Chisoxfn

That is really insane for a pitcher. This is one area I agree with JR. Develop your own or get them in short term deals for big bucks - long term with massive bucks is just so risky.

Yeah - he fell apart after Covid and some other stuff (can't remember what). Could just be coincidence too. Or maybe something was off, I don't know. But I do know this guy works hard and is always looking at optimizing things and this drop-off was nothing compared to how he started his career in the MLB and how he remastered his game.

They would have drafted Ryan Leaf anyway.

Yes - I am saying Glasnow may have negative value to the Rays. Or maybe a combo. Depends on why Rays want to make a move. If they want to do something different with payroll or not ($30+M for Glasnow may be viewed as expensive on him, maybe it isn't). I don't know that there is massive surplus value there given the uncertainty in his return. So there is risk. And no I am not proposing Glasnow for Gio straight up - I would not make that move if I were the Sox (without getting something more).

And yet this is still likely an awful move. That is too much money and 1 yr too many to give to an older reliever (or a non elite closer period).

And if the Sox got Glasnow that and maybe there was some cash or other stuff coming from the Rays back? it isn't as silo'd as you think, just given the positional value (SP > 2B - WAR be damn). I don't think you need to do Colas+ (I wouldn't do it from the Sox perspective than). I would probably give up a multiple guys type of approach if that is what it took (and I have been on record I am perfectly fine with the Sox taking that sort of path). You don't trade Montgomery though for a player like Lowe - Lowe is good when healthy (presuming he bounces back) but he isn't worthy of inclusion in a deal for a 2B. Nope.

I only know this because I looked him up a while ago and was shocked at how much younger he was than I thought.

All I know is I would be a fan of the move for Lowe. It has risk though and I don't know that I compare Lowe and Robert. One plays a premier defensive position with a higher upside the other doesn't have. I think Lowe's upside is what he was - which is really good - where as Robert's upside (whether you buy it or not is something else). But your point is well taken. Sometimes it also comes down to positional value. 2B don't typically get traded for as much as pitchers. The reality is if the Sox made this deal with the Rays, I would know we were in big trouble. That said - if Sox / Rays were to match, is Glassnow a fit as part of this. I would imagine Rays don't love the idea of paying him (not saying Sox would love the risk either) with the uncertainty.

The big thing with Gio is he has been very durable (*knock on wood*) during his major league career (although I appreciate he has already had TJ). The list of guys who are on the market with Gio's pedigree, age and relative reasonable contract is small. I would say if he were on the market - he is getting > 1yr 20M (yet his contract will be less than that - telling me he is definitely a surplus asset despite the 1 year deal). He is also widely thought of as a strong clubhouse guy, etc.

Semien really gutted his way through that game. Fields appears set to start Sunday. Brisker / Gordon / Borom out.

Or they could get an above average outfielder who is signed for a bit longer term deal (doesn't necessarily have to be prospects). And I laugh at GIo+ for Kepler (I think Gio is more valuable than Kepler but maybe I'm wrong). And maybe the Sox decide they won't replace Gio, rather lean in on other guys and take a lesser approach and essentially deploy more money into other holes? And lets not act like the Sox can't trade some prospects for other more cost controlled guys. Quite frankly - if they are trying to win - does it really matter how great the farm system is vs. pushing in some chips to inject more talent into the team now. If it doesn't work you are going to be restarting a rebuilding anyway and be starting over. So I kind of view it as - go ahead and throw away a few young cost controlled guys for a ML above average cost controlled guy who can help this team now and I would be fully supportive of doing it.

Wow.

That is where I am - my view is - trade him now as part of a broader retooling when you have the whole market available (if it makes sense). If offer is weak fine - but I don't think the offers will be weak. People say Soxtalk overrates guys - I actually think in general the negativity on here outweighs the positivity from most posters and in general they underrate individuals. Gio is at a fair price (but expiring), healthy and entering his prime. They absolutely can get a real difference maker for him (or other chips). I'm not saying you are getting a Chris Sale or Jose Quintana package for him - but lets not act like Gio is trash. His projections are also favorable for '23 and prior to last year had 3 straight years of 4+ WAR and 1 top 10 and 1 top 11 CY Young appearance.

Figured lets make its own thread. I don't like giving Rogers credit - cause there isn't likely any inside info here, but he raises a point. Yes - it is a low point to sell Gio, but at the same time - they only have him for this season, so the question is - is the value you get for him next year worth more than the value of a comp pick? I would probably say I don't know and I am a huge Lucas fan. Given the going rate of FA - Gio still has a good profile and I think analytics and past support are kind to him. Yes, he had a bad year - but excluding last year - he has basically been one of the best pitchers via WAR for a couple years and last year's peripheals are indicative of bad luck. If you can get younger assets and fill other holes - I kind of think Gio is someone you should trade (sure you could wait and see if he outperforms / bounces back and potentially get more at the deadline - but knowing Sox are trying to contend it feels like repositioning now makes more sense because club can do more NOW around overall roster construction).

The question with Salvy and his contract is can there be creativity here. Moncada and his contract is no bargain, Grandal is out there. I don't know what the options are but could there be a move that saves Royals money while Sox feel they ultimately get a better incremental value (I guess worthy of the $ they would spend). I see zero scenario where you'd have Grandal and Salvy's contracts tied up to this team. Makes zero financial sense to have that much annual money committed to catchers that age. But would Grandal for Salvy be something teams would consider. Royals save a lot of LT cash - Sox tie up LT cash but get someone who is probably more likely to be productive than Grandal (his body is just breaking down). Can't say I love it - knowing the Sox payroll committments down the road.

Two good orgs.

On Clevinger's fastball - it is interesting because his '22 velocity was exactly in line with his '18 and '17 seasons; 19 and 20 is where he saw a jump. His '18 velocity was 93.5 (vs. '22 of 93.6) while '17 was 92.5. As you mentioned - a sinker starts show up in his data - was it a new pitch or something else (yet his ground ball ratio didn't change, it decreased slightly if anything - and his line drive rate also went down). The one stat that was way different in '22 vs. any past years from Clevinger was that he gave up quite a bit more flyballs than the past. In '22 his Flyball percentage was 35%. For perspective he never had a season above 25% at any point in his entire career. Edit: Went to dig into his velocity trend for '22 (thought it was interesting how it dipped later in the season).

I don’t know what drove Clevinger to that substantially outperform his peripherals but I do know his era was sub 4 every month of the season but September. Now could it be he just fatigued after the time off - yes. I suppose he could have also fell off a cliff but I have zero clue what projection system gives Boyd so much credit over a very small sample size out of the pen and than extrapolates thay to him starting as much as that when he has been a pure crap starter over a massive sample size (unless he underwent some massive transformation that I am not aware of from a pitch usage velo etc). Clevinger could suck but he was pretty damn solid last year in that first year back. Sure his arm could re explode but he also could just benefit that much more from a normal offseason after getting back on his feet this year. And it isn’t like his advanced peripherals were down in terms of velocity or other things that would be great imdicatioms of smoke and mirrors.

This is a really good point.

$10M for a guy with a 4.90 ERA over 145 starts. Man this is like giving Vince Velasquez 10M per year. I get it - he has 130 innings split over 2 years that have been way better than the rest of his career - but its still just a handful of starts in each of those seasons, so SSS. I never understood Velasquez and this feels that way when you put the $10M on it.

I expect 1-2 moves.

Why shouldn't they find other ways to drive revenue.

How can someone do so little yet at times look ok. Who was it Phil would meow when he was coach of Lakers…cause that is PWill.

Not great update. And to think I read somewhere yesterday there was rumblings he would be ready in January / worse case by all star break. Can you get medical relief or something for a guy that is too injured to play at some point?

The ability to upgrade the LB corps via free agency should be feasible - plus getting an upgrade at 3-tech as well (and obviously some upper echelon defensive talent should be there when Bears pick too). Will be interesting. My lean would be make most free agent contracts shorter duration and fill voids at right spots - if you are going to spend on higher end - do it at a position you don't think you can address via draft and that is a premium position (i.e., your Payne at 3 tech or one of the tackles).