Trade Deadline Approach
- Thread starter tims4wins
- Start date
I see nothing in Sandoval's profile that implies that he's a top of the rotation pitcher or the type of guy you'd trust in the playoffs.
& they'll have like $80m to spend this off season & no real holes. I'd be pretty surprised if they didn't invest at the top of the starting pitching market.
well, it's a LH-hitting infielder
The Red Sox are in agreement with utilityman Eddy Alvarez on a minor league contract, tweets Chris Cotillo of MassLive. He’ll join their top affiliate in Worcester.
The Red Sox are in agreement with utilityman Eddy Alvarez on a minor league contract, tweets Chris Cotillo of MassLive. He’ll join their top affiliate in Worcester.
Yeah, any potential movement of Verdugo likely happens in the off season.
Terrible trade, unless 2024 is a quasi-GFIN year, and/or they're privately convinced Paxton is going to break down or Yorke is a turkey.
That may be. But whatever they choose to do, I hope it's a 180 from what they've done the past 4 seasons, because whatever the plan has been with regards to pitching, its gone horribly. Unless of course the plan was to be really bad at pitching, in which case it has been a massive success.
They've been in the bottom 1/3 of the league in cumulative ERA for the past 4 seasons (averaged out to 21st in MLB) with a high water mark of being exactly average (15th) in 2021. Hopefully there is a massive change in either philosophy or execution of philosophy in building a pitching staff.
They're currently exactly average again this year at 4.30, ahead of the Dodgers and slightly behind the Rangers and Orioles. You can be successful with an average pitching staff and really good lineup.
Timing. We've had these window conversations so many times...but you still constantly advocate for adding guys outside the window who are likely to be overpaid during the window without elite stuff. The Jameson Taillon's of the world.
What they've done the last 4 seasons is put together the underpinnings of a good staff for 2024 with lots of cost-controlled talent & a lot of money to spend on the top of the market, while giving up none of their future to get there, & trying to walk the tightrope of being competitive enough for the Boston market while keeping the window wide open.
& they've been pitching just fine this year - despite having 3 of their top 5 starters injured for significant amounts of time (won't count Kluber here as the problem with him is he's bad at baseball now).
Agreed. Especially in regards to getting to the post-season. But a team could be more successful with above average or even good pitching and a really good line up.
I suppose what it comes down to is I don't see why they can't try to improve / extend the window. I'd rather have "the window" be 2023-2030 as opposed to 2025-2030. Which clearly does not mean giving up top prospects for a two month rental, but for pitchers with term, I think it's a worthwhile discussion.
But either way, I hope you're right and they do deviate from what they've done, and if it's not at this deadline, hopefully for next season. Whether that is investing prospect capital (to trade for pitching), selling of MLB pieces if need be for pitching, or investing in it during the free agent market. Hopefully the strategy changes because it would be a shame to continually
I don't want them giving up prospects for rentals. If there's a deal to be made for a player(preferably a top starting pitcher) with term left that can help both now and in the future, then Bloom needs to dig deeper into his prospect pool and try to get it done. The prospect pool he has is deeper now than at any time in his tenure. He and his team need to decide which prospects to keep and which ones to use in trade to help the ML club.
If the Sox were to do what it takes to land a Giolito or EROD and a good relief pitcher, add Story, I think the team might surprise alot of people.
Since Kluber was removed from the rotation on May 21, the Sox pitching staff is 8th in MLB in fWAR and 7th in ERA and FIP.
Of course, Kluber turning out to be cooked is part of your point and I'll cede that.
But looking at cumulative ERA for the past four seasons, as you're doing here, factors 2020, which is the most meaningless Red Sox season of all time. That was the year that roster moves were literally frozen for months and our two best starters went down without throwing a pitch (one with a serious and non-baseball-related medical condition).
I acknowledge that the 2020 season materially happened, but if we're trying to assess the front office's "plan, philosophy or execution," why would 2020 matter in any sense?
Sox pitching is 16th in MLB from 2021-23 by FIP and 20th by ERA, and the discrepancy has a lot to do with shortstops and first basemen who no longer play for us.
This is true, and it and maybe be why they do in fact give up prospects for rentals. Not premium prospects of the Mayer and Anthony variety, but lesser guys who might end up get plucked anyway in the upcoming 40 man crunch.
Right, but the question is, how much are we upgrading?
Bello/Paxton are fixtures (unless they trade Paxton).
Crawford has been fine. Sale, Whitlock & Houck are all expected back.
Pivetta has been elite in the bulk role. & Murphy hasn't been much worse.
This off season we lose Paxton (unless we don't), & come back with Bello/Sale/Houck/Whitlock/Crawford/Bulk Pivetta/Bulk Murphy & the ability to sign a high-end starter (hopefully Yoshinobu Yamamoto).
Where do the Patrick Sandoval's of the world fit into that equation? Are they significantly better than any of those other 8 options? Like why do I want to give up something that could eventually be a real something to have a 9th option that's roughly equivalent to my 3rd through 8th best options (& I would argue has about the 9th best stuff out of any of those options)?
You may be right. I just don't want them dipping into prospects in the 10-20 range for rentals. If you're talking about a middle reliever or a 5th starter type for org filler, then sure go for it. But for someone like Blake Snell or something like that, I'm not sure I would be into that. I don't think they're that close to winning a World Series to be making those types of moves.
I’d prefer flexing the wallet and saving prospects. Verlander for example. Solves 1.5 seasons for mostly cash.
@RedOctober3829
Thank you for saying succinctly (in both posts) what I am trying to convey in longer paragraphs.
I just happen to use Bleis and Yorke because they are the two prospects are both really good prospects, but also those I happen to think of as somewhat expendable (again, only for good SPs with term) as Meyer, Rafaela, Anthony, Perales and now Teel, and because I don't expect that other GMs are going to give up good SPs with term for bad prospects. If Bloom feels he should trade Rafaela, Romero and Drohan instead for a starting pitcher wiht term, fine.
@chawson - I actually agree with you about the worthlessness of 2020 and the meaninglessness of that Dodgers title. People have just said I shouldn't throw out the season, so I'm trying not to. 2020 was the deadline of Bloom's I've liked the most, though, for the record. That was another team wasn't heading to the playoffs, he correctly sold, got a decent pitcher (Pivetta) in the process, allowed the team to reset it's tax implications AND moved up to be in a spot to land Marcelo Mayer. If he'd done something similar last year, I probably wouldn't have as many questions about his philosophy as I did heading into this season.
For what it's worth, Sale was expected back last year. Then he was expected to be healthy all this year. I'm sorry, but I'm completely done counting on Chris Sale for anything except being a really good teammate and a stand up and accountable guy - which for all reports he seems to be. I was saying I didn't expect him to be healthy this year in the off-season as well, so it's not knee jerk to this recent injury. His delivery is violent, he's on the wrong side of 30, he's had a ton of injuries and he's not exactly built like Jon Lester. If he comes back, awesome. I was in no way counting on him for 2023 and I'm in no way counting on him for the rest of 2023 or 2024. (To be fair, I wasn't counting on Paxton for anything either, and I would not be the least bit shocked if he gets hurt in his next start, but he's been great so while I was right about Sale, I was wrong about him. I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong; when it benefits the Sox, I'm happy to do it).
While I agree totally with them trying to start Whitlock this year, I think we've seen that his body can't hold up to being a starter either. They should move him to the 'pen (I was wrong, I wanted him as a starter, I think I projected he'd have the most wins on the staff this year. I was totally wrong).
On Sandoval, if they traded for "just him" (which I'd be more than fine with):
His FIP is 3.99 (this year). Which is not quite as good as Paxton's (3.70) but better than Whitlock (4.50) Bello (4.36), Crawford (4.33), Houck (4.23) and I think he's a heck of a lot more likely to be pitching in August and September and most of 2024 than 34 (and 35) year old Chris Sale coming off yet another injury. To be clear, even with the FIP I don't think he's better than Bello. I do think he's a better starting pitcher than the others.
2023 regular season rotation - Bello, Paxton, Sandoval, Crawford, bulk Pivetta. Possibly Houck if he does in fact come back in August, but him vs Bulk Pivetta is an interesting conversation. Hopeful 2023 playoffs of Bello, Paxton, Sandoval and then make a call on Houck or Bulk Pivetta. Crawford has assuredly been fine - but he was FINE (if you get the emphasis) in the bullpen, so I think that is where he'd head for the playoffs.
2024 would be Bello, Sandoval, Houck, Crawford, bulk Pivetta as is. I'd still like to see them go out and get a top tier FA (agree on Yamamoto but if Bloom says "Julio Urias" or "Aaron Nola" I'm not going to argue) to then move one of bulk PIvetta, Crawford or Houck back to the 'pen (in that order), for the record.
Thank you for saying succinctly (in both posts) what I am trying to convey in longer paragraphs.
I just happen to use Bleis and Yorke because they are the two prospects are both really good prospects, but also those I happen to think of as somewhat expendable (again, only for good SPs with term) as Meyer, Rafaela, Anthony, Perales and now Teel, and because I don't expect that other GMs are going to give up good SPs with term for bad prospects. If Bloom feels he should trade Rafaela, Romero and Drohan instead for a starting pitcher wiht term, fine.
@chawson - I actually agree with you about the worthlessness of 2020 and the meaninglessness of that Dodgers title. People have just said I shouldn't throw out the season, so I'm trying not to. 2020 was the deadline of Bloom's I've liked the most, though, for the record. That was another team wasn't heading to the playoffs, he correctly sold, got a decent pitcher (Pivetta) in the process, allowed the team to reset it's tax implications AND moved up to be in a spot to land Marcelo Mayer. If he'd done something similar last year, I probably wouldn't have as many questions about his philosophy as I did heading into this season.
For what it's worth, Sale was expected back last year. Then he was expected to be healthy all this year. I'm sorry, but I'm completely done counting on Chris Sale for anything except being a really good teammate and a stand up and accountable guy - which for all reports he seems to be. I was saying I didn't expect him to be healthy this year in the off-season as well, so it's not knee jerk to this recent injury. His delivery is violent, he's on the wrong side of 30, he's had a ton of injuries and he's not exactly built like Jon Lester. If he comes back, awesome. I was in no way counting on him for 2023 and I'm in no way counting on him for the rest of 2023 or 2024. (To be fair, I wasn't counting on Paxton for anything either, and I would not be the least bit shocked if he gets hurt in his next start, but he's been great so while I was right about Sale, I was wrong about him. I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong; when it benefits the Sox, I'm happy to do it).
While I agree totally with them trying to start Whitlock this year, I think we've seen that his body can't hold up to being a starter either. They should move him to the 'pen (I was wrong, I wanted him as a starter, I think I projected he'd have the most wins on the staff this year. I was totally wrong).
On Sandoval, if they traded for "just him" (which I'd be more than fine with):
His FIP is 3.99 (this year). Which is not quite as good as Paxton's (3.70) but better than Whitlock (4.50) Bello (4.36), Crawford (4.33), Houck (4.23) and I think he's a heck of a lot more likely to be pitching in August and September and most of 2024 than 34 (and 35) year old Chris Sale coming off yet another injury. To be clear, even with the FIP I don't think he's better than Bello. I do think he's a better starting pitcher than the others.
2023 regular season rotation - Bello, Paxton, Sandoval, Crawford, bulk Pivetta. Possibly Houck if he does in fact come back in August, but him vs Bulk Pivetta is an interesting conversation. Hopeful 2023 playoffs of Bello, Paxton, Sandoval and then make a call on Houck or Bulk Pivetta. Crawford has assuredly been fine - but he was FINE (if you get the emphasis) in the bullpen, so I think that is where he'd head for the playoffs.
2024 would be Bello, Sandoval, Houck, Crawford, bulk Pivetta as is. I'd still like to see them go out and get a top tier FA (agree on Yamamoto but if Bloom says "Julio Urias" or "Aaron Nola" I'm not going to argue) to then move one of bulk PIvetta, Crawford or Houck back to the 'pen (in that order), for the record.
Last edited:
The trouble with that is they supposedly intend to reset the luxury tax penalty this year. That goes entirely out the window taking on the roughly $15M still owed to Verlander this season. it would also put a crimp in spending this off-season on a younger pitcher (e.g. Yamamoto, Urias, etc) having to pay Verlander half of their expected freed up payroll.
That's not to mention that Steve Cohen seems unconcerned with burning money. In other words, he isn't going to be looking to shed payroll for the sake of it (or because this season is lost for the Mets), so Verlander would probably cost significant prospects to peel away. Also, Verlander has a no-trade so he might not be willing to leave New York anyway.
Hmm. I don’t know that I love the direction Verlander’s peripherals are headed. K rate way down, BB rate way up, FIP .070 above his (good!) ERA. I’m worried that if his HR rate returned to his career norms, he’d be a very expensive pretty good starter.
It's an interesting discussion. I happen to just like this summation from PitcherList (fun site): "That said, at least for these two years, FIP best tracked ERA in the same season by a significant margin. SIERA was most predictive of ERA going forward, but only marginally more so than xFIP, with FIP providing no predictive value over just looking at a pitcher’s prior ERA. However, none of the ERA indicators were particularly predictive of ERA in the following season. The (baseball) community longs for something better. " https://www.pitcherlist.com/going-deep-the-relative-value-of-fip-xfip-and-siera/
Or, put another way to the old adage of people can find a statistic to support anything.
Also, whatever we're looking at, I'd have to believe major league baseball front offices (almost all of them) are looking at something that make all of our stats look like 2nd grade math. But it's not a question of if whatever the Sox are looking at is better than what we are (it assuredly is), but if it's better than what New York, Tampa, Toronto, Baltimore, Houston, Seattle, Cleveland, LAD, SF, and Atlanta are looking at.
Even for someone that generally questions Bloom, I'm certain he's a better "decision maker" than easily what half the teams in baseball have. I do question if he's better than the decision makers of the teams mentioned above though.
Last edited:
In terms of counting on Sale, or anyone else, you don't. When Sale's healthy, he's one of your 5 best pitchers & you throw him out there & hope for the best. But that's why he's 1 of 8 or 9 options, not 5 options. The problem is paying a large premium for a guy to join the depth mix who isn't a difference maker.
We have? He made all 13 of his scheduled starts. Averaged a bit over 5IP per start (which is pretty average these days). BRef has his FIP at a perfectly reasonable 4.23. Fangraphs xFIP 3.82.
Do relief pitchers have stronger facebones?
Sure, but overall the "None of the ERA indicators were particularly predictive of ERA in the following season" summation. Which is why I said I'm sure that Bloom (and almost all other GMs) are looking at things so far beyond what we have.
Shoot, I meant Whitlock. Sorry, thanks for pointing it out @joe dokes, editing it now. FWIW, I like the idea of leaving Houck in the rotation and seeing if he can continue to develop his arsenal to get through the line up multiple times.
Shoot, I meant Whitlock. Sorry, thanks for pointing it out @joe dokes, editing it now. FWIW, I like the idea of leaving Houck in the rotation and seeing if he can continue to develop his arsenal to get through the line up multiple times.
Teoscar Hernandez is a talented righty outfield bat rental almost certain to move. Paul Sewald is a big time bullpen arm that still has a year and a half of team control. Those two straight up for Verdugo works and I think it makes the Sox better up and down the roster, but according to the trade sim actually shorts the Sox, so when I played with the sim I made it a three teamer with the white sox and brought back Giolito and old friend Joe Kelly. I sent out Walter to the White Sox and Seattle sent an SP prospect to the White Sox as well and that deal worked. Seattle gets a year and a half of a cost controlled dugo + salary relief essentially for Sewald and a prospect. They should do that all day. White Sox flip two rental arms for two B+ prospects. Red Sox get a bullpen infusion, back end starter, and the OF becomes more balanced.
It's a lot of rentals for Chaim, but he talks about keeping the core, and this deal does that. I for one don't think Chaim has Verdugo in the long time core...
It's a lot of rentals for Chaim, but he talks about keeping the core, and this deal does that. I for one don't think Chaim has Verdugo in the long time core...
Ok... so you used FIP to explain why Sandoval was a better pitcher than all of our other options... but when I use xFIP to explain why he is the worst of all the options, we can no longer use statistics to predict things.
It also literally says in that article "SIERA and xFIP were far more predictive of a pitcher's ERA in the next season than his ERA or FIP the season before".
I've already explained why his poor fastball, low strikeout rates & high walk rate concerns me. What about him as a pitcher has you optimistic?
They should make SIERA easier to find. Anyway, here's the same list with SIERA...
Sale 3.47
Paxton 3.52
Pivetta 3.68
Whitlock 3.87
Crawford 3.89
Murphy 3.91
Bello 4.08
Houck 4.14
Sandoval 4.78
So no, I don't want to trade SoxProspects #2 Red Sox Prospect (my #3), for the guy at the bottom of those lists.
Sale 3.47
Paxton 3.52
Pivetta 3.68
Whitlock 3.87
Crawford 3.89
Murphy 3.91
Bello 4.08
Houck 4.14
Sandoval 4.78
So no, I don't want to trade SoxProspects #2 Red Sox Prospect (my #3), for the guy at the bottom of those lists.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply in any way that your statistic wasn't valid. It was more that I think there are a lot of statistics out there that may of us use to try and back up our points as we're all trying to make well thought out arguments about why we like (or don't like) something having to do with our favorite baseball team (and God bless guys like @jon abbey that are here as Yankee fans or others).
Anyway -
1) I like the fact that since becoming a regular part of the rotation, he has out performed his xFIP each year (I'll try to stick to your stat). In 2021 he had a 3.62ERA and a 3.79 xFIP; in 2022 it was 2.91 vs 3.67; this year it's 4.16 and 4.41.
2) I really like that he consistently limits hard contact, and has done it for the past 3 seasons. (https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/patrick-sandoval-663776?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb)
3) I like that he keeps the ball on the ground. Not as much as Bello (which is part of why I love Bello,), but a bit more than Houck, a good bit more than Whitlock, and much more than Crawford, Probably doesn't help as much in those huge parks out West, but I like that for the AL East. Though admittedly our defense this year has been atrocious, but I do think that will improve with Story, Rafaela, Meyer, Yorke, Meidroth and Yorke on the horizon. At least I hope it will. I'm a big fan of starters that give up less than 1 HR per 9ip, really helps to keep teams in the game when you have an offense like I hope the Sox are putting together.
4) Small sample size alert, but I like that he's done well against other AL East teams (2.38ERA vs Baltimore; 3.93 vs NY; 6.00 vs Toronto - obv not good; 2.65 vs Tampa).
5) He's a LHP, and I tend to believe those take longer to develop, generally speaking. This is anecdotal (I think) so probably has no place on the main board and if someone wants to delete this, no qualms.
That's more than fair @Sandy Leon Trotsky. Hahaha. It's like not being able to look at Kyle Hurt for the Dodgers because he makes me think of Kyle Hart.
Anyway -
1) I like the fact that since becoming a regular part of the rotation, he has out performed his xFIP each year (I'll try to stick to your stat). In 2021 he had a 3.62ERA and a 3.79 xFIP; in 2022 it was 2.91 vs 3.67; this year it's 4.16 and 4.41.
2) I really like that he consistently limits hard contact, and has done it for the past 3 seasons. (https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/patrick-sandoval-663776?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb)
3) I like that he keeps the ball on the ground. Not as much as Bello (which is part of why I love Bello,), but a bit more than Houck, a good bit more than Whitlock, and much more than Crawford, Probably doesn't help as much in those huge parks out West, but I like that for the AL East. Though admittedly our defense this year has been atrocious, but I do think that will improve with Story, Rafaela, Meyer, Yorke, Meidroth and Yorke on the horizon. At least I hope it will. I'm a big fan of starters that give up less than 1 HR per 9ip, really helps to keep teams in the game when you have an offense like I hope the Sox are putting together.
4) Small sample size alert, but I like that he's done well against other AL East teams (2.38ERA vs Baltimore; 3.93 vs NY; 6.00 vs Toronto - obv not good; 2.65 vs Tampa).
5) He's a LHP, and I tend to believe those take longer to develop, generally speaking. This is anecdotal (I think) so probably has no place on the main board and if someone wants to delete this, no qualms.
That's more than fair @Sandy Leon Trotsky. Hahaha. It's like not being able to look at Kyle Hurt for the Dodgers because he makes me think of Kyle Hart.
Last edited:
109 era+ this year, tied for 6th best in baseball. They do have good pitching.
No idea what Seattle’s approach is going to be, but FWIW, as a RF, Teoscar makes a great DH.
Although, as I look, he’s actually above average by OAA and DRS, so what do I know?
EDIT: also not sure why the Ms would want Verdugo when they’ve got Kelenic, Marlowe, and Trammell already.
Last edited:
Well if you think lefties take longer to develop may I interest you in a lightly used Chris Murphy or Shane Drohan?
I agree generally that groundball pitchers who limit hard contact are a good thing, & also agree that predictive stats can underestimate that profile of pitcher.
The difference between a pitcher like Bello & a pitcher like Sandoval though is that Bello has actual swing & miss stuff.
Last year Sandoval was quite good & his 4-seam fastball was 93.1 mph. This year his fastball is 92.5 & he's been not nearly as good. (his sinker has gone from 93.4 to 92.6). He's gone from a guy whose stuff kind of plays to a guy who isn't striking anyone out.
So how are we going to get him back to the guy who was throwing the ball hard enough to strike people out? Do we need to shut him down for a while? Is there an underlying arm problem that is going to require TJ?
'22 Sandoval could be #3 of 9, but '23 Sandoval, & as a result the projection for '24 Sandoval seems pretty clearly #8 or 9 of 9.
I like Murphy quite a bit, actually.
The way Drohan has gotten lit up in Worcester concerns me a little, but I'm with you in that he is easily the "high minors" pitching prospect I want the Sox moving the least. Would I do it for something that I think really helps this year and next year - if he was an ultimatum, then I'd probably do it - but I'd try like heck to get someone to take Mata, Walter, Winckowski or similar first, and it would have to really fill a hole this year and next year (at minimum). I'd suggested Drury earlier when it looked like he'd be back around the end of this month. With still no timetable for him, that would now be a hard pass for me as of today (moving Drohan for him), however. Now if you could pry Kim from the Padres... (that isn't realistic, but just citing an example of someone I'd include Drohan in a deal to acquire off the top of my head).
But it'd have to be something that either fixes the hole at MI2 (the non-Story position) for this year and next year really nicely or for a pitching upgrade with term. Certainly no rentals...
Looking at Sandoval's game logs and splits this year, I'm wondering if a heavy reliance on his curve had something to do with some of his problems. I admittedly do not have any idea how to isolate advanced statistics by month or role, however when you look at Sandoval's splits by month they look like this:
3.16ERA in 5 March/April starts
3.64ERA in 5 May starts
7.11ERA in 5 June starts
1.46 ERA in 2 July starts.
That coincides with a drastic uptick in his curveball usage in June. Admittedly I'm not smart enough to know if that is simple correlation where no causation exists (is it like the old criminology joke that ice cream consumption doesn't cause crime), but it's pretty glaring when you look at his splits this year and his game logs for pitch type. Clearly I'm no pitching coach and I could be way off base there, but again, the increased usage of the curveball - if nothing else - coincides with that huge uptick in ERA for June.
https://www.fangraphs.com/players/patrick-sandoval/19447/game-log?type=6&gds=&gde=&season=&position=P
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=sandopa02&year=2023&t=p
This year by ERA+ they're tied for #4 in the AL with the Yanks and Jays.
In 2022, the season of massive unexpected injuries, they were in the bottom 5 by almost any measure. Perhaps due to the massive unexpected injuries.
In 2021, they were better than average.
In 2020, the 60 game COVID shortened season which nobody really gives a shit about, they were dead last.
So because I wasted five minutes on this, I'll ask. Why would you ever conflate these 4 seasons into "the plan?" And why would you ever confuse 4 discrete outcomes with 4 different plans?
I ask this as a genuine question, is there a "widely accepted" board stat for pitching success or lack thereof?
I cited Sandoval's career ERA+ of 114 as "evidence" as to why I think he's a good pitcher and someone I'd like the Sox to acquire, along with ERA and FIP and the ERA+ wasn't even discussed, which because I greatly respect @JM3 opinion, I kind of took to assume wasn't a reliable stat (but maybe it was overlooked - I'm not trying to call you out, by the way @JM3, which is why I'm trying to make really clear I really enjoy reading your posts because I generally learn something or enjoy the discussion). My intent isn't to try and vilify anyone's stat, but is a question of what is seen as the best pitching statistic to use on the board?
Generally the preference seems to be wRC+, OPS+, fWAR and bWAR in terms of hitters (and overall value) but I don't know what it is for pitchers, and I'd like to so that I can focus on that.
As in if it's xFIP I know this year the Sox are 7th in the AL (Sea, TB, Min, Tor, Bal, Hou, Bos).
For ERA they're 9th (TB, Hou, Min, Sea, Cle, Tor, NYY, Bal, Tex, Bos).
For FIP they're 10th.
For ERA- (I've only seen that on FG, but I happen to like it since the lower the number the better, like ERA metrics) they're 9th.
I haven't looked at ERA+ because I just assume @Rovin Romine is correct and they are 4th.
Is there widely accepted stat?
I cited Sandoval's career ERA+ of 114 as "evidence" as to why I think he's a good pitcher and someone I'd like the Sox to acquire, along with ERA and FIP and the ERA+ wasn't even discussed, which because I greatly respect @JM3 opinion, I kind of took to assume wasn't a reliable stat (but maybe it was overlooked - I'm not trying to call you out, by the way @JM3, which is why I'm trying to make really clear I really enjoy reading your posts because I generally learn something or enjoy the discussion). My intent isn't to try and vilify anyone's stat, but is a question of what is seen as the best pitching statistic to use on the board?
Generally the preference seems to be wRC+, OPS+, fWAR and bWAR in terms of hitters (and overall value) but I don't know what it is for pitchers, and I'd like to so that I can focus on that.
As in if it's xFIP I know this year the Sox are 7th in the AL (Sea, TB, Min, Tor, Bal, Hou, Bos).
For ERA they're 9th (TB, Hou, Min, Sea, Cle, Tor, NYY, Bal, Tex, Bos).
For FIP they're 10th.
For ERA- (I've only seen that on FG, but I happen to like it since the lower the number the better, like ERA metrics) they're 9th.
I haven't looked at ERA+ because I just assume @Rovin Romine is correct and they are 4th.
Is there widely accepted stat?
Last edited:
ERA+ is a fine way to explain ERA compared to league average ERA. But in terms of predictability, it's only as reliable as you expect the ERA to be.
There's lots of different things I look at to form my opinions, but they are only a fraction of what major league evaluators look at obviously.
The biggest issue with Sandoval, to me, is the downward trend. Could it be a downtick that he'll bounce back from? Sure. Could he need surgery & after sitting out a year be back to his '22 pitching? Sure. Could this just be the new normal & his stuff just isn't good enough to miss bats anymore? Sure.
If you swap his '22 & '23 seasons, you have a player who is getting significantly better year over year after developing additional velocity, lowering his ERA, increasing his k/9, etc. That's a really cool pitcher profile.
Just averaging those 2 scenarios, you get the exact same pitcher, but it ignores the trendline.
There's lots of different things I look at to form my opinions, but they are only a fraction of what major league evaluators look at obviously.
The biggest issue with Sandoval, to me, is the downward trend. Could it be a downtick that he'll bounce back from? Sure. Could he need surgery & after sitting out a year be back to his '22 pitching? Sure. Could this just be the new normal & his stuff just isn't good enough to miss bats anymore? Sure.
If you swap his '22 & '23 seasons, you have a player who is getting significantly better year over year after developing additional velocity, lowering his ERA, increasing his k/9, etc. That's a really cool pitcher profile.
Just averaging those 2 scenarios, you get the exact same pitcher, but it ignores the trendline.
The whole Chris Martin conversation I think is a pretty good example of how I think about pitching...
I'll spoil my posts on the subject because it's basically just a brag post about a guy with a 1.44 ERA & 2.74 xFIP.
I'll spoil my posts on the subject because it's basically just a brag post about a guy with a 1.44 ERA & 2.74 xFIP.
If Ohtani really is 100% out the door after the season, & if some of the proposed trades out there have any semblance of reality, they're making a franchise killing decision not trading him.
But it is more fun this way.
Thanks @JM3 - do you follow ERA- as well? I happen to like it because 1) it's on Frangraphs which 2) makes it easier to find and 3) to me at least it's more intuitive because like ERA, FIP, xFIP, etc, etc, the lower the number the better (as opposed to ERA+ which is counter intuitive because of higher being better in regards to pitching).
To the best of my knowledge, the biggest reason I like ERA- is that it shows how much better the pitcher was than the league average as opposed to ERA+ because it tells how much better (or worse) the league was to the pitcher. A nuanced difference, but one that I think makes sense. There could be better reasons for it, but that is the one I really like.
I've been hesitant to post that for pitching performance because Fangraphs is the only place I've seen it widely used (or easily found) and ERA+ seems to be cited more on here, so I've been trying to use that even though I personally like ERA- more. However, here is a discussion on ERA- vs ERA+ if anyone is interested (https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2012/9/14/3332194/era-plus-vs-era-minus)
Brag away on Martin, he's been excellent.
I also agree with your spoiled post about the human element of bullpens and pitchers, and that's why I was such a big fan of the Jansen signing - and really do believe that teams should spend on an actual proven closer. They have their own limitations as well, but I do think there is something to slotting a guy in at the back and allowing managers to mix and match with other pieces while having defined roles. Baseball players are certainly creatures of habit.
But I also do still firmly believe that in what I'll at least sum up as "not the back end" of the bullpen, teams are better served spending nothing on the bulk of the bullpen - at least if they're going to adhere to the Luxury Tax at all - if you're going to spend like the Yankees, go nuts.
Which means either using guys from your own system before giving them money to try and find Papelbon and Bard (or Whitlock and Murphy if one prefers) or just throwing a bunch of cheap stuff against the wall until you find what sticks. Or, put another way, I'm not the least bit surprised that the team has gotten more from Bernardino, Winckowski, Schrieber, Walter and Sheriff while getting nothing from Bleier (or Matt Barnes), Rodriguez and Brasier.
I'd rather use their money elsewhere.
*As an aside, it's why I really like the Hernandez deal and actually like the acquisition of Llovera. Get as many dirt cheap guys as possible to throw at the bulk of the bullpen and see what sticks. I'd MUCH rather them do this than give up even a top 30 prospect or spend $2m on "Kendall Graveman" or whatever. I think the resources can be better allocated elsewhere.
To the best of my knowledge, the biggest reason I like ERA- is that it shows how much better the pitcher was than the league average as opposed to ERA+ because it tells how much better (or worse) the league was to the pitcher. A nuanced difference, but one that I think makes sense. There could be better reasons for it, but that is the one I really like.
I've been hesitant to post that for pitching performance because Fangraphs is the only place I've seen it widely used (or easily found) and ERA+ seems to be cited more on here, so I've been trying to use that even though I personally like ERA- more. However, here is a discussion on ERA- vs ERA+ if anyone is interested (https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2012/9/14/3332194/era-plus-vs-era-minus)
Brag away on Martin, he's been excellent.
I also agree with your spoiled post about the human element of bullpens and pitchers, and that's why I was such a big fan of the Jansen signing - and really do believe that teams should spend on an actual proven closer. They have their own limitations as well, but I do think there is something to slotting a guy in at the back and allowing managers to mix and match with other pieces while having defined roles. Baseball players are certainly creatures of habit.
But I also do still firmly believe that in what I'll at least sum up as "not the back end" of the bullpen, teams are better served spending nothing on the bulk of the bullpen - at least if they're going to adhere to the Luxury Tax at all - if you're going to spend like the Yankees, go nuts.
Which means either using guys from your own system before giving them money to try and find Papelbon and Bard (or Whitlock and Murphy if one prefers) or just throwing a bunch of cheap stuff against the wall until you find what sticks. Or, put another way, I'm not the least bit surprised that the team has gotten more from Bernardino, Winckowski, Schrieber, Walter and Sheriff while getting nothing from Bleier (or Matt Barnes), Rodriguez and Brasier.
I'd rather use their money elsewhere.
*As an aside, it's why I really like the Hernandez deal and actually like the acquisition of Llovera. Get as many dirt cheap guys as possible to throw at the bulk of the bullpen and see what sticks. I'd MUCH rather them do this than give up even a top 30 prospect or spend $2m on "Kendall Graveman" or whatever. I think the resources can be better allocated elsewhere.
Last edited:
If there were a "rec" button, I'd hit it for this take. For sure, you are correct. @Big Papi's Mango Salsa take is much about hyperbole. You can't possibly say the FO hasn't done a good job developing pitching. Bashing on the Kluber signing is common, but he was not really going to be relied upon. Just because he was in the starting rotation at the beginning of the year didn't mean that the Sox really thought he was a full time rotation guy. My sense is that they signed him, hoping to get about 10 starts out of him, buying time for other starters to emerge.