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.
2017 Red Sox Rotation Discussion
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 30, 2016 12:14:16 GMT -5
What indication is there that Kelly is not going to the pen? It makes all the sense in the world. Side Note: Brentz should not be listed as a bubble spot for the roster for Boston but Rutledge should be. I guess that depends on where you see Kelly heading, for me at least the bullpen seems obvious. 1) It's a bit back in the thread (or another one), but Brisox has posted that he's hearing that Kelly is going to be in Pawtucket, starting. Brisox's sources have proven reliable in the past. 2) Brentz is listed as on the bubble for the Boston roster because he's out of options. Because Marco Hernandez has options remaining, assuming health, I have a hard time thinking they'll keep Hernandez and send Rutledge back unless Hernandez is MUCH better in ST. It could definitely happen, but I think that it's more likely they try to keep as much depth as possible, especially considering the uncertainty at third base. Now, if they sign Plouffe, then yeah, Rutledge is probably going back to Colorado. Thanks for the info. As puzzling as it is, I'm not questioning the source just the decision. Regarding Brentz I need to be more clear. The website here shows the 25 man roster with 27 players, with 1 being C. Smith on the DL (that's doesn't need an explanation and the other is Brentz. Either he shouldn't be listed at all as the 26th man on a 25 man roster or he should be listed along with another player to show who he is battling with for the last spot, otherwise it makes no sense. Is that clear or am I missing something?
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Dec 30, 2016 13:19:16 GMT -5
I just meant left handed. Abad is the better LOOGY so I doubt if Scott would replace him. The original point though is that he has options. I'm sure we'll see him during the year but if everyone is healthy we're not likely to cut anyone just to make space for him and I doubt the Sox will option someone like Barnes for a third lefty. Although I agree, they might option someone like Hembree (bc of Ross ability to get both RH and LH out, multiple innings). Im of, admittedly, probably the small school that believes in having 2 lefty specialists, Especially for the division though.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 30, 2016 16:11:54 GMT -5
I just meant left handed. Abad is the better LOOGY so I doubt if Scott would replace him. The original point though is that he has options. I'm sure we'll see him during the year but if everyone is healthy we're not likely to cut anyone just to make space for him and I doubt the Sox will option someone like Barnes for a third lefty. Although I agree, they might option someone like Hembree (bc of Ross ability to get both RH and LH out, multiple innings). Im of, admittedly, probably the small school that believes in having 2 lefty specialists, Especially for the division though. They can't option Hembree. He's out of options and they'd very likely lose him. They'd have to option Barnes instead who has options. I wouldn't want two LOOGYs, two pitchers who can't eat up innings in relief.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 30, 2016 22:58:04 GMT -5
Although I agree, they might option someone like Hembree (bc of Ross ability to get both RH and LH out, multiple innings). Im of, admittedly, probably the small school that believes in having 2 lefty specialists, Especially for the division though. They can't option Hembree. He's out of options and they'd very likely lose him. They'd have to option Barnes instead who has options. I wouldn't want two LOOGYs, two pitchers who can't eat up innings in relief. The only way I see Scott on the team would be if Wright was traded and they turned Ross (former starter) into the long man and put Kelly in Pawtucket as a starter or if Abad was traded (which wouldn't make sense in our pen because Abad to Scott would be a LOOGY downgrade). Both Hembree and Barnes would also have to be there. Because of catcher experience, Wright would be a difficult trade unless he was packaged with one of our catchers so, it would take a significant trade to do. Highly unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 30, 2016 23:48:45 GMT -5
They can't option Hembree. He's out of options and they'd very likely lose him. They'd have to option Barnes instead who has options. I wouldn't want two LOOGYs, two pitchers who can't eat up innings in relief. The only way I see Scott on the team would be if Wright was traded and they turned Ross (former starter) into the long man and put Kelly in Pawtucket as a starter or if Abad was traded (which wouldn't make sense in our pen because Abad to Scott would be a LOOGY downgrade). Both Hembree and Barnes would also have to be there. Because of catcher experience, Wright would be a difficult trade unless he was packaged with one of our catchers so, it would take a significant trade to do. Highly unlikely. Agreed. It also seems unlikely they'd trade Wright since he's outstanding SP depth. Actually, given their rotation and the possibility (likelihood?) that they're good for over 900 innings, the team is reasonably constructed to be able to carry a RH specialist (Hembree) and a LOOGY (Abad, for now). Thornburg and Ross have minimal platoon splits, meaning they're the prime "8th" and "7th" inning guys, respectively, with each good for more than an inning. And I'd hate to see them send Barnes to AAA, because 1) I think he's going to take a big step forward, and 2) he's eminently capable of multi-inning stints, especially if he keeps his pitch counts reasonable. While I trust brisox based on his terrific track record re: source info, I'm sad to think of Kelly in AAA as a starter; his track record suggests he's just not a starter, and his career relief numbers are quite good. I also believe that, given the almost-stupid-high premium on relievers, that he'd generate (substantially) more value as a trade option pitching in relief versus in AAA as a starter. I also think he'd be valuable to the big club in an 8th-inning shared role. I don't see Scott having a secured place unless there's an injury/terrible performance, or Abad gets moved. I'm not sure MLB batters would "adjust" him into obsolescence (think Okajima), but he just doesn't have the track record yet to know. Hopefully Barnes breaks out or Hembree develops a cutter, and there's an excess of good arms when Smith comes back. I'm not sold on Kimbrel at all, as his performance has followed a fairly steady downward trend since his first couple of years. I'd like to see them have someone able to take his spot if he falters, with depth enough to fill spots down the line. Smith coming back pre-deadline would be a nice addition, but would probably force a shake-up.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 31, 2016 4:35:57 GMT -5
The only way I see Scott on the team would be if Wright was traded and they turned Ross (former starter) into the long man and put Kelly in Pawtucket as a starter or if Abad was traded (which wouldn't make sense in our pen because Abad to Scott would be a LOOGY downgrade). Both Hembree and Barnes would also have to be there. Because of catcher experience, Wright would be a difficult trade unless he was packaged with one of our catchers so, it would take a significant trade to do. Highly unlikely. Agreed. It also seems unlikely they'd trade Wright since he's outstanding SP depth. Actually, given their rotation and the possibility (likelihood?) that they're good for over 900 innings, the team is reasonably constructed to be able to carry a RH specialist (Hembree) and a LOOGY (Abad, for now). Thornburg and Ross have minimal platoon splits, meaning they're the prime "8th" and "7th" inning guys, respectively, with each good for more than an inning. And I'd hate to see them send Barnes to AAA, because 1) I think he's going to take a big step forward, and 2) he's eminently capable of multi-inning stints, especially if he keeps his pitch counts reasonable. While I trust brisox based on his terrific track record re: source info, I'm sad to think of Kelly in AAA as a starter; his track record suggests he's just not a starter, and his career relief numbers are quite good. I also believe that, given the almost-stupid-high premium on relievers, that he'd generate (substantially) more value as a trade option pitching in relief versus in AAA as a starter. I also think he'd be valuable to the big club in an 8th-inning shared role. I don't see Scott having a secured place unless there's an injury/terrible performance, or Abad gets moved. I'm not sure MLB batters would "adjust" him into obsolescence (think Okajima), but he just doesn't have the track record yet to know. Hopefully Barnes breaks out or Hembree develops a cutter, and there's an excess of good arms when Smith comes back. I'm not sold on Kimbrel at all, as his performance has followed a fairly steady downward trend since his first couple of years. I'd like to see them have someone able to take his spot if he falters, with depth enough to fill spots down the line. Smith coming back pre-deadline would be a nice addition, but would probably force a shake-up. You and I share different opinions on the bullpen to be honest. I still don't know what either Kelly, Hembree, or Barnes will bring or what they'll be year to year. I like Kimbrel more than you and I think he'll be solid. Kimbrel, Thornburg, and Ross Jr are the only known quantities in that bullpen. There's decent upside in Kelly and Barnes but you don't know if they can throw strikes game to game or get knocked around from game to game. Kimbrel might not throw strikes at times but he won't get tattooed like Kelly and Barnes do at certain points. There's also a part of me that hopes and prays Workman can comeback and works himself into the mix. After the collapse of his career to this point, it's only a wish really. This bullpen is still the most questionable part of this team outside of the last 2-3 innings, but in fairness that's probably a okay problem to have with all the innings the rotation might give the Sox. This rotation should take off a lot of stress and workload this year if past performance translates into this year and injuries don't completely derail things.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 31, 2016 7:07:21 GMT -5
What indication is there that Kelly is not going to the pen? It makes all the sense in the world. [...]] 1) It's a bit back in the thread (or another one), but Brisox has posted that he's hearing that Kelly is going to be in Pawtucket, starting. Brisox's sources have proven reliable in the past. [...] Here's the exact wording, which makes it a "likelihood" rather than certain which seems right "2017 Projected Sox Roster Dec 20, 2016 at 2:38pm Quote like Post Options Post by brisox on Dec 20, 2016 at 2:38pm FYI - According to internal Sources Roenis Elias does have 1 option left and will be a starter at AAA . With the Addition of Thornburg and the feel that Hembree will make the roster as he is out of options (Farrel Likes him too) . There is likelihood that Kelly goes back to AAA to stretch as a Starter and burn his last option. If Pomeranz stays, Wright becomes the long man" Read more: forum.soxprospects.com/search/results?captcha_id=captcha_search&who_at_least_one=92&display_as=0&search=Search#ixzz4UPsnWWXB
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 31, 2016 15:33:58 GMT -5
get him to boston looked at by doctors & rehab until ST- no WBC If you were to closely examine World Health Organization statistics, getting him examined in the USA is not what you think it is. We're pretty far down the totem pole in virtually every medical category except spending. John Henry's football players have far better doctors than his baseball players.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 31, 2016 16:33:15 GMT -5
get him to boston looked at by doctors & rehab until ST- no WBC If you were to closely examine World Health Organization statistics, getting him examined in the USA is not what you think it is. We're pretty far down the totem pole in virtually every medical category except spending. John Henry's football players have far better doctors than his baseball players. The medical care that professional athletes get isn't anywhere close to the medical care us peons get. I bet doctors spend more than 90 seconds for their appointments that don't start 3 hours late. That is surely the case all over the world too. There is a lot of financial interest in keeping professional athletes on the field.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 31, 2016 20:29:39 GMT -5
If you were to closely examine World Health Organization statistics, getting him examined in the USA is not what you think it is. We're pretty far down the totem pole in virtually every medical category except spending. John Henry's football players have far better doctors than his baseball players. The medical care that professional athletes get isn't anywhere close to the medical care us peons get. I bet doctors spend more than 90 seconds for their appointments that don't start 3 hours late. That is surely the case all over the world too. There is a lot of financial interest in keeping professional athletes on the field. It may be better for athletes but there's still the time element for the doctors who are intentionally in short supply. I also am pretty sure that situation is not the same all over the world. I haven't looked for a while but 3rd world country Philippines ranks significantly higher than the USA. During office hours, I can pretty much walk into any doctor's office without an appointment, see a doctor within an hour and spend as much time as needed and the cost is typically 300 pesos or $6 in American currency. After hours, the emergency rooms and 24 hour clinics aren't limited to extreme emergencies but the wait might be closer to 2-3 hours. The doctors here are also flat out better. Besides the fact that they are a somewhat of a mix of eastern and western medical philosophies, there are also significantly more of them which means that the doctors have significantly more time to keep up with the medical field. One of our family's close friend is our pediatrician. She spends about a week a month at one kind of seminar or another. Doctors there have no time to keep abreast of their fields. Seriously, check out WHO stats, they're pretty telling. lol, don't get me started on attorneys. Happy New Year to y'all. I'm a year ahead of most of you peeps.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Jan 1, 2017 13:19:11 GMT -5
Over/Under 160IP in 2017 by ERod?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 1, 2017 13:30:43 GMT -5
Over/Under 160IP in 2017 by ERod? Definitely under. That's a safe bet to make.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Jan 1, 2017 23:22:22 GMT -5
Over/Under 160IP in 2017 by ERod? It will all depend on health but I don't think it would be crazy if he got to 160. I could see him going 180-190 if he's healthy all year. His second half performance last year really impressed me and I'm excited to see what he'll do in '17.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Jan 2, 2017 10:42:08 GMT -5
We'll try this then. Who throws more Innings in 2017, Erod or Buchholz?
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Jan 2, 2017 13:27:40 GMT -5
We'll try this then. Who throws more Innings in 2017, Erod or Buchholz? Buchholz for 3 reasons..... 1. He is in his walk year & he won't pull himself out for a sore toe. 2. He'll be a #3 or #4 in the rotation there & won't be a #6 or #7 BP arm like he's been here. 3. The RS will be careful on E-Rod due to our "current" SP depth we have.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Jan 2, 2017 13:35:21 GMT -5
Although I agree, they might option someone like Hembree (bc of Ross ability to get both RH and LH out, multiple innings). Im of, admittedly, probably the small school that believes in having 2 lefty specialists, Especially for the division though. They can't option Hembree. He's out of options and they'd very likely lose him. They'd have to option Barnes instead who has options. I wouldn't want two LOOGYs, two pitchers who can't eat up innings in relief. I honestly did not know Hembree was out options. Maybe it's just deep down I don't trust Abad and have a soft spot for Scott. I don't have his numbers right in front of me but he couldn't have pitched more than 10 innings. Having a second "Loogy" can be important when the closer is RH(late inning situations, extra inning, long innings)but I agree when they can't eat innings it doesbt matter. Although Scott has pitched well against RH I hear in the ether...
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 2, 2017 13:37:31 GMT -5
get him to boston looked at by doctors & rehab until ST- no WBC If you were to closely examine World Health Organization statistics, getting him examined in the USA is not what you think it is. We're pretty far down the totem pole in virtually every medical category except spending. John Henry's football players have far better doctors than his baseball players. I just don't buy that. Pro athletes in US get best healthcare in world. The USA healthcare system needs overhaul because it leaves a ton of people without good healthcare. The problem isn't that we don't have world class doctors and equipment though. The problem is that it's a for profit service, when it shouldn't be in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 2, 2017 13:42:33 GMT -5
We'll try this then. Who throws more Innings in 2017, Erod or Buchholz? That's a toss up. Could go either way. I would bet on the young guy that's been very good when healthy. They could both get injured, but Clay has shown he can pitch poorly even when healthy.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 2, 2017 13:45:16 GMT -5
The medical care that professional athletes get isn't anywhere close to the medical care us peons get. I bet doctors spend more than 90 seconds for their appointments that don't start 3 hours late. That is surely the case all over the world too. There is a lot of financial interest in keeping professional athletes on the field. It may be better for athletes but there's still the time element for the doctors who are intentionally in short supply. I also am pretty sure that situation is not the same all over the world. I meant the situation is likely that professional athletes get better healthcare than anyone else in the same country all over the world. The world has gone back to feudalism.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 2, 2017 14:30:14 GMT -5
If you were to closely examine World Health Organization statistics, getting him examined in the USA is not what you think it is. We're pretty far down the totem pole in virtually every medical category except spending. John Henry's football players have far better doctors than his baseball players. I just don't buy that. Pro athletes in US get best healthcare in world. The USA healthcare system needs overhaul because it leaves a ton of people without good healthcare. The problem isn't that we don't have world class doctors and equipment though. The problem is that it's a for profit service, when it shouldn't be in my opinion. Yeah, the disparity between US spending and outcomes (first vs last when looking at per capita $, infant mortality, and lifespan among thirteen wealthy nations) is largely due to incomplete coverage, ludicrously high administrative spending (adjusted for inflation, salaries among high-ranking admin executives has quadrupled in the past 30 years, while physician salaries have stayed flat or slightly decreased), and an over-reliance on extremely expensive diagnostics (especially imaging). There's also our tremendously unhealthy lifestyle and reluctance with addressing root issues in mental health. And drug spending. There is absolutely **not** an "intentional" physician shortage. That's plain silly. But when it takes four years of college, four years of medical school, and 3-9 years of residency training (working "80" HR/wk...more like 100 for surgery, regardless of the largely wink-and-ignore work hour restrictions), plus an average debt in excess of $300,000...well, it's tough to get people to sign up. Especially with the mountains of paperwork and 20-minute mind-numbing pre-authorization calls, all while being told how to do your job by an endless stream of bureaucrats. Regardless, cost is no issue for athletes, and the injuries are often low-acuity or at least, non-emergent. The US does have the best diagnostic/imagining capabilities in the world, and certainly some of the best orthopedic surgeons, particularly the sports med guys. There's little doubt that care for the elite in the US is, if not peerless, unlikely surpassed anywhere. But Jimed's point is a good one: the world is re-approaching feudalism again, which was predictable in the trajectory wealth distribution takes in developed nations. As for the rotation...I still have hope that Rodriguez gets his 160-190. Hopefully, Pomeranz's elbow holds up. They have *some* depth, but ideally they don't tap too deeply into it.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Jan 2, 2017 16:25:30 GMT -5
I just don't buy that. Pro athletes in US get best healthcare in world. The USA healthcare system needs overhaul because it leaves a ton of people without good healthcare. The problem isn't that we don't have world class doctors and equipment though. The problem is that it's a for profit service, when it shouldn't be in my opinion. Yeah, the disparity between US spending and outcomes (first vs last when looking at per capita $, infant mortality, and lifespan among thirteen wealthy nations) is largely due to incomplete coverage, ludicrously high administrative spending (adjusted for inflation, salaries among high-ranking admin executives has quadrupled in the past 30 years, while physician salaries have stayed flat or slightly decreased), and an over-reliance on extremely expensive diagnostics (especially imaging). There's also our tremendously unhealthy lifestyle and reluctance with addressing root issues in mental health. And drug spending. There is absolutely **not** an "intentional" physician shortage. That's plain silly. But when it takes four years of college, four years of medical school, and 3-9 years of residency training (working "80" HR/wk...more like 100 for surgery, regardless of the largely wink-and-ignore work hour restrictions), plus an average debt in excess of $300,000...well, it's tough to get people to sign up. Especially with the mountains of paperwork and 20-minute mind-numbing pre-authorization calls, all while being told how to do your job by an endless stream of bureaucrats. Regardless, cost is no issue for athletes, and the injuries are often low-acuity or at least, non-emergent. The US does have the best diagnostic/imagining capabilities in the world, and certainly some of the best orthopedic surgeons, particularly the sports med guys. There's little doubt that care for the elite in the US is, if not peerless, unlikely surpassed anywhere. But Jimed's point is a good one: the world is re-approaching feudalism again, which was predictable in the trajectory wealth distribution takes in developed nations. As for the rotation...I still have hope that Rodriguez gets his 160-190. Hopefully, Pomeranz's elbow holds up. They have *some* depth, but ideally they don't tap too deeply into it. IMO, the "best of the best" orthopedic surgeons (Andrews) are going to be hired by the top sports leagues/teams around the world. Whether it's the MLB or EPL, that's where they'll be. These guys are servicing very valuable athletes & the owners of said athletes are going to hire the very best.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,914
|
Post by ericmvan on Jan 2, 2017 16:45:23 GMT -5
The only way I see Scott on the team would be if Wright was traded and they turned Ross (former starter) into the long man and put Kelly in Pawtucket as a starter or if Abad was traded (which wouldn't make sense in our pen because Abad to Scott would be a LOOGY downgrade). Both Hembree and Barnes would also have to be there. Because of catcher experience, Wright would be a difficult trade unless he was packaged with one of our catchers so, it would take a significant trade to do. Highly unlikely. Agreed. It also seems unlikely they'd trade Wright since he's outstanding SP depth. Actually, given their rotation and the possibility (likelihood?) that they're good for over 900 innings, the team is reasonably constructed to be able to carry a RH specialist (Hembree) and a LOOGY (Abad, for now). Thornburg and Ross have minimal platoon splits, meaning they're the prime "8th" and "7th" inning guys, respectively, with each good for more than an inning. And I'd hate to see them send Barnes to AAA, because 1) I think he's going to take a big step forward, and 2) he's eminently capable of multi-inning stints, especially if he keeps his pitch counts reasonable. While I trust brisox based on his terrific track record re: source info, I'm sad to think of Kelly in AAA as a starter; his track record suggests he's just not a starter, and his career relief numbers are quite good. I also believe that, given the almost-stupid-high premium on relievers, that he'd generate (substantially) more value as a trade option pitching in relief versus in AAA as a starter. I also think he'd be valuable to the big club in an 8th-inning shared role. I don't see Scott having a secured place unless there's an injury/terrible performance, or Abad gets moved. I'm not sure MLB batters would "adjust" him into obsolescence (think Okajima), but he just doesn't have the track record yet to know. Hopefully Barnes breaks out or Hembree develops a cutter, and there's an excess of good arms when Smith comes back. I'm not sold on Kimbrel at all, as his performance has followed a fairly steady downward trend since his first couple of years. I'd like to see them have someone able to take his spot if he falters, with depth enough to fill spots down the line. Smith coming back pre-deadline would be a nice addition, but would probably force a shake-up. Kelly adds value as a starter if and only if two of the top six guys get hurt simultaneously for more than a start or two, and he significantly outpitches all of Owens, Johnson, and Elias. OTOH, there's a huge downgrade from a guy who pitched as an elite relief ace after his conversion, to a long reliever with big platoon and leverage splits -- especially when you've handed that guy to an incompetent bullpen manager prone to bringing in his worst relievers in high-leverage situations. One might also ask oneself why the team with the best starting rotation in MLB and a legitimate 2016 All-Star starting pitcher as their long man needs a second long man. Instead, of, you know, a guy who may well be the best reliever in the organization. Of course, I do find it credible that a team dumb enough to do the Sale trade, and dumb enough to keep Abad on the roster, would be dumb enough to keep Hembree (who's a probable goner when Smith is healthy, anyway) and send Kelly down. Edit: once everyone other than Smith is healthy, I'd rather see them move Abad than Hembree, but they both should be out of the picture once Smith is healthy, too.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 2, 2017 17:30:39 GMT -5
1) It's a bit back in the thread (or another one), but Brisox has posted that he's hearing that Kelly is going to be in Pawtucket, starting. Brisox's sources have proven reliable in the past. 2) Brentz is listed as on the bubble for the Boston roster because he's out of options. Because Marco Hernandez has options remaining, assuming health, I have a hard time thinking they'll keep Hernandez and send Rutledge back unless Hernandez is MUCH better in ST. It could definitely happen, but I think that it's more likely they try to keep as much depth as possible, especially considering the uncertainty at third base. Now, if they sign Plouffe, then yeah, Rutledge is probably going back to Colorado. Thanks for the info. As puzzling as it is, I'm not questioning the source just the decision. Regarding Brentz I need to be more clear. The website here shows the 25 man roster with 27 players, with 1 being C. Smith on the DL (that's doesn't need an explanation and the other is Brentz. Either he shouldn't be listed at all as the 26th man on a 25 man roster or he should be listed along with another player to show who he is battling with for the last spot, otherwise it makes no sense. Is that clear or am I missing something? 1) Re: Kelly... I don't disagree. 2) On Brentz, first of all, you'll note that the blue italics in which he's listed mean "on the bubble for a roster spot." There are more players in the system than roster spots, so if we're going to include everyone, we need to use that denotation for guys who don't have a clear spot on a roster. Put it this way: you can often read "on the bubble for a roster spot" as "doesn't have a roster spot if everyone is still in the org. and healthy, so take with that what you will." We don't have room to have eight different ways to describe guys on the page, so blue italics is a way to denote, "look, there's not really a spot for this guy." Also, the following is less in response to you and more just something that's worth mentioning out loud every now and then when it comes up naturally, regarding our projections and how we cover the system: because most of what we do is minor-league based, we have steered away from actively projecting guys to get cut. Most of the players in the system are never going to be major leaguers, but they're working their butts off trying to get to the show. Players read this website. Their families and friends read this website. And the family of a guy like, say, Reed Gragnani when he was still around doesn't need to come to this site and read us projecting that he's about to lose his job. Because that's what it is for a lot of these guys. Now, with a guy that's like Brentz, on the bubble for the majors and having other options if he doesn't make the roster, maybe it's not that big a deal. But for a guy who's fighting for a spot in Portland or Salem or Greenville, it's a much different animal. We try to respect that. I don't take joy in being right that a guy's about to lose his job, y'know? And that's why we cut off discussion of that here - there used to be two very popular threads in our forums a while back, the Promotion Watch and the Cut Watch. We ended the latter for this reason as well. Our posters have been great about this as well, which has been awesome. But like I said, since it flowed naturally from the discussion, thought I'd throw this back out there.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 3, 2017 2:34:29 GMT -5
For me, I'm not so sure that Joe Kelly is necessarily a better reliever than starter or that his future is in the pen. Yes, he had more success but, he also changed his pitch mix considerably. It's still a starter's 4 pitch mix but last year, he threw more 4 seam FBs while throwing less 2 seamers, more breaking balls and less change ups. In the WEEI interview today, he mentioned Bannister around the time he was talking about his slider although I'll have to admit most of the conversation flew over my head because it was totally mixed in with Pokemon.
Looking at the Sox situation, you can project 200+ innings for Price, Porcello and Sale but after that we have no starters with any full season history. IF everything went well for the four (ERod, Pomeranz, Wright, Kelly), it might be beneficial to rotate the roles for the middle third of the season. Wright and Kelly to the rotation, Pomeranz to the pen and Rodriguez on limited duty at Pawtucket. That should serve to keep them fresh for the season.
The last third of the season would then be best fit.
lol, in the interview, if I interpreted correctly, when asked if he would play in the WBC if asked, he said yes, there's no Pokemon at Fort Meyers.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 3, 2017 6:57:47 GMT -5
[...] Of course, I do find it credible that a team dumb enough to do the Sale trade, and dumb enough to keep Abad on the roster, would be dumb enough to keep Hembree (who's a probable goner when Smith is healthy, anyway) and send Kelly down. [...] Sometimes I just hate this site.
|
|
|