2017 Rotation

Kimmi · December 9, 2016

You are a careful reader!

And I'm here. I'm always here.

cp176 · December 9, 2016

And I'm here. I'm always here.

A shadow lurker.

Bellhorn04 · December 9, 2016

That's the key. This team is absolutely better for the shorter run. If we win a title or two, it will have been worth it.

My issue is that I think the team was already set up very well for the shorter term, as well as being set up very well for the longer term. Now we're set up for the shorter term only.

John Henry has this tendency to panic and overreact, IMO.

Keep in mind that Henry isn't a young man any more. By the time the 2017 season is over he'll be 68 years old.

Eddy Ballgame · December 9, 2016

Keep in mind that Henry isn't a young man any more. By the time the 2017 season is over he'll be 68 years old.

68 is the new "52," especially when you have a wife still in her late 30s 😬

Spudboy · December 9, 2016

So the Sox have no opportunity to draft more worthwhile prospects for the next 3-5 years?

What of the boys drafted in 2016? Don't they stand a chance of turning into prospect gold?

I don't get the panic at all.

I am more concerned that the Sox have some heavy price tags ( no pun intended ) on some veteran players and continue to throw money around like a drunken sailor on leave.

The idea that this team may not be able to compete for talent or compete for a tittle is unproven and unsubstantiated.

It's just opinion.

jacksonianmarch · December 9, 2016

I'd like to go on record and request competing for tittles. I'm a big fan

jacksonianmarch · December 9, 2016

Spud, it's not that you can't draft and develop, it's the top tier talent that you won't have access to due to your perceived success. Look at your #1 and #3 prospect currently. Benintendi and Groome were drafted at a level where you won't have access to them for a few years. Top 15 guys have high hit rates, after that it drops off immensely.

cp176 · December 9, 2016

So the Sox have no opportunity to draft more worthwhile prospects for the next 3-5 years?

What of the boys drafted in 2016? Don't they stand a chance of turning into prospect gold?

I don't get the panic at all.

I am more concerned that the Sox have some heavy price tags ( no pun intended ) on some veteran players and continue to throw money around like a drunken sailor on leave.

The idea that this team may not be able to compete for talent or compete for a tittle is unproven and unsubstantiated.

It's just opinion.

I'm with you on this one as I am most of the time. the expression "gutting the farm" has been used by a number of people here. Whatever works I guess. I see it differently. We have added some players who are absolutely in their primes and we have given up some damn good prospects that would have been fun to watch develop. Without the deal for Sale, The Red Sox quite likely would have been very competitive next year. With the deal, they have established themselves as one of the team's to beat. For me, it is kind of lie the Celtics. Fun to watch, competitive for sure, but certainly not winning the big one and it won't matter how many young prospects get added. If our current moves looked to be a one year and done deal, I would be a lot more concerned. They don't so I am going to sit back and enjoy the next three years.

Jack Flap · December 9, 2016

So the Sox have no opportunity to draft more worthwhile prospects for the next 3-5 years?

What of the boys drafted in 2016? Don't they stand a chance of turning into prospect gold?

I don't get the panic at all.

I am more concerned that the Sox have some heavy price tags ( no pun intended ) on some veteran players and continue to throw money around like a drunken sailor on leave.

The idea that this team may not be able to compete for talent or compete for a tittle is unproven and unsubstantiated.

It's just opinion.

I think it's a "bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" type of thing. Sure, we'll be able to add more warm bodies to the farm system in short order, but whether any of them will ever come close to Moncada/Kopech/Espinoza/etc. stature is not something that can be counted on. A couple of weak drafts in a row (see 2012/2013) could easily set us back even further.

That's not to say I'm panicking, of course. The major league roster is quite young and should have no real holes for the next 2-3 seasons, so we'll have some time to replenish.

I don't know if I saw this suggested here or somewhere else, but if Dave's aggressive style translates into the draft and international prospect signings, that may help us restock on high-end talent quicker than normal. I like what he did by taking a chance on Groome this summer when other teams were shying away.

moonslav59 · December 9, 2016

I'm with you on this one as I am most of the time. the expression "gutting the farm" has been used by a number of people here. Whatever works I guess. I see it differently. We have added some players who are absolutely in their primes and we have given up some damn good prospects that would have been fun to watch develop. Without the deal for Sale, The Red Sox quite likely would have been very competitive next year. With the deal, they have established themselves as one of the team's to beat. For me, it is kind of lie the Celtics. Fun to watch, competitive for sure, but certainly not winning the big one and it won't matter how many young prospects get added. If our current moves looked to be a one year and done deal, I would be a lot more concerned. They don't so I am going to sit back and enjoy the next three years.

I'm happy with what we've done as well, but I have used the term "gutting", because it was appropriate. We've kept three top prospects (Beni, Devers & Groome) and maybe three tier two prospects (Travis, Dalbec & Chatham), but we've also traded over 15 prospects in the last 13 months, including 5 ranked in the top 93 nationally. I didn't use the term as a complaint but rather to counter the posters who are sugar-coating our extended future.

It is what it is: a trade off of future talent and hope for a 2-3 year window. I'm not saying we cannot rebuild our farm at all, but we're not going to be able to spend like we did to get Moncada or draft guys like Beni and Groome for a while. Yes, we've had some success in later rounds, and I hope that continues, but we gave up a lot to get where we are right now.

Sox prospects traded in the last year:

Mid-season Baseball America Rankings:

#1 Moncada

#15 Espinosa

#39 Margot

#87 Guerra (52 to start the season/right after the trade)

#93 Kopech

Highest soxprospects.com ranking:

1. Moncada

3. Espinoza

3. Margot

3. Cecchini

5. Kopech

6. Guerra

7. Basabe

10. Dubon

12. T Shaw (not a prospect when traded)

12. Wendell Rijo

13. Logan Allen

13. Pat Light

14. Edwin Escobar (claimed off waivers)

18. Basabe (the other one)

20. Carlos Asuaje

21. Victor Diaz

21. Jonathan Aro

27. Josh Pennington

30. Aaron Wilkerson

40. Jose Almonte

cp176 · December 9, 2016

I'm happy with what we've done as well, but I have used the term "gutting", because it was appropriate. We've kept three top prospects (Beni, Devers & Groome) and maybe three tier two prospects (Travis, Dalbec & Chatham), but we've also traded over 15 prospects in the last 13 months, including 5 ranked in the top 93 nationally. I didn't use the term as a complaint but rather to counter the posters who are sugar-coating our extended future.

It is what it is: a trade off of future talent and hope for a 2-3 year window. I'm not saying we cannot rebuild our farm at all, but we're not going to be able to spend like we did to get Moncada or draft guys like Beni and Groome for a while. Yes, we've had some success in later rounds, and I hope that continues, but we gave up a lot to get where we are right now.

Sox prospects traded in the last year:

Mid-season Baseball America Rankings:
#1 Moncada
#15 Espinosa
#39 Margot
#87 Guerra (52 to start the season/right after the trade)
#93 Kopech

Highest soxprospects.com ranking:
1. Moncada
3. Espinoza
3. Margot
3. Cecchini
5. Kopech
6. Guerra
7. Basabe
10. Dubon
12. T Shaw (not a prospect when traded)
12. Wendell Rijo
13. Logan Allen
13. Pat Light
14. Edwin Escobar (claimed off waivers)
18. Basabe (the other one)
20. Carlos Asuaje
21. Victor Diaz
21. Jonathan Aro
27. Josh Pennington
30. Aaron Wilkerson
40. Jose Almonte

I understand perfectly what you mean and I don't really care about the terminology either. I'm guilty of spying many things that might seem a little over the top to prove a point as well. Gutting the farm to me means that there is 0 left and that is not the case. We lost some really good prospects but we'll probably still field some pretty good minor league teams. I don't need to defend DD - I'm not even "over the top" wired about his moves to date. What I like about most of them is that he has added players - good players- who are entering their prime years. If you can move prospects for players like this, I think that is great - Pomeranz included.

southpaw777 · December 9, 2016

Our pitching staff is set for the next 3 years with 3 CY type pitchers! Thats pretty badass. Now, when we start to shed payroll over the next three years with guys like Hanley, Buch, Panda, etc..we will then sign our young nucleus.

Kimbrel has 2 years left, so the best chance window is really just 2 years not 3.

We lose $25.5M off the budget next winter (Buch, Young & Moreland) and some more the following winter, so maybe replacing Kimbrel with an acquisition is possible.

Devers > Pablo
Travis> Moreland
Swihart > Young
Owens/Johnson> Buchholz
and eventually,
Hernandez> Holt
Groome > Pom

I was referring to our rotation... thats why I mentioned CY Young. Besides Kimbrel most everyone is under control anyway

Edited December 9, 2016 by southpaw777

cp176 · December 9, 2016

I think it's a "bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" type of thing. Sure, we'll be able to add more warm bodies to the farm system in short order, but whether any of them will ever come close to Moncada/Kopech/Espinoza/etc. stature is not something that can be counted on. A couple of weak drafts in a row (see 2012/2013) could easily set us back even further.

That's not to say I'm panicking, of course. The major league roster is quite young and should have no real holes for the next 2-3 seasons, so we'll have some time to replenish.

I don't know if I saw this suggested here or somewhere else, but if Dave's aggressive style translates into the draft and international prospect signings, that may help us restock on high-end talent quicker than normal. I like what he did by taking a chance on Groome this summer when other teams were shying away.

this is a good post. Accurate too. What I would also say is that as hard as it is to say good bye (at least for now) to Espinoza, Kopech, Moncada, is that as good as they look - they are still prospects. I would love to see them become good ml performers but who knows. I hope that the tradeoffs prove to worth it. if they do, we are all in for a great future.

southpaw777 · December 9, 2016

It's not the trades that I disagree with. It's the overall philosophy of gutting the farm system for a 'win now' mentality. This team was in pretty good shape to 'win now' before Dombrowski further gutted the farm.

People seem to be forgetting that the only reason that Dombrowski is able to do what he has done is because of the strong farm system and the strong young core that were built here by Theo and Ben.

Disagree all you want, but building a strong franchise begins with a strong farm. Yes, you use that strong farm to fill in some holes. But you don't gut the farm at the expense of long term outlook of the team.

Of course Dombrowski is a good GM. I have given him credit many times where I believe it was due. However, I am very likely never going to agree with the win now at any cost philosophy, with no regard to the long term.

Ive alreay heard DD menion replenishing the farm again with a trade of a pitcher or anoher player. He identified the keepers. Were NOT going to play every prospect, so he trades them...The position players curently here are set for the next few years. Were sill in a good posiion moving forward. Im sure he farm will be built up again.

TO say hes doing it all wrong is a bit premature, no? Hes done the first part, now we wait to see how he replenishes the system...cant say hes doing it all wrong before you give him a chance to actually do it...

Hugh2 · December 9, 2016

this is a good post. Accurate too. What I would also say is that as hard as it is to say good bye (at least for now) to Espinoza, Kopech, Moncada, is that as good as they look - they are still prospects. I would love to see them become good ml performers but who knows. I hope that the tradeoffs prove to worth it. if they do, we are all in for a great future.

I agree, jackflap almost always has good points and I've used the bird in hand reference in the past as well. Hypothetically if every prospect develops the team trading for prospects should win the trade every single time. If you're trading Chris Sale for a guy who has a 50% chance of being Chris Sale then you need to trade at least two of those prospects to get him. As a finance guy, I also see a similar concept to time value of money at work here. If you were trading Chris Sale for a guy you knew with 100% certainty was going to be the next Chris Sale then all things being equal you'd still have to get a little premium on your return because you're trading now for then.

moonslav59 · December 9, 2016

I understand perfectly what you mean and I don't really care about the terminology either. I'm guilty of spying many things that might seem a little over the top to prove a point as well. Gutting the farm to me means that there is 0 left and that is not the case. We lost some really good prospects but we'll probably still field some pretty good minor league teams. I don't need to defend DD - I'm not even "over the top" wired about his moves to date. What I like about most of them is that he has added players - good players- who are entering their prime years. If you can move prospects for players like this, I think that is great - Pomeranz included.

I guess we see things pretty much the same and were only arguing semantics. Yes, gutting usually means leaving nothing or maybe 1, but I don't think it is too much of an exaggeration to see us go from the over abundance of promising prospects to just 2 left on the farm (Devers & Groome). We got rid of 18 guys that reached the top 27 in our system, 17 in the top 21 and 12 in the top 14, and kept two plus Beni in the bigs now.

I'm glad we kept the better defensive 3Bman in Devers.

I'm glad we kept Groome, but I'd have preferred Espi.

I'm super glad we kept the killer B's.

I'm on board with what DD did.

I'm just not going to sugar coat the fact that our extended future is going to suffer for what DD did over the past 13 months.

Hugh2 · December 9, 2016

I guess we see things pretty much the same and were only arguing semantics. Yes, gutting usually means leaving nothing or maybe 1, but I don't think it is too much of an exaggeration to see us go from the over abundance of promising prospects to just 2 left on the farm (Devers & Groome). We got rid of 18 guys that reached the top 27 in our system, 17 in the top 21 and 12 in the top 14, and kept two plus Beni in the bigs now.

I'm glad we kept the better defensive 3Bman in Devers.

I'm glad we kept Groome, but I'd have preferred Espi.

I'm super glad we kept the killer B's.

I'm on board with what DD did.

I'm just not going to sugar coat the fact that our extended future is going to suffer for what DD did over the past 13 months.

The only trade I really have a problem with in hindsight is the Pomeranz trade.

We traded Moncada and Kopech but the return was a strong addition which could lead to the best rotation in baseball.

The Margot, Guerra, Asuaje, Allen trade hurt a little but Margot was redundant and our outfield is fine in Betts/JBJ/Benintendi for years to come. Guerra looks to have been sold high on but Asuaje has taken a huge step forward but we gained a dominant late inning relief arm.

I don't think we gave up anything that will come back to bite us in the ass for the Thornburg trade, none of those guys have high ceilings and I think we sold high on all of them.

Yes we traded away a ton of chips but we got back so much more elite proven talent. We don't need those prospects because this team is set for the next 3 years.

The top guys we still have in our system are in the only areas that may have openings in a couple years in Devers at 3B, Sam Travis at 1B (one sooner than the other).

The Pomeranz trade still irks me, you traded away a potential ace for a guy to help you down the stretch but I was skeptical from day one he could because of his innings. Turns out I was right, not because I'm brilliant but because that seems to be a very predictive and re-occurring theme in the game of baseball.

What DD didn't do was trade away Devers, Travis, Groome, Swihart, JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, and Benintendi. Lets also not forget that by the time guys like Groome and Devers are in the majors and under team control the Sox will likely extended at least some one or two of Bogaerts, Betts, JBJ. So this "window" we talk about might be closer to 5-6 years than the 3 we are saying now.

southpaw777 · December 9, 2016

I guess we see things pretty much the same and were only arguing semantics. Yes, gutting usually means leaving nothing or maybe 1, but I don't think it is too much of an exaggeration to see us go from the over abundance of promising prospects to just 2 left on the farm (Devers & Groome). We got rid of 18 guys that reached the top 27 in our system, 17 in the top 21 and 12 in the top 14, and kept two plus Beni in the bigs now.

I'm glad we kept the better defensive 3Bman in Devers.

I'm glad we kept Groome, but I'd have preferred Espi.

I'm super glad we kept the killer B's.

I'm on board with what DD did.

I'm just not going to sugar coat the fact that our extended future is going to suffer for what DD did over the past 13 months.

kopech was the one that hurt me. I saw him as our Noah Syndergaad type. But we got a proven CY type pitcher. Im ok with Espinoza being traded. If he was King Felix at 18 then maybe id be more bothered by it.

I really Like Dalbec...ifhe can improve the hit tool a little, hes A 30+ hr at the hot corner...between him, Devers and Travis, the IF corners are covered...

Slasher9 · December 9, 2016

so...the real question for me now is....which David Price do we get in 2017?

is 4 ERA the "norm" we should expect?

Hugh2 · December 9, 2016

kopech was the one that hurt me. I saw him as our Noah Syndergaad type. But we got a proven CY type pitcher. Im ok with Espinoza being traded. If he was King Felix at 18 then maybe id be more bothered by it.
I really Like Dalbec...ifhe can improve the hit tool a little, hes A 30+ hr at the hot corner...between him, Devers and Travis, the IF corners are covered...

Kopech could come back to bite us in the ass, but theres also a good chance he winds up in the bullpen. He'll be good there, but I think it's more probable that he becomes one of the best closers in baseball than an ACE.

I think he's more likely to become the next chapman than the next Syndergaad.

I still hate the Pomeranz trade. Sale is gone in 3 years, so is Porcello, and Price could opt out. Pomeranz didn't help us last year down the stretch and we may have bought high on him. He's still yet to have ever pitch a full year healthy in a MLB rotation. Seeing how he didn't help us, and Sale makes him expendable now I really wish we didn't give up one of the best young pitching prospects in the game for him.

moonslav59 · December 9, 2016

The only trade I really have a problem with in hindsight is the Pomeranz trade.

Great post cp. I can understand DD's thinking at the time. We needed a SP'er, and he had no idea Sale would fall in his lap the following winter.

I hated the trade day one and still do.

We traded Moncada and Kopech but the return was a strong addition which could lead to the best rotation in baseball.

Agreed. Sale is a once in a generation opportunity. DD did what he should have done. Great move!

The Margot, Guerra, Asuaje, Allen trade hurt a little but Margot was redundant and our outfield is fine in Betts/JBJ/Benintendi for years to come. Guerra looks to have been sold high on but Asuaje has taken a huge step forward but we gained a dominant late inning relief arm.

My biggest beef was the combination of giving top prospects PLUS paying near FA money. Now, the money for a closer has gone through the roof, so that aspect is lessened, but still, there were other pen options at the time and a year or two earlier (not DD's fault there).

I don't think we gave up anything that will come back to bite us in the ass for the Thornburg trade, none of those guys have high ceilings and I think we sold high on all of them.

One of those guys could surprise, but it was a great deal not having to give up a top 5 or 6 prospect to get a true set-up man.

Yes we traded away a ton of chips but we got back so much more elite proven talent. We don't need those prospects because this team is set for the next 3 years.

We don't need prospects for 3 years, except for maybe Devers to 3B, but we have little long away top prospects to fill the gaps 4-8 years from now. It's hard to start building a farm now that will produce a top player in 3-4 years, when you're drafting low and restricted from signing international players.

The top guys we still have in our system are in the only areas that may have openings in a couple years in Devers at 3B, Sam Travis at 1B (one sooner than the other).

Yes, and Groome to replace Pom or Porcello.

The Pomeranz trade still irks me, you traded away a potential ace for a guy to help you down the stretch but I was skeptical from day one he could because of his innings. Turns out I was right, not because I'm brilliant but because that seems to be a very predictive and re-occurring theme in the game of baseball.

I hate to use the word Pedro, but I don't think there's been a pitcher his age ranked so highly. The sky is the limit with him. That was the worst trade of all.

What DD didn't do was trade away Devers, Travis, Groome, Swihart, JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, and Benintendi. Lets also not forget that by the time guys like Groome and Devers are in the majors and under team control the Sox will likely extended at least some one or two of Bogaerts, Betts, JBJ. So this "window" we talk about might be closer to 5-6 years than the 3 we are saying now.

True, but part of the window might close in 2 years, when we lose Pom, Kimbrel & Kelly

Emp9 · December 9, 2016

I still consider Beni, Swihart and Vazquez prospects in most ways. Add them to Groome and Devers and we're not as bad off as it seems. What it will really come down to is when DD decides certain players nearing free agency are worth keeping or worth trading a year or two early to get value back. We just have to wait and see.

mvp 78 · December 9, 2016

I'm just not going to sugar coat the fact that our extended future is going to suffer for what DD did over the past 13 months.

Why? If he can stay out of Luxury Tax Hell and add a few pieces here and there, he'll be just fine. It's not like the Sox don't have the financial backing to stay competitive year in and year out.

mvp 78 · December 9, 2016

so...the real question for me now is....which David Price do we get in 2017?
is 4 ERA the "norm" we should expect?

I think he has a bounce back year. I don't expect him to with the CY, but he should be better than last year. Having Sale at the top of the rotation will certainly help. I just hope Sale can get on the same page as Leon or CV early in the season.

Hugh2 · December 9, 2016

The only trade I really have a problem with in hindsight is the Pomeranz trade.

Great post cp. I can understand DD's thinking at the time. We needed a SP'er, and he had no idea Sale would fall in his lap the following winter.

I hated the trade day one and still do.

We traded Moncada and Kopech but the return was a strong addition which could lead to the best rotation in baseball.

Agreed. Sale is a once in a generation opportunity. DD did what he should have done. Great move!

The Margot, Guerra, Asuaje, Allen trade hurt a little but Margot was redundant and our outfield is fine in Betts/JBJ/Benintendi for years to come. Guerra looks to have been sold high on but Asuaje has taken a huge step forward but we gained a dominant late inning relief arm.

My biggest beef was the combination of giving top prospects PLUS paying near FA money. Now, the money for a closer has gone through the roof, so that aspect is lessened, but still, there were other pen options at the time and a year or two earlier (not DD's fault there).

I don't think we gave up anything that will come back to bite us in the ass for the Thornburg trade, none of those guys have high ceilings and I think we sold high on all of them.

One of those guys could surprise, but it was a great deal not having to give up a top 5 or 6 prospect to get a true set-up man.

Yes we traded away a ton of chips but we got back so much more elite proven talent. We don't need those prospects because this team is set for the next 3 years.

We don't need prospects for 3 years, except for maybe Devers to 3B, but we have little long away top prospects to fill the gaps 4-8 years from now. It's hard to start building a farm now that will produce a top player in 3-4 years, when you're drafting low and restricted from signing international players.

The top guys we still have in our system are in the only areas that may have openings in a couple years in Devers at 3B, Sam Travis at 1B (one sooner than the other).

Yes, and Groome to replace Pom or Porcello.

The Pomeranz trade still irks me, you traded away a potential ace for a guy to help you down the stretch but I was skeptical from day one he could because of his innings. Turns out I was right, not because I'm brilliant but because that seems to be a very predictive and re-occurring theme in the game of baseball.

I hate to use the word Pedro, but I don't think there's been a pitcher his age ranked so highly. The sky is the limit with him. That was the worst trade of all.

What DD didn't do was trade away Devers, Travis, Groome, Swihart, JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, and Benintendi. Lets also not forget that by the time guys like Groome and Devers are in the majors and under team control the Sox will likely extended at least some one or two of Bogaerts, Betts, JBJ. So this "window" we talk about might be closer to 5-6 years than the 3 we are saying now.

True, but part of the window might close in 2 years, when we lose Pom, Kimbrel & Kelly

I don't see losing Pom Kimbrel and kelly as a big deal. Pom could arguably be the odd man out of the rotation this year if Erod takes a step forward. Kelly has never been of value to this team so if he is good in the pen going forward GREAT, and if anything we could probably trade him to restock the farm. Kimbrel could sting a little bit but this team is loading up arms.

You lose guys every year, every team losses guys every year so I don't see losing those guys as a huge deal and if anything we could have something better replacing them.

Orange Juiced · December 9, 2016

Last year the Red Sox' top two starting pitchers performed this way:

(A) 22-4, 3.15 era, 145 era+

( 17-9, 3.99 era, 114 era+

I just thought that (A) would be Price and ( would be Porcello. Ha!

As for Pomeranz, he's been a very good major league pitcher for the past 3 seasons:

2014: 2.35 era, 1.12 whip, 8.3 k/9

2015: 3.66 era, 1.19 whip, 8.6 k/9

2016: 3.32 era, 1.18 whip, 9.8 k/9

It's just that 2014 and 2015 were out of the bullpen. I think he'll be fine, and will be one of the best 4th or 5th starters in all of baseball.

I didn't like the Pomeranz deal when it happened, but he's a solid pitcher.

Hugh2 · December 9, 2016

Why? If he can stay out of Luxury Tax Hell and add a few pieces here and there, he'll be just fine. It's not like the Sox don't have the financial backing to stay competitive year in and year out.

Exactly, and some of these guys will be extended as well.

Slasher9 · December 9, 2016

I think he has a bounce back year. I don't expect him to with the CY, but he should be better than last year.

This is my expectation (hope) as well.

moonslav59 · December 9, 2016

Why? If he can stay out of Luxury Tax Hell and add a few pieces here and there, he'll be just fine. It's not like the Sox don't have the financial backing to stay competitive year in and year out.

It's almost impossible to subtract 15 promising prospects and not suffer to some degree.

I know we will not suck. We can spend our way out of some of the holes in our future rosters, but having cost-controlled players like Betts, Bogey, JBJ, Swi/Vaz, Thornburg, Ross, Barnes, etc... really opens the door for big signings.

I don't see us having a core of young players like this in 4-8 years. We might have Devers, Groome and a couple surprises, but nothing like this.

It's going to be different in 4 years. We will suffer some effects from this trade in 4 years. It's my opinion, but I have no doubts.

moonslav59 · December 9, 2016

Last year the Red Sox' top two starting pitchers performed this way:

(A) 22-4, 3.15 era, 145 era+
( 17-9, 3.99 era, 114 era+

I just thought that (A) would be Price and ( would be Porcello. Ha!

As for Pomeranz, he's been a very good major league pitcher for the past 3 seasons:

2014: 2.35 era, 1.12 whip, 8.3 k/9
2015: 3.66 era, 1.19 whip, 8.6 k/9
2016: 3.32 era, 1.18 whip, 9.8 k/9

It's just that 2014 and 2015 were out of the bullpen. I think he'll be fine, and will be one of the best 4th or 5th starters in all of baseball.

I didn't like the Pomeranz deal when it happened, but he's a solid pitcher.

Yes, he is a solid pitcher. He could be a big part of our success in the next 2 years. We may end up extending him for further successes.

Sign In

2017 Rotation

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blog Entries

Recent Status Updates