nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,497
|
Post by nomar on Jul 25, 2022 21:59:03 GMT -5
Good to be back in the AL Central
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jul 25, 2022 22:00:39 GMT -5
Can't lose em all.
|
|
|
Post by reasonabledoubt on Jul 25, 2022 22:03:51 GMT -5
On the optimistic side, I think the Red Sox now own WC tie-breakers against SEA and CLE, but not CWS and BAL - though with BAL there are games left to decide it.
|
|
|
Post by wkdbigsoxfan on Jul 25, 2022 22:06:09 GMT -5
“It just feels good to win one” - Kevin Malone
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 25, 2022 22:14:36 GMT -5
I was on board starting Whitlock, but in retrospect it was clearly a mistake. He is a dominant reliever, far beyond what he is likely to be as a starter. All his starts were with that injured hip from covering first. I still think he'll be a good starter if they give him the chance
|
|
|
Post by philip on Jul 25, 2022 22:22:44 GMT -5
But Whitlock can affect the outcome of more than 1 game every 5 days. He deserves to be a high leverage reliever.
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Jul 25, 2022 22:33:12 GMT -5
I was on board starting Whitlock, but in retrospect it was clearly a mistake. He is a dominant reliever, far beyond what he is likely to be as a starter. I never wanted Whitlock in the rotation, because he is just too dominant in relief. GMs do not put enough priority on having at least three or four really dominant pitchers of their eight bullpen arms. How many games have the Red Sox lost by blowing ninth inning saves.
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Jul 25, 2022 22:35:27 GMT -5
The AL Central and West really suck at baseball lol Thank goodness the ALWest and Central suck, because the Red Sox play 76 games against the ALEast who do not!
|
|
|
Post by philip on Jul 25, 2022 22:47:25 GMT -5
I agree there is not enough attention to a strong bullpen. With starters going 5 to 6 innings that leaves at least 1/3 of the games decided by the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jul 25, 2022 22:55:16 GMT -5
I was on board starting Whitlock, but in retrospect it was clearly a mistake. He is a dominant reliever, far beyond what he is likely to be as a starter. All his starts were with that injured hip from covering first. I still think he'll be a good starter if they give him the chance I am not saying he couldn’t be a good starter. I just think it turned out to be a mistake this year. That’s total retrospect, because I was in complete agreement with what they did.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Jul 26, 2022 1:05:59 GMT -5
I want Bobby and Franchy to be good so bad and they go 0-5 with 4 strikeouts just to ruin the W for me. 😂
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,008
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 26, 2022 3:51:09 GMT -5
Winck, Eovaldi, and Kutter now officially set for the rest of the series.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 26, 2022 5:43:05 GMT -5
Great win!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 26, 2022 7:46:10 GMT -5
Was there ever an explanation for Bobby's black eye He was reading the 99,999 posts about the Renfroe trade and finally punched himself in the face to feel better.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 26, 2022 7:48:36 GMT -5
But Whitlock can affect the outcome of more than 1 game every 5 days. He deserves to be a high leverage reliever. Or he can affect games more by pitching more innings.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 26, 2022 8:25:40 GMT -5
I was on board starting Whitlock, but in retrospect it was clearly a mistake. He is a dominant reliever, far beyond what he is likely to be as a starter. I never wanted Whitlock in the rotation, because he is just too dominant in relief. GMs do not put enough priority on having at least three or four really dominant pitchers of their eight bullpen arms. How many games have the Red Sox lost by blowing ninth inning saves. Most good starters could be dominant relievers. That doesn't mean every good starter should be a reliever instead.
Whitlock has all of 9 career starts, he was battling an injury, and he was still pretty good (3.61 FIP/3.66 xFIP). It's fine if they want to ride him out as a reliever this season, but he has to be given a chance to show whether he can be a top-of-the-rotation starter, for a full season as a minimum. If it doesn't work out then multi-inning relief ace would be a decent fallback plan.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,497
|
Post by nomar on Jul 26, 2022 8:30:14 GMT -5
But Whitlock can affect the outcome of more than 1 game every 5 days. He deserves to be a high leverage reliever. Or he can affect games more by pitching more innings. Lol people are trying to un-invent the wheel
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jul 26, 2022 8:37:09 GMT -5
I never wanted Whitlock in the rotation, because he is just too dominant in relief. GMs do not put enough priority on having at least three or four really dominant pitchers of their eight bullpen arms. How many games have the Red Sox lost by blowing ninth inning saves. Most good starters could be dominant relievers. That doesn't mean every good starter should be a reliever instead.
Whitlock has all of 9 career starts, he was battling an injury, and he was still pretty good (3.61 FIP/3.66 xFIP). It's fine if they want to ride him out as a reliever this season, but he has to be given a chance to show whether he can be a top-of-the-rotation starter, for a full season as a minimum. If it doesn't work out then multi-inning relief ace would be a decent fallback plan.
I feel like you're sweeping the whole "battling an injury" thing under the rug a bit here. Shouldn't that be part of the thought process? He's only eclipsed 100 innings once in his professional career and he's still a little less removed from his TJ recovery than it feels like he should be, at least to me. The whole argument about him being a starter because he pitches more innings doesn't really work if he's hurt, so I would probably be trying to find that balance of maximizing his leverage while also not overtaxing his arm.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 26, 2022 8:39:29 GMT -5
Most good starters could be dominant relievers. That doesn't mean every good starter should be a reliever instead.
Whitlock has all of 9 career starts, he was battling an injury, and he was still pretty good (3.61 FIP/3.66 xFIP). It's fine if they want to ride him out as a reliever this season, but he has to be given a chance to show whether he can be a top-of-the-rotation starter, for a full season as a minimum. If it doesn't work out then multi-inning relief ace would be a decent fallback plan.
I feel like you're sweeping the whole "battling an injury" thing under the rug a bit here. Shouldn't that be part of the thought process? He's only eclipsed 100 innings once in his professional career and he's still a little less removed from his TJ recovery than it feels like he should be, at least to me. The whole argument about him being a starter because he pitches more innings doesn't really work if he's hurt, so I would probably be trying to find that balance of maximizing his leverage while also not overtaxing his arm. Hence "It's fine if they want to ride him out as a reliever this season."
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 26, 2022 8:40:04 GMT -5
Remember the 2018 World Series when Cora used his starters in the bullpen and they all looked way better than the relievers? That's not because Chris Sale, David Price, Rick Porcello, and Nathan Eovaldi made better relievers than they are starters, it's because relieving is easier. Calling Whitlock's move to the rotation clearly a mistake because he had what amounts to two bad starts is crazy. The idea he can affect more games as a reliever than he can as a starter doesn't hold up to much scrutiny - we've all seen how a good starter who goes deep into games preserves the bullpen, it clearly affects more than just the game he pitches. And when you step back it's kind of self-explanatory: someone who pitches 180 innings has a bigger impact on more outcomes than someone pitching 90 innings.
To use an example from the 2021 season, Corbin Burnes had an ERA twice as high as Josh Hader (2.43 to 1.23), and he did it in over twice as many games (60 to 28). But there's absolutely no chance that Hader was more valuable than Burnes, who took Hader's season and added a 3.07 ERA in 108 1/3 more innings. Less "dominant" on its surface but much, much more helpful to the team winning games.
That's not to say that Whitlock's upside is Corbin Burnes. But you can't just look at someones stats as a starter and be like "oh well he's a better reliever." Of course he's a better reliever! Every pitcher is more effective in short bursts than he is trying to pace himself through a lineup two or more times.
I have no problem with Whitlock going back to the bullpen for the second half of 2022. If they don't want him pushing 120+ innings or whatever, it's the best way to pace him for long term development. But it's pretty apparent he has the upside of a front-line starter, and that's not just projection, it was true in his several very good starts.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 26, 2022 8:43:28 GMT -5
All his starts were with that injured hip from covering first. I still think he'll be a good starter if they give him the chance I am not saying he couldn’t be a good starter. I just think it turned out to be a mistake this year. That’s total retrospect, because I was in complete agreement with what they did. I think in retrospect it seems like an even better idea to have tried him as a starter. Would have been nice to have him making starts rather than Bello and Seabold - they needed that starting pitching depth desperately. But of course that was before he got hurt.
ADD: Yes to everything James said. It's why putting any relievers not named Mariano in the Hall of Fame drives me a little nuts: "Congratulations on being one of the best pitchers ever who wasn't good enough to be a starter!" I know it's not quite that simple, but... it's not a lot less simple.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jul 26, 2022 8:47:09 GMT -5
Remember the 2018 World Series when Cora used his starters in the bullpen and they all looked way better than the relievers? That's not because Chris Sale, David Price, Rick Porcello, and Nathan Eovaldi made better relievers than they are starters, it's because relieving is easier. Calling Whitlock's move to the rotation clearly a mistake because he had what amounts to two bad starts is crazy. The idea he can affect more games as a reliever than he can as a starter doesn't hold up to much scrutiny - we've all seen how a good starter who goes deep into games preserves the bullpen, it clearly affects more than just the game he pitches. And when you step back it's kind of self-explanatory: someone who pitches 180 innings has a bigger impact on more outcomes than someone pitching 90 innings. To use an example from the 2021 season, Corbin Burnes had an ERA twice as high as Josh Hader (2.43 to 1.23), and he did it in over twice as many games (60 to 28). But there's absolutely no chance that Hader was more valuable than Burnes, who took Hader's season and added a 3.07 ERA in 108 1/3 more innings. Less "dominant" on its surface but much, much more helpful to the team winning games. That's not to say that Whitlock's upside is Corbin Burnes. But you can't just look at someones stats as a starter and be like "oh well he's a better reliever." Of course he's a better reliever! Every pitcher is more effective in short bursts than he is trying to pace himself through a lineup two or more times. I have no problem with Whitlock going back to the bullpen for the second half of 2022. If they don't want him pushing 120+ innings or whatever, it's the best way to pace him for long term development. But it's pretty apparent he has the upside of a front-line starter, and that's not just projection, it was true in his several very good starts. I agree with all of this. But… this season, the Sox have suffered more from not having a Hader than a Corbin in your scenario. This isn’t a judgement on Whitlock as a starter… it is a judgement on the staff overall. It isn’t really about Whitlock in isolation.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jul 26, 2022 8:50:17 GMT -5
I am not saying he couldn’t be a good starter. I just think it turned out to be a mistake this year. That’s total retrospect, because I was in complete agreement with what they did. I think in retrospect it seems like an even better idea to have tried him as a starter. Would have been nice to have him making starts rather than Bello and Seabold - they needed that starting pitching depth desperately. But of course that was before he got hurt.
ADD: Yes to everything James said. It's why putting any relievers not named Mariano in the Hall of Fame drives me a little nuts: "Congratulations on being one of the best pitchers ever who wasn't good enough to be a starter!" I know it's not quite that simple, but... it's not a lot less simple.
Totally agree on HOF. Lee Smith? C’mon.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 26, 2022 8:53:44 GMT -5
I agree with all of this. But… this season, the Sox have suffered more from not having a Hader than a Corbin in your scenario. This isn’t a judgement on Whitlock as a starter… it is a judgement on the staff overall. It isn’t really about Whitlock in isolation. I don't agree because if they had Burnes they'd just move their fifth starter in the bullpen, plus they'd need to use their bullpen less frequently, giving more appropriate rest and eliminating several innings of their least effective relievers.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 26, 2022 9:03:23 GMT -5
I am not saying he couldn’t be a good starter. I just think it turned out to be a mistake this year. That’s total retrospect, because I was in complete agreement with what they did. I think in retrospect it seems like an even better idea to have tried him as a starter. Would have been nice to have him making starts rather than Bello and Seabold - they needed that starting pitching depth desperately. But of course that was before he got hurt. ADD: Yes to everything James said. It's why putting any relievers not named Mariano in the Hall of Fame drives me a little nuts: "Congratulations on being one of the best pitchers ever who wasn't good enough to be a starter!" I know it's not quite that simple, but... it's not a lot less simple.
I actually get less mad about the Hall of Fame than I do about the All-Star games. Do we all want to see a nameless seventh-inning guy who popped a 1.46 ERA for 29 innings, or the American League's sixth-best starter airing it out? Like, all due respect to Liam Hendriks who seems fun and is consistently effective, but wouldn't everyone prefer to see Kopech, who has been much more valuable this year, open it up for an inning? Or Johnny Cueto? Everyone loves Johnny Cueto.
|
|