Extending Chris Sale---what will it take?

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Chris Sale is signed through 2019. What parameters would an extension have? Would DD approach him this offseason about it?

I would think 5 years $220 million with an opt out after year 3 of the new deal would be a good jumping off point. If signed after this season his contract would be a total of 7 years $248 million. That would blow Price's record contract out of the water. It also wouldn't get expensive until a time where the Sox don't have much salary commitments.

Thoughts?
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Wouldn't the point of doing it this offseason be to keep the money down a bit? I get that you're going short on years, but I think they'd shoot for more like 7/$220 total, hoping that slightly better than Price $, on a winning team, would be enough.

Also, for context, they need to be thinking about the B's, too, and maybe first.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,058
Hingham, MA
Too much can go wrong in 2.33 years of life as a starting pitcher. I'd rather just play out the contract and if he remains healthy just pay him what he deserves. But, it's not my money

edit: I don't get the rush to sign him. If he likes Boston he will stay so long as the money is fair. So now vs. after 2019 doesn't seem like it would make a difference unless he would rule out re-signing simply out of spite for the Red Sox not offering something sooner. But I doubt that would happen
 
Last edited:

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
I think you throw out something fair, but team favorable to exchange the long term security for both sides. If he bites, great. If not, you wait to see what Price does with his opt out before you start throwing out numbers like 5/$220. Expending over a third of the cap on two players seems insane to me when you have the kids to consider soon.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Wouldn't the point of doing it this offseason be to keep the money down a bit? I get that you're going short on years, but I think they'd shoot for more like 7/$220 total, hoping that slightly better than Price $, on a winning team, would be enough.

Also, for context, they need to be thinking about the B's, too, and maybe first.
The money isn't going down for him no matter the time. I just think you should take care of him now.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
David Price opting out.

If Price opts out, they will offer his ~30M per year to Sale for an additional 3 to 5 years. If not, I don't think they can afford to keep him without letting more than just one of the kids walk.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
That $32 million or so in Price's is going to be going up. I think Sale will be the first $40 million pitcher.
I'm guessing Kershaw beats him to it if he can just stay healthy next year. That said, if Price opts out after the 2018 season and the Sox immediately throw that money at Sale, buying out the last year of his contract, I think it's closer to 30M. If he makes it to free agency, yeah, he'll push 40.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Too much can go wrong in 2.33 years of life as a starting pitcher. I'd rather just play out the contract and if he remains healthy just pay him what he deserves. But, it's not my money
This is almost certainly the answer. Sale has been just incredible but 2+ years is an eternity. One of the reasons he was so absurdly valuable on the trade market is because of the ability avoid this scenario. I'd absolutely hate to guarantee big money to any pitcher 5-7 years in the future, and I certainly would be hesitant to do it for a guy I had no risk of losing in the near future.

I would never say never to anything, of course there is some point and some discount when a deal would eventually make sense for the team. But it's below some of the numbers being discussed. I might consider a 3 year extension at 25M a year (not that I think he would take it). But even then, there is a nonzero chance he doesn't even turn out to be worth half that from 2020-2022.
 
Last edited:

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
Too much can go wrong in 2.33 years of life as a starting pitcher. I'd rather just play out the contract and if he remains healthy just pay him what he deserves.
The Sox may not have that option if there is another team that would choose to pay him what he deserves. There is a division rival that plays in a LHH-friendly park who would certainly appreciate Sale's talent.
 

Wallball Tingle

union soap
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,518
I agree that it's too soon, but when's the time? At the end of the 2018 season, I'd be fine if they threw 6/200 out there if his performance is what it has been.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
At the end of 2018 he's going to wait for the market to set his price. I think you need to strike this offseason with an offer that leaves him no doubt about the Red Sox interest in paying him enough to not even consider alternatives.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
The problem with striking now (or this winter) on a Sale extension is the luxury tax threshold. Right now, he's a $6.5M hit on the cap. His options, taken one at a time, are $12M and $12.5M...more but still reasonable given the total salary of the team.

Re-working his deal to pay him $30M+ per year more than doubles his tax hit for 2018-2019, and likely costs them extra money and draft picks down the line. I think Snod's right. See what Price does, and if he goes, you immediately give his money to Sale. If he stays, then you see who else you have to let walk to pay Sale. Either way, no reason to do it sooner.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,760
Pittsburgh, PA
At the end of 2018 he's going to wait for the market to set his price. I think you need to strike this offseason with an offer that leaves him no doubt about the Red Sox interest in paying him enough to not even consider alternatives.
Right, the reason he'd consider a discount from his full market rate isn't for some love of Boston, it's because by buying early, we're taking on some injury risk and performance risk and, essentially, insuring him. And we're the only team who can do that.

Now, I think someone in Sale's position, who has never really been injured (missed just a little time in 2014, 174IP that year, 192+ all other years) and never really been anything but awesome (top-6 in AL CYA each of the last 5 years, avg 5.5 bWAR) might view that discount as smaller than we'd like. But it also means we're not insuring him for very much risk.

If we can get a discount to Expected-Kershaw dollars, even something like a 5@$40 extension (what with expected inflation that far out - what's a win worth these days, $8M? Even at current prices, that's fair value; any inflation on $/WAR, or above-average years for him, accretes to the team.
 

PudgeFIST

New Member
Aug 19, 2016
39
Is it just me, as i'm hearing nothing else yet, but isn't making the jump to $44mil/year a hell of figure to even suggest?
Call me crazy, but shouldn't we be thinking that someone has to break the $35mil/yr threshold first? (Greinke technically hits it but AAV is lower)

I like Sale, hell i love Sale, and while i think you have to exceed the Price
contract, i'd start a Mil or 2 higher, thinking maybe $35mil/yr does it.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
He's younger and better than Greinke who signed it when he was 32. I'd say he would get close to 40 (37-38ish?) if he were a free agent today.

Kershaw signed his deal in 2014 and is making about 32, and this was before the offensive surge The market has gone batshit crazy for starters since then. His contract number will be insane when he opts out. Maybe even closer to 45 (not taking health into account - just pure prime pitching ability).

I think Sale is the closest thing there is to Kershaw right now among ace pitchers approaching free agency and would clear 40 mill easily when he becomes one.
 
Last edited:

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
No, no no.

From Fangraphs in 2014: The Curse of the Unnecessary Contract Extension

Over the past few seasons, there have been several examples of nine-figure contract extensions that didn’t begin until well into the future:

PLAYER EXTENSION DATE YEARS COVERED ADDITIONAL YEARS/MONEY
Ryan Howard April 26, 2010 2012-16 5 years/$125 million
Troy Tulowitzki Nov. 30, 2010 2014-20 7 years/$134 million
Ryan Braun April 21, 2011 2016-20 5 years/$105 million
Ryan Zimmerman Feb. 26, 2012 2014-19 6 years/$100 million
Joey Votto April 3, 2012 2014-23 10 years/$225 million
Evan Longoria Nov. 26, 2012 2017-22 6 years/$100 million
Felix Hernandez Feb. 14, 2013 2015-19 5 years/$130 million
Justin Verlander March 29, 2013 2015-19 5 years/$140 million
Elvis Andrus April 4, 2013 2015-22 8 years/$120 million
Miguel Cabrera March 28, 2014 2016-23 8 years/$248 million

Of the deals listed above, only two aren’t entirely problematic...

The best gauge of whether these future extensions make sense is to speculate which teams would still offer them knowing what they know now. The best guess is that a vast majority of them wouldn’t.

Sentimental value aside, it simply doesn’t make sense to guarantee players the value of a small private island when they’re already under contract. In doing so, GMs forfeit the opportunity to gain more information and certainty on their investment — and subject themselves to any number of things that could go wrong. And yet, even as the wreckage of ill-advised deals piles up across the league, one team after another continues to take the dive.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
yea, buying up arb years for extra FA makes sense, but giving a huge "discounted" contract years before we need to doesnt make any sense.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,421
They are set up pretty nicely to pay Sale starting in 2020: The only contracts on the books per Sportrac are Price and Pedroia.

The problem is that they're also going to have to replace two starting pitchers (Porcello and Pomeranz) plus a closer (Kimbrel) and a middle-of-the-order bat (Hanley), plus they're going to have to either pay Bogaerts FA money or replace him, too.

I don't see anyone in the Red Sox system who looks like a good bet to be ready to step into any of those roles come 2020 (Groome's the only one who looks like even a halfway-decent bet to ever be ready to step into any of those roles, and even if he goes a level a year, he'd be starting 2020 in Pawtucket).

So they're going to have to buy some dudes. And meanwhile, Betts and Bradley will both be going into their last arb years, and Rodriguez and Benintendi will both be in arb, which will further constrict payroll.

My point is that this team is pretty much locked in for the next couple of years, but there's a tremendous amount of uncertainty beyond that. And in that context, I think it's unwise to start by committing to a giant Sale extension.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
For a little context on the year Chris Sale is having...

1999 Pedro: 213.1 ip, 23-4, 2.07 era, 243 era+, 0.92 whip, 13.2 k/9, 9.7 bWAR
2000 Pedro: 217.0 ip, 18-6, 1.74 era, 217 era+, 0.74 whip, 11.8 k/9, 11.7 bWAR
1986 Clemens: 254.0 ip, 24-4, 2.48 era, 169 era+, 0.97 whip, 8.4 k/9, 8.9 bWAR
1990 Clemens: 228.1 ip, 21-6, 1.93 era, 211 era+, 1.08 whip, 8.2 k/9, 10.6 bWAR
2004 Schilling: 226.2 ip, 21-6, 3.26 era, 148 era+, 1.06 whip, 8.1 k/9, 7.9 bWAR
2016 Porcello: 223.0 ip, 22-4, 3.15 era, 141 era+, 1.01 whip, 7.6 k/9, 5.1 bWAR
2017 Sale: 148.1 ip, 13-4, 2.37 era, 192 era+, 0.88 whip, 12.8 k/9, 5.2 bWAR
2017 Sale (projected): 233.1 ip, 20-6, 2.37 era, 192 era+, 0.88 whip, 12.8 k/9, 8.2 bWAR

It just goes to show, that even though Sale is having a ridiculously great season, he's not even close to peak Pedro. Maybe not even peak Clemens.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
It just goes to show, that even though Sale is having a ridiculously great season, he's not even close to peak Pedro. Maybe not even peak Clemens.
To be fair, is anyone claiming that he is?

I've heard it claimed that he's the most electric and "must see" starter since Pedro's peak, but I don't take that to mean he's as good as Pedro was. Just the best we've seen since Pedro.

None of that is really all that relevant to discussions about when to extend him and for how much.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,178
Washington
Sale is awesome, but isn't there injury concern even beyond a typical SP because of his mechanics/delivery?


On the plus side, maybe that makes Sale a little more likely to accept a discounted extension.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
People have been speculating on that since he was drafted - I believe Keith Law espoused he should be made a reliever originally, because of it - and so far he's not run into anything. If the mechanics were that troublesome, I'd imagine he'd have had an issue by now (moreso than any other pitcher anyway), considering how many innings and pitches he throws. Frankly I'm not sure it would hurt his AAV all that much even if his elbow blew out on the last day of his current deal - someone would still give him the 'discounted' numbers being thrown around.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
To be fair, is anyone claiming that he is?

I've heard it claimed that he's the most electric and "must see" starter since Pedro's peak, but I don't take that to mean he's as good as Pedro was. Just the best we've seen since Pedro.

None of that is really all that relevant to discussions about when to extend him and for how much.
No, I haven't seen anyone say he's been as good as Pedro. I just wanted to make the point that while Sale has been unreal this year, Pedro is just....on a completely other level.

As for whether to extend him...

Well, I think I side with those who say wait. A lot can happen in 2+ years. Injuries, the market, who knows what else.

One thing to consider is that if they re-sign him (or extend him or whatever) so that he's still on the roster at, say, age 36-37, while it's not likely that he will be a great starter still at that point (very few are), he could still be either a useful starter or possibly a still elite reliever. Imagine him in an Andrew Miller type role, albeit throwing more like 90-91 rather than 95-96 (because if he throws 95-96 he's still probably an elite starter). With a 90-91mph fastball, a nice changeup, a nasty slider, and the kind of control he has, he'd still be a pretty awesome weapon. Would you want to have that guy at that kind of money? No, probably not. But if you go into an extension assuming you'd get 3 great years as a starter, 1-2 as a decent starter, and then 1-2 as a nasty bullpen weapon, that might be worth it in the long run.
 

PudgeFIST

New Member
Aug 19, 2016
39
The current CBA will still be in effect at the point he actually hits free agency. Even if he stays healthy, what are the ramifications of committing 1/5 of a teams(under the "cap") payroll to ONE GUY? With that being said, I'm in the school of spending up to, but not over the cap. If you can't be consistently competitive spending $200 million dollars you are an idiot, or have historically bad luck(or judgement)

I know the 1/5 of total payroll is a more common occurrence in the NBA, but the rosters are smaller.

I guess i just can't wrap my brain around it. 40+mil for one guy.

Maybe we let somebody else pay that?
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
For a little context on the year Chris Sale is having...

1999 Pedro: 213.1 ip, 23-4, 2.07 era, 243 era+, 0.92 whip, 13.2 k/9, 9.7 bWAR
2000 Pedro: 217.0 ip, 18-6, 1.74 era, 217 era+, 0.74 whip, 11.8 k/9, 11.7 bWAR
1986 Clemens: 254.0 ip, 24-4, 2.48 era, 169 era+, 0.97 whip, 8.4 k/9, 8.9 bWAR
1990 Clemens: 228.1 ip, 21-6, 1.93 era, 211 era+, 1.08 whip, 8.2 k/9, 10.6 bWAR
2004 Schilling: 226.2 ip, 21-6, 3.26 era, 148 era+, 1.06 whip, 8.1 k/9, 7.9 bWAR
2016 Porcello: 223.0 ip, 22-4, 3.15 era, 141 era+, 1.01 whip, 7.6 k/9, 5.1 bWAR
2017 Sale: 148.1 ip, 13-4, 2.37 era, 192 era+, 0.88 whip, 12.8 k/9, 5.2 bWAR
2017 Sale (projected): 233.1 ip, 20-6, 2.37 era, 192 era+, 0.88 whip, 12.8 k/9, 8.2 bWAR

It just goes to show, that even though Sale is having a ridiculously great season, he's not even close to peak Pedro. Maybe not even peak Clemens.
Why is Schilling's bWAR so close to Sale's projected numbers, when Sale in this scenario would blow away his adjusted ERA, K rate, and even exceed his inning total?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
You have to think he has a shot at the MVP at this pace, right?

To me it's between Judge (who has really cooled off), Altuve and Sale.

Verlander won it in 2011 and Kershaw in 2014, and Sale's season may end up being better than both of theirs.

He is roughly two WAR higher than the next best AL pitcher (Kluber also threw a gem tonight).
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
You have to think he has a shot at the MVP right?

To me it's between Judge (who has really cooled off), Altuve and Sale.

Verlander won it in 2011 and Kershaw in 2014, and Sale's season may end up being better than both of theirs.

He is roughly two WAR higher than the next best pitcher (Kluber also threw a gem tonight).
I think Altuve is the prohibitive favorite at this point
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Sale vs. Cleveland. How much confidence does it inspire should he face them in the playoffs? On the plus side, we're talking about CHRIS SALE, who has been just ridiculous this year and has been one of the very best pitchers in baseball the past 5 years or so. So yeah, no worries, right?

But...

His career numbers against Cleveland...aren't very good. And it's a pretty good-sized sample size.

28 g, 115.2 ip, 117 h, 4.44 era, 1.30 whip, 9.8 k/9

The past two years:

3 g, 15.1 ip, 21 h, 9.39 era, 1.83 whip, 10.6 k/9

So...yeah, not inspiring.

I know this is a ways away. But the media is already talking about it...so I thought it might be worth a mention.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I think Altuve is the prohibitive favorite at this point
I don't know. Altuve is having an excellent season, but he's also on a strong and well balanced team in a somewhat weak division. Houston, minus Altuve is probably still in first.

Sale's also been having an excellent season, but he's been the one season-long constant in the Boston rotation. The team is 17 and 6 when he starts, and he's never put a game out of reach all by himself. I realize the offense is not under his control, much like the rest of the Houston offense is not under Altuve's control, but the practical upshot is that he's given the Sox the opportunity to win in nearly all his starts. Boston, minus Sale, is probably a .500-ish team at this point if they had a hypothetical .500 starter to replace him with (who'd go less innings, taxing the bullpen more.) If you replaced him with what we actually have, say Johnson/Fister/Owens, we'd be neck and neck with the Jays in the cellar.

It's contextual, but the MVP is a contextual award.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I don't know. Altuve is having an excellent season, but he's also on a strong and well balanced team in a somewhat weak division. Houston, minus Altuve is probably still in first.

Sale's also been having an excellent season, but he's been the one season-long constant in the Boston rotation. The team is 17 and 6 when he starts, and he's never put a game out of reach all by himself. I realize the offense is not under his control, much like the rest of the Houston offense is not under Altuve's control, but the practical upshot is that he's given the Sox the opportunity to win in nearly all his starts. Boston, minus Sale, is probably a .500-ish team at this point if they had a hypothetical .500 starter to replace him with (who'd go less innings, taxing the bullpen more.) If you replaced him with what we actually have, say Johnson/Fister/Owens, we'd be neck and neck with the Jays in the cellar.

It's contextual, but the MVP is a contextual award.
You may be right, which unfortunately makes me think it's even more likely that Judge wins it as well as the ROY.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,241
I don't know. Altuve is having an excellent season, but he's also on a strong and well balanced team in a somewhat weak division. Houston, minus Altuve is probably still in first.

Sale's also been having an excellent season, but he's been the one season-long constant in the Boston rotation. The team is 17 and 6 when he starts, and he's never put a game out of reach all by himself. I realize the offense is not under his control, much like the rest of the Houston offense is not under Altuve's control, but the practical upshot is that he's given the Sox the opportunity to win in nearly all his starts. Boston, minus Sale, is probably a .500-ish team at this point if they had a hypothetical .500 starter to replace him with (who'd go less innings, taxing the bullpen more.) If you replaced him with what we actually have, say Johnson/Fister/Owens, we'd be neck and neck with the Jays in the cellar.

It's contextual, but the MVP is a contextual award.
I think you're right about context, but I think to many voters context = "Altuve is the best player on the best team, therefore, he's the MVP." Especially with the still-present bias against pitchers winning MVPs
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think you're right about context, but I think to many voters context = "Altuve is the best player on the best team, therefore, he's the MVP." Especially with the still-present bias against pitchers winning MVPs
And he "held the team together" while Correa, Springer, and several pitchers were injured. And he's an overachieving mighty mite. He's exactly the type of guy the voters will flock to, and he is having a great season.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
I think you're right about context, but I think to many voters context = "Altuve is the best player on the best team, therefore, he's the MVP." Especially with the still-present bias against pitchers winning MVPs
As to the pitching bias - Verlander won his MVP in 2011 when Ellsbury had his 9.5 win season - 2.5 higher than Verlander (though rougly equal on b-ref). The Sox missed the playoffs by one game, but Verlander did fit the mold of the best player on a playoff team, so he eked it out.

Kershaw was up against McCutchen in 2014 whose teams both made the playoffs, and Kershaw won that battle. Though in that case Stanton stole a lot of the votes and finished ahead of Cutch even though the Marlins sucked.

There is recent precedent at least. I think if Sale wins a few more of the types of games he won last night, he'll get more attention. I don't think he's there yet, but with Judge fading, he could get more consideration. Though I agree that Altuve has the scrappiness factor.
 
Last edited:

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
Sale vs. Cleveland. How much confidence does it inspire should he face them in the playoffs? On the plus side, we're talking about CHRIS SALE, who has been just ridiculous this year and has been one of the very best pitchers in baseball the past 5 years or so. So yeah, no worries, right?

But...

His career numbers against Cleveland...aren't very good. And it's a pretty good-sized sample size.

28 g, 115.2 ip, 117 h, 4.44 era, 1.30 whip, 9.8 k/9

The past two years:

3 g, 15.1 ip, 21 h, 9.39 era, 1.83 whip, 10.6 k/9

So...yeah, not inspiring.

I know this is a ways away. But the media is already talking about it...so I thought it might be worth a mention.
Of course the media's talking about it, they get paid to sucker people into viewing bogus content by manufacturing enticing narratives. What can you tell me about his numbers playing for the 2017 Red Sox while pitching to his regular catcher against members of the current Cleveland team?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Of course the media's talking about it, they get paid to sucker people into viewing bogus content by manufacturing enticing narratives. What can you tell me about his numbers playing for the 2017 Red Sox while pitching to his regular catcher against members of the current Cleveland team?
I guess you really don't take seriously any notion of a pitcher struggling against certain teams. Because every single game is a unique event, and I could simply say to any such claim, for example, "Well, what can you tell me about his numbers playing for the 2017 Red Sox while pitching at home with his regular catcher against this exact lineup and in this exact situation?" And the answer, of course, would be...nothing. Because every game, every circumstance, is totally unique.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,241
I guess you really don't take seriously any notion of a pitcher struggling against certain teams. Because every single game is a unique event, and I could simply say to any such claim, for example, "Well, what can you tell me about his numbers playing for the 2017 Red Sox while pitching at home with his regular catcher against this exact lineup and in this exact situation?" And the answer, of course, would be...nothing. Because every game, every circumstance, is totally unique.
Chris sale made his major league debut in 2010. Only chief wahoo remains from that years indians' squad.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,251
Sale's CLE start was 3 runs of BABIP shit in the 1st, and two two-run HRs each in the 2nd/5th. not great but it could have easily been 6 IP, 4 ER which any ace is going to have sometimes. that was also just one of those insane baseball games, 12-10 with Carrasco vs Sale. that is just not an October baseball game.

he should be pitching @CLE Thursday the 24th too, let's see what happens then.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
I guess you really don't take seriously any notion of a pitcher struggling against certain teams. Because every single game is a unique event, and I could simply say to any such claim, for example, "Well, what can you tell me about his numbers playing for the 2017 Red Sox while pitching at home with his regular catcher against this exact lineup and in this exact situation?" And the answer, of course, would be...nothing. Because every game, every circumstance, is totally unique.
Yeah, I don't take it very seriously in general. There could be park effects, sure, and the opposing coaching staff's plan of attack (if that staff remains consistent), but generally speaking there's just too much roster turnover on most teams to make a multi-year comparison useful. Add in any changes in Sale's approach over the years, his team change, and the fact that we know he lets his catcher call all the pitches, and yes, I'm waiting till the 24th to see how he does in those particular circumstances.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Chris sale made his major league debut in 2010. Only chief wahoo remains from that years indians' squad.
Totally get that, which is why I gave not only his career numbers against Cleveland, but the last two years' worth of numbers specifically.

Small sample size of course. And it may mean nothing. But if they do mean something, the numbers aren't encouraging.

Therefore... I hope they mean nothing.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
I don't know. Altuve is having an excellent season, but he's also on a strong and well balanced team in a somewhat weak division. Houston, minus Altuve is probably still in first.
I hate this argument. I'm not saying that voters don't think this way. They obviously do. But I hate this argument.

It draws votes away from players like Trout (in part seasons) who clearly brought the most value to the field in a vacuum, but who are discounted for no reason other than his GM built a shitty team around him. Or in this case, away from Altuve because he is lucky enough to have a GM who built a monster roster around him.

But hey, the way the award is described leaves it open to interpretation so it's a factor.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,481
Rogers Park
It draws votes away from players like Trout (in part seasons) who clearly brought the most value to the field in a vacuum, but who are discounted for no reason other than his GM built a shitty team around him.
It's even worse than that. His GM has actually done well, making some savvy trades and smart bargain bin pickups (Simmons, Maybin, Petit, Norris, etc...). It's the owner's questionable judgment that has tied the GM's hands behind his back by spending money hand over fist on past performance from Pujols and Hamilton.

We complain about how the Sandoval signing hamstrings a roster, but that's only $18m AAV. Try to win while spending $50m AAV on -2 WAR. It's frankly amazing they're a .500ish team, even starting with Trout.

At least they're done paying Hamilton after this year.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
It's even worse than that. His GM has actually done well, making some savvy trades and smart bargain bin pickups (Simmons, Maybin, Petit, Norris, etc...). It's the owner's questionable judgment that has tied the GM's hands behind his back by spending money hand over fist on past performance from Pujols and Hamilton.

We complain about how the Sandoval signing hamstrings a roster, but that's only $18m AAV. Try to win while spending $50m AAV on -2 WAR. It's frankly amazing they're a .500ish team, even starting with Trout.

At least they're done paying Hamilton after this year.
If you wan to go that route, they have ~40M tied up in -0.4 fWAR between Pablo and Hanley. But now I feel like P91, so I'm gonna go shower.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
You lot ought to lighten up a bit. It's the MVP. I am not 100% sure, but something tells me this merry-go round discussion has happened before. Nobody is stomping on the various WAR leaders.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Where does this season for Sale rank among the great seasons by a Red Sox starting pitcher in history? It's short of peak Pedro, but it's gotta be close to Clemens' best, right? Better than Eck in 1978. Better than Schilling in 2004. Better than anything Lester did. Better than Beckett in 2007.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
He's in the conversation of best by non-Pedro.

Compared to Clemens:

Clemens top ERA+ 211 to Sale's 181.
FIP 2.18 to Sale's 1.92
WHIP .989 to Sale's .88
K's 291 to Sale's pace well over 300
fWAR 9.2 to Sale's pace of 10.2 - though Clemens is blowing him away in bWAR.

Just to put Pedro in context - his ERA+ in 2000 was 291. By that metric, Sale's year would be Pedro's 7th best season.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,688
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Where does this season for Sale rank among the great seasons by a Red Sox starting pitcher in history? It's short of peak Pedro, but it's gotta be close to Clemens' best, right? Better than Eck in 1978. Better than Schilling in 2004. Better than anything Lester did. Better than Beckett in 2007.
I think for a full-season starter comparisions, ERA+ is a good place to look to begin to assess relative dominance - how good was the SP compared to the league at the time? Granted it's not perfect, but it translates into a kind of end-of-day effectiveness across the season as opposed to favoring, say, a lot of strikeouts. Once excellent seasons are identified, they can be parsed out more finely.

Sale's current ERA+ is 181. He's close to Grove's 1936 season: 17-12, 2.81, 189 ERA+, 1.19 WHIP, 130 K, 253 1/3 IP, 22 CG, 6 SHO.

I'd love to see a spreadsheet, but as you say, short of peak Pedro - and short of old time Cy Young in 1901 and Dutch Leonard in 1914. I'd give Clemens the edge in 1990, but would say Sale is close to some of Clemens' other seasons to merit discussion.

He's better than 2007 Beckett's regular season - but Beckett was sublime in the post-season, including his clutch 8 inning, one run, elimination start against CLE in game 5 of the ALCS. That could be an interesting discussion.

Final thought on Sale - as far as those older season comps go, we can't just ignore CGs and SHOs, but that sort of thing isn't in the pitcher's control now. There might be an approximate stat though - "Getting to the Closer" or something. And Sale seems good at that - he's completed the 8th in 6 starts out of 24. He's completed the 7th in 18 out of 24 starts. We could parse it more finely for situations where he left without men on base, I suppose, but he's also got 6 games where he completed the 7th and allowed 0 runs. So hypothetically duplicating Grove's 22 CGs, and 6 SHOs out of 30 starts, seems to be close, given that Sale has games to go, but, sans closer, likely wouldn't have converted all his starts to CGs or SHOs if allowed to.

(The CG and CG SHOs are probably the things I miss most about MLB from my youth - the added drama of can your favorite starter make it through the whole game. An important factor in playground bragging rights v. Yankees fans in central CT, and all that.)
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Thanks grimshaw. Doing a little research myself. Looks like I did some of this earlier in the thread

2007 Beckett: 200.2 ip, 20-7, 3.27 era, 3.08 fip, 145 era+, 1.14 whip, 8.7 k/9, 6.5 bWAR
1999 Pedro: 213.1 ip, 23-4, 2.07 era, 1.39 fip, 243 era+, 0.92 whip, 13.2 k/9, 9.7 bWAR
2000 Pedro: 217.0 ip, 18-6, 1.74 era, 2.17 fip, 217 era+, 0.74 whip, 11.8 k/9, 11.7 bWAR
1986 Clemens: 254.0 ip, 24-4, 2.48 era, 2.81 fip, 169 era+, 0.97 whip, 8.4 k/9, 8.9 bWAR
1990 Clemens: 228.1 ip, 21-6, 1.93 era, 2.18 fip, 211 era+, 1.08 whip, 8.2 k/9, 10.6 bWAR
2004 Schilling: 226.2 ip, 21-6, 3.26 era, 3.11 fip, 148 era+, 1.06 whip, 8.1 k/9, 7.9 bWAR
2016 Porcello: 223.0 ip, 22-4, 3.15 era, 3.40 fip, 141 era+, 1.01 whip, 7.6 k/9, 5.1 bWAR
1978 Eckersley: 268.1 ip, 20-8, 2.99 era, 3.70 fip, 139 era+, 1.23 whip, 5.4 k/9, 7.3 bWAR
1974 Tiant: 311.1 ip, 22-13, 2.92 era, 3.15 fip, 133 era+, 1.17 whip, 5.1 k/9, 7.8 bWAR
1967 Lonborg: 273.1 ip, 22-9, 3.16 era, 2.95 fip, 112 era+, 1.14 whip, 8.1 k/9, 4.1 bWAR
2017 Sale (projected): 233.0 ip, 19-5, 2.51 era, 1.92 fip, 181 era+, 0.88 whip, 12.9 k/9, 7.8 bWAR