How much would you offer Eovaldi?

[notin]

Some of us -- certainly you and I -- said all offseason that a trade for a starter was needed. I wish I could say demanded and expected, but we've all learned those verbs are futile when fans discuss Chaim Bloom.

 

The problem with free agent starters is never the salary as much as it is the years. As a free agent, the goal of starting pitcher (and his agent) is to get a contract that pays you for more years than you have left as a good starter.

 

If Eovaldi is the rare commodity of a decent SP, why do people think he will settle for 4 years? He’s peak marketable right now.

 

If the Sox go crazy spending, go get Edwin Diaz. Closers/high leverage relief arms rarely (re: never) command 6 or 7 year deals…

[notin]

So where's the "best place" then, exactly?

 

Trades and farm system.

 

Unless you like how Price is pitching this season…

[Bellhorn04]

Trades and farm system.

 

Unless you like how Price is pitching this season…

 

So Price is sucking.

 

So is Sale, and he came by way of trade.

 

Eovaldi was a free agent signing and he's been excellent.

 

I don't think there's a consistent rule to be followed.

[notin]

So Price is sucking.

 

Eovaldi was a free agent signing and he's been excellent.

 

Sale came by way of trade.

 

I don't think there's a consistent rule to be followed.

 

 

The safest guideline seems to be fewest years.

 

Even Eovaldi is straight up Recency Effect. His 2019 was awful. He was good in 2020, but he was limited to 9 starts and 48 IP. Not really the best year to evaluate anybody. (Even you, JD.)

 

And he was outstanding in 2021.

 

So at what point did he become “excellent”? For one season plus 88 IP on a 4 year deal?

 

And if he was excellent, why only 4 years? This is his last real contract. What if he wants six?

 

And Sale produced great on the seasons the Sox traded him for. His 5 year extension has been a complete payroll albatross…

[Bellhorn04]

And Sale produced great on the seasons the Sox traded him for. His 5 year extension has been a complete payroll albatross…

 

Sure, Sale's original 3 years were great, although he actually started to sputter health-wise in Year 3.

 

Thing is, we had to pay a very high price in talent to acquire those 3 years. And one of the players we gave up, Moncada, cost us $63 million, which isn't chicken feed either.

 

I still say there's no rule to be followed. Every acquisition comes with its own costs and risks baked in.

[moonslav59]

So Price is sucking.

 

So is Sale, and he came by way of trade.

 

Eovaldi was a free agent signing and he's been excellent.

 

I don't think there's a consistent rule to be followed.

 

We actually traded for Eovaldi, too. Then, we re-signed him, just like Sale, Porcello, Beckett, Schilling and Pedro.

 

Price and Lackey were our two biggest FA starting pitcher splashes.

[moonslav59]

Sure, Sale's original 3 years were great, although he actually started to sputter health-wise in Year 3.

 

Thing is, we had to pay a very high price in talent to acquire those 3 years. And one of the players we gave up, Moncada, cost us $63 million, which isn't chicken feed either.

 

I still say there's no rule to be followed. Every acquisition comes with its own costs and risks baked in.

 

We gave up a lot to get Pedro & Beckett, too. All led to ring. The Schilling trade, in hindsight, looks like we didn't give up much, but at the time, it seemed like a reasonable return.

 

We ended up trading Beckett, and many of us are now highly critical of the Sale extension, while at the same time clamoring for us to extend Eovaldi.

[Old Red]

We gave up a lot to get Pedro & Beckett, too. All led to ring. The Schilling trade, in hindsight, looks like we didn't give up much, but at the time, it seemed like a reasonable return.

 

We ended up trading Beckett, and many of us are now highly critical of the Sale extension, while at the same time clamoring for us to extend Eovaldi.

 

The Sale extension made little sense at the time, and even less sense now. It was. Done with a year left on his contract, and TJ was predicted in the future, which turned into a right prediction, and the Sox have gotten very little out of him since. I’m not clamoring for any big extension for Evol either.

Edited May 14, 2022 by Old Red

[Bellhorn04]

We actually traded for Eovaldi, too. Then, we re-signed him, just like Sale, Porcello, Beckett, Schilling and Pedro.

 

Technically, Eovaldi was different from the others, because he actually became a free agent and we had to outbid other teams.

[Bellhorn04]

We ended up trading Beckett, and many of us are now highly critical of the Sale extension, while at the same time clamoring for us to extend Eovaldi.

 

The Sale extension was unusual because there were concerns about his health well before he signed it.

[moonslav59]

The Sale extension made little sense at the time, and even less sense now. It was. Done with a year left on his contract, and TJ was predicted in the future, which turned into a right prediction, and the Sox have gotten very little out of him since. I’m not clamoring for any big extension for Evol either.

 

I did not mean to imply all of us were clamoring to extend Eovaldi.

 

I think the Sale extension was based on the belief that he'd miss a full season during it's time frame, and the money somewhat reflected that. I'm not arguing it was a good signing, although I liked it at the time, but had he missed just 1 year and was able to pitch near 80-90% of his former self, the money reflected that idea. Hoping he would be a Verlander was not the right mindset. (BTW, Verlander missed 2 years and is being paid very well after that.)

 

With Big Nate, it's not like he has been a model of health, either, and some of his peripherals seem to be showing signs of decline from his career year in 2021.

 

The problem is, most of the good FA pitchers are about 30-32 years old..

[moonslav59]

The Sale extension was unusual because there were concerns about his health well before he signed it.

 

Very true, and there were concerns about resigning Eovaldi after 2018, too, for the same reasons. You hit on some and miss on others.

 

We hear complaining about the Paxton signing, now.

 

There is risk with every signing and the longer the term the higher the risk. I don't think anyone expected Price to be great for 7 years, but it seemed like we needed an ace, so badly, it was all we could do.

 

We need an ace, now and for 2023 and beyond. Trade or FA?

 

We might hit the jackpot with one or two of our promising pitching prospects, but I don't think we should plan around that notion.

[Old Red]

I did not mean to imply all of us were clamoring to extend Eovaldi.

 

I think the Sale extension was based on the belief that he'd miss a full season during it's time frame, and the money somewhat reflected that. I'm not arguing it was a good signing, although I liked it at the time, but had he missed just 1 year and was able to pitch near 80-90% of his former self, the money reflected that idea. Hoping he would be a Verlander was not the right mindset. (BTW, Verlander missed 2 years and is being paid very well after that.)

 

With Big Nate, it's not like he has been a model of health, either, and some of his peripherals seem to be showing signs of decline from his career year in 2021.

 

The problem is, most of the good FA pitchers are about 30-32 years old..

 

I like Nate, but he would have to win more games for me to want him give him a $20M whatever contract.

[moonslav59]

I like Nate, but he would have to win more games for me to want him give him a $20M whatever contract.

 

I'd offer him a $25M/1 extension, yesterday. It's the years beyond 2023 that scare me.

 

Sure, he could decline or get hurt the day after we extend him, but so could some young stud... like, say, Luis Severino. I'd have given him a 7 year extension a few years back. Yes, the gamble is less with younger pitchers, but at some point we are going to have to take a big plunge (risk) and sign or trade for an ace.

[dgalehouse]

The problem with free agent starters is never the salary as much as it is the years. As a free agent, the goal of starting pitcher (and his agent) is to get a contract that pays you for more years than you have left as a good starter.

 

If Eovaldi is the rare commodity of a decent SP, why do people think he will settle for 4 years? He’s peak marketable right now.

 

If the Sox go crazy spending, go get Edwin Diaz. Closers/high leverage relief arms rarely (re: never) command 6 or 7 year deals…

We are going to outbid the Mets for Diaz?

[dgalehouse]

Sure, Sale's original 3 years were great, although he actually started to sputter health-wise in Year 3.

 

Thing is, we had to pay a very high price in talent to acquire those 3 years. And one of the players we gave up, Moncada, cost us $63 million, which isn't chicken feed either.

 

I still say there's no rule to be followed. Every acquisition comes with its own costs and risks baked in.

 

There is always some risk. Especially with pitchers. Sometimes you have to take the risk. No guts , no glory.

[notin]

We are going to outbid the Mets for Diaz?

 

I forgot. You like to go cheap at closer

[notin]

The Sale extension was unusual because there were concerns about his health well before he signed it.

 

As Tom Jones would say “It’s not unusual. It was f***ing stupid to sign an injured pitcher to a five-year nine figure contract.”

 

Or something like that. He’s not the best lyricist, but sometimes he does hit the nail on the head…

[vegasbob]

As Tom Jones would say “It’s not unusual. It was f***ing stupid to sign an injured pitcher to a five-year nine figure contract.”

 

Or something like that. He’s not the best lyricist, but sometimes he does hit the nail on the head…

 

Definitely agree that the Sale signing was a question mark of large proportions. Maybe his current non-baseball, non-disclosed injury came from trying to hit a nail on the head and missing.

[notin]

Sure, Sale's original 3 years were great, although he actually started to sputter health-wise in Year 3.

 

Thing is, we had to pay a very high price in talent to acquire those 3 years. And one of the players we gave up, Moncada, cost us $63 million, which isn't chicken feed either.

 

I still say there's no rule to be followed. Every acquisition comes with its own costs and risks baked in.

 

The risks with free agency are just much greater. At least for the top tier players. And the risks are in the years.

 

The whole premise of this thread shows this. Not one person has selected more than 4 years.

 

And the big issue is a lot of people are looking at the Eovaldi Glass and saying “it’s been half full lately.” Even the normally sardonic 5Gold tried to paint the rosiest picture possible of Eovaldi, calling him the Sox best pitcher of the last 3years. Sure, if you like thinking 2020 is some sort of equal representative. And if you assume he finishes 2021 still holding that title.

 

The reality is, it was a way to try desperately to not make 2021 look like an outlier. The problem is, that’s exactly what it was. 5.6 fWAR season for a 31yo pitcher who never topped 3.3 fWAR before (and that was from 8 years ago).

 

It would be very unwise for the Sox to even go to 4 years with Eovaldi, let alone 4 or 5. And to say “there’s no one else” is just a justification, not a reason…

[Bellhorn04]

The risks with free agency are just much greater. At least for the top tier players. And the risks are in the years.

 

The whole premise of this thread shows this. Not one person has selected more than 4 years.

 

And the big issue is a lot of people are looking at the Eovaldi Glass and saying “it’s been half full lately.” Even the normally sardonic 5Gold tried to paint the rosiest picture possible of Eovaldi, calling him the Sox best pitcher of the last 3years. Sure, if you like thinking 2020 is some sort of equal representative. And if you assume he finishes 2021 still holding that title.

 

The reality is, it was a way to try desperately to not make 2021 look like an outlier. The problem is, that’s exactly what it was. 5.6 fWAR season for a 31yo pitcher who never topped 3.3 fWAR before (and that was from 8 years ago).

 

It would be very unwise for the Sox to even go to 4 years with Eovaldi, let alone 4 or 5. And to say “there’s no one else” is just a justification, not a reason…

 

I'm not saying "there's no one else". But it seems like a certainty the Red Sox are going to invest some money in another starter. So who should that starter be?

 

I like Syndergaard, and if we get him instead of Eovaldi, cool.

 

But how many other potential acquisitions are there that seem like better plays?

[Bellhorn04]

And you're the same guy who didn't like, or still doesn't like, Gausman for what he got. But he seems to be pitching pretty darn well.

 

Who are your big picks, notin? What are those trades you've got in mind?

 

Edit: just noticed that Gausman has 54 K's and 2 BB's. That's ridiculous!

Edited May 14, 2022 by Bellhorn04

[notin]

And you're the same guy who didn't like, or still doesn't like, Gausman for what he got. But he seems to be pitching pretty darn well.

 

Who are your big picks, notin? What are those trades you've got in mind?

 

Edit: just noticed that Gausman has 54 K's and 2 BB's. That's ridiculous!

 

Gausman has been outstanding. But do you really think he will be for 5 years. He’s another one where 2021 (4.8 fWAR) looked a lot like an outlier.

 

But if you think he and Eovaldi are both late bloomers, do you think Eovaldi should get a 5 yea nine figure contract? Gausman got one and his pre-2021 wasn’t any better than Eovaldi’s. So we can safely assume at least one GM would give Eovaldi 5 years / $110mill.

 

Should Boston be that team?

[Bellhorn04]

Gausman has been outstanding. But do you really think he will be for 5 years. He’s another one where 2021 (4.8 fWAR) looked a lot like an outlier.

 

But if you think he and Eovaldi are both late bloomers, do you think Eovaldi should get a 5 yea nine figure contract? Gausman got one and his pre-2021 wasn’t any better than Eovaldi’s. So we can safely assume at least one GM would give Eovaldi 5 years / $110mill.

 

Should Boston be that team?

 

I don't know, but again it's about alternatives.

 

You said trades were better. Our last big trade for a pitcher was Sale. For 3 years we gave up Kopech and Moncada, who we paid $61 million to acquire.

 

And I actually misspoke earlier when I said Sale's health issues started in Year 3. It was Year 2 they started in. The second half of his 3 year deal was all IL trips and question marks.

[notin]

And you're the same guy who didn't like, or still doesn't like, Gausman for what he got. But he seems to be pitching pretty darn well.

 

Who are your big picks, notin? What are those trades you've got in mind?

 

Edit: just noticed that Gausman has 54 K's and 2 BB's. That's ridiculous!

 

 

And as for trades, while very few GMs talk to me about who is available, certainly there are a few teams you must have noticed that are pumping out MLB-caliber arms left ad right but not so much with the position prospects. (Although I am flabbergasted - yes flabbergasted - that neither Montas nor Manaea made it to Boston.)

 

Most notably, Miami and Cleveland.

 

 

And one of the most talented arms in Miami might be the one most easily available in Elieser Hernandez. His injuries make him somewhat of a risk, but Miami's incredible (and growing) pitching depth makes him all but expendable. BTV gives him a surpolus value of $5.2million (or, roughly, Matthew Lugo), but this is probably because most of the sites projecting his performance don't anticipate him playing much, thus keeping his fWAR down. I do imagine he would cost more than that. But if he stays healthy, he would be an absolute steal overa wide range of prices...

[notin]

I don't know, but again it's about alternatives.

 

You said trades were better. Our last big trade for a pitcher was Sale. For 3 years we gave up Kopech and Moncada, who we paid $61 million to acquire.

 

And I actually misspoke earlier when I said Sale's health issues started in Year 3. It was Year 2 they started in. The second half of his 3 year deal was all IL trips and question marks.

 

I would take my chances with alternatives.

 

The Sox are loaded at middle infield with prospects, and really, how many do we need? In the right deal, Nick Yorke is absolutely available IMO...

[moonslav59]

I'm not saying "there's no one else". But it seems like a certainty the Red Sox are going to invest some money in another starter. So who should that starter be?

 

I like Syndergaard, and if we get him instead of Eovaldi, cool.

 

But how many other potential acquisitions are there that seem like better plays?

 

I remember thinking when we signed Price, there really has not been a clearly better pitcher available for several years. (I had liked Scherzer, the previous year, but he seemed sort of a head case type.) I knew we overpaid. I knew it was for at least 1-2 years, too long, but we needed an ace.

 

I'm thinking, now, a trade is probably the best way to get one, and not just because we've had better luck that way (Pedro, Schillin, Beckett, Sale.)

[moonslav59]

I would take my chances with alternatives.

 

The Sox are loaded at middle infield with prospects, and really, how many do we need? In the right deal, Nick Yorke is absolutely available IMO...

 

I have to agree.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'm not desperate to justify re-signing Eovaldi (like I was in the winter of 2018, after he was the best pitcher that entire postseason, and because the other favorite to sign him was only Houston). And as much as some posters hated that signing, if they won't admit he has earned his now-below market $17 million AAV, can they at least be humble enough to appreciate his time in Boston?

 

I was wrong about Wacha, but he's already hurt again. I loved Verdugo's contributions in the '21 run, but still hate the Betts trade, because of what it revealed about Bloom and the organization going forward. I can't stand the Benintendi trade, either, but I'd really like to see Winckowski get a shot. The Renfroe deal didn't bother me, except that Bloom still has not added any righty-swinging outfielder -- even after he said he needed one.

 

But the Red Sox better be desperate to find, sign, trade for or call up a top of the rotation starting pitcher -- even if 2023 is a total rebuild. An ace is that important.

 

To paraphrase Bellhorn: this early in the season, are there any clearcut alternatives that are more reliable than Nate Eovaldi?

[moonslav59]

It's hard to name possible trade candidates or what it will take to get one, but that might be the best way to add an ace, this winter.

 

Here are some BTV values:

 

Assuming we don't trade Whitlock (68.0) or Mayer (55.4)...

52.4 Casas

48.4 Devers

48.2 Houck

37.7 Yorke

18.7 Verdugo

18.3 Bogey

14.8 Duran

13.0 Bello

7.7 Eovaldi, 7.6 Kike & Jordan, 7.5 Pivetta, 6.8 Downs, 6.6 Gonzalez, 5.2 Dalbec, 5.0 Lugo, 4.6 Jimenez & Winckowski, 4.4 Taylot & Walter, 4.2 Bleis, 3.8 Mata, 3.5 Groome, 3.3 Hamilton, 3.0 Binelas & McDonough

 

Reds:

34.5 Mahle

31.9 Greene

30.2 Castillo

 

Marlins

81.9 Rogers

71.6 Alcantara

65.5 Lopez

38.1 Chisholm

35.6 Luzardo

25.3 Meyer (prospect)

13.1 Sanchez

5.2 Hernandez

 

Guardian

79.2 Bieber

30.1 McKenzie

19.2 Civale

 

A's

37.8 Montas

 

Orioles

6.3 Means

 

Pirates

28.1 Bednar

21.7 Contreras

 

Royals

28.7 Lynch