Red Sox: Off Season 2024-2025

[moonslav59]

I'm not excited about any FA SP'er beyond Burnes. I hate the idea of looking to upgrade our #4 or #5 SP, but it's better than going with what we have. I do think adding Crawford to the pen would mean adding Pivetta, manaea or Flaherty would be a double boost, in that way.

I'm not sure Quinatana ia better than Crawford or even the Criswell/Fitts/Priester/Dobbins combo.

Flaherty, Manaea or Pivetta plus Hoffman would be fine with me, but still less than I hoped for.

SP: Crochet, Houck, Flaherty, Bello, Giolito (Crawford long man/spot starter)

RP: Hoffman, Chapman, Hendriks, Slaten, Whitlock, Crawford, Winckowski, Wilson

Not bad.

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, notin said:

I’m not sold on Buehler yet either.  75 largely ineffective IP in the regular season with a great HR/9 than Kutter Crawford shouldn’t be ignored because of 10 good innings in the postseason.  Buehler is as big of a question mark as Paxton was, and I don’t understand how people can hope they avoid contracts like Kluber in favor of deals like Buehler.

Buehler is a lot younger than Kluber was.

Honestly, I think one of the biggest reason Buehler is being advocated by a few of us is that we're so conditioned to this team not wanting to spend much money on starting pitching.  Taking a shot at Buehler for $15 mill or whatever seems better than nothing.  We can be pretty sure Burnes is not a realistic target.

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Buehler is a lot younger than Kluber was.

Honestly, I think one of the biggest reason Buehler is being advocated by a few of us is that we're so conditioned to this team not wanting to spend much money on starting pitching.  Taking a shot at Buehler for $15 mill or whatever seems better than nothing.  We can be pretty sure Burnes is not a realistic target.

Yeah the Kluber comp is really lazy and unjustified.  Buehler is even younger than Paxton was  when he pitched here, by about 4 years.  The dude is probably going to only play here one year.  

I'm ok with spreading risk, we already traded away 2 of our top prospects for a pitcher, it really makes sense to spend money on someone, if they're trying to go pitcher and have money left over to sign a hitter someone like Buehler really makes sense.  Unless they wanna go big and sign Burnes I don't really see a better move.  With the lone caveat being to empty the farm. 

[moonslav59]

7 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Yeah the Kluber comp is really lazy and unjustified.  Buehler is even younger than Paxton was  when he pitched here, by about 4 years.  The dude is probably going to only play here one year.  

I'm ok with spreading risk, we already traded away 2 of our top prospects for a pitcher, it really makes sense to spend money on someone, if they're trying to go pitcher and have money left over to sign a hitter someone like Buehler really makes sense.  Unless they wanna go big and sign Burnes I don't really see a better move.  With the lone caveat being to empty the farm. 

He has more upside. More risk, too.

[Hugh2]

I really really think we shouldn't give up a pick for 32 year old Sean Manaea

[Hugh2]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He has more upside. More risk, too.

Yeah, what are you risking? 1-2 years? That's the type of risk you think REAL hard before making when you're the Pittsburgh pirates not the Boston Red Sox. 

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Yeah, what are you risking? 1-2 years? That's the type of risk you think REAL hard before making when you're the Pittsburgh pirates not the Boston Red Sox. 

Risking not having him pitch vs someone like Pivetta, who is more reliable but has much less upside.

[mvp 78]

14 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Risking not having him pitch vs someone like Pivetta, who is more reliable but has much less upside.

Pivetta is reliable until he's no longer reliable. We saw that with Giolito. 

Pivetta's ceiling is a 3 at his best? He pitches more often like a decent 4 and a 5 for a good rotation. Why spend large on that? 

[notin]

30 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Yeah the Kluber comp is really lazy and unjustified.  Buehler is even younger than Paxton was  when he pitched here, by about 4 years.  The dude is probably going to only play here one year.  

I'm ok with spreading risk, we already traded away 2 of our top prospects for a pitcher, it really makes sense to spend money on someone, if they're trying to go pitcher and have money left over to sign a hitter someone like Buehler really makes sense.  Unless they wanna go big and sign Burnes I don't really see a better move.  With the lone caveat being to empty the farm. 

See I think saying “Kluber was older” is lazy and unjustified.  Kluber was coming off a season with 160 IP and worth 3 fWAR.

For Burnes or Flaherty, the Sox should re-arrange the rotation.  But I’d rather bulk up the bullpen with options like Tanner Scott or Jeff Hoffman over signing Buehler.   The Sox have enough physically questionable starting pitchers already.  If we need IP, keep Kutter in the rotation.

And it’s more of a bullpen game today anyway.  Fewer starters throw 200 IP anymore.  Today, teams need about 1450 IP for a season, but starting rotations often only pitch 700-800 of them.  The bullpen obviously gets the rest, meaning you need a lot more than just a closer out there.  Fifteen years ago, you needed just 3 reliable RPs. Now, having 5 makes your pen a question mark…

[notin]

3 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Pivetta is reliable until he's no longer reliable. We saw that with Giolito. 

Pivetta's ceiling is a 3 at his best? He pitches more often like a decent 4 and a 5 for a good rotation. Why spend large on that? 

Pivetta would work, but he might be looking at $100mill over 4 years.  At that price, I pass…

[Hugh2]

15 minutes ago, notin said:

See I think saying “Kluber was older” is lazy and unjustified.  Kluber was coming off a season with 160 IP and worth 3 fWAR.

For Burnes or Flaherty, the Sox should re-arrange the rotation.  But I’d rather bulk up the bullpen with options like Tanner Scott or Jeff Hoffman over signing Buehler.   The Sox have enough physically questionable starting pitchers already.  If we need IP, keep Kutter in the rotation.

And it’s more of a bullpen game today anyway.  Fewer starters throw 200 IP anymore.  Today, teams need about 1450 IP for a season, but starting rotations often only pitch 700-800 of them.  The bullpen obviously gets the rest, meaning you need a lot more than just a closer out there.  Fifteen years ago, you needed just 3 reliable RPs. Now, having 5 makes your pen a question mark…

Nah man, I call ******** on that I'm sorry.  Kluber was 37.  Father time beats us all, every single one of us.  Most baseball players are either retired or a mirror image of their younger self at 37. 

Banking on a 30 year old to put up average career numbers is an entirely different thing than saying a 37 year old can.  You're at that age where you're either IN SERIOUS DECLINE.....or any year you're going to fall off a cliff. Kluber ran off that cliff full throttle!!!! 

Kluber hit the wall that year, it's blatantly obvious he hit that wall.  Buehler can be a lot of things, for better or worse, but this is not even CLOSE to being a comparison.  Buehler ain't up against the wall.  He's either back or he aint'.  Sometimes guys need time to get back, and if that is him.....pulling it together at the end of the year and looking stronger as the season goes on is EXACTLY what you would expect. 

I could be wrong, Buehler could be an awful investment.  I can admit that, I actually have no problem admitting that and for the official record he is not my first choice (I continue to want Burnes) but Kluber is an awful comparison, there's none to be had between the two really.  Sorry. 

[Hugh2]

44 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Risking not having him pitch vs someone like Pivetta, who is more reliable but has much less upside.

Does anyone here really think we can elevate this club to something better than it's been the past several years by signing the same guys? Yeah, Pivetta is reliably a BOTRS and we got a pletora of those.  We don't need Pivetta, we need someone who can raise the ceiling of the rotation. 

And you know, I don't really want to say this because if it were true you'd think you would of seen a dominant performance but Pivetta is an enigma. From a pure stuff perspective, he's really good.....he should be better than his numbers suggest he is. 

[Hugh2]

31 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Pivetta is reliable until he's no longer reliable. We saw that with Giolito. 

Pivetta's ceiling is a 3 at his best? He pitches more often like a decent 4 and a 5 for a good rotation. Why spend large on that? 

Especially when we have it.  If we had Skubal and Wheeler at the top of our rotation but very little starting pitching after that Nick Pivetta would be the perfect offseason get for us.  

That is not the case. 

[mvp 78]

24 minutes ago, notin said:

See I think saying “Kluber was older” is lazy and unjustified.  Kluber was coming off a season with 160 IP and worth 3 fWAR.

It was his age 37 season. He pitched 164 innings the year before that. That's more than he pitched the previous 3 years combined. Arms have a limited amount of bullets in them. Corey snuck in an additional 250 productive innings after surgery and then was toast. His 2022 season was only worth 0.8 bWAR. 

If you look at his 2022 Statcast, his "stuff" looked nothing like what it was prior to surgery in 2018. He no longer had a valuable fastball or breaking ball. His whiff and k rates fell off a cliff. 19th percentile xBA. 26th percentile xSLG. 

He was on his way out due to the surgery and age. 

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Does anyone here really think we can elevate this club to something better than it's been the past several years by signing the same guys? Yeah, Pivetta is reliably a BOTRS and we got a pletora of those.  We don't need Pivetta, we need someone who can raise the ceiling of the rotation. 

And you know, I don't really want to say this because if it were true you'd think you would of seen a dominant performance but Pivetta is an enigma. From a pure stuff perspective, he's really good.....he should be better than his numbers suggest he is. 

Martin and Jansen are still available too. 

I'd rather they come back than Pivetta. 

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Especially when we have it.  If we had Skubal and Wheeler at the top of our rotation but very little starting pitching after that Nick Pivetta would be the perfect offseason get for us.  

That is not the case. 

I think we have a lot of 3/4/5 types in the org. We don't have guys to slot in at the top. 

[Hugh2]

3 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I think we have a lot of 3/4/5 types in the org. We don't have guys to slot in at the top. 

It's kind of crazy, but I wouldn't hate Jansen back here on a 1 year deal, maybe with a vesting option. 

[notin]

24 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Nah man, I call ******** on that I'm sorry.  Kluber was 37.  Father time beats us all, every single one of us.  Most baseball players are either retired or a mirror image of their younger self at 37. 

Banking on a 30 year old to put up average career numbers is an entirely different thing than saying a 37 year old can.  You're at that age where you're either IN SERIOUS DECLINE.....or any year you're going to fall off a cliff. Kluber ran off that cliff full throttle!!!! 

Kluber hit the wall that year, it's blatantly obvious he hit that wall.  Buehler can be a lot of things, for better or worse, but this is not even CLOSE to being a comparison.  Buehler ain't up against the wall.  He's either back or he aint'.  Sometimes guys need time to get back, and if that is him.....pulling it together at the end of the year and looking stronger as the season goes on is EXACTLY what you would expect. 

I could be wrong, Buehler could be an awful investment.  I can admit that, I actually have no problem admitting that and for the official record he is not my first choice (I continue to want Burnes) but Kluber is an awful comparison, there's none to be had between the two really.  Sorry. 

Right.  Every player slams into that magical wallat age 37.  
 

Highlighting Buehler solely by his age is shallow and incomplete.  His primary issues are not age-related.  It’s more about the number of stitches holding his UCL together.
 

Again, Kluber threw 160 inning AT AGE 36!  Buehler failed to do that at age 27. And 28. And when he did come back at age 29, he wasn’t that good.  Is he worth a one year gamble?  Maybe, but most likely it’s just a. waste.

Rather than spend on Buehler, get a reliever.  Or make a deal for a contracted pitcher some other team wants to move. Tyler Anderson? Erick Fedde? Jordan Montgomery?  There’s no rule you can only acquire free agents.  Yes, trading costs prospects, but none of those arms will cost you Kristian Campbell…

[Bellhorn04]

38 minutes ago, notin said:

See I think saying “Kluber was older” is lazy and unjustified.  Kluber was coming off a season with 160 IP and worth 3 fWAR.

And only 0.8 bWAR.  So it was a "system-dependent" year, crappy by one system, decent by another.  

Pointing out a 6+ year age difference is lazy and unjustified?  That's one of the nuttiest statements I've read here this year.

[Bellhorn04]

BTW the Kluber signing was not a horrible signing.  Nobody complained that loudly.  Mind you the market was down to a few scraps when he signed.  Didn't seem to be much competition for him. 

It was the fact that it was the only starter signing that offseason that was horrible. 

 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Pivetta is reliable until he's no longer reliable. We saw that with Giolito. 

Pivetta's ceiling is a 3 at his best? He pitches more often like a decent 4 and a 5 for a good rotation. Why spend large on that? 

I didn't say sign Pivetta.

I said Buehler has way higher upside and agree Pivetta's is as a #3.

I mentioned there is injury risk in even guys like Gio.

I was just talking risk and odds of missing lots of times. Also, someone suggested $19M x 2 for Buehrle, and that AAV is close to what Pivetta will get, so the risk with Pivetta is more years.

The reward can be much greater with Buehrle. I'm not doubting that and have agree on that point.

[moonslav59]

Does anyone believe all pitchers have the exact same injury risk?

I understand that is but one factor in making a choice, and eventually upside potential can reach a point, where it outweighs the higher injury risk factor. I fully understand those who want Buehrle- injury risk and all.

I guess I'm not understanding why it seems hard to understand my position, even if you disagree with it.

[notin]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

And only 0.8 bWAR.  So it was a "system-dependent" year, crappy by one system, decent by another.  

Pointing out a 6+ year age difference is lazy and unjustified?  That's one of the nuttiest statements I've read here this year.

Really?  Nuttier than the statement about pitchers with 2 TJs having an 89-90% success rate?  Or the one.about Pivetta being risky because Giolito got injured?

And it wasn’t just the age difference.  It was age vs very risky health history.  Why is that part left out of your summary?

Kluber didn’t work out, but he was less risky than Buehler, who, in case you didn’t notice, was pretty bad last year.  But the overall reality is you will have a better success rate with 37yo starting pitchers who were ok at 36 than you will pitchers coming off their second Tommy John.

Im not convinced the Sox really need another SP.  But as depth is a good thing, I’d prefer that pitcher not be Buehler.  When it comes to needing starter depth, Buehler is more of a cause than a solution.

The only decent remaining starters do have QOs (except Flaherty).  Granted, signing one keeps the Sox even with draft picks, so it’s not so punitive. But why limit to just free agents?  Or if you need to sign someone, sign bullpen arms.  Or better yet, if he really only wants 3 years, sign Teoscar.  But limit it to 3 years.  Signing him to a 4th and he will be 37, and then his talent will just evaporate immediately…

[moonslav59]

20 minutes ago, notin said:

Really?  Nuttier than the statement about pitchers with 2 TJs having an 89-90% success rate?  Or the one.about Pivetta being risky because Giolito got injured?

And it wasn’t just the age difference.  It was age vs very risky health history.  Why is that part left out of your summary?

Kluber didn’t work out, but he was less risky than Buehler, who, in case you didn’t notice, was pretty bad last year.  But the overall reality is you will have a better success rate with 37yo starting pitchers who were ok at 36 than you will pitchers coming off their second Tommy John.

Im not convinced the Sox really need another SP.  But as depth is a good thing, I’d prefer that pitcher not be Buehler.  When it comes to needing starter depth, Buehler is more of a cause than a solution.

The only decent remaining starters do have QOs (except Flaherty).  Granted, signing one keeps the Sox even with draft picks, so it’s not so punitive. But why limit to just free agents?  Or if you need to sign someone, sign bullpen arms.  Or better yet, if he really only wants 3 years, sign Teoscar.  But limit it to 3 years.  Signing him to a 4th and he will be 37, and then his talent will just evaporate immediately…

We'll never get anyone good, if we don't give up the back end year(s) on a winning bid.

I'm fine with going for RP'ers over a SP, and keeping the draft pick.

I'm not so sure we should trade away more prospects for what we need.

I would not have chosen Bregman, Teoscar or Santander as my big winter signing, but it is what it is. JH has gotten himself into a similar situation, where he ended up signing Story, at the last minute.

I'd be okay with Flaherty & Hoffman, or Flaherty & Teoscar/Santander. That's minimum.

I doubt we get Burnes. It looks like Devers ain't moving to 1B, so why get Bregman? Teoscar and Santander would further crowd the OF. Scott is not happening. Hoffman might be, too.

[moonslav59]

Tomoyuki Sugano just signed with the O's for $13M/1. Hell, he might have been a better risk than Buehler.

[Larry Cook]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Tomoyuki Sugano just signed with the O's for $13M/1. Hell, he might have been a better risk than Buehler.

Baltimore with O’Neil and sugano! Kind of different for them 

[notin]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

We'll never get anyone good, if we don't give up the back end year(s) on a winning bid.

I'm fine with going for RP'ers over a SP, and keeping the draft pick.

I'm not so sure we should trade away more prospects for what we need.

I would not have chosen Bregman, Teoscar or Santander as my big winter signing, but it is what it is. JH has gotten himself into a similar situation, where he ended up signing Story, at the last minute.

I'd be okay with Flaherty & Hoffman, or Flaherty & Teoscar/Santander. That's minimum.

I doubt we get Burnes. It looks like Devers ain't moving to 1B, so why get Bregman? Teoscar and Santander would further crowd the OF. Scott is not happening. Hoffman might be, too.

Depends.  What would Jordan Montgomery’s price tag be?  Or Erick Fedde’s?  Both have one year left, and should be available.

Fedde’s salary is pretty low, so he might cost something.  Montgomery?  Not likely much..

[moonslav59]

9 hours ago, notin said:

Depends.  What would Jordan Montgomery’s price tag be?  Or Erick Fedde’s?  Both have one year left, and should be available.

Fedde’s salary is pretty low, so he might cost something.  Montgomery?  Not likely much..

Who knows what they will "cost," these days, buy probably not that much, as in a top 3-5 prospect.

Both seem less risky than Buehler.

[notin]

10 hours ago, notin said:

Depends.  What would Jordan Montgomery’s price tag be?  Or Erick Fedde’s?  Both have one year left, and should be available.

Fedde’s salary is pretty low, so he might cost something.  Montgomery?  Not likely much..

On BTV, Fedde has a surplus value of $16.5mill, so he comes at a fairly steep price.  Montgomery, on the other hand, has a surplus value of (-$10.4mill).  Readily available.  Sure you might not be able to pawn off Yoshida or Story for him, but nearly everyone else in the entire organization is in play here…

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

Who knows what they will "cost," these days, buy probably not that much, as in a top 3-5 prospect.

Both seem less risky than Buehler.

Your second "less risky than Buehler" post in the last 12 hours LOL

Montgomery's 2025 salary is 22.5 mill.  If Buehler gets the projected 15 mill, it seems like Monty would put 50% more money at risk.