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.
Who should be the Red Sox closer in 2022?
|
Post by ghostofrussgibson on Dec 15, 2021 19:50:24 GMT -5
I'd think a healthy, rested Barnes should/will be our closer. As with everything, especially relievers, it's subject to change.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 15, 2021 21:09:32 GMT -5
Oh don't get me wrong Jansen scares the crap out of me. I'm saying that it's not like it's sign a Closer(TM), of which Jensen is the only one left on the market, or stick with Barnes. I'm guessing it's highly likely that the "closer" is not going to be the same guy all year unless they swing a trade for someone. But as much as I'd love, say, Trivino, I don't know that I want to make another Kimbrel trade either.I know it was kind of an aside, but I'm confused by this. 1) Why would you love a reliever with a career FIP of 4? Don't we already have half a dozen of those guys?
2) Why would this be comparable in any way to a Kimbrel trade? I don't want to come within a thousand miles of the Carson Smith trade, let alone the Kimbrel trade, let alone for Trivino.
I think it's the weird 'he's a closer now, so he's really good' effect. He's the equivalent of Ryan Brasier, who's a perfectly fine bullpen piece, but who I would never want to see anointed as the closer.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 15, 2021 22:01:42 GMT -5
I know it was kind of an aside, but I'm confused by this. 1) Why would you love a reliever with a career FIP of 4? Don't we already have half a dozen of those guys?
2) Why would this be comparable in any way to a Kimbrel trade? I don't want to come within a thousand miles of the Carson Smith trade, let alone the Kimbrel trade, let alone for Trivino.
I think it's the weird 'he's a closer now, so he's really good' effect. He's the equivalent of Ryan Brasier, who's a perfectly fine bullpen piece, but who I would never want to see anointed as the closer. Sometimes guys figure things out.
The A's tried him in the closer role in 2018 and '19 but he was a combined 4 for 14 converting save opportunities. Then for some reason he was 22 for 26 in 2021.
I'm a firm believer that some guys are cut out for it (which is why I voted for Pivetta, based on what I saw in the playoffs and also some of his better starts when he was amped up like a maniac) and some guys just aren't.
Looks like Trivino figured out the right mindset last year but I doubt OAK would give him up for what I'd offer.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 15, 2021 23:22:45 GMT -5
I just meant it as giving up assets, potentially more than they should, to acquire a Closer(TM). Kimbrel probably not the best comp, so fair point on that.
FWIW, Trivino was outstanding through August 20 (1.72 ERA), then had a stretch of five BRUTAL games in which he gave up multiple runs in each and had an ERA near 32.00 before getting his act back together for his final 11 appearances. His season line is like Ottavino's 2020 somewhat in that sense that it got completely submarined by that one stretch.
His FIP isn't great because he walks too many guys and doesn't strike a ton of guys out and again, I'm not saying he's actually comparable to Kimbrel. But he's a legitimate bullpen piece if not necessarily a surefire closer, and potentially put it together for a season. Question is what he'll be going forward.
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Dec 16, 2021 0:06:35 GMT -5
If Matt Barnes were a free agent, he’d be one of the better relief pitchers available and a good contingent here would be clamoring to re-sign him. You may be right. Barnes is leading in the poll. But his performance post-substance control leads me to believe that he is unsuited to the role going forward. Hope Bloom picks up a proven closer so Whitlock can go into the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 16, 2021 2:23:58 GMT -5
I just meant it as giving up assets, potentially more than they should, to acquire a Closer(TM). Kimbrel probably not the best comp, so fair point on that. FWIW, Trivino was outstanding through August 20 (1.72 ERA), then had a stretch of five BRUTAL games in which he gave up multiple runs in each and had an ERA near 32.00 before getting his act back together for his final 11 appearances. His season line is like Ottavino's 2020 somewhat in that sense that it got completely submarined by that one stretch. His FIP isn't great because he walks too many guys and doesn't strike a ton of guys out and again, I'm not saying he's actually comparable to Kimbrel. But he's a legitimate bullpen piece if not necessarily a surefire closer, and potentially put it together for a season. Question is what he'll be going forward. It's a good thing you aren't his agent - If there are two things I want from a closer it's 'strike guys out and keep the walks down'. It looks like he had two stretches which were pretty bad (One in May and another in Aug/Sept). But to flip the script a bit, after April last year (he threw 15 innings in April) he pitched 58.2 innings, allowed 78 baserunners and struck out 50. Last year he had a low BABIP at .265 and a VERY low HR rate at 0.61 per 9. Maybe he's better than the numbers, but the numbers scream 'sell high' to me. This is the type of guy teams overpay for at the trade deadline when they're desperate for relief pitching. But I bet there are a half-dozen free agents (at least) who will sign for around the minimum and perform better than Trivino did last season. Who those guys are is the tough part - but I have faith Chaim can find one or two. I'm still all-in on Rosenthal. Could be a bust due to health, but the upside is higher than anyone else we're discussing (in 2020 he averaged 98.1 mph on his fastball while striking out 14.45 and walking 3.04 per 9)
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 16, 2021 2:37:00 GMT -5
I think it's the weird 'he's a closer now, so he's really good' effect. He's the equivalent of Ryan Brasier, who's a perfectly fine bullpen piece, but who I would never want to see anointed as the closer. Sometimes guys figure things out.
The A's tried him in the closer role in 2018 and '19 but he was a combined 4 for 14 converting save opportunities. Then for some reason he was 22 for 26 in 2021. I'm a firm believer that some guys are cut out for it (which is why I voted for Pivetta, based on what I saw in the playoffs and also some of his better starts when he was amped up like a maniac) and some guys just aren't.
Looks like Trivino figured out the right mindset last year but I doubt OAK would give him up for what I'd offer.
Something to keep in mind when looking at the blown save stat is that it doesn't actually measure blown saves. It measures blown saves + blown holds; that's the main reason his 2018-2019 save numbers look so bad. I'm not a fan of 'this guy knows how to close' because for almost all relievers it's noise in the numbers and not an actual talent (or lack of talent), but the best way to measure is: (holds + saves) / (holds + saves + blown saves) = (save+hold)% In 2018-2019: (40 holds + 5 saves) / (40 holds + 5 saves + 10 blown saves) = 82% In 2020-2021: (8 holds + 22 saves) / (8 holds + 22 saves + 5 blown saves) = 86% It's possible he became more comfortable in save/hold situations, but it's also possible that 4% is just noise (he gave up 4.3 runs per 9 over each of these samples, which is quite consistent).
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Dec 16, 2021 2:40:34 GMT -5
If Matt Barnes were a free agent, he’d be one of the better relief pitchers available and a good contingent here would be clamoring to re-sign him. You may be right. Barnes is leading in the poll. But his performance post-substance control leads me to believe that he is unsuited to the role going forward. Hope Bloom picks up a proven closer so Whitlock can go into the rotation. It really would be a shame if the team ended up throwing Whitlock into the closer role because of team need. I always wondered what Papelbon would have been like if he stayed a starter his whole career. I hope I don't have to wonder the same about Whitlock.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 16, 2021 8:46:02 GMT -5
I doubt that Chaim will be going out and spending big on a closer, it just isn't a cost effective move IMO. He will trade and or sign guys with the type of stuff that fits for the BP and then see how they do in spring training. Barnes will certainly be in the mix based on performance and he should be.
Wacha could be in the mix if his stuff plays up in lower pitch counts, who knows. I don't want to see Whitlock or Houck in that role as they both look like the have the kind of stuff that could lead to success as starters and can at least give you a lot more innings in other roles.
And I wouldn't be surprised it 3 or 4 guys are ending games.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 16, 2021 9:07:20 GMT -5
I'd imagine unless Jansen would take a 1 or maybe a 2 year deal he won't be a red sox as I can't imagine Bloom tying up 15 or so million into a bullpen arm for 3+ years. It doesn't seem to fit his MO to date. I'm going to guess for better or worse it'll be a revolving door type of deal where they play the matchups and hopefully someone takes the reigns.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,802
|
Post by mobaz on Dec 16, 2021 9:07:29 GMT -5
You may be right. Barnes is leading in the poll. But his performance post-substance control leads me to believe that he is unsuited to the role going forward. Hope Bloom picks up a proven closer so Whitlock can go into the rotation. It really would be a shame if the team ended up throwing Whitlock into the closer role because of team need. I always wondered what Papelbon would have been like if he stayed a starter his whole career. I hope I don't have to wonder the same about Whitlock. Nope, it was worth it for "Shipping up to Boston!"
|
|
|
Post by jbsox on Dec 16, 2021 9:20:16 GMT -5
If Matt Barnes were a free agent, he’d be one of the better relief pitchers available and a good contingent here would be clamoring to re-sign him. You may be right. Barnes is leading in the poll. But his performance post-substance control leads me to believe that he is unsuited to the role going forward. Hope Bloom picks up a proven closer so Whitlock can go into the rotation. Wasn’t Barnes struggles in the 2nd half of the season partly due to his kitchen accident cutting a finger on his pitching hand, and getting COVID (I thought I remembered him having lingering effects from it)?
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,228
|
Post by cdj on Dec 16, 2021 9:27:35 GMT -5
I voted Brasier. I’d use our best reliever (Whitlock? Houck?) as a relief ace for high leverage spots and use Brasier in the 9th
If they add somebody that changes things though
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 16, 2021 11:24:30 GMT -5
I just meant it as giving up assets, potentially more than they should, to acquire a Closer(TM). Kimbrel probably not the best comp, so fair point on that. FWIW, Trivino was outstanding through August 20 (1.72 ERA), then had a stretch of five BRUTAL games in which he gave up multiple runs in each and had an ERA near 32.00 before getting his act back together for his final 11 appearances. His season line is like Ottavino's 2020 somewhat in that sense that it got completely submarined by that one stretch. His FIP isn't great because he walks too many guys and doesn't strike a ton of guys out and again, I'm not saying he's actually comparable to Kimbrel. But he's a legitimate bullpen piece if not necessarily a surefire closer, and potentially put it together for a season. Question is what he'll be going forward. Here is my theory about relievers: at any given time, there are maybe 2 or 3 legitimately great ones. A few years ago it was Kimbrel and Jansen. Now it's probably Hendriks, maybe Hader, maaaybe 1 or 2 others. Then there are some bad ones who are simply on their way to failing out of the league. And then there is the vast middle, where everyone is pretty much at the same level of "not quite good enough to be a starter in the major leagues." In a 60 IP sample, any one of these guys is capable of having a good run and ending a season with an ERA of 2.00 or whatever; and any one of them is capable of having a brutal stretch and blowing up their ERA. If they get lucky and dodge the brutal stretch for 60 games, they look like they might be ascending to that top tier. But I tell you, it's Lucy and the football.
How else to explain this: That's basically a 30% hit rate on big money relievers. It's all just throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. And when throwing spaghetti you don't want to put all your eggs in one basket.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 16, 2021 13:54:32 GMT -5
You may be right. Barnes is leading in the poll. But his performance post-substance control leads me to believe that he is unsuited to the role going forward. Hope Bloom picks up a proven closer so Whitlock can go into the rotation. It really would be a shame if the team ended up throwing Whitlock into the closer role because of team need. I always wondered what Papelbon would have been like if he stayed a starter his whole career. I hope I don't have to wonder the same about Whitlock. Not good. He had 2 pitches and one kind of went away over time (and he learned that one in AAA to boot). He also didn't want to start.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 16, 2021 13:59:57 GMT -5
Papelbon was also a *great* closer. What are the odds he’d have been more valuable as a starter? There *are* cases where guys are designed to be great relievers… not just “failed starters.” He seems like a perfect example.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 16, 2021 14:13:08 GMT -5
Papelbon was also a *great* closer. What are the odds he’d have been more valuable as a starter? There *are* cases where guys are designed to be great relievers… not just “failed starters.” He seems like a perfect example. Correct. Not only that but Papelbon didn't even want to start. He was supposed to in 2007 but made it clear he wanted to close instead
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 16, 2021 15:28:44 GMT -5
Sometimes guys figure things out.
The A's tried him in the closer role in 2018 and '19 but he was a combined 4 for 14 converting save opportunities. Then for some reason he was 22 for 26 in 2021. I'm a firm believer that some guys are cut out for it (which is why I voted for Pivetta, based on what I saw in the playoffs and also some of his better starts when he was amped up like a maniac) and some guys just aren't.
Looks like Trivino figured out the right mindset last year but I doubt OAK would give him up for what I'd offer.
Something to keep in mind when looking at the blown save stat is that it doesn't actually measure blown saves. It measures blown saves + blown holds; that's the main reason his 2018-2019 save numbers look so bad. I'm not a fan of 'this guy knows how to close' because for almost all relievers it's noise in the numbers and not an actual talent (or lack of talent), but the best way to measure is: (holds + saves) / (holds + saves + blown saves) = (save+hold)% In 2018-2019: (40 holds + 5 saves) / (40 holds + 5 saves + 10 blown saves) = 82% In 2020-2021: (8 holds + 22 saves) / (8 holds + 22 saves + 5 blown saves) = 86% It's possible he became more comfortable in save/hold situations, but it's also possible that 4% is just noise (he gave up 4.3 runs per 9 over each of these samples, which is quite consistent). I get your point, that blown saves can happen before the 9th inning (and Trivino has had some of those), but I don't really put much stock into the hold stat. You can come into a game with a 2-run lead, pitch poorly, give up a run, get lifted with guys on base, and still get a hold after your teammate gets out of the inning. I'd feel better about the hold stat if you had to finish the inning to be credited with one. To get a save, you have to finish the inning (and game) with the lead.
My overall point is that there's plenty of guys who are effective as set-up guys who wilt when asked to close. If you're going to acquire someone for the Closer(TM) role (as Chris puts it), I'd like to know that he's had success closing, as Trivino has (albeit for one year). If you want to just acquire a guy who's been successful in relief but not closing and maybe put him in save situations occasionally due to match-ups, you probably won't pay as much and it could also work out. I kind of doubt that anyone is basing any decisions on a guy's holds though.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 16, 2021 15:30:49 GMT -5
Something to keep in mind when looking at the blown save stat is that it doesn't actually measure blown saves. It measures blown saves + blown holds; that's the main reason his 2018-2019 save numbers look so bad. I'm not a fan of 'this guy knows how to close' because for almost all relievers it's noise in the numbers and not an actual talent (or lack of talent), but the best way to measure is: (holds + saves) / (holds + saves + blown saves) = (save+hold)% In 2018-2019: (40 holds + 5 saves) / (40 holds + 5 saves + 10 blown saves) = 82% In 2020-2021: (8 holds + 22 saves) / (8 holds + 22 saves + 5 blown saves) = 86% It's possible he became more comfortable in save/hold situations, but it's also possible that 4% is just noise (he gave up 4.3 runs per 9 over each of these samples, which is quite consistent). I get your point, that blown saves can happen before the 9th inning (and Trivino has had some of those), but I don't really put much stock into the hold stat. You can come into a game with a 2-run lead, pitch poorly, give up a run, get lifted with guys on base, and still get a hold after your teammate gets out of the inning. I'd feel better about the hold stat if you had to finish the inning to be credited with one. To get a save, you have to finish the inning (and game) with the lead.
My overall point is that there's plenty of guys who are effective as set-up guys who wilt when asked to close. If you're going to acquire someone for the Closer(TM) role (as Chris puts it), I'd like to know that he's had success closing, as Trivino has (albeit for one year). If you want to just acquire a guy who's been successful in relief but not closing and maybe put him in save situations occasionally due to match-ups, you probably won't pay as much and it could also work out. I kind of doubt that anyone is basing any decisions on a guy's holds though.
The point is that you can't look at save % for non-closers because they rarely if ever get saves. You have to add in holds if you want any kind of success rate stat. You can't have a rate when all you can do is fail and never succeed.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Dec 16, 2021 16:33:30 GMT -5
Houck has a nasty pitch, perfect closer. But this team needs him for another job.
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Dec 16, 2021 16:43:55 GMT -5
Houck has a nasty pitch, perfect closer. But this team needs him for another job. We will see how Houck's splitter comes about the next two years. It'll be the difference of him starting or relieving. Yeah I agree though, I'd much rather see Houck relieving over Whitlock. Whitlock has 3 quality pitches. Houck has 2.
|
|
|
Post by taiwansox on Dec 16, 2021 17:20:30 GMT -5
Houck has a nasty pitch, perfect closer. But this team needs him for another job. We will see how Houck's splitter comes about the next two years. It'll be the difference of him starting or relieving. Yeah I agree though, I'd much rather see Houck relieving over Whitlock. Whitlock has 3 quality pitches. Houck has 2. I don’t mean to be contrarian, but isn’t Whitlock’s biggest plus his fastball movement/control? His offspeed is pretty inconsistent (maybe that’s a coming off TJS specific issue), especially missing arm side with his changeup). I also don’t love his slider, yanks it glove side and doesn’t seem to finish the pitch (again it should be better the more time away from TJS, but I am not a fan of his 2021 slider). Houck has an easy plus sinker and plus plus slider, but his control can be suspect. Honestly, Whitlock reminds me more of Papelbon than any pitcher in recent years in terms of how heavily he pitches off his fastball and how he learned a change/split right before making the majors.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 16, 2021 18:21:06 GMT -5
I get your point, that blown saves can happen before the 9th inning (and Trivino has had some of those), but I don't really put much stock into the hold stat. You can come into a game with a 2-run lead, pitch poorly, give up a run, get lifted with guys on base, and still get a hold after your teammate gets out of the inning. I'd feel better about the hold stat if you had to finish the inning to be credited with one. To get a save, you have to finish the inning (and game) with the lead.
My overall point is that there's plenty of guys who are effective as set-up guys who wilt when asked to close. If you're going to acquire someone for the Closer(TM) role (as Chris puts it), I'd like to know that he's had success closing, as Trivino has (albeit for one year). If you want to just acquire a guy who's been successful in relief but not closing and maybe put him in save situations occasionally due to match-ups, you probably won't pay as much and it could also work out. I kind of doubt that anyone is basing any decisions on a guy's holds though.
The point is that you can't look at save % for non-closers because they rarely if ever get saves. You have to add in holds if you want any kind of success rate stat. You can't have a rate when all you can do is fail and never succeed. Correct. And I should have looked at Trivino's game logs to capture that. But I don't think the remedy is to add holds and saves together like they're equal.
A hold can come from a good outing or a crappy outing. The same may be true of the save (e.g. much of Kimbrel's 2018 playoffs) but to get a save, you still have to end the inning (and game) yourself, with the lead.
There ought to be a "blown hold" stat instead of giving out blown saves in the 6th or 7th inning when the manager's intention was never to keep the pitcher in long enough to get a save (i.e. until the end of the game).
EDIT: And a hold should only be awarded to a pitcher who ends an inning while preserving a lead.
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Dec 16, 2021 19:06:09 GMT -5
We will see how Houck's splitter comes about the next two years. It'll be the difference of him starting or relieving. Yeah I agree though, I'd much rather see Houck relieving over Whitlock. Whitlock has 3 quality pitches. Houck has 2. I don’t mean to be contrarian, but isn’t Whitlock’s biggest plus his fastball movement/control? His offspeed is pretty inconsistent (maybe that’s a coming off TJS specific issue), especially missing arm side with his changeup). I also don’t love his slider, yanks it glove side and doesn’t seem to finish the pitch (again it should be better the more time away from TJS, but I am not a fan of his 2021 slider). Houck has an easy plus sinker and plus plus slider, but his control can be suspect. Honestly, Whitlock reminds me more of Papelbon than any pitcher in recent years in terms of how heavily he pitches off his fastball and how he learned a change/split right before making the majors. It's getting kind of far away to remember clearly, but there were times Whitlock abandoned his changeup/split altogether through times last year. He was a slider fastball guy throughout a large part of the second half if I can recall correctly. He had pronounced splits with LHB having a lot more success off him than RHB last year. So not sure where you're getting those feelings from.
|
|
|
Post by taiwansox on Dec 17, 2021 3:15:19 GMT -5
I don’t mean to be contrarian, but isn’t Whitlock’s biggest plus his fastball movement/control? His offspeed is pretty inconsistent (maybe that’s a coming off TJS specific issue), especially missing arm side with his changeup). I also don’t love his slider, yanks it glove side and doesn’t seem to finish the pitch (again it should be better the more time away from TJS, but I am not a fan of his 2021 slider). Houck has an easy plus sinker and plus plus slider, but his control can be suspect. Honestly, Whitlock reminds me more of Papelbon than any pitcher in recent years in terms of how heavily he pitches off his fastball and how he learned a change/split right before making the majors. It's getting kind of far away to remember clearly, but there were times Whitlock abandoned his changeup/split altogether through times last year. He was a slider fastball guy throughout a large part of the second half if I can recall correctly. He had pronounced splits with LHB having a lot more success off him than RHB last year. So not sure where you're getting those feelings from. Whitlock threw his fastball 63% last year, slider just 16% and over 20% changeup. Houck on the other hand threw 55% fastballs and that’s with a more pronounced difference between the sinker and 4-seamer. Fastball heavy pitchers like Whitlock tend to have poor splits. Not saying that Whitlock won’t see dramatic improvement in his slider another year removed from TJ, but similar to Papelbon, attacking hitters multiple times through the lineup with that level of fastball usage is difficult. I think during spring training we’re going to have to look for an improvement in Whitlock’s ability to spin the ball. He had a 3.22 xFIP last year with really careful use. I think we’re looking at a 4.60-4.70 xFIP if he starts and is exposed through 18 batters per game if he has last year’s pitch mix
|
|
|