Jump to content

Paulino apparently ahead of Rienzo


Princess Dye

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 03:54 PM)
Why is signing over 30 year old pitchers a bad idea, yet so many expect an over 30 pitcher who has pitched a combined 37 innings the last 2 years to suddenly set a career high in IP?

 

Are you serious? Because there's quite the difference between "managing to pitch three quarters of a season" and "sustaining a level of play to justify $12-15m and the loss of a draft pick for four years."

Edited by Eminor3rd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 03:29 PM)
It would really be doubtful he makes 32 starts.

 

That's true too, but I'd say it's far likelier that he makes between 28-30 starts and gets to 170-180+ innings than it is that he barely gets to 150. While he's going to have starts where he struggles to get out of 4 or so, he's also likely to have more starts where he pitches into the 7th and the 8th, perhaps even the 9th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that this should be a determining factor, but I think it is interesting how big a crowd there is to fit onto Charlotte's roster in terms of pitchers. Assuming Paulino is in the rotation and Webb takes the open bullpen slot, with Veal taking the LOOGY spot, here are the pitchers you'd assume would be in AAA:

 

Andre Rienzo*

Eric Surkamp (L)*

Charlie Leesman (L)*

Spencer Arroyo (L)

Stephen McCray

Jake Petricka

Deunte Heath

Brian Omogrosso

David Purcey (L)

Taylor Thompson

Evan Crawford (L)

Nestor Molina

Zach Stewart

Matt Zaleski

Scott Carroll

Salvador Sanchez

Ryan Kussmaul

Parker Frazier

Tony Pena Jr

Dylan Axelrod

Frank De Los Santos (L)*

 

That's about 9 guys too many to fit. And if the Sox have to go with only 6 in the pen, it gets tighter.

 

Again, don't misunderstand, I'm not saying this should effect who makes the team because it absolutely should not. But it is worth noting that you have about 10 starters and 11 relievers there. The ones with an asterisk are on the 40 at this time. There are even more guys who, under normal development, may also be at AAA (Vance, Mabee, Remenowsky).

 

As they did last year, I predict they will use the DL for capacity, citing dubious "injuries".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 02:54 PM)
Why is signing over 30 year old pitchers a bad idea, yet so many expect an over 30 pitcher who has pitched a combined 37 innings the last 2 years to suddenly set a career high in IP?

 

Paulino is a lottery ticket. He won't be around for the next run. The idea is to try to hit it rich with him. If he does well, and we aren't having a good season, he goes to get us more top notch depth in the minors. If he doesn't, he cost a million dollars more than the rookie who would have been on the roster instead.

 

In no way, shape, or form is what Paulino does anywhere relevant to a full dollar, long term contracted, starting pitcher on the free agent market.

 

This is a page out of the Theo and Billy handbook. It is a no risk signing. It is nothing like throwing a multi-year, eight figure per season, contract at someone. Any comparisons like that are false equivalencies and non sequitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:54 PM)
Not that this should be a determining factor, but I think it is interesting how big a crowd there is to fit onto Charlotte's roster in terms of pitchers. Assuming Paulino is in the rotation and Webb takes the open bullpen slot, with Veal taking the LOOGY spot, here are the pitchers you'd assume would be in AAA:

 

Andre Rienzo*

Eric Surkamp (L)*

Charlie Leesman (L)*

Spencer Arroyo (L)

Stephen McCray

Jake Petricka

Deunte Heath

Brian Omogrosso

David Purcey (L)

Taylor Thompson

Evan Crawford (L)

Nestor Molina

Zach Stewart

Matt Zaleski

Scott Carroll

Salvador Sanchez

Ryan Kussmaul

Parker Frazier

Tony Pena Jr

Dylan Axelrod

Frank De Los Santos (L)*

 

That's about 9 guys too many to fit. And if the Sox have to go with only 6 in the pen, it gets tighter.

 

Again, don't misunderstand, I'm not saying this should effect who makes the team because it absolutely should not. But it is worth noting that you have about 10 starters and 11 relievers there. The ones with an asterisk are on the 40 at this time. There are even more guys who, under normal development, may also be at AAA (Vance, Mabee, Remenowsky).

 

As they did last year, I predict they will use the DL for capacity, citing dubious "injuries".

 

Wouldn't they just cut like half of those guys to free up a spot? Seems like dumping someone on the DL would be more harmful because of missed playing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:25 PM)
Wouldn't they just cut like half of those guys to free up a spot? Seems like dumping someone on the DL would be more harmful because of missed playing time.

 

 

Agree, I would expect some of those guys to be DFA'ed to make space for some guys that are waived by other teams. A majority of those guys have ceilings as low leverage relievers at this point. Coop has already tried to fix'em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:25 PM)
Wouldn't they just cut like half of those guys to free up a spot? Seems like dumping someone on the DL would be more harmful because of missed playing time.

Some will get cut, some maybe traded in a nothing-for-nothing deal. But last season they put a whole slew of pitchers from the upper levels on the DL, like a shadow roster for depth. Talked with Gonzo about it at the time, and the injuries were, in some cases, very questionable. When they are on the DL, they can still work out in AZ with the extended guys.

 

A bunch of that list is filler guys of course, but there are also a number of key guys in there. Hard to say what they'll do. I just think it is interesting that they seem to have set themselves up to have a large depth of near-majors arms ready to go. Then they have to decide what to do with them come April.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:06 PM)
Paulino is a lottery ticket. He won't be around for the next run. The idea is to try to hit it rich with him. If he does well, and we aren't having a good season, he goes to get us more top notch depth in the minors. If he doesn't, he cost a million dollars more than the rookie who would have been on the roster instead.

 

In no way, shape, or form is what Paulino does anywhere relevant to a full dollar, long term contracted, starting pitcher on the free agent market.

 

This is a page out of the Theo and Billy handbook. It is a no risk signing. It is nothing like throwing a multi-year, eight figure per season, contract at someone. Any comparisons like that are false equivalencies and non sequitors.

 

More like no reward signing

 

You'd look like a damn fool trying to sell Paulino for much at the deadline. Even in a best case scenario, the other GM will say "yes, but it's Felipe Paulino . . ."

 

This low reward signing just spins the wheels of the rebuild.

Edited by Marty34
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 05:52 PM)
More like no reward signing

 

You'd look like a damn fool trying to sell Paulino for much at the deadline. Even in a best case scenario, the other GM will say "yes, but it's Felipe Paulino . . ."

 

This low reward signing just spins the wheels of the rebuild.

At which point you note his solid ERA, the fact that he hasn't been hurt yet this year, his low cost, and the fact that he has an option next year. If he continues to respond "yes but it's Felipe Paulino", you then trade Paulino to the intelligent GM in his division, thus allowing that team to win the division and causing the GM who refused to trade for a cheap pitcher having a good season because his name sounded icky to be fired for darn-near criminal negligence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:52 PM)
More like no reward signing

 

You'd look like a damn fool trying to sell Paulino for much at the deadline. Even in a best case scenario, the other GM will say "yes, but it's Felipe Paulino . . ."

 

This low reward signing just spins the wheels of the rebuild.

 

Kind of like how they laughed about Scott Feldman last year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 05:52 PM)
More like no reward signing

 

You'd look like a damn fool trying to sell Paulino for much at the deadline. Even in a best case scenario, the other GM will say "yes, but it's Felipe Paulino . . ."

 

This low reward signing just spinns the wheels of the rebuild.

 

Yeah, for sure. It reminds me a lot of when the Cubs did the exact same thing with Scott Feldman, signing him to a low-risk, one year contract hoping he could recover from a couple consecutive injury-riddled seasons and show some of the upside that made him attractive before. When the deadline came around, all they were able to do with him was flip him for a former top prospect showing signs of rebound (Jake Arrieta) and a fireballing, pre-arbitration reliever (Pedro Strop). If you told me that one year, $6m contract was only going to return two promising, controllable pitchers and ~120 innings of 3.86 ERA production, I would have been really upset as a Cubs fan.

 

But, I just chalk it up to typical "Hail Theo" crap. Definitely no precedent for this type of a thing working out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 05:03 PM)
Yeah, for sure. It reminds me a lot of when the Cubs did the exact same thing with Scott Feldman, signing him to a low-risk, one year contract hoping he could recover from a couple consecutive injury-riddled seasons and show some of the upside that made him attractive before. When the deadline came around, all they were able to do with him was flip him for a former top prospect showing signs of rebound (Jake Arrieta) and a fireballing, pre-arbitration reliever (Pedro Strop). If you told me that one year, $6m contract was only going to return two promising, controllable pitchers and ~120 innings of 3.86 ERA production, I would have been really upset as a Cubs fan.

 

But, I just chalk it up to typical "Hail Theo" crap. Definitely no precedent for this type of a thing working out.

 

Scott Feldman is going to get you more in a trade than Felipe Paulino. Feldman had enough suitors last offseason to command $6M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:52 PM)
More like no reward signing

 

You'd look like a damn fool trying to sell Paulino for much at the deadline. Even in a best case scenario, the other GM will say "yes, but it's Felipe Paulino . . ."

 

This low reward signing just spins the wheels of the rebuild.

You're seriously trolling if you think Paulino would have no value at the deadline despite pitching well all season. GMs won't care about his past as long as the stuff and results are there now. Plus as we saw last year, cheap assets have a much larger market at the deadline and Paulino would fit the bill along with an extra, affordable year of team control. He won't get you a Matt Garza type package, but you should be able to get something plenty valuable and very likely a lot more than you'd get in return for Ervin Santana with three years remaining on his deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 03:54 PM)
Why is signing over 30 year old pitchers a bad idea, yet so many expect an over 30 pitcher who has pitched a combined 37 innings the last 2 years to suddenly set a career high in IP?

That's not what I'm expecting. He's injury prone and maybe a good fourth for us. Hopefully more but not banking on it. But I don't want to give up a high 2nd round pick for Santana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 05:27 PM)
Scott Feldman is going to get you more in a trade than Felipe Paulino. Feldman had enough suitors last offseason to command $6M.

I disagree. Paulino is known as a very talented pitcher who just hasn't stayed healthy. This is where Cooper and Herm come in. They work with him and see where it goes. If it goes well there are many options. If it goes poorly you don't pick up his option and either Surkamp or rienzo get time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:06 PM)
Paulino is a lottery ticket. He won't be around for the next run. The idea is to try to hit it rich with him. If he does well, and we aren't having a good season, he goes to get us more top notch depth in the minors. If he doesn't, he cost a million dollars more than the rookie who would have been on the roster instead.

 

In no way, shape, or form is what Paulino does anywhere relevant to a full dollar, long term contracted, starting pitcher on the free agent market.

 

This is a page out of the Theo and Billy handbook. It is a no risk signing. It is nothing like throwing a multi-year, eight figure per season, contract at someone. Any comparisons like that are false equivalencies and non sequitors.

I understand the concept, what I don't understand is if you think a guy like Jimenez is only going to regress because he is over 30, how you can possibly believe a guy a year older than him who has pitched 37 innings the last 2 seasons, is suddenly going to be better and healthier than he ever has been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:31 PM)
I understand the concept, what I don't understand is if you think a guy like Jimenez is only going to regress because he is over 30, how you can possibly believe a guy a year older than him who has pitched 37 innings the last 2 seasons, is suddenly going to be better and healthier than he ever has been.

 

If he doesn't, he cost a million dollars more than the kid who would have been in the rotation.

 

If Santana regresses, he would cost about 100 times what the kid who replaces him will cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:40 PM)
If he doesn't, he cost a million dollars more than the kid who would have been in the rotation.

 

If Santana regresses, he would cost about 100 times what the kid who replaces him will cost.

Again I understand that, but some of the same people who claim Paulino is going to be great and do things he has never done are the same people who said a couple of pitchers his age and even younger were doomed to get injured and regress due to age. I don't understand how he defies age.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:27 PM)
Scott Feldman is going to get you more in a trade than Felipe Paulino. Feldman had enough suitors last offseason to command $6M.

 

Unless Paulino throws up ~120 innings of 3.8 ERA. A rental is a rental. GMs don't choose players based on name value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:50 PM)
Unless Paulino throws up ~120 innings of 3.8 ERA. A rental is a rental. GMs don't choose players based on name value.

 

It's not about name value it's about track record and Paulino's track record is going to severely limit any return they may get for him. That's in a BEST case scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 07:03 PM)
It's not about name value it's about track record and Paulino's track record is going to severely limit any return they may get for him. That's in a BEST case scenario.

 

I don't know about you, but the name Scott Feldman screams "track record" to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:48 PM)
Again I understand that, but some of the same people who claim Paulino is going to be great and do things he has never done are the same people who said a couple of pitchers his age and even younger were doomed to get injured and regress due to age. I don't understand how he defies age.

 

Who exactly said he IS going to be great? I think you are making stuff up and twisting people's words again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:48 PM)
Again I understand that, but some of the same people who claim Paulino is going to be great and do things he has never done are the same people who said a couple of pitchers his age and even younger were doomed to get injured and regress due to age. I don't understand how he defies age.

 

Many posters here think it's a win if a player outperforms their contract regardless of whether the team is any better. There's something wrong with an acquisition when the best thing that can be said is if he is awful it doesn't hurt the rebuild. Low reward move that in the end does nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...