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 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. The Flying Monkey Posted: June 25, 2007 at 10:41 PM (#2417038)
"I was gonna do some quick math to show that Buerhle is worth less to us than to a team fighting for the playoffs because we get virtually no value from Buerhle making us more likely to reach the postseason. That would show that we shouldn't get Buerhle if teams are at all rational. But actually working it out, he's worth more to us than the Dodgers or Brewers (independent of team specific needs) because we're guaranteed to get Buerhle's added ALDS value and more likely to get ALCS and WS value. So I am less in favor of standing pat as I was when I made my first post in this thread."

But JBH or whomever, we are talking about such a small sample size of starts once we get to the playoffs. the chance of the red sox making the playoffs at this point is 98.89440 according to BP's postseason odds report. i fail to see how Buerhle's starts in the playoffs are worth more to the sox than a team which might need him in order to get there. plus, do people really think that schilling is cooked? his K numbers are definitely down this year...but he's still been pretty good. unless he's toast (which i doubt he is) i don't see the point in trading for a guy who's going to increase your chance of making the playoffs pretty much 0.

buerhle's a good (not great) pitcher who's durable. the chance of that helping you in the playoffs for a few starts over a league average guy like wakefield is pretty slim. i'm even less on board for a long-term contract for this guy. think of it this way: if he loses anything that he has right now he becomes tim wakefield pretty quickly.
   102. Ozzie's gay friend Posted: June 25, 2007 at 11:21 PM (#2417091)
he's young, he's under control for another year and a half, he's cheap, and he can rake. he's a valuable commodity.


He's not that young, he hasn't raked since coming to Boston, he's expensive in arbitration, he is useless coming off the bench, he may be done as a starter, he's a DH or leftfielder at best.
   103. Mattbert Posted: June 25, 2007 at 11:44 PM (#2417132)
I'd be willing to do Lowrie, Wily Mo and C'ish prospect for Buehrle, though that would probably be my best offer.

I'm trying to look at this from Chicago's perspective, and I don't see much downside to that deal for them (unless there's another team out there with a substantially better offer - duh). For three months of Buerhle, which every team knows is worth bupkis to the White Sox at this point, they get a pretty good middle infield prospect, some minor league filler, and a young outfielder with the proverbial light tower power. None of those guys are perfect, but neither is Buerhle. This isn't Randy Johnson on the block, here.

Lowrie certainly has some promise, but to be honest it's Pena that could really make Boston look bad. Even with his contact issues, it's not hard to envision him popping 30-40 bombs a year with regular playing time in Chicago. If the White Sox don't get a better offer from some other team, they'd have to be awfully optimistic about their ability to turn 2008 draftees into something useful in short order for them to pass on a Pena/Lowrie/*Filler deal.
   104. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 25, 2007 at 11:57 PM (#2417165)
I'm actually really unwilling to give up Manny Delcarmen in a trade. The guy is ready, pitching in the Majors, and perfectly capable of getting outs in high leverage situations.

He's got 65 IP of MLB pitching, and he's throwing at leageu average, a 2:1 k/bb ratio, and has kept the ball in the park. He can get us outs, and for cheap too, I'm not getting rid of him.

Hansen might be a bust though, I'd trade him.
   105. Darren Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:01 AM (#2417172)
Just to put Lowrie in perspective, his MLE is something like an .800 OPS this year. He's 23 and he's stuck at SS thus far. A 23-year-old SS putting up an .800 OPS for the minimum would be excellent. Even last year, while he was recovering from injury, he kept up a very nice K/BB ratio.

I hope they don't trade him or any of the other top prospects. If the White Sox are interested in Moss, Gabbard, Wily Mo, etc, then fine. The Red Sox are in excellent position right now--they are not desperate. The only one of their top prospects I could see letting go in the deal is Bowden, who's so young and not yet successful at AA that he may not develop.

Hold fast and if someone else gets Buehrle, then just try to sign him in the offseason if you still want him.
   106. Darren Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:02 AM (#2417175)
I'd deal Delcarmen. He's 25, a reliever, and has only been decent so far.
   107. covelli chris p Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:12 AM (#2417207)
I'm actually really unwilling to give up Manny Delcarmen in a trade.

get real, wok. if manny delcarmen is untouchable, then nothing would ever get done.
   108. Danny Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:15 AM (#2417218)
Short term he looks pretty good Chris-but did you peruse the list of comps I provided upthread?

I think BB-Ref comps are the definition of "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."
   109. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:40 AM (#2417271)
get real, wok. if manny delcarmen is untouchable, then nothing would ever get done.

Not saying he's untradable: I'm saying he's providing value to the team already.

Btw, if we are giving up "top" prospects, I'd much rather be after Tex rather than Buerhle, but that's just me
   110. tfbg9 Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:56 AM (#2417313)
Too lazy to search the thread, how many years would Buerhle be seeking/getting on a new contract?
   111. Ozzie's gay friend Posted: June 26, 2007 at 12:58 AM (#2417317)

Last year, he hit as well as he did in Cincy. 25 is still pretty young for a guy with his poew potential.


True, but for someone that age you'd hope for improvement from year to year.
Also, you can't help but wonder if he was placed in favourable situations (facing LHP for Nixon), hitting in a great park for a powerfull righthanded hitter etc.

I don't want to sound like I'm rehashing the Arroyo-Pena trade, IMO a mediocrity for a mediocrity that's disected far to much given the players involved.
At the same time I think it's fair to say that Wily Mo's value has falled. Not playing regularly can't be good, esp for someone who's development is already stunted.


I have to say the overall tone of this thread is a little arrogant, but most fans think their team can pull off big trades like this w/o giving away their best prospects.

Pitchings a pretty big commodity, Buehrle is likely the best avalible pitcher and pretty much every contending team (2/3 of MLB) needs pitching. Even as a rental I'll be shocked if he takes less than an "A" prospect to get him.
   112. tfbg9 Posted: June 26, 2007 at 01:05 AM (#2417344)
Even as a rental I'll be shocked if he takes less than an "A" prospect to get him.


Shocked? And what team are you a fan of? The White Sox?
   113. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 26, 2007 at 01:34 AM (#2417421)
Reading through the thread, I have no idea what the term "A prospect" means any more. Obviously Clay Buchholz is an A prospect, but just as obviously, he ain't going nowhere, and the White Sox can't expect a top 10 MLB prospect for a rental. Where is the line drawn? There are question marks around Ellsbury (power? AAA numbers?) and Bowden (upside? distance to majors?) - do they count? There are bigger questions around Lowrie (defense?) but his MLE is impressive and he might be an A-... does that count?

And OGF - you've been nonstop praying for months now, at some point, I think you've gotta accept that K-Fed's just too classy to release it.
   114. Ozzie's gay friend Posted: June 26, 2007 at 02:00 AM (#2417472)
:)
Yeah, I only come here every so often, though K-Fed is still in my prayers, I should update it.

I'm not trying to troll, or butt heads here, but whenyou hear that only a handfull of teams have enought to get Buehrle you don't expect him to later be traded for Wily Mo Pena and Brandon Moss +.

Though I'm not too familiar w/ the RS system, I'd imagine it would take one of their top-5 guys or Lowrie, (as an aside, just browing soxprospects now, it would seems the RS are fairly well off in the minors, nice earlt return from the last couple drafts as well).

Even if it does, Theo should pull the trigger, besides Becket and Dicek the rotation is far from certain.
   115. covelli chris p Posted: June 26, 2007 at 02:02 AM (#2417479)
I'd imagine it would take one of their top-5 guys or Lowrie,

if you assume lowrie ends up at 2nd base instead of short, i might put moss ahead of him. if the strikeouts don't get the better of moss, he could hit enough to start at a corner outfield spot.
   116. karkface killah Posted: June 26, 2007 at 02:08 AM (#2417496)
Shocked? And what team are you a fan of? The White Sox?


Buehrle is left-handed, a "World Series" hero, and extremely durable. Boston fans may be more enlightened, but I'd expect one "A Prospect" will probably be what it takes to get him in a trade.
   117. Tom Cervo, backup catcher Posted: June 26, 2007 at 02:16 AM (#2417533)
I don't see any team thinking Lowrie is an A- prospect. Am I missing something here, because BA's not even convinced he'll be a regular. That doesn't sound like the centerpiece of a deal for Buehrle.

If the Sox get him, I'd guess Bowden goes. Buchholz and Ellsbury are too good to give up, and the guys below Bowden probably aren't enough (although Anderson sure is looking good...).
   118. Darren Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:33 AM (#2417837)
I'm not trying to troll, or butt heads here, but whenyou hear that only a handfull of teams have enought to get Buehrle you don't expect him to later be traded for Wily Mo Pena and Brandon Moss +.


I don't expect that to get him (although there's a non-zero chance that Williams thinks one of these guys is special) but that's all I'd want to give up. I fully admit it may be my bias toward the Red Sox prospects. But then again I've been somewhat willing to trade Manny for a Kotchman in the past, so maybe I'm just obsessed with the cheap guys.

I don't see any team thinking Lowrie is an A- prospect. Am I missing something here, because BA's not even convinced he'll be a regular. That doesn't sound like the centerpiece of a deal for Buehrle.


Lowrie was well regarded before 06, when he was hurt at the beginning of the year, struggled for 4 months, then played very well at the end of the season. I would imagine he's got a good rep now, but not A-. Still, I hate the idea of trading a guy with a .420 OBP infielder and reasonable power in AA. It reminds me of something...
   119. covelli chris p Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:36 AM (#2417843)
Still, I hate the idea of trading a guy with a .420 OBP infielder and reasonable power in AA. It reminds me of something...

uh. lowrie != bagwell.
   120. Darren Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:49 AM (#2417895)
Really? Because I literally meant that they were the same player!
   121. covelli chris p Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:55 AM (#2417923)
more evidence that youks is the best baseball player in history.
   122. covelli chris p Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:56 AM (#2417929)
oops.
   123. Darren Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:00 AM (#2417947)
Get over in the game chatter wise guy!
   124. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:19 PM (#2418305)
This is about as bad as sourcing can possibly get, but...

They're saying on SoSH that someone on another message board heard Steve Phillips on the radio and Steve Phillips said that Chicago and Boston are closing in on the following deal:

Ellsbury, Lester, and Gabbard to Chicago
Buehrle, MacDougal and a 72-hour negotiating window to Boston

I am against that trade. The 72-hour window adds value, but that's still, jeez, that's a lot. Of course, it's some dude who heard some other dude who heard Steve Phillips, so it's probably less likely to happen than any of the internet-created trades, but it's out there.
   125. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:24 PM (#2418314)
I do hope that the Red Sox aren't following their usual media strategy of slowly escalating the price over 48 hours, until we're sending Matsuzaka, Buchholz, and the right field picnic area to Chicago.
   126. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:26 PM (#2418316)
Ellsbury, Lester, and Gabbard to Chicago
Buehrle, MacDougal and a 72-hour negotiating window to Boston


DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE
   127. PJ Martinez Posted: June 26, 2007 at 03:41 PM (#2418341)
If that deal happens, it would seem to suggest that the Sox FO 1) believes in the new Crisp (aka Coco Classic), and 2) has soured somewhat on Lester. Right? I mean, you have to give value to get value, but there was a time when some hoped Lester would be producing at a Buehrle-esque level by next year, and obviously you don't make this deal if you believe there's a strong chance of that. Maybe they're very worried about Schilling, and see Buehrle as the new no. 3 starer, and still think Lester has a decent chance at development in the future, but are worried about the here and now.

It also might suggest that Kenny's early assertion that he wouldn't grant a negotiating window was a pretty clever strategy. Now that window is being listed as an asset alongside actual players while in other trades I think it would be more or less taken for granted. Not sure if that's actually been a factor in the negotiations, but it's at least playing out that way in the reporting of the talks.
   128. Mister High Standards Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:09 PM (#2418370)
I might be missing something here, but what is the value in a window, of you the value you're sending isn't dependent on the outcome of those discussions.

I wouldn't be heart broken by that trade if Buehrle was locked up for 4 more years. But if it's a rental it is way too much.
   129. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:13 PM (#2418375)
I wouldn't be heart broken by that trade if Buehrle was locked up for 4 more years. But if it's a rental it is way too much.

And the return, while substantial, doesn't really match the White Sox' needs. I'm going to have to call bullshit on this rumor.
   130. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:13 PM (#2418377)
MacDougal? Who he?
   131. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:15 PM (#2418381)
MacDougal? Who he?

Right-handed reliever. Good arm, but erratic and injury-prone.
   132. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:43 PM (#2418416)
Would they be willing to part with Cole Armstrong in place of Mcdougall?

Highly doubtful. The White Sox can't afford to part with position player prospects.
   133. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 26, 2007 at 04:55 PM (#2418436)
I might be missing something here, but what is the value in a window, of you the value you're sending isn't dependent on the outcome of those discussions.
I assume the trade is dependent on the success of negotiations. And, by definition, the Red Sox would only sign a contract they deem favorable, so there is value in the window. I don't know how much, but it's real.

As you say, the trade is better if the Sox lock Buehrle up. The window guarantees that the trade would only happen if they could sign Buehrle longterm.

Has everyone given up on Jon Lester after one bad month? I'm kinda shocked, as of May, he looked like a league average MLB starter with ace-y upside, and now he's the second prospect in a deadline deal? That's what I doubt - I can't imagine that the Red Sox have actually given up on Lester such that they'd trade him when his value is at its lowest point.
   134. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: June 26, 2007 at 05:04 PM (#2418445)
The trade listed above is not happening.
   135. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: June 26, 2007 at 05:39 PM (#2418474)
Has everyone given up on Jon Lester after one bad month? I'm kinda shocked, as of May, he looked like a league average MLB starter with ace-y upside, and now he's the second prospect in a deadline deal? That's what I doubt - I can't imagine that the Red Sox have actually given up on Lester such that they'd trade him when his value is at its lowest point.


Seriously. He's had a tough time his last few starts, but he had, like, cancer 6 months ago, and he's still only 23. I'm still amazed that he could be able to contribute at all at a major-league level this year. He probably needs a year just to build up his strength again, but assuming he can do that, he still seems to have #2 or #3 upside.

From today's Globe, FWIW:
While the Sox have spoken with the Chicago White Sox about the availability of lefthander Mark Buehrle -- special assignment scout Allard Baird has been in Chicago and watched Buehrle pitch -- they are not close to making a deal, according to team sources. The Sox have no interest in parting with prospects such as outfielder Jacoby Ellsbury and pitcher Clay Buchholz, the types of prospects White Sox GM Kenny Williams almost certainly would seek in return.
   136. PJ Martinez Posted: June 26, 2007 at 05:55 PM (#2418488)
According to the Herald, the Sox are "out of the running," which I take to mean "using the Herald to help them play hardball." Anyway, here's what they're reporting:

"While it remains unclear as to where Buehrle will eventually end up, the Red Sox are not willing to part with the prospects necessary to make the trade. Chicago is believed to be looking for at least one of two front-line pitching prospects - Clay Buchholz or, perhaps, Jon Lester - in order to part with Buehrle, who is a free agent at the end of the season."
   137. Mattbert Posted: June 27, 2007 at 06:50 AM (#2419422)
Kenny Williams is playing hardball, but I guess I'd be willing to part with Kason Gabbard in the right deal.

This series is probably going to be the only three Sox games I get to attend this year, and the first two have both been atrocious and excruciating. You gotta be trying pretty f**king hard to walk that many Mariners. Good lord.
   138. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 27, 2007 at 09:17 AM (#2419443)
Kenny Williams is playing hardball, but I guess I'd be willing to part with Kason Gabbard in the right deal.

Yah no kidding.

Seriously though, I think the Red Sox have absolutely played like krap in June. If it wasn't for the "lol San Francisco" series and the "lol Padres offense" and the Yankees getting swept in Coors, we'd be really screwed.
   139. Darren Posted: June 30, 2007 at 08:55 PM (#2424094)
If it wasn't for the "lol San Francisco" series and the "lol Padres offense" and the Yankees getting swept in Coors, we'd be really screwed.


Good think all those games count, particularly the ones against the first place Padres.
   140. Dan Szymborski Posted: July 07, 2007 at 01:46 PM (#2431995)
Fully half of Buehrle's comps were toast by age 31; Buehrle is the kind of guy who lives on the edge-Tom Glavine has pitched on that edge for more than 10 years now but he's pretty unique.

I think this is a bit overstated - most pitchers' top 10 comp lists have a large number of early-30s toast simply because of the normal attrition rate. Yes, Buehrle's margin of error is smaller than that of Roger Clemens's, but Clemens is a better pitcher and Buehrle's not exactly Kirk Rueter out there. Petry's ERA+s fell off, but he also had a .254 BABIP through 1985 and walked a million batters.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
rr
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.3918 seconds
52 querie(s) executed