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 p23w on Jan 4, 2019 13:38:21 GMT -5
File this under the meaningless take department. One word answer to a question with the word “potential”. 5% chance equals potential. Eh, Keith is often terse like that. He is saying that he likes Feltman and that he's relatively close to being a contributor. He's not the type who would just say "yes" if he thought there was only a 5% of a chance it was going to happen. I've been saying the same thing about Kimbrel for years. He's more reliant on his velocity than just about any pitcher I can think of. That's a scary thought when considering a 4+ year deal with him at age 30. There's a fine line between Kimbrel being dominant and him being out of the majors IMO. Yeah. And the thing is, I can be talked into paying a year at the end for quality in the early end of the contract. But Kimbrel doesn't give the kind of confidence in 2019 that a high-end free agent should. There's a much better chance he totally washes out than most guys in his position. There's also a chance that he's the best reliever in baseball, but it's a tougher risk/reward balance than you see with other free agents, IMO. So I agree that I just don't like him on a four year deal. I'd have no problem with three, because the reward is really high in the short term. But I totally get why Kimbrel sees the Jansen and Chapman deals and doesn't want to settle for three. I don't buy the tipping pitches argument. I think it was attributable to lack of command brought about by an inconsistent arm angle/ release point. Agree with a 3 year deal for Kimbrel
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 4, 2019 14:43:52 GMT -5
Typical wow Speier piece: It is a significant part of the team’s planning for next year. At a time when the bullpen is still being formed, part of the Red Sox’ comfort in waiting for the right market conditions on relievers comes from the success they’ve had working with numerous pitchers in recent years.
The Red Sox believe they have some flexibility to consider looking beyond pedigree in order to find late-innings impact from pitchers who may not have the track record of Kimbrel or David Robertson but who, with a few subtle tweaks, may be able to help offset the loss of Kimbrel and Kelly.
That’s not to say the Sox won’t add a high-profile reliever if the terms are right. But the past three years have convinced them that they have more options than might have been the case a few years ago.
“You can’t create physical talent out of thin air,” said Bannister. “The pitcher or the player has to have the physical talent to start with. You’re always limited by that. If you can’t acquire that, you’re not going to create it. www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2019/01/04/how-red-sox-rebuilt-their-pitching-infrastructure/SHgUa974oenyoJonwQYx3K/story.html
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jan 4, 2019 15:30:47 GMT -5
File this under the meaningless take department. One word answer to a question with the word “potential”. 5% chance equals potential. Eh, Keith is often terse like that. He is saying that he likes Feltman and that he's relatively close to being a contributor. He's not the type who would just say "yes" if he thought there was only a 5% of a chance it was going to happen. Agree to disagree here. There are two different things being said here. “Close to being a contributor” and “potential high leverage reliever” are 2 very different things. Keith Law most likely does think he’s close to ready to pitch in the majors, but that wasn’t the question. I doubt very much he believes there’s a good chance he’s a high leverage guy immediately but there’s always the chance. I would agree there’s a much higher than 5% chance he “contributes” on some level.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jan 4, 2019 15:31:53 GMT -5
Eh, Keith is often terse like that. He is saying that he likes Feltman and that he's relatively close to being a contributor. He's not the type who would just say "yes" if he thought there was only a 5% of a chance it was going to happen. Yeah. And the thing is, I can be talked into paying a year at the end for quality in the early end of the contract. But Kimbrel doesn't give the kind of confidence in 2019 that a high-end free agent should. There's a much better chance he totally washes out than most guys in his position. There's also a chance that he's the best reliever in baseball, but it's a tougher risk/reward balance than you see with other free agents, IMO. So I agree that I just don't like him on a four year deal. I'd have no problem with three, because the reward is really high in the short term. But I totally get why Kimbrel sees the Jansen and Chapman deals and doesn't want to settle for three. I don't buy the tipping pitches argument. I think it was attributable to lack of command brought about by an inconsistent arm angle/ release point. Agree with a 3 year deal for Kimbrel What I don’t get is how he ever has command when he starts his delivery looking at third base. I believe he’s done that his whole cares tho, but I just don’t get it.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jan 4, 2019 15:34:34 GMT -5
... comes from the success they’ve had working with numerous pitchers in recent years. Ummm like who? Braiser?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 4, 2019 16:44:03 GMT -5
... comes from the success they’ve had working with numerous pitchers in recent years. Ummm like who? Braiser? Rich Hill, Eovaldi, Price (at different times), Joe Kelly finally
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Jan 4, 2019 16:47:17 GMT -5
Also, and I love Brian Bannister so this isn't a shot at him. But the way people run to post "looks like a Bannister project!" at every single low-level signing is kind of funny. I can see Erasmo Ramirez, who has something of a history of underperforming his stuff. But Zach Putnam isn't really a reclamation project, or a guy who needs fixing. He's just a pretty good pitcher who got hurt. This latest Speier column confirms my suspicions about Bannister's role in player acquisition. Whether or not the Sox sign a premium late inning arm (and, as I posted before, I think they will), it seems clear they're actively looking for undervalued pitchers. They have confidence that some percentage of these signings will pan out specifically because of a competitive coaching/analytics advantage, of which Bannister is a major part. From the article:
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 4, 2019 17:00:43 GMT -5
... comes from the success they’ve had working with numerous pitchers in recent years. Ummm like who? Braiser? The article specifically names Sale, Brasier, Barnes, Ziegler, Reed & Eovaldi and there were some obvious others not mentioned like Hill & Kelly. Speier went into a lot of detail about Eovaldi and it was impressive. “I felt like I improved a lot,” Eovaldi said. “Coming off Tommy John surgery, it’s like you have a chance to redevelop how you pitch. I had some highs and lows with the Rays. When I was traded to the Red Sox, we were able to get on that right page and those last two months I was throwing the ball really well.”ADD: The entire article is well worth the read. If you don't have a subscription, there's good news, there is a two week free trial and you don't have to input your credit card number. ADD2: You can also learn about Pitching Evaluation Development Research Optimization with an interesting acronym.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 4, 2019 17:13:06 GMT -5
And remember now, the Sox targeted Brewer at last year's trade deadline but weren't able to pull it off.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 4, 2019 17:50:48 GMT -5
The thing I find funny is that when looking at Kimbrels velocity over the years I see nothing that shows if he loses a few MPH he's toast. I see a bunch of months of him doing great at 95 and 96 MPH. Heck because of no spring training he started out the first two months at 96 this year and was lights out. He wasn't very good the last two months yet averaged over 98 MPH.
Just my two cents but couldn't the fact he had basically no spring training and the crap with his daughter just caught up to him as the year went on? I mean I 'd buy the velocity stuff if they were reversed. Like he was at 98, then struggled at 96 the last few months. That just wasn't the case though.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 4, 2019 18:16:37 GMT -5
And remember now, the Sox targeted Brewer at last year's trade deadline but weren't able to pull it off. Yet another reason to sign Shelby Miller now. Start him in the pen and, if he can ramp up, shift him to the rotation as soon as there’s a need. And there’s always a need.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Jan 4, 2019 18:25:23 GMT -5
The thing I find funny is that when looking at Kimbrels velocity over the years I see nothing that shows if he loses a few MPH he's toast. I see a bunch of months of him doing great at 95 and 96 MPH. Heck because of no spring training he started out the first two months at 96 this year and was lights out. He wasn't very good the last two months yet averaged over 98 MPH. Just my two cents but couldn't the fact he had basically no spring training and the crap with his daughter just caught up to him as the year went on? I mean I 'd buy the velocity stuff if they were reversed. Like he was at 98, then struggled at 96 the last few months. That just wasn't the case though. Yes, Kimbrel is still probably pretty effective at 95-97. I think the question is whether he's still good at 92-95. The follow-up question is how long before his velocity drops that much. Purely gut level, I think he has a good chance to hold on to the majority of his velocity for another 3-4 years, in which case he should be very good (2018-level), if not great (2017-level).
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Jan 4, 2019 18:28:55 GMT -5
And just to reinforce James' point above, here's that FB/CB overlay:
Kimbrel can get away with his frequent middle-middle fastballs as long they a) have lots of late life, b) are 98 MPH, and c) are 10 MPH faster than his filthy breaking ball.
Once his fastball slows down, but his breaking ball stays 85-88 (as usually happens), he's going to have to command a lot better or he's toast.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 4, 2019 22:43:15 GMT -5
The thing I find funny is that when looking at Kimbrels velocity over the years I see nothing that shows if he loses a few MPH he's toast. I see a bunch of months of him doing great at 95 and 96 MPH. Heck because of no spring training he started out the first two months at 96 this year and was lights out. He wasn't very good the last two months yet averaged over 98 MPH. Just my two cents but couldn't the fact he had basically no spring training and the crap with his daughter just caught up to him as the year went on? I mean I 'd buy the velocity stuff if they were reversed. Like he was at 98, then struggled at 96 the last few months. That just wasn't the case though. Yes, Kimbrel is still probably pretty effective at 95-97. I think the question is whether he's still good at 92-95. The follow-up question is how long before his velocity drops that much. Purely gut level, I think he has a good chance to hold on to the majority of his velocity for another 3-4 years, in which case he should be very good (2018-level), if not great (2017-level). Yea I mean Kimbrel could easily go his whole career and not drop to 92 with his fastball. I also feel really good that he won't lose much velocity over the next few years and will be rather good. Given free agent war are over 10 million now. It's like do you think he can be better than 6 bwar over 4 years? I think a very reasonable estimate is 8 bwar. Which makes it a rather good deal is you can get 4 years 60 million.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Jan 4, 2019 23:05:37 GMT -5
Yes, Kimbrel is still probably pretty effective at 95-97. I think the question is whether he's still good at 92-95. The follow-up question is how long before his velocity drops that much. Purely gut level, I think he has a good chance to hold on to the majority of his velocity for another 3-4 years, in which case he should be very good (2018-level), if not great (2017-level). Yea I mean Kimbrel could easily go his whole career and not drop to 92 with his fastball. I also feel really good that he won't lose much velocity over the next few years and will be rather good. Given free agent war are over 10 million now. It's like do you think he can be better than 6 bwar over 4 years? I think a very reasonable estimate is 8 bwar. Which makes it a rather good deal is you can get 4 years 60 million. Yeah, I agree. For me, the question is not so much whether Kimbrel will be decent over a 4Y deal, it’s whether that kind of commitment prevents them from signing someone more important like Xander or Sale. We can’t really answer that without a lot of information we don’t have (their payroll projections, what they think Xander and Sale will get, what they want to do with the luxury tax, etc), which is why most of this thread is going to be total speculation until they sign someone.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 4, 2019 23:27:53 GMT -5
Yea I mean Kimbrel could easily go his whole career and not drop to 92 with his fastball. I also feel really good that he won't lose much velocity over the next few years and will be rather good. Given free agent war are over 10 million now. It's like do you think he can be better than 6 bwar over 4 years? I think a very reasonable estimate is 8 bwar. Which makes it a rather good deal is you can get 4 years 60 million. Yeah, I agree. For me, the question is not so much whether Kimbrel will be decent over a 4Y deal, it’s whether that kind of commitment prevents them from signing someone more important like Xander or Sale. We can’t really answer that without a lot of information we don’t have (their payroll projections, what they think Xander and Sale will get, what they want to do with the luxury tax, etc), which is why most of this thread is going to be total speculation until they sign someone. It's easy to say at this moment that a Kimbrel signing will hurt their chances at signing Xander, Sale, and Mookie (any one of these 3), nevermind JD Martinez on top of that. I don't want Kimbrel back on anything besides a one year deal. If the Sox want to load up this year, fine. 4 years to Kimbrel? Ouch. The guy is already erratic and he really hasn't hit his decline yet.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 4, 2019 23:52:21 GMT -5
So I did a quick look to see if the numbers reinforced my what my eyes were telling me. In 13 games where Kimbrel averaged 98+ on the fastball, he allowed one run on four hits in 13 innings, for an extremely nice 0.69 ERA. He struck out 24 of the 50 batters he faced (48%), walking seven (15%), and he didn't allow a homer. In the 50 appearances where his fastball was lower than 98, he allowed 18 runs on 27 hits in 49 1/3 innings (3.28 ERA), striking out 72 of 197 (36.5%), walking 24 (12.2%) and allowing seven homers. Using a basic FIP calculator, it was the difference between 1.08 and 3.67.
Now, you can't take much from 13 innings, you say? Going down slightly, to a 97.5mph threshold. He was at 97.5 in 26 appearances. He allowed six runs on seven hits in 25 2/3 innings (2.10 ERA), striking out 44 of 98 batters (44.9%), walking 13 (13.3%), and he gave up just one home run. In his other 37 appearances, he allowed 13 runs on 24 hits in 36 2/3 innings (3.19 ERA), striking out 52 of 149 batters (34.9%), walking 18 (12.1%), and giving up six homers. His swinging strike rate at 97.5+ was 18.5%. Lower than that, it was 16.6%. Going back to the basic FIP calculator, it was the difference of 1.88 vs. 4.01. Which, ugh.
If you go down to a threshold of 97, everything seems to turn into a wash, so it looks like 97.5 is the real mark he needs to be getting over. The lower walk rate at the lower velocity might indicate that he's able to focus some on his control when he knows his peak velocity isn't there, but it's still worrisome.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 5, 2019 0:28:45 GMT -5
Using Brooks Brothers #s by month, plus era and WHIP 96.56 .77 .857 98.02 3.38 .825 97.57 2.16 .960 97.68 2.31 1.20 97.51 4.50 1.50 98.48/97.71 3.86 .750 Sept and Oct velocities. Looking back at his history in his early career with the Braves he had a bunch of months in the 96 range and was crazy good. In over 11 innings in April he gave up one run by way of HR. His success is much more a result of control than velocity. First half 40.2 innings 16 BB 1.77 ERA, second half 21.2 innings 15 BB 4.57 ERA. His velocity was higher in the second half than the first half, but his control tanked. www.brooksbaseball.net/velo.php?player=518886&time=&startDate=03/30/2007&endDate=01/05/2019&s_type=2
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 5, 2019 0:42:24 GMT -5
Oh, well that's less precise so yeah let's just go with that.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 5, 2019 1:07:40 GMT -5
Oh, well that's less precise so yeah let's just go with that. Well he had his best month of the year averaging 96.56 on his fastball, he's shown that in the past it hasn't mattered. So yea I'm going to go with that. You start breaking down numbers into small sections one bad game can make the numbers look crazy different and misleading. You really think it was velocity that was his issue in the playoffs and not command? It couldn't have been the 8 walks in 10.2 innings? He was at 97.71 over those 10.2 innings and was horrible. Maybe if I get enough time I'll actually breakdown the speed of his pitches that resulted in HR's and extra base hits. That could be telling, yet I don't think it will matter. It's all about control. I would have thought that was crazy obvious after watching him for 3 years.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 5, 2019 1:45:59 GMT -5
Why would it matter what his best month was if he's getting better results, by appearance, when his velocity is better? Seriously--why would *month* be the breakdown you're looking at? I'm breaking down the numbers based on his inputs, you're doing it based on when the calendar changed. And that's pretty rich to say that I'm breaking the numbers down "into small sections" when I've broken the numbers into two sections and you've broken them into six. The April that you're harping on was 11 1/3 innings. He faced 44 batters.
Kimbrel's strikeout rates when his velocity is at its peak are sublime, and it leads to him being an elite pitcher. When he doesn't have elite velocity, his command is more important (obviously), but the command hasn't been consistent. The numbers reinforce that. That doesn't mean he's NEVER good when he doesn't have his elite velocity, he was, of course, good in April. But "it's all about control" just doesn't fit with him. Among 336 pitchers with 50 innings last year, Kimbrel ranked 327th on pitches thrown in the strike zone, but ranked fifth in swinging strike rate. In 2017, he led baseball in swinging strike rate, while he was 87th (of 355) in % of pitches in the zone. There is nobody in Kimbrel's zone% range putting up ERAs (or FIPs) that match his - he blows past them because his strikeout rate is so massive. And his strikeout rate is tied very closely to that velocity.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 5, 2019 4:00:05 GMT -5
So I did a quick look to see if the numbers reinforced my what my eyes were telling me. In 13 games where Kimbrel averaged 98+ on the fastball, he allowed one run on four hits in 13 innings, for an extremely nice 0.69 ERA. He struck out 24 of the 50 batters he faced (48%), walking seven (15%), and he didn't allow a homer. In the 50 appearances where his fastball was lower than 98, he allowed 18 runs on 27 hits in 49 1/3 innings (3.28 ERA), striking out 72 of 197 (36.5%), walking 24 (12.2%) and allowing seven homers. Using a basic FIP calculator, it was the difference between 1.08 and 3.67. Now, you can't take much from 13 innings, you say? Going down slightly, to a 97.5mph threshold. He was at 97.5 in 26 appearances. He allowed six runs on seven hits in 25 2/3 innings (2.10 ERA), striking out 44 of 98 batters (44.9%), walking 13 (13.3%), and he gave up just one home run. In his other 37 appearances, he allowed 13 runs on 24 hits in 36 2/3 innings (3.19 ERA), striking out 52 of 149 batters (34.9%), walking 18 (12.1%), and giving up six homers. His swinging strike rate at 97.5+ was 18.5%. Lower than that, it was 16.6%. Going back to the basic FIP calculator, it was the difference of 1.88 vs. 4.01. Which, ugh. If you go down to a threshold of 97, everything seems to turn into a wash, so it looks like 97.5 is the real mark he needs to be getting over. The lower walk rate at the lower velocity might indicate that he's able to focus some on his control when he knows his peak velocity isn't there, but it's still worrisome. Ok I didn't buy your numbers so I checked, Brooks Brother has Kimbrel over 98 MPH average in 31 games last year. I'm not sure what you are using. Given his averages that makes sense, no way it was only 13 games all year. Brooks Brothers matches up with Baseball References monthly numbers Now I'm not going to check all of the games. So I looked at the Postseason only. 9 games 5 games over 98 MPH, 6.1 innings 7.11 ERA 6 BB, 4 games under 4.1 innings 4.16 ERA 2 BB. 5 games over 98 MPH he gave up runs in 4 of them, 4 games under he only gave up a runs in one game. That is 5 earned runs in 6.1 innings just in the Postseason when over 98 MHP. www.brooksbaseball.net/velo.php?player=518886&b_hand=-1&gFilt=&pFilt=FA|SI|FC|CU|SL|CS|KN|CH|FS|SB&time=game&minmax=ci&var=mph&s_type=2&startDate=03/30/2007&endDate=01/05/2019
|
|
|
Post by sparkygian on Jan 5, 2019 6:36:23 GMT -5
Part of me wants to see Kimbrel back on a 1 year deal while waiting out the development of the younger arms. The other part is very intrigued by Britton and the potential he can bounce back and be a key LHR for the next 2-3 years. I too can't understand why Sox don't seem to be pursuing Britton as strongly as others (according to rumors). It would seem that he would be a very good closer -- maybe not perceived as being 'Kimbrel quality' -- and isn't looking for the massive contract that Kimbrel is seeking. As it's been pointed out by many, Kimbrel is at a crossroads in his career, so who knows how good he'll be even two years from now, nevermind 3 - 4 yrs down the road. Risky, plus he doesn't seem to be open to pitching anything but the last inning of a game, which doesn't jive with what most teams are looking for in good closers nowadays. DD obviously has proven his wisdom with the way he's put together this team, and who he's gotten, and how he obtained them. However re-signing Kimbrel, if the rumors are true that he's most likely going to end up back with the Sox, seems very risky, imo., especially in light of the financial ramifications his contract would put on this team to be able to afford to re-sign the more important players on this team who's contracts are almost up.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 5, 2019 7:34:11 GMT -5
My money is on no big free agent signing past 2019, including Kimbrel. If the Sox improve the pen, it will be via trade. The pen is good enough without taking huge risks. Here's Gammo's take on the Speier article which is also what I think.: Peter Gammons Verified account @pgammo How the Red Sox rebuilt their pitching infrastructure www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2019/01/04/how-red-sox-rebuilt-their-pitching-infrastructure/ … Brilliant read w/message:Sox worry about next 2 winters, and kids(Lakins, Hernandez, et al) more likely than any longterm BP signing
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 5, 2019 7:44:55 GMT -5
Fangraphs game average. I used average FB velo, not peak.
Okay. I did and came away with results you apparently don't like, so that's cool.
If the whole thing in the playoffs was that he was tipping his pitches, then the Astros weren't swinging at anything that wasn't a fastball. Since his success comes from his FB making pitch identification a problem, you can see how that would be a problem.
|
|
|