Drew Pomeranz was worth it

[Nick]

I just can't buy the overpay 'theory' when Pom is integral part of current chase for World Series ring. As an alternative, we would have traded for middle of road at best starter just so it won't cost as much? What if that prospect turns out to be better than Espinoza?

 

The point is projecting out prospects is an inexact science at best. Just think what we could have received for Owens and Johnson at one point. There are more failures than success stories. Just that fact alone tells you that it's okay to trade away your best prospects as long as you are getting something of known value. Obviously that's what DD did. DD also placed his bets on Devers being a better 3rd baseman than Moncada (White Sox has him playing back to 2B). He also read that correctly. Now it maybe that Moncada turns out to be a better player. So what? We got what we wanted in Sale. It's a risk worth taking.

 

Last night was another prime example. I realize it's taken awhile for Carson Smith to show us what he maybe capable with his recent outings. Wade Miley is just an inning eater. A number five pitcher at best. I still love that trade with Seattle. Carson Smith is under team control for another three years. He can definitely be our 8th inning guy next year and there's an outside chance that he becomes a closer for 2019/20 seasons. He's that good.

 

Jay Groome? I'd listen to an offer only because he's a hot commodity. Moon, would you have done a straight up deal for Quintana? I would have.

Edited September 21, 2017 by Nick

[Dojji]

Let's not forget that Pomeranz was the player with the injury concerns at the moment of the trade, not Espinosa.

 

He had TJS mere months after the trade, so I wouldn't go THAT far.

[Nick]

He had TJS mere months after the trade, so I wouldn't go THAT far.

 

Maybe, mabe it was the Sox with better understanding of medical records.

[Dojji]

Let's just say for the sake of argument that Anderson Espinosa comes on like gangbusters at some point in the next 5 years or so.

 

Does that necessarily invalidate the value of Pomeranz now? Heck no. The Red Sox at the time of the trade were and still are trying to reestabish themselves as a top franchise in the AL East after a couple tough seasons. We had a legit chance to ramp up for a deep playoff run and that's a legitimate time to mortgage the future in favor of the present in a league where it's damn hard to be good year in and year out.

 

Especially in light of our abysmal record in developing homegrown starting pitching, I am entirely fine in letting prospects go to bring in starting pitching from outside the organization. It's a defensible decision especially in the short term and when you're fighting for pennants, the short term is at least as important as the long term.

[Emp9]

I just can't buy the overpay 'theory' when Pom is integral part of current chase for World Series ring. As an alternative, we would have traded for middle of road at best starter just so it won't cost as much? What if that prospect turns out to be better than Espinoza?

 

The point is projecting out prospects is an inexact science at best. Just think what we could have received for Owens and Johnson at one point. There are more failures than success stories. Just that fact alone tells you that it's okay to trade away your best prospects as long as you are getting something of known value. Obviously that's what DD did. DD also placed his bets on Devers being a better 3rd baseman than Moncada (White Sox has him playing back to 2B). He also read that correctly. Now it maybe that Moncada turns out to be a better player. So what? We got what we wanted in Sale. It's a risk worth taking.

 

Last night was another prime example. I realize it's taken awhile for Carson Smith to show us what he maybe capable with his recent outings. Wade Miley is just an inning eater. A number five pitcher at best. I still love that trade with Seattle. Carson Smith is under team control for another three years. He can definitely be our 8th inning guy next year and there's an outside chance that he becomes a closer for 2019/20 seasons. He's that good.

 

Jay Groome? I'd listen to an offer only because he's a hot commodity. Moon, would you have done a straight up deal for Quintana? I would have.

 

But we can't compare the Sale trade to the Pom trade. Sale was a guaranteed Ace, Pom was not. With the Pom trade we built from the middle, with Sale we built from the top. I'll take either one rather than trying to build from the bottom but.... Eh, Pom had more question marks, that's for sure... and will always have more question marks I'm willing to bet.

[moonslav59]

Let's just say for the sake of argument that Anderson Espinosa comes on like gangbusters at some point in the next 5 years or so.

 

Does that necessarily invalidate the value of Pomeranz now? Heck no. The Red Sox at the time of the trade were and still are trying to reestabish themselves as a top franchise in the AL East after a couple tough seasons. We had a legit chance to ramp up for a deep playoff run and that's a legitimate time to mortgage the future in favor of the present in a league where it's damn hard to be good year in and year out.

 

Especially in light of our abysmal record in developing homegrown starting pitching, I am entirely fine in letting prospects go to bring in starting pitching from outside the organization. It's a defensible decision especially in the short term and when you're fighting for pennants, the short term is at least as important as the long term.

 

Certainly continued greatness from Pom will make this deal look much better.

 

Not many go back and lament the Beckett-Lowell trade, although HRam and Anibal Sanchez's numbers (and more years of control) looked better.

 

Still, if Espi goes on to give the Padres 5 years of ace or number 2 slot value, one can argue the deal was "an overpay"- necessary or not.

[Nick]

whatever Dojji just said, I'm on board with that.

[moonslav59]

Maybe, mabe it was the Sox with better understanding of medical records.

 

That would be a first.

[moonslav59]

He had TJS mere months after the trade, so I wouldn't go THAT far.

 

Was that surgery predictable at the time of the trade?

[Emp9]

I'll put it this way...

 

Past, Present, and Future...What Trade held and holds MORE risk? The Sale trade or the Pom trade?

 

For me I'm going with the Pom trade as more risky.

 

***(but as of this year, I'm very satisfied with both trades)***

[Emp9]

Certainly continued greatness from Pom will make this deal look much better.

 

Not many go back and lament the Beckett-Lowell trade, although HRam and Anibal Sanchez's numbers (and more years of control) looked better.

 

Still, if Espi goes on to give the Padres 5 years of ace or number 2 slot value, one can argue the deal was "an overpay"- necessary or not.

 

That's a fair way to put it. Was it an overpay? YES. Was it necessary? YES.

[moonslav59]

But we can't compare the Sale trade to the Pom trade. Sale was a guaranteed Ace, Pom was not. With the Pom trade we built from the middle, with Sale we built from the top. I'll take either one rather than trying to build from the bottom but.... Eh, Pom had more question marks, that's for sure... and will always have more question marks I'm willing to bet.

 

If you take away the part of last year that Pom missed or was pitching while injured, he's put up very good numbers for a 47 start sample size. That's a season and a half. He's approaching or is at a time where "questionable" can be removed from his descriptors. (Injury issues may return, but he has had 30 starts for 2 straight years now.

 

17 starts w SD

2.47/ 1.059 WHIP

 

30 starts this year

3.15/ 1.340

 

The WHIP of over 1.3 in concerning. The pitches per inning are too. He's never gone over 171 IP (until maybe his next start puts him at 172).

 

Bottom line: I'm thrilled we have him.

 

The plus: DD got 3 playoff cycles for a single A pitcher.

 

The minus: Espi's ceiling, if reached, could be haunting.

[Emp9]

If you take away the part of last year that Pom missed or was pitching while injured, he's put up very good numbers for a 47 start sample size. That's a season and a half. He's approaching or is at a time where "questionable" can be removed from his descriptors. (Injury issues may return, but he has had 30 starts for 2 straight years now.

 

17 starts w SD

2.47/ 1.059 WHIP

 

30 starts this year

3.15/ 1.340

 

The WHIP of over 1.3 in concerning. The pitches per inning are too. He's never gone over 171 IP (until maybe his next start puts him at 172).

 

Bottom line: I'm thrilled we have him.

 

The plus: DD got 3 playoff cycles for a single A pitcher.

 

The minus: Espi's ceiling, if reached, could be haunting.

 

But I feel like I have to include Pom's Boston performance at the very beginning because we made that trade for a post season run. We wouldn't have made the trade in the first place for it not.

[moonslav59]

But I feel like I have to include Pom's Boston performance at the very beginning because we made that trade for a post season run. We wouldn't have made the trade in the first place for it not.

 

I agree, and if he is injury prone, that's part of the trade evaluation criteria (as with Espi), but my point was that I feel the "questionable" label is (at least) starting to peel away.

[moonslav59]

That's a fair way to put it. Was it an overpay? YES. Was it necessary? YES.

 

One bone of contention: trading for a starter was "necessary", but Pom was not the only guy to trade for, and Espi was not the only guy we had to trade to get a starter.

 

It looks like DD picked a good starter for 2017-2018 maybe, but not really 2016 which was the major impetus of the trade, right? I get that.

 

Usually, GM trade good prospects for 2 month rentals. Getting 3 playoff cycles is a huge plus from this trade, despite the fact that the first one (P.O. cycle) did not work out too well.

[mvp 78]

One bone of contention: trading for a starter was "necessary", but Pom was not the only guy to trade for, and Espi was not the only guy we had to trade to get a starter.

 

It looks like DD picked a good starter for 2017-2018 maybe, but not really 2016 which was the major impetus of the trade, right? I get that.

 

Usually, GM trade good prospects for 2 month rentals. Getting 3 playoff cycles is a huge plus from this trade, despite the fact that the first one (P.O. cycle) did not work out too well.

 

https://www.sbnation.com/2016/7/25/12274126/2016-mlb-trades-list-rumors-deadline

 

Pomeranz was the best starter available at the deadline last year. Hill struggled with injuries and didn't pitch up to expectations down the stretch.

[moonslav59]

https://www.sbnation.com/2016/7/25/12274126/2016-mlb-trades-list-rumors-deadline

 

Pomeranz was the best starter available at the deadline last year. Hill struggled with injuries and didn't pitch up to expectations down the stretch.

 

We don't know all the pitchers that were dangled and not traded.

 

Yes, on paper, Pom was the best pitcher (Apr-Jun) that got traded.

[Emp9]

I agree, and if he is injury prone, that's part of the trade evaluation criteria (as with Espi), but my point was that I feel the "questionable" label is (at least) starting to peel away.

 

I agree.

 

I was pushing to trade for Pom, like 6 weeks before the trade. When it happened (found out we traded Espi), all I thought was "Oh,boy... I hope I'm right".

[cp176]

I agree.

 

I was pushing to trade for Pom, like 6 weeks before the trade. When it happened (found out we traded Espi), all I thought was "Oh,boy... I hope I'm right".

 

Same here. i do have to say that regardless of how things ultimately ended up for him last year after I saw him lock up with Verlander in a pitcher's duel in Fenway, I really really liked the trade. Seeing him live made a difference. A big young lefty with lots of movement on whatever he throws. Glad that it has worked out for him so far.

[Spudboy]

whatever Dojji just said, I'm on board with that.

 

Me too.

 

It's common sense.

[moonslav59]

Nothing wrong with uncommon sense either.

[Kimmi]

I always liked Pom ( as a solid #3), but at the time I thought it was a huge over pay. Last year it was, this year is wasn't. Anytime Pom performs better than a #3, I'm super-duper happy about it. His true potential was a bit of an unknown and it could've gone either way (and has quite a bit until recently). I still would've liked a far away SD prospect thrown in (like a scratch-off ticket). And we all know TJS is common enough now and better handled that it's not all doom and gloom for Espi's career. Bottom-line:We needed a solid mid-rotation starter more than we needed a potential Ace 3-4 years away prospect. No real complaints here from me.

 

That's it in a nutshell for me. IMO, the trade needed to be done.

[Dojji]

Was that surgery predictable at the time of the trade?

 

why does that matter to you?

[Jack Flap]

I think I started the process of eating crow on this trade a few months back. I'm not writing off Espinoza by any means at this point, but Pomeranz has been superb this year. I haven't heard any news on this, but hopefully DD has already started thinking about working out an extension this winter.

[mvp 78]

http://www.csnne.com/boston-red-sox/boston-red-sox-how-drew-pomeranz-2nd-best-lefty-american-league-can-be-even-better

 

Per FanGraphs’ wins above replacement, Pomeranz is the second-most valuable lefthanded starter among those qualified in the American League (you know who's No. 1). He's one of the 10 best starters in the AL overall.

 

Is this the year Pomeranz became the pitcher he always envisioned he would be?

 

“I don’t know, I mean, I had a pretty dang good year last year,” Pomeranz said, referring to a 3.32 ERA between the Padres and Sox, and an All-Star selection. “I think these last two years have been kind of you know, more what I wanted to be like. But I still, I don’t think I’m done yet, you know what I mean?”

 

Most pro athletes say there’s always room to improve. Pomeranz, however, was able to specify what he wants. The focus is on his third and fourth pitches: his cutter and his change-up.

 

“My changeup’s been really good this year,” Pomeranz said. “That’s something that still can go a lot further. And same with my cutter too. I still use it sparingly. I don’t think me just being a six-inning guy is the end of it for me either.

 

“You set personal goals. You want to throw more innings, cover more innings so the bullpen doesn’t have to cover those. Helps save them for right now during the year.”

 

 

I'm glad he realizes that he needs to figure out how to go more than 6 innings.

[OH FOY]

Nobody factors in the Park. Toughest Park to pitch in the Majors.

[moonslav59]

why does that matter to you?

 

Because we should not judge a trade in hind sight until the team control of all players expires.

 

It would be like me saying we didn't actually need Pom last year, because he ended up sucking, and we won anyways.

 

[OH FOY]

Still say Padres make Espinoza a Reliever, (Closer). Quickest way to the Majors at this point. Edited September 22, 2017 by OH FOY!

[OH FOY]

He'll be 21 when he gets on Field again, takes about 1 year to pitch to get his full strength again, 22,should be 100%. He makes the Majors by 24, that would be good as far as I'm concerned. If he's good.

By that time both the Sox and Padres, will be different teams.

Trades are made to help both teams, injury to Espinoza, makes this win for Sox. Unfortunate, but true.

Edited September 22, 2017 by OH FOY!

[S5Dewey]

Because we should not judge a trade in hind sight until the team control of all players expires.

 

It would be like me saying we didn't actually need Pom last year, because he ended up sucking, and we won anyways.

 

 

Ok..but I think we can get bogged down in the details too. Keeping Espinoza in the hope that he'd be ready in 2019 could very well affect the acquisitions we make in 2018 and what their performance is in 2019, 2020, and until Espinoza is actually ready to pitch again. How do we figure that into the equation?

 

When we start tracking things like this it soon starts to look like a "family tree' with branches off branches which yield branches of their own. The difference is that in MLB each branch bears a different "fruit" and that fruit's vale has to be figured in also - as well as the value of the players whom the "third generation" of players (fruit) gets traded for. It quickly becomes so unmanageable as cast doubt on any conclusion made from looking at it.