User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.4553 seconds
51 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Dale Sams Posted: December 13, 2012 at 05:06 PM (#4324148)Then again, if Haren goes back to being Haren, he's better than Dempster by a bit, so maybe the two just aren't that comparable.
They re-signed Saberhagen after 1997 and he put up two good years.
John Burkett was the mildest of mild successes maybe. Ech
Also agreeing: 30 Helens.
FA starters signed since 1990 who have put up 5+ WAR total for the Sox are:
Joe Hesketh (signed 1990)
Danny Darwin (1990)
Frank Viola (1992)
Tom Gordon (1995)
Tim Wakefield (1995)
Brett Saberhagen (1997)
Daisuke Matsuzaka (2007)
Greg Harris was technically a free agent in 1990, but that was really a re-signing. Hesketh was a swingman, but spent a couple of years mostly starting.
Acquired via trade. (from BBRef: November 28, 2003: Traded by the Arizona Diamondbacks to the Boston Red Sox for Michael Goss (minors), Casey Fossum, Brandon Lyon and Jorge De La Rosa.)
I'd also thought of Arroyo, but forgot that he was a waiver claim from the Pirates.
*Pretty impressive that Gordon signed with both the Yankees and Red Sox since 1990 and earned 5+ WAR for both of them
I don't think Ben Cherington really knows his butt from his elbow.
Not now that the Red Sox have signed him.
More seriously, he's a pretty good pitcher but could just as easily flame out and be bad as pitch well. Two years is a reasonable amount of time for him.
Voxter, guy on the internet, obviously knows more about baseball than the Red Sox GM.
hard core brewer fans were concerned that doug would get stupid and sign dempster to oodles of cash a la the suppan debacle
maybe dempster will maintain his effectiveness.
but i would prefer to roll the dice with peralta et al and pay to keep talent that still has a future versus paying some guy for his age 38 season. blech
good luck to dempster
As someone on SoSH said, all of these moves will expire at about the time that the kids in AA are ready. This gives them time to figure out what they've got on the farm and doesn't lock them into anything long term.
I'd also like to add that in 3 years they will again have massive payroll flexibility, but even in the interim, going into the next 3 FA classes, they'll still have a ton of flexibility.
####
And I think at 5/125 for Hamilton is a good signing for the Angels. I would've been happy with that for the Sox. At some stage, you need to sign some stars at a slightly inflated price.
Oh well, maybe they can still get Sanchez. I'm thinking 5/65(just to continue on their $13mil per theme...)
Age doesn't strike me as a huge problem for Dempster, Dempster's two trips to the DL last year were both for muscle tightness. There was some speculation that the second DL trip was more precautionary than anything. He was working on something like a 20 inning scoreless streak when he was DL'd that second time, so whatever the extent of the problem, it wasn't screwing up his game. Little muscle tweaks are of course a part of aging, but his shoulder and elbow seem OK and the muscle issues were gone after June. Point is that he's about as healthy as a pitcher coming up on his 36th birthday can be, and as good a bet to throw 350 solid innings over the next two years as any non-elite pitcher.
The real danger is that his control is always a bit iffy, and in 2010 and 2011 sometimes his normal 3 walks became 5 or 6. There's always the chance that he goes the full Matsuzaka and turns into a guy who has to throw 120 pitches to go 5 innings. But at least he works reasonably quickly and isn't tedious about things. He also seems to require fewer mound visits than most other pitchers, though this could just be an incorrect impression on my part.
does #### refer to Clemens?
That would be a 12-win improvement on where they finished last year. If Cherington improves this team by 12 with these players, then he's done a hell of a job this offseason. That puts them in good position to be able to acquire top shelf talent next year and the year after when they're better able to compete.
Dale Sams, guy on the internet, knows not to trade starting field players for relievers.
Start with FA and then consider trades of players who have already been traded this offseason. I think when it comes down to it, the cost of adding all of the talent necessary for a 95-win team in this one offseason is both unreasonable and impossible.
Not a player, but if you replaced Cherington with Dan Duquette, I'm pretty sure 95 wins is the floor next season.
Dumpster diving Dempster price?
By that logic, he should be fired for losing 21 wins.
Congratulations on having nothing to say.
Well that probably wasn't a realistic possibility. That doesn't mean the signings are good. I don't understand the rush to sign Victorino and frankly I would rather give 25 starts to de la Rosa than sign Dempster. It's not that he should have transformed the Sox into a 95 win team but I don't really see these signings as particularly good.
I do like the Napoli signing assuming it goes through.
Yep, I didn't get that comment, this is a baseball forum for people to talk about teams and the moves they make. There are a lot of skills it takes to be a GM of a team, and no GM is great at all the skills, it's very possible that the Red Sox GM is utterly incompetent at identifying the needs of his team and getting the best fit for them.
Sign Sanchez and Jackson for $28 mil per. Add Hamilton at $25 mil per..How much do I have left? $30 mil. Go ahead and do the Napoli thing at $13 mil per, that leaves $17mil. They already signed Ross, don't do Victorino, sign Drew to play SS with money left over. Cobble together warm bodies for LF with existing players. So the rotation includes Lester, Buchholz, Sanchez, Jackson, filler(warm body), pen is already set. Lineup has added Hamilton, Drew and Napoli. Hoping for Ellsbury to produce in CF, LF is warm bodies, infield is set.
Did I forget a signing or something? I feel like I forgot someone and have run out of cash...
You mean like Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett, and John Lackey?
The cognitive dissonance that this will require is unfathomable to me.
Quick bet: Carl Crawford will have a better OPS+ than Hamilton in 2017.
I was just about to type, "I look forward to seeing Sanchez join Dan Haren in the Cub rotation," but I wouldn't want to be cynical or anything.
I said it before, Theo's Lackey and Crawford signings smelled like: "You want me to get the best hitter and pitcher on the market, no matter what? Can do."*
*Maybe just Lackey...Crawford had 'SABR friendly signing written on him'.
According to Heyman, the Tigers are still very much in play for the free-agent right-hander.
The Cubs also denied a deal had been reached.
Source
You mean like Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett, and John Lackey?
Well unfortunately mistakes get made. Crawford and Lackey were massive overpays and we all pretty much knew it at the time. Gonzalez was great his first year, then the inexplicable power outage(so I'll give you that one)...And I believe Beckett was worth his value with the initial trade and many of us were aghast at the extension. When you fall off the horse though, you need to get back on. You can't just walk away and continue down the path of mediocrity. I like the Napoli signing and always believed that needed to get at least (2) good starters to make their biggest improvement. The starting pitching was sh*t last year through a combination of things and that is the first area that they needed to address; however moves can still be made.
Though I was pretty high on Sanchez also, so not happy that they didn't land him.
You think that makes this a 95 win team in 2013? Care to show your math?
Not necessarily, but it sure would make them competitive towards gaining a chance at the wild card game. As it stands now, they virtually have no chance of going anywhere.
Sanchez or Jackson is 3 wins more than Cook. The other replaces Doubront and is 2 more. Hamilton is 4 more than whoever played left. Napoli and 4/5th of AGon is a wash (optimistic) Ross is 1 win more than whatever ABS would go to Salty or Lavarnaway. Drew is 1 win more than Iglesias "Ellsbury producing" is 3 wins more than last year. Let's say Lackey is 1 win better than Beckett was and throw in 2 more wins to account for bad luck last year. Throw in more health from Ortiz and Middlebrooks, say 2 wins.
That comes to...88 wins.
edit: No Valentine..how bout two wins for that to get to 90.
edit edit: Sign Greinke, trade Clay. If you squint, that might get 95 wins.
In '10, he was OK - 2.4 bWAR (110 ERA+, 215 IP).
In '11, he was horrible - .5 WAR (81 ERA+, 202 IP).
In the 1st half of '12, he was great - 174 ERA+, 104 IP.
Finished '12 not very good - 90 ERA+, 69 IP.
Over the past 3 seasons, he has an ERA+ of 102 in 590 IP, bWAR of 6.5 (for perspective, the Mets won't pay Dickey the equivalent of $35M/3 yrs, and he's been almost twice as valuable (616 IP, 129 ERA+, 12.1 bWAR) over the past 3 seasons). If Dempster continues to average 2.2 WAR/season, it's actually a slight overpay.
Step 1: Sign Victorino and Dempster
Step 2: Fuse them to form Voltron
Step 3: Convert Voltron to catcher
Step 4: Profit!
This is my point. The other point is what Sean Forman said the other day. You need about 42 WAR to get to the playoffs. the Sox are not getting there with this free agent class.
I think the biggest single improvement the Sox could make is getting Lester not to suck. If he pitches as if he wasn't a jerk, he alone adds about 4 bWAR to the team. Buchholz not sucking gives you maybe another 1 bWAR.
If we are not here to call GMs dumb, why the heck are we here? :)
Hamilton and Greinke are pretty darn expensive, but....
The Red Sox could have signed Hamilton/Greinke/Pagan for the same luxury tax number that they had Crawford/Beckett/Gonzalez for, a hair more in total money, and they would have better projections than those guys.
Over the past 3 seasons, he has an ERA+ of 102 in 590 IP, bWAR of 6.5
Greinke: 604 IP, bWAR of 7.9, 6/$150
Shields: 680 IP (very nice), bWAR of 5.1 (not so much), Myers plus 2/$20
Sanchez: 590 IP, bWAR of 9, 5/$75 and climbing
Peavy: 437 IP, bWAR of 7.3, 2/$29 plus vesting player option (great deal if he's healthy but he wasn't really an FA/available)
Haren: 650 IP, bWAR of 6.2, 1/$13 I think it was, coming off a terrible year
Jackson: 599 IP, bWAR of 6.1, unsigned
Marcum: 520 IP, bWAR of 8, unsigned ... hurt last year I assume
or....
Guthrie: 599 IP, bWAR of 7, 3/$25
Moore might have gotten one right. :-)
I'd agree, it doesn't qualify as a "bargain" as it's close enough to non-Greinke market price. But there are also only 43 pitchers with more WAR than Dempster over the last 3 seasons and getting him for just 2 years is good given his age and possibly a bit of a "bargain." But also, other than Guthrie, anybody else available is either more expensive or coming off a bad/injured year (and probably every bit as expensive).
Of these pitchers, personally I think Sanchez is the one who might really bust out and I'd rather have Jackson at the same price and probably even 3 years at the same AAV as Dempster.
I've been preaching this since the end of the season. For about $28 mil AAV, you could have had Sanchez and Jackson. If Lester pitches somewhat normally and Buchholz does his thing, then you'd have a real solid rotation for the next few years.
We all have our own ideas on how to build a better team. I'm a pitching whore, so I'd sign as many decent, young starters that I can find. Good SP is always needed at the trade deadline, seems easier to acquire a bat if you have good arms to trade.
You missed my (admittedly middling) joke. Haren to the Cubs was reported as a done deal as well, and didn't happen.
Thanks DA! Youtube is blocked by my employer, but the reference alone made me laugh.
That strikes me as an insane way to make a decision. Somewhat better than the giant pile of overpaid suck we just got out under from, is a pretty low bar.
The Red sox should not be trying to make slightly less disastrous decisions than last time. They should be trying to make good ones.
For me, I don't think Zack Greinke is an elite pitcher, so I wanted no part of that contract. Josh Hamilton I could really go either way on, at this money, and the determinative questions (all health related) are both questions I don't have the ability to answer and questions I don't trust the Red Sox to answer. So I am pretty much entirely agnostic on Hamilton. The Sox will need to find some way to add talent before 2014, but I have trouble saying that the fact that they haven't added impact talent before mid-December 2012 is particularly damning.
This is fair, but I'd be more positive about it if they hadn't also committed $39ish million per year for non-impact talent.
Just as a warning, I may turn into a raving, KM-style trolling lunatic if the only two above average youngish starters left on the market sign for 5/75 or less and Boston ends up with neither of them.
If the Sox haven't added some sort of impact talent by March 2014, I think I'll class that a failure. But there's still time and money for it.
I get that, but he's also as consistent and projectable as you're going to find on the open market, right? These guys just aren't hitting the market anymore.
I mean, having watched Anibal Sanchez pitch, I'm not seeing "projectible". He's a solid innings eater, but there isn't a big plus pitch there waiting to break out. I can see projectible with Jackson given his fastball. I can wish on Jackson a lot more easily than I can wish on Sanchez.
That's true but that's why you stay away from him. I'm not a fan of the Dempster move but on a two year deal I think there is a very real chance his deal proves to be much better than Sanchez'.
Excite, no. But it seems like a perfectly reasonable deal.
The guy's only gonna be 29, and has averaged 195 IP of 109 ERA+ (9 total bWAR) the last 3 seasons, with nice peripherals. That guy is not coming cheap.
Years seem right, AAV a bit high for my liking.
Now, I've never seen the guy pitch (NZ, Australia ... not conducive) so my liking him is strictly on the numbers. It's of course the K/9 of 8.1 and the K/BB of nearly 3 and the HR/9 under 1 over the last 3 years. In terms of projectibility, bWAR is 9 and fWAR is 12 ... it's a shame they don't have the same replacement level (why? why? why? stop it you silly nerds) ... and fWAR might have more predictive value.
Now it's fair enough to tell me I'm living in the past -- NL starter averages last year were 7.3 K/9 and 2.6 K/BB so Sanchez isn't exactly blowing those numbers out of the water.
EDIT: Oops, meant to add that 5/$80 is at or close to my breaking point for Sanchez. I can certainly see arguments that Dempster at 2/$27 or Jackson at 3/$42 (to make up a number) are better options. I have no great love for 5-year pitcher contracts.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main