Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

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. Kevin Sweet Child Romine (aco) Posted: July 22, 2007 at 10:52 PM (#2450912)
I'm guessing that this means Tavarez takes Pineiro's bullpen role, Gabbard stays in the rotation and Lester gets one (or two?) starts before Schilling comes back and he goes back to Pawtucket.

DFA'ing Pineiro looks bad, but it's better than holding on to him just to save face. He hasn't been good and Tavarez has been a good three-inning pitcher as a starting, so I think he'll be alright as a reliever.
   2. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: July 22, 2007 at 11:10 PM (#2450971)
JC Romero has been real god with the Phillies.
   3. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: July 22, 2007 at 11:11 PM (#2450974)
Actually he's been good. Not infallible.
   4. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 22, 2007 at 11:11 PM (#2450975)
Jon Lester is a clubhouse cancer.
   5. Mister High Standards Posted: July 22, 2007 at 11:35 PM (#2451048)
DFAing Pinerio is exactly the correct move. He is the worst pitcher on their staff, unless they were going to send down Lopez who has more value to this particular team than Pinerio.

They made an error in talent evaluation in re: to Pinerio. It's better to cut your losses than ride it out and hope for better.
   6. Darren Posted: July 23, 2007 at 12:03 AM (#2451092)
It can be the right move and still be embarrassing that they have to do it.

.288 .387 .404

That's what lefties are hitting against Lopez.
   7. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney) Posted: July 23, 2007 at 12:11 AM (#2451097)
Jon Lester is a clubhouse cancer.


So is Mike Lowell so they should cancel each other out.
   8. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: July 23, 2007 at 12:21 AM (#2451106)
Sometimes, I think the Red Sox outsmart themselves. I'm sure they had some reason, a projection system or chart, or something of that nature that told them Pineiro would help them this season. But sometimes, the most obvious answer is the right one. All you needed to do was take a quick look at his stats to see that he isn't the same pitcher he used to be.
   9. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: July 23, 2007 at 12:50 AM (#2451123)
He might indeed not be the guy that he used to be, but is 34 innings enough to prove that?

I'm just disappointed that there hasn't been much Lobsterman on the Sox yet this year. Maybe he didn't get around with Drawnbutterman in the clubhouse.

I haven't been hanging around much at ST this year, but I definitely won't be around much over the next week. I'm going to the SABR Convention.
   10. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:30 AM (#2451144)
I'm sure they had some reason, a projection system or chart, or something of that nature that told them Pineiro would help them this season.

Oh please. They just made a dumb ass decision and signed a crappy pitcher. It happens. Shitty players get decent contracts all the time. (See Hillenbrand, 6 million).
   11. philly Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:35 AM (#2451149)
Oh please. They just made a dumb ass decision and signed a crappy pitcher. It happens. Shitty players get decent contracts all the time. (See Hillenbrand, 6 million).


No kidding. I don't get this "they look foolish" business. It was a slightly too expensive one year flyer. Until some team becomes perfect at player evaluation no team should be graded against expected perfection. They look exactly like the other 29 teams that make similar (and many much worse) mistakes.

No biggie.
   12. Darren Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:40 AM (#2451155)
I'm sure they had some reason, a projection system or chart, or something of that nature that told them Pineiro would help them this season.

*****************************

Oh please. They just made a dumb ass decision and signed a crappy pitcher. It happens. Shitty players get decent contracts all the time. (See Hillenbrand, 6 million).


You're saying the same thing--they thought they were being smart but they were being dumb.

Here's the real problem with the whole Pineiro affair, as I see it: they liked Pineiro enough to sign him for $4 mil.+ and let him take up a roster spot they could have given to Craig Breslow, but 34 IP changed their minds so drastically that they'd rather DFA him then send down the clearly ineffective Javier Lopez. What could they have possibly learned in 34 scattered IP spread over 4 months? It just doesn't compute and it smacks of, as Russlan puts it, someone outsmarting themself.

(* again, if they have a reasonably useful trade lined up involving Pineiro, then none of the above necessarily applies.)
   13. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:41 AM (#2451156)
He might indeed not be the guy that he used to be, but is 34 innings enough to prove that?


Add the word statistically to this.
   14. PJ Martinez Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:41 AM (#2451157)
Also, I assume it was scouting, and not statistical projection, that let them down. How could one have made a positive statistical projection of Piniero's last few years?

I agree it was the right move. It's a fairly expensive mistake, but they've made more expensive ones in the past, and no doubt will in the future.
   15. PJ Martinez Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:43 AM (#2451158)
I think if a relief pitcher is allowing 1.6 baserunners per inning over 34 innings, and only strikes out 20 and walks 14, that's fairly meaningful.
   16. Darren Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:14 AM (#2451171)
Also, I assume it was scouting, and not statistical projection, that let them down. How could one have made a positive statistical projection of Piniero's last few years?


As a reliever in 2006, Pineiro pitched 24.1 IP, allowed 19 H, 5 unintentional walks, K'ed 20, and allowed 3 HR. Granted, that's very little to go on.

I think if a relief pitcher is allowing 1.6 baserunners per inning over 34 innings, and only strikes out 20 and walks 14, that's fairly meaningful.


I don't. But if I did, I'd also be looking at Kyle Snyder, who's allowed 1.4 baserunners per inning for 35.7 IP, and far more of those have been the result of walks. Lopez is also over 1.4 and he's failing miserably at the what he's supposed to be doing as a Loogy AND can be sent down without being exposed to waivers. My guess is that they're keeping Lopez because they (Tito?) like having a Loogy, even though he's not doing well as well.

Given regular work, I'd guess that Pineiro has as good of a chance to succeed as either of those two guys. I would still rather see Breslow get promoted and replace Lopez ASAP.
   17. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:42 AM (#2451185)
My guess with Pineiro is that the Red Sox were desperate for a reliever, and they saw what they wanted to see. There is a case to be made based on his numbers (as Darren pointed out) and by observation he's got a fastball and a curveball or whatever. It's not a good case - as everyone knows, he's actually Joel Pineiro - but it's important to remember that the Red Sox were looking at Mike Timlin as their top closing option at the time, and Hideki Okajima had yet to throw a split finger change. The Sox saw a closer prospect because they needed a closer prospect badly.
   18. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:59 AM (#2451200)
BYE PINIERO YOU STINK
   19. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 23, 2007 at 03:01 AM (#2451205)
I would still rather see Breslow get promoted and replace Lopez ASAP.


Yes to #1, what about a trade for #2? Damaso Marte?
   20. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: July 23, 2007 at 04:58 AM (#2451275)
i think the organizational politics resulting from hiring allard baird made the sox sign pineiro. and granted i can't know that, but wasn't there an article after pineiro was signed talking about how he had good stuff and baird loved him. so, this might have been an attempt to make allard feel good about himself and do the real job he was hired to do. which he isn't probably good at either, and so he'll probably be gone soon too.

this site nicely sums it up, and no i didn't write, don't know the person and couldn't care less about it. but the guy links to the original globe article which tells about baird's influence on the hernandez and pineiro signings.
http://soxnest.com/the-case-for-allard-baird-there-isnt-one/
   21. Dave Cyprian Posted: July 23, 2007 at 05:06 AM (#2451277)
Lester = Trade bait?
   22. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 23, 2007 at 05:08 AM (#2451279)
Lester = Trade bait?


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
   23. Ozzie's gay friend Posted: July 23, 2007 at 07:04 AM (#2451330)
If you spend $4 million on a guy it's not really taking a "flyer" on him anymore is it?

I think Theo didn;t want to have to rely on young guys from the system in the bullpen (foolishly, IMO not other team is more afraid of trusting their own young pitchers to fill out a bullpen), so he signed some vets with potential upside.
That's fine, but for $1m more he could have gotten Dotel (who'd probably also struggle in an inconsistent non-lead preserving role) but still.
   24. PJ Martinez Posted: July 23, 2007 at 01:30 PM (#2451344)
"I would still rather see Breslow get promoted and replace Lopez ASAP."

On this, I think, we can all agree.
   25. Josh Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:33 PM (#2451411)
That's fine, but for $1m more he could have gotten Dotel
People keep writing things like this, but I don't think it is true. If I were Dotel, I would take a pay cut to close. I would not take a pay cut to be a set-up man. I don't think the RS had their choice. (I realize that Papelbon was a "starter" then, but I'd still pick KC if I was looking to get a long term K -- more stability, esp given the uncertainty with Papelbon's status.)
   26. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:41 PM (#2451422)
I think they're showcasing Lester. Oswalt. That's the name. Lester and ? (not Ellsbury, Buchholz) for Oswalt?
   27. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:48 PM (#2451433)
You're not going to get Oswalt, who is under Houston's control through the 2012 season, for "Lester and ?".
   28. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: July 23, 2007 at 02:51 PM (#2451440)
Always begin negotiations with a lowball offer.
   29. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: July 23, 2007 at 03:02 PM (#2451454)
If they're showcasing Lester, doing it against the Indians is pretty damn risky.

It seems like each offseason the Red Sox just sign a few guys for a not-insignificant amount of money who are a long shot to be good, but who the Red Sox get for depth or in case they have something left. Pineiro, JT Snow, Mantei, Halama - I think each of these guys like $3-4M. These guys weren't going to kill the Red Sox if they were lousy, and in most cases they had backups in the (likely) event that they sucked.
   30. villageidiom Posted: July 23, 2007 at 03:25 PM (#2451472)
Here's the real problem with the whole Pineiro affair, as I see it: they liked Pineiro enough to sign him for $4 mil.+ and let him take up a roster spot they could have given to Craig Breslow, but 34 IP changed their minds so drastically that they'd rather DFA him then send down the clearly ineffective Javier Lopez. What could they have possibly learned in 34 scattered IP spread over 4 months?
They learned:

1. Jonthan Papelbon's shoulder rehabilitation went about as well as could be expected, with his shoulder in better shape entering 2007 than it likely ever was in 2006.

2. Hideki Okajima has the ability to get major-league hitters out on an unexpectedly consistent basis.

3. Manny Delcarmen has enough confidence in his stuff that he can get himself out of jams, instead of adding fuel to the fire.

4. Apparently, a healthy Mike Timlin can still pitch, not having given up an earned run in close to a month.

Pineiro, Romero, Donnelly, and Okajima were acquired to add depth to an otherwise uncertain situation. At the time those players were acquired, Papelbon, Timlin, and Delcarmen all had significant question marks - as did many of the other bullpen "solutions". What we learned in Pineiro's 34 IP is that we don't need him. While his performance does factor into it, mostly it has to do with the success of the other options.

Looking back, signing David Ortiz was not a mistake, while signing Walker/Giambi/Mueller/Ortiz/Millar (in that order) for $10.8 million to share five positions with two incumbents (Hillenbrand, Nixon) is full of "mistakes". But by simply having the overabundance of players they were able to find out who should stick and who shouldn't.

I see similarities between that situation in 2003 and the bullpen situation in 2007, in which they signed Pineiro/Romero/Donnelly/Okajima for $8.25 million. The two big differences, as I see it, were that the Pineiro contract was relatively big, and that they couldn't rotate their bullpen options as well as they had rotated the hitters between the lineup and the bench. The other bullpen options were in the minors, and couldn't be rotated through unless injuries took place. (Of course, injury isn't uncommon to the relief corps of any team; so it wasn't as big a concern.) Taken in isolation, signing Pineiro for $4 million was a mistake; but providing significant depth for $8 million was not.
   31. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 23, 2007 at 04:21 PM (#2451522)
SALOMON TORRES? That guy blows.

We should get Marte to replace Lopez as the LOOGY.
   32. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 23, 2007 at 04:23 PM (#2451524)
Er, they traded for Brendan Donnelly.

ALso, next year, PLEASE look at Kobayashi. He's really really good... except for Kobayashi Theatre moments, but i bet you he'd be badass as a setup man.
   33. RobertMachemer Posted: July 23, 2007 at 04:33 PM (#2451537)
Apparently, a healthy Mike Timlin can still pitch
His ERA is certainly nice, but I'm not yet convinced. He's got a 5.10 dERA. He's struck out 13 and (unintentionally) walked 6. Yes, he's doing better lately, but is it sustainable? I have my doubts.

Incidentally, Ironchef, can you still edit your "nooo!" post? I think it may have screwed up the margins...
   34. tfbg9 Posted: July 23, 2007 at 04:48 PM (#2451553)
I'll take a wait and see attitude on Timlin, and MDC, actually, as well, after MCD's yesterday's Sunday meltdown vs the White Sox.

His command is very shakey still, IMO.
   35. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 23, 2007 at 04:57 PM (#2451557)

Incidentally, Ironchef, can you still edit your "nooo!" post? I think it may have screwed up the margins...


There's no post editing in Therapy. Racists.


Incidentally, Ironchef, can you still edit your "nooo!" post? I think it may have screwed up the margins...


I also have my doubts. If he's taking Pineiro's job as bullpen asshat... ah who am I kidding.

This is who I'd want in the pen in terms of "priority" if there is no trade
(Salomon Torres will blow, he will blow if he gets here, count on it.)

Locks:
Papelbon
Okajima
Manny D

Should be pitching when healthy:
Donnelly

LOOGY:
Breslow

Useless garbage innings:
Snyder or Tavarez

That's 6 pitchers right there. I'd trade for another legit bullpen arm, option Lopez back to AAA, kindly request Mike Timlin to retire (We'll have MIke Timlin day at Fenway: we owe it to the man to acknowledge his contributions, he owes it for us to retire), and get rid of one of Snyder or Tavarez.

As for starters, I'd probably go with Becket/Daisuke/Schilling/Wake/Gabbard (I can't believe I just typed that) for now, send back Lester, and then see what happens.

Don't trade Lester: He'll be a very good legitimate 200 IP league average inning eater soon, and he'll be young and cheap. ANd besides cancer no health problems.
   36. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: July 23, 2007 at 05:03 PM (#2451561)
besides cancer no health problems.

"...other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"
   37. villageidiom Posted: July 23, 2007 at 06:40 PM (#2451675)
His ERA is certainly nice, but I'm not yet convinced. He's got a 5.10 dERA. He's struck out 13 and (unintentionally) walked 6. Yes, he's doing better lately, but is it sustainable? I have my doubts.
I'm not convinced either, but (a) I am willing to look past his early struggles after returning from the DL (most of which were in very low leverage situations), and (b) effectively we're talking about the 4th-most-important bullpen slot at best. The bar for performance there is considerably lower than primary setup.

On (a), here's the game situation for his first seven outings post-DL:

8th 0 out down 1 1st & 2nd
9th 0 out down 10
8th 0 out down 5
6th 2 out down 4 1st & 3rd
9th 0 out up 11
6th 1 out down 4
7th 0 out down 4

In those he had a 6.75 ERA, and 7.18 dERA. In only one of them was he in the position to affect the game outcome, and that was his first game back from the DL.

After that stretch...

7th 1 out down 2 1st & 2nd
9th 0 out down 1
6th 2 out up 4 2nd base
8th 0 out up 11
11th 0 out tie
6th 0 out down 4
6th 2 out down 1 2nd base
9th 0 out down 1
5th 2 out down 2 1st base
7th 0 out up 2

In those, a 0.00 ERA and 3.24 dERA.

Selective endpoints and small sample, but they are giving him more responsibility and he is responding. Whether either of those is the chicken or the egg I don't know.

Wok, I agree with the first 4 on your depth chart. After that I start getting indifferent about who stays & who goes, but until Donnelly is back I'm OK with Timlin taking his place. And, yes, you're right, they traded for Donnelly. (In 2003 they traded for Giambi and Walker, and claimed Millar.)

On another front, the DFA of Pineiro frees up a 40-man roster spot before the trade deadline. That, I like.
   38. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: July 23, 2007 at 06:56 PM (#2451694)
Don't trade Lester: He'll be a very good legitimate 200 IP league average inning eater soon, and he'll be young and cheap. ANd besides cancer no health problems.

What makes you so confident that Lester can pitch 200 IP in a season? I have my doubts.
   39. villageidiom Posted: July 23, 2007 at 08:23 PM (#2451783)
200 IP in 32 starts = 6.25 IP/Start

Lester's 2006 starts with Pawtucket: 11 games, 0 over 6.25 IP.
Lester's 2006 starts with Boston: 15 games, 2 over 6.25 IP.

Lester's 2007 starts with Pawtucket: 14 games, 4 over 6.25 IP.

I have my doubts he'll be able to do that soon, but he could get there.
   40. Darren Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:33 AM (#2452501)
Lester walked a fine line tonight but did well overall.
   41. Darren Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:35 AM (#2452504)
They learned:

1. Jonthan Papelbon's shoulder rehabilitation went about as well as could be expected, with his shoulder in better shape entering 2007 than it likely ever was in 2006.

2. Hideki Okajima has the ability to get major-league hitters out on an unexpectedly consistent basis.

3. Manny Delcarmen has enough confidence in his stuff that he can get himself out of jams, instead of adding fuel to the fire.

4. Apparently, a healthy Mike Timlin can still pitch, not having given up an earned run in close to a month.


I disagree on #4 (I'm not entirely convinced) but I think overall, all of these things could be true, but they wouldn't mean that Pineiro s/b released. His money is sunk cost, so keeping him as the last man in the pen makes sense, particularly if you think he has potential.
   42. PJ Martinez Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:46 AM (#2452522)
"Lester walked a fine line tonight but did well overall."

Which was SOP for Lester last year, too. But the Indians are a tough offensive team and the strike zone tonight was reportedly small. So certainly a good first outing.
   43. villageidiom Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:28 AM (#2452596)
I disagree on #4 (I'm not entirely convinced) but I think overall, all of these things could be true, but they wouldn't mean that Pineiro s/b released. His money is sunk cost, so keeping him as the last man in the pen makes sense, particularly if you think he has potential.

The idea of a sunk cost is that you won't get the money back no matter what you do. The money doesn't justify keeping him. Were they to need someone for a valued roster spot, and were he one of their better options for it, they should keep him. But they don't, and he's not.

FWIW, I'm not convinced that Lester is ready, despite the outing this evening. But he doesn't have to be THE solution. Buchholz and Breslow could contribute, as could Hansack; and they have this Schilling kid who might be promoted soon. I'm much more concerned with the bench depth than the pitching staff right now.
   44. Darren Posted: July 24, 2007 at 11:21 AM (#2452774)
The idea of a sunk cost is that you won't get the money back no matter what you do. The money doesn't justify keeping him.


I never said that they should have kept him because of the money. I said that it makes them look foolish because it means their opinion of him changed greatly after just 34 IP. You countered that they had learned a lot in that time, and I'm saying that even if they learned all that stuff, it would not be reason enough for him to be off the team. They would have had to also learn that Pineiro is worse than Snyder and so valueless that you'd rather lose him completely than send down Lopez. I submit that it is very hard to learn that much in such a short time.

Your comparison to the 03 team's 1B/3B/DH situation is an interesting one, but again, I think it depends on them figuring out who's best in very brief auditions. Maybe they can, but I'm reminded of the 564 other relievers who have left the Red Sox and found success elsewhere recently. Fox, Embree, Jones, Riske, Meredith, Seanez, Myers, Bradford, etc. I'm not particularly confident that they are good at figuring out who's going to be successful in the pen based on full seasons of data, much less half seasons.
   45. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 24, 2007 at 12:28 PM (#2452794)
Yeah, the Red sox didn't cut any of those hitters in 2003. The issue with Pineiro is that surely he wasn't the only reliever in the world, and surely they could have spent less than 4M on a different reliever, as they did with the rest of the bullpen. Putting 4M into Pineiro speaks to a very high valuation of his ability as a reliever. Lumping him in with guys who made half as much doesn't make a lot of sense to me. My take, as I said above, is that the Red Sox realized pretty soon that they were wrong on Pineiro, that their judgment was clouded by their needs or that they trusted the wrong scouts or stats. I think that it wasn't a decision made in 34 IP, but a decision made in about 4 IP, and a decison that was relatively easy to make because they saw what they knew they should have seen to begin with.

This isn't a criticism of the Red Sox bullpen - which, as seems obvious, is quite good - but rather this one move seems quite easy to disaggregate because the contract was so much larger, and this one move seems to have been a mistake realized quite early on.

And how about lester? That's one of the best offenses in baseball that he held in check. If he can get swings and misses like that on the fastball, hew's gonna be a heckuva MLB pitcher.
   46. baudib Posted: July 24, 2007 at 12:39 PM (#2452798)


ALso, next year, PLEASE look at Kobayashi.


Plus he can keep the hot dog vendors in business.
   47. villageidiom Posted: July 24, 2007 at 12:43 PM (#2452800)
They would have had to also learn that Pineiro is worse than Snyder and so valueless that you'd rather lose him completely than send down Lopez. I submit that it is very hard to learn that much in such a short time.

I doubt they think Pineiro is valueless. But:

1. I think part of the decision was that they valued having an open 40-man roster spot heading into the trading deadline more than having him around. Sending down Lopez doesn't accomplish that. Maybe casting off some minor-league flotsam would be better, but the improvements in the minors have cut down on the possibilities there.

2. I think the other part of the decision is looking forward to 2008 and beyond. Snyder and Lopez are both under team control for more than just 2007 (albeit at arbitration prices starting in 2008). Pineiro likely has at most two months left to his Red Sox career. It doesn't make sense in the long run to cut Snyder or Lopez, because both will have more opportunity to provide value - either in trade or in performance - for some time. And it's not like Snyder or Lopez providing value is a pipe dream.

Whether Pineiro is really worse than Snyder or Lopez, I don't know; but...

3. If Pineiro has 34 IP in 4 months, and there's 2 months left to his tenure with the Red Sox, exactly how much more time should they give him to demonstrate superior value? And exactly which opportunities will they give him to do that?

Pineiro is expendable. Partly he put himself into this position with his performance, but mostly Papelbon, Okajima, and Delcarmen put him there. I'm shocked to be saying this, but the Boston bullpen is stocked with quality pitching. Given the personnel out there, and the kids waiting in the wings, I don't see how they'd miss Pineiro.

Pineiro deserves better than to be expendable. On some other team he'd probably get quality innings - quantity, too - and he may prove himself to be of great value to some team. But it won't be this one. Hopefully there's enough value that another team will trade for him.

I never said that they should have kept him because of the money.

You said, "His money is sunk cost, so keeping him as the last man in the pen makes sense, particularly if you think he has potential." Granted, you'd been drinking when you typed it, so maybe it's not the best reflection of your actual opinion.
   48. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 24, 2007 at 12:54 PM (#2452806)
vi -

We're obviously talking past each other. The point is that the Red Sox spent much more on Pineiro than on any other reliever, and now they have determined that he's just not as good as Kyle Snyder. They had to massively revise their estimate of his ability in order to make that decision. This means they made an error in signing him, and so we're all noting that.

the fact that the Red sox have a good bulpen is true, and worth noting, and useful for limiting the scope of the criticism, but nothing you've said has suggested that the Red Sox didn't make an error in judgment in signing Pineiro.
   49. Josh Posted: July 24, 2007 at 01:05 PM (#2452810)
And how about lester?
Maybe it was just me, and maybe I'm just not that sentimental, but I think he looked merely OK out there. Really wild at times - missing high to RHers, often, scares me, esp when they would set up down and in.

Great story, though.
   50. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 24, 2007 at 01:11 PM (#2452812)
Lester's command wasn't great, but how about the stuff? If his fastball is good enough to throw by the Cleveland offense, it's good enough to throw by anyone. The cutter looked good too, though I think it was a cutter that he left over the heart of the plate to Sizemore, and you can't do that.
   51. villageidiom Posted: July 24, 2007 at 01:32 PM (#2452823)
the fact that the Red sox have a good bulpen is true, and worth noting, and useful for limiting the scope of the criticism, but nothing you've said has suggested that the Red Sox didn't make an error in judgment in signing Pineiro.

And I'm not suggesting that they didn't make an error in judgment in signing Pineiro specifically. I'm addressing the notion that they shouldn't have DFA'ed Pineiro this week. You're right, we are talking past each other. (I didn't see your post #46 when I posted #47.)

Darren seems to take the $4 mil as a sign that they thought there was potential, and thus shouldn't give up on that potential after 34 IP. You seem to take the $4 mil as a sign that they thought there was potential, and thus were bad evaluators of potential. I'm taking the approach that they got a bunch of arms to see what would stick, precisely because they're poor evaluators of relief potential - though not at a particular disadvantage because NO team has demonstrated consistency in that field - and part of the fallout of that approach is that you'll end up having to jettison some of the surplus, maybe even someone you thought would contribute more than he has. It happened with Romero already, and it's happening now with Pineiro.

These are things we've each been saying off and on for five months or so, and each of us have enough evidence to suggest we're right.

I'm not particularly confident that they are good at figuring out who's going to be successful in the pen based on full seasons of data, much less half seasons.

Same here. They are generally impatient with bad performance in the pen. But I'm not sure how patient they should be. I'd prefer more patience, but in the case of Pineiro I don't really see a compelling reason why they should.

Yeah, the Red sox didn't cut any of those hitters in 2003.

They didn't have to. They traded Hillenbrand when it was clear they didn't need him, and they had room on the bench and the DL for the rest (that being Giambi). In fact, they later picked up Kapler and McCarty to add to the depth, rather than subtract. The position player situation is different in that respect, and also different in that it's harder to evaluate relief potential than offensive potential, but the general approach is similar.
   52. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 01:42 PM (#2452835)
I'm taking the approach that they got a bunch of arms to see what would stick, precisely because they're poor evaluators of relief potential -

that works for romero, but i don't think it works for piniero. they paid him significantly more than the rest of the relievers, so they should have seen something in him that makes it worth paying him more than the other guys.
   53. PJ Martinez Posted: July 24, 2007 at 01:47 PM (#2452838)
Just as an aside, Javier Lopez struck out Hafner last night in a big spot-- so, for one night, at least, holding onto Lopez and dropping Piniero appears to have been the right move.
   54. Josh Posted: July 24, 2007 at 01:51 PM (#2452844)
Lester's command wasn't great, but how about the stuff?
He certainly is throwing harder, and his stuff has better movement, than last year. It wasn't consistent (esp the velocity, which dipped at times even when his FB wasn't the cutter), but the peak was very nice. He didn't throw it often, but the curve was much better than last year's post call-up.

So, let's say a team calls up and asks for Lester for player X. Player X would help this year, is sufficiently young and sufficiently cost-controlled to be an asset. So, the trade is a good one to the RS. Do you take the PR hit? This isn't a roto league team - and the business is entertainment; Jon Lester is a good player (though, not great) and has a devoted following. He is a good non-baseball story, while also being good at baseball. OTOH, winning is entertainment, and the primary goal of an. Even karlmangus would have a tough time with this one.

You can construct the trade in such a way that it is obvious (Johan for Lester, omgz), but that isn't my point. I mean for it to be a hard decision - how much of a plus trade does it need to be? How much does non-on-the-field baseball PR get in the way of a baseball on-field decision? I have no answer, btw.
   55. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:05 PM (#2452860)
Josh, I'm going to sidestep your question.

I don't see what trade the Sox could make for such a player. They don't have any really bad players. (One could make the case for Lugo, but I don't see the Red Sox trading for a shortstop.) They have six starters. They have an excellent top three in the bullpen. The Red Sox, if they want to improve, need a superstar if they want to make a real improvement. I don't see any superstars out there, but I'm sure Theo is putting together several double-bankshot trades that won't come particularly close to fruition.

and if there's a real superstar to be had, you trade Lester, and I don't think anyone minds too, too much.

The one thing the Red Sox need is a backup catcher, but they aren't going to trade for one. They need a 4th OF, but Ellsbury, Murphy, and Moss deserve a shot at that job. My guess is the main trade the Red Sox make will be Wily Mo for a B/C prospect to some middling NL club. (But, then, I was pretty sure they wouldn't DFA Pineiro.)
   56. PJ Martinez Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:10 PM (#2452862)
"I don't see any superstars out there, but I'm sure Theo is putting together several double-bankshot trades that won't come particularly close to fruition."

There was some report that the Sox were knocking the tires on Jermaine Dye, which is either totally made up or some preliminary work for some crazy trade that will never happen (involving either Manny or Drew).

A lot of rumbling that Wily Mo's days as a Red Sock are numbered. I will root for him wherever he goes (other than the Bronx, obviously).
   57. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:28 PM (#2452876)
I will root for him wherever he goes (other than the Bronx, obviously).


As will I.

They have six starters. They have an excellent top three in the bullpen. The Red Sox, if they want to improve, need a superstar if they want to make a real improvement.

We don't need a superstar. We need a legit (star?) reliever to take the god damn load off Okajima. Papelbon is being babied this year, and he's been effective and healthy at the expense of Okajima. That's not only unfair, but quite frankly bad for the short-term. Okajima will end up being tired for the stretch (if not already tired), and he's got a 2 year deal, so he might not be as effective next year too.

Brendan Donnelly has pitched well this year, and I'd like to keep him for the rest of year (if healthy), but I wouldn't bring him back next year. He'll be 36... he coudl go Alan Embree on us next year. I'd trade him this offseason.

Damaso Marte might be a good idea to replace Javier Lopez. Marte can actually get lefties out, he's having a great year in Pittsburgh and he's pitched decently in the AL before, and Lopez has an option left anyway. Just say no to Saloman Torres. I'd advocate getting Marte to replace Lopez right away, and he can help shoulder some of the Okajima load. Instead of having OKajima pitch 3 nights in a row, Marte can take his place on one of teh nights, and still be available to LOOGY on one other night.

that power arm I'd like see come, will probably cost too much in trade.

I'd do this for the stretch run:

Papelbon
Okajima
Delcarmen
Donnelly (against righties primarily)
Marte (high-lev LOOGY + occasional Okajima innings)
Two of Snyder/Tavarez/Breslow/Lopez


That sets us up next year nicely as well. Swap in a Kobayashi for Donnelly, and we look pretty good.
   58. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:29 PM (#2452879)
The one thing the Red Sox need is a backup catcher, but they aren't going to trade for one. They need a 4th OF, but Ellsbury, Murphy, and Moss deserve a shot at that job. My guess is the main trade the Red Sox make will be Wily Mo for a B/C prospect to some middling NL club. (But, then, I was pretty sure they wouldn't DFA Pineiro.)

ellsbury, murphy, and moss deserve a shot, but right now, hinske's the lefthanded hitter off the bench and the backup 1B. ellsbury, and murphy can play center, so they have that on hinske, but moss is a lefthanded hitter that is limited to the corner outfield. of course, he probably doesn't suck, so he has that over hinske.
   59. Mister High Standards Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:29 PM (#2452880)
they paid him significantly more than the rest of the relievers, so they should have seen something in him that makes it worth paying him more than the other guys.


I don't particularly think that is true, it may be - but they very well could have seen the same thing but their was more demand for Pinerio so they had to pay more for him. You could make the case they were building a "portfolio" of relievers, so the price of any specific one isn't the issue but the cost of the entire basket of goods.

I don't know if I think that is true, but it just as easily be as true as they though Pinerio was better than the others, they could have thought he was better, or worse, or the same as the others they brought in. Just that other teams perception of him was higher AND he offered the best risk/reward of the players that were available to them that they didn't sign, for that dollar range.
   60. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:38 PM (#2452885)
ellsbury, and murphy can play center, so they have that on hinske, but moss is a lefthanded hitter that is limited to the corner outfield. of course, he probably doesn't suck, so he has that over hinske.


I'd call down to AAA right now and have Moss start at 1B. Moss used to be a 2B right? Start grooming him for the possibility of a 1B/corner OF role on the Sox next year.
   61. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 02:44 PM (#2452887)
i think moss gets traded and starts as a corner outfielder somewhere next year.
   62. Dave Cyprian Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:00 PM (#2452904)
I thought Lester looked great and very promising. His stuff looked fantastic, at least as good as I remember it last year. His very first pitch of the game was an unhittable cutter painting the black, his curve had sharper break, and he was throwing the fastball right past righties and lefties when he got it over.

Obviously it wasn't a stellar outing, but it wasn't for lack of confidence or ability that got Lester in trouble. He left a terrible cutter down the middle to Sizemore, no one is perfect, and the sketchy 4th inning was entirely a result of his shoulder flying open, not some mysterious hard-to-solve mental bugaboo.

I can't believe this guy wasn't dominating AAA, it must have been mental, and I hope he gets more big league starts to get into the solid groove he is definitely capable of.
   63. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:08 PM (#2452908)
It's as much the Red Sox bullpen being awesome to this point as it is Pineiro being kinda lousy. Pineiro has a place in an average or below average bullpen, but in this above average bullpen, he been a weak link.

There are several teams who have a guy like Pineiro around. He's got (or had) some upside at one point, and I'm guessing the scouts thought they saw someone with decent stuff. The thing is, the Red Sox bullpen has been way better than expected this year. I don't think anyone here expected the bullpen to be even above average. Signing a guy with some upside and then having to cut him because the rest of the bullpen you assembled is too good is the kind of "error" I don't think the Red Sox mind making.

We need a legit (star?) reliever to take the god damn load off Okajima.


Okajima is projected for 76 innings this year. That's a lot of innings, but it's not an overwheling workload, especially since he cruised through most of them pretty well.
   64. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:10 PM (#2452909)
i think moss gets traded and starts as a corner outfielder somewhere next year.


I'd have Moss play at 1B everyday for the rest of the season at AAA. If Lowell walks and we don't get a corner IF, Moss could step in right away as our insurance plan.
   65. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:14 PM (#2452912)
We need a legit (star?) reliever to take the god damn load off Okajima.

in chatter, i advocated replacing tavarez, snyder, and lopez with gagne, lidge, and fuentes.
   66. SoSH U at work Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:21 PM (#2452919)
The one thing the Red Sox need is a backup catcher, but they aren't going to trade for one.


Looking far out in the future, it would be nice to have a non-dead backup catcher available for when the playoffs roll around. Wakefield may not be in the rotation come playoff time, which means there is absolutely no on-field reason to have Mirabelli active (if Wake's throwing out of the pen, you can't really go with the personal caddy).
   67. PJ Martinez Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:23 PM (#2452920)
Atlanta is supposedly looking into Teixeira. How much would people here offer for Saltalamacchia, if the Braves were willing to listen?
   68. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 03:47 PM (#2452939)
are ellsbury and salty equal value? if andruw jones walks and we think crisp is the real deal, it makes sense.
   69. Kevin Sweet Child Romine (aco) Posted: July 24, 2007 at 04:02 PM (#2452956)
are ellsbury and salty equal value?

I don't think they are. Salty has already shown the ability to hit Major League pitching and plays a more demanding position (pretty well, as I understand it). He's actually a couple of months younger than Ellsbury, to boot. It think that Ellsbury + another prospect in the Gabbard/Pauley/Murphy echelon would make a lot of sense for both teams if Jones departs, but I don't see how it could happen before the offseason. Salty is Atlanta's best option at first base right now and their best backup catcher, and they won't be trading Jones in a pennant race. Something to keep in mind for the hot stove season, though.
   70. PJ Martinez Posted: July 24, 2007 at 04:40 PM (#2453017)
"I don't see how it could happen before the offseason."

Only if Atlanta lands Teix-- and doesn't include Salty in the deal. That seems pretty unlikely, but one hopes Theo & Co. are staying on top of the situation (facilitating a three-way trade, e.g.).

With Kottaras mostly scuffling, acquiring Varitek's long-term replacement (not to mention, ideally, Mirabelli's near-term one) has to be a major organizational priority.
   71. Mister High Standards Posted: July 24, 2007 at 04:45 PM (#2453024)
are ellsbury and salty equal value?


I don't think I would make that swap. I think Elsbury will have more value to the Sox than Salty would at least for a while. The positional blocks in the near term aren't nearly as severe for JE especially if he you figure Manny and David along with Coco as guys he could be filling in for.
   72. Kevin Sweet Child Romine (aco) Posted: July 24, 2007 at 04:54 PM (#2453040)
The positional blocks in the near term aren't nearly as severe for JE especially if he you figure Manny and David along with Coco as guys he could be filling in for.

Doug Mirabelli is a severe positional block? If Lowell departs and Youks goes back the third, there's really no one blocking anyone at first. Plus, Varitek has only one season left on his contract, during which he'll be 36 years old.

Coco's an everyday centerfielder, Manny's an every day left fielder and Ellsbury doesn't hit enough to be a DH. I think you got this one backwards.
   73. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:04 PM (#2453053)
yeah. i'm a huge ellsbury fan ... can't quite get a read on salty's value, though.
   74. Mister High Standards Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:04 PM (#2453054)
Doug Mirabelli is a severe positional block?


Yes, as long as Wake is on the team.

Coco's an everyday centerfielder, Manny's an every day left fielder and Ellsbury doesn't hit enough to be a DH. I think you got this one backwards.


If Coco goes down then JE goes in. If Manny goes down CC goes to left and JE goes to CF. If David goes down Manny to DH CC to LF and JE to CF. I also assume if Drew goes down for any length of time JE gets the call though I'm unsure how you do the stacking.
   75. Josh Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:05 PM (#2453056)
A backup OF fills in for David by moving Manny to DH. Subbing for Manny also means you can sub for David.

That said, I don't think that really utilizes Ellsbury in a way that maximizes his value. In other words, with Coco here, Ellsbury has less value to this team than in a trade.

Ellsbury + Lester for Teixera? Does that bring up my question before? (Not enough?)
   76. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:07 PM (#2453059)
If Manny goes down CC goes to left and JE goes to CF

that's a bold move. i think it's the right move, but i'm not sure it happens.
   77. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:08 PM (#2453061)
Doug Mirabelli is a severe positional block?

FIND SOMEBODY ELSE TO CATCH HIM DAMMIT

yeah. i'm a huge ellsbury fan ... can't quite get a read on salty's value, though.

Salty's value is really really dependent on his ability to stay behind the plate. If he's a catcher, he can probably fetch 2 Bucholtz's, because Schulerholtz is that damn good. If he's not a catcher... just a youngish power 1B bat would fetch.
   78. chris p Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:11 PM (#2453067)
spell his name right, wokster: Buchholz
   79. Kevin Sweet Child Romine (aco) Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:12 PM (#2453069)
If Coco goes down then JE goes in. If Manny goes down CC goes to left and JE goes to CF. If David goes down Manny to DH CC to LF and JE to CF.

Ah, I see. I didn't realize that by "filling in" you meant on a long-term basis due to injury, rather than as a 4th outfielder/bench player. All the same, if Varitek goes down (at least as likely as any of the OFs getting hurt) there is NOBODY to take his place right now.

Also, I don't think Mirabelli is brought back next year no matter what Wakefield decides to do. Just because Bard couldn't adjust to catching the knuckler doesn't mean no other catcher in the world besides Dougie can do it.
   80. Mister High Standards Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:15 PM (#2453071)
Ellsbury + Lester for Teixera? Does that bring up my question before? (Not enough?)


I wouldn't even consider that deal. I wouldn't consider that deal for any player in baseball for 1.5 years of service.

at least as likely as any of the OFs getting hurt

Any ONE of the OF'er getting hurt. Not all the permutations.

Plus I really think you all are mistaken in that Varitek is only starting here for one more year. Varitek is the starter until he puts up back to back 220 EQA's or he wants to retire.
   81. Chip Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:16 PM (#2453072)
Also, I don't think Mirabelli is brought back next year no matter what Wakefield decides to do. Just because Bard couldn't adjust to catching the knuckler doesn't mean no other catcher in the world besides Dougie can do it.

It would help if they didn't bring multiple backup candidates into spring training and then give most of the early ST Wake innings to only one of them. Isn't that what happened with Flaherty?
   82. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:26 PM (#2453080)
Hey, Bobby Kielty DFAed! He'd be a good temporary 5th OF
   83. villageidiom Posted: July 24, 2007 at 05:38 PM (#2453099)
Hey, Bobby Kielty DFAed! He'd be a good temporary 5th OF

Too bad we don't have an open roster spot with which to pick up such players. Oh, wait...
   84. PJ Martinez Posted: July 24, 2007 at 06:13 PM (#2453127)
"Varitek is the starter until he puts up back to back 220 EQA's or he wants to retire."

Both of those outcomes become more and more likely with each passing year. At 35, he's already old for a catcher. And one way to keep him fresh over the next few years (if he indeed re-signs) would be to rest him more and more, which is a frightful prospect with Mirabelli (or most of the other available C's, for that matter) in tow.

Another part of Saltalamacchia's value is that people expect him to hit well enough to get occasional starts at 1B and DH, which, as we've seen lately, would hold some value for the Red Sox.
   85. villageidiom Posted: July 24, 2007 at 06:33 PM (#2453159)
Back to the original thread topic for a moment.

With all the talk about how much expectation is reflected in the fact that Pineiro is getting $4 million, I started thinking whether it's true. If they really had expected his upside, wouldn't they have guaranteed more than one year? Are their expectations of Pineiro reflected more in the $4 million, or in the one year with a carefully-constructed, only-if-there's-upside option? I'm starting to think it's the latter.

And as I started thinking about option years, my economic schooling - and options pricing theory - came back to me. Let's try an exercise.

1. Based on Pineiro's track record, what would you have guaranteed for him before this season to serve in a middle relief role? How many dollars, and how many years?

2. Let's say he had upside of being a 2nd-tier MLB closer. (Not Rivera, not Papelbon, not Nathan, not Hoffman... you get the idea.) How much would you have guaranteed if you knew he could handle that role? Again, dollars and years?

3. Obviously, you don't "know" he can handle the latter role. Given that, how much would you pay for an option of the latter?

When I break it that way, this is where I am (from the team's perspective):

1. $1-2 million, one year.

2. $4-6 million per year, 2-3 years. (Injury risks would keep me from extending too far.)

3. Depends on how likely I think 2 is and what my other options are. Let me cop out for now and say $X million.

In that case, the high range for a good contract would be:

- one year guaranteed for $2+X million, plus
- 1 team option year for $10-X million OR 2 team option years for a total of $16-X million.

Based on that, and on the actual terms of Pineiro's contract ($4 million in 2007, option for $4-8 million in 2008 with the range based on 2007-08 "games finished" incentives) it seems like the option was valued by Boston at around $2 million.

Now, I don't know if that's a reasonable value (in fact, I don't think it is, given I'm saying it's the "high" value). I have no idea what the opportunity costs are here, and there were a lot of other possible scenarios (involving other players) that could push the value to Boston one way or the other. And I don't know whether Boston's estimate of the likelihood of Pineiro's success was anywhere near a rational assessment.

But option pricing is a reasonable approach to pricing contracts, no? And if that's what they're doing, you'll get some contracts that will look pretty screwy at face value. You'll get $4 million guaranteed to a pitcher with a spotty track record, with a carefully structured option that can only be exercised if the upside is achieved.

In the end, yeah, maybe they misevaluated Pineiro. And maybe they're taking a more economically-reasonable approach to contracts than we'd considered. I think both are true, but I could be wrong. I do think it would be hard to expect them to outperform all other teams on reliever evaluation, without also expecting them to take basic modern economic theories into account in contract negotiations. And as such, I'm not so sure we can simply look at the dollar value on a contract with options and conclude that they didn't know what they were doing, because that dollar value could also reflect the value of having the option.
   86. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 24, 2007 at 06:42 PM (#2453180)
Pineiro has a mutual option, not a team option. I don't think it had much value to anyone, and looks like the end product of a negotiation where the Red Sox wanted something along the lines vi suggests, but couldn't get Pineiro to accept it.
   87. Darren Posted: July 24, 2007 at 10:30 PM (#2453539)
Too bad we don't have an open roster spot with which to pick up such players. Oh, wait...


Yes, imagine if the Sox didn't have that open space on the 40-man--they would have had to do something drastic, like ... DFA Pineiro!

Opening up a spot on the 40 man is a non-issue WRT to Pineiro. First, because as shown above, it's like shaving your head in case you go bald in the future. Second, they already had an open space.

Darren seems to take the $4 mil as a sign that they thought there was potential, and thus shouldn't give up on that potential after 34 IP.


Just to be clear, I'm not arguing that they should have kept Pineiro. I'm saying that there is a large disconnect between giving Pineiro $4 mil + and DFAing him--one that makes them look foolish. As I said above, it could both be the right thing to do AND something that reflects badly on their decision-making process.
   88. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: July 25, 2007 at 12:31 AM (#2453893)
I admire THeo for DFAing Joel. Most GM's around the leaegue do try to save face (heck, save their jobs) by holding onto players with no consideration that a salary is sunk cost.
   89. villageidiom Posted: July 25, 2007 at 01:06 AM (#2453984)
Opening up a spot on the 40 man is a non-issue WRT to Pineiro. First, because as shown above, it's like shaving your head in case you go bald in the future. Second, they already had an open space.

So much for trying to make a joke.
   90. jordan Posted: July 25, 2007 at 04:12 AM (#2454352)
As I said above, it could both be the right thing to do AND something that reflects badly on their decision-making process.

Maybe the decision-making process was strong, but just happened not to work out in this instance. I don't think it's that unreasonable to have thought that Pineiro could have maintained the strong strikeout rate that he had last year pitching in relief especially if their scouting supported this belief.
   91. villageidiom Posted: July 25, 2007 at 04:03 PM (#2454720)
Atlanta is supposedly looking into Teixeira. How much would people here offer for Saltalamacchia, if the Braves were willing to listen?

Don't the Braves want to compete this year, and if so wouldn't trading prospects for him not really help them out?

If I were confident that Oritz were healthy, or if Drew were hitting, or if I really though Pena would hit with regular playing time, I'd consider seeing if we could actually flip Manny for something that nets Salty. Isn't this the first year we haven't heard Manny's agent or someone in the front office saying at the deadline that Manny wants to be traded? It almost makes me think something's in the works.

Manny, Gabbard, 2 months of Mirabelli, and cash for Salty, 2 months of Andruw, and ______?
   92. villageidiom Posted: July 25, 2007 at 04:05 PM (#2454722)
FWIW, I can think of reasons why neither team would want to do that particular trade. I'm just throwing it out there as a starting point for discussion.
   93. Josh Posted: July 25, 2007 at 07:50 PM (#2455020)
Weird. (As pointed out at SoSH.)
This is a bit of a surprise: the Sox just announced that Joel Pineiro cleared waivers and accepted an optional assignment to Pawtucket. The right-hander, who officially was designated for assignment on Monday, is scheduled to pitch three innings tonight for the PawSox at Toledo. Seeing that using him as a reliever didn’t work out as hoped, the Sox appear ready to stretch out Pineiro and see if he can make a contribution later in the season as a starter.
   94. chris p Posted: July 25, 2007 at 07:56 PM (#2455027)
not surprised nobody claimed at 4 mil. and he could collect a paycheck fine from pawtucket.
   95. Josh Posted: July 25, 2007 at 08:15 PM (#2455049)
I'm surprised no one else wanted him (or he was unwilling to look elsewhere) for the league minimum, though. Even Romero is picked up for the league minimum.
   96. PJ Martinez Posted: July 25, 2007 at 08:36 PM (#2455066)
"Don't the Braves want to compete this year, and if so wouldn't trading prospects for him not really help them out?"

Yes, which is why this may be a deal to re-visit in the offseason, if Saltalamacchia isn't dealt in the next few days for, say, Teixeira.

On the other hand, if he is dealt to Texas, I would certainly hope Theo & Co. are talking to Daniels & Co. to see if they'd be more interesting in pitching prospects than in the catcher they just acquired. Obviously, they may prefer just to keep him, but they are supposedly looking for pitching (and young outfielders).

So the question's not entirely moot at the moment.
   97. Darren Posted: July 25, 2007 at 09:53 PM (#2455126)
So much for trying to make a joke.


But the joke was based on your earlier contention that having an open 40-man spot was a good thing. If we agree that having an open 40-man spot is irrelevant, there's no joke.

Thank you,

The Joke Police.

I don't understand the Pineiro thing. That is weird. Probably the best result given the circumstances.
   98. villageidiom Posted: July 26, 2007 at 12:00 AM (#2455357)
But the joke was based on your earlier contention that having an open 40-man spot was a good thing. If we agree that having an open 40-man spot is irrelevant, there's no joke.

Your response was based on your taking #83 way too seriously.

Thank you,

The Overly-Sensitive Response Police.
   99. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 26, 2007 at 03:12 AM (#2455797)
Lead down to 6 games.

PANIC
   100. Answer Guy Posted: July 26, 2007 at 03:19 AM (#2455807)
Lead down to 6 games.

No kidding. How come the Royals rolled over and played dead for the Yankees?
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
Traderdave
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6873 seconds
41 querie(s) executed