POLL: Drew Pomeranz for Anderson Espinoza

Who "Won" the trade


  • Total voters
    471
  • Poll closed .

EvilEmpire

Dope
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
Apr 9, 2007
10,125
Washington
I like this trade a little better for the Padres than the Sox. Espinoza may be a ways away, but he's enough of a highly rated prospect that I think if the Sox didn't need starting pitching right now, they had a chance to maybe use him as part of a package for a more established SP this next off season. They might have been able to get more if they could have waited. That said, how many quality innings is Pomeranz going to be able to give the Sox for the rest of this season?

I do like Pomeranz though. I sure wouldn't mind him on the Yankees.
 

alwyn96

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2005
1,351
I thought this was an interesting comment from Brian Bannister about Pomeranz' cutter: ""I was an example of it," Bannister said. "[Cutters] generate a different batted-ball profile. There's just different weak contact in there. Some guys it's popups. Sometimes you get gyro-spin and it's almost like a knuckleball. I mean, knuckleballers beat BABIP. It's not always a given that a full regression is going to occur. When I look at a guy, if there's a cutter involved or a knuckleball involved, you just can't say for sure. I know a lot of people look at those two numbers -- left on base percentage and the BABIP -- and say, 'Oh, he's going to get worse in the second half.' It's not always a given.""

I just thought I'd look at the highest cutter users and their BABIP.
Name Team Cutter% BABIP
Code:
Josh Tomlin Indians 39.00% 0.259
Jeff Samardzija Giants 31.50% 0.282
Collin McHugh Astros 31.30% 0.346
CC Sabathia Yankees 31.30% 0.294
Jake Peavy Giants 29.90% 0.327
Mike Leake Cardinals 29.80% 0.291
Adam Wainwright Cardinals 28.50% 0.323
Kendall Graveman Athletics 27.70% 0.304
Chad Bettis Rockies 25.60% 0.344
Jon Niese Pirates 24.30% 0.317
Cole Hamels Rangers 24.20% 0.287
Jon Lester Cubs 24.10% 0.266
Corey Kluber Indians 22.60% 0.268
Johnny Cueto Giants 21.50% 0.277
Jake Arrieta Cubs 20.60% 0.259
David Price Red Sox 20.00% 0.321
James Shields - - - 19.10% 0.318
Michael Wacha Cardinals 16.90% 0.318
Jaime Garcia Cardinals 16.60% 0.304
Trevor Bauer Indians 15.90% 0.279
Average BABIP for top 20 qualified cutter users in 2016: 0.299

FWIW, top 20 qualified cutter users BABIP
2015: .282
2014: .294
2003 - 2013: .289 (league average: .294)

As far as LOB%, the average LOB% from all pitchers 2006-2016 is 72.2%. For the top 20 highest cutter users over that period, it's 73.2%.

Maybe a small effect of highest cutter use? Pomeranz is 25th in cutter% thus far this year. Bannister is making the best case for his boss' guy, although I don't know about the cutter-specific claims. On a first pass to look at what he's saying, I wonder what data he's looking at. Maybe he has cooler data than this that looks more interesting.

EDIT: Apologies for the terrible table design. What html code could I use to get the columns to line up?
 
Last edited:

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
18,088
The whole Bannister article alwyn96 linked above is worth a read. Bannister addresses all the apparent watch outs relative to Pomeranz (BABIP, low innings historically, late development, pressure of pitching in Boston). Pretty good stuff.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
The sox traded away a starter and failed to make an offer to another one they had saved from the scrap heap.

To undo this mess. The sox have up one of the best young pitching prospects of the generation. If he doesn't get hurt he's a potential long term ace. These are the guys you don't trade away. Period.

Further the best guy available has never pitched as many innings in the majors as he has already this year. The odds of him failing or getting hurt making the trade a disaster are not low. Certainly no lower than Espinoza getting hurt.

It's a bad trade unless you have some reason to believe the cutter made a massive difference AND he can stand up to a season plus post season.

He's not a proven anything. He's a half season of good with no track record nor durability.

The vast majority of the lineup is young, and there is talent in buckets coming.
You don't give up a potential kershaw for a question mark because the offense is good this year.

Anyone, by the way, saying I'll judge it on results is missing the whole point of decision making.
You cannot control the outcome. This is luck. You make the best decision to optimise the probabilities. This is a mortgage the future for a shot. It's a bad trade unless someone can give any reason Pomeranz can handle the innings. Esp given the cutter which has helped this magic leap in performance is hard on arms.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
61,172
Oregon
You cannot control the outcome. This is luck. You make the best decision to optimise the probabilities. This is a mortgage the future for a shot.
You cannot control the outcome ... therefore the "future" you are mortgaging is impossible to determine.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
You cannot control the outcome ... therefore the "future" you are mortgaging is impossible to determine.
This is clearly a foolish argument. Your decision making process needs to have this all included.
Your decision should maximize the odds of success. The odds of Espinoza being a star are what they are.
The number of pitchers of his age throwing as hard and easy as him and being so highly rated at his age, and succeeding at his level at his age, is almost zero.

Now I will admit this can fall down, because the objective is to win the title, and for a team that is close a small improvement can mean a lot.

There are times when "losing" a trade can win you a world series. It might cost you one or more later but that no one cares about if you win.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
61,172
Oregon
This is clearly a foolish argument. Your decision making process needs to have this all included.
Your decision should maximize the odds of success. The odds of Espinoza being a star are what they are.
The number of pitchers of his age throwing as hard and easy as him and being so highly rated at his age, and succeeding at his level at his age, is almost zero.

Now I will admit this can fall down, because the objective is to win the title, and for a team that is close a small improvement can mean a lot.

There are times when "losing" a trade can win you a world series. It might cost you one or more later but that no one cares about if you win.
It's foolish to suggest that it's impossible to know what Espinoza's career path might be?

Okay
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
It's foolish to suggest that it's impossible to know what Espinoza's career path might be?

Okay
It's foolish to say I can't know so I won't try to have an expectation or value. Yes.
Do you think this is what professional front offices do?
Go huh all prospects are a crap shoot so they're all worth the same? I mean what is your point?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
61,172
Oregon
It's foolish to say I can't know so I won't try to have an expectation or value. Yes.
Do you think this is what professional front offices do?
Go huh all prospects are a crap shoot so they're all worth the same? I mean what is your point?
My point is you said they were mortgaging the future by trading Espinoza. I'm saying it's impossible to say how valuable that piece of the future will turn out to be.

You seemingly based your dislike for the trade on a variable that cannot be determined at this stage
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
Honest to God, the arguments against this trade are convincing me I should be for it.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
The sox have up one of the best young pitching prospects of the generation. If he doesn't get hurt he's a potential long term ace. These are the guys you don't trade away. Period.
He's in no way, shape or form "one of the best young pitching prospects of the generation". People need to take a breath. Comparisons to Pedro do not mean scout guys think he's going to turn into Pedro. It means his stuff is reminiscent of Pedro's stuff - pitch mix, movement, etc - not on par with it; that he could someday develop into a similar pitcher. He's not the first guy who's been compared to him and won't be the last. (Which is to say nothing of the fact that Pedro was Pedro because he melded the pure stuff with the mental aspect of it. He had a gift, just like every other great pitcher in history.)

Look, this isn't like they traded AAA Stephen Strasburg who was knocking on the door to come in and make an immediate impact. They didn't trade Jose Fernandez. AE is a good prospect and highly rated. But he's not even the most highly rated pitching prospect at the moment, let alone the generation's and every single write up you read throws some pretty significant caveats in about his probability.

I'll also add that people are ignoring what these midseason prospects rankings are, in part, telling us. Look at Law's top 50. There are 13 pitchers. And yet AE was still only the 5th SP. Usually these lists have a far more representative portion of pitchers. But a decent number of guys graduated and the pitching pool may be a bit thin at the moment. Which leads to everyone getting valued a bit more in review and guys like Michael Kopech - he of 90 career innings and swimming with make up concerns. And Law also said Groome - a 17 yo high schooler - would have ranked ahead of Kopech. Yet he felt to 12th in the draft.

All that should tell you something. Which at least in part is that if you think the bolded above is true - either you don't really have a good grasp on how all this stuff works or you might be a bit emotional about the whole thing and are being hyperbolic.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
My point is you said they were mortgaging the future by trading Espinoza. I'm saying it's impossible to say how valuable that piece of the future will turn out to be.
I'm saying that fangraphs for example gives the Sox a 0.9 win improvement for the trade. That is the pomeranz value by one method. That one win needs to be pretty fucking important to make it worth Espinoza.

Secondly just more broadly, this argument is not logical. I just made the whole point that your decision should be tied to a process.
That process should have a value for Espinoza. It may be that this is 50% nothing 25% x WAR and 25% superstar with 2x war. Whatever your numbers you should have one. You can't know but you can have an estimate.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
He's in no way, shape or form "one of the best young pitching prospects of the generation". People need to take a breath. Comparisons to Pedro do not mean scout guys think he's going to turn into Pedro. It means his stuff is reminiscent of Pedro's stuff - pitch mix, movement, etc - not on par with it; that he could someday develop into a similar pitcher. He's not the first guy who's been compared to him and won't be the last. (Which is to say nothing of the fact that Pedro was Pedro because he melded the pure stuff with the mental aspect of it. He had a gift, just like every other great pitcher in history.)

Look, this isn't like they traded AAA Stephen Strasburg who was knocking on the door to come in and make an immediate impact. They didn't trade Jose Fernandez. AE is a good prospect and highly rated. But he's not even the most highly rated pitching prospect at the moment, let alone the generation's and every single write up you read throws some pretty significant caveats in about his probability.

I'll also add that people are ignoring what these midseason prospects rankings are, in part, telling us. Look at Law's top 50. There are 13 pitchers. And yet AE was still only the 5th SP. Usually these lists have a far more representative portion of pitchers. But a decent number of guys graduated and the pitching pool may be a bit thin at the moment. Which leads to everyone getting valued a bit more in review and guys like Michael Kopech - he of 90 career innings and swimming with make up concerns. And Law also said Groome - a 17 yo high schooler - would have ranked ahead of Kopech. Yet he felt to 12th in the draft.

All that should tell you something. Which at least in part is that if you think the bolded above is true - either you don't really have a good grasp on how all this stuff works or you might be a bit emotional about the whole thing and are being hyperbolic.
Best YOUNG pitching prospect.
How many prospects are top 25 ranked at 19 and in high A and doing fine?
This is exceptionally rare. How many pitchers sub 19 have been in the top 50 of ba and nearly all other scouting places?
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,336
Best YOUNG pitching prospect.
How many prospects are top 25 ranked at 19 and in high A and doing fine?
This is exceptionally rare. How many pitchers sub 19 have been in the top 50 of ba and nearly all other scouting places?
He's in Low A, and 18.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
6,573
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Best YOUNG pitching prospect.
How many prospects are top 25 ranked at 19 and in high A and doing fine?
This is exceptionally rare. How many pitchers sub 19 have been in the top 50 of ba and nearly all other scouting places?
Espinoza isn't in high A, he's in Greenville. Also, I don't see how being further from the majors is a positive when evaluating him as a prospect.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
How about a decision tree?

What outcome justifies losing Espinoza?

1) Sox win the world series helped by pomeranz.
2) pomeranz pitches great the rest of the season and is far more valuable at season end than today, and wouldn't be possible to acquire him or a better pitcher for next year.

Any other situation and it's bad right?
1) Sox win the world series but pomeranz is hurt or does nothing to help.
2) Sox don't make the playoffs
3) Sox make the playoffs but do nothing when there.

Unless pomeranz becomes an ace and he or someone of his level can't be acquired for just money, or the Sox win the world series how is this a good move?
I literally don't understand the thought process. You have to believe that pomeranz significantly impacts the odds of winning it all this year. I don't. If you do, fine. We disagree but you have a view and it makes sense.

If you don't. You have to think he going to increase his value. Is there a third way I haven't thought of?
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,336
Why does he have to increase his value? He's been good the last 2 1/2 years and if he continues at that pace he's going to add great value to the Redsox.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Espinoza isn't in high A, he's in Greenville. Also, I don't see how being further from the majors is a positive when evaluating him as a prospect.
My bad mental slip. Apologies.
The point about his level of prospect at his age is the point. This is very unusual. To throw this hard at this level at this age is not the same as a 23 year old nearing AAA in terms of upside.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
Best YOUNG pitching prospect.
How many prospects are top 25 ranked at 19 and in high A and doing fine?
This is exceptionally rare. How many pitchers sub 19 have been in the top 50 of ba and nearly all other scouting places?
Julio Urias is 19 and in the majors. He is ranked higher on the lists you are citing.
Jose Fernandez was at a higher level and ranked higher at the same age.

These are just off the top of my head. If I had the time or desire to dig through the lists to prove how inaccurate your assessment is I could accumulate a laundry list. It's not exceptionally rare. And he's not generational.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,336
My bad mental slip. Apologies.
The point about his level of prospect at his age is the point. This is very unusual. To throw this hard at this level at this age is not the same as a 23 year old nearing AAA in terms of upside.
Yet we just signed a guy who is 17 who will probably be in the top 50 of many publications.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
My bad mental slip. Apologies.
The point about his level of prospect at his age is the point. This is very unusual. To throw this hard at this level at this age is not the same as a 23 year old nearing AAA in terms of upside.
Ok, now I get it. You have no grasp of pitching or how prospects are evaluated or why he's ranked so high.

He throws 93-96. Literally hundreds of 18 year olds can throw that hard. The Sox just drafted a 17 year old that throws that hard. His ranking is not because of his radar gun reading.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,336
Kopech was also in the top 50 on some lists last year too iirc, and he would have been... 19! Or at least he would have been if not for suspensions. I think it was midseason lists last year.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
11,435
Seattle, WA
This thing can be played both ways. Decision trees aren't useful unless probabilities are included at each branch.

What outcome justifies retaining Espinoza?
1) Sox win the world series despite not having a viable #4.
2) Espinoza might be used to acquire a better pitcher for next year.

Any other situation and it's bad right?
1) Sox lose the world series, Espinoza blows out his arm and gets arrested for crack.
2) Sox make the playoffs but are eliminated in the LCS because Rodriguez gives up 23 runs in Game #4
3) Sox miss the playoffs by 1 game due to their #4 starter sucking

I'm certain there are more nodes to be assessed.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
My bad mental slip. Apologies.
The point about his level of prospect at his age is the point. This is very unusual. To throw this hard at this level at this age is not the same as a 23 year old nearing AAA in terms of upside.
If you don't even know how old he is, or what level he's at, maybe you should pump the brakes on such bold and unyielding opinions about his value and take some time to read up on him a bit.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Ok, now I get it. You have no grasp of pitching or how prospects are evaluated or why he's ranked so high.

He throws 93-96. Literally hundreds of 18 year olds can throw that hard. The Sox just draft a 17 year old that throws that hard.
I think he's behind basically these guys and King felix and few others. I may be too melodramatic with generational. I am saying he's one of a handful of guys in a decade who reached this level of consensus scouting accolades at his age.
He's one of the top 10 guys at his age in the last 10 years I think. I need to go over that and it may be 15 or whatever but that's what I'm talking about. And yes all young pitchers have risks.

I follow prospects very closely actually. Espinoza is talked about as the same kind of level as Fernandez was if lot better as his age. Before Fernandez jumped to majors and succeeded.

It's his feel and command and stuff (the stuff!) he throws at his age. Again not well put by me.

Seriously I was following all prospects but more recently I haven't had time for no big name non sox. So maybe in wrong

But how many 18/19 year olds have had his level of scouting agreement and upside and been this high rated a prospect across baseball?
Groome with make up concerns and having never pitched in the pros at all is clearly not close to as good a prospect. For me anyway.

Seriously hyperbole aside isn't he one of the best pitching prospects in generations for the sox, and one of the best 5-10 in a decade? I think he is. Maybe you guys don't. In which case fair enough.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
I think he's behind basically these guys and King felix and few others. I may be too melodramatic with generational. I am saying he's one of a handful of guys in a decade who reached this level of consensus scouting accolades at his age.
He's not.

He's one of the top 10 guys at his age in the last 10 years I think.
He's not.

I need to go over that and it may be 15 or whatever but that's what I'm talking about.
You're spewing words too quickly to even know what you're saying.

And yes all young pitchers have risks.
This is a nontrivial factor for an 18 yo in low A ball.

I follow prospects very closely actually.
Not trying to be a dick, but either you don't or you don't know how to do it with perspective.

Espinoza is talked about as the same kind of level as Fernandez was if lot better as his age. Before Fernandez jumped to majors and succeeded.
Please cite a source.

It's his feel and command and stuff (the stuff!) he throws at his age. Again not well put by me.
But you said it was how hard he threw. And his feel and stuff haven't looked nearly as generational this season as it did last season.

Seriously I was following all prospects but more recently I haven't had time for no big name non sox. So maybe in wrong
You are. And maybe you should check before you hyperventilate.

But how many 18/19 year olds have had his level of scouting agreement and upside and been this high rated a prospect across baseball?
Far more than you think.

Groome with make up concerns and having never pitched in the pros at all is clearly not close to as good a prospect. For me anyway.
No one is saying he is.

Seriously hyperbole aside isn't he one of the best pitching prospects in generations for the sox
Possibly, but at 18 years old it's far too early to state that.

and one of the best 5-10 in a decade?
No.

I think he is.
We get that.

Maybe you guys don't.
We don't, that's what what you're not getting.

In which case fair enough.
Then please stop.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Espinoza is talked about as the same kind of level as Fernandez was if lot better as his age. Before Fernandez jumped to majors and succeeded.
Where? And by whom?

Seriously hyperbole aside isn't he one of the best pitching prospects in generations for the sox, and one of the best 5-10 in a decade? I think he is. Maybe you guys don't. In which case fair enough.
You're not even throwing shit at the wall at this point. You're finger painting with it.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
Jul 18, 2005
25,915
Alexandria, VA
I'm saying that fangraphs for example gives the Sox a 0.9 win improvement for the trade. That is the pomeranz value by one method. That one win needs to be pretty fucking important to make it worth Espinoza.
Thankfully the Sox are getting more than a 3-month rental here, so that one win is only a fraction of what Espinoza was actually traded for.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,336
24 different pitchers 19 and under have made a top 50 list in Baseball America since 2007. That would be 10 seasons. Many pitchers made the list twice, including our good friend Rick Porcello who made the top 20 twice before reaching 20 years old. Also, no one in the world compares Espinoza to King Felix, King Felix was pitching in the majors at 19.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
13,256
I think Espinoza is probably going to make to the majors and be good to very good. I'd be shocked if he's Pedro or some comparable because that's a huge stretch for anyone at 18, even for an 18 year old Pedro.

He's in low A, as stated above, is young for A ball but he's throwing a 4.38 ERA. At 19 Jose Ferenadez was mowing down both A ball levels at a 1.88 ERA.

I like this for both teams, the pitching market blows for this year and next, the Sox have a great offense and needed a starter. I'd much prefer to have a real starting pitcher than running out the current options for the next 2-3 years. I'm sure I'll regret it in 2021 when Espinoza gets to the majors.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Ok look you guys don't like him as much as me. When I don't have a kid on my lap screaming I'll dig up my reasons for thinking he's that high a level. I didn't appreciate I was so far on a limb. My understanding is that this view of one of the best very young talents was not uncommon.
I clearly need to show my work and will when I have time.

Thankfully the Sox are getting more than a 3-month rental here, so that one win is only a fraction of what Espinoza was actually traded for.
I know he's not a 3mth rental the point I was making was in 3mth you can replace him in any number of ways, unless he becomes more valuable. Getting a 4/5th starter next year is clearly not going to cost a talent like Espinoza.
So the point is the value in Pomeranz over random 4/5th starter (who may be just for money) is his performance this year. If he increased his value that's one thing. If he makes a difference to this team this year that is the other.

If he pitches as a good 4th starter next year and gets hurt this (hypothetically) is that worth the trade ?

i think nearly everyone would agree not, right?
So the only reason he's even possibly worth Espinoza is if he helps this year or improves his value (which are likely pretty correlated).
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
Dude, just like with Jahlil Okafor, maybe you should just consider the thought that you're not looking at a player rationally because he's your player.

But yes, when you get a break from the little one, take some time to dig through and report back. I think you're going to be surprised. And if you're not, reconsider the first sentence of this post.
 
Last edited:

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
10,006
Somewhere
Best YOUNG pitching prospect.
How many prospects are top 25 ranked at 19 and in high A and doing fine?
This is exceptionally rare. How many pitchers sub 19 have been in the top 50 of ba and nearly all other scouting places?
technically not Urias, who was in AA at the same age.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
The idea of placing extra value in a prospect who can be something that's rare is reasonable. These days that's high quality pitchers.

But they're still prospects. Every prospect--even the best pitching prospect we've had since Roger Clemens--stands a pretty good chance of flaming out completely when he hasn't seen an inning above low A. There is simply not enough certainty about these guys to be so absolutist about them. I know, I've done it too. Having a home grown ace that leads your staff for a decade is a special thing.and one we haven't had around here since Roger Clemens.

You obviously don't give up guys like Anderson Espinoza for just anything, but as has been pointed out here, Drew Pomeranz has been good for years and there's a tangible reason for his performance improving significantly. Sure, that could be a mirage. People who add a pitch don't always succeed. Hitters who change their stance don't always succeed. But sometimes they do, and at some point, you have to trust your scouts. If you can't, why are you paying them? Pomeranz has been good for years and is under control for two more beyond 2016. That's exactly the kind of player you trade Espinoza for.

I have often said that this year's team isn't more important than the team three years from now, and it's true, but it's not less important either. This year, we have literally everything in place to win a world series except the starting pitching. Espinoza gives the team a fourth playoff starter. Pending moves by the Orioles and Jays, the Red Sox are the best team in the division, one of the five best in baseball, and a legitimate contender to win the world series.

I voted that this trade was a win for the Padres because I think Anderson Espinoza is going to be a better pitcher longer than Drew Pomeranz and I still think that's true, but it's not like that win is a blowout. Someone mentioned in the other thread that someone on soxprospects said this was worse than Bagwell and you just have to laugh. Pomeranz is both better and more important than Anderson, and under control longer.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
I stand by that there haven't been a lot of pitchers ranked in ba top 20 at age 18. And they aren't alone in that ranking. Making him on this simple basis a very rare commodity. Perhaps I am wrong on how rare that is. I need some time to look back, but there are more than 10ish pitchers aged 18 as consensus top 25 prospects I am wrong and I'll say it.

I am not clear what you mean re okafor. I don't rate him super high but I think people are too negative, esp than he cannot improve in his weak areas. He's young and cheap and has some skills. The thread on him is full of Celtics fans thinking valuing him at like a late first or second. I think that's a bit much.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
I stand by that there haven't been a lot of pitchers ranked in ba top 20 at age 18. And they aren't alone in that ranking. Making him on this simple basis a very rare commodity. Perhaps I am wrong on how rare that is. I need some time to look back, but there are more than 10ish pitchers aged 18 as consensus top 25 prospects I am wrong and I'll say it.
Yes, please let us know how accurate you are in saying only 10ish pitchers age 18/19 have been ranked top 25 over the last 26 years. Please include any midseason rankings, as that's where AE checks in right now and could drop or get passed by end of season.

You have a head start in the thread with Porcello, King Felix, Urias, Fernandez and AE.

I'll give you Kershaw, Todd Van Poppel, Rich Ankiel and Ryan Anderson.

I gotta go to work, but I have a feeling you can find more than one more.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,336
I stand by that there haven't been a lot of pitchers ranked in ba top 20 at age 18.
You keep changing your goal post. First it was 19 year olds in the top 50, now its 18 year olds in the top 20. Anyway, here is the list of pitchers under the age of 20 with their age, their name and their ranking since 2006. You are wrong.


2016- 19 Julio Urias 4
18 Anderson Espinoza 19

2015- 18 Julio Urias 10

2014- 19 Lucas Giolito 21
17 Julio Urias (51)

2013- 19 Max Fried 46
19 Lance McCullers Jr 50

2012 19 Dylan Bundy 10
19 Taijuan Walker 20
19 Archie Bradly 25

2011 19 Julio Teheran 5
19 Jameson Taillon 11
19 Jacob Turner 21
19 Martin Perez 24
19 Manny Banuelos 41

2010 18 Martin Perez 17
19 Tyler Matzek 23
18 Jacob Turner 26
19 Zack Wheeler 49
19 Shelby Miller 50

2009 19 Madison Bumgarner 9
19 Jarrod Parker 29

2008 19 Clayton Kershaw 7
19 Rick Porcello 21
18 Deolis Guerra 35
18 Jarrod Parker 46

2007 19 Carlos Carrasco 42

2006 19 Homer Bailey 38
19 Phil Hughes 39
 

iayork

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2006
636
He throws 93-96. Literally hundreds of 18 year olds can throw that hard. The Sox just drafted a 17 year old that throws that hard. His ranking is not because of his radar gun reading.
My son is playing in 15U tournament right now in which at least two kids throw 93-95. Again, these are 15 year old kids.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Julio Urias is 19 and in the majors. He is ranked higher on the lists you are citing.
Jose Fernandez was at a higher level and ranked higher at the same age.

These are just off the top of my head. If I had the time or desire to dig through the lists to prove how inaccurate your assessment is I could accumulate a laundry list. It's not exceptionally rare. And he's not generational.
Since it seems important to keep score, this is objectively not true.

At Espinoza's age -- in baseball terms, the age-18 season -- Jose Fernandez had been drafted #14 overall, pitched to a 12.46 ERA as a professional, had scouts questioning if he was as young as his birth certificate, was a conditioning concern, and had reached short-season NYPL league ball.

At Espinoza's age -- in real terms of 18 years, 4 months -- Fernandez had not been drafted.

Both Fernandez and Espinoza, however, were credited with the three plus out-pitches including a fastball with heavy sink, before they were 19.

[EDIT] Since you'll probably ask, here's the link, published when Fernandez was 55 days away from being 19.
 
Last edited:

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
Since it seems important to keep score, this is objectively not true.

At Espinoza's age -- in baseball terms, the age-18 season -- Jose Fernandez had been drafted #14 overall, pitched to a 12.46 ERA as a professional, had scouts questioning if he was as young as his birth certificate, was a conditioning concern, and had reached short-season NYPL league ball.

At Espinoza's age -- in real terms of 18 years, 4 months -- Fernandez had not been drafted.

Both Fernandez and Espinoza, however, were credited with the three plus out-pitches including a fastball with heavy sink, before they were 19.

[EDIT] Since you'll probably ask, here's the link, published when Fernandez was 55 days away from being 19.
I know you love to cherry pick comments and take them out of context, but the post I responded to was asking about pitchers aged 19.

Fernandez age 19 season was 2012. He was the #5 prospect in baseball after unison High A.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that my loose language misled you, as even I got mixed up with the amount of times London changed the parameters to try to fit his stance . Here's the link for that http://www.baseballamerica.com/statistics/players/cards/20
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I know you love to cherry pick comments and take them out of context, but the post I responded to was asking about pitchers aged 19.

Fernandez age 19 season was 2012. He was the #5 prospect in baseball after unison High A.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that my loose language misled you, as even I got mixed up with the amount of times London changed the parameters to try to fit his stance . Here's the link for that http://www.baseballamerica.com/statistics/players/cards/20
Your comparison even in "loose language" was clearly to Espinoza, who isn't 19, as you and others were so quick to pillory LondonSox for getting wrong.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Or, maybe you're spewing words too quickly to even know what you're saying.
 

jateders

lurker
Apr 23, 2010
27
I voted that the Sox won just because the likelihood that Espinoza reaches his full potential is pretty low. Based on the list above, how many true aces are we looking at there, 5? I think if he reaches what what Pomeraz is right now, then we would have been happy campers, throw in the fact we get 2.5 more seasons out of a pitcher who looks like he's starting to really put it together really seals it for me. If there was ever a year when you "overpay" for a guy, this is it. My guess though is that by the end of the deadline it won't look like an overpay at all. I'd much prefer giving up Espinoza for Pomeraz then Devers for 1/2 season of Rich Hill.

Not that it matters but here are the minor league stats for Espinoza. Kid is filthy but he's far from a sure thing.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=espino005and
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,740
Portsmouth, NH
Your comparison even in "loose language" was clearly to Espinoza, who isn't 19, as you and others were so quick to pillory LondonSox for getting wrong.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Or, maybe you're spewing words too quickly to even know what you're saying.
Please quote the post where I pilloried London for getting his age wrong. I'll wait.
 

rehabsox

Ornithologist
SoSH Member
Aug 5, 2014
500
Atlanta, GA
What's all the fuss about Doyle Alexander for John Smoltz?

Tigers won the Series.

Braves got a Hall of Famer.

No-brainer.

/ducks
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
17,005
I'm saying that fangraphs for example gives the Sox a 0.9 win improvement for the trade. That is the pomeranz value by one method. That one win needs to be pretty fucking important to make it worth Espinoza.
I believe the 0.9 win improvement that FanGraphs is based on what probably would be an optimistic projection of Buchholz or whoever would be pitching in Pomeranz's place. For example, Pomeranz's had a first half WAR of 2.5 but O'Sullivan had a WAR of -0.3 and Buchholz had a WAR of -0.8.

I'll mention this again. DD got Daniel Norris, who was BA's 18th ranked prospect, plus two other prospects for 6 months of David Price. I personally think he got more for Price than Preller got for Pomeranz, but to me, one thing is pretty certain: DD knows the market value of pitchers at the trade deadline.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
672
Stumptown via Chelmsford
Honest to God, the arguments against this trade are convincing me I should be for it.
Having read this thread, I am now even more firmly convinced that had DD and Ben Cherington sat down together at the poker table, DD would have subsequently emerged with Ben's clothes, jewelry and wife. And I think Ben is probably an above average poker player.