Shields did not give himself the nickname and he has had it since he was in the minors. Channel your disdain somewhere else
Trading for Starting Pitching
- Thread starter ivanvamp
- Start date
Among all qualified starters, here are the 2014 GB% and rank of some of the pitchers rumored to be available:
Ross - 57 (2)
Liriano - 54.4 (6)
McCarthy - 52.6 (14)
Iwakuma - 50.2 (22)
Samardzija - 50.2 (23)
Porcello - 49 (25)
Fister - 48.9 (26)
Hamels - 46.4 (37)
Cueto - 46.2 (39)
Shields - 45.2 (43)
Santana - 42.7 (56)
Lester - 42.4 (57)
Sale - 40.7 (65)
Zimmerman - 40.1 (67)
If Lester doesn't resign, I'd be pretty happy with those top three guys, or three of the top five.
Ross - 57 (2)
Liriano - 54.4 (6)
McCarthy - 52.6 (14)
Iwakuma - 50.2 (22)
Samardzija - 50.2 (23)
Porcello - 49 (25)
Fister - 48.9 (26)
Hamels - 46.4 (37)
Cueto - 46.2 (39)
Shields - 45.2 (43)
Santana - 42.7 (56)
Lester - 42.4 (57)
Sale - 40.7 (65)
Zimmerman - 40.1 (67)
If Lester doesn't resign, I'd be pretty happy with those top three guys, or three of the top five.
I completely agree with this. As nice as it would be to have a legitimate ace in the SP1 slot, there's something to be said for a well-balanced rotation of established veterans with the young arms we have coming up through the system.foulkehampshire said:
The ball is in Lester's court, imho. Adding a Zimmerman, Sale, Cueto, Hamels type would only make us that much better but foulke's rotation gives us a fighting shot especially with the offense we project to have this season.
I had heard his mother gave it to him in little league or some such.swingin val said:
I can't imagine he's particularly thrilled with it now .. But what are you gonna do?
The Bogaerts and Betts thread is a worthwhile discussion, regardless of whether Lester signs here. That said, there is no reason to trade either, The team is fush with deep depth, and the market is rich for what they need, while deficient with what they offer. Fill the rotation and keep the depth. They don't have to win the World Series in the offseason and can be patient and make strategic moves at the deadline. Of the people on the roster, Cespedes is most redundant so he's the only one I clearly see needing to depart.
Deal Cespedes for an arm. Porcello would be my choice because I think he finally figured it out and will maintain what he did in 2014
Deal kids for Smardzija and Doolittle
Re-sign Badenhop
Lester signed great, if not, OK, they deal for another arm later and the need for Victorino and Craig to restore value becomes more significant. Don't spend the money on a fallback free agent, instead wait for deal between now and mid season.
Done
They have redundancy at every position to the point where they would likely start Betts in AAA. That would extend his control window another year while at the same time serving as a window for Victorino and Craig to restore their value. I'd love to have Lester back, but they'll be fine if not.
Deal Cespedes for an arm. Porcello would be my choice because I think he finally figured it out and will maintain what he did in 2014
Deal kids for Smardzija and Doolittle
Re-sign Badenhop
Lester signed great, if not, OK, they deal for another arm later and the need for Victorino and Craig to restore value becomes more significant. Don't spend the money on a fallback free agent, instead wait for deal between now and mid season.
Done
They have redundancy at every position to the point where they would likely start Betts in AAA. That would extend his control window another year while at the same time serving as a window for Victorino and Craig to restore their value. I'd love to have Lester back, but they'll be fine if not.
Yes, and the Sox have the depth to give Beane what he desires. Doolittle is Miller minus $6M in cost, He's worth paying out young talent because what he offers fits precisely with what they need.curly2 said:
What "kids" get it done if Bogaerts and Betts aren't in the deal? I wouldn't do Swihart? would you trade Owens for a reliever locked up but a starter with just one year of team control? I don't know if that's maximizing Owens' value, and it would probably take someone else with him.
Ignoring the fact that Doolittle probably isn't on the block for a minute, the opposite is completely correct. In a situation where you have to choose between giving up real talented pre-arb players and money, the Sox should choose money. It's what allowed them to build and keep such a strong farm system.67WasBest said:
I would include none of Betts, Bogaerts, or Swihart, and I would also exclude Owens and Rodriguez. I think Beane wants volume as much as he wants quality, as was the case last time he blew it up I would start the deal with Margot and see if it can come together from there.. Naming any package begets ridicule either way, so I'll pass on that exercise, but I do believe they could assemble a package to get this done.
If there were a player available to fill that role, that fits into the long term financial model, then I agree. Miller fits the profile of the need, but if the rumors of the Dodgers and Yankees entering his market are accurate, I assume his cost will not fit the model beyond 2015. Thus why I turned my attention to identifying a replacement option for Miller. I saw Doolittle named in someone's tweet yesterday and we're talking about Billy Beane, so everyone has a price.
I'm 100% with you to spend money instead of talent whenever possible. I fear that may not be possible however.
If there were a player available to fill that role, that fits into the long term financial model, then I agree. Miller fits the profile of the need, but if the rumors of the Dodgers and Yankees entering his market are accurate, I assume his cost will not fit the model beyond 2015. Thus why I turned my attention to identifying a replacement option for Miller. I saw Doolittle named in someone's tweet yesterday and we're talking about Billy Beane, so everyone has a price.
Excuse me for getting cranky but can't we please keep this thread for starting pitching trade discussions? There's a perfectly good thread for discussing the bullpen.67WasBest said:
Oh .. And get off my lawn ..
soxhop411 said:
Unfortunately, if he can hold his arm over his head he'll get a lot of interest, and probably from places that look to be more appealing in terms of re-establishing his market value.
Concur. Actually starting to like this better than going for 7/$154. I think the run expectations for the Sox may be around 800 to 850 this season which would support foulke's rotation just fine.Yaz4Ever said:
Couple of reports today suggesting Sox and A's are continuing to talk Shark with A's ( Olney mentioned Marrero as an obvious centerpiece)
Who says no to this deal first ?
A's get
Marrero
B.Holt
Nava
Red Sox
Shark
Doolittle
Red Sox get an elite bullpen piece and Shark who they can extend or turn into a draft pick. A's get controllable dirt cheap Nava and Holt who really fit into their obsession with platoons and Holt could theoretically play short if they want to give Marrero more time at AAA. Red Sox avoid giving 4 years and a bunch of millions to Miller and get insurance if Lester doesn't return and they have to trade more of their SP prospects for another high quality piece like Hamels Latos Cashner Ross etc.....
EDIT
relevant consideration that may necessitate a Workman/Webster addition to the above package is Doolittle's insane contract worth 10.5 mill over 5. Let's not forget Donaldson was pretty cheap as well for how good he was.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10820428/sean-doolittle-5-year-contract-oakland-worth-105m
Who says no to this deal first ?
A's get
Marrero
B.Holt
Nava
Red Sox
Shark
Doolittle
Red Sox get an elite bullpen piece and Shark who they can extend or turn into a draft pick. A's get controllable dirt cheap Nava and Holt who really fit into their obsession with platoons and Holt could theoretically play short if they want to give Marrero more time at AAA. Red Sox avoid giving 4 years and a bunch of millions to Miller and get insurance if Lester doesn't return and they have to trade more of their SP prospects for another high quality piece like Hamels Latos Cashner Ross etc.....
EDIT
relevant consideration that may necessitate a Workman/Webster addition to the above package is Doolittle's insane contract worth 10.5 mill over 5. Let's not forget Donaldson was pretty cheap as well for how good he was.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10820428/sean-doolittle-5-year-contract-oakland-worth-105m
So we give up a prospect and spare parts for a pitcher the A's traded their best prospect for and a dominant reliever?
Not happening in a million years.
Not happening in a million years.
Marrero, Holt, Nava would not come close to getting you Shark alone, let alone him and Doollttle. It will take a negotiating coup by Ben to avoid including Owens and EdRod in any Shark deal. Doolittle in the deal probably puts Devers or Margot on the table, plus one of the AAAA pitchers (Ranaudo, Webster etc). Even that is not enough.jimbobim said:
Beane will never trade Shark if he insists at being compensated at the level of prospect he paid. The Russell deal will haunt him and I doubt he's able to get the bidding high enough for that compensation given the other SP options. But he is a genius we shall see.
Take it here:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/86894-worst-to-first-to-worst-to-first-offseason-game-thread/#entry5766970
(Damns, I should be a Mod!)
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/86894-worst-to-first-to-worst-to-first-offseason-game-thread/#entry5766970
(Damns, I should be a Mod!)
The Sox can get Samardzija for a Marrero, Cecchini, and Brian Johnson type deal.
Glove first SS, Cecchini has a great hit tool, and can grow into power, and Johnson has a high floor/low ceiling, and is about as low risk of a prospect as you can get.
I wouldn't trade for Doolittle. Our bullpen is fine, guys like Workman, Barnes, RDLR, and Webster can fill in fine. If we are going to use some of our better trade pieces, it better be bringing back a starter and a top of the rotation arm too
Glove first SS, Cecchini has a great hit tool, and can grow into power, and Johnson has a high floor/low ceiling, and is about as low risk of a prospect as you can get.
I wouldn't trade for Doolittle. Our bullpen is fine, guys like Workman, Barnes, RDLR, and Webster can fill in fine. If we are going to use some of our better trade pieces, it better be bringing back a starter and a top of the rotation arm too
I can't see BB doing this unless he simply lost his mind. He's got a lot of young arms but that would simply be suicide. To the best of my knowledge BB is not throwing this season away. You got to offer him Owens, DRLR, Marrero, Rijo, Margot & Ramos. The trade would have to retool the A's for the next couple seasons.jimbobim said:
Based on the A's needs, the rumored price, and the types of players BB generally goes after, this is the type of deal I would anticipate it taking. Nobody knows for sure about anything, but that's my best guessThere is no Rev said:
Maybe my sarcasm detector is out of whack .. You can't be serious .. All that for one year of a good SP and a relief pitcher??lxt said:
If you want to keep this simple .. Just a trade for Shark .. Then I think maybe, just maybe it could include Owens .. But I'd be dammed reluctant to even include him.
Sorry for a whimsical aside, and understand that it is not a complaint, imagine if the A's had drafted Matt Barnes and the Sox Sonny Gray instead of the other way around.
The Sox also got Swihart, Owens, Betts, and JBJ in that draft so I'm not complaining, and I don't even know if Gray was on their serious radar. There is a long long long way to go of course and who knows what kind of value they will get out of those guys long term, but at least in terms of the rough time when it was graduating prospects to the majors, this is the best draft since 2005 (Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lowrie). There have been times when the farm system I think has been stronger, and of course the Sox will be really really lucky if those guys all add up to equal the value of the 89 draft (Bagwell, Vaughn) or just the sole value of Clemens, Boggs or the various HoF/near HoF they drafted from 66-72 (although mostly in different drafts).
The Sox also got Swihart, Owens, Betts, and JBJ in that draft so I'm not complaining, and I don't even know if Gray was on their serious radar. There is a long long long way to go of course and who knows what kind of value they will get out of those guys long term, but at least in terms of the rough time when it was graduating prospects to the majors, this is the best draft since 2005 (Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lowrie). There have been times when the farm system I think has been stronger, and of course the Sox will be really really lucky if those guys all add up to equal the value of the 89 draft (Bagwell, Vaughn) or just the sole value of Clemens, Boggs or the various HoF/near HoF they drafted from 66-72 (although mostly in different drafts).
As for the A's, they will be the first to say no to that prosposed deal for Shark. Marrero may be a better SS prospect than Robertson if you are really really high on Marrero and/or don't think that Robertson will stick at SS, but I don't see any reason to believe either of those things. For 2015 alone Lowrie is a better bet than Marrero to help you win games.
I think they were obviously trying (and failing spectacularly somehow) to make a push in a vulnerable year for the league last year. The fact that the Royals were the AL rep speaks to this being a good strategy for them...they just sucked after the trades, through no fault of the actual guys acquired. But anyway, even considering that, why would the A's have traded Addison Russel for Shark just to now trade him for Deven Marrero? That would be hard to make sense of. Yes they got two high leverage months out of Shark and that is worth something, I just don't think it's worth the difference between Russel and Marrero.
I do think BB overpaid for Shark in the first place. Even saying that though, I don't think Marrero as a centerpiece gets it done. Not only is it not enough in the abstract, other teams should and will offer more. You're probably talking about Margot or Devers and Rodriguez unless you want to upgrade the centerpiece to Xander/Betts/Swihart (I am not endorsing this action). Even Owens I think needs another piece.
I think they were obviously trying (and failing spectacularly somehow) to make a push in a vulnerable year for the league last year. The fact that the Royals were the AL rep speaks to this being a good strategy for them...they just sucked after the trades, through no fault of the actual guys acquired. But anyway, even considering that, why would the A's have traded Addison Russel for Shark just to now trade him for Deven Marrero? That would be hard to make sense of. Yes they got two high leverage months out of Shark and that is worth something, I just don't think it's worth the difference between Russel and Marrero.
I do think BB overpaid for Shark in the first place. Even saying that though, I don't think Marrero as a centerpiece gets it done. Not only is it not enough in the abstract, other teams should and will offer more. You're probably talking about Margot or Devers and Rodriguez unless you want to upgrade the centerpiece to Xander/Betts/Swihart (I am not endorsing this action). Even Owens I think needs another piece.
I know someone mentioned Shark's FIP as being among the best in baseball, but I see him as just a solid 3 who pitched like a pseudo ace last year. His career BB/9 rate is 3.25 which was higher than any Sox starter not named Peavy last year (it did come down a lot last year, but hard to say if that was from AL hitters flailing at his nastiness) Aside from his 4 WAR season last year, he's had 2 years above 2 now at age 30. Fister and Zimmerman have been more consistently good and have also had better seasons than his best.
I like him and would be happy to slot him in, but I'm not coughing up one of our top 5 guys to make up for Beane's (probable) overpay. I'd do Marrero/Johnson maybe. I don't think Marrero as the centerpiece gets it done either but I'm fine if the A's say no. They don't really have a middle ground positional guy unless you count Coyle or Shaw which makes filling Oakland's potential needs a little tougher.
I'm a stingy asshole with prospects though and Margot is my binky and Sox Prospects has him at #3 now.. If the Sox didn't have so many high end guys it would be easier for them to make these kinds of deals.
Edit: I'll make an addendum after looking around. Wins are figured into the arbitration process and the guy has had super shitty luck in that department, so he may be really damn cheap. That loosens up my stance a bit.
I like him and would be happy to slot him in, but I'm not coughing up one of our top 5 guys to make up for Beane's (probable) overpay. I'd do Marrero/Johnson maybe. I don't think Marrero as the centerpiece gets it done either but I'm fine if the A's say no. They don't really have a middle ground positional guy unless you count Coyle or Shaw which makes filling Oakland's potential needs a little tougher.
I'm a stingy asshole with prospects though and Margot is my binky and Sox Prospects has him at #3 now.. If the Sox didn't have so many high end guys it would be easier for them to make these kinds of deals.
Edit: I'll make an addendum after looking around. Wins are figured into the arbitration process and the guy has had super shitty luck in that department, so he may be really damn cheap. That loosens up my stance a bit.
I agree Russell was an overpay. But the A's didn't trade Addison Russell for Samardzija just to now trade him for Marrero. They traded him in the hopes that Samardzija would help them make a run last season, and perhaps this season. KC derailed last year's run, and the Donaldson deal and Cruz signing probably signal that the odds are getting longer against a 2015 run. Circumstances have changed since Beane made the initial deal, and the fact that he offered up Russell last July is essentially meaningless in any conversation about Shark and the Red Sox today.smastroyin said:
If you're going to use the fact that Beane was willing to trade Russell for Samardzija as some indication of Shark's current value, go ask Theo if he'd be open to dealing Russell for Samardzija right now.
I agree with you that other teams could offer more than the hypothetical packages offered here (and in many cases, they almost certainly would), but Addison Russell has no place in any discussion, beyond the A's maybe targeting a SS prospect. He's got about as much bearing on the value of Samardzija as Josh Donaldson does on the value of Rich Harden.
Russell wasn't traded for Shark. McKinney and Hammel were also involved, as were different contract lengths. The overpay at the time also represented Beane's assessment that the A's needed 2 starting pitchers quickly to stop the bleeding of a depleted staff. This, what it considered to be a steep price NOW, was perfectly reasonable this summer.
Ok so this is Jared Carrabis. He's a writer for Barstool, specifically the Red Sox, as I am sure most are aware. He is the one who had mentioned previously that the Sox were in on Sale. Forgive me for the lengthy post, I just want to be thorough on this.
Well, he seems to believe the Sox are out on Lester because they are moving forward on a different target. That target? Well here you go.
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539999323833241600
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/540000650902659076
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/540002105738919936
So it sounds like perhaps the Sox have shifted their thinking toward Sale. I haven't known Carrabis to float ideas out that had no backing, either, so I believe him when he discusses this.
As for the package to get Sale?
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539982277246484481
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539997451114278912
Well, he seems to believe the Sox are out on Lester because they are moving forward on a different target. That target? Well here you go.
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539999323833241600
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/540000650902659076
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/540002105738919936
So it sounds like perhaps the Sox have shifted their thinking toward Sale. I haven't known Carrabis to float ideas out that had no backing, either, so I believe him when he discusses this.
As for the package to get Sale?
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539982277246484481
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539997451114278912
There's a pretty substantial difference between Sale and Hamels in terms of age, ability, and AAV (with all three strongly favoring Sale, obviously).MakMan44 said:
A package that's a massive overpay for Hamels could be a massive underpay for Sale.
Wait, wasn't Amaro insane, and going to be forced to take a bunch of low ceiling, blocked prospects from our system for Hammels.
never underestimate the value of a number 1 stater
For the same reason, Beane won't be taking a deal for Samardzija with Marrero as the key component. They won't get a guy as good as Rusell (how could they), but they will get at least one legit Stud in the deal.
In terms of the Sele "rumor" . Maybe, I guess if CWS are exceptionally high on Swihart or Owens then it might happen. If I were running the White Sox I hold out for Betts
never underestimate the value of a number 1 stater
For the same reason, Beane won't be taking a deal for Samardzija with Marrero as the key component. They won't get a guy as good as Rusell (how could they), but they will get at least one legit Stud in the deal.
In terms of the Sele "rumor" . Maybe, I guess if CWS are exceptionally high on Swihart or Owens then it might happen. If I were running the White Sox I hold out for Betts
We'll have to see if it's official (and if Amaro kicks in $$) but Joc Pederson looks like the only worthwhile piece. I've been arguing people have been creating shitty trade offers left and right around here but it's not like Amaro fleeced the Dodgers here. Still a stupid deal on the Dodger's end, but whatever.BigMike said:
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539982277246484481SoxFanForsyth said:
link to tweet
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539997451114278912
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539997451114278912
link to tweet
If this is true, acquiring Sale while keeping Betts & Bogaerts would be awesome. Obviously losing Owens & Swihart would hurt, but Sale replaces Owens short & long term. Swihart leaving would suck, & I'm a big fan of Vazquez, but I think you have to pull the trigger on that. Obviously if the Sox felt that way, the trade would've already happened, right?
Stop it about Sale. One guy on twitter guessed Betts and Bogaerts for Sale. Then he guessed neither Betts nor Bogaerts. Then he guessed CWS wants Betts or Bogaerts. At best this is just two teams doing due diligence, as I'm sure happens dozens of times each offseason. There is no reason to think a deal is close or will happen.
In fact he doesn't even think it will happen. In response to a tweet saying that it's unlikely that the Red Sox trade for Sale, he replies
"If you actually followed me and read what I've been saying, I don't think it's likely at all."
(I hate that I had to wade through that guy's tweets to find that. There is very little interesting in his account.)
The only thing that he has claimed to "report," as far as I can tell is that the Red Sox called and White Sox picked up the phone. Until a credible reporter has anything substantive on this, Sale is best discussed here http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/86894-worst-to-first-to-worst-to-first-offseason-game-thread/
In fact he doesn't even think it will happen. In response to a tweet saying that it's unlikely that the Red Sox trade for Sale, he replies
"If you actually followed me and read what I've been saying, I don't think it's likely at all."
(I hate that I had to wade through that guy's tweets to find that. There is very little interesting in his account.)
The only thing that he has claimed to "report," as far as I can tell is that the Red Sox called and White Sox picked up the phone. Until a credible reporter has anything substantive on this, Sale is best discussed here http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/86894-worst-to-first-to-worst-to-first-offseason-game-thread/
I don't get this line of thinking on Sale. Yes he has a higher ceiling than Hamels but he also has a much greater chance of breaking down. Are people forgetting his injury issue last season? Not to mention his delivery screams future TJ candidate. I'll be in the minority here but I want nothing to do with Sale.SoxFanForsyth said:
Tyrone Biggums said:
Its not just that he has a higher ceiling, its that he comes at less than half the cost for the same amount of time.
You are very right about the elbow injury scare last season, and a TJ recovery potentially chewing up ~ a season and a half sounds really depressing. Imagine watching Swihart, Owens, and Marrero's first seasons in the bigs from afar while Sale sits on our bench with a cast on.
I agree although I actually think Swihart has a chance to be the best of the bunch even if he doesn't reach that Posey ceiling he's probably the best catching prospect since Weiters.ivanvamp said:
Sale it's not a question of IF but when will he need TJ
Tyrone Biggums said:
Maybe. Maybe not. (re: Sale and TJ)
I wish our pitching prospects were *READY* right now. Like 180 ip, 3.50 era kind of ready. Then we just blow the money on Lester, and let Clay, Kelly, and two of RDLR/Ranaudo/Barnes/Owens/Rodriguez/Johnson fill it out. Then we could keep all the prospects and roll.
OnWisc said:
Making points that I have already made and then acting as if I didn't make them is a really odd way to make a point. Regardless, other than the oversimplification that I made for convenience sake (calling the deal Addison for Shark when there were other players involved) then of course it is relevant. It is a proxy for the value that Beane put on Shark. In fact it is the best information we have for how Beane (not Theo, not the Red Sox, and not some schmucks on a message board) values Shark. People like to talk a lot about the vast overpays of deadline deals but it is actually fairly rare for the valuation of a player to change so dramatically based on the outcome of a season if they have remaining control.
Let's put it this way, put yourself in Billy Beane's shoes. He doesn't have to trade Shark. You may think he does and Buster Olney may think it, but he is not beholden to. In fact the A's have a chance to be a strong team again this year. I know the Donaldson trade makes little sense, but I don't think it's an indication of a fire sale (otherwise why not target Blue Jays prospects with less service time, why sign Billy Butler). So, here's the first indication that the A's probably will want someone that is either a very good prospect or can help the team in 2015. I know there was a month or so when people here started putting Marrero as an equivalent to Bogaerts but that doesn't make it true.
This point doesn't even make sense. Why would Theo's willingness to make a trade in reverse have any indication of how Beane values Shark?