Tyler Thornburg traded to Boston for 3B Travis Shaw, SS Mauricio Dubon, RHP Josh Pennington, SS Yeison Coca

[adambr2]

Gennett is far better than Weeks.

 

Uh, what? Maybe at this very minute, sure. For their careers, no way.

[Ennder]

not sure all the complaining. Carter was far and away better than Fielder, while Gennett is far better than Weeks.

 

 

Weeks had a 2 year stint where he wasn't awful defensively. It didn't stick though unfortunately.

[Mass Haas]

Translated (via Google Chrome) version of this Q&A with Mauricio Dubon, photos at the link as well:

 

Turns out the site will not allow for a copy and paste of any kind, but if you open the link in Chrome, and choose the "translate page" option in upper-right, you'll see it.

 

Xander Bogaerts a big friend and influence...

[MrTPlush]

not sure all the complaining. Carter was far and away better than Fielder, while Gennett is far better than Weeks.

 

 

Weeks had a 2 year stint where he wasn't awful defensively. It didn't stick though unfortunately.

 

Early career Weeks was fine. It went bad after 2011 though.

[CheezWizHed]

Cheez - neither reason you gave makes any sense.

1) If player is selected from team A, team A is unable to protect others after that selection. The protected list was put in place before the winter meetings (& therefore before the Thornberg trade).

2) Players drafted in June XX are able to be dealt right after the conclusion of the world series in XX

 

PTBNL can't be on the 40 man roster so perhaps DS & company want a little more time to review some scouting reports/ medical info before they name the person.

 

Its very possible that I may be operation on old rules.

 

Once you get someone picked in Rule 5, aren't you able to pull another player off the list? That's how it used to work...

[Point Beer Is Best]

Cheez - neither reason you gave makes any sense.

1) If player is selected from team A, team A is unable to protect others after that selection. The protected list was put in place before the winter meetings (& therefore before the Thornberg trade).

2) Players drafted in June XX are able to be dealt right after the conclusion of the world series in XX

 

PTBNL can't be on the 40 man roster so perhaps DS & company want a little more time to review some scouting reports/ medical info before they name the person.

 

Its very possible that I may be operation on old rules.

 

Once you get someone picked in Rule 5, aren't you able to pull another player off the list? That's how it used to work...

 

I don't think it ever worked that way, since they have to be on the 40 man to protect them. Maybe you're confusing the rules of an expansion draft. I know the rule there the last time was that you issued a list of players to protect, and if you had a player selected you could protect more players.

[djoctagone]

PTBNL can't be on the 40 man roster so perhaps DS & company want a little more time to review some scouting reports/ medical info before they name the person.

one of the two players to be named later in the 12 july 2011 trade that first brought francisco rodriguez to the brewers was daniel ray herrera. he was on the 40-man roster at the time of the trade on 1 september 2011.

[JosephC]

Before the trade MLB.com had Dubon at #12 on the Red Sox prospect list, but Baseball America had Dubon at #7. He was obviously behind what was Boston's "big five" and 1B-Sam Travis was #6. Dubon might not be a top 100 prospect, but he's probably not too far off that list.

[Point Beer Is Best]

PTBNL can't be on the 40 man roster so perhaps DS & company want a little more time to review some scouting reports/ medical info before they name the person.

one of the two players to be named later in the 12 july 2011 trade that first brought francisco rodriguez to the brewers was daniel ray herrera. he was on the 40-man roster at the time of the trade on 1 september 2011.

 

Pretty sure the only roster restriction on PTBNL is they cannot be on the 25 man roster, which isn't an issue in the offseason. There was some speculation early that the PTBNL in the Lucroy trade may actually be Joey Gallo (he was in the minors at the time, and obviously on the 40 man roster), but that was put to rest almost immediately when he was recalled to the 25 man roster after the trade.

[sveumrules]

Pretty interesting interview of Thronburg conducted by Burke Badenhop over at MLBTR...

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/12/tyler-thornburg-trade-chat-burke-badenhop-red-sox-brewers-interview.html

 

The comment that stuck out for me was Tyler mentioned being yanked around between starting & relieving with the Brewers. I always thought the Garza signing threw a big wrench in any possibility Thorny ever had of being a starter.

 

His 2013 AAA number were pretty bad but he was dominant in his MLB time finishing the season with three straight scoreless relief appearances followed by four straight quality starts for a 1.95 ERA in 27 innings over that stretch. Small sample sure, but given his pedigree that probably put him in line for a pretty good shot at a 2014 rotation spot to open the season before Garza was signed.

 

Instead, he got pushed to the bullpen where Running Ron ran his arm into the ground after he got off to a blistering start. Would be really curious to know if it was his decision or the organization's to go back to starting with Colo Springs in 2015 as he struggled there in that role before transitioning back to the pen in MLB to close the season and taking off from there.

 

Overall a great example of how progress rarely occurs in constant ascension.

[reillymcshane]

Before the trade MLB.com had Dubon at #12 on the Red Sox prospect list, but Baseball America had Dubon at #7. He was obviously behind what was Boston's "big five" and 1B-Sam Travis was #6. Dubon might not be a top 100 prospect, but he's probably not too far off that list.

Baseball America did their review of the Boston system just last month - so they have a 1/2 season more of ball to assess Dubon - specifically the excellent results he put up at AA.

 

Regarding the MLB.com rankings - these were originally done mid-season. It's why, for example, Woodruff is so low on our list. So the ranking MLB.com had of Dubon was for mid-season - meaning they didn't see the progress he made at AA.

 

MLB.com did adjust some of Dubon's values when they re-ranked him with Milwaukee - so perhaps they took into account his second half performance (as his grades went up when moved to Milwaukee's list).

 

As you say, I don't think Dubon is going to be a Top 100 player - but he's probably in the next 100 guys. And that's not a bad thing. Continued success should get him moved up even more. I remember John Sickels at minorleagueball.com saying that there really isn't that much of a difference between a guy at 150 and 100 (or something like that).

[paul253]

Assuming he has continued success. A lot of our top guys had pretty bad years last year. If Dubon doesn't have at least an above average season and Shaw plays how not people think he will play then I think this deal will look even worse to me then it does now. And if the reliever market at the deadline is a strong s it was last year.......

[sveumrules]

& if Thornburg's elbow doesn't blow up & if he maintains the upper tier results he's really only produced for one season...

 

One nice thing about the deal is that our risk is spread among three players; an MLB 3B who produced similar value in a down year as Thornburg did in a career year, a middle infielder who has consistently displayed above average results despite being young at every stop along the way and a lottery ticket pitcher with a live arm. All the risk for the Red Sox is wrapped up in a relief pitcher with as many top flight full seasons as elbow related shutdowns.

[MrTPlush]

We can sugar coat this any way we want to make the Brewers look good, but bottom line is Stearns is selling low in a sense. He doesn't want to risk an sort of decline/injury which is fine and all. However, with that being said if Thornburg would have continued what he did last year this will be a real head slapper for Stearns at face value. I say face value because you never know what will happen in the end, but obviously we can only grade at face value right now.

[paul253]

All the risk for the Red Sox is wrapped up in a relief pitcher with as many top flight full seasons as elbow related shutdowns.

 

Our risk may be spread out over three players but the risk is much higher as none of them, including Shaw I'd argue, have had any real success at the major league level. I'd prefer to take the chance that Thornburg would have had another good season and tried to get a more advance starting pitching or third base prospect then, and I'll say it, settling for what we got. I think we settled.

 

And I think this idea that Thornburg has only had one good season is a little overblown. He was awesome in 2013 when he came up. And he was off to a very good start the following year before Roenecke completely overused him and he wore down and got injured. Then after that he was still bounced around the rotation and the bullpen before he was finally given a consistent role, which he has excelled in. Injury is certainly a risk but it's risk for any pitcher. If you're trading away guys because you're afriaid they are going to get hurt then you aren't going to be hanging on to anyone very long.

[homer]

We can sugar coat this any way we want to make the Brewers look good, but bottom line is Stearns is selling low in a sense. He doesn't want to risk an sort of decline/injury which is fine and all. However, with that being said if Thornburg would have continued what he did last year this will be a real head slapper for Stearns at face value. I say face value because you never know what will happen in the end, but obviously we can only grade at face value right now.

 

Or he's selling high. Maybe he and the staff think Thornburg out produced his stat line last year.

[sveumrules]

2013: Terrible in AAA, excellent in 66 MLB IP.

2014: Excellent for a month and a half in MLB, shut down with elbow.

2015: Terrible in AAA, solid in 34 MLB IP.

 

There have been flashes for sure, but Tyler has been in the Majors for parts of five seasons now and 2016 was the first time he pitched in all six calendar months. He is the perfect example of the volatility of relief pitchers with glimpses of his potential here & there sandwiched around injury & underperformance.

 

Shaw has produced 3.4bWAR & 3.0 fWAR in parts of two major league seasons. Thornburg has produced 4.2 bWAR & 2.6 fWAR in parts of five seasons. If Shaw hasn't had any real success at the MLB level than Thornburg hasn't had that much if any more.

[MrTPlush]

We can sugar coat this any way we want to make the Brewers look good, but bottom line is Stearns is selling low in a sense. He doesn't want to risk an sort of decline/injury which is fine and all. However, with that being said if Thornburg would have continued what he did last year this will be a real head slapper for Stearns at face value. I say face value because you never know what will happen in the end, but obviously we can only grade at face value right now.

 

Or he's selling high. Maybe he and the staff think Thornburg out produced his stat line last year.

 

Sure you can spin it to be selling high or low. Looking at realistic situations he didn't sell at rock bottom, but he sure didn't sell anywhere near the sky high potential either. He could add a lot more value than they did. Tyler Thornburg had the talent to pitch the way he did. That was no fluke last year. The health risk ended up being too much for Stearns and he cashed in now.

 

I am not saying the deal is bad/good. I am just saying Stearns could have left a lot on the table and it could be a deal that comes back to bite him. It isn't like trading Lucroy where it had to happen in July as his value wasn't going to get higher. With Thronburg he traded away a player who could really add to his value.

[brewerfan82]

We can sugar coat this any way we want to make the Brewers look good, but bottom line is Stearns is selling low in a sense. He doesn't want to risk an sort of decline/injury which is fine and all. However, with that being said if Thornburg would have continued what he did last year this will be a real head slapper for Stearns at face value. I say face value because you never know what will happen in the end, but obviously we can only grade at face value right now.

 

Or he's selling high. Maybe he and the staff think Thornburg out produced his stat line last year.

Exactly. Very few relievers become consistently very good year to year.

 

Over the past 5 seasons, 29 relievers have posted 2+ WAR seasons.

 

- Chapman has accomplished a 2+ WAR 4 times

- Miller, Kimbrel, Betances, Holland, and Jansen have each accomplished a 2+ WAR 3 times

- McGee, Melancon, Rosenthal, Davis, and Britton have each accomplished a 2+ WAR 2 times

- And 17 other relievers have accomplished a 2+ WAR just once (incl. Thornburg)

 

Stearns sold him high and for a nice return. He's not in the same class as recently traded relievers like Chapman, Miller, or even Davis. He would need to repeat last year's results for another 2-3 years to be in that discussion, which isn't likely. History shows that he's more likely to regress from a 2 WAR than repeat or improve on it, so now was the time to deal him. Furthermore, those thinking he can get in that class with another half season of work, that just isn't the case, especially if you're admitting he has health concerns.

[sveumrules]

If you try to estimate Thornburg's trade value over the years it was probably pretty high around 2012 when he was #100 on Baseball America's prospect list.

 

2013 was terrible in AAA but pretty excellent in the Majors so it probably stayed static, maybe a slight tick up if a team believed in the Major League results.

 

2014 trade value bottomed out after being shut down with an elbow injury.

 

2015 climbed back up a little just by getting back on the mound though the results were terrible in AAA & merely solid in MLB.

 

2016 jumped up quite a bit by staying healthy for a full MLB season for the first time & display upper tier results.

 

Of course it could have climbed even more with another 3-4 months of healthy, upper tier relief work, but I'd say Stearns & company definitely sold Thorny at the highest point his value has been in the last five years.

[danzig6767]

2013: Terrible in AAA, excellent in 66 MLB IP.

2014: Excellent for a month and a half in MLB, shut down with elbow.

2015: Terrible in AAA, solid in 34 MLB IP.

 

There have been flashes for sure, but Tyler has been in the Majors for parts of five seasons now and 2016 was the first time he pitched in all six calendar months. He is the perfect example of the volatility of relief pitchers with glimpses of his potential here & there sandwiched around injury & underperformance.

There are also two other factors

 

1. Thornburg was being shuffled between starting and relief pitching. Last year he was allowed to stick with just being a reliever and he mentioned this helping him a lot.

 

2. The eye test. With him being just a relief pitcher, his velocity was regularly in the mid-90's. He has a quality change and curve. Thornburg has three plus pitches that when commanded are filthy. We've seen this out of many failed starters who have quality stuff that when allowed to just pitch out of the bullpen, they go from fringe starter to elite reliever. The Cubs just traded for one in Wade Davis. A guy with stuff, but who struggled to stick as a starter for whatever reason. When moved to the bullpen though, he thrived. Many of the best relievers have followed this path.

[sveumrules]

No doubt getting shuffled around in different roles altered Tyler's developmental path. I'd be really curious if it was his decision or the organization's (or arrived upon collaboratively) to go back to starting in 2015 after he came back from the elbow issue that ended his 2014. If he had gone right back into the bullpen after his impressive showing to start 2014 it might have accelerated his ascension instead of spending 4 months struggling as a starter in Colo Springs.

[MKE81]

We can sugar coat this any way we want to make the Brewers look good, but bottom line is Stearns is selling low in a sense. He doesn't want to risk an sort of decline/injury which is fine and all. However, with that being said if Thornburg would have continued what he did last year this will be a real head slapper for Stearns at face value. I say face value because you never know what will happen in the end, but obviously we can only grade at face value right now.

 

Or he's selling high. Maybe he and the staff think Thornburg out produced his stat line last year.

This. He's selling high because Thornburg's value has never been so high and he's never shown 3.5 months of complete and utter domination before. The chances of him sustaining that level moving forward aren't in his favor (of course he could end up doing though). His last 4 games he gave up runs every outing and he certainly wasn't being abused usage wise. 3.1ip, 7h, 5er. Had a 3.22 ERA the beginning of June so what if he repeats that performance next year? He's been up and down like this his entire career as a reliever. And he's a fly ball pitcher in Fenway now where a 325' fly ball to straight away LF is a double instead of an out at Miller Park. In return we get a lefty 3b who hit 16HR playing half his games in a park where straight away RF is 380 (his career HR splits are even too). If Shaw is sniffing 500 AB for us he's hitting 20+ HR easy. Red Sox fans overall really liked him, his defense and his raw power.

 

Stearns could have received a Top 100 player for Thornburg right now along with someone else but getting what he did at this time was a great move now (Shaw) and moving forward (Dubon/Pennington) when all the prospects are up in 2-3yrs. Dubon has hit for a high BA/OPB at every level. If he was hitting even 10HR annually thus far he'd be Top 80 right now but he's overlooked as a result of that given every other tool is above average from the SS position while being 1.5+yrs young for every level. Remove the "top 100" from all discussions and simply evaluating the talent of the players shows this is a great return. I think Stearns made the right decision trading him now instead of waiting to the break.

[paul253]

He is the perfect example of the volatility of relief pitchers with glimpses of his potential here & there sandwiched around injury & underperformance

 

2016 has really been his first season in which he's only been a reliever and healthy. He was throwing hard, striking out a ton of people and had a very good year all around. I don't think it's fair to call volatile because he seems to do fine when he has one defined role, which he's never had for an extended period of time before last year.

 

The chances of him sustaining that level moving forward aren't in his favor

 

Based on what? There is just this assumption that he is going to blow his elbow out again and this assumption that he's going to regress and almost nobody is actually believing he could do well again. If he were still in Milwaukee I would fully expect a sub 3.00 ERA with a high strikeout rate. Maybe that is an unrealistic expectation but considering how dominant he was last year I don't believe it is. I just don't understand this argument that we did well trading him now because it's only a matter of time before he pulls a Derrick Turnbow.

 

In return we get a lefty 3b who hit 16HR playing half his games in a park where straight away RF is 380 (his career HR splits are even too).

 

While barely get on base at a .300 clip and striking out once every four at bats. We should have just kept Carter. He's the same thing but with much better power, although obviously not a third baseman. We are still in the early stages of a rebuild. Travis Shaw is not a guy you build around. He is a place filler. And we have to hope his second half last year was a fluke because his numbers were putrid.

[Boomer5]

I do think he sold him high. Maybe it would have been higher had Thornburg had an excellent first half, but I'm ok that he sold him now to eliminate the risk of injury.

 

That's not the issue; it's did we get a good return of 3 guys ranging from meh to interesting vs say selling him for one elite prospect and a useful MLB back up piece like the Will Smith deal?