Daniel Bard is not, and will not be, a starting pitcher.

[Dojji]

Steady enough undercurrent here of Bard-to-the-rotation, and I can't for the life of me figure out why.

 

He simplified his repertoire in order to make it in the bullpen, and his command, while decent, is not profound. He was moved to the bullpen because he was a DISASTER as an over-age starter in A-ball. He doesn't have the pitch selection or command to do it and was never stretched out to start for a full year anyway. I don't think his mechanics are clean enough to do him longterm for 200 innings a year either for that matter.

 

Focus on ideas that have a snowball's chance of working. This team will not throw away what it has in Dan Bard on a fool's gamble when we're hurting in the pen as it is. Aceves is more likely to go to the rotation. I'd actually rate Papelbon more likely to go into the rotation -- at least he's done it successfully at the pro level before, and even at the major league level in 05!

 

This will not happen, it cannot happen, and it would be poor asset management to try to make it happen.

 

Find another idea, people. Find another idea.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

I'm on this boat too but I wouldn't say that it won't happen. With Lackey and Dice-K who knows what can happen.

[soxfan74]

Over A seven run ERA in A ball. I'll pass. Add my vote to keep Bard where he is or take over for Pap if he doesn't come back.

[Dojji]

With lackey and Daisuke out we have one hole in the rotation. Spots are presently occupled by Beckett, Lester, Buchholz and Bedard if he returns, which I think the team is going to try to make that happen.

 

I would try Aceves to the rotation, or look to bring in a few reclamation projects and hope one stuck, before I risked ruining Bard.

 

I think the fact that it worked with CJ Wilson is making people think it's an easy process. In fact stretching out a longterm reliever into the rotation is chancy in the extreme. Just ask Justin Duchscherer. Sure if a guy is in the pen while waiting for a rotation spot, a la Curt Schilling, that can work, because the team knows the guy's a starter and he's waiting his chance and so does the pitcher. That's a far cry from a guy who's being prepared as a reliever every day for years and then suddenly, hey-presto, starting pitcher, which is more or less what we'd be asking of Bard.

 

Again both Aceves and Papelbon have a much stronger base and history as starting pitchers to draw on than Bard does. Looking at asset management strictly from a standpoint of maximizing ROI, either one of those two would be in the rotation before Bard would.

[SoxSport]

Cherington says they will try to get one more starter on the cheap. That could mean somebody like Colon.

 

Aceves will surely be the no.4 starter.

 

Bard will probably stay at setup for Pap--or close if Pap signs elsewhere. They could also add another closer,

and keep Bard at setup.

 

The top Sox starters need to pitch more innings: Lester and Beckett were both below 200 innings last year.

Most #1 and 2 starters throw 200 + innings. That suggests they are taking their starters out too soon, which puts extra pressure on the bullpen.

[User Name]

. I don't think his mechanics are clean enough to do him longterm for 200 innings a year either for that matter.

 

How do you know about his mechanics? Did you read that somewhere? Not meant to disregard your opinion, i just think he's sound mechanically, and if he isn't, i'd like to see evidence to the contrary.

 

Cherington says they will try to get one more starter on the cheap. That could mean somebody like Colon.

 

Did he specifically say this?

[Dojji]

His mechanics were a common concern about Bard as a starter at Soxprospects when he was drafted, and the fact that the Sox tried twice to correct his mechanics fuels the concern.

 

At any rate, you stretch out Bard when, and only when, you can afford a Duchscherer.

[User Name]

His mechanics were a common concern about Bard as a starter at Soxprospects when he was drafted, and the fact that the Sox tried twice to correct his mechanics fuels the concern.

 

At any rate, you stretch out Bard when, and only when, you can afford a Duchscherer.

 

I don't agree with making Bard a starter either. I just don't see the issue with his mechanics since he became a reliever, and would like to know if there is fact behind the opinion, since it's not the first time i've read about it in a forum, but nothing concrete.

 

More of a curiosity thing.

[mvp 78]

As for pitch selection: Justin Masterson's fastballs are on line 1 for you.

 

Should he be a starter? Idk. Should he be the closer? Hell no.

[a700hitter]

IDK why his fixed mechanics would not translate to starting. Do relievers have one type of mechanics and starters have different mechanics? I don't think so.

 

Here's some reasons why this might happen:

 

1. There are 2 openings in the rotation

2. He had been a successful starter in college

3. He has 2 plus pitches and his changeup is serviceable

4. It is rumored that he has expressed a desire to be a starter.

[ORS]

His mechanics were a common concern about Bard as a starter at Soxprospects when he was drafted, and the fact that the Sox tried twice to correct his mechanics fuels the concern.

 

At any rate, you stretch out Bard when, and only when, you can afford a Duchscherer.

You are conflating this concern a bit. Yes, there was concern about his mechanics, and have been subsequent corrections, as it pertains to the ability to command his pitches. This does not mean that, as you put it, his mechanics wouldn't stand up to 200 IP as a starter, which suggests concerns about mechanics that might lead to injury, never the concern with Bard. As his SR stated coming out of college, he throws "easy gas", ie he can achieve excellent velocity with minimal effort (think Verlander).

 

While I agree that there's risk in moving away from what you know you have with him, a good relief pitcher, in lieu of trying him out as a starter. That said, it might be worth the risk/reward if he can maintain his control over the higher load. I'd try it to start the year, but if, and only if, they can replace him (plus more) in what was a very shallow bullpen last year.

[Dojji]

As for pitch selection: Justin Masterson's fastballs are on line 1 for you.

 

Should he be a starter? Idk. Should he be the closer? Hell no.

 

Justin Masterson is a sinkerballer. That's a HUGE difference from being a power pitcher like Bard. A sinkerballer, especially one with the kind of life on his sinker Masterson has, can live on that pitch practically exclusively. Masterson himself adds has a serious ability to mix up his velocity and vary the depth of his sink as a result that puts him in a league apart. He doesn't so much have *a sinker* as he has several points along the sinkerball spectrum that he can access at will. He can throw a mid 90's relatively straight sinker, or really drop an 88 MPH full sink pitch at you, and that's as much variation as Schilling's heat/split duo that he used to such great effect. In one pitch.

 

In short I don't think I've ever seen a pitch as plus as Masterson's sinker, with the possible exception of Mariano's cutter (Mariano though is not a starter) and Bard's heat, while overpowering, doesn't stand up to that. There's a reason Masterson was one of those guys I defended to the hilt around here and didn't want traded even for V-mart.

[jacksonianmarch]

You are conflating this concern a bit. Yes, there was concern about his mechanics, and have been subsequent corrections, as it pertains to the ability to command his pitches. This does not mean that, as you put it, his mechanics wouldn't stand up to 200 IP as a starter, which suggests concerns about mechanics that might lead to injury, never the concern with Bard. As his SR stated coming out of college, he throws "easy gas", ie he can achieve excellent velocity with minimal effort (think Verlander).

 

While I agree that there's risk in moving away from what you know you have with him, a good relief pitcher, in lieu of trying him out as a starter. That said, it might be worth the risk/reward if he can maintain his control over the higher load. I'd try it to start the year, but if, and only if, they can replace him (plus more) in what was a very shallow bullpen last year.

 

We did that same thing with Joba and the conversions hurt his effectiveness.

[YAZMAN]

Justin Masterson is a sinkerballer. That's a HUGE difference from being a power pitcher like Bard. A sinkerballer, especially one with the kind of life on his sinker Masterson has, can live on that pitch practically exclusively. Masterson himself adds has a serious ability to mix up his velocity and vary the depth of his sink as a result that puts him in a league apart. He doesn't so much have *a sinker* as he has several points along the sinkerball spectrum that he can access at will. He can throw a mid 90's relatively straight sinker, or really drop an 88 MPH full sink pitch at you, and that's as much variation as Schilling's heat/split duo that he used to such great effect. In one pitch.

 

In short I don't think I've ever seen a pitch as plus as Masterson's sinker, with the possible exception of Mariano's cutter (Mariano though is not a starter) and Bard's heat, while overpowering, doesn't stand up to that. There's a reason Masterson was one of those guys I defended to the hilt around here and didn't want traded even for V-mart.

 

Masterson was a HUGE loss for us, you just knew it when it happened. Aside from being a corn-fed monster of a workhorse, he was a stand up guy as well.

[seabeachfred]

I'm reading sort of a CATCH 22 here. We need two starters and maybe we make Bard and Aceves starters, right? Well, then, what happens to our bullpen where we would be very very thin? OK, we keep Bard and Aceves in the bullpen and, walla, our bullpen is stronger as it would have to be if we lose Papelbon. Either way we find ourselves between a rock and a hard place. I think that is what's going through Cherington's mind right not. As I see it we need three more pitchers, a starter and two relievers, or two starters and a reliever......and hopefully Papelbon too.

 

As I suggested earlier in another post, three pitchers of either of aforementioned variety and a RH hitting outfielder. Cherington has to decide along with the others in the front office and manager, whoever he turns out to be, which of our current pitchers Bard and Aceves start or relieve. A healthy Bedard would be ideal for us, but such a thing seems to be an oxymoron the past few years.

 

OK, I'll take a flier at this. We resign Papelbon, Bard and Aceves stay in the bullpen. We trade for a starter and sign two relievers. If they work out well in ST, we make Aceves a starter. Right now that's as far as my thinking takes me on this subject. That and a RH hitting outfielder.

[User Name]

In short I don't think I've ever seen a pitch as plus as Masterson's sinker' date=' with the possible exception of Mariano's cutter[/b'] (Mariano though is not a starter) and Bard's heat, while overpowering, doesn't stand up to that. There's a reason Masterson was one of those guys I defended to the hilt around here and didn't want traded even for V-mart.

 

Woah, talk about hyperbole.

 

Also, Masterson still lacks a quality changeup. He's good, but i don't think he's 2011 good without a reliable pitch to get lefties out.

[ORS]

We did that same thing with Joba and the conversions hurt his effectiveness.

He was always an effort guy to get the velocity he had as a reliever, which is evident in the dropoff you saw when he was trying to find himself as a SP. Bard is different in that regard. He had easy heat coming out of college as a SP.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Couple things:

 

1. Bard had a total of 22 games started in the minors, in which he threw 75 total innings, and posted a 9.1 BB/9. Spare me on the minor league numbers. It's an absolutely minuscule sample size, and he was 22 years old.

 

2. When he first came up, he basically didn't have a change. He's throwing his change up 5X more now than he did when he was first coming through the system (per fangraphs). He's now throwing a 2 seamer, a 4 seamer, a filthy slider, and a change up. He's got the pitches to make it as a starter.

 

3. His command, overall, is not even close to being the same as when he was 22. He walked 9.1 per 9 in A ball when he was 22. Last year, he walked 3 per 9.

 

You make it sound as if a pitcher is not able to develop or improve once he gets drafted.

 

Youk never hit more than 8 HR in the minors. Ellsbury never hit more than 7. Players develop. Bard was in his first year of professional baseball. Sure, he had a bad year. But writing him off as a starter because of a bad 75 IP in A ball when he was 22?!?!? Come on man.

[User Name]

But is the possibility of him becoming a good SP worth the gamble of screwing up the bullpen and Bard himself in the process?

[SoxFanForsyth]

But is the possibility of him becoming a good SP worth the gamble of screwing up the bullpen and Bard himself in the process?

 

Personally, I don't think it's a huge gamble. The sooner the decision is made, the sooner Bard can start prepping for the season as a starter, working on his stamina, etc. It's dangerous when you make the decision in Spring Training, or in January. It's not much of a gamble when you make the decision in November.

 

Plus, from a cost perspective, it's much cheaper to go find a replacement for Bard in the bullpen than it is to go find a SP with as much upside as Bard has.

[User Name]

I don't think you're considering how difficult the transformation from RP to SP really is.

 

The same argument that you use about his tiny sample size as a starter should be reason for worry, because he's never had a starter's workload for a full season over his career. That, imo, is a recipe for disaster, but let's see what happens.

[Palodios]

I don't think you're considering how difficult the transformation from RP to SP really is.

 

The same argument that you use about his tiny sample size as a starter should be reason for worry, because he's never had a starter's workload for a full season over his career. That, imo, is a recipe for disaster, but let's see what happens.

 

Isn't Texas's entire rotation comprised of guys who were once closers?

[SoxFanForsyth]

Isn't Texas's entire rotation comprised of guys who were once closers?

 

Exactly. CJ Wilson, Alexi Ogando, Justin Masterson, all come to mind, and they're just in the past few years.

 

I don't know. I just think the likelihood of Bard getting hurt and/or ruined because of a move to the rotation is greatly exaggerated.

[User Name]

Isn't Texas's entire rotation comprised of guys who were once closers?

 

CJ Wilson was a starter who was converted to the bullpen because of arm trouble, other than that, this was pretty much pulled out of thin air.

 

Ogando and Masterson were both starters who ended up pitching relief.

[SoxFanForsyth]

CJ Wilson was a starter who was converted to the bullpen because of arm trouble, other than that, this was pretty much pulled out of thin air.

 

Ogando and Masterson were both starters who ended up pitching relief.

 

So you're telling me that CJ Wilson, who was converted to the bullpen because of arm problems, is less of a gamble than Bard?

 

Masterson is a lot like Bard. He started 27 games in A-AA ball, posted ERA's in the mid-4's, and got moved to the bullpen where he excelled.

[Palodios]

CJ Wilson was a starter who was converted to the bullpen because of arm trouble, other than that, this was pretty much pulled out of thin air.

 

Ogando and Masterson were both starters who ended up pitching relief.

 

"Closers" was poor word choice on my part, but Texas has made the transition for many of its starters back and forth from relief roles. Ogando, Wilson, and Lewis have all pitched atleast one full season as a reliever in the majors, and Feliz will likely end up in their rotation in 2012 if Wilson leaves.

[User Name]

Wilson was converted to starting out of necessity, it was a indeed a gamble, albeit one that paid off, so i fail to see the point of the comment.

 

The point isn't necessarily that Bard will get ruined or will suck, or both, but that not only are there options with a proven track record in the FA market, but we actually have a guy that has experience starting in Aceves. No real reason to try to fix what isn't broken.

 

From an objective standpoint, there are a lot of things that can go wrong

[User Name]

"Closers" was poor word choice on my part' date=' but Texas has made the transition for many of its starters back and forth from relief roles. Ogando, Wilson, and Lewis have all pitched atleast one full season as a reliever in the majors, and Feliz will likely end up in their rotation in 2012 if Wilson leaves.[/quote']

 

All guys who were starting in the minors and transitioned to the big leagues in the bullpen like many other starters have, such as David Price, Johan Santana and Fausto Carmona. Feliz was also a starter in the minors.

 

Lewis is the worst example of all, since he sucked in the Majors, went to Japan, started several years, then came back.

 

They are different situations. Bard was not transitioned into a reliever in order to become a starter, he was transitioned into a reliever because they felt he couldn't cut it as a starter.

 

Apples and oranges.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Wilson was converted to starting out of necessity, it was a indeed a gamble, albeit one that paid off, so i fail to see the point of the comment.

 

The point isn't necessarily that Bard will get ruined or will suck, or both, but that not only are there options with a proven track record in the FA market, but we actually have a guy that has experience starting in Aceves. No real reason to try to fix what isn't broken.

 

From an objective standpoint, there are a lot of things that can go wrong

 

The only point I was trying to make is that, recently, more often than not, the gamble of taking a guy from a RP role to a SP role has worked. Whether that's because of better preparation, better conditioning, or what, I don't know. But I do see quite a few successful transitions, and not many failures, especially with low-effort power pitchers like Bard (as ORS said, Joba was a max-effort guy)

 

Also, Bard has thrown 148 IP over the past 2 seasons. He has taken on a considerable workload over the past 2 seasons, so it's not like we would be having to stretch him from 45 IP to 180 IP. Going from around 75 IP to 180 IP is a big jump, but not as risky as some (not necessarily you) make it seem.

 

CJ Wilson went from 74 IP in 09 to 203 in 10, and 223 in 11.

Ogando went from 41 IP in 2010 to 170 IP in 2011.

 

And by the way, Ogando started 3 total games in his entire professional career prior to 2011.

 

I'm not saying it's not a risk. There is definitely risk involved. But to say that putting him in a rotation on a 180 IP limit provides more risk than reward is crazy IMO. We used Bard in 70 games in 2011, 73 in 2010. We've basically used him every other game over the past 2 seasons. Between that, along with getting up, warming up, and sitting back down, I just don't see this enormous risk.

[ORS]

They are different situations. Bard was not transitioned into a reliever in order to become a starter, he was transitioned into a reliever because they felt he couldn't cut it as a starter.

 

Apples and oranges.

This is true, and a good point. However, at this point, I think 2011 version of Daniel Bard is apples and oranges to the 2007 version of Daniel Bard. All the warts he had as a SP in 2007 were there when he starting pitching in relief. Given the refinement shown in his ability to pitch, it's probably worth it to see if he can crack the rotation. If he can't, he can always go back to the BP.