That's interesting. I think this will get lost in the shuffle, but I find myself disagreeing. Though I think Kelly is best suited for the pen, I think the Sox want to try and give him at least a full season in the rotation to see if he really can harness his ability.Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
Sox acquire Wade Miley for De La Rosa, Webster, and minor leaguer
- Thread starter LesterFan
- Start date
Mileys Career FIP (3.79) is closer to Lesters (3.58) than it is to Kellys (4.11).O Captain! My Captain! said:
A couple more for fun.
Buchholz career FIP 4.06
Shields 3.77
Sure, but you need a high number of innings to come from (at least) one roster spot. If you could have a 35-man active major league roster in April and May, maybe the number of candidates for this role would matter. Also, now they have eight, right? We should only be mad about this deal if Webster/RDLR turn into maybe a combined #3 starter and excellent bullpen piece or better, IMO.Rasputin said:
Well, the problem with that is they just traded the two most likely "kids" .. While Owens and Rodriguez and Barnes and possibly Johnson are considered to be better long term prospects than RDLR or Webster (I think) none of them (accepting maybe Barnes) is really ready to jump to the majors this year.Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
There is Barnes, and also Wright and Ranaudo and Workman. Maybe one of them will emerge and keep the seat warm until Rodriguez is ready.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Except they probably won't have a seat to keep warm .. which seems to be the biggest complaintBob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
Hey! You!Rasputin said:
The problem isn't everyone on the forum's reading comprehension, it's your crappy reasoning and communication.
Nobody else agrees with you that Miley isn't an upgrade at SP over what the Res Sox gave up or had available for 2015, Joe Kelly included. The obvious numbers don't bare it out and you've done NOTHING to convince anyone otherwise other than post your unsupported opinions in rant style.
Take a deep breath and do better.
Yes and no. I think if you're a serious contender, you want to have an ace at the top of your rotation to give you that edge. Two aces likely make a team heavy favorites in a short series. A rotation of McCarthy/Porcello/Miley/Buchholz/Kelly likely gets us into the playoffs with this offense, but I don't like it going up against say Price/Sanchez/Verlander, or Sale/Shark, or Hernandez/Iwakuma, etc...LahoudOrBillyC said:
One caveat to this is that the older pitchers are going to look worse because offensive numbers have been declining over the last... decade? or so. In 2008 league average FIP was 4.32; in 2014 it was 3.74.Lowrielicious said:
Yes we just traded our number 3 and our number 4 for our current 1 or 2. Not sure what comp w Kelly has to do with it. Who sits behind the "big 3" on the depth chart now? Ranaudo, Wright, Barnes, Owens, ERod, Johnson. Get one more guy for Cespedes and let the kids fight it out for the 5th starter role.
Over the past three years, Miley ranks as follows among qualifying SPs. These are all park- and league-adjusted numbers.
SIERA: 33rd (high 2nd quintile)
ERA-: 59th (high 3rd quintile)
FIP-: 44th (low-ish 2nd quintile)
xFIP-: 50th (low 2nd quintile)
So if we insist on slapping rotation slot numbers on somebody, Miley has been somewhere between an average #2 and a kick-ass #3.
SIERA: 33rd (high 2nd quintile)
ERA-: 59th (high 3rd quintile)
FIP-: 44th (low-ish 2nd quintile)
xFIP-: 50th (low 2nd quintile)
So if we insist on slapping rotation slot numbers on somebody, Miley has been somewhere between an average #2 and a kick-ass #3.
Well, that was my original musing about Kelly to the 'pen.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Regardless, it's just a thought.
Assuming your rotation will all stay healthy and therefore not have any quality depth ready to fill the hole made by injury just so there are rotation slots to blood the kids is a very dangerous game.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
While Ras is being rather strident about this but I think the point is rather simple.amarshal2 said:
Which rotation would people rather see ..
Shields
Porcello
Buchholz
Kelly
One of the Nine
Or
Shields
Porcelain
Buchholz
Kelly
Miley
I would agree that the option two is a stronger rotation .. But I really think the Sox need to sort out which of those nine (now seven) guys is going to become a regular member of the rotation. And that's a lot more difficult now.
The bolded is all that should matter. It's up to the Red Sox development staff to figure out which of the prospects are suitable for the rotation in the future.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Even if everyone stays relatively healthy and performs well, you're still looking at 20-30 starts that will need to be made throughout the year, based on past seasons.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Especially since none of the TINSTAPPs were exactly banging down the door to the rotation on the order of a Bogaerts or Betts-level prospect. Owens and Eduardo Rodriguez are the best prospects but are probably a year away, the remainder of the pitchers were low-ceiling or unpolished or both despite being more MLB-ready. I think RDLR was the most likely #5 starter in 2014 out of the bunch, so losing him is a bummer, but that's what a trade is.Lowrielicious said:
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Porcelain will never make it through a full season without breaking down.
Just like every year, we will need more than 5 starters next year. The kids will get a chance when chances come up. And if they don't come up, that's a great thing, and well worth the trade off of only getting to evaluate them based off of AAA innings or MLB relief appearances.
LahoudOrBillyC said:
This.
Beyond all the hypothetical scenarios that have other teams doing us a "we'll leave your very best prospects alone" favor, or free agents like Shields signing below what plays out to be their actual market value, the overall goal in play should have us attempting to upgrade the current projected 5 however we can (within reason, of course). Not completely giving up if/when that satisfactory 1/2 combo everybody seems to think is given fails to present itself this winter.
I'm good with cutting the potential corner a tad in favor of securing more of a sure thing in Miley. Still have the major prospects intact, and the Cespedes trade to play itself out. There will be more pitching additions to come.
Edit: beaten to the Porcelain joke.
The trade probably can be judged when we see the makeup of the rotation when the hit Fort Myers in February.
But even with a rotation of acquisition, acquisition, Buchholz, Kelly and Miley, there will be some kind of injuries to give the best "kid" or two a chance to make an impression in the rotation.
The trade probably can be judged when we see the makeup of the rotation when the hit Fort Myers in February.
But even with a rotation of acquisition, acquisition, Buchholz, Kelly and Miley, there will be some kind of injuries to give the best "kid" or two a chance to make an impression in the rotation.
amarshal2 said:
If you think that I am saying that Miley isn't an upgrade, you haven't understood what I've been saying. I've said it several times now. I'm not going to do it again.
Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
This is an intriguing possibility.
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Yes, and I'll apologize for the stridency. I'm tired and cranky and taking it out on you all. Sorry 'bout that.
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Yeah, this.
But Porcelain Porcello (if we get him, can we call him The Doll or Dollface?) can be a free agent in 2016 and the Sox could extend him a QO which he refuses, take the comp pick, and go with Shields, Buch, Miley, Kelly, Kid in 2016.
Nah. 2 of the "9" are gone and they were future relievers anyway. Most of the rest are clearly inferior to 4 of the guys on that list (sorry Joe), bullpen arms, or are far away. You've basically got Owens, EdRod, and Brian Johnson to worry about. Buchholz isn't going to pitch the full season and someone else is bound to miss time. Let them battle it out in AAA to get the MLB starts. If someone forces their hand at the MLB level, great. He'll get a shot. It's way better than planning on relying on any of those guys to get 200BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
innings.
Yeah, "he's not what we need!!!!!" I get it. Nobody else agrees we don't need a guy like him to fill out this staff.Rasputin said:
But you can't find out the ones you want unless you give them major league innings .. And not just cups of coffee .. and those innings just dried up.Darnell's Son said:
I don't think its a terrible trade. And quite frankly it's better to trade from this surplus before they prove they can't pitch. The trick is to trade the right guys. They may very well have done so. I'm starting to get the feeling two or three more may be gone before long as well.
Darnell's Son said:
No it isn't. It very very much isn't. The Sox as an organization cannot think of one season to the exclusion of others. The 2016 season isn't less important than the 2015 season just because it's further away.
Here is a fun one: I know there was talk of Mike Leake earlier.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=8779,10130
By pure RA9-Value, they are similar. FIP love Miley's 2012, but they are shockingly similar.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=8779,10130
By pure RA9-Value, they are similar. FIP love Miley's 2012, but they are shockingly similar.
They'll get shots thanks to injuries. I would rather not go into a season with our offense with a question mark in one of the rotation spots. What if it takes three kids to flame out before we find the one that is good enough to stick? How many unnecessary losses is that?BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
If you are very lucky, then half of your pitching prospects turn into Wade Miley. With the number of pitching prospects coming up the redsox didn't have time to find out which one (or either or both) of Rubby or Webster was going to do it, so they sacrificed some years of control to make it happen immediately.
KC came within one out of winning the World Series with a rotation of Shields/Guthrie/Ventura/Vargas/Duffy. So I guess we try to match that?Hank Scorpio said:
There are many ways to construct a good team that do not involve having a great top of the rotation, just as their are ways without a great shortstop or a great closer or a great lead off man.
Lowrielicious said:
Why didn't they have the time?
I'm pretty sure they both have options so you could have, for example, given de la Rosa the job out of Spring Training as his last chance to seal the deal as a starter and if it didn't work, move him to the 'pen to bring up Webster who would also get a couple months. That takes you to the trade deadline and Owens would probably have had enough innings in AAA that it would be reasonable to call him up if Webster didn't cut it.
Rasputin said:
I agree with this but they should probably target the best SP expiring contract that Cespedes will buy. Given the franchises's aversion to paying the going rate for free agent pitchers, it's possible if not likely that, even if they could acquire Cueto or Zimmerman, they would let them walk into free agency unless pitchers that good will sign extensions within Sox limits. If this pitcher leaves in free agency, there will be no impediment to these studs from taking a rotation spot next season after what will hopefully be full seasons at AAA with nothing left to prove in the minors after that.
Honest question...if RDLR was the #5 going into the season and pitched well enough to not lose the job, how were the other 8 going to get MLB innings anyways?
The only way this makes any difference is if RDLR were to fail to keep his starting spot.
You can be upset at losing RDLR'S talent or you can be upset at blocking the young kids, but I don't understand how you can be upset about both.
The only way this makes any difference is if RDLR were to fail to keep his starting spot.
You can be upset at losing RDLR'S talent or you can be upset at blocking the young kids, but I don't understand how you can be upset about both.
LahoudOrBillyC said:
And the team that did win the World Series only had one guy with them the whole season that had an ERA+ over 100 which, incidentally, is largely why the Royals got so close to winning it.
If we get two guys at the top, we're going to have a decent chance of going deep in the playoffs. The offense should be strong. The bullpen should be strong. The defense should be strong. The rotation should be pretty good and pretty deep.
Sure but you likely just took a significant hit to the rotation for the year. There isn't any good reason to believe that any combination of RDLR and Webster would put up the numbers Miley is likely to. Even then, you haven't opened up a spot for anyone else if RDLR pitches ok but not at Miley's level.Rasputin said:
Cellar-Door said:
Yeah, and?
Figuring out which of the kid pitchers is good enough to stick is one of the more important things the organization has to do heading into The Next Great Red Sox Team (TM). If it makes us slightly less likely to win in 2015 and 2016, we have to be okay with that.
Rasputin said:
What you haven't done is explain how you think this trade stops us from doing that.
That's what July, August and September 2014 were for. Farrell watched these two kids pitch all summer long. And now they're gone.Rasputin said:
Rasputin said:
And how many starts do you expect those 5 guys to make next year? I'd take the under on 150. How about relief innings? And this trade opens up a AAA spot for one of the kids that would have been stuck in AA. Wasting innings on a prospect with nothing left to prove in AA seems counter productive.
After the investments made towards improving the offense I really hope they don't feel the same as you. An above average rotation with our lineup should be able to win the division for the next two years.Rasputin said:
Rasputin said:
If you think that the opening day rotation makes it through the season without injuries/sucking than the Red Sox did pretty well. If one of the kids pitches out of his mind then awesome - great problem to have - and you can make a spot for him. I'm not too worried about the kids being "too good." That almost never happens, and if it does there's usually a pretty easy fix.
And if Rubby still hasnt shown anything as a starter in the 50-60 innings you have 2-3 wins from those starts rather than 5-6 that a good starter would have got you. And he has lost a ton of trade value. But you get a decent mid-bullpen guy I guess.Rasputin said:
Maybe the redsox had seen enough already.
Rasputin said:
Guy 1 and Guy 2 are going to cost you 300 million dollars. Or 200 millions dollars and trading a good chunk of your kids. Then you don't need spots for your kids.
This isn't a real problem. This is like when Grady Sizemore was blocking JBJ. It's probably not going to be an issue and if it is then great(!) but it's easy to find a way to figure it out. There's always a way to work the Mookie Betts into the lineup when he forces your hand. The alternative is you risk starting the worst everyday hitter in the AL and kill his confidence/prospect status/value not to mention the team's season.Rasputin said:
Edit: Buch isn't reliable and Joe Kelly isn't good. The rest of the guys south of Owens and maybe EdRod you're worried about have upsides that are lower than Wade Miley. Miley is not the problem here.
Miley has proven to be about a #3 MLB starter.
---
All the following from SoxProspects.com:
Owens: Ceiling of a high end third starter on a first-division team. Floor of a back of the rotation starter.
EdRod: has the ceiling of a number two starter and realistically projects as a mid-rotation starter.
Johnson: Projects as an innings eating, back of the rotation starter.
Barns: third starter projection on a first division team.
Note from am2: And frankly people are split on Barns and many have him going to the bullpen.
Ranaudo: Projects as a back-end starter at major-league level. If fastball command doesn't improve and he doesn't develop a consistent third offering, profiles best in a bullpen role.
----
These are the guys who it's a travesty to block with a guy who's better than most of them will ever be? Really?
If I was a D'Backs fan I'd be pissed. "You traded our best proven young cost controlled MLB starter for two guys who project as relievers? Cmon!"
See I think this is crazy. For a team with the payroll and roster of the Red Sox the idea of making the team less good for two years in the hope that they strike gold and are slightly better in later years is nuts. They should attempt to be the best team they can every year, especially since some of the better position players are either at or past their peak.Rasputin said:
Workman has 18 career starts and 128.2 major league innings despite never starting the year in the rotation.
Webster has 18 career starts and 89.1 major league innings despite never starting the year in the rotation.
Rubby had 18 starts and 101.2 major league innings last year despite not starting the year in the rotation.
Innings will be there for the kids. I don't understand not liking this trade because you think the kids we still have will never get a shot.
Webster has 18 career starts and 89.1 major league innings despite never starting the year in the rotation.
Rubby had 18 starts and 101.2 major league innings last year despite not starting the year in the rotation.
Innings will be there for the kids. I don't understand not liking this trade because you think the kids we still have will never get a shot.
We got a cost controlled innings eater with a career ERA+ of 103 for two guys who are unlikely to amount to much, frankly. And he's lefthanded.
I see no reason to be anything but pleased. I gotta say I feel a lot better about the rotation than I did 24 hours ago.
I see no reason to be anything but pleased. I gotta say I feel a lot better about the rotation than I did 24 hours ago.
