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.
5/12-5/15 Red Sox vs. Astros Series Thread
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 14, 2016 0:30:58 GMT -5
Exactly. And about Barnes, well maybe it was to see what he had in these close games, it's not like he's a AAAA vet who's beyond hope, he could be a key cog in the bullpen. Besides, I remember people calling out Farrell for using Tazawa over Barnes so yeah, there's that. Why would you do that when you have a proven, ground ball generating, RHH shutting, rested reliever in Carson Smith? Add: And man, I've been on record for saying that Barnes is a terrible pitcher. He's a mop up guy at best. Because you want to see if you can also have a K-generating fireballer? What's the use of bringing players along if you don't let them fail? It's not just a rumor, that is the road to success - that's if a player can learn from those mistakes. Let's judge Barnes on how well he does that. It's a very.. long... season.... and they've got to figure out what they have. And believe it or not, they will lose once in a while.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,018
|
Post by ericmvan on May 14, 2016 0:33:11 GMT -5
ummm... Wright has been our best starter this year.... He deserves more rope than the rest of the rotation Exactly. And about Barnes, well maybe it was to see what he had in these close games, it's not like he's a AAAA vet who's beyond hope, he could be a key cog in the bullpen. Besides, I remember people calling out Farrell for using Tazawa over Barnes so yeah, there's that. The chances are pretty f-ing great that what "he has in these close games" is what he has in the not close games. Which has been, not good enough to pitch for this team in close games.
The question is not whether Barnes sucks or is potentially pretty valuable. We don't have to have that debate. I mean, we all agree that Tazawa is pretty good. If, however, you had in-their-prime Mariano Rivera, Dennis Eckersley, Dick Radatz, Bruce Sutter, and Eric Gagne full of juice in your bullpen, all well rested, and you had Tazawa pitch the 6th inning of a tie game, that would be indefensibly stupid.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,018
|
Post by ericmvan on May 14, 2016 0:46:52 GMT -5
Why would you do that when you have a proven, ground ball generating, RHH shutting, rested reliever in Carson Smith? Add: And man, I've been on record for saying that Barnes is a terrible pitcher. He's a mop up guy at best. Because you want to see if you can also have a K-generating fireballer? What's the use of bringing players along if you don't let them fail? It's not just a rumor, that is the road to success - that's if a player can learn from those mistakes. Let's judge Barnes on how well he does that. It's a very.. long... season.... and they've got to figure out what they have. And believe it or not, they will lose once in a while. In fact, it's such a long season that there will very likely be high-leverage situations in the future where Barnes is not your 7th or 8th best option! Yes, there have been managers who are so reluctant to let a guy like Barnes pitch in a close game that they overwork their proven guys. When your go-to guys need a break, that's when you go figure out what you've got with your Matt Barnes types. The Red Sox had won five straight games: Complete game 4 bullpen innings, average LI of .08 3 bullpen innings, average LI of .07 2.1 bullpen innings, average LI of .02 2.1 bullpen innings, average LI of .02 That they even had an 8th bullpen guy for the next game is mind-boggling. That he pitched the 6th inning of a tie game is satire.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,585
|
Post by radiohix on May 14, 2016 0:48:49 GMT -5
Why would you do that when you have a proven, ground ball generating, RHH shutting, rested reliever in Carson Smith? Add: And man, I've been on record for saying that Barnes is a terrible pitcher. He's a mop up guy at best. Because you want to see if you can also have a K-generating fireballer? What's the use of bringing players along if you don't let them fail? It's not just a rumor, that is the road to success - that's if a player can learn from those mistakes. Let's judge Barnes on how well he does that. It's a very.. long... season.... and they've got to figure out what they have. And believe it or not, they will lose once in a while. Throwing a straight 97 mph with no deception doesn't make you a k-generating reliever, it makes you a flyball reliever and that's a bad formula when you're pitching in Fenway, it's pretty simple if you're willing to think about it. Again, this front office payed a king ransom to get a top notch young reliever who's been total death to RHH (you live on the west coast, you saw him toying with Trout). Smith was rested, JF has the top of the Astros order coming (all right handed) why on earth not use him?
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 14, 2016 1:14:29 GMT -5
Because you want to see if you can also have a K-generating fireballer? What's the use of bringing players along if you don't let them fail? It's not just a rumor, that is the road to success - that's if a player can learn from those mistakes. Let's judge Barnes on how well he does that. It's a very.. long... season.... and they've got to figure out what they have. And believe it or not, they will lose once in a while. Pretty much how I feel, it's a very long season and I understand that people are right to use these threads to vent about the baffling decisions the manager makes. Thing is, I don't think Farrell moves are usually that bad. He makes a few bad ones, sure, but I can understand every single move he made in this game for example. I might have done differently, but he's still trying to build his group and seeing what he has. Team lost a game, so what, that happens. And the Red Sox are still sitting pretty at 22 wins, bested only by 2 teams in the entire MLB. Everyone should relax a bit.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,018
|
Post by ericmvan on May 14, 2016 1:23:18 GMT -5
Why would you do that when you have a proven, ground ball generating, RHH shutting, rested reliever in Carson Smith? Add: And man, I've been on record for saying that Barnes is a terrible pitcher. He's a mop up guy at best. Because you want to see if you can also have a K-generating fireballer? What's the use of bringing players along if you don't let them fail? It's not just a rumor, that is the road to success - that's if a player can learn from those mistakes. Let's judge Barnes on how well he does that. It's a very.. long... season.... and they've got to figure out what they have. And believe it or not, they will lose once in a while. When was the last time a Red Sox reliever had even pitched with an LI of over 0.50? A week ago. When Tommy Layne came in with an 0.53 LI when he pitched the 8th down 3-2. On the 6th, he used the following guys, with their LI when entering: 1.13 Hembree 3.83 Barnes 1.53 Tazawa 0.69 Ross Uehara had a 1.04 on the 4th. Kimbrel last pitched with LI > 1.0 on May 1. Ross hadn't pitched in high-leverage since April 25th, before having a 1.01 tonight. Smith has been active for 11 days and has yet to pitch in high leverage. It's indeed a luxury to go 12 days and have only two high-leverage relief situations. Given that almost non-existent load on the bullpen, how the F do you end up using the universally agreed-upon 8th best reliever in both of them? And it's not like this is the first time this happened this year.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 14, 2016 1:38:46 GMT -5
The poster child for this discussion is the guy out in center field. His numbers after a few hundred major league PAs were abysmal. The very same analysts who touted him as a sure bet before he'd seen a day in AAA were ready to toss him aside when he proved not to be ready for the majors.
Once he'd gotten back on track in Pawtucket as one of the best players in minor league ball, there was only one thing left to do, bring him up and put him out there every day but the team was loath to do that. If not for the wheels finally falling off Victorino for good, he might still be down there. Players need to play on that top rung and endure the failures to get to success. Barnes is no different. Can he do that? Only one way to find out.
And stop with the junk about straight fastball or Eric will hunt you down. The guy has always been able to strike people out. What he lacks is consistency with the secondaries. Read the scouting reports. Again, it was a hanging curve in the heart of the plate that did him in.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,585
|
Post by radiohix on May 14, 2016 2:21:48 GMT -5
I'm not sure you're really understanding what Eric is talking about here: He thinks for a fact that Barnes IS THE WORST RELIEVER ON THIS TEAM. You don't use your worst reliever in a high leverage situation when you have all your better options available! You use him maybe when the other has been pitching for 3 consecutive days or when they've been already used in the game but not in this case! You try to win every game you can in a very competitive division, a win in May is as valuable as a win September. Oh an please don't compare JBJ to Barnes: JBJ has been dominant in every level in the MiLB, Barnes beside Low A was pretty meh to down right mediocre (that's why he found himself in the pen). There's a big difference here.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on May 14, 2016 7:39:13 GMT -5
iI am with Orgeon Norm...which probably causes him to rethink this position. Wright, nnfortunately, blows a 5-1 lead, but the fault lies with Barnes and Farrell. I like Barnes potential, so I want to see him pitch in those situations, you have to find out what you have. We also need to get away from 13 pitchers...it's too clogged int eh bullpen
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,018
|
Post by ericmvan on May 14, 2016 8:36:46 GMT -5
The poster child for this discussion is the guy out in center field. His numbers after a few hundred major league PAs were abysmal. The very same analysts who touted him as a sure bet before he'd seen a day in AAA were ready to toss him aside when he proved not to be ready for the majors. Once he'd gotten back on track in Pawtucket as one of the best players in minor league ball, there was only one thing left to do, bring him up and put him out there every day but the team was loath to do that. If not for the wheels finally falling off Victorino for good, he might still be down there. Players need to play on that top rung and endure the failures to get to success. Barnes is no different. Can he do that? Only one way to find out. And stop with the junk about straight fastball or Eric will hunt you down. The guy has always been able to strike people out. What he lacks is consistency with the secondaries. Read the scouting reports. Again, it was a hanging curve in the heart of the plate that did him in. If we remove all the mismatches from your analogy, then you have just made a heartfelt argument that Deven Marrero should be starting at SS once or twice a week. Really. Think it through. Your bolded statement is absolutely true, but at the same time, you cannot give them the opportunity to succeed or fail when their are multiple demonstrably better options for the PT. JBJ projected to be the best CFer in the organization. Barnes projects to be the 8th best reliever for a 7-man bullpen. See the Farrell thread for more, if I get it done today. FG fixes their bug where pitching stats from May 9 aren't included on the site.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on May 14, 2016 8:40:57 GMT -5
And stop with the junk about straight fastball or Eric will hunt you down. The guy has always been able to strike people out. What he lacks is consistency with the secondaries. Read the scouting reports. Again, it was a hanging curve in the heart of the plate that did him in. "Straight" is possibly something of a misnomer, but by the numbers, his fastball movement seems very typical. It move the way hitters would expect a fastball to move, and that shows in the results. For his career, he's gotten basically league-average swinging strikes on it, which is not really what you're looking for in a reliever. The secondary stuff is decent but again not special by results, and as you say, inconsistent. If he can improve his command and consistency with his secondary pitches, he could be a pretty decent pitcher... which is a statement that describes literally hundreds of professional pitchers. Overall I just don't see anything so special about the guy that you just have to keep him on the major league roster. He's basically an up-and-down guy right now, and becoming something more than that is on him, regardless of what level he's at.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on May 14, 2016 9:52:25 GMT -5
I understand Norm's point and agree with its philosophy. I also agree with Eric's argument. What I would do with Barnes, if he is going to be on the major league roster, is pitch him in less important innings until he shows that he has the command to pitch in high leverage situations.
Norm is right that to become a quality major league pitcher he has to pitch in the major leagues. But I know from many years of managing and developing people that you can do damage to the development of a person if you put them in a situation for which they are not ready unless, of course, you have no choice. Farrell had lots of choices, as Eric points out, and it was just dumb to put Barnes in instead of one of the others.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 14, 2016 10:04:10 GMT -5
The poster child for this discussion is the guy out in center field. His numbers after a few hundred major league PAs were abysmal. The very same analysts who touted him as a sure bet before he'd seen a day in AAA were ready to toss him aside when he proved not to be ready for the majors. Once he'd gotten back on track in Pawtucket as one of the best players in minor league ball, there was only one thing left to do, bring him up and put him out there every day but the team was loath to do that. If not for the wheels finally falling off Victorino for good, he might still be down there. Players need to play on that top rung and endure the failures to get to success. Barnes is no different. Can he do that? Only one way to find out. And stop with the junk about straight fastball or Eric will hunt you down. The guy has always been able to strike people out. What he lacks is consistency with the secondaries. Read the scouting reports. Again, it was a hanging curve in the heart of the plate that did him in. Let him try and fail or succeed in lower leverage situations. We're trying to win games here, not developing 8th relief pitchers with on the job training in high leverage situations. He hadn't shown enough in low leverage innings to let him pitch in higher leverage innings. Especially when Carson Smith hasn't pitched in 11 days.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on May 14, 2016 10:53:06 GMT -5
Top of the 5th, 5-1, Red Sox had a 90% WE. Wright's knuckleball, what with the drizzle, etc. was skating by (just read Wright's comments after the game). If you want to let him face the bottom of the order to start the 5th, fine. Ringing Wall double from Castro. Bunt single. You traded a 200 IP starter for Carson Smith. He's pitched 2 low-impact innings the whole year! You've got one of the best hitters in the AL coming up, 3 RHH due up in a row. If you limit the damage in that inning, it's game over, with a bullpen as rested as possible, except maybe for Opening Day. That situation is made for Carson Smith, it's why he's on the team. If he's not hurt (and Farrell had him warming at some point), it's a no-brainer. You need to win games when you have a 90% WE - Farrell literally is responsible for this loss. I hate it when every move is somehow treated as a referendum on the *individual* involved - you make moves to win the game in front of you. I hope this doesn't come back to bite them.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on May 14, 2016 11:08:43 GMT -5
I called Farrell out for leaving Wright in too long during the game and same with Barnes.
Both we're clearly laboring and we're bound to give up multiple runs. So what did Farrell do, wait until the exact moment when they both blew it to pull them.
For once John, try having some bleeping forsight? I don't know, try using the stats to your advantage.
Good to know though, that the only thing that can beat this team is their own damn manager. You know the guy who wastes his top relievers in 10 run games so we are stuck with Matt Barnes in a tie game? That one. Seriously, there literally isn't a worse manager in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on May 14, 2016 11:42:57 GMT -5
I understand Norm's point and agree with its philosophy. I also agree with Eric's argument. What I would do with Barnes, if he is going to be on the major league roster, is pitch him in less important innings until he shows that he has the command to pitch in high leverage situations. Norm is right that to become a quality major league pitcher he has to pitch in the major leagues. But I know from many years of managing and developing people that you can do damage to the development of a person if you put them in a situation for which they are not ready unless, of course, you have no choice. Farrell had lots of choices, as Eric points out, and it was just dumb to put Barnes in instead of one of the others. Honestly, this doesn't match anything I've ever observed about pitcher development. Pitchers often improve because of major changes to mechanics or arsenal, and that's often work that's best done away from major league hitters and games that matter. And there's plenty of examples of guys who are good major league pitchers right from the jump, particularly relievers. I don't see any reason why Barnes just HAS to struggle in the majors in order to one day become good in the majors. Plenty of guys have taken other paths, so why can't he? Unless you just don't consider a guy a "good major league pitcher" until he's pitched well in the majors for a stretch, in which case it's just a tautology.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on May 14, 2016 12:11:11 GMT -5
Good lord, Clay Buchholz has no business pitching in the majors right now.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on May 14, 2016 12:11:16 GMT -5
Buchholz is a very, very bad pitcher and has literally no business in a major league rotation.
|
|
|
Post by bosox89 on May 14, 2016 12:11:41 GMT -5
Luck!!!
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on May 14, 2016 12:14:12 GMT -5
So glad we pissed away last nights game.
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on May 14, 2016 12:20:19 GMT -5
Anyone else a little annoyed by how often O'Brien cites pitcher wins?
|
|
|
Post by thursty on May 14, 2016 12:25:03 GMT -5
Bogaerts the king of BABIP
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on May 14, 2016 12:27:01 GMT -5
Anyone else a little annoyed by how often O'Brien cites pitcher wins? No. Because in reality, those are the types of things 90% of fans still only care about. He's not announcing the game to those of us who care so much about the game that we are posting on message boards about it.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 14, 2016 12:27:31 GMT -5
JBJ finally batting at the top of the order! I hope it's not just because Pedroia is sitting though.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on May 14, 2016 12:35:48 GMT -5
Boy, that play to cut down 1 run at home rather than turn the double play was dumb.
But, unfortunately Remy doesn't realize there was no outs.
|
|
|