Sox send Miley to Seattle for Smith (RP) and Elias (SP)

koufax37

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,474
The AL East isn't the best place for a 37 year old who hasn't pitched in a year and a half to try to try to make a comeback.
Lee's mechanics and command would make me view him as a prime candidate for a successful early recovery period from TJS. Not that it will take him less time to get back to the mound, but I would take the over on his performance his first six months back on the mound.

At his age there are a lot of factors health and stuff wise, but his likelihood to stay healthy would be a bigger concern than my expectations of his post-surgery performance when healthy.

Count me in the cautiously optimistic group if they can see him throw and are pleased there aren't huge red flags when they see him in person. I think the concerns about AL East and performance and "try to make a comeback" probably aren't so great. If healthy I expect he will pitch well for someone, and if not healthy he won't pitch. I think the chances of him pitching and pitching poorly are pretty small.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,027
AZ
c. I didn't because it was not part of my point. I simply chose not to. Based on what you just wrote, you are valuing Miley less than I am. Miley eats your innings and those are the innings Buchholz et cetera have to fill now. For the record, Miley (who doesnt pitch that well as you opined) had a higher WAR than Smith in 2015. 2.6 vs. 2.1. So he was 0.5 wins more valuable than Smith. You could interpret that differently, but for me it comes down to that stat.
I don't think you're taking into account the cost savings. The Red Sox shed $14 million of payroll. They can buy wins elsewhere with that. This is also a multi-year deal, and the wins Smith and Elias are giving you are close to free, because they are cost controlled. Unless you have a better option on the bench that you otherwise wouldn't play who can do better in the same innings, even 1 win from a $500,000 player is pretty good. Miley is moderately cost controlled -- if he gives the Mariners 5 wins over the next two years for $12 million, they will have done great. But it's only two years. After that, he'll get paid as a free agent, which means by definition he'll be paid precisely for exactly how the market values his likelihood to save runs. Smith will make $8 and maybe $15 million or so over the next 5 years. He doesn't need too many wins to prove a higher value than Miley (and, obviously, the more he makes in his arbitration years, the more value he would have provided). Even 5 wins over 5 years, and he's given more value than Miley is expected to.

I also don't think you're really grappling with the resources point. They had a surplus of starting pitchers. So, if you want to ask what Miley's value (using WAR again) would be next year, you can't just say "steamer projects him at 2.1 wins, so that's what the Red Sox gave up." The point is that whatever innings Miley would have pitched now will be pitched by an asset they already have and have already committed to pay. Let's say Miley would have pitched 175 innings. The Sox were in position that they didn't need to go out on the market and pay anyone anything to fill up those 175 innings. They will be pitched now by players already under control who otherwise wouldn't have been playing those innings. Let's say maybe Kelly, or a combination of Kelly, Wright, Owens, whatever. Those guys also will accumulate WAR in those same 175 innings that they otherwise wouldn't have. And, indeed, WAR is really not all the difficult to accumulate for starting pitchers. A replacement pitcher, is, by definition, not very good. He's someone who costs no significant assets to acquire. For pitchers, he has a win percentage of about .380. A team of replacement players wins like 46 games. It changes year to year, but replacement FIP was something like 4.40 last year. For a pitcher (or group of starting pitchers) who pitch 175 innings, it doesn't take that much to start accumulating WAR. Even a pretty much repulsive 4.30 FIP means you're picking up runs over replacement, and the more innings you pitch the more runs (wins) that gives you. That's why a guy like Aaron Harang can put up a 4.83 WHIP (4.89 ERA, 1.39 WHIP) and still find his way to .8 fWAR -- it's because he pitched 172 innings and because the mythical replacement pitchers sucks even worse than that. So, if you want to talk about what we're losing in giving up Miley, it's the delta between the wins he would have given us, and the wins that his replacement, which we already have and who would be on the bench otherwise, is going to give us. That should be a much smaller number, unless you believe Kelly will never be better than replacement level (or, if he is, that the Sox won't find someone better in the system to pitch all or part of those 175 innings). You have to do the same exercise with Smith in reverse -- ask what he gives us over an existing asset that would pitch those 50 to 70 innings. But that's the resources point. The delta there is much likely to be greater, because it was an area of relatively greater need.

Edit: Sorry, I was working on that post off and on over some time, and so didn't notice buzzkill had made the same point about existing staff being capable of taking over Miley's innings at greater than replacement level value.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,696
I'm not even sure that the 1999 Sox bullpen was that great, but IMO Jimy Williams was masterful at knowing when to pull starters and how to manage the pen. I don't think "Farrell and friends" will be quite as masterful as 1999 Jimy, but if the pen stays healthy, it seems good enough that its management may be close to foolproof.
Hopefully this is where Brian Bannister's presence will prove to be useful.
 

gryoung

Member
SoSH Member
Just curious if you're referring to someone other than Rodriquez or if you're thinking Miley's departure solidifies his spot in the rotation.
Little bit of both. Now the 5th spot can be between Kelly/Owens/Johnson with support in Pawtucket. Presents an opportunity to bring along some of the young pitching. I always figured Rodriguez would be in the rotation.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
I'm not even sure that the 1999 Sox bullpen was that great, but IMO Jimy Williams was masterful at knowing when to pull starters and how to manage the pen. I don't think "Farrell and friends" will be quite as masterful as 1999 Jimy, but if the pen stays healthy, it seems good enough that its management may be close to foolproof.
I'm not sure your criticism of bullpen usage is well-founded. Listening to Farrell yesterday - he mentioned a couple of things:

1. How having Smith will take a big load off of Tazawa, who was necessarily abused last year due to a lack of options
2. How constructing a bullpen made of "different looks" and different release points was a priority this year. He compared Kimbrel's arsenal to that of the sinker/slider Smith, to the splitter of Uehara and the different splitter of Tazawa, etc. (too bad they don't have Miller)

Sounds like a guy who knows how to use a bullpen if he has the tools.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,601
Little bit of both. Now the 5th spot can be between Kelly/Owens/Johnson with support in Pawtucket. Presents an opportunity to bring along some of the young pitching. I always figured Rodriguez would be in the rotation.
I would think that after this trade, Kelly would have the first shot at losing that 5th starter spot, and the Owens/Johnson/Elias group would be used to fill in for injuries and Kelly if he falters. Wright would be the short term emergency guy hanging out in the pen, and maybe Elias moves into the pen if they need another lefty at some point and they think he would be better suited to that role. Overall, I think the pitching staff is pretty well setup. Of course I'd love a second ace or almost ace level pitcher, but I don't see that guy showing up under any reasonable trade or signing.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Little bit of both. Now the 5th spot can be between Kelly/Owens/Johnson with support in Pawtucket. Presents an opportunity to bring along some of the young pitching. I always figured Rodriguez would be in the rotation.

Thanks for clarifying. I feel that Rodriquez earned a spot in the rotation, but unless somebody just blows it up in spring training I'm concerned about having two youngsters in the rotation. Especially given Porcello's poor performance last season and the fact that we no longer know what to expect from Buchholz.
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
I'm not sure your criticism of bullpen usage is well-founded. Listening to Farrell yesterday - he mentioned a couple of things:

1. How having Smith will take a big load off of Tazawa, who was necessarily abused last year due to a lack of options
2. How constructing a bullpen made of "different looks" and different release points was a priority this year. He compared Kimbrel's arsenal to that of the sinker/slider Smith, to the splitter of Uehara and the different splitter of Tazawa, etc. (too bad they don't have Miller)

Sounds like a guy who knows how to use a bullpen if he has the tools.
I didn't mean to convey that I think Farrell is poor at managing a pitching staff, just that he's not excellent. My completely unscientific opinion is that he seems average. So yeah, if he has the tools, he'll be fine.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I'm not sure your criticism of bullpen usage is well-founded. Listening to Farrell yesterday - he mentioned a couple of things:

1. How having Smith will take a big load off of Tazawa, who was necessarily abused last year due to a lack of options
2. How constructing a bullpen made of "different looks" and different release points was a priority this year. He compared Kimbrel's arsenal to that of the sinker/slider Smith, to the splitter of Uehara and the different splitter of Tazawa, etc. (too bad they don't have Miller)

Sounds like a guy who knows how to use a bullpen if he has the tools.
Being a new priority this year, bullet point #2 sounds an awful lot more like Frank Wren's input than John Farrell's, IMO.

He's easy to pick on as GM for signing position player to ludicrous deals (starting with Albert Belle!). That being said, the Braves had phenomenal bullpens from 2009-2013, with fangraphs rating them top-five in MLB reliever ERA each year throughout that span. The Braves' worst reliever ERA season during Wren's tenure was his first, when the Braves bullpen finished 19th by WAR, but every other year it's been better-than-average including the terrific, consistent excellence during the main part of his stay there.

Now, it's obviously essential to have a great closer to make a great bullpen usage work under contemporary "rules" of player management, but it's also important that the GM knows how to construct a staff that the manager is able to use. Wren had Soriano, then Wagner, and then Kimbrel. So he started with terrific closers. But he also was able to make the most of other, much lesser lights, such as David Carpenter, Eric O'Flaherty, and Johnny Venters.