The version of the board software has been updated. If you want to use a different theme (currently only subsilver is available), please do the following:

1) click your name in the upper right
2) click user control panel
3) go to the board preferences tab
4) Change from prosilver to subsilver
5) click submit.

Might as well have a David Price thread

User avatar
KingCubsFan
All-Star
Posts: 3133
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:39 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby KingCubsFan » Tue Apr 30, 2013 5:44 pm

KyleJRM wrote:
Tangled Up in Plaid wrote:I'm getting to the point where I'll be bummed if we don't get one of Stanton or Price. Shame there's no chance either one will hit free agency.


I kind of see how people are superficially seeing a fit between the Cubs and Rays for Price, but I just think the cons outweigh the pros in terms of likelihood of it happening.

We're going to pay a huge haul of prospects *and* a massive contract extension for a pitcher who turns 30 during our first "ready to compete" year? Tampa Bay's going to find what it wants in a system that has very little in terms of impact prospects above A-ball (though some of them might have had a small taste of AA by the end of the year)?

All for a pitcher who is a 2-win improvement over a guy on Garza's level? Not that two-win improvements aren't important, but it seems like this front office would want to pick up a bunch of the cheaper, less commital improvement options we have available to us.

The only way it makes sense for us is if we're trying to turn on the switch and be a 90+ win team in 2014, and I don't see how we're likely to get there even with a Price trade.

The only way it makes sense for Tampa Bay is if they *really* like Baez or Soler even more than most people.

I agree, it doesn't really fit into Theo's model. But a rotation of Price, Samardzija, Garza, Jackson and Wood would be pretty incredible (and still good even if they decided to get rid of Garza). You combine that with an actual bullpen and you could be looking at a pretty good team.

One thing about Price is that he's gotten better as he's relied less on his fastball and more on his curveball and changeup. So maybe the inevitable decrease in velocity won't hurt him as much in the future in the event he's given a long-term contract.

davell
Superstar
Posts: 14247
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:55 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby davell » Tue Apr 30, 2013 6:25 pm

Currently, if we kept everyone thats under contract for next year on our roster, we're looking at about 70 mill in payroll. If we have to stay at 110(hopefully not), adding Price and a Choo or Ellsbury would put us around 100. Leaving 10 mill for bullpen, extra SP depth, etc. Playoff team? Probably not, but it could project as a .500 type team. That said, I wonder if trading for a Brett Anderson makes more sense. He wouldn't cost us nearly as much in prospects, will be around 7 mill cheaper than Price next year, and would give us extra cash to go add one other pretty solid player. He's a health risk, but hell, all pitching is to an extent anyway. It may be a risk I'd take if it allowed me to keep Baez, Soler, and Almora.

Tryptamine
All-Star
Posts: 4172
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:13 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Tryptamine » Sat May 04, 2013 9:53 pm

Price got shelled yet again tonight. His average fastball velocity is down from 95.5MPH to 93.6MPH. Between this and Stanton's constant injuries, I'm really souring on selling the farm for these guys.

User avatar
rawaction
Hall of Fame
Posts: 30907
Joined: Thu May 29, 2003 5:04 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby rawaction » Sun May 05, 2013 7:07 am

davell wrote:Currently, if we kept everyone thats under contract for next year on our roster, we're looking at about 70 mill in payroll. If we have to stay at 110(hopefully not), adding Price and a Choo or Ellsbury would put us around 100. Leaving 10 mill for bullpen, extra SP depth, etc. Playoff team? Probably not, but it could project as a .500 type team. That said, I wonder if trading for a Brett Anderson makes more sense. He wouldn't cost us nearly as much in prospects, will be around 7 mill cheaper than Price next year, and would give us extra cash to go add one other pretty solid player. He's a health risk, but hell, all pitching is to an extent anyway. It may be a risk I'd take if it allowed me to keep Baez, Soler, and Almora.


This team plus Price and Ellsbury and 10mil spent wisely would be a playoff contender, I think. Especially if u add some players for Garza and possibly Soriano.

User avatar
CaliforniaRaisin
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 84040
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 8:20 am
Location: Pasadena, CA
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Wed May 15, 2013 10:55 pm

Price left his start today due to a triceps strain.

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 29828
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Wed May 15, 2013 11:03 pm

CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Price left his start today due to a triceps strain.


His fastball velocity has been down 2.2 MPH from last year. A little bit of that might be early-season effect, but that's still noticeable.

Add it all up, and that does not sound good.

User avatar
KingCubsFan
All-Star
Posts: 3133
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:39 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby KingCubsFan » Thu May 16, 2013 9:59 am

KyleJRM wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Price left his start today due to a triceps strain.


His fastball velocity has been down 2.2 MPH from last year. A little bit of that might be early-season effect, but that's still noticeable.

Add it all up, and that does not sound good.

Maybe not good for Price, but probably good for the Cubs.

User avatar
Cubswin11
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 9127
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Cubswin11 » Thu May 16, 2013 11:10 am

KingCubsFan wrote:
KyleJRM wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Price left his start today due to a triceps strain.


His fastball velocity has been down 2.2 MPH from last year. A little bit of that might be early-season effect, but that's still noticeable.

Add it all up, and that does not sound good.

Maybe not good for Price, but probably good for the Cubs.

How so?
Screw Pitchers

User avatar
illiniguy
Hall of Fame
Posts: 25025
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 7:59 am
Location: Kansas City
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby illiniguy » Thu May 16, 2013 11:42 am

Cubswin11 wrote:
KingCubsFan wrote:
KyleJRM wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Price left his start today due to a triceps strain.


His fastball velocity has been down 2.2 MPH from last year. A little bit of that might be early-season effect, but that's still noticeable.

Add it all up, and that does not sound good.

Maybe not good for Price, but probably good for the Cubs.

How so?

That it's happening before we traded for him?
Image

DrCub
bench player
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:37 am
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby DrCub » Fri May 17, 2013 8:18 am

davell wrote:Currently, if we kept everyone thats under contract for next year on our roster, we're looking at about 70 mill in payroll. If we have to stay at 110(hopefully not), adding Price and a Choo or Ellsbury would put us around 100. Leaving 10 mill for bullpen, extra SP depth, etc. Playoff team? Probably not, but it could project as a .500 type team. That said, I wonder if trading for a Brett Anderson makes more sense. He wouldn't cost us nearly as much in prospects, will be around 7 mill cheaper than Price next year, and would give us extra cash to go add one other pretty solid player. He's a health risk, but hell, all pitching is to an extent anyway. It may be a risk I'd take if it allowed me to keep Baez, Soler, and Almora.


That's a playoff team for sure. The team currently assembled is a .500 team if given a decent bullpen. We currently stand at a -7 run differential. Of the 9 games our bullpen has blown, just converting just 33% of those puts us at .500 on the year.

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 29828
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Fri May 17, 2013 8:34 am

DrCub wrote:
davell wrote:Currently, if we kept everyone thats under contract for next year on our roster, we're looking at about 70 mill in payroll. If we have to stay at 110(hopefully not), adding Price and a Choo or Ellsbury would put us around 100. Leaving 10 mill for bullpen, extra SP depth, etc. Playoff team? Probably not, but it could project as a .500 type team. That said, I wonder if trading for a Brett Anderson makes more sense. He wouldn't cost us nearly as much in prospects, will be around 7 mill cheaper than Price next year, and would give us extra cash to go add one other pretty solid player. He's a health risk, but hell, all pitching is to an extent anyway. It may be a risk I'd take if it allowed me to keep Baez, Soler, and Almora.


That's a playoff team for sure. The team currently assembled is a .500 team if given a decent bullpen. We currently stand at a -7 run differential. Of the 9 games our bullpen has blown, just converting just 33% of those puts us at .500 on the year.


I don't know if it's a flat-out playoff team. It's in the mix.

We're on pace for a -28 run differential right now. That's roughly a 78-win team (right where most people had them, incidentally).

Using updated ZIPS projects, replacing Villanueva with Price would be +3 wins, Soriano with Choo +4, and upgrading the bullpen to average would be +1 (yes, they've cost us more than that, but that's accounted for by using run differential and not raw win totals).

So by getting the best pitcher in baseball, the best available FA outfielder and magicking an average bullpen, you're still a couple wins short of a playoff projection.

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Hall of Fame
Posts: 46980
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 10:23 am
Location: Greater Chicagoland
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Fri May 17, 2013 8:40 am

An 86 win ZiPS projection is almost guaranteed projected for a playoff berth. The Nationals and Braves were the only NL teams projected for higher than that preseason, with 88 each.

That said, Price + Choo is probably not equal to Villanueva + Soriano + 7 wins, but that team is very much a playoff contender.

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 29828
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Fri May 17, 2013 8:43 am

Does ZIPS do team win projections? Can I see them? Google's not helping.

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Hall of Fame
Posts: 46980
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 10:23 am
Location: Greater Chicagoland
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Fri May 17, 2013 8:46 am

KyleJRM wrote:Does ZIPS do team win projections? Can I see them? Google's not helping.


http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2013-pos ... s-wrap-up/

Cincinnati 86
St. Louis 84
Milwaukee 82
Pittsburgh 80
Chicago 78

Washington 88
Atlanta 88
Philadelphia 83
New York 74
Miami 68

Los Angeles 85
Arizona 84
San Francisco 84
Colorado 80
San Diego 78

For another point of reference, here's BP, CAIRO, and Vegas projections stacked against each other: http://www.azsnakepit.com/2013/2/13/398 ... -standings

BP has 3 NL teams with > 86 wins, CAIRO has 5, and Vegas has 3 with 2 other 86 game winners.

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 29828
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Fri May 17, 2013 8:54 am

OK, I wondered where Cincinnati would have been.

biittner77
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 6:10 pm
Location: Maryland's Eastern Shore
Status: Offline

Re: Might as well have a David Price thread

Postby biittner77 » Fri May 17, 2013 10:52 am

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
KyleJRM wrote:Does ZIPS do team win projections? Can I see them? Google's not helping.


http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2013-pos ... s-wrap-up/

Cincinnati 86
St. Louis 84
Milwaukee 82
Pittsburgh 80
Chicago 78

Washington 88
Atlanta 88
Philadelphia 83
New York 74
Miami 68

Los Angeles 85
Arizona 84
San Francisco 84
Colorado 80
San Diego 78

For another point of reference, here's BP, CAIRO, and Vegas projections stacked against each other: http://www.azsnakepit.com/2013/2/13/398 ... -standings

BP has 3 NL teams with > 86 wins, CAIRO has 5, and Vegas has 3 with 2 other 86 game winners.


That has them going 16 over .500 against the AL
Original 6


Return to “Transactions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest