moonslav59

Umm, I think your list supports my position more than yours. These are the pitchers ranked 14 or higher: 6) Liriano 7) Billingsley 8) Verlander 10) Cain How about 2007? 1) Dice-K 4) P Hughes 5) H Bailey 10) Miller 11) Lincecum 16) Gallardo 2004? 2) Felix 7) Kazmir 13) Cain 16) A Miller 2008: 3) Chamberlain 4) Buchholz 7) Kershaw 8) F Morales 9) Bailey 10) D Price 15) Jake McGee 17) Wade Davis Yes, some did not do all that great, but many more did very well. Even the ones who did not do all that well may easily end up with a much better 5-8 initial years than Pomeranz will put up.

Well said, and how many 18 year old pitchers ever break into the top 14 rankings? This guy was a unique asset.

Certainly true, but 50% of Pedro for 4-6 years may blow away 2.4 years of Pomeranz.

My numbers on Pomeranz may be off as well. The second half of the season could make a difference, and it's his 2nd or 3 arbs next winter- not the first as is the case with Bogey.

$150K is a lot to a young kid with an uncertain future giving up a free ride education. I wonder where he'll be ranked in our system. After Kopech or Travis?

Not many 14th ranked pitchers fail. Besides, one could view Pomeranz as a "lottery ticket" as well. His record indicates there's a lot of risk involved by counting on him, as a lefty, moving to a new league, a new park, against new and stronger opponents to succeed (at least right away).

It's a tiny sampler size. Opps still have only a .690 OPS against Espi this year, so I'm not sure that the 4.08 ERA in just 70 IP is an indication of a major "struggle". Even if we want to call it a "struggle", the kid is only 18, and it's not a good idea to raise and lower an 18 year old's stock too much over a selected 70 IP stretch. In fact, Espi's stock, according to ranking services, has risen since last year. I hope this kid doesn't turn out to be the next Pedro, but we won't know for many years from now.

We had plenty of other good prospects, so I'm not sure it was absolutely necessary to part with Espi, Moncada or Beni to get a quality SP'er like DP with 2.4 years of control.

Yeah, I'm not an expert on arb projections, but often players get much less on their first arb year.

With Pomeranz in the fold, it certainly makes next year's budget easier to work with. We'll probably need one less SP'er now, and should have more money to acquire another SP'er and/or 1-2 RP'ers and maybe a big bat.

The Red Sox and first-round pick Jason Groome have agreed to terms on a $3.65MM signing bonus, reports Jon Heyman of FanRag Sports (via Twitter). The agreement, which is pending a physical, comes less than 24 hours before the deadline to sign 2016 draft picks. -Steve Adams

Updated with Pomeranz: Under contract for 2017 (7 players): $30M Price, $22M H. Ramirez, $20.6M Porcello, $19M Sandoval, $13.75M Pedroia, $10.5M Kimbrell, $6.5M Young. TOTAL: $123.35M (Note: Castillo's$10.25M Castillo and Craig's $6.2M contracts do not count on the luxury tax budget, if they remains off the 40 man roster.) Options ( 2 players): $13.5M Buchholz and $3.75M Hannigan TOTAL: $17.25M Arbs (9 players): Bogaerts:$650K > ~$3.5M (1st of 3) Bradley: $546K > ~$2.7M (1 of 4) Pomeranz $1.35M> ~$3.0M (2 of 3) Kelly: $2.6M>$2.5M (2 of 3 arbs) Ross: $1.25M> $1.5M (2 of 3) Holt: $606K > $1M (1 of 3) Leon: $minor > $800K (1 of 3) Layne: $564K> $700K (1 of 4) Rutledge: $minor> $700K (1 of 3) Workman: $540K > $600K (1 of 3) TOTAL ARBS: ~$17M TOTAL of 18 players: ~$158M ($141M without Buch and Hanigan) The 22 other players on the current 40 man roster (listed by seniority on the roster): Wright, Vazquez, Brentz, Betts, Hembree, Barnes, Coyle, Swihart, Shaw, E Rodriguez, Marrero, N Ramirez, B Johnson, Owens, Jerez, Light, Hernandez, Carson, Elias, Cuevas & LaMarre TOTAL: ~$12M Grand Total: $170M or $153M (No Buch/Hanigan) Now, add the $11M for player benefits and our Luxury Tax Total is... $181M or $163M That leaves us with about $9M to $26M to spend without going over the luxury limit as it is right now ($189M), however, the limit is expected to rise to over $200M and perhaps closer to $210M. That would mean we'll have between $20M and $30M, or if we dump Buch and Hanigan between $36M and $46M to spend on added salary and be close to the limit. That may appear like a lot of money, but finding a replacement for Papi (DH, 3B, LF or 1B) will not come cheap. We will probably also need a solid number 2 SP'er and at least 2 quality RP'ers to replace Uehara and Tazawa.

I'd have given Swihart instead of Espi as well. I'd also have traded Devers and Kopech instead. We may never know if the Padres would have accepted either.

His last 3 years have been in pitcher's parks. He's never won and held a slot in the rotation until this year, and that's during 6 years in the bigs. He's started 22 games once in his career. His second most before 2016 was 10. That being said, out of the 132 pitchers with 250+ IP since 2014, Drew places... 8th in ERA- at 73 (tied with Felix and Sale and Lester) 38th in xFIP- at 93 (just above Lackey and Porcello). I'm nota going to pretend to know more than Sox management. I don't like the trade, but certainly there is some evidence to show this guy has some talent. The juryw ill be out on this one for many years though.

Owens was never ranked as high as #14, especially while still in single-A. Pomeranz was traded for next to nothing this past winter. If the Sox liked this guy before 2016, they could have gotten him easily. So, his stock has really risen that much based on a tiny sample size of 100 IP? I'm not buying it.

I'm just not buying the fact that our scouts and management went from not liking Pomeranz enough to out bid the Padres (who acquired Pomeranz from the A’s for Yonder Alonso and Marc Rzepczynski) to thinking he's worth Espinoza now after just 100 IP more or experience. The more I think about it, the more I'm getting depressed. I'm with Hugh on this one. I'd rather have gone much larger to get someone more established and less risky.

I hate the theory that Espinoza is so far away from the bigs, we can afford to trade him. This kid was the best pitching prospect we've had since maybe Clemens.

Espinoza is a big overpay for a guy with just a half season of proven quality pitching. The Padres traded for this guy last winter for peanuts. Apparently, we didn't like him that much just 4-5 months ago.

I actually think Moncada is already ML ready on offense or at least very very close. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's why I'd like to see him taking reps at 3B or LF sooner rather than later.

It may come down to Moncada at 3B and Shaw/Pablo/HanRam at 1b/DH. Or, Shaw/Pablo at 3B and Shaw/HanRam at 1B with someone at DH. If Shaw and Pablo are better defensively at 3B than Moncada, why would we DH Pablo and Shaw so we can play Moncada at 3B?

He's dumped a lot of players right before they s*** the bed. I like his philosophy of developing closers and selling high.

I've been advocating giving Moncada some reps in practice at 3B or LF sooner rather than later. From what I hear, he might be "athletic" but he's not even a plus fielder at 2B after years of playing there. I doubt he turns into a better defensive 3Bman than Shaw, Pablo, Hernandez and others after one winter learning that new position. I carefully stated that I think we may see Moncada at DH quite a bit, UNTIL he learns a new position well enough to be a plus (or better than who we have at DH in his stead). It's not my ideal landing spot for him, but the Sox seem to be slow moving Moncada to 3B or LF, so I think DH might be is starting point in the bigs.

Too risky to extend for more than 1 year at $8-10M.

I think Beane has a different view on the value of the people he gets back in trades. He doesn't think he's selling low, but often the experts bash his trades, and hindsight has not shown him to be a great trader.

I'm not sure an injury-related poor 2016 performance has affected the stock price all that much. The A's will still demand a king's ransom in return.