Red Sox: Off Season 2024-2025

[moonslav59]

Soxprospects.com is usually pretty conservative, when it comes to saying "acquisition" in its projected roster for the next year. Right now, they have that designation for the #1 SP slot and the #2 RP slot.

SP1 ___

SP2 Houck

SP3 Bello

SP4 Crawford

SP5 Criswell/ SP 6 Priester (They don't list Gio, at all.)

RP1 Hendriks

RP2 ____

RP3 Slaten

RP4 Whitlock

RP5 Bernardino

RP6 Kelly

RP7 Booser

RP8 Fulmer/ RP9 Winckowski

[notin]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

By far the best value starter signings this past offseason were mid-priced guys-Lugo, Wacha, Imanaga. 

 

And you left out Manaea.

Problem is the success rate with these type of signings is not optimal, and there were quite a few flops this past off-season in this range, like Giolito, Stroman, Montas, Lynn, Gibson, Severino, and Maeda…

[moonslav59]

40 minutes ago, notin said:

And you left out Manaea.

Problem is the success rate with these type of signings is not optimal, and there were quite a few flops this past off-season in this range, like Giolito, Stroman, Montas, Lynn, Gibson, Severino, and Maeda…

Also...

Flaherty ($14M/1) 3.0 fWAR

(We could have signed him and not traded for O'Neill and been under the tax line.)

[moonslav59]

2025 Unrestricted FAs at positions the Sox need:

Burnes, Fried

Flaherty, Kikuchi

Heaney, Severino, Pivetta, Lorenzen, DeSclafani, Bieber, J Quintana

Morton, Verlander, Scherzer, Cobb

Player Option: Snell ($38.5M) & Wacha ($16M)

Nate has vesting option of $20M based on IP

Montas has a mutual option at $20M

RP: I'm not sure what top RP'ers are FAs other than Jansen, Sewald, Graveman and a few others.

 

[dgalehouse]

52 minutes ago, notin said:

And you left out Manaea.

Problem is the success rate with these type of signings is not optimal, and there were quite a few flops this past off-season in this range, like Giolito, Stroman, Montas, Lynn, Gibson, Severino, and Maeda…

Severino is 10-6 with a 3.84 ERA.  Not great, but not a flop either. If you had an entire rotation with that performance, you would be in pretty good shape .  Provided you also had a good bullpen. 

[moonslav59]

10 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

Severino is 10-6 with a 3.84 ERA.  Not great, but not a flop either. If you had an entire rotation with that performance, you would be in pretty good shape .  Provided you also had a good bullpen. 

This was certainly one of the best winters for mid-level signings (under $15M AAV.)

It happens to be the one year we go above $15M to sign Gio, which many would have considered a mid-level signing, too.

$16M x 2 Wacha

$15M x 3 Lugo

$14M x 1 Flaherty

$13.25M x 4 Imanaga

$14M x 2 Manaea

$7.5M x 2 Fedde

Others:

Lorenzen 0.6 fWAR

Gibson 1.9 fWAR at $13M/1

Severino 1.8 fWAR at $13M/1

Montas 1.5 fWAR at $16M/1

Lynn 1.1 fWAR at $11M/1

 

We paid $19.25M x 2 for Gio

[Duran Is The Man]

10 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

FWAR since June 29...

3.0 Sale

2.5 Skubal

2.4 F Valdez

2.2 Snell

2.0 Gilbert, Steele & H Brown

16. Miller 1.6 (tied w Nate & Lugo)

30. Bello 1.2

50. Pivetta 0.9

110. Criswell, Houck & Crawford 0.2

 

wow...this Sale guy topping the list. why can't we get guys like this?

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

wow...this Sale guy topping the list. why can't we get guys like this?

Tight budget.

[Larry Cook]

13 hours ago, notin said:

“Stuff” Is meaningless unless it can be translated into useful pitching.  The MLB landscape is littered with guys with amazing stuff who simply couldn’t pitch…

And if we were talking about prospects I would agree.
but you realize both these guys are successful major leaguers????  

[notin]

10 hours ago, dgalehouse said:

Severino is 10-6 with a 3.84 ERA.  Not great, but not a flop either. If you had an entire rotation with that performance, you would be in pretty good shape .  Provided you also had a good bullpen. 

Fair point. 
 

By ERA, Severino is basically a league average pitcher.  ERA+ is 105, so slightly better.

But there’s nothing wrong with league average (unless you pay for much, much better)…

[notin]

8 hours ago, Larry Cook said:

And if we were talking about prospects I would agree.
but you realize both these guys are successful major leaguers????  

Then tell me how they are more successful than Houck, and not about their stuff.  They’re beyond that point…

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, notin said:

Then tell me how they are more successful than Houck, and not about their stuff.  They’re beyond that point…

Maybe better than the last 2 months of Houck or before the first 3 months of 2024???

[notin]

10 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Also...

Flaherty ($14M/1) 3.0 fWAR

(We could have signed him and not traded for O'Neill and been under the tax line.)

Or signed him instead of Giolito. But Flaherty isn’t much of a workhorse…

[Bellhorn04]

15 minutes ago, notin said:

Or signed him instead of Giolito. But Flaherty isn’t much of a workhorse…

Flaherty should hit 165-170 innings.

He's having an outstanding year, really.  

[mvp 78]

35 minutes ago, notin said:

Or signed him instead of Giolito. But Flaherty isn’t much of a workhorse…

Are there any workhorses anymore? 

[moonslav59]

The one year deal for Flaherty should have been on Brez's radar. 

I think once he chose Gio & O'Neill (via trade), the budget was all used up.

In hindsight, the $25M AAV spent on those two could have almost gotten gotten us two of these guys:

 

$16M x 2 Wacha

$15M x 3 Lugo

$14M x 1 Flaherty

$13.25M x 4 Imanaga

$14M x 2 Manaea

Or, one plus....

$7.5M x 2 Fedde

[notin]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Maybe better than the last 2 months of Houck or before the first 3 months of 2024???

At least that’s something.

 

Of course Miller has some advantages Houck doesn’t have - larger ballpark, better defense, better bullpen, weaker division.  And yet his performance overall is maybe comparable on some metrics…

[mvp 78]

Flaherty throws a straight 4 seamer a lot of the time and it was really bad the last 2 seasons. That's probably a big reason Breslow wasn't in on him last offseason. 

[notin]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Are there any workhorses anymore? 

Sure, if you lower the bar to 180IP…

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, notin said:

Sure, if you lower the bar to 180IP…

Then we can start stratifying the way we do with #1 to #5 pitchers.

180 IP = workhorse

160 IP = mule

Etc. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Old scouting report (we'll call him CBO): "fastball tops out at 90 mph, but generally sits in high-80s. Also possess an above-average curveball and an average straight change-up. Excellent control with good strikeout numbers."

Here's another guy (a future pitching coach): "in his rookie-of-the-year season, threw 47% four-seam fastballs, and struck out 28% of batters. Then his elbow acted up. The next season he checked in at 69% and 22%. Last year he checked in at 75% and 24%... he's still been good the last couple years, but he hasn't been what he was as a rookie." 

You can see why Breslow and Bailey might always be on the same screen when looking to add to their pitching staff...

[notin]

2 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Then we can start stratifying the way we do with #1 to #5 pitchers.

180 IP = workhorse

160 IP = mule

Etc. 

At least it’s an attempt to put some context to those numbers.  Go barnyard…

[moonslav59]

140 Donkey

120 Ass

100 ___hole

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

17 hours ago, notin said:

And you left out Manaea.

Problem is the success rate with these type of signings is not optimal, and there were quite a few flops this past off-season in this range, like Giolito, Stroman, Montas, Lynn, Gibson, Severino, and Maeda…

Is Stroman at 10-7 with a 4.03 ERA really a "flop"?

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Is Stroman at 10-7 with a 4.03 ERA really a "flop"?

18M, 4.73 FIP, 1.475 WHIP, 769 OPSa, 1.2 bWAR

I wouldn't say flop, but it's slightly disappointing. It's his highest OPS in a season with over 60 innings pitched. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

53 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Is Stroman at 10-7 with a 4.03 ERA really a "flop"?

A 4 ERA on the Yankees isn't that bad. They may be a playoff team, but only because they have two star sluggers and slightly better pitching than Boston (NY's staff WHIP is 1.252, Red Sox' is 1.256. The Yanks also give up less home runs -- averaging only 1.1 per game, which is one-tenth of a dinger better than the Sox).

If we're talking defense, though, we all know the BoSox lead the AL in errors. In fact, they're the only club in the league that has made more than the Bronx Bumblers. Of course, in bbref's category Total Zone Total Fielding Runs Above Average -- abbrev. Rtot -- the Red Sox have 19... the Stanks have ZERO.

When defenders can't make any above-average plays, a 4 ERA doesn't suck.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

54 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

18M, 4.73 FIP, 1.475 WHIP, 769 OPSa, 1.2 bWAR

I wouldn't say flop, but it's slightly disappointing. It's his highest OPS in a season with over 60 innings pitched. 

Certainly not great, but not a flop either.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

3 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

A 4 ERA on the Yankees isn't that bad. They may be a playoff team, but only because they have two star sluggers and slightly better pitching than Boston (NY's staff WHIP is 1.252, Red Sox' is 1.256. The Yanks also give up less home runs -- averaging only 1.1 per game, which is one-tenth of a dinger better than the Sox).

If we're talking defense, though, we all know the BoSox lead the AL in errors. In fact, they're the only club in the league that has made more than the Bronx Bumblers. Of course, in bbref's category Total Zone Total Fielding Runs Above Average -- abbrev. Rtot -- the Red Sox have 19... the Stanks have ZERO.

When defenders can't make any above-average plays, a 4 ERA doesn't suck.

I think the only stat that really matters when comparing the two teams is 82-61 vs 72-71

[moonslav59]

I think many felt it was a coin toss between Stroman and Gio, with some not liking both. At least Stroman ate some innings with mediocrity.

[dgalehouse]

7 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

A 4 ERA on the Yankees isn't that bad. They may be a playoff team, but only because they have two star sluggers and slightly better pitching than Boston (NY's staff WHIP is 1.252, Red Sox' is 1.256. The Yanks also give up less home runs -- averaging only 1.1 per game, which is one-tenth of a dinger better than the Sox).

If we're talking defense, though, we all know the BoSox lead the AL in errors. In fact, they're the only club in the league that has made more than the Bronx Bumblers. Of course, in bbref's category Total Zone Total Fielding Runs Above Average -- abbrev. Rtot -- the Red Sox have 19... the Stanks have ZERO.

When defenders can't make any above-average plays, a 4 ERA doesn't suck.

The Yankees do have a clear edge over the Sox in team ERA,  3.80 to 4.17.   There are many different stats you can choose to measure a pitching staff. Choose whichever you like. I prefer ERA to WHIP simply because games are decided by runs scored , not the number of baserunners. A baserunner who doesn't score is soon forgotten.  I don't have any desire to delve into the more advanced stats involving +,- or x , etc.   Keeping it simple, the team who allows fewer runs to score wins the game.