Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Red Sox - Acquired Beckett and Lowell

Boston Red Sox - Acquired P Josh Beckett and 3B Mike Lowell for SS Hanley Ramirez and P Anibal Sanchez and a player to be named.

A few years ago, the Twins had an impressive glut of outfielders and other weaknesses at the bottom of the rotation and the middle infield (though they didn’t quite realize the extent to which the latter was a weakness).  Not all of them or even most of them were stars, but they did have value at the time in filling the team’s holes.  But the Twins didn’t do anything.  They sat on their strength, whistled Dixie and watched their surplus fade away, none of the value realized.  Kielty?  One of the few they did trade, but for a player who’s now just as mediocre and much more expensive.  Restovich?  Lost on waivers.  Jones?  Likely gone.  Hunter?  They wish he was gone.  Those aren’t the only player.

What does this have to do with the Red Sox?  The Twins had a choice either to use the value of players or lose the value of those players.  They chose the latter.

Given that Lucchino’s thinking and organizational philosophy has won the day in the Byzantine environment of the Red Sox front office, it seems unlikely that a 1990s Brave mindset will be used for decision-making with the 2000s Yankees mindset being used instead.  Young players in this organization are no longer the future stars of tomorrow - well, they may be, but not in Beantown.  Now, the future is something to be avoided, the wall mended in place with duct tape instead of mortar.

As such, the Red Sox had to either use Sanchez and Ramirez as players or trade them and get the value that way.  Could this look horrible 10 years ago if Sanchez’ arm stays on?  Certainly.  But it’s better for Sanchez to star in Florida and the Red Sox get Beckett than Sanchez to pitch in Pawtucket for 3 years and watch his trade value go away.  Ramirez is a lesser prospect than Sanchez, clearly hyped more than his performance has warranted, and if one wants to win now and damn the future, it’s better to make someone else pay to try and wait and hope for Hanley’s tools to become skills.

One things the Marlins know how to do is commit to a rebuild.  The post-1997 firesale was ugly, but just take a look at the post-1997 Orioles to see what a half-ass rebuild does.  The Marlins dumped everything, built up a new team, won a World Series and started another rebuild cycle while the O’s haven’t even seen .500 in that span.

2006, this is a great trade for the Red Sox.  If you’re going for instant gratification, get something gratifying.  And Beckett certainly does that.  The constant blister problems are annoying but I’ll take them over constant shoulder problems and the side benefit that Beckett has been very mildly used compared to other very good young pitchers.  The question is - now that the Red Sox have crossed the Rubicon, will they now go all the way?  Pedroia to Minnesota for Hunter?  Lester for Kent?  Papelbon for Wily Mo Pena?  Youkilis for a random reliever?  In for a penny, in for a pound.  It’s not how I would personally go about it, but there’s more than one way to win a championship, I guess.

 

2006 ZiPS Projections
——————————————————————————————-
Player       W   L   G GS   IP   H   ER HR BB SO   ERA
——————————————————————————————-
Sanchez     7   6 23 23 118   97   50 13 47 137 3.84
Beckett     14   7 27 27 161 150   69 14 52 140 3.88

 

2006 ZiPS Projections
———————————————————————————————————
Player     AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————
Ramirez     426 51 103 13 5   5 38 29 66 21 .242 .294 .331
Lowell     540 93 153 49 1 20 104 60 70   3 .283 .356 .489

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: November 22, 2005 at 02:02 AM | 121 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

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.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. WillieMays Haze Posted: November 22, 2005 at 02:58 AM (#1741697)
If the Oracle says so, I take it this is official?

That's a real nice-lookin projection for Lowell. If he comes close to that then this a great trade for the Sox.
   2. NTNgod Posted: November 22, 2005 at 02:58 AM (#1741698)
Over the years, haven't you learned your lesson yet about jumping the gun on 'soon-to-be-completed' deals?

:)
   3. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 02:59 AM (#1741701)
That's a pretty nice line for Sanchez.

The deal looks reasonable to me, though I'm not at all optimistic about a rebound for Lowell. I hope hope hope he doesn't get flipped to the Bucs on the rebound.
   4. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:00 AM (#1741704)
Over the years, haven't you learned your lesson yet about jumping the gun on 'soon-to-be-completed' deals?


Yeah, but on the other hand, if it takes a week for this trade to be official, everyone will be tired of talking about it by then! I'll blame P-Gam if it doesn't go through.
   5. chris p Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:00 AM (#1741707)
oh piss off, dan.
   6. Grunthos Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:04 AM (#1741720)
I don't see where this deal, itself, really signals a sea change in the Sox philosophy of talent management. It's an excellent opportunity for the Sox to take prospects and turn them into an occasionally dominant pitcher in his prime, not a pitcher who is five years past his peak.

I think that a smart GM can win the Yankee way, the Brave way, the Indian/Marlin way, the A's way, or any gradation in between. You don't need to nail a 95-point personnel manifesto to Bud Selig's door to have a consistent plan that works.

With all of that said, you're probably right that Lucchino isn't the man to find his way to glory using a flexible, mix-n-match talent strategy.
   7. Dan The Mediocre Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:04 AM (#1741722)
So the Red Sox have Papelbon, Wakefield, Arroyo, Miller, Wells, Clement, Schilling, and Beckett as starters?
   8. Halofan Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:04 AM (#1741723)
Manny for Finley, Kennedy, Donnelly and a prospect ending with the letter Y
   9. Grunthos Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:11 AM (#1741736)
The Sox will need almost all of those guys to get over 1000 innings pitched.
   10. Darren Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:14 AM (#1741742)
Pedroia to Minnesota for Hunter? Lester for Kent? Papelbon for Wily Mo Pena? Youkilis for a random reliever?

Don't do this Dan. It's very scary.


So the Red Sox have Papelbon, Wakefield, Arroyo, Miller, Wells, Clement, Schilling, and Beckett as starters?

They've talked about Paps in pen, which I think is the wise move. If Miller ever pitches again, maybe he'll be an insurance policy for them, and Wells is almost certainly going to be dealt.
   11. Darren Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:15 AM (#1741744)
Manny for Finley, Kennedy, Donnelly and a prospect ending with the letter Y

Woody?
   12. sasquatch83 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:15 AM (#1741745)
I can't imagine that Wells will be with the Red Sox come spring training.

Arroyo might be gone by then too, in which case a rotation of Schilling, Beckett, Papelbon, Wakefield and Clement/Miller makes sense.
   13. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:27 AM (#1741771)
lets face it, it doesn't look like hanley is going to be the blue chip star he's hyped to be. sanchez might be a very a fine pitcher, but beckett is a very fine pitcher now, and the sox have lester and papelbon as well. with pedroia, youks, lester, and papelbon the sox have 4 players who are ready/close to ready for the majors. there's no reason to trade them as they can help during the next couple years when their window of opportunity will be open.

this could be a great trade if lowell bounces back.
   14. Cris E Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:35 AM (#1741788)
As a Twins fan I'm not happy watching Terry Ryan sitting on his hands again, but I am glad we didn't end up with Lowell. I'm not all that confident that he's going to bounce back all the way, though I have to admit most of that scepticism is based in never having heard why he sucked last year. I know guys have bad years all the time, but it's been a long time since Lowell has been the guy that warrented the huge contract he's carting around today. I looked at him in July and no one knew, and I still haven't read a divorce, disease, dianabol or dimentia story that indicates he'll be anything other than older next spring. It amounts to little more than a feeling in my big toe, but I'm still glad he won't be in MN next season.
   15. susan mullen Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:37 AM (#1741792)
What happens to Bill Mueller if all this happens?
   16. Halofan Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:40 AM (#1741797)
What does it say about Lowell if that feeling in your big toe is inflamatory gout?
   17. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:44 AM (#1741801)
Manny for Finley, Kennedy, Donnelly and a prospect ending with the letter Y

Stop it.

That's quite an...interesting looking line for Sanchez.
   18. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:47 AM (#1741807)
What happens to Bill Mueller if all this happens?


He is a free agent
   19. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:48 AM (#1741808)
I'm hearing a rumor involving Lowell and Twins pitcher Scott Baker. Baker's K numbers look good but not great. He has good control but doesn't appear to prevent HR's much (any?) better than average. Does he have a future? If he does, why is his name being connected with Lowell's?
   20. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:51 AM (#1741813)
"What does it say about Lowell if that feeling in your big toe is inflamatory gout?"

I don't know, but Wells might.
   21. Craig in MN Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:52 AM (#1741814)
What does it say about Lowell if that feeling in your big toe is inflamatory gout?

I think that would mean that Cris E is Matt LeCroy. I don't think that affects Lowell, or Frank Tanana.

What happens to Bill Mueller if all this happens?

I don't know, but I think that is a key thing to thin about when you people talk about trading Lowell elsewhere. Mueller is a free agent probably won't get a contract as generous as Lowell's. Getting much in return for him will be hard when there are other good free agent options available.
   22. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:00 AM (#1741826)
If the Marlins end up as the 2008 World Series Champs, a lot of people are going to look upon their method of scrapping an entire team and rebuliding with rookies as the new "moneyball".
   23. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:10 AM (#1741831)
What happens to Bill Mueller if all this happens?

Mueller's low 2005 salary will make him a net positive with the contract he would get in arb. Boston might do well to sign him again and make a trade.

I bet they'll move Lowell and eat a huge chunk of his salary to get a decent prospect.
   24. NTNgod Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:16 AM (#1741840)
Palm Beach Post for Tuesday is saying the Marlins are still holding out for Jon Lester, as well as still generally trying to hash things out...
   25. Halofan Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:18 AM (#1741844)
If the Marlins end up as the 2008 World Series Champs, a lot of people are going to look upon their method of scrapping an entire team and rebuliding with rookies as the new "moneyball".

Even just NL champs in '08 or 2009 or 2010 will suffice qualifying "GUTTINGBALL" as the new trendy methodology.
   26. Rough Carrigan Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:20 AM (#1741848)
Why does this trade necessarily have to represent a screw the future front office perspective? Couldn't it be characterized as a prudent recognition that Hanley Ramirez's value would be gone like a wisp of smoke in the wind with any more disappointing minor league play? Would should a wise front office do with a prospect who they're uncertain about but whom another team regards as a sure thing blue chip guy except trade him to them?
   27. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:22 AM (#1741852)
Great trade for Boston.
   28. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:26 AM (#1741858)
This trade is not done by any stretch of the imagination, folks. Ned Colletti is apparently taking a page from the Sabean book and offering Billingsley and Guzman (!). The Marlins would be CRAZY not to back out and do that.
   29. Shalimar Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:26 AM (#1741859)
If the Marlins end up as the 2008 World Series Champs, a lot of people are going to look upon their method of scrapping an entire team and rebuliding with rookies as the new "moneyball".

It works well in Baseball Mogul, though the game is easy enough that it is more reloading with rookies than rebuilding. I'm guessing that being a real GM is somewhat tougher than playing a game against computer AI.
   30. NTNgod Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:35 AM (#1741873)
This trade is not done by any stretch of the imagination, folks.

Well, considering earlier this past weekend, Blalock/Danks for Beckett/Lowell was reported as a done deal, to be complete by Monday per sources... I'd agree it's a bit too early for Red Sox fans to start celebrating/complaining.
   31. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:37 AM (#1741875)
Palm Beach Post for Tuesday is saying the Marlins are still holding out for Jon Lester, as well as still generally trying to hash things out...


I don't want to give up Lester for these muppets. Now I am getting angry...
   32. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:41 AM (#1741883)
I am in official this is rumour mode now and have deleted my blog entry on the trade until further notification
   33. Robert S. Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:48 AM (#1741896)
Why does this trade necessarily have to represent a screw the future front office perspective?

I don't get it, either. The only reason we've heard anything other than "potential sleeper" about Ramirez is because he belongs to the Yankees/Mets/Red Sox triumvirate. The odds that Sanchez ever begins to approach Beckett are long to say the least.

Beckett is young, cheap and still has quite a ceiling on him. He's not even close to one of the bigger question marks in the Boston rotation. He's probably Boston's best starter even if he misses five starts with blister trouble.

Surely, the Marlins can do better.
   34. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:08 AM (#1741918)
Surely, the Marlins can do better.


Maybe they realise that and are going after Lester
   35. AROM Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:17 AM (#1741932)
That's 10.45 strikeouts per 9 innings for Sanchez. Only way he does that is if he pitches AAA in 2006.

He struck out 10.9 in A, 9.9 in AA. No way that translates to 10+ in the big leagues.
   36. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:41 AM (#1741963)
Done deal or not, if this lands in the Red Sox lap, I think this is a big win, particularly because neither player they receive in the short-term is a 35-year-old making $14 million a year for the next several years. Lowell's making $9 million a year for the next two years and then he's gone; Beckett, meanwhile, is young, has good K rates, lowered his walk rate this year, is liked by scouts as well as statheads, and hasn't been overworked in his youth. Furthermore, Hanley Ramirez is starting to remind me a lot of Freddy Sanchez, the last "budding star" the Sawks nurtured through their system before (wisely) trading him for whatever they could get a couple of years ago.

Unless they back out, I think the Marlins just got escrewed.
   37. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:51 AM (#1741975)
What does this mean for the Greek God of Walks? 1B?
   38. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:20 AM (#1741989)
He struck out 10.9 in A, 9.9 in AA. No way that translates to 10+ in the big leagues.

Well, he'd be facing pitchers in the NL and ProPlayer appears to markedly promote strikeous.

Furthermore, Hanley Ramirez is starting to remind me a lot of Freddy Sanchez, the last "budding star" the Sawks nurtured through their system before (wisely) trading him for whatever they could get a couple of years ago.

I don't think you could pick two more dissimilar prospects than Hanley Ramirez and Freddy Sanchez.
   39. AROM Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:27 AM (#1741991)
A 113 strikeout park factor (according to the Bill James 2006 Handbook will turn a 9.9 K/9 pitcher to a 10.5.

Going from the Eastern League to the NL should drop him quite a bit though.
   40. Mudpout Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:52 AM (#1742000)
While I find the thought of damning the future in such a way to be very disheartening, I don't think it's quite there yet. The most encouraging thing is that, of the Big Three pitching prospects, Sanchez is the riskiest, but at the same time doesn't have a noticably larger upside than Lester, maybe even Papelbon. Of the marketable prospects, the Sox traded the two most valuable longshots for a young starter who hasn't been noticably overworked and already has postseason success.

Don't get me wrong, I was really high on both Sanchez and Ramirez, but when you get down to it there's a young pitcher and a toolsy player with injury problems and a spotty record. I don't think this is the opening of the floodgates, but I could be wrong.
   41. rory_b_bellows Posted: November 22, 2005 at 07:01 AM (#1742006)
Unbelievable trade for the Red Sox if it happens. To trade for a 25 year old underworked pitcher and give up only potential in return is amazing. What I don't understand is that the Marlins want to get rid of Lowell so bad they would trade their 2nd best player to help move him. If you don't want him so much why did you sign him? Just a baffling move...
   42. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 22, 2005 at 07:03 AM (#1742007)
Even just NL champs in '08 or 2009 or 2010 will suffice qualifying "GUTTINGBALL" as the new trendy methodology.

Why wait till '08? The Indians might win in '06 with their team built on guttingball. How do you think they wound up with Sizemore, Westbrook, Crisp, etc? They gutted the 1990s power houses starting in 2002 and now have a new powerhouse.
   43. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 22, 2005 at 07:15 AM (#1742024)
What I don't understand is that the Marlins want to get rid of Lowell so bad they would trade their 2nd best player to help move him.


Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis say hi.
   44. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: November 22, 2005 at 07:40 AM (#1742048)
Just a baffling move...

To me, this move makes a ton of sense for the Marlins. Do the Marlins have a good shot at winning the World Series in the next two seasons? They finished tied with the Mets for third place and are losing their 3rd starter, their best reliever, and their RF. What's the point of keeping Beckett around to pitch 300-400 IP for a team that will in all likelihood not come close to making the playoffs? The Marlins aren't going to be able to afford Beckett when he becomes a FA anyway. Instead of those innings the Marlins are:

1) Saving a ton of money that can be used to sign Cabrera and Willis.
2) Getting two guys who could be part of the next Marlins team that makes the playoffs.

I think teams should do this more often. The only reason they don't is because they are afraid of their fans' reaction. The Marlins don't have to worry about that much because they simply don't draw well. They finished 14th in attendance in the NL in 2004, one year after winning the World Series.
   45. Elton Posted: November 22, 2005 at 08:22 AM (#1742075)
It's a ballsy move by the Marlins, giving up a young World Series MVP. I don't know much about the guys they're getting back, but isn't this similar to Oakland's Hudson and Mulder trades from last year? Florida isn't trying to rebuild on the fly like Oakland was, but they've already shown they can tear down and build up again.

Of course it looks great for Boston too, because they should be able to afford to sign Beckett to a long deal through his prime.
   46. DCW3 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 08:48 AM (#1742097)
Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis say hi.

And Carlos Delgado says that he hasn't been traded yet.
   47. Walt Davis Posted: November 22, 2005 at 08:50 AM (#1742099)
Do the Marlins have a good shot at winning the World Series in the next two seasons?

All depends on what kind of payroll they can truly afford. Willis, Beckett, Delgado, Cabrera, Castillo, Lowell (if he bounces back) are damn fine players. LoDuca and Pierre are roughly average (Pierre's OPS+ stinks but historically he gets on base). If they could bring back Encarnacion (average) and Burnett (or bring in equivalent players), they'd still have an excellent core. And all but two of those guys would be 32 or younger. That would be a team not far from a shot at winning the World Series at all.

But it would be a pretty expensive team.
   48. Artie Ziff Posted: November 22, 2005 at 01:52 PM (#1742195)
Smart deal on Boston's part. No major franchise loss, but with players that could pay off immediately. Well done.
   49. villageidiom Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:09 PM (#1742224)
Mueller's low 2005 salary will make him a net positive with the contract he would get in arb. Boston might do well to sign him again and make a trade.

There are two courses of action that would lead to their signing him:

1. They offer arb and he accepts.
2. They offer arb, he declines, but they sign him anyway.

If it's the latter, I believe they can't trade him until midseason.

Nevertheless, I don't think they can afford to risk the former, unless Mueller is your new 2B. And I don't think that's wise.

What does this mean for the Greek God of Walks? 1B?

That's where I'd put him, though I suppose Lowell could move there instead.
   50. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:14 PM (#1742226)
So the Red Sox have Papelbon, Wakefield, Arroyo, Miller, Wells, Clement, Schilling, and Beckett as starters?

Beckett lives on the DL. He will continue to have problems. If he notches 130 innings, I'd be surprised. Schilling is finished--Mr. red Light, it's time to go play with your bloody sock and your Nazi memorabelia. Clement will rebound from his shaky ending, if he can maintain decent control. Wells is sure to win at least 12 games. Wakefield is the most valuable guy here: he could pitch every three days and still come out of the bullpen on days off. Oh, and Lowell is pure liability. Since the drug testing, his numbers rolled off the table; he couldn't make the starting lineup on the 1962 Mets.
   51. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:18 PM (#1742231)
"Boston Herald: "According to baseball sources, the Sox and Florida Marlins have agreed in principle on a deal that would bring Josh Beckett and third baseman Mike Lowell to Boston for prized shortstop prospect Hanley Ramirez and minor league right-handers Anibal Sanchez and Jesus Delgado."

Who is Jesus Delgado? The spawn of Damon and Carlos?!
   52. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:22 PM (#1742237)
. . . and minor league right-handers Anibal Sanchez and Jesus Delgado

Holy Jesus!
   53. Sean Forman Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:31 PM (#1742246)
This comparison is going to be a little bit forced, but here goes.


Age ERA+ (IP)
   Beckett   Pedro
21  282-24   151-107
22  97-107   123-145
23  132-142  120-195
24  108-157  117-217
25  119-179  221-241 (cy with Montreal)


However, Beckett is a young 26 born in May, while Pedro was an old 26 when the Red Sox got him born in October, so a more accurate matchup would be this.

Age ERA+ (IP)
   Beckett   Pedro
21  282-24   
22  97-107   151-107
23  132-142  123-145
24  108-157  120-195
25  119-179  117-217
26ish        221-241 (cy with Montreal)


If you line them up that way they are very comparable pitchers. Strikeouts, walks, the entire package. I can't possibly see what Dan is talking about this being a trade for the present. Odds are Beckett is going to be a better pitcher than Sanchez ten years from now. Beckett is less than four years older than Anibal Sanchez.

As for Lowell, here are the remaining careers of his age comparables.

BR scomp tool
   54. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:35 PM (#1742250)
Jesus Delgado is a toolsy LHP with some injury issues that the Sox started grooming to be a reliever this season. He was 21 this year and repeated Low-A, where he probably should have done better. He did well enough for his age and experience level in the AFL to get added to the 40-man roster, though.
   55. SouthSideRyan Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:40 PM (#1742254)
They finished 14th in attendance in the NL in 2004, one year after winning the World Series.

And they also drew roughly a million more that season than they did in '02. Same for '05.

If the Marlins blow the whole thing up, I can't see this franchise being viable again barring a Yankees-esque run in the playoffs.
   56. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 03:42 PM (#1742258)
"I don't think you could pick two more dissimilar prospects than Hanley Ramirez and Freddy Sanchez."

Count the "z"s, baby!

"As for Lowell, here are the remaining careers of his age comparables."

You can probably scratch Kurowski from that list. I don't think Lowell's likely to be diagnosed with a congenital bone disorder.
   57. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 22, 2005 at 04:58 PM (#1742356)
Wakefield is the most valuable guy here: he could pitch every three days and still come out of the bullpen on days off.

While I don't necessarily disagree with the first part of the statement, I gotta call BS on the seond half. We hear this crap all the time, but the fact is that throwing 100 or more pitches, even if they're mostly knuckleballs, is anything but effortless. And 60 mph is probably harder than most of the people who write this kind of stuff could throw their best fastball. Wakefield can start every five days and pitch in relief on one day in between, but I suspect that most starters could do that if they really wanted to.
   58. Sean Forman Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:22 PM (#1742391)
Re: Lowell and the "fact" he is done. Your comments about Lowell could have been taken word for word and applied to Bill Mueller when the Red Sox acquired him. He was 31 and had had a poor year (though much better than Lowell's).
   59. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:39 PM (#1742410)
We hear this crap all the time, but the fact is that throwing 100 or more pitches, even if they're mostly knuckleballs, is anything but effortless.

The knuckleball also requires Wakefield to use a different motion than normal pitchers. Just because he's throwing an 80 mph fastball (or whatever) doesn't mean that it's not just as much work for him as another pitcher throwing a 95 mph fastball.
   60. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:46 PM (#1742425)
Lowell had 500 ABs and only 58 RBIs. For a "power man," or even an "average man," that blows. His worst enemy is the new drug policy. David Eckstein knocked in 61, Mark Grudzielanek had 59 RBIs. Christ, even Julio Lugo had 57 RBIs. Lowell is a liability.
   61. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:54 PM (#1742439)
Have we gotten any confirmation on this yet?

Just because he's throwing an 80 mph fastball (or whatever) doesn't mean that it's not just as much work for him as another pitcher throwing a 95 mph fastball.

I'm pretty sure that knuckleballers need as much rest between starts as any other pitcher, but throwing a knuckleball is a lot less un-natural and stressful than, say, throwing a slider. They're at a much lower injury risk, and they can work deeper into games without fear of wearing down.

The White Sox just added a knuckleballer, Charles Haeger, to their 40-man. I hope he gets a look at some point - I like knuckleballers.
   62. cseadog Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:55 PM (#1742442)
This is a great trade for the RS. They are about the "rings" and Beckett has been a legit postseason ace. That's worth more to them than to other teams. He's young and likely to be bordering on great for years to come. Lowell can't be worse than last year and if he is so what--the RS can afford it a bad contract.

It's got some risk: Beckett's shoulder could give out and Hanley could become not just a good, but a great, player. In terms of tools, Hanley is one of the most talented players in pro ball. Now, tools aren't performance, but if you'd seen Hanley play, you'd understand why he's been so highly rated. My sense is that he'll never reach his potential because he cannot sustain his performance over the long haul. He's excelled right after a call-up or in big games and been mediocre for the remainder. Plus, Hanley is blocked by Renteria.

Sanchez could be good, but he is clearly behind JonPapi and Lester. I see him as a #3 at best. He's tradeable.

I'm not saying that Beckett is Pedro, but this reminds me of the Armas/ Pavano deal for Pedro. 2 grade A prospects for a big league ace.

Great move for the sox (again). Coincidentally, both times without Theo (and I don't mean this as a knock in any way).
   63. nycfan Posted: November 22, 2005 at 05:59 PM (#1742447)
The Armas/Pavano trade was for a guy who just posted a sub-2.00 ERA. Beckett hasn't performed near that level yet.
   64. robinred Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:01 PM (#1742450)
I think this is a good move by the Red Sox, although a slightly risky one. It shows a good understanding of leveraging the ability to spend money to acquire A-level talent.

It would also seem possible that Schilling might be positive influence on Beckett.

Question for the Red Sox fans (of which I am definitely not one): would Epstein have done this?

I think probably yes.

Also, as a guy who doesn't like the Red Sox much, I am kind of liking this Catfish326 dude--;-0
   65. Cris E Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:49 PM (#1742519)
Re: Lowell and the "fact" he is done. Your comments about Lowell could have been taken word for word and applied to Bill Mueller when the Red Sox acquired him. He was 31 and had had a poor year (though much better than Lowell's).

That would be the year after he busted his knee running into a wall in Chicago. My big toe is comfortable with the injury explaining the rough following year. Lowell didn't miss any games and I still haven't heard any reasons for the downturn, so I'm not convinced a team on a tight budget should be betting on a rebound. I understand bad years happen, but he was awful last season.
   66. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:51 PM (#1742527)
Enough already about Beckett being an "ace"! Please. He has 41 career wins over 5 years. . . . an average of 8.2 per year. Last year, yet another injury ladened season for Beckett, was his best year and he only pitched 178 innings. That's an ace? The pitcher he is "most similar to" at age 25, is Lynn McGlothen. A fine pitcher, but hardly an ace; his career W-L was 86-93, but at least McGlothen managed to pitch over 200 innings in 4 seasons. Beckett hasn't done it once.

As to Lowell's 58 RBIs . . . Little Freddie Patek knocked in 60 RBIs in 1977.
   67. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 06:59 PM (#1742546)
Jesus Delgado is a toolsy LHP

RHP, crap. Now I have no idea why they put him/were thinking about putting him on their 40-man roster. I'd think Durbin would be a much more likely rule 5 choice.
   68. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 07:05 PM (#1742557)
"I still haven't heard any reasons for the downturn"

He got old?
   69. VegasRobb Posted: November 22, 2005 at 08:01 PM (#1742658)
Is this still just rumor?
   70. Kevin Sweet Child Romine (aco) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 08:08 PM (#1742671)
It hasn't been confirmed yet; best I can tell, it's contingent on all players involved passing physicals.
   71. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 08:51 PM (#1742753)
another projection for beckett in boston

http://www.rotoauthority.com/2005/11/becketts_boston.html
   72. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 09:03 PM (#1742793)
another projection for beckett in boston:
IP 205.3 SO 178 ERA 3.77 W 16


No way. This guy has never pitched over 160 innings, until last year (he only hit 178). Now, after 5 years of averaging 121 innings per season, he hits 208? Shyaa. He's been on the DL 9 times in 4 years.
   73. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 09:16 PM (#1742829)
Levski, why is he using translated pitching stats as a starting point?
   74. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 09:22 PM (#1742846)
Catfish, that's his translated pitching line for 2005. It's not translated to fenway, though, but to some imaginary context:

Converts all pitching statistics into a standard context. Pitchers are translated to a league where the top five pitchers (in innings) pitch an average of 275 innings. An average pitcher will have rates, per nine innings, of 9.00 hits, 1.00 home run, 3.00 walks, 6.00 strikeouts, and 4.50 earned runs. In the standard context, a replacement level pitcher has a 6.00; the translation is set up to conserve runs above replacement (alltime PRAR). Wins and losses are set using the pythagorean formula with average run support, with the pitcher's actual deviation from his real expected win percentage added back in.


link

As the top 5 AL pitchers don't average 275 innings each, I don't think that translation is a relevant or useful starting point. I have no idea why he uses it as one.
   75. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 09:29 PM (#1742865)
Levski, why is he using translated pitching stats as a starting point?

why are you asking me, i'm not doing the projection.
   76. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 22, 2005 at 09:46 PM (#1742891)
why are you asking me, i'm not doing the projection.

I thought you may be familiar with the source. The page you linked to didn't provide a rationale for using such translated stats.
   77. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 09:47 PM (#1742894)
I'm not familir with the source, no. I followed a link from the mlbtraderumors site.
   78. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:00 PM (#1742919)
I thought Beckett's biggest problem was staying off the DL, but not according to ESPN's scouting report:

"His biggest problem remains his bursts of anger when things go wrong on the mound. He still struggles to put bad pitches and bad calls behind him and tends to brood, sometimes for days, after disappointing outings."

Great. Another hot-head in Boston.
   79. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:03 PM (#1742929)
catfish, I assume you're a yankee fan, no? shouldn't you be worried that the sox are upgrading so much going into next year (while the yankees can't even get a free agent to return their calls?) instead of gloating over beckett's perceived emotional problems?
   80. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:06 PM (#1742936)
"Is this still just rumor?"

That Lowell can't hit anymore? I think it's pretty well established by now, personally.
   81. JMoulton Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:09 PM (#1742939)
Sanchez could be good, but he is clearly behind JonPapi and Lester. I see him as a #3 at best. He's tradeable.

IMHO Sanchez has the highest upside of the trio actually. You're not going to find any holes in his numbers this year. But I'm not sure why the injury risk floats around with his name either. He's only had TJ surgery...nothing with the shoulder.

He's also about neutral, or maybe just leaning towards being a flyball pitcher and calling Pro Player home never hurts in the HR department.
   82. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:11 PM (#1742950)
shouldn't you be worried that the sox are upgrading so much going into next year (while the yankees can't even get a free agent to return their calls?) instead of gloating over beckett's perceived emotional problems?

Nah. Beckett has averaged only 121 inning over 5 years . . . on the DL 9 times in 4 years. No threat. And Lowell? Hah. A bum. 58 RBIs in 500 ABs. Little Freddie Patek smacked in 60 RBIs in 497 ABs one year. Lowell is a liability. I hope to see him in their lineup.
   83. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:24 PM (#1742980)
All depends on what kind of payroll they can truly afford. Willis, Beckett, Delgado, Cabrera, Castillo, Lowell (if he bounces back) are damn fine players. LoDuca and Pierre are roughly average (Pierre's OPS+ stinks but historically he gets on base). If they could bring back Encarnacion (average) and Burnett (or bring in equivalent players), they'd still have an excellent core. And all but two of those guys would be 32 or younger. That would be a team not far from a shot at winning the World Series at all.

The Marlins have three young pitchers - Olsen, Johnson, and Vargas - plus Hermida and maybe Willingham that they can slot into their lineup, so they can get rid of some of a lot of the salary without too much pain. The proposed Lowell/Beckett trade addresses an organizational weakness by adding Hanley Ramirez as the SS of the future, allowing them to finally cut Alex Gonzalez adrift. There are also some rumors that Pierre could be traded, with Eric Reed (a Pierre clone, except that he's white) possibly slotting into CF.

Florida could do something like this by '07:

C LoDuca
1B Delgado
2B Castillo
SS Ramirez
3B Cabrera
LF Willingham
CF Reed
RF Hermida

SP Willis, Olsen, Vargas, Johnson, Sanchez

and then they need to build a bullpen.

-- MWE
   84. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:28 PM (#1742992)
Nah. Beckett has averaged only 121 inning over 5 years . . . on the DL 9 times in 4 years.

right. i'm sure you'd much rather have jaret wright or carl pavano on your team.

oh wait, you already do...

talk about sour grapes.
   85. chris p Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:29 PM (#1742999)
Nah. Beckett has averaged only 121 inning over 5 years

really funny, troll. beckett was called up for 4 games at the end of '01.
   86. Harold can be a fun sponge Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:36 PM (#1743029)
Levski, why is he using translated pitching stats as a starting point?

He starts with Prospectus' translated stats. The benefit of that is he doesn't have to translate everybody to a neutral context first; he can rely on Davenport to do that, and presumably Davenport does it better than he could. The downside is that he starts with Davenport's context, and doesn't adjust to a realistic 2006 context (he does a park adjustment, but that's it). If you use his projections exclusively, it doesn't matter because they're all relative. But if you just see one projection, it's going to be off (mostly on the innings).
   87. Kyle S Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:38 PM (#1743033)
Catfish is going to win my vote for poster of the year, if the Primeys ever come back.

MikeE, I posted nearly that same possible lineup/rotation on Braves Journal. Who is Johnson, and is he a lot better than Logan Kensing?
   88. Catfish326 Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:44 PM (#1743045)
beckett was called up for 4 games at the end of '01.

Never distrust statistics my friend. He was nursing a hampered wing. Poor fella. Seemed to have some promise, yet, the injury bug always seemed to get him. Strangely enough, the bug seemed to find its way clear up the youngeters rear quarters, causing a two pronged dilemma: Extended time on the DL and nuclear emotional flairups. Perhaps the hampered chap could use some ointment and a few sessions with Dr. Nazi Schilling . . . perhaps he might come around.
   89. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:46 PM (#1743054)
Kyle, that's Josh Johnson. He is probably better than Kensing.
   90. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:52 PM (#1743072)
uh oh. catfish knows statistics and baseball injuries.

a combo of dayn perry and will carroll.

someone please think of the children.
   91. 1k5v3L Posted: November 22, 2005 at 10:58 PM (#1743090)
(a Pierre clone, except that he's white)

genetic engineering AND eugenics? that's it, emeigh, now you've done it.
   92. AROM Posted: November 22, 2005 at 11:18 PM (#1743127)
Florida could do something like this by '07:

C LoDuca
1B Delgado
2B Castillo


I doubt those 3 will be there in 2007, especially Carlos.

How about Jason Stokes to replace the traded Delgado?
   93. Dizzypaco Posted: November 22, 2005 at 11:25 PM (#1743142)
The Marlins may very well have that lineup... and go 67-95 in 2007.
   94. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 22, 2005 at 11:42 PM (#1743177)
Kyle, that's Josh Johnson. He is probably better than Kensing.

FWIW, Kensing was shut down with elbow problems in August, and it's not clear how healthy he's going to be in '06.

Josh Johnson is a 22-YO righty who spent most of the season with Carolina. Excellent stuff, inconsistent command. I don't think he has a lot of upside, though.

-- MWE
   95. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 22, 2005 at 11:43 PM (#1743182)
FishStripes is reporting that the PTBNL is Jesus Delgado.

-- MWE
   96. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 23, 2005 at 12:26 AM (#1743238)
IMHO Sanchez has the highest upside of the trio actually. You're not going to find any holes in his numbers this year. But I'm not sure why the injury risk floats around with his name either. He's only had TJ surgery...nothing with the shoulder.

His elbow operation wasn't TJ -- a nerve in his arm was giving him trouble and he had surgery to fix it.

Interview:

RSN: I understand that you've had Tommy John surgery. Are you 100% recovered from that?

AS: That s a misunderstanding. It wasn't Tommy John surgery. I had a problem with a nerve in my arm, near a ligament, but I didn't have my ligament replaced and I feel very strong now.
   97. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: November 23, 2005 at 01:14 AM (#1743319)
So I assume Catfish thinks this is a bad trade for the Red Sox?
   98. scotto Posted: November 23, 2005 at 01:49 AM (#1743363)
So I assume Catfish thinks this is a bad trade for the Red Sox?

Yeah, that's why he seems cheesed off about it instead of doing the exultant gleeful Yankee fan thing.

I mean, Freddie Patek once had more RBIs than Mike Lowell did! He reeks!
   99. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 23, 2005 at 03:33 AM (#1743452)
How about Jason Stokes to replace the traded Delgado?

Stokes = Dave Kingman.

-- MWE
   100. Kyle S Posted: November 23, 2005 at 04:07 AM (#1743468)
Minus the ability to hit 400 home runs in the major leagues.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
1k5v3L
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.9185 seconds
66 querie(s) executed