SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 27, 2015 13:09:22 GMT -5
Considering Johnson was a very good batter in college does that make him a good fit for a trade to the NL? Like maybe the Phillies? If you are a NL GM does a pitchers ability at the plate come into consideration when evaluating? I really doubt it. At most, a starting pitcher might get 70-80 PAs over a season. Besides that, there is no guarantee that he'd be better than anyone else at hitting. He hasn't hit since college.
|
|
|
Post by johnmark on Apr 27, 2015 13:14:23 GMT -5
Dodgers didn't bring Greinke in because he can hit.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Apr 27, 2015 13:46:33 GMT -5
Space is quickly becoming limited on the official Brian Johnson bandwagon. Hop aboard now. True, but I'll hold off jumping on until we see him at the big league level. I love the mix of pitches, not to mention the fact that since he is a control pitcher there's less chance he'll be buying a ticket on the Tommy John wagon, and I do think he'll be a solid big league pitcher. But I would like to see him face some big league hitters. I watched Johnson pitch one of the last spring training games this year. He left quite a few pitches up and they got hit hard. Not sure what, if anything, he doing differently in pawtucket but unless he finishes all his pitches, bringing him up could be a confidence killer because major leaguers will hit them.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Apr 27, 2015 14:21:41 GMT -5
Depends. I don't think they're bringing up Eduardo until they feel he's really ready. He's got too much of a future here to short circuit his progression. Though maybe he is ready now. If you've followed this team for awhile, you know they're not going to dump someone they feel they need on the 40 man to get a marginal upgrade if you could even argue that. Johnson might be added to the 40 only if there's a 60-day DL trip for someone else at this point of the season. Yeah, but their penchant for protecting young potential stars is even stronger. I'm not saying Rodruiguez isn't better now, but that he's a higher ceiling prospect, and not one they're going to rush as he's both young and probably could benefit from more seasoning. Meanwhile, Johnson is 24, a college grad and had sustained success last year. There's little additional upside, so the time to use him is now. He's both more of a finished product, and less of a risk if he gets the yips.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 27, 2015 14:35:56 GMT -5
Depends. I don't think they're bringing up Eduardo until they feel he's really ready. He's got too much of a future here to short circuit his progression. Though maybe he is ready now. If you've followed this team for awhile, you know they're not going to dump someone they feel they need on the 40 man to get a marginal upgrade if you could even argue that. Johnson might be added to the 40 only if there's a 60-day DL trip for someone else at this point of the season. They could dump Spruill right now and lose nothing.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Apr 27, 2015 16:31:44 GMT -5
Exactly what I said. Spruill or Hembree. Neither should ever pitch an inning for Boston.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,440
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Apr 27, 2015 16:50:32 GMT -5
Exactly what I said. Spruill or Hembree. Neither should ever pitch an inning for Boston. Yeah I'm in the boat that says Spruill gets DFA'd to make room for Johnson before Eduardo Rodriguez gets the call. Johnson seems ready and you'd like to see Rodriguez keep his good thing going a little longer. He's only had like 9 starts in this org still, which is easy to forget.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on May 19, 2015 15:44:23 GMT -5
Brian Johnson slides into mlb.com's top 100 prospect list because Michael Taylor graduated today.
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 20, 2015 10:05:22 GMT -5
Even with his underwhelming stuff...I think he should have been there a while ago. Advanced pitchability I believe, is an overlooked and under valued skill...in fact I would say that it may be the most important quality along with command.
|
|
|
Post by malynn19 on May 30, 2015 8:38:20 GMT -5
Bring this kid up, and put Kelly in the Bullpen if he falters tonight. I saw that whole game last night and this guy's curve is banned in 22 states.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 30, 2015 8:57:33 GMT -5
Bring this kid up, and put Kelly in the Bullpen if he falters tonight. I saw that whole game last night and this guy's curve is banned in 22 states. There are six guys in the MLB rotation right now. You have to get rid of two of them to make room for Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on May 30, 2015 9:00:59 GMT -5
Just curious, but how would Brian Johnson's stuff compare to that of someone like Mark Buehrle? Is there a reason he couldn't have a similar career?
There are a lot of really knowledgeable people on this site, and I would appreciate it if one of them would answer this. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on May 30, 2015 9:03:12 GMT -5
Bring this kid up, and put Kelly in the Bullpen if he falters tonight. I saw that whole game last night and this guy's curve is banned in 22 states. There are six guys in the MLB rotation right now. You have to get rid of two of them to make room for Johnson. Plus Masterson when he's back. Though I suspect you could make room in the bullpen for Kelly and Masterson and option Wright.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on May 30, 2015 9:29:16 GMT -5
Hopefully we stay with a six man rotation, gives an opportunity down the road for Johnson if Kelly continues to struggle.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on May 30, 2015 10:06:05 GMT -5
Just curious, but how would Brian Johnson's stuff compare to that of someone like Mark Buehrle? Is there a reason he couldn't have a similar career? Buehrle would be the absolute ceiling. The likelihood is that he won't be Mark Buehrle. grantland.com/features/mark-buehrle-surprising-success/Just like every undersized middle infielder is compared to Pedroia, every lefty with average stuff is compared to Buehrle. They are both extreme outliers. So, if you want to hang your hat that Johnson is the next extreme outlier, have at it.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on May 30, 2015 10:33:28 GMT -5
Amfox: Thank you!!
That is essentially what I thought. Mark Buehrle was a good middle of the rotation starter for most of his career with a number of years as a Number 2. I don't expect Brian Johnson to be that pitcher.
On the other hand, I think he may well have more than a couple years in which he is a very solid or even better than average middle of the rotation starter. I think his reasonable ceiling may just be a bit higher than back end starter, although the latter does seem to me to be the consensus.
|
|
|
Post by malynn19 on May 30, 2015 10:37:42 GMT -5
Because of the fact they do not throw 95+ MPH, pitchers like Owens and Johnson are always being compared to Mark Buehrle as the absolute ceiling. If Owens or Johnson end up having similar careers to Buerhle we would be very happy. As good as Buehrle is, it is not impossible to obtain his level of success if you know how to pitch (And many scouts have agreed that Owens and especially Johnson have a feel for it).
I know I am making it sound easier than it is (I am an optimist) But all I have to do is look back to my teenage years (the 80s) and remember 3 Red Sox lefties that were identical to Buerhle, Bruce Hurst, John Tudor and Bobby Ojeda, yes they did not have the longevity Buerhle has enjoyed but they were pretty damn good. So if Owens is Hurst and Johnson is Ojeda, I am fine with that too.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on May 30, 2015 11:16:39 GMT -5
I know I am making it sound easier than it is (I am an optimist) But all I have to do is look back to my teenage years (the 80s) and remember 3 Red Sox lefties that were identical to Buerhle, Bruce Hurst, John Tudor and Bobby Ojeda, yes they did not have the longevity Buerhle has enjoyed but they were pretty damn good. So if Owens is Hurst and Johnson is Ojeda, I am fine with that too. First of all, going back to the 80s, Owens would clearly be Ojeda and Johnson would clearly be Hurst. If anything, EdRod would be early Tudor, before he got hurt and lost his fastball. Second of all, none of the the three were identical to Buehrle. It's a lazy comp at best. Late Tudor is probably the best match for Buehrle. Finally, I would not put Ojeda in the same class as either Hurst or Tudor. Hurst and Tudor, at their peaks, were good #2 pitchers. Tudor's age 31-36 years were really underrated. Ojeda wasn't much more than a late-rotation arm, even at his peak.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 30, 2015 11:44:16 GMT -5
Second of all, none of the the three were identical to Buehrle. It's a lazy comp at best. Late Tudor is probably the best match for Buehrle. It's a lazy comp that everyone keeps making. I really don't get it. Other than being big lefties who are much more athletic than they look, they aren't similar pitchers at all.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 30, 2015 11:44:55 GMT -5
I'm still mad they let Hurst go.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on May 30, 2015 11:46:45 GMT -5
Owens is more like Hurst and Johnson more like Ojeda. Hurst.though he didn't have velocity was the stuff guy because he had so much movement on his pitches. Owens is much the same way in that he's the stuff guy because of his change. Johnson has the wider repotoire like Ojeda did. ERod? more like Lester.
|
|
|
Post by malynn19 on May 30, 2015 12:18:37 GMT -5
I know I am making it sound easier than it is (I am an optimist) But all I have to do is look back to my teenage years (the 80s) and remember 3 Red Sox lefties that were identical to Buerhle, Bruce Hurst, John Tudor and Bobby Ojeda, yes they did not have the longevity Buerhle has enjoyed but they were pretty damn good. So if Owens is Hurst and Johnson is Ojeda, I am fine with that too. First of all, going back to the 80s, Owens would clearly be Ojeda and Johnson would clearly be Hurst. If anything, EdRod would be early Tudor, before he got hurt and lost his fastball. Second of all, none of the the three were identical to Buehrle. It's a lazy comp at best. Late Tudor is probably the best match for Buehrle. Finally, I would not put Ojeda in the same class as either Hurst or Tudor. Hurst and Tudor, at their peaks, were good #2 pitchers. Tudor's age 31-36 years were really underrated. Ojeda wasn't much more than a late-rotation arm, even at his peak. Fine, maybe identical was not the right word, but they were similar in the fact that they were not power pitchers, get it now? Lazy comp? I watched these guys live (Don't know or care if you did too), not through Youtube and they were "similar". And yes you can compare them, I didn't put Steven Carlton, or Randy Johnson or even a Glavine or Teddy Higuera or Finley in there cause they packed a bit more heat and these guys are not like those and all those were #1s. I could add some righties as well so it won't look so lazy but why bother. I was talking ceiling here, and you said it best Tudor and Hurst were #2 pitchers, Ojeda a #3 but they were all very similar to me and Buerhle is the only one (now) that reminds me of them. You don't have to agree with me, but I think I am entitled to my opinion whether you think its wrong or lazy. I didn't look up stats I just did it from memory. Another pitcher was Zane Smith, yes and he's another lefty, but I remember him being on those bad Atlanta teams (TBS) of the 80s and then having some success with Pitt and I think he pitched for us one or two years.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on May 30, 2015 13:11:25 GMT -5
Fine, maybe identical was not the right word, but they were similar in the fact that they were not power pitchers, get it now? Lazy comp? I watched these guys live (Don't know or care if you did too), not through Youtube and they were "similar". And yes you can compare them, I didn't put Steven Carlton, or Randy Johnson or even a Glavine or Teddy Higuera or Finley in there cause they packed a bit more heat and these guys are not like those and all those were #1s. I could add some righties as well so it won't look so lazy but why bother. I was talking ceiling here, and you said it best Tudor and Hurst were #2 pitchers, Ojeda a #3 but they were all very similar to me and Buerhle is the only one (now) that reminds me of them. You don't have to agree with me, but I think I am entitled to my opinion whether you think its wrong or lazy. I didn't look up stats I just did it from memory. Another pitcher was Zane Smith, yes and he's another lefty, but I remember him being on those bad Atlanta teams (TBS) of the 80s and then having some success with Pitt and I think he pitched for us one or two years. We are probably close to the same age, so, yes, I saw Tudor, Hurst and Ojeda live, many times. I've also seen Johnson and Owens. I got it - lots of people compare pitchers who are not power pitchers to Buehrle, which IMO is a lazy comp because Buehrle is so far out of the mainstream for pitchers with average to below-average stuff. I did not say Ojeda was a #3. I said he "wasn't much more than a late-rotation arm, even at his peak." Also, I never said that you were not entitled to your opinion. But no one (including me) is safe from having their opinions picked over and analyzed. In fact, there are some on this board (not saying you are among them) whose only talent is to pick over other people's opinions and deign to be an authority on all things baseball. If I think that Johnson is more similar to Hurst because of his ability to work both sides of the plate with a variety of pitches, and Owens is more similar to Ojeda because of the way both pitchers work(ed) backwards off their changeup with below-average fastballs, then that's my opinion. My recollection of Zane Smith is that he relied primarily on a sinking fastball. He pitched one below-replacement value season for the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 30, 2015 14:06:45 GMT -5
I know I am making it sound easier than it is (I am an optimist) But all I have to do is look back to my teenage years (the 80s) and remember 3 Red Sox lefties that were identical to Buerhle, Bruce Hurst, John Tudor and Bobby Ojeda, yes they did not have the longevity Buerhle has enjoyed but they were pretty damn good. So if Owens is Hurst and Johnson is Ojeda, I am fine with that too. First of all, going back to the 80s, Owens would clearly be Ojeda and Johnson would clearly be Hurst. If anything, EdRod would be early Tudor, before he got hurt and lost his fastball. Second of all, none of the the three were identical to Buehrle. It's a lazy comp at best. Late Tudor is probably the best match for Buehrle. Finally, I would not put Ojeda in the same class as either Hurst or Tudor. Hurst and Tudor, at their peaks, were good #2 pitchers. Tudor's age 31-36 years were really underrated. Ojeda wasn't much more than a late-rotation arm, even at his peak. You can make the argument that at his very peak Ojeda was as good as anybody in the Mets rotation in 1986. It's like they had 4 aces: Gooden, Darling, Ojeda, and Fernandez, who all had top of the rotation credentials that year, although it was a total comedown year for Gooden. My recollection of Ojeda was that he was hit or miss with the Sox. I certainly didn't shed any tears when he was dealt, but he did have a great year in 1986, and also shut the Sox down in Game 3. The Sox had him on the ropes in Game 6, but could never put him away.
|
|
|
Post by awall on May 30, 2015 18:48:50 GMT -5
I still think Jimmy key is who he reminds me of the most. Not saying I expect him to be that successful, that's just a guy who's style he reminds me of.
|
|
|