Start, Sit, Trade: Play Along with Dave

[czar]

Even with no external moves made, the possibility exists that an ace emerges next season, with EdRo being by far the most likely one.  That being said, I still think that, given the glut of quality starters on the market this offseason, DDski will probably give someone $100MM. I just hope he doesn't give anyone $150+MM.

 
"By far the most likely" is a bit of a stretch here. I don't disagree with the notion that an "ace" may emerge from SP the Sox have under control, but I'd be putting more money on the guy with a solid track record who only really pitched poorly for half a season (Porcello) or the guy who has pitched like an ace recently who needs to overcome injury woes (Buchholz).
 
I think it's a very different proposition to pencil in guys with 1000+ career IP for something near career norms and worrying about projecting out a 22-yo with a 4.16 SIERA in 121 career innings.
 
Also, FWIW, 3.55 was the 80th percentile for FIP among AL SP (80+ IP) in 2015 (Buchholz was 2nd behind Price). So saying things like "Porcello and Kelly need to substantially improve on their already good late season metrics" is a bit excessive. If both of them pitched like that all season, the Sox would have two low-end #1 AL starters, not counting Buchholz. I think the safer projection is to move the needle somewhere in the middle, unless you know they made very tangible improvements that explain the majority of the rate jumps.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

 
As to the bolded: Your logical fallacy is: Strawman. Nobody said the Sox wouldn't be better with Price replacing any of their current starters. Of course they would. I'm just pushing back against the notion that the team can't contend without someone like that. Recent history contradicts your assertion that you need to have an ace to "play deep into October." KC didn't have one last year (unless you want to make a serious case that Shields is one at this stage of his career). In fact their rotation reflected a "quality depth" approach. 2011 Rangers, same deal. The 2005 White Sox won 99 games and a World Series; their best pitcher was Buehrle, who did have a hell of a year, but really doesn't fit the ace profile very well. 

 
Playoff teams that don't have an ace tend to have elite bullpens. The 2014-2015 Royals are an obvious example, but the 2005 White Sox had three relievers with ERA+ over 200. The bullpen gave up 3 ER all postseason.

 

[nvalvo]

 
Playoff teams that don't have an ace tend to have elite bullpens. The 2014-2015 Royals are an obvious example, but the 2005 White Sox had three relievers with ERA+ over 200. The bullpen gave up 3 ER all postseason.

 
I don't think I'd number myself among them, but as I read them, the crowd who is pumping the brakes on potential $150m+ SP acquisitions is largely proposing that we divert resources to build such a bullpen. 

 

[Al Zarilla]

I saw on NESN that they're showing a Dombrowski press conference at 2:30 Eastern. DVRing it.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I saw on NESN that they're showing a Dombrowski press conference at 2:30 Eastern. DVRing it.

What is it in reference to?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I saw on NESN that they're showing a Dombrowski press conference at 2:30 Eastern. DVRing it.

 

What is it in reference to?

 
More announcements regarding the front office...
 
https://twitter.com/TimBritton/status/653995647624945664
 
https://twitter.com/TimBritton/status/653995938118246400

 

[jimbobim]

1. 
   
   Dombrowski says the payroll is "not going backwards.. and there is a desire to win."
   
    
    
   
   
   redsoxstats  4m4 minutes ago
   
   
   
   
   
   
2. 
   
   
   Dombrowski says what stood out to him was young players continuing to take strides, and pitching getting better, especially Porcello.
   
    
   
   
   
   

Dombrowski talks about Espinoza and Kopech catching his eye throwing 100 MPH in Florida ... Buchholz passed medicals, team good health wise.

0 retweets1 favorite


Reply

 

Retweet
 
 

 

Favorite
 
1

 


More




 
Red Sox Stats ‏@redsoxstats  30s31 seconds ago
Dombrowski says Koji is the closer going into next season, but they want to find a backup closer / 7th inn man so Taz can stay 8th inning.

0 retweets0 favorites
 



 



 
Dombrowski says Castillo needs to hit more consistently than the others, but felt he tired. As of now expect the BBC outfield in 2016.

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

Red Sox Stats ‏@redsoxstats  53s54 seconds ago
Dombrowski says the Red Sox committed to Hanley at 1B going into next year. Have a nice pipeline with Shaw and points out Sam Travis coming.

 
 

Mike Loyko ‏@NEPD_Loyko  14s15 seconds ago
Dombrowski" on how many SP he'd like to acquire: "I'll start with one and go form there, depends on who they are"
 

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

 
Playoff teams that don't have an ace tend to have elite bullpens. The 2014-2015 Royals are an obvious example, but the 2005 White Sox had three relievers with ERA+ over 200. The bullpen gave up 3 ER all postseason.

Correct. While the ace argument might be "strawman" you need not look any further than the current playoffs. Honestly the Sox don't need one to start the season but one certainly needs to emerge. The Sox should not concern themselves with paying for Price if it only costs money. I would rather break the bank on a free agent and save the kids for depth or to make another move.

 

[GaryPeters71]

 





Bob Halloran @BobWCVB
Dave Dombrowski got a call from another GM today who had ideas DD hadn't considered. Hmmm. #wcvb






3 retweets12 favorites


Reply

 

Retweet
 
3

 

Favorite
 
12

 


More

 

[Laser Show]

 





Bob Halloran @BobWCVB
Dave Dombrowski got a call from another GM today who had ideas DD hadn't considered. Hmmm. #wcvb

3 retweets12 favorites


Reply 

Retweet 
3 

Favorite 
12 


More

What in the world does that mean?

 

[lostjumper]

What in the world does that mean?

The marlins called to see if they could trade us Jose Fernandez. Vindication!

But seriously, I assume GM's are calling about players to see who is available.

 

[alwyn96]

What in the world does that mean?

 
If one is the excitable type, it could mean that an amazing, superstar player who you wouldn't otherwise think would be available in trade might be available. Fire up the speculation engines! Get that hot stove roaring!
 
If you're not the excitable type, it's just the usual GMs calling each other and discussing players, like every GM always does. 
 
I gotta think we're going to see at least one major trade this offseason. New GMs seem to like making a splashy move or two when they first arrive, and Dombrowski is a guy known for making trades. I think the Red Sox perceive making big moves as pretty important to their financial success, as well. You need to get the fan base fired up and generate excitement about the team to sell those season tickets and NESN ad space. I think the Red Sox do actually have some good will from the fans going into the offseason based on their strong finish, but I think a lot of signs point to at least one big move. 

 

[Devizier]

 
Still, this is exactly the kind of thought process that ends up with the team filling up its active roster with low-WAR, high-cost players like Hanley and Sandoval were last season. 

 
Ramirez was coming off 3- and 5-fWAR seasons the last two years. Those are not "low WAR" seasons.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

DD's suggestion that they're looking for a back-up closer/7th inning guy seems to point more toward a Soria/O'Day FA move than a trade for Kimbrel/Chapman.
 
The anonymous GM is obviously Beane, looking to deal Gray for a package, with Marrero as  a key piece, 'cuz he loves those unheralded MI types... :q:

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

What in the world does that mean?

 
Maybe someone wants to give us an elite pitcher for an unsubsidized Hanley. 
 
I mean, that would certainly be an idea DD probably hasn't considered.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

 
Ramirez was coming off 3- and 5-fWAR seasons the last two years. Those are not "low WAR" seasons.

When you sign a guy with the explicit intent to shift him all the way down the defensive spectrum from SS to LF, you bank a net loss of 15 runs from decreased positional value alone, according to fWAR calculations.

Hanley, as a SS, was valued at 3.3, 5.1, and 2.6 WAR over the past three seasons.

Which means, the Sox signed a guy to a $22MM AAV contract when his previous three seasons would have been valued in LF at about 2, 3.5, and 1 fWAR. That's pretty much the definition of high cost, low WAR.

The only thing the Sox could possibly have been thinking, was that Hanley's batting line would improve and he would be able to play more games per season, due to reduction in defensive effort and energy expended by playing the easier position.

 

[alwyn96]

When you sign a guy with the explicit intent to shift him all the way down the defensive spectrum from SS to LF, you bank a net loss of 15 runs from decreased positional value alone, according to fWAR calculations.

Hanley, as a SS, was valued at 3.3, 5.1, and 2.6 WAR over the past three seasons.

Which means, the Sox signed a guy to a $22MM AAV contract when his previous three seasons would have been valued in LF at about 2, 3.5, and 1 fWAR. That's pretty much the definition of high cost, low WAR.

The only thing the Sox could possibly have been thinking, was that Hanley's batting line would improve and he would be able to play more games per season, due to reduction in defensive effort and energy expended by playing the easier position.

 
I'm not sure the Red Sox thought Ramirez would even need a better batting line - just reproducing his 2014 135 wRC+ would have had him tied for the best hitting LF in the league this year. Assuming full health is always an issue, but I think you're obviously right that they thought a change to a less demanding position would help with health.
 
Unfortunately, he had a down year with the bat and a truly astounding year with the glove. I'm not sure it means you never sign an expensive free agent ever again, but those are definitely the risks.

 

[nvalvo]

The only thing the Sox could possibly have been thinking, was that Hanley's batting line would improve and he would be able to play more games per season, due to reduction in defensive effort and energy expended by playing the easier position.

 
Well, that and that he graded out as a very poor shortstop, losing more value on defense many seasons than the value of the positional adjustment.
 
We now know that he was even worse as a left fielder, even leaving aside the positional values, but they didn't know that when they signed him. 

 

[benhogan]

 
Well, that and that he graded out as a very poor shortstop, losing more value on defense many seasons than the value of the positional adjustment.
 
We now know that he was even worse as a left fielder, even leaving aside the positional values, but they didn't know that when they signed him.

I guess that's the difference between being an excellent GM and an unemployed GM.
 
I know the options are extremely limited in regards to Hanley. We don't want to just pay his entire salary to go away and he does provide insurance in case Papi gets injured.  So he has value there.
 
BUT we are making the same mistake we made last winter expecting this guy to adapt to new position or even be interested in picking up a mitt and getting to work.  He'll have a mix of bad instincts at first, running into pitchers covering, clueless in bunt situations, etc   Add in the expected minor hammy tweaks from running the bases plus wear and tear to playing infield.
 
Expecting him to play first and be above league average is optimistic in my opinion.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I guess that's the difference between being an excellent GM and an unemployed GM.
 
I know the options are extremely limited in regards to Hanley. We don't want to just pay his entire salary to go away and he does provide insurance in case Papi gets injured.  So he has value there.
 
BUT we are making the same mistake we made last winter expecting this guy to adapt to new position or even be interested in picking up a mitt and getting to work.  He'll have a mix of bad instincts at first, running into pitchers covering, clueless in bunt situations, etc   Add in the expected minor hammy tweaks from running the bases plus wear and tear to playing infield.
 
Expecting him to play first and be above league average is optimistic in my opinion.

 
Who in their right mind is expecting "above league average" out of Hanley at 1B?  As long as he isn't a butcher defensively (and that much will be obvious quickly) and he hits somewhere close to his career averages, he'll be fine.  Overpaid but fine.
 
He doesn't need to be an all star.  He just needs to not be a black hole.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
Well, that and that he graded out as a very poor shortstop, losing more value on defense many seasons than the value of the positional adjustment.
 
We now know that he was even worse as a left fielder, even leaving aside the positional values, but they didn't know that when they signed him. 

 
This is an important point that's easy to forget--when we talk about a player losing X amount of value by being shifted leftward on the defensive spectrum, that's only true if his defense is equally good at both positions, the inherent unlikelihood of which is the basic reason why there is such a thing as positional value in the first place.
 
In fairness to Ben & co., it's probably pretty rare for a player to move from shortstop to left field and get defensively worse, although it might be fairly common to not gain enough defensive value to offset the positional value hit. Hanley's 2015 was a perfect storm of worst-case value scenarios: he was a worse fielder than ever at a less demanding position than ever, had a career-worst season at the plate and on the bases, and missed a bunch of time. I think they can be forgiven for not foreseeing the totality of that disaster.

 

[ALiveH]

I continue to stand by my opinion that he bulked up too much in the offseason, thinking that he'd become a pure masher & didn't work on his OF defense at all.  That caused him to become muscle-bound & cause all sorts of biomechanical issues.
 
I think & hope that he has a better offseason regimen that includes more general athletic training than just weight-lifting, plus more work on 1B-specific skills, and hitting mechanics / timing.  If he does that, I believe we'll see him have a good bounce back year.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

1 - David Price (FA)
2 - Gray/Carrasco (Owens/Margot/Miley +)
3 - Porcello
4 - Buchholz
5 - Rodriguez/Kelly
 
I'm a big Miley guy for what he offers a team with SP depth concerns as we were last season as he gives you solid 200 IP every year as a 3/4 guy. For a team losing a key starter in a deal he provides value to them (greater than he gives us with these top end acquisitions) in this role and he's a bargain for a lower payroll team over the next two seasons.  Margot is redundant and blocked, his greatest value to us should be as a chip in a larger deal. Our depth at SP and CF allows us to upgrade Owens to a Gray/Carrasco-type.....we could even include Kelly as a part of a Gray trade. It's clear DD wants to upgrade the front of the rotation and we have both the financial resources (Price) and prospects (Gray/Carrasco) to do so.
 
With Buchholz penciled in you need to have a strong 6th starter ready to go and with him in his walk year we get to hang on to ERod/Kelly to gain more information on them as mainstays moving forward. I'm not sure DD is a Porcello guy however he should be much much better than he was in the first half of last season......it's easier to move Miley and gain value in return than in Porcello at his price tag.  Wright as your long/middle guy with Brian Johnson in Pawtucket gives us plenty of SP depth beyond the top six.

 

[BaseballJones]

I cannot really fathom why Oakland would trade Gray, unless they get a dump truck of talent in return.  What do you propose, HRB, as a realistic trade offer to get Gray?

 

[alwyn96]

I guess that's the difference between being an excellent GM and an unemployed GM.
 
I know the options are extremely limited in regards to Hanley. We don't want to just pay his entire salary to go away and he does provide insurance in case Papi gets injured.  So he has value there.
 
BUT we are making the same mistake we made last winter expecting this guy to adapt to new position or even be interested in picking up a mitt and getting to work.  He'll have a mix of bad instincts at first, running into pitchers covering, clueless in bunt situations, etc   Add in the expected minor hammy tweaks from running the bases plus wear and tear to playing infield.
 
Expecting him to play first and be above league average is optimistic in my opinion.

 
 

 
Yeah, like Redhawksfan said, I don't think many people think Hanley is going to be above average at 1B. As a guy who has some trouble bending over, Hanley's probably going to be pretty stiff over there. After 2015, I don't think anyone's under the illusion that another position switch is going to be easy for him, but there aren't many other alternatives. If he plays 1B as well as he played LF (which seems hard to believe, although at 1B he'd be involved in a lot more plays and able to do even more damage, which is a scary thought) the Red Sox are in a bad spot.

 

[jasail]

1 - David Price (FA)
2 - Gray/Carrasco (Owens/Margot/Miley +)
3 - Porcello
4 - Buchholz
5 - Rodriguez/Kelly
 
I'm a big Miley guy for what he offers a team with SP depth concerns as we were last season as he gives you solid 200 IP every year as a 3/4 guy. For a team losing a key starter in a deal he provides value to them (greater than he gives us with these top end acquisitions) in this role and he's a bargain for a lower payroll team over the next two seasons.  Margot is redundant and blocked, his greatest value to us should be as a chip in a larger deal. Our depth at SP and CF allows us to upgrade Owens to a Gray/Carrasco-type.....we could even include Kelly as a part of a Gray trade. It's clear DD wants to upgrade the front of the rotation and we have both the financial resources (Price) and prospects (Gray/Carrasco) to do so.
 
With Buchholz penciled in you need to have a strong 6th starter ready to go and with him in his walk year we get to hang on to ERod/Kelly to gain more information on them as mainstays moving forward. I'm not sure DD is a Porcello guy however he should be much much better than he was in the first half of last season......it's easier to move Miley and gain value in return than in Porcello at his price tag.  Wright as your long/middle guy with Brian Johnson in Pawtucket gives us plenty of SP depth beyond the top six.

 
Could we reopen the unrealistic Trade Idea Thread? This would give a place for all persons wanting to post about Sonny Gray to do so and give the rest of us a break from reading it. Asinine Gray trades have been discussed ad nauseam on this board. The bottom line is one quarter, a dime and two nickels and five pennies isn't going to get you a half dollar. Either move on and not Larry Fitzgerald this or at least attempt to realistically discuss what it's going to take to acquire an elite cost controlled player like Gray.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

I cannot really fathom why Oakland would trade Gray, unless they get a dump truck of talent in return.  What do you propose, HRB, as a realistic trade offer to get Gray?

This is very likely true, but one would have also said the same about Donaldson last year. Of course, maybe Beane has learned his lesson...

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

1 - David Price (FA)
2 - Gray/Carrasco (Owens/Margot/Miley +)
3 - Porcello
4 - Buchholz
5 - Rodriguez/Kelly
 
I'm a big Miley guy for what he offers a team with SP depth concerns as we were last season as he gives you solid 200 IP every year as a 3/4 guy. For a team losing a key starter in a deal he provides value to them (greater than he gives us with these top end acquisitions) in this role and he's a bargain for a lower payroll team over the next two seasons.  Margot is redundant and blocked, his greatest value to us should be as a chip in a larger deal. Our depth at SP and CF allows us to upgrade Owens to a Gray/Carrasco-type.....we could even include Kelly as a part of a Gray trade. It's clear DD wants to upgrade the front of the rotation and we have both the financial resources (Price) and prospects (Gray/Carrasco) to do so.
 
With Buchholz penciled in you need to have a strong 6th starter ready to go and with him in his walk year we get to hang on to ERod/Kelly to gain more information on them as mainstays moving forward. I'm not sure DD is a Porcello guy however he should be much much better than he was in the first half of last season......it's easier to move Miley and gain value in return than in Porcello at his price tag.  Wright as your long/middle guy with Brian Johnson in Pawtucket gives us plenty of SP depth beyond the top six.

This is exactly what I want with the caveat that I want Carrasco rather than Gray.

 

[benhogan]

 
Who in their right mind is expecting "above league average" out of Hanley at 1B?  As long as he isn't a butcher defensively (and that much will be obvious quickly) and he hits somewhere close to his career averages, he'll be fine.  Overpaid but fine.
 
He doesn't need to be an all star.  He just needs to not be a black hole.

Apologies, I wasn't clear.  I don't expect him to be much above league average inclusive of his bat.
 
His fielding is a given, it will be bad, very bad.
 
My point was we've seen this play out once already, I expect the wear/tear of first base (and the extra practice time needed there) to hurt his bat (like LF did) and his speed/base running to deteriorate further.
 
Where would you predict Hanley will rank, in terms of first basemen, in all of baseball (inclusive of what you expect to get from his bat)?

 

[alwyn96]

Apologies, I wasn't clear.  I don't expect him to be much above league average inclusive of his bat.
 
His fielding is a given, it will be bad, very bad.
 
My point was we've seen this play out once already, I expect the wear/tear of first base (and the extra practice time needed there) to hurt his bat (like LF did) and his speed/base running to deteriorate further.
 
Where would you predict Hanley will rank, in terms of first basemen, in all of baseball (inclusive of what you expect to get from his bat)?

 
Well, you didn't ask me, but it depends on how much you think he is going to stink at 1B and whether you think he's too fragile to play the field anymore. If Ramirez hits at about his career averages and is merely below average at fielding 1B, that's more or less Jose Abreu's 2015, which is around a 3 WAR player. Maybe knock off a win because Ramirez may miss a bunch of games.
 
If you think Ramirez is going to be all-world bad at 1B, but still hit around career averages, that's probably a 0-1.0 WAR player, but a major team can't really play a guy who is very, very bad at 1B. Baseball just doesn't work as a game without a minimally competent 1B, and teams don't generally play guys who are very, very bad at 1B there very long. If Ramirez is very, very bad at 1B and is broken and can't hit anymore, he'd probably have another -2.0 WAR season, although I imagine his playing time would be reduced such that he wouldn't get to that point. 
 
I don't hold out a ton of hope that Hanley will be very good at 1B, but LF and 1B are very different positions that require very different skill sets. Not all position switches are created equal and a player won't necesarily be equally terrible at all of them. I've seen enough weird stuff in baseball that very little is a given. I'd guess that Ramirez bounces back a little with the bat and is merely bad at 1B and is something like a 1 WAR player, but there's a pretty wide range of outcomes that wouldn't be out of the question.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

I don't know about predict, but how about Hanley 2016 equals Prince Fielder 2015? I'd take that.

 

[Pilgrim]

one thing to consider here is that the Red Sox are probably uniquely prepared to handle the risk of trying to play Hanley at 1b.  They have a decent backup, their main utilityman can cover 7 positions, and all three of their OF can cover any of the three positions.  And they still have one more bench guy to add.
 
So, if they go into camp next year and Hanley absolutely fails at 1b and isnt anything more than a RH bench bat that is pretty horrible, but I don't think it would completely wreck their roster construction.  They are at least better off trying it out than paying 40 million to move him off the team.

 

[lxt]

You know what would be really ugly is DD going after his boy Miguel. 

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

You know what would be really ugly is DD going after his boy Miguel. 

 
Why do you think this is even remotely likely?

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

I understand why everyone wants Gray, cheap, really good pitcher, but if I'm giving up the talent it takes to get Gray (to me, that means Swihart, Devers/Margot, Owens, and Marrero - and that may be light), I have got to have more strikeouts. Gray didn't post a K/9 over the mid 6's since June, and got torched in September. If I'm going for a trade target, bring me Carrasco over Gray. Think you can get him for similar package, minus Swihart and include both of Margot/Devers

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I don't know about predict, but how about Hanley 2016 equals Prince Fielder 2015? I'd take that.

 
Who are we dealing Ortiz to? Because in order for Hanley 2016 to be Fielder 2015, he needs to DH nearly all the time.
 
But if you just mean roughly the same offense and overall value, that would fall into the category of an acceptable massive overpay, as opposed to a catastrophic massive overpay. So, thumbs up.  :astonished:

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Its a waste of time to try and project how Hanley will handle first defensively. I remember when Napoli was signed posters were freaking out about his hip and how it would prevent him from being a good first baseman. Its a moot point. It all depends on what you're willing to take as an acceptable result. I'm personally not expecting much defensively but I'm expecting the bat to rebound in a major way. Hanley was not the same player ever since he ran into the wall back in May. Give it another season and see how it goes. They have nothing to lose in this regard and everything to gain. The good news about the off season, I would argue, is that the Sox are in a better spot than last year. Younger talent is going to really help complement some of the vets in the lineup. Not much needs to be done about the lineup. Its just the pitching staff that needs tweaks. I will keep beating the drum in regards to acquiring an ace since I'm not really a fan of the way the staff was put together. I would also look into cashing in on any value Tazawa has and just rebuild the pen from the 8th inning on. Maybe push Koji to the 8th and acquire Chapman or Kimbrel. 

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

 
"By far the most likely" is a bit of a stretch here. I don't disagree with the notion that an "ace" may emerge from SP the Sox have under control, but I'd be putting more money on the guy with a solid track record who only really pitched poorly for half a season (Porcello) or the guy who has pitched like an ace recently who needs to overcome injury woes (Buchholz).
 
I think it's a very different proposition to pencil in guys with 1000+ career IP for something near career norms and worrying about projecting out a 22-yo with a 4.16 SIERA in 121 career innings.
 
Also, FWIW, 3.55 was the 80th percentile for FIP among AL SP (80+ IP) in 2015 (Buchholz was 2nd behind Price). So saying things like "Porcello and Kelly need to substantially improve on their already good late season metrics" is a bit excessive. If both of them pitched like that all season, the Sox would have two low-end #1 AL starters, not counting Buchholz. I think the safer projection is to move the needle somewhere in the middle, unless you know they made very tangible improvements that explain the majority of the rate jumps.

 
I said "by far the most likely" because in Buchholz and Porcello you're talking about two pitchers who have already established their respective baselines as (a. Buchholz) great when fully healthy but currently 0-9 in attempts to pitch 30+ starts, and with worse results during the seasons he pitches more innings, and (b. Porcello) consistently good but not great results.
 
Both have about a 3 fWAR baseline, which has been established over a significant period of time for each guy.  It's not to say a breakout season can't happen, but each one has a solid baseline for expectations based on a longstanding history which is more likely than either one "emerging as an ace" next season.
 
OTOH, EdRo worked at approximately the same level of production when prorated over a full season; however, he did that as a rookie at age 22 with a terrific fastball and a problem with tipping his slider. Those qualitative facts don't necessarily show up in the stat lines, but I absolutely believe those make his "emerging as an ace" much more likely than either Buchholz or Porcello developing into one at this stage of their respective careers. 

 

[Devizier]

Just for the hell of it, I made some non-regressed 3-2-1 projections for some of our favorite players.
 
These are very coarse approximations, but they're better than the ass-extraction system.
 
Hanley: 442 PA, 17 HR, 276/336/469
Pablo: 563 PA, 13 HR, 262/311/391 
Porcello: 184 IP, 141 K, 4.32 ERA, 3.88 FIP
 
Again, unregressed. But the numbers look reasonable to me. Below average offense at the corners, but not the sinkhole that the Sox endured this year. Porcello roughly falls in line with what Miley provided this year. Certainly an acceptable output, but not what any of us imagined.
 
Hanley's defense at first base is the big question mark for me. I don't see the Sox getting anything resembling 50% value for any of these guys, so I don't really see "trade" as a viable option.

 

[HangingW/ScottCooper]

 
The unfortunate truth is that the Sox could easily be in the same boat as KC even spending $100+MM this winter.
 
To my mind, any and all of the following are possible, in decreasing probability of likelihood:

• The Red Sox could sign an "ace" in the offseason and max out their budget for years to come;
• Eduardo Rodriguez could stop tipping pitches and approach his Sep/Oct performance (2.60 FIP);
• The Red Sox could acquire an "ace" at the trade deadline for a few quality prospects;
• Rick Porcello could substantially improve upon his post-DL 2015 performance (3.57 FIP)
• Joe Kelly could substantially improve upon his post-AAA 2015 performance (3.69 FIP);
• The Red Sox could mortgage their farm system to acquire a young "ace" in the offseason;
• Clay Buchholz could pitch as he did for part of 2015, for the entirety of 2016 (2.68 FIP).

Even with no external moves made, the possibility exists that an ace emerges next season, with EdRo being by far the most likely one.  That being said, I still think that, given the glut of quality starters on the market this offseason, DDski will probably give someone $100MM. I just hope he doesn't give anyone $150+MM.

I would much rather see the Sox pay big money for an ace than close to big money for a #3. We already did that with Porcello.
 
I let Buchholz walk and sign Price. If Cueto is coming at a discount I'd entertain adding him and Price as well. Yes, ideally you don't want to pay a pitcher $25-30 mil for 6 years, but that thought process only works when you've developed established cost controlled aces. E.Rod isn't that guy yet, and you can't bank on him being that guy. It doesn't mean he won't become that guy, it just means he's not there yet.
 
I've said this before and I'll say it again. I love the idea of front loading a deal and give a player an opt out clause. Realistically, the Sox would want David Price for 3 years and $90 million, but Price is expecting 7 years and $210 mil. You give him a 6 year $180 million deal, but front load it to say 3/$105 and and then the back half is $3/75. Price gets paid for the years where he's going to theoretically be at his best, and perhaps we miss out on one or two prime years. But you let someone else pay him after he opts out after 3.
 
The mistake that teams get into is re-upping the player after they give them an opt out clause. The Yankees re-upped Sabathia and A.Rod, but had they let them walk they would have received great value on the initially high contracts they signed. The Dodgers built an opt out into J.D. Drew's contract and Theo wound up paying him. Sure it's a risky proposition, but the player option typically adds value to the contract from the player's perspective and therefore lowers the total liability over the life of the contract as well.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Oh, awesome. We haven't had the player option debate in a while. Thanks for bringing that back.

 

[chrisfont9]

If Cueto is coming at a discount I'd entertain adding him and ...

I think we can cross this off our list of fantasies. The market was going to evolve on Cueto regardless of his poor finish. Now it'll start sooner, and hit warp speed if he has a couple more outings like yesterday. "Proven playoff winner!" his agents will scream, as will more than a few sportswriters.

 

[In my lifetime]

The problem with selling Hanley at 50 cents on the dollar is that I don't think it'll be very easy to find a taker at even 50 cents on the dollar.  10 cents?  Sure.  20?  Maybe.  Asking someone else to take Hanley at $11M per for the next three years is going to be followed by a request for a pretty nice player to off-set.  Right now he's a man without a position and dubious health.
 
Alternatively if the Sox bring him back, play him at 1B, and he gets even remotely close to what he was to start 2015 he could be a pretty valuable 1B for a few years before replacing Ortiz at DH.
 
It's the same rationale for Sandoval.  The team who would most likely be interested in a "buy low" move on the last four years of Pablo or last three years of Hanley would be the current Red Sox roster absent either one of them.  There is no good in-house starting 3B or 1B options for 2016.  They have two solid cost controlled options who would look good as part of a timeshare at either position (Holt, Shaw) but not as the only option.  That's the reality of the current organizational depth chart.

And then after eating the contract(s), then the RS have to go out and find a replacement who can hit in the middle of order. Thus they end up paying let's say 14M of Hanley's salary and his replacement is not going to be an insignificant cost with no great home grown prospect ready (sorry Shaw doesn't fit the bill for me)

 

[lxt]

 
Why do you think this is even remotely likely?

None ... it was an ugly thought ... would I like to see it, no.

 

[lxt]

Anyone that looks at Hanley is think DH. Everyone remembers the numbers he put up in April and early May. If you eliminate his defense and can get 100 - 120 games out of him there is a chance he can drive you into the playoffs. Is Hanley worth $11million as a DH ... Yes. Will the Sox be able to trade him before spring training is another guess all together. He may have to show people a thing or two before they bite. However, I think there are enough offense hungry teams that would be interested. What would we get in return ... maybe a 4th OF, maybe a super-sub type player or possibly a useful bullpen arm but I don't think much more than that.
 
I think Travis earned a shot at trying to make 1B his spot. His numbers were good and he remain solid throughout his stay. He is also young, healthy and inexpensive. The Sox need their dollars for pitching.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Anyone that looks at Hanley is think DH. Everyone remembers the numbers he put up in April and early May. If you eliminate his defense and can get 100 - 120 games out of him there is a chance he can drive you into the playoffs. Is Hanley worth $11million as a DH ... Yes. Will the Sox be able to trade him before spring training is another guess all together. He may have to show people a thing or two before they bite. However, I think there are enough offense hungry teams that would be interested. What would we get in return ... maybe a 4th OF, maybe a super-sub type player or possibly a useful bullpen arm but I don't think much more than that.
 
I think Travis earned a shot at trying to make 1B his spot. His numbers were good and he remain solid throughout his stay. He is also young, healthy and inexpensive. The Sox need their dollars for pitching.

 
If they're shopping Hanley as a DH only and offering to cover 50% of his remaining salary, how many takers are there realistically?  I'm quite sure this list has been done before, and recently...
 
Yankees....ARod is the DH and they've got Beltran who probably should be a DH too, no need for another one.
Rays...they're not paying $11M for anyone not named Longoria, let alone a one-dimensional DH.
Blue Jays...Encarnacion seems pretty entrenched, with Bautista as an alternative.
Orioles...with Davis and Pearce hitting FA, they could be looking to upgrade Paredes.
Tigers...Martinez and Cabrera, they're covered.
White Sox...LaRoche signed for one more year ($13M).
Indians...no one specific, but $11M might still be more than they want pay.
Twins...Sano looks pretty legit (and cheap)
Royals...Morales signed for one more year ($9M)
A's...Butler signed for two more years ($22M total)
Mariners...Cruz signed for three more years ($45M)
Angels...Pujols may need more time at DH in coming years plus they owe a bazillion dollars to Josh Hamilton still.
Astros...Gattis is fairly entrenched
Rangers...Prince Fielder, nuf said.
 
So that's what, two or three possible landing spots for him, most of whom probably don't have the budget to justify 8 figures per year for a DH-only player.  And you have to think that they'll all address their DH spot by the time they get to spring training, so barring injury, it's doubtful anyone will be buying Hanley based only on him having a good spring.

 

[Pilgrim]

 
If they're shopping Hanley as a DH only and offering to cover 50% of his remaining salary, how many takers are there realistically?  I'm quite sure this list has been done before, and recently...
 
Yankees....ARod is the DH and they've got Beltran who probably should be a DH too, no need for another one.
Rays...they're not paying $11M for anyone not named Longoria, let alone a one-dimensional DH.
Blue Jays...Encarnacion seems pretty entrenched, with Bautista as an alternative.
Orioles...with Davis and Pearce hitting FA, they could be looking to upgrade Paredes.
Tigers...Martinez and Cabrera, they're covered.
White Sox...LaRoche signed for one more year ($13M).
Indians...no one specific, but $11M might still be more than they want pay.
Twins...Sano looks pretty legit (and cheap)
Royals...Morales signed for one more year ($9M)
A's...Butler signed for two more years ($22M total)
Mariners...Cruz signed for three more years ($45M)
Angels...Pujols may need more time at DH in coming years plus they owe a bazillion dollars to Josh Hamilton still.
Astros...Gattis is fairly entrenched
Rangers...Prince Fielder, nuf said.
 
So that's what, two or three possible landing spots for him, most of whom probably don't have the budget to justify 8 figures per year for a DH-only player.  And you have to think that they'll all address their DH spot by the time they get to spring training, so barring injury, it's doubtful anyone will be buying Hanley based only on him having a good spring.

 
Honestly the situation is even worse, considering how easy it is to fill a DH position with somebody competent.  Anyone who really wants one can probably just have someone like Trumbo or Beltran for a minor commitment.  The amount of money the Red Sox would have to eat to make him a good option for someone is huge.

 

[chrisfont9]

 
Mariners...Cruz signed for three more years ($45M)

Cruz is a 50-50 RF/DH. I'm sure the Ms like having him play DH and not tempt injury fate in this way, but he's not a DH-only guy. I doubt Seattle would be interested, but it's possible, since the Ms are always looking for more offense. Cruz and Hanley would balance out lefties Cano and Seager. But Hanley probably can't fit in without being able to play 1B, any more so than in Boston.

 

[Fireball Fred]

There are very few teams that might consider Hanley for a DH, and none that would look at him for another position. The Sox, who have him, could use a first baseman and will need a DH soon -- I could see them standing pat with him. Sandoval, by contrast, might find takers for a fraction of his salary, though he really can't play anywhere but third. This is where the Sox could save some money. Should they be focused on moving him?