I'd do 3/$66; 4/$80; or 5/90. Essentially, I'd pay $14 million for year 4, and $10 million for year 5, which is approximately what they paid Dempster for a 2 year deal with no upside potential.
Beyond Lester: Building a Rotation
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
P91: that's reasonable. Most people don't like using "5 years" and Shields in the same sentence. However, at that price point, with the lower AAV ($18M per will be what #2 SPs are making in 2017-19, not "aces"), it'd be a fair risk and trade off. And I would think Shields, especially at his age, would prefer a longer deal for the most money he can get guaranteed.
A really interesting read that may further explain Ben's groundball fetish. The pounding of the zone low along with a full year of Vaz stealing low strikes with his incredible framing could lead to tremendous results....
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-larger-strike-zone-declining-offense/
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-larger-strike-zone-declining-offense/
I think I would give Shields two options. Something like 2/45 and 5/75 with an opt out after three years. He can take a short deal to hit the market again after all the big names next year, or he can take a little more security by giving us at least an extra year that's relatively cheap.
Other people can emerge and become decent FAs in 2 years. Shields would also be 35 then. I've seen the short years option suggested now multiple times, but I really doubt Shields would be interested in that (or in an opt-out after three years, when he'd be 36). This is his last good chance to land a big contract.
I'm interested in Shields at something like what Plympton said upthread, but I have a feeling that we're going to see a great Sox pitching staff even if nothing changes from here on out. And as my feelings on things are always correct, Ben should stand pat.
Minneapolis Millers said:
While this may be true, so far, the market isn't giving it to him and time is growing short.
Pozo the Clown said:
Yeah, this. If he's not getting the big contract he wants, a shorter one that would give him the first two years of what he wants with a chance to get the rest later might be acceptable. If he's healthy and effective for these two years, someone will pony up for a three or four year deal when it's done.
Trotsky said:
I'm convinced the pitching is going to be better than people expect, but "great" seems like a reach. Good enough to go get a post season #1 at the deadline is, I think, the reasonable upside.
Of course, I'd love to be wrong.
nvalvo said:
I think it's asking a whole lot to have a guy who doesn't even project as an ace emerge as one in less than a full season of major league ball. I suppose it can happen, and I'd be delighted, but, well, yeah, I can't think it's likely.
Look at the ground ball rate of the pitchers they acquired.
Look at the ground ball rate of the Pawtucket pitchers who've moved on.
Look at the ground ball rate of last year's Pawtucket starter who they kept.
And yet - NO ONE, NO ONE, has Steven Wright penciled in as a starter.
Conventional wisdom, you can't build a rotation without true #1s (ideally 2 of them).
Conventional wisdom, you can't win in the NBA without a cluster of superstars.
The Red Sox are building the 2015 rotation like the NBA Hawks built their league leading roster.
Steven Wright will have double-digit wins for the Red Sox in 2015.
Look at the ground ball rate of the Pawtucket pitchers who've moved on.
Look at the ground ball rate of last year's Pawtucket starter who they kept.
And yet - NO ONE, NO ONE, has Steven Wright penciled in as a starter.
Conventional wisdom, you can't build a rotation without true #1s (ideally 2 of them).
Conventional wisdom, you can't win in the NBA without a cluster of superstars.
The Red Sox are building the 2015 rotation like the NBA Hawks built their league leading roster.
Steven Wright will have double-digit wins for the Red Sox in 2015.
Monbo Jumbo said:
This is a very bold prediction. Unless, of course, you mean for the Pawtucket Red Sox.
Pozo the Clown said:
We don't know what deals he's refused or how close he was to accepting them. Just because this is coming down to the wire doesn't mean it's not going to happen, nor that when it does happen, he won't get a contract fairly close to what people were predicting all along. He needs to make a deal, yes, but lots of teams also need a pitcher. For all we know he has multiple standing offers in the 4/80 range, which he hasn't taken because he's still trying to cajole a fifth year from somebody.
Monbo Jumbo said:
Steven Wright is probably less than even money to have double digit starts for the Red Sox. For it to happen, the Sox would either have to have had so many injuries that they go nine or ten deep for three months, or they'd have to have a need early in the season, before Owens and Rodriguez are deemed ready, and at a time when Workman can't, and Wright looks like a better option than Barnes and Escobar.
It's not impossible, but a lotta things have to go right including him pitching his balls off.
Hey, for now, we don't have to choose between Owens and Rodriguez. We can eagerly anticipate the progression of both. Owens = Pettitte and Rodriguez = Kershaw. Add Betts = Joe Morgan, and we've got lots of prospect love to throw around...
Minneapolis Millers said:
I've got this feeling that Brian Johnson is going to be the best of the batch.
gryoung said:
It's conceivable that, although it will 4/5 made up of southpaws (unprecedented), the 2016 rotation could consist of Porcello, Miley, Rodriguez, Owens and Johnson. I could see them swapping one of the lefties for a Syndergaard level of prospect. This many lefties might be a little scary but good southpaws have always succeeded in Fenway including Ruth, Grove, Parnell, Lee, Hurst and Lester. This is probably the best trio of Sox southpaws to arrive at close to the same time with Ball possibly having turned the corner too in the low minors.
Hurst, Tudor, Ojeda. The Sox couldn't live with more than one, kept Hurst. It was felt at the time that they couldn't get full value for Tudor and Ojeda because Fenway did not display LHP favorably.
gryoung said:
One way to look at it: I like David Wells as a ceiling comp for Johnson--similar body, similar repertoire, both known for control more than stuff, both surfer dudes from beach towns. And if you ask which of our three LHP prospects has the best chance of being as good as Wells, the answer might well be Johnson. But Johnson's upside probably stops there (or perhaps even short of there) and the other guys' go a bit further.
Savin Hillbilly said:
Yeah, I'd lay heavy odds on Johnson being the better pitcher in the short term (next 2 years), but I would also be surprised if one of Rodriguez or Owens wasn't the better pitcher long term.
Rudy Pemberton said:
Wells won 239 games because he was a good pitcher for a long time. He was only better than good for a few years scattered here and there. He was rarely the best pitcher in the rotation, and those teams were pretty bad; on the good teams he pitched for, he was typically a #3. Among 52 pitchers with at least 2000 innings between 1987 and 2007, he ranks 26th in ERA- and 22nd in FIP-. Obviously the 2000-inning bar tends to exclude guys who weren't good, so you could say that as good pitchers go, he was about average. Among that group, he's tied with Tim Wakefield and Pat Hentgen in ERA-, and with Brad Radke and John Burkett in FIP-. That's not even quite Hall of Very Good company; that's Hall of Solid and Productive.
Even so, you're probably right that he's a little over the top as a ceiling comp for Johnson. I guess I just find him an interesting comp because he strikes me as potentially a similar type.
In a perfect Sox world, Rodriguez would be the best of the three long term. Why? Johnson and Owens have higher probability of solid average or better major league careers. Rodriguez has better stuff and better chance to be very good or great. He also has better chance of flaming out. If he's the best then there is a high likelihood that two or three of these guys are in Boston rotation by middle of 16
It's going to be very fun following these guys up through Pawtucket and into Boston. Add in betts, Boegaerts, Castillo and maybe Moancada? It's a youth move like we haven't seen before.
It's going to be very fun following these guys up through Pawtucket and into Boston. Add in betts, Boegaerts, Castillo and maybe Moancada? It's a youth move like we haven't seen before.
Brian Johnson also has the highest probability of having a career like Kevin Morton. The love for his 2014 season is more than a little overblown. It's great that he put himself back on the radar, but it's hardly out-of-the-ordinary for a 23-year-old from a major college program to have a great season in AA. This year, he'll be a 24-year-old getting his first real taste of AAA, which is basically the end of prospect status. Let's see how he does there before we even consider him a real major league prospect, much less decide he's better than two pitchers who are 2 years younger yet already productive at the same level and possessing much better raw stuff. If there's a team that thinks Brian Johnson has the upside of David Wells, let's find that team and work out a trade.
Plympton91 said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "back on the radar." He had a solid 2013; a few too many walks, but his batted ball results were excellent (6.4 H/9, 0.4 HR/9), his FIP was decent (3.48) and his ERA was fine (2.54). His 2014 was a step forward, but it wasn't a step forward from mediocrity.
I have the same criticism, argue that it was a step from mediocrity given the level of competition. He was a 22-year-old graduate of a major college program pitching in low-A; it was only for half a season; and he didn't even average 5 innings per start or a strikeout an inning. It's nice that he did well on batted ball results, but it's about as impressive as a 14-year-old with a fake birth certificate dominating the Little League World Series.Savin Hillbilly said:
His 2014 compares favorably to Casey Fossum's AA season in 2001 that had everyone in Boston drooling over him, once you adjust for BABIP. He had a few more walks than Casey, and a lot fewer strikeouts, in almost an identical number of innings. Even with the better strikeout rate, Fossum was never consistently successful in the big leagues.
To the bolded: he was a two way player in college. He was closer to being raw than he was a finished product. Also, he spent a few months after he graduated eating out of a straw because he was drilled in the face with a liner. I'm still not all that high on him, but it isn't for that reason.Plympton91 said:
Plympton91 said:
What's your point, though? Of course it's possible that Johnson will turn out no better than Fossum; in fact this is a much more likely outcome than that he'll be anywhere near as good as Wells. This could be said of most pitching prospects who haven't hit triple-A yet. Is anybody denying it?
I was mainly objecting to the two posters who said they thought that Johnson was 1) likely to have the best career among the Red Sox current crop of pitching prospects and 2) while not likely to have the best career, might be better than Owens and Rodriguez are right now. My point was that you can't base "who is the better pitcher right now" on the ERA of a 23 year old in AA.Savin Hillbilly said:
Plympton91 said:
Better how? Brian Johnson is probably the most ready to pitch a major league game today. if i had my choice for a spot start I would probably go with Johnson. However Rodriguez and Owens have far more potential. Johnson at this point is what he probably going to be, an inning eating 4/5 starter who will keep you in most games.
Owens and Rodriguez have top of the rotation potential.
TomRicardo said:
That is far from a universal opinion. Soxprospects.com says Owens has the ceiling of a high end third starter, and of Rodriguez that he has the ceiling of a #2 with a realistic projection of a 3 and mlb.com has something similar. There's obviously a chance they exceed those projections, but it's not like we have any reasonable expectation that these guys are going to be anything more than good, solid pitchers.
Of course, if we held ourselves to reasonable expectations, this place would get pretty boring in a hurry.
May be in the minority here, but I'd absolutely jump on 3/50 (ish) for Shields. Would really bring the needed consistency that this rotation lacks. Only Porcello, Miley, and Masterson have a reasonable chance of making 30+ starts. Masterson might be regulated to the bullpen if the platoon issues continue to plague him.
He's not an ace, but theoretically the price has dropped enough that the Sox wouldn't have to pay him like one. At worst Shields is an innings eating mid-rotation guy.
He's not an ace, but theoretically the price has dropped enough that the Sox wouldn't have to pay him like one. At worst Shields is an innings eating mid-rotation guy.
They keep saying on MLB radio that Shields really wants to pitch for a west coast team. That may be one reason why his market is low right now. If he opens up his horizons, it may reinflate, at least to the 4/$80 range.
Separate topic, I think people are underrating Owens because the velocity on his fastball is 89-92 rather than 92-95. I think his height will compensate for some of that, even if he doesn't add a couple mph or at least get more consistent around 91-92 as he further refines his mechanics.
If I had to choose someone among our prospects to start a game tomorrow, it would not be Brian Johnson. It would be Steven Wright (perforance), or Escobar (full year of AAA, 2 years younger than Johnson).
Separate topic, I think people are underrating Owens because the velocity on his fastball is 89-92 rather than 92-95. I think his height will compensate for some of that, even if he doesn't add a couple mph or at least get more consistent around 91-92 as he further refines his mechanics.
If I had to choose someone among our prospects to start a game tomorrow, it would not be Brian Johnson. It would be Steven Wright (perforance), or Escobar (full year of AAA, 2 years younger than Johnson).
Rasputin said:
That is the first time I have ever seen soxprospects.com have a more pessimistic view on a player than Sickel and Law or anyone for that matter. Owens ceiling is No. 2 starter (hence top of the rotation) as Rodriguez. High end No. 3 might be the dumbest term in the litany of terrible terms to describe starting pitchers in term of a hypothetical rotation.
Plympton91 said:
I was talking between the three lefties. That said why would pick someone because of age instead of consistency? We aren't ranking them in terms of prospects, we are picking someone to pitch a MLB game tomorrow.
I'm not sure that Red Sox fans really overrate their prospects, it's just that it's really hard to project this stuff. Hanley, Pedroia, Lester all exceeded the more "reasonable" expectations of even their strongest supporters. Every player any of us suggested trading in a package for Johan Santana (Ellsbury? Lowrie? Buchholz? Masterson? Lester?) turned out to have at least pretty high performance peaks. Even guys like Nava and Reddick got to levels that I think most of us didn't foresee. On the other hand, you can have seasons like Boston got last year from Bradley and Bogaerts and Doubront and Workman and feel like they may have been overrated.Rasputin said:
I think you are in a huge majority here. 3/50 is peanuts for a guy like Shields. Even if he regresses big time, 16.5 million a year is a contract that is easily absorbed. Especially for only 3 years.foulkehampshire said:
However, I can't imagine a scenario where he settles for a contract like that, either in years or total value.
foulkehampshire said:
I think this is right. We have tons of upside in this rotation — starting with Buchholz, who's a decent King Felix impersonator when he has his act together — but we need some reliable good-quality innings.
If we could get Shields without needing to commit for his age 36 and 37 seasons, that's a huge win.
nvalvo said:
I'm isolating this as an excuse to post this piece Fangraphs did on Buchholz recently that is reason for some optimism.
http://www.fangraphs.com/community/what-to-make-of-clay-buchholz-for-2015/
A couple of interesting observations made during the piece:
Buster Olney @Buster_ESPN 34m34 minutes ago
One official involved in the Shields bidding does not expect the final numbers will be as high as $80 million/4 yrs. We'll see.
One official involved in the Shields bidding does not expect the final numbers will be as high as $80 million/4 yrs. We'll see.
Reading the mlbtraderumors summary, it may very well be that he wants to play in San Diego, but the Padres don't have the highest offer. So it could still work out.
Of course David Wells wanted to pitch in San Diego, but went to Boston because the offer was higher and then spent the whole time being pissed off he wasn't in San Diego.
Of course David Wells wanted to pitch in San Diego, but went to Boston because the offer was higher and then spent the whole time being pissed off he wasn't in San Diego.
Seems like if they did have the highest it would be over, so agreed. I think I'm still in the minority, but I'd gobble him up at this price. 220+ quality innings is nothing to sneeze at.snowmanny said:
