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.
2016 Red Sox Rotation Discussion
|
Post by okin15 on May 6, 2016 12:40:28 GMT -5
Won't be and shouldn't be O'Sullivan, though. Not sure Johnson is ready. No confidence Elias is any better. Maybe Cuevas. Really think they need to do something as Owens is one of the worst pitchers in the mlb right now. Can't give away that game. Owens walked a lot of below average hitters last night and we can't do the same again with oakland. If I'm not mistaken, Barnes is back to using a three-pitch arsenal. It's possible that you could use him as a piggy-back starter (or start him and PB someone else) for this spot. He has gotten a bit stretched out, and with ample rest could easily go 3 innings, maybe 4. Perhaps a successful stint in the PB role could allow him transition back into a starter and be successful.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 6, 2016 12:47:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 6, 2016 12:50:38 GMT -5
Really think they need to do something as Owens is one of the worst pitchers in the mlb right now. Can't give away that game. Owens walked a lot of below average hitters last night and we can't do the same again with oakland. If I'm not mistaken, Barnes is back to using a three-pitch arsenal. It's possible that you could use him as a piggy-back starter (or start him and PB someone else) for this spot. He has gotten a bit stretched out, and with ample rest could easily go 3 innings, maybe 4. Perhaps a successful stint in the PB role could allow him transition back into a starter and be successful. I asked this question in the game day thread, I think: Barnes is averaging 96.7 on his FB and his CB and CH are becoming useable pitches (i.e., his command of them is nearly sufficient). I'm not sure it makes sense to transition him back, especially this early, but the 'pen-rotation development track has worked for St Louis and Atlanta.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 6, 2016 13:19:07 GMT -5
That's fine. Any one else won't be and shouldn't be O'Sullivan, though. Not sure Johnson is ready. No confidence Elias is any better. Maybe Cuevas. Really think they need to do something as Owens is one of the worst pitchers in the mlb right now. Can't give away that game. Owens walked a lot of below average hitters last night and we can't do the same again with oakland. While it's not the end-all and be-all, they have won all three of the games he's pitched. That's not to downplay the BBs either. While he may have walked six of the players he faced (and those included "bad" hitters Lawrie, Rollins ( 32), Eaton, and Frazier (2) with a wild pitch thrown in for good measure), he also struck out two others. He got Abreu looking and Lawrie swinging with his version of "heat". The learning curve is obviously steep but he hasn't given much away so far.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 6, 2016 13:41:40 GMT -5
During the offseason, the front office committed to moving Barnes to relief full-time. It seems incredibly reactionary to go back on that promise a month into the season. Barnes as a starting pitcher won't be throwing 97, and a major reason his secondaries have been so successful this year is because guys have to respect his velocity. Plus, it's not like they desperately need starting pitching depth. Even if he coverts to starting, it's hard to see him winning a rotation spot anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on May 6, 2016 14:04:25 GMT -5
I expect him to be more the durable 4th starter type, at least for this year (which is what his regressed peripherals think too). Which peripherals are you regressing how far too which prior? If you're just assuming his BABIP and HR/FB will be league-average moving forward, then you're doing it wrong.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 6, 2016 14:16:56 GMT -5
Peavy wasn't a rental, he had a year and a half of team control left when acquired. Well, you get the idea. Someone like 2013 Peavy or a little better than that minus the extra year. Someone like Joe Kelly could fit the bill.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on May 6, 2016 14:48:45 GMT -5
Owens numbers are really, really bad, and he had a BB/9 of 9.49, and a FIP over 8. There is no need to waste a home game against a light hitting oakland team with Owens. Practically anyone else would be preferable. That's fine. Any one else won't be and shouldn't be O'Sullivan, though. Not sure Johnson is ready. No confidence Elias is any better. Maybe Cuevas. Owens optioned, O'Sullivan called up, per the team.
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 87
|
Post by brisox on May 6, 2016 14:54:02 GMT -5
I have a hard time imagining the Angels would trade Richards to the Red Sox without receiving at least one of Moncada, Benintendi or Espinoza, and I wouldn't trade six years of either Benintendi or Moncada for two and a half years of Richards. I can't imagine the Red Sox acquiring an impact starter (Richards, Gray, etc.) for anything less than a package of Devers, Swihart, Rodriguez and some lesser prospects, and I am really not confident that would be enough. I think the current roster is strong enough to remain competitive all year and probably but not certainly make the playoffs. I think there is also enough aggregate talent in the system to remain competitive for a decade. Unfortunately, I can't see Henry/Dombrowski passing up the opportunity to strengthen the pitching even at a large cost in future talent. You think a couple years of Richards is worth that on the trade market? Agree to disagree. Rodriguez could be just as good as him this year. I'm more afraid of DD trading Devers or Espinoza for him. There's no shot in hell that they'll get a package like the one you listed though. That's even worse than the Shelby Miller trade. It's all irrelevant now Richards is getting TJ out for year
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,353
|
Post by radiohix on May 6, 2016 14:54:58 GMT -5
Rodriguez is scheduled to make a rehab start on Sunday, so I think we're getting one more Owens start. Owens does not need to pitch for Boston for the foreseeable future. I'd give that spot start to Sean O'Sullivan. He has pitched very well for Pawtucket & has a good K/BB rate, ERA, HR/9 IP, ect. Is that you Dave? ADD:
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 87
|
Post by brisox on May 6, 2016 15:02:50 GMT -5
Rotation 2016 from what I have heard from folks inside the Org 1) Price - he is getting as much leash as he needs he carries himself like an Ace, he is a great guy that is already well liked and even if he isn't killing it right now he gives the team the feeling that they can win any night he pitches and that confidence is having an impact 2) Porcello- he is a red Sox for as long as Dombo is the GM/ President . I am told he is very well liked in the clubhouse and his work ethic is top notch. They feel they got a deal for him and will try to keep him around 3) Buch- Unlike Porcello people are sort of done with Buch , he comes off as flippant in losses and it infuriates the execs. He needs to show something for a game or two and they will try to flip him at the deadline, but if he keeps being up and down he will see himself sinking in the rotation 4) Wright - Wakefield believes he could be better than he was and says he wants to be the greatest knuckle ball pitcher ever and works tirelessly, he will have to fail in a big way to lose his spot or others will have to dominate. 5) Owens - He has had too many solid outings at AAA and the stuff is too good to leave him there, until ER is ready to come back he will get every chance to show what he can do. He is the guy that will push Buch out with one or two more strong outings 6) Kelly - Everyone but him seems to feel he is better in the bullpen that will have to play out in a trade at some point. But we like having the depth he provides in case of injury (ie: Clay) 7) there is a deal that is essentially done sending Garret Richards from the Angels for a slew of players JBJ was one of them, but that may have changed . If the Angels slide in June this will get done, and it will probably cost us some top prospects , but getting stronger pitching is DDs #1 ,2 and 3 priority . seems like a lot , but GR is a cost controlled stud who has already proven he can pitch in the majors. 7) As always, interesting stuff. I like Garret Richards but I wouldn't be too high on dealing JBJ unless the Sox are getting a big corner OF bat (which would move Mookie to CF)and I don't see the Sox going after that kind of a corner bat nor do I see them trying out Rusney in CF at this point to replace JBJ. Are you saying that they would try to flip Buchholz for a corner OF bat and use Bradley and others like a Swihart and other prospects to obtain Richards? I am not really saying anything other than that there has always been interest in Clay because of his stuff , but in the end we always felt he is more valuable to us than as a trade chip , that sentiment seems to have left with Ben. There is nobody who wants to move JBJ , but the deal to get Richards at the time seemed necessary for us. We have had surprising performances from Wright and Porcello and we expect Price to Right himself If ER comes back and pitches well they will probably stand pat.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on May 6, 2016 15:25:19 GMT -5
Owens does not need to pitch for Boston for the foreseeable future. I'd give that spot start to Sean O'Sullivan. He has pitched very well for Pawtucket & has a good K/BB rate, ERA, HR/9 IP, ect. Is that you Dave? ADD: Even a blind squirrel...................................
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 6, 2016 16:04:40 GMT -5
As always, interesting stuff. I like Garret Richards but I wouldn't be too high on dealing JBJ unless the Sox are getting a big corner OF bat (which would move Mookie to CF)and I don't see the Sox going after that kind of a corner bat nor do I see them trying out Rusney in CF at this point to replace JBJ. Are you saying that they would try to flip Buchholz for a corner OF bat and use Bradley and others like a Swihart and other prospects to obtain Richards? I am not really saying anything other than that there has always been interest in Clay because of his stuff , but in the end we always felt he is more valuable to us than as a trade chip , that sentiment seems to have left with Ben. There is nobody who wants to move JBJ , but the deal to get Richards at the time seemed necessary for us. We have had surprising performances from Wright and Porcello and we expect Price to Right himself If ER comes back and pitches well they will probably stand pat. Moving JBJ would require acquiring another starting OF, preferably one who could play CF. It's not like Castillo has made JBJ expendable so far. And they already lack depth. Imagine an injury to Mookie or JBJ right now? They are already short an OF which is being filled by our super utility player who can't play anything but LF out of necessity. JBJ is practically untradeable at this point because of that. They aren't going to create a giant hole in the outfield to possibly, but not necessarily upgrade Buchholz.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on May 6, 2016 16:14:09 GMT -5
As always, interesting stuff. I like Garret Richards but I wouldn't be too high on dealing JBJ unless the Sox are getting a big corner OF bat (which would move Mookie to CF)and I don't see the Sox going after that kind of a corner bat nor do I see them trying out Rusney in CF at this point to replace JBJ. Are you saying that they would try to flip Buchholz for a corner OF bat and use Bradley and others like a Swihart and other prospects to obtain Richards? I am not really saying anything other than that there has always been interest in Clay because of his stuff , but in the end we always felt he is more valuable to us than as a trade chip , that sentiment seems to have left with Ben. There is nobody who wants to move JBJ , but the deal to get Richards at the time seemed necessary for us. We have had surprising performances from Wright and Porcello and we expect Price to Right himself If ER comes back and pitches well they will probably stand pat. I don't count guys pitching a bit better than expected as actually "surprising." I'm not surprised an iota, and no one who read my posts all winter should be, either. All winter long the media wrote that we would have to make a deal for a #2 starter at some point in the season, when the plain reality was that Porcello was a very likely #2, E-Rod a likely #2, Wright a very likely #3, Kelly a tentatively likely #3, and Buchholz likely to very likely to give you #2 to #3 value even counting a slow start and injury. Which is why I spent all winter arguing that there was no need at all to add any kind of a SP. But a good GM has contingency plans for bad outcomes, and all of those guys had some degree of risk. So I'm sure they talked to a lot of teams about potentially available #2s, to find out what the asking price was. I can absolutely buy that the deal they settled on as the best, if they needed to make it, was a Richards deal. But that doesn't mean they ever thought they were likely to have to pull the trigger, let alone that they thought it would be necessary at some point.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on May 7, 2016 7:52:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mannofsteele on May 7, 2016 9:34:12 GMT -5
Trade them Clay Buchholz with Rusney Castillo attached. This is purely a cap driven plea. I accept that I am about to be slammed in response.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 8, 2016 0:24:32 GMT -5
Trade them Clay Buchholz with Rusney Castillo attached. This is purely a cap driven plea. I accept that I am about to be slammed in response. They don't want more salary, they want to shed it with Trout getting a HUGE ($18M) raise next year. Their farm system is barren. Trading Buchholz is an untenable risk, IMO, given his tendency to pitch well after April, and the uncertainty in the Sox rotation. OTOH, if the Sox were willing to part with Swihart and pieces (Ockimey, Marrero, Lakins), I could maybe see the Angels doing it. They wouldn't want Castillo, who's hitting under .250 in AAA, and is owed a bunch. Personally, I'd love to see the Sox shed Castillo's contract (SD?) as long as they didn't need to include too much. But Buchholz has a cheap, team-friendly option. I think trading him is a mistake. They don't need an injured pitcher, even if he *would* be good in 15-18 months. They don't really need another starter, they need the ones they have to start (Price, +/- ERod through no fault of his own) or continue (Porcello, Wright, +/- Buchholz if his last start was a turnaround) pitching well, which they're all capable of. Castillo and Panda are, unfortunately, sunk costs in all likelihood.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on May 8, 2016 7:34:57 GMT -5
Wright's emergence (and Porcello's to a much lesser extent) has really changed the complexion of the Sox fairly significantly and is probably the most significant development of the season so far. Not to undersell your point, but my confidence in Wright to maintain this level of production is low. I expect him to be more the durable 4th starter type, at least for this year (which is what his regressed peripherals think too). Typically, Knuckleballers are exactly that, having stretches of dominance and ones of futility, making them basically .500 ball-players. Which is plenty good, it's just that our other guys have to be good too or we aren't gonna win the World Series. I'm banking on three of the other five starters to be better than Wright over the course of the season (and postseason if we get there.) Anything short of that or a 1995 Wakefield miracle and we're only going to be a playoff contender, not a WS one. It's a thin line to walk, even with our lineup, and I assume that's why people are talking about upgrading the staff with a Sale/Gray type or a rental. Sorry, that was rambling, was thinking through my own approach out loud. I think it's a worthwhile point so I'll post it. Sure, I don't have confidence that Wright will get to the end of the year with a 1.67 ERA. I think he's likely to have a fairly significant regression from that number because, well, 1.67! But, even if he settles at a "durable 4th starter type," that's still a significant change in the complexion of the pitching staff from a guy who was battling for a rotation spot in spring training. I personally think that's a slightly pessimistic projection - I think he could end up anywhere from a #2 type to a #4 in a reasonable confidence band, with some low probability outcomes outside that - but it doesn't really matter. The point is that Wright has filled a big hole in the rotation for the next couple of years after Porcello, Price, Rodriguez and the 10-15 good starts you get from Buccholz each year.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 8, 2016 9:41:12 GMT -5
They should seriously consider claiming Tommy Milone and starting him Tuesday, even if they just end up DFAing him after. He is better than the in-house options right now. His 2016 numbers are bad because of a silly HR/FB, but he is a fine depth option.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on May 8, 2016 10:23:55 GMT -5
Not to undersell your point, but my confidence in Wright to maintain this level of production is low. I expect him to be more the durable 4th starter type, at least for this year (which is what his regressed peripherals think too). Typically, Knuckleballers are exactly that, having stretches of dominance and ones of futility, making them basically .500 ball-players. Which is plenty good, it's just that our other guys have to be good too or we aren't gonna win the World Series. I'm banking on three of the other five starters to be better than Wright over the course of the season (and postseason if we get there.) Anything short of that or a 1995 Wakefield miracle and we're only going to be a playoff contender, not a WS one. It's a thin line to walk, even with our lineup, and I assume that's why people are talking about upgrading the staff with a Sale/Gray type or a rental. Sorry, that was rambling, was thinking through my own approach out loud. I think it's a worthwhile point so I'll post it. Sure, I don't have confidence that Wright will get to the end of the year with a 1.67 ERA. I think he's likely to have a fairly significant regression from that number because, well, 1.67! But, even if he settles at a "durable 4th starter type," that's still a significant change in the complexion of the pitching staff from a guy who was battling for a rotation spot in spring training. I personally think that's a slightly pessimistic projection - I think he could end up anywhere from a #2 type to a #4 in a reasonable confidence band, with some low probability outcomes outside that - but it doesn't really matter. The point is that Wright has filled a big hole in the rotation for the next couple of years after Porcello, Price, Rodriguez and the 10-15 good starts you get from Buccholz each year. I don't know that I'd expect Wright to regress based on any statistical method I know of. Comparing data about different pitchers has become a kind of dead end (see Carleton, Zimmerman). The still interesting analysis is the kind that ericmvan has generously provided here, by comparing pitchers to themselves. By this method, eric has looked at Wright's own stats to see what kind of trends he shows, and then projected from that, but not against other knuckleballers. This is the kind of analysis that Bannister is trying to do for pitchers, and to some extent, Chili Davis is doing for hitters. Each player is his own data set. Why the Red Sox don't hire eric, I can't imagine. TL/DR: there's no confidence in saying that: "Knuckleballers are exactly that, having stretches of dominance and ones of futility, making them basically .500 ball-players." Wright could have a data trend that shows he could become just as good as the pitcher he already is.
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 87
|
Post by brisox on May 9, 2016 7:59:59 GMT -5
I am not really saying anything other than that there has always been interest in Clay because of his stuff , but in the end we always felt he is more valuable to us than as a trade chip , that sentiment seems to have left with Ben. There is nobody who wants to move JBJ , but the deal to get Richards at the time seemed necessary for us. We have had surprising performances from Wright and Porcello and we expect Price to Right himself If ER comes back and pitches well they will probably stand pat. Moving JBJ would require acquiring another starting OF, preferably one who could play CF. It's not like Castillo has made JBJ expendable so far. And they already lack depth. Imagine an injury to Mookie or JBJ right now? They are already short an OF which is being filled by our super utility player who can't play anything but LF out of necessity. JBJ is practically untradeable at this point because of that. They aren't going to create a giant hole in the outfield to possibly, but not necessarily upgrade Buchholz. You missed me saying "at the time" ,times change . I agree completely
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 87
|
Post by brisox on May 9, 2016 8:23:30 GMT -5
I am not really saying anything other than that there has always been interest in Clay because of his stuff , but in the end we always felt he is more valuable to us than as a trade chip , that sentiment seems to have left with Ben. There is nobody who wants to move JBJ , but the deal to get Richards at the time seemed necessary for us. We have had surprising performances from Wright and Porcello and we expect Price to Right himself If ER comes back and pitches well they will probably stand pat. I don't count guys pitching a bit better than expected as actually "surprising." I'm not surprised an iota, and no one who read my posts all winter should be, either. All winter long the media wrote that we would have to make a deal for a #2 starter at some point in the season, when the plain reality was that Porcello was a very likely #2, E-Rod a likely #2, Wright a very likely #3, Kelly a tentatively likely #3, and Buchholz likely to very likely to give you #2 to #3 value even counting a slow start and injury. Which is why I spent all winter arguing that there was no need at all to add any kind of a SP. But a good GM has contingency plans for bad outcomes, and all of those guys had some degree of risk. So I'm sure they talked to a lot of teams about potentially available #2s, to find out what the asking price was. I can absolutely buy that the deal they settled on as the best, if they needed to make it, was a Richards deal. But that doesn't mean they ever thought they were likely to have to pull the trigger, let alone that they thought it would be necessary at some point. I love your positive outlook on things , but FO guys are generally the most miserable stressed out negative people you will ever meet. they are paid to act like the sky is falling at all times. In a perfect world everything you said would be true, but a perfect world has not been the norm for us in a while. This year is playoffs or Bust Dombo has the pressure on like it's never been. He has been in Salem 3 times in the past few weeks , which in his world historically doesn't mean he is looking to promote guys, he is trying to figure out what chips he has. Wright has been a miracle and Porcello is where we all hoped he would be , Price is going to turn it around his stuff is too good for him not to. so depth at 4 and 5 is not hard to come by there was hope that Owens could find his control at the majors but he is just a Yip machine. There is no more money coming DDs way from JH , so he has to either clear cap or trade cost control for cost control in any move he makes, If we can get one more 2-3 quality starter with cost control and it costs us 2 or 3 top 20 guys while our farm is still highly rated. He will make that move. not likely until July . I'll post here if I hear anything percolating
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 9, 2016 8:39:30 GMT -5
If Pedroia found the flaw in Price's delivery that will turn his season around that's awesome. Thursday is a big day. But it makes me wonder why our second baseman found it and not our coaching or scouting staff... Shouldn't have have had people devoted to watching Price to see why his velo was down and his command has been so off?
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on May 9, 2016 8:57:26 GMT -5
Sure, I don't have confidence that Wright will get to the end of the year with a 1.67 ERA. I think he's likely to have a fairly significant regression from that number because, well, 1.67! But, even if he settles at a "durable 4th starter type," that's still a significant change in the complexion of the pitching staff from a guy who was battling for a rotation spot in spring training. I personally think that's a slightly pessimistic projection - I think he could end up anywhere from a #2 type to a #4 in a reasonable confidence band, with some low probability outcomes outside that - but it doesn't really matter. The point is that Wright has filled a big hole in the rotation for the next couple of years after Porcello, Price, Rodriguez and the 10-15 good starts you get from Buccholz each year. I don't know that I'd expect Wright to regress based on any statistical method I know of. Comparing data about different pitchers has become a kind of dead end (see Carleton, Zimmerman). The still interesting analysis is the kind that ericmvan has generously provided here, by comparing pitchers to themselves. By this method, eric has looked at Wright's own stats to see what kind of trends he shows, and then projected from that, but not against other knuckleballers. This is the kind of analysis that Bannister is trying to do for pitchers, and to some extent, Chili Davis is doing for hitters. Each player is his own data set. Why the Red Sox don't hire eric, I can't imagine. TL/DR: there's no confidence in saying that: "Knuckleballers are exactly that, having stretches of dominance and ones of futility, making them basically .500 ball-players." Wright could have a data trend that shows he could become just as good as the pitcher he already is. Well, you missed my point a bit ... I only think he's going to regress somewhat because only Bob Gibson has ever had an ERA of 1.67 or lower in the live ball era, and I'm pretty reluctant to say that Steven Wright will have the best pitching season in history. I think it's certainly possible he's a #2 pitcher over the long haul ... who knows? I don't think it's too early to say that he's likely to be a good starting pitcher for a long time; we're just not sure yet how good. But, hey, after I wrote that Wright's ERA went *down* so maybe Gibson should start worrying about his 1968 season getting eclipsed. edit to add: pfft, just realized you were responding to the post I was responding to, not to mine ... so, carry on.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,784
|
Post by mobaz on May 9, 2016 9:01:37 GMT -5
If Pedroia found the flaw in Price's delivery that will turn his season around that's awesome. Thursday is a big day. But it makes me wonder why our second baseman found it and not our coaching or scouting staff... Shouldn't have have had people devoted to watching Price to see why his velo was down and his command has been so off? I would think that'd be Bannister's job. It really bothered me last year when Hanley and Napoli were quoting Pedroia as finding issues in their swings on video. Why do we have 2 hitting coaches, a pitching coach and "pitcher whisperer" manager plus scouts, video folks analytics folks, etc. and our second baseman is the one trying to solve all these problems?
|
|
|