Offseason rumors

John Marzano Olympic Hero · Dec 9, 2023

BigSoxFan said:
The Sox aren’t on even financial standing with Milwaukee though. They have budget constraints that we do not have. I absolutely would be willing to deal with the Boras headache on Burnes. He’s tremendous and you have to pay up sometime. The Yankees will be doing it next offseason with Soto. The Red Sox need to leverage their competitive advantage here.

I absolutely agree with you here. If you get Burnes and he performs, you give him the cash. Just like you did with Pedro and Schilling and Beckett and Sale. (One of those deals is unlike the others.)

And I think that this is what happens when you neglect pitching development. You’re going to pay for it either way. And you can pay for it with just cash (Yamamoto) or you pay for it with cash and prizes (Burnes).

Complaining about the cost or thinking that you can get a deal is foolish. Pitching is a commodity. Everyone knows this. Commodities are expensive. We should know this.

Petagine in a Bottle · Dec 9, 2023

I think the primary benefit is you have Burnes for next year. If you trade for him, though, I imagine it’s with the expectation that you give him a market rate deal pretty quickly, you don’t wait until the end of the year.

LogansDad · Dec 9, 2023

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat said:
I guess my question is how much of an advantage does having a Boras client for one year give a team in the subsequent year negotiation. Doesn't history say it's not much? I have absolutely no issue dealing with Boras on any FA the team wants. And if they want a one year test drive to see how he fits in Boston, then I'm fine trading value for one year of him. But I don't think that trading for one year of a Boras client gets them big advantage versus just dealing with him in a year.

Not sure how much benefit it gives, but if (and it is a big if) Burnes is a path they want to go down, I hope they get it done before the season starts so they can give him a QO when he leaves.

E5 Yaz · Dec 9, 2023

I would add to this discussion whether 2024 is the year to add a FA2B pitcher. If anything, the ALEast is going to be tougher this season than last, depending on whether Toronto adds Ohtani. Wouldn't it make more sense to time such an addition in '25 or '26, when the minor league crop is ready to ascend? I'd rather focus on long-term controllables this year, like Montgomery or Yamamoto than add a Burnes for a season.

Harry Hooper · Dec 9, 2023

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat said:
I think the Burnes situation is really interesting. The Sox are unlikely to trade for only one year of him, and with Boras being his agent, it’s very doubtful that they’d get an extension done without a serious overpay. As much as I would love to have him leading the staff for the next 5 years, I have a hard time seeing how this disconnect gets resolved.

Unless the player has a strongly preferred destination other than Boston, there's a major offer (but not really an overpay) that the Sox have the means to make where it's likely not rational for Burnes to not sign and risk getting hurt on the way to FA.

E5 Yaz · Dec 9, 2023

Harry Hooper said:
Unless the player has a strongly preferred destination other than Boston, there's a major offer (but not really an overpay) that the Sox have the means to make where it's likely not rational for Burnes to not sign and risk getting hurt on the way to FA.

Soto, another Boras client, turned down $440 million from the Nationals, with no guarantee of health when he becomes a FA next year. It happens.

Petagine in a Bottle · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
I would add to this discussion whether 2024 is the year to add a FA2B pitcher. If anything, the ALEast is going to be tougher this season than last, depending on whether Toronto adds Ohtani. Wouldn't it make more sense to time such an addition in '25 or '26, when the minor league crop is ready to ascend? I'd rather focus on long-term controllables this year, like Montgomery or Yamamoto than add a Burnes for a season.

Theoretically, that probably does make sense- but now sure how the organization spins another bridge year, especially with a new GM and oodles of cash to spend.

Petagine in a Bottle · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
Soto, another Boras client, turned down $440 million from the Nationals, with no guarantee of health when he becomes a FA next year. It happens.

Sure, but let’s see if he does the same with the Yankees. He’s also a unique player who clearly wants to see what happens with Ohtani. Burnes seems like a player with more established comps.

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat · Dec 9, 2023

Harry Hooper said:
Unless the player has a strongly preferred destination other than Boston, there's a major offer (but not really an overpay) that the Sox have the means to make where it's likely not rational for Burnes to not sign and risk getting hurt on the way to FA.

In a vacuum, I agree. And there is a first for everything. But I can't think of an example of a Boras client in his final year signing an extension after a trade. I've always figured that players who hire Boras do so with full knowledge of how he operates.

Manuel Aristides · Dec 9, 2023

John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
Because the perfect deal is not out there—and that’s what sunk Bloom.

Thanks for this thought. Obviously we don't know that it's actually the explanation, but, this is the observation I needed to make the whole sequence makes sense in my head.

HangingW/ScottCooper · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
Soto, another Boras client, turned down $440 million from the Nationals, with no guarantee of health when he becomes a FA next year. It happens.

That deal would have been a good deal for the nationals and Soto was right to turn it down. He bet on himself and won.
It's similar to what Scherzer did several years ago. Just because the numbers are astronomical, doesn't mean it was the wrong move for Soto.

E5 Yaz · Dec 9, 2023

Petagine in a Bottle said:
Theoretically, that probably does make sense- but now sure how the organization spins another bridge year, especially with a new GM and oodles of cash to spend.

Signing a Montgomery or Yamamoto would hardly signal a bridge year

E5 Yaz · Dec 9, 2023

HangingW/ScottCooper said:
That deal would have been a good deal for the nationals and Soto was right to turn it down. He bet on himself and won.
It's similar to what Scherzer did several years ago. Just because the numbers are astronomical, doesn't mean it was the wrong move for Soto.

Did he win yet? If he steps on a drain in the Bidet outfield this season and seriously blows out a knee, what's the contract going to look like?

Max Power · Dec 9, 2023

HangingW/ScottCooper said:
That deal would have been a good deal for the nationals and Soto was right to turn it down. He bet on himself and won.
It's similar to what Scherzer did several years ago. Just because the numbers are astronomical, doesn't mean it was the wrong move for Soto.

He hasn't won anything yet. If he blows out his ACL in May, he might have to take another one year deal next year.

Red(s)HawksFan · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
I would add to this discussion whether 2024 is the year to add a FA2B pitcher. If anything, the ALEast is going to be tougher this season than last, depending on whether Toronto adds Ohtani. Wouldn't it make more sense to time such an addition in '25 or '26, when the minor league crop is ready to ascend? I'd rather focus on long-term controllables this year, like Montgomery or Yamamoto than add a Burnes for a season.

Is a FA2B pitcher this season all that different than the one-year deals they've given out to the likes of Kluber and Hill and Wacha in recent years? The only difference is giving up trade capital rather than just cash. If it's prospects from areas of depth (such as middle infield), it could be a worthwhile expense if they think they can take advantage of the exclusive negotiation window they'd have to extend the pitcher beyond next season.

E5 Yaz · Dec 9, 2023

Red(s)HawksFan said:
Is a FA2B pitcher this season all that different than the one-year deals they've given out to the likes of Kluber and Hill and Wacha in recent years? The only difference is giving up trade capital rather than just cash. If it's prospects from areas of depth (such as middle infield), it could be a worthwhile expense if they think they can take advantage of the exclusive negotiation window they'd have to extend the pitcher beyond next season.

That's the risk, of course. I think it becomes a bigger risk with a Boras client -- though that just might be presumptive on my point. I'm just not certain that taking that risk, depending on the player cost in return, is worth it in a year where the road to being a playoff team might be tough.
Given a choice, I'd rather spend the longterm money in an offseason such as this.

Petagine in a Bottle · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
Signing a Montgomery or Yamamoto would hardly signal a bridge year

Sorry, missed that last sentence. Yeah, of course, they should go after Yamamoto, and potentially Montgomery. I’m guessing the Brewers don’t move Burnes until after those guys sign.

pjheff · Dec 9, 2023

Red(s)HawksFan said:
For one year of Corbin Burnes? Moving all five of those guys would be a massive overpay. Massive. Like unfathomably stupid overpay. If that doesn't come close for the Brewers, they're delusional.

For what it's worth, BTV (I know, I know) suggests Houck/Rafaela, Houck/Yorke, and Houck/Walter/Valdez would each be reasonable packages for Burnes.

I can’t imagine that they would trade a legitimate starting pitcher for a quantity of broken pieces.

Red(s)HawksFan · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
That's the risk, of course. I think it becomes a bigger risk with a Boras client -- though that just might be presumptive on my point. I'm just not certain that taking that risk, depending on the player cost in return, is worth it in a year where the road to being a playoff team might be tough.
Given a choice, I'd rather spend the longterm money in an offseason such as this.

Sure. I expect that Burnes (or any of the other guys who might be traded this winter) will probably not go anywhere until the free agent market starts to dry up. So if the Sox are going after him, it may be because they've struck out on most/all their free agent targets. At which point, the risk might be worth it.

Red(s)HawksFan · Dec 9, 2023

pjheff said:
I can’t imagine that they would trade a legitimate starting pitcher for a quantity of broken pieces.

One year of that "legitimate starting pitcher." One year of service carries only so much value. If Milwaukee insists on getting back more than all five of those players, they're never going to move Burnes.

E5 Yaz · Dec 9, 2023

Red(s)HawksFan said:
Sure. I expect that Burnes (or any of the other guys who might be traded this winter) will probably not go anywhere until the free agent market starts to dry up. So if the Sox are going after him, it may be because they've struck out on most/all their free agent targets. At which point, the risk might be worth it.

True, but if they strike out with the current free agents, I'd rather they see if Seattle can be enticed to deal Gilbert or Kirby for a solid return. I guess my overall thinking is that unless everything falls into place, we're looking at '25 at the earliest for true contention -- so I'd rather the starting pitching they acquire this offseason be guaranteed to be with the team for that season and beyond.

chrisfont9 · Dec 9, 2023

EyeBob said:
Respectfully, @chrisfont9 that was not my point. No one owes the Sox a thing. What I want is to be entertained. It helps a lot that the team is good and wins much more than it loses. It also helps to have likeable characters (for me) and intriguing talent. I personally love the narrative that usually comes along with a home grown player (Casas, Devers, Bello, etc). I have grown to dislike only nibbling to improve. Buy the damn filet mignon and not the just the stringy, slightly grey sirloin. It’s way better.
Go get YY, because I remember when Roger pitched, you stopped to watch those games. Pedro too. (Yup, I go back)

OK, sorry if I overreacted. It's just a VERY finite ecosystem now, and we got kind of spoiled by those years when the Sharks could always poach guys from the Minnows. That's really not an option now. And that's a good thing! Having (close to) 30 engaged franchises is pretty amazing and the level of play is nearly always through the roof. But it also means we are only "entitled" to one win every 30 tries, which means we have 120 years of success in our pockets from the last 19 years (and 192 years' worth of NFL glory). There is no replicating that anymore. Prime free agents come up for sale once a year or so, maybe a bit more once you factor in short-term rentals which are incredibly risky. So I say sure, try to get those guys when they come up, try to get Yamamoro (as they surely are doing), but we can't be too shocked when it doesn't happen. We don't control our destiny like that anymore.

chrisfont9 · Dec 9, 2023

changer591 said:
What a weird reaction and way to interpret that post.
It's easy to understand. Some believe that having other teams.in the division be good and have big names will pressure Boston to do the same. How those big names get to Boston is kind of irrelevant. Literally no one is saying any teams owe the Red Sox anything. No one owes any other team anything, yet big names get traded every year.

He was talking about healthy allstars in their prime. They get traded when they are 30 or older and usually on an expiring contract. The Pedros don't come up much and when they do there are many, many more teams, often with better prospects, ahead of us in line.

chawson · Dec 9, 2023

What’s next year’s draft class looking like? My understanding is that this year’s (coming in June) is not so good. Maybe there’s a little extra value in the consolation of a comp pick if we can’t get an extension done.

OCD SS · Dec 9, 2023

E5 Yaz said:
True, but if they strike out with the current free agents, I'd rather they see if Seattle can be enticed to deal Gilbert or Kirby for a solid return. I guess my overall thinking is that unless everything falls into place, we're looking at '25 at the earliest for true contention -- so I'd rather the starting pitching they acquire this offseason be guaranteed to be with the team for that season and beyond.

If you’re trading with Seattle, the relevant question is probably “who is making some money who’s salary we can absorb?”

JM3 · Dec 9, 2023

sezwho said:
Because he has success attacking the zone? Movement? Stuff? Which of his traits are most predictive for the new Breslow crew? Thanks! Edit – or maybe is it just the four years?

Based on various interviews & the types of pitchers they've acquired so far, it seems like Breslow is really targeting:

1) Years of control - He said he wasn't looking for rentals & that getting a pipeline of cost-controlled pitching is a large priority that will allow them the flexibility to do other things. 4 years is valuable.

2) Ability to miss bats in the zone - When Breslow came out with his quotes about that I looked at the Z-Contact rate for all our pitchers last year:

JM3 said:
1) Josh Winckowski 75%
2) Kenley Jansen 80.9%
3) Chris Sale 81.1%
4) Joe Jacques 81.8%
5) Chris Martin 82.9%
6) Kutter Crawford 83.6%
7) Tanner Houck 84.3%
8) Garrett Whitlock 85.6%
9) Nick Pivetta 86%
10) Chris Murphy 86.8%
11) Brayan Bello 87%
12) Mauricio Llovera 89.9%
13) John Schreiber 90%
14) Brennan Bernardino 90.9%
15) Brandon Walter 91%

Paxton was 84.8%, Kluber was 87.3%.

Houck was behind only Sale & Crawford among starters. This reminds me I think they'll probably trade Schreiber as part of a series of transactions to add a MLB lefty to the pen. Houck was in the 69th percentile in whiff %.

3) Control/command - Both Breslow & Bailey have talked about the importance of throwing strikes & Breslow is on the record as saying it's easier for them to teach velo than command. Houck has been about average in walk rate the past 3 years. Not a strength, but not a weakness.

4) Nasty sliders - Every pitcher Breslow has acquired so far throws a notable slider (with the exception of maybe Fitts who they probably think is young enough to improve that). Houck was in the 89th percentile in breaking run value. Houck's slider moves 10% more vertically than an average slider & 79% more horizontally than an average slider, & has a 38.7% whiff rate. His splitter also has plus horizontal & vertical movement & has a 40.4% whiff rate.

So yeah, Houck seems like a great fit for what Breslow appears to want from a pitcher.

Red(s)HawksFan · Dec 9, 2023

OCD SS said:
If you’re trading with Seattle, the relevant question is probably “who is making some money who’s salary we can absorb?”

That Rodriguez kid has a hefty contract. I'm sure the Sox would be glad to take that off their hands as the price for getting Gilbert.

chawson · Dec 9, 2023

JM3 said:
Based on various interviews & the types of pitchers they've acquired so far, it seems like Breslow is really targeting:

1) Years of control - He said he wasn't looking for rentals & that getting a pipeline of cost-controlled pitching is a large priority that will allow them the flexibility to do other things. 4 years is valuable.

2) Ability to miss bats in the zone - When Breslow came out with his quotes about that I looked at the Z-Contact rate for all our pitchers last year:

Houck was behind only Sale & Crawford among starters. This reminds me I think they'll probably trade Schreiber as part of a series of transactions to add a MLB lefty to the pen. Houck was in the 69th percentile in whiff %.

3) Control/command - Both Breslow & Bailey have talked about the importance of throwing strikes & Breslow is on the record as saying it's easier for them to teach velo than command. Houck has been about average in walk rate the past 3 years. Not a strength, but not a weakness.

4) Nasty sliders - Every pitcher Breslow has acquired so far throws a notable slider (with the exception of maybe Fitts who they probably think is young enough to improve that). Houck was in the 89th percentile in breaking run value. Houck's slider moves 10% more vertically than an average slider & 79% more horizontally than an average slider, & has a 38.7% whiff rate. His splitter also has plus horizontal & vertical movement & has a 40.4% whiff rate.

So yeah, Houck seems like a great fit for what Breslow appears to want from a pitcher.

Where are you seeing those Z-contact rates? I’m seeing Schreiber’s Z-contact last year at a team-leading 79.5%. (Slight variation between Sports Info Solutions and Statcast.)

Yelling At Clouds · Dec 9, 2023

The thing about addressing FA through pitching is, as this post effectively lays out, that it's not entirely clear to me why someone would want to sign with the Red Sox at the moment unless they're offering a ton of money.

Do you want to win next year? The Braves, Dodgers, and others are probably a better bet. The Rangers just won the World Series!
Do you want to play alongside marquee baseball superstars? NY, Toronto*, Philadelphia, and, again, the Braves, Dodgers, and Rangers all have the Red Sox beat there, too. Devers and Story are nice, but they're not Ronald Acuna or Freddie Freeman.
Do you want a young team on the rise? The Red Sox have a nice trio on the way, but Baltimore and Arizona have a bunch of young stars already on the team, and they're coming off of, respectively, a 100-win season and a WS appearance.
Do you want to just make a truckload of money? Steve Cohen has got everyone beat there, plus (yet again) the Dodgers*. Lots of teams have money, really

Basically, I think if the Red Sox want to compete in 2024 - and it's a valid debate, IMO, whether they should, but one for another thread - they might have to do something that looks like an overpay, not unlike the last time they finished last in consecutive seasons. The Kimbrel trade and the Price signing were, objectively, both overpays, too.

(Having said all this, if Jordan Montgomery's wife really does like the Boston area, then maybe his situation is unique. But he's not enough on his own.)

Yaz4Ever · Dec 9, 2023

Red(s)HawksFan said:
That Rodriguez kid has a hefty contract. I'm sure the Sox would be glad to take that off their hands as the price for getting Gilbert.

Maybe if they cover some of his salary...

simplicio · Dec 9, 2023

JM3 said:
Based on various interviews & the types of pitchers they've acquired so far, it seems like Breslow is really targeting:

1) Years of control - He said he wasn't looking for rentals & that getting a pipeline of cost-controlled pitching is a large priority that will allow them the flexibility to do other things. 4 years is valuable.

2) Ability to miss bats in the zone - When Breslow came out with his quotes about that I looked at the Z-Contact rate for all our pitchers last year:

Houck was behind only Sale & Crawford among starters. This reminds me I think they'll probably trade Schreiber as part of a series of transactions to add a MLB lefty to the pen. Houck was in the 69th percentile in whiff %.

3) Control/command - Both Breslow & Bailey have talked about the importance of throwing strikes & Breslow is on the record as saying it's easier for them to teach velo than command. Houck has been about average in walk rate the past 3 years. Not a strength, but not a weakness.

4) Nasty sliders - Every pitcher Breslow has acquired so far throws a notable slider (with the exception of maybe Fitts who they probably think is young enough to improve that). Houck was in the 89th percentile in breaking run value. Houck's slider moves 10% more vertically than an average slider & 79% more horizontally than an average slider, & has a 38.7% whiff rate. His splitter also has plus horizontal & vertical movement & has a 40.4% whiff rate.

So yeah, Houck seems like a great fit for what Breslow appears to want from a pitcher.

Unless Bailey's got some magic beans to turn Houck into a good pitcher past the third inning though, he shouldn't be a starter.

BringBackMo · Dec 9, 2023

pjheff said:
I don’t think a package of all five Red Sox players and prospects mentioned (Houck, Yorke, Rafaela, Walter, Valdez) comes close to getting that deal done.

I think either of the packages is possible, but giving up Houck, Rafaela, AND Yorke for one year of Burnes seems like way too much. I think the Brewers would be

John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
I absolutely agree with you here. If you get Burnes and he performs, you give him the cash. Just like you did with Pedro and Schilling and Beckett and Sale. (One of those deals is unlike the others.)

And I think that this is what happens when you neglect pitching development. You’re going to pay for it either way. And you can pay for it with just cash (Yamamoto) or you pay for it with cash and prizes (Burnes).

Complaining about the cost or thinking that you can get a deal is foolish. Pitching is a commodity. Everyone knows this. Commodities are expensive. We should know this.

Who is arguing differently here? The only questions relate to what the prospect cost would be to acquire him from the Brewers. You must agree that there is some limit to what the Sox should give up for one year of control.

JM3 · Dec 9, 2023

chawson said:
Where are you seeing those Z-contact rates? I’m seeing Schreiber’s Z-contact last year at a team-leading 79.5%. (Slight variation between Sports Info Solutions and Statcast.)

I got them all from Fangraphs manually I believe. Looks like I got that one wrong somehow. My bad.

YTF · Dec 9, 2023

Petagine in a Bottle said:
Why wouldn’t the Sox trade for one year of Burnes, or a similar pitcher? Cost in prospects will be lower for a player under less control, than it would for a player signed for longer (like Cease). Assume if they traded for him, they’d have a pretty good sense of what it would take to extend him and would make an immediate effort to do so.

How much they value a player and are willing to give up will be influenced by a variety of factors (age, contract, years of control, likely production, etc) but I can’t imagine they’d just not consider trading for players with a year left, given their current situation. Can’t be that picky.

Cost in prospects will also depend on competition for the player. We have to remember that the Sox aren't operating in a vacuum.

chrisfont9 · Dec 9, 2023

Yelling At Clouds said:
The thing about addressing FA through pitching is, as this post effectively lays out, that it's not entirely clear to me why someone would want to sign with the Red Sox at the moment unless they're offering a ton of money.

Do you want to win next year? The Braves, Dodgers, and others are probably a better bet. The Rangers just won the World Series!
Do you want to play alongside marquee baseball superstars? NY, Toronto*, Philadelphia, and, again, the Braves, Dodgers, and Rangers all have the Red Sox beat there, too. Devers and Story are nice, but they're not Ronald Acuna or Freddie Freeman.
Do you want a young team on the rise? The Red Sox have a nice trio on the way, but Baltimore and Arizona have a bunch of young stars already on the team, and they're coming off of, respectively, a 100-win season and a WS appearance.
Do you want to just make a truckload of money? Steve Cohen has got everyone beat there, plus (yet again) the Dodgers*. Lots of teams have money, really

Basically, I think if the Red Sox want to compete in 2024 - and it's a valid debate, IMO, whether they should, but one for another thread - they might have to do something that looks like an overpay, not unlike the last time they finished last in consecutive seasons. The Kimbrel trade and the Price signing were, objectively, both overpays, too.

(Having said all this, if Jordan Montgomery's wife really does like the Boston area, then maybe his situation is unique. But he's not enough on his own.)

You do get the odd player who connects to the Sox and their whole vibe in a way that's unique. Sounds like Teel is an example. And maybe Henry can play the rings card in a "trust us" sort of pitch. But that's not a lot.

JM3 · Dec 9, 2023

simplicio said:
Unless Bailey's got some magic beans to turn Houck into a good pitcher past the third inning though, he shouldn't be a starter.

Houck was fine the 1st 2 times through the order last year (2.91 the 1st time through & 4.03 the 2nd). That will take you well beyond the 3rd inning, even prior to the infliction of magic.

pjheff · Dec 9, 2023

Red(s)HawksFan said:
One year of that "legitimate starting pitcher." One year of service carries only so much value. If Milwaukee insists on getting back more than all five of those players, they're never going to move Burnes.

I don’t think the issue is quantity of value as much as quality or density. There’s not one sure thing in the proposed package to Milwaukee.

sezwho · Dec 9, 2023

JM3 said:
Based on various interviews & the types of pitchers they've acquired so far, it seems like Breslow is really targeting:

1) Years of control - He said he wasn't looking for rentals & that getting a pipeline of cost-controlled pitching is a large priority that will allow them the flexibility to do other things. 4 years is valuable.

2) Ability to miss bats in the zone - When Breslow came out with his quotes about that I looked at the Z-Contact rate for all our pitchers last year:

Houck was behind only Sale & Crawford among starters. This reminds me I think they'll probably trade Schreiber as part of a series of transactions to add a MLB lefty to the pen. Houck was in the 69th percentile in whiff %.

3) Control/command - Both Breslow & Bailey have talked about the importance of throwing strikes & Breslow is on the record as saying it's easier for them to teach velo than command. Houck has been about average in walk rate the past 3 years. Not a strength, but not a weakness.

4) Nasty sliders - Every pitcher Breslow has acquired so far throws a notable slider (with the exception of maybe Fitts who they probably think is young enough to improve that). Houck was in the 89th percentile in breaking run value. Houck's slider moves 10% more vertically than an average slider & 79% more horizontally than an average slider, & has a 38.7% whiff rate. His splitter also has plus horizontal & vertical movement & has a 40.4% whiff rate.

So yeah, Houck seems like a great fit for what Breslow appears to want from a pitcher.

Thanks for breaking it down.

chrisfont9 · Dec 9, 2023

Yahoo! Japan saying Roki Sasaki has asked to be posted.
https://x.com/gaijinbaseball/status/1733542190255583340?s=46&t=tm64lLj_CJh_1TJTaHp3hA

snowmanny · Dec 9, 2023

Yelling At Clouds said:
(Having said all this, if Jordan Montgomery's wife really does like the Boston area, then maybe his situation is unique. But he's not enough on his own.)

I don’t know if she likes Boston, but she has a derm residency in Boston; I presume that ends July 2026 but could be wrong.

JM3 · Dec 9, 2023

snowmanny said:
I don’t know if she likes Boston, but she has a derm residency in Boston; I presume that ends July 2026 but could be wrong.

I originally thought that, too, but looks like she's going to Vanderbilt this upcoming summer.

In June, Dirr will head to Boston to do her intern year at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. From there, it’s off to Vanderbilt University Medical Center, where she’ll be a part of their dermatology department, something she’s dreamed of for a long time.

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/what-does-red-sox-starting-pitching-look-like-in-2024.40102/page-24#post-5863919

https://web.musc.edu/about/news-center/2023/05/16/home-run-dermatologist

BigSoxFan · Dec 9, 2023

chrisfont9 said:
Yahoo! Japan saying Roki Sasaki has asked to be posted.
https://x.com/gaijinbaseball/status/1733542190255583340?s=46&t=tm64lLj_CJh_1TJTaHp3hA

Ha. Dude is seeing what Yamamoto is looking at and says, yeah, I’m interested. But he’s a few years from cashing in due to his age so who knows.

Diamond Don Aase · Dec 9, 2023

YTF said:
We also need to keep in mind the that The Sox are one of 30 and don't have absolute control over their obit.

Thankfully, the Red Sox are only mostly dead, although that has not discouraged John Henry from checking their pockets for loose change.

simplicio · Dec 9, 2023

JM3 said:
Houck was fine the 1st 2 times through the order last year (2.91 the 1st time through & 4.03 the 2nd). That will take you well beyond the 3rd inning, even prior to the infliction of magic.

I didn't ask for fine the second time through, I asked for good. He had as many starts at 4 or fewer innings than 6 or more this year. That's not good enough.

JM3 · Dec 9, 2023

simplicio said:
I didn't ask for fine the second time through, I asked for good. He had as many starts at 4 or fewer innings than 6 or more this year. That's not good enough.

A better than league average ERA the 2nd time through seems fine/good? MLB average ERA was 4.33 for the year, compared to Houck at 4.03 the 2nd time through.

He also didn't pitch as well as he can last season, left 1 of those games after 4 innings due to being hit in the face with a line drive, & had a higher ratio of 4 inning starts after coming back from that injury, which made it very hard for him to eat & maintain strength.

But also like...compared to who? He was better the 1st 2 times through the order than Bello & Crawford for example. He also averaged 5.05 innings per start compared to 4.76 for Crawford (of course there was also some extenuating circumstances with Crawford).

& one thing all Red Sox pitchers had in common last year was playing in front of a defense that made less outs than any other defense in the league, in a stadium that is about as hitter friendly as any stadium in baseball.

The dreadful infield defense would be even more painful for Houck who was in the 89th percentile for groundballs this past year.

Lose Remerswaal · Dec 9, 2023

JM3 said:
I originally thought that, too, but looks like she's going to Vanderbilt this upcoming summer.

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/what-does-red-sox-starting-pitching-look-like-in-2024.40102/page-24#post-5863919

https://web.musc.edu/about/news-center/2023/05/16/home-run-dermatologist

And now we know why Reinsdorf was talking with Nashville

ehaz · Dec 9, 2023

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat said:
In a vacuum, I agree. And there is a first for everything. But I can't think of an example of a Boras client in his final year signing an extension after a trade. I've always figured that players who hire Boras do so with full knowledge of how he operates.

Walk year after a trade? I can’t think of any. But there have been a few to sign extensions in their walk year though. Jose Altuve, Stephen Strasburg, and obviously, Xander. Note that Boras insisted on an opt-out with Xander and Stras.

Also a couple things on Corbin Burnes. He was repped by CAA his whole career until this spring. It seems like he wanted an extension and made some comments to the media an off-season or two ago expressing his disappointment that the Brewers were not serious about extension talks. Then last year, he had a seemingly contentious arbitration hearing that he lost, and he made some noise about the Brewers going a bit over the line. A few months later, he fires CAA and hires Boras.

All this to say that he’s been a Boras client for less than a year, and only after it became clear that there would be no extension. Maybe a year out he’s determined to hit FA now and changing teams isn’t going to change his mind, but who knows if you get him out of a small market and throw $200M+ in his face?

Boras has always said he does what’s best for his clients. And pitchers are at a different level of injury risk, he’s not a dummy. You offer something market-rate and they have to consider it, even if they could conceivably get more in a bidding war.

Ronnie_Dobbs · Dec 9, 2023

I don't think they should offer up Houck in a package for anything that trading partners might value him at. He has proven to be more than adequate the first 2 times through the order while not having the brain trust of the new pitching minded FO. They should work on him for a minimum of at least a year to get him to be able to get through the 3rd time with much better success. If that fails by end of 2024 or 2025, then try him out in the closer role in place of Jansen. He seems to me to have the makeup of a hard minded, determined, cool under fire closer similar to get closers of our not so distant past (he even kind of resembles Pap in a way).
He does seem to have potential that with the proper coaching may be able to bring it up a notch or two and we ought to try to get him there given his cost and years of control. Then possibly we can point to him in a couple years as a "success" as far as developing young pitching entirely within the org

EyeBob · Dec 9, 2023

YTF said:
I get where you're coming from and believe it or not I feel the same frustrations to a certain extent. At the same time I try to understand that each season is not the same and while you want to build toward something better you also need to do that in a way that can sustain the organization over a period of time. There are different ways of getting there, but much of that depends on different facets of the game. The farm system, the construction of the 40 man roster, payroll flexibility AND how each of these facets affects the other at any given time. IMO, it's misguided to react to every move being made by your competitors until you have the majority of that aligned in a way that best allows you to follow the course that you see to be optimal for the present AND the for future. I hate the results of the past few seasons as much as most folks, but I also look at the things that seem to have the team moving in the right direction. The farm is in better shape than it was a couple of years ago. There are some exciting, young players on the MLB roster with some others that look as though they will contribute this season. Breslow seems committed to building a completely new culture top to bottom when it comes to pitching. I feel the we are going to see young, cost controlled talent extended sooner rather than later. And while it pains us to see the competition in the East getting tougher and tougher, ask yourself these questions. If Ohtani goes to Toronto, what do they look like under the weight of that contract in a couple of years when Boston might be better able to compete? Yankees got Soto. Good for them, GFIN mode. Are we there yet? Would it have made any sense to put together a trade deal that might have hamstrung us in the future when we're not in a position to GFIN? We also need to keep in mind the that The Sox are one of 30 and don't have absolute control over their obit. There's fine line to walk at times when it comes to being proactive vs reactive and in knowing which serves best you at any given time.

Agree with everything you said. For what it’s worth I think Breslo has done a great job so far moving bit pieces and getting a better return. No question we should expect that he would continue to do this in a smart manner but this team needs quite a bit of help at SP. one of Montgomery or YY would go a long way towards helping that. Both seem to be pretty safe bets. YY would be a smart “splash”. .

snowmanny · Dec 9, 2023

JM3 said:
I originally thought that, too, but looks like she's going to Vanderbilt this upcoming summer.

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/what-does-red-sox-starting-pitching-look-like-in-2024.40102/page-24#post-5863919

https://web.musc.edu/about/news-center/2023/05/16/home-run-dermatologist

Thank you.

Offseason rumors

has fancy plans, and pants to match

Member

Member

polka king

Well-Known Member

polka king

Member

Member

has big, douchey shoulders

Member

Member

polka king

polka king

thai good. you like shirt?

Member

polka king

Member

Member

Member

Member

polka king

Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

often quoted

Member

Member

Post-darwinian

MemBer

Member

Member

often quoted

Member

Member

often quoted

Member

Member

Member

Member

often quoted

Member

Member

Member

often quoted

Experiencing Furry Panic

Member

New Member

New Member

Member