Red Sox Rotation Discussion

[Dojji]

Or the opposing lineup. Wakefield would tend to be more effective IMHO against aggressive teams, Sonnanstine against patient ones.

[jacksonianmarch]

Masterson made 9 major league starts, averaging just barely under 6 innings a start with a sub-4 ERA. I know you've covered your bases a little with that word "sustainable," but frankly that's the closest thing to consistent success any of these guys has shown yet. He could probably pitch right now at about the Andy Sonnanstine level if needed.

 

As vital as Masterson was in the bullpen I happen to think that the decision to send Masterson to the pen ultimately cost us a trip to the World Series. There's your missing top 5 starter.

 

I think moving Masterson to the pen was a necessity for him. Make no bones about it, I like Masterson and would love to see him in pinstripes. But he isnt without his vices. He has a wicked sinker that he can throw 87-93mph, and intentionally varies the speed and break. And his slider is very solid, sometimes loopy and sometimes difficult to control. But, his changeup was non-existant and it was started to catch up to him. His last 3 starts were indicative of this. He was passable in all 3, but not to the level he was in the first 6.

 

18IP 18H 10ER 11BB 11K.

 

The sox saw something and took corrective action. This is what Theo does. By moving him to the pen, they were able to keep him away from lefties and also had the opportunity of bringing in an extreme GB pitcher if a DP was needed. His numbers vs lefties werent horrible as many people will be quick to point out. But his stuff became a lot easier to take or foul off the more the lefties saw him. This was evidenced by a huge difference in OBP.

 

Masterson vs Lefties: .238/.365/.422

Masterson vs Righties: .196/.273/.298

 

He absolutely murders righties. Lefties dont hit for a high average vs him, but they get on base and when they do hit the ball, it is usually for extra bases. Until his changeup matures, he should not be in a MLB rotation. As any good manager would just load up on lefties and feast on the amount of walks and EBH he'd give up.

 

But what does that mean for the sox? Should they move him down to AAA and let him work on his changeup exclusively? That would be best for the player. But having an asset like Masterson who theoretically could be a long man/spot starter as well as a devastating righty and sinkerball specialist on your roster is hard to turn away.

[TheKilo]

Kennedy will be a major league starter for a long time. There' date=' I said it. It may not be with us, but he will carve out a career as a #3-5 starter. Thats depth to me.[/quote']

 

lol based on what

[Dojji]

I think moving Masterson to the pen was a necessity for him. Make no bones about it, I like Masterson and would love to see him in pinstripes. But he isnt without his vices. He has a wicked sinker that he can throw 87-93mph, and intentionally varies the speed and break. And his slider is very solid, sometimes loopy and sometimes difficult to control. But, his changeup was non-existant and it was started to catch up to him. His last 3 starts were indicative of this. He was passable in all 3, but not to the level he was in the first 6.

 

18IP 18H 10ER 11BB 11K.

 

The sox saw something and took corrective action. This is what Theo does. By moving him to the pen, they were able to keep him away from lefties and also had the opportunity of bringing in an extreme GB pitcher if a DP was needed. His numbers vs lefties werent horrible as many people will be quick to point out. But his stuff became a lot easier to take or foul off the more the lefties saw him. This was evidenced by a huge difference in OBP.

 

Masterson vs Lefties: .238/.365/.422

Masterson vs Righties: .196/.273/.298

 

He absolutely murders righties. Lefties dont hit for a high average vs him, but they get on base and when they do hit the ball, it is usually for extra bases. Until his changeup matures, he should not be in a MLB rotation. As any good manager would just load up on lefties and feast on the amount of walks and EBH he'd give up.

 

But what does that mean for the sox? Should they move him down to AAA and let him work on his changeup exclusively? That would be best for the player. But having an asset like Masterson who theoretically could be a long man/spot starter as well as a devastating righty and sinkerball specialist on your roster is hard to turn away.

 

 

I disagree with that.

 

Wang's Platoon Splits

Webb's

Carmona's

Lowe's

 

Between them, Wang, Lowe, Carmona and Webb are, in no particular order, perhaps the best sinkerballers in the league. All of them have significant platoon splits. Some more than others of course (Webb's surprised me by being frairly significant) but it's a hurdle sinkerballers learn to overcome if they're left in the rotation. I do NOT believe that three bad starts made that a different thing for Masterson than for those other 4 starters, especially considering his upside and just how effective that sinker is for him.

 

JMHO, but I think Theo let the illusion of depth lure him into making the easy call and it cost us in the long run.

[a700hitter]

Honestly' date=' because the differences between them are stylistic in terms of how they arrive at averagish, Sonnanstine being steadily average and Wakefield being hit or miss, I'd make a decision based on the opposing pitcher.[/quote']Okay, opposing pitchers: Sabbathia and Pettitte

[ORS]

Okay' date=' opposing pitchers: Sabbathia and Pettitte[/quote']

Wakefield and Sonnanstine, respectively.

[jacksonianmarch]

lol based on what

 

Endurance, depth of arsenal, capability of the strikeout and a solid minor league resume spanning multiple levels over a very short period of time. Players who do what he did typically carve out big league careers. His velocity will keep him from being a top of the rotation SP, but I do think he carves out a big league career as a starter, whether it be with us or not remains to be seen. Looks unlikely at this point

[jacksonianmarch]

I disagree with that.

 

Wang's Platoon Splits

Webb's

Carmona's

Lowe's

 

Between them, Wang, Lowe, Carmona and Webb are, in no particular order, perhaps the best sinkerballers in the league. All of them have significant platoon splits. Some more than others of course (Webb's surprised me by being frairly significant) but it's a hurdle sinkerballers learn to overcome if they're left in the rotation. I do NOT believe that three bad starts made that a different thing for Masterson than for those other 4 starters, especially considering his upside and just how effective that sinker is for him.

 

JMHO, but I think Theo let the illusion of depth lure him into making the easy call and it cost us in the long run.

 

Agree to disagree. I think Theo saw that as constituted, Masterson's arsenal in the rotation set him up to be a mediocre MLB SP. I think he saw his arsenal out of the pen as devastating and made the decision that a lights out reliever was better than a middle of the road starter

[a700hitter]

Wakefield and Sonnanstine' date=' respectively.[/quote']But it would be very unlikely that Tito would allow himself to be in a position where he would not have Beckett, Dice K or Lester to oppose CC. It's much more likely that he'd be facing Pettitte, so I'd rather have Sonnestine. What about you?

[ORS]

Oh, that's fun, do I get to make up hypotheticals too? How about we agree to disagree?

[a700hitter]

Oh' date=' that's fun, do I get to make up hypotheticals too? How about we agree to disagree?[/quote']You are one stubborn guy. You know and I know that come the playoffs that we will both get nauseas if we see Wakefield penciled in for a playoff start and that we'd rather have Sonnestine on the hill. You are making up the hypothetical with your "it depends upon the opposing pitcher" argument. The 4th slot will line up against the other team's 4th slot in the playoffs. That is reality, not a hypothetical. Who do you hand the ball? We both know the answer.

[BoSox21]

The goal is definitely not to be forced to have Wakefield make a playoff start and I don't think the FO has any intention of letting that happen but no matter how you cut it, there are far worse options to have for a 5th starter

[yeszir]

Attempted to split rotation discussion from this thread. Please keep the pitching discussion here now.

[a700hitter]

The goal is definitely not to be forced to have Wakefield make a playoff start and I don't think the FO has any intention of letting that happen but no matter how you cut it' date=' there are far worse options to have for a 5th starter[/quote']But he is the 4th starter, and it is difficult to avoid the 4th starter in a 7 game series.

 

Edit: In the Red Sox last 3 post seasons, he has had starts in each and the result has been an 0-3 record with a 9.95 ERA. That's as ugly as it gets.

[BoSox21]

But he is the 4th starter' date=' and it is difficult to avoid the 4th starter in a 7 game series.[/quote']

 

Yea, maybe he is the 4th starter on paper but how bad would Penny, Smoltz and Buchholz have to be to have Wakefield get the nod over them in a playoff start?

[Dojji]

Agree to disagree. I think Theo saw that as constituted' date=' Masterson's arsenal in the rotation set him up to be a mediocre MLB SP. I think he saw his arsenal out of the pen as devastating and made the decision that a lights out reliever was better than a middle of the road starter[/quote']

 

I disagree with that assessment mostly because I disagree with the point philosophically. Especially in the context of 2008 where we already knew that Colon and Schilling were going to be undependable at the time we made the move to shorten our rotation depth even further. With rotation depth a big part of what kept us out of the World Series I think it's a legitimate criticism.

 

I believe Theo was still trying to force Buchholz as a solution at the time. If Masterson is down there at the bottom of the rotation as a dependably average innings burner when Buck flames out when we have 4 options for the postseason rotation and still have Paps, Oki and MDC in the pen for high-leverage innings.

[rhet]

Don't forget about Smoltz.

I expect 10 wins and a sub-3.50 ERA.

[a700hitter]

Yea' date=' maybe he is the 4th starter on paper but how bad would Penny, Smoltz and Buchholz have to be to have Wakefield get the nod over them in a playoff start?[/quote']Bucholz would have to be better than he was last season to get the nod and Smoltz and Penny would have to be healthy.

[BoSox21]

At least one of which I would expect to become reality

[a700hitter]

At least one of which I would hope to become reality

. Unless you are Penny's or Smolt's doctor, on what would you base your expectation? You have a hope, nothing more.

[TheKilo]

Don't forget about Smoltz.

I expect 10 wins and a sub-3.50 ERA.

 

Unrealistic.

 

8 and an ERA of around 4.20 would make me ecstatic

[Dojji]

That strikes me as a little overcautious. You might be right, but I think it's safe to be a bit more optimistic than that if Smoltz really is healthy again.

[a700hitter]

That strikes me as a little overcautious. You might be right' date=' but I think it's safe to be a bit more optimistic than that if Smoltz really is healthy again.[/quote']The young uninjured Smoltz is gone forever. Now, there is an old surgically repaired Smoltz. If he is healthy enough to pitch again, we are never again going to see vintage John Smoltz-- not even close. Asking whether he'll be "healthy again" confuses me, because he's not going back to his prime. He'll just be healthy enough to pitch at 41 years old.

[a700hitter]

WAKEFIELD THROWS 94 PITCHES (1:56 p.m., MID 4, NO SCORE)

 

Not much happening here in Kissimmee, so Adam Kilgore offers this from Fort Myers: Tim Wakefield threw five innings in a Class-A game against the Reds at the minor league complex and allowed five runs on five hits, including three homers. Wakefield said her struggled some with his mechanics, but the good news is he threw 94 pitches and continued to get work in with George Kottaras

Excellent news. He can throw 95 pitches and give up 5 runs to minor leaguers. Stupendous!!

[ORS]

You are one stubborn guy. You know and I know that come the playoffs that we will both get nauseas if we see Wakefield penciled in for a playoff start and that we'd rather have Sonnestine on the hill. You are making up the hypothetical with your "it depends upon the opposing pitcher" argument. The 4th slot will line up against the other team's 4th slot in the playoffs. That is reality' date=' not a hypothetical. Who do you hand the ball? We both know the answer.[/quote']

No, I made no hypothetical up. I've stated the difference between the two is marginal and that to make a decision on who would start a particular game, I'd need to know more than just what I can find on the back of their baseball cards. You can make whatever assumptions you want on how that other information will shake out, but that is a hypothetical scenario.

 

Yes, I have full sphintcer pressure whenever Wakefield pitches in a big game. This isn't a winning argument either, as I wouldn't be comfortable if Sonnanstine took the bump.

[ORS]

The young uninjured Smoltz is gone forever. Now' date=' there is an old surgically repaired Smoltz. If he is healthy enough to pitch again, we are never again going to see vintage John Smoltz-- not even close. Asking whether he'll be "healthy again" confuses me, because he's not going back to his prime. He'll just be healthy enough to pitch at 41 years old.[/quote']

Yet, you were perfectly content bringing back Schilling for his 41 y/o season. You are a tough one to follow. The only thing that remains consistent is that the FO did a poor job in your book.

[BoSox21]

The young uninjured Smoltz is gone forever. Now' date=' there is an old surgically repaired Smoltz. If he is healthy enough to pitch again, we are never again going to see vintage John Smoltz-- not even close. Asking whether he'll be "healthy again" confuses me, because he's not going back to his prime. He'll just be healthy enough to pitch at 41 years old.[/quote']

 

And there is no hope that old, surgically-repaired Smoltz can be effective?

[TheKilo]

I have more faith in Smoltz being effective than I did Schilling.

[a700hitter]

No, I made no hypothetical up. I've stated the difference between the two is marginal and that to make a decision on who would start a particular game, I'd need to know more than just what I can find on the back of their baseball cards. You can make whatever assumptions you want on how that other information will shake out, but that is a hypothetical scenario.

 

Yes, I have full sphintcer pressure whenever Wakefield pitches in a big game. This isn't a winning argument either, as I wouldn't be comfortable if Sonnanstine took the bump.

You are too stubborn to admit that I am right on this, but your last paragraph is as close as I'll get. Sonnestine isn't Roy Halladay, but in 3 post-season starts , he is 2-1 with a 4.24 ERA which is a far cry from Wakefield's record of futility in his last 3 starts.

[a700hitter]

Yet' date=' you were perfectly content bringing back Schilling for his 41 y/o season. You are a tough one to follow. The only thing that remains consistent is that the FO did a poor job in your book.[/quote']Dude, your blood sugar must be low. It's that time of the day. Grab a candy bar and calm down. Who is discussing the FO performance in this thread? Not me. Also, although I question and criticize many FO moves, I have openly shared my opinion that on balance they have done a good job. You memory is selective in this regard.

 

Schilling? Where is that coming from? You have also recently misrepresented my 2006 ST evaluations of Lester. You forced me to research a 3 year old thread to prove that my memory of my evaluation was accurate. Why'd you do that? I hate having to research old posts. From now on when you accuse me of inconsistency or anything else, how about you bring the proof with the accusation? That's only fair. Without the proof, in the future I am just going to respond that your accusation is unsubstantiated BS. You search the posts. As for Schilling, when did I ever say that the post-surgical Schilling would be as good as the young uninjured Schilling? I didn't say that I didn't want Smoltz this season. I just think some people have unrealistic expectation of a post-surgical 41-yr old Smoltz. People are predicting 10 wins and he will not even take the mound until June. That's very ambitious.