Sox acquire Wade Miley for De La Rosa, Webster, and minor leaguer
- Thread starter LesterFan
- Start date
Isn't there already a spot for a kid? Is it really a sure thing that Joe Kelly will be the one to ride it out all year, healthy or not? His stuff projects to do well out of the bullpen too and if one of the kids is able to show that they'd be more reliable out of spring training, I don't think it would surprise anybody if they take the fifth spot from Kelly. I'm not so sure that he has that spot locked down at all.
A few observations. The Sox acquired a ground-ball throwing lefty who can throw 200+ innings with generally better than league average stuff for two prospects who have hit their mid-20s and some other minor league body. Only the biggest prospect humper with the longest leash can hate this deal.
Furthermore, those criticizing this deal assume that they know more than the entire Sox organization about De La Rosa and/or Webster. Fine, you are smarter than Ben Cherrington (I mean, who isn't?) but are you smarter than the entire Sox collective? If De La Rosa was really going to become a top of the rotation starter and Miley was such a bottom of a rotation pitcher, do you think that Farrell et al would allow the FO to pull the trigger on this? Because if you do, you are either delusional or need to be hired by a ML front office immediately.
Lastly, its pretty clear brandonchristensen isn't the only poster here who hasn't heard of Wade Miley (good on him for his honesty btw). It would help the discussion if people took a look at his numbers rather than referring to him as a fifth starter or even a bottom of the rotation one. Its not an apt description and doesn't really allow for proper framing of the discussion around this deal.
Furthermore, those criticizing this deal assume that they know more than the entire Sox organization about De La Rosa and/or Webster. Fine, you are smarter than Ben Cherrington (I mean, who isn't?) but are you smarter than the entire Sox collective? If De La Rosa was really going to become a top of the rotation starter and Miley was such a bottom of a rotation pitcher, do you think that Farrell et al would allow the FO to pull the trigger on this? Because if you do, you are either delusional or need to be hired by a ML front office immediately.
Lastly, its pretty clear brandonchristensen isn't the only poster here who hasn't heard of Wade Miley (good on him for his honesty btw). It would help the discussion if people took a look at his numbers rather than referring to him as a fifth starter or even a bottom of the rotation one. Its not an apt description and doesn't really allow for proper framing of the discussion around this deal.
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
That second point is a huge problem. What are we suppose to do? Blindly trust a team to make good decisions because they "know more than us"? We can't have ideas or criticize them because we don't know as much. I bet you the Red Sox have really no idea on what those players will become because otherwise teams would never regret a trade.
Well, at the very least history suggests that the Red Sox know more about RDLR and Webster's chances than the Diamondbacks do.GilaMonster said:
I personally don't have any problem criticizing the Red Sox front office, but I think it is important to remember that the gap between what they know and what we know is much larger for prospects than it is for established major leaguers.
I think you're missing Dejesus' point. He means that with regards to Webster and RDLR. They should have enough information at this point to make a relatively accurate assumption on what type of pitchers they will become. We don't have nearly as much info on those two as they do.GilaMonster said:
GilaMonster said:
To be clear, its fine to criticize the front-office. That said, most of the criticism here is of the knee-jerk variety and it assumes that the front office doesn't have more information on the players involved than you. For example, what if the Sox saw something in De La Rosa's medicals (and I am not suggesting they actually did) that suggested he was headed for more arm trouble? People here aren't likely to know that and we should take that sort of inside information into consideration.
In short, its a safe assumption that the Sox brass knows more than you do. There is a reason they get paid for this while you (and I) spend hours of our life ruminating on the team on an internet messageboard.
And giving the kids a rotation spot doesn't mean you don't have an above average rotation.Darnell's Son said:
And you really do hope they think long term. Thinking short term is how organizations get totally screwed.
3 years is a pretty long time. Long enough for ERod and Owens to graduate, for Ball to move further along, trades to be made, etc etc. The Sox are making the bet that Miley is a better choice over that time frame than RDLR/Webster/Prospect and I don't think it's unreasonable one to make.Rasputin said:
Of course I hope they think long term, I said I hope they don't think like you. Using a rotation slot to figure out who's good instead of a guy like Wade Miley is sacrificing wins for the future. You can give the kids spot starts and bring them up for the inevitable DL stints to figure out who the Next Great One is. We don't need to suffer now to succeed later.
Rasputin said:
Right, but what's the long term? You can get lost in the horizon, too - this move solidifies the rotation for three years, plus anything they can get in a team-friendly arb buyout ... so there's even 4 or 5 possible. I'd guess five years out is about the longest view you can reasonably take with any certainty, isn't it?
If Miley is acquired for the proposed package, I think I am OK with it. He has pretty good peripherals and seems like a GB machine, I think he's a legit 3/4 with a peak projection of a 2 if everything goes right for him (look at Miley's rookie year). I believe that with Lester gone, the best way to go about the remainder of this offseason is to forget about a #1. Scherzer, too much money. Hamels, too much money and prospects. Cueto, too many prospects. With McCarthy off the board, give Masterson his 1 year, 10 millish show-me deal, trade Cespedes and lesser prospects to the Reds for Latos. Simon, Latos, Cueto and Leake are all FA after this season, Cespedes will fill a need while allowing Cincinnati to compete with their FA-to-be rotation + Bailey. A rotation of Latos/Miley/Masterson/Buchholz/Kelly with Ranaudo/Johnson/Owens/Rodriguez holding the fort at AAA can allow the offense to carry the team and win 87-92 games.
See how Owens/Rodriguez develop, overspend for Zimmermann/Cueto/Latos/Price/Shark if it's determined to be necessary next year.
See how Owens/Rodriguez develop, overspend for Zimmermann/Cueto/Latos/Price/Shark if it's determined to be necessary next year.
So, really quick-and-dirty, but one way of looking at this:
The issue of years of control, value, and potential ceilings for the players involved all come in to play, and all of those have values and probabilities that can be tough to measure exactly (though someone who wants to do a little more work on this when it isn't late at night is welcome to), so I will be making a lot of rough estimates/assumptions.
Let's establish some parameters I am assuming for this thought exercise:
value of a "#1/#2" starter (pre-arb/arb): $80 million (these values are accounting for the actual RDLR/Webster service time, roughly)
value of a "#3/#4" starter (pre-arb/arb): $40 million
Probability of one of our NINE starter prospects becoming an "ace/#1/#2": .05
Probability of one of our NINE starter prospects becoming an "#3/#4": .10
Now, we don't know which ones will pan out (that's the whole point), so we are assuming that they all have a roughly equal chance of these outcomes, given that some have put up great MiL numbers but haven't pitched in the majors, while others have made The Show but haven't demonstrated that level of success yet.
So, with those assumptions, we can say that with 9 guys at these odds and values we would expect a return from the two that pan out to be about 72 million:
((.05*9)*80)+(.1*9)*40) = 72
Now, having traded two of them, we only have 7 guys who could fulfill these outcomes, leading the odds to change:
((.05*7)*80)+(.1*7)*40) = 56
So our "expected value" (I realize that I am making these numbers up, but with some guidance from other sources and the back of this envelope) to be gained from our starter prospects has dropped from $72 million to $56 million, a difference of 16 million. (Also, this obviously assumes that the remaining prospects end up providing 0 value due to flaming out, but there is also a chance that some will become relievers, and provide some bit of value during their arb years.)
However, since we get something back for this decrease in opportunity, that $16 million = Miley.
Since we have Miley for 3 years, he has to provide 16/3, or $5.33 million in excess value per year. Even if you want to consider his $4 million salary, he would only need to be worth 2+ wins per season, which his recent performance and current projections make him a very good bet to do.
Obviously, you can play with these numbers a lot, but I think that it is easy to make a case this way for the trade being a good one.
The issue of years of control, value, and potential ceilings for the players involved all come in to play, and all of those have values and probabilities that can be tough to measure exactly (though someone who wants to do a little more work on this when it isn't late at night is welcome to), so I will be making a lot of rough estimates/assumptions.
Let's establish some parameters I am assuming for this thought exercise:
value of a "#1/#2" starter (pre-arb/arb): $80 million (these values are accounting for the actual RDLR/Webster service time, roughly)
value of a "#3/#4" starter (pre-arb/arb): $40 million
Probability of one of our NINE starter prospects becoming an "ace/#1/#2": .05
Probability of one of our NINE starter prospects becoming an "#3/#4": .10
Now, we don't know which ones will pan out (that's the whole point), so we are assuming that they all have a roughly equal chance of these outcomes, given that some have put up great MiL numbers but haven't pitched in the majors, while others have made The Show but haven't demonstrated that level of success yet.
So, with those assumptions, we can say that with 9 guys at these odds and values we would expect a return from the two that pan out to be about 72 million:
((.05*9)*80)+(.1*9)*40) = 72
Now, having traded two of them, we only have 7 guys who could fulfill these outcomes, leading the odds to change:
((.05*7)*80)+(.1*7)*40) = 56
So our "expected value" (I realize that I am making these numbers up, but with some guidance from other sources and the back of this envelope) to be gained from our starter prospects has dropped from $72 million to $56 million, a difference of 16 million. (Also, this obviously assumes that the remaining prospects end up providing 0 value due to flaming out, but there is also a chance that some will become relievers, and provide some bit of value during their arb years.)
However, since we get something back for this decrease in opportunity, that $16 million = Miley.
Since we have Miley for 3 years, he has to provide 16/3, or $5.33 million in excess value per year. Even if you want to consider his $4 million salary, he would only need to be worth 2+ wins per season, which his recent performance and current projections make him a very good bet to do.
Obviously, you can play with these numbers a lot, but I think that it is easy to make a case this way for the trade being a good one.
I'm sad to see Webster and Rubby go because each one had great changeups that missed bats. It will be a long time before we see such good offspeed pitches again. Neither one had reliable command of the fastball, however, and apparently the Red Sox coaching staff did not have confidence that either one was ready for a great leap forward.
The Red Sox had an overload of young pitchers who need seasoning, and not enough major league innings or roster spaces to go around. Cherington needed to convert some pitching quantity to quality. The team had great expectations that the young position players would be ready for the majors, and Bogaerts, Bradley and Middlebrooks all disappointed, dragging the team to a last-place finish in the process. Miley (whom I've never seen pitch) clearly does not need seasoning, and his acquisition raises the probability that the Red Sox can get through the season without an equivalent disappointment from their young pitchers.
I think Webster will make a pretty good starter in two years, and Rubby might make a great reliever in three, but neither one turned the corner in 2014, and a team with pennant ambitions like the 2015 Red Sox can't afford to wait.
The Red Sox had an overload of young pitchers who need seasoning, and not enough major league innings or roster spaces to go around. Cherington needed to convert some pitching quantity to quality. The team had great expectations that the young position players would be ready for the majors, and Bogaerts, Bradley and Middlebrooks all disappointed, dragging the team to a last-place finish in the process. Miley (whom I've never seen pitch) clearly does not need seasoning, and his acquisition raises the probability that the Red Sox can get through the season without an equivalent disappointment from their young pitchers.
I think Webster will make a pretty good starter in two years, and Rubby might make a great reliever in three, but neither one turned the corner in 2014, and a team with pennant ambitions like the 2015 Red Sox can't afford to wait.
I'd like to just toss in here the possibility, however slim, that this deal could get scuttled. We're dealing with a first-time GM here in Dave Stewart whose boss (Tony LaRussa) is also in this high a position for the first time. Stewart's responses about this trade in particular suggest that he's not happy with a) that it has been reported as being done and/or b) acknowledged (apparently, to sources) as complete by the Red Sox.
Now, maybe this blows over and it gets settled relatively quickly. But it wouldn't be the first time in recent memory that a red Sox transaction has been held up, complicated or even eventually retracted.
Now, maybe this blows over and it gets settled relatively quickly. But it wouldn't be the first time in recent memory that a red Sox transaction has been held up, complicated or even eventually retracted.
Good point. I think there are probably several different time periods to look at. There's the upcoming/current season, the next three years, the next three to six years, and the next six to ten years.Alcohol&Overcalls said:
Mostly that's just three year increments based on three pre arb years, three arb years, and free agency with the third segment rounded off because we like round numbers.
And yeah, the further you go out, the less certain everything is, so the longest term you're just looking at structural things, whether it's easier to get talent in the draft, foreign amateurs, whatever.
For the three to six years range, you're going to know you can keep a guy even if you have to go to arb the straight years to do it, so we can plan to have Betts for six years and Bogaerts for I think just five.
With this trade we're looking shorter than that, and I guess I'm watching up to the trade a little based on the notion that the FO wouldn't do this trade if they had any confidence in RDLR or Webster being the guy for the next three years.
I think it sucks because I think RDLR will probably be an excellent short reliever for a lot of years, but the reality is that even if either of them mess it through the season as a starter, they were probably going to get bumped by Owens or Rodriguez sometime soon.
And of course without RDLR and Webster, it's much less important to have a rotation spot for the kids because they were the kids the spot was for. Ranaudo, Barnes, and effort I'm forgetting are less likely to make it as starters than RDLR and Webster.
And if one of the guys we bring in is a free agent after the season, we can pencil in Owens or Rodriguez for the spot, make the QA, take the pick, and be in pretty good shape.
Whatever. I still don't like the trade, but it didn't involve giving up the guys I really don't want to give up and maybe Miley will work out better than I think.
Some of the players the D Backs are picking from could be eligible to be drafted, the Backs might have to clear roster space, or the Sox are trying to pull some kind of shenanigans with a draft and trade.E5 Yaz said:
Comps, using 1.7 WAR and 3.5 xFIP for Miley:
Tim Hudson (1.7, 3.57)
Jason Hammel (1.7, 3.57)
Mike Leake (1.9, 3.49)
Zach Wheeler (1.8, 3.49)
Yovani Gallardo (1.7, 3.64)
Francisco Liriano (1.6, 3.40)
Tim Hudson (1.7, 3.57)
Jason Hammel (1.7, 3.57)
Mike Leake (1.9, 3.49)
Zach Wheeler (1.8, 3.49)
Yovani Gallardo (1.7, 3.64)
Francisco Liriano (1.6, 3.40)
I was looking at the azsnakepit.com coverage of this trade (they seem to hate it) and found this in the comments. Take this with a mountain of salt, they guy appears to be a blogger, but it seemed so specific I couldn't completely ignore it.
Of course if Chris Cotillo is right and they plan to announce it on Saturday, it sounds like they found middle ground.
One comment I was happy to read about Miley on that Diamondbacks blogsite:
"I always liked that Wade worked quickly on the mound..."
"I always liked that Wade worked quickly on the mound..."
Ok, I got sick of reading a lot of these negative posts, so if I'm repeating someone in the last 2-3 pages I'm sorry.
Wade Miley is NOT Lester's replacement. Not even close. If we signed Jon and then traded for this guy most everyone would be excited about the RS getting a cost controlled innings eater. The dude is a 3, sometimes more, sometimes less. None of the players we gave up are going to be aces, so who cares? The biggest commodity in baseball is the cost controlled ace. We dont have that. Rubby and Allen are never, ever going to be top of the line starters, but the RS turned them into a serviceable workhorse with 3 years left before FA. Their ceilings for someone's floor. Anyone that is against this I would love to hear factual evidence
Wade Miley is NOT Lester's replacement. Not even close. If we signed Jon and then traded for this guy most everyone would be excited about the RS getting a cost controlled innings eater. The dude is a 3, sometimes more, sometimes less. None of the players we gave up are going to be aces, so who cares? The biggest commodity in baseball is the cost controlled ace. We dont have that. Rubby and Allen are never, ever going to be top of the line starters, but the RS turned them into a serviceable workhorse with 3 years left before FA. Their ceilings for someone's floor. Anyone that is against this I would love to hear factual evidence
This is a bit fun:
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=6893,3815,8779,3254
I mean if Miley can get the BABIP down a tad (He should with this Red Sox defense) and K% rate up a bit....considering what you gave up and all.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=6893,3815,8779,3254
I mean if Miley can get the BABIP down a tad (He should with this Red Sox defense) and K% rate up a bit....considering what you gave up and all.
Here's the thing about this trade. On it's own it might turn out OK, but with Webster and De La Rosa gone they are no longer part of any deal to land a #1 or #2 starter. Be prepared to lose one or two of your binkies.
We were going to lose a binky in a deal for a number 1 regardless. No team is going to trade a Cueto or a Zimmerman or someone else of 1 caliber without one or more of the guys we really like in the deal.YTF said:
I don't like losing Rubby because he has the potential to be a nice power arm out of the pen. But you have to give to get, and Miley could step right into the rotation in Boston.
Hate to break it to you, but I don't think we're going to land a "#1 or #2 starter". My bet going forward: we get one of Latos, Ross, or Cashner and sign one of Masterson/Liriano/Santana. I would say in roughly that order of probability for each. That ties the FO to no significant dollars long term.YTF said:
Not real in love with trading RDLR and Webster but Wade Miley has an interesting set of tools at this point. Good GB%, K/9 took a nice jump last year but at the expense of a higher BB/9. He's a less successful LH version of Tyson Ross. Given how dramatically McCarthy turned it around after leaving the Diamondbacks this will be an interesting second test as to whether the D-Backs are currently failing to coach up their pitchers. Should Miley keep his K/9 in the low 8's, get his BB/9 back into the <3 territory, keep the GB% where it's at, and see a more normal BABIP for a GB pitcher he could be great value for the next three years.
With RDLR it was about stamina and harnessing his control. Webster it was about control. Both have the stuff to become pretty solid starters in the AL East if things go right. If you look at Webster's numbers in September it seemed like he figured it out. I would take a Allen Webster that's figured it out over Miley in the AL East. While I understand Chase Field graded out as the 2nd best launching pad in baseball in 2014, the teams in that division had pretty bad offenses outside of the Dodgers of course. The Rockies never had a complete lineup due to injuries. Maybe the Sox feel that the organizational philosophy held Miley back such as it did with McCarthy.TheoShmeo said:
Unless they are flipping Miley as part of a deal for Cole Hamels then the deal doesn't make sense. You're trading Webster who Keith Law and Jim Callis both mentioned as having one of the highest ceilings out of the prospects. I especially hate this deal if the rumors are true about the Sox sending Rijo also.
I don't think you interpreted my post correctly (or more likely, I didn't write it very well). I'm not saying Webster and Rubby should have turned a corner and become consistent performers. Quite the opposite. I'm saying that we know the reality is that young guys are going to take time, and I hope the FO is willing to be patient.Savin Hillbilly said:
This may very well be a case of roster squeeze. Cherington et al might feel like they have enough young pitching depth that they can move a couple guys who have few options left and for which there just isn't much room to wait longer for consistent production.
Tyrone Biggums said:
The "figuring out" occured over 24 innings and he still had a 5.6 K/9 with a 60% strike rate over that period. People are lending a lot more credence to those numbers than they should. I'd much rather have Miley right now than Webster. The questions about the deal are about what De La Rosa and Webster could become, and by that perspective I'll agree that the price was a bit steep, but I don't think there's any question about which of those three pitchers is more likely to be a positive contributor in the near future.
i think this is misleading because many of those innings were available only because the RS sucked last year. If the RS had been in the playoff hunt, the end of the year starts wouldn't have been available.
The RS need proven MLB arms for next year. The trade was at worst fair. Granted, it will suck if either of the two figure out fastball command over the next three years, but AZ is in a better position to give them major league innings than the RS.
No, my problem is that his FIP and xFIP weren't better than his ERA over the last three years so his situation isn't the same as McCarthy's.gammoseditor said:
If you're talking about getting more certainty at the back end of the rotation in the short term then I see the point. But again why trade two guys who have lesser floors but higher ceilings for Miley who might very well be longing for the NL West after meeting the AL East. Just doesn't make sense to me. Especially if they end up including Rijo.MakMan44 said:
I'd argue that 3 years isn't really all that short term, but yeah, that's the point. You can argue that they overpaid to get it, and that's totally fair, but the rotation is better today than it was yesterday and that's probably a good thing when looking at everything.Tyrone Biggums said:
McCarthy was only in Arizona for 245 innings. Where his FIP and xFIP outperformed his ERA.glennhoffmania said:
Miley threw 201 innings in Arizona last year. Era 4.34, FIP 3.98, xFIP 3.50.
The initial outrage to this trade was a wonderful example of "prospect humping".
Imagine you are an Arizona Diamondbacks fan. You aren't terribly familiar with the Red Sox system. Last night you found out that the team traded a dependable lefty starter that was an All-Star three years ago, selling low on him after his worst year as a professional (by traditional measures). They traded this cheap innings-eater for two projects, both over the age of 25, who are huge question marks, and who project as bullpen arms. Two guys who haven't even been that successful at the AAA level! One of whom has been mostly bombed in the majors.
Do you think you like that trade?
Imagine you are an Arizona Diamondbacks fan. You aren't terribly familiar with the Red Sox system. Last night you found out that the team traded a dependable lefty starter that was an All-Star three years ago, selling low on him after his worst year as a professional (by traditional measures). They traded this cheap innings-eater for two projects, both over the age of 25, who are huge question marks, and who project as bullpen arms. Two guys who haven't even been that successful at the AAA level! One of whom has been mostly bombed in the majors.
Do you think you like that trade?
Their 2014 opening day starter no less. Although that was only after Corbin went down with injury.ngruz25 said:
What's your basis for saying that? I don't have a crystal ball but I assume that the Sox are trying to reel in someone of the 1/2 ilk. I understand that Ben has said you don't need an ace (and that there are not many of them), but the Sox have assets to trade and with guys like Cueto, Zimmerman and Hamels potentially available, I would think that they would try. They also could just use dollars on Shields. None of this precludes adding Miley and someone like Masterson (Liriano has been re-signed by the Pirates), also.Drek717 said:
I can't disagree with your point but what is Wade Miley in the AL East? 4th starter? 5th starter? The Sox have a lot of SP depth in the minors and the 5th spot is generally reserved for situations where you'll have prospects fight it out for a rotation spot. As of today the Red Sox have no top of the rotation talent and unless Hamels is on the table or they somehow sign Shields this isn't going to change. Maybe by the end of 2015 or 2016 we will look back and talk about how De La Rosa flamed out or how Webster is awful but I find it likely that it will be treated as a deal we wish that we had back.MakMan44 said:
Yes and prior to that Miley's ERA was about the same or lower than his FIP and xFIP. All I was saying was that Speier was focusing on one season to make his point instead of looking at his whole body of work. And that just because McCarthy improved after leaving AZ doesn't necessarily mean that Miley will too. I like Miley- I just thought Speier's point was pretty useless.Lowrielicious said:
This doesn't pass the smell test. Esponaza is one of the bonus babies we just spent a ton on this past signing period, I believe. It seems unlikely Boston would entertain trading a 16 year old they just signed for over a million dollars under the new rules, especially since they can't spend more than 300 k a player for the next 2 seasons. Second while I could see the Rijo v Guerrera thing being a choice for the PTNL, there'e a pretty big delta between Basabe and everyone else on that second list. Mars is an interesting sleeper prospect, but Basabe (assuming we're talking about the better of the twins) is very highly regarded.ZMart100 said:
I could see any of these guys outside of Espinosa being included as the PTNL, but I don't think it's likely the D'Backs would have to think very hard on Basabe V Mars.
Miley is an interesting case of whether you like traditional stats or advanced metrics.
Consider his three-year ERA numbers:
2012: 3.33
2013: 3.55
2014: 4.34
You look at that and warning flags go up. But then look at his XFIP:
2012: 3.75
2013: 3.77
2014: 3.50
Kind of tells the opposite story.
My view: I don't like giving up Webster and RDLR because I was hoping to see them blossom with the Red Sox. But Miley is a solid, 200 ip kind of guy who pitches, on the whole, at a slightly above league average level. Steamer projects him (before the trade, anyway; not sure if those will change) to throw 192 innings at a 3.91 era and 3.73 fip.
Here's the number of pitchers the Sox have had from 2004-2014 to post at least 192 innings with a 3.91 era or better:
2004 - Schilling (226.2, 3.26), Pedro (217.0, 3.90)
2007 - Beckett (200.2, 3.27)
2008 - Lester (210.1, 3.21)
2009 - Beckett (212.1, 3.86), Lester (203.1, 3.41)
2010 - Lester (208.0, 3.25)
2011 - Beckett (193.0, 2.89) - Lester just missed out at 191.2 ip and 3.47….so let's include him too
2013 - Lester (213.1, 3.75) - Lackey just missed out at 189.1 ip and 3.52 ….so let's include him too
So in 11 seasons, comprising at least 80 starting pitchers (some names obviously included multiple times), the Red Sox had 9 seasons of 192+ innings and 3.91 era or better. 11 if we include 2011 Lester and 2013 Lackey, which we will.
11 pitching seasons that reach these numbers over 11 MLB seasons.
That's it.
Ergo, if Wade Miley were able to produce 192+ innings at 3.91 or better, he would immediately be one of the best Red Sox starters in the past 12 seasons. And if you just think about the *pitchers*, not the number of individual seasons, that produce these numbers, he would be behind only Lester, Schilling, Pedro, Beckett, and Lackey. That's it.
Clay at his peak is much better than Miley. But Clay doesn't produce the number of innings. Other guys have produced innings, but haven't been as effective. Miley would rank right up there among Red Sox pitchers of the last 12 seasons if he were to achieve the Steamer projections.
Big IF, but still.
Consider his three-year ERA numbers:
2012: 3.33
2013: 3.55
2014: 4.34
You look at that and warning flags go up. But then look at his XFIP:
2012: 3.75
2013: 3.77
2014: 3.50
Kind of tells the opposite story.
My view: I don't like giving up Webster and RDLR because I was hoping to see them blossom with the Red Sox. But Miley is a solid, 200 ip kind of guy who pitches, on the whole, at a slightly above league average level. Steamer projects him (before the trade, anyway; not sure if those will change) to throw 192 innings at a 3.91 era and 3.73 fip.
Here's the number of pitchers the Sox have had from 2004-2014 to post at least 192 innings with a 3.91 era or better:
2004 - Schilling (226.2, 3.26), Pedro (217.0, 3.90)
2007 - Beckett (200.2, 3.27)
2008 - Lester (210.1, 3.21)
2009 - Beckett (212.1, 3.86), Lester (203.1, 3.41)
2010 - Lester (208.0, 3.25)
2011 - Beckett (193.0, 2.89) - Lester just missed out at 191.2 ip and 3.47….so let's include him too
2013 - Lester (213.1, 3.75) - Lackey just missed out at 189.1 ip and 3.52 ….so let's include him too
So in 11 seasons, comprising at least 80 starting pitchers (some names obviously included multiple times), the Red Sox had 9 seasons of 192+ innings and 3.91 era or better. 11 if we include 2011 Lester and 2013 Lackey, which we will.
11 pitching seasons that reach these numbers over 11 MLB seasons.
That's it.
Ergo, if Wade Miley were able to produce 192+ innings at 3.91 or better, he would immediately be one of the best Red Sox starters in the past 12 seasons. And if you just think about the *pitchers*, not the number of individual seasons, that produce these numbers, he would be behind only Lester, Schilling, Pedro, Beckett, and Lackey. That's it.
Clay at his peak is much better than Miley. But Clay doesn't produce the number of innings. Other guys have produced innings, but haven't been as effective. Miley would rank right up there among Red Sox pitchers of the last 12 seasons if he were to achieve the Steamer projections.
Big IF, but still.
WHile you may be right, I would be very bummed if they traded Rijo. He was the fourth youngest player in the South Atlantic League (Low A) last year at 18 years old. And while he didn't light it up, he definitely held his own.billy ashley said:
Appropos of nothing but, at age 28, Miley has one more All Star appearance (2012) than Webster, DLR and the PTBNL combined. Wouldn't Miley have arguably been the best starter, comparably, on the woeful 2012 Valentine doomed Sox? Wasn't he better than Lester that season?
Miley is now the same age as was Lester in 2012. As an age 25 rookie, he had a much better 2012 season (3.15 FIP) for the Diamondbacks than did the dear departed Lester (4.11 FIP). Cherington would have been hailed as a genius if it would have been possible (which it never would have been) to swap Miley for Lester straight up after the 2012 season. Career context is everything. You can make an argument that with the Sox controlling the upcoming prime years of Miley's major league career, he could perform comparably to Lester, if not as he produced during these last two post Valentine seasons, than arguably going forward as Lester's career begins its decline for a fraction of Theo's overpay.
Just sayin'.
Miley is now the same age as was Lester in 2012. As an age 25 rookie, he had a much better 2012 season (3.15 FIP) for the Diamondbacks than did the dear departed Lester (4.11 FIP). Cherington would have been hailed as a genius if it would have been possible (which it never would have been) to swap Miley for Lester straight up after the 2012 season. Career context is everything. You can make an argument that with the Sox controlling the upcoming prime years of Miley's major league career, he could perform comparably to Lester, if not as he produced during these last two post Valentine seasons, than arguably going forward as Lester's career begins its decline for a fraction of Theo's overpay.
Just sayin'.
What's not to like? Sox acquire a left-handed starter who most likely will give you 200 innings with a 4.00 ERA, and is controlled for three more years (ages 28-30). You do realize there are five pitchers in a rotation, right? He wasn't acquired to replace Lester, but unlike Webster and De La Rosa, he's averaged 32 starts and 200 innings the past three seasons in the big leagues.
Webster has good stuff, but lousy makeup which was obvious every time he toed the rubber. De La Rosa has a power arm and a good changeup, but apparently the Sox project him as a reliever, and I trust their judgement more than I do those here who consistently overvalue prospects. And are these guys really still prospects? Webster will be 25 next season while De La Rosa will be 26.
In any event, this trade truly cannot be properly evaluated for couple of years, as is the case with most trades. Everyone relax, the system is still well-stocked, and the front office has way more information and smarts then we do.
Webster has good stuff, but lousy makeup which was obvious every time he toed the rubber. De La Rosa has a power arm and a good changeup, but apparently the Sox project him as a reliever, and I trust their judgement more than I do those here who consistently overvalue prospects. And are these guys really still prospects? Webster will be 25 next season while De La Rosa will be 26.
In any event, this trade truly cannot be properly evaluated for couple of years, as is the case with most trades. Everyone relax, the system is still well-stocked, and the front office has way more information and smarts then we do.
Tyrone Biggums said:
Wiley's SIERA last year was 3.67. His FIP- was 104 and his xFIP- was 95.
Let's look at the AL East division winners of the past decade and see how many starters each of those teams had who matched or topped at least two of those three marks, while making at least 20 starts.
BAL 2014: 0
BOS 2013: 1 (Lackey)
NYY 2012: 2 (Sabathia, Kuroda)
NYY 2011: 2 (Sabathia, Colon)
TBR 2010: 2 (Price, Shields)
NYY 2009: 1 (Sabathia)
TBR 2008: 2 (Shields, Kazmir)
BOS 2007: 2 (Beckett, Matsuzaka)
NYY 2006: 3 (Mussina, Wang, Johnson)
NYY 2005: 2 (Mussina, Johnson)
So Miley, by these measures, would have been the third starter on six of the past ten AL East winners, the #2 on two of them, and the ace on last year's. On only one of the ten would he have been a fourth starter.
There's a whole lot of underestimating of Miley going on in this thread, and/or a whole lot of overestimating of a typical contending team's starting rotation.
Savin Hillbilly said:
Thnx - useful reminder to look at data and not just spill out immediate non-quantitative judgments.