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 philsbosoxfan on Mar 3, 2016 8:19:33 GMT -5
I think that's pretty much what every else said. There's no guarantees but it's Kelly's spot to lose.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 3, 2016 8:23:28 GMT -5
You really think it's a given that Joe Kelly turns into a relief pitcher as dominant as Andrew Miller? Rodriguez made great strides after the trade. He was not nearly as highly regarded as people think he was at the time of the trade. Furthermore, Miller got 4/$32 million as a free agent as one of the most dominant relief pitchers ever available as a free agent, while Ian Kennedy got 5/$70 million as a #4/5 starter. I think Kelly could get away with less control and I think he could ramp his fastball to 98-100 in short stints. Yes I think he has a chance to be dominant there. He has a arm that you dream about coming out of a bullpen late in games. I'm not doubting the value in the open market. No doubt starters will always be paid more than relievers. It's the trade market, that's overvaluing relief pitching. I know Rodriguez made great strides as a Sox but he had already made a appearance in the futures game and was in aa for Baltimore by age 19/20. He's the kind of guy you don't trade for a half year of Miller unless you are overvaluing relief pitching.Or are in the middle of a playoff run and peg reliever as a need in order to make the playoffs. The Orioles did just that and Miller was spectacular down the stretch. You can't say the Orioles made a mistake here either. The trade worked out well so far for both teams, both teams got what they wished for. Again, there are too many variables to use trades as your basis.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 8:35:23 GMT -5
I think Kelly could get away with less control and I think he could ramp his fastball to 98-100 in short stints. Yes I think he has a chance to be dominant there. He has a arm that you dream about coming out of a bullpen late in games. I'm not doubting the value in the open market. No doubt starters will always be paid more than relievers. It's the trade market, that's overvaluing relief pitching. I know Rodriguez made great strides as a Sox but he had already made a appearance in the futures game and was in aa for Baltimore by age 19/20. He's the kind of guy you don't trade for a half year of Miller unless you are overvaluing relief pitching.Or are in the middle of a playoff run and peg reliever as a need in order to make the playoffs. The Orioles did just that and Miller was spectacular down the stretch. You can't say the Orioles made a mistake here either. The trade worked out well so far for both teams, both teams got what they wished for. Again, there are too many variables to use trades as your basis. It's not a variable if another team was willing to pay a similar price. The Tigers offered up Robbie Ray for a half year of Miller too. The price is probably always going to be high for relief pitching from now on. It's just the way it is now. A proven great arm out of the bullpen is going to cost a fortune from now on. It's the reality of the baseball trade market these days.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 8:37:02 GMT -5
I think that's pretty much what every else said. There's no guarantees but it's Kelly's spot to lose. No some people have made it a point to say on here that Kelly won't lose his job no matter how good or bad he does in spring training because results in spring training doesn't matter at all. They have also said that his 8-1 stretch was enough to warrant him a guaranteed spot in the rotation- Not the case.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 3, 2016 8:57:47 GMT -5
You really think it's a given that Joe Kelly turns into a relief pitcher as dominant as Andrew Miller? Rodriguez made great strides after the trade. He was not nearly as highly regarded as people think he was at the time of the trade. Furthermore, Miller got 4/$32 million as a free agent as one of the most dominant relief pitchers ever available as a free agent, while Ian Kennedy got 5/$70 million as a #4/5 starter. I think Kelly could get away with less control and I think he could ramp his fastball to 98-100 in short stints. Yes I think he has a chance to be dominant there. He has a arm that you dream about coming out of a bullpen late in games. I'm not doubting the value in the open market. No doubt starters will always be paid more than relievers. It's the trade market, that's overvaluing relief pitching. I know Rodriguez made great strides as a Sox but he had already made a appearance in the futures game and was in aa for Baltimore by age 19/20. He's the kind of guy you don't trade for a half year of Miller unless you are overvaluing relief pitching. Kelly can already get up to 98-100 as a starter. He gets hit. If starters are always paid more than relievers, then they are worth more than than relievers in a trade. Joe Kelly is not going to be worth more in a trade because you move him to the bullpen which is what you keep saying. This will be my last comment to you if you disagree with that.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 3, 2016 9:01:13 GMT -5
I think people have generally said that scouting is more important than stats in spring training. I also interpret the general point of view that the 8-1 stretch pretty much made him the front runner. I don't see anybody that said he's guaranteed the slot no matter how bad he looks.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 9:14:28 GMT -5
I think Kelly could get away with less control and I think he could ramp his fastball to 98-100 in short stints. Yes I think he has a chance to be dominant there. He has a arm that you dream about coming out of a bullpen late in games. I'm not doubting the value in the open market. No doubt starters will always be paid more than relievers. It's the trade market, that's overvaluing relief pitching. I know Rodriguez made great strides as a Sox but he had already made a appearance in the futures game and was in aa for Baltimore by age 19/20. He's the kind of guy you don't trade for a half year of Miller unless you are overvaluing relief pitching. Kelly can already get up to 98-100 as a starter. He gets hit. If starters are always paid more than relievers, then they are worth more than than relievers in a trade. Joe Kelly is not going to be worth more in a trade because you move him to the bullpen which is what you keep saying. This will be my last comment to you if you disagree with that. Kelly averaged 95 mph on the fastball on average last year, which would put his range from 93-99 as a starter. He will probably throw from 96-101 as a reliever and average a lot higher than 95. It certainly will make it more harder to hit that way if Kelly is averaging more on his heat. The trade value isn't better for back end starters than it is for top end relievers. That's fact. Nathan Karns got one year of Morrison and Miller. While 1 1/2 years of Jake MgGee got 4 years of Dickerson. You can think what you want as perception, but the trade value doesn't add up when it comes to back end starters versus late inning arms.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 9:15:51 GMT -5
I think people have generally said that scouting is more important than stats in spring training. I also interpret the general point of view that the 8-1 stretch pretty much made him the front runner. I don't see anybody that said he's guaranteed the slot no matter how bad he looks. I think you need to read most of Eric's posts then. I think he's a good poster but he made it a point to say that Kelly is pretty much guaranteed the job out of spring training.
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Mar 3, 2016 9:23:43 GMT -5
I think people have generally said that scouting is more important than stats in spring training. I also interpret the general point of view that the 8-1 stretch pretty much made him the front runner. I don't see anybody that said he's guaranteed the slot no matter how bad he looks. I think you need to read most of Eric's posts then. I think he's a good poster but he made it a point to say that Kelly is pretty much guaranteed the job out of spring training. What are you arguing about? It's not his decision, so what? And I don't agree, he just said that in his opinion Kelly deserves a shot. As if it'd matter who we think should make the team?!
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 3, 2016 9:26:29 GMT -5
I think people have generally said that scouting is more important than stats in spring training. I also interpret the general point of view that the 8-1 stretch pretty much made him the front runner. I don't see anybody that said he's guaranteed the slot no matter how bad he looks. I think you need to read most of Eric's posts then. I think he's a good poster but he made it a point to say that Kelly is pretty much guaranteed the job out of spring training. I had read and have re-read, I don't see that at all. just as Kelly is going to have to look really bad to scouts to lose his job.That makes sense to me and I'm a big Owens fan.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 9:28:02 GMT -5
I think you need to read most of Eric's posts then. I think he's a good poster but he made it a point to say that Kelly is pretty much guaranteed the job out of spring training. What are you arguing about? It's not his decision, so what? And I don't agree, he just said that in his opinion Kelly deserves a shot. As if it'd matter who we think should make the team?! Ohh I have no problems with it. I was just pointing out that there was people saying it. I was by no means taking any shots at anyone, especially Eric. Which is also my first name.
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Mar 3, 2016 9:32:07 GMT -5
What are you arguing about? It's not his decision, so what? And I don't agree, he just said that in his opinion Kelly deserves a shot. As if it'd matter who we think should make the team?! Ohh I have no problems with it. I was just pointing out that there was people saying it. I was by no means taking any shots at anyone, especially Eric. Which is also my first name. What Phil said. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy many of your posts, but this debate here - at this point at least - is really a dead one with nothing new to it. I'd be thankful though if someone has information how Owens and Johnson were doing yesterday. So far I coudn't get any video, while I was very happy about the 5 Ks from Hank, there where some baserunners. I know, it's just spring training, but I just can't get enough infomation and can't wait for the season to start...
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 9:33:30 GMT -5
I could quote the Kelly bashers before this rebuttal, but I'll be kind. Before he went on the DL, Kelly had a 4.41 SIERA. That would rank him 102nd among the 150 starting pitchers with the most IP as a starter last year. That's the bad Joe Kelly, and it's not awful. It's just above the borderline between a 4th starter and a 5th starter. He came back from the DL trying a completely different pitch mix from anything he'd ever tried. This was at about the same time that Brian Bannister was resurrecting Rich Hill's career, so it seems quite possible that Bannister had a hand in this. He made 11 starts with the new pitch mix, which is a pretty healthy sample, had his ups and downs, and he had a 4.00 SIERA. That would rank him 60th. That's an average #3 starter. As your 5th starter. Some of the guys who had a higher (league-adjusted) SIERA: John Lackey, Michael Wacha, Jeff Samardzija, and so on. E-Rod ranked 75th, with 4.16. And you don't want to give this guy another 10 starts to see if he's for real? Are you people in your right minds?
Seriously. End of discussion. You have no rational argument.
(I mean, I'm officially the world's biggest Steven Wright fan, and one of the biggest champions on this board for Owens' upside, and I think Kelly has earned the shot.)Ohh...
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 3, 2016 9:36:20 GMT -5
Ohh I have no problems with it. I was just pointing out that there was people saying it. I was by no means taking any shots at anyone, especially Eric. Which is also my first name. What Phil said. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy many of your posts, but this debate here - at this point at least - is really a dead one with nothing new to it. I'd be thankful though if someone has information how Owens and Johnson were doing yesterday. So far I coudn't get any video, while I was very happy about the 5 Ks from Hank, there where some baserunners. I know, it's just spring training, but I just can't get enough infomation and can't wait for the season to start... Yeah would be nice to actually watching baseball instead of talking about it. I just think it's a dead argument because it's not later into March yet ;-)
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 3, 2016 11:02:41 GMT -5
I could quote the Kelly bashers before this rebuttal, but I'll be kind. Before he went on the DL, Kelly had a 4.41 SIERA. That would rank him 102nd among the 150 starting pitchers with the most IP as a starter last year. That's the bad Joe Kelly, and it's not awful. It's just above the borderline between a 4th starter and a 5th starter. He came back from the DL trying a completely different pitch mix from anything he'd ever tried. This was at about the same time that Brian Bannister was resurrecting Rich Hill's career, so it seems quite possible that Bannister had a hand in this. He made 11 starts with the new pitch mix, which is a pretty healthy sample, had his ups and downs, and he had a 4.00 SIERA. That would rank him 60th. That's an average #3 starter. As your 5th starter. Some of the guys who had a higher (league-adjusted) SIERA: John Lackey, Michael Wacha, Jeff Samardzija, and so on. E-Rod ranked 75th, with 4.16. And you don't want to give this guy another 10 starts to see if he's for real? Are you people in your right minds?
Seriously. End of discussion. You have no rational argument.
(I mean, I'm officially the world's biggest Steven Wright fan, and one of the biggest champions on this board for Owens' upside, and I think Kelly has earned the shot.)Ohh... LOL, I agree with that part too but there's a difference between wanting to give someone 10 starts and saying he's guaranteed a slot, specifically when the top part points out that the scouting will be the important indicator in the spring. I think you are pretty much alone on your life raft.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 3, 2016 13:03:35 GMT -5
I think people have generally said that scouting is more important than stats in spring training. I also interpret the general point of view that the 8-1 stretch pretty much made him the front runner. I don't see anybody that said he's guaranteed the slot no matter how bad he looks. I think you need to read most of Eric's posts then. I think he's a good poster but he made it a point to say that Kelly is pretty much guaranteed the job out of spring training. No, no, no. What I have said is that spring training results have no predictive value, and are therefore ignored by every MLB franchise. That almost means the same, to my most people, as ST performance, so I've sometimes put it in those words. If Joe Kelly looks like the same Joe Kelly who finished the season, he will not lose his job no matter how hard he gets hit. If Joe Kelly looks wrong, like his mechanics are all out of synch, or he's nursing an injury, or his FB velocity is down a few mph for no good reason, then he could absolutely lose his job. He won this job based on being better than average last year once he started pitching, for the first time in his career, like a normal person. He might lose that job if and only if he stops looking, to the scouting eye, like the guy who won that job. He does not, however, have to get people out in ST.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 3, 2016 13:14:53 GMT -5
I think Kelly could get away with less control and I think he could ramp his fastball to 98-100 in short stints. Yes I think he has a chance to be dominant there. He has a arm that you dream about coming out of a bullpen late in games. I'm not doubting the value in the open market. No doubt starters will always be paid more than relievers. It's the trade market, that's overvaluing relief pitching. I know Rodriguez made great strides as a Sox but he had already made a appearance in the futures game and was in aa for Baltimore by age 19/20. He's the kind of guy you don't trade for a half year of Miller unless you are overvaluing relief pitching. Kelly can already get up to 98-100 as a starter. He gets hit. If starters are always paid more than relievers, then they are worth more than than relievers in a trade. Joe Kelly is not going to be worth more in a trade because you move him to the bullpen which is what you keep saying. This will be my last comment to you if you disagree with that. Furthermore, the thing that appears to have held Kelly back is overuse of his fastball. Guys who benefit from a relief conversion are usually guys who have one or two great pitches but a thin repertoire after that. Kelly is actually the opposite. He used to throw his FB, on average, more often that 90% of starting pitchers. He'd try throwing it even more often at times, and then for a stretch he'd try it somewhat less often, but he had never, ever, in his career tried throwing it only as often as a typical starting pitcher. And the fastball was strangely ineffective despite its velocity. It took him a long time to realize, that for whatever reason, it was not so good a fastball that he could just throw it a whole lot. After he came off the DL, he finally tried using a typical FB%. He also re-jiggered his offspeed pitch mix, throwing more changeups (which he has talked about this ST), many more sliders and fewer curves. And he was really quite good.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 3, 2016 13:15:29 GMT -5
Yeah, Eduardo Rodriguez was a 50-60 range guy going into 2014, but had probably fallen out of the top 100 by the time the Sox got him (and was part of why they could get him for just two months of Miller). He had knee problems (makes his current issue more concerning) and got rocked in AA that year. He regained his luster after the trade by throwing up a sub-1 ERA in Portland.
Shelby Miller's career stats clearly place him in the middle of "3" territory, although I'll give you that he has upside. Then again, so did Webster and RDLR, which is why the DBacks wanted them. Miley got Carson Smith (one of the top 10 relievers in baseball last year, with five years of control) **and** Roenis Elias. Right there is the best example: a first-division 4 is worth a dominant reliever with five years of control **and** relatively young 5th starter, who has third starter stuff.
Is it possible that Kelly has more trade value as a reliever than as a starter? Yes, as in it's non-zero. But it's not bloody likely by a long shot. They'll almost assuredly keep him in the rotation until he absolutely proves he can't hack it. As well they should, because the Dodgers have DeLeon and Holmes in their system, and they **really** need a starting pitcher or three right now.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 3, 2016 13:20:59 GMT -5
Ohh I have no problems with it. I was just pointing out that there was people saying it. I was by no means taking any shots at anyone, especially Eric. Which is also my first name. What Phil said. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy many of your posts, but this debate here - at this point at least - is really a dead one with nothing new to it. I'd be thankful though if someone has information how Owens and Johnson were doing yesterday. So far I coudn't get any video, while I was very happy about the 5 Ks from Hank, there where some baserunners. I know, it's just spring training, but I just can't get enough infomation and can't wait for the season to start... Farrell said that they had Johnson at 91-93, which would be plus velo for a LH starter. Only two innings, and the results weren't good, but that's nice to see after 86-89 in his last start against Houston. Nice sleeper potential.
|
|
|