A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

[Kimmi]

I did not like the trade when we made it, and it looks bad in hindsight.

 

However, if Kelly gives us two good years, the deal may not look as horrible as it does now.

 

My point was that at the time of the deal we were looking at giving up 1 year of Lackey for 4 of Kelly and the hope that Craig might return to being close to the top 22 hitter he was from 2011 to 2013 plus the 2013 playoffs.

 

I liked the trade when it happened. It looks terrible in hindsight, but the value that we got out of it should have been much better than what we got, well worth trading Lackey for.

[Bellhorn04]

I liked the trade when it happened. It looks terrible in hindsight, but the value that we got out of it should have been much better than what we got, well worth trading Lackey for.

 

Did you think Kelly would be better (have a higher WAR) than Lackey in 2015?

[Kimmi]

Did you think Kelly would be better (have a higher WAR) than Lackey in 2015?

 

No, I didn't, but it also wasn't out of the question. I did think that there was a very good chance that the combination of Kelly and Craig would produce a higher war than Lackey in 2015. Additionally, the number of years of control that we were getting for both players compared very favorably with Lackey's 1.5 years of control, and it is questionable whether Lackey would have played for the Sox in 2015.

[Bellhorn04]

No, I didn't, but it also wasn't out of the question. I did think that there was a very good chance that the combination of Kelly and Craig would produce a higher war than Lackey in 2015. Additionally, the number of years of control that we were getting for both players compared very favorably with Lackey's 1.5 years of control, and it is questionable whether Lackey would have played for the Sox in 2015.

 

It was a funky deal IMO. Instead of getting back prospects we got 2 'big-league ready' players, but both who had big question marks over their heads, especially health-wise. I can't remember another one quite like it.

[moonslav59]

Did you think Kelly would be better (have a higher WAR) than Lackey in 2015?

 

I know I didn't, and I thought we could have done better too, but it wasn't all about a higher WAR for one year. Kelly had 4 years to Lackey's 1.3 years (really just one with us).

[moonslav59]

It was a funky deal IMO. Instead of getting back prospects we got 2 'big-league ready' players, but both who had big question marks over their heads, especially health-wise. I can't remember another one quite like it.

 

I remember saying, "We played it halfway." We were afraid to go total rebuild like the Yanks did this year. We wanted to hit the refresh button but still be competitive the very next year. Lester for Cespy was the real head-scratcher to me. I'm glad we got Porcello for him, but it was weird.

[iortiz]

I was very optimistic this year. Rethinking... We still have a very good team, but we are not going to win a WS with this pitching staff. Price is no longer an ace neither a No. 1. Porcello is going to regress, badly. Then what do Y have? Eduardo?... DD has to sign at least 2 solid SPs.

[Bellhorn04]

I know I didn't, and I thought we could have done better too, but it wasn't all about a higher WAR for one year. Kelly had 4 years to Lackey's 1.3 years (really just one with us).

 

Oh, I know Kelly had 4 years. But all that really means is that his average cost wasn't too high. We've had him for 2.3 years and his net value has been nil. He's set us back more than helped us.

 

I don't usually have an instant negative feeling about trades but this one felt weird to me right away.

[moonslav59]

Oh, I know Kelly had 4 years. But all that really means is that his average cost wasn't too high. We've had him for 2.3 years and his net value has been nil. He's set us back more than helped us.

 

I don't usually have an instant negative feeling about trades but this one felt weird to me right away.

 

I agree, and I agreed at the time, but obviously the Sox expected better from Kelly, and it wasn't far-fetched to think that way.

 

I liked Kelly, but thought 1.3 years of Lackey was worth more.

 

[moonslav59]

I was very optimistic this year. Rethinking... We still have a very good team, but we are not going to win a WS with this pitching staff. Price is no longer an ace neither a No. 1. Porcello is going to regress, badly. Then what do Y have? Eduardo?... DD has to sign at least 2 solid SPs.

 

1) There are no top FA SP'er FAs.

 

Price should do better. Porcello may decline, but he could still be very good. ERod, Pom, Wright and Buch could all have good years, but we might just need two of them to have good years.

[iortiz]

1) There are no top FA SP'er FAs.

 

Price should do better. Porcello may decline, but he could still be very good. ERod, Pom, Wright and Buch could all have good years, but we might just need two of them to have good years.

Seems like you like our pitching staff. First off, Buchh has to go. Rodriguez is a No.4 at best. I was very high on Pom but I'm not sure anymore. Wright? IDK what to say. As I said, neither Price nor Porcello are No. 1.

 

We need 2 SPs

[moonslav59]

Seems like you like our pitching staff. First off, Buchh has to go. Rodriguez is a No.4 at best. I was very high on Pom but I'm not sure anymore. Wright? IDK what to say. As I said, neither Price nor Porcello are No. 1.

 

We need 2 SPs

 

Our starters had the best second half ERA in MLB. We ended up with Buch starting due to injury issues with Pom and Wright, neither of which is terribly threatening to their 2017 projections.

 

Look, I'm always for upgrading the rotation from the top, but we don't need 2 SP'ers. We could probably get by with none added, if we fix other high need areas- like the pen and 3B.

 

Buch will be back for $13M. At worst, we could trade him.

 

If you define a number one as a top 30 SP'er, then Porcello and Price are both number 1's. I'd love to get another one and make them a 2 and 3, but here are the numbers:

 

Top 137 SP'ers in MLB (100+ IP) WAR

6) Porcello 5.5

13) Price 4.5

43) Pomeranz 2.9

48) Wright 2.8 (in just 24 starts!)

 

ERA-

13) Porcello 71

22) Wright 75

33) Pomeranz 79

51) Price 90

 

These numbers show we have at least one number 1 and 3 number 2's, and it's not even counting ERod (or Buch).

 

Out of 135 starters with 40+ IP in the second half of 2016, we have this....

WAR

1) Porcello 3.4

15) Price 1.9

23) ERod 1.7

71) Buch 1.0

 

(Wright ranked 26th in 1st half WAR and 6th in first half ERA-, so I'm not sure I'd write him off so easily--pun intended.)

 

 

 

Edited October 14, 2016 by moonslav59

[mvp 78]

Seems like you like our pitching staff. First off, Buchh has to go. Rodriguez is a No.4 at best. I was very high on Pom but I'm not sure anymore. Wright? IDK what to say. As I said, neither Price nor Porcello are No. 1.

 

We need 2 SPs

 

Their starters are Price, Porcello, Pomeranz, Wright and Rodriguez. They may move one of those guys out of the rotation, but not 2. There's zero chance they pick up 2 SP's. In the past, when they've actually needed 2 arms, they've only brought in one. They either go with what they got or they use ERod in a trade to bring someone back.

[mvp 78]

Also "Price is not a number 1" even though he'll be top 3 in CY votes this year... Ok?

[oldtimer]

At least one Boston sports writer has us keeping Ziegler if we can get him to resign. That wouldn't be a bad idea and would cut down our needs at RP.

[mvp 78]

At least one Boston sports writer has us keeping Ziegler if we can get him to resign. That wouldn't be a bad idea and would cut down our needs at RP.

 

I'd love it. I think Ziegler really wants to be closer to his family though. I admire that.

[moonslav59]

I know this might be viewed as cherry-picking sample sizes, but with injuries to Wright and Pomeranz and a turn-around by Buchholz, I think these numbers show the upside potential of our 2017 rotation:

 

1st Half 2016 SP'er Rankings (50+ IP-143 pitchers)

 

ERA-

6) Wright 61

8) Pomeranz 62

41) Porcello 83

67) Price 98

 

WHIP

14) Pomeranz 1.06

34) Porcello 1.17

38) Price 1.19

44) Wright 1.21

 

WAR

11) Price 2.6

15) Pomeranz 2.5

26) Wright 2.1

33) Porcello 1.9

 

 

2nd Half 2016 SP'er Rankings (40 IP- 135 pitchers)

ERA-

6) Porcello 59

17) Buchholz 67

28) ERod 73

41) Price 81

88) Pomeranz 106

99) Wright 114

 

WHIP

1) Porcello 0.85

30) ERod 1.13

35) Buchholz 1.15

48) Price 1.22

83) Wright 1.34

96) Pomeranz 1.40

 

 

WAR

1) Porcello 3.4

15) Price 1.9

23) ERod 1.7

71) Buchholz 1.0

89) Wright 0.7

105) Pomeranz 0.4

 

If you average out their rankings over these 3 categories and assign the #1 starter label to all pitchers ranked 1-30, and #2 starter to 31-60 and so on, here's what you come up with:

 

These starters pitched like a...

#1 2nd half Porcello (3rd -avg ranking on 3 categories)

#1 1st half Pomeranz (12th)

#1 1st half Wright (25th)

#1 1st half ERod (27th)

#2 1st half Porcello (36th)

#2 2nd half Price (35th)

#2 1st half Price (39th)

#2 2nd half Buchholz (41st)

 

That's 4 different starters who pitched "like an ace" for half a season (Porcello, Wright, ERod and Pomeranz), one starter who pitched like a #2 for both halves (Price) and one starter who pitched like a #2 for one half (Buch). (Note: Porcello also pitched like a #2 for his other half season.)

 

These numbers look very impressive and very promising as those who pitched like #2's were on the top end of the #2 spectrum. Price's 35th and 39th rankings would place him in the top 30 for the season overall (if you value WAR highly), here are those numbers:

 

137 SP'ers with 100+ IP:

 

ERA-

13) Porcello 71

22) Wright 75

33) Pomeranz 79

51) Price 90

88) ERod 106

 

WHIP

6) Porcello 1.01

35) Pomeranz 1.19

40) Price 1.20

54) Wright 1.24

68 ERod 1.30

98) Buchholz 113

 

WAR

6) Porcello 5.2

13) Price 4.5

43) Pomeranz 2.9

48) Wright 2.8

97) ERod 1.2

130) Buchholz 0.3

 

Going by seasonal WAR, we have two #1's, two #2's, one #4 and one #5.

48) Wright 2.8

 

Going by ERA-, we have basically the same, but with Wright becomming a number 1 and Price dropping to a #2.

 

 

[Spudboy]

Oh, I know Kelly had 4 years. But all that really means is that his average cost wasn't too high. We've had him for 2.3 years and his net value has been nil. He's set us back more than helped us.

 

I don't usually have an instant negative feeling about trades but this one felt weird to me right away.

 

You guys are hung up on WAR and control.

 

The Sox had a decent rotation before they traded Lester and Lasckey. Lester could have been signed to a reasonable contract and Lackey could have been extended.

 

In my opinion the Sox f***ed up by blowing up a functional rotation and replacing it with essentially nothing.

 

Nothing with more control, though.

[moonslav59]

You guys are hung up on WAR and control.

 

The Sox had a decent rotation before they traded Lester and Lasckey. Lester could have been signed to a reasonable contract and Lackey could have been extended.

 

In my opinion the Sox f***ed up by blowing up a functional rotation and replacing it with essentially nothing.

 

Nothing with more control, though.

 

Back before the trade and even a year before the Lackey trade, I suggested we extend Lackey and give him a signing bonus that would be paid out during his "minimum salary" year, so as to minimize the bad feelings. I think I suggested a 2 year extension worth $30M/2, but that would actually be paid out as $10M x 3 years. He ended up signing for $32M/2 with the Cubs 2 years later, so I think I was pretty close.

 

I disliked the trade at the time as well. All I'm saying was that at the time, Lackey's 2 months of the 2014 season was useless to us, so we were essentially trading 1 year (2015- a year coming off a last place finish) for 4 years of Kelly and 4 years of Craig at a $62M luxury tax cost- a guy who had the 22nd best OPS from 2011 to 2013.

 

At the time of the trade, one could see the reasoning behind the trade- like it or not. I did not like it, but it wasn't a horrible looking trade at the time. In hindsight, it is.

 

The other factor to consider is that we could have signed Lester, lackey and Miller after we traded them.

[SoxnCycles]

Also "Price is not a number 1" even though he'll be top 3 in CY votes this year... Ok?

 

So, who is Price going to beat out in CY voting, Kluber, Porcello or Britton?

[moonslav59]

So, who is Price going to beat out in CY voting, Kluber, Porcello or Britton?

 

I doubt Price finishes in the top 6 or 7.

 

My vote would go....

 

1) Porcello

2) Kluber (close to tie with Porcello)

3) Verlander

4) Sale

5) Miller

6) Quintana

7) Tanaka

8) Happ

9) Britton

10) Price (maybe)

Edited October 14, 2016 by moonslav59

[SoxnCycles]

1) There are no top FA SP'er FAs.

 

Price should do better. Porcello may decline, but he could still be very good. ERod, Pom, Wright and Buch could all have good years, but we might just need two of them to have good years.

 

I'm not sure I buy the "Price will be better" line.

 

Guys like Beckett and Porcello needed a year to adjust to playing Boston (why, I don't know), but they were also 26 yrs old.

I don't see Price getting better at 32 and Porcello regressing at 27.

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure I buy the "Price will be better" line.

 

Guys like Beckett and Porcello needed a year to adjust to playing Boston (why, I don't know), but they were also 26 yrs old.

I don't see Price getting better at 32 and Porcello regressing at 27.

 

Well, Price did improve as the season went on. At one point, I think he had the worst ERA in the league.

 

Besides, I said, "Price should do better." I never said "will".

[moonslav59]

Don't hear many people talking about this, but how about Toronto's signing of JA Happ for $36M/3 last winter?

 

The guy went 20-4 with a 3.18 ERA and 1.169 WHIP!

 

Here's a look at the big named FA SP'er signings:

 

Remember, most of these guys were expected to produce big time on the front end of their deals.

 

Price $217M/7 w/opt out (17-9 3.99 in 230 IP)

Greinke $206M/6 (13-7 4.37 in 174 IP)

Cueto $130M/6 w/opt out (18-5 2.79 in 220 IP)

Zimmerman $110M/5 (9-7 4.93 in 102 IP)

Samardzjia $90M/5 (12-11 3.81 in 203 IP)

Leake $80M/5 (9-12 4.69 in 177 IP)

Wei-Chen $80M/5 w/opt out (5-5 4.96 in 123 IP)

Kennedy$70M/5 w/opt out (11-11 3.68 in 196 IP)

Kazmir $48M/3 w/opt out (10-6 4.56 in 136 IP)

 

I'd say only Cueto looks like an unqualified success after one year.

 

[Kimmi]

It was a funky deal IMO. Instead of getting back prospects we got 2 'big-league ready' players, but both who had big question marks over their heads, especially health-wise. I can't remember another one quite like it.

 

That was one of the things I liked about it. I was glad that the FO felt like we could compete in 2015, and wanted big league ready players. I thought our team would be good enough to contend. It should have been good enough to contend.

[Kimmi]

You guys are hung up on WAR and control.

 

The Sox had a decent rotation before they traded Lester and Lasckey. Lester could have been signed to a reasonable contract and Lackey could have been extended.

 

In my opinion the Sox f***ed up by blowing up a functional rotation and replacing it with essentially nothing.

 

Nothing with more control, though.

 

I'm not hung up on WAR when it comes to Lester. I have said over and over and over that the Sox screwed up with him. IMO, once they screwed up with Lester, Lackey was all but gone too. I really feel like they had no choice to trade him.

 

To be fair, while Porcello is no Lester, he should have been much better than he was last year.

[Kimmi]

So, who is Price going to beat out in CY voting, Kluber, Porcello or Britton?

 

Price was disappointing this year. Not awful. Sometimes very good. But still disappointing.

 

I do think he will be better next year.

 

And I think Porcello will regress a bit, but will still be a very good pitcher.

[Bellhorn04]

That was one of the things I liked about it. I was glad that the FO felt like we could compete in 2015, and wanted big league ready players. I thought our team would be good enough to contend. It should have been good enough to contend.

 

That's exactly why I was nonplussed about it. If they planned to compete in 2015, why not keep Lackey.

[moonslav59]

Here's one way to look at next year. Let's look at what else we could to replace besides Papi's 626 PAs and 1.021 OPS:

 

184 PAs Vazquez .585 OPS

137 PAs A Hill .577 OPS

113 PAs Hanigan .468 OPS

64 PAs B Brentz .690 OPS

35 PAs Holaday .500 OPS

20 PAs Moncada .513 OPS

14 PAs Marrero .298 OPS

28 PAs Others under .400 OPS combined

 

That's about 600 PAs of pretty god-awful hitting. If we can replace these PAs plus Papi's 626 (total of about 1200 PAs) with more or better PAs from

 

Beni (118 to over 450) .835

Young (227 to over 400) .850

Swihart (74 PAs to over 400) .720

B Holt (324 PAs to maybe 400) .705

S Leon (283 to maybe 350) .845

Hernandez (56 to 200) .730

Moncada (20 to ???) ???

 

...we may not be as bad as we thought we might be losing Papi.

 

Let's look the same way at our pitching:

We may lose:

50 IP Tazawa 4.17

47 IP Uehara 3.45

30 IP Ziegler 1.52

127 IP Total

 

These guys should get less or no IP:

29 IP Layne 3.77

22 IP Owens 6.95

21 IP O'Sullivan 6.75

13 IP N Ramirez 6.23

13 IP F Abad 6.39

8 IP Elias 12.91

103 IP Total

 

230 Total IP may come from where?

ERod 107 IP to ???

Pomernaz 69 IP to ???

Buchholz 139 IP to ???

Kelly, Kimbrel, Scott more???

 

 

 

Edited October 15, 2016 by moonslav59

[Kimmi]

That's exactly why I was nonplussed about it. If they planned to compete in 2015, why not keep Lackey.

 

As I said before, I thought the value from Kelly/Craig would be greater than that of Lackey, but I get what you're saying.

 

I really do have to wonder if there is any truth to the speculation that Lackey would not have played for the Sox at league minimum, and more or less forced his trade. Either way, it still goes back to the FO screwing up the Lester negotiations big time.