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.
Groome - 5/9/18: Tommy John Surgery; 8/21/19: He's back!
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 8:39:18 GMT -5
Using your excess minor league talent to acquire MLB pitching is just as legitimate as developing it yourself. Using the extra cash you have on hand to buy pitching because you've developed an entire lineup on your own is legitimate. The Red Sox didn't develop pitching for the 2018 team either. The difference between that team and this is that last year the pitching they went outside of the organization to get was very good, and this year the pitching they went out of the organization to get was very poor. The Red Sox play in a pitching-hostile environment (not just the park, but the division), and there's been plenty of research showing that teams in more pitching-friendly environments are more successful when it comes to developing pitching. Which is to say, I think a "develop hitters, buy pitchers" strategy is probably a smart one of this team. That, and being more aggressive about moving guys to the bullpen. |
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Aug 22, 2019 9:49:18 GMT -5
I would like to see more draft capital going towards pitching. A few weeks back I looked up the last 5-6 drafts and only about 1/3 of our top 100 overall picks went towards pitchers. Also adding a few in as 2nd or 3rd pieces doesn’t help depth and there’s always a bargain or two position player out there every offseason in free agency.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,355 
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 22, 2019 10:15:04 GMT -5
Using your excess minor league talent to acquire MLB pitching is just as legitimate as developing it yourself. Using the extra cash you have on hand to buy pitching because you've developed an entire lineup on your own is legitimate. The Red Sox didn't develop pitching for the 2018 team either. The difference between that team and this is that last year the pitching they went outside of the organization to get was very good, and this year the pitching they went out of the organization to get was very poor. The Red Sox play in a pitching-hostile environment (not just the park, but the division), and there's been plenty of research showing that teams in more pitching-friendly environments are more successful when it comes to developing pitching. Which is to say, I think a "develop hitters, buy pitchers" strategy is probably a smart one of this team. That, and being more aggressive about moving guys to the bullpen. I totally agree with this. Hitters are easier to project, too. Taking an 18-22 year old pitcher thinking he’ll help in three years is a complete crapshoot. He has to a) develp and b) stay healthy. Both big “if”s. But if you have redundancy at offensive positions, you can let other teams take the pitcher-development risk for you. The line of [Moncada], Devers, Chavis, and Dalbec at 3B is a great example. Moncada yields Sale, Devers is our guy, and the other two could be flexibility going forward. |
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 11:10:35 GMT -5
The Red Sox play in a pitching-hostile environment (not just the park, but the division), and there's been plenty of research showing that teams in more pitching-friendly environments are more successful when it comes to developing pitching. Which is to say, I think a "develop hitters, buy pitchers" strategy is probably a smart one of this team. That, and being more aggressive about moving guys to the bullpen. I totally agree with this. Hitters are easier to project, too. Taking an 18-22 year old pitcher thinking he’ll help in three years is a complete crapshoot. He has to a) develp and b) stay healthy. Both big “if”s. But if you have redundancy at offensive positions, you can let other teams take the pitcher-development risk for you. The line of [Moncada], Devers, Chavis, and Dalbec at 3B is a great example. Moncada yields Sale, Devers is our guy, and the other two could be flexibility going forward. The interesting thing too is that if you look at the "pitching factory" organizations in recent history, it's not necessarily that they shy away from 20 year old top-100 guys or anything, but they're not just doing it with a parade of those guys. Like Atlanta came into the season with a whole rotation's worth of guys who were theoretically knocking on the door, and they still had to go out and sign Keuchel. It's just too hard to get everyone to develop on the same timeline, and be healthy at the same time. It seems like If you want to really build around pitching, you have to be looking in every possible player pool all the time. Tampa Bay and Cleveland are good examples, they do develop their own prospects well, but they pick up other people's broken prospects and develop them, and they do well by buying low on journeyman types like Eovaldi and Bauer and then selling them for a profit. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 22, 2019 15:34:44 GMT -5
I would like to see more draft capital going towards pitching. A few weeks back I looked up the last 5-6 drafts and only about 1/3 of our top 100 overall picks went towards pitchers. Also adding a few in as 2nd or 3rd pieces doesn’t help depth and there’s always a bargain or two position player out there every offseason in free agency. Top 100 picks is kind of an arbitrary cut off though, no? That's the top 2 or 3 picks in a given draft. In a sample size that small (3 of last 9, in the four-year sample you probably were looking at), that could just be how the board fell in a given year. I, for one, do not want them taking a player they think is inferior just because he happens to be a pitcher. There also might be something to using later picks on pitchers where it might be less risky. That's a gamble that seems to have worked with, say, a Thaddeus Ward last year, and the Zeferjahn-Song-Murphy trio this year. When we release the interview I just did with Mike Rikard, listen for the tidbit about Murphy as it relates to Ward. But anyway, back on point - if you can get good pitching talent on Day 2, does it matter that the pitcher wasn't drafted on Day 1? |
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Aug 23, 2019 14:03:01 GMT -5
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,753
|
Post by mobaz on Aug 24, 2019 7:45:21 GMT -5
Glad we didn't trade him and Dalbec to the Mets for Diaz or whatever.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Duck on Aug 29, 2019 11:42:38 GMT -5
With the GCL shut down, do we know where Groome will appear next?
|
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Aug 29, 2019 12:07:16 GMT -5
With the GCL shut down, do we know where Groome will appear next? Nothing confirmed...just some speculation he could see an appearance with Lowell. |
|
|
