Paulino removed from Rehab assignment

[Eminor3rd]

He is down about 1.5 MPH from last season. Last year his numbers up until this point were far worse than they are this year. He came back pretty strong. Fangraphs said last year he put up a 3.2 WAR and his performance was worth $16.1 million. Even his performance this season they claim is worth $3.5 million.

 

You can think he won't be any better, but to say definitively he will not is what I object to. When the season is over, bury me all you want about me wanting the Sox to sign him. Not now.

 

I am probably Beckham's biggest backer on this board. I don't think for a minute he is better than Pedroia. To take numbers with these small sample sizes, when one or two good starts or bad games switches things around, and come to 4 year conclusions is silly.

 

I assume that when Marty refers to "upside," he's talking about his 5-6 WAR season in Colorado when he was average 94 mph. At the time when he had to be signed, he was coming off that 3.2 win season, so the guy you'd "expect" to get is that gradually declining 3 win guy. At the time, Marty was arguing that guys like Ubaldo need to be signed now, even if we won't compete for a few years, simply because they won't be available to sign when we need them later. And I had said something along the lines of "there will always be a 3 win guy that can be had for market rate in the offseason." So that's what Marty, I think, was asking me to identify guys that will be available next year that could pitch as well as Ubaldo.

 

The Beckham/Pedroia analog doesn't work because Pedroia has been consistently good for several consecutive seasons, is not at an age where we would expect steep decline, and hasn't had any changes in his physiology or tools to suggest a premature decline. So as of today, it's safe to expect his true talent is closer to his career numbers than the most recent small sample. Ubaldo, on the other hand, is four years removed from his All-Star level status and has suffered a consistent and significant decline in stuff the entire time. Further decline at his age and with his velocity loss would fit both a typical career arc and the career arc he's shown, so it's easier to believe in his 1.8 fWAR pace. Steamer thinks he'll end up at 1.9, ZiPS at 2.5, and both seem reasonable to me and also a pretty natural next step for an early-thirties guy who just put up 3.2 fWAR and lost a couple mph on his fastball.

 

But this is really the crux of my opposition of the signing: I didn't expect Ubaldo to be as bad as he has been, but I knew it was very realistic that he could be. The best case scenario for him, given the age and velocity, was that he would maintain his 3 win pace for a year or two and then get worse. So we'd pay market rate for his contribution when it wouldn't move the needle for us, and then he'd be overpaying him when we did need it. And that's best case. There is also downside, which, right now, appears to be occurring -- he loses more velocity and declines immediately. So now in what should be the best part of the deal, you're already paying a 2-2.5 win guy like a 3 win guy and can expect that to get worse, AND for the Sox, he isn't even going to make the difference in a good or bad season. Why take that downside risk with so little reward at stake? Marty thinks that guy might still have a 5 win season in him, but I don't think that's even in the realm of possibility without his lost velocity.

[Marty34]

I assume that when Marty refers to "upside," he's talking about his 5-6 WAR season in Colorado when he was average 94 mph. At the time when he had to be signed, he was coming off that 3.2 win season, so the guy you'd "expect" to get is that gradually declining 3 win guy. At the time, Marty was arguing that guys like Ubaldo need to be signed now, even if we won't compete for a few years, simply because they won't be available to sign when we need them later. And I had said something along the lines of "there will always be a 3 win guy that can be had for market rate in the offseason." So that's what Marty, I think, was asking me to identify guys that will be available next year that could pitch as well as Ubaldo.

 

The Beckham/Pedroia analog doesn't work because Pedroia has been consistently good for several consecutive seasons, is not at an age where we would expect steep decline, and hasn't had any changes in his physiology or tools to suggest a premature decline. So as of today, it's safe to expect his true talent is closer to his career numbers than the most recent small sample. Ubaldo, on the other hand, is four years removed from his All-Star level status and has suffered a consistent and significant decline in stuff the entire time. Further decline at his age and with his velocity loss would fit both a typical career arc and the career arc he's shown, so it's easier to believe in his 1.8 fWAR pace. Steamer thinks he'll end up at 1.9, ZiPS at 2.5, and both seem reasonable to me and also a pretty natural next step for an early-thirties guy who just put up 3.2 fWAR and lost a couple mph on his fastball.

 

But this is really the crux of my opposition of the signing: I didn't expect Ubaldo to be as bad as he has been, but I knew it was very realistic that he could be. The best case scenario for him, given the age and velocity, was that he would maintain his 3 win pace for a year or two and then get worse. So we'd pay market rate for his contribution when it wouldn't move the needle for us, and then he'd be overpaying him when we did need it. And that's best case. There is also downside, which, right now, appears to be occurring -- he loses more velocity and declines immediately. So now in what should be the best part of the deal, you're already paying a 2-2.5 win guy like a 3 win guy and can expect that to get worse, AND for the Sox, he isn't even going to make the difference in a good or bad season. Why take that downside risk with so little reward at stake? Marty thinks that guy might still have a 5 win season in him, but I don't think that's even in the realm of possibility without his lost velocity.

 

Put Jimenez in this rotation and they can compete for a playoff spot. There just was no downside.

 

 

[Kyyle23]

Put Jimenez in this rotation and they can compete for a playoff spot. There just was no downside.

 

.....if everything goes right. If it goes wrong, which I very possible, there is a 4 year 50 million dollar downside

[witesoxfan]

Put Jimenez in this rotation and they can compete for a playoff spot. There just was no downside.

 

How do you figure?

[Balta1701]

How do you figure?

It doesn't matter. He refuted that entire 3 paragraph post by saying it was wrong. Isn't that enough?

[Marty34]

.....if everything goes right. If it goes wrong, which I very possible, there is a 4 year 50 million dollar downside

 

Look at the future payroll obligations. A $50M mistake would not hurt their ability to field a winning team.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Marty34

[Eminor3rd]

Put Jimenez in this rotation and they can compete for a playoff spot. There just was no downside.

 

What alternate reality do you think we're talking about? No downside? It's happening in Baltimore before your very eyes!

 

.....if everything goes right. If it goes wrong, which I very possible, there is a 4 year 50 million dollar downside

 

...and it already has! he's 2 mph down on his fastball and has a FIP and ERA well over 4.

[Marty34]

It doesn't matter. He refuted that entire 3 paragraph post by saying it was wrong. Isn't that enough?

 

You can't argue with 3 WAR.

[Marty34]

What alternate reality do you think we're talking about? No downside? It's happening in Baltimore before your very eyes!

 

 

 

...and it already has! he's 2 mph down on his fastball and has a FIP and ERA well over 4.

 

Paulino can't get anyone out at Charlotte.

[Eminor3rd]

You can't argue with 3 WAR.

 

Sure you can. But you haven't.

 

How about a 4.98 ERA. Yeah, that would look real sexy in our rotation right about now.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[Eminor3rd]

Paulino can't get anyone out at Charlotte.

 

So what?

[witesoxfan]

You can't argue with 3 WAR.

 

Except that was in the past. You could give Barry Bonds a $25 million contract based on what he did at the end of his career, but that wouldn't make it a good investment today.

 

That's how FA has changed and why it took Jimenez so long to sign. Nobody wants to pay for past performance, but instead they want to pay for future output. If Jimenez had been 27 instead of 30, he would have signed within the first 2 weeks of free agency to a richer contract than he got, but when his perceived production is going to go down, then he's not going to be worth it to a lot of teams.

[Marty34]

Sure you can. But you haven't.

 

You can't argue with 3 WAR. 3 WAR is a fact. As far as Paulino goes, he represents an opportunity lost. With the turnaround of this offense, it's too damn bad they didn't help the rotation out more.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Marty34

[Kyyle23]

Look at the future payroll obligations. A $50M mistake would not hurt their ability to field a winning team.

 

Of course it would. It hurts any team not named the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers. Investing money terribly affects any team, future payroll projections or not.

 

Bottom line is, everything you want to do is based on the now, not now and the future. And that is the problem that Rick is currently trying to climb out of, and all you want him to do is keep digging deeper.

[Eminor3rd]

You can't argue with 3 WAR. 3 WAR is a fact. As far as Paulino goes, he represents an opportunity lost. With the turnaround of this offense, it's too damn bad they didn't help the rotation out more.

 

Oh you're using the 3 WAR as a defense for him -- I thought you were being sarcastic.

 

I actually think you have a legitimate argument here, and have stated so. The problem isn't Paulino, it's that if you're going to take that kind of gamble, you need more depth so you aren't screwed when it goes wrong. They should have, at least, made it a priority to sign three Paulino-like guys.

 

What I don't agree with is Ubaldo being the answer. It looked risky and costly at the time, and now it looks even worse with his early season performance.

[witesoxfan]

You can't argue with 3 WAR. 3 WAR is a fact. As far as Paulino goes, he represents an opportunity lost. With the turnaround of this offense, it's too damn bad they didn't help the rotation out more.

 

But the difference between what Rienzo and Noesi have done for the Sox and Jimenez the Orioles is not significant enough to justify the additional $12 mill they'd have to pay him plus the draft pick.

 

The Sox have handled this situation about as perfectly as possible.

Edited May 29, 2014 by witesoxfan

[Marty34]

Of course it would. It hurts any team not named the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers. Investing money terribly affects any team, future payroll projections or not.

 

Bottom line is, everything you want to do is based on the now, not now and the future. And that is the problem that Rick is currently trying to climb out of, and all you want him to do is keep digging deeper.

 

The reason they have to gamble in the free agent pitching market is because there is nothing in the minors. You're not suggesting they wait to develop pitching I hope.

[southsider2k5]

But the difference between what Rienzo and Noesi have done for the Sox and Jimenez the Orioles is not significant enough to justify the additional $12 mill they'd have to pay him plus the draft pick.

 

The Sox have handled this situation about as perfectly as possible.

 

And the bonus being that they still have the flexibility to do something else if they want to do so.

[Kyyle23]

The reason they have to gamble in the free agent pitching market is because there is nothing in the minors. You're not suggesting they wait to develop pitching I hope.

 

How is it in your mind that the only options are sign bad deal or wait for development? There are other players, acquired via trade, international market, draft. There will be other pitchers available. Jimenez wouldn't have made this team a contender

[Dick Allen]

Sure you can. But you haven't.

 

How about a 4.98 ERA. Yeah, that would look real sexy in our rotation right about now.

It actually would. Comparatively

[Marty34]

How is it in your mind that the only options are sign bad deal or wait for development? There are other players, acquired via trade, international market, draft. There will be other pitchers available. Jimenez wouldn't have made this team a contender

 

All those are risky too.

[Kyyle23]

All those are risky too.

 

But not costly, which you pretend to not understand.

[Marty34]

But not costly, which you pretend to not understand.

 

If you make a bad trade or draft, sure it can be as costly. Besides, how costly do you think missing a playoff opportunity to this franchise is?

[Balta1701]

It actually would. Comparatively

Compared to who? We have 5 starters with a better ERA than that. Noesi, Rienzo, Sale, Danks, Quintana.

[Marty34]

Compared to who? We have 5 starters with a better ERA than that. Noesi, Rienzo, Sale, Danks, Quintana.

 

What about Jimenez's xFIP though?