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 telson13 on Sept 29, 2015 2:12:44 GMT -5
So what do we do with Henry? He has had some bad outings, but his last few have been great. He generates swings and misses at a high rate. He has his warts (seems to be prone to homers, inconsistent control) but he could turn it on at some point if things click. What are your evaluations now that we have seen him for a couple months in the show. I'm comfortable with him as the sixth starter going into next year, but I don't know that he's performed well enough that I want to pencil him into a rotation spot. 21 swings-and-miss his last start. And 17 not long before. Obviously his "deception" is playing well at the MLB level. He's also steadily improving. I think he makes Miley expendable in trade, as long as they bring in a T.O.R. guy. Johnson, Barnes, and maybe an arb dump signee as depth, with Kelly as the sixth starter (or fifth, if Buchholz gets moved). www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/09/23/henry-owens-latest-outing-elevates-his-big-league-success-even-more/tMtSgYWG86jhATQ8bcZQ1N/story.html
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Sept 29, 2015 4:35:37 GMT -5
He met scepticism again and again, but so far he allways had an answer. While I think it'd be okay to put him in AAA first, trading him could be something we'll regret. And honestly: I don't see the point of it. The return would've to be an ace-caliber pitcher (obviously Owens being part of a package) but even then I'm not sure we'll be on the loosing side for that trade in the long run. To have Rodriguez and Owens is really something!
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Sept 29, 2015 5:16:57 GMT -5
I love his durability and workethic. He is the guy to keep.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 29, 2015 7:59:49 GMT -5
I think it's more a symptom of him giving up his changeup for too long. Looking at the game yesterday, his changeup was outstanding, and had the O's hitters on their ears all game long. Lots of waves, weak swings, funky weak contact, and batters shaking their heads as they walked away from the batters box. His change is his best weapon and it's not close. It gets over 25% swings-and-misses, which is approaching best-changeup-in-baseball territory. Of course that rate would have to hold up for another 500 or so changeups to really start talking about that, but still, what he's done to MLB hitters so far with that pitch is extremely impressive.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Sept 29, 2015 8:21:42 GMT -5
Looking at the game yesterday, his changeup was outstanding, and had the O's hitters on their ears all game long. Lots of waves, weak swings, funky weak contact, and batters shaking their heads as they walked away from the batters box. His change is his best weapon and it's not close. It gets over 25% swings-and-misses, which is approaching best-changeup-in-baseball territory. Of course that rate would have to hold up for another 500 or so changeups to really start talking about that, but still, what he's done to MLB hitters so far with that pitch is extremely impressive. Love to see this, I hadn't looked that up yet. Just gotta hope he can keep chipping away at his command issues which will help him reduce the number of HRs he gives up. He induces a good amount of weak contact too.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Sept 29, 2015 8:32:54 GMT -5
Something else I think Owens has going for him is a pretty clean delivery and the fact that he isn't an "all out effort" guy to be successful. That bodes well for longevity and injury-free seasons.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 29, 2015 9:34:01 GMT -5
Something else I think Owens has going for him is a pretty clean delivery and the fact that he isn't an "all out effort" guy to be successful. That bodes well for longevity and injury-free seasons. He has a body and delivery that looks built to last. There's a reason Clay can't finish a season. He's built like a 15 year old cheerleader. Not a knock. Just genetics.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 29, 2015 10:48:57 GMT -5
Looking at the game yesterday, his changeup was outstanding, and had the O's hitters on their ears all game long. Lots of waves, weak swings, funky weak contact, and batters shaking their heads as they walked away from the batters box. His change is his best weapon and it's not close. It gets over 25% swings-and-misses, which is approaching best-changeup-in-baseball territory. Of course that rate would have to hold up for another 500 or so changeups to really start talking about that, but still, what he's done to MLB hitters so far with that pitch is extremely impressive. HIs changeup comes as advertised, at least so far. It's an elite pitch, generating lots of swings-and-misses and seems like an extreme ground-ball pitch. But where's a good place to compare stuff like his contact% overall or on other pitches? I've been busy in the last couple of years and am not that up on the deeper database tools, but I've got some time and want to play around. While I've been impressed by him, his xFIP (4.89) and SIERRA (4.54) aren't very good, so I'd like to dig down a little bit. In general, though, my impression is a little better than I expected. I'd say I was in the "we don't really know about Owens" camp, neither scared off by his lack of velocity nor convinced by his swing-and-miss stuff in MiLB. He seems like a bit of an outlier, so it's hard to get a read on him. But I see a guy that now has two breaking balls he can use at the MLB level (curve and slider) when a year+ ago he really didn't have any. His fastball command is not universally terrible; it comes and goes, which seems more fixable than a guy who's just all over the place. And any time you have a pitch that can rate among the best in the game, you've got something going for you. With that change, his other pitches don't really need to be that great for him to be successful. If he can tighten up his command a little more - and especially get more consistent with command and his breaking balls - my eye-test sees a guy who can anchor a mid-rotation spot for a team with playoff ambitions for years to come. But what does my eye know?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 29, 2015 11:02:42 GMT -5
He met scepticism again and again, but so far he allways had an answer. While I think it'd be okay to put him in AAA first, trading him could be something we'll regret. And honestly: I don't see the point of it. The return would've to be an ace-caliber pitcher (obviously Owens being part of a package) but even then I'm not sure we'll be on the loosing side for that trade in the long run. To have Rodriguez and Owens is really something! I meant that if the Sox signed a TOR FA, then they could trade Miley, put Owens in his spot, and keep Kelly as a sixth starter. I'm definitely not advocating trading Owens, who gets swings and misses like a 1/2, not a 4/5. If his FB command keeps improving, and the HR rate comes down, he seems a safe bet to be better than just a solid 3. Even if he keeps pitching the way he has, he'll probably outperform Miley at a fraction of the cost.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 29, 2015 11:06:45 GMT -5
His change is his best weapon and it's not close. It gets over 25% swings-and-misses, which is approaching best-changeup-in-baseball territory. Of course that rate would have to hold up for another 500 or so changeups to really start talking about that, but still, what he's done to MLB hitters so far with that pitch is extremely impressive. HIs changeup comes as advertised, at least so far. It's an elite pitch, generating lots of swings-and-misses and seems like an extreme ground-ball pitch. But where's a good place to compare stuff like his contact% overall or on other pitches? I've been busy in the last couple of years and am not that up on the deeper database tools, but I've got some time and want to play around. While I've been impressed by him, his xFIP (4.89) and SIERRA (4.54) aren't very good, so I'd like to dig down a little bit. In general, though, my impression is a little better than I expected. I'd say I was in the "we don't really know about Owens" camp, neither scared off by his lack of velocity nor convinced by his swing-and-miss stuff in MiLB. He seems like a bit of an outlier, so it's hard to get a read on him. But I see a guy that now has two breaking balls he can use at the MLB level (curve and slider) when a year+ ago he really didn't have any. His fastball command is not universally terrible; it comes and goes, which seems more fixable than a guy who's just all over the place. And any time you have a pitch that can rate among the best in the game, you've got something going for you. With that change, his other pitches don't really need to be that great for him to be successful. If he can tighten up his command a little more - and especially get more consistent with command and his breaking balls - my eye-test sees a guy who can anchor a mid-rotation spot for a team with playoff ambitions for years to come. But what does my eye know? We've had this argument before, but if you subscribe to the theory that some pitchers have a weak contact skill, any stat based on FIP/BABIP is not going to be kind to them because those stats are based on the assumption that every pitcher will give up the same contact as every other pitcher over a long enough period of time. So far it seems Owens does have a weak contact skill that he's shown throughout the minors, but of course sample sizes... Owens is much more interesting than most pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 29, 2015 11:29:22 GMT -5
HIs changeup comes as advertised, at least so far. It's an elite pitch, generating lots of swings-and-misses and seems like an extreme ground-ball pitch. But where's a good place to compare stuff like his contact% overall or on other pitches? I've been busy in the last couple of years and am not that up on the deeper database tools, but I've got some time and want to play around. While I've been impressed by him, his xFIP (4.89) and SIERRA (4.54) aren't very good, so I'd like to dig down a little bit. In general, though, my impression is a little better than I expected. I'd say I was in the "we don't really know about Owens" camp, neither scared off by his lack of velocity nor convinced by his swing-and-miss stuff in MiLB. He seems like a bit of an outlier, so it's hard to get a read on him. But I see a guy that now has two breaking balls he can use at the MLB level (curve and slider) when a year+ ago he really didn't have any. His fastball command is not universally terrible; it comes and goes, which seems more fixable than a guy who's just all over the place. And any time you have a pitch that can rate among the best in the game, you've got something going for you. With that change, his other pitches don't really need to be that great for him to be successful. If he can tighten up his command a little more - and especially get more consistent with command and his breaking balls - my eye-test sees a guy who can anchor a mid-rotation spot for a team with playoff ambitions for years to come. But what does my eye know? We've had this argument before, but if you subscribe to the theory that some pitchers have a weak contact skill, any stat based on FIP/BABIP is not going to be kind to them because those stats are based on the assumption that every pitcher will give up the same contact as every other pitcher over a long enough period of time. So far it seems Owens does have a weak contact skill that he's shown throughout the minors, but of course sample sizes... Owens is much more interesting than most pitchers.That is definitely true ... I think the guy's fascinating. As for the other point, I don't think there's much to be gleaned from his xFIP/SIERRA right now. He's volatile, some of his games are great, a few have been terrible. Maybe that's adjusting to MLB, maybe that's just how he is, who knows? Too early to get more from stats than just getting first indicators of how he's gonna be , imo.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 29, 2015 11:33:13 GMT -5
Something else I think Owens has going for him is a pretty clean delivery and the fact that he isn't an "all out effort" guy to be successful. That bodes well for longevity and injury-free seasons. He has a body and delivery that looks built to last. There's a reason Clay can't finish a season. He's built like a 15 year old cheerleader. Not a knock. Just genetics. Owens is listed at 6-6, 220; Buchholz at 6-3, 190. Owens really looks like his body is more durable to you?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 29, 2015 11:35:17 GMT -5
He met scepticism again and again, but so far he allways had an answer. While I think it'd be okay to put him in AAA first, trading him could be something we'll regret. And honestly: I don't see the point of it. The return would've to be an ace-caliber pitcher (obviously Owens being part of a package) but even then I'm not sure we'll be on the loosing side for that trade in the long run. To have Rodriguez and Owens is really something! I meant that if the Sox signed a TOR FA, then they could trade Miley, put Owens in his spot, and keep Kelly as a sixth starter. I'm definitely not advocating trading Owens, who gets swings and misses like a 1/2, not a 4/5. If his FB command keeps improving, and the HR rate comes down, he seems a safe bet to be better than just a solid 3. Even if he keeps pitching the way he has, he'll probably outperform Miley at a fraction of the cost. I disagree with the idea that Owens is likely to outperform Miley next year. Reasons why: - Despite the tons of swings-and-misses, Owens' overall strikeout rate is actually below-average for a starting pitcher. That's largely because his first strike percentage (54.9%) is 11th-worst among starting pitchers with 50+ IP. You have to get two strikes on a hitter before striking him out, and at his current level of command, Owens is struggling to get there.
- Because of his K- and BB-heavy profile, Owens can't get as deep into games as Miley can (Owens is at 5.8 IP/G this year both in the majors and AAA, whereas Miley is 6.1 IP/G both this year and over his career). Those extra few outs add value for a team with a few other inefficient projected starters (Rodriguez in particular) and bullpen questions.
- Owens has the higher ceiling, but a far lower floor. If you're penciling in Buchholz into next year's rotation, I'd rather my fifth option be a low-risk innings-eater-type than a higher-risk/higher-reward-type.
- Most importantly, Miley looks better on a per-innings basis both by 2015 stats and projected 2015 stats (ZiPS: 3.96 ERA/3.84 FIP for Miley, 4.33 ERA/4.48 FIP for Owens; Steamer: 4.15 ERA/4.06 FIP for Miley, 4.46 ERA/4.68 FIP for Owens).
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 29, 2015 12:08:32 GMT -5
He has a body and delivery that looks built to last. There's a reason Clay can't finish a season. He's built like a 15 year old cheerleader. Not a knock. Just genetics. Owens is listed at 6-6, 220; Buchholz at 6-3, 190. Owens really looks like his body is more durable to you? I doubt that Buchholz is 190. Owens is what 22? He'll easily put 15-20 pounds on over the next few years. So yeah, 6'7" 240lb is better than a professional athlete who didn't have a good diet at 28-29 years old.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 29, 2015 12:10:03 GMT -5
It's hard to fathom that Owens has added 50 pounds since he was drafted.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Sept 29, 2015 12:14:25 GMT -5
He has a body and delivery that looks built to last. There's a reason Clay can't finish a season. He's built like a 15 year old cheerleader. Not a knock. Just genetics. Owens is listed at 6-6, 220; Buchholz at 6-3, 190. Owens really looks like his body is more durable to you? Yes.....He looks more sturdy overall on the eye test.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Sept 29, 2015 12:15:05 GMT -5
Appearance has little to do with durability anyway.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Sept 29, 2015 12:26:33 GMT -5
Appearance has little to do with durability anyway. Well that's good news. For a minute I was worried Clay might struggle with health issues in his career.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 29, 2015 12:40:30 GMT -5
I'm in this camp too. I view the rotation (at least for now) next year as beginning with ACQUISITION, Buchholz, Rodriguez, Porcello, 5th guy. Its great to have depth and also competition for that 5th spot, but I think we currently have 1 too many guys in that territory. There is redundancy there, and I think we'd be best to trade MIley from that group, whose trade value should be decent. That would leave Owens, Kelly, Wright, and Brian Johnson as the top options for that spot and depth which I think is solid.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 29, 2015 12:55:35 GMT -5
As impressed by Owens as I have been, I'm completely comfortable with the idea of his starting out in AAA as depth. I think in terms of six starters because that's really the minimum you need. I don't think we can count on Johnson for next year (maybe he's ok, maybe not), Kelly and Wright are out of options, iirc, and after Owens, we're years away from a starter with options in AAA (unless Barnes takes a step forward).
Besides, Owens could use some finishing polish.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Sept 29, 2015 13:06:45 GMT -5
I would prefer to be safe and call him the 6th starter as well. I also think he's a major trade candidate too thiough, so we'll see.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Sept 29, 2015 14:11:48 GMT -5
I'm guessing this is sarcasm. Well played, but with Owens, my belief is that unless he develops near pinpoint control there's no chance to rise above a 3/4. That "deception" won't play vs. MLB hitters, and his FB is, in terms of MLB starters, is pedestrian. The Change is very good when it's on, but it's not enough. And I will be a rare thing to improve his control enough to lower his BB/9 below 3.0 at the MLB level IMHO. Like I said, 4/5s are important and needed, but I've seen this guy almost a dozen times over the years. He's no ace, near ace or #2. I know I'm not no expert, but based on this front office's track record, neither are they. I have a hard time believing he peaks at what Miley is giving us this year, which is a solid backend of rotation year. Considering the state of our pitching I'm surprised so many here have targeted Miley as a trade candidate. He has been the most reliable pitcher we've had all year. I believe he has 2 starts left and a chance for 200 IP, the only man on the staff that will even come close. His XFip nearly matches his non April ERA of 4.00. He has 17 QS and should finish with 18 or 19 with 200IP something he's been very consistent about. HIS ERA+ is 104 or just above average, so he appears to me to be a #3 type pitcher and not the #4 or#5 he's being cast as. This being his first year in the AL I expect him to pitcher closer to his XFIP especially with Hanley removed from the outfield equation and possibly all together in fact I expect minuscule overall improvement as he'll be 29 YO all next year with his second year in the AL and he likely has defensive stalwart back in young catching phenom Vasquez. His contract is as follows; 16:$6M, 17:$8.75M, 18:$12M club option ($0.5M buyout). The plan according to all of us is to sign/trade for at least an ace like pitcher. E-Rod at 23 next year still will have the harnesses on him with an IP cap, Buchholz may be the biggest enigma ever so who knows how many innings we'll get out of him, other than less than 200 IP. Porcello sure seems to have righted the ship and has 157 IP right now easily the second most of the staff but with an overall ERA over 5.00 if he becomes your most dependable holdover pitcher going into next season then we have bigger problems than merely signing an ace. Therefore all factors considered while I'm not opposed to trading Miley I certainly am opposed to it for this offseason. I think we'd be better served by waiting a year for a few reasons including my belief his performance will climb and his value increase. and in an uncertain staff we need his steadiness and innings pitched ALOT more than anyone who wants to trade him this offseason appears to be aware of.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Sept 29, 2015 14:23:35 GMT -5
He has a body and delivery that looks built to last. There's a reason Clay can't finish a season. He's built like a 15 year old cheerleader. Not a knock. Just genetics. Owens is listed at 6-6, 220; Buchholz at 6-3, 190. Owens really looks like his body is more durable to you? I'd guess yes, one is 23 and likely to add weight while the other is 31 and looks not much different from when I first saw him pitch in AA in 2007. Also while 3 inches and 30 pounds sound likely the same kinda body the 3+ extra inches coming on a downward plane makes it easier on his body too.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Sept 29, 2015 15:33:58 GMT -5
Something else I think Owens has going for him is a pretty clean delivery and the fact that he isn't an "all out effort" guy to be successful. That bodes well for longevity and injury-free seasons. He has a body and delivery that looks built to last. There's a reason Clay can't finish a season. He's built like a 15 year old cheerleader. Not a knock. Just genetics. Sometimes reading some of your quotes are just so entertaining and hilarious. We have got some serious comics on here.....and I must admit I could not stop laughing at the above line. Thanks for a good laugh!
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 29, 2015 22:16:21 GMT -5
I meant that if the Sox signed a TOR FA, then they could trade Miley, put Owens in his spot, and keep Kelly as a sixth starter. I'm definitely not advocating trading Owens, who gets swings and misses like a 1/2, not a 4/5. If his FB command keeps improving, and the HR rate comes down, he seems a safe bet to be better than just a solid 3. Even if he keeps pitching the way he has, he'll probably outperform Miley at a fraction of the cost. I disagree with the idea that Owens is likely to outperform Miley next year. Reasons why: - Despite the tons of swings-and-misses, Owens' overall strikeout rate is actually below-average for a starting pitcher. That's largely because his first strike percentage (54.9%) is 11th-worst among starting pitchers with 50+ IP. You have to get two strikes on a hitter before striking him out, and at his current level of command, Owens is struggling to get there.
- Because of his K- and BB-heavy profile, Owens can't get as deep into games as Miley can (Owens is at 5.8 IP/G this year both in the majors and AAA, whereas Miley is 6.1 IP/G both this year and over his career). Those extra few outs add value for a team with a few other inefficient projected starters (Rodriguez in particular) and bullpen questions.
- Owens has the higher ceiling, but a far lower floor. If you're penciling in Buchholz into next year's rotation, I'd rather my fifth option be a low-risk innings-eater-type than a higher-risk/higher-reward-type.
- Most importantly, Miley looks better on a per-innings basis both by 2015 stats and projected 2015 stats (ZiPS: 3.96 ERA/3.84 FIP for Miley, 4.33 ERA/4.48 FIP for Owens; Steamer: 4.15 ERA/4.06 FIP for Miley, 4.46 ERA/4.68 FIP for Owens).
1) Owens is a rookie; his command is likely to improve at least a small amount given that he's 23. The idea that his first 50 innings in MLB--with a 7.1 K/9 and 3.1 BB/9 rates (versus 6.9 and 2.9, respectively, for Miley) are representative of future performance ignores the general trend of young pitchers improving with MLB experience. Frankly, if his first-strike percentage is that bad, and he's still getting over 7 K/9, I'm pretty confident that he'll be substantially better in terms of strikeouts next year, because I find it similarly hard to believe he'll continue to struggle this badly to throw early strikes. 2) Miley is averaging 6.1 innings, Owens 5.8. That's a difference of 0.3, or ***one out***, not "an extra few." I think it's a fair bet (particularly with his recent excellent starts going late into several games) that Owens can manage to average one more out per game next year. Really, you're arguing and incredibly minute difference here, one that, again, Owens will probably erase or reverse with more MLB time under his belt. 3) This is a matter of personal preference. I don't see replacing 200 innings of .500 W%/ 4.2-4.4 ERA as difficult, no matter how it has to be cobbled together. Trading money frees significant salary (8M I think?) to be spent on a TOR FA, and returns probably some A-ball high-upside talent, ideally. Plus, it gets a young pitcher with upside in the MLB rotation where he belongs. If you're worried about durability, Owens has been healthy his whole career. And the cost savings could also be put towards shoring up the 'pen...or trading Miley used directly for that purpose. 4) The numbers are what they are, I can't argue that. But I think the Sox are better off getting Owens MLB experience so that they both know what they have, and what to do with him. I don't think it's a stretch at all to think Owens can pitch next year to a 3.80-4.20 ERA. And while FIP is a useful tool, because it's less noisy than ERA, it's also a somewhat contrived stat: it measures surrogate markers of the true outcome (runs allowed), rather than the outcome itself. There are problems with FIP's utility in that pitchers who pitch to weak contact (Owens and his CH, and GB tendencies) but give up mistake HR tend to be markedly underrated. Owens has had a couple of very poor outings (early in, btw) that really killed his FIP, too. FWIW, compare Owens's to Lester's first season. Lester had big command issues early on as well, but was outstanding the next year. At the same age. Other than the IP difference, I think all are very valid points. I'm just more willing to bet on Owens having success. I do see your point on Buchholz, who can't be remotely counted on. But at the same time, I've got to think Mikey could return an excellent bullpen arm and/or prospects. At some point, they need spots for guys like Owens, Johnson, Wright, even Kelly. If they get a TOR pitcher via FA, that means FA, Buchholz, Rodriguez, Porcello, Miley, Kelly, Owens, Johnson, Wright, Barnes. I'm OK with taking a minor risk at the back end to continue the development of those young starters (Owens in particular). That's ten starters for five spots. Plenty of depth for a move in the number-five spot. Hell, Dempster was the five in 2013, and that worked out just fine.
|
|
|