Which type of plate discipline is eating Panda?

[Corleone]

I go back to SD and JShields. Durable as they come with more K's than IP while allowing less hits than IP. Three and $63 left. Bucholz? Or a possible combination of Bucholz Sandoval Castillo while Boston takes on the wrong Upton at 2 for $32 who posted a 900 OPS the last month...
Sandoval 4 at 70 fills a need for SD if they are interested. Dollars wise Panda at 18.75 which includes the buyout for 4 years, CBuc deal is Team friendly. SD dumps 95 million over 3 years. Would Boston eat a portion of PS deal?
Or perhaps CBuc and Castillo which would be more of a savings for SD?

Price Shields Porcello ERod #5 - Sox finishing 32 22 final 2 months last year with the latter might get you the division in 16.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

I go back to SD and JShields. Durable as they come with more K's than IP while allowing less hits than IP. Three and $63 left. Bucholz? Or a possible combination of Bucholz Sandoval Castillo while Boston takes on the wrong Upton at 2 for $32 who posted a 900 OPS the last month...
Sandoval 4 at 70 fills a need for SD if they are interested. Dollars wise Panda at 18.75 which includes the buyout for 4 years, CBuc deal is Team friendly. SD dumps 95 million over 3 years. Would Boston eat a portion of PS deal?
Or perhaps CBuc and Castillo which would be more of a savings for SD?

Price Shields Porcello ERod #5 - Sox finishing 32 22 final 2 months last year with the latter might get you the division in 16.

No.

About everything

 

[pantsparty]

James Shields has an opt-out after this year, so a team gets him for 1 year if he's good and 3 years if he sucks.

 

[E5 Yaz]

No.

About everything

Especially "CBuc"

 

[Fireball Fred]

IMO it makes little sense for the Sox to trade a lot more prospects for pitching at this point. The truth is that the rest of the team is so loaded with uncertainty--significant doubts about 6 of 9 positions--that they can't sacrifice too much future for a roll of the dice this year or next. A trade with Kelly or Buchholz as a major piece might make sense in terms of stability. But whatever they do with the staff now, we'll be looking at a team that could finish anywhere from first to last.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

I go back to SD and JShields. Durable as they come with more K's than IP while allowing less hits than IP. Three and $63 left. Bucholz? Or a possible combination of Bucholz Sandoval Castillo while Boston takes on the wrong Upton at 2 for $32 who posted a 900 OPS the last month...
Sandoval 4 at 70 fills a need for SD if they are interested. Dollars wise Panda at 18.75 which includes the buyout for 4 years, CBuc deal is Team friendly. SD dumps 95 million over 3 years. Would Boston eat a portion of PS deal?
Or perhaps CBuc and Castillo which would be more of a savings for SD?

Price Shields Porcello ERod #5 - Sox finishing 32 22 final 2 months last year with the latter might get you the division in 16.

Shields for Panda straight up with no money going back? Maybe. This deal where the Sox are picking up money and including Buchholz and Castillo? No thanks. Both of those guys have more value than Shields alone.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

IMO it makes little sense for the Sox to trade a lot more prospects for pitching at this point. The truth is that the rest of the team is so loaded with uncertainty--significant doubts about 6 of 9 positions--that they can't sacrifice too much future for a roll of the dice this year or next. A trade with Kelly or Buchholz as a major piece might make sense in terms of stability. But whatever they do with the staff now, we'll be looking at a team that could finish anywhere from first to last.

Six of nine?

I'll give you Pablo and Hanley .. and maybe Castillo .. But the rest of the lineup is fine. Unless, of course you're inherently pessimistic and always see the downside of any player.

 

[moondog80]

Shields for Panda straight up with no money going back? Maybe. This deal where the Sox are picking up money and including Buchholz and Castillo? No thanks. Both of those guys have more value than Shields alone.

Buchholz, sure. But Castillo? I don't know. Shields is owed 65 mil over 3 years (assuming you buy him out in 2019), Castillo just under 60 mil for 3 years. Shields sucked last year but had a long track record of being good to very good before that. Castillo has a career OPS+ of 83. It's a small sample size but he wasn't lights out in Pawtucket either. This is probably a case where the scouting report would be particularly valuable, but going on the numbers alone, I'd bet on Shields.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

IMO it makes little sense for the Sox to trade a lot more prospects for pitching at this point. The truth is that the rest of the team is so loaded with uncertainty--significant doubts about 6 of 9 positions--that they can't sacrifice too much future for a roll of the dice this year or next. A trade with Kelly or Buchholz as a major piece might make sense in terms of stability. But whatever they do with the staff now, we'll be looking at a team that could finish anywhere from first to last.

The problem with this line of thinking is that there will always be uncertainty. Even the players you think are "certain" are uncertain. Just ask Jim Lonborg or Trot Nixon.

But that will always be the case, which is why DDski is going for it now. He's done a tremendous job improving the MLB club, without unduly distressing the organizational development system. The farm may be there to be harvested, but aside from Margot, there wasn't a lot of fruit already ripened when the offseason started.

By which I mean, none of the A-ball prospects by themselves are enough to headline a major deal, while the top-line AAA pitching is needed to hedge the very high uncertainty and injury risk that exists among the Boston staff.

Next year, Travis, Moncada and Benintendi will all be upper-minors prospects and therefore real chips (or not, if any take a step or two back). Devers, Kopech, and Espinoza may join them as possible headliners, but more likely will need another half-season or more to get there. But right now, the value is too low individually on each of these players to trade, while bundling them up together makes no sense from a surplus-value standpoint.

Which is why -- aside from prospect pundits and Billy Beane -- you don't hear teams looking for Moncada or Devers or Espinoza as a return for a Harvey or Fernandez or Gray. The Mets, Marlins, and whoever else might be dangling a #1/2 pitcher outside the spotlight, is looking first to Betts, Bogaerts, and EdRo.

And any of those guys would likely be too much to give up, because the present MLB club is better, but still so uncertain. And stocked with too many high-priced question marks to lose the low-priced bargains who emerged to drive the team's success last August and September.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Buchholz, sure. But Castillo? I don't know. Shields is owed 65 mil over 3 years (assuming you buy him out in 2019), Castillo just under 60 mil for 3 years. Shields sucked last year but had a long track record of being good to very good before that. Castillo has a career OPS+ of 83. It's a small sample size but he wasn't lights out in Pawtucket either. This is probably a case where the scouting report would be particularly valuable, but going on the numbers alone, I'd bet on Shields.

The bolded has a very different meaning for a guy who's about to turn 34 than it would for a 27-year-old. And this is not a comforting picture either.

Sure, Shields is a much better bet to throw 200 innings than Buchholz--but 120 innings of Buchholz plus 80 innings of [insert random SP depth guy here] is a pretty good bet to be at least as good as 200 innings of Shields.

 

[Drek717]

Buchholz, sure. But Castillo? I don't know. Shields is owed 65 mil over 3 years (assuming you buy him out in 2019), Castillo just under 60 mil for 3 years. Shields sucked last year but had a long track record of being good to very good before that. Castillo has a career OPS+ of 83. It's a small sample size but he wasn't lights out in Pawtucket either. This is probably a case where the scouting report would be particularly valuable, but going on the numbers alone, I'd bet on Shields.

Castillo is owed $44M over the next 4 with an opt out after 2019 and $14M in 2020 if he doesn't take it. Shields is owed $65M over the next three or $79M over the next 4, depending on a team taking the option or not.

Also, the scouting report is particularly valuable, as Castillo is a scouting darling who flashed exactly why he got the contract he got in August of last year. 2015 was his first real taste of organized baseball since an abbreviated 2012 season in Cuba. If Castillo is marginally better at the plate than his current career totals (which seems pretty highly likely) his solid CF defense and speed on the bases will make him a valuable regular likely to earn his contract.

Shields meanwhile had significant production decline when going to an extreme pitcher's park and the value year on his deal has now been eaten up and he's getting paid $21M going forward. He also has an opt-out after 2016, so if he outperforms the surplus value he'd represent walks out the door.

Shields for Sandoval would make some sense as the AAVs are close but the actual money paid over the next three seasons is $9.2M apart or so. Sandoval has another year and a higher dollar option buyout, but is a younger player. I'd assume Shields is worth more than Sandoval, but the delta is probably equal or less than Joe Kelly, if the Red Sox wanted to make that kind of a swap.

I'm personally betting that they don't have much interest in something like that and Dombrowski believes he's going to reap a value windfall from at least two of Buchholz, Rodriguez, Kelly, Owens, and Johnson this year. That coupled with Price as the #1, Porcello as a solid #3/#4, a strong offense, and elite OF defense should be enough to win the division, have serious WS aspirations, and at the same time sort out the future of the organization.

 

[alwyn96]

The bolded has a very different meaning for a guy who's about to turn 34 than it would for a 27-year-old. And this is not a comforting picture either.

Sure, Shields is a much better bet to throw 200 innings than Buchholz--but 120 innings of Buchholz plus 80 innings of [insert random SP depth guy here] is a pretty good bet to be at least as good as 200 innings of Shields.

I don't know, I think Shields is a pretty strong bounceback candidate. He just posted the highest K/9 of his career - and one of the highest in the league - with a higher SwStr% than Price or Greinke, so he still had great swing-and-miss stuff. He pitched like a guy who knew he was working in front of the worst defense in the NL - lots of strikeouts but lots of walks, compounded by having the unluckiest HR/FB% in baseball. He's old for a pitcher, but I think if you put him back in Kansas City or Tampa with great OF defense he'd be excellent.

EDIT: Ok, excellent is probably pushing it, but I bet he'd be a lot better.

 

[absintheofmalaise]

Broke this conversation out of the Spillover thread.

 

[sackamano]

If the Sox traded for Shields, every time he started I'd have to say a Hail Mary, and every time I'd say a Hail Mary I'd curse under my breath.

Corleone indeed.

 

[pokey_reese]

In all of these scenarios where Panda is going west, who plays 3B for the Sox? Are you really comfortable handing Shaw that job full time, and do you really think that Shields + Shaw is a better team than Buchholz + Panda over the course of the full season?

 

[smastroyin]

While Shields is a decent bounce back candidate, the opt-out is kind of a poison pill.

If he bounces back to being a very good pitcher, you will lose him after a year, but at least you got the one year.
If he bounces back and is just mediocre, you have given up prospects, etc. to be locked in to a pitcher making good not great starter market rate to be at the back of the rotation.
If he doesn't bounce back you are stuck with a bad pitcher on a bad contract.

Even if you weigh the bounceback as "60% good, 30% mediocre, 10% bad" or something, I'm not sure how much you want to pay for that.

 

[Rasputin]

Price Shields Porcello ERod #5 - Sox finishing 32 22 final 2 months last year with the latter might get you the division in 16.

Sticking with what we have right now might win us the division. Trading for Shields would open up a hole we don't need opened. Sure, we have the resources to fill that hole, but we're going to have naturally occurring holes of our own we want to fill soon.

This idea makes no sense.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Any and all scenarios in which Sandoval is exchanged for Shields are foolish to even consider. San Diego is presumably going to make Shields available in an effort to shed payroll. Taking on Sandoval doesn't accomplish that.

Sending decent to good prospects for Shields is also a bad idea. He's just not a significant upgrade to what the team already has in the rotation when you factor in his salary. They're very likely to get Shields-like production out of an amalgamation of pitchers who combined will make less than he does.

 

[moondog80]

If the Sox traded for Shields, every time he started I'd have to say a Hail Mary, and every time I'd say a Hail Mary I'd curse under my breath.

Corleone indeed.

Maybe, but we're not talking about giving up any real assets for him. More like trading one big question mark (Pablo, Castillo) for another. If we keep the status quo, how many Hail Marys are you going to say every time there's a slow chopper to 3rd base?

In all of these scenarios where Panda is going west, who plays 3B for the Sox? Are you really comfortable handing Shaw that job full time, and do you really think that Shields + Shaw is a better team than Buchholz + Panda over the course of the full season?

Well, I wouldn't give up Buchholz too, I'd be giving Kelly's spot to Shields. Lawrie was an obvious solution, and the Sox knew he was available at a reasonable cost, so I suspect they'll just be sticking with Panda.

 

[Drek717]

In all of these scenarios where Panda is going west, who plays 3B for the Sox? Are you really comfortable handing Shaw that job full time, and do you really think that Shields + Shaw is a better team than Buchholz + Panda over the course of the full season?

Very much this. Sandoval is a solid bounce back candidate himself and the next guy up for 3B the Sox have is Moncada. It is probably Holt's worst defensive position, Hanley wasn't a good 3B several years and injuries ago, and Shaw is more of a secondary option at 3B than the primary. There are really no good FA options to plug in either, *edit* and with Lawrie now a White Sox it isn't like there are good 3B options for trade either.

Meanwhile the difference between Shields and at best Kelly has the potential to be pretty marginal if last year was the new James Shields and the last couple months of 2015 is even an approximation of what Kelly can be going forward, and Kelly is the bubble starter. James Shields at $21M per for the next three years isn't a bubble starter even if he's putting up a mid-4's ERA.

In a world where Rick Porcello isn't on the team and making $20M himself maybe it'd make sense, but as it stands now I'd rather try our luck with a bounce back campaign from Panda where we have no other good alternative.

 

[Rasputin]

Maybe, but we're not talking about giving up any real assets for him. More like trading one big question mark (Pablo, Castillo) for another. If we keep the status quo, how many Hail Marys are you going to say every time there's a slow chopper to 3rd base?

The hate for Sandoval around here is really weird and the hate for Castillo may be weirder. Both of them are assets. Both of them would require giving up real assets to replace.

 

[GreyisGone]

The hate for Sandoval around here is really weird and the hate for Castillo may be weirder. Both of them are assets. Both of them would require giving up real assets to replace.

Sandoval was literally the worst position player in baseball last year per Fangraphs WAR. The root cause of the hate is pretty clear.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

Any and all scenarios in which Sandoval is exchanged for Shields are foolish to even consider. San Diego is presumably going to make Shields available in an effort to shed payroll. Taking on Sandoval doesn't accomplish that. ...

Well, no. On an annual basis, Pablo costs less, so there'd be a small savings for SD. So, not foolish. A good deal? Probably not, but maybe they see more value in Sandoval going forward.

Agree re not dealing prospects for him at his salary

 

[Pilgrim]

I'd trade Sandoval for Shields in a heartbeat, but that's more of an acknowledgement that Pablos contract is a much bigger disaster.

 

[moondog80]

The hate for Sandoval around here is really weird and the hate for Castillo may be weirder. Both of them are assets. Both of them would require giving up real assets to replace.

Castillo, I don't know. But if Sandoval is an asset, that means that if someone wanted to take him and 100% of his deal, but give nothing in return, this would be a bad thing for the Red Sox. You really think that?

 

[Rasputin]

Sandoval was literally the worst position player in baseball last year per Fangraphs WAR. The root cause of the hate is pretty clear.

A guy has a bad year and people are calling his contract a disaster. That's pretty fucked up.

 

[Rasputin]

Castillo, I don't know. But if Sandoval is an asset, that means that if someone wanted to take him and 100% of his deal, but give nothing in return, this would be a bad thing for the Red Sox. You really think that?

In isolation, in the short term, of course. The Sox would then have to spend assets to find a third baseman. The net result might be better than Sandoval, but it might not.

 

[JimD]

Pass, unless the Padres are willing to take back a (mostly) unsubsidized Hanley in return.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Well, no. On an annual basis, Pablo costs less, so there'd be a small savings for SD. So, not foolish. A good deal? Probably not, but maybe they see more value in Sandoval going forward.

Small savings per year, but not overall. Pablo is owed a minimum of $77.4M through 2019. Shields is owed $65M through 2018. Not seeing where that is more attractive to a team looking to shed payroll.

 

[sackamano]

Well, I wouldn't give up Buchholz too, I'd be giving Kelly's spot to Shields. Lawrie was an obvious solution, and the Sox knew he was available at a reasonable cost, so I suspect they'll just be sticking with Panda.

Whether the Sox "stick" with Sandoval or not (and I'm guessing they do), they already have seemingly as many guys that can play third as can pitch.

Brett Lawrie wasn't an "obvious" anything. Sometimes a banana daiquiri, is just a banana daiquiri.

 

[Pilgrim]

They could move Hanley back to 3b for a year and find a platoon partner for Shaw. I'd expect him to be a poor defender, but there is a major chance both corner IF are epically bad right now as it stands.

 

[shaggydog2000]

Small savings per year, but not overall. Pablo is owed a minimum of $77.4M through 2019. Shields is owed $65M through 2018. Not seeing where that is more attractive to a team looking to shed payroll.

Exactly. They've been dumping salary all offseason, why would they want to swap bad contracts? They want to dump Shields for as much savings as possible.

 

[moondog80]

Small savings per year, but not overall. Pablo is owed a minimum of $77.4M through 2019. Shields is owed $65M through 2018. Not seeing where that is more attractive to a team looking to shed payroll.

It wouldn't be, but maybe SD figures they can't find a taker for Shields' contract and so if that they have to pay the money one way or another, Pablo is a better fit for them.

 

[sackamano]

Still don't quite understand how the Padres come to the determination that Sandoval is a "better fit" than Shields.

Is it just because they're a West coast team? The Padres were one of the worst defensive teams in baseball and Sandoval doesn't help that.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

It wouldn't be, but maybe SD figures they can't find a taker for Shields' contract and so if that they have to pay the money one way or another, Pablo is a better fit for them.

Right. They'd save something like $2.3M per year and switch the remaining spending from a 34 yo declining pitcher to a 29 yo overweight (and declining) 3bman, while taking on a longer commitment. Is that a good deal for them? I don't think so, but absent other alternatives, I could see them doing it. It's not necessarily "foolish," which is the opinion to which I was responding.

 

[Pozo the Clown]

If by "going after Shields" you mean this:
I like the idea. Otherwise, I'll pass.

 

[Adrian's Dome]

A guy has a bad year and people are calling his contract a disaster. That's pretty fucked up.

A bad year in the first season of a new contract tacked on to what has been a consistent annual decline. The downward trend is real, and he did nothing to show that it may've been a fluke, in fact he did the exact opposite. How is that fucked up?

 

[tims4wins]

Plus the instagram incident, etc. He earned every ounce of the hate.

 

[SydneySox]

Get it done, Theo!

 

[Rasputin]

A bad year in the first season of a new contract tacked on to what has been a consistent annual decline. The downward trend is real, and he did nothing to show that it may've been a fluke, in fact he did the exact opposite. How is that fucked up?

His OPS+ for the last several years: 123 116 111 76. One of these things is not like the other. That's the one you're judging him on, and that's fucked up.

 

[Adrian's Dome]

His OPS+ for the last several years: 123 116 111 76. One of these things is not like the other. That's the one you're judging him on, and that's fucked up.

So we're supposed to act like last season didn't happen and/or matter, his numbers haven't been going downhill, and his contract isn't terrible. Got it.

 

[Devizier]

A bad year in the first season of a new contract tacked on to what has been a consistent annual decline. The downward trend is real, and he did nothing to show that it may've been a fluke, in fact he did the exact opposite. How is that fucked up?

Incidentally, this exact phrase could be used to describe James Shields.

I don't want Shields on the Red Sox, and any sane Padres fan wants no part of Sandoval on the Padres.

 

[moondog80]

In isolation, in the short term, of course. The Sox would then have to spend assets to find a third baseman. The net result might be better than Sandoval, but it might not.

So given the chance to dump him and 100% of his contract, you would say no?

 

[SydneySox]

His OPS+ for the last several years: 123 116 111 76. One of these things is not like the other. That's the one you're judging him on, and that's fucked up.

That's the whole story, is it?

His career numbers have been in steady decline for years, culminating in a massive drop last year. Ally that to clear and growing (yep) weight issues that have been a perennial concern and your response is that to judge him on last year - which was terrible - is 'fucked up'.

You pick bizarre fights.

 

[Bdanahy14]

I much rather take a shot at an arm like Latos on FA than trade for Shields. He's the youngest pitcher on the market, will take a one year deal, etc.

 

[DJnVa]

The hate for Sandoval around here is really weird and the hate for Castillo may be weirder. Both of them are assets. Both of them would require giving up real assets to replace.

Castillo wasn't that good last year. At all.

 

[Rasputin]

So we're supposed to act like last season didn't happen and/or matter, his numbers haven't been going downhill, and his contract isn't terrible. Got it.

False dichotomy.

So given the chance to dump him and 100% of his contract, you would say no?

Not without knowing what the replacement would be. I'd love to chop a year off on the end of the contract, but we can't do that and I'm not about to open up a hole on what looks to be a very good team just because someone is overpaid.

 

[nvalvo]

So we're supposed to act like last season didn't happen and/or matter, his numbers haven't been going downhill, and his contract isn't terrible. Got it.

No, but of the realistic candidates to play an above average third base for Boston next season, isn't Sandoval the most likely?

I would let him go if someone wanted to take 100% of his contract, but I wouldn't give up very much or take on very much money to make that happen. Because we're realistically replacing him with Shaw and an elderly Juan Uribe, so it's not like that's so much less performance risk.

 

[nvalvo]

I should also be clear that I think we're going to end up trading him before this deal is up, but it would be good not to do it at the absolute nadir of his value.

 

[alwyn96]

Still don't quite understand how the Padres come to the determination that Sandoval is a "better fit" than Shields.

Is it just because they're a West coast team? The Padres were one of the worst defensive teams in baseball and Sandoval doesn't help that.

It seems like Dombrowski has been pretty up front about the Red Sox mostly being done, so a Sandoval for Shields swap is probably just a hypothetical discussion. I'd guess it's mostly a referendum about how much you think Panda's likely to bounce back v. Shields, rather than actual plausibility.