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 jimed14 on Jan 18, 2019 14:49:32 GMT -5
The Red Sox traded for Andrew Bailey before the 2012 season. And not re-signing Papelbon was the right move.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaydouble on Jan 18, 2019 14:52:16 GMT -5
Relievers are good until they're bad. Relievers are bad until they're good. I had hoped that the Red Sox winning 108 games and the World Series with a bullpen that everybody thought was a disaster would kill this weird trendy belief that a name-brand bullpen is the most important thing you can have (thanks Royals). You guys remember that the Yankees assembled "the greatest bullpen of all-time" last year too, right? They'll figure it out. Even if it's rocky, they'll still have a very good shot at the playoffs, and then they can just do the rover thing again.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 18, 2019 16:12:58 GMT -5
Relievers are good until they're bad. Relievers are bad until they're good. I had hoped that the Red Sox winning 108 games and the World Series with a bullpen that everybody thought was a disaster would kill this weird trendy belief that a name-brand bullpen is the most important thing you can have (thanks Royals). You guys remember that the Yankees assembled "the greatest bullpen of all-time" last year too, right? They'll figure it out. Even if it's rocky, they'll still have a very good shot at the playoffs, and then they can just do the rover thing again. I think most fans agree we got lucky that almost everyone was lights out. Barnes and Kelly weren't no names. Only one no name guy stepped forward in Braiser. Now were going to fully trust him and hope for a few more guys to be just like him? Last year Braiser spent half the year in the minors because we had depth. Now your going to be putting this guys in the bullpen from day one, all while you break in a new closer? All while you have crazy depth everywhere else? No one is asking for a Yankees bullpen, just to reduce the risk we currently have in our bullpen. Right now were counting on Braiser being the player he was and no one knows if he will. Wright being healthy and staying healthy. A long list of guys coming off injury or unproven guys. I feel better if guys like Thornburg and Smith weren't coming off of injuries that mean they might never be the same or could take a long time to recover from. Or if Feltman and Hernandez were sitting at AAA ready to help. Right now they could be fine if everything breaks just right or that bullpen could implode. Having no relievers making what over 2 million is about the total opposite of the Yankees. Right now the A's are outspending us on bullpen arms. We clearly have the worst bullpen of the top 4 teams last year. You can debate the Indians, but they have Hand who's better and more proven then anyone we have.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,684
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 18, 2019 16:26:57 GMT -5
The Red Sox traded for Andrew Bailey before the 2012 season. And not re-signing Papelbon was the right move. All true, but Bailey wasn't very good in 2012 and I think Papelbon still was. The Red Sox in 2012 were a disaster area so it wouldn't have mattered who closed for them. The problem is that in 2019 the Red Sox are probably in a neck and neck race with the Yankees while they still hold the services of Chris Sale, Xander Bogaerts, JD Martinez, and Rick Porcello while Betts and Bradley are still on the team. 2019 is a crucial year for the Red Sox because if they don't retain Betts and/or the farm system doesn't replace departing/declining players well enough, the other seasons might not have as much promise, especially with the threat of a likely strike coming up soon. Thank God for 2018 - nobody can ever take that away, but now it's 2019 and they have to try to capitalize for this season before the "superteam" window starts to close. That doesn't mean they should throw 60 million at Kimbrel, but the point I'm making is that the Bailey/Papelbon situation took place in a different contention scenario.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 18, 2019 16:28:42 GMT -5
And not re-signing Papelbon was the right move. All true, but Bailey wasn't very good in 2012 and I think Papelbon still was. The Red Sox in 2012 were a disaster area so it wouldn't have mattered who closed for them. Exactly. The point the previous poster made was that the Red Sox didn't spring for a proven closer when they lost Papelbon. They did, he got hurt, stunk when he wasn't, and it didn't matter anyway. And they'd have been worse in 2013 with Papelbon blowing things up instead of Uehara nailing them down. The lesson of the 2011-12 offseason is definitely not "you need a proven closer."
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,684
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 18, 2019 16:33:24 GMT -5
Relievers are good until they're bad. Relievers are bad until they're good. I had hoped that the Red Sox winning 108 games and the World Series with a bullpen that everybody thought was a disaster would kill this weird trendy belief that a name-brand bullpen is the most important thing you can have (thanks Royals). You guys remember that the Yankees assembled "the greatest bullpen of all-time" last year too, right? They'll figure it out. Even if it's rocky, they'll still have a very good shot at the playoffs, and then they can just do the rover thing again. The Yankees didn't lose last year because of "the greatest bullpen of all-time". They lost because their starters weren't very good, the defense wasn't great, and their offense was one dimensional. That's like saying you shouldn't have the finest SS of his generation in Ernie Banks because what good did it do the Cubs - they didn't win the World Series or pennant? And I don't think they can do the "rover" thing as easily as you point out. The Sox in 2018 were able to take advantage of a huge comfortable lead. They were able to rest their starting pitchers. Nobody was taxed in the pressure of a race with NY to avoid the Wild Card game, because the pennant race was over by August. That's probably not the case this season. That scenario is not as likely this year. The Red Sox might not be able to use rovers to the extent they did last season. Everything last season was the perfect storm. Everything during that season that could have gone right seemingly went right.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 18, 2019 16:35:37 GMT -5
The Red Sox traded for Andrew Bailey before the 2012 season. And not re-signing Papelbon was the right move. A big part of that was getting a first round pick that turned into Brain Johnson. Also we traded Josh Reddick to get Bailey and he went on to produce 16.4 bwar with 4.6, 2.4, 3.2, 3.7, and 2.5 seasons. While Papelbon went 1.6, 1.4, 2.9, and 1.4 bwar for 7.3 bwar over the four year deal before falling a part in the vesting option year. I mean if that is the example of why not to sign Kimbrel I'm not sure it makes sense. It's not like you couldn't have still signed Koji he was a set-up guy his whole career before Boston. We won two championships and there are a ton of moving parts. I just think Papelbon is more a story of what can go wrong, than it was 100% the right move. No Reddick would kill us for years and caused us to trade for deadweight like Craig.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,684
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 18, 2019 16:39:31 GMT -5
All true, but Bailey wasn't very good in 2012 and I think Papelbon still was. The Red Sox in 2012 were a disaster area so it wouldn't have mattered who closed for them. Exactly. The point the previous poster made was that the Red Sox didn't spring for a proven closer when they lost Papelbon. They did, he got hurt, stunk when he wasn't, and it didn't matter anyway. And they'd have been worse in 2013 with Papelbon blowing things up instead of Uehara nailing them down. The lesson of the 2011-12 offseason is definitely not "you need a proven closer." As you said, the Red Sox won the 2013 World Series with a very dominating, but unproven closer in Uehara. although they started the season with "proven" closer Joel Hanrahan. Sure, the Sox could go into 2019, go with Matt Barnes as closer and who knows, maybe he takes to it very well. Maybe Brasier continues to be effective and Wright becomes a relief pitching godsend and perhaps Colten Brewer is who the Red Sox think he can be. It can work. But the certainty level is so low - so many question marks. The Yanks' bullpen has very little in the way of bullpen question marks beyond will the Yanks get a healthy Chapman? And they have improved their rotation with the addition of Paxton and the eventual subtraction of Gray. But that confidence level is why it's hard to feel so comfortable with the Sox pen. The confidence in the rotation and the offense is certainly there. And in the manager and I do think Dombrowski will get somebody at the deadline if need be if the pen is costing them games.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 18, 2019 16:50:53 GMT -5
Exactly. The point the previous poster made was that the Red Sox didn't spring for a proven closer when they lost Papelbon. They did, he got hurt, stunk when he wasn't, and it didn't matter anyway. And they'd have been worse in 2013 with Papelbon blowing things up instead of Uehara nailing them down. The lesson of the 2011-12 offseason is definitely not "you need a proven closer." As you said, the Red Sox won the 2013 World Series with a very dominating, but unproven closer in Uehara. although they started the season with "proven" closer Joel Hanrahan. Sure, the Sox could go into 2019, go with Matt Barnes as closer and who knows, maybe he takes to it very well. Maybe Brasier continues to be effective and Wright becomes a relief pitching godsend and perhaps Colten Brewer is who the Red Sox think he can be. It can work. But the certainty level is so low - so many question marks.The Yanks' bullpen has very little in the way of bullpen question marks beyond will the Yanks get a healthy Chapman? And they have improved their rotation with the addition of Paxton and the eventual subtraction of Gray. But that confidence level is why it's hard to feel so comfortable with the Sox pen. The confidence in the rotation and the offense is certainly there. And in the manager and I do think Dombrowski will get somebody at the deadline if need be if the pen is costing them games. The certainty level is low whether they waste money or not. As you said, we've had lots of "proven" closers and good relievers that have crashed and burned. Zach Britton might never regain his form and Ottavino had 1 good season at age 33. Joel Hanrahan might tear his UCL, Andrew Bailey, Tyler Thornberg and Carson Smith might end up with severe shoulder problems.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 18, 2019 17:15:11 GMT -5
As you said, the Red Sox won the 2013 World Series with a very dominating, but unproven closer in Uehara. although they started the season with "proven" closer Joel Hanrahan. Sure, the Sox could go into 2019, go with Matt Barnes as closer and who knows, maybe he takes to it very well. Maybe Brasier continues to be effective and Wright becomes a relief pitching godsend and perhaps Colten Brewer is who the Red Sox think he can be. It can work. But the certainty level is so low - so many question marks.The Yanks' bullpen has very little in the way of bullpen question marks beyond will the Yanks get a healthy Chapman? And they have improved their rotation with the addition of Paxton and the eventual subtraction of Gray. But that confidence level is why it's hard to feel so comfortable with the Sox pen. The confidence in the rotation and the offense is certainly there. And in the manager and I do think Dombrowski will get somebody at the deadline if need be if the pen is costing them games. The certainty level is low whether they waste money or not. As you said, we've had lots of "proven" closers and good relievers that have crashed and burned. Zach Britton might never regain his form and Ottavino had 1 good season at age 33. Joel Hanrahan might tear his UCL, Andrew Bailey, Tyler Thornberg and Carson Smith might end up with severe shoulder problems. Ottavino just completed his age 32 season and has 8.6 bwar for his career. That's a lot more than one good season. More like a couple of great seasons and some good ones. He's a much more proven guy than any of Hanrahan, Bailey, Thornburg, or Smith. Which is kinda of the point people are making. Yea maybe he craps out, but there is a better chance he doesn't than those other guys.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 18, 2019 17:23:59 GMT -5
I really don't give a damn about bWAR for relief pitchers. It's a terrible stat. It does not adjust for fielding which is especially necessary for the very small number of innings that relief pitchers pitch compared to starters. He had negative fWAR in 2017 and missed most of 2015 and 2016 in the 3 years prior to 2018. That's an extremely risky contract.
And the sky is blue.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 18, 2019 18:00:06 GMT -5
Compared to fwar that acts like everything under or above .300 BAbip is luck? Bwar will give you a better true value for most relievers than fwar will. Heck for pitchers in general.
You say Bwar doesn't include defense, you get fwar doesn't adjust for D right? It just tries to eliminate it completely by overvaluing strikeouts and setting all balls in play at .300. I'd buy your take if fwar actually adjusted numbers for team D, but it doesn't. Their is no part of the calculation that adjusts for team D. It's just FIP that tries to eliminate it and that's broken because it treats all balls in play at the .300 level. So color me confused by not adjusting for fielding. Fwar doesn't do that and uses a 20 year old logic that all balls in play are luck above or below .300. Which is crazy!
Bwar might not be perfect, but the majority of the time gives you a much better true value of a pitchers results.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 18, 2019 18:03:33 GMT -5
The Red Sox traded for Andrew Bailey before the 2012 season. And not re-signing Papelbon was the right move. And my memory is a little fuzzy, but I think there may have been some other stuff going on in 2012 that contributed to the last place finish.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Jan 18, 2019 20:23:37 GMT -5
Relievers are good until they're bad. Relievers are bad until they're good. I had hoped that the Red Sox winning 108 games and the World Series with a bullpen that everybody thought was a disaster would kill this weird trendy belief that a name-brand bullpen is the most important thing you can have (thanks Royals). You guys remember that the Yankees assembled "the greatest bullpen of all-time" last year too, right? They'll figure it out. Even if it's rocky, they'll still have a very good shot at the playoffs, and then they can just do the rover thing again. The Yankees didn't lose last year because of "the greatest bullpen of all-time". They lost because their starters weren't very good, the defense wasn't great, and their offense was one dimensional.That's like saying you shouldn't have the finest SS of his generation in Ernie Banks because what good did it do the Cubs - they didn't win the World Series or pennant? And I don't think they can do the "rover" thing as easily as you point out. The Sox in 2018 were able to take advantage of a huge comfortable lead. They were able to rest their starting pitchers. Nobody was taxed in the pressure of a race with NY to avoid the Wild Card game, because the pennant race was over by August. That's probably not the case this season. That scenario is not as likely this year. The Red Sox might not be able to use rovers to the extent they did last season. Everything last season was the perfect storm. Everything during that season that could have gone right seemingly went right. I think they lost it partially because of their "belief" in building their team through the strength of a bullpen than building through starters. At least make it 50-50 – but the Yanks aren’t; dong that. IMO they are clearly looking to build through the bullpen. I like the Sox way better by building through starters. SO yeah I do think you can blame the bullpen. But to make it more clear blame the philosophy of building through the bullpen vs starters. I can’t speak for the poster fenwaydouble but if I were to guess – maybe he and I agree along with some others on here that there is belief that the Kansas City Royal way is the best way – which the Yanks seem they are trying to do. OFC that can work, but I think some of us think it is getting way overplayed. Any mention of preseason "the greatest of all time" is just nonsense - it further adds to the hype created by the Royals. The last two champions - the starters were more important but that get lost because someone wants ot proclaim some other team has the greatest at something. Every year everything can be wildly different with bullpens. And when it comes to any discussion of greatest of all time at least in the last 10 years or so- The Red Sox has a claim. When you win 108 games and no team even stretches you to a deciding game-- that is much much much more relevant than what the Yanks did.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Jan 18, 2019 22:09:57 GMT -5
All I know is I trust Dombrowski more than anyone on this forum by a long shot.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 18, 2019 22:16:54 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't know how Dombrowski can make the Barnes-Brasier-Wright-Thornburg comment with a straight face.
As I've said, Wright isn't even likely to be ready for opening day, and as others have said in this thread, his knee is such a question mark that any contribution from him needs to be considered a bonus.
Thornburg missed 2017 and when he was healthy last year was basically a mediocre middle reliever. Again, I get penciling him into the pen, but anything above a 7th inning reliever needs to be considered an immense success that can't be counted on.
This is clearly just posturing. If they're not going Kimbrel, I'd feel better with two more arms, especially if they're planning on easing in the starters like I think they're going to. I get waiting out that market because there are still a number of 7th-inning types out there, but at the very least, I think we now need to put to be the "but Dombrowski himself said..." argument out to pasture, because he's lost credibility with that comment.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Jan 18, 2019 22:28:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't know how Dombrowski can make the Barnes-Brasier-Wright-Thornburg comment with a straight face. As I've said, Wright isn't even likely to be ready for opening day, and as others have said in this thread, his knee is such a question mark that any contribution from him needs to be considered a bonus. Thornburg missed 2017 and when he was healthy last year was basically a mediocre middle reliever. Again, I get penciling him into the pen, but anything above a 7th inning reliever needs to be considered an immense success that can't be counted on. This is clearly just posturing. If they're not going Kimbrel, I'd feel better with two more arms, especially if they're planning on easing in the starters like I think they're going to. I get waiting out that market because there are still a number of 7th-inning types out there, but at the very least, I think we now need to put to be the "but Dombrowski himself said..." argument out to pasture, because he's lost credibility with that comment. Maybe it's just the World Championship talking ? It's a fact though that relievers often seem to arrive and depart from the top of the charts without warning. Maybe Dombrowski knows more than we do about medical status ? The guy won a World Series. I'm giving him a three year pass. My dad lived and died and never saw the Sox win a World Series. I have now seen four. After the first it was all gravy.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,684
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 18, 2019 22:41:58 GMT -5
The Yankees didn't lose last year because of "the greatest bullpen of all-time". They lost because their starters weren't very good, the defense wasn't great, and their offense was one dimensional.That's like saying you shouldn't have the finest SS of his generation in Ernie Banks because what good did it do the Cubs - they didn't win the World Series or pennant? And I don't think they can do the "rover" thing as easily as you point out. The Sox in 2018 were able to take advantage of a huge comfortable lead. They were able to rest their starting pitchers. Nobody was taxed in the pressure of a race with NY to avoid the Wild Card game, because the pennant race was over by August. That's probably not the case this season. That scenario is not as likely this year. The Red Sox might not be able to use rovers to the extent they did last season. Everything last season was the perfect storm. Everything during that season that could have gone right seemingly went right. I think they lost it partially because of their "belief" in building their team through the strength of a bullpen than building through starters. At least make it 50-50 – but the Yanks aren’t; dong that. IMO they are clearly looking to build through the bullpen. I like the Sox way better by building through starters.
SO yeah I do think you can blame the bullpen. But to make it more clear blame the philosophy of building through the bullpen vs starters. I can’t speak for the poster fenwaydouble but if I were to guess – maybe he and I agree along with some others on here that there is belief that the Kansas City Royal way is the best way – which the Yanks seem they are trying to do. OFC that can work, but I think some of us think it is getting way overplayed. Any mention of preseason "the greatest of all time" is just nonsense - it further adds to the hype created by the Royals. The last two champions - the starters were more important but that get lost because someone wants ot proclaim some other team has the greatest at something. Every year everything can be wildly different with bullpens. And when it comes to any discussion of greatest of all time at least in the last 10 years or so- The Red Sox has a claim. When you win 108 games and no team even stretches you to a deciding game-- that is much much much more relevant than what the Yanks did. jim, the Yankees tried to address the imbalance - they were originally under the mistaken impression that Sonny Gray was going to be a contributor. As you recall they added JA Happ to the rotation and he pitched extremely well for the Yankees. The only clunker he had happened at the worst time fortunately for the Red Sox, right in Game 1 of the ALDS. But make no mistake, Happ was an addition to address their pitching imbalance. Now they have brought back Happ and have added James Paxton which should make their rotation a lot better, so now their rotation becomes Happ, Paxton, Severino, Tanaka, and Sabathia. At that point Sabathia drops down a peg to #5 starter, a guy who doesn't even get a playoff start and as far as #5 starters goes, he's a decent #5. Not saying those five necessarily equal the Sox starting five. You give the Sox the edge unless Sale's injury issues continue, but the Sox edge in the rotation at this point doesn't negate the Yankees big edge in the pen. Having a guy like Kimbrel there helped mitigate that somewhat but Kimbrel isn't coming back and they're not really replacing him other than to push Barnes up a peg and find two guys to replace setup man Barnes and Kelly, who actually wasn't overly effective during the regular season. The Yankees pen edge narrows the gap between the Sox and Yankees and you have to figure some major regression from their 108 wins last year. They were projected to win 103 and exceeded it by a good deal. That might not happen this year and if they don't lock down their wins as well as they did last year the bullpen issues will show. Kimbrel was a roller coaster ride in the 2nd half and was tough to watch in the post-season, but he did lock down those saves. It might not work as smoothly this year for whoever closes (Barnes?).
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Jan 19, 2019 0:54:55 GMT -5
I think they lost it partially because of their "belief" in building their team through the strength of a bullpen than building through starters. At least make it 50-50 – but the Yanks aren’t; dong that. IMO they are clearly looking to build through the bullpen. I like the Sox way better by building through starters.
SO yeah I do think you can blame the bullpen. But to make it more clear blame the philosophy of building through the bullpen vs starters. I can’t speak for the poster fenwaydouble but if I were to guess – maybe he and I agree along with some others on here that there is belief that the Kansas City Royal way is the best way – which the Yanks seem they are trying to do. OFC that can work, but I think some of us think it is getting way overplayed. Any mention of preseason "the greatest of all time" is just nonsense - it further adds to the hype created by the Royals. The last two champions - the starters were more important but that get lost because someone wants ot proclaim some other team has the greatest at something. Every year everything can be wildly different with bullpens. And when it comes to any discussion of greatest of all time at least in the last 10 years or so- The Red Sox has a claim. When you win 108 games and no team even stretches you to a deciding game-- that is much much much more relevant than what the Yanks did. jim, the Yankees tried to address the imbalance - they were originally under the mistaken impression that Sonny Gray was going to be a contributor. As you recall they added JA Happ to the rotation and he pitched extremely well for the Yankees. The only clunker he had happened at the worst time fortunately for the Red Sox, right in Game 1 of the ALDS. But make no mistake, Happ was an addition to address their pitching imbalance. Now they have brought back Happ and have added James Paxton which should make their rotation a lot better, so now their rotation becomes Happ, Paxton, Severino, Tanaka, and Sabathia. At that point Sabathia drops down a peg to #5 starter, a guy who doesn't even get a playoff start and as far as #5 starters goes, he's a decent #5. Not saying those five necessarily equal the Sox starting five. You give the Sox the edge unless Sale's injury issues continue, but the Sox edge in the rotation at this point doesn't negate the Yankees big edge in the pen. Having a guy like Kimbrel there helped mitigate that somewhat but Kimbrel isn't coming back and they're not really replacing him other than to push Barnes up a peg and find two guys to replace setup man Barnes and Kelly, who actually wasn't overly effective during the regular season. The Yankees pen edge narrows the gap between the Sox and Yankees and you have to figure some major regression from their 108 wins last year. They were projected to win 103 and exceeded it by a good deal. That might not happen this year and if they don't lock down their wins as well as they did last year the bullpen issues will show. Kimbrel was a roller coaster ride in the 2nd half and was tough to watch in the post-season, but he did lock down those saves. It might not work as smoothly this year for whoever closes (Barnes?). Just to make it clear I'm arguing your comment that "you can't blame the Yanks bullpen." -- You can because the Yanks starters got their clocks cleaned in the playoffs with Severino cracking at the end, and having torely on 36 yo Happ and especially relying on CC in game 4-- instead they tried to live with it and go after a great pen. They have the prospects and relievers in 2017 to make a huge trade like DD did to get Sale. That's the major point. As for Sonny Gray- he was not very good at the time he left Oakland and it showed. The Yanks knew after 2017 he wasn't very good and just looked to build a super pen instead. Gray was not thought of as much. Were you really scared of Gray in 2017 or in 2018? After 2017 if Yanks knew he wasn't that good why not find another starter? In 2018 the SOx went after eovaldi while the yanks went after Lynn. There were many of us-- a lot of people a lot smarter than me that knew Gray wasn't that good especially coming back after injury. This year they could have gone after COrbin AND Britton with $3m to spare instead they get the 36 going on 37 yo Happ and Britton and Otto. You fear Happ? I don't. There's a reason why the Sox bombed him in the playoffs - he's not that good. He's pretty good but he was 36. Anyways as a Sox fan I love the idea they went after happ instead of Corbin. I say thank you Brian Cashman. ANd I;m not sure why you are mentioning to me about 108 wins. I've said here that I don't expect them to duplicate the season thus I don't understand all the complaining from others (not you) of "not being better" despite the fact the sox could overall "may be better" but lose more games. I just think you have vastly overrated the Yanks staff from last year - and this year the Yanks Tanaka and Paxton are injury questions. Severino has consistency questions. ANd Happ and Sabathia are old.To rely on CC as your number 5 isn't showing me a sign of strength for a team that has shown they will spend big. Yet they spent big on the bullpen. They had CC start game 4 in an elimination game last year. That should tell us all we need to know; they wanted to be and even continue to this day to be a bullpen driven team.**There is a reason why they got blitzed last year vs the sox. It was because the yanks looked to build a super pen 1st and not address the prior year their SP issues. ANd i'm not arguing with yo u about kimbrel. I'm arguing your reply to fenway when you spoke of the Yanks didn't lose because of the bullpen. Even if you say they had no other options the fact remains they were heavy into the bullpen and their SP was a weak link---> and it got exposed. Badly. This year I'd think the same thing. Paxton is always hurt. Let's see how he does for a full season. Tanaka is a time bomb. Severino has faded two straight year I think. Happ and CC are old. And yet they have 4 guys that are closer types along with another dude who stunk but the year or two before with Chicago was good (Kahnle) and Chad Green. ***Certainly with all these arms they could have instead looked to move a couple or not signed a couple etc and with a prospect or two gotten a young pretty good starter.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 19, 2019 7:37:33 GMT -5
My lasting thoughts on the Sox bullpen is that I definitely don't feel that they will sign Kimbrel after ownership was complaining about the payroll in yesterday's tweets. Whether or not that's justified because Henry is a billionaire is another topic for discussion.
I keep thinking Justin Wilson is a bad idea because of his bad splits and atrocious walk rate, but he did post walk rates of 3 per nine innings 2 years ago and had a history of being a solid reliever before the past two years. I'm not a big believer in Bannister being some magical Guru, but maybe he can find something to make that walk rate go down back to around where Justin Wilson was two years ago.
Dombrowski likes acquiring guys he knows in the past and he acquired Wilson in Detroit. So maybe he is the guy he is after. This team doesn't have a talented left handed reliever in the organization outside of Darwinzon Hernandez and he's currently a starter.
This team is loaded with right handed power relievers. Between Barnes, Brasier, Hembree, Lakins, Brewer, and soon Feltman, the Sox might be okay here with this bunch against a AL team like the Yankees already. So maybe they'd like a guy from the left side with power stuff to go along with it.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jan 19, 2019 19:26:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by PedroKsBambino on Jan 19, 2019 20:43:57 GMT -5
Who do you guys think are the best options at this point on the free agent market besides bringing back Kimbrel? Justin Wilson, Greg Holland, Brad Brach, Tony Sipp?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 19, 2019 22:38:33 GMT -5
jim, the Yankees tried to address the imbalance - they were originally under the mistaken impression that Sonny Gray was going to be a contributor. As you recall they added JA Happ to the rotation and he pitched extremely well for the Yankees. The only clunker he had happened at the worst time fortunately for the Red Sox, right in Game 1 of the ALDS. But make no mistake, Happ was an addition to address their pitching imbalance. Now they have brought back Happ and have added James Paxton which should make their rotation a lot better, so now their rotation becomes Happ, Paxton, Severino, Tanaka, and Sabathia. At that point Sabathia drops down a peg to #5 starter, a guy who doesn't even get a playoff start and as far as #5 starters goes, he's a decent #5. Not saying those five necessarily equal the Sox starting five. You give the Sox the edge unless Sale's injury issues continue, but the Sox edge in the rotation at this point doesn't negate the Yankees big edge in the pen. Having a guy like Kimbrel there helped mitigate that somewhat but Kimbrel isn't coming back and they're not really replacing him other than to push Barnes up a peg and find two guys to replace setup man Barnes and Kelly, who actually wasn't overly effective during the regular season. The Yankees pen edge narrows the gap between the Sox and Yankees and you have to figure some major regression from their 108 wins last year. They were projected to win 103 and exceeded it by a good deal. That might not happen this year and if they don't lock down their wins as well as they did last year the bullpen issues will show. Kimbrel was a roller coaster ride in the 2nd half and was tough to watch in the post-season, but he did lock down those saves. It might not work as smoothly this year for whoever closes (Barnes?). Just to make it clear I'm arguing your comment that "you can't blame the Yanks bullpen." -- You can because the Yanks starters got their clocks cleaned in the playoffs with Severino cracking at the end, and having torely on 36 yo Happ and especially relying on CC in game 4-- instead they tried to live with it and go after a great pen. They have the prospects and relievers in 2017 to make a huge trade like DD did to get Sale. That's the major point. As for Sonny Gray- he was not very good at the time he left Oakland and it showed. The Yanks knew after 2017 he wasn't very good and just looked to build a super pen instead. Gray was not thought of as much. Were you really scared of Gray in 2017 or in 2018? After 2017 if Yanks knew he wasn't that good why not find another starter? In 2018 the SOx went after eovaldi while the yanks went after Lynn. There were many of us-- a lot of people a lot smarter than me that knew Gray wasn't that good especially coming back after injury. This year they could have gone after COrbin AND Britton with $3m to spare instead they get the 36 going on 37 yo Happ and Britton and Otto. You fear Happ? I don't. There's a reason why the Sox bombed him in the playoffs - he's not that good. He's pretty good but he was 36. Anyways as a Sox fan I love the idea they went after happ instead of Corbin. I say thank you Brian Cashman. ANd I;m not sure why you are mentioning to me about 108 wins. I've said here that I don't expect them to duplicate the season thus I don't understand all the complaining from others (not you) of "not being better" despite the fact the sox could overall "may be better" but lose more games. I just think you have vastly overrated the Yanks staff from last year - and this year the Yanks Tanaka and Paxton are injury questions. Severino has consistency questions. ANd Happ and Sabathia are old.To rely on CC as your number 5 isn't showing me a sign of strength for a team that has shown they will spend big. Yet they spent big on the bullpen. They had CC start game 4 in an elimination game last year. That should tell us all we need to know; they wanted to be and even continue to this day to be a bullpen driven team.**There is a reason why they got blitzed last year vs the sox. It was because the yanks looked to build a super pen 1st and not address the prior year their SP issues. ANd i'm not arguing with yo u about kimbrel. I'm arguing your reply to fenway when you spoke of the Yanks didn't lose because of the bullpen. Even if you say they had no other options the fact remains they were heavy into the bullpen and their SP was a weak link---> and it got exposed. Badly. This year I'd think the same thing. Paxton is always hurt. Let's see how he does for a full season. Tanaka is a time bomb. Severino has faded two straight year I think. Happ and CC are old. And yet they have 4 guys that are closer types along with another dude who stunk but the year or two before with Chicago was good (Kahnle) and Chad Green. ***Certainly with all these arms they could have instead looked to move a couple or not signed a couple etc and with a prospect or two gotten a young pretty good starter. To be fair, Gray had a career-high 8.72 K/9 and a 3.43/3.30 ERA/xFIP in 97 innings at the time he was traded to NY. His ERA was elevated, too, because of a poor 65% strand rate. He’d re-established his CB (or rather, gotten back to using 2 different speed/CB locations), and his walk rate was under 3 per 9, with a HR rate of 0.74/9, which is pretty good. He WAS pitching pretty well, more or less in line with his career norms. His home/road splits with the Yankees revealed a horrendous propensity to get shelled in NY, where HR really killed him. This continued in 2018. He was a solid/good pitcher when they acquired him (2.2 fWAR in a half-season, basically a 4-WAR pitcher or a pretty good #2), he just is a terrible fit for the stadium, where he was prone to HR and where contact really hurt him (the INF defense wasn’t good for him, and his walk rate shot up...probably from nibbling). I agree that Gray wasn’t a pitcher I “worried” about, but that’s more because I never really have...he’s not a good choice for the AL East, which is why I never wanted the Sox to acquire him. But look at his home/away splits last year...outside the stadium, he was 3.17 with a .274 wOBAA and a 78/22 K/BB ratio in 71 innings. That’s a pretty good pitcher, especially in front of an INF defense that had Andújar at 3b and a reduced Didi (whose defense is slipping) at SS. NY’s bullpen isn’t necessarily better than it was at the end of last year (it might be; Britton will probably be improved and Ottavino might very well be a step up from Robertson), but the rotation is definitely improved substantially. Happ isn’t great but he’s almost assuredly going to be better than Gray. Paxton is a huge step up over the assortment of guys they had including Lynn. Yeah, Tanaka’s basically a 3 now, but that’s where he slots. CC is a pretty good 5...he’s pitched like a 3/4. And Severino faded last year, but he was terrific the first half, and he was terrific in the second half of 2017. So I don’t think you can assume he’ll fade...he’s just (very) young. Odds are he gets better, not worse...he’s *just* entering his prime years, at 25. It’s true that NY’s ‘pen didn’t save them last year, especially in the playoffs. But there’s a very good chance their starters pitch more innings this year and are more reliable...allowing more rest for the bullpen and fewer innings to guys lower down the totem pole. Like RSchamps, I don’t think the bullpen last year was *the problem*...it was the rotation. That problem has been solved and the most likely result is that that particular solution has positive downstream effects on the ‘pen.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 19, 2019 22:57:32 GMT -5
Who do you guys think are the best options at this point on the free agent market besides bringing back Kimbrel? Justin Wilson, Greg Holland, Brad Brach, Tony Sipp? I like Wilson, who still has excellent velocity and is relatively young (though he’s so FB-heavy...Idk...it’s possible he could benefit from more SL, but it also makes me nervous that he’s too one-dimensional). Holland has lost a lot of velocity and he’s basically FB/SL/CB, and has been decreasing his FB use as his velocity has dropped. I doubt he ever gets back to what he was, but there’s an outside chance he can leverage his mix in a way to compensate for lost velo (which is still basically average). His BB rate scares me but I also think it’s a product of reduced stuff. Again, if he can find a nice mix (bring back the SF maybe?!), and challenges hitters more, maybe he’s good again, if not great. I think either is worth a flier. Sipp is getting up there and his stuff isn’t very good. I don’t think they’re in a position to hope on a LOOGY. Brach is intriguing because he’s not particularly old (32), and he still has pretty damn good stuff, and to top it off he had bad BABIP luck last year: 0.344). His K and BB rates are both going in the wrong directions the last three years though. Idk...he had a hard contact problem last year, so the BABIP isn’t all fluke. But of that group, I think he’s pretty clearly the best option. The question is more whether or not he’s affordable. If they’re getting him in a 2/$11M deal, I think it’s worth a shot. But if he wants a REAL raise, say 2/$14M, I’d probably balk. I know it’s not much money overall, but at some point I think they’re better off going volume over taking a risk on one guy.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 20, 2019 1:05:38 GMT -5
Flip a coin between Holland, Brach, and Wilson. Sipp is a distant 4th. Yet I don't see you signing any of them for 2-3 million.
|
|
|