Red Sox, Padres Reportedly Still Negotiating Wil Myers Swap

@Mo4ever – it does, and it keeps on doing so the more you dig down.

SD has a plethora of #4/5 sp types including the prospects who need some mlb time at the back of the rotation to finish development and figure out if they’re starters or relievers.

SD also has TOO many young 40 man players and prospects to protect all the non-40 man prospects who are coming up on rule 5 eligibility.

Both are expendable to get something of value. Obviously preller hasn’t been able to line up – yet – on a big trade. But he can free up cash to make moves ownership won’t chip in extra for.

Javia, sorry the auto correct changed your name above.

There is some difference between Lucchesi and Price in your argument above, as far as I know – so feel free to correct me.

1) last year, like many, average ERA in the AL was higher than the NL, partly due to no dh, partly due to ballparks, etc. The point is, when you look at ERA+ which is defense/schedule/park/etc neutral, an AL pitcher with a higher overall era could be equal in era+ to a pitcher in the NL with a lower era.

Takeaway of my point 1 – it’s a data point that to be “equals” a NL pitcher needs a LOWER overall era.

2) David price was injured, trying to pitch with a cyst after the AS break. He was ultimately shut down with surgery to remove said cyst. Was Lucchesi injured in 2019, affecting his numbers?

Takeaway of point 2: price’s 2019 era was less indicative of performance ability than lucchesi’s 2019 line. Lucchesi could play to his peak ability, Price was impaired from doing so.

3) Before injury, Price was one of the top 3 pitchers in most metrics, including era, and a potential cy young contender. At no point in 2019 or otherwise did Lucchesi post a dominant stretch for such a length of time.

Takeaway of point 3: price has a much higher PROVEN ceiling than Lucchesi has shown thus far.

Now, if you want to argue lost value re:injury history… well we can differ on opinion whether prices surgery has left him fully healthy. If you want to argue control or contract value or age… we can do that too.

But 2019 era line as a measure of whether Lucchesi and Price are equivalent pitchers from a value perspective is deeply and inherently flawed. Pick a new set of arguments to try, then we can agree to disagree on some of those due to data pointing both ways.

@Javia – you ignore engaging on all of my other points about Price/Lucchesi, so, I presume you agree and/or do not have evidence to the contrary? You’re not engaging on actual point raised just like your earlier taunts you directed at others.

“Upside at 34 yrs old is nonexistant.” Hmm… I think all of mlb would disagree with you, Justin verlander was traded at exactly in his 34 yrs old season, and what has he done sense? No trashcan banging or buzzers fueled him. No, Price will not become verlander. But a 34 yr old can have upside compared to his recent history or be a buy low candidate

With regards to why Price was hard to trade? There were 96 million of them, 32 million in each of the next 3 years. Each one a greenbacked one. For all the upside he has, Price hasn’t been worth 32m/yr.

We don’t know how much chaim was willing to eat off the deal at any time except the final trade, or how that amount changed over time.

We also dont know what offers Chaim got, but we do know he wasn’t hired immediately, took time evaluating the team and getting up to speed, and all this during a time lots of teams were blowing through their FA budgets at a recently unprecedented pace.

We also dont know what kind of return Chaim would’ve taken – sp only, or something else? But we are pretty sure that unless he could get under the CBT, chaim likely wasn’t trading price because the goal appears to either have been compete with Mookie, or, get significant young talent and below the cbt without him.

Simply putting the entire career out there.

You neglect that a 3.84 in the NL does NOT equal a 3.84 in the AL, and, you misrepresent his innings totals and ability by cherry picking two unrelated injury seasons, the only two in many years, one of which was to remove a cyst from his wrist to put him at his peak in 2020 – a shut down due to lack of contention with an eye towards the future rather than an inability to go on the field whatsoever.

We can go back and forth like that.

Again, to use a schedule, stadium, and defense neutral evaluators like ERA+ and FIP, Price’s ERA+ was 112, 135, 123, 113 in the last 4 years of your choice. If we make it 6 yrs add a 115 and 164. That’s compared to league average.

In the last 6 yrs price put up 248, 220, 230, 75, 176, 107 IP. Obviously injuries and recoveries played a role.

Since you don’t like era+, let’s look at FIP. That adjusts everyon for their defense benefits/costs of the guys behind them.

Lucchesi posted a 4.31 (18) and 4.17 (19) FIP. He posted better actual era than his FIP expected based on his perepherals thanks to his teammates.

Price posted in order FIP of 2.78 (14), 2.78 (15), 3.60 (16), 3.64 (17), 4.02 (18), 3.62 (19).

What you see, even if we hold to the last 4 years you cherry pick, likely because Price was worse in boston than elsewhere (more a boston issue than a being 30 yrs old issue), is that he is pretty consistent over time.

Again, accounting for the proven bump where AL pitchers most often see a decrease in era and increase in era+/fip on a move to the NL, it’s not unreasonable to expect movement in those directions here.

Regardless, 2019 FIP for price was consistent to 3 of 4 boston campaigns – low 3.60s. That’s a full half point better than anything lucchesi ever showed.

So again, the more you know.

Javia, you haven’t met or refuted this giant body of statistical evidence with pieces of proof that your original contention that lucchesi was turning in equal production to price in 2019 yet. It’s devloved into you claiming that, generally he was prices equal, and now, that price is in some great decline.

Let me disprove your latest statements.

As for price having declined from “Price STARTED with a fastball over 95, and that it is now under 92.”

In price’s first 2 years in the league here’s what he threw, and how hard it averaged. (Fangraphs is your friend.)

He threward the FA 94.8 in ’08, 94.7 in ’09. Was 92.4 including balls thrown WITH AN INJURY in 2019, and 93.1 the year before.

So not only did it not start at 95+, even if you want to count the injury diminished skewed readings that throw off the ’19 average it fell a whopping 2.4mph in 12 seasons. Btw, 2.4 doesn’t even round up to 3, let alone qualify for “the 3+ mph he lost off his fastball” you stated above.

His other pitches? Well, he wasn’t using the FC yet, the Sl in his 2nd season, first time using it really, in’09 was 91.5, actually SLOWER than the 92.1 it averaged in ’19.

Price averaged 86.3 in ’08 on his CH, BUT, in ’09, his second season, he averaged 84.4… you know what he averaged in ’19? 84.4. So I guess guys fall apart after the rookie year is th data point there… at least in your world?

Price threw a SL, but only his first 3 seasons. No data point there.

Then you have the CU, price started using regularly in his 2nd season. On ’09 he averaged 78.0, and as a 3rd year player his second year of use it was 78.4. You know what he did in ’19? 80.7.

So you see, not only did price not start out with a FB “over 95”, it didn’t decrease “over 3+” from when he “started” as you now make it sound like you meant as a rookie.

The context of your earlier statement was actually saying “Price has been declining over the last few years. Over the last 4 years he has averaged 147 innings and an ERA of 3.84. Those seem to fit within my estimates, not yours. His fastball has declined from averaging over 95 when he got started to under 92 last year pre injury.”

Everything points to you talking about either the last few years, the last 4 years, but no context ever referencing price as a rookie. Logical interpretation was either when he got started in boston, which fits the rest of the conversation and the time period being discussed, or, starting when he was 30…. but not as a rookie.

Regardless, numbers/data disproved your over 95 as a rookie anyways, and, comparing rookie to 2019 also dont show even a number to round up to 3, let alone 3+.

So wrong.

I don’t need to misquote or personally attack to win anything. Numbers and data are on my side. I don’t include other pitches to “muddy the issue”, nice to try to presume my intent then again, try to attack me for it because you have NO FACTS for your positions, just distorted data that isn’t true. I include the other pitches like I include the other years… to show his entire body of work isn’t this sliding decline you make it out to be.

Yes players decline with age. The rate of decline varies. Pitchers with control adjust to their decline to where, even WITH substantial decline in “stuff” they remain as effective, or even more effective, than at points earlier in their careers (which isn’t clear to be happening across the board here as might be implied by allegations)

The one who has shifted, muddied and obscured is the one who got off and never defended his point.

How, again, are price and lucchesi “the exact same pitcher last year” supporting the idea that “they have the same value” when all these metrics and data points show price was, and projects to be, the superior? And even if you don’t like the data, and refuse to accept my conclusions, even the projections agree price should be significantly superior?

It’s ok to admit you’re wrong. I’m wrong every day, my wife tells me so. Even if I’m right, even then it IS wrong to tell her so… happy wife, happy life. That’s one battle you just never fight.