Is Eduardo Rodriguez going to be an ace?

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
Let's get the obvious out of the way immediately. It's far too soon to think he's going to be an ace and it's probably far too optimistic to think he's going to be an ace.
 
Those are both some very true facts and so are these.
 
He's got three pretty good pitches.
He knows what to do with them.
He's as unflappable a young pitcher as I've ever seen.
 
Tonight's game was the first game he's pitched where he's been pretty meh. He had three horrible games where he was pretty obviously tipping pitches. Tonight he didn't really have good control but was still able to minimize the damage and get through five innings. Whenever he's had a bad outing he's responded with a good one.
 
It's too soon to be an ace.
 
It's too optimistic to think he'll be an ace.
 
It's way too optimistic to plan on him being an ace in 2016.
 
With all those caveats and addendums (addendi?) I ask you, what does your gut say?
 
Mine says we're going to enjoy watching him pitch very well for a long time.
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
He's a good young pitcher who in all likelihood will be better next year than he is this year, and he's been pretty darn good most of this year.  His flashes of brilliance suggest his peak will be that of an ace or near to it.  Next year I am sure there will still be plenty of short outings and a few blowups, but they should be fewer and further between.  That said, any competitive team would not count on him as being more than a #3/4.  He, Buchholz (assuming he can pitch next year) and Miley are a great 3/4/5 combo.  If they really want to compete though, they need to slot in 2 more front-line guys.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
What my gut says. There is no metric that measures "it" and really no definition either. Having said that, there are certain pitchers who when they first step foot on a ML field......you just can see that they have "it" even if you can't totally define what "it" even is.

Eddie seems to have "it"
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Just before he was brought up. Soxprospects.com had Rodriguez' project ceiling as a #3.  So I was pleasantly surprised by his early success.  After having watching him for a couple of months, I better appreciate the  Soxprospects.com  projection.
 
I saw Jon Lester at Portland, a year before he made the majors, and I was more impressed with Lester, then, than I am with Rodriguez after 11 starts.  Now that's a tough standard, indeed, but, overall, Lester has been near the lower mark for Aces.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
WenZink said:
Just before he was brought up. Soxprospects.com had Rodriguez' project ceiling as a #3.  So I was pleasantly surprised by his early success.  After having watching him for a couple of months, I better appreciate the  Soxprospects.com  projection.
 
What does that mean, you better appreciate the soxprospects.com projection? You think he's more likely to be a three? 'Cause I don't know how you get that out of what we've seen in the last couple months. If he ends up being a three, it will largely be because he can't replicate what he's done so far over the long haul.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
As one of the few (arguably) expendable and cost controlled pieces we have showing promise at the MLB level, my gut tells me that we will be seeing Rodriguez's name pop up quite a bit this winter. Probably in a thread more along the lines of: 
 
Is Eduardo Rodriguez going to be traded for an ace?
 
To directly answer your question though, my guess would be no. Or at least I wouldn't be making that bet going into 2016, while then attempting to downplay a need to add 2 more frontline'ish types in our rotation.  
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Rasputin said:
 
What does that mean, you better appreciate the soxprospects.com projection? You think he's more likely to be a three? 'Cause I don't know how you get that out of what we've seen in the last couple months. If he ends up being a three, it will largely be because he can't replicate what he's done so far over the long haul.
 
That Lester had more in his arsenal at the age of 21, and a more advanced idea of how to work hitters.  Both he and Rodriguez had plus velocity for lefties.  Lester was still working on his command.  So it makes sense that Lester would have a higher ceiling as a prospect.
 
That's "what my gut says", anyway.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
I see Madison Bumgarner as a reasonable comp for him (performance wise, not stuff-wise).   Bumgarner started his career earlier but has settled in as a very good 3-4 win pitcher.  Obviously he has had flashes of brilliance and I could see Rodriquez showing that as well but I would put him just outside of that nebulous "Ace" category.  I'd be surprised to see a bunch of 5+ win seasons out of him that guys like Felix, Scherzer and Kershaw put up but 3-4 a year with his stuff and makeup seems reasonable to me. 
 

FanSinceBoggs

seantwo
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2009
937
New York
Soxprospects.com had Rodriguez' project ceiling as a #3.  So I was pleasantly surprised by his early success.
 
 
 
It is worth noting that soxprospects doesn’t employ professional scouts; it is just an internet site with non-baseball people (or fans) expressing opinions, and thus soxprospect player evaluations must be taken with a grain of salt.
 
I respect Curt Schilling’s assessment, a guy who could possibly work for a front office if he wanted to do that.  A couple of weeks ago on Baseball Tonight Schilling called Rodriguez an “ace-in-waiting.”  He had previously called Rodriquez an "ace-in-waiting" while saying "he was the best player that moved at the deadline last year." http://nesn.com/2015/06/curt-schilling-eduardo-rodriguez-is-boston-red-soxs-ace-in-waiting/
 
Schilling's assessment bodes well for Rodriguez’s future.  I think a ceiling of J.Santana is not out of the question.
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,624
The Coney Island of my mind
Rasputin said:
 
What does that mean, you better appreciate the soxprospects.com projection? You think he's more likely to be a three? 'Cause I don't know how you get that out of what we've seen in the last couple months. If he ends up being a three, it will largely be because he can't replicate what he's done so far over the long haul.
There's really not much in his minor league pedigree that suggests top of the rotation.  He caught fire at AA/AAA after he came to the Sox organization, although there's nothing in his repertoire or career numbers that scream "ace."
 
Could he be an ace?  Sure.  He's young, he's off to a solid start, he might polish up his slider to the average-plus potential that Soxprospects has it pegged at.  But he hasn't really done enough to start re-thinking the bigger-picture, longer-term projections and expect that he will become a #1.  I'd still bet the chalk with him and put him as a good #3/weak #2.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I'm in the #3 camp as well. The fastball is above average but not elite, the secondary pitches are average at best. With better command he can be more consistent, but his ceiling is a step below John Leater's prime, which is in turn, a step below ace. I always saw Lester as more a 1a than a 1.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
WenZink said:
 
That Lester had more in his arsenal at the age of 21, and a more advanced idea of how to work hitters.  Both he and Rodriguez had plus velocity for lefties.  Lester was still working on his command.  So it makes sense that Lester would have a higher ceiling as a prospect.
 
That's "what my gut says", anyway.
Is your gut feeling based on seeing EdRo with the PawSox, pitching against milb hitters?

If you're taking a 21-year old Lester who dominated AA-ball hitters on one hand, and a 22-year old EdRo who's giving up bombs to A-rod and Pujols on the other, of course the latter is going to "look bad" in direct comparison.

Comparing EdRo's 8 games in AAA against Lester's 11 games in AAA at age 22 is more appropriate, I think. EdRo pitched more innings/game (6.0 vs 4.2), at a comparable hit rate and k-rate per 9 IP (8.6/8.2 vs 8.3/8.3), because he had a much lower bb-rate, and therefore far better whip than Lester (1.3/1.097 whip vs. 4.8/1.457 whip).

Of course, Lester was likely starting to battle cancer in the spring of 2006, so I'm not suggesting a direct comparison.

Hoeever, Lester's early years in MLB were spent attending pitchers meetings to game prep with Schilling and Varitek.EdRo, well...let's just say Buchholz and Swihart aren't them.

I guess I'll just close by saying EdRo has as good a shot to become an ace as anyone I've seen come off the farm since Buchholz, a good 8 years ago.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,347
I don't think many people even thought Lester was going to be anything more than a "no. 2".   When the Santana deal came up, there were very, very few that weren't in favor of that deal (an Ellsbury and Lester package was most discussed, IIRC).  Lester always had control issues and gave up far too many walks per 9 than most thought would keep him from ever putting it together enough to be a solid workhorse type, but never the ace type that he has flashed occasionally since '08. 
A few posters here felt like Lester would get it together similar to how a lot of other power lefties do- a little later in the careers.  Lester seemed to really turn it around when he developed a great cutter in '08.  I don't see any reason at this point to not think Eddie could do the same.  I actually like Eddie's fastball more than Lester's at similar points in their careers, and their secondary pitches feel about the same to me.  Eddie is younger than Lester at similar points (and healthier...) so I envision him really putting it all together in maybe two more years to be an "ace" for about 5-6 years after.  In the next few years he'll be a very good "no. 2".  That's why they need to go get one of the FA pitchers available this offseason- pair him up with an ace for two years and then that ace will slowly swap "ace" and "no. 2" labels with Eddie down the road
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Trotsky said:
I don't think many people even thought Lester was going to be anything more than a "no. 2".   When the Santana deal came up, there were very, very few that weren't in favor of that deal (an Ellsbury and Lester package was most discussed, IIRC).  Lester always had control issues and gave up far too many walks per 9 than most thought would keep him from ever putting it together enough to be a solid workhorse type, but never the ace type that he has flashed occasionally since '08. 
A few posters here felt like Lester would get it together similar to how a lot of other power lefties do- a little later in the careers.  Lester seemed to really turn it around when he developed a great cutter in '08.  I don't see any reason at this point to not think Eddie could do the same.  I actually like Eddie's fastball more than Lester's at similar points in their careers, and their secondary pitches feel about the same to me.  Eddie is younger than Lester at similar points (and healthier...) so I envision him really putting it all together in maybe two more years to be an "ace" for about 5-6 years after.  In the next few years he'll be a very good "no. 2".  That's why they need to go get one of the FA pitchers available this offseason- pair him up with an ace for two years and then that ace will slowly swap "ace" and "no. 2" labels with Eddie down the road
 
Entering his year-22, in 2006, Lester was ranked much higher than Rodriguez was going into this year.  Comparing rankings from year to year is not very "scientific" but he was considered a sure thing, if he could continue to improve his control, as he had shown in 2005.  Not sure if the Sox ever really offered him in a package for Santana, but I was against it.  And even before his cutter, Lester had more pitches in his arsenal than Rodriguez, even at 22.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
5,870
WenZink said:
 
Entering his year-22, in 2006, Lester was ranked much higher than Rodriguez was going into this year.  Comparing rankings from year to year is not very "scientific" but he was considered a sure thing, if he could continue to improve his control, as he had shown in 2005.  Not sure if the Sox ever really offered him in a package for Santana, but I was against it.  And even before his cutter, Lester had more pitches in his arsenal than Rodriguez, even at 22.
 
The concern is a legitimate one, Eddie is working with a plus-plus fastball, which contrary to what P91 said upthread, I think actually is elite: commands to both sides of the plate on a good night, and top 5 velocity among lefthanded pitches (admittedly, he came hot out of the gate). Some at bats, he's been essentially pitching with it exclusively.
 
And that, of course, is the problem. As Chris Sale shows every night, left-handed pitchers can survive with just a couple of pitches, but as should be obvious, Eddie's change-up doesn't have Sale's separation,  his slider doesn't have Sale's bite, and for that matter, he doesn't have Sale's deception, either.
 
But that might not matter if he can just locate them better. As we've seen at various times this year, when he's locating all three, he's unstoppable. He's already shown a very advanced feel for his fastball and for his slider and for locating them, and if he can do that consistently, I think "ace," or at least 1a, isn't out of the question. I wouldn't bet on it, though -- I'll put it that way.
 
And to be clear, I am not comparing Eddie to Sale. 
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
MikeM said:
As one of the few (arguably) expendable and cost controlled pieces we have showing promise at the MLB level, my gut tells me that we will be seeing Rodriguez's name pop up quite a bit this winter. [/size]
Why the hell would he be expendable?
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Rasputin said:
Why the hell would he be expendable?
Obviously, because Brian Johnson and Henry Owens, regardless of the fact that neither of them has done what EdRo is doing now.

EdRo isn't untouchable, but he should be damn close to it.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
538
Here is how he compares to other left handed starter fastball-changeup pitchers, in terms of getting swings and misses. Above average but not elite with the changeup and slightly below average with the fastball. Red Sox seem to have trouble with guys that throw gas that can't get swings and misses.
http://i.imgur.com/Nn5QkzV.png
 

NoXInNixon

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
5,299
Rasputin said:
Why the hell would he be expendable?
All starting pitchers are expendable. Every organization is going to be able to find five guys to fill out a rotation and provide innings. I'm not sure if I'm expressing this well. If the Red Sox trade away Xander, they are going to have to replace him at shortstop. There aren't many shortstops in the system because you only need one starting shortstop. Outfielders are a little bit more expendable because you can move outfielders around to a different position, within reason, although it might not be optimal. But you can replace a starting pitcher with any other starting pitcher. The role isn't specialized.
 
So what I'm trying to say is that it's logistically easier to trade away a pitching prospect than a hitting prospect. Now, EdRo is right now a tremendously valuable prospect and if they trade him it had better be for an ace. Being expendable doesn't in any way reflect upon his value.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,440
Haiku
Trotsky said:
A few posters here felt like Lester would get it together similar to how a lot of other power lefties do- a little later in the careers.  Lester seemed to really turn it around when he developed a great cutter in '08.  I don't see any reason at this point to not think Eddie could do the same.  I actually like Eddie's fastball more than Lester's at similar points in their careers, and their secondary pitches feel about the same to me. 
WenZink said:
Entering his year-22, in 2006, Lester was ranked much higher than Rodriguez was going into this year.  Comparing rankings from year to year is not very "scientific" but he was considered a sure thing, if he could continue to improve his control, as he had shown in 2005.  Not sure if the Sox ever really offered him in a package for Santana, but I was against it.  And even before his cutter, Lester had more pitches in his arsenal than Rodriguez, even at 22.
This characterization has Lester backwards. His cutter was always his best pitch, so deadly against RHB that the Red Sox sent him down to the minors in ~2006 with instructions not to throw the cutter so that he would learn to pitch with the fastball and changeup. To say that Lester developed a cutter late is like saying Owens developed a changeup late -- it completely misconstrues their development and the specific challenges they will have to overcome.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
O Captain! My Captain! said:
Probably in that he has a ton of trade value, and isn't more valuable to the Sox (Pedroia, Ortiz) than he would be to other teams. 
 
Bogaerts and Betts aren't more valuable to the Red Sox than they are to anyone else, are they expendable?
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
NoXInNixon said:
All starting pitchers are expendable. Every organization is going to be able to find five guys to fill out a rotation and provide innings.
Have you been following the 2015 Red Sox? Like, the ones from Boston?
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
NoXInNixon said:
All starting pitchers are expendable. Every organization is going to be able to find five guys to fill out a rotation and provide innings. I'm not sure if I'm expressing this well. If the Red Sox trade away Xander, they are going to have to replace him at shortstop. There aren't many shortstops in the system because you only need one starting shortstop. Outfielders are a little bit more expendable because you can move outfielders around to a different position, within reason, although it might not be optimal. But you can replace a starting pitcher with any other starting pitcher. The role isn't specialized.
 
So what I'm trying to say is that it's logistically easier to trade away a pitching prospect than a hitting prospect. Now, EdRo is right now a tremendously valuable prospect and if they trade him it had better be for an ace. Being expendable doesn't in any way reflect upon his value.
 
But Rodriguez is definitely the best left-handed, pitching prospect the Sox have, and he's in the majors.  If anything, he makes Owens and B. Johnson more "expendable."  But what could the Sox get in return for  Rodriguez that would bring MORE value to a team that is desperately short of quality starting pitching?  What team needs starting pitching more than the Sox?
 
I guess you could make a case that someone in another organization sees a higher ceiling than the Sox do.  But that is rarely the case for a team's #1 prospect.   If you're trying to make the point that everyone is expendable, then Rodriguez is the LEAST expendable.  Which means he isn't really expendable.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
Yeah, expendable isn't the right word. He might not be irreplaceable but that's a different thing entirely.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Sprowl said:
This characterization has Lester backwards. His cutter was always his best pitch, so deadly against RHB that the Red Sox sent him down to the minors in ~2006 with instructions not to throw the cutter so that he would learn to pitch with the fastball and changeup. To say that Lester developed a cutter late is like saying Owens developed a changeup late -- it completely misconstrues their development and the specific challenges they will have to overcome.
 
it was always my understanding that Lester didn't develop his cutter until AA in 2005.  Also, do you mean when they sent him "down in 2006" -- was that out of Spring Training?
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
If I remember correctly, one of Rodriguez' issues last start was that he couldn't catch the outside of the plate (against RHH) or induce a swing and miss on outside pitches. What's the deal with that? I kept thinking, "move more towards 3B on the rubber", but he was all the way to the right already.
 
 
 

 
Edit: I assume "throwing" the ball to RF is a good strategy in Fenway, but that means you need to make outside pitches effective. It also means you need to throw inside to get outside strikes. Didn't see much of that.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
kieckeredinthehead said:
Have you been following the 2015 Red Sox? Like, the ones from Boston?
 
I have, and from a getting back into contention POV those Red Sox currently have a need for at least one higher quality starting pitcher. Two if one is concerned with the reliability factor surrounding Buchholz. 
 
Can Edro develop into one of those guys? Maybe. But we do currently have a surplus of options for that single 3-5 rotation spot projected to be open in 2016 (granted each offering varying degrees of potential promise), and sometimes it's the least expendable of those options that need to be sacrificed in the name of the greater good. The landscape across the league has changed quite a bit over the years, especially with the introduction of that 2nd wild card possibility. Nobody is realistically going to be selling off a legitimate 1/2 starting pitcher type, making league min or early arby money, for some stack-a-lottery-ticket-behind-random-headliner package.
 
If Ben wants to make the serious attempt at going cost controlled pitcher shopping this winter, Edro simply strikes me as the most logical building block (atm) in any deal that has an actual chance of happening. So yeah, in that respect i stand by my application of "expendable".
 

O Captain! My Captain!

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 3, 2009
3,532
Rasputin said:
 
Bogaerts and Betts aren't more valuable to the Red Sox than they are to anyone else, are they expendable?
Expendable wasn't my choice of words, I would have used something like "a reasonable trade chip." There are a whole lot of players who aren't tradeable if you want to get anything like a reasonable return for them.
 
1) Local hero types or players uniquely suitable for your home park (ie Pedroia, Ortiz)
2) Sell low (Sandoval)
3) Massive value (this is where I see Betts and Bogaerts. You'd very likely get change on the dollar for trading them since players with that sort of trade value just don't get traded very often. You're exceedingly unlikely to see a trade like Betts for Matt Harvey, even if it made sense).
 
If Rodriguez is more a 2-3 pitcher he might not fit into category 3. If you see him as a Lester-like 1a, he belongs in that category.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
O Captain! My Captain! said:
Expendable wasn't my choice of words, I would have used something like "a reasonable trade chip." There are a whole lot of players who aren't tradeable if you want to get anything like a reasonable return for them.
 
1) Local hero types or players uniquely suitable for your home park (ie Pedroia, Ortiz)
2) Sell low (Sandoval)
3) Massive value (this is where I see Betts and Bogaerts. You'd very likely get change on the dollar for trading them since players with that sort of trade value just don't get traded very often. You're exceedingly unlikely to see a trade like Betts for Matt Harvey, even if it made sense).
 
If Rodriguez is more a 2-3 pitcher he might not fit into category 3. If you see him as a Lester-like 1a, he belongs in that category.
If guys like #3 don't get traded often, then what are we getting back for Edro?
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
MikeM said:
 
I have, and from a getting back into contention POV those Red Sox currently have a need for at least one higher quality starting pitcher. Two if one is concerned with the reliability factor surrounding Buchholz. 
 
Can Edro develop into one of those guys? Maybe. But we do currently have a surplus of options for that single 3-5 rotation spot projected to be open in 2016 (granted each offering varying degrees of potential promise), and sometimes it's the least expendable of those options that need to be sacrificed in the name of the greater good. The landscape across the league has changed quite a bit over the years, especially with the introduction of that 2nd wild card possibility. Nobody is realistically going to be selling off a legitimate 1/2 starting pitcher type, making league min or early arby money, for some stack-a-lottery-ticket-behind-random-headliner package.
 
If Ben wants to make the serious attempt at going cost controlled pitcher shopping this winter, Edro simply strikes me as the most logical building block (atm) in any deal that has an actual chance of happening. So yeah, in that respect i stand by my application of "expendable".
So in your search for cost controlled pitching, you think the best cost controlled pitcher we have is expendable.

That's messed up.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Rasputin said:
So in your search for cost controlled pitching, you think the best cost controlled pitcher we have is expendable.

That's messed up.
 
 If the cost controlled pitcher coming back presented a higher level of certainty, and immediately projected as the better fit to our roster construction going forward?
 
Yeah, absolutely. 
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,401
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
MikeM said:
If the cost controlled pitcher coming back presented a higher level of certainty, and immediately projected as the better fit to our roster construction going forward?
 
Yeah, absolutely.
Why isn't Eduardo Rodriguez a good fit for our roster construction going forward?

Edit: I think this a perfect example - as mentioned in a couple of the other threads on the go - of always valuing other teams players more than our own.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,421
Not here
MikeM said:
 
 If the cost controlled pitcher coming back presented a higher level of certainty, and immediately projected as the better fit to our roster construction going forward?
 
Yeah, absolutely. 
If he's at a higher level of certainty, he's more expensive and not controlled as long.

I'm not even sure what "projected as the better fit for our roster going forward" even means. Good young starting pitchers pretty much all fit the same.

I'm not saying Rodriguez is untouchable but you'd rather give up someone like Devers.

I mean, I guess I get what you're saying in that if you included Rodriguez in a package for Sonny Gray you could then start Johnson or Owens, but I think anyone looking to trade for Rodriguez would be interested in Johnson, Owens, Devers, Margot, Moncada, et cetera as well.
 

The Talented Allen Ripley

holden
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2003
12,723
MetroWest, MA
MikeM said:
 
 If the cost controlled pitcher coming back presented a higher level of certainty, and immediately projected as the better fit to our roster construction going forward?
 
Yeah, absolutely. 
 
 
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Why isn't Eduardo Rodriguez a good fit for our roster construction going forward?

Edit: I think this a perfect example - as mentioned in a couple of the other threads on the go - of always valuing other teams players more than our own.
 
It's a perfect example of a person finding a reason to post any wild-ass statement just to be part of the conversation.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
MikeM said:
 
 If the cost controlled pitcher coming back presented a higher level of certainty, and immediately projected as the better fit to our roster construction going forward?
 
Yeah, absolutely. 
Allard, is that you?

Off the record, why did you push to give Crawford $142MM when we had Reddick at the league minimum?
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
In terms of pure stuff, there's not many lefties in the minors or with minimal experience like Eddie who can match his talent ceiling. His fastball is electric from the left side and with more refinement his change and slider are both swing and miss pitches.

The kid is learning on the job still and doing so pretty darn well.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Why isn't Eduardo Rodriguez a good fit for our roster construction going forward?

Edit: I think this a perfect example - as mentioned in a couple of the other threads on the go - of always valuing other teams players more than our own.
 
The fact i view Edro as being expendable in the search for frontline pitching doesn't necessarily translate into "not a good fit".  Speculating his future in vacuum i actually see him being a fairly solid fit. Especially in a parallel universe where those investments we made towards building what played out to be the bottom half of our rotation never happen, and/or one that sees our FO go into this winter being completely content to call 2016 a legitimate rebuild year.
 
Unfortunately last winter did happen, and I don't see a full rebuild being in this team's immediate future. So while not betting as heavily as Ras here might into Edro's potential future, i'm still left seeing a surrounding reality where front line pitching is and projects to remain a huge organizational hole. If the situation presented itself where we could remedy that problem by trading Edro for the already more established frontline pitcher we "hope" Edro develops into, at the expense of giving up a year or 2 of comparative control on the back end, that is a trade Ben needs to make to atm/imo. Which again and yeah...is also the better fit considering the current situation we've put ourselves in.
 
In my defense to some of the other responses, I fail to see how any of that qualifies as "wild-ass" btw. If people disagree with my pov and insist on drawing the untouchable line behind Edro, by all means have at it. Even if taking pretty much all of our fairly interesting MLB-ready pieces off the table, while still maintaining a belief that our highly ranked system has the depth and specific piece types to pull off the big trade, sounds eerily similar to the same tune many were singing last winter. Which for better or for worse, i just can't see the end result being any different. 
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Allard, is that you?

Off the record, why did you push to give Crawford $142MM when we had Reddick at the league minimum?
 
Heh.
 
If you are really going to throw that claim around here, wouldn't it make more sense to aim that at the people in this thread who have actually spent any amount of time or effort defending some of our more reckless player evaluations of late. You know, like the Panda signing or Porcello extension.
 
Spoiler without the need to click: You won't find me on that list. 
 
(I also doubt there was anybody that hated the Crawford signing more then i did btw. I could probably even dig up my initial and immediate reaction to that signing posted on another board if you actually cared. Which i'm guessing you don't. It is full blown doom and gloom though  :D )
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
MikeM said:
one that sees our FO go into this winter being completely content to call 2016 a legitimate rebuild year.
 
Unfortunately last winter did happen, and I don't see a full rebuild being in this team's immediate future.
Semantics about "bridge years" and "rebuilds" are for teams on the decline, where one or two pieces may rejuvenate the existing roster. This team is on pace for two last place finishes in a row. No one or two moves are going to turn this into a 90 win team. Whether they want to call it a rebuild or not, its a rebuild.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Rodriguez is expendable in te sense that absolutely nobody should be completely off the table. It's just that if I'm gonna deal him, I'd better be getting a crazy package back. He's a young, talented, hard throwing, cost controlled (for six years) left handed starting pitcher.

There just aren't many of those guys floating around.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
ivanvamp said:
Rodriguez is expendable in te sense that absolutely nobody should be completely off the table. It's just that if I'm gonna deal him, I'd better be getting a crazy package back. He's a young, talented, hard throwing, cost controlled (for six years) left handed starting pitcher.

There just aren't many of those guys floating around.
And only one of these guys is actually available to the Red Sox at no further acquisition cost.

FWIW, EdRo's got six more years of club control after this one, and so should hit free agency before his age 29 season, in 2021. Ages 22-28 for a fireballing lefty starter with a milb track record of throwing strikes? On a team with no other above-average starters not sitting on the DL?

If EdRo isn't untouchable at this particular moment in time, then I don't know who should ever be given that label. He should be one of the foundation pieces the Sox plan to build the next good team upon.
 

threecy

Cosbologist
SoSH Member
Sep 1, 2006
1,587
Tamworth, NH
His monthly splits this season are a bit concerning.  Fatigue?  Scouting catching up with him?
 


Code:
                         
Split    G   BA  OPS BAbip
May      1 .115 .332  .158
June     6 .236 .667  .281
July     5 .263 .781  .284
August   2 .306 .910  .325

 


Code:
                             
I    Split  ERA   IP  WHIP SO9
       May 0.00  7.2 0.652 8.2
      June 4.81 33.2 1.218 7.8
      July 5.04 25.0 1.480 7.2
    August 7.50 12.0 1.500 5.3
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
threecy said:
 
His monthly splits this season are a bit concerning.  Fatigue?  Scouting catching up with him?
 



                         
Split    G   BA  OPS BAbip
May      1 .115 .332  .158
June     6 .236 .667  .281
July     5 .263 .781  .284
August   2 .306 .910  .325



 


Code:
                             
I    Split  ERA   IP  WHIP SO9
       May 0.00  7.2 0.652 8.2
      June 4.81 33.2 1.218 7.8
      July 5.04 25.0 1.480 7.2
    August 7.50 12.0 1.500 5.3

 
 
Probably a bit of both.  He threw 159.2 innings in 2013, 120 innings last year, and he's at 126.2 so far this year.  He hasn't been over-worked necessarily, but the big league innings have come with a whole lot more travel and stress.  It's not unreasonable to think he has some adjustments to make both on and off the field in order to be a better pitcher going forward.  Of course, that also applies to all the other young pitchers too.  Growing pains are inevitable.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Don't forget outs-stealing and bullpen fail as other factors. Not just EdRo, but the other starters also have experienced inflation to their stats due to low bullpen strand rates.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,323
Boston
The biggest change is babip, it was unsustainable early and lately it's been high. He was never a 3 era pitcher this year, but he's a 4.0 guy already and has shown the potential to do better. I personally see him as a 3.5 guy and a #2/3 type, around 2017.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
ivanvamp said:
Rodriguez is expendable in te sense that absolutely nobody should be completely off the table. It's just that if I'm gonna deal him, I'd better be getting a crazy package back. He's a young, talented, hard throwing, cost controlled (for six years) left handed starting pitcher.

There just aren't many of those guys floating around.
There's more of them than you think. Is EdRo as good as Paxton, for instance?

The Red Sox farm system is just overloaded with offense and extremely light on pitching, particularly hard throwers.

I see significant risks that EdRo's secondary pitches never quite develop. Is there a precedent for a pitcher increasing the spread between his fastball and change up, for instance? If the don't, he'll remain a #3/4. That's valuable, but I don't see why the suggestion of trading him for Sonny Gray is "wild ass" either.