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 okin15 on Jan 6, 2014 3:57:54 GMT -5
This is the complete opposite of all reports. Where are you getting this? Umm I think you are misunderstanding my comment. It's not Webster that isn't a prospect.....but rather a hypothetical AAA pitcher with great stuff who throws it all over the place. A guy like that isn't a prospect. Webster is better than that. In your quote you said Webster's problem was that his fastball wasn't moving... but that's the opposite of true. Often, it moves too much and misses the strike zone. Occasionally he has to compensate with a straight fastball, and occasionally he hangs one, but generally, straightness is the opposite of his problem.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Jan 6, 2014 7:02:50 GMT -5
I think this guy is an Andrew Miller type - a pitcher a lot of people are convinced will be a #1 starter, but who ultimately will be a pen arm. Someone may fix Webster but - as Speier said recently - if many teams still consider him the #1 starter-type who is near MLB ready, I would sell as high as I could on this guy if someone is dumb enough to give you the kind of return you'd expect on a #1 starting pitcher prospect. I have been praying that Miami loves him and he becomes the cornerstone of a package for Giancarlo Stanton, that way the Sox would only have to give up 2-3 other good prospects. I would move him soon for the best package I could get before other teams stop drooling and start seeing his best case comp is not Michael Wacha but rather Daniel Bard, if that. I say that as I have said before on Webster, hoping I am very, very wrong (unless they trade him, of course - then I hope he goes all Jobba implosion immediately). Wacha was only the 6th rated prospect in the Cards system and struggled initially. Granted he had a nice playoff run but so did Doubront. Wacha profiles lower than a guy like Martinez who could actually become a #1. I'm a believer Webster will figure it out and become a good #2 eventually. I would love for it to be this year so they can either feel comfortable in allowing Peavy to leave or as you put it, use him in a Stanton deal. Either scenario the Sox win.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Jan 6, 2014 7:56:41 GMT -5
Webster reads sort of like the anti-Ranaudo. Put 'em together and you'd have another King Felix. But separately, they could turn out to be simply a mismatched set of Wal-Mart vases.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Jan 6, 2014 10:52:20 GMT -5
I suppose what baffles me is this: Webster was traded to our system and immediately ranked as the #4 prospect in our system. This coming after (our towards the end of) a year in which he was repeating Double-A and put up the following numbers: WHIP: 1.485, H/9: 9.2, BB/9: 4.2, K/9: 8.9 That is fairly unspectacular, yet we were excited and optimistic. He then spends his FIRST full season in Triple A and puts up: WHIP: 1.086, H/9: 6.1, BB/9: 3.7, K/9: 9.9 So he jumped up a level, and improved across the board including the drastic reduction in hits/9 as has already been discussed. All of this, and he falls to the 8 position in the rankings with the majority of the fanbase being very lukewarm on him all of a sudden. So why? For one, the reports on him during spring training were so ridiculous that I think everyone expected him to force his way to the majors this year and be a star. When he did pitch the majors, he did struggle, but I think even that is being blown out of proportion for two reasons. 1. He actually didn't do all that bad in 3 of the 6 starts he made, but everyone is focused on the 3 starts that he got shelled. 2. The ridiculous rate of swings and misses at least confirm how nasty his stuff is at the major league level. I think more realistically we should have been looking for progression from Webster this year making the jump from Double to Triple A, and I think its clear that progress was made. I'm not going to argue that the command is questionable and will ultimately decide his ceiling, but to me, he is the only guy in our system with a ceiling as a #1 (yes, a #1), and his floor as a high leverage reliever isn't too shabby either. I like him ahead of all of our pitching prospects, even Henry Owens, who has very similar problems with command, yet hasn't proven himself at the levels that Webster has. This. I think this sums things up perfectly. Tangentially, it also helps explain why I'm down on Owens relative to the other pitching prospects. Another thought: Perhaps we as a community are negative about Webster's future because he impressed so much in ST that our hopes were significantly higher. It's the same effect as what occurred with JBJ. The difference may be that Webster has several contemporaries at his experience level and talent level within the system, whereas JBJ doesn't. We might be having this same discussion about Bradley if we had Jorge Soler, Oscar Tavares and Nick Castellanos.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pereira on Jan 6, 2014 11:36:58 GMT -5
I think the start that best defines the type of season Webster had in 2013 was on May 19 against the Indianapolis Indians, during which he countered Pittsburgh's Gerrit Cole.
He retired the first 11 batters he faced, including six straight strikeouts. It was pure dominance. When I was watching, I thought he was going to no hit the Indians. Folks up in the press box were in awe and thought he was going to set the PawSox record for consecutive strikeouts (if memory serves me correct, it's nine). The best stretch I saw from a PawSox pitcher since I started covering them in 2011. He topped out at 96, and was hitting his spots with ease. The Indians batters were baffled by his sinker.
After that, though, he walked five of the subsequent eight batters he faced, and just lost his command (17 of his final 28 pitches of that outing where balls, and he threw in a wild pitch). I'd never seen a pitcher endure such a drop-off of that nature, but I've also never seen such dominance in person.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 6, 2014 11:53:05 GMT -5
I think the issue is more that he hasn't learned to harness the movement on his pitches. Almost as if he has too much movement on his fastball. From his sox prospects.com profile: Fastball sits 92-95 mph and tops out at 98 mph. Shows plus plus sinking movement, with late life.Right it's more of a consistency issue. As we learned in the World Series, a sinking fastball that doesn't sink ends up in the seats. It's a devastating almost unhittable pitch especially when it's thrown in the mid 90s, but you can't make mistakes with it in the middle of the zone. A good example of a pitcher who threw this pitch was Kevin Brown, so that tells you how good Webster could be if he puts it all together. Wasn't there some report that his problems started when he was clocked at 99 or 100 in spring training last year? Supposedly, it went to his head and he started over-throwing and losing movement and control? I remember reading that somewhere. You definitely should not overthrow a sinker.
|
|
hank
Rookie
Posts: 102
|
Post by hank on Jan 6, 2014 12:33:27 GMT -5
I have serious doubt Webster will ever put it together, at least in Boston. He seems to be mentally pillow soft. Something bad happens and more often than not he goes right to the 1000 yard stare, deer in the headlights look, it scares me and I just don't trust him out there. Seems like a great kid and maybe he'll get it it in a small market some day but if someone came knocking with a solid offer I'd be in, just my take.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 6, 2014 13:03:05 GMT -5
Umm I think you are misunderstanding my comment. It's not Webster that isn't a prospect.....but rather a hypothetical AAA pitcher with great stuff who throws it all over the place. A guy like that isn't a prospect. Webster is better than that. In your quote you said Webster's problem was that his fastball wasn't moving... but that's the opposite of true. Often, it moves too much and misses the strike zone. Occasionally he has to compensate with a straight fastball, and occasionally he hangs one, but generally, straightness is the opposite of his problem. From Keith Law Chat 12/19/13 I don't think that this is the opposite of what I said.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 6, 2014 13:23:45 GMT -5
In looking over a few of Websters game logs, he pitched well following the May demotion, but got rocked in the two games following the Jul demotion. I am inclined to think there is a confidence issue as Webster had an outstanding 1.09 WHIP in AAA but 1.81 with Bos. I supposed indicator would be pitching in a jam, either with RISP or after giving up a HR. Not to side track, but the reason I don't think Owens has serious control issues is that he may give up a walk or even two to start an inning, but then he tightens down to close out the inning. It seems to me that he working on his repertoire than being excessively worried about his stat line (which were mostly outstanding) Something that stood out to me was Webster's struggles when he first got promoted to AA. It took him a year to get his numbers back down to something dominant, but his K numbers dropped way down when he first got promoted to AA and walks shot up. That could be a sign that it takes him a while to mentally adjust to higher levels of competition or that his flaws were exposed at higher levels for a year. He is truly an enigma right now, but one that has undeniable upside.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 6, 2014 14:59:22 GMT -5
He wasn't just getting demoted. He was getting his ML spot start and immediately sent down because of how long it took them to put Buchholz on the DL. He had absolutely no regularity in his preparation. I argued that they should leave him on the roster for at least a few weeks to give him some kind or stability to prepare between starts. Let him be around the other pitchers to see what they do, etc.
I don't think anyone in the Red Sox rotation would have done great in that scenario, let alone a rookie getting his first ML starts. I've read many many times that starting pitchers are creatures of habit even more than regular baseball players. I wasn't a huge fan of how Webster was handled. Probably would have been better off giving Wright the starts.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 6, 2014 15:10:20 GMT -5
I have serious doubt Webster will ever put it together, at least in Boston. He seems to be mentally pillow soft. Something bad happens and more often than not he goes right to the 1000 yard stare, deer in the headlights look, it scares me and I just don't trust him out there. Seems like a great kid and maybe he'll get it it in a small market some day but if someone came knocking with a solid offer I'd be in, just my take. I'm not much of one for amateur psychology. I'd rather that the staff have him work on his mechanics, getting him to repeat his motion and developing a rhythm. Maybe they'll put him on the couch if that doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Jan 19, 2014 12:38:09 GMT -5
here are Webster's 2013 L/R splits
___ IP _ PA/AB _ FIP _ K% _ BB% _ WHIP _ BA / OBP/ SLG BOS v L 13.0 70/59 10.6 11.4% 10.0% 2.38 .407/.443/.847 v R 13.1 58/48 3.28 22.4% 12.1% 1.58 .250/.362/.271 PAW v L 50.0 218/186 4.56 20.6% 12.4% 1.44 .220/.332/.355 v R 55.0 218/188 3.09 32.6% 7.3% 1.05 .160/.266/.250
granted the sample size is very small, especially for MLB, but I could live with his line against righties while he is getting adjusted to playing at the MLB level. Given his excellence in AAA over 105 IP, I would be inclined to think that pitching out of the bullpen with Boston is the better place for Webster to complete his development. If he has success against lefties, then we can re-evaluate his potential as starter?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 19, 2014 14:32:37 GMT -5
I could live with the AAA line but .362 OBP before MLB had even figured him out? No thank you.
As you said, small sample, and unless you're pitching him out of the pen, MLB lefties will feast if we're living with what we have.
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Jan 19, 2014 15:12:01 GMT -5
the complete sentence finished with: "while he is getting adjusted to playing at the MLB level". I am not arguing that Webster's .362 OBP against RH makes him the best choice to take the last RP spot on the roster. It is that there is not much development for Webster to be done in AAA. Why would we accept marginal performance while he works on the final phase of his training? Because we believe he could be a 3 starter with possible upside. Per my comment in the Owens thread, a free agent 3 starter costs $15M per year. I am sure we can find some low stress middle innings for Webster to pitch. The more difficult matter is finding a roster spot give the pitching depth we have. -- Oh Sh!t, the game has started.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 19, 2014 15:17:47 GMT -5
I could live with the AAA line but .362 OBP before MLB had even figured him out? No thank you. As you said, small sample, and unless you're pitching him out of the pen, MLB lefties will feast if we're living with what we have. You could live with his AAA line? Exaggerate much? Webster's AAA line was fantastic. If he could reproduce that in the majors he would be a solid #2 starter.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jan 19, 2014 19:19:11 GMT -5
I could live with the AAA line but .362 OBP before MLB had even figured him out? No thank you. As you said, small sample, and unless you're pitching him out of the pen, MLB lefties will feast if we're living with what we have. That's a funny way of saying "a young pitcher in his first exposure to the MLB".
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Jan 20, 2014 14:51:14 GMT -5
as to whether "MLB had even figured him out?" notice that Webster faced 70/58 LH/PH batters in MLB, and 218/218 in Pawtucket, surely those were stacked lineups?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 21, 2014 6:43:10 GMT -5
as to whether "MLB had even figured him out?" notice that Webster faced 70/58 LH/PH batters in MLB, and 218/218 in Pawtucket, surely those were stacked lineups? I have no idea what you're saying here.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jan 21, 2014 7:42:40 GMT -5
as to whether "MLB had even figured him out?" notice that Webster faced 70/58 LH/PH batters in MLB, and 218/218 in Pawtucket, surely those were stacked lineups? I have no idea what you're saying here. He is just saying that mlb managers stacked the lineup against Webster more than even minor league managers. A starter who sees more lefties than righties is odd, though I doubt that is the product of advance mlb scouting. Seems more likely to be just "stack the lineup against the rookie" than "I've scouted his change..." Seeing even numbers in the minors is odd, too, though.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jan 21, 2014 8:26:53 GMT -5
Can we all just agree that his major league numbers mean absolutely nothing?
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Jan 21, 2014 9:57:55 GMT -5
Can we all just agree that his major league numbers mean absolutely nothing? Yes. I can agree with you. Others may take more convincing though.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 21, 2014 11:23:58 GMT -5
Can we all just agree that his major league numbers mean absolutely nothing? Yes. I can agree with you. Others may take more convincing though. "mean very little" might convince more people than "mean absolutely nothing"
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jan 21, 2014 11:50:03 GMT -5
Yes. I can agree with you. Others may take more convincing though. "mean very little" might convince more people than "mean absolutely nothing" How about "means so little as to be useless?"
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 21, 2014 12:14:37 GMT -5
Just a reminder. He's 23, the same age as Barnes, a year younger than Ranaudo and 2 years younger than Workman.
Just sayin'
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 21, 2014 13:12:17 GMT -5
Yes. I can agree with you. Others may take more convincing though. "mean very little" might convince more people than "mean absolutely nothing" I wouldn't say his numbers mean absolutely nothing as much as I would say that his 2013 numbers show that he obviously hasn't proven he can effectively pitch in the majors as of yet. His numbers indicate that he needs to cut down on the free passes and keep the ball in ballpark to post better 2014 numbers which he might or might not do. His 2013 numbers aren't necessarily an accurate portrayal of how he may pitch going forward, but they indicate the troubles he needs to work on and to what degree he solves those issues will determine how good a pitcher he can become. It's a mouthful, but I'd say this is more accurate.
|
|
|