Sox acquire Wade Miley for De La Rosa, Webster, and minor leaguer

[joe dokes]

That second point is a huge problem. What are we suppose to do? Blindly trust a team to make good decisions because they "know more than us"? We can't have ideas or criticize them because we don't know as much. I bet you the Red Sox have really no idea on what those players will become because otherwise teams would never regret a trade.
 

 
While it may not qualify as "knowing more than us," anyone who doesn't concede that the Sox, as a whole, are probably much better than you are at pegging which "prospects" (a loosley applied term here given the players' ages and option status) are likely to be good major league pitchers is really overinflating their own abilities.
 
You can call it "knowing more than us" if you want, because for most of us, projecting Webster's and deLaRosa's major league careers is like trying to fly the space shuttle. We don't know what we're doing.
 
So yeah, in the realm of deciding what these two are likely to become, I'll go with "blindly trusting."   This isn't like bunting with 1st and 2nd and nobody out in the 2nd inning of a scoreless game.

 

[theapportioner]

I'm not a huge fan of this deal, but from a probabilistic perspective I can understand it. I think both Webster and RDLR have the potential to be a better starter than Miley is, but I also feel that neither of them are likely to reach that potential. Even from a bullpen perspective, neither is as good a match as Ranaudo or Barnes would be for converting to that role, so I understand Cherington's preference of dealing them. That being said, this deal feels a bit high risk. The upside is Miley performs as a #3 and Webster/RDLR never amount to anything. The downside is if both of them put it together and make this seem very, very, very lopsided. 

 
Here's my guesstimate of the expected value of Miley on the Red Sox, versus RDLR and Webster if they remained on the Sox.
 
Assumptions:
EV(2-3 starter) ~ 3.5 WAR
EV(4-5 starter) ~ 2 WAR
EV(reliever) ~ 1 WAR
 
Miley:
Probability(2-3 starter): 0.5
Probability(4-5 starter): 0.3
Probability(reliever or bust): 0.2
 
RDLR:
P(2-3 starter): 0.33
P(4-5 starter): 0.33
P(reliever or bust): 0.33
 
Webster:
P(2-3 starter): 0.2
P(4-5 starter): 0.4
P(reliever or bust): 0.4
 
EV(Miley) = 0.5(3.5) + 0.3(2) + 0.2(1) = 2.55
EV(RDLR) = 0.33(3.5) + 0.33(2) + 0.33(1) = 2.145
EV(Webster) = 0.2(3.5) + 0.4(2) + 0.4(1) = 1.9
 
EV(RDLR) + EV(Webster) = 4.045
 
I don't see how the Sox come out ahead in this deal, unless they really think Miley will be a top half of the rotation starter here in Boston. There's an opportunity cost to letting the "less proven" RDLR and Webster continue to try out for another year, and there are substitutes for them in the minors (Owens etc.) but in isolation this appears to be a bad deal for Boston.

 

[irinmike]

Webster never struck me as a guy I'd want to have on the mound in a big game, even if he did manage to put it all together.  He looks like a pants-shitter.  For whatever that's worth.

Exactly, why all the love for Webster?  We have a glut of young pitchers that the Red Sox have had plenty of time to assess in person daily.  None of the aforementioned chips in this trade were going to be included in the rotation.  This is only step one in building a decent rotation for 2015.  And it brought the Red Sox a reliable 200 inning ground ball pitcher.  

 

[tims4wins]

 
Here's my guesstimate of the expected value of Miley on the Red Sox, versus RDLR and Webster if they remained on the Sox.
 
Assumptions:
EV(2-3 starter) ~ 3.5 WAR
EV(4-5 starter) ~ 2 WAR
EV(reliever) ~ 1 WAR
 
Miley:
Probability(2-3 starter): 0.5
Probability(4-5 starter): 0.3
Probability(reliever or bust): 0.2
 
RDLR:
P(2-3 starter): 0.33
P(4-5 starter): 0.33
P(reliever or bust): 0.33
 
Webster:
P(2-3 starter): 0.2
P(4-5 starter): 0.4
P(reliever or bust): 0.4
 
EV(Miley) = 0.5(3.5) + 0.3(2) + 0.2(1) = 2.55
EV(RDLR) = 0.33(3.5) + 0.33(2) + 0.33(1) = 2.145
EV(Webster) = 0.2(3.5) + 0.4(2) + 0.4(1) = 1.9
 
EV(RDLR) + EV(Webster) = 4.045
 
I don't see how the Sox come out ahead in this deal, unless they really think Miley will be a top half of the rotation starter here in Boston. There's an opportunity cost to letting the "less proven" RDLR and Webster continue to try out for another year, and there are substitutes for them in the minors (Owens etc.) but in isolation this appears to be a bad deal for Boston.

 
Even if your expected values come true, the EV for RDLR + Webster comes to 2.025 per player, while Miley brings in 2.55. Trading 2 for 1 means there is another roster spot toget the remaining 1.5 that you "lose" in this scenario.

 

[theapportioner]

 
Even if your expected values come true, the EV for RDLR + Webster comes to 2.025 per player, while Miley brings in 2.55. Trading 2 for 1 means there is another roster spot toget the remaining 1.5 that you "lose" in this scenario.

 
That's why I say in isolation. We could add in the lost value from not signing Lester, the "cost" of blocking someone like Owens, additional signings and trades, and many other things. 

 

[JimBoSox9]

 
Here's my guesstimate of the expected value of Miley on the Red Sox, versus RDLR and Webster if they remained on the Sox.
 
Assumptions:
EV(2-3 starter) ~ 3.5 WAR
EV(4-5 starter) ~ 2 WAR
EV(reliever) ~ 1 WAR
 
Miley:
Probability(2-3 starter): 0.5
Probability(4-5 starter): 0.3
Probability(reliever or bust): 0.2
 
RDLR:
P(2-3 starter): 0.33
P(4-5 starter): 0.33
P(reliever or bust): 0.33
 
Webster:
P(2-3 starter): 0.2
P(4-5 starter): 0.4
P(reliever or bust): 0.4
 
EV(Miley) = 0.5(3.5) + 0.3(2) + 0.2(1) = 2.55
EV(RDLR) = 0.33(3.5) + 0.33(2) + 0.33(1) = 2.145
EV(Webster) = 0.2(3.5) + 0.4(2) + 0.4(1) = 1.9
 
EV(RDLR) + EV(Webster) = 4.045
 
I don't see how the Sox come out ahead in this deal, unless they really think Miley will be a top half of the rotation starter here in Boston. There's an opportunity cost to letting the "less proven" RDLR and Webster continue to try out for another year, and there are substitutes for them in the minors (Owens etc.) but in isolation this appears to be a bad deal for Boston.

 
I'm not going to get into the precise math, but this is exactly the wrong way to evaluate a trade in the context of roster-building.  The core constraint is 25 roster spots.  How it impacts WAR per roster spot is going to be more important from trade to trade then the simple exchanged total WAR.  Wade Miley is one person who gives you that WAR by himself.  RDLR and Webster are two people who need two roster spots, one of which could be used on someone better.
 
Plus, certainty.  And everything about Webster screams "I really might figure it out when I'm 29 on my 3rd team".

 

[Hoplite]

This seems like a surprisingly low price for an above average innings eater with three years of team control. I don't feel comfortable judging Miley by his 4.34 ERA because Chase Field is not a friendly place to pitch and the Diamdonbacks were 28th out of 30 teams in defensive efficiency last year. Miley's defensive independent statistics suggest that at the very least his effectiveness remained the same. If you put more weight in xFIP and SIERA, which tend to be the most accurate statistics in predicting future performance when used in sample sizes such as one season, Miley even improved. In fact, Miley's xFIP last year was 32nd among qualifying starters, beating out Shields and Porcello. Miley's SIERA was 39th among qualified starters, beating out Teheran and Porcello.

 

[ctsoxfan5]

If you're a fan of quick workers, you'll like Miley.  In the past three years, the only pitchers who have worked at a faster pace are Buehrle and Dickey.
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=15&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=11,a

 

[semsox]

It seems the D'Backs want one of Anderson Espinoza, Javier Guerra, or Wendell Rijo. Sox are saying no on those 3, so negotiations continue.
 
http://www.azsnakepit.com/2014/12/10/7375325/diamondbacks-trade-miley-to-boston#276728824

 

[InsideTheParker]

Hate to break it to you, but I don't think we're going to land a "#1 or #2 starter".  My bet going forward: we get one of Latos, Ross, or Cashner and sign one of Masterson/Liriano/Santana.  I would say in roughly that order of probability for each.  That ties the FO to no significant dollars long term.
 
Not real in love with trading RDLR and Webster but Wade Miley has an interesting set of tools at this point.  Good GB%, K/9 took a nice jump last year but at the expense of a higher BB/9.  He's a less successful LH version of Tyson Ross.  Given how dramatically McCarthy turned it around after leaving the Diamondbacks this will be an interesting second test as to whether the D-Backs are currently failing to coach up their pitchers.  Should Miley keep his K/9 in the low 8's, get his BB/9 back into the <3 territory, keep the GB% where it's at, and see a more normal BABIP for a GB pitcher he could be great value for the next three years.

Hasn't Liriano already made a deal with the Pirates? Santana has an offer from the Twins, although the agreement isn't final. I wanted McCarthy but he's gone, so I hope the Sox are working on deals with the Reds and/or Padres. The speculation on mlbn is that the Padres want Kemp and will be giving some of their pitching prospects to the Dodgers to send to Phillies for Hamels. It's all very confusing, but it worries me that the Sox might be left with a mediocre rotation.

 

[JayMags71]

I can't disagree with your point but what is Wade Miley in the AL East? 4th starter? 5th starter?

Did you read the rest of the thread?

 

[theapportioner]

 
I'm not going to get into the precise math, but this is exactly the wrong way to evaluate a trade in the context of roster-building.  The core constraint is 25 roster spots.  How it impacts WAR per roster spot is going to be more important from trade to trade then the simple exchanged total WAR.  Wade Miley is one person who gives you that WAR by himself.  RDLR and Webster are two people who need two roster spots, one of which could be used on someone better.

 
I dunno. I get what you are saying, but simply dividing by # roster spots would give some counterintuitive results. For instance, let's say we traded 10 RDLRs for 1 Miley. 21.45/10 = 2.145 < 2.55, so based on that, it would be a better trade for Boston, but I think most people would say that if we gave up 10 RDLRs, we got royally fleeced.

 

[bluefenderstrat]

Savin's on point--there's huge value in being a dependable 32 start, 200 inning guy at league average.   Particularly with what I expect will be a terrific offense in 2015 in support.   Hell, we regretted the Bronson Arroyo deal for years.

 

[joe dokes]

 
 
I don't see how the Sox come out ahead in this deal, unless they really think Miley will be a top half of the rotation starter here in Boston. There's an opportunity cost to letting the "less proven" RDLR and Webster continue to try out for another year, and there are substitutes for them in the minors (Owens etc.) but in isolation this appears to be a bad deal for Boston.

 
Or they "really think" that the likelihood of one or both of Webster and deLaRosa to be productive major league starting pitchers equal to or better than Miley is much smaller than you do.
 
Say what you will about John Farrell as a manger, but the guy has been a pitcher, college pitching recruiter, MLB pitching coach, director of player development. I trust his instincts on the progress and projections of these 2.
 
Nobody, as far as I can tell, thinks Miley sucks. So the Sox aren't going to be able to acquire him for guys who do.  Ruben Amaro may think he has to "win" every trade.

 

[ivanvamp]

If you have this offense (or what we think it will be) and five starters like Miley, you're going to win a LOT of baseball games.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

It seems the D'Backs want one of Anderson Espinoza, Javier Guerra, or Wendell Rijo. Sox are saying no on those 3, so negotiations continue.
 
http://www.azsnakepit.com/2014/12/10/7375325/diamondbacks-trade-miley-to-boston#276728824

 
If this is the worst case scenario for the prospect going out, I'll be okay with the trade. If it's less than that, I think I'll have come around to liking it overall. I don't like including two pitchers who have a higher upside than Miley in the deal, but their downside risk is really large so I get it. Giving up promise, even really exciting promise for more reliable production makes sense for a team hoping to contend. If one of these three is the prospect, that probably make this about an even swap with a pretty good chance the Diamondbacks end up with the best player in the deal in the long run, but that the Red Sox get the better return in the early going. If the prospect is of lesser value, great.

 

[Leather]

 
Why?

 
I suspect a lot of people took a shine to RDLR because of the comments Pedro made about him possibly becoming "someone special."  
 
Looking at his stats, he's the definition of "meh", and at 25 and with portions of 4 ML seasons under his belt, I think it was time for the Sox to either trade kinda high or commit to him, and there's just no room for that commitment on this team.  He's not good enough to rely on.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

To theapportioner: what about Miley's record to date justifies assigning him a 20% likelihood of "reliever or bust"? Do 28-year-olds with an established multi-year track record of average-or-better performance as starters really wind up banished to the pen or washed out of the majors within the next three years 1 out of 5 times? (Not saying it's impossible, just wondering where you got that number from.)

 

[grimshaw]

The Red Sox projected starting 5 are all very tradeable now commodities too.  They don't need to deal any of them, but they could certainly upgrade in June or July like the Cards and A's did.  Even a bipolar guy like Buchholz would fetch a lot.  They just keep stockpiling young, valuable, cheap talent.

 

[DJnVa]

I can't disagree with your point but what is Wade Miley in the AL East? 4th starter? 5th starter?

 

The AL East isn't as good as you are implying here.
 
And the 4th or 5th starter stuff is claptrap. You need 162 starts. This guy gives you (if healthy) 20% of them at better than league average numbers.

 

[Drek717]

 

What's your basis for saying that?  I don't have a crystal ball but I assume that the Sox are trying to reel in someone of the 1/2 ilk.  I understand that Ben has said you don't need an ace (and that there are not many of them), but the Sox have assets to trade and with guys like Cueto, Zimmerman and Hamels potentially available, I would think that they would try.  They also could just use dollars on Shields.  None of this precludes adding Miley and someone like Masterson (Liriano has been re-signed by the Pirates), also.

Topping out at 6/$135M for Lester.  That is pretty much the same AAV as Cole Hamels, so if you view fair market value for Lester, a good comp to Hamels, as $22M you sure aren't giving up a Betts/Swihart/Owens to pay the exact same money to Hamels.  It also is not even in the ballpark of what Scherzer will get, and if that is the value they put on Lester I'd imagine an offer to Shields tops out at 4/$80M, which some team is almost definitely going to top in a market where Lester gets 6/$150M with a vesting 7th.  It says a lot that Lester had such a hard time picking when the gap was that large between the Sox and Cubs, but it says even more that the Sox didn't bridge the gap enough to land him.
 
The recent trends in MLB suggest that pitching is actually becoming less valuable as umpires call low strikes more freely and power declines (maybe from PEDs, maybe not).  The AL East in particular is no longer the pitching meat grinder it used to be.  The Jays added a nice piece in Donaldson to be sure, but Baltimore meanwhile has lost both Cruz and Markakis, really weakening the front end of their lineup.  To me all signs point to the Red Sox believing we're either entering a prolonged period of pitching > offense (as opposed to the 90's and 00's where offense dominated pitching) and therefore aren't willing to pay market rates when they can get 90% of the production for less, or they believe that we're in a brief bubble, the league will correct itself and the cost of pitching will (relative to league-wide inflation) come down.
 
Consider the pitchers they've acquired in the last few months.  Joe Kelly, 26, ground ball pitcher, several years of control remaining, already a productive ML starter, has the raw stuff to be better.  Wade Miley, 28, ground ball pitcher, several years of control remaining, laready a productive ML starter, has peripherals that suggest if he puts his best rate stats (GB%, K/9, BB/9, BABIP) together in one season he'll look damn good.  Notice how much of each description matches?  They also supposedly really like Tyson Ross.  Another guy who meets all these same criteria.
 
So what is it about mid-20's proven starters with good GB rates and pre-FA control that have the Sox so enamored?  The GB rate probably has a lot to do with how small the parks in the AL East tend to be.  Suppressing HRs in any park is beneficial, suppressing fly balls to left and left center in Fenway is especially beneficial.  There is also well below league average foul territory in Fenway, so there are few "free" outs to be had for fly ball pitchers as opposed to what other clubs in other parks benefit from.  It makes sense why they're hunting out this particular tool.
 
Pitchers in their mid-20's also tend to be players who have gotten through the highest risk period for catastrophic injury, while still having the least threat of age related decline.  I don't have any numbers but I'd also be willing to bet the Sox have data suggesting that they're the most likely to take the next step as a pitcher and show improvement from the 3-5 ranks to a legitimate #1/#2 type.
 
Lastly, control.  The Sox clearly don't feel comfortable with market rates for front end pitching.  I'm pretty sure no GM ever has been comfortable with market rates for mid to back of the rotation pitching.  So Cherington is buying a lot of time here with guys like Kelly and Miley.  Three years to be exact (I believe that is what both have until FA).  If the market doesn't offer up more palatable rates and the farm fails to produce worthwhile cost controlled arms the Sox will either need to find a new round of mid-20's guys or suck it up and pay market rates, but this at least lets them see how the market behaves.
 
And who knows, given the glut of #1/#2 types hitting next year's FA class and the unwillingness/inability of teams to extend most of those guys to date we might just see the market correct itself as soon as next winter.  A team that gives Shields 5/$125M might really be kicking themselves when Samardzija takes the same deal next year in a market with at least as many headliners as this year and a hell of a lot more by way of #2 types.
 
My personal gut reaction to this deal is that the Sox are trading two fifty cent pieces and a dime for one dollar, which makes some sense as the club has a glut of mL pitching that needs to prove itself at the ML level and not enough proven ML pitching.  I'd much rather have traded any two of the on-the-verge RH prospects than RDLR or Webster, but then I also can see why it had to be them because Barnes, Ranaudo, and Escobar have more questions than the already questionable Ruby and Webster.
 
I think Ranaudo and Escobar are both destined for the bullpen while Barnes gets another season or two to show the maturation to have a real chance at being a ML starter before he experiences the same fate.  I can't feel too broken up about losing Ruby or Webster when I'm pretty sure Steven Wright could out-produce either one of them for the next 2-3 years while they figure out how to actually pitch.

 

[DJnVa]

How have you determined that Webster and RDLR have higher upside than Miley? I keep hearing this, and I just don't understand how people have come to that conclusion.

 
Isn't our top SP prospect Owens? Soxprospects gives his ceiling as a #3 starter. His ceiling is approximately Wade Miley according to that. His CEILING.
 
RDLR and Webster are not as highly rated, so with my keen powers of insight, I can tell you that their ceilings must not be that high. So, yeah, not sure what the deal is here.

 

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

How have you determined that Webster and RDLR have higher upside than Miley? I keep hearing this, and I just don't understand how people have come to that conclusion.

They both have a wipe out secondary pitch and have demonstrated elite velocity.

 

[JimBoSox9]

 
I dunno. I get what you are saying, but simply dividing by # roster spots would give some counterintuitive results. For instance, let's say we traded 10 RDLRs for 1 Miley. 21.45/10 = 2.145 < 2.55, so based on that, it would be a better trade for Boston, but I think most people would say that if we gave up 10 RDLRs, we got royally fleeced.

 
Absolutely, which is why simply dividing by the # of roster spots isn't at all what you would do*.  That's why it needs to come within the context of your building to an optimal 25 (and 40).  If we're going to be realistic about the projection uncertainty of young pitchers, the Sox are/were carrying a glut of guys who are all currently hovering around a 4th-7th starter median.  What they didn't/don't have is enough arms that reliably projected to contribute at the 1-3 or 2-4 levels.  Using your basic method, in essence what you need to be asking is whether the WAR is more or less efficiently allocated across the 25-man than it was before.   
 
 
*Not all good posts need math, but good posts that do use math are hard, not simple.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
Isn't our top SP prospect Owens? Soxprospects gives his ceiling as a #3 starter. His ceiling is approximately Wade Miley according to that. His CEILING.
 
RDLR and Webster are not as highly rated, so with my keen powers of insight, I can tell you that their ceilings must not be that high. So, yeah, not sure what the deal is here.
 

Neither one is being included in prospect lists anymore due to losing rookie eligibility and even if they were, ceiling is only one factor in writing these lists.

 

[Reggie's Racquet]

Seems like a pitcher like Miley is even more valuable on a team that projects to be very good defensively and has been rebuilt to score runs. It also means we have a left hander in the rotation and while Hammels would be a nice addition we don't have to mortgage the farm for Amaro.

 

[DJnVa]

Neither one is being included in prospect lists anymore due to losing rookie eligibility and even if they were, ceiling is only one factor in writing these lists.

 
That first part is meaningless--whether they're on a list or not has no bearing on what they will turn out to be.
 
And yes there are other factors, but if we're talking about the potential, isn't the bottom line what the team thinks they can be? If our top prospect is projected to be a #3 starter at best, lower rated prospects presumable would be lower. Isn't someone actually producing on the field as that #3 guy worth more than 2 youngers that may get there if things break right?
 
A bird in the hand and all that?

 

[czar]

Neither one is being included in prospect lists anymore due to losing rookie eligibility and even if they were, ceiling is only one factor in writing these lists.

 
In addition, the combination of "overall ceiling" and "projected odds of reaching said ceiling" are a nuance that some appear to be struggling with.
 
For example, many of the people lamenting the proposed trade under the guise of "but RDLR and Webster ultimately have higher ceilings!" are the same people that are saying "Clay Buchholz is a #5 starter." You can conveniently ignore the probability of downside on one hand but empirically bake it into your projections on the other.

 

[mauf]

I didn't read all 300+ posts, but I assume the people who wanted the Sox to acquire 3 SPs instead of 2 are happy. RDLR was the best internal candidate for the 5th starter, so unless BC is comfortable with a rotation of TBD/Buchholz/Miley/Kelly/Workman (with Ranaudo or a STI guy as the fallback if there's an injury), we'll be acquiring 2 more SPs.

 

[Max Venerable]

 
The AL East isn't as good as you are implying here.
 
And the 4th or 5th starter stuff is claptrap. You need 162 starts. This guy gives you (if healthy) 20% of them at better than league average numbers.

 
Miley's 3.98 FIP would make him a top ten AL east starter at the end of last year.  At the moment, the field is pretty weak in this division when it comes to starting pitching.

 

[Unbearable Lightness]

 
I dunno. I get what you are saying, but simply dividing by # roster spots would give some counterintuitive results. For instance, let's say we traded 10 RDLRs for 1 Miley. 21.45/10 = 2.145 < 2.55, so based on that, it would be a better trade for Boston, but I think most people would say that if we gave up 10 RDLRs, we got royally fleeced.

Besides the questionable probability, your math also suggest trading a 3 war #2-3 pitcher for 4 1 war relief pitcher is a good idea.  Is that right?

 

[Quintanariffic]

It seems the D'Backs want one of Anderson Espinoza, Javier Guerra, or Wendell Rijo. Sox are saying no on those 3, so negotiations continue.
 
http://www.azsnakepit.com/2014/12/10/7375325/diamondbacks-trade-miley-to-boston#276728824

 
They damn well better be saying no to that type of ask.  I can understand offering a lower minor lottery ticket in a deal like the Gagne trade with Texas when the main assets were high floor/low ceiling types.  This is very much different, and the Sox should be thinking about a kicker that is well beneath those three in potential value - I'm thinking like Janzen Witte.

 

[Otis Foster]

 
 

Topping out at 6/$135M for Lester.  That is pretty much the same AAV as Cole Hamels, so if you view fair market value for Lester, a good comp to Hamels, as $22M you sure aren't giving up a Betts/Swihart/Owens to pay the exact same money to Hamels.  It also is not even in the ballpark of what Scherzer will get, and if that is the value they put on Lester I'd imagine an offer to Shields tops out at 4/$80M, which some team is almost definitely going to top in a market where Lester gets 6/$150M with a vesting 7th.  It says a lot that Lester had such a hard time picking when the gap was that large between the Sox and Cubs, but it says even more that the Sox didn't bridge the gap enough to land him.
 
The recent trends in MLB suggest that pitching is actually becoming less valuable as umpires call low strikes more freely and power declines (maybe from PEDs, maybe not).  The AL East in particular is no longer the pitching meat grinder it used to be.  The Jays added a nice piece in Donaldson to be sure, but Baltimore meanwhile has lost both Cruz and Markakis, really weakening the front end of their lineup.  To me all signs point to the Red Sox believing we're either entering a prolonged period of pitching > offense (as opposed to the 90's and 00's where offense dominated pitching) and therefore aren't willing to pay market rates when they can get 90% of the production for less, or they believe that we're in a brief bubble, the league will correct itself and the cost of pitching will (relative to league-wide inflation) come down.
 
Consider the pitchers they've acquired in the last few months.  Joe Kelly, 26, ground ball pitcher, several years of control remaining, already a productive ML starter, has the raw stuff to be better.  Wade Miley, 28, ground ball pitcher, several years of control remaining, laready a productive ML starter, has peripherals that suggest if he puts his best rate stats (GB%, K/9, BB/9, BABIP) together in one season he'll look damn good.  Notice how much of each description matches?  They also supposedly really like Tyson Ross.  Another guy who meets all these same criteria.
 
So what is it about mid-20's proven starters with good GB rates and pre-FA control that have the Sox so enamored?  The GB rate probably has a lot to do with how small the parks in the AL East tend to be.  Suppressing HRs in any park is beneficial, suppressing fly balls to left and left center in Fenway is especially beneficial.  There is also well below league average foul territory in Fenway, so there are few "free" outs to be had for fly ball pitchers as opposed to what other clubs in other parks benefit from.  It makes sense why they're hunting out this particular tool.
 
Pitchers in their mid-20's also tend to be players who have gotten through the highest risk period for catastrophic injury, while still having the least threat of age related decline.  I don't have any numbers but I'd also be willing to bet the Sox have data suggesting that they're the most likely to take the next step as a pitcher and show improvement from the 3-5 ranks to a legitimate #1/#2 type.
 
Lastly, control.  The Sox clearly don't feel comfortable with market rates for front end pitching.  I'm pretty sure no GM ever has been comfortable with market rates for mid to back of the rotation pitching.  So Cherington is buying a lot of time here with guys like Kelly and Miley.  Three years to be exact (I believe that is what both have until FA).  If the market doesn't offer up more palatable rates and the farm fails to produce worthwhile cost controlled arms the Sox will either need to find a new round of mid-20's guys or suck it up and pay market rates, but this at least lets them see how the market behaves.
 
And who knows, given the glut of #1/#2 types hitting next year's FA class and the unwillingness/inability of teams to extend most of those guys to date we might just see the market correct itself as soon as next winter.  A team that gives Shields 5/$125M might really be kicking themselves when Samardzija takes the same deal next year in a market with at least as many headliners as this year and a hell of a lot more by way of #2 types.
 
My personal gut reaction to this deal is that the Sox are trading two fifty cent pieces and a dime for one dollar, which makes some sense as the club has a glut of mL pitching that needs to prove itself at the ML level and not enough proven ML pitching.  I'd much rather have traded any two of the on-the-verge RH prospects than RDLR or Webster, but then I also can see why it had to be them because Barnes, Ranaudo, and Escobar have more questions than the already questionable Ruby and Webster.
 
I think Ranaudo and Escobar are both destined for the bullpen while Barnes gets another season or two to show the maturation to have a real chance at being a ML starter before he experiences the same fate.  I can't feel too broken up about losing Ruby or Webster when I'm pretty sure Steven Wright could out-produce either one of them for the next 2-3 years while they figure out how to actually pitch.

 

 
 
Interesting way to look at it.
 
I've previously wondered what impact next year's FA crop would have, and if there was a bubble in 2014-2015 FA spending. If this is how BC currently looks at things, what he's doing makes a lot of sense. He doesn't want to touch Max's demands, and he'll take Shields only at a reasonable level, one, which leaves him sufficient ammo to do business next time around.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
That first part is meaningless--whether they're on a list or not has no bearing on what they will turn out to be.
 
And yes there are other factors, but if we're talking about the potential, isn't the bottom line what the team thinks they can be? If our top prospect is projected to be a #3 starter at best, lower rated prospects presumable would be lower. Isn't someone actually producing on the field as that #3 guy worth more than 2 youngers that may get there if things break right?
 
A bird in the hand and all that?

It's not meaningless. They aren't talked about as prospects with higher ceilings because they aren't prospects anymore.

 

[DJnVa]

It's not meaningless. They aren't talked about as prospects with higher ceilings because they aren't prospects anymore.

 
So when I look at soxprospects at RDLR and Webster and they talk about what their ceiling might be, I ignore that?
 
Anyway, we're onto Porcello.

 

[The Boomer]

 
If this is the worst case scenario for the prospect going out, I'll be okay with the trade. If it's less than that, I think I'll have come around to liking it overall. I don't like including two pitchers who have a higher upside than Miley in the deal, but their downside risk is really large so I get it. Giving up promise, even really exciting promise for more reliable production makes sense for a team hoping to contend. If one of these three is the prospect, that probably make this about an even swap with a pretty good chance the Diamondbacks end up with the best player in the deal in the long run, but that the Red Sox get the better return in the early going. If the prospect is of lesser value, great.

 
In their mid-20's now, you can't assume that Webster and DLR still have higher upsides than what Miley has accomplished entering his prime.  Likewise, even if he stays only one season in Boston, Porcello has accomplished much more at roughly the same age.  Elsewhere I opined that I would be happy with a trade that had that Pavano, Rose and Armas for Pedro vibe.  This is essentially it.  No team may ever again acquire a pitcher as good as Pedro in such a trade but IMO Miley's floor is probably a pretty good # 3 such as Bobby Ojeda (remember him?) but his ceiling could still arguably be reminiscent of Bruce Hurst and Lester (solid No. 2 pitchers with post season chops).  I like this move because it gives me that Pedro trade vibe even if Miley is just a younger and cheaper lefty version of John Lackey.

 

[JimD]

 
Or they "really think" that the likelihood of one or both of Webster and deLaRosa to be productive major league starting pitchers equal to or better than Miley is much smaller than you do.
 
Say what you will about John Farrell as a manger, but the guy has been a pitcher, college pitching recruiter, MLB pitching coach, director of player development. I trust his instincts on the progress and projections of these 2.

 
This.  Farrell has had first-hand experience working with Webster and RDLR - maybe it's as simple as his having seen enough to conclude that the odds of them reaching their potential aren't very good, or that the guys coming up behind them are better bets in his and the organization's opinion.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

I agree with Drek's comments about the desirability of acquiring semi-established, mid-20s starters.  I'd add that a significant benefit of getting solid, young, but not quite star starters with 3 years of control left allows them to evaluate the guy for a year and then consider extending him to a reasonable deal when they still have two-years of leverage to work with.  They avoid the growing pains on the front end and the full market rates/declining years on the back end with such an approach.

 

[IdiotKicker]

Through his age-24 season, albeit in SSS, Allen Webster has shown no ability to get major league hitters out on a consistent basis. He has shown an above-average ability to miss bats, but unfortunately only when hitters chase his pitches out of the zone. When in the zone, he has been a very hittable pitcher, which likely has to do with his poor command. His control is also below-average. Allen Webster at this point is has a ton of talent, but for one reason or another, has shown no ability to translate that into actual pitching at the major league level. I don't think much is being given up here.
 
De La Rosa will be turning 26 next season. While his stuff is off-the-charts, there is nothing to suggest that he is a consistent option in the rotation either. As in, there is actually no statistic I can find that indicates he pitches anywhere near as good as his stuff is.
 
Is there a risk in giving up players like this? Definitely. With their stuff as good as it is, they may finally click and become top-level arms. However, the place where I would be more nervous is if they were several years younger with similar statistical profiles. Giving up guys in their mid-20s who have not been able to contribute consistently at the major league level is not something that is overly concerning to me.
 
We tend to forget that prospects are nothing more than potential. I am not saying that giving up prospects is the way to go in every situation. But with these two guys, they are at an age where you would like to see talent translating into results, and for whatever reason, it has not happened to this point. Thus, even with the risk of them developing into stars with someone else, I am comfortable giving up both of these pieces here.

 

[The Boomer]

I agree with Drek's comments about the desirability of acquiring semi-established, mid-20s starters.  I'd add that a significant benefit of getting solid, young, but not quite star starters with 3 years of control left allows them to evaluate the guy for a year and then consider extending him to a reasonable deal when they still have two-years of leverage to work with.  They avoid the growing pains on the front end and the full market rates/declining years on the back end with such an approach.

 
Yes!  The trend is to give young established players security by buying out the end of their free agency plus a year or two of free agency.  There will be less time to do this for Porcello (who will get them a draft pick if he doesn't extend) but they have a chance to buy those first couple of years of Miley's free agency before he hits the market at age 33 or so.  Kelly fits this profile too except that he is younger.  As I opined elsewhere, acquiring these kinds of pitchers might be the Moneyball market inefficiency that Sox management have recognized to exploit at a time when high OBP hitters, older free agent pitchers and prospects are overvalued.

 

[The Boomer]

Through his age-24 season, albeit in SSS, Allen Webster has shown no ability to get major league hitters out on a consistent basis. He has shown an above-average ability to miss bats, but unfortunately only when hitters chase his pitches out of the zone. When in the zone, he has been a very hittable pitcher, which likely has to do with his poor command. His control is also below-average. Allen Webster at this point is has a ton of talent, but for one reason or another, has shown no ability to translate that into actual pitching at the major league level. I don't think much is being given up here.
 
De La Rosa will be turning 26 next season. While his stuff is off-the-charts, there is nothing to suggest that he is a consistent option in the rotation either. As in, there is actually no statistic I can find that indicates he pitches anywhere near as good as his stuff is.
 
Is there a risk in giving up players like this? Definitely. With their stuff as good as it is, they may finally click and become top-level arms. However, the place where I would be more nervous is if they were several years younger with similar statistical profiles. Giving up guys in their mid-20s who have not been able to contribute consistently at the major league level is not something that is overly concerning to me.
 
We tend to forget that prospects are nothing more than potential. I am not saying that giving up prospects is the way to go in every situation. But with these two guys, they are at an age where you would like to see talent translating into results, and for whatever reason, it has not happened to this point. Thus, even with the risk of them developing into stars with someone else, I am comfortable giving up both of these pieces here.

 
Andrew Miller says hi.  These hard throwers are lottery tickets.  Sandy Koufax was the paradigm for how hard throwing but wild younger pitchers who harness their control can become valuable.  If Webster and DLR find themselves, it will always make the Red Sox a good partner in future trades.  I won't criticize management if the Diamondbacks end up with this best case scenario.  The reality, however, is that they are more likely to end up as decent journeymen or simply wash out.  Nevertheless, many people would prefer to play it safe by swapping their lottery tickets for cash whenever somebody offers.

 

[MentalDisabldLst]

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.

 
Fact: Rick Porcelain is Ice Cube's favorite MLB player.
 
(although Port Cellar wouldn't be a bad nickname either)
 

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.

 
You'd do great in the world of finance.  It would be hard for me to make a non-sarcastic rebuttal to this terrible piece of reasoning, so let me instead say: go read an article on the Time Value of Money.  The same applies to the baseball world because the Sox have to sell tickets today, for this year, and a dollar next year is somewhere between 6% and 15% less valuable to them than one is today.
 

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.

 
This is my take as well, and very well-put.  I was very happy to read about the trade, despite the fact that I liked RDLR's potential.  As Bill Parcells once said, show me a guy who's "got potential" and I'll show you a guy who hasn't done &^%$ yet.  And the real brilliance of the trade is that we get 3 cost-controlled years, during which time what Miley is worth will almost certainly exceed what he is paid.  So unlike Hamels, we get excess value from the player that we acquired.  I see this trade as being much closer to a fleecing in favor of the Sox, than an even trade.
 

I didn't read all 300+ posts, but I assume the people who wanted the Sox to acquire 3 SPs instead of 2 are happy. RDLR was the best internal candidate for the 5th starter, so unless BC is comfortable with a rotation of TBD/Buchholz/Miley/Kelly/Workman (with Ranaudo or a STI guy as the fallback if there's an injury), we'll be acquiring 2 more SPs.

 
Don't worry, the Sox always use rotation protection.

 

[Fishy1]

Understanding that Miley was 32nd, per fangraphs, in xFIP last year, and that Rubby and Webster both have higher upside than him, our understanding of this trade should hinge on a couple of things.
 
1) Prospect logjam:  Rubby and Webster could have made a move to the pen if needed, but there's not going to be enough space for them at AAA. With Johnson, Owens and Rodriguez all moving up, there isn't even room for all of Ranaudo, Wright, Escobar, and Barnes, nevermind those two. Furthermore, the idea that we could have tossed Rubby and Webster into the rotation and 'given them a chance' seems nice until you realize that the second Buchholz or Kelly goes down, we're going to see Ranaudo and Wright out there as well. It's a different story if we'd nabbed Lester or Scherzer, but the ship on Lester has sailed and Scherzer has probably sailed as well: this FO just isn't going to make that move.
 
2) Control: we're getting three years of Miley, as opposed to the 9 we would've gotten (total) from De La Rosa and Webster. That hurts, but thinking about the the logjam above is instructive: it's of course, an immediate problem, rather than a long-term one, and may well have resolved itself (flame-outs, moves to the bullpen, Buchholz kleptomania, Joe-Kelly-prank-gone-wrong, etc.) in the coming years. But how useful that control is of course is predicated on not just whether or not De la Rosa and Webster turn out to be good pitchers, but where they slot in in context of the rest of the pitching we've have. It's not just that there's not room to try all these guys out, it's that there's no need to try all these guys out. If Rubby and Webster really struggle, they're not only hurting the ball club, but they've killed their trade value too. This team needed a sure thing (or as close to a sure thing as you can get), and we've turned a surplus of talented into an extremely cheap top 50 pitcher. I don't think this club makes this deal unless it's got Ranaudo, Wright, Escobar, Barnes, Rodriguez, Johnson and Owens all behind those two.

 

[Drek717]

Through his age-24 season, albeit in SSS, Allen Webster has shown no ability to get major league hitters out on a consistent basis. He has shown an above-average ability to miss bats, but unfortunately only when hitters chase his pitches out of the zone. When in the zone, he has been a very hittable pitcher, which likely has to do with his poor command. His control is also below-average. Allen Webster at this point is has a ton of talent, but for one reason or another, has shown no ability to translate that into actual pitching at the major league level. I don't think much is being given up here.
 
De La Rosa will be turning 26 next season. While his stuff is off-the-charts, there is nothing to suggest that he is a consistent option in the rotation either. As in, there is actually no statistic I can find that indicates he pitches anywhere near as good as his stuff is.
 
Is there a risk in giving up players like this? Definitely. With their stuff as good as it is, they may finally click and become top-level arms. However, the place where I would be more nervous is if they were several years younger with similar statistical profiles. Giving up guys in their mid-20s who have not been able to contribute consistently at the major league level is not something that is overly concerning to me.
 
We tend to forget that prospects are nothing more than potential. I am not saying that giving up prospects is the way to go in every situation. But with these two guys, they are at an age where you would like to see talent translating into results, and for whatever reason, it has not happened to this point. Thus, even with the risk of them developing into stars with someone else, I am comfortable giving up both of these pieces here.

A lot of good points here.  The Sox acquistions of Sandoval and Ramirez is a clear indication that they aren't looking to wait on potential for another couple seasons, they want to win now.
 
Also, the big concern with Webster I have isn't the lack of control or the high BB/9 rate, it's the lack of Ks.  If his stuff is so filthy why can't he fool ML hitters consistently?  His September improvement was a sudden drop in BB/9, not suddenly gaining deception against ML hitters.  Same with Rubby really, his ability to strike guys out declined dramatically as the league saw more of him.  That was my biggest concern with both, the clear inability for all their great raw stuff to fool ML hitters with any regularity.

 

[KillerBs]

It is true, a year or two ago I understood Webster worked in the mid 90s and flashed a bit more, but what we saw was some pedestrian 91-92, with scant command. 
 
On the other hand, Miley was pretty bad in the last 3 mos of the year, walking almost 4 batters per inning and getting hit hard.  Hopefully that doesn't signal who he is now.

 

[phenweigh]

 
Wiley's SIERA last year was 3.67. His FIP- was 104 and his xFIP- was 95.
 
Let's look at the AL East division winners of the past decade and see how many starters each of those teams had who matched or topped at least two of those three marks, while making at least 20 starts.
 
BAL 2014: 0
BOS 2013: 1 (Lackey)
NYY 2012: 2 (Sabathia, Kuroda)
NYY 2011: 2 (Sabathia, Colon)
TBR 2010: 2 (Price, Shields)
NYY 2009: 1 (Sabathia)
TBR 2008: 2 (Shields, Kazmir)
BOS 2007: 2 (Beckett, Matsuzaka)
NYY 2006: 3 (Mussina, Wang, Johnson)
NYY 2005: 2 (Mussina, Johnson)
 
So Miley, by these measures, would have been the third starter on six of the past ten AL East winners, the #2 on two of them, and the ace on last year's. On only one of the ten would he have been a fourth starter.
 
There's a whole lot of underestimating of Miley going on in this thread, and/or a whole lot of overestimating of a typical contending team's starting rotation.

[SIZE=10.5pt]There have been a number of posts that provide a pretty good argument that Wade Miley is likely a significant benefit to the Red Sox rotation.  The quoted post above happens to be my favorite.  I think the positives outweigh the negatives for this trade:[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10.5pt]Positives:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]He works quickly (a strong personal preference of mine)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]Three straight years of at least 190 IP and 29 starts[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]The various metrics that measure his ability in a neutral environment are consistently positive[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10.5pt]Negatives:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]NINE starting pitching prospects are now seven (doesn’t seem like a huge deal)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]Another low level prospect lost (seems like a low probability negative long-term impact)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]His HR/9 rate seems high to me for a purported GB pitcher[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10.5pt]Expanding on the HR/9 rate, for a comp I looked at Derek Lowe in the Red Sox uniform.  To me, Derek seems like a good comp if Savin’s post pans out and Wade becomes a very good but not ace type of pitcher.  So I calculated Derek’s HR/9 rate in a Red Sox uniform and got 0.60.  For his career Derek’s HR/9 rate is 0.7 per baseball-reference.com.  Wade’s HR/9 rate is 0.9 per baseball-reference.com.  Am I right that 0.9 is a warning sign, is Lowe too high a standard for comparison, or is there more to Wade Miley than a GB specialist?  [/SIZE]

 

[diehard24]

[SIZE=10.5pt]There have been a number of posts that provide a pretty good argument that Wade Miley is likely a significant benefit to the Red Sox rotation.  The quoted post above happens to be my favorite.  I think the positives outweigh the negatives for this trade:[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10.5pt]Positives:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]He works quickly (a strong personal preference of mine)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]Three straight years of at least 190 IP and 29 starts[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]The various metrics that measure his ability in a neutral environment are consistently positive[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10.5pt]Negatives:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]NINE starting pitching prospects are now seven (doesn’t seem like a huge deal)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]Another low level prospect lost (seems like a low probability negative long-term impact)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]His HR/9 rate seems high to me for a purported GB pitcher[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10.5pt]Expanding on the HR/9 rate, for a comp I looked at Derek Lowe in the Red Sox uniform.  To me, Derek seems like a good comp if Savin’s post pans out and Wade becomes a very good but not ace type of pitcher.  So I calculated Derek’s HR/9 rate in a Red Sox uniform and got 0.60.  For his career Derek’s HR/9 rate is 0.7 per baseball-reference.com.  Wade’s HR/9 rate is 0.9 per baseball-reference.com.  Am I right that 0.9 is a warning sign, is Lowe too high a standard for comparison, or is there more to Wade Miley than a GB specialist?  [/SIZE]

 
So does the Miley trade represent a bold new direction where the Sox will hang their hats on SIERA, FIP, and XFIP? If this data supports Miley as a clear #3 or even a #2, why didn't the Dbacks get more? With three years of control, why wasn't he more coveted?
 
I know this data has been presented to argue that Miley does, in fact, have solid value, but I think the support is starting to skew away from reality. How valuable would this guy be on the open market? Relative to all starters on all teams? What sort of contract would he reasonably command?
 
Of course we can't answer that definitively, it's just food for thought. This guy didn't appear to be on anyone's radar, but now that he's ours, he seems to be viewed as a front-end starter in virtually any rotation.

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

 
So does the Miley trade represent a bold new direction where the Sox will hang their hats on SIERA, FIP, and XFIP? If this data supports Miley as a clear #3 or even a #2, why didn't the Dbacks get more? With three years of control, why wasn't he more coveted?

Cause Dave Stewart likes ERA, guts and mad-dog stares into home plate.  /spits in spitoon
 
The D-Backs trades thus far lead me to believe their analytics department may be lacking?

 

[joe dokes]

Of course we can't answer that definitively, it's just food for thought. This guy didn't appear to be on anyone's radar, but now that he's ours, he seems to be viewed as a front-end starter in virtually any rotation.
 

 
He didn't really appear to be on our radar, until he was. Its just as likely that the SOX wanted *him* and called AZ as it is that AZ "made it known" (however that gets done in MLB circles) that Miley is available.

 

[soxhop411]

“@SteveGilbertMLB: #Dbacks Dave Stewart on #RedSox deal: ”We’re still squabbling about the extra player. If we can get through that than we’ll be OK.“”