Chris Sale traded to Braves

[Bellhorn04]

20 hours ago, notin said:

This deal looked to be about actually upgrading the team. They had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all, let alone at this level.  They found a buyer, and got a player they liked.  The premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness; even the Braves clearly hedged their bets here.

Appreciate the effort that went into this post, but a couple of the statements here really require a rebuttal.

Why would you say "they had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all"?  He was active at the end of the season and he obviously passed all his medicals.  So what sense can that statement possibly make?

And "the premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness"?  Atlanta clearly felt there was a reasonable chance Sale would be a worthwhile addition or they wouldn't have risked $21 million and given up a prospect for him.  That's the only reasonable way to characterize it. 

It seems like you need to resort to hyperbole to convince yourself of the validity of your points. 

 

[Old Red]

15 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Appreciate the effort that went into this post, but a couple of the statements here really require a rebuttal.

Why would you say "they had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all"?  He was active at the end of the season and he obviously passed all his medicals.  So what sense can that statement possibly make?

And "the premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness"?  Atlanta clearly felt there was a reasonable chance Sale would be a worthwhile addition or they wouldn't have risked $21 million and given up a prospect for him.  That's the only reasonable way to characterize it. 

It seems like you need to resort to hyperbole to convince yourself of the validity of your points. 

 

Like I said before that Atlanta was interested in Sale last year, but Bloom didn’t want to deal, so it’s not like Atlanta made this deal with a hope, and a prayer that Sale would be able to pitch. Atlanta had more foresight on Sale than Boston did, and Atlanta was right, and Brez , and Boston was wrong, and Atlanta is reaping the reward of a Cy Young season from Sale, and Boston is paying the bill. A win, win for Atlanta, and a big loss for Boston. 

[Bellhorn04]

20 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Like I said before that Atlanta was interested in Sale last year, but Bloom didn’t want to deal, so it’s not like Atlanta made this deal with a hope, and a prayer that Sale would be able to pitch. Atlanta had more foresight on Sale than Boston did, and Atlanta was right, and Brez , and Boston was wrong, and Atlanta is reaping the reward of a Cy Young season from Sale, and Boston is paying the bill. A win, win for Atlanta, and a big loss for Boston. 

Brez was their man.  

[Old Red]

40 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Brez was their man.  

No matter how you look at it the Red Sox got slickered, pockets picked, fleeced, or just plain robbed by Atlanta. 🤭🙈

[notin]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Appreciate the effort that went into this post, but a couple of the statements here really require a rebuttal.

Why would you say "they had no reason to expect Sale to play again at all"?  He was active at the end of the season and he obviously passed all his medicals.  So what sense can that statement possibly make?

And "the premise that Atlanta clearly saw this comeback borders somewhere between pessimism and ridiculousness"?  Atlanta clearly felt there was a reasonable chance Sale would be a worthwhile addition or they wouldn't have risked $21 million and given up a prospect for him.  That's the only reasonable way to characterize it. 

It seems like you need to resort to hyperbole to convince yourself of the validity of your points. 

 

What reason did they have to believe he would be healthy?  From 2020-2023, Sale pitched fewer innings than Michael Pineda, an oft-injured pitcher who retired 2 years ago due to frequent injuries.  There was zero reasons to think Sale would bounce back at age 35.   
 

Sale ended 2023 on the mound, but he didn’t pitch worthy injury.  He had a shoulder issue.   Sure, you can say past injuries don’t predict future ones.  But with pitchers, this doesn’t necessarily apply to shoulder and elbow issues.  Worth noting Sale ended 2021 healthy, and followed up in 2022 with 5 IP.  
 

As explained multiple times, Atlanta was in a better position to gamble.  If Sale went down again, what was Boston’s Plan B? We still don’t know 140 games later.  Atlanta had numerous MLB-ready pitching prospects, none of whom were included in the return package. (I hope Breslow asked, and it seems like he should have.)  In fact, it’s possible they viewed Sale as someone to merely pick up some innings while the younger arms adjusted.  

Atlanta also knew it was a risk.  They made Boston pay the bulk of the salary.  When Sale wanted a contract to approve the trade, rather than pick up his option, they took an opportunity to lower the AAV.   Really his first year money once Boston made their payment left Atlanta paying roughly the same salary range most teams pay to pitchers recovering from TJ, such as what Boston paid Paxton.  Pineda and Drew Smyly had similar deals, too.  Atlanta was just taking a similar gamble, but with giving up a player they couldn’t accommodate with a starting position.  

It’s worked out great for them so far.  Of course, if Sale was injured again this year, we’d all be looking at this like we dumped our biggest problem on another team…

 

[Bellhorn04]

13 minutes ago, notin said:

As explained multiple times, Atlanta was in a better position to gamble.  If Sale went down again, what was Boston’s Plan B? We still don’t know 140 games later.

 

That explanation still doesn't make sense to me.  I'll just never understand why trading a starting pitcher made a lot of sense for the Red Sox because they were so thin in starting pitching.

We do know the Red Sox suck at Plan B's though, I'll ready concede that point.  

[Bellhorn04]

And the "couldn't count on him" argument drives me batty.

I mean, I'd argue that the Red Sox really had no reason to "count on" any of Giolito, Houck, Crawford, Bello, Pivetta or Whitlock to have a good season.  Every single one of those guys had issues and question marks of some sort.

[moonslav59]

20 hours ago, notin said:

So you just argued that they could have gotten better by slashing even more payroll…

I agree with you and Bell over 90% of the time, but it's weird how you two disagree on almost everything.

What's up with that?

[Old Red]

50 minutes ago, notin said:

What reason did they have to believe he would be healthy?  From 2020-2023, Sale pitched fewer innings than Michael Pineda, an oft-injured pitcher who retired 2 years ago due to frequent injuries.  There was zero reasons to think Sale would bounce back at age 35.   
 

Sale ended 2023 on the mound, but he didn’t pitch worthy injury.  He had a shoulder issue.   Sure, you can say past injuries don’t predict future ones.  But with pitchers, this doesn’t necessarily apply to shoulder and elbow issues.  Worth noting Sale ended 2021 healthy, and followed up in 2022 with 5 IP.  
 

As explained multiple times, Atlanta was in a better position to gamble.  If Sale went down again, what was Boston’s Plan B? We still don’t know 140 games later.  Atlanta had numerous MLB-ready pitching prospects, none of whom were included in the return package. (I hope Breslow asked, and it seems like he should have.)  In fact, it’s possible they viewed Sale as someone to merely pick up some innings while the younger arms adjusted.  

Atlanta also knew it was a risk.  They made Boston pay the bulk of the salary.  When Sale wanted a contract to approve the trade, rather than pick up his option, they took an opportunity to lower the AAV.   Really his first year money once Boston made their payment left Atlanta paying roughly the same salary range most teams pay to pitchers recovering from TJ, such as what Boston paid Paxton.  Pineda and Drew Smyly had similar deals, too.  Atlanta was just taking a similar gamble, but with giving up a player they couldn’t accommodate with a starting position.  

It’s worked out great for them so far.  Of course, if Sale was injured again this year, we’d all be looking at this like we dumped our biggest problem on another team…

 

Atlanta didn’t see Sale as any big gamble IMO. Atlanta didn’t see it as any big risk either IMO. The fact the Braves got the Rookie Brez to cough up $17M was just taking advantage of him IMO also, and taking advantage they did, and then some.🙈🤭

[Bellhorn04]

17 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I agree with you and Bell over 90% of the time, but it's weird how you two disagree on almost everything.

What's up with that?

He was actually disagreeing with mvp that time LOL

I think what notin and I have in common is that we just can't let something go the way normal people would LOL

 

[notin]

11 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Atlanta didn’t see Sale as any big gamble IMO. Atlanta didn’t see it as any big risk either IMO. The fact the Braves got the Rookie Brez to cough up $17M was just taking advantage of him IMO also, and taking advantage they did, and then some.🙈🤭

That’s 100% speculation on your part.  And I’m willing to go higher…

[notin]

6 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

He was actually disagreeing with mvp that time LOL

I think what notin and I have in common is that we just can't let something go the way normal people would LOL

 

And when I disagree with mvp, it often devolves into something off-topic, irrelevant, and irreverent…

[notin]

57 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

And the "couldn't count on him" argument drives me batty.

I mean, I'd argue that the Red Sox really had no reason to "count on" any of Giolito, Houck, Crawford, Bello, Pivetta or Whitlock to have a good season.  Every single one of those guys had issues and question marks of some sort.

The “couldn’t count on him” was something often said on these boards.  In the off-season before 2022 and 2023, I said the season depends heavily on Sale, which was universally countered with “you can’t count on Sale”.

 

And both years, that turned out to be correct.

 

None of those other pitchers impacted the budget like Sale did.   Not even combined.

 

Hopefully you’re not arguing Sale and Giolito posed equal risks…

[Old Red]

1 hour ago, notin said:

That’s 100% speculation on your part.  And I’m willing to go higher…

That’s why I said IMO, but everything that you keep repeating is 100% speculation on your part. Like I said when Sale got traded that all he needed was to get out of Boston, and he would have a healthy year, which would lead to a good year for the Braves. The Story out there was that the Rangers wanted Sale before,  and were willing to take on his full salary also. The Braves were interested in Sale last year also, so trading for Sale this year wasn’t on just a whim, or that they were taking any big risk on him, which we have found out isn’t the case at all. Boston’s case for Sale, and Atlanta’s case for Sale are two entirely different cases, and the results of a Cy Young has borne that out.

[moonslav59]

27 minutes ago, notin said:

The “couldn’t count on him” was something often said on these boards.  In the off-season before 2022 and 2023, I said the season depends heavily on Sale, which was universally countered with “you can’t count on Sale”.

 

And both years, that turned out to be correct.

 

None of those other pitchers impacted the budget like Sale did.   Not even combined.

 

Hopefully you’re not arguing Sale and Giolito posed equal risks…

I do think Sale had a better chance of pitching well (2.50 to 3.75) than Gio (3.25 to 4.25,) but on estimated IP, I'd have gone Gio (140-180) to Sale (30-120.) I'd have predicted a higher WAR for Gio based on his IP projection, and I was never high on Gio.

[moonslav59]

30 minutes ago, notin said:

The “couldn’t count on him” was something often said on these boards.  In the off-season before 2022 and 2023, I said the season depends heavily on Sale, which was universally countered with “you can’t count on Sale”.

Hell, when we extended him, many said he was "an injury waiting to happen," or "already damaged goods." We heard that repeated every year afterwards, until the last few months. He did not let down that crowd, every year.

[notin]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I do think Sale had a better chance of pitching well (2.50 to 3.75) than Gio (3.25 to 4.25,) but on estimated IP, I'd have gone Gio (140-180) to Sale (30-120.) I'd have predicted a higher WAR for Gio based on his IP projection, and I was never high on Gio.

Agreed Sale had the higher ceiling .  But Giolito was the one with the actual floor…

[Bellhorn04]

32 minutes ago, notin said:

Hopefully you’re not arguing Sale and Giolito posed equal risks…

They posed different kinds of risks.  

I'd call a guy who posted a 7 ERA over his last 2 months of work pretty risky.  I think you might have suggested he was pitching hurt and the injury in spring training was the end result. 

[Bellhorn04]

Almost all the 2024 pre-season projections for Sale predicted a WAR of 2.7-2.9, with innings of 127 to 150.

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/chris-sale/10603/stats?position=P

(Click on the Preseason Projections tab.)

Make of that what you will, but these are objective, data-based numbers.

 

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

The 2024 pre-season projections for Sale predicted a WAR of 2.7-2.9, with innings of 127 to 150.

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/chris-sale/10603/stats?position=P

Make of that what you will, but at least these are objective, data-based numbers.

 

They usually go conservative, esp on IP. What was Gio's projection, or was he already hurt when they made them?

[Bellhorn04]

14 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Hell, when we extended him, many said he was "an injury waiting to happen," or "already damaged goods." We heard that repeated every year afterwards, until the last few months. He did not let down that crowd, every year.

Injuries suck.  The recurring injuries to Story and Whitlock suck too, but I don't necessarily think it means we should cut bait on them. 

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

They usually go conservative, esp on IP. What was Gio's projection, or was he already hurt when they made them?

Yes, I looked for them, but he must have been already hurt.

[notin]

37 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Almost all the 2024 pre-season projections for Sale predicted a WAR of 2.7-2.9, with innings of 127 to 150.

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/chris-sale/10603/stats?position=P

(Click on the Preseason Projections tab.)

Make of that what you will, but these are objective, data-based numbers.

 

Ok, but how did they project him before 2021, 2022 and 2023?  The risk with Sale wasn’t necessarily about pitching well…

[notin]

46 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

They posed different kinds of risks.  

I'd call a guy who posted a 7 ERA over his last 2 months of work pretty risky.  I think you might have suggested he was pitching hurt and the injury in spring training was the end result. 

I have no medical opinion on Giolito and never did, although someone might have.

If his injury that lead to a ligament tear had already started, that is on Boston and their (lack of a complete?) physical. 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, notin said:

And when I disagree with mvp, it often devolves into something off-topic, irrelevant, and irreverent…

What the?!?!

[dgalehouse]

The Sale for Grissom trade was a monumental blunder. We need to stop trying to rationalize it and justify it. It's a done deal. Just admit it was stupid and move on. 

[mvp 78]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I agree with you and Bell over 90% of the time, but it's weird how you two disagree on almost everything.

What's up with that?

The Ying Yang Twins of TalkSox. 

[mvp 78]

Just now, dgalehouse said:

The Sale for Grissom trade was a monumental blunder. We need to stop trying to rationalize it and justify it. It's a done deal. Just admit it was stupid and move on. 

Move on? I think they have another 50 more pages of posting to get through before we can really get to the meat of the issue. 

[moonslav59]

13 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Move on? I think they have another 50 more pages of posting to get through before we can really get to the meat of the issue. 

LOL. So much is still left unsaid!

[notin]

25 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

The Sale for Grissom trade was a monumental blunder. We need to stop trying to rationalize it and justify it. It's a done deal. Just admit it was stupid and move on. 

Then suggest another topic…