Buchholz Traded to the Phillies

[Eddy Ballgame]

I guess I'm the only one here who doesn't like this deal.

 

First of all, I wanted him around for rotation depth. As has been pointed out, we had O'Sullivan making starts for us last year and IMO that's not acceptable. I don't want to jinx anyone but we now have a starting pitcher whose motion implies that he may have elbow trouble at some time and it would be nice to have someone around with ace stuff in case it happens.

 

Second, I don't think we got nearly enough for him. If they were Hell-bent on trading him that's fine. I understand their desire to get under the LT level so they can exceed it next year if necessary. However, Buch is still a good pitcher, albeit unreliable for more than half a season. In what world is that not worth more than a 26 year old High-A 2B?

I just cannot believe that there wouldn't be a club that will figure out in February, March, or April that they need a pitcher like Buch and would be willing to give up someone who would at least make us believe that we're rebuilding our farm.

 

But.... I've been the lone voice in the wilderness before....

 

Rotation depth is certainly important for every team, except for maybe the 2004 Red Sox, but Buchholz would've definitely asked to be traded if he didn't make the rotation. As many have mentioned, Buchholz became expendable with the Sale trade & the savings against the luxury tax gives them some much needed flexibility.

[S5Dewey]

Apparently in the same world you're living in. I don't think the Phillies were the only organization that the Sox discussed Clay with. This was probably the best deal they could get without eating money.

 

You may be right, but I don't see how waiting a couple of months could have garnered us any less for him. We already got essentially nothing.

[mvp 78]

The stories that I read indicated that DD was pushng Buch, but the other GMs were interested in Pom. Last year, there were also no takers for Buch. The Mariners declined on Buch and went for Miley.

 

Yup, I think it's obvious at this point that he had more value to the Sox than to other organizations.

[mvp 78]

You may be right, but I don't see how waiting a couple of months could have garnered us any less for him. We already got essentially nothing.

 

Well, he could get injured by having a baby sleep on him again... Might as well sell him before he's out for the year.

[moonslav59]

I guess I'm the only one here who doesn't like this deal.

 

First of all, I wanted him around for rotation depth. As has been pointed out, we had O'Sullivan making starts for us last year and IMO that's not acceptable. I don't want to jinx anyone but we now have a starting pitcher whose motion implies that he may have elbow trouble at some time and it would be nice to have someone around with ace stuff in case it happens.

 

Second, I don't think we got nearly enough for him. If they were Hell-bent on trading him that's fine. I understand their desire to get under the LT level so they can exceed it next year if necessary. However, Buch is still a good pitcher, albeit unreliable for more than half a season. In what world is that not worth more than a 26 year old High-A 2B?

I just cannot believe that there wouldn't be a club that will figure out in February, March, or April that they need a pitcher like Buch and would be willing to give up someone who would at least make us believe that we're rebuilding our farm.

 

But.... I've been the lone voice in the wilderness before....

 

Think of it this way; let's say we get to June or July and realize we need a starter. We can trade for a guy making $20M annually (someone else's salary dump), because we only pay the pro-rated amount. If we trade at the half way point, we pay $10M and are still under the limit. If we wait until the deadline, we'll pay $7.3M.

 

We could even end up trading for Buch in June or July!

 

I've brought up the point about using our 10th starter (O'Sullivan) for four starts in early May, but when you look at all the question marks with SP'ers we had starting the season and compare it to this year, I actually feel better about our depth than this year.

 

Even Porcello was a question mark this year in March--not as a 4th or 5th starter, but you get my point.

 

Kelly was our 5th starter based on 8 good starts to end the 2015 season after sucking the rest of it.

 

Buch was our 4th starter, and we all know how dependable he has been.

 

ERod was our 3rd starter. We all had great hopes for him, but there was always doubt.

 

Wright was our 6th starter and did better than most expected.

 

Owens was really disappointing.

 

Johnson got the jitters.

 

Elias was supposed to be a good starter for depth but was given just one chance to start, and that was way after O'Sullivan.

 

O'Sullivan probably started as the 10th on the depth chart.

 

Of course I'm concerned about our starter depth, but it's not like Buch has been some sort of rock we could have counted on to be there, if needed.

 

I see our opening day starters expectations as compared to this year's opening day expectations like this:

 

1 Sale>Price

2 Porcello > Porcello

3 Price > Erod

4 ERod > Buch

5 Pom > Kelly

6 Wright > Wright

7 Owens

8 Johnson

9 Elias

10 Kelly/Workman = O'Sullivan

 

Yes, 7-10 appears worse, but the 1-6 look so much better this year than last, that I feel it will more than make up the difference.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Well, he could get injured by having a baby sleep on him again... Might as well sell him before he's out for the year.

 

Yep. And the Phillies may have been the only real suitor. They might have gone in another direction rather than wait around.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Yep. And the Phillies may have been the only real suitor. They might have gone in another direction rather than wait around.

 

I think that they exercised the Buchholz option as insurance against not being able to upgrade the rotation through a trade, assuming that they'd be able to move him if they were able to upgrade.

Once the Sale trade happened, Buchholz' salary relief became more valuable than he did. As many have mentioned, a lot of things could've happened had they waited.

[moonslav59]

I think that they exercised the Buchholz option as insurance against not being able to upgrade the rotation through a trade, assuming that they'd be able to move him if they were able to upgrade.

Once the Sale trade happened, Buchholz' salary relief became more valuable than he did. As many have mentioned, a lot of things could've happened had they waited.

 

Exactly. Imagine us holding onto Buch, him getting hurt or sucking (high probability) and us not resetting the tax.

 

We basically trade Buch, Moncada, Kopech, Basabe and Diaz for Sale and $7M in luxury tax salary relief....enough to avoid the tax and leave us some flex space.

[Slasher9]

Is it still too late to trade Brandon Workman and Mookie Betts for Matt Kemp???

 

lol. +200 points hugh.

[Station 13]

So they took the risk picking up his option only to dump him for a non prospect. Lucky somebody even wants to take that on.

[Bellhorn04]

So they took the risk picking up his option only to dump him for a non prospect. Lucky somebody even wants to take that on.

 

It wasn't a big risk. The worst case scenario was eating a few million to trade him.

[mvp 78]

It wasn't a big risk. The worst case scenario was eating a few million to trade him.

 

pocket change for JH.

[Slasher9]

No one cares about BDC.

 

i do.

[Slasher9]

I guess I'm the only one here who doesn't like this deal.

 

First of all, I wanted him around for rotation depth. As has been pointed out, we had O'Sullivan making starts for us last year and IMO that's not acceptable. I don't want to jinx anyone but we now have a starting pitcher whose motion implies that he may have elbow trouble at some time and it would be nice to have someone around with ace stuff in case it happens.

 

Second, I don't think we got nearly enough for him. If they were Hell-bent on trading him that's fine. I understand their desire to get under the LT level so they can exceed it next year if necessary. However, Buch is still a good pitcher, albeit unreliable for more than half a season. In what world is that not worth more than a 26 year old High-A 2B?

I just cannot believe that there wouldn't be a club that will figure out in February, March, or April that they need a pitcher like Buch and would be willing to give up someone who would at least make us believe that we're rebuilding our farm.

 

But.... I've been the lone voice in the wilderness before....

 

you are not alone. DD with yet another TERRIBLE move

[Oscars]

Buch was likely our 7th rated starter, and at 13.5mill he was expendable.

Given the weak return, that tells you what the market though of Buch, as it's a given that DD would have engaged with the entire trade market.

The timing may be related to another player being signed.

[mvp 78]

Buch was likely our 7th rated starter, and at 13.5mill he was expendable.

Given the weak return, that tells you what the market though of Buch, as it's a given that DD would have engaged with the entire trade market.

The timing may be related to another player being signed.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017-mlb-free-agent-tracker/positions-p

 

Greg Holland?

[Eddy Ballgame]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017-mlb-free-agent-tracker/positions-p

 

Greg Holland?

 

You'd have to think that Greg Holland could find some better opportunities than Boston to rebuild his value, but he would be worth the risk if that's not the case.

[cp176]

For Buch, I think that this will be a good move. A fresh start in the National League. I really think that he had reached a point where it was in everybody's best interests for him to move on. When good Buch is on the mound though we are going to miss him. This one was done for $ but I still don't think the dealing is done.

[Eddy Ballgame]

For Buch, I think that this will be a good move. A fresh start in the National League. I really think that he had reached a point where it was in everybody's best interests for him to move on. When good Buch is on the mound though we are going to miss him. This one was done for $ but I still don't think the dealing is done.

 

Just a guess, but I think that they'd rather save whatever wiggle room that they have with the luxury tax for whatever needs might arise at the deadline. They are likely going to have some tough calls with the roster as it is.

[Kimmi]

I guess I'm the only one here who doesn't like this deal.

 

First of all, I wanted him around for rotation depth. As has been pointed out, we had O'Sullivan making starts for us last year and IMO that's not acceptable. I don't want to jinx anyone but we now have a starting pitcher whose motion implies that he may have elbow trouble at some time and it would be nice to have someone around with ace stuff in case it happens.

 

Second, I don't think we got nearly enough for him. If they were Hell-bent on trading him that's fine. I understand their desire to get under the LT level so they can exceed it next year if necessary. However, Buch is still a good pitcher, albeit unreliable for more than half a season. In what world is that not worth more than a 26 year old High-A 2B?

I just cannot believe that there wouldn't be a club that will figure out in February, March, or April that they need a pitcher like Buch and would be willing to give up someone who would at least make us believe that we're rebuilding our farm.

 

But.... I've been the lone voice in the wilderness before....

 

I posted before the Sale trade that my biggest concern with our team was the starting pitching depth. The acquisition of Sale addressed that concern. Trading Buchholz reopens that concern, but to a lesser extent than when we had Buchholz but not Sale.

 

I would have preferred to keep Buchholz, but I understand the need to reset the luxury tax penalty. This trade also helps sort out some of the roster congestion. As I said before, though, I hope this doesn't come back to bite us.

 

Wouldn't it be ironic if we end up really needing a starting pitcher and the Phillies traded Buchholz back to us at the deadline?

[Hugh2]

Wouldn't it be ironic if we end up really needing a starting pitcher and the Phillies traded Buchholz back to us at the deadline?

 

Oh dear god please no! my brain hurts! I don't even want to think about that. : )

[Kimmi]

Oh dear god please no! my brain hurts! I don't even want to think about that. : )

 

LOL I keep reading that if Buchholz is pitching well, the Phillies could trade him at the deadline for a much better haul than what they gave up. The Sox trading back for him is the first thing that came to mind.

[S5Dewey]

LOL I keep reading that if Buchholz is pitching well, the Phillies could trade him at the deadline for a much better haul than what they gave up. The Sox trading back for him is the first thing that came to mind.

 

I thought of that too. I'll bet we don't get him back for a 26 year old High-A 2B.

[Bellhorn04]

It'll be no surprise if the bastard has one of his best seasons this year.

[S5Dewey]

It'll be no surprise if the bastard has one of his best seasons this year.

 

If that happens you'll never head the end of it from me... and possibly Kimmie!

[moonslav59]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017-mlb-free-agent-tracker/positions-p

 

Greg Holland?

 

The Sox showed interest in him earlier, but I haven't heard much after that. If we could trade Abad and save his estimated $2M arb, maybe Holland would be a nice addition.

 

I kind of like our pen depth better than SP'er depth, so maybe finding a decent swingman on the cheap might work better.

[Bellhorn04]

If that happens you'll never head the end of it from me... and possibly Kimmie!

 

LOL this is going to be one interesting season.

[OH FOY]

I still like Holland. Reason BP's get tired, he should be ready just when this happens.

[notin]

I posted before the Sale trade that my biggest concern with our team was the starting pitching depth. The acquisition of Sale addressed that concern. Trading Buchholz reopens that concern, but to a lesser extent than when we had Buchholz but not Sale.

 

I would have preferred to keep Buchholz, but I understand the need to reset the luxury tax penalty. This trade also helps sort out some of the roster congestion. As I said before, though, I hope this doesn't come back to bite us.

 

Wouldn't it be ironic if we end up really needing a starting pitcher and the Phillies traded Buchholz back to us at the deadline?

 

It would be especially funny if Josh Tobias found his way on to the Sox "untouchable" list by then too...

[moonslav59]

I still like Holland. Reason BP's get tired, he should be ready just when this happens.

 

I like him too, but at what cost?