Masterson didn't sing to pitch out of the pen. CB, JM are not signed past this year. they have three kids they probably think can start in 2016. The options here remain endless
Red Sox Agree to Terms with Justin Masterson
- Thread starter mloyko54
- Start date
Luis Taint said:
And that, IMO, is insane - on what planet is one year of Cueto worth someone like X?
Owens I can see a case for
On the planet where you can extend Cueto. If Sox think they have a reasonable shot to extend him I'd give up X in a second for Cueto.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Rough Carrigan said:
There are things to like with the GB%, track record of durablity, and the K/9. I'd be less skeptical if there was clear evidence that the velocity loss and crappy results were injury related and correctable.
NJ_Sox_Fan said:
Cueto would get at least Lester money. If you're willing to give him that, plus deal X, why not just resign Lester?
P'tucket said:
Right, but if a guaranteed spot wasn't available (or wasn't available for reasonable money or competitiveness), then "a chance to compete in ST" could be close enough.
In my head, this is much more about using money to create depth to replace the guys who brought back Miley - and depth with a pretty reasonable upside.
ivanvamp said:
Question - I assume you are saying you would trade X for one year of Cueto. If so, why not trade X for 5 years of Hamels - wouldn't that be preferable?
Posted a .910 OPS against vs LHH last year.
That means basically all LHH's are Miguel Cabrera against him.
Can't say I'm a fan of giving a guy 9.5 million dollars when he appears only suited to be a ROOGY.
That means basically all LHH's are Miguel Cabrera against him.
Can't say I'm a fan of giving a guy 9.5 million dollars when he appears only suited to be a ROOGY.
He was terrible for one year. Working backwards, in 2013 he was solid, 2012 meh, and 2011 fantastic. It's not terribly unusual for very good pitchers to lose their way for an extended period of time. Even Lester spent a full 12 months in the wilderness before late 2012. The trick with Masterson is that his track record suggests his mechanics (or health, but most of the speculation is about mechanics) come and go for extended periods, so the Sox have to be able to correct something that the Indians couldn't, or couldn't keep corrected. MIller and Lester are both guys who very recently pulled it all together under Farrell and co. So from that, you'd think there's a decent chance, albeit with no guarantees. If he's even halfway good, they could possibly talk him into a pretty effective relief role. And if he sucks? All they gave up was a little money.Why Not Grebeck? said:
chrisfont9 said:
I really like the deal as long as we're not relying on Masterson for anything and/or the Sox pull the trigger quickly if it's clear he's still in 2014 form. Cleveland ran him out there for months last year and he got hung out to dry a ton. If they'd moved on earlier, they'd likely have made the playoffs. It's a low risk signing with nice upside, certainly, but I do worry about him and Clay pitching back-to-back two inning eight run starts.
Relatively low money and a one-year deal for a guy who's been very good recently (just not 2014)? Yes, please.
Even if he's average, they win. And nothing in Masterson's deal protects him from bullpen, trade, or DFA if he can't recover his form.
I like this a lot.
Even if he's average, they win. And nothing in Masterson's deal protects him from bullpen, trade, or DFA if he can't recover his form.
I like this a lot.
Was hoping that maybe the huge power he gives up to lefties in Fenway might be mitigated, but...
mikeford said:
In 67.1 innings. His 2011-2013 seasons were more consistent in IP, if not in OPS:
2011 = 119.1 / .746
2012 = 115.1 / .826
2013 = 113.2 / .697
mikeford said:
Miggy only slugged .895 in 2014. A more appropriate goggle-eyed knee-jerk response from you would have been Anthony Rizzo, who slugged .913 and is actually a lefty hitter.
mikeford said:
Based on the rest of this thread, the Sox are seeing if Masterson can be better than 2014's numbers. Based on 2014's subjective chatter (injury? mechanics out of whack?), the Sox saw fit to speculate.
Is it possible that Masterson doesn't repeat his career worst OPS against LHH, his career worst BB/9 (4.83), or his career high BABIP (.339) from 2014?
Is it possible that, given the fact his GB% and K-rate was in line with his career averages, he can do better on a make-good one-year deal?
It's not clear what his role with the 2015 Sox is yet. Saying in December that they intend him to be a starter is org-speak. He's been a starter, so he's a starter. It doesn't preclude additional moves to be made to the pitching corps before April. And it helps leverage any future moves with other trading partners (i.e. "our rotation is set, we don't need to make any more deals").
If his role were to change - i.e. if Masterson is making 9 million out of the bullpen as a ROOGY with experience, rotation flexibility, and upside, that's still a pretty good FA signing for a guy who's had success in the past.
Continue to burn it down, but I'm not positive that Masterson's toast yet.
kieckeredinthehead said:Was hoping that maybe the huge power he gives up to lefties in Fenway might be mitigated, but...
I think it has less to do with the park and more with infield defense, regaining velocity/mechanics, and perhaps the continued development of a 3rd pitch. Masterson's suck had little to do with with the Jake's dimensions.
My concern with this signing stems from the negative remarks by Francona about Masterson's attitude that someone posted somewhere in Sosh in the last couple of days. What, I wonder, occasioned his saying something like that?
InsideTheParker said:
Someone alluded to it, but I haven't been able to track any quote like that down, and noted someone else posting to that effect. It was mentioned by that same poster late in the '14 season and I looked then and couldn't find it.
Not saying it didn't happen, but given it seems not to have popped up anywhere but in paraphrase here, thinking it may be a poor interpretation of something Francona said.
InsideTheParker said:
Pitching hurt (supposedly) behind an all-world butcher infield of Swisher/Santana, Kipnis, Cabrera, Chisinhall/Santana might have something to do with it. Bullpen was fairly lousy for most of the year too.
I read the stories when it was first published. Masterson is deeply religious and the story suggested he often has difficulty reconciling playing baseball instead of doing charitable work in God's name. "God gave you this amazing gift son, use it to make loads of money and use that to help so many more people" is a simple way to look at this if I were wrestling with this dilemma. .I think however this statement was a last straw for Tito in trying to find a way to turn him around and I don't think it's really all that applicable at this time. If he wanted to be a missionary, he could do that right now, but he instead signed a contract to continue playing baseball.InsideTheParker said:
If being in the position to play baseball for the Boston Red Sox isn't "God's work", then I don't know what is.
foulkehampshire said:
Not sure what that evidence would look like, but Masterson's velocity was down in 2014 from the get-go. He lost about 2mph off his FB and Sinker comparing Oct 2013 to Apr 2014, and never really got back to where he was. That will probably be something to watch out for early in 2015.
It would be nice if he had a changeup or cutter to throw against LHB, but I'm sure every pitching coach he's ever met has tried and it just hasn't worked for him. He's got funny arm action, and I can see how those pitches might not come out of his hand in a way that would make them effective.
mikeford said:
Last year. His downside is a ROOGY, although ROOGY can easily be R(Two)OGY or one inning guy given typical lineup construction.
But as I had stated a couple days ago in a different thread, given his pitching style, he relies on command and velocity against lefties while against righties his arm angle and normal slider rotation are going to be his focus. Not to make an excuse for his performance, but I would see nagging injuries that he endured as well as any mechanical glitches as having a bigger negative impact against lefties (who already will always do better against him).
So I am very optimistic that if he is healthy (and none of his injuries seem like things that carry over an offseason), Farrell can help get him sorted out and back to who he was. You are not buying who he was last year, you are buying your expectations that health and mechanics can get him back to who he was before that.
At this price, and with Farrell having been his pitching coach in the past, I'm definitely bullish on the upside, even if the downside is a bullpen overpay.
From a distance ~10M for a starting pitcher seems like a lot for a guy with so much uncertainty. But free agents with less uncertainty don't sign one-year contracts. I'd rather someone better (who wouldn't), but thinking about this as an RDLR replacement (pencil in as a starter and move to the pen if it doesn't work out) doesn't sound terrible. I'll reserve judgment until the roster shakes out.
Man, even in his good years his lefty splits are pretty awful. In 2013 lefty OPS against him was .698. Then when he was good in 2011 his lfet OPS split was still .746. In 2013 that's a tOPS+ against lefties of 120 (sOPS+ of 95) and in 2011 tOPS of 123 (sOPS+ of 97) . Those are the numbers at the peak of his powers. When he was bad last year, his tOPS+ was 120 and sOPS+ was freaking 160
I always liked Masterson, but those splits are absolutely frightening if you assume that he is anything short of his absolute best.
I always liked Masterson, but those splits are absolutely frightening if you assume that he is anything short of his absolute best.
Maybe he Christian Koufax, or Shawn Greene? I jest because I truly believe this was a last ditch desperation move by Tito to get him going in a different direction. He may have been miffed by the whole scene, expressed his dissatisfaction and that's why he was traded? I don't know, but I do suspect the story is a non factor now and never was a real issue.InsideTheParker said:
I don't get this deal at all. They've already acquired a couple solid pitchers, but what they needed was a top of the rotation guy or at least a #2. That's not Masterson. Just seems like a lot of money for something they already have plenty of (imperfect starters)
Perhaps they are dealing an arm in a package?
It's not Christmas yet, there's two months to go before pitchers and catchers report.
It's not Christmas yet, there's two months to go before pitchers and catchers report.
Or maybe Cherington is jumping at opportunities to create a solid base of pitchers to work with and will deal with a surplus if he ends up with one later. Porcello, Miley, Buchholz, Masterson, Kelly is a solid, but unspectacular rotation. They could make the playoffs with it if things break well. They also wouldn't have a problem moving Kelly to the pen if they can land Shields on a palatable contract or trade for Hamels or another starter. And yeah, they could also include Kelly in a trade.
Stockpiling arms before Christmas is a good way to ensure you don't end up with a rotation that would have to get lucky to be average while affording the team plenty of time to try and find the front line starter they (and everyone else) obviously covet.
Stockpiling arms before Christmas is a good way to ensure you don't end up with a rotation that would have to get lucky to be average while affording the team plenty of time to try and find the front line starter they (and everyone else) obviously covet.
You can never have too much pitching.
Would you rather have Workman start in a pinch?
This is just a 'depth/hope he gets better/oh well if he doesn't because it is a one year contract' move. And based on the Sox experience with him, he won't be a cancer if he doesn't get to start.
Would you rather have Workman start in a pinch?
This is just a 'depth/hope he gets better/oh well if he doesn't because it is a one year contract' move. And based on the Sox experience with him, he won't be a cancer if he doesn't get to start.
Clearly he can't be a full year starter, there's just no way they ramp up his innings that much.Rudy Pemberton said:
The projections show Johnson ready by mid year. He would be an option for the 2nd half of the season and if so, they would bolster the bullpen with Kelly. There's always a deal that could happen also.
Are we really under the impression that Masterson is the last starting pitcher BC will be bringing in?
Playing Devil's Advocate here:
Instead of spending $10MM on Masterson, why didn't we just offer Lester $10MM more over 6 years?
Probably would have got it done.
Instead of spending $10MM on Masterson, why didn't we just offer Lester $10MM more over 6 years?
Probably would have got it done.
Rudy Pemberton said:
I think Kelly slots in as the #5 right now (in terms of usage, not necessarily quality). He's candidate number 1 to move to the pen to make room for a hot Pawtucket arm (Ranuado, Barnes, Escobar, Owens, etc) sometime in July or August. If they're counting on him to cover 160+ innings, that means other things are going wrong.
benhogan said:
I'm not sure it's an either/or proposition. Given John Henry's stated willingness to go over the luxury tax threshold, I'd imagine we could have signed both. It's not like Masterson's taking Lester's spot or anything, we could still add a #1 starter like Scherzer/Shields/Hamels/Cueto/Zimmerman/Fister instead of Lester.
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
I think it actually makes it more likely that they deal Cueto. I read somewhere that they were quoted as saying they were either " All in or all out". Their last few moves definitely fall into the "All out" category, so perhaps he is available.
Or maybe they are only willing to go that high on Masterson because it is a 1 year deal and they don't expect to be giving out 23M a year to another player at this point.benhogan said:
benhogan said:
Gamble more than $200 million for 6 years of Lester, if the Sox could afford this as you believe, or gamble roughly $10 million (more if he's good) for a single season of Masterson? Masterson is actually immensely less risky for what he is costing but has the potential to reward for a single season if last season's injuries and performance were an aberration. Change of scenery can unlock such potential. Masterson's old pitching coach, John Farrell, will probably help him significantly during his pillow contract year. DLR finally has an ideal situation to develop because his upside is probably that of his GM, Dave Stewart, who he resembles in terms of the slow trajectory to start but the possibility of big performances to end his career. It was the perfect landing spot for him because they are physically so similar.
Whoa big fella, settle down.The Boomer said:
I was merely suggesting the Sox could have gone from $135MM to $145MM to see if Lester would have bit.
Why on earth would you think I was suggesting $200MM, when he went for far less?
But that Lester boat has set sail so its a pointless discussion.