Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Rosenthal: Red Sox sign Dempster to 2-year/$26.5M deal


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
209 replies to this topic

#1 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 9809 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:45 PM

Source: #RedSox, Dempster in serious discussions. No deal yet; still possible he could sign elsewhere.

https://twitter.com/...917624140808192

Edited by Corsi, 13 December 2012 - 02:56 PM.


#2 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30161 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:49 PM

Serious talks with a 36-year old who turned down 2/$26M, doesn't want to go to spring training in Florida, and wanted to pitch in the NL. What could go wrong?

FWIW, besides BABIP and LOB%, he was pretty good in Texas

IP ERA WHIP K/9 BB/9 BABIP LOB% GB% SwStr% FIP FIP- xFIP xFIP-
104 2.25 1.04 7.2 2.3 0.242 84% 42% 10% 3.43 86 3.72 95
69 5.09 1.43 9.1 3.3 0.330 66% 46% 11% 4.08 92 3.86 93

Edited by SoxScout, 12 December 2012 - 01:01 PM.


#3 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28235 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:52 PM

You just have to wait and see all of the moves, and then the plan will be clear to all!!!!!!!1!

Any guesses on what it takes? I'm going with 3 / 39.

(Turns 36 in May. Career ERA+ of 99. has turned down 2 / 26. The 2013 Boston Red Sox: Average, or Bust!)

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 12 December 2012 - 12:56 PM.


#4 StuckOnYouk

  • 2048 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:54 PM

Isn't that the team's standard contract template this year? 3/39?

#5 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 9809 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:56 PM

I won't be upset if he caves and takes the 2/$26M. If it's jumps to 3/$39M (lol), I'll be annoyed.

He spent time on the disabled list last June with tightness in his latissimus dorsi muscle, but tossed 200+ innings each of the previous four seasons (and was primarily a reliever the four seasons before that).

Edited by Corsi, 12 December 2012 - 12:57 PM.


#6 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 6963 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:04 PM

I won't be upset if he caves and takes the 2/$26M. If it's jumps to 3/$39M (lol), I'll be annoyed.

He spent time on the disabled list last June with tightness in his latissimus dorsi muscle, but tossed 200+ innings each of the previous four seasons (and was primarily a reliever the four seasons before that).


The 4 years as a reliever means he might have more tread on his tires than most pitchers his age. Someone had posted somewhere (in SP thread I believe) that his line is almost a carbon copy to Sanchez' the last 4 years. They might rather take the short term route with Dempster as opposed to something like 6/90 with Sanchez, which seems sensible.

#7 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15204 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:09 PM

Good lord, Ryan Dempster? I'm going to have to watch this jackass pitch every five days?

What is the upside to this (aside from making me like Lackey starts more)?

#8 czar


  • fanboy


  • 3577 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:09 PM

Of all pitchers with 900+ IP over the last 5 years (180+/season), Dempster is 17th in xFIP, ahead of guys like Kuroda, Lester, Verlander, and Shields.

While some of that is probably trend bias, even going to 2/$28 seems eminently fair given how the market shook out for Grienke (FA) and Shields (trade) so far.

#9 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 9809 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:12 PM

Teams value him for his clubhouse presence, and the Red Sox have worked hard this offseason to change their culture, reaching free-agent agreements with catcher/first baseman Mike Napoli, center fielder Shane Victorino, designated hitter/left fielder Jonny Gomes and catcher David Ross.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/boston-red-sox-free-agent-right-handed-pitcher-ryan-dempster-hot-stove-121212

#10 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11533 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:12 PM

Also, FWIW, he's used to working (and succeeding) in good hitter's parks, which can't be said of Sanchez, at least until this year.

He's maintained a nice solid K rate into his mid-30s, too. And by all accounts, he'd be a further addition to Ben's collection of Good Clubhouse Guys.

#11 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 9809 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:14 PM

He's maintained a nice solid K rate into his mid-30s, too. And by all accounts, he'd be a further addition to Ben's collection of Good Clubhouse Guys.


He's maintained the K rate, while cutting down on the walks.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edited by Corsi, 12 December 2012 - 01:16 PM.


#12 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 20868 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:15 PM

You just have to wait and see all of the moves, and then the plan will be clear to all!!!!!!!1!

Any guesses on what it takes? I'm going with 3 / 39.

(Turns 36 in May. Career ERA+ of 99. has turned down 2 / 26. The 2013 Boston Red Sox: Average, or Bust!)


The plan is clearly to try and compete in 2013 without giving up prospects and perhaps without giving up a draft pick and the money that comes with it. If Cherington values Dempster at 2/28 or so more than, say trading Salty for Floyd, I would disagree with that. Strongly. But we don't know that Salty for Floyd is on the table or that it wouldn't cost more than Salty. Dempster is a likely candidate for regression or flat out decline and a multi-year deal seems risky. I can understand going this route over a free agent like Sanchez or Jackson because of the draft pick and the length of the contract, but if they go three years to get him I'm going to strongly dislike this deal.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 12 December 2012 - 01:16 PM.


#13 SMU_Sox


  • loves his fluffykins


  • 5102 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:17 PM

His velocity is trending downward and he will be 36 in May next year. His xFIP- and FIP- have all been slightly above average the past 4 years but I wonder how he will fare in the AL East with declining stuff. Pass - I wouldn't give him more than 2 years if that.

#14 Hairps

  • 1732 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:20 PM

I'll refer to this post from Edelpeddle in the general FA pticher thread, which seems like a logical place from which to start analyzing the Sox' thinking, assuming these reports are accurate:

I don't see why a 69 game** sample size, during which his [Dempster's] peripherals suggested he pitched well, would prevent him from being a top 10 free agent pitcher. His peripherals are almost identical to [Anibal] Sanchez over the last three years.

Sanchez - 587 IP, 3.63 xFIP, 3.67 SIERA, 19.5 LD%, 45.3 GB%, 35.2 FB%, 21.1 K%, 7.3 BB%
Dempster - 590.2 IP, 3.74 xFIP, 3.76 SIERA, 19 LD%, 45.1 GB%, 35.9 FB%, 21.9 K%, 8.7 BB%

** this should be 69 inning sample size.

Edited by Hairps, 12 December 2012 - 01:23 PM.


#15 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28235 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:27 PM

It seems eerily reminiscent to when they signed John Burkett (although I'm not sure how good a clubhouse guy he was). Career NL pitcher, who had a great year in his mid-30's, signed to pitch in the AL East? I'm skeptical.

#16 sackamano

  • 415 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:34 PM

There isn't a single free-agent out there that you shouldn't be skeptical about, whether you consider the talent level or the terms.

#17 Seels

  • 1493 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:35 PM

This is the most mediocre off season I can remember. If we're going to be shelling out big money on mediocrities like Gomes Napoli Victorino Dempster and Swisher, why make the trade in August in the first place?

One mediocre guy is a role player. But at this point we have a team full of them for the next ~3 years. What's the point? This reminds me of the early 90's era Sox signing washed up guys like Frank Viola and Danny Darwin. I really dislike this teams front office.

#18 stormmon

  • 350 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:42 PM

Personally, I'm psyched for the 2014 home opener and the unfurling of the AL Clubhouse Presence Championship Banner

#19 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 4760 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:43 PM

This is the most mediocre off season I can remember. If we're going to be shelling out big money on mediocrities like Gomes Napoli Victorino Dempster and Swisher, why make the trade in August in the first place?

One mediocre guy is a role player. But at this point we have a team full of them for the next ~3 years. What's the point? This reminds me of the early 90's era Sox signing washed up guys like Frank Viola and Danny Darwin. I really dislike this teams front office.

I don't neccesarily disagree with your premise that they are signing a whole lot of medicore players, but what exactly would you have liked them to do? It isn't like there is a whole lot of top line talent available in free agency, save for Zack Greinke and Josh Hamilton who both have big time questions/baggage that come along with them.

And if you want to go the trade route, are you willing to trade Bogaerts or Bradley, because that is the only way you would get someone like Justin Upton or someone of that ilk?

#20 czar


  • fanboy


  • 3577 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:43 PM

His velocity is trending downward and he will be 36 in May next year. His xFIP- and FIP- have all been slightly above average the past 4 years but I wonder how he will fare in the AL East with declining stuff. Pass - I wouldn't give him more than 2 years if that.


They've been above average every year since 2004.

I'd be more concerned about the 1-2 mph drop in velocity over the last four years if it translated to significant changes in his SwStr% or opponent plate discipline rates. They've been remarkably steady.

And if you want to go the trade route, are you willing to trade Bogaerts or Bradley, because that is the only way you would get someone like Justin Upton or someone of that ilk?


Given what KC just dumped in TB's lap, you'd think teams would be looking at more than Bogaerts and Bradley (two guys sitting between 25-50 on most MLB prospect lists) if the Sox wanted to procure young, elite talent.

Edited by czar, 12 December 2012 - 01:46 PM.


#21 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 20868 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:52 PM

It seems eerily reminiscent to when they signed John Burkett (although I'm not sure how good a clubhouse guy he was). Career NL pitcher, who had a great year in his mid-30's, signed to pitch in the AL East? I'm skeptical.


Actually, he's had four very good years in the last five. Now, he's 36, so the chances that his 2011 wasn't just a blip in the radar are significant enough for this deal to be a fairly big risk. That said, the Burkett comp is interesting considering the similar FIPs even if the results in ERA were vastly different in the five years prior to joining the Sox (assuming Dempster does).

3.41, 3.87, 3.99, 3.91, 3.69
3.55, 3.89, 4.42, 3.98, 3.39

Without looking it up, can you tell me which line belongs to which pitcher?

This is the most mediocre off season I can remember. If we're going to be shelling out big money on mediocrities like Gomes Napoli Victorino Dempster and Swisher, why make the trade in August in the first place?

One mediocre guy is a role player. But at this point we have a team full of them for the next ~3 years. What's the point? This reminds me of the early 90's era Sox signing washed up guys like Frank Viola and Danny Darwin. I really dislike this teams front office.


The trade off was long term money for short term money. The strategy seems to be protect the farm while filling in the major league roster with players who could keep them in the playoff picture until a new core can form from the wealth of minor league talent we have available. It's a risky approach. If these additions don't decline, or in some cases rebound from down years or injuries, they could field a playoff contender for the next two years without giving up a single prospect or draft pick. Of course, if two or three of them go the other way, they could finish in the basement again this year.

I'm OK with this approach, but I'm also one of the posters here who would be fine with another lost season to improve the outlook for the future. It's entirely valid to disagree with me on that. This is about as hedged as hedged bets get. They weren't willing to fold and wait a year to see how the farm develops before making moves, but they're not willing to bet hard on 2013 by dealing prospects or even their 2nd round pick. They're trying to strike a balance between being competitive now and setting the roster up for a sustained run of success.

#22 BCsMightyJoeYoung

  • 2654 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:57 PM

Looking at Dempster's game logs ..
http://espn.go.com/m...5/ryan-dempster

After the Texas trade Dempster had 12 starts. Of those 12, 4 were against the angels (3) and the Yankees (1) - in which he gave up 25 runs in 16 2/3 IPS for an era of 13.5.

In his other 8 starts - against very mediocre offenses - he gave up 14 ERs in in 52 1.3 IP for an ERA of 2.40

Just shows the effects of a SSS. If those splits are actually meaningful then it doesn't bode well for a transition to the AL East. At least he would not be facing the Angels nearly as much.

#23 teddywingman


  • Looks like Zach Galifianakis


  • 3431 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:59 PM

I'm surprised that Dempster's numbers are as good as they are. The few times I've watched him pitch, he looked brutal. Gives up a ton of hits. Command seems shaky.

Career WHIP of 1.43
Career BB/9 of 4. Terrible rates in the first half of his career make that number as high as it is. Last year was 2.7--best rate he's posted. There are aspects of last year's performance that make it look like an outlier--the first 104 innings for the cubs especially.

Edit: Between June 10th and July 14th he started 5 straight games--against Brewers, Twins, Red Sox!, Mets, and Dbacks without allowing an earned run. I doubt he ever has or ever will go on a run like that again.

Edited by teddywingman, 12 December 2012 - 02:12 PM.


#24 redsoxstiff


  • hip-tossed Yogi in a bar fight


  • 6657 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:28 PM

This is the most mediocre off season I can remember. If we're going to be shelling out big money on mediocrities like Gomes Napoli Victorino Dempster and Swisher, why make the trade in August in the first place?

One mediocre guy is a role player. But at this point we have a team full of them for the next ~3 years. What's the point? This reminds me of the early 90's era Sox signing washed up guys like Frank Viola and Danny Darwin. I really dislike this teams front office.


I await ,probably foolishly...the signing of two major players...If we get more fairly decent players ...thus all within the 3 year silliness...I'll go back to the good old days ...I'll dispise the front orifice...

#25 SMU_Sox


  • loves his fluffykins


  • 5102 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:32 PM

They've been above average every year since 2004.


Right, but how much relevance does that have to this year? Not to get sidetracked but what he did as a RP, swing man, or SP in his early years don't have much relevance now. I tend to think of Dempster as a medium risk guy to give you slightly above average innings and plenty of them. The risk is all due to his age.

I'm also not concerned with his very brief stint in the AL. I'm concerned with his age and a slow trickle of his velocity creeping downward. I think that's probably deserved.

#26 Manramsclan

  • 1989 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:34 PM

I hope these talks aren't as serious as cancer. This would be a terrible move for more than 2 years. He is 36.

I like the stats that Hairps Quoted above, and it does show what the Sox FO is thinking.

Logically, however, I think Sanchez is a better bet to continue performing at that rate at age 28 than Dempster does at 36. One could very easily argue that Sanchez may even improve upon those numbers. If that it too rosy it is a near certainty that Sanchez is the better bet than Dempster to not regress.

Just because the Sox FO doesn't want to pay 5 years $90 Million for Sanchez, does not mean they should pay 3 years $39 Million for Dempster.

PS I think the $13 Million that we are seeing the Sox run with regarding Free agents has a lot to do with the required value qualifying offer for FA's to receive a draft pick. It makes sense to me in the abstract that it creates a kind of salary "floor" for those FA's who are right on the borderline (ie 2.5 WAR players at $5.5 Million a marginal win who are not likely to significantly outperform those projections). I may be missing a step in my reasoning but it seems as if the thinking is, "We have money to spend. If we aren't giving up a draft pick then we will pay the going rate for $ per marginal win for players we like." It just so happens that those players are right on the borderline of whether or not they would receive a qualifying offer(ie they are good but not slam dunk to commit $13 Million to if they can be had for a bit less)

Edited by Manramsclan, 12 December 2012 - 02:35 PM.


#27 In my lifetime

  • 395 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:18 PM

I expect 2/28.
I would be shocked at 3/36+. Just too large a chance that the 3rd year will have 0 value to the RS.
As a 2 year starting pitcher on a team that has room in the budget, in a market very tight for pitching, the deal is okay. I would expect that the Sanchez deal has gotten too rich/long for them.

Edited by In my lifetime, 12 December 2012 - 03:21 PM.


#28 maufman


  • SoSH Member


  • 12266 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:18 PM

You just have to wait and see all of the moves, and then the plan will be clear to all!!!!!!!1!

Any guesses on what it takes? I'm going with 3 / 39.

(Turns 36 in May. Career ERA+ of 99. has turned down 2 / 26. The 2013 Boston Red Sox: Average, or Bust!)


I'm guessing 3/32. Dempster's going to take the biggest pile of guaranteed money available -- taking a few million less to hit the market one more time heading into his age-38 season makes no sense.

#29 Dewy4PrezII


  • Very Intense


  • 2685 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:20 PM

Is it just me or does this off season have a very Lou Gorman feel to it? Demptster seems like Ben's Danny Darwin. I hope I am wrong but an over pay for a 36 year old Dempster doesn't improve anything but Dempster's bank balance IMO.

#30 gammoseditor


  • also had a stroke


  • 2768 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:21 PM

I doubt (and hope they don't) go three years with other options out there. If Dempster were the last decent SP standing I could see caving, but if he won't take two years you move on to the next guy. Marcum/Lohse/Edwin Jackson, not all of them are going to get three years, and Marcum might not get two.

#31 Edelpeddle

  • 273 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:25 PM

As I had previously pointed out, I think this would be a really smart signing. It's a buy low opportunity because he didn't pitch 200 innings or the first time since he became a starter in 2008 and his raw numbers in Texas look bad. But his FIP and xFIP in Texas were pretty good and he actually pitched well for them down the stretch. After getting traded to Texas, he gave up 8 earned runs in two of his first three starts. But then over the next 8 starts, six of them were "quality starts" and overall he had an ERA of 3.26. His peripherals over the last three seasons are nearly identical to Anibal Sanchez and because Dempster was traded mid-season, he won't cost a draft pick.

And on top of it all, Dempster is reportedly looking for a 3 year deal worth $13 million a year. That seems to be the front offices favorite contract this off-season.

Edited by Edelpeddle, 12 December 2012 - 03:26 PM.


#32 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 20868 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:31 PM

As I had previously pointed out, I think this would be a really smart signing.

snip


At one or two years it could be, but at 3 it seems unnecessarily risky. One year would be ideal, but I don't know why Dempster would agree to one year unless there is zero market for him. So two years is probably the sweet spot.

#33 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11533 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:35 PM

I'm guessing 3/32. Dempster's going to take the biggest pile of guaranteed money available -- taking a few million less to hit the market one more time heading into his age-38 season makes no sense.


3/32 sounds right to me too, or maybe even 3/30 with some incentives. It would allow Dempster to save face on the three-year thing, yet allows the Sox to commit so little beyond what they had offered before as a two-year deal that the third year should prove edible or (better yet) subsidize-and-movable.

Is it just me or does this off season have a very Lou Gorman feel to it? Demptster seems like Ben's Danny Darwin.


You mean the guy who, despite a lost-cause first year where he blew out his shoulder by the All-Star break, went on to pitch 500+ innings with a 109 ERA+, racking up 8.8 fWAR, over what boiled down to a three-year stint with the Sox (about three years' worth of roster time spread over four seasons). If Dempster could do that, I'd consider 3/30-something money well spent.

#34 redsoxstiff


  • hip-tossed Yogi in a bar fight


  • 6657 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:43 PM

As Lou said" the sun will rise tomorrow and i'll have lunch"...

If anyone is excited about all these 3 year acquisitions I 've yet to read it...admittedly I am beating a dead horfse unmecilessly but a mediocre ,maybe team with very exciting tix prices,leads me to the Gorman way of life...Screw it...

Edited by redsoxstiff, 19 December 2012 - 04:14 PM.


#35 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 38319 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 05:05 PM

Personally, I'm psyched for the 2014 home opener and the unfurling of the AL Clubhouse Presence Championship Banner


Not nearly enough love for this post. I'm still cackling.

#36 geoduck no quahog


  • SoSH Member


  • 5709 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 05:46 PM

Well the team better do something about pitching. The best thing about the staff right now is when they inevitably lose 1 or 2 to injuries this year, the replacement arms will probably mean no significant drop-off. So, time to stock up on mediocrity for mediocrity-insurance.

#37 SoxLegacy

  • 548 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 06:40 PM

This is the most mediocre off season I can remember. If we're going to be shelling out big money on mediocrities like Gomes Napoli Victorino Dempster and Swisher, why make the trade in August in the first place?

One mediocre guy is a role player. But at this point we have a team full of them for the next ~3 years. What's the point? This reminds me of the early 90's era Sox signing washed up guys like Frank Viola and Danny Darwin. I really dislike this teams front office.


I don't get this--did you see the team the Sox ended the 2012 season with? They need major league players to fill positions that were filled (out of necessity) by minor leaguers and fodder. The guys they've added this off season fill the gaps, don't block prospects, and are cheap in terms of years and money. The team will be competitive in 2013, and even moreso in following years. And furthermore, it's not like the Sox are spurning decent, above average/very good players in FA in order to sign cheaper, older players. The guys they signed fit the team's needs best and are some of the better players out there. And the younger, better guys aren't on the market or cost too much in terms of dollars and time.

Edited by SoxLegacy, 12 December 2012 - 08:35 PM.


#38 MikeM

  • 841 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 07:04 PM

I doubt (and hope they don't) go three years with other options out there. If Dempster were the last decent SP standing I could see caving, but if he won't take two years you move on to the next guy. Marcum/Lohse/Edwin Jackson, not all of them are going to get three years, and Marcum might not get two.


Jackson may end up with more years then we'd be comfortable in giving, but Marcum is a guy i'd like to be seeing show up on the rumor radar here.

Going 3 on Dempster shouldn't even be on the potential possibility table here, imo.

#39 lexrageorge

  • 3049 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 07:09 PM

This is the most mediocre off season I can remember. If we're going to be shelling out big money on mediocrities like Gomes Napoli Victorino Dempster and Swisher, why make the trade in August in the first place?

One mediocre guy is a role player. But at this point we have a team full of them for the next ~3 years. What's the point? This reminds me of the early 90's era Sox signing washed up guys like Frank Viola and Danny Darwin. I really dislike this teams front office.


Neither Napoli nor Victorino are mediocre role players; neither is Swisher. Even with Gomes, the Sox OF is significantly improved over last year.

#40 foulkehampshire


  • hillbilly suburbanite


  • 3164 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 07:26 PM

Frank Viola pitched 452.2 innings of 3.40 ERA baseball for the Sox over 3 years. 130 ERA+, 8 CG, 2 SHO, 8.4 WAR.

He may have not been a sexy pitcher, but I'd kill for that kind of production now.

Moan and moan all you want, the FA class is weak this year. A balanced roster of complementary pieces, ok-good-yet-not-great players, sprinked with some health/luck fairy dust looks way more appealing than the situation this team has been in over the last 3 years.

Its not like signing these "stud" players than have hit free agency has been doing us any favors the last half-decade.

#41 OCD SS


  • SoSH Member


  • 6849 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:12 PM

Dempster is the safe rather than sexy signing. There's no dreaming on his harnessing his stuff or having a break out season, but when you get right down to it the Sox need to add a SP and the other options aren't really great either. Dempster at least seems to have less variance in what you can expect going forward, and that stability can be attractive.

The bottom line for adding a stronger SP comes down to the trade market. Ellsbury is probably their best chip, but I don't see him bringing back anyone all that impressive (at that's without having to deal with the moving parts of turning around signing Hamilton).

#42 Robert Plant

  • 664 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:20 PM

At this point I would much rather see us get some low risk, high reward free agents like Chris Young or even Tim Stauffer. Although both are injury prone, they are fairly young and have enormous upside. We could end up getting some ace like performances. Dempster is not going to give us many ace like performances. If we stretch out Morales, Doubrant and Aceves to start we would actually have quite a bit of starting pitching depth to hedge against any injuries.

#43 gammoseditor


  • also had a stroke


  • 2768 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:37 PM

At this point I would much rather see us get some low risk, high reward free agents like Chris Young or even Tim Stauffer. Although both are injury prone, they are fairly young and have enormous upside. We could end up getting some ace like performances. Dempster is not going to give us many ace like performances. If we stretch out Morales, Doubrant and Aceves to start we would actually have quite a bit of starting pitching depth to hedge against any injuries.


Tim Stauffer has pitched more than 90 innings in a season once, and all of his decent pitching has been in Petco. He has never come close to being an Ace, and at his best was never really better than Dempster was last year. Young was pretty good in 2005 and 2007 with the Rangers and Padres, again a good season in San Diego, but he's been bad or injured for five years and was never close to an ace either. He may have had a little better year in 2005 than Dempster did last year. Stauffer turns 31 next June, and Young turns 34 in May. I'd take either if they wanted to pitch for the Pawsox.

#44 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28235 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:08 PM

I'd rather they sign Anibal Sanchez, because he has the potential to be an ace, and still in his prime a few years from now. People talk about how the Sox should be really good in 2015 or so, but who is pitching on that team? Barnes, Rubby, Buchholz?

Marcum is a lot more appealing than Dempster too, IMO.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 12 December 2012 - 10:09 PM.


#45 JakeRae


  • SoSH Member


  • 5304 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:18 PM

I'd rather they sign Anibal Sanchez, because he has the potential to be an ace, and still in his prime a few years from now. People talk about how the Sox should be really good in 2015 or so, but who is pitching on that team? Barnes, Rubby, Buchholz?

Marcum is a lot more appealing than Dempster too, IMO.

If everything breaks perfectly, the 2015 rotation would look like Buchholz, De La Rosa, Doubront, Barnes, Lackey/Webster with Workman and Ranaudo waiting in the wings. Everything won't break perfectly, and it's a safe bet that one of the starters at that point is from outside of the organization, but there is plenty of starting talent to fill out a projected in-house rotation.

I also really don't see Anibal Sanchez as a potential ace. I think he's pretty much reached his ceiling and buying now is just hoping he can maintain it. I'd rather bet on Dempster holding onto his for the next 2 years than Sanchez doing it for 4 or 5. There seems to be a tendency to lose track of the fact that age matters a lot less for starters than it does for position players and risk tied to contract length is much greater. A 2-year deal for a 36 year old pitcher is a much safer contract than a 5 year deal for a 28 year old, recent performance being equal.

#46 Robert Plant

  • 664 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:30 PM

Tim Stauffer has pitched more than 90 innings in a season once, and all of his decent pitching has been in Petco. He has never come close to being an Ace, and at his best was never really better than Dempster was last year. Young was pretty good in 2005 and 2007 with the Rangers and Padres, again a good season in San Diego, but he's been bad or injured for five years and was never close to an ace either. He may have had a little better year in 2005 than Dempster did last year. Stauffer turns 31 next June, and Young turns 34 in May. I'd take either if they wanted to pitch for the Pawsox.


My main point still stands. Both of them combined would come cheaper than Dempster and each of them has an upside that is at least as high as Dempster. For the same price and less years than Dempster we could get 2 or maybe more high ceiling pitchers. Perhaps this is an inefficiency in the free agent market that we could take advantage of. I would much rather test this theory than overpay for a middle aged man who is almost definitely going to decline over the course of a 3 or god forbid 4 year contract.

#47 SMU_Sox


  • loves his fluffykins


  • 5102 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:39 PM

Tim Stauffer and Chris Young have "enormous upside" today? Neither of their FIP's or xFIP's come close to Dempster. Stauffer's upside IS Dempster in the sense that his 2010 and 2011 were somewhat Demster like. I'll grant you even with his injury he has upside. I don't know if he will ever top 200 IP though. But Chris Young's FIP and xFIP have not been league average or better for 6 and 7 years respectively. And he's going to be 34 next year. Where do you get upside from that?

#48 JakeRae


  • SoSH Member


  • 5304 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:44 PM

My main point still stands. Both of them combined would come cheaper than Dempster and each of them has an upside that is at least as high as Dempster. For the same price and less years than Dempster we could get 2 or maybe more high ceiling pitchers. Perhaps this is an inefficiency in the free agent market that we could take advantage of. I would much rather test this theory than overpay for a middle aged man who is almost definitely going to decline over the course of a 3 or god forbid 4 year contract.

We don't have roster space for 2 free agent starters. We have roster space for 1. Also, no one is talking about 4 years for Dempster. We're talking 2, maybe 3 years at moderate dollars.

#49 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28235 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:47 PM

14M is now "moderate dollars"? Dempster is 36, with a career ERA+ of 99, pitching nearly his entire career in the NL. I guess I just don't get it, is he going to be a part of the next contending Sox team? Either go for it, or give the starts to de la Rosa or someone similar. I can't figure out what this team is trying to do, win 80 games?

#50 gammoseditor


  • also had a stroke


  • 2768 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:49 PM

14M is now "moderate dollars"? Dempster is 36, with a career ERA+ of 99, pitching nearly his entire career in the NL. I guess I just don't get it, is he going to be a part of the next contending Sox team? Either go for it, or give the starts to de la Rosa or someone similar. I can't figure out what this team is trying to do, win 80 games?


If it's two years then whatever they pay Dempster isn't going to stop us from signing anyone else. They're still way under budget. Rubby's career high in innnings is 100 and he's coming off TJ. I think/hope they view him as a 6th starter for the 2nd half. He can't handle the workload of a full season.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users