|
Post by jbberlo22 on Jun 24, 2013 16:47:16 GMT -5
7 innings and a chance to win the game sounds like a very good #3 starter or better to me. Better. Think about it: averaging 7 IP is saying that for every game you go just 5 ip, you throw a 9-inning CG. And this in a time where the league-leaders in CG right now are Wainwright and Zimmermann with 3. An inning eater is somebody who can consistently give 5-6 innings giving up 3-4 runs. Id say a guy a little worse than lackey but the same kind of pitcher is an "innings eater". Hes averaging 5.8 innings per game and 2 runs per game (this would be like 3 or 4 for the typical inning eater) and a guy with good command who pitches to contact.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 24, 2013 16:58:56 GMT -5
Better. Think about it: averaging 7 IP is saying that for every game you go just 5 ip, you throw a 9-inning CG. And this in a time where the league-leaders in CG right now are Wainwright and Zimmermann with 3. An inning eater is somebody who can consistently give 5-6 innings giving up 3-4 runs. Id say a guy a little worse than lackey but the same kind of pitcher is an "innings eater". Hes averaging 5.8 innings per game and 2 runs per game (this would be like 3 or 4 for the typical inning eater) and a guy with good command who pitches to contact. That still sounds like better than an #3 to me, too. 2 runs a game and can give you 6 innings? That's a 3.10 ERA. You have an extra that or two and half a clue at the trade deadline you're gonna reap some serious goodies. Or do you mean someone like Felix Doubront?
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jun 24, 2013 18:28:22 GMT -5
7 innings and a chance to win the game sounds like a very good #3 starter or better to me. Better. Think about it: averaging 7 IP is saying that for every game you go just 5 ip, you throw a 9-inning CG. And this in a time where the league-leaders in CG right now are Wainwright and Zimmermann with 3. This is a great and important point. To average 7 you have to have the capability of going deep and being efficient. Very few are. Having said that, now that pitch counts( and for the love of God not innings!) are managed properly, perhaps the go forward measurement of success and the whole number three or five guy thing needs adjustment. Say a guy never has big innings, always gets to five and more than half the time goes into the seventh. Whatever that is, and my eyes Workman, Renaudo, and Webster all are capable of starting at this level in 2014, to me is success.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Jun 28, 2013 6:15:24 GMT -5
Is Workman the next call up if Lester needs time???
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jun 28, 2013 6:28:27 GMT -5
Is Workman the next call up if Lester needs time??? Nope, It'd be Rubby he has a.79ERA in his last 11 games and is already on the 40man.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,968
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 28, 2013 9:29:18 GMT -5
Maybe I should have said 6 or 7 innings, or "up to 7 innings" or "into the 7th" where you have a guy warming up when he starts the 7th. I said "7" but did not say "average 7." By "chance to win the game" I meant slowly giving up 3 or 4 runs in those 6 or 7 innings, which means your ERA is about 5, instead of giving up 4 runs in the first three or four innings so you have to be pulled. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_baseball_(I)Joe Blanton is quoted in his second year as describing himself as an innings eater, aiming for 6 innings per or 200 on the season ((6 x 35 = 210)) Actually here is their source: usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2006-04-02-bonus-spot-starters_x.htm?csp=34in "Loaiza's case, he is a veteran starting pitcher a team can count on to start every fifth day and pitch deep into games. Over the last six seasons, he has averaged 195 innings with a 4.50 ERA and 63-60 record." "Other examples include the Toronto Blue Jays' James Baldwin or the New York Yankees' Tanyon Sturtze, who had one of the ultimate innings-eater seasons with the Tampa Bay Devil Rays in 2002 when he was 4-18 with a 5.18 ERA and 271 hits allowed in 224 innings."
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jun 28, 2013 10:13:35 GMT -5
Dempster is an innings eater, and is in the range of #3 or #4 on a good pitching team. That's without looking at his stats.
This year, he's been a good #3 in my book. He's averaging just about 6 innings per start and has a 4.15 ERA. Lester has been just about as good, slightly more innings, slightly more runs per inning.
|
|
|
Post by jbberlo22 on Jun 28, 2013 12:53:51 GMT -5
An inning eater is somebody who can consistently give 5-6 innings giving up 3-4 runs. Id say a guy a little worse than lackey but the same kind of pitcher is an "innings eater". Hes averaging 5.8 innings per game and 2 runs per game (this would be like 3 or 4 for the typical inning eater) and a guy with good command who pitches to contact. That still sounds like better than an #3 to me, too. 2 runs a game and can give you 6 innings? That's a 3.10 ERA. You have an extra that or two and half a clue at the trade deadline you're gonna reap some serious goodies. Or do you mean someone like Felix Doubront? dude... read my comment again.. i said if he gave up a run or two more hed be a solid 5th. The # of innings he goes per game is right but he gives up too few runs to be a solid #5. Im saying go 5.8 innings and give up around 3 runs per game. thats a mid 4 ERA
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jun 28, 2013 13:39:47 GMT -5
#4 or #5 , all those numbers are so arbitrary. Innings eater or not, it's a judgement call not an exact science..... Who cares
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 28, 2013 15:09:14 GMT -5
Got a report from a NL scout the other night who was going to write him up as a reliever. That said, a good reliever - likes how the FB will play up in that role, and liked how he pounded the strike zone.
Also interesting was that he came away unimpressed with the cutter, which is supposed to be his bread-and-butter pitch.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jun 29, 2013 7:43:53 GMT -5
Got a report from a NL scout the other night who was going to write him up as a reliever. That said, a good reliever - likes how the FB will play up in that role, and liked how he pounded the strike zone. Also interesting was that he came away unimpressed with the cutter, which is supposed to be his bread-and-butter pitch. Next time you see the scout, can you ask him about Lester's cutter? To my eyes the current Lester cutter has next to no life on it as opposed to earlier this year when it danced.
|
|
|
Post by knuckledown on Jul 16, 2013 7:08:24 GMT -5
I wanted to add this analysis by Katie Morrison to the mix: fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2013/07/10/could-brandon-workman-be-the-next-justin-masterson-for-the-red-sox/Simply put, if Workman can reach the mark (and similar trajectory) set by Masterson then he would seem to be a fer-sure rotation piece by time Lester/ Lackey/ Dempster are no longer Sox. If he's less effective than that over the next season-and-a-half, I imagine he would stay in the pen, likely progressing to a set-up role. And I am always a fan of a guy who can give you a six-out save. It is of course too soon to tell, because he'll need to succeed more and fail more for us to understand his capabilities.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 16, 2013 7:23:48 GMT -5
Got a report from a NL scout the other night who was going to write him up as a reliever. That said, a good reliever - likes how the FB will play up in that role, and liked how he pounded the strike zone. Also interesting was that he came away unimpressed with the cutter, which is supposed to be his bread-and-butter pitch. Actually, in that start the change-up - at least that's what it looked like - seemed to be his best out pitch on that day. The fastball was journeyman, but he was able to locate it for the most part.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2013 13:16:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 2, 2013 13:22:29 GMT -5
Three games started and eight games in relief mean next to nothing.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 2, 2013 14:23:36 GMT -5
Especially when one of those relief appearances was a 4.2 inning stint in that Houston disaster game.
|
|
|
Post by gator39 on Sept 2, 2013 19:35:23 GMT -5
It appears that some guys are more comfortable starting. Maybe they don't like pitching in short appearances, and like the long warm-up that comes with starting. Either way, I think that Workman is more comfortable starting and should be our #3 or #4 starter next year.
How are they gonna find room for him in next years rotation when Buchholz, Lester, Lackey, Peavy, Doubront & Dempster are all signed for next season. As it is already they are gonna have to try to trade Dempster.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 2, 2013 19:35:43 GMT -5
A lot of teams would like Workman. He doesn't seem to get hurt. He's stretched out and ready for a decent workload and he throws strikes. In a lot of parks he has a great chance to put up solid numbers and he's cheap. He is of significant value to any team and I'd keep him a starter but certainly consider the right deal as well. The word "workhorse" comes to mind for me also and what is wrong with that when so many starters often result in 20-25 starts a year when you are lucky? Most teams can't afford to have stockpiles of talent sitting around. Reliability is important.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 9, 2014 5:31:40 GMT -5
Sent down to Triple A and the guy has been a pretty darn good major leaguer. By the sounds of his comments, I sense some frustration...and deservedly so. Isn't there a spot on the big club for a guy who has shown his ability and are 3 lefties really needed in your bullpen? Options....understood...but backlogs hindering player development isn't effective.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Apr 9, 2014 7:52:20 GMT -5
There's a chance for him to develop into a rotation mainstay for years, so I'm fine with him going down to spend more time starting.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 9, 2014 8:17:41 GMT -5
Sent down to Triple A and the guy has been a pretty darn good major leaguer. By the sounds of his comments, I sense some frustration...and deservedly so. Isn't there a spot on the big club for a guy who has shown his ability and are 3 lefties really needed in your bullpen? Options....understood...but backlogs hindering player development isn't effective. I'm annoyed as well. He's one of the better pitchers on the entire MLB roster and can't even get a spot because we need the depth more than the best team. Just wait til JBJ is sent down...
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 9, 2014 8:30:49 GMT -5
Sent down to Triple A and the guy has been a pretty darn good major leaguer. By the sounds of his comments, I sense some frustration...and deservedly so. Isn't there a spot on the big club for a guy who has shown his ability and are 3 lefties really needed in your bullpen? Options....understood...but backlogs hindering player development isn't effective. It's frustrating to have some success in the majors but still be sent down, but this is frankly the best long-term career move for him. Even mediocre back-end starters earn way more in arbitration and free agency than good relievers. Also: low-leverage innings are meaningfully different from higher-leverage ones. Three good innings in a blowout is nice, but I'm still pretty confident that he's not one of the five best starters on the team, and even if you think he is, there's enough of a margin for error that you want the one with options to be the odd man out. Last night, Doubront cruised through the first two innings, and then next thing you know he gives up a home run on a pretty well-located pitch (the hitter got on one knee and Beltre'd it) and a few BABIP hits (the Fielder ground-ball double over Napoli's head, the pitch Sizemore froze on) and it all comes apart (the bases-loaded walk, etc). Don't overreact to one start.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Apr 9, 2014 8:56:38 GMT -5
Sent down to Triple A and the guy has been a pretty darn good major leaguer. By the sounds of his comments, I sense some frustration...and deservedly so. Isn't there a spot on the big club for a guy who has shown his ability and are 3 lefties really needed in your bullpen? Options....understood...but backlogs hindering player development isn't effective. It's frustrating to have some success in the majors but still be sent down, but this is frankly the best long-term career move for him. Even mediocre back-end starters earn way more in arbitration and free agency than good relievers. Also: low-leverage innings are meaningfully different from higher-leverage ones. Three good innings in a blowout is nice, but I'm still pretty confident that he's not one of the five best starters on the team, and even if you think he is, there's enough of a margin for error that you want the one with options to be the odd man out. Last night, Doubront cruised through the first two innings, and then next thing you know he gives up a home run on a pretty well-located pitch (the hitter got on one knee and Beltre'd it) and a few BABIP hits (the Fielder ground-ball double over Napoli's head, the pitch Sizemore froze on) and it all comes apart (the bases-loaded walk, etc). Don't overreact to one start. He also missed a number of strike calls in that inning on some pretty bad pitch framing by AJP.
|
|
|
Post by MLBDreams on Apr 9, 2014 10:00:47 GMT -5
It's not right to send Workman down to minors when he did a great job so far as Badenhop & Mujica didn't do their job. Both are horrible when they get the chance to pitching. It's series of bad luck for Ben to find the right relievers (except Uehara) by trade or FA signings. It's too bad if both guys continue struggling and doesn't help the team when they need them the most.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 9, 2014 10:35:39 GMT -5
I don't want to get off on a tangent with this and won't respond regardless of the response, but I am curious why someone who doesn't believe in someone being able to be a "clutch" performer or the assertion that players can't either rise to the occasion in the playoffs or crumble under it's pressure would feel there is a difference between performing in low leverage vs high leverage situations. I'm fairly certain, you've had many comments about these guys don't react to pressure because they've been under pressure their entire lives just to get to the majors.
To keep it relevant maybe we can just respond with regards to how this would apply to Workman or not.
|
|