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.
6/27-6/30 Red Sox vs. Blue Jays Series Thread
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 27, 2013 11:17:21 GMT -5
(1) Most of that track record was in relief. Aceves' career marks as a starting pitcher: 77.2 IP, 4.87 K/9, 4.87 BB/9, 4.29 ERA, 5.52 FIP, 5.49 xFIP. Not so good. (2) Even looking at his combined career stats, he's been lucky to outperform his peripherals. 4.38 FIP, 4.55 xFIP. The guy is just not a very good pitcher. (3) Like I alluded to earlier, if you believe that small-sample-size ERA results based on abnormally low BABIP is more predictive than advanced metrics, we're speaking two different languages here and continued discussion is unlikely to be productive. So, you're assessment on Aceves career is that he's lucky. That's rich. You're right. No sense in taking this any further.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 11:53:03 GMT -5
More importantly, the Red Sox have longer term goals than winning on Friday. Allen Webster is close to ready, and major league reps will do him some good. If it backfires and the Red Sox go on miss the playoffs by one game that would be unfortunate, but it would also be unfair to blame it solely Webster getting lit up by the Blue Jays on a Friday in late June. Agreed. I'd add in Detroit and Minnesota.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 27, 2013 12:00:11 GMT -5
So, you're assessment on Aceves career is that he's lucky. That's rich. You're right. No sense in taking this any further. Lucky enough to be the worst closer in recent memory and earn a demotion to AAA this year, sure. It's hilarious that you think he's some kind of savior compared to Webster. Which again isn't to say that Webster is anything great right now, but if you really think the Red Sox are punting a game by not starting Aceves... I mean, really? Alfredo freaking Aceves is the hill you want to die on? Ok, good luck with that...
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 12:01:19 GMT -5
In yesterday's thread we opined how do the Yankees always seem to stay alive. Like a vampire. Just can't kill them unless you drive a stake thru their heart. I loathe them as much as anybody. Well, except for maybe Guidas. But, let's just say we all hate em. The Yankees play to win the game. Egos checked at the door. Play the hot hand. Hughes and Joba you're in the pen. Keep running Small and Chacon out there as long as they are winning. Not let's move Bard to starter. He might be able to make more money in the long term. After we traded our closer. Oops, I forgot. We don't need one of them either. Let's run Webster out there again. He gets a lot of swings and misses. Do the results count for Boston? Not always. Let's stroke their egos. Oh stop. Everyone and their brother wanted Aceves DFA'ed, like, five minutes ago. But now he's the key to success? Also, the Yankees are the worst team in the AL East right now, and they don't project to get much better. Oh, but a 47 year old man with a bum ankle might come back to save the day for them by playing shortstop for them as that is apparently his birthright. Egos checked at the door.... No one denied he had talent but, yes, Aceves was sent down because he wasn't performing and because he was reportedly being an obstinate dick. He went down, tail between his legs, he performed, he came back up and reportedly hasn't shaken off a single pitch in his returns to MLB and has been a model citizen. Peripherals or not, he's pitched better at a higher level than Webster, period. 1) Why not ride that horse til it bucks you? 2) What kind of organizational message does this send - Go, down a level, do what we tell you, succeed and we'll bring you back up...uh, unless we bring up some guy who's not doing nearly as well because he's got "great stuff" and just needs to "settle in." If this is the logic for the new standard, Will Middlebrooks should be terrified of succeeding in his recent demotion.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 27, 2013 12:10:30 GMT -5
Oh stop. Everyone and their brother wanted Aceves DFA'ed, like, five minutes ago. But now he's the key to success? Also, the Yankees are the worst team in the AL East right now, and they don't project to get much better. Oh, but a 47 year old man with a bum ankle might come back to save the day for them by playing shortstop for them as that is apparently his birthright. Egos checked at the door.... No one denied he had talent but, yes, Aceves was sent down because he wasn't performing and because he was reportedly being an obstinate dick. He went down, tail between his legs, he performed, he came back up and reportedly hasn't shaken off a single pitch in his returns to MLB and has been a model citizen. Peripherals or not, he's pitched better at a higher level than Webster, period. 1) Why not ride that horse til it bucks you? 2) What kind of organizational message does this send - Go, down a level, do what we tell you, succeed and we'll bring you back up...uh, unless we bring up some guy who's not doing nearly as well because he's got "great stuff" and just needs to "settle in." If this is the logic for the new standard, Will Middlebrooks should be terrified of succeeding in his recent demotion. I'm sorry, you can't just hand-wave away the fact that Aceves has walked more than he's struck out. I don't care if he's shaking off pitches or not, he's not good.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 27, 2013 12:11:59 GMT -5
Why the scare quotes around great stuff? And beyond the quality of his arsenal, his performance at Triple-A has been quite good.
If we're going with overwrought over-dramatic messages where a player's tender fee-fees might be hurt, what would it say to all of the young pitchers in the system to say "we'll promote you, but if you have a couple bad starts, it's back to the minors with ye!"
Once again, Webster got 20 swings and misses in his last start against the Tigers. Aceves has 19 in his last three starts. Is Webster better than Aceves in 2013? I can't say I'm sure either way. Getting toward an answer puts the Red Sox in better position for 2013, and getting Webster innings is going to help his long-term development.
Also, Webster has a better ERA, WHIP, K rate and HR rate at Pawtucket than Aceves. So discussing Aceves's Triple-A performance doesn't bolster his case for a recall.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 27, 2013 12:17:36 GMT -5
If Webster keeps his fastball down he is at least an average MLB starter. If he commands it within the strikezone he is a top of the rotation/ace. Those are two "IFS" with the first one being much more realistic.
Aceves has been strong for us recently but I like to call to go to Webster. Give him a chance to have his routine between starts at the major league level and see how he does.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 27, 2013 12:18:19 GMT -5
Is Webster better than Aceves in 2013? I can't say I'm sure either way. This is where things get silly. If you think Aceves is better than Webster right now, fine. But if you think the difference is so vast that giving Webster ONE START over Aceves is some kind of horrible baseball decision, you're speaking with greater confidence than the track record of either pitcher reasonably allows. The difference between these guys is swamped by the normal start-to-start variance of any pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 27, 2013 12:30:48 GMT -5
Peripherals or not, he's pitched better at a higher level than Webster, period. 1) Why not ride that horse til it bucks you? Beyond what everyone else has said, which I agree 100% with, this is the kind of knee-jerk reactionism that is the worst logic to run a team by. I want my front office to trust the process, not go chasing after the hot hand, which is more often than not just smoke and mirrors.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 12:33:15 GMT -5
This would be the second start over Aceves. The 5ERs Webster gave up in 4 1/3 against Det is the one start. That came less than 10 days after Webster's second game of plunking four batters. But that only happened because he had no clue where the ball was going when he let go of it. I heard that each guy that got drilled said "Great stuff!" just before he got his new four-seam bruise.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 12:39:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Legion of Bloom on Jun 27, 2013 12:40:10 GMT -5
People need to stop overreacting about Webster's last two starts. He had 20 swing and misses against a filthy Detroit lineup, that's insane. When Miguel Cabrera says your stuff is nasty, you must be pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by bjb406 on Jun 27, 2013 12:50:05 GMT -5
So does the small sample size argument only counts when its in the minors. 2 bad starts people. Webster has had exactly 2 bad starts to got with his 1 good one, and a half season of dominating AAA. Now if it were me I would probably think about giving De la Rosa, but they are still limiting his pitches so its understandable they haven't. Aceves has been pretty good in the minors as well, but another reason to give Webster some starts is to get him acclimated to the major leagues so that there becomes a good chance he could prove himself between now and September and potentially be pitching in the playoffs and be slotted into the rotation next season. Or is everyone already convinced he is a bust because of 2 starts?
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jun 27, 2013 13:20:58 GMT -5
I'm really pissed that the sox aren't calling up Rubby De La Rosa for this start !!!111!1!!!!!1!!!!!
He has a 0.00 ERA in the majors this season !!!!! Let's see you come up with some advanced metrics that beat those numbers !!!!11!!11!!!
Screw Aceves he sucks Donkey Balls and sweats too much and to hell with Webster he had his chance !!!!!
None of you guys know what you're talking about... Farrell and Cherington are a couple of morons for not starting Rubby, how dare they go with Webster !1!!1! Why are they throwing away a game that is sure to mean the playoffs!!! Don't they understand this game is against our chief rivals for the division the 2nd place Blue Jays, who are only a half game behind us and the season is almost over!!!!
Rubby would pitch a perfect game in this situation... Those freakin' idiots!!!!! The guy hasn't allowed a hit or a walk in the majors this year and they're actually gonna start Webster over him...... Uggh this is sooo frustrating
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 14:03:12 GMT -5
People need to stop overreacting about Webster's last two starts. He had 20 swing and misses against a filthy Detroit lineup, that's insane. When Miguel Cabrera says your stuff is nasty, you must be pretty good. No, it must mean you must have filthy stuff. Doesn't mean you have control or are a good pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 27, 2013 14:55:54 GMT -5
I'm really pissed that the sox aren't calling up Rubby De La Rosa for this start !!!111!1!!!!!1!!!!! He has a 0.00 ERA in the majors this season !!!!! Let's see you come up with some advanced metrics that beat those numbers !!!!11!!11!!!k/9, BB/9, FB/HR, FIP, xFIP, GB%, LOB%, and BABIP are all #DIV/0! per my excel sheet. Just doesn't seem good to me
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jun 27, 2013 15:28:08 GMT -5
The discussion is both very funny, and very, very predictable. The off season was all about talking people down off the ledge: the team needed Josh Hamilton; it needed Greinke; Nava was going to stink it up; the lineup was cobbled together from leftovers - sort of a baseball version of the African Wildebeest; no aces; on, and on, and on... And while I was optimistic enough to believe they might push over 85 wins, maybe even compete for a playoff spot, there were lots of posters convinced that the Sox would be lucky to break even. Which brings us to the current success. We all need to realize that part of that has been on the backs of performances such as Iglesias' and Carp's. Stuff like that is not necessarily reproducible forever. It means you get wins you may not see in the second half. My own opinion is that the team should stick to the plan, fielding a competitive roster while tapping the emerging riches of the farm system. And yes, that means Webster, Bradley, Lavarnaway, and probably others before the season's out. It's easy to imagine Workman and Brentz getting their shots at some point, and perhaps even a late-season callup for Bogaerts. My own feeling is that, at this point, the Sox need both Aceves and Webster and that they'll use them both. I really don't see Buchholz getting much time in before the all-star break. I don't think there's any chance at all he shows up for those festivities. So giving Webster a few starts to take some of the load off the rotation, getting the staff ready for that second half, that's not a bad idea. I think the rest of the season will be predicated more on what the team decides to do before the trade deadline(s), than it will based on a start or two for Webster or any of the other minor leaguers. This is often how players make it to the majors: blood, sweat and tears.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jun 27, 2013 15:30:29 GMT -5
The trade deadline is coming up. Maybe they want to see what they have in Webster and keep Aceves with some value. It is obvious that Ruby's time will come soon. If they want some relief help do they not have it waiting in Pawtucket potentially? Aceves, Ruby et al.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jun 27, 2013 15:39:20 GMT -5
is this board acting wonky or is it me?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jun 27, 2013 15:55:37 GMT -5
is this board acting wonky or is it me? U
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 16:44:04 GMT -5
So does the small sample size argument only counts when its in the minors. 2 bad starts people. Webster has had exactly 2 bad starts to got with his 1 good one, and a half season of dominating AAA. Now if it were me I would probably think about giving De la Rosa, but they are still limiting his pitches so its understandable they haven't. Aceves has been pretty good in the minors as well, but another reason to give Webster some starts is to get him acclimated to the major leagues so that there becomes a good chance he could prove himself between now and September and potentially be pitching in the playoffs and be slotted into the rotation next season. Or is everyone already convinced he is a bust because of 2 starts? These numbers are good, but dominating? Really? And this is against AAA competition. But if you want to use that standard then this guy has been equally "dominating" and he gets more innings to his outings. Oh, and he's had success in his all 3 of spot starts at the MLB level since being sent down in April, as opposed to the other "dominating" guy. Also, he's has gotten more innings in his MLB starts since forced to have a diaper change by the organization than the other dominating guy, too.
|
|
|
Post by feez732 on Jun 27, 2013 17:11:52 GMT -5
So does the small sample size argument only counts when its in the minors. 2 bad starts people. Webster has had exactly 2 bad starts to got with his 1 good one, and a half season of dominating AAA. Now if it were me I would probably think about giving De la Rosa, but they are still limiting his pitches so its understandable they haven't. Aceves has been pretty good in the minors as well, but another reason to give Webster some starts is to get him acclimated to the major leagues so that there becomes a good chance he could prove himself between now and September and potentially be pitching in the playoffs and be slotted into the rotation next season. Or is everyone already convinced he is a bust because of 2 starts? These numbers are good, but dominating? Really? And this is against AAA competition. But if you want to use that standard then this guy has been equally "dominating" and he gets more innings to his outings. Oh, and he's had success in his all 3 of spot starts at the MLB level since being sent down in April, as opposed to the other "dominating" guy. Also, he's has gotten more innings in his MLB starts since forced to have a diaper change by the organization than the other dominating guy, too. Alfredo Aceves has an ERA over 5 since the start of last year. He was terrible last year and he's been terrible this year. Only over an extremely small recent sample size, of 3 starts, has he gotten decent results. Even then his peripherals were still terrible. Maybe Allen Webster won't do well given another start, but arguing this passionately for Alfredo Aceves over him is absolutely absurd.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jun 27, 2013 18:01:04 GMT -5
Per NESN pregame. Lackey the first Red Sox pitcher to strike out 12 or more in a game with no walks since Pedro in 2003.
Clay shut down for a few days. MRI showed no structural damage, but there is inflamation. Not good. Doubt we see him before the all star break now.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 27, 2013 18:05:28 GMT -5
These numbers are good, but dominating? Really? And this is against AAA competition. But if you want to use that standard then this guy has been equally "dominating" and he gets more innings to his outings. Oh, and he's had success in his all 3 of spot starts at the MLB level since being sent down in April, as opposed to the other "dominating" guy. Also, he's has gotten more innings in his MLB starts since forced to have a diaper change by the organization than the other dominating guy, too. Alfredo Aceves has an ERA over 5 since the start of last year. He was terrible last year and he's been terrible this year. Only over an extremely small recent sample size, of 3 starts, has he gotten decent results. Even then his peripherals were still terrible. Maybe Allen Webster won't do well given another start, but arguing this passionately for Alfredo Aceves over him is absolutely absurd. I was only using the same logic/sample size for dominance as bjb406, and in part arguing if that is the measuring stick they are just as dominating, but one guy has enjoyed more success at the highest level while theother has decidedly not.
|
|
|
Post by greekgodofpancakes on Jun 27, 2013 18:12:53 GMT -5
I rarely notice someone's colloquialisms, but I hear every single one of Shane Victorino's "yeah know".
|
|
|