2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[Jack Flap]

At this point, is the top of the rotation upside still there? He has yet to put in a consistent run of good performances. http://www.fangraphs.com/statsd.aspx?playerid=13164&position=P&type=&gds=&gde=&season=all

 

Of course, I hope he can prove me wrong this year.

 

He's had fairly sustained runs of success in 2015 and 2016...after being recalled in July this year he put up a 3.24 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 3.48 FIP, 9.15 K/9, and 3.24 BB/9 over 14 starts. I'm more inclined to believe that the spring training injury (and his mechanics subsequently being out of whack, if I recall correctly) messed him up for the better part of the first half and his second half performance is more representative of the pitcher he's capable of being. We'll see.

Edited December 8, 2016 by Jack Flap

[mvp 78]

He's had fairly sustained runs of success in 2015 and 2016...after being recalled in July this year he put up a 3.24 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 3.48 FIP, 9.15 K/9, and 3.24 BB/9 over 14 starts. I'm more inclined to believe that the spring training injury (and his mechanics subsequently being out of whack, if I recall correctly) messed him up for the better part of the first half and his second half performance is more representative of the pitcher he's capable of being. We'll see.

 

He only got to 6 innings 6 out of 14 starts. If he can start going deeper into games, I'll believe in his upside.

[Slasher9]

I wouldn't trade either at the moment.

 

i would trade Pom for Espinoza in a heartbeat. but would Pads be dumb enough to do that deal?

[Bellhorn04]

i would trade Pom for Espinoza in a heartbeat. but would Pads be dumb enough to do that deal?

 

Of course they wouldn't. It's not like they've magically transformed into a contender since July LOL

[moonslav59]

At this point, is the top of the rotation upside still there? He has yet to put in a consistent run of good performances. http://www.fangraphs.com/statsd.aspx...de=&season=all

 

Erod only has 41 MLB starts spread over two seasons, so not having an extended time of TOR performance is not a big deal.

 

1) Maybe some of his poor performances were due to "tipping his pitches", which is something that should never happen again and is not skills related.

 

2) He has nasty stuff. I've never read otherwise from any scout or skill-rating service.

 

3) He has had some min stretches of brilliance at the ML level:

 

2nd half 2016: (14 starts) 3.24 ERA / 1.133 WHIP

 

In 2015, he started 21 games. He let up 0-2 runs in 15 of them. He let up 3 runs in 2 others. That's 17 out of 21 games with 0-3 ERs allowed. He got shelled in the other 4, including 9 ERs in 4.1 IP, 8 in 5.0, 7 in 1.2 and 6 in 3.2 IP. Take away just those 4 games (30 ER in 14.2 IP), and ERod had 22 ERs in 107 IP in those other 17 starts for a 1.85 ERA. That's his rookie season at age 22!!!

 

I know all pitchers would look much better on paper, if you took away their worst 20% starts, but ERod has shown greatness in his MLB short sample size, even if some has been scattered around.

 

[S5Dewey]

I don't get all this love for trading Pom. If we're going to be making a move it should be one that first, improves the team, and second, helps us on the Luxury Tax. Pom is scheduled to make $1.35M in 2017, almost exactly 1/10 of what Buch will make.

 

I'm not in favor of trading any of our pitchers because "you can't have too much pitching", but if one is traded it should be Buch. He's more likely to bring back players that can help the team (now or in the future) and he gets us below the LT threshold.

[harmony]

I believe, he secretly thinks Buch will way outperform "Steamer's WAR projections", but he doesn't want to debunk his faith in those projections as his major measuring stick of player value over the years.

 

Am I right, hill?

As noted, Clay Buchholz has a higher ceiling but lower floor than many mid- to bottom-of-the-rotation starters.

 

Is it worth $13.5 million to find out whether Buchholz will exceed the projected 1.7 WAR (valued at $13.5 million)?

 

Steamer projects a 2017 WAR of 1.7 for Seattle righthander Nate Karns, who likely has a lower ceiling but higher floor than Buchholz. The Buchholz floor might be lower than that of Seattle lefthander Ariel Miranda, who is projected at 1.1 WAR in only 119 innings. Karns and Miranda currently slot as No. 4 and No. 5 in the Seattle rotation.

 

I doubt Buchholz would land, as another posted suggested, an MLB-ready starter with options. Karns and Miranda fall into that category but are needed for rotation depth. Seattle's newly acquired righthander Chris Heston, who pitched a no-hitter among his 31 starts in 2015, comes with options and five years of team control.

 

I suspect the Mariners will find a solution elsewhere but I enjoy discussing the possibilities with fans of other teams.

 

A Mariner beat reporter writes: "Boston is eager to unload Buchholz, who is owed $13.5 million for 2017."

 

Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/mlb/seattle-mariners/mariners-insider-blog/article119662648.html#storylink=cpy

Edited December 8, 2016 by harmony

[Bellhorn04]

I can't see them getting very much for Clay. It would be primarily a salary dump.

[moonslav59]

As noted, Clay Buchholz has a higher ceiling but lower floor than many mid- to bottom-of-the-rotation starters.

 

Agreed, and some top of rotation pitchers too.

 

 

Is it worth $13.5 million to find out whether Buchholz will exceed the projected 1.7 WAR (valued at $13.5 million)?

 

You must think so, right?

[moonslav59]

I can't see them getting very much for Clay. It would be primarily a salary dump.

 

Not a straight dump, but from the Sox perspective, that's a main reason for looking to trade him.

 

I do think we could get a good prospect or a couple decent one, so that's not really a dump.

 

I look at what some other oft-injured SP'ers have gotten on the FA market, and I see the lack of available SP'ers on the market now- injury history or not- and I think as teams get desperate, some GM will come calling for Buch and will overpay out of necessity.

[harmony]

As noted, Clay Buchholz has a higher ceiling but lower floor than many mid- to bottom-of-the-rotation starters.

 

Agreed, and some top of rotation pitchers too.

 

 

Is it worth $13.5 million to find out whether Buchholz will exceed the projected 1.7 WAR (valued at $13.5 million)?

 

You must think so, right?

Clay Buchholz may not be at the top of my wish list but the righthander is probably worth consideration.

[Jack Flap]

We'll probably trade Clay for spare parts only to see him put up 30 starts of 2.75 ERA and win the Cy Young...just because.

[harmony]

Not a straight dump, but from the Sox perspective, that's a main reason for looking to trade him.

 

I do think we could get a good prospect or a couple decent one, so that's not really a dump.

 

I look at what some other oft-injured SP'ers have gotten on the FA market, and I see the lack of available SP'ers on the market now- injury history or not- and I think as teams get desperate, some GM will come calling for Buch and will overpay out of necessity.

A team "desperate" for starting pitching will call a team equally desperate to get under the luxury tax threshold.

 

Incentives abound.

[moonslav59]

A team "desperate" for starting pitching will call a team equally desperate to get under the luxury tax threshold.

 

Apparently, DD is already getting plenty of phone calls asking about our pitching surplus.

 

Wait it out, and I'm pretty sure someone will overpay.

[harmony]

A team "desperate" for starting pitching will call a team equally desperate to get under the luxury tax threshold.

 

Apparently, DD is already getting plenty of phone calls asking about our pitching surplus.

 

Wait it out, and I'm pretty sure someone will overpay.

Do you think Dave Dombrowsi is making calls to get under the luxury tax threshold?

[Slasher9]

I don't get all this love for trading Pom. If we're going to be making a move it should be one that first, improves the team, and second, helps us on the Luxury Tax. Pom is scheduled to make $1.35M in 2017, almost exactly 1/10 of what Buch will make.

 

I'm not in favor of trading any of our pitchers because "you can't have too much pitching", but if one is traded it should be Buch. He's more likely to bring back players that can help the team (now or in the future) and he gets us below the LT threshold.

 

great points. i only want to trade Pom for Espinoza. other than that...i agree completely...pitching, pitching, pitching.

[moonslav59]

Do you think Dave Dombrowsi is making calls to get under the luxury tax threshold?

 

No. I think he has getting under the limit as a priority but not a must, and he's taking calls knowing someone will eventually offer what he wants, and the side effect will be getting under the luxury tax.

[harmony]

No. I think he has getting under the limit as a priority but not a must, and he's taking calls knowing someone will eventually offer what he wants, and the side effect will be getting under the luxury tax.

Boston GM Dave Dombrowski is taking calls on starting pitchers just as Seattle GM Jerry Dipoto is taking calls on Seth Smith. Perhaps eventually each will receive the right offer.

[harmony]

Koji Uehara is close to signing with the Cubs, according to Evan Drellich of the Boston Herald:

 

[OH FOY]

Going to miss Koji. Hope he does well for the Cubs.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

I would trade Buchholz for international signing money. I believe that can be done under the new CBA. I don't think the Red Sox can get a top prospect for Buchholz. By increasing their international spending amount, the Red Sox can hopefully sign one of the top international free agents in the coming year. They will also have the 24th pick (if not higher) in the draft. The international free agent and the first round pick would slot right behind Devers and Groome, giving the Red Sox four really good prospects (at least). Such a plan would help rebuild their decimated farm system.

[S5Dewey]

I would trade Buchholz for international signing money. I believe that can be done under the new CBA. I don't think the Red Sox can get a top prospect for Buchholz. By increasing their international spending amount, the Red Sox can hopefully sign one of the top international free agents in the coming year. They will also have the 24th pick (if not higher) in the draft. The international free agent and the first round pick would slot right behind Devers and Groome, giving the Red Sox four really good prospects (at least). Such a plan would help rebuild their decimated farm system.

 

Interesting concept. I hadn't heard of that. But aren't the Sox being penalized for a couple of years by not being allowed to pick up any international players as a penalty for some creative bookkeeping regarding signing international players?

[Fan_since_Boggs]

Interesting concept. I hadn't heard of that. But aren't the Sox being penalized for a couple of years by not being allowed to pick up any international players as a penalty for some creative bookkeeping regarding signing international players?

 

I thought the penalty was for last year and not the 2017 signing period. Though, I'm not fully certain.

[Bellhorn04]

I thought the penalty was for last year and not the 2017 signing period. Though, I'm not fully certain.

 

You'd need a team of Philadelphia lawyers and Boston accountants to figure out some of this stuff.

[harmony]

I would trade Buchholz for international signing money. I believe that can be done under the new CBA. I don't think the Red Sox can get a top prospect for Buchholz. By increasing their international spending amount, the Red Sox can hopefully sign one of the top international free agents in the coming year. They will also have the 24th pick (if not higher) in the draft. The international free agent and the first round pick would slot right behind Devers and Groome, giving the Red Sox four really good prospects (at least). Such a plan would help rebuild their decimated farm system.

Interesting idea, but Clay Buchholz and his $13.5 million salary would need to have surplus value.

 

With a Steamer's generous early projected 2017 WAR of 1.7 (since rescinded), valued this year at $13.5 million, Buchholz may not have surplus value.

[notin]

Interesting idea, but Clay Buchholz and his $13.5 million salary would need to have surplus value.

 

With a Steamer's generous early projected 2017 WAR of 1.7 (since rescinded), valued this year at $13.5 million, Buchholz may not have surplus value.

 

Not sure how many GMs use Steamer future projections, but I would guess very few. And certainly none use it the way you do.

 

Yes Buchholz is projected for 0.5 fWAR, down from 1.7. But the part you part you keep omitting is that the current projection has him making SIX STARTS. This is probably because the acquisition of Sale and Thornburg has left his role in a question mark, not because he lost any talent or health.

 

Any team acquiring Buchholz probably plans to use him for more than six starts. And would be ecstatic if he was worth 0.5 fWAR over that stretch on a consistent basis. ...

[harmony]

Not sure how many GMs use Steamer future projections, but I would guess very few. And certainly none use it the way you do.

 

Yes Buchholz is projected for 0.5 fWAR, down from 1.7. But the part you part you keep omitting is that the current projection has him making SIX STARTS. This is probably because the acquisition of Sale and Thornburg has left his role in a question mark, not because he lost any talent or health.

 

Any team acquiring Buchholz probably plans to use him for more than six starts. And would be ecstatic if he was worth 0.5 fWAR over that stretch on a consistent basis. ...

For Clay Buchholz, I've always used the early Steamer 2017 projection of 1.7 WAR in 23 starts, which is just under the average number of starts Buchholz has made over the past three years. It's the 1.7 fWAR that was valued this year at $13.5 million, giving Buchholz no surplus value with his 2017 salary of $13.5 million.

 

Each team likely has its own proprietary means of projecting value, but Steamer is one widely cited and publicly available projection. Each front office could have a higher or lower projection for Buchholz.

[moonslav59]

I'm as certain as I ever have been that Buch could be traded for a prospect without paying a dime.

 

[notin]

I'm as certain as I ever have been that Buch could be traded for a prospect without paying a dime.

 

 

A likelihood that will only increase as spring training nears and injuries slowly manifest.

 

Of course if the Sox are one of those teams hit by injury , then Clay goes nowhere...

[harmony]

A likelihood that will only increase as spring training nears and injuries slowly manifest.

 

Of course if the Sox are one of those teams hit by injury , then Clay goes nowhere...

Especially if Clay Buchholz is hit by injury:

 

https://e8k0luq9wg.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/v1/articles/16486532/boston_red_sox_clay_buchholz_i.amp