Swihart To Undergo Ankle Surgery

[moonslav59]

I said at the time of the trade that bringing in an ace would have been overkill and I stand by that.

 

I like Pomeranz, but I'm standing by my philosophy: it's rarely beneficial to build a staff from the middle down. Start from the top.

 

I realize we had just added Price, and Porcello was pitching like an ace, but the Cubs added Lester and Lackey after already having solid 1- 2 starters.

[Dojji]

Rotation depth is valuable wherever it appears on the depth chart. IF you have a contender, and the opportunity appears to acquire a #3 for a fair price, and your rotation has 4 starters in it yo absolutely do not refuse to acquire that mid rotation guy merely because he's not an ace. The opportunity costs of making a nonmove like that can very easily include taking a contending team and failing to make the playoffs at all.

 

Refusing to make a move because it is not the best imaginable move is idiotic when a team has a chance to win it all.

[moonslav59]

No we didn't. Anderson Espinosa was a fine prospect, but one top 5 prospect who's at least 4 years from the majors isn't nearly the price any team would ask for an ace type starter in a market this short on supply and this long on demand. You know that just as well as I do, so stop spewing BS you don't even believe yourself.

 

Nowhere on this site has anybody said we could trade Espi for an ace- one for one. The "headliner" comment, I assume, was implying that maybe Espi would be the headliner of a package to get an ace not a number 3-4.

 

Espi, Moncada and Swihart could have probably gotten us an ace.

 

I was against the Kimbrel trade, because we traded top prospects for a RP'er. Plus, the RP'er was paid like aa FA.

 

I was against the Pomeranz trade, not out of my reluctance to trade top prospects. On the contrary. I'm more than willing to part with top prospects, but I want an ace- not a number 3/4 and a RP'er.

 

I don't think anyone is saying the Kimbrel or Pom packages would, by themselves, net us an ace.

[Dojji]

No we didn't. Anderson Espinosa was a fine prospect, but one top 5 prospect who's at least 4 years from the majors isn't nearly the price any team would ask for an ace type starter in a market this short on supply and this long on demand. You know that just as well as I do, so stop spewing BS you don't even believe yourself.

 

Nowhere on this site has anybody said we could trade Espi for an ace- one for one. The "headliner" comment, I assume, was implying that maybe Espi would be the headliner of a package to get an ace not a number 3-4

 

Maybe but that's still pretty ludicrous. Any trade for an ace will include value that will dwarf the significance of even the most projectable of 18 year olds.

[Spudboy]

Well Gentlemen, as we all know there is more than one way to build a rotation!

[moonslav59]

I haven't been on this site very long, but if it's like "the other one", my guess is that if Espi becomes the next Pedro, 80% of the board will say, "I told you we overpaid". Maybe 50% will say they were against it at the time.

 

For years, I've heard the complaints that our system never produces any aces. We finally get a pitcher who might be the highest ranked 18 year old starter in a very very long time (I'm still waiting for some research on this point), and we buckle under the pressure of a need for a number 3-4 type starter on a team that finished last in 3 of 4 years prior.

 

Trading Iggy for Peavy, or Stephen Fife for Erik Bedard is one things, but trading a top 12-15 pitching prospect like Espi, in my opinion, was a huge gamble and a huge mistake. Even if Pom pitches like a number 2 for the remaining two years on his deal, I think it was a massive overpay.

[moonslav59]

Well Gentlemen, as we all know there is more than one way to build a rotation!

 

Yeah, let's sign Penny & Smoltz again!

 

[moonslav59]

Let's trade for Miley and call it a day.

[moonslav59]

Masterson

Dempster

or the Aaron Cooks of the world

[Nick]

I'd like to borrow money from some of you guys.....with your logic I can get a loan for $10,000 today from you and pay you back $10,000 five years from now...

 

You're comparing Pomeranz today vs Espi 5 years from now. What is Espi worth today ASSUMING HE FULL FILLS YOUR FANTASY? There's a time value to money and one has to discount back Espi's worth five years from now to today's worth. From where I sit, we gave up just about the right amount, especially with risks involved when it comes to an eighteen year old pitcher.

[Bellhorn04]

For years, I've heard the complaints that our system never produces any aces. We finally get a pitcher who might be the highest ranked 18 year old starter in a very very long time (I'm still waiting for some research on this point), and we buckle under the pressure of a need for a number 3-4 type starter on a team that finished last in 3 of 4 years prior.

 

They 'buckled' because they thought we were a contender this year. Same principle as the Peavy trade in 2013.

[harmony]

Let's trade for Miley and call it a day.

To be precise, the Red Sox added Rick Porcello and Justin Masterson four days after trading for Wade Miley in December 2014.

[cp176]

I haven't been on this site very long, but if it's like "the other one", my guess is that if Espi becomes the next Pedro, 80% of the board will say, "I told you we overpaid". Maybe 50% will say they were against it at the time.

 

For years, I've heard the complaints that our system never produces any aces. We finally get a pitcher who might be the highest ranked 18 year old starter in a very very long time (I'm still waiting for some research on this point), and we buckle under the pressure of a need for a number 3-4 type starter on a team that finished last in 3 of 4 years prior.

 

Trading Iggy for Peavy, or Stephen Fife for Erik Bedard is one things, but trading a top 12-15 pitching prospect like Espi, in my opinion, was a huge gamble and a huge mistake. Even if Pom pitches like a number 2 for the remaining two years on his deal, I think it was a massive overpay.

 

If I am still alive when (if) Espinoza reaches his potential, I will give you one helluva atta boy great call. Also your thinking that Espinoza, Moncada, and Swihart would have brought us an ace is a little too far out there for me. No one is going to give you a Sale for 3 maybe someday guys. I hope that they all become HOFamers but it is probably unlikely.

[cp176]

You paid the headliner price for a #1 or #2 and you got a #4

 

I'm thinking that DD might not see Pomeranz as a #4 going forward. He is still a young man. It is a little unfair I think to paint this guy as a back of the rotation guy at this stage of his career.

[moonslav59]

If I am still alive when (if) Espinoza reaches his potential, I will give you one helluva atta boy great call. Also your thinking that Espinoza, Moncada, and Swihart would have brought us an ace is a little too far out there for me. No one is going to give you a Sale for 3 maybe someday guys. I hope that they all become HOFamers but it is probably unlikely.

 

I might be the only guy here who still thinks GMs value Swihart highly, but if you prefer Espi, Moncada, Basabe and Dubon or Travis, I think that will come close to what ATL or LAD gives the CWS for Sale.

 

I'd even consider JBJ, Espi, Moncada, Swihart, Hembree and Shaw for Sale, Robertson & Frazier.

[moonslav59]

I'm thinking that DD might not see Pomeranz as a #4 going forward. He is still a young man. It is a little unfair I think to paint this guy as a back of the rotation guy at this stage of his career.

 

He pitched like a #1 for the Padres for half a season. He pitched like a 3/4 for us the second half.

 

I'd say calling him a 3/4 with 2 upside is about right.

[Kimmi]

The Pomeranz trade didn't make sense. I am talking about dealing Devers and Moncada for someone who can front your rotation

 

The Pomeranz trade made plenty of sense. Do you have any idea how bad the #4 and #5 spots in our rotation were? We needed another solid pitcher. I did not like the price that we paid for Pom, but it needed to be done.

[cp176]

He pitched like a #1 for the Padres for half a season. He pitched like a 3/4 for us the second half.

 

I'd say calling him a 3/4 with 2 upside is about right.

 

I'm not going out on any limb to suggest what number he might be in future rotations. What I will say is that my guess is as good as anyone elses. He is young. He is big. He is left handed. Works for me.

[cp176]

I might be the only guy here who still thinks GMs value Swihart highly, but if you prefer Espi, Moncada, Basabe and Dubon or Travis, I think that will come close to what ATL or LAD gives the CWS for Sale.

 

I'd even consider JBJ, Espi, Moncada, Swihart, Hembree and Shaw for Sale, Robertson & Frazier.

 

Really - you think that you might be the only person here that truly thinks that Swihart is highly valued? You normally are better than this. I think that it is safe to say that most people at talksox see great potential value in Swihart.

[jacksonianmarch]

He was a top 25 prospect in all of baseball. Those guys are headliners of deals. It's rare for 18 yr old pitchers to be top 25 guys, but he was

[cp176]

The Pomeranz trade made plenty of sense. Do you have any idea how bad the #4 and #5 spots in our rotation were? We needed another solid pitcher. I did not like the price that we paid for Pom, but it needed to be done.

 

I agree and I did not like seeing them move Espinoza either. The arguement being made about the trade not making sense though is ridiculous.

[moonslav59]

Really - you think that you might be the only person here that truly thinks that Swihart is highly valued? You normally are better than this. I think that it is safe to say that most people at talksox see great potential value in Swihart.

 

Not as trade value at this time. Just about everyone says we need to wait and let him build his value back up.

 

I'm not saying his value can't be higher by the deadline, but it seems like everytime I include him in a suggested trade, just about everyone says he adds little value to the other team.

 

Besides, I said "I might be". I know there are others who value him highly.

[moonslav59]

He was a top 25 prospect in all of baseball. Those guys are headliners of deals. It's rare for 18 yr old pitchers to be top 25 guys, but he was

 

I'd love to do the research, but where can I find data on how many 18 year old pitchers have been ranked in the top 15?

[Dojji]

Well Gentlemen, as we all know there is more than one way to build a rotation!

 

Not quite. It's not so much that there's more than one way to build a rotation, although I can see how that perception would persist -- while there are multiple ways to acquire rotation talent, the only sane way to build a rotation, is to use all of them at the same time.

 

In other words, there is exactly one way to build a rotation, and that's all the ways, all at once, all the time.

[Dojji]

I might be the only guy here who still thinks GMs value Swihart highly,

 

There's "highly" and there's "trade an ace highly." I'm sure half the league would like to trade a position player or reliever for Swihart, some may even trade a bottom of the rotation starter. But you can ask the moon and stars for an ace, and probably get it. Swihart is of an age and experience level where he's more of an ex-prospect than a prospect, that's just the facts. Swihart has attractive qualities, especially with offensive catchers so sparse, but a team with an expendable ace does not have to settle for a pretty good return or a solid ex-prospect, they can ask for bona fide fully cost-controlled elite prospects and get them, probably alongside at least a couple established regulars (another thing that Blake Swihart is not).

 

Roster math and arbitration math are working against him now, he still has some value but is not a pristine asset and has had the opportunity to show his warts without the real opportunity to demonstrate progress that usually goes with it. I have my doubts that there's a team in this league that would willingly center a deal for one of their aces around Blake Swihart. Half the league probably would be interested in this guy if he was dangled, but they would want to make a different kind of trade, target other of the team's needs.

Edited November 24, 2016 by Dojji

[Dojji]

He was a top 25 prospect in all of baseball. Those guys are headliners of deals. It's rare for 18 yr old pitchers to be top 25 guys, but he was

 

So the Sox cashed in on a guy who was highly touted but probably, on account of his age and all the X factors that can plague a young starting pitching prospect, significantly overhyped. Sounds like a distinct possibility they sold high, to me.

 

Fantastic stuff is not all there is to being a good pitcher, if a guy can command big league value now that can help the team, and is that far removed from big league status, I see no reason not to go for it -- 4 years of prospect development is forever, the odds are never in favor of any particular 18 year old making the majors at all, much less doing anything when he gets there.

[OH FOY]

I never go by DSL or GCL stats, for any Prospects. What I like seeing is a 16 year old by pass those leagues and go right to A ball and dominate. Level of competition is the important thing.

Espinoza dominated Rookie Leagues, but when he made his jump to next level he struggled. Does he get promoted to A+ ball or does he stay where he will face many players he just dominated a year before? Wait and see I guess.

Urias was facing kids on a average 6 years older than him in the Minors, Espinoza has faced kids 3.5 years older than him. Now Urias in the Majors he is facing 9 years older than him, with Major League experience.

Only Player I would Trade Moncada for.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Edited November 24, 2016 by OH FOY!

[Dojji]

You raise an excellent point OH FOY! Stick around and post a bit more often, your perspective is very solid here. Enjoy your turkey day.

[moonslav59]

Swihart is of an age and experience level where he's more of an ex-prospect than a prospect, that's just the facts.

 

Not true for catchers.

[Kimmi]

Really - you think that you might be the only person here that truly thinks that Swihart is highly valued? You normally are better than this. I think that it is safe to say that most people at talksox see great potential value in Swihart.

 

I think other GMs value Swihart more highly than some people here do.