Masterson DFA'ed
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
Masterson is a good kid. I'll miss him and Nava and (soon) Breslow.
I like to root for underdogs.
I like to root for underdogs.
Yeah, I've never heard anything but good things about him as a person -- just about everyone who ever dealt with him called him the nicest guy in baseball -- but even nice guys reach the ends of their careers. Even if he doesn't catch somewhere, he's had a pretty decent one -- 8 years in the majors, 4 of them as a league-average or somewhat better pitcher, and he earned somewhere around $30M. Lots of pretty good pitchers can't say as much. Good luck to him.crystalline said:
It is sad that Masterson wasn't able to pitch to the expectations we had hoped for but this move should be of no great surprise to any of us. Many here have been callling for it for quite some time.
soxhop411 said:
Gotta figure Tommy Layne will return. Hopefully, the corresponding move for Mookie is Marrero optioned or a DL trip for Hanley.
Why why why does Breslow continue to be on this staff, I know Masterson has been a disappointment for sure as well, but Breslow has been god awful since April
Masterson is a nice guy, but he was and is cooked. The Red Sox gave him a longer leash year than he deserved, so it's high time they made this move.
One of Hembree, Layne or Aro should get the call. Frankly at this point all three should be up by early September to see what they can offer for 2016.
One of Hembree, Layne or Aro should get the call. Frankly at this point all three should be up by early September to see what they can offer for 2016.
jscola85 said:
And they will be. Pawtucket isn't going to the playoffs, so I'd expect all healthy 40-man arms to head to Boston for the month of September.
It's a tough business and Masterson is a nice guy. But it really is a results driven business if you are a RHP (see Breslow) and Justin wasn't getting it done. Time to move on. He made some serious cash and best to him and his family. I'm sure it was quite awkward in the clubhouse.
All things considered, he's had an excellent career for a guy who most people (myself included) wrote off as a likely bullpen arm that was unlikely to ever get lefties out. He was an excellent starting pitcher for 2 seasons and a very solid contributor for several more. Hopefully he sticks somewhere as a pen arm but if not, it's still been a very good career.
Allard Baird recommended to Ben Cherington that the team spend almost 10 million dollars for sentimental reasons and because of the continued hubris of the organization that they can "fix" broken pitchers. Exactly how was his velocity to be reacquired?
What happened to the slider? He rolled it out somewhat effectively now and then. Not the last two appearances. Did somebody decide that he could not throw it for strikes. Who?
What happened to the slider? He rolled it out somewhat effectively now and then. Not the last two appearances. Did somebody decide that he could not throw it for strikes. Who?
My guess is Pat Light will get a good look now since it doesn't make sense they would bring up just another guy otherwise. Plus he isn't on the 40 man yet. Light had a miserable start in AAA and has been extremely wild, but has looked better of late and he's the closest thing they have to a closer in waiting.
Long overdue.
Goodbye to you and your cookies, Justin.
I kinda hope they dont call up Layne only because if he keeps up his pace he and Taz are going on the dl simultaneously.
Although now that it doesn't matter, maybe he'll be used properly and they can injure Breslow instead.
Goodbye to you and your cookies, Justin.
I kinda hope they dont call up Layne only because if he keeps up his pace he and Taz are going on the dl simultaneously.
Although now that it doesn't matter, maybe he'll be used properly and they can injure Breslow instead.
grimshaw said:
If Light has "had a miserable start in AAA and has been extremely wild", why rush him to the big league roster now? Leave him where he is until he settles down, figures it out or whatever he needs to do. If he has the upside and future of a "closer in waiting", there's no need to start his service clock now if he hasn't shown himself to be ready.
grimshaw said:
Could also be nothing, as far as the 40-man spot goes. They've DFA'd guys before without a corresponding 40-man move, just a 25-man roster move. That could be Layne, Aro, or Ramirez.
Do you have some evidence of Baird doing this? I don't remember reading that anywhere.fineyoungarm said:
At this point, they should be making moves primarily with either player development or payroll management in mind. There's really not much upside left to winning games in 2015. I don't mean they should be out-and-out tanking, of course, but just that in evaluating any roster decision the rest of the way, whether Player X can help win more games than Player Y should be far down the list of criteria. So bring on whichever AAA arms we think will lose the least value from being thrown into the fire right now.
I thought I might hear from you about this one. No direct evidence, and I shall lighten up on the Baird thing. However, for the employee holding his title to be the one involved in the details and evaluation and then making a recommendation to his boss is likely. Mea culpa.absintheofmalaise said:
If you thought you might hear from me, or one of the other mods, on it, then you shouldn't have posted it. Don't state opinions or assumptions as facts without evidence.fineyoungarm said:
Far be it from me to intervene here, but if the director of pro scouting didn't have a significant say in whether to spend $10 million on a reclamation project that's almost as concerning as if he recommended this particular craptasic move. I think there's plenty of reason to point at Baird here. He either made a bad recommendation or failed to have a big say in a major move. Neither covers him in glory.absintheofmalaise said:
The signing of Masterson should be a fireable offense for anyone who argued strongly for it. There were an infinite number of ways to allocate that money more efficiently, ex ante. I gave them the benefit of the doubt that they saw something they could fix. They didn't fix it. Someone f'ed up and needs to be held accountable.
No they don't. It's a 1 year 9.5 million deal. For a 1 year deal no one should ever get fired. 1 year mitigates a ton of risk.
Now, the dude who talked the GM into signing Panda....
Now, the dude who talked the GM into signing Panda....
Justin is a good example of our team's ills the past two seasons. We had him before his prime, we had him after his prime, we missed his prime. This makes me appreciate the 2013 lightning in a bottle so much more, teams don't get that kind of lucky very often. I wish Justin well, he seems like a good kid.
It's a tough business, but he will get his money, and that's good.
Poster boy for the pitching farce generally, and the starting pitching fiasco in particular. But in fairness, lots of people here were drinking that Kool Aid -- "give us a Masterson and a Shields and we'll be fine."
Of course, we don't run the team.
Poster boy for the pitching farce generally, and the starting pitching fiasco in particular. But in fairness, lots of people here were drinking that Kool Aid -- "give us a Masterson and a Shields and we'll be fine."
Of course, we don't run the team.
Once again into the fray. Perhaps (I plan on using that word often) the issues really are:Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
1. Who saw what in Masterson that led to the contract (the amount of money being what raises some eyebrows, not the term)?
2. Is there an in house hubris (or some less fancy word) that has the team believing it is especially adept at reclamation projects?
3. Did "emotions" get the better of the team - probably we never should have traded him, but in any event he's a great guy and we'd love to have him back - we know him and can get him on track.
The answer to #1 will remain under wraps by the FO. As for #2, Masterson is hardly the first veteran signed by the Sox seemingly out of the belief that he has something left and they know how to get it (go back to Tom Seaver). Any moreso than other teams? I do not have the data.
#3 - Despite the occasional post indicating to the contrary, I am no mind reader. However, boy, it sure makes sense at least to me. It could even fairly be described as human nature. Had Masterson originally moved from the Angels to the Indians, would he have been in Red Sox uniform this season for almost an 8 figure salary? To me - doubtful.
We're really talking about something closer to $3M than $10M.
Had the Red Sox not taken, for instance, a $5-6M flyer on him, their remaining starting rotation would have begged the question "why didn't you take a chance on Masterson? He was available!" $9.5M-$10M was an overpay, but not dramatically more than some of the other one year fliers the Sox have taken out on pitchers over the years (such as Smoltz for $5.5M+4.5M incentives half a decade ago).
Had the Red Sox not taken, for instance, a $5-6M flyer on him, their remaining starting rotation would have begged the question "why didn't you take a chance on Masterson? He was available!" $9.5M-$10M was an overpay, but not dramatically more than some of the other one year fliers the Sox have taken out on pitchers over the years (such as Smoltz for $5.5M+4.5M incentives half a decade ago).
fineyoungarm said:
fineyoungarm said:
Masterson came up with the Sox and the FO was intimately familiar with the player and his makeup. They took a gamble that their knowledge of the player was such that they would be able to fix his mechanics. They were obviously wrong about that, but let's not pretend that this is some sort of incomprehensible, illogical flaw.
Criticize their talent evaluation or player analysis all you want, because (obviously) they failed in this regard. But to continually characterize the signing as a move driven by sentiment or emotion is utter, complete nonsense and you know it.
Flynn4ever said:
And it's important to note, in this context, that the "2013 lightning in a bottle" was the result of investments in a bunch of post-prime talents, some coming off injury, all of whom just happened to pay off. I mean, if we get the 2014-15 versions of Victorino, Gomes and Drew that year, or 2014 Peavy, or 2015 Napoli, then that strategy looks pretty terrible. And we easily could have.
dcmissle said:
And again, we could have been fine. It's entirely possible that Masterson has one good season left in him--but if so, we didn't get it.
As Charlemagne once said, "it's smarter to be lucky than it's lucky to be smart."
fineyoungarm said:
fineyoungarm said:
You didn't even make it 12 hours. You could have waited forever, as this post is chock full of worthless.
ETA: Thank god Masterson is gone. Nice guy who will be pitching in Nashua for an independent league team this time next year.
Average Reds said:
I did not write that the signing was driven solely by emotion - and you know that. I do not understand why the idea of "we really like this guy as a person and think we have the skills to improve his performance" is so incomprehensible.
fineyoungarm said:
Go ahead and re-read my post very carefully. Stop when you find the word "solely." I'll wait.
And your characterization here is hilarious. You didn't originally state that the FO signed Masterson because "we really like this guy as a person and think we have the skills to improve his performance." you said the following:
If you can't figure out the difference, I can't help you.
My advice is to put down the shovel and stop digging.
fineyoungarm said:
Because it makes no sense whatsoever. Do you remember that other "reclamation" projects by the Sox have worked out very well? Adrian Beltre was coming off some MISERABLE years in Seattle, and the Sox signed him to a 1 year, $10 million deal. It was entirely possible he could have sucked, that his long tenure in Seattle was who he was going to be going forward. Instead he had a terrific year. And Beltre had a ton of questions about his "character" or whatever loaded term people like to use to denigrate guys they don't like for some reason.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
I do not believe that the Boston Red Sox would have signed Justin Masterson to a one year 9.5 million dollar contract, if he was not admired as a person throughout the organization by virtue of his history with the team, and a belief that, if he knee healed, the coaching staff could return him to some semblence of 2013 form. Without the prior history with the team, such a move would surprise me.
(Perhaps that the Cards appear to have expressed little or no interest in him at the end of the season should have been seen as a red flag.)
However, having poked some fun at myself and conceded to hyperbole, I leave the field of battle.
(Do we think they can "fix" Kelly?)
fineyoungarm said:
You don't leave the field of battle on this note. You're making a baseless assertion backed up by neither facts nor links. As the Dude said, "that's, like, your opinion, man."
Thank you for the 2008 PostSeason Justin that saw us one game away from another World Series.....You were lights out in relief in what was a fun few weeks!