Jump to content

Sonny Gray


Flash
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

This is how I look at it. 

Looking up his fangraphs numbers, he didn't lose velocity or have any other big redflags to say that his stuff is gone.  Gray would be far from the first guy who couldn't pitch in NYC.  Even his xFIP and FIP were 4.17 and 4.10, despite his ERA being 4.90.  I think more teams will be willing to take a chance on a soon to be 29 year old starter who than was a 33 year old reliever with the same basic contract prices.

If teams are willing to take a chance on him being something other than a complete loss then it's not a good fit for us. If someone like the Mariners thinks they can get enough out of him to help a competitive roster next year, he's worth more to them than he would be to us since he has only 1 year on his deal. For us, his only real value is as a guy that could be moved at the trade deadline, otherwise he's a replacement player. That's all we should give up for him - stuff that doesn't matter to us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Gray would cost that much — he's coming off a bad season, has only one year on his contract and the Yankees are clear on moving him. Any contending team wouldn't really trust him to do much. The Sox are an ideal landing spot.

I don't mind the Greinke idea either. He's set to earn more than $30M/year for three more years. The Sox can afford to take on a huge portion of that bonkers contract, but holy crap is that bonkers money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buehrlesque said:

I don't think Gray would cost that much — he's coming off a bad season, has only one year on his contract and the Yankees are clear on moving him. Any contending team wouldn't really trust him to do much. The Sox are an ideal landing spot.

I don't mind the Greinke idea either. He's set to earn more than $30M/year for three more years. The Sox can afford to take on a huge portion of that bonkers contract, but holy crap is that bonkers money.

I like to use Robert's salary as a comparison point for "the price for buying a prospect". If Greinke has $90 million remaining on his deal...he's still a strong pitcher, but for the next year or two he's definitely not worth anything like that to us. It took $50 million for us to buy Robert...if the D-Backs wanted us to take on Greinke's entire deal, then it would have to include a top 50 value prospect to make it worth doing. If they wanted to get a better return, then they'd have to include some money, but if the D-Backs are paying 1/2 the deal then why wouldn't someone like the Phillies or Braves jump into that so that they could actually have him contribute next year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I like to use Robert's salary as a comparison point for "the price for buying a prospect". If Greinke has $90 million remaining on his deal...he's still a strong pitcher, but for the next year or two he's definitely not worth anything like that to us. It took $50 million for us to buy Robert...if the D-Backs wanted us to take on Greinke's entire deal, then it would have to include a top 50 value prospect to make it worth doing. If they wanted to get a better return, then they'd have to include some money, but if the D-Backs are paying 1/2 the deal then why wouldn't someone like the Phillies or Braves jump into that so that they could actually have him contribute next year?

Yeah, if the DBacks pay down half the deal, it becomes attractive to teams like the Phillies and the Braves. The Sox' advantage might be they are able to pay something like $20–25 mil/year. But even with a low payroll, that's a LOT of money to spend on a guy in a non competitive season, plus two more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eminor3rd said:

That’s one way of organizing some data, yes. But another way would be to say that Gray is one year removed from a 3.55 ERA / 3.90 FIP season in which he put up nearly 3 wins in just 160 innings. 

Yes, there’s a good reason he’s on the chopping block, and you don’t want to give up a ton, but this is exactly the type of guy the Sox should be looking at. Bounce back guys that still have the stuff and can fill a much needed rotation spot can turn into gold a la Arrieta. One of the advantages of rebuilding is that we have innings to give the guy with nothing at stake. We are gonna have to nail a couple of these if we are going to end up like the Cubs/Astros. 

I wish he had more control remaining, but we could flip him or extend him if he gets good. We should be very involved in trying to pry him away at a modest price. 

And when the Sox acquired James Shields, he was one year removed from a 3.21 ERA in 227 IP and a 1.18 WHIP.  

I "organized the data" as I did to not just use 1 year as a snap shot but to look at a little more.  Gray has had 2 excellent years (not counting his rookie year because it was 12 starts, but that would qualify here as well) and 1 really good year in his career.  The problem is that the most recent excellent year was in 2015.  He had a good year in 2017, yes.  He was very good and completely usable.  The problem is here, the 2 years sandwiched around 2017 are both bad.  If I had to bet which one was the real Sonny Gray at this point, I would guess a guy with a mid to high 4 ERA with much more confidence than I would a guy with a mid 3 ERA.  He hasn't allowed a season with a BB/9 of fewer than 3 since 2015, including about 4 last season.  

 

The point about his splits are interesting.  But if you are looking for a guy to be like Arrieta, a 29 year old with 1 year of control ( I know you addressed this as ledd than ideal, just thinking out loud) seems like an odd target.  I am not against pursuing him, but I don't even think I'd offer Smith.  Castillo, sure, maybe just flip problems, but I don't think I would give up anyone that could be a contributor in any sense because of the risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, bubba phillips said:

I mentioned this on another thread.  Though his ERA of 4.90 is not good, the breakdown between home and road is very interesting.

At Yankee Stadium, with its Little League dimensions in right field, Gray's ERA was a whopping 6.98, with 11 HR's allowed in 59 innings.  On the road he was a different pitcher.  His ERA was 3.17 with only 3 dingers in 71 innings.  Maybe the pressure of New York and/or those short dimensions got in his head.

 

This. You have to look at more than just his overall ERA. Look what the Cubs gave for Chatwood cause of splits. Some team will take him on and give up a prospect -- it may be a fringe prospect, but a prospect. We're willing to trade Fulmer for a reason so I wouldn't call him a fringe prospect. I think you'd have to throw in a Zavala or Gavin Sheets type too if you even want to have a chance.

 

In this case I just don't see the upside. Best case is he pitches like old Sonny Gray and you flip him for prospects that are similar to what you gave up to get him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, turnin' two said:

And when the Sox acquired James Shields, he was one year removed from a 3.21 ERA in 227 IP and a 1.18 WHIP.  

I "organized the data" as I did to not just use 1 year as a snap shot but to look at a little more.  Gray has had 2 excellent years (not counting his rookie year because it was 12 starts, but that would qualify here as well) and 1 really good year in his career.  The problem is that the most recent excellent year was in 2015.  He had a good year in 2017, yes.  He was very good and completely usable.  The problem is here, the 2 years sandwiched around 2017 are both bad.  If I had to bet which one was the real Sonny Gray at this point, I would guess a guy with a mid to high 4 ERA with much more confidence than I would a guy with a mid 3 ERA.  He hasn't allowed a season with a BB/9 of fewer than 3 since 2015, including about 4 last season.  

 

The point about his splits are interesting.  But if you are looking for a guy to be like Arrieta, a 29 year old with 1 year of control ( I know you addressed this as ledd than ideal, just thinking out loud) seems like an odd target.  I am not against pursuing him, but I don't even think I'd offer Smith.  Castillo, sure, maybe just flip problems, but I don't think I would give up anyone that could be a contributor in any sense because of the risk.

James Shields was 34 and exhibiting noticeable declines in velocity. It isn’t the same thing.

We can both cherry pick data and look right because Gray has been inconsistent and flawed. But that’s why he’s available in the first place. If he fetches a back-end top 100 guy, then yeah, it’s too much. But without much control left and considering that the Yankees are looking to bolster a current roster, I think it may be possible to get him for a decent depth piece or two that simply meets their needs more than Gray does. 

All I’m saying is that the White Sox should have made an inquiry the moment Cashman said he was a change of scenery candidate, and if he gets moved for peanuts, it should be the Sox paying the peanuts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eminor3rd said:

James Shields was 34 and exhibiting noticeable declines in velocity. It isn’t the same thing.

We can both cherry pick data and look right because Gray has been inconsistent and flawed. But that’s why he’s available in the first place. If he fetches a back-end top 100 guy, then yeah, it’s too much. But without much control left and considering that the Yankees are looking to bolster a current roster, I think it may be possible to get him for a decent depth piece or two that simply meets their needs more than Gray does. 

All I’m saying is that the White Sox should have made an inquiry the moment Cashman said he was a change of scenery candidate, and if he gets moved for peanuts, it should be the Sox paying the peanuts. 

Fair enough.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Whitesox27 said:

Greinke is a terrible idea. Beyond awful. The dude is going to be 35 on Opening Day.

Shoot.  Really?  I was just basing things on his performance over the last 15 years, and especially the last 2, in an extreme hitters park no less.  I forgot that anyone over 34 was clinically dead (please forgive me, as I am also clinically dead).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, turnin' two said:

Shoot.  Really?  I was just basing things on his performance over the last 15 years, and especially the last 2, in an extreme hitters park no less.  I forgot that anyone over 34 was clinically dead (please forgive me, as I am also clinically dead).

Age is just part of it. His contract is the biggest factor.

2019: 34.5 million

2020: 35 million

2021: 35 million

I wouldn't want him even if Arizona ate half of his deal. Despite the fact that he hasn't shown any signs of aging yet, it's way too risky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Whitesox27 said:

Age is just part of it. His contract is the biggest factor.

2019: 34.5 million

2020: 35 million

2021: 35 million

I wouldn't want him even if Arizona ate half of his deal. Despite the fact that he hasn't shown any signs of aging yet, it's way too risky.

Grienke is not getting moved unless the DBacks are willing to eat substantial amounts of that salary. I'm just guessing, but I think it would take at least $30 million of that deal to even get teams talking to them about a trade. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Whitesox27 said:

Age is just part of it. His contract is the biggest factor.

2019: 34.5 million

2020: 35 million

2021: 35 million

I wouldn't want him even if Arizona ate half of his deal. Despite the fact that he hasn't shown any signs of aging yet, it's way too risky.

Well, that is why I explicitly said that same thing and said that it would only make sense if the Sox paid a low prospect price and no more than 15 in any year of his contract.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Well, that is why I explicitly said that same thing and said that it would only make sense if the Sox paid a low prospect price and no more than 15 in any year of his contract.   

My bad, I didn't see your original post as it was buried on the first page in this thread. I guess I wouldn't completely opposed to it if the Sox could get Greinke for essentially 3 years and $45 million without giving up anything significant in terms of prospects, but that seems highly unlikely as of now. Although I have heard that the Diamondbacks want to blow everything up, so who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Whitesox27 said:

Age is just part of it. His contract is the biggest factor.

2019: 34.5 million

2020: 35 million

2021: 35 million

I wouldn't want him even if Arizona ate half of his deal. Despite the fact that he hasn't shown any signs of aging yet, it's way too risky.

They would have to back up a truckfull of prospects to get me interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Whitesox27 said:

My bad, I didn't see your original post as it was buried on the first page in this thread. I guess I wouldn't completely opposed to it if the Sox could get Greinke for essentially 3 years and $45 million without giving up anything significant in terms of prospects, but that seems highly unlikely as of now. Although I have heard that the Diamondbacks want to blow everything up, so who knows.

If the D-Backs were willing to eat that much of his salary to get a decent return...there's teams that need starting pitching and are competitive right now who are better fits. Hell one of them is playing tonight and had Greinke before. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

If the D-Backs were willing to eat that much of his salary to get a decent return...there's teams that need starting pitching and are competitive right now who are better fits. Hell one of them is playing tonight and had Greinke before. 

Yep. Both really with Kershaw potentially leaving (I don't think he will).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, turnin' two said:

Shoot.  Really?  I was just basing things on his performance over the last 15 years, and especially the last 2, in an extreme hitters park no less.  I forgot that anyone over 34 was clinically dead (please forgive me, as I am also clinically dead).

I never thought baseball would become football where 30 is really old. I guess baseball might go all the way to 32 before the player is deemed somebody to be avoided if significant dollars are being discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, greg775 said:

I never thought baseball would become football where 30 is really old. I guess baseball might go all the way to 32 before the player is deemed somebody to be avoided if significant dollars are being discussed.

 

It is getting there in most sports. Every sport is trending younger. Baseball needs to get with the times, and football does too. In both sports by the time players reach FA their best years are already behind them. RFA in the NHL allows players to get paid during their prime. Surprisingly, the NBA is the one league where older players still have a role and can get paid. Being a proven vet isn't an asset anymore for a player, it is more of a liability, strange as it is to say. A player is expensive and getting worse at that point to most teams in sports. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...