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.
Discussion of 2014 and 2015 pitching rotations
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Dec 11, 2014 19:45:14 GMT -5
Love Masterson back he could be great if he is healthy. I wonder how much of his problems last season were due to health, how much due to mechanics and how much was pressure he put on himself to have a great year in his contract year. The mechanics should get a huge boost from working with Farrell again. I still think this was a good signing. The real problem with Masterson has always been his inability to get lefties out. Can't really see that suddenly changing. I don't hate the signing, but to suggest he could be great after the season he had last year is quite the stretch.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Dec 11, 2014 21:12:20 GMT -5
I wonder how much of his problems last season were due to health, how much due to mechanics and how much was pressure he put on himself to have a great year in his contract year. The mechanics should get a huge boost from working with Farrell again. I still think this was a good signing. The real problem with Masterson has always been his inability to get lefties out. Can't really see that suddenly changing. I don't hate the signing, but to suggest he could be great after the season he had last year is quite the stretch. Yes his mechanics last year were a problem like his injuries as you said, but I was wondering how much of his mechanic problems were due to injuries. If he is in that bad of shape and has that many injuries well its gonna be hard to do anything rite.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Dec 11, 2014 21:34:59 GMT -5
We might also have to skip Masterson's start every time we're in Baltimore or Tampa. He owns career ERAs of 7.71 in 42 innings and 6.68 in 33 2/3 innings pitched at Camden and the Trop, respectively. To be fair one bad start could skew those numbers in Tampa. Sample sizes are too small to worry about here. Just have to hope Masterson stays healthy because he likely rebounds if that's the case.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Dec 12, 2014 13:01:51 GMT -5
One thing that I found interesting is that Detroit and Arizona were two of the teams that used the shift the least last year. According to this WSJ article, only two teams used the shift less than Detroit. Arizona was 23rd in shift usage. St. Louis was also low on the list at 19th. This could be a really underrated factor in the construction of the new pitching staff. Porcello, Miley, Kelly, and Masterson would all rank in the top 25 starting pitchers in GB% last year had they qualified. Miley had a 51% GB% last year, but it was 65% against lefties. Only about 20-25% of the time he'll be facing a lefty, but I would expect it to be a near-automatic to deploy the shift in these cases. The other interesting thing about Miley is that versus righties he appears (just based on looking at the spray chart) to give up a disproportionate amount of flyballs to right field (a quick count shows only 10 flyballs to RHH that went left of left-center field. That seems like a characteristic that will play up at Fenway Park. Porcello had a 49% GB% last year, which was 25th among qualified pitchers. The year before he was at 55% which placed him 3rd. For his career that rate is 56% vs. RHH and 49% vs. LHH. Looking at his spray chart, LHH very rarely put the ball on the ground to the left side. He'll be going from plus defensive second baseman and an average first baseman to a plus-plus defensive second baseman and a plus defensive firstbaseman. Add in the greater utilization of shifts and I think you'll see a fairly significant uptick in his performance versus LHH (including outperforming his peripherals). Kelly has a career 54% GB% which would have put him tied for 6th among qualified starters had he qualified, so he will also benefit from increased use of shifting. Masterson has a career 57% GB% - 55% vs LHH and 63% vs RHH. He is another guy that doesn't give up many groundballs to the left side when facing LHH. And while Cleveland is a team that uses the shift, the horribleness of their infield cannot be understated. All four primary infielders (Carlos Santana, Jason Kipnis, Asdrubal Cabrera, and Lonny Chisenhall) put up negative UZR/150 scores including -15 for Chisenhall, -10.8 for Cabrera, and -9.7 for Kipnis. The Red Sox infield w/ career UZR/150 scores: Napoli: +5.6 Pedroia: +11.3 Bogaerts: -1.1 Sandoval: +2.2
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Dec 12, 2014 13:45:23 GMT -5
I like what we've done so far. It's not exciting, but I think we can go into spring training like this (although I am sure BC is still working on things to see if he can more of a top of the rotation guy for a reasonable price). It gives BC and team time to evaluate three things -
1 - the opportunity to acquire a #1/#2 type pitcher at the trade deadline 2 - determine which of Pocello/Miley/Masterson emerges and they would like to sign longer term 3 - get another year of development at higher levels (mostly AAA) for Owens, Rodriguez, Barnes and Johnson. This should provide them with more scouting and performance info to hep them decide who they think they can rely on as a starter in 2016 and beyond and at what level.
And all three of these are interdependent. They should be able to be competitive for the first 4 months while making these determinations. It will be critical, of course, to make the right evaluations on these guys.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Dec 12, 2014 13:52:39 GMT -5
Hamels Porcello Miley Buchholz Masterson
This would be a rotation I definitely am content with. 3 innings eaters at the top. Masterson and Buchholz have high ceilings and risks, but we have the necessary depth (in Barnes, Workman, Ranaudo, Owens, Rodriguez, and Johnson) to take these risks.
I hope a Kelly + Margot deal for Hamels happens.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Dec 12, 2014 14:02:12 GMT -5
One thing that I found interesting is that Detroit and Arizona were two of the teams that used the shift the least last year. According to this WSJ article, only two teams used the shift less than Detroit. Arizona was 23rd in shift usage. St. Louis was also low on the list at 19th. This could be a really underrated factor in the construction of the new pitching staff. Porcello, Miley, Kelly, and Masterson would all rank in the top 25 starting pitchers in GB% last year had they qualified. Miley had a 51% GB% last year, but it was 65% against lefties. Only about 20-25% of the time he'll be facing a lefty, but I would expect it to be a near-automatic to deploy the shift in these cases. The other interesting thing about Miley is that versus righties he appears (just based on looking at the spray chart) to give up a disproportionate amount of flyballs to right field (a quick count shows only 10 flyballs to RHH that went left of left-center field. That seems like a characteristic that will play up at Fenway Park. Porcello had a 49% GB% last year, which was 25th among qualified pitchers. The year before he was at 55% which placed him 3rd. For his career that rate is 56% vs. RHH and 49% vs. LHH. Looking at his spray chart, LHH very rarely put the ball on the ground to the left side. He'll be going from plus defensive second baseman and an average first baseman to a plus-plus defensive second baseman and a plus defensive firstbaseman. Add in the greater utilization of shifts and I think you'll see a fairly significant uptick in his performance versus LHH (including outperforming his peripherals). Kelly has a career 54% GB% which would have put him tied for 6th among qualified starters had he qualified, so he will also benefit from increased use of shifting. Masterson has a career 57% GB% - 55% vs LHH and 63% vs RHH. He is another guy that doesn't give up many groundballs to the left side when facing LHH. And while Cleveland is a team that uses the shift, the horribleness of their infield cannot be understated. All four primary infielders (Carlos Santana, Jason Kipnis, Asdrubal Cabrera, and Lonny Chisenhall) put up negative UZR/150 scores including -15 for Chisenhall, -10.8 for Cabrera, and -9.7 for Kipnis. The Red Sox infield w/ career UZR/150 scores: Napoli: +5.6 Pedroia: +11.3 Bogaerts: -1.1 Sandoval: +2.2 Thank you for that post. That was great. You are right, which I hadn't thought about, that are tendency to shift can only help this guys we picked up.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Dec 12, 2014 14:09:47 GMT -5
One thing that I found interesting is that Detroit and Arizona were two of the teams that used the shift the least last year. According to this WSJ article, only two teams used the shift less than Detroit. Arizona was 23rd in shift usage. St. Louis was also low on the list at 19th. This could be a really underrated factor in the construction of the new pitching staff. Porcello, Miley, Kelly, and Masterson would all rank in the top 25 starting pitchers in GB% last year had they qualified. Miley had a 51% GB% last year, but it was 65% against lefties. Only about 20-25% of the time he'll be facing a lefty, but I would expect it to be a near-automatic to deploy the shift in these cases. The other interesting thing about Miley is that versus righties he appears (just based on looking at the spray chart) to give up a disproportionate amount of flyballs to right field (a quick count shows only 10 flyballs to RHH that went left of left-center field. That seems like a characteristic that will play up at Fenway Park. Porcello had a 49% GB% last year, which was 25th among qualified pitchers. The year before he was at 55% which placed him 3rd. For his career that rate is 56% vs. RHH and 49% vs. LHH. Looking at his spray chart, LHH very rarely put the ball on the ground to the left side. He'll be going from plus defensive second baseman and an average first baseman to a plus-plus defensive second baseman and a plus defensive firstbaseman. Add in the greater utilization of shifts and I think you'll see a fairly significant uptick in his performance versus LHH (including outperforming his peripherals). Kelly has a career 54% GB% which would have put him tied for 6th among qualified starters had he qualified, so he will also benefit from increased use of shifting. Masterson has a career 57% GB% - 55% vs LHH and 63% vs RHH. He is another guy that doesn't give up many groundballs to the left side when facing LHH. And while Cleveland is a team that uses the shift, the horribleness of their infield cannot be understated. All four primary infielders (Carlos Santana, Jason Kipnis, Asdrubal Cabrera, and Lonny Chisenhall) put up negative UZR/150 scores including -15 for Chisenhall, -10.8 for Cabrera, and -9.7 for Kipnis. The Red Sox infield w/ career UZR/150 scores: Napoli: +5.6 Pedroia: +11.3 Bogaerts: -1.1 Sandoval: +2.2 Thank you for that post. That was great. You are right, which I hadn't thought about, that are tendency to shift can only help this guys we picked up. Agree. Quality observation.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 12, 2014 15:45:49 GMT -5
Thank you for that post. That was great. You are right, which I hadn't thought about, that are tendency to shift can only help this guys we picked up. Agree. Quality observation. Yup, terrific stuff. The thing to do now is to trade Kelly for someone less risky and better -- ideally, a lot better. I loved the Kelly acquisition as a risky, fairly high-upside move, but we've just added Masterson who fits the precise same profile (joining Buchholz). You don't want 2 guys you can count on and 3 you're hoping on, you want vice versa. Hamels may be unrealistic, simply because Amaro's likely to overvalue him relative to other GMs and their pitchers. If the point of dealing Latos and Simon was to extend Cueto, he might require a big overpayment, too. The Mariners keep on claiming that Iwakuma's not on the market (and a GB pitcher loses value in their park). The Nats are talking again to Zimmermann about an extension, but there are signs he really wants to go to free agency, so he might be the most realistic option -- but he may be the least great. The fallback would be Fister. Unlike the others, he's not an ace, but he's quite a bit better than Kelly and has much less downside risk. Our chief chips to add to Kelly to get an ace would be Ranaudo, Marrero, and Coyle. Holt and Craig are possibilities, but ideally, you would hold on to all the surplus into ST. And obviously you could expand any deal with Guerra / Rijo, Stankiewicz / Mercedes, etc. Later today, I may run down how each our our trade chips fits with the Phillies, Reds, Mariners, and Nats.
|
|
|
Post by knuckledown on Dec 12, 2014 16:15:57 GMT -5
Heard Speier on the radio today say that he though an elite pitcher was 200+ innings of 120 ERA+, which I think is a more inclusive definition than many have. Being a fangraphs (vs bbref) guy, I took ERA-, here are the top 25, which also happens to be the group with a score about 20% or better (lower) than league average. And somebody please tell me if I'm not presenting this correctly. All 2014 seasons.
Kershaw - 50 Sale - 55 F. Hernandez - 58 Cueto - 61 Lester - 63 Kluber -66 Fister - 66 Wainright - 66 Hamels - 67 H. Alvarez - 72 Richards - 72 Zimmermann - 73 Lynn - 76 Wood - 77 Kuechel - 77 Grinke - 77 Roark - 78 Cobb - 78 Teheran - 79 Samardzija - 80 Scherzer - 81 Tyson Ross - 81 Gray - 83 Y Ventura - 83 Shields - 83
This data tells, me to trade for Fister, Cueto or Zimmermann if they're actually available at a price we're willing to pay. There's not a huge spread between Scherzer and Shields, though their contracts will likely be very different possibly both bad but for different reasons. We missed a chance with Samardzija (and Lester) and Alex Cobb is better than we give him credit for.
Eric, why don't you think Fister qualifies as an ace?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 12, 2014 16:22:57 GMT -5
One year of data is never enough to judge a player on, especially with regards to pitcher ERA. Take a three year sample, regress it 3-2-1, and you'd get a better picture.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Dec 12, 2014 16:23:55 GMT -5
Agree. Quality observation. Yup, terrific stuff. The thing to do now is to trade Kelly for someone less risky and better -- ideally, a lot better. I loved the Kelly acquisition as a risky, fairly high-upside move, but we've just added Masterson who fits the precise same profile (joining Buchholz). You don't want 2 guys you can count on and 3 you're hoping on, you want vice versa. Hamels may be unrealistic, simply because Amaro's likely to overvalue him relative to other GMs and their pitchers. If the point of dealing Latos and Simon was to extend Cueto, he might require a big overpayment, too. The Mariners keep on claiming that Iwakuma's not on the market (and a GB pitcher loses value in their park). The Nats are talking again to Zimmermann about an extension, but there are signs he really wants to go to free agency, so he might be the most realistic option -- but he may be the least great. The fallback would be Fister. Unlike the others, he's not an ace, but he's quite a bit better than Kelly and has much less downside risk. Our chief chips to add to Kelly to get an ace would be Ranaudo, Marrero, and Coyle. Holt and Craig are possibilities, but ideally, you would hold on to all the surplus into ST. And obviously you could expand any deal with Guerra / Rijo, Stankiewicz / Mercedes, etc. Later today, I may run down how each our our trade chips fits with the Phillies, Reds, Mariners, and Nats. I was thinking Fister would make a lot of sense because he's a ground ball pitcher, but interestingly he doesn't generate many grounders versus lefties, so he wouldn't be a great fit for this team IMO. He's better than Kelly, but it seems to me that the upgrade - given his GB% splits - wouldn't be worth the cost. The guys that stand out to me as good fits (in that they will be able to utilize the shift better) would be Iwakuma, Tyson Ross, or Mike Leake. Of those, Iwakuma is the only one that is a big enough upgrade to really be worth the investment. If he is at all available, he is the guy I would target.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,665
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 12, 2014 23:05:48 GMT -5
One thing that I found interesting is that Detroit and Arizona were two of the teams that used the shift the least last year. According to this WSJ article, only two teams used the shift less than Detroit. Arizona was 23rd in shift usage. St. Louis was also low on the list at 19th. This could be a really underrated factor in the construction of the new pitching staff. Porcello, Miley, Kelly, and Masterson would all rank in the top 25 starting pitchers in GB% last year had they qualified. Miley had a 51% GB% last year, but it was 65% against lefties. Only about 20-25% of the time he'll be facing a lefty, but I would expect it to be a near-automatic to deploy the shift in these cases. The other interesting thing about Miley is that versus righties he appears (just based on looking at the spray chart) to give up a disproportionate amount of flyballs to right field (a quick count shows only 10 flyballs to RHH that went left of left-center field. That seems like a characteristic that will play up at Fenway Park. Porcello had a 49% GB% last year, which was 25th among qualified pitchers. The year before he was at 55% which placed him 3rd. For his career that rate is 56% vs. RHH and 49% vs. LHH. Looking at his spray chart, LHH very rarely put the ball on the ground to the left side. He'll be going from plus defensive second baseman and an average first baseman to a plus-plus defensive second baseman and a plus defensive firstbaseman. Add in the greater utilization of shifts and I think you'll see a fairly significant uptick in his performance versus LHH (including outperforming his peripherals). Kelly has a career 54% GB% which would have put him tied for 6th among qualified starters had he qualified, so he will also benefit from increased use of shifting. Masterson has a career 57% GB% - 55% vs LHH and 63% vs RHH. He is another guy that doesn't give up many groundballs to the left side when facing LHH. And while Cleveland is a team that uses the shift, the horribleness of their infield cannot be understated. All four primary infielders (Carlos Santana, Jason Kipnis, Asdrubal Cabrera, and Lonny Chisenhall) put up negative UZR/150 scores including -15 for Chisenhall, -10.8 for Cabrera, and -9.7 for Kipnis. The Red Sox infield w/ career UZR/150 scores: Napoli: +5.6 Pedroia: +11.3 Bogaerts: -1.1 Sandoval: +2.2 Interesting post. Farrell loves to shift. Could be a difference maker. Hadn't considered that before.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by ianrs on Dec 13, 2014 12:18:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 13, 2014 15:45:18 GMT -5
Definitely would love to get any of Zimmermann, Fister or Cueto to finish the staff. It would be the cherry on top of a fantastic offseason for the Red Sox.
I'd prefer Cueto, but after Cincy already traded a couple of arms, I don't see them moving him. After him, I'd put the full court press on Washington for Zimmermann.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 13, 2014 18:08:41 GMT -5
I don't see the Nationals giving up Zimmermann without including one of the guys we don't want to give up. And I'm not giving up any of them for 1 year of anyone.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Dec 13, 2014 18:14:07 GMT -5
I don't see the Nationals giving up Zimmermann without including one of the guys we don't want to give up. And I'm not giving up any of them for 1 year of anyone. The truth is we don't really know, but the vibe I get is that the Nats will spend the coming weeks working behind the scenes to see which of their pitchers they can extend and which they can't. If they don't think they can extend Zimmermann and aren't thrilled with the possibility of re-signing him, they will deal him before spring training and I would expect the cost to be very moderate.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 13, 2014 18:17:12 GMT -5
I don't see the Nationals giving up Zimmermann without including one of the guys we don't want to give up. And I'm not giving up any of them for 1 year of anyone. The truth is we don't really know, but the vibe I get is that the Nats will spend the coming weeks working behind the scenes to see which of their pitchers they can extend and which they can't. If they don't think they can extend Zimmermann and aren't thrilled with the possibility of re-signing him, they will deal him before spring training and I would expect the cost to be very moderate. That's just the feeling I get with them being so close. If I were a Nats fan, I'd rather keep him than make the team worse in the short term. I could be completely wrong.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Dec 13, 2014 20:25:53 GMT -5
One thing that I found interesting is that Detroit and Arizona were two of the teams that used the shift the least last year. According to this WSJ article, only two teams used the shift less than Detroit. Arizona was 23rd in shift usage. St. Louis was also low on the list at 19th. This could be a really underrated factor in the construction of the new pitching staff. Porcello, Miley, Kelly, and Masterson would all rank in the top 25 starting pitchers in GB% last year had they qualified. Miley had a 51% GB% last year, but it was 65% against lefties. Only about 20-25% of the time he'll be facing a lefty, but I would expect it to be a near-automatic to deploy the shift in these cases. The other interesting thing about Miley is that versus righties he appears (just based on looking at the spray chart) to give up a disproportionate amount of flyballs to right field (a quick count shows only 10 flyballs to RHH that went left of left-center field. That seems like a characteristic that will play up at Fenway Park. Porcello had a 49% GB% last year, which was 25th among qualified pitchers. The year before he was at 55% which placed him 3rd. For his career that rate is 56% vs. RHH and 49% vs. LHH. Looking at his spray chart, LHH very rarely put the ball on the ground to the left side. He'll be going from plus defensive second baseman and an average first baseman to a plus-plus defensive second baseman and a plus defensive firstbaseman. Add in the greater utilization of shifts and I think you'll see a fairly significant uptick in his performance versus LHH (including outperforming his peripherals). Kelly has a career 54% GB% which would have put him tied for 6th among qualified starters had he qualified, so he will also benefit from increased use of shifting. Masterson has a career 57% GB% - 55% vs LHH and 63% vs RHH. He is another guy that doesn't give up many groundballs to the left side when facing LHH. And while Cleveland is a team that uses the shift, the horribleness of their infield cannot be understated. All four primary infielders (Carlos Santana, Jason Kipnis, Asdrubal Cabrera, and Lonny Chisenhall) put up negative UZR/150 scores including -15 for Chisenhall, -10.8 for Cabrera, and -9.7 for Kipnis. The Red Sox infield w/ career UZR/150 scores: Napoli: +5.6 Pedroia: +11.3 Bogaerts: -1.1 Sandoval: +2.2 I'm stealing this (with due credit given of course). Awesome stuff.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Dec 13, 2014 21:36:58 GMT -5
I don't see the Nationals giving up Zimmermann without including one of the guys we don't want to give up. And I'm not giving up any of them for 1 year of anyone. Maybe the sox can include a third team and get a deal done without sacrificing any of the over values prospects that cherrington loves to hoard. Cherrington has no problem turning over lesser prospects and the non-core elements of the roster.
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Dec 13, 2014 21:57:06 GMT -5
I don't see the Nationals giving up Zimmermann without including one of the guys we don't want to give up. And I'm not giving up any of them for 1 year of anyone. Maybe the sox can include a third team and get a deal done without sacrificing any of the over values prospects that cherrington loves to hoard. Cherrington has no problem turning over lesser prospects and the non-core elements of the roster. The chance of Zimmerman being available may be if the Nats land Scherzer. Same may be said for Price in Detroit or Grienke in LA? ?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 13, 2014 23:16:46 GMT -5
I don't see the Nationals giving up Zimmermann without including one of the guys we don't want to give up. And I'm not giving up any of them for 1 year of anyone. Maybe the sox can include a third team and get a deal done without sacrificing any of the over values prospects that cherrington loves to hoard. Cherrington has no problem turning over lesser prospects and the non-core elements of the roster. You say this, what, once a day? What's your evidence? It's an impossible assertion to prove, since you have no idea what kind, if any, of reasonable deals for prospects Cherington has turned down. What we do know is that he has traded a slew of prospects and cost-controlled young players in deals he lost on paper; in many cases they were deals that were huge overpayments, seen analytically. Trading four years of Jed Lowrie for two of Mark Melancon (and tossing in a prospect, Kyle Weiland) is not hoarding. Trading 6 years of Jose Iglesias for 1 1/3 years of Jake Peavy (and tossing in Frank Montas and Cleuluis Rondon) is not hoarding. Trading five years of Josh Reddick for two of Andrew Bailey (and tossing in Raul Alcantara and Miles Head) is not hoarding. Oh, and he once, as co-GM with Jed Hoyer, traded Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez for Josh Beckett.
I happened to have had a long phone conversation with Jed a few weeks before that trade (just before Theo quit and he got promoted and way too busy!), and what we talked about was the fact that there were absolutely no frontline starters available, and how the Sox might be able to be an elite team without improving the rotation, by simply being great offensively (this was at a time when there was some thought of trading Manny, which we both opposed). Then the Marlins unexpectedly made Beckett available, and Ben and Jed pounced on him. Cherington has shown a willingness to overpay in trades by including rookies and prospects he thought were blocked. He has, in the past, traded elite prospects if he felt it was the only way to fill a need. And that circumstance has not happened again. Furthermore, most people on this board do not like the idea of trading elite prospects anyway. So what exactly is your beef? If you have some dirty low-down about Cherington stealing your lunch money as a kid, or threatening to kill you and your family if you spell his name correctly, please share.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 14, 2014 2:17:47 GMT -5
Here are pitch-framing runs/9 IP for each of our starters, and some possible ace acquisitions. It appears as if BP / Dan Brooks has tried to adjust out the pitcher's own contribution to framing, since the totals per catcher of all the pitchers he caught in a year do not match his overall numbers, in a very interesting way (I'll have more to say about that later in the Vazquez pitch-framing thread, I hope).
A positive number means good framing, and the listed number can be simply added to the pitcher's ERA for that year. If you want to divide that number in half or make any other such tweak short of ignoring it altogether, I have no objections. And to answer the inevitabel questions, yes, it's fishy to me that these guys got collectively better framing in 2013 and better again, in spades, in 2014, and fishy that, after adjusting out the pitcher's own contribution, all these elite pitchers got collectively good framing.
So the absolute center of the scale here is in question (it might be 0.05 too high in 2013 and 0.13 too high in 2014), and the size of the effect is in question -- but I think the relative ranking is pretty accurate.
The Wgt at the end is 3-2-1 (* IP) and can be used to tweak a Steamer projection, etc.
Name 2012 2013 2014 Wgt Clay Buchholz 0.13 0.35 0.33 0.29 David Price 0.11 0.41 0.25 0.27 Johnny Cueto 0.31 0.03 0.26 0.24 Jon Lester 0.17 0.07 0.35 0.23 Wade Miley 0.14 -0.05 0.30 0.16 Jose Quintana -0.13 0.15 0.14 0.11 James Shields 0.22 0.02 0.05 0.07 Joe Kelly -0.05 -0.10 0.25 0.07 Hisashi Iwakuma -0.17 -0.12 0.23 0.04 Max Scherzer -0.04 0.15 -0.01 0.04 Chris Sale -0.14 -0.01 0.10 0.02 Jor. Zimmermann -0.10 -0.04 0.09 0.01 Cole Hamels 0.20 -0.09 0.01 0.01 Rick Porcello -0.09 0.08 -0.10 -0.04 Doug Fister -0.16 0.04 -0.08 -0.04 Just. Masterson -0.40 -0.15 -0.16 -0.21
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 14, 2014 21:46:40 GMT -5
I'd absolutely give up a package headline by Owens for Zimmermann, but definitely wouldn't go to the Bogaerts, Betts or Swihart level.
If it costs even less then that's even better.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 15, 2014 0:21:59 GMT -5
I like what the team has done about their pitching. Porcello and Miley are both young and dependable. While Miley has averaged 200 innings/year over his last 3 years as a regular, Porcello has averaged 180 over the last 6... and he's still younger by almost two years! They've both had very good seasons, Miley's three years ago and Porcello's last year, so there's a track record. I'm willing to attribute a bit Miley's down year last year to luck. He was much better on the road and that's a good sign. Given that they both throw a lot of ground balls, they're also well suited to Fenway.
Masterson is more of a lottery ticket at this point, as the team has no idea which guy they'll get. If he is healthy, he's another gopher-killing groundball machine. Kelly is also relatively young, and another guy who induces a lot of grounders.
Regardless of who starts the season, and whether they're all still with the team, there's good upside, and a lot of flexibility. As others have mentioned, this may not be the end of it. If the opportunity does arise, the Sox have a pile of assets they can use to get a player they might want.
|
|
|