Garza to the Red Sox?

[MrTPlush]

I would rather get a soon to be top 100 player who has the potential to be a top 10 player than just get a top 100 player in a trade. Take Appel for example former #1 pick and his ceiling is that of a #3 who is also ranked in the top 10 currently. I am sorry but if the Astros said hey you can have Appel for Garza and the Red Sox said you could have the deal I posted earlier I would take the Red Sox deal every time.

 

Top 100 players are for fans to go oooh and aaahhh over kind of like fireworks they go boom and bang and then they are gone. I would rather trade on potential than some silly top 100 prospect ranking which has so many flaws and has a near 100% bias on how prospects are ranked.

 

Let me ask you this would you trade Garza for Lara today or even Garza for Arcia last year?

 

Really the value of a prospect comes down to a lot of things. Obviously there is a difference between an 18 who is like 150 range and a 23 year old in AAA who is a 90 range prospect. Future value has to be taken into consideration. Devers is a Top 100 prospect without proving much. He could have future value of a Top 30 prospect some day easily. Higher up prospects are also more valuable because they are more proven and they are closer to the MLB.

 

With Garza you pretty much have to hope for a diamond in the rough. Because of the high salary I doubt a team wants to give up an already highly touted guy while taking on that money. Devers would be wishful thinking and even a guy like Arcia last year would be a pretty big stretch. Going to have to dig deeper unless Garza really tears it up.

[trwi7]

Porcello got 6 years, $115M.

 

Why do you keep saying this? He got 4/82 and he's only 26 and improved each of the last three years he was pitching.

 

Copied directly from BR.com:

 

2015 26 Boston Red Sox $12,500,000 5.170

 

2016 27 Boston Red Sox $20,125,000

2017 28 Boston Red Sox $20,125,000

2018 29 Boston Red Sox $21,125,000

2019 30 Boston Red Sox $21,125,000

30 Boston Red Sox $21,125,000

Earliest Free Agent: 2020

Career to date (may be incomplete) $36,231,000 Does not include future salaries ($103.6M)

 

Put simply, BR is wrong.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2015/04/red_sox_sign_porcello_to_four-year_extension.html

[brewcrewdue80]

Porcello got 6 years, $115M.

 

Why do you keep saying this? He got 4/82 and he's only 26 and improved each of the last three years he was pitching.

 

Copied directly from BR.com:

 

2015 26 Boston Red Sox $12,500,000 5.170

 

2016 27 Boston Red Sox $20,125,000

2017 28 Boston Red Sox $20,125,000

2018 29 Boston Red Sox $21,125,000

2019 30 Boston Red Sox $21,125,000

30 Boston Red Sox $21,125,000

Earliest Free Agent: 2020

Career to date (may be incomplete) $36,231,000 Does not include future salaries ($103.6M)

 

 

Hate to be the one to say it but the guy appears to be right. Sorry Ely. BRef as your graph shows has 2 years at age 30 both earning 21.125mil thus where they are off.

 

Either way Porcello is making about 8mil more than Garza per season the next 2 seasons. With the future Free Agency coming up and the price it is for pitching/length of years. Garza's deal has to be saving money for the pitcher he is.

With the upcoming Free Agency of Starters, I think by July the value of such pitchers should be taking shape. And guys like Scott Kazmir or Yovani Gallardo may pitch well enough where they are going to be commanding 16mil+ per season....Or maybe they will be pitching just crappy enough you see a 12.5Mil pricetag roughly next to their names. Brett Anderson, Mat Latos, older guys like Doug Fister, Wei-Yin Chen and Hisashi Iwakuma. These are a bunch of Matt Garza type pitcher abilities and based on health issues like Anderson's or prices again on Latos or Fister to Years involved on a Chen/Iwakuma deal. Netting Garza for 2/25mil/3/30-38mil may seem a better route to go come that time.

I mean if Porcello is worth 20mil+ free agency years, Latos, Gallardo, Kazmir, Fister and even Anderson would seem types that can ask for that amount of money if they pitch 27+starts and under a 4ERA this season. Some likely at 5years length.

 

8mil can net you something decent in Free Agency or in buying out arb years for team controlled players. So what you gave up a prospect? You were able to sign a Bobby Parnell or Tyler Clippard to have in the back end of your Bullpen and have Matt Garza pitching for you vs just Matt Latos at 20mil a year.

[adambr2]

The Red Sox must be getting excited. 31 year old starters who haven't cracked 200 innings in 5 years with an ERA near 6 and a $12.5M annual salary don't grow on trees.

[MrTPlush]

Either way Porcello is making about 8mil more than Garza per season the next 2 seasons. With the future Free Agency coming up and the price it is for pitching/length of years. Garza's deal has to be saving money for the pitcher he is.

With the upcoming Free Agency of Starters, I think by July the value of such pitchers should be taking shape. And guys like Scott Kazmir or Yovani Gallardo may pitch well enough where they are going to be commanding 16mil+ per season....Or maybe they will be pitching just crappy enough you see a 12.5Mil pricetag roughly next to their names. Brett Anderson, Mat Latos, older guys like Doug Fister, Wei-Yin Chen and Hisashi Iwakuma. These are a bunch of Matt Garza type pitcher abilities and based on health issues like Anderson's or prices again on Latos or Fister to Years involved on a Chen/Iwakuma deal. Netting Garza for 2/25mil/3/30-38mil may seem a better route to go come that time.

I mean if Porcello is worth 20mil+ free agency years, Latos, Gallardo, Kazmir, Fister and even Anderson would seem types that can ask for that amount of money if they pitch 27+starts and under a 4ERA this season. Some likely at 5years length.

 

8mil can net you something decent in Free Agency or in buying out arb years for team controlled players. So what you gave up a prospect? You were able to sign a Bobby Parnell or Tyler Clippard to have in the back end of your Bullpen and have Matt Garza pitching for you vs just Matt Latos at 20mil a year.

 

Either way Porcello is a massive outlier and not even close to comparable to Garza. Porcello is 26 and the Red Sox gave him that money assuming through his PRIME would improve greatly...becoming maybe a 1-2 type starter in time. People either thought it was one of the worst overpays ever or assumed he was going to be the great starter some hoped. No one thought they signed him to be a 3.75 ERA type pitcher. Unless you are 26 with big upside you shouldn't compare yourself to Porcello.

 

To say Garza is a 8mil a year bargain or even close is waaaay off base.

[brewcrewdue80]

How So? You seem to be thinking I'm talking in regards to Porcello only. Even if it's an overpay, Porcello's price tag is something a number of the pitchers I mentioned will base their asking price for. And that is where Garza's 8mil cheaper price would come in. Would you rather have Garza or Gallardo? straight up, I'd take Garza. If Gallardo though like I mentioned goes 27+ starts under a 4ERA in the AL, I don't see how he doesn't toss his worth being 20mil/year. Kazmir, the way he's been going, He's gotta be looking at 20mil per year if he can get that 27starts+. And it's not just the 8mil cheaper, but what about giving these pitchers 4/5years?

[adambr2]

How So? You seem to be thinking I'm talking in regards to Porcello only. Even if it's an overpay, Porcello's price tag is something a number of the pitchers I mentioned will base their asking price for. And that is where Garza's 8mil cheaper price would come in. Would you rather have Garza or Gallardo? straight up, I'd take Garza. If Gallardo though like I mentioned goes 27+ starts under a 4ERA in the AL, I don't see how he doesn't toss his worth being 20mil/year. Kazmir, the way he's been going, He's gotta be looking at 20mil per year if he can get that 27starts+. And it's not just the 8mil cheaper, but what about giving these pitchers 4/5years?

 

Why would you take Garza over Gallardo straight up? Gallardo is over 2 years younger, better, and more durable. I can't see any advantage to Garza over Gallardo.

[brewcrewdue80]

How So? You seem to be thinking I'm talking in regards to Porcello only. Even if it's an overpay, Porcello's price tag is something a number of the pitchers I mentioned will base their asking price for. And that is where Garza's 8mil cheaper price would come in. Would you rather have Garza or Gallardo? straight up, I'd take Garza. If Gallardo though like I mentioned goes 27+ starts under a 4ERA in the AL, I don't see how he doesn't toss his worth being 20mil/year. Kazmir, the way he's been going, He's gotta be looking at 20mil per year if he can get that 27starts+. And it's not just the 8mil cheaper, but what about giving these pitchers 4/5years?

 

Why would you take Garza over Gallardo straight up? Gallardo is over 2 years younger, better, and more durable. I can't see any advantage to Garza over Gallardo.

 

How long will Gallardo's arm last? It's not just that. Garza to me can go deeper in to games with his quality outings. Gallardo just doesn't do that. Since the start of 2013 Gallardo has pitched in the 8th inning 3 times. Garza 10. Including 2 complete games. That's in 59 Starts compared to 71 for Gallardo. I want the Starting pitcher that can take the ball and win a game for the team. Not someone who no matter what will have to rely on his bullpen for 6outs at minimum 96% of the time. Gallardo isn't the same pitcher he was 2008-2012. His velocity has dropped/ Ks per 9 are lower; Garza works with more velocity at his older age than Gallardo with a better K/9. Considering that drop and lack of ability to pitch past the 7th inning? Yes Garza to me is a better pitcher than Gallardo, it's not even close. Gallardo essentially is only a solid #3 with #4 fallbacks. He provides 0 ability at being a #2 due to the fact he doesn't go complete games...ever anymore. Garza can at least take the mound and be a #2 what? 17% of the time at minimum. The only reason Garza is a Brewer is at the worry of his durability. If he averaged 30starts or more a season he'd be making 20mil/yr right now. Gallardo will maybe reach that kind of 20/mil a year due to his durability not because he's a better pitcher than Garza at this stage.

[reillymcshane]

However, he's gradually overcome the early poor starts and is starting to resemble the pitcher we had last season.

Yeah, that worked out well.

[LouisEly]

Put simply, BR is wrong.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2015/04/red_sox_sign_porcello_to_four-year_extension.html

We're both right and wrong. It was a 4/$84M extension that starts in 2016; the Red Sox also have to pay him the $12.5M owed to him for 2015, so the Red Sox are paying him 5/$96.5M.

[Boomer5]

Unless Garza really puts it together in a big way, he should be packaged with Lohse to a rotation starved team on the verge of the play offs.

 

If Im DM, I use the Cubs template last year of Samardzija and Hammels for Russell. Obviously we wouldn't get a guy as good as Russell for that package but two quality 3/4's for the stretch run should bring a really nice prospect back.

[trwi7]

Put simply, BR is wrong.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2015/04/red_sox_sign_porcello_to_four-year_extension.html

We're both right and wrong. It was a 4/$84M extension that starts in 2016; the Red Sox also have to pay him the $12.5M owed to him for 2015, so the Red Sox are paying him 5/$96.5M.

 

How does that make you right when you said 6/115? Even though they have to pay him this year, the extension itself was 4/82.5.

[monty57]

but two quality 3/4's for the stretch run should bring a really nice prospect back.

 

Nothing about Garza or Lohse has screamed "quality" this year. I hope they can pitch better, and they have done so in the past, but right now, teams have reason for concern. Lohse is pitching better recently, and has a short-term (less risk) deal, but I still wouldn't expect much from him. We would have received a lot more this past offseason... possibly similar to what we got back for Gallardo, but that ship has sailed. Now we're probably looking at just trading him to get salary relief.

 

Garza needs to pitch much better or teams will run away. Who wants to get stuck with a multi-year deal for a guy with 8 HR and 22 BB in 45 IP? 1.58 WHIP/5.72 ERA!! He has a decent track record, and should be better than this, but is that a risk you want to take, especially if asked to give up quality prospects to get him?

[adambr2]

I honestly feel that a lot of people are still stuck in 8 or 9 years ago in their expectations of starting pitching. If you were a 4.00 ERA starting pitcher in 2007 or 2008, you were a very solid starter. Those days are over. It's a pitchers' era again and pitchers are much better than they were in recent years. A high 3 ERA isn't a solid 2 anymore, it's a middle of the rotation guy in an average rotation. And if you're paying market value for those guys, it means you're not developing your own starting pitching and you're right in the situation that we're in now.

[nate82]

I honestly feel that a lot of people are still stuck in 8 or 9 years ago in their expectations of starting pitching. If you were a 4.00 ERA starting pitcher in 2007 or 2008, you were a very solid starter. Those days are over. It's a pitchers' era again and pitchers are much better than they were in recent years. A high 3 ERA isn't a solid 2 anymore, it's a middle of the rotation guy in an average rotation. And if you're paying market value for those guys, it means you're not developing your own starting pitching and you're right in the situation that we're in now.

 

What?

 

A high 3 ERA has never been a solid 2. A mid 3 ERA is a solid #2 or #1 type pitcher. A high 3 ERA is a solid #3 or average #2 type pitcher. A mid to high 3 ERA pitcher right now is a solid #3 pitcher in a good rotation. There are not that many #2 type pitchers below a 3 ERA right now. There are a bunch of #1 type pitchers who are below a 3 ERA but I don't see many #2 type pitchers who have an ERA between a low 3 and a mid 3 ERA. You are over exaggerating what a solid #2 pitcher is.

[adambr2]

I honestly feel that a lot of people are still stuck in 8 or 9 years ago in their expectations of starting pitching. If you were a 4.00 ERA starting pitcher in 2007 or 2008, you were a very solid starter. Those days are over. It's a pitchers' era again and pitchers are much better than they were in recent years. A high 3 ERA isn't a solid 2 anymore, it's a middle of the rotation guy in an average rotation. And if you're paying market value for those guys, it means you're not developing your own starting pitching and you're right in the situation that we're in now.

 

What?

 

A high 3 ERA has never been a solid 2. A mid 3 ERA is a solid #2 or #1 type pitcher. A high 3 ERA is a solid #3 or average #2 type pitcher. A mid to high 3 ERA pitcher right now is a solid #3 pitcher in a good rotation. There are not that many #2 type pitchers below a 3 ERA right now. There are a bunch of #1 type pitchers who are below a 3 ERA but I don't see many #2 type pitchers who have an ERA between a low 3 and a mid 3 ERA. You are over exaggerating what a solid #2 pitcher is.

 

What you want or don't want to consider a 'solid 2' 8 or 9 years ago wasn't really the point of the post, it was the simple fact that starting pitching as a whole is much better than it was 8-10 years ago. Gallardo was almost always a high 3 ERA guy and almost universally considered a solid 2 by Brewer fans. From that whole paragraph you're hung up whether a solid 2 in 2006-2008 was a 3.75 ERA or 3.50 ERA? (which is also a solid #1, apparently.)

[brewcrewdue80]

There are so many factors to me on what makes a #2/#3/and #4 SP. I think #1 starters are pretty clearly elite and easy to identify. Wasn't it 3.72ERA Average for SPs last season? Would seem to me you take average and base your #3s around that. So I'd start at 3.5ERA to 3.85ERA as your #3 Expectation. Probably 3.15-3.5ERA for a #2 and any better would make #1 types. But ERAs just aren't the determining factor. I look at depth in Starts. What good is a 3ERA SP if he only goes 5IP? I think that was about what the Cardinals were staring at with Shelby Miller. A complete lack of ability to go 6IP for much of his career with them. They sold him off as a low #3 imo to get Heyward. And suddenly with the Braves he's immediately become a strong #2 which is what he was believed as potential.

 

It's the difference of why to me Garza has #2 ability and Gallardo doesn't.

Also Fastball velocity. If you're sitting at 88-90 I see it hard to give someone better than #3 starter. You're now at location/pitchability to be higher. Like Maddux was for his career. I'll never see Fiers as anymore than a #3 due to his velocity with the FB. I'd easily take a decent trade offer from a team who gets enamored by his K Rate.

Meanwhile Peralta and Nelson possess 93-96MPH FBs. And an ability to work 7IP. Already that puts them as having #2 ability in my mind and strong #3s overall. Peralta's 3.52 ERA last season doesn't make him a #2 because the Fip numbers shown him above 4. But going 198.2IP at that ERA shows why I believe he's a strong #3 and not far off to becoming a #2. But at the same time due to his higher Fip, a drop in Velocity by him would be alarming.

 

Velocity to me is important and it shows with today's batters. RPs throwing 97+Gas has become the norm and many of the hitters just don't hit that, they never have really. There's just more doing it today than before.

Someone thought Orismer Despaigne from San Diego would be a worthy trade offer for one of our trade assets. The guy touches 90, and his recent ER giving up isn't surprising to me. HItters are just figuring him out. Kinda like Fiers I believe in starts. These lower velocity pitchers can make nice short term runs 10-14 starts when they are locating and pitching well. But mistakes at 90 vs 96 are going to get smacked to the wall or over it.

 

There's just many factors that make a starter a #1-5. ERA doesn't cover it. Especially when nights like last night Garza has 2 inherited runners score vs getting out of the jam himself or being his own gas can. It was the difference last year of him being a 3.3ERA pitcher vs the 3.6 roughly that his number was. Luck in RPs can swing a SPs ERA .33-.5 in one season. Good or bad. Garza had the bad last season. Kintzler a major part of that bad got the good when he was replaced.

 

 

Adam just posted same time as me.... to reply on Gallardo

Gallardo had 200IP+ and 200K ability in 2009-2012 with a 92+FB. It's dropped to 185IP and 145K with a 90-92FB. Again ERA doesn't determine what a #2-#4 SP is. Gallardo at 200+IP/K and 92+FB while being a ML avg-ish ERA had him as a #2 SP weaker but still a #2. Definitely a Very Strong #3. He's no longer that production that high in FB velocity. He's just a #3 and with less Ks his production now and slowly degrading would be what Peralta could immediately become if his FB dropped 2MPH. People hope that with a lower velocity FB the pitcher learns to locate more and "Pitch" a better approach to getting the hitter out. Less BBs is a usual sign, or more first pitch strikes "pitching" more for contact.

[bensheeps]

A Garza for Cecchini proposal from this writer.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2471641-3-potential-deals-the-boston-red-sox-should-propose-at-the-trade-deadline

 

 

Cecchini has been BAD this year at Pawtucket BA = .203 OBP = .269 SLG = .276, but is shedding Garza's contract & hoping Cecchini can remember his on-base skills enough?

[TheCrew07]

A Garza for Cecchini proposal from this writer.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2471641-3-potential-deals-the-boston-red-sox-should-propose-at-the-trade-deadline

 

Cecchini has been BAD this year at Pawtucket BA = .203 OBP = .269 SLG = .276, but is shedding Garza's contract & hoping Cecchini can remember his on-base skills enough?

 

That would be a depressing return for Garza considering our divisional rivals the Cubs got CJ Edwards, Justin Grimm, Neil Ramirez, and Mike Olt for him in 2013. What a difference 3 years can make.

 

I generally don't like dealing for Yankee or Red Sox prospects because they are so overhyped and in this case Cecchini's 3 year trend is discouraging. I wouldn't mind shedding Garza's contract but I don't see Cecchini as a positive even though I thought he could be an average MLB 3B in the past. I'd rather go down to R ball for some latin prospect like Rafael Devers than acquire a player I'm pretty positive won't make any kind of difference for the Brewers.

[bill hAll Star]

I've thought that Bleacher Report is an utter joke of fanboys that don't follow the game enough to be real writers but are assumed to be real writers due to the site's prominence.

 

Not that there is anything wrong with people blogging, it is just that others that read it take it as more professional than it really is (not insinuating our poster above is, because Garza/Cecchini is not far-fetched).

 

Here is an absolute gem of an LOL from that article about Garza:

 

Shane Victorino to the Houston Astros for Their Best Offer

 

The Astros are a shocking 27-14, the No. 1 record in the American League. They've managed to get there despite a .231 team batting average, the second-lowest in baseball. Right fielder George Springer is hitting .195, while designated hitter Evan Gattis is batting just .196. Shane Victorino could fill in at either position.

 

My goodness...how could they be winning with a LOW BATTING AVERAGE? Better trade for a solid, yet declining player to fill in for one of the top young players in baseball or a very solid hitter (eventually) in Gattis...because batting average.