Buchholz Traded to the Phillies

[harmony]

As a side note, I've had brief discussions on a Phillies forum about the current trade value of Clay Buchholz. I initiated the discussion after a Philadelphia blogger mentioned Seattle outfielder Seth Smith as a potential trade target:

 

http://www.thegoodphight.com/2016/12/23/14060030/are-there-any-more-ways-to-improve-2017-phillies-roster

 

I initially maintained that Josh Tobias defined the current trade value of Buchholz. An insightful poster, however, noted that the Phillies would probably trade Buchholz only for a far more highly regarded prospect. The Phillies, unlike the Red Sox, are in a position to pay much of the Buchholz salary in a trade because the Phils are not up against the luxury tax threshold. Buchholz at a 2017 cost of $5 million is worth far more than Buchholz at his entire 2017 salary of $13.5 million.

 

https://www.philliesphans.com/t/phillies-2016-2017-offseason-discussion/43074/875

 

I again was educated by venturing on to the message board of another MLB club.

[moonslav59]

As a side note, I've had brief discussions on a Phillies forum about the current trade value of Clay Buchholz. I initiated the discussion after a Philadelphia blogger mentioned Seattle outfielder Seth Smith as a potential trade target:

 

http://www.thegoodphight.com/2016/12/23/14060030/are-there-any-more-ways-to-improve-2017-phillies-roster

 

I initially maintained that Josh Tobias defined the current trade value of Buchholz. An insightful poster, however, noted that the Phillies would probably trade Buchholz only for a far more highly regarded prospect. The Phillies, unlike the Red Sox, are in a position to pay much of the Buchholz salary in a trade because the Phils are not up against the luxury tax threshold. Buchholz at a 2017 cost of $5 million is worth far more than Buchholz at his entire 2017 salary of $13.5 million.

 

https://www.philliesphans.com/t/phillies-2016-2017-offseason-discussion/43074/875

 

I again was educated by venturing on to the message board of another MLB club.

 

So, maybe we should trade Henry Owens for Buchholz as Philly pays $10M of the $13.5 owed.

 

Just kiddin'!

[Kimmi]

Say Pom or Wright gets hurt, we'll still have a great 4 starters and a replacement level 5th starter. I'm not sure I'd call that "serious trouble", but it is a concern.

 

We still won the division last year (yes, we can now say last year!) with this from some of our starters:

 

IP Pitcher W-L ERA

117 Buchholz 6-8 5.01

107 Rodriguez 3-7 4.71

67.1 Pomeranz 3-5 4.68

22.1 Joe Kelly 2-0 8.46

22.0 H Owens 0-2 6.95

20.1 O'Sullivan 2-0 6.64

4.0 R. Elias 0-1 15.75

 

Wright, who was our 6th starter last year is now our 6th starter (maybe 5th depending on ERod's knee), so adding a full year and hopefully a better one by Pomeranz and Wright as the number 5 still looks so much better than 2016 that maybe having a 5.50 ERS guy as our 5th starter would not be such a horrible thing.

 

Once we make the playoffs, our 5th starter is a non issue.

 

OK, 'serious trouble' may be a bit of an exaggeration, but I think my point stands. If ERod is out for any length of time, starting pitching depth will be a big concern.

[moonslav59]

OK, 'serious trouble' may be a bit of an exaggeration, but I think my point stands. If ERod is out for any length of time, starting pitching depth will be a big concern.

 

Yes, even if ERod starts out healthy, I'd say our starter depth is a big concern.

 

I do think we can still make the playoffs with Owens, Johnson, Workman and Elias getting 35 starts.

[jacksonianmarch]

You've got Sale, Price, Porcello, ERod, Wright and Pomeranz. You don't need a seventh starter of note. A AAAA guy will suffice for now

[harmony]

So, maybe we should trade Henry Owens for Buchholz as Philly pays $10M of the $13.5 owed.

 

Just kiddin'!

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/hot-stove-digest-could-the-red-sox-consider-reacquiring-clay-buchholz-012530953.html

 

http://calltothepen.com/2017/01/01/boston-red-sox-clay-buchholz-return/

 

http://insider.espn.com/blog/buster-olney/insider/post?id=15606

Edited January 2, 2017 by harmony

[georom4]

figured you would be popping champagne and going out for steak tonight....

 

I'm not because he was able to string everyone along right until the end. Why was he starting a playoff game at all when we had Drew/Wright available down 2-0? What a waste of time, talent, and money.

[moonslav59]

I'm not because he was able to string everyone along right until the end. Why was he starting a playoff game at all when we had Drew/Wright available down 2-0? What a waste of time, talent, and money.

 

Wright and Pom were both recovering from injuries.

 

We traded Buch to avoid wasting time and money on an unreliable, yet highly talented, pitcher.

[Fisk]

Bucholtz has a partial tear of the right flexor pronator mass( whatever that is ) and is visiting Dr. Andrews. Not a shock.

[Jack Flap]

Clearly Dombrowski made the right call in shedding Buch's salary when an opportunity presented himself...I know some questioned what this trade would do to our starting depth, but it wouldn't do us any good to be over the luxury tax threshold because Clay and his $13.5 million are sitting on the 60-day DL.

[Bellhorn04]

I take no pleasure in Buch getting hurt, but we were fortunate we moved him.

[cp176]

Clearly Dombrowski made the right call in shedding Buch's salary when an opportunity presented himself...I know some questioned what this trade would do to our starting depth, but it wouldn't do us any good to be over the luxury tax threshold because Clay and his $13.5 million are sitting on the 60-day DL.

 

Like so many moves that GM's make, they get judged after the fact. It does look like he used some commons sense and played the odds based on buck's history. If Clay was a healthy Clay pitching the way that he sometimes can, it would be a different story. I was in favor of the move because at some point I think you just have to cut your losses and move on.

[moonslav59]

Like so many moves that GM's make, they get judged after the fact. It does look like he used some commons sense and played the odds based on buck's history. If Clay was a healthy Clay pitching the way that he sometimes can, it would be a different story. I was in favor of the move because at some point I think you just have to cut your losses and move on.

 

Exactly.

 

Like it or not, GMs are graded in hindsight, like they were supposed to know a player was going to get hurt or suddenly and sharply decline. There are cases where warning signs were abundant, and a GM took a gamble anyway, maybe because it was his best or only option available at the time.

 

On Buch, I was one of his biggest defenders over the years, but I agreed that it was time to cut our losses and move on from all of the uncertainty that came with his health status. I will say that if he was only making $2-3M, I'd have wanted to keep him. The money saved should help us immensely this summer.

[a700hitter]

Luckily, we dumped him. He disappointed more often than not when we depended upon him.

[Jack Flap]

Like so many moves that GM's make, they get judged after the fact. It does look like he used some commons sense and played the odds based on buck's history. If Clay was a healthy Clay pitching the way that he sometimes can, it would be a different story. I was in favor of the move because at some point I think you just have to cut your losses and move on.

 

I thought it made sense at the time, too, for what it's worth. Of course, the risk was there that he could go on one of his crazy hot streaks and we'd all end up kicking ourselves for a little while, but it doesn't appear that's going to be the case any time soon.

[Nick]

We all want 'protection' but at what price?

 

Only Sox fans would want the team to spend $13.5M for #7 starter.

[Kimmi]

Clearly Dombrowski made the right call in shedding Buch's salary when an opportunity presented himself...I know some questioned what this trade would do to our starting depth, but it wouldn't do us any good to be over the luxury tax threshold because Clay and his $13.5 million are sitting on the 60-day DL.

 

I completely understand the desire to get under the luxury cap, but starting pitching depth was and still is a concern for me. I was not as in favor of the trade as most people here were. In hindsight, Dombrowski made the right call.

[Kimmi]

We all want 'protection' but at what price?

 

Only Sox fans would want the team to spend $13.5M for #7 starter.

 

Except that had he stayed (and not gotten injured), there's a very real chance that he could have been the #4 starter.

[Kimmi]

Nice avatar BTW Nick.

 

The cliff edge is coming!

[moonslav59]

We all want 'protection' but at what price?

 

Only Sox fans would want the team to spend $13.5M for #7 starter.

 

I'm glad we were able to trade him without having to pay a penny.

 

Remember, his buy out was $500K, so his "real cost" was about $13M.

[moonslav59]

I completely understand the desire to get under the luxury cap, but starting pitching depth was and still is a concern for me. I was not as in favor of the trade as most people here were. In hindsight, Dombrowski made the right call.

 

In foresight too.

 

DD knew we could always at least trade scraps for a salary dump pitcher mid season and do as good as Buch projected to do.

 

If we can wait until July 31st, we only pay 1/3 of a pitcher's yearly salary, so Buch's $13.5M is really like a third of two pitchers making $20M each!!! Or 3 pitchers making $13.5M each.

 

It's hard to imagine us doing worse than even a healthy Buch would have done.

[Kimmi]

In foresight too.

 

DD knew we could always at least trade scraps for a salary dump pitcher mid season and do as good as Buch projected to do.

 

If we can wait until July 31st, we only pay 1/3 of a pitcher's yearly salary, so Buch's $13.5M is really like a third of two pitchers making $20M each!!! Or 3 pitchers making $13.5M each.

 

It's hard to imagine us doing worse than even a healthy Buch would have done.

 

In foresight, I can't say that trading Buccholz was a bad call, but I also can't that it was the right call.

 

Buch always has the chance to be a #1 type pitcher.

 

Again, I get the whole luxury tax thing. My preference would have been to keep Buccholz, but I understand that resetting the tax penalty is significant.

[Nick]

Nice avatar BTW Nick.

 

The cliff edge is coming!

 

I did it just for you......all is well.....I love the back and forth here.....I guess I need to get a life!!!!!

[Jack Flap]

I completely understand the desire to get under the luxury cap, but starting pitching depth was and still is a concern for me. I was not as in favor of the trade as most people here were. In hindsight, Dombrowski made the right call.

 

And rightly so...I share those concerns as well, as do most of us, I think. However, Buchholz is hardly ideal depth/protection for the rotation as he is inconsistent, frequently injured, and (for what he usually provides) expensive. We should be able to do better.

[Nick]

One last beat down on a dead horse.

 

I like to praise or critique trades/signings at the time of the transaction. It's always easy to look back and support your decision based on what transpires afterwards.

 

Clay B.....even if Clay was healthy and pitching well for the Phillies, I still would think the decision to trade him was the right one. Trade has to be fair for both sides. Phillies got a pitcher with ton of upside and Sox got rid of $13.5M contract.

 

Clay had two things going against him and one was out of his control. His $13.5M price did him no favors for one but he mainly got caught up in Sox wanting to go below the luxury tax limit. Now front office can say whatever it wants, but I think THAT had lot to do with it. Had our payroll sat at $150M, I'd say keep him. No sweat. Sox would have kept him too.

 

Price....There was simply not much available as far as top of the line pitching was concerned. Again, it was something DD had to do. Did we overpay? Perhaps but not knowing what the going price was DD was not going to take any chances and get beaten out by another offer. It's unfortunate $31M per year sticks out like a sore thumb but it is what it is. No chance we win the division without him last year. Can we have it done cheaper? Perhaps but it's all Monday am quarterbacking to me.

 

Kimbrel....this one hurts but it was our inability to have a healthy closer at the time that forced DD to make this move. Not only did it take Kimbrel, but we also had to trade for Ziegler and convert Kelly in a relief role to accomplish what we did. With emergence of some arms in the pen, it's pretty certain we will not resign him after 2018. As Moon said, was it worth paying FA price AND prospects for his 3 years of service? I'd say yes only if we win the world series. BUT again, this was a move DD thought he had to make in order for us to become a contender for 2016. He was right, even though we may have overpaid.

 

Pomeranz....again, inconsistencies from Kelly, E Rod and Clay B forced this trade. I still think it was the correct move. The possibility exists for Espinoza to become a stud pitcher and Pomeranz to be mediocre pitcher for 2 1/2 years of service. Did we overpay? Probably. But DD was not going to sit idle and watch the team implode. As it turned out, Pom did not help the Sox but again that's after the fact.

 

Sale.....no brainer. Emergence of Devers probably made trading away Moncada easier. Signing Groome probably made trading away Kopech more palpable. Finally a team friendly 3 year contract. Really enhances our chances of 'going for it'.

 

It will be interesting to see what's needed for Sox at trade deadline and what's available. I would think Groome, Devers and Travis are untouchable for a half year rental if we decide to make a move.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Nick

[moonslav59]

MLBTR...

 

Buchholz has been diagnosed with a partial tear of the flexor pronator mass in his pitching arm, per a club announcement. He is headed to visit Dr. James Andrews for a second opinion.

 

As things stand, it’s not clear what treatment will be undertaken for the injury. That’ll be sorted out after the trip to Dr. Andrews’s office — which is never where a pitcher hopes to find himself.

 

Clearly, though, Buchholz is headed for a layoff of some duration. Surgery isn’t always required in cases of strains (slight tears) or partial tears, but in such cases a fairly lengthy rest-and-rehab protocol is typically followed.

[moonslav59]

In foresight, I can't say that trading Buccholz was a bad call, but I also can't that it was the right call.

 

Buch always has the chance to be a #1 type pitcher.

 

Again, I get the whole luxury tax thing. My preference would have been to keep Buccholz, but I understand that resetting the tax penalty is significant.

 

To me, it was more than just resetting the tax. It meant we can wait until mid season and spend the savings on a better pitcher or two better pitchers or a positional player that covers a currently unforeseen need.

 

Flexibility.

[moonslav59]

I like to praise or critique trades/signings at the time of the transaction. It's always easy to look back and support your decision based on what transpires afterwards.

 

Clay B.....even if Clay was healthy and pitching well for the Phillies, I still would think the decision to trade him was the right one.

 

100%!

[moonslav59]

Price....There was simply not much available as far as top of the line pitching was concerned. Again, it was something DD had to do. Did we overpay? Perhaps but not knowing what the going price was DD was not going to take any chances and get beaten out by another offer. It's unfortunate $31M per year sticks out like a sore thumb but it is what it is. No chance we win the division without him last year. Can we have it done cheaper? Perhaps but it's all Monday am quarterbacking to me.

 

There was other top starters avaiable, like Cueto, but although I felt like we grossly overpaid to get him, he was the best we could hope for at that time of great starter need.

 

 

Kimbrel....this one hurts but it was our inability to have a healthy closer at the time that forced DD to make this move. Not only did it take Kimbrel, but we also had to trade for Ziegler and convert Kelly in a relief role to accomplish what we did. With emergence of some arms in the pen, it's pretty certain we will not resign him after 2018. As Moon said, was it worth paying FA price AND prospects for his 3 years of service? I'd say yes only if we win the world series. BUT again, this was a move DD thought he had to make in order for us to become a contender for 2016. He was right, even though we may have overpaid.

 

I totally understand why the move was made, but that's not enough for me to agree with it. I don't "blame" DD for making the move, because I try to avoid the blame game as much as possible, but I guess some could argue over the semantics of my position. While there were no other top closers available at that time, getting a top closer was not an essential priority, in my opinion. We could have obtained two or three good closers for the same money but with less prospects given up. Those prospects could have been saved or used as part of a bigger package to land us someone better than Pomeranz- see below.

 

Again, I viewed Kimbrel as a top 3 closer and expected top 5 closer from him for all 3 years. The fact that he has slipped from top 5 status makes the trade look worse in hindsight besides the fact that good RP'ers market value has sky-rocketed since the trade. I'm hopeful he can regain his earlier form.

 

 

 

Pomeranz....again, inconsistencies from Kelly, E Rod and Clay B forced this trade. I still think it was the correct move. The possibility exists for Espinoza to become a stud pitcher and Pomeranz to be mediocre pitcher for 2 1/2 years of service. Did we overpay? Probably. But DD was not going to sit idle and watch the team implode. As it turned out, Pom did not help the Sox but again that's after the fact.

 

While true, some of us disliked the deal when it was made, so it is not "hindsight" in my case anyways. I do think we needed a starter, but maybe a 2 month rental would have been enough.Maybe we could have tried to go larger and trade for Sale or Quintana last summer, but who knows if the CWS were open to the idea back then.

 

I think we may have gotten Sale & Quintana for probably less than Moncada, Espi, Kopech, Margot, Allen, Guerra, Asuaje, Basabe and V Diaz. Now, that's hindsight and speculative hindsight at that!

[Fisk]

The guy they got for Clay, Josh Tobias is tearing it up in Salem.