2014 MLB Thread

[JonInMiddleGA]

Pete Van Wieren, longtime Braves broadcaster, passes away

[Toddzilla]

Very sad, I remember him from the old Channel 17 days...

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

This is a great story:

Jim Bowden Caught Stealing From Fake Twitter Account, Deletes Everything

On Thurs both my email &twitter accounts were hacked &compromised. They are now back working;thx for your patience & sorry for any confusion

— Jim Bowden (@JimBowden_ESPN) August 2, 2014

[BishopMVP]

Jane Lee ‏@janemlb 26m
Re: Price to Tigers, Beane "had a feeling it was going to happen." Dombrowski jokingly texted, "You have 1 minute to acquire Chris Sale"

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Cause hackers just give shit back for nothing shortly after the accounts are compromised and the trade deadline has passed.

[cuervo72]

Woohoo! Yet another NYY/BOS game on tonight.

[korme]

It's fun/relieving to able to be on Twitter and let your frustration's out, like I did here today:

@JJ_Hoover continuing to do JJ Hoover Things - giving up HR, making Reds fans nervous. I liked his 2013 Hoover Things better.

— Shane (@shane_____) August 3, 2014

But it's not so fun when the man responds and you realize he's the guy stressing the most, like JJ Hoover did here:

@shane_____ I liked the it better too. Going to keep working.

— JJ Hoover (@JJ_Hoover) August 4, 2014

[stevew]

Jim Bowden is such a shitty commentator

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

This is a great story:

Jim Bowden Caught Stealing From Fake Twitter Account, Deletes Everything

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Jane Lee ‏@janemlb 26m
Re: Price to Tigers, Beane "had a feeling it was going to happen." Dombrowski jokingly texted, "You have 1 minute to acquire Chris Sale"

This was my favorite part of the Trade Deadline, besides the actual, you know exciting trade deadline as there were lots of huge moves. It may be Monday AM speaking and I was out of town this weekend, but was this the largest trade deadline for pitchers moved in recent memory? Ever?

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

Jed Hoyer (Cubs GM) said their strategy yesterday was to let the big name pitchers change teams so they no longer have draft-pick compensation to worry about when signing someone this offseason.

Welcome to Chicago, John Lester!

(in 6 months)

How exactly did the Cubs have a say in where the big name pitchers went unless they were looking to outbid for Lackey, Lester, etc? The only major pitcher they had a way to control was, well, Jeff Samardzija (yes, I had to Google it to spell it right)

Or is there a joke here I'm not getting.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

First to Worst in a trade . Though Boston does come with perks.

It would really suck to go from first place to like... Kansas City or Houston .

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

lol... can't wait until SI sees this.

I was surprised that being outrighted to Indianapolis or Richmond wasn't an option in the insult

Spoiler

The other places I have lived, for those who didn't get the initial joke

And, while I don't think they will get to the playoffs, the Royals are 1.5 out of the playoffs at the moment. Can you at least pick another team one of the rare years the team is above .500? Though I guess in the AL, that's tough as the only two teams worse than the Red Sox right now are the Rangers and the aforementioned Astros.

SI

[Logan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

How exactly did the Cubs have a say in where the big name pitchers went unless they were looking to outbid for Lackey, Lester, etc? The only major pitcher they had a way to control was, well, Jeff Samardzija (yes, I had to Google it to spell it right)

Or is there a joke here I'm not getting.

SI

I'm with you. Seems like this "strategy" was really "do nothing". Unless you want to replace "strategy" in the original comment to "hope".

[Arles]

It was really smart for Lester to get Boston to trade him. Now, he can have the full market after him in the offseason without the fear of paying a 1st after signing him. That's bound to get him an extra big offer or two.

If Boston wanted to keep him, trading him was not very smart. They will basically be paying a premium to keep him as any team with cash and a need at SP can give him an offer with no compensation.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Arles

It was really smart for Lester to get Boston to trade him. Now, he can have the full market after him in the offseason without the fear of paying a 1st after signing him. That's bound to get him an extra big offer or two.

If Boston wanted to keep him, trading him was not very smart. They will basically be paying a premium to keep him as any team with cash and a need at SP can give him an offer with no compensation.

Eh, teams don't really worry about the first round pick when signing guys to $25m/y contracts. It's the Koji Uehara, Jarrod Saltalamacchia and Stephen Drew's of the world it really affects.

Look at the free agents this winter - there are multiple very good pitchers and basically no power bats, at least in the outfield.

[Arles]

Its enough to scare teams like the Cubs, Cardinals, Giants and Diamondbacks from signing Ervin Santana last offseason (all cited compensation as one of the reasons they didn't give an offer). The Braves ended up signing him in spring training for a 1-year, $14 mil deal because half their rotation got hurt. Lester is a better pitcher (4.2 WAR compared to Santana's 3.0 with KC), but having to pay that compensation would have probably kept 1-2 big offers away. Here's a good article about Kyle Loshe and others as well:

Has MLB's Draft-Pick Compensation for Top Targets Hurt the Free-Agency Process? | Bleacher Report

Lohse was coming off a career season with the Cardinals in 2012 during which he went 16-3 with a 2.86 ERA and a 1.09 WHIP. St. Louis smartly presented Lohse with a qualifying offer, which he promptly rejected, figuring he would be able to land a nice bounty with several suitors seeking his services.

Problem was, that didn't happen. Rather than see Lohse as a high-end arm, many teams instead viewed him as little more than a mid-tier free agent with an inconsistent track record and a recent history of injury issues—not to mention, a 34-year-old sporting a 4.45 ERA for his career.

And so Lohse didn't hear from many teams. And so Lohse waited for weeks and then months without any real hint of a contract offer he had been expecting. And so Lohse, at long last, wound up settling for a respectable-but-not-quite-hoped-for $39 million over three years from the Brewers—a deal he signed only a week before the start of last season.

[BishopMVP]

Ervin Santana also had an ERA over 5.00 and a negative WAR in 3 of the previous 7 seasons and a playoff ERA of 5.56. Jon Lester has one full season out of 7 with an ERA over 3.75 and arguably the best postseason track record of any active pitcher. There were plenty of reasons not to sign Santana to a long-term deal, hence why Atlanta still only signed him for 1 year even after they decided to sacrifice the draft pick. If you're willing to offer the $130-$150 million it'll take to sign Lester, a draft choice that probably has a worth of ~2 million should not affect that calculus.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Ervin Santana also had an ERA over 5.00 and a negative WAR in 3 of the previous 7 seasons and a playoff ERA of 5.56. Jon Lester has one full season out of 7 with an ERA over 3.75 and arguably the best postseason track record of any active pitcher. There were plenty of reasons not to sign Santana to a long-term deal, hence why Atlanta still only signed him for 1 year even after they decided to sacrifice the draft pick. If you're willing to offer the $130-$150 million it'll take to sign Lester, a draft choice that probably has a worth of ~2 million should not affect that calculus.

Atlanta signed him to 1-year deal to keep compensation rights for 2015 and limit the risk if he doesn't have a great season. There's no way Santana signs that unless draft pick compensation kept his value down. Lester has had ERAs of 2.59 (this year), 3.75 (13) and 4.82 (2012). Since 2011, he's been between 3.1 and 4.1 on WAR coming into this season. According to Dan Szymborski, the cost of Atlanta signing Santana was losing a draft pick valued at 3.5 WAR (or $19.6 million):

The pre-free-agency value for the typical 26th pick is roughly 3.5 WAR, and that amount of talent would cost $19.6 million in the free-agency market. While the majority of prospects don't succeed, the payout when they do is massive.

Ervin Santana signing a panic move for Atlanta Braves - MLB - ESPN

Lester is probably good enough to get a few offers independent of compensation, but some teams would have abstained. No starting pitcher owed compensation has signed for more than 4-$48 mil since this new system, with most signing very late in the game for a lot less than what they had thought. While plenty of marginal pitchers without compensation (headlined by Edwin Jackson in 2012 and Ricky Nolasco in 2013) have signed for higher than that. Had Lester not been traded, he would have been behind Max Scherzer, Yovani Gallardo and maybe even James Shields in pecking order for deals. But, now, since those three will involve compensation, Lester vaults to the top.

[ISiddiqui]

Arles, the problem is that Red Sox Nation has already created their own narrative of the trade. One of my close friends is a big Red Sox fan and usually a realist about the team, but even he's fallen for the narrative. The narrative is this: The trade was fantastic because they got Cespedes for Gomez, because they'll just resign Lester in the offseason. It's almost a done thing to Red Sox Nation that Lester is coming back. This narrative will control until Lester is signed by some other team (if he is) and THEN Red Sox Nation will come back and yell and scream at the deal and say, we screwed up by getting rid of the compensation requirement by trading Lester. Until then, the narrative will give you pushback.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Arles

he would have been behind Max Scherzer, Yovani Gallardo and maybe even James Shields in pecking order for deals. But, now, since those three will involve compensation, Lester vaults to the top.

I can't imagine the Brewers not picking up Gallardo's $13M option.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Arles, the problem is that Red Sox Nation has already created their own narrative of the trade. One of my close friends is a big Red Sox fan and usually a realist about the team, but even he's fallen for the narrative. The narrative is this: The trade was fantastic because they got Cespedes for Gomez, because they'll just resign Lester in the offseason. It's almost a done thing to Red Sox Nation that Lester is coming back. This narrative will control until Lester is signed by some other team (if he is) and THEN Red Sox Nation will come back and yell and scream at the deal and say, we screwed up by getting rid of the compensation requirement by trading Lester. Until then, the narrative will give you pushback.

Your one friend doesn't equal all of "Red Sox nation". Plenty of Red Sox fans hated the whole haul they got back at the trading deadline, they expected much more. Many are very upset by the loss of Lester. I would say most (based on my facebook wall, the SOSH message board, and my slight dabbling into Boston sports radio) don't expect the Red Sox to shell out the money for Lester. They could have had him for less in spring training if that's the route they wanted to go.

[ISiddiqui]

I used him as an example. I've also read that sort of junk on Bleacher Report and all over my facebook feed.

And this thread as well.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I used him as an example. I've also read that sort of junk on Bleacher Report and all over my facebook feed.

And this thread as well.

Who here said "it's a done thing" that Lester is coming back?

[ISiddiqui]

It's more of a hinting... comments on page... 26 about the Red Sox weren't going to ship Lester to a team like the Cards, who would develop a relationship with him. Implying the Red Sox deliberately made the deal to Oakland to resign him in the offseason.

[Arles]

I still don't think it's a terrible deal. I'm just not a huge fan of Cespedes. From the All Star break of 2013 through the same point in 2014, he's hit .252 (.297 OBP) with 25 HR and an OPS of .826 (WAR of 2.1). OFs with a war of 2.0 or higher in 2013 included guys like Alejandro De Aza, Michael Cuddyer, Nate McLouth, Gregor Blanco and Will Venable. I'm not sure getting a guy like that (for only 1+ seasons) is worth a chance at having the inside track on Lester. But, time will tell. It is a steal if they sign back Lester at a reasonable price. But if they overpay and get him back, you have to wonder what the price would have been with compensation and is that difference worth a season of Cespedes?

Originally Posted by lungs

I can't imagine the Brewers not picking up Gallardo's $13M option.

Good point. I didn't see he had a team option.

[Logan]

I think Bill Simmons shoulders a big part of that blame.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

It's more of a hinting... comments on page... 26 about the Red Sox weren't going to ship Lester to a team like the Cards, who would develop a relationship with him. Implying the Red Sox deliberately made the deal to Oakland to resign him in the offseason.

So BishopMVP? Not sure he fits your caricature.

Edit: It was reported that the A's were a desirable trade target because it improved the chances the Red Sox would get him back. I don't buy that and don't think ownership is shelling out the money, as I stated in that post. (I actually said I'd be "shocked" if the Red Sox resigned him, and hoped that the team didn't turn down a better offer for that miniscule improved chance of signing him). And, since he was done in Boston at the end of this bad season anyway, I'm not upset by the haul. I'd like to think if there was a better offer they'd have taken it.

[ISiddiqui]

Well, he seems to be vociferously arguing against something that is fairly obvious (compensation draft pick is going to affect whether some teams go after a Free Agent, regardless of how much money it will take to sign that player). Things that make me wonder.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Logan

I think Bill Simmons shoulders a big part of that blame.

I think part of his success is how he matches up, in some ways, with the manufactured narrative of a lot of people who hate Boston sports. I mean, how many people read him just to bitch about him?

Red Sox fans, like anyone in the world, can be overly optimistic or depressingly pessimistic. Simmons can actually be both, its part of his gimmick.

It is true though that thinking everything was going to turn out well is not a traditional criticism of Boston sports fans that I'm used to. Fortunately, I know enough of them that are still miserable fucks about everything. (I believe our own lovable DT gave up on the Red Sox during LAST season).

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Arles

Good point. I didn't see he had a team option.

I do agree with your original point about pitchers w/o compensation being more valuable. Matt Garza is probably a little more consistent than Ervin Santana but not all that much different. Garza got a four year deal, Santana one.

I'd bet Kyle Lohse could've done much better than 3/$33 had he not had compensation attached to him.

[SirFozzie]

They did get a compensation pick back from the Athletics, so it's a matter of trading a lower half first round pick or 2nd round pick (free agent) for Cespedes and a between 2nd-3rd round pick.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Arles

Atlanta signed him to 1-year deal to keep compensation rights for 2015 and limit the risk if he doesn't have a great season. There's no way Santana signs that unless draft pick compensation kept his value down. Lester has had ERAs of 2.59 (this year), 3.75 (13) and 4.82 (2012). Since 2011, he's been between 3.1 and 4.1 on WAR coming into this season. According to Dan Szymborski, the cost of Atlanta signing Santana was losing a draft pick valued at 3.5 WAR (or $19.6 million):

Even after Atlanta made the decision to forfeit the 26th pick, they still only signed Santana to a 1-year deal, because no one trusts Ervin Santana. I'm positive the draft pick compensation hurt the number of suitors for Santana, and he wouldn't have been available in March without it, but he's not even close to the level of Lester (or Scherzer, or even Shields) and Atlanta was still scared to give him a long-term contract even after they sacked up and sunk the cost of the 26th pick.

And I guess you can just ignore the 4 previous seasons where Lester had an ERA between 3.2 and 3.5

Lester is probably good enough to get a few offers independent of compensation, but some teams would have abstained. No starting pitcher owed compensation has signed for more than 4-$48 mil since this new system, with most signing very late in the game for a lot less than what they had thought. While plenty of marginal pitchers without compensation (headlined by Edwin Jackson in 2012 and Ricky Nolasco in 2013) have signed for higher than that. Had Lester not been traded, he would have been behind Max Scherzer, Yovani Gallardo and maybe even James Shields in pecking order for deals. But, now, since those three will involve compensation, Lester vaults to the top.

As mentioned, Gallardo has a team option for 2015, and Shields will be 33 in December. This "new system" is 2 years old, and there hasn't been a pitcher close to Lester or Scherzer on the market - the two most recent I can think of are Zach Greinke in 2012 and CC Sabathia the first time around in 2009. Both are going to get PAID this offseason and I really doubt any serious suiter is affected by the draft pick compensation. It does make sense to go after Lester first, but once he's off the market I really doubt Scherzer (who has the draft pick cost, but is also 2 years younger) gets a significantly lower AAV. Doubly so since a number of big-market teams with $$$ to spend project to finish in the bottom 10 and thus get their 1st-rounder protected (Rangers, Red Sox, Cubs, Phillies/Mets too even though they don't really need pitching).

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

They did get a compensation pick back from the Athletics, so it's a matter of trading a lower half first round pick or 2nd round pick (free agent) for Cespedes and a between 2nd-3rd round pick.

Teams no longer get the signing team's pick. Now it's just the signing team loses it's first (or 2nd, etc if they sign 2+ FA's or their 1st rounder is top 10 protected), and the team that lost the FA receives a pick at the end of round 1 (so 35ish).

There was also the non-zero percent chance that we resigned Lester, in which case we'd also not get a draft pick.

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, he seems to be vociferously arguing against something that is fairly obvious (compensation draft pick is going to affect whether some teams go after a Free Agent, regardless of how much money it will take to sign that player). Things that make me wonder.

Lester and Scherzer are in the superstar, Robinson Cano/Jacoby Ellsbury/Josh Hamilton class where the draft pick isn't a big deal like it is for some marginal talent like Ervin Santana or Kyle Lohse. (And it will be very interesting to see how many marginal players accepts a QO this offseason after seeing Morales and Drew lose money.)

I said before I think there is a 25-30% chance we re-sign Lester, and about the same chance we sign Scherzer. But I just don't think this trade materially affected those odds. Based on all the information about the Lester contract talks, it wasn't the AAV so much as the years that were scaring off the Red Sox (although they did lowball him on the AAV too). Whichever team is willing to add on a $25ish million for Jon Lester's 37 or even 38 year old seasons wasn't going to be scared off by losing a late 1st or early 2nd round pick. Now, teams trying to sign Koji Uehara would be, which is why he's still here (and we'll offer him a QO) even as we traded off all our other veteran pitchers.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by lungs

I do agree with your original point about pitchers w/o compensation being more valuable. Matt Garza is probably a little more consistent than Ervin Santana but not all that much different. Garza got a four year deal, Santana one.

I'd bet Kyle Lohse could've done much better than 3/$33 had he not had compensation attached to him.

That doesn't make sense though. QO's should drive down the number of suitors on average to above-average players, but once a team decides to sign such a player, theoretically they'd want to sign a longer deal to amortize the cost of losing that pick.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

That doesn't make sense though. QO's should drive down the number of suitors on average to above-average players, but once a team decides to sign such a player, theoretically they'd want to sign a longer deal to amortize the cost of losing that pick.

Signing fewer years is almost always a better decision for players over 28. Take Santana. The Braves limited their financial risk with a 1-year deal. They lose the pick, but if Santana does "blow up" - worst case they get a similar pick next season when he does the QO dance and signs elsewhere. If he sucks, well - then they only paid him one season.

For Santana, Garza, Shields, Lester ... There's no real risk in signing them to a 1-year deal. Worst case, he leaves and gets you a first round pick. Plus, you've made him "in essence" a restricted free agent given you are the only team that can sign him in the next offseason at no draft pick compensation. There's a decent chance Santana resigns with the Braves in the offseason at slightly below market given both he (and the Braves) know the limited market for a pitcher like him with the compensation attached.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

That doesn't make sense though. QO's should drive down the number of suitors on average to above-average players, but once a team decides to sign such a player, theoretically they'd want to sign a longer deal to amortize the cost of losing that pick.

Once you sign 1 guy, just sign like 4 of them

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by lungs

I do agree with your original point about pitchers w/o compensation being more valuable. Matt Garza is probably a little more consistent than Ervin Santana but not all that much different. Garza got a four year deal, Santana one.

I'd bet Kyle Lohse could've done much better than 3/$33 had he not had compensation attached to him.

Then again, Santana's agent was asking for 5/$100M to start free agency last year and eventually got fired so maybe the agent played somewhat of a role in this

SI

[Thomkal]

Anthony Bosch surrenders to DEA - ESPN

also arrested Alex Rodriguez's cousin Yuri Sucart

[Arles]

Gotta love Pujols:

[BishopMVP]

Oh, great.

T.J. Quinn ‏@tjquinnespn 12m
Two law enforcement sources tell me investigation revealed previously unnamed MLB players. Names will be revealed. Expect more suspensions.

Originally Posted by Arles

Signing fewer years is almost always a better decision for players over 28. Take Santana. The Braves limited their financial risk with a 1-year deal. They lose the pick, but if Santana does "blow up" - worst case they get a similar pick next season when he does the QO dance and signs elsewhere. If he sucks, well - then they only paid him one season.

For Santana, Garza, Shields, Lester ... There's no real risk in signing them to a 1-year deal. Worst case, he leaves and gets you a first round pick. Plus, you've made him "in essence" a restricted free agent given you are the only team that can sign him in the next offseason at no draft pick compensation. There's a decent chance Santana resigns with the Braves in the offseason at slightly below market given both he (and the Braves) know the limited market for a pitcher like him with the compensation attached.

When there's an acquisition cost of prospects (or a future prospect that a pick represents), presumably you'd want to use it on a player that will help you more than one year. And no, the worst case is that Santana got injured or had one of his bad seasons, and left without getting Atlanta a pick back. Is there really any guarantee anyone signs Santana this winter if he declines a QO (and he will, because there's no indication agents have accepted the realities of the market yet)? His peripherals have been better, but he's got an ERA- of 98, essentially league average and significantly worse than the 80 he posted with the Royals, and he's another year older at 32.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by molson

I think part of his success is how he matches up, in some ways, with the manufactured narrative of a lot of people who hate Boston sports. I mean, how many people read him just to bitch about him?

Red Sox fans, like anyone in the world, can be overly optimistic or depressingly pessimistic. Simmons can actually be both, its part of his gimmick.

It is true though that thinking everything was going to turn out well is not a traditional criticism of Boston sports fans that I'm used to. Fortunately, I know enough of them that are still miserable fucks about everything. (I believe our own lovable DT gave up on the Red Sox during LAST season).

Indeed - so I'm 1 for 2 on that decision.

To be fair though - it wasn't that I "gave up on the Red Sox" as much as "baseball ceased being an interesting sport to follow for me" due to the time that it takes to watch a game primarily.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Oh, great.

T.J. Quinn ‏@tjquinnespn 12m
Two law enforcement sources tell me investigation revealed previously unnamed MLB players. Names will be revealed. Expect more suspensions..

Whatever happened to Tiger Woods? Wasn't he supposed to be part of this initially and then it went away. Got to wonder about all the injury issues lately.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Arles

Gotta love Pujols:

Needless to say Pujols forgot how to play the right way I guess

[korme]

Wonder if this recent list of players will come out and/or effect the pennant race.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by panerd

Whatever happened to Tiger Woods? Wasn't he supposed to be part of this initially and then it went away. Got to wonder about all the injury issues lately.

What'll ya give me for Tiger Woods and Ken Griffey Jr having the exact same career? Young, everyone's favorite, poised to shatter records...then completely derailed by injury.

Perhaps the injury breakdown is when the steroids stopped? I have no reason to believe Griffey juiced (other than the fact that everyone did it and he had ridiculous numbers), but the similarities are striking.

[BishopMVP]

Pitch-framing by catchers seems to be one of the new things the saber crowd is putting more thought into - cool little article on Sox rookie Christian Vazquez here with some nice .gifs - Christian Vazquez is Partially Elite | FanGraphs Baseball

CVazPitch.png

Just ask Matt Holliday from last night's game if he steals any strike calls!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Really awesome to hear the crowd roar when the Royals score on the road in August. It's been a LONG time since we've heard that.

[sterlingice]

Stupid west coast games. Too late to stay up and watch

SI

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Stupid west coast games. Too late to stay up and watch

SI

It's not the west coast games that are stupid. It's the stupid turning of the Earth, blast that planet.

[Matthean]

So a drunk supermodel can throw better than 50 Cent.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

It's not the west coast games that are stupid. It's the stupid turning of the Earth, blast that planet.

I know, I know

SI