Series Thread Disclaimer: The SoxProspects Moderators will be somewhat liberal in policing the Red Sox "Series" Threads. Some of the Ground Rules are applied loosely in here, as we understand that there is a tendency to want to react (or overreact) to every play of a Sox game with one line reactionary posts. Those posts are okay in the Red Sox Series threads to a point - we certainly appreciate the passion. Just try not to overdo it, and try to maintain some semblance of reason. In addition, please don't let those type of posts spill over to other more substantive threads, where they may be deleted. -The Management
So, how good has the Sox setup relief been? Rankings of the entire pen are a bit biased ...
(No, you won't be seeing that much more of me ... I'm in bed after minor surgery and I was curious ...)
(I counted Chapman and Britton as closers and Betances and Brach as setup guys. Ditto with the guys who lost their jobs--Neftali Feliz and Francisco Rodriguez are closers and Corey Knebel and Justin Wilson are setup guys. IOW, it's an assessment of the initial roster. If I'm missing any other closer changes, let me know.)
The Sox rank:
28th in setup IP 11th in xFIP 4th in ERA 4th in ERA - xFIP 5th in WPA/IP 3rd in WPA adjusted for LI / IP. 28th in setup leverage management (WPA - LI-adjusted WPA, per IP)
The setup staff appears to be rocking some combination of low BABIP, low HR/FB, and clutch pitching (the spreadsheet I threw together doesn't have the right data to go deeper there). OTOH, The Sox are one of just three teams with an inverse correlation between setup reliever WPA (adjusted for LI) and LI.
It's arguable that the mild backwards correlation of setup quality to setup leverage-use is a function of instead matching pitchers to the right hitters. Which is to say, you can't bury Farrell for the former without knowing how much of the ERA - xFIP difference he's responsible for. Among the 30 teams, there is a tendency (r = .29, p = .12) for ERA - xFIP to be opposite setup leverage management, so I think this may be a legit tradeoff.
Now, the big question, the one that motivated this study, is of course: where would they rank without Tyler Thornburg?
Last Edit: Jun 14, 2017 16:11:24 GMT -5 by ericmvan
"You either need some medication or you're an a******." -- David Ortiz correctly diagnosing Bobby Valentine
Post by soxfansince67 on Jun 14, 2017 16:19:10 GMT -5
As we get ready for the game, something interesting to note - just looking at latest WAR - Mookie has zoomed to 4th at 2.9 (Judge at 4.1, Trout at 3.4, Dickerson at 3.0). And he's not really caught fire - at least with consistency - yet. JBJ is in a big tie - 7 at 2.0, currently listed as 19th on ESPN.
Trouble on the way (Valasquez). Going to need more runs and Farrell's got to manage the pen for another 5 innings. Not Good.
Seriously? Velazquez has been every bit as good as BJ in Pawtucket. !st opportunity wasn't as good as planned, but BJ has had opportunities that he hasn't seized either. No reason to expect HV shouldn't be reasonably effective - or at least as effective as BJ.
“There is only one way to avoid criticism: Do nothing, say nothing, and be nothing” ~ Aristotle