So you want to trade a once prospect who has had some success for more prospects? This logic baffles me.

 

It makes sense if you're talking about SP or position prospects.

Point about his arm not having mileage on it. I just think that as empty as the Sox farm system is, it'd be best to cash in the Santos chips now rather than later.

If he becomes an elite closer next year, which I think is definitely possible, his value will be even higher. I'm willing to take that gamble if I'm KW. I don't see much downside short of a freak injury.

It makes sense if you're talking about SP or position prospects.

 

So we trade our closer who is under our control for six seasons, for a prospect who is under our control for six seasons.

So we trade our closer who is under our control for six seasons, for a prospect who is under our control for six seasons.

Which is why my statement was 2 prospects before I even start thinking about it.

So we trade our closer who is under our control for six seasons, for a prospect who is under our control for six seasons.

 

If said prospect(s) ceiling is that of a 5-6 WAR SP or position player, you bet. Craig Kimbrel had an X-Box type season and topped out at 3.2 WAR. Relievers are a distant third behind SP and position players in terms of importance. Give Reed a shot to close. If he bombs, find somebody else to pitch those 60 innings.

If said prospect(s) ceiling is that of a 5-6 WAR SP or position player, you bet. Craig Kimbrel had an X-Box type season and topped out at 3.2 WAR. Relievers are a distant third behind SP and position players in terms of importance. Give Reed a shot to close. If he bombs, find somebody else to pitch those 60 innings.

Remember though, even a top prospect probably has close to a 50% bust rate, or even higher if it's only a moderate level prospect, so a 50% rate of not even getting to where Sergio currently is. That's why the price has to be higher than just 1 position player/pitcher top prospect.

Remember though, even a top prospect probably has close to a 50% bust rate, or even higher if it's only a moderate level prospect, so a 50% rate of not even getting to where Sergio currently is. That's why the price has to be higher than just 1 position player/pitcher top prospect.

 

No question. I was saying one or the other as a centerpiece. You would definitely need more than just that. I'm having a very difficult time coming up with a reliever equivalent package to what the Indians gave up for Ubaldo that doesn't sound Tim McCarverish

Remember though, even a top prospect probably has close to a 50% bust rate, or even higher if it's only a moderate level prospect, so a 50% rate of not even getting to where Sergio currently is. That's why the price has to be higher than just 1 position player/pitcher top prospect.

 

Exactly.

Remember though, even a top prospect probably has close to a 50% bust rate, or even higher if it's only a moderate level prospect, so a 50% rate of not even getting to where Sergio currently is. That's why the price has to be higher than just 1 position player/pitcher top prospect.

 

Santos is closer to being Jesse Crain than he is to being Jonathon Papelbon.

Santos is closer to being Jesse Crain than he is to being Jonathon Papelbon.

 

Cost-effective and good instead of overpaid and bad?

Cost-effective and good instead of overpaid and bad?

 

If you think Papelbon is bad, how can you think Santos is good?

 

If you think Papelbon is bad, how can you think Santos is good?

 

Their numbers are actually really comparable.

If you think Papelbon is bad, how can you think Santos is good?

 

Cause Papelbon was super-bad two years ago.

Cause Papelbon was super-bad two years ago.

Sergio was worse.

Santos was a few pitches away from being one of the most dominant relievers in baseball last season, but he didn't make the pitches. If a team wants to give the Sox the value that comes with making those pitches, or at least half of them, plus a pretty team friendly contract, I say move him, but if they are just going to give you talent that is worthy of a questionable reliever, dominant at times, meat others, the Sox might as well hang on to him.

 

In a nutshell, either get a team to overpay or keep him.

Sergio was worse.

 

And a rookie.

And a rookie.

Yeah, I get all the mileage on the arm stuff and the inexperience stuff, however, like many football players who turn into baseball players and miss out on serious development time in their teens and early twenties, I think most of the time its hard to get that back. IMO, there's a better chance Santos is what he is or can improve slightly, which would make him All Star calibur, than a guy who is going to keep growing based on his lack pitching experience.

 

He'll probably be terrific most of the season, but make a few boneheaded pitches in crucial situations to keep from being called truly elite. I like him, and wouldn't trade him unless I knew I was getting more than he's worth, but I don't think his upside is much higher than where he's at now. But that's still pretty good.

Sergio was worse.

 

In a few areas. In others he was much better.

And a rookie.

And Papelbon had a down year after a half decade of pure dominance.

Cost-effective and good instead of overpaid and bad?

None of the pitchers mentioned are bad.

Never mind. Its been said. I thought that was the end of the thread for some reason.

Yeah, I get all the mileage on the arm stuff and the inexperience stuff, however, like many football players who turn into baseball players and miss out on serious development time in their teens and early twenties, I think most of the time its hard to get that back. IMO, there's a better chance Santos is what he is or can improve slightly, which would make him All Star calibur, than a guy who is going to keep growing based on his lack pitching experience.

 

He'll probably be terrific most of the season, but make a few boneheaded pitches in crucial situations to keep from being called truly elite. I like him, and wouldn't trade him unless I knew I was getting more than he's worth, but I don't think his upside is much higher than where he's at now. But that's still pretty good.

 

You make some good points. I agree with your stance.