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.
Red Sox Sign LHP Jake Diekman
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Mar 13, 2022 11:25:37 GMT -5
That was fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 11:25:49 GMT -5
Diekman can be tough to hit but he walks 5 guys per 9 innings, too much for my comfort.
|
|
|
|
Post by deversrakes on Mar 13, 2022 11:29:21 GMT -5
Hopefully for not more than 2 years with a option, maybe. Diekman is already 35.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 11:30:00 GMT -5
I hope this isnt the Sox big bullpen move.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Mar 13, 2022 11:34:39 GMT -5
Good looking sign. Only negative can see so far with the 2 lefties brought in and 1 pretty effective guy in Diekman.. Is Taylor someone another team is looking for in some deal?
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,029 
|
Post by cdj on Mar 13, 2022 11:34:57 GMT -5
Lots and lots of whiffs, plenty of walks. I’ve always liked him though, the stuff is great.
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2022 11:36:49 GMT -5
I hope this isnt the Sox big bullpen move. Who's left that would be any better than Diekman? Kenley Jansen, and...? In fact, per fangraphs Diekman has the highest WAR projection of any remaining free agent reliever, Jansen included.
The team now has like 37 relievers. Low-cost spaghetti to hurl at the wall is the way to go when it comes to the bullpen, if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 11:38:44 GMT -5
I hope this isnt the Sox big bullpen move. Who's left that would be any better than Diekman? Kenley Jansen, and...? In fact, per fangraphs Diekman has the highest WAR projection of any remaining free agent reliever, Jansen included. The team now has like 37 relievers. Low-cost spaghetti to hurl at the wall is the way to go when it comes to the bullpen, if you ask me.
With his lack of control I wouldnt trust him to close. Would you? They need somebody they can count on to close. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2022 11:41:12 GMT -5
Who's left that would be any better than Diekman? Kenley Jansen, and...? In fact, per fangraphs Diekman has the highest WAR projection of any remaining free agent reliever, Jansen included. The team now has like 37 relievers. Low-cost spaghetti to hurl at the wall is the way to go when it comes to the bullpen, if you ask me.
With his lack of control I wouldnt trust him to close. Would you? They need somebody they can count on to close. I don't trust any relievers! But they have Barnes, and there's no one available who would be a better option to close, unless they traded for one of the few elite closers in the game, which I wouldn't want them to do in any event. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 11:59:30 GMT -5
With his lack of control I wouldnt trust him to close. Would you? They need somebody they can count on to close. I don't trust any relievers! But they have Barnes, and there's no one available who would be a better option to close, unless they traded for one of the few elite closers in the game, which I wouldn't want them to do in any event. I'm not wild about him but if sign Ian Kennedy as a potential 8th inning guy/closer. I'd hate to rely on Barnes to close after the 2nd half collapse he had. I'd want other options. |
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Mar 13, 2022 12:15:01 GMT -5
It’s taking an awfully big risk relying on Matt Barnes to be who he was in the first half of last season. The bullpen is in a state of flux with Whitlock and Houck’s role up in the air, but a back end of Barnes, Diekman, and…Brasier? Taylor? That’s not a bullpen I’d trust to hold down games for a full season. Don’t get me wrong, I like the Diekman and Strahm signings but it’s all going to depend on Houck and Whitlock.
|
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Mar 13, 2022 12:15:54 GMT -5
I don't trust any relievers! But they have Barnes, and there's no one available who would be a better option to close, unless they traded for one of the few elite closers in the game, which I wouldn't want them to do in any event. I'm not wild about him but if sign Ian Kennedy as a potential 8th inning guy/closer. I'd hate to rely on Barnes to close after the 2nd half collapse he had. I'd want other options. I get the fear, but hard no on Kennedy. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2022 12:21:42 GMT -5
It’s taking an awfully big risk relying on Matt Barnes to be who he was in the first half of last season. The bullpen is in a state of flux with Whitlock and Houck’s role up in the air, but a back end of Barnes, Diekman, and…Brasier? Taylor? That’s not a bullpen I’d trust to hold down games for a full season. Don’t get me wrong, I like the Diekman and Strahm signings but it’s all going to depend on Houck and Whitlock. I'm just waiting to hear who the better option out there is... |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 12:29:15 GMT -5
It’s taking an awfully big risk relying on Matt Barnes to be who he was in the first half of last season. The bullpen is in a state of flux with Whitlock and Houck’s role up in the air, but a back end of Barnes, Diekman, and…Brasier? Taylor? That’s not a bullpen I’d trust to hold down games for a full season. Don’t get me wrong, I like the Diekman and Strahm signings but it’s all going to depend on Houck and Whitlock. I'm just waiting to hear who the better option out there is... Despite Manfred's hard no I would take a shot with Kennedy, acknowledging full well he might not be good, although I think he can be serviceable and close if Barnes can't do and if they need Whitlock and Houck for the rotation. They're also questionable in the 8th as well, particularly from the right side as I dont have much faith in Brasier, Sawamura or Wacha for setup roles. It seems to me that between Whitlock, Houck, and Pivetta, at least one of those guys need to be high leverage in the pen, which is too bad, because all 3 need to be explored further as starting pitchers. |
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,977
|
Post by jimoh on Mar 13, 2022 12:35:08 GMT -5
It’s taking an awfully big risk relying on Matt Barnes to be who he was in the first half of last season. The bullpen is in a state of flux with Whitlock and Houck’s role up in the air, but a back end of Barnes, Diekman, and…Brasier? Taylor? That’s not a bullpen I’d trust to hold down games for a full season. Don’t get me wrong, I like the Diekman and Strahm signings but it’s all going to depend on Houck and Whitlock. I'm just waiting to hear who the better option out there is... Gambling on Barnes seems less dangerous than it would be if Whitlock were not looking over his shoulder. Looks like Darwinson and Taylor will go to AAA and the Sox will have multiple paths toward having a solid bullpen. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2022 12:36:44 GMT -5
With so may swingy, 3-inning type guys on the staff - plus Bloom's stated view that it made sense to use some pitches in such in-between roles - I'm just not even thinking about the pitching staff in terms of "starters" vs. "relievers." I think it makes more sense to just figure out how many innings you can get out of each guy. Whitlock, Houck, Wacha, Hill... those guys might all end up closer to 100 IP than a 60 IP traditional reliever or 180 IP traditional starter.
(Also, I am... seeing absolutely nothing appealing about Kennedy.)
|
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Mar 13, 2022 12:55:08 GMT -5
With so may swingy, 3-inning type guys on the staff - plus Bloom's stated view that it made sense to use some pitches in such in-between roles - I'm just not even thinking about the pitching staff in terms of "starters" vs. "relievers." I think it makes more sense to just figure out how many innings you can get out of each guy. Whitlock, Houck, Wacha, Hill... those guys might all end up closer to 100 IP than a 60 IP traditional reliever or 180 IP traditional starter.
(Also, I am... seeing absolutely nothing appealing about Kennedy.)
Bloom showed that this approach can work, and for that reason alone, the 37 relievers, spaghetti on the wall approach needs to be given a chance. Problem is that sometimes all you wind up with is spaghetti and a messy wall. I personally prefer a proven closer to a sloppy kitchen. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 12:59:07 GMT -5
I'm just waiting to hear who the better option out there is... Gambling on Barnes seems less dangerous than it would be if Whitlock were not looking over his shoulder. Looks like Darwinson and Taylor will go to AAA and the Sox will have multiple paths toward having a solid bullpen. Taylor absolutely belongs in Boston rather than AAA though. I think they can work 3 lefties in the pen especially since Diekman doesn't have huge splits. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 13, 2022 13:05:53 GMT -5
With so may swingy, 3-inning type guys on the staff - plus Bloom's stated view that it made sense to use some pitches in such in-between roles - I'm just not even thinking about the pitching staff in terms of "starters" vs. "relievers." I think it makes more sense to just figure out how many innings you can get out of each guy. Whitlock, Houck, Wacha, Hill... those guys might all end up closer to 100 IP than a 60 IP traditional reliever or 180 IP traditional starter.
(Also, I am... seeing absolutely nothing appealing about Kennedy.)
Bloom showed that this approach can work, and for that reason alone, the 37 relievers, spaghetti on the wall approach needs to be given a chance. Problem is that sometimes all you wind up with is spaghetti and a messy wall. I personally prefer a proven closer to a sloppy kitchen. Yeah, but the other thing is, even when you spend a ton of money on your spaghetti, you often still end up with a mess anyways:
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 13, 2022 13:17:50 GMT -5
With so may swingy, 3-inning type guys on the staff - plus Bloom's stated view that it made sense to use some pitches in such in-between roles - I'm just not even thinking about the pitching staff in terms of "starters" vs. "relievers." I think it makes more sense to just figure out how many innings you can get out of each guy. Whitlock, Houck, Wacha, Hill... those guys might all end up closer to 100 IP than a 60 IP traditional reliever or 180 IP traditional starter. (Also, I am... seeing absolutely nothing appealing about Kennedy.)
There is Kimbrel (ducks) to trade for. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Mar 13, 2022 13:31:08 GMT -5
I'm interested to see how he can pitch during a full season in Fenway. Good pitcher.
|
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 13, 2022 14:18:01 GMT -5
With so may swingy, 3-inning type guys on the staff - plus Bloom's stated view that it made sense to use some pitches in such in-between roles - I'm just not even thinking about the pitching staff in terms of "starters" vs. "relievers." I think it makes more sense to just figure out how many innings you can get out of each guy. Whitlock, Houck, Wacha, Hill... those guys might all end up closer to 100 IP than a 60 IP traditional reliever or 180 IP traditional starter.
(Also, I am... seeing absolutely nothing appealing about Kennedy.)
Bloom showed that this approach can work, and for that reason alone, the 37 relievers, spaghetti on the wall approach needs to be given a chance. Problem is that sometimes all you wind up with is spaghetti and a messy wall. I personally prefer a proven closer to a sloppy kitchen. This approach worked last year... until it didn't and the Astros teed off on the suddenly exposed bullpen.
The answer at closer has been there all along: Nicholas Johncarlo Pivetta.
EDIT: Diekman should be a solid addition.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Mar 13, 2022 14:18:45 GMT -5
He has a career OPS against of 661. I know it is just one stat but it is a favorite of mine and covers a lot of areas. Career FIP of 3.46. The walk rate spiked last yr so maybe that can be fixed. I like the guy, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Mar 13, 2022 14:25:30 GMT -5
With so may swingy, 3-inning type guys on the staff - plus Bloom's stated view that it made sense to use some pitches in such in-between roles - I'm just not even thinking about the pitching staff in terms of "starters" vs. "relievers." I think it makes more sense to just figure out how many innings you can get out of each guy. Whitlock, Houck, Wacha, Hill... those guys might all end up closer to 100 IP than a 60 IP traditional reliever or 180 IP traditional starter.
(Also, I am... seeing absolutely nothing appealing about Kennedy.)
I was thinking they could get between 120 and 160 from the six not named Eovaldi that could be used in those 3-5 inning roles. Sale could ramp up to more but if everything is going smoothly as a staff but why push it. I want him healthy for game 7 of the WS. He might not like it but it would be for his own good. |
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 13, 2022 14:40:42 GMT -5
A quick scan of his b-ref page reveals...
Diekman's oOPS was .715 last year in his age-34 season. Hope he's got more bullets left.
Pretty even L/R splits, both around league average OPS (for 2021 and for career).
In 67 appearances last season, his longest outing was 1.1 IP, which he did 6 times. He's basically an one-inning or finish-the-inning guy who might come back out if he originally came in to record the third out of an inning.
First batter he faced had a .821 OPS last year.
He's been on four playoff teams with mixed results, including 2 HRs in 12 IP.
|
|
|
