Red Sox acquire RHP Quinn Priester from Pittsburgh; optioned to Worcester

MetSox1

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2007
768
What do you think Nick Yorke was going to get you?

Quinn Priester is one year removed from being a top 100 prospect. This is a fabulous pick up. Priester is 50 IP removed from being our top pitching prospect and fourth overall. He leaves too pitchers high in the zone right now but if he can have a quarter of the success Kutter and Houck have had here, Priester could be a top line pitcher. I would put him over Bello going forward.
I expected him to be part of a package. No I didn't expect him to get us Robert Jr straight up... But either we've greatly overstated his value around here, or he would have been welcomed by a number of selling ballclubs, as part of a deal...

The point is, all, that he had value, decent value (this isnt a bad return) and we did not use him to address a top need.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
29,002
Unreal America
This also seems to indicate a belief and a confidence boost by the brain trust in Grissom also. Young, controllable pitching is what this team needs! Old regimes had a tendency to ship out players like Yorke for rentals to make a run at the playoffs in one year. I like these types of deals MUCH more!
I suspect between Story, Grissom, Hamilton and even Wong, the FO isn’t too concerned about 2B for the next few seasons.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,697
Mine too. Yorke was excelling in Worcester and would likely be a better option than Westbrook right now on the MLB roster ...just don't get this, at least at first blush.
Fitts looks like a reliever. Perales had TJ. Sandlin has pitched 4 innings beyond High A.

People just really aren’t acknowledging how rail thin the starting depth in the system is right now.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,809
Mine too. Yorke was excelling in Worcester and would likely be a better option than Westbrook right now on the MLB roster ...just don't get this, at least at first blush.
Yorke has a .898 ops in 38 games in AAA this year
Westbrook had a .897 and .858 ops in 117 and 61 games at AAA over the last 2 years

So maybe, but I'm not sure why we should expect that Yorke would have been much better, especially after he couldn't really hit in AA
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
96,437
Oregon
@IanMBrowne
Craig Breslow on the acquisition of Quinn Priester. "In Quinn we see a young starting pitcher with a ton of potential. He throws strikes and misses barrels and keeps the ball on the ground which is a good place to start when seeking rotation pieces. It hurts to give up a player as talented as Nick but we saw upper level middle infielders as an area where we have a lot of good players."
 

chawson

Hoping for delivery
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
5,224
I suspect between Story, Grissom, Hamilton and even Wong, the FO isn’t too concerned about 2B for the next few seasons.
Agreed, and I'd even add Romy to the list here. I've been liking him as a short-side platoon guy who can play all over the infield and even the outfield in a pinch. He's like a Refsnyder bat, a Brock Holt-style defensive profile, and a Rafaela-caliber runner all in one.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
4,101
I expected him to be part of a package. No I didn't expect him to get us Robert Jr straight up... But either we've greatly overstated his value around here, or he would have been welcomed by a number of selling ballclubs, as part of a deal...

The point is, all, that he had value, decent value (this isnt a bad return) and we did not use him to address a top need.
This deal isn't preventing the Sox from addressing a "top need", though. If you're shopping at the top of the trade market to address those top needs, Yorke is probably more like a 3rd piece in a deal, something that they can easily replace with a Meidroth or Zanatello if they want to and still can. It's not that Yorke doesn't have value, obviously, but he's not a headliner in that kind of deal.

One of the organization's top needs is starting pitching, particularly in the upper-minors. They just traded a guy who didn't appear to have a spot on the MLB roster to help address that need. We'll see how it pans out, but nothing about this deal is stopping them from making more moves before the deadline.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
4,131
I get why it makes sense to take a gamble on a guy like Priester, it just seems weird unusual to try it in the middle of a season where you’re fighting for your playoff life. I suppose the thinking might be that a rental pitcher with a more established track record is potentially risky, too, and you don't want to trade away a guy like Yorke for someone who's just going to pitch poorly and then walk away after the year. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,776
CT
Not sure how anyone can be mad at flipping some surplus talent for an area of need.

Pretty easy win in terms of flipping a guy that was probably blocked and not exactly lighting the world on fire for an arm with decent upside.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,776
CT
I get why it makes sense to take a gamble on a guy like Priester, it just seems weird unusual to try it in the middle of a season where you’re fighting for your playoff life. I suppose the thinking might be that a rental pitcher with a more established track record is potentially risky, too, and you don't want to trade away a guy like Yorke for someone who's just going to pitch poorly and then walk away after the year. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
What value was Yorke going to add? It isn’t like they traded a guy already contributing for a prospect.
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
27,689
@IanMBrowne
Craig Breslow on the acquisition of Quinn Priester. "In Quinn we see a young starting pitcher with a ton of potential. He throws strikes and misses barrels and keeps the ball on the ground which is a good place to start when seeking rotation pieces. It hurts to give up a player as talented as Nick but we saw upper level middle infielders as an area where we have a lot of good players."
Misses barrels? How the heck does he have a 6.00+ era over his last 7-8 games?
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
29,002
Unreal America
I get why it makes sense to take a gamble on a guy like Priester, it just seems weird unusual to try it in the middle of a season where you’re fighting for your playoff life. I suppose the thinking might be that a rental pitcher with a more established track record is potentially risky, too, and you don't want to trade away a guy like Yorke for someone who's just going to pitch poorly and then walk away after the year. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
My hunch is that Breslow/Bailey sees something in Priester that can be fixed immediately. And that fix would make him serviceable at the major league level for the remainder of the season. It's not unprecedented, we saw that happen with Brasier just last year. Who knows if we can make it work, of course.

What strikes me as unusual is Pittsburgh giving up on the guy for Yorke. They must really like Yorke, or perhaps think there isn't a fix for Priester.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
10,066
My hunch is that Breslow/Bailey sees something in Priester that can be fixed immediately. And that fix would make him serviceable at the major league level for the remainder of the season. It's not unprecedented, we saw that happen with Brasier just last year. Who knows if we can make it work, of course.

What strikes me as unusual is Pittsburgh giving up on the guy for Yorke. They must really like Yorke, or perhaps think there isn't a fix for Priester.
PIT has had a really difficult time developing hitters of late, so their thinking may be to get someone close to the majors where someone else has done most of the work already.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,984
What strikes me as unusual is Pittsburgh giving up on the guy for Yorke. They must really like Yorke, or perhaps think there isn't a fix for Priester.
I think it's as simple as B- prospect from a position of abundance for a B- prospect from a position of need, on both sides.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
23,024
Maine
My hunch is that Breslow/Bailey sees something in Priester that can be fixed immediately. And that fix would make him serviceable at the major league level for the remainder of the season. It's not unprecedented, we saw that happen with Brasier just last year. Who knows if we can make it work, of course.

What strikes me as unusual is Pittsburgh giving up on the guy for Yorke. They must really like Yorke, or perhaps think there isn't a fix for Priester.
Pirates seem thin in the middle infield, especially at the top end of their system. Yorke addresses that for them. They do have a fair amount of solid pitching prospects in the pipeline, so they can let a guy go who's nearing the end of the line as a prospect (one option year remaining after this season).
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
29,002
Unreal America
PIT has had a really difficult time developing hitters of late, so their thinking may be to get someone close to the majors where someone else has done most of the work already.
I think it's as simple as B- prospect from a position of abundance for a B- prospect from a position of need, on both sides.
Pirates seem thin in the middle infield, especially at the top end of their system. Yorke addresses that for them. They do have a fair amount of solid pitching prospects in the pipeline, so they can let a guy go who's nearing the end of the line as a prospect (one option year remaining after this season).
Makes sense. I won't pretend to know much about the Pirates.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,788
Rogers Park
This is all Yorke goes for? My initial reaction is yikes, maybe big yikes.
*Could* have lost him, not would have. Though as simplicio says, if they held on to him into the winter, they 100% would have added him to the 40-man.

Yorke strikes me as much more a Michael Chavis type prospect than someone who's going to break out and be a perennial All Star type. I very much doubt that Breslow gave him away for less than he was worth. We likely have an inflated sense of what he could actually yield on the trade market.
If you were the GM of a rebuilding team, how much value are you really sending back for a hit-over-power guy with a 2B/LF/DH profile? His modest defensive value means you really have to believe in the bat, and it just hasn't been there reliably.

I'm glad they got something for him while they could.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
36,677
I figured now is the time to trade him (or else he should have come up as the platoon for Hamilton), just thought he had more value. But every team is smarter now.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,933
Row 14
I expected him to be part of a package. No I didn't expect him to get us Robert Jr straight up... But either we've greatly overstated his value around here, or he would have been welcomed by a number of selling ballclubs, as part of a deal...

The point is, all, that he had value, decent value (this isnt a bad return) and we did not use him to address a top need.
He was never going to be a real value add in a trade for an all star. The White Sox aren't going to stop a Luis Robert trade because Nick Yorke is gone. They aren't going to step away from asking for a top four prospect because you are adding Nick Yorke as a sweetener instead of Luis Perales. Nick Yorke was C prospect who was traded for B prospect with a year of service time. There are plenty of other C prospect to package up.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,697
I figured now is the time to trade him (or else he should have come up as the platoon for Hamilton), just thought he had more value. But every team is smarter now.
Getting a pitcher with actual starting pitcher potential with 6 years of control might be the highest valued profile in baseball.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,788
Rogers Park
The three pitchers with the most similar velo/movement profile are
  • Merrill Kelly, a good Diamonbacks starter,
  • Chad Kuhl, a decent White Sox reliever, and
  • Joe Ross, a decent Brewers starter.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,494
I wonder how he gives up so many runs then.
Take a look at his statcast profile on baseball savant. His hard hit percentage is very bad. Lots of hard hit balls that arent necessarily barreled or squared up - those still go for hits and can get a pitcher in a lot of trouble. And those are disproportionately coming against his fastball and sinker, which Bailey is probably going to tell him to throw a lot less. And also hes given up a shitload of homeruns.

They'll change his pitch mix. Same thing they did with like, half of the pitching staff. Probably transition him to throwing a sweeper rather than a slider too, like they did with Pivetta, Giolito, Houck, Whitlock and a few others, iirc.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,855
2021 me would have been horrified by this trade

2024 me is ok with it

Yorke can’t field and his bat doesn’t make up for it. Truthfully, I’m happy that he’ll get his chance sooner rather than later in Pittsburgh. He wasn’t ever going to play here.

Hope they can make something out of Priester.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
96,437
Oregon
Hope they can make something out of Priester.
What I've been reading is that he gets hammered on his low-90s fastball. Seems like a candidate for the Bailey School of Deemphasizing Velocity for Movement
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
4,101
I get why it makes sense to take a gamble on a guy like Priester, it just seems weird unusual to try it in the middle of a season where you’re fighting for your playoff life. I suppose the thinking might be that a rental pitcher with a more established track record is potentially risky, too, and you don't want to trade away a guy like Yorke for someone who's just going to pitch poorly and then walk away after the year. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
3 things:
1. Preister could contribute this year. He probably jumps to option #1 for a starter if the team needs to call someone up. With the youngsters in the rotation/Paxton, they might need a guy to give them a spot start here or there to keep their innings in check. Who knows what they'll get from Paxton. Unlike Yorke, he's actually played in the MLB this year. Point is, he could contribute this year.

2. I think you're overthinking it, but instead of a rental pitcher, they got a guy with like 6 years of control left. If they can get him right, that's a lot more valuable to the franchise than a rental pitcher (better value in return for Yorke, which is what I think you were getting at), even if it doesn't help them this year.

3. They can still go out and get another pitcher. This deal isn't preventing them from making another deal. Yorke is easily replaceable in trade offers.

TLDR- This deal likely has very little impact on making a playoff push and zero impact on their ability to make moves to make that push.
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
27,689
Is it your contention that barrel rate is uncorrelated with runs?
huh? I actually assume that the harder guys hit the ball, in general that leads to more runs. so I don’t know why his relatively low barrel rate nonetheless yields a lot of runs given up.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
33,383
Looks like we've reached the "do something, Breslow, but only if you completely fuck over the other team" stage of deadline analysis.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,984
huh? I actually assume that the harder guys hit the ball, in general that leads to more runs. so I don’t know why his relatively low barrel rate nonetheless yields a lot of runs given up.
I would not dismiss small sample size.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,933
Row 14

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
27,689
I would not dismiss small sample size.
well, it definitely is not a large sample size, but even in small sample sizes there has to be a reason for why somebody gives up a lot of runs without giving up a lot of barrels. I guess if you’re giving up home runs instead of lots of doubles and such, it can lead to a lot of runs given up on relatively few barrels.
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 3, 2001
46,053
Mtigawi
I get why it makes sense to take a gamble on a guy like Priester, it just seems weird unusual to try it in the middle of a season where you’re fighting for your playoff life. I suppose the thinking might be that a rental pitcher with a more established track record is potentially risky, too, and you don't want to trade away a guy like Yorke for someone who's just going to pitch poorly and then walk away after the year. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
I’m with ya and I agree we may be overthinking it. The Sox are having a super fun year but it’s probably not a season for the ages. This is taking a gamble on the future while maybe helping the team this year. Yorke is a good player but he’s not the prospect that he was. We need pitching now and in the future.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,984
well, it definitely is not a large sample size, but even in small sample sizes there has to be a reason for why somebody gives up a lot of runs without giving up a lot of barrels. I guess if you’re giving up home runs instead of lots of doubles and such, it can lead to a lot of runs given up on relatively few barrels.
I don't know, but it feels like "barrel" and "hard hit" would be at least somewhat correlated and Priester's are 91%ile and 4%ile. So I'm not sure what to make of it.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,788
Rogers Park
huh? I actually assume that the harder guys hit the ball, in general that leads to more runs. so I don’t know why his relatively low barrel rate nonetheless yields a lot of runs given up.
Sorry, I read you as sarcastically dismissive of his low barrel rate. My bad.

well, it definitely is not a large sample size, but even in small sample sizes there has to be a reason for why somebody gives up a lot of runs without giving up a lot of barrels. I guess if you’re giving up home runs instead of lots of doubles and such, it can lead to a lot of runs given up on relatively few barrels.
It's true that he gives up hard contact (bad), but it's mostly on the ground (good) and thus not a "barrel" by definition.

Statcast says Priester has been a better pitcher this season than Paxton, it's just that Priester has a .304 BABIP (average) and Paxton has a .269 (very low).
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,788
Rogers Park
I get why it makes sense to take a gamble on a guy like Priester, it just seems weird unusual to try it in the middle of a season where you’re fighting for your playoff life. I suppose the thinking might be that a rental pitcher with a more established track record is potentially risky, too, and you don't want to trade away a guy like Yorke for someone who's just going to pitch poorly and then walk away after the year. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
There's a rule change kicking in this season that lowers the cap on the number of players you're allowed to have on all the rosters of all of your domestic minor league affiliates all told, and we just drafted 20 new guys and are about to finalize contracts with 18 or 19 of them. I wonder if a bunch of the sorts of trades that would once have happened before the rule 5 roster deadline will now happen before the June draft signing deadline.

This probably has less to do with Yorke-for-Priester (at least on our side) than the deal that sent three guys for Danny Jansen. Not that somebody like Coffey or Paulino would have gotten cut, but maybe at the margin you're willing to add Paulino to get the deal done, say, because downstream it means you're going to get to keep another lower down guy who (partly) offsets his loss.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
4,131
There's a rule change kicking in this season that lowers the cap on the number of players you're allowed to have on all the rosters of all of your domestic minor league affiliates all told, and we just drafted 20 new guys and are about to finalize contracts with 18 or 19 of them. I wonder if a bunch of the sorts of trades that would once have happened before the rule 5 roster deadline will now happen before the June draft signing deadline.

This probably has less to do with Yorke-for-Priester (at least on our side) than the deal that sent three guys for Danny Jansen. Not that somebody like Coffey or Paulino would have gotten cut, but maybe at the margin you're willing to add Paulino to get the deal done, say, because downstream it means you're going to get to keep another lower down guy who (partly) offsets his loss.
I did not know this, thank you!