Cy Young winner Chris Sale thread

donutogre

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,479
Philadelphia
I've never been so happy as when Sale was traded, and that hasn't changed despite his season with Atlanta. He could not stay healthy here, he wasted an enormous amount of the organization's time, energy, and money, and he was a constant planning distraction due to his inability to play.

I'm glad he's gone. And I always will be.
Man, being a major contributor to a WS title doesn't buy you the same respect around here that it used to!

I kid, somewhat. I definitely can't argue with anyone who was happy to see him off the team after such a long stretch of not being able to contribute. Change of scenery was needed. And there's a lot of time to prove that this deal was the right one to make, even if it didn't pay off this season.
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
13,765
The Paris of the 80s
I don't get the fanbase anymore. The current roster features a Devers making a leap up into actual elite hitter territory this year. They've got a core of longer term under control hitters that are quite frankly pretty good in Casas, Duran, Abreu, and Wong (plus, I guess Yoshida now that he's apparently good at hitting baseballs again). Houck and Crawford elevated the perception of the potential place in the rotation going forward even if they wore down in the second half. Plus the Sox lucked in Mayer, Teel, Anthony, and Montgomery. But yea, the "baseball gods" are against them. Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,635
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Man, being a major contributor to a WS title doesn't buy you the same respect around here that it used to!

I kid, somewhat. I definitely can't argue with anyone who was happy to see him off the team after such a long stretch of not being able to contribute. Change of scenery was needed. And there's a lot of time to prove that this deal was the right one to make, even if it didn't pay off this season.
I'm grateful for 2018. It's pretty much everything that took place after that I tired of.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
28,225
Unreal America
While they debate, I disagree with both @MikeM and @jezza1918 .

Regarding MikeM's points, I don't understand how one can declare a deal bad right now when it was very clearly a trade that knowingly sacrificed potential current results for potential future results. Breslow knew that Sale could have a bounce back season. He also knew this team was not a title contender with him even at his best, so he got a guy he believes could solidify a position for several years into the future. If Grissom totally washes out then we can call it a bad deal. But not some kind of epically catastrophic deal like you're insinuating. We've lost one year of Sale on a team that wasn't a WS contender anyway.

As for Jezza, I disagree that we should largely evaluate a trade at the moment it is made. I do think a factor in evaluating it is considering the circumstances and objectives at the time. But it's also the job of a GM to be right more often than not. If a few years from now Grissom is out of MLB, and Sale has a 2024 ring, then I think it's fair to say the trade was a loser. We can debate the degree that it was a loser, for sure. But it'll be a loser nonetheless. Results have to matter.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,588
South Dartmouth, MA
While they debate, I disagree with both @MikeM and @jezza1918 .

Regarding MikeM's points, I don't understand how one can declare a deal bad right now when it was very clearly a trade that knowingly sacrificed potential current results for potential future results. Breslow knew that Sale could have a bounce back season. He also knew this team was not a title contender with him even at his best, so he got a guy he believes could solidify a position for several years into the future. If Grissom totally washes out then we can call it a bad deal. But not some kind of epically catastrophic deal like you're insinuating. We've lost one year of Sale on a team that wasn't a WS contender anyway.

As for Jezza, I disagree that we should largely evaluate a trade at the moment it is made. I do think a factor in evaluating it is considering the circumstances and objectives at the time. But it's also the job of a GM to be right more often than not. If a few years from now Grissom is out of MLB, and Sale has a 2024 ring, then I think it's fair to say the trade was a loser. We can debate the degree that it was a loser, for sure. But it'll be a loser nonetheless. Results have to matter.
Ok, that's a good way of saying it and I somewhat agree - results do have to matter. I guess where I come from is there are plenty of trades/signings/draft picks etc that turn out to be busts/losers/insert another word here that I dont blame the GM for. If the consensus amongst fans, local experts, national people at the time of a specific move was that said move was a winner...but eventually turns out to be a loser, is that the GMs fault? Not meant to be specific about Sale/Grissom by the way. But yeah, aggregate wise I understand that if a GM makes 10 moves that day of people love, but all suck down the road...well yeah. The GM probably isn't very good!
The other thing is there are just so many layers to roster construction and moves like this - hypothetically let's pretend what you wrote comes true (Sale wins a 2024 ring, and the Cy for that matter...and Grissom never contributes). But let's also pretend that Priester is a top of rotation guy for Sox from 2026-2031. Does the fact that Sox felt more comfortable giving up Yorke perhaps because they had Grissom factor into the Sale deal at all? Obviously Im rabbit holing here a bit, but that's kind of my point.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,698
Row 14
Sale is having a monster season. He is second among starters in the NL in WAR. This is just crazy, do you blame Breslow for this trade? I don't, I am convinced that he and the team needed a change of scenery. But it sure would be great to have this Chise Sale now.
Is it not equally laughable to more or less ignore the outcome data we already have here? Absolutely nothing wrong imo with openly acknowledging the early grade on this is currently projecting out to look really bad.
Really bad? In order to that you would have to assume Chris Sale would be healthy all season in Boston and the Red Sox had some knowledge that a 35 YO would finally bounce back after 3 years. Also you need to assume Chris Sale is the difference between where the team is now to a real competitor (He isn't). At best the Red Sox are neck and neck against KC for the wild card instead of 3.5 back.

It will be interesting to see is Sale can continue this through the playoffs but it is really hard to shed a tear.
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,845
I think that this current team, with a healthy and fully functioning Chris Sale (like we've seen this year in Atlanta), is a "contender". I mean, he's basically been the very best starting pitcher in baseball this year (14-3, 2.62 era, 187 k, 2.05 fip, 0.99 whip, 12.0 k/9). Put him in there instead of Pivetta, and this team is likely like 8 games better than it is today and absolutely has a chance against anyone in a short series.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,573
Rogers Park
Like I said from the start you "objectively" have to. Nothing about what you just posted there coming off as being objective to me.

At the end of the day the trade is what it is. If ends up Breslow traded away the 2024 Cy Young award winner for a non-prospect that ends up amounting to a next to nothing value a year from now...it was a bad and terrible trade for us no matter how you want to dress it up.
It’s not objective/subjective so much as ex ante/ex post.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,698
Row 14
I think that this current team, with a healthy and fully functioning Chris Sale (like we've seen this year in Atlanta), is a "contender". I mean, he's basically been the very best starting pitcher in baseball this year (14-3, 2.62 era, 187 k, 2.05 fip, 0.99 whip, 12.0 k/9). Put him in there instead of Pivetta, and this team is likely like 8 games better than it is today and absolutely has a chance against anyone in a short series.
How is the team 8 games better?
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,084
I don't get the fanbase anymore. The current roster features a Devers making a leap up into actual elite hitter territory this year. They've got a core of longer term under control hitters that are quite frankly pretty good in Casas, Duran, Abreu, and Wong (plus, I guess Yoshida now that he's apparently good at hitting baseballs again). Houck and Crawford elevated the perception of the potential place in the rotation going forward even if they wore down in the second half. Plus the Sox lucked in Mayer, Teel, Anthony, and Montgomery. But yea, the "baseball gods" are against them. Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.
Ha, this was a fun overreaction to read. It was a reference to continued poor injury luck and a half-serious one at that.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,267
Florida
The bolded is why I prefer to judge trades as much as possible at time of trade...if he ends up winning 2 MVPs in a row for the red sox in 28/29 do we revisit whether the trade was a win or a loss again? We traded an aging pitcher who hadn't contributed positively to the team in a few years for a cost controlled position player who had already produced at the age of 21 at the major league level. It was a good move. Good for Sale for turning back the clock and staying healthy.
This general line of thought and assessment would be more fitting in *this* specific instance if there was anybody (especially among the ones getting overly-defensive imo about what I stated here) that would actually make the honest claim, right now, that they *wouldn't* want this trade back if given the opportunity.

I don't believe anybody that would try to genuinely claim that.

Not to say I don't agree with what you said there in principle mind you. Maybe Grissom's MLB projection outlook reverses itself and we do indeed revist the trade a year or 2 from now. But I just don't believe one can adequately rationalize Breslow somehow being deserving of walking out of this season without getting a hard L hung on him for that trade. Without question for me it rightfully goes into the end year evaluation bad pile.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,635
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I think that this current team, with a healthy and fully functioning Chris Sale (like we've seen this year in Atlanta), is a "contender". I mean, he's basically been the very best starting pitcher in baseball this year (14-3, 2.62 era, 187 k, 2.05 fip, 0.99 whip, 12.0 k/9). Put him in there instead of Pivetta, and this team is likely like 8 games better than it is today and absolutely has a chance against anyone in a short series.
IMO there's zero chance he would be effective and healthy in Boston this year. That to me seems obvious. He simply couldn't do it. Maybe the Braves have tweaked his program in some way to ensure his health. Whatever the reason, there's zero chance he would be healthy for the Sox this year, never mind healthy and effective.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
28,225
Unreal America
If the consensus amongst fans, local experts, national people at the time of a specific move was that said move was a winner...but eventually turns out to be a loser, is that the GMs fault? Not meant to be specific about Sale/Grissom by the way. But yeah, aggregate wise I understand that if a GM makes 10 moves that day of people love, but all suck down the road...well yeah. The GM probably isn't very good!
In these cases it certainly could be a GM's fault. He's supposed to know more than the fans, media, etc. And if it turns out to be largely an issue of poor evalulation, then why isn't it his fault? To be clear, I'm not talking about injuries or some other outlier factor. Just straight up poor performance.

Now, this doesn't mean we should get the pitchforks out. I feel like that's the dynamic that ruins a lot of these conversations. Even if this Sale/Grissom trade turns out to be a loser for Breslow, I certainly don't think he should be fired because of it. It can just be a negative mark on the ledger, hopefully offset by positive marks.

The other thing is there are just so many layers to roster construction and moves like this - hypothetically let's pretend what you wrote comes true (Sale wins a 2024 ring, and the Cy for that matter...and Grissom never contributes). But let's also pretend that Priester is a top of rotation guy for Sox from 2026-2031. Does the fact that Sox felt more comfortable giving up Yorke perhaps because they had Grissom factor into the Sale deal at all? Obviously Im rabbit holing here a bit, but that's kind of my point.
I'm leery of going down this road unless we have explicit knowledge that allows us to draw a straight line from one move to another. In your hypothetical, I guess that mitigates the trade evaluation if we know for sure that Grissom was why Yorke was dealt. And honestly, that probably only works for me if Grissom also performs well. Trading one guy because you have another guy, and that other guy doesn't pan out, but some other other guy does, seems like a sketchy way to mark a trade as good.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,588
South Dartmouth, MA
This general line of thought and assessment would be more fitting in *this* specific instance if there was anybody (especially among the ones getting overly-defensive imo about what I stated here) that would actually make the honest claim, right now, that they *wouldn't* want this trade back if given the opportunity.

I don't believe anybody that would try to genuinely claim that.

Not to say I don't agree with what you said there in principle mind you. Maybe Grissom's MLB projection outlook reverses itself and we do indeed revist the trade a year or 2 from now. But I just don't believe one can adequately rationalize Breslow somehow being deserving of walking out of this season without getting a hard L hung on him for that trade. Without question for me it rightfully goes into the end year evaluation bad pile.
From that lens yes I agree. Right now, given where sox team currently is and Sale/Grissom are, I'd want the trade back. But if Crawford/Houck dont pitch like Cy Young contenders the first half of the season having Sale wouldnt make us contenders. So stuff like that...and...
I'm leery of going down this road unless we have explicit knowledge that allows us to draw a straight line from one move to another. In your hypothetical, I guess that mitigates the trade evaluation if we know for sure that Grissom was why Yorke was dealt. And honestly, that probably only works for me if Grissom also performs well. Trading one guy because you have another guy, and that other guy doesn't pan out, but some other other guy does, seems like a sketchy way to mark a trade as good.
The above rabbit holes are exactly why I try to weigh time of specific move assessment so heavily. Revisionist stuff gets into murkier and murkier waters. So, for me, I try to keep thing as simple as possible. Im willing to die on this hill...though I recognize I may be on it alone :) By that I really do mean it's just the way I like to view these things, not the way I think they should be viewed.
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,845
How is the team 8 games better?
I was looking at the difference in their W-L records, to be honest, just to keep it simple. Sale: 14-3, Pivetta, 5-8. 9 game difference in the win column, 5 game difference in the loss column = 7 games difference. So off by one. But that's not really how it should work so let's do a deeper dive.

In games when Pivetta has started, the Sox are 10-9. In those 10 wins, here's the IP and R allowed by Pivetta:

7.0 ip, 0 r
7.0 ip, 0 r
7.0 ip, 3 r
6.2 ip, 3 r
6.0 ip, 1 r
5.2 ip, 2 r
5.0 ip, 0 r
4.2 ip, 2 r
4.1 ip, 3 r
4.0 ip, 4 r

In those 9 losses, here's the IP and R allowed by Pivetta:

6.0 ip, 1 r
3.1 ip, 5 r
6.2 ip, 4 r
6.0 ip, 0 r
5.0 ip, 3 r
4.0 ip, 5 r
5.1 ip, 2 r
4.0 ip, 5 r
2.2 ip, 7 r

Chris Sale has only had 2 games all year where he's given up more than 3 R, and only 4 games all year where he's given up more than 2 R. In 19 games, he's given up 2 R or fewer. Pivetta has had 5 games where he's given up more than 3 R, and 10 games where he's given up more than 2 R. Plus, Sale has averaged 6 IP per start, while Pivetta has averaged fewer than 5.1 ip per start. So those extra 2 outs per game on average really do add up, helping the bullpen not only for that game, but for the games surrounding Sale's starts.

So maybe 8 was a bit much, but I have no doubt that if the Sox had THIS Chris Sale this year, they'd be comfortably in the playoffs right now if the season were to end today, and they'd absolutely have a shot against anyone once in the playoffs.

So you never know how these games would have played out, of course, so I'm just guessing, but he's pitched way better than Pivetta
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,845
IMO there's zero chance he would be effective and healthy in Boston this year. That to me seems obvious. He simply couldn't do it. Maybe the Braves have tweaked his program in some way to ensure his health. Whatever the reason, there's zero chance he would be healthy for the Sox this year, never mind healthy and effective.
Well that's how I feel as well, and I was ok with the trade for this reason. But all I'm saying is that if the Sox had THIS Sale, they'd be in really good shape and a legit contender. But it's an open question as to whether they'd ever get THIS Chris Sale.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,635
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Well that's how I feel as well, and I was ok with the trade for this reason. But all I'm saying is that if the Sox had THIS Sale, they'd be in really good shape and a legit contender. But it's an open question as to whether they'd ever get THIS Chris Sale.
Yes, we are in agreement. I suspect if he were still in Boston, he'd lead the league in televisions punched again, but nothing else.
 

barbed wire Bob

crippled by fear
SoSH Member
While there are times I wish we still had Chris Sale pitching for us, He did seem to have a great deal of issues staying healthy here, and so, I recall a deep and meaningful scene from the highly regarded 70’s classic “Cannonball Run”
View: https://youtu.be/AjGXn249Fc0
Nit: the scene is from The Gumball Rally, not the Cannonball Run and IMO, it’s the better of the two movies.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,668
Is it not equally laughable to more or less ignore the outcome data we already have here? Absolutely nothing wrong imo with openly acknowledging the early grade on this is currently projecting out to look really bad.
I think "currently projecting out" is a non-sequitur at best. There's today, when Atlanta has an advantage. There's projecting out, which is something different. If Atlanta fails to make the playoffs, did they flush 10 million dollars down the toilet?
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
35,894
It's notable as well while Atlanta struck gold this year with Sale, all of Strider, Acuna, Albies, Harris Jr, and now Riley have had severe injuries.

Sometimes the best-laid plans go awry, on both sides of this trade.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,698
Row 14
I was looking at the difference in their W-L records, to be honest, just to keep it simple. Sale: 14-3, Pivetta, 5-8. 9 game difference in the win column, 5 game difference in the loss column = 7 games difference. So off by one. But that's not really how it should work so let's do a deeper dive.

So maybe 8 was a bit much, but I have no doubt that if the Sox had THIS Chris Sale this year, they'd be comfortably in the playoffs right now if the season were to end today, and they'd absolutely have a shot against anyone once in the playoffs.

So you never know how these games would have played out, of course, so I'm just guessing, but he's pitched way better than Pivetta
8 games assumes a lot of luck the numbers don't match. You would expect about 3-4 game swing which would just get them to KC line on the Wild card. You are also assuming Sale is going to be healthy for the playoffs.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,653
Really bad? In order to that you would have to assume Chris Sale would be healthy all season in Boston and the Red Sox had some knowledge that a 35 YO would finally bounce back after 3 years. Also you need to assume Chris Sale is the difference between where the team is now to a real competitor (He isn't). At best the Red Sox are neck and neck against KC for the wild card instead of 3.5 back.

It will be interesting to see is Sale can continue this through the playoffs but it is really hard to shed a tear.
There's only a 3.5 game difference between the Royals at WC3 and the Orioles and Yankees who are tied for the best record in the AL. If you're neck and neck with the wild card teams this year you're absolutely a contender.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
15,154
Sale has been worth 5.2 fWAR; Pivetta 0.7. Of course, Sale may have just replaced Houck, right? And he’s been with 3.3. Then again, maybe Houck in the pen would have been an asset. Who really knows (nobody). Certainly the first year has not worked out but assuming Sale would have been this dominant in Boston is like assuming Roger Clemens would have won the 96 CYA with the Sox.
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,845
8 games assumes a lot of luck the numbers don't match. You would expect about 3-4 game swing which would just get them to KC line on the Wild card. You are also assuming Sale is going to be healthy for the playoffs.
Maybe this is just a "feel" thing, but I think going from a below-average pitcher to the guy who's been the best pitcher in baseball this year is probably worth more than 3-4 games. Because from what you're saying, the difference between a team with 5 Cy Young winners in the rotation and the team with 5 below average starters is "only" 15-20 games?
 

HfxBob

goes on and on...
Nov 13, 2005
940
IMO there's zero chance he would be effective and healthy in Boston this year. That to me seems obvious. He simply couldn't do it. Maybe the Braves have tweaked his program in some way to ensure his health. Whatever the reason, there's zero chance he would be healthy for the Sox this year, never mind healthy and effective.
Your level of certainty is astounding.

If you're right, it doesn't speak very well for the Red Sox program.
 

HfxBob

goes on and on...
Nov 13, 2005
940
I think "currently projecting out" is a non-sequitur at best. There's today, when Atlanta has an advantage. There's projecting out, which is something different. If Atlanta fails to make the playoffs, did they flush 10 million dollars down the toilet?
If Atlanta misses the playoffs, did they flush their whole payroll down the toilet?

Seems like a pretty narrow way to look at it.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
12,553
Maybe this is just a "feel" thing, but I think going from a below-average pitcher to the guy who's been the best pitcher in baseball this year is probably worth more than 3-4 games. Because from what you're saying, the difference between a team with 5 Cy Young winners in the rotation and the team with 5 below average starters is "only" 15-20 games?
That's the difference between 80 wins and 100. That's a lot, and it's not accounting for the impact of all the hitters, defense, and relievers. Really good teams are better than bad teams in lots of ways.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,421
Portland
Second base has been a revolving door of suck since Pedroia retired. I don't blame Breslow for trying to get a right handed hitter who might stabilize the position. And the rotation was killed by injuries the last couple of years, so switching from unreliable Chris Sale to 30-start workhorse Lucas Giolito made sense. Then of course the two guys they got immediately got hurt and the whole thing blew up.
I think we're all in agreement about how awful the talent has been, but my issue is the timing of it. I don't think Breslow was expecting to contend this year. Do you think he would have made the trade if Mayer was in AAA or saved the Sale bullet for somewhere else?
...and then we traded Nick Yorke, who is a lesser version of Vaughn Grissom (in my view; both are hit-over-power 2B/LF types, but Grissom mostly hit better age/level through the minors, is more projectable, has a more reliable hit tool, and is more plausibly an infielder), for another SP post-prospect in Quinn Priester. Priester is young and has terrific peripherals in the minors that he hasn't made click in a few major league stints. Priester got shelled in his first start in Worcester, but has had two pretty good appearances since, including a 65% groundball rate.

I actually like the trade better if you think about it as Sale and Yorke for Grissom and Priester.
I guess this is where it comes down to preference. If they are both major league caliber players, what's the gap in talent going to be? I don't think it will be much either way, but that's just my opinion.
But this is coming from the minority (me) that likes Yorke more. In terms of hit/power tools Grissom was graded at future 45 for hit to Yorke's 55 and in terms of power it was 40 for Grissom and 45 for Yorke. And this is also with Grissom moving to 2nd.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,668
If Atlanta misses the playoffs, did they flush their whole payroll down the toilet?

Seems like a pretty narrow way to look at it.
A post declaring a trade a total loss without regard to any factors other than how the two players are performing on August 19 demands the narrowest of prisms through which to respond.

Equally narrow (and nonsensical) would be to point out that the Braves were pre-season World Series picks, while the Sox were expected to be relegated to Bolivian. And now they have the same records. Ergo, GREAT TRADE!
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,845
That's the difference between 80 wins and 100. That's a lot, and it's not accounting for the impact of all the hitters, defense, and relievers. Really good teams are better than bad teams in lots of ways.
We are assuming all other things besides the starting pitching are equal.

A team with five Cy Young award level starters that are healthy all season long had better win at least 100 games.

And a team with five below average starters probably is much worse than an 80-win team.
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
962
In this post facto assessment, why would you compare Sale's performance to Pivetta's? Pivetta wasn't involved in the Sale-Grissom deal.

If Sale wasnt dealt, he would have almost certainly replaced the Whitlock-Winck-Criswell slot in the rotation, pushing the latter two back into the pen full-time and in turn our two worst relievers off the staff.

That looks like 4Ws at minimum, ie the current difference between making the play-offs and not.

As an added benefit, we would have avoided Grissom's 87 terrible PAs which bref calculates as costing another 1/2 win relative to replacement level and the owners would have another 17M in their account.

In other words, at this stage, the deal has been, to date, a complete disaster.

On the other hand, looking to the future, without this deal, we would be without the guy OPSing 680 at Worcester now and be stuck with Sale signed next year for $20M.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I don't get the fanbase anymore. The current roster features a Devers making a leap up into actual elite hitter territory this year. They've got a core of longer term under control hitters that are quite frankly pretty good in Casas, Duran, Abreu, and Wong (plus, I guess Yoshida now that he's apparently good at hitting baseballs again). Houck and Crawford elevated the perception of the potential place in the rotation going forward even if they wore down in the second half. Plus the Sox lucked in Mayer, Teel, Anthony, and Montgomery. But yea, the "baseball gods" are against them. Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.
Don't take the "baseball gods" too seriously. It's just a reference to the fact that the last three seasons have included painful waves of injury, particularly in the rotation and middle infield. It wrecked the last two teams' chances for a wildcard, however slim, and has cost this team a real inside shot, while Chris Sale of all people is suddenly uninjured. For the things you point out to be true at the same time is absolutely correct. I'm among the more bullish people here on the near future, I think?, for the reasons you cite. But even this year's rotation injuries have contributed to this team struggling since the ASG. Even the stopgap guy we got to ease the pressure immediately hurt himself. That doesn't seem excessive to you? After the last two years of rotation injuries, basta!
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
22,590
Maine
In this post facto assessment, why would you compare Sale's performance to Pivetta's? Pivetta wasn't involved in the Sale-Grissom deal.

If Sale wasnt dealt, he would have almost certainly replaced the Whitlock-Winck-Criswell slot in the rotation, pushing the latter two back into the pen full-time and in turn our two worst relievers off the staff.

That looks like 4Ws at minimum, ie the current difference between making the play-offs and not.

As an added benefit, we would have avoided Grissom's 87 terrible PAs which bref calculates as costing another 1/2 win relative to replacement level and the owners would have another 17M in their account.

In other words, at this stage, the deal has been, to date, a complete disaster.

On the other hand, looking to the future, without this deal, we would be without the guy OPSing 680 at Worcester now and be stuck with Sale signed next year for $20M.
To the bolded. That's not true. They'd have about $10M less in their coffers because they'd be on the hook for all of Sale's salary ($27.5M real cash, $25.6M counted toward the tax cap).

Also, the 2025 option was a club one, so they wouldn't necessarily be "stuck" with it or him.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I think we're all in agreement about how awful the talent has been, but my issue is the timing of it. I don't think Breslow was expecting to contend this year. Do you think he would have made the trade if Mayer was in AAA or saved the Sale bullet for somewhere else?


I guess this is where it comes down to preference. If they are both major league caliber players, what's the gap in talent going to be? I don't think it will be much either way, but that's just my opinion.
But this is coming from the minority (me) that likes Yorke more. In terms of hit/power tools Grissom was graded at future 45 for hit to Yorke's 55 and in terms of power it was 40 for Grissom and 45 for Yorke. And this is also with Grissom moving to 2nd.
You mention Mayer, when he comes up, I don't think there's any place for quibbling about Yorke vs Grissom, I'm not sure either one of them would be looking at a starting spot. Unless Story's injury funk continues, he's probably at SS most days and pushes Mayer to 2b. There's also Hamilton (probably a good bench guy with positional versatility and massive late inning value for his speed), so either of Grissom or Yorke would be looking at a small role.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
932
Maryland
Hindsight is 20/20. In retrospect, the trade doesn't look so great right now, but at the time it was made what were the odds that (a) Sale would have a Cy Young caliber season (maybe a 1 in 5 chance at best): and (B) Grissom would produce nothing all season (maybe 50% if you were down on him). So what's that, about a 10% chance things would work out this way? That a 10% long shot came to pass doesn't mean that it was a bad decision or a "bad trade."

And as others have noted, we still have several years to get value out of Grissom. So let's give it some time before we judge the results. Sure it sucks to see Sale doing so well in Atlanta who Grissom has done nothing so far, but who knows what would have happened if they hadn't made this deal.

You have to judge the trade based on the information and likelihood of outcomes at the time it was made. If the decision (and decision-making process) was sound, then we shouldn't second-guess the decision based on the "results."
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
962
Agreed it is too early to say it was a bad trade. I am only saying that it cannot reasonably be argued that thus far it has been a disaster, on both ends of it.

For what it is worth, back of the envelope, Whitlock-Criswell-Winck have pitched to a 3.32 ERA in their 23 starts, which is pretty damn good to be fair, even if well worse than Sale's 2.62. But they have pitched only 103 innings in those starts compared to Sale's 140 IPs in 23 starts. Removing those 37 IPs from the pen's workload (and thus making the pen relatively more available for the other SPs) would have been massive.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,421
Portland
You mention Mayer, when he comes up, I don't think there's any place for quibbling about Yorke vs Grissom, I'm not sure either one of them would be looking at a starting spot. Unless Story's injury funk continues, he's probably at SS most days and pushes Mayer to 2b. There's also Hamilton (probably a good bench guy with positional versatility and massive late inning value for his speed), so either of Grissom or Yorke would be looking at a small role.
Yes, which brings me back to questioning the position they traded for.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Yes, which brings me back to questioning the position they traded for.
Valid! I suppose they would say that future players are too uncertain. I think they probably saw a way to stabilize the position in the short term… best laid plans and all that. If he’d been healthy and done well, Grissom would have had value either for the Sox or in a trade. But yeah.
 

voidfunkt

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,543
/dev/null
The whole small-brained zero-sum fantasy sports bullshit of needing to "win" trades sucks.

Getting rid of Sale was the right move even if outcome has been suboptimal so far for Sox.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
7,981
Salem, NH
I'll never fault Breslow for moving on from Chris Sale. I think it was the right and obvious move at the time, and when you take into account the expectations of this team heading into the season, getting six years of control on a player who figures to be an everyday player is and was a no-brainer.

It remains to be seen if Grissom was the right piece to get back for Sale, but absolutely no one saw Chris Sale turning back the clock to 2017. He broke down in 2018, was awful in 2019, and barely pitched in 2020, 2021 and 2022. He was alright in 2023, but still only pitched about 100 innings. It's not like we traded Bagwell for Larry Anderson or something here.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,668
be argued that thus far it has been a disaster
In terms of "trade analysis," "thus far" is as close to meaningless as possible.

"And theres strike 1 to Duran on this Opening Day. Its a disaster." If an announcer said that, theyd get ridiculed.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
2,080
Melbourne, Australia
A post declaring a trade a total loss without regard to any factors other than how the two players are performing on August 19 demands the narrowest of prisms through which to respond. Equally narrow (and nonsensical) would be to point out that the Braves were pre-season World Series picks, while the Sox were expected to be relegated to Bolivia. And now they have the same records. Ergo, GREAT TRADE!
This did not get enough love. Road trips would be... hard.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,573
Rogers Park
I think we're all in agreement about how awful the talent has been, but my issue is the timing of it. I don't think Breslow was expecting to contend this year. Do you think he would have made the trade if Mayer was in AAA or saved the Sale bullet for somewhere else?


I guess this is where it comes down to preference. If they are both major league caliber players, what's the gap in talent going to be? I don't think it will be much either way, but that's just my opinion.
But this is coming from the minority (me) that likes Yorke more. In terms of hit/power tools Grissom was graded at future 45 for hit to Yorke's 55 and in terms of power it was 40 for Grissom and 45 for Yorke. And this is also with Grissom moving to 2nd.
I guess I don’t buy that difference given their very different track records at each level. Yorke’s bat just disappeared for most of an entire season *twice.*
 

Mike473

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
174
I think it is pretty safe to say the Red Sox would be quite a bit better if this years Chris Sale were on the staff. Sale, when healthy, is a clear level above any starter we have right now. The Red Sox offense is pretty good. So, I don't think Sale would get too upset with the support he got. I am not high on Grissom but am willing to give him a chance. The truth is that Sale had such a bad run of injuries and luck since 2018 that the Red Sox felt they needed to move on. And, they did. Who can really blame them based on how things went over that period of time? Who knows how things would have gone for Sale if he was still here. For some reason, I don't think it would have worked out the way it has in Atlanta. I am not going to second guess management on this move. Sale proved them wrong for this year and good for him. But, it was the right decision non the less.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
2,080
Melbourne, Australia
…, but absolutely no one saw Chris Sale turning back the clock to 2017. He broke down in 2018, was awful in 2019, and barely pitched in 2020, 2021 and 2022. He was alright in 2023, but still only pitched about 100 innings. It's not like we traded Bagwell for Larry Anderson or something here.
I think this is exactly the point. Only a time traveler could have seen Chris Sale turning back the clock this year. And to be honest, if he were still in Boston, as someone else pointed out, he would’ve tripped over his cat and injured himself again. There was no way he was going to be CHRIS FUCKING SALE as a Red Sox.
 

HfxBob

goes on and on...
Nov 13, 2005
940
An awful lot of "sure he's doing good there but he wouldn't be doing good here" takes.
 

ZiggySox

New Member
Mar 28, 2024
2
I don't blame Breslow for trading Sale. The problem is he should have been traded for a pitching prospect. Grissom wasn't needed especially with Story healthy. This team would be better off with Sale or him flipped for a younger pitcher for the future. If Sale was on the team Pivetta could have been flipped to the bullpen and strengthened an obvious weakness.
 

astrozombie

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2022
710
This doesn't look like a great trade today, but I don't blame Breslow. Sale was perpetually hurt and expensive and getting anything for him was a win at the time. Everyone knew that the trade was made with an eye on the future and the fact that Sale has been doing so well does not really change that. I would have preferred a pitching prospect in return, but Grissom was pretty solid. Maybe this trade ends up being a win-win, maybe it ends up a bust for the Sox, maybe Sale mangles his hand turning on the TV next week. Who knows. But the thought process made sense.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,668
I don't blame Breslow for trading Sale. The problem is he should have been traded for a pitching prospect. Grissom wasn't needed especially with Story healthy.
Honus Wagner could have been healthy, but they almost literally did not have a second baseman they could depend on when that trade was made.
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 3, 2001
45,722
Mtigawi
Right, they traded one year of a pitcher that is the definition of a really nice expensive lottery ticket for 5 years of control for one of the better 2b prospects in the game, a major-league ready one at that. That one year, this year, is a year the Sox were not winning the World Series. We've had a great season all things considered, but they are not winning a World Series this year even in this good-case scenario.

It may not work out for Grissom but all/most players, particularly young ones, come with some sort of risk. That will never, ever change.