don't get why so many here seem to hate Buch, but are gushing over Pomeranz based on 17 starts. Last year, Buch gave us 17 starts equal to or better than JD's this year with the Pahds.

 

The guy has put up some nice numbers in the 250 IP he's pitched over the last 3 years. It's funny that Buch has over 350 IP over that same period, but he's labeled "injury prone" and Pomeranz is a possible savior based on a rather small sample size.

 

OK dude, three things.

 

1: Pomeranz' durability issues are overblown. People who are saying that this year's 100 innings are the most he's ever pitched in a season are ignoring minor league innings -- while they don't count in some areas, you HAVE to count those when discussing durability. In 2012, Pomeranz pitched 144 1/3 innings between the bigs and the littles. That means in theory that getting up to at least 170 innings isn't going to be a substantial risk for him even if he was 23 instead of 27.

 

2: Comparing Pomeranz directly to Buchholz ignores the many areas in which the two are very different. Pomeranz' issues are not related to the same factors that plague buchholz. For one thing, Pomeranz doesn't have anywhere near buchholz' injury history. Pomeranz' lack of innings pitches is a matter of role, not a matter of injury or incapability as has been the problem with Buchholz. Yes he struggled in the funny physics of Colorado's high altitude stadium as a young player, but that was 4 years ago, and in the meantime he's put up decent numbers in a swing role, and took a step forward at age 27 -- not that unreasonable age for a pitcher of that high status as a prospect, to take that step forward.

 

3: One thing I'm looking forward to out of Pomeranz is at least some chance of being healthy and effective in the playoffs. If buchholz had ever once given us at least that much, I'd be a lot less hard on him. Pomeranz has also done at least one thing that Clay Buchholz has never EVER done in the big leagues -- pitch effectively IN his role FOR a full season WITH a minimum of drama and catastrophe for THREE straight seasons.

[moonslav59]

OK dude, three things.

 

1: Pomeranz' durability issues are overblown. People who are saying that this year's 100 innings are the most he's ever pitched in a season are ignoring minor league innings -- while they don't count in some areas, you HAVE to count those when discussing durability. In 2012, Pomeranz pitched 144 1/3 innings between the bigs and the littles. That means in theory that getting up to at least 170 innings isn't going to be a substantial risk for him even if he was 23 instead of 27.

 

Then count Buch's minor league starts and IP and it's a whole new picture. I've actually used this same argument with Buch on durability, but there's one big difference, Pomeranz has never been good enough or healthy enough to win AND hold down a rotation slot for a full ML season, and he's been in and out of the bigs for 6 seasons.

 

2016 is thef irst time he appears to be on his way to pitching a full season in the bigs. I didn't mean to focus on injuries, although he's had more than one. It's inconsistency coupled with some injuries. He's played on 3 awful teams, but could never win a rotation slot and keep it. That's a fact until 2016, and we're not done yet.

 

2: Comparing Pomeranz directly to Buchholz ignores the many areas in which the two are very different. Pomeranz' issues are not related to the same factors that plague buchholz. For one thing, Pomeranz doesn't have anywhere near buchholz' injury history. Pomeranz' lack of innings pitches is a matter of role, not a matter of injury or incapability as has been the problem with Buchholz. Yes he struggled in the funny physics of Colorado's high altitude stadium as a young player, but that was 4 years ago, and in the meantime he's put up decent numbers in a swing role, and took a step forward at age 27 -- not that unreasonable age for a pitcher of that high status as a prospect, to take that step forward.

 

I'm not trying to imply Pomeranz is not a very good pitcher- only that his future is highly questionable. I'm not one who easily thinks every pitcher repeats his previous 100 IP over the next 200 or 500 IP.

 

3: One thing I'm looking forward to out of Pomeranz is at least some chance of being healthy and effective in the playoffs.

 

I agree. He was a good pick-up for our immediate needs.

 

If buchholz had ever once given us at least that much, I'd be a lot less hard on him.

 

Pomeranz has never done it either.

 

 

Pomeranz has also done at least one thing that Clay Buchholz has never EVER done in the big leagues -- pitch effectively IN his role FOR a full season WITH a minimum of drama and catastrophe for THREE straight seasons.

 

You talking about his last 3 seasons?

 

Aren't you ignoring the fact that Pomeranz was not doing well enough to even stay in the majors for large parts of the last 3 years?

He spent 91 Innings in the minors in 2013.

He spent 46 innings in the minors in 2014 (just 23 IP less than in MLB).

He's been on the DL over those 3 years.

He pitched only 13 innings at the ML level after June 16th in 2014 (kinda like Buch's 2015).

 

I'd compare Buc's 2010-2012 or 2011-2013 three year stretches to Pomeranz's 2014-2016 and not see much difference. This year's not over though, so that could change.

 

Buch has done one thing Pomeranz has never done: He pitched the second half of a season very well and finished it off with a darn good playoff start (2009), and then started 28 games the next season with a league leading 187 ERA+ in 2010. that's a 45 start stretch missing just 3 starts and pitching very very well as a SP'er- not losing his rotation slot and having to be a long RP'er. (He actually started the his first 14 games of 2011 without any drama and was doing very well, so he actually went just about 2 years straight as a very good SP'er- missing only 3 starts (end of 2009 to middle of 2011).

 

(Note: He began the 2009 season with 17 starts at AAA with a 2.73 ERA, so he started 33 games that year when combined with MLB. He started 29 in 2010, 14 in 2011 and 30 in 2012 when combining minors and majors. That 4 year stretch was pretty drama free. He followed that up with an amazing start to the 2013 season, so one could argue 4.5 years straight.)

 

There's an old saying about "swing men" and long relievers that says that they are in that role, because they are not good enough to be an full time starter. I'm not sure that's always the case, but I find it concerning that he was never able to be a FT starter all year in his 6 seasons as a ML'er. If he was good enough, why didn't he?

 

[SinceYaz]

i assume he'll arrive by air like most athletes.

 

lol

[User Name]

In the sense that we could and should have added another quality pitcher over the winter at less cost. We should have known we'd need one. Now everyone needs one and we are forced into a corner and to overpay.

I don't want to sound like a whinner but I don't like the deal.

I do think Pomeranz has a chance to continue nearly as well as his recent tiny sample size of success playing in a big park division, a laid back atmosphere and just 100 IP. He's a good pitcher with some upside potential still there, so I'm going to try to be optimistic.

I'm going to still be a sox fan in 3 to 8 years- God willing!

 

 

You don't like the deal but qualifying it as a panic move is both silly and revisionist. Hindsight is 20/20.

[Bellhorn04]

I have little doubt that Dombrowski seriously explored making a trade for a CCTOR starter this past offseason and found out that the ones he was interested in were only available for an exorbitant price-Betts or Bogey plus.

 

Two of the names that were mentioned the most as targets were Carrasco and Salazar. But guess what, Cleveland wasn't in sell mode at all.

[Jack Flap]

CCTOR...I like it.

[User Name]

If these acronyms keep up, I will murder you all in your sleep.

[Bellhorn04]

If these acronyms keep up, I will murder you all in your sleep.

 

I hear ya, but typing 'cost-controlled top of rotation' or the like every time is ridiculous.

[Spudboy]

After the initial phase of losing a guy I really wanted to see come up and throw smoke...... I'm good with this trade.

 

The one thing I'm really worried about in this playoff or bust style atmosphere, it that many new pitching acquisitions struggle the first year in Boston. I'm trying to think back over the last decade what pitcher came in and did well at the start...... and that's not to say year 2 didn't go much much better for some.....

 

Matt Clement pitched well for about 10 games until he got hit in the gourd by a com-backer.

[Spudboy]

One thing Pomerantz provides that Buch does not provide is hope.

[moonslav59]

You don't like the deal but qualifying it as a panic move is both silly and revisionist. Hindsight is 20/20.

 

Maybe "panic" was too strong a word, but clearly we were in deep doo doo at the back end of the rotation. Obviously DD thought the massive group of SP'ers accumulated over the years would produce enough quality to make our 3 to 5 slots decent enough that we wouldn't have to overpay with prospects to fill a void(s).

 

It's not "hindsight revision", when many of us were saying this all winter long.

 

Many of us felt the need was great before the start of the season. Call it luck, if you want, but it turned out we were right. The injury and struggles of Buc, Kelly and ERod over-shadowed the great season by Wright and the establishment of Porcello as a capable, solid #2 type starter.

 

I'm not revising anything. My position all along has been that I prefer quality to quantity in the back end of a rotation.

 

Maybe it wasn't a "panic" move, but to me it looks at least a little bit like one. Is this better: we messed up planning our full rotation, and now we overpaid to compensate for the short-comings.

 

Acquiring SP'ers is almost always easier and cheaper during the winter. There are more choices (FA & trades), and some can be acquired without losing a top prospect like Espinoza. In fact, Pomeranz could have been acquired last winter without losing Espi.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe "panic" was too strong a word, but clearly we were in deep doo doo at the back end of the rotation. Obviously DD thought the massive group of SP'ers accumulated over the years would produce enough quality to make our 3 to 5 slots decent enough that we wouldn't have to overpay with prospects to fill a void(s).

 

It's not "hindsight revision", when many of us were saying this all winter long.

 

Many of us felt the need was great before the start of the season. Call it luck, if you want, but it turned out we were right. The injury and struggles of Buc, Kelly and ERod over-shadowed the great season by Wright and the establishment of Porcello as a capable, solid #2 type starter.

 

I'm not revising anything. My position all along has been that I prefer quality to quantity in the back end of a rotation.

 

Maybe it wasn't a "panic" move, but to me it looks at least a little bit like one. Is this better: we messed up planning our full rotation, and now we overpaid to compensate for the short-comings.

 

Acquiring SP'ers is almost always easier and cheaper during the winter. There are more choices (FA & trades), and some can be acquired without losing a top prospect like Espinoza. In fact, Pomeranz could have been acquired last winter without losing Espi.

 

 

But haven't you also said:

 

1) You liked the deal for Kelly.

2) You liked the exercise of Buch's option.

[moonslav59]

I have little doubt that Dombrowski seriously explored making a trade for a CCTOR starter this past offseason and found out that the ones he was interested in were only available for an exorbitant price-Betts or Bogey plus.

 

Two of the names that were mentioned the most as targets were Carrasco and Salazar. But guess what, Cleveland wasn't in sell mode at all.

 

There were guys like Pomerarnz around, oh wait, Pomeranz himself was around last winter.

 

Now, for some true 20/20 hindsight revisionism: these guys were available also:

 

Doug Fister $7M/1

Kenta Maeda $25M/8 (plus acquisition costs)

Bud Norris $2.5M/1

J Zimmerman $22M x 5

plus others I'm too lazy to research and find.

 

I say revisionism, because I never advocated getting any of these guys, but the fact is none cost an Espi.