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.
Let’s discuss the Red Sox horrendous pitching
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 19, 2020 14:43:32 GMT -5
Let's add that with all-time bad pitching we don't use Johnson. Now they have DFA Shawaryn without even giving him a chance. Give the guy a chance, if he sucked and you did this I'm 100% fine. Yet the guy had a good track record and his strikeouts jumped when used as a reliever. What do you mean they didn't give him a chance? He came up last year and was pretty bad. He had more runs against than innings pitched. Also, he was much worse out of the bullpen than as a starter. Yeah his strikeouts went up a little but everything else got WAY worse. You seem to have a habit of being fixated on what a guy was 2, 3, 4 years ago. Shawaryn's DFA has been coming since they sent him to the ATS with a bunch of non-40-man guys back on July 17. It's not like they didn't watch him in camp in the spring and in July. He was there. They saw him pitching in Pawtucket. It's the same thing with Gonsalves in the other thread. Gonsalves was barely a top 100 guy in 2017 and 2018, but last year he was only in the middle of the Twins' top 30 and he didn't even make the Mets' list in this year's handbook. He was eligible to be ranked on our top 60 and we declined to. At some point, the fact that a guy was seen as having some potential two or more years ago needs to give way to what he is now. metsminors.net/stephen-gonsalves-rated-mets-23rd-best-prospect/That shows him making the Mets list. Shawaryn got 14 games and his stats while bad don't look horrible compared to what we currently have. So yeah I would like to see the guy. Our GM isn't doing that, wanting his guys over using what was here. I mean we are picking up guys with horrible stats that aren't pitching well, hence why they are being waived. So past stats is all we have. Shawaryn had a better track record than a bunch of them.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 19, 2020 14:46:56 GMT -5
Verdugo is 24 with an .867 OPS and they got a very well-rounded 2B prospect, and a catcher with some potential, but likely a non-factor for 60 games of Mookie Betts and half the albatross of David Price's contract. I don't think you really deserved to get more back. I would have liked to somehow get Graterol as well, but he'd just be a nice bullpen piece unless the Red Sox just wanted to start him until they destroyed his arm. I wouldn't change Verdugo or Downs. I don't mind Wong, yet my point stands you couldn't get a pitcher from a team that has that many? Their AAA site likely is better than our whole staff. I would have went after a pitcher given our need over Wong. Like a said nothing huge, yet it seems like a miss opportunity. Where's the creative side like Tampa does shipping out a prospect to add another guy to the deal? Or a guy like Workman. My point is, you got very fair value for what you sent back. Even more so now with the condensed season (though ironically might have been what caused Betts to sign an extension). I'm sure Bloom asked about all available parts and came away with what he felt was the best deal. So far, he doesn't seem like Dombrowski and just takes the first offer. There was a lot of back and forth that happened this past off-season with multiple "leaks" from both sides. The point is, you'd need to take away from their current return to get one of those pitching prospects. It also made sense trade-wise because Verdugo is young, was highly touted (formerly 16th best prospect in baseball), had some health concerns and was expendable as they were replacing him with Betts and threw in a well-rounded, great at nothing prospect and a fringe guy. I'm not sure if the Dodgers saw Price at 50% as an asset. Rather more of an acceptable cost to get a deal done. Not a positive, but not a negative.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 19, 2020 14:48:10 GMT -5
What do you mean they didn't give him a chance? He came up last year and was pretty bad. He had more runs against than innings pitched. Also, he was much worse out of the bullpen than as a starter. Yeah his strikeouts went up a little but everything else got WAY worse. You seem to have a habit of being fixated on what a guy was 2, 3, 4 years ago. Shawaryn's DFA has been coming since they sent him to the ATS with a bunch of non-40-man guys back on July 17. It's not like they didn't watch him in camp in the spring and in July. He was there. They saw him pitching in Pawtucket. It's the same thing with Gonsalves in the other thread. Gonsalves was barely a top 100 guy in 2017 and 2018, but last year he was only in the middle of the Twins' top 30 and he didn't even make the Mets' list in this year's handbook. He was eligible to be ranked on our top 60 and we declined to. At some point, the fact that a guy was seen as having some potential two or more years ago needs to give way to what he is now. metsminors.net/stephen-gonsalves-rated-mets-23rd-best-prospect/That shows him making the Mets list. Shawaryn got 14 games and his stats while bad don't look horrible compared to what we currently have. So yeah I would like to see the guy. Our GM isn't doing that, wanting his guys over using what was here. I mean we are picking up guys with horrible stats that aren't pitching well, hence why they are being waived. So past stats is all we have. Shawaryn had a better track record than a bunch of them. I don’t think there is a conspiracy! I just see a lot of bad options. You’d lose with Shawaryn. Bloom chooses to lose (or... today... maybe win!?!) with Hart. I doubt there are any gems we are missing out on.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 19, 2020 15:39:36 GMT -5
Hart was much better than Shawaryn last year at Pawtucket.
Hart: 19.37% K, 8.72% BB, 1.94% HR, 3.86 ERA, 1.266 WHIP Shawaryn: 19.84% K, 12.79% BB, 3.39% HR, 4.52 ERA, 1.394 WHIP
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Aug 20, 2020 8:03:36 GMT -5
Which teams wants Shawaryn or Gonsalves in MLB for 2020? Which team wants to carry either on their 40-man over the winter? At age 26.
That's why they are both likely to make it thru waivers. Gonsalves is milbfa this Oct '20. Shawaryn is milbfa in Oct '21. Sox have another year.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 20, 2020 12:20:57 GMT -5
This is pretty cool. I decided to figure out how to best predict RA or ERA from K%, BB% (including HBP, excluding IBB), and the rawest Statcast data: Exit Velocity, HardHit%, Barrel%, and Launch Angle. I first tested everything against team ERA and discovered that all of the predictors correlate better to ERA than RA.
The prediction formula has one really interesting feature. BB% and EV are not factors by themselves; they have an interaction, which is to say that if you multiply them together, that's so predictive that the individual numbers don't tell you anything more.
Now, the joker in that deck is that if you're a skilled nibbler like Martin Perez, who limits EV by being willing to walk more batters, that skill doesn't show up at all. The fact is that more walks almost always lead to higher EV. Right now I can't think of any way to identify the exceptions from this data.
If I added swing metrics, that wou;d likely do the trick and should give you a predictor that was that much better. But that's also a huge amount of extra analysis!
So here are the Raw Statcast Projected ERA for everyone so far. Name pERA Robert Stock 1.53 Phillips Valdez 3.27 Josh Taylor 3.74 Dylan Covey 3.83 Chris Mazza 3.99 Josh Osich 4.19 Brandon Workman 4.25 Heath Hembree 4.31 MLB Average 4.45 Austin Brice 4.56 Zack Godley 4.93 Martin Perez 5.04 Nathan Eovaldi 5.45 Kyle Hart 5.47 Jeffrey Springs 5.75 Marcus Walden 6.36 Ryan Brasier 6.48 Colten Brewer 6.62 Matt Barnes 7.05 Matt Hall 7.17 Ryan Weber 7.20 (3.86 since his recall) Edit: Zack Godley by appearances:
-0.96 7.67 3.68 8.16 2.89
So the overall 4.93 tells you nothing; it's two outings of 8.04 sandwiched between three of 2.12.
|
|
|
Post by juanfatj on Aug 20, 2020 17:24:34 GMT -5
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 20, 2020 17:52:19 GMT -5
] Edit: Zack Godley by appearances:[/div]
-0.96 7.67 3.68 8.16 2.89
So the overall 4.93 tells you nothing; it's two outings of 8.04 sandwiched between three of 2.12.
[/quote] Doesn’t this suggest that a small sample is not all that instructive? I mean, Stock has faced 9 batters. If the next guy hits a home run off him, what does that do to his projection? Plawecki faced 3 batters and got two out, walking one. What is his projected ERA over a season?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 20, 2020 20:23:39 GMT -5
Doesn’t this suggest that a small sample is not all that instructive? I mean, Stock has faced 9 batters. If the next guy hits a home run off him, what does that do to his projection? Plawecki faced 3 batters and got two out, walking one. What is his projected ERA over a season? Maybe you haven't been watching the games ... those were outings of 16, 21, 16, 19, 18, and 21 PA respectively. He's third on the team in sample size, after Eovaldi and Perez. And the point is that this is not remotely a normal distribution in either the technical or common sense of the word. He's been 4.93 +/- 3.35. That standard deviation is crazy. If you did this for every outing of 15 PA or more, you would rarely see a pattern like this over five straight games, where a guy is either excellent or awful but never mediocre. A bimodal distribution like this is a reliable indicator of potential upside. Perez had this last year, and the only reason he's been better this year is that he's been the good version of himself more often. So far!
No, there's no reason to project him any differently than his 4.93. But the hope is that a reason can be found for the good / bad difference that will allow him to be his good self more often.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 20, 2020 20:42:24 GMT -5
Doesn’t this suggest that a small sample is not all that instructive? I mean, Stock has faced 9 batters. If the next guy hits a home run off him, what does that do to his projection? Plawecki faced 3 batters and got two out, walking one. What is his projected ERA over a season? Maybe you haven't been watching the games ... those were outings of 16, 21, 16, 19, 18, and 21 PA respectively. He's third on the team in sample size, after Eovaldi and Perez. And the point is that this is not remotely a normal distribution in either the technical or common sense of the word. He's been 4.93 +/- 3.35. That standard deviation is crazy. If you did this for every outing of 15 PA or more, you would rarely see a pattern like this over five straight games, where a guy is either excellent or awful but never mediocre. A bimodal distribution like this is a reliable indicator of potential upside. Perez had this last year, and the only reason he's been better this year is that he's been the good version of himself more often. So far!
No, there's no reason to project him any differently than his 4.93. But the hope is that a reason can be found for the good / bad difference that will allow him to be his good self more often.
I was referring more to the other people. Covey, Mazza et al. It also seems like factoring in what teams they face would matter. Is Godley doing better against bad lineups? I didn’t look. I guess I don’t much see the point other than a different way to frame what has happened. I don’t think some of the guys you have as lower-ERA look so good. I think Brice could be good, and he might find a tweak that turns him stud. That is not a projection, but a possibility. I do think Plawecki could be extended and pitch hitless baseball for a full season. He has been dominant from what I’ve seen.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Aug 20, 2020 23:56:56 GMT -5
Maybe you haven't been watching the games ... those were outings of 16, 21, 16, 19, 18, and 21 PA respectively. He's third on the team in sample size, after Eovaldi and Perez. And the point is that this is not remotely a normal distribution in either the technical or common sense
no reason to project him any differently than his 4.93. I do think Plawecki could be extended and pitch hitless baseball for a full season. He has been dominant from what I’ve seen. Plawecki would insist on having Lin as his personal catcher, which would be a hassle.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 21, 2020 0:14:35 GMT -5
I do think Plawecki could be extended and pitch hitless baseball for a full season. He has been dominant from what I’ve seen. Plawecki would insist on having Lin as his personal catcher, which would be a hassle. Can't blame him there, Lin's CERA is off the charts.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 21, 2020 0:29:55 GMT -5
Maybe you haven't been watching the games ... those were outings of 16, 21, 16, 19, 18, and 21 PA respectively. He's third on the team in sample size, after Eovaldi and Perez. And the point is that this is not remotely a normal distribution in either the technical or common sense of the word. He's been 4.93 +/- 3.35. That standard deviation is crazy. If you did this for every outing of 15 PA or more, you would rarely see a pattern like this over five straight games, where a guy is either excellent or awful but never mediocre. A bimodal distribution like this is a reliable indicator of potential upside. Perez had this last year, and the only reason he's been better this year is that he's been the good version of himself more often. So far!
No, there's no reason to project him any differently than his 4.93. But the hope is that a reason can be found for the good / bad difference that will allow him to be his good self more often.
I was referring more to the other people. Covey, Mazza et al. It also seems like factoring in what teams they face would matter. Is Godley doing better against bad lineups? I didn’t look. I guess I don’t much see the point other than a different way to frame what has happened. I don’t think some of the guys you have as lower-ERA look so good. I think Brice could be good, and he might find a tweak that turns him stud. That is not a projection, but a possibility. I do think Plawecki could be extended and pitch hitless baseball for a full season. He has been dominant from what I’ve seen. Maybe in your mind you were, and in fact your quote of my post is all messed up, as the board sometimes does. You ended up quoting just the Godley numbers, though.
Obviously the sample sizes of Mazza and Covey are small. But just as obviously, you do want the best number possible when you assess that sample.
And the aggregate performance of Bloom's castaways is not a small sample; it's 343 PA, and the group Projected ERA is 4.49, where 4.45 is MLB average. In contrast, the returning core is 5.50 and the returning fringe is 6.65. And the 4.49 figure includes Hall and Springs, who have shown nothing, and when you're gathering bodies to try to find some actual pitchers, no one forces you to continue to use the failures. Excluding them , he's gotten 60 IP (316 PA) of 4.16 pERA from 7 different guys. That's impressive. They may not be here for a long, long time, but so far it's been fun.
I confess to not paying enough attention when Covey has pitched. But Mazza in his second outing seemed to have great natural armside run on his FB.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 21, 2020 0:50:40 GMT -5
I was referring more to the other people. Covey, Mazza et al. It also seems like factoring in what teams they face would matter. Is Godley doing better against bad lineups? I didn’t look. I guess I don’t much see the point other than a different way to frame what has happened. I don’t think some of the guys you have as lower-ERA look so good. I think Brice could be good, and he might find a tweak that turns him stud. That is not a projection, but a possibility. I do think Plawecki could be extended and pitch hitless baseball for a full season. He has been dominant from what I’ve seen. Maybe in your mind you were, and in fact your quote of my post is all messed up, as the board sometimes does. You ended up quoting just the Godley numbers, though. Obviously the sample sizes of Mazza and Covey are small. But just as obviously, you do want the best number possible when you assess that sample.
And the aggregate performance of Bloom's castaways is not a small sample; it's 343 PA, and the group Projected ERA is 4.49, where 4.45 is MLB average. In contrast, the returning core is 5.50 and the returning fringe is 6.65. And the 4.49 figure includes Hall and Springs, who have shown nothing, and when you're gathering bodies to try to find some actual pitchers, no one forces you to continue to use the failures. Excluding them , he's gotten 60 IP (316 PA) of 4.16 pERA from 7 different guys. That's impressive. They may not be here for a long, long time, but so far it's been fun.
I confess to not paying enough attention when Covey has pitched. But Mazza in his second outing seemed to have great natural armside run on his FB.
When I've looked at your recent numbers, here and elsewhere, I am essentially using the aggregate numbers and what the Bloom guys have done is impressive compared to what the non-Bloomers have done and for far less money than Eovaldi alone. I think people (here and in the other thread) are generally (not all) looking at the trees instead of the forest. If someone wants to use Plawecki in the comparisons, it doesn't say much about that person's abilities.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 22, 2020 15:05:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 22, 2020 15:57:08 GMT -5
What can be done about it going forward? Is the plan going to be "pray" that Sale, ERod and Eovaldi will be healthy next year?
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 22, 2020 16:08:37 GMT -5
What can be done about it going forward? Is the plan going to be "pray" that Sale, ERod and Eovaldi will be healthy next year? Maybe the trade yesterday is a baby step to doing something? Pivetta has at least an intriguing arm, and Seabold looks close to getting a shot (well... in age, maybe not in minor league innings). I am not sure anything major can be done for next season. Assuming ERod is normal, and maybe 1/2 season of pretty good Sale, the pitching could be just good enough to be mediocre. Sign someone like Perez... hell, if a couple guys out perform expectations, maybe it is even decent. But in 2022, if you go Full Sale, ERod, Eovaldi, and a mix of a veteran FA/Mata/Pivetta/Seabold/mayyyybbee Groome... things could be good.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 22, 2020 16:12:24 GMT -5
What can be done about it going forward? Is the plan going to be "pray" that Sale, ERod and Eovaldi will be healthy next year? Maybe the trade yesterday is a baby step to doing something? Pivetta has at least an intriguing arm, and Seabold looks close to getting a shot (well... in age, maybe not in minor league innings). I am not sure anything major can be done for next season. Assuming ERod is normal, and maybe 1/2 season of pretty good Sale, the pitching could be just good enough to be mediocre. Sign someone like Perez... hell, if a couple guys out perform expectations, maybe it is even decent. But in 2022, if you go Full Sale, ERod, Eovaldi, and a mix of a veteran FA/Mata/Pivetta/Seabold/mayyyybbee Groome... things could be good. I just think relying on Sale, EROD and Eovaldi in 2022 is an awful bet.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 22, 2020 16:18:19 GMT -5
Maybe the trade yesterday is a baby step to doing something? Pivetta has at least an intriguing arm, and Seabold looks close to getting a shot (well... in age, maybe not in minor league innings). I am not sure anything major can be done for next season. Assuming ERod is normal, and maybe 1/2 season of pretty good Sale, the pitching could be just good enough to be mediocre. Sign someone like Perez... hell, if a couple guys out perform expectations, maybe it is even decent. But in 2022, if you go Full Sale, ERod, Eovaldi, and a mix of a veteran FA/Mata/Pivetta/Seabold/mayyyybbee Groome... things could be good. I just think relying on Sale, EROD and Eovaldi in 2022 is an awful bet. Could be. I don’t disagree. But... it is what we’ve got. I suppose they could trade Eovaldi, but Sale is not moving and ERod has to high a ceiling to get the return to make it worth moving him. Still, it is not crazy to think you have at least two really good pitchers from that group in two years. That could still be good with, say, Scherzer or another FA, Mata, and Pivetta or something.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,644
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 22, 2020 16:33:22 GMT -5
If there's one thing that I think you'll see about Bloom, from watching Tampa operate, is that they'll cycle through pitchers quickly and there will be a lot of trades, so by 2022 - if there's even a season that year, it's hard to imagine it's pray on Sale, E-Rod, and Eovaldi and others. No. There will be a lot of other unanticipated names in the mix by then of varying degrees of success. Hopefully somewhere in there some stability emerges, whether it's Groom and/or Mata developing or the Sox raiding other farm systems in deals, or doing the castoff thing which they've done this year. Either way, I couldn't even hazzard a guess to what the Sox pitching staff might look like two years from now.
I'm curious to see what Bloom does the rest of this deadline and even more curious as to what he does when the financial restraints come off and what he does this upcoming winter in the trade market.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 22, 2020 19:42:12 GMT -5
I've been aware of the serious problems with xwOBA from the beginning and folks might remember that I included a pitcher's Center% as one of three modifiers in my version. Balls pulled exceed their xwOBA by a big margin, and balls hit to center underperform. Balls hit Oppo are average.
It's also true that a combination of a bad EV and a bad launch angle can produce bloops with xwOBA's above .900, which is called the Chris Mazza in the First Inning Against the Yankees on National TV Effect. I've long known about that bug, but it wasn't until Rosenthal pointed it out that I decided to create my own metric from more basic stats, since we had so many small sample sizes to deal with.
It is an open question as to how much hitting those chip shots over the infielder's heads is a skill. I think Rafael Devers has it to some degree. The balls the Yankees hit were clearly lucky.
What MLBAM needs is an actual quality of contact metric, and one which gives hitters proper credit for that skill, to the extent that is exists. Note that it may be a hitting skill, but preventing it may not be a pitching skill.
All of this can be done by finding out what is most predictive. Do hitters have a skill at hitting grounders through holes? I've never thought they did, but a guy who worked for BAM and who had played college ball insisted to me that this was commonplace. Do pitchers adapt their deep-flyball propensity to ballpark? If so, the deep fly balls they give up to LF in NY and to RF at Fenway will be less predictive than expected.
Tom Tango's a smart guy and it would surprise me if he hasn't thought along these lines. And I bet teams have done this on their own.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 22, 2020 23:39:32 GMT -5
I just think relying on Sale, EROD and Eovaldi in 2022 is an awful bet. Could be. I don’t disagree. But... it is what we’ve got. I suppose they could trade Eovaldi, but Sale is not moving and ERod has to high a ceiling to get the return to make it worth moving him. Still, it is not crazy to think you have at least two really good pitchers from that group in two years. That could still be good with, say, Scherzer or another FA, Mata, and Pivetta or something. I guess I got to pray. Sale is going to be 33 and I suspect his fastball velocity is going to be down. ERod has a heart condition. Id be surprised if he ever approaches being "good" again. I suspect Eovalid's fastball will lower in 2022 and overall won't be that good when 2022 comes around. Maybe he won't be bad -- if healthy. I just think expecting two out of of 3 is going to be a prayer.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 22, 2020 23:44:43 GMT -5
If there's one thing that I think you'll see about Bloom, from watching Tampa operate, is that they'll cycle through pitchers quickly and there will be a lot of trades, so by 2022 - if there's even a season that year, it's hard to imagine it's pray on Sale, E-Rod, and Eovaldi and others. No. There will be a lot of other unanticipated names in the mix by then of varying degrees of success. Hopefully somewhere in there some stability emerges, whether it's Groom and/or Mata developing or the Sox raiding other farm systems in deals, or doing the castoff thing which they've done this year. Either way, I couldn't even hazzard a guess to what the Sox pitching staff might look like two years from now.I'm curious to see what Bloom does the rest of this deadline and even more curious as to what he does when the financial restraints come off and what he does this upcoming winter in the trade market. So -- we are living on a prayer, right? The bold I highlighted from your quote above sound like prayers. You can't look at a thing when it comes to pitching and say "I can count on this," right? Is there even one pitcher that's a lock to be good? Or a good chance to be good in 2021 or 2022?
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Aug 22, 2020 23:52:16 GMT -5
If there's one thing that I think you'll see about Bloom, from watching Tampa operate, is that they'll cycle through pitchers quickly and there will be a lot of trades, so by 2022 - if there's even a season that year, it's hard to imagine it's pray on Sale, E-Rod, and Eovaldi and others. No. There will be a lot of other unanticipated names in the mix by then of varying degrees of success. Hopefully somewhere in there some stability emerges, whether it's Groom and/or Mata developing or the Sox raiding other farm systems in deals, or doing the castoff thing which they've done this year. Either way, I couldn't even hazzard a guess to what the Sox pitching staff might look like two years from now.I'm curious to see what Bloom does the rest of this deadline and even more curious as to what he does when the financial restraints come off and what he does this upcoming winter in the trade market. So -- we are living on a prayer, right? The bold I highlighted from your quote above sound like prayers. You can't look at a thing when it comes to pitching and say "I can count on this," right? Is there even one pitcher that's a lock to be good? Or a good chance to be good in 2021 or 2022? I mean, put that way, sure, game to game an arm can simply explode. So projections are probably informed guesses. I don’t think it is absurd to think Sale can be, say, 85% of his prime. That’s a very good pitcher. I hope ERod’s condition is temporary. If it is, why wouldn’t he be good in 2021/2022? Eovaldi... well, he’s barely good now, so... same? Anyway, I don’t think they can even be good next year. But 2022? I don’t see prayers as necessary. A good (albeit old) FA class, Mata and Groome, maybe, one of these new guys... there are arms in the mix that could at least make a decent staff.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 23, 2020 0:57:26 GMT -5
Could be. I don’t disagree. But... it is what we’ve got. I suppose they could trade Eovaldi, but Sale is not moving and ERod has to high a ceiling to get the return to make it worth moving him. Still, it is not crazy to think you have at least two really good pitchers from that group in two years. That could still be good with, say, Scherzer or another FA, Mata, and Pivetta or something. I guess I got to pray. Sale is going to be 33 and I suspect his fastball velocity is going to be down. ERod has a heart condition. Id be surprised if he ever approaches being "good" again. I suspect Eovalid's fastball will lower in 2022 and overall won't be that good when 2022 comes around. Maybe he won't be bad -- if healthy. I just think expecting two out of of 3 is going to be a prayer. You base these Sale and ERod predictions on what exactly? I'd assume Sale's velocity goes up from 2019 levels. Heck a lot of guys come back throwing harder. John Lackey threw harder than ever after TJ surgery. ERod had inflammation around his heart. Common after having bad infections and isn't a long-term type thing. Things might not turn out good, that's true for any player, especially pitchers. Yet it isn't some crazy long shot type thing either.
|
|
|