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

[rickh150]

Is it a perfectly fair system across the board, no, and it never will be. Obviously teams that have more money to spend have an advantage in free agency and retaining their own. But the current system of 6 years of control (closer to 7 if they are mindful to service time restraints), does give the smaller markets a way to compete if they build their franchise the right way.

 

Small windows for small markets..... look at KC. How sad is that? They built it the "right" way, and now after an extremely brief run they have to blow up the ship and trade off pieces. Sad for their fans. Sad that these teams, including us, that can't keep good home-grown teams together for longer periods of time.

 

It's just sad that the disparity between bigs and smalls is so large. I'd like to see a MLB FA pool of shared money that is for teams to help specifically sign their own FA. Seems like that would be good for the game.... promote teams to keep their own..... build relationships in the neighborhood.... keep t-shirt names relevant. Also, sharing all tv $ has to be in the next CBA.

[sveumrules]

And again it's not like he was a bad pitcher who just had a good year. He's been a pretty solid pitcher his entire career.

 

I've enjoyed following Thorny since he was drafted, but 2016 was the first time his results matched his talent for more than a handful of appearances. From 2013-15 there were 209 relievers with at least 80 innings, Tyler's 87.2 were 195th. His ERA of 3.70 ranked 140th. His FIP of 4.35 ranked 188th. His -0.2 WAR ranked 187th.

[markedman5]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2016/12/06/brewers-did-well-getting-mauricio-dubon-from-sox/wQyvClqZaWwMHow7Hso0TK/story.html

[Austin Tatious]

I happened to catch Dubon on the MLB network. I forgot what game it was, but it may have been an AFL game or all star game.

 

He was very memorable, particularly because he is from Honduras. I was impressed, and thought he really could handle the bat. He seemed slim, so he will need to bulk up. He looked like he was rangy defensively. I think he's a really nice prospect to obtain.

 

In my prior homework of the Bosox system, I liked Basabe, Diaz, and Dubon. I am happy we got Dubon for a variety of reasons. I think he can hit for average and hopefully eventually fill out and develop bat speed and power. He gives us a hedge in case Arcia's upside doesn't get to what we hope. Unlike Betancourt and the other Bosox kid we got for Aaron Hill, Dubon looks more legit in the middle of the infield.

 

Shaw is just a guy to keep the 3rd base seat warm for Erceg or some other prospect.

 

Pennington is obviously a classic lottery ticket. Not a huge guy but very powerful arm. He's likely a power reliever if he can develop movement on his fastball, improve his curve, and gain command. He's got a long way to go. But, as far as lottery tickets go, he makes sense. In classic Stearns fashion, he tried to nab Pennington based on metrics and scouting before his value becomes proven. By definition, a lottery ticket can be boom, or bust.

[jerichoholicninja]

Is it a perfectly fair system across the board, no, and it never will be. Obviously teams that have more money to spend have an advantage in free agency and retaining their own. But the current system of 6 years of control (closer to 7 if they are mindful to service time restraints), does give the smaller markets a way to compete if they build their franchise the right way.

 

 

 

 

Small windows for small markets..... look at KC. How sad is that? They built it the "right" way, and now after an extremely brief run they have to blow up the ship and trade off pieces. Sad for their fans. Sad that these teams, including us, that can't keep good home-grown teams together for longer periods of time.

 

It's just sad that the disparity between bigs and smalls is so large. I'd like to see a MLB FA pool of shared money that is for teams to help specifically sign their own FA. Seems like that would be good for the game.... promote teams to keep their own..... build relationships in the neighborhood.... keep t-shirt names relevant. Also, sharing all tv $ has to be in the next CBA.

 

If KC were to resign their current core group in about 3 years they would have an old, overpaid, under performing team and no money to sign anyone to make it better. In most cases, signing your own guys to long term extensions only fulfills emotional goals and isn't in the best interest of the success of the team. Imagine if we resigned Prince. That would have really set the franchise back. Losing your players at about 30 years old by trade or free agency is often a blessing in disguise.

[Austin Tatious]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2016/12/06/brewers-did-well-getting-mauricio-dubon-from-sox/wQyvClqZaWwMHow7Hso0TK/story.html

 

Thanks! Very positive article, obviously.

 

The Globe has a great sports page, and Cafardo is a very knowledgeable writer. Not only does he know the Bosox but he has great command on baseball as a whole, with great contacts. I try not to miss his Sunday baseball column which is usually a real treat.

[paul253]

I've enjoyed following Thorny since he was drafted, but 2016 was the first time his results matched his talent for more than a handful of appearances. From 2013-15 there were 209 relievers with at least 80 innings, Tyler's 87.2 were 195th. His ERA of 3.70 ranked 140th. His FIP of 4.35 ranked 188th. His -0.2 WAR ranked 187th

 

Don't forget though he was a starter his entire minor league career. I'm sure it took time to adjust to a completely different role. And as if that wasn't bad enough it's not like he went from starter to reliever and that was that. He bounced back and forth numerous times. I also believe he was off to a really good start early on in, I want to say 2014, but was overused and broke down.

 

I'm not saying he's a perennial all star. But I'd be more willing to guess his 2017 will be closer to his 2016 then any other years although those years weren't even that bad.

[Eye Black]

Alex Speier put together the Red Sox top ten prospect rankings for Baseball America and ranked Dubon #7. Back in November he joined the podcast for SoxProspects.com and had some very encouraging things to say about Dubon. Skip to the 27-minute mark for about 5 minutes of discussion about Dubon...

 

SoxProspects.com Podcast: Episode 109 - Alex Speier

[FVBrewerFan]

Yea, the performance risk is not a factor for me, but the injury risk is very real. Roll the dice hemail holds up until August? No, I rather take this deal.

[brewcrewdue80]

Alright, taken quite awhile to read through the posts. I can't say I know anything about the two prospects,I've read the comments, they appear to have upside as well of course downside.

Travis Shaw. This is legit 3b on the field. Provides positive WAR with his defense. Pair that up with Arcia and Villar? Can be excited about that play on the field.

Let's add we removed Carter and got Thames. People get hurt or let's say this experiment completely fails. Shaw has 1b ability to protect against that. As Hernan Perez protects from Shaw's LH platoon need. As Villar protects Arcia. And again Perez protects Villar. How cool is that? You've gotta love this move just for that fact. As a statement was made earlier, The WAR value from Thornburg to Shaw is most likely equal, leaving the 2 prospects as bonus addition value in the trade.

Another SP/ RP projection. How has the RP market done for Milwaukee? 3 of them have just supplied more than 3 players. KRod, Axford even brought back players. So there are great positives a RP can provide in trades.

 

2 Desperate needs at 1b/3b seem to be covered for the next 2years at minimum which provides time for prospects like Erceg, Nottingham, Gatewood, Lara to develop without rushing one of them. We've literally got 8 position players to play on the field with a resemblance of all being worth more than just Replacement level. Talking 3WAR+ at every position and backups behind. Love this trade it's perfect beyond the Thames signing.

 

For someone who posted a well this isn't good trade taking a 71win team to 73 wins while losing Thornburg, I believe is vastly under appreciating the potential. The pitching is coming. There are a lot of team control players now to play the field. And a number of prospects that can replace for quite some time. The depth is amazing and we got more with Dubon and Pennington, while filling a need the depth needs catching up to.

 

This is a competitive team being put on the field. Not a 70win team but one that has 81wins within it. And that's before the talented depth reaches the everyday team.

[Ennder]

Ken Giles had a season and a half but the Astros gave up a haul for him.

 

In that season and a half before Giles was traded he had 115 IPs with a 1.56 ERA/1.82 FIP. When adjusted for park/league those numbers were both 4th among all relievers in that time. Over the last two years Thorny has 101 IPs with a 2.66 ERA/3.61 FIP. When adjusted for park/league those numbers rank 31st/67th among all relievers in that time. So Giles was younger, had more success, more team control & from what I could find no history of arm problems when dealt. Add it all up & I can see why he commanded more of a return than Tyler.

 

It should also be noted that both players we've been able to find so far as trade comps for Thorny had underwhelming results or almost no results due to injury in the season following their trades, offering a snapshot of the volatility exhibited by all relievers, but especially ones with a limited record of consistent results.

 

 

Yeah he was 4 years younger and if you asked the Astros today if it was worth it they would probably say no since he didn't have a good year. Giles is the example of why you make this deal because it is so easy for a really good RP to get off to a bad start and kill his value.

 

Giles had a couple bad months to start the season, otherwise he was his dominating self and regained the closer spot halfway through the year.

 

Which was exactly my point. If Thornburg gets off to a bad start which is very easy to do, he kills his trade value. RP are way too volatile to expect them to repeat their previous season. The same reason I didn't mind trading Khris Davis when we did. He is such a streaky player that it is very easy for him to ruin his trade value by starting slow.

[Ennder]

Is it a perfectly fair system across the board, no, and it never will be. Obviously teams that have more money to spend have an advantage in free agency and retaining their own. But the current system of 6 years of control (closer to 7 if they are mindful to service time restraints), does give the smaller markets a way to compete if they build their franchise the right way.

 

Small windows for small markets..... look at KC. How sad is that? They built it the "right" way, and now after an extremely brief run they have to blow up the ship and trade off pieces. Sad for their fans. Sad that these teams, including us, that can't keep good home-grown teams together for longer periods of time.

 

It's just sad that the disparity between bigs and smalls is so large. I'd like to see a MLB FA pool of shared money that is for teams to help specifically sign their own FA. Seems like that would be good for the game.... promote teams to keep their own..... build relationships in the neighborhood.... keep t-shirt names relevant. Also, sharing all tv $ has to be in the next CBA.

 

 

KC had a group of prospects that never turned into what they hoped for. They had to mortgage the future to win a World Series and I'm sure their fanbase is happy with the result. That was never a team built for long term success. Has nothing to do with their payroll.

[TURBO]

Is it a perfectly fair system across the board, no, and it never will be. Obviously teams that have more money to spend have an advantage in free agency and retaining their own. But the current system of 6 years of control (closer to 7 if they are mindful to service time restraints), does give the smaller markets a way to compete if they build their franchise the right way.

 

Small windows for small markets..... look at KC. How sad is that? They built it the "right" way, and now after an extremely brief run they have to blow up the ship and trade off pieces. Sad for their fans. Sad that these teams, including us, that can't keep good home-grown teams together for longer periods of time.

 

It's just sad that the disparity between bigs and smalls is so large. I'd like to see a MLB FA pool of shared money that is for teams to help specifically sign their own FA. Seems like that would be good for the game.... promote teams to keep their own..... build relationships in the neighborhood.... keep t-shirt names relevant. Also, sharing all tv $ has to be in the next CBA.

 

 

KC had a group of prospects that never turned into what they hoped for. They had to mortgage the future to win a World Series and I'm sure their fanbase is happy with the result. That was never a team built for long term success. Has nothing to do with their payroll.

 

Not sure how payroll doesn't come into play. If they could go out and buy players to add to what they have done, you don't think that factors in? Payroll does have a major part in what teams do, big market and small market.

[reillymcshane]

 

KC had a group of prospects that never turned into what they hoped for. They had to mortgage the future to win a World Series and I'm sure their fanbase is happy with the result. That was never a team built for long term success. Has nothing to do with their payroll.

KC won 86, 89 and 95 games from 2013-2015 - plus 81 last year in a disappointing season. I think they are looking okay to put a winning club together this year - but after 2016, they are going to need an infusion of young talent.

 

I'd say they did all right. A 3-5 year run of contention. Most teams would love that.

 

I don't think the 'mortgaged' all that much. They dealt from pitching depth - Finnegan for Cueto and Manea for Zobrist - as well as 1B depth with Myers for Shields/Davis. Perhaps I've missed a big trade. Good teams have depth to deal from to fill holes. That's how it should be.

 

I'd argue that the Royals built their club like they should, but screwed up with bad drafting. They had four Top Five picks from 2009-2013 that haven't reached the majors - or barely done anything - although they still have time. The developmental pipeline just dried up. Some of that is not their fault as you can't predict injuries. It was like the Brewers in the late 2000s. We had a nice core of players, but drafted badly and could never supplement that core very well. It lead to some good teams - but teams that lacked depth.

[Greenleaf1]

Is it possible this rebuild got started off with the best deal we're likely to see and we're spoiled by it?

 

I remember seeing the absolute haul we got back for Carlos Gomez and Mike Fiers. Gomez seemed to already be majorly regressing, which he obviously continued to do even worse in Houston, and while Fiers has been a good contributor, he's still very replaceable. The fact that for those two guys we got two potential star outfielders, a guy with ace potential who is now our top pitching prospect, plus another throw-in was just such an amazing deal that I wonder if we'll just always be disappointed with every other trade after that during this rebuild.

 

I honestly would say that the only deals I've been kinda shaky on during this rebuild were the K-Rod trade and the Adam Lind trade, and both of those have already delivered more promise than I was ever expecting (I'm a big Manny Pina fan and Freddy Peralta has developed into a prospect worth watching).

 

Some trades work out, some don't, and even if Thornburg has a stellar 2017 with Boston, that doesn't mean this was a bad trade, you just can't judge things like that so soon.

 

To me, this trade is a sign that Stearns and co. are doing their homework on prospects rather than just looking at the top of teams' prospect lists and saying "give me #2 and #8". Dubon and Pennington are both underrated prospects in my opinion, and the fact that we got both of them plus a guy with some potential who can fill a positional need for years to come is a pretty good haul.

 

I honestly don't think you'll find many people around who were bigger fans of Thornburg than I've been since 2013. Looking past the numbers, when healthy, Thornburg has always appeared to me to be a dominant reliever capable of being a lights-out closer, and this year was just his first real chance to stay healthy and get the opportunity to prove that. I think if he can stay healthy he's going to have a long, dominant career as a closer, but the risk of holding on to him too long during non-competitive years and not getting anything in return is too great in my opinion not to take a good deal like this.

[Greenleaf1]

One other important point I'd like to make that people haven't addressed that much here:

 

The faster we trade closers in this seller's market, the faster we can develop a new guy in that role in order to trade for more prospects.

 

If we waited to trade K-Rod, we wouldn't have gotten as much for Jeffress, and same thing for Jeffress/Thornburg. Smith benefited from having more responsibility after trading K-Rod too. They may not work out, but guys like Knebel/Torres/Barnes are going to have the chance to see their stock majorly rise with setup/closer experience this year, potentially creating more trade chips for us at the deadline or next offseason, or just allow our young controllable guys to get valuable experience for the future.

 

The value lost by keeping the same good (or even great) closer and not trading them now is something not really considered in this trade as much as it should be.

[3and2Fastball]

I think it is obvious that Stearns values athleticism & versatility. Also he isn't just going all in on any one prospect at the primary positions, because you never truly know who is going to hit MLB pitching and who isn't.

 

We were all excited about Brett Phillips but that didn't stop Stearns from getting Ray & Brinson. Same with the acquisition of Villar even though we had Arcia coming up and now the acquisition of Dubon. You throw enough on the wall, some of it is going to stick

[topper09er]

Feeling a little melancholy.

The Red Sox get Thornburg and Sale today.

The Brewers get guys that they can control cheaply for a long time.

Why there isn't a bigger uproar over a level playing field in the MLB, I don't know. Every other sport has it. Certainly not my intention of derailing this thread with revenue talk, but it's hard to get excited when we have to operate on a level 10 tiers below the rich. I commend Stearns for doing what he has to do and how he has to do it, but some days the task just seems impossible. Playing the "hope the stars align in 5 years" vs "sign who you need and keep who you want" is discouraging to watch.

 

Boston had a losing record 3 of the past 4 years as they went through a mini rebuild. Cubs had 5 straight losing years while they did a rebuild. Now these teams are the buyers in the market. That is just how baseball works. This has very little to do with payroll fairness.

 

Also if you think the other sports are 'fair' because of salary caps you really do not understand the economics of sports. It is harder to turn around an NFL franchise that is losing than an MLB one. Basketball is just more random since hitting big on just 1 or 2 players is all you need.

 

The Packers were able to sign Reggie White, the top free agent available. It is literally impossible for the Milwaukee Brewers to sign the top free agent of any off season. No matter how much we want to pay someone else would just pay more.

 

It is hard to turn around an NFL franchise because the only thing the matters for long term success in the NFL is QB play, and the NFL has a system where teams can keep top QBs if they want to. Do you realize that Aaron Rodgers would be on the Jets now if the NFL had the same model as MLB.

[gregmag]

The faster we trade closers in this seller's market, the faster we can develop a new guy in that role in order to trade for more prospects.

 

If we waited to trade K-Rod, we wouldn't have gotten as much for Jeffress, and same thing for Jeffress/Thornburg. Smith benefited from having more responsibility after trading K-Rod too. They may not work out, but guys like Knebel/Torres/Barnes are going to have the chance to see their stock majorly rise with setup/closer experience this year, potentially creating more trade chips for us at the deadline or next offseason, or just allow our young controllable guys to get valuable experience for the future.

 

The value lost by keeping the same good (or even great) closer and not trading them now is something not really considered in this trade as much as it should be.

I was all set to say this, but you said it first and better. This is a huge point. The closer's slot is like a value-inflating machine. We can grow a resource that we don't need but for which other teams will overpay. Our new closer can add a lot more value by the trade deadline or the next offseason than TT would have added even with a dominant season. Of course, our next closer could flop, but TT could also regress or have a shoulder explosion. Trading closers fast in this market makes a ton of sense.

[TURBO]

Since we have had recent success grooming and trading closers, why is it that other teams can't do the same exact thing, especially the ones overpaying for our closers?

 

It seems that the more success we have of doing it, other teams will steal our formula and start doing the same thing.

[MrTPlush]

Since we have had recent success grooming and trading closers, why is it that other teams can't do the same exact thing, especially the ones overpaying for our closers?

 

It seems that the more success we have of doing it, other teams will steal our formula and start doing the same thing.

 

Not many teams are in a full blown rebuild with three near elite relievers that are experienced and controllable. What we had was a luxury and not all that common.

[gregmag]

Here's another thing about this trade. People have said pieces of this, but I'm going to try to put the pieces together. I don't love Travis Shaw, but here's why I love *getting* Travis Shaw: He helps us maximize a whole bunch of resources.

 

Villar gets to play what everyone seems to think is his best defensive position.

 

Perez gets slotted into what I and others believe is his optimal position as supersub.

 

Thames doesn't face any pressure to play him at 3b, which seems likely to be a defensive stretch for him.

 

Gennett's proper role, trade bait, gets solidified.

 

Getting Shaw puts the whole infield roster into better positions to succeed. Putting guys in comfortable defensive positions can help their offensive performance as well. This is why rebuilding teams should get veterans: for plugging holes not so much to win games but more to avoid having to stretch guys whom you're counting on. Villar, and to a lesser extent Perez, and in a different way Gennett are important for our development. Used properly, as players or (exclusively in Scooter's case) trade bait, they can help our next good team. Putting them in the best position to realize their value is really important.

[gregmag]

Since we have had recent success grooming and trading closers, why is it that other teams can't do the same exact thing, especially the ones overpaying for our closers?

 

It seems that the more success we have of doing it, other teams will steal our formula and start doing the same thing.

 

Not many teams are in a full blown rebuild with three near elite relievers that are experienced and controllable. What we had was a luxury and not all that common.

Also, grooming closers is risky. If you're the Red Sox, with pressure and opportunity to win now, you need a closer you can trust. You can't hold auditions. For us, the risk of holding auditions is nil. If we try Knebel as our closer and he flops and costs us three games, we just shrug and turn to Marinez or whomever. If that happens in Boston, heads roll.

 

Maybe this is stupid. Maybe contending teams should be growing and auditioning their own closers, because the marginal risk matters less than having to blow up your talent pipeline. GMs are pretty smart now, so I'm inclined to think they know what they're doing, but bubbles happen. We'll see over time how the relief market plays out.

[SoCalBrewfan]

At first glance I was a bit underwhelmed by the return, but I think this is a solid deal from both teams' perspectives. It is very much a Stearns trade, with the possibility of acquiring an asset just before its value goes big. The strategy of developing relievers and moving them at a time of high value seems wise given the state of the team and MLB.

 

Shaw was a pretty good defender at third, it seems, so there is a likelihood of having a significantly improved infield defense across the board compared to last season. In terms of the team's short term needs he seems like a great fit, as a lefty bat with some pop and a stable solution at third. We have a perfect platoon partner in Perez as well. I didn't know a lot about Dubon before the deal (a Boston prospect without big hype??!), but everything I read seems very promising, and I feel like he'll be the best player on our side of this deal. Pennington adds to the stable of big arms, but realistically his best case is probably a Tyler Thornburg level reliever.

 

Much as I've liked watching Thornburg establish himself, there have always been concerns about his durability. It sure seemed like his workload early in 2014 contributed to his subsequent issues, and while he seemed to thrive last season, there's a very real fear that he'll break down again. I'm sad to see him go, but from a value point of view I think it's a good time to make this deal.

[Thurston Fluff]

Feeling a little melancholy.

The Red Sox get Thornburg and Sale today.

The Brewers get guys that they can control for a long time.

Why there isn't a bigger uproar over a level playing field in the MLB, I don't know. Every other sport has it. Certainly not my intention of derailing this thread with revenue talk, but it's hard to get excited when we have to operate on a level 10 tiers below the rich. I commend Stearns for doing what he has to do and how he has to do it, but some days the task just seems impossible.

 

 

I mean...the Brewers traded for Zach Greinke and CC Sabathia not so long ago.

 

We rented them. One rental a bit longer than the other with zero chance of ever keeping either of them.

 

I don't think trading for a pitcher with two years of control counts as a rental.