2017 Rotation

[harmony]

Ok. Now let's look at the flip side of that. Buch is also a guy who can put up a dozen W's for a team in a half season, without accumulating a lot of L's. And when he goes down those 12 W's are still there. One of the good things about Buch is that when he goes down it's because he's injured and everyone knows it. It's not like he just loses his stuff and the team keeps running him out there hoping he'll suddenly get it back. The trick is knowing when to stop using him - and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know when to do it, based on his history.

 

I agree that his value is limited. If it weren't for those horrendous stretches he's be making David Price money.... and deserving it. That's his limiting factor.

 

As we approach the 2017 season, Clay Buchholz has not won more than eight games in a season since 2013. The Red Sox rocket scientists have deployed Buchholz to the tune of a 4.60 ERA and 93 ERA+ over the last three seasons.

Edited December 9, 2016 by harmony

[OH FOY]

1) I'm not paying any of his Salary. Not with FA class that's out there.

2) I think a AL Pitcher has value, to the National League.

3) GM's will evaluate their staffs, and see with that affordable salary, what's Clay's ceiling.

4) Don't ask for the world, but just don't give him away. See what your Scouts think of the lower levels of other teams. But no Lower than A ball. Rookie Leagues mean nothing to me. I want tougher competition.

[moonslav59]

I agree that his value is limited. If it weren't for those horrendous stretches he's be making David Price money.... and deserving it.

 

Speaking of Price, he had a horrendous stretch too, so there's no sure bets anyways. Certainly Buch has a higher than wanted probability of injury or poor performance, but his upside is proven and not just a promise or dream.

 

It's the "proven" ceiling that raises his value.

 

(Note: price had an ERA over 5 after 11 games this season. We paid $31M for that!)

[moonslav59]

As we approach the 2017 season, Clay Buchholz has not won more than eight games in a season since 2013.

 

Then why do you keep proposing so many trades to get him to Seattle. You know why. I know you know, but the steamer projections and WAR numbers just don't show it.

[moonslav59]

Then why do you keep proposing so many trades to get him to Seattle. You know why. I know you know, but the steamer projections and WAR numbers just don't show it.

 

BTW, Buch has the highest WAR of any Sox pitcher from 2013-2016.

 

Fangraphs has his value at $62.5M in the last 4 years.

 

That's more than he's been paid.

[moonslav59]

If nobody will give much for Buch, he'll be great out of our pen...probably much better than Abad, who will likely be traded or cut, if Buch stays on the 25 man roster.

 

Cutting Abad's projected $2M will keep us under the limit- just barely.

[harmony]

Then why do you keep proposing so many trades to get him to Seattle. You know why. I know you know, but the steamer projections and WAR numbers just don't show it.

I proposed a one trade of outfielder/DH Seth Smith for Clay Buchholz because Seattle probably doesn't need a $7 million platoon partner (who could complement Chris Young).

 

I don't recall another trade proposal involving Buchholz (although on other boards I've discussed proposed Seattle trades for Scott Kazmir, Brandon McCarthy, Ervin Santana, Shelby Miller, Patrick Corbin, Homer Bailey, Zack Wheeler, Matt Garza, Matt Moore, Alex Cobb and even Wade Miley).

Edited December 9, 2016 by harmony

[harmony]

BTW, Buch has the highest WAR of any Sox pitcher from 2013-2016.

 

Fangraphs has his value at $62.5M in the last 4 years.

 

That's more than he's been paid.

Clay Buchholz was worth more in 2013 than he is today. According to the FanGraphs conversion, Buchholz has been valued at $41.5 million over the past three seasons, which is in line with Steamer's 2017 WAR projection of 1.7, valued this year at $13.5 million. Steamer has since revised the 2017 projection down to 0.5 in six starts but the 1.7 WAR projection is more practical in the valuation.

 

Buchholz was mentioned prominently in this Over the Monster piece today:

 

http://www.overthemonster.com/2016/12/9/13898032/red-sox-prefer-to-keep-drew-pomeranz-trade-clay-buchholz

 

... including this tweet from an MLB blogger:

 

Edited December 9, 2016 by harmony

[Jack Flap]

I proposed a one trade of outfielder/DH Seth Smith for Clay Buchholz because Seattle probably doesn't need a $6 million platoon partner (who could complement Chris Young).

 

I don't recall another trade proposal involving Buchholz (although on other boards I've discussed proposed trades for Scott Kazmir, Brandon McCarthy, Ervin Santana, Shelby Miller, Patrick Corbin, Homer Bailey, Zack Wheeler, Matt Garza, Alex Cobb and even Wade Miley).

 

You dirty two-timer.

[OH FOY]

Lets take a step back for a second. If David Price were a FA this year, would he be the #1, target for teams? Would he be as valuable as last year?

Reason I'm saying this is he will never Opt out, and are you absolutely sure he is made for Boston?

Weak FA class, I might throw his name out there. Just a thought.

Edited December 9, 2016 by OH FOY!

[Spudboy]

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.

 

I understand that Doc. I just don't see a complete dearth of talent as imminent. Of course a team would want higher draft picks. But the nead for replacing starting MLB talent has to demand top prosects for there to be a real problem if the Sox wallow in unproductive lower picks.

 

People are just hand wringing and chanting woe is me prematurely.

[Spudboy]

There is never a shortage of prospects. If you have good scouts, there should be no problem with restocking. Major league top line starting pitching is the rarest of commodities.

 

The King of Talksox has spoken.

 

So be it.

 

Long live the King.

[moonslav59]

Clay Buchholz was worth more in 2013 than he is today. According to the FanGraphs conversion, Buchholz has been valued at $41.5 million over the past three seasons, which is in line with Steamer's 2017 WAR projection of 1.7, valued this year at $13.5 million. Steamer has since revised the 2017 projection down to 0.5 in six starts but the 1.7 WAR projection is more practical in the valuation.

 

He's earned more than his pay in 3 of the last 4 seasons.

 

2013: $20.8 value but paid $7M

2014: $11.9- paid $9M

2015: $25.7- paid $11M

2016: $3.9 - paid $13M (He ended up with a 1.1 WAR over the second half of 2016, an $8.6M value.)

 

[mvp 78]

2016: $3.9 - paid $13M (He ended up with a 1.1 WAR over the second half of 2016, an $8.6M value.)

 

 

Does that mean he owes the team money for the 1st half?

[harmony]

He's earned more than his pay in 3 of the last 4 seasons.

 

2013: $20.8 value but paid $7M

2014: $11.9- paid $9M

2015: $25.7- paid $11M

2016: $3.9 - paid $13M (He ended up with a 1.1 WAR over the second half of 2016, an $8.6M value.)

 

Indeed Clay Buchholz would be more marketable if the righthander were earning his 2013, 2014 or 2015 salary.

 

But he's not ... and it makes a difference:

 

[mvp 78]

Indeed Clay Buchholz would be more marketable if the righthander were earning his 2013, 2014 or 2015 salary.

 

But he's not ... and it makes a difference:

 

 

And that's exactly why I don't think you pick up a $13.5M option just to trade a guy in the offseason and why I don't think he gets traded.

[Hugh2]

And that's exactly why I don't think you pick up a $13.5M option just to trade a guy in the offseason and why I don't think he gets traded.

 

I also doubt they knew with 100% certainty they would land Chris Sale, perhaps they would have acted differently otherwise?

 

13.5 is peanuts now-a-days. I'm not sure what Harmony meant when he said we aren't negotiating from a position of strength. We aren't negotiating from a position of weakness either!!! We don't HAVE to trade Clay Buchholz, the Red Sox aren't going to go out of business or bankrupt if they don't trade Clay and for how much in demand pitching is now I think we could easily find another team who would take a waiver one 1 year of Clay, especially if we kicked in a few million.

[moonslav59]

I also doubt they knew with 100% certainty they would land Chris Sale, perhaps they would have acted differently otherwise?

 

13.5 is peanuts now-a-days. I'm not sure what Harmony meant when he said we aren't negotiating from a position of strength. We aren't negotiating from a position of weakness either!!! We don't HAVE to trade Clay Buchholz, the Red Sox aren't going to go out of business or bankrupt if they don't trade Clay and for how much in demand pitching is now I think we could easily find another team who would take a waiver one 1 year of Clay, especially if we kicked in a few million.

 

I think we'd have given Buch the option, even if we had traded for Sale beforehand.

 

Buch can be traded for a prospect, at worst. At best, he could net us a good prospect or two, or a decent vet from another position.

 

I do think the Sale and Thornburg signings have increased the odds Buch will be traded, but I wouldn't bet on him being traded before the opening day.

 

Remember, we used our 10th starter (O'Sullivan) in early May this year, and then still needed to trade for another starter (Espi>Pom) later.

[harmony]

I also doubt they knew with 100% certainty they would land Chris Sale, perhaps they would have acted differently otherwise?

 

13.5 is peanuts now-a-days. I'm not sure what Harmony meant when he said we aren't negotiating from a position of strength. We aren't negotiating from a position of weakness either!!! We don't HAVE to trade Clay Buchholz, the Red Sox aren't going to go out of business or bankrupt if they don't trade Clay and for how much in demand pitching is now I think we could easily find another team who would take a waiver one 1 year of Clay, especially if we kicked in a few million.

The Red Sox are bumping up against the luxury tax threshold if they're not already over for the third straight year. Sanctions under the new CBA add to the 50 percent tax a potential loss of draft picks and international signing money. I suspect the Red Sox want to avoid those penalties and still have budget space to make mid-season moves.

 

http://www.telegram.com/sports/20161205/dombrowski-red-sox-will-try-to-stay-under-luxury-tax-threshold

 

Clay Buchholz currently accounts for $13.5 million of the 2017 budget although projections suggest that the 32-year-old righthander has limited, if any, surplus value with a projected 2017 WAR of 1.7*, which this year was valued at $13.5 million.

 

Bartolo Colon, with a projected 2017 WAR of 2.2, landed a one-year, $12.5 million contract. Andrew Cashner, with a projected 2017 WAR of 1.2 (and a higher WAR than Buchholz over the past four seasons), landed a one-year, $10 million contract. R.A. Dickey, with a projected 2017 WAR of 1.8, signed a one-year, $8 million contract. Neither Colon, Cashner nor Dickey cost his new team a draft pick or existing talent.

 

The Red Sox should expect little in return if a trade partner assumes the entire $13.5 million owed Buchholz in 2017. A better return may come if the Sox pay part of the salary although that contribution will count against the Red Sox luxury tax threshold.

 

We'll see whether the Red Sox avoid harsh penalties by coming in under the luxury tax threshold for the first time in three years.

 

* the WAR projections are from Steamer, which revised the Buchholz projection down to 0.5 following the Chris Sale trade. I use the original 1.7 WAR projection for this valuation.

[mvp 78]

I also doubt they knew with 100% certainty they would land Chris Sale, perhaps they would have acted differently otherwise?

 

13.5 is peanuts now-a-days. I'm not sure what Harmony meant when he said we aren't negotiating from a position of strength. We aren't negotiating from a position of weakness either!!! We don't HAVE to trade Clay Buchholz, the Red Sox aren't going to go out of business or bankrupt if they don't trade Clay and for how much in demand pitching is now I think we could easily find another team who would take a waiver one 1 year of Clay, especially if we kicked in a few million.

 

I think he's more valuable to the Sox as a #5/swing guy then as trade bait.

[moonslav59]

I think he's more valuable to the Sox as a #5/swing guy then as trade bait.

 

He might be the 7th starter after Sale, Porcello, Price, ERod, Wright and Pom. That's pretty expensive for a 7th starter or even a 6th..

Edited December 9, 2016 by moonslav59

[Kimmi]

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

 

I heard on the radio this morning that Mick Jagger became a father again at the age of 73.

 

His girlfriend is in her later 30s.

[Kimmi]

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.

 

But you have to wonder about Dombrowski's track record in terms of drafting and developing with the Tigers.

 

Their farm system has been terrible for several years running.

 

If I'm not mistaken, this past year is the first year in about 3 or 4 years that they have not been ranked last. They're up to 2nd to last.

[Kimmi]

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...

 

I just strongly disagree with the philosophy of winning now at any cost. Everyone knows that the key to building a strong franchise is building a strong farm system. Dombrowski may surprise me, but from what I've seen of him recently, building a strong farm and balancing the short term with the long term do not seem to be priorities of his.

 

I've been reading some blurbs of how the Sox and the Yankees have reversed roles, and how we have become George Steinbrenner's Yankees, to which there is a lot of truth. Think about how, as Sox fans, we always hated the way the Yankees did business. I don't like it one bit.

 

Thank goodness we do have a strong core of young homegrown players to get us through the next few years. The team will definitely be exciting to watch for the short term. Thank you Ben.

[Kimmi]

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

is 4 ERA the "norm" we should expect?

 

You crack me up.

 

I expect Price will return to his pre-2016 form.

[moonslav59]

You crack me up.

 

I expect Price will return to his pre-2016 form.

 

I expect top 5 Cy Young.

[Nick]

You crack me up.

 

I expect Price will return to his pre-2016 form.

 

Don't we have several 'farm sytem' players excelling in the majors? Beni, Bradley Jr, Betts, Xander, Swihart, Vazquez and Holt. Throw in E Rod for good measure. It's not asinine to think they are still in AAA.

 

We still have Devers, Travis, Groome, Dalbec, Chatham and Oakimey in the minors. Let's just see where we are in three years. Looks to me like we're sitting pretty good.

 

Xander/Holt 3 yrs, Betts/Bradley Jr/Vazques/Sandy Leon..4 yrs....Swihart 5..Benintendi 6...Sam Travis/Dever...7 years.....HOW MANY f***ING YEARS DO YOU WANT COVERED?

 

Price 6 yrs, E Rod 5 yrs, Wright 4 yrs, Porcello 3 yrs, Sale 3 yrs, Pomeranz/Kelly 2 yrs, Carson Smith 4 yrs, Thornburg 3 yrs, Barnes, Hembree, Elias 5 yrs...I'm a half empty type guy but our glass looks to be pretty full.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Nick

[Kimmi]

I expect top 5 Cy Young.

 

Could be. It wouldn't surprise me.

[Kimmi]

Don't we have several 'farm sytem' players excelling in the majors? Beni, Bradley Jr, Betts, Xander, Swihart, Vazquez and Holt. Throw in E Rod for good measure. It's not asinine to think they are still in AAA.

 

We still have Devers, Travis, Groome, Dalbec, Chatham and Oakimey in the minors. Let's just see where we are in three years. Looks to me like we're sitting pretty good.

 

Xander/Holt 3 yrs, Betts/Bradley Jr/Vazques/Sandy Leon..4 yrs....Swihart 5..Benintendi 6...Sam Travis/Dever...7 years.....HOW MANY f***ING YEARS DO YOU WANT COVERED?

 

Of course we have several farm system players excelling in the majors, because Theo and Ben know the importance of building a strong farm system.

 

I'm thrilled with the way our team is set up for the next few years.

 

But I'm also concerned with the direction that Dombrowski is taking this team.

 

He may very well replenish the farm system and set us up for the long haul, but until he does, I'm allowed to voice my concerns.

 

FTR, before he gutted our farm, we were set up well for the short term and the long haul.

[Slasher9]

I heard on the radio this morning that Mick Jagger became a father again at the age of 73.

 

His girlfriend is in her later 30s.

 

He is also already a great grandfather. His baby is younger than his great grandchild