Bard to Rotation a Mistake?

[Elktonnick]

Well you have to love his arm and potential. He's gotten better the last 2 starts but still encounters that 1 hiccup inning.

 

Bard's role as a starter is also dependent on how his competition fares and the Red Sox needs in the bull pen. Even if he is designated the 4th or 5 th starter I don't think he'd be ever secure in that role until he has had 2 or 3 successful starts under his belt during the regular season. Even then there are others waiting in the wings to get their chance. In short, I suspect the rotation other than the big three won't be finalized fora long time, if ever this year.

[redsoxfan3]

Bard's role as a starter is also dependent on how his competition fares and the Red Sox needs in the bull pen. Even if he is designated the 4th or 5 th starter I don't think he'd be ever secure in that role until he has had 2 or 3 successful starts under his belt during the regular season. Even then there are others waiting in the wings to get their chance. In short' date=' I suspect the rotation other than the big three won't be finalized fora long time, if ever this year.[/quote']

 

I agree with you. This is a big year for Doubront and Bard. That would be awesome if both could exceed expectations and earn permanent spots in the rotation. It would be nice to know who our five starters will be at the beginning of next season. Dice-K's contract is up after this season, so it will be interesting to see if he will pitch decent when he comes back. If that is the case, then we might be able to sign him for a cheap contract as an insurance policy or 5th starter for next year. Of course, his health is always a concern, but if he wants any chance of getting a team to take a chance on him next year, then he needs to comeback and prove that he still has something left in the tank. Also, when the hell is Slackey coming back? I know he is out entirely this year. He isn't a free agent until 2015 and I would prefer if he doesn't pitch for us ever again.

[seabeachfred]

Well it seems like it's going to be Doubrant and Bard for our Nos. 4 and 5 starters in the rotation. It took a long time to decide on these two as if the Red Sos FO was in the throes of that infamous paralysis by analysis. I hope both do the job because it can only help us immeasurably if they can; it can derail us if they don't.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Well it seems like it's going to be Doubrant and Bard for our Nos. 4 and 5 starters in the rotation. It took a long time to decide on these two as if the Red Sos FO was in the throes of that infamous paralysis by analysis. I hope both do the job because it can only help us immeasurably if they can; it can derail us if they don't.

 

I think Doubront is going to be a hidden gem this year and is going to be a 13-14 game winner for us, ERA anywhere from 3.6-4.0. Probably around 175-180 IP.

 

I said earlier that Bard, I thought, would be a sub 3.50 ERA pitcher. That was too optimistic. I actually think Doubront will be a better pitcher than Bard in a starting role this year. I think Bard throws 150 IP to around a 4.2-4.4 ERA. He'll probably go something like 9-7, may reach double digit wins, but regardless, he'll be better than the league average #5 starter.

 

DiceK is a bit of an X factor this year. If he's ready to rejoin the team on June 1, he could steal a few starts away, especially if he comes back strong.

 

To be honest, between DiceK, Cook, Padilla, and let's not forget that we will, in all likelihood, trade for a pretty solid SP come July, I think we've got much better SP depth this year than we did going into last season, and our SP doesn't look nearly as bad as all the analysts are predicting.

[Dojji]

Bard isn't going to be great this year. He's too green to be consistent. He's going to be somewhere in between 06 Lester or 08 Buchholz. Hopefully he can figure out how to come up with that one clutch pitch and wriggle his way out of trouble like Lester was great at even before he became consistent. If he doesn't, he's probably going back to the pen.

[SoxSport]

I think the 4th and 5th spots will be evolving during the season. That's why you have to have some decent alternatives available. If Bailey goes down, for example, you have Bard back to the bullpen.

If Buchholz goes down, you have to have a 6th starter ready to fill the void. Their failure last year was not having competent pitchers in those slots to take up the slack.

[Elktonnick]

I think the 4th and 5th spots will be evolving during the season. That's why you have to have some decent alternatives available. If Bailey goes down, for example, you have Bard back to the bullpen.

If Buchholz goes down, you have to have a 6th starter ready to fill the void. Their failure last year was not having competent pitchers in those slots to take up the slack.

 

I concur 100%

[Dojji]

I think the 4th and 5th spots will be evolving during the season. That's why you have to have some decent alternatives available. If Bailey goes down, for example, you have Bard back to the bullpen.

If Buchholz goes down, you have to have a 6th starter ready to fill the void. Their failure last year was not having competent pitchers in those slots to take up the slack.

 

They actually had a fairly solid plan going into the season. It just didn't work.

 

Any one of Miller, Wakefield and Aceves could have stepped into the bottom of the rotation as Lackey and Daisuke fell out of it, and there was no particular reason Lackey and Daisuke had to fail so hard either. When your plan is 8 starters deep, that's pretty decent. And we went into the year with a couple bit options (Weiland, Tazawa, possibly Millwood) who were worth a cuppa as well.

 

Sometimes plans don't work out. When that happens it sucks, but it is disingenouos to intimate that there was no plan.

[User Name]

They actually had a fairly solid plan going into the season. It just didn't work.

 

Any one of Miller, Wakefield and Aceves could have stepped into the bottom of the rotation as Lackey and Daisuke fell out of it, and there was no particular reason Lackey and Daisuke had to fail so hard either. When your plan is 8 starters deep, that's pretty decent. And we went into the year with a couple bit options (Weiland, Tazawa, possibly Millwood) who were worth a cuppa as well.

 

Sometimes plans don't work out. When that happens it sucks, but it is disingenouos to intimate that there was no plan.

 

Hindsight is 20/20. They had a full, solid rotation and depth in Aceves/Wakefield/Miller. No one could have predicted Lackey would turn into the worst starter in recent history, and Daisuke and Buchholz would be lost for the year.

 

It's easy to look back and point fingers, although that accomplishes nothing.

[mvp 78]

And who can say if Cooke, Padilla, Miller will not s*** the bed at 6-8 either? 6-8 is always a roll of the dice. It's just about having bodies.

[SoxSport]

Bailey seems to be one of those guys who has to find an injury to happen. Like Lowrie? Now he has a thumb problem and may go on the DL--before the season starts. Maybe they'll move up Melancon or Aceves, but Aceves may have to replace Beckett because of HIS thumb to start the first game--against Verlander. What's with the thumbs? Cook had a good start today, so maybe he figures in. Hope he keeps his thumbs where they belong.

[SoxSport]

They actually had a fairly solid plan going into the season. It just didn't work.

 

Any one of Miller, Wakefield and Aceves could have stepped into the bottom of the rotation as Lackey and Daisuke fell out of it, and there was no particular reason Lackey and Daisuke had to fail so hard either. When your plan is 8 starters deep, that's pretty decent. And we went into the year with a couple bit options (Weiland, Tazawa, possibly Millwood) who were worth a cuppa as well.

 

Sometimes plans don't work out. When that happens it sucks, but it is disingenouos to intimate that there was no plan.

 

They decided on Miller and Wakefield. Very shakey options. Millwood was clearly better, but

other considerations prevailed. Aceves had done better as a reliever, but he was still better than the other two as a starter. The best options were Aceves and Millwood. You look at Aceves, and they still aren't starting him, even though he is their best option on the back end of the rotation. He must be related to Rodney Dangerfield.

 

Bobby V is a new guy, so you listen to him. But the others don't have a good track record on judging pitchers.

[jung]

I think for Aceves and the Sox it is still about how valuable he is in the pen more than anything else. The FO has been very mindful of the fact that it was not Bard that saved their bacon out of the pen last year and it was not even Paps who was fading by the end of the season. It was Aceves that saved their bacon out of the pen and I just do not think the Sox are willing to give up their security blanket.

 

The Sox are also spooked by the idea of both Aceves and Bard going to the rotation and Bard just has more upside than Aceves has as a starter.

 

It would have been interesting to see what the Sox would have done if Doubront had not pitched well enough to earn a shot. I think Doubront bailed their butts out of some tough choices.

[seabeachfred]

Bailey seems to be one of those guys who has to find an injury to happen. Like Lowrie? Now he has a thumb problem and may go on the DL--before the season starts. Maybe they'll move up Melancon or Aceves' date=' but Aceves may have to replace Beckett because of HIS thumb to start the first game--against Verlander. What's with the thumbs? Cook had a good start today, so maybe he figures in. Hope he keeps his thumbs where they belong.[/quote']

 

Cook thre well today......why not give the guy a shot in the rotation and put Bard in the bullpen until we see if Beckett will be ready to take his turn or not. We needed a closer after we let Papelbon walk but there were many on this board who knew the guy's reputation that insisted Bill Beane would not have traded him to us for what we gave him in exchange unless he was convince we was getting rid of nothing but excess baggage.

 

Another great move by Cherington.

[jung]

Put Bard in the pen to do what? He is no closer and if anything we might need a closer pending the term of Bailey's problem.

[jacksonianmarch]

Cook thre well today......why not give the guy a shot in the rotation and put Bard in the bullpen until we see if Beckett will be ready to take his turn or not. We needed a closer after we let Papelbon walk but there were many on this board who knew the guy's reputation that insisted Bill Beane would not have traded him to us for what we gave him in exchange unless he was convince we was getting rid of nothing but excess baggage.

 

Another great move by Cherington.

 

You move Bard back and forth and he'll end up on the DL as well. You make a decision and you stick with it for now. Also, it is much easier to move him back to the pen than from the pen into the rotation

[BornToRun]

Yes, we don't need to ruin Daniel like the Skanks ruined Joba.

[jung]

Well don't pile that all on the Yanks. Joba may have had a bit of "head" start (pun fully intended).

[iortiz]

Yes' date=' we don't need to ruin Daniel like the Skanks ruined Joba.[/quote']

 

This.

[SoxSport]

Put Bard in the pen to do what? He is no closer and if anything we might need a closer pending the term of Bailey's problem.

 

Oh sure he can close. His stuff is probably better as a closer than starter at this point. He has been lights out setup for a couple years. Anybody with high heat who can get it over the plate can close.

[pedroias laser]

I dont see why Bard could not close!. The guy has closer stuff plain and simple and i have never been one for being a closer type of fan in regards to where the term we are doomed theory comes into place. I think closers are overrated plain and simple hell i could close if i threw 90+ lol.

[User Name]

I dont see why Bard could not close!. The guy has closer stuff plain and simple and i have never been one for being a closer type of fan in regards to where the term we are doomed theory comes into place. I think closers are overrated plain and simple hell i could close if i threw 90+ lol.

 

I agree in principle that closers are overrated, but i take issue with the bolded part.

 

Two words: Craig Hansen. Excellent stuff, didn't have the makeup.

 

Countless other examples of guys with explosive stuff who just couldn't close, like Joel Zumaya.

[pedroias laser]

I agree in principle that closers are overrated, but i take issue with the bolded part.

 

Two words: Craig Hansen. Excellent stuff, didn't have the makeup.

 

Countless other examples of guys with explosive stuff who just couldn't close, like Joel Zumaya.

 

 

That's true Hansen was just a garbarge pick at the time wow did he suck.

[SoxSport]

I think they outsmarted themselves, figuring they could start Bard instead of spending big on a FA, and then trade for a cheap closer like Bailey. It worked on paper, but now Bailey has invented still another injury in his short career, and they are up the creek without an oar. They either have Bard close, have Aceves start, or vice versa? Bard is better suited to close, but he may also be an excellent starter, so it's a tough call. Maybe they should just go with Melancon, and see how it works out. He had 20 saves last year, and Houston has a hitter's park.

[kapsis21]

Melancon in the beast of AL East i dont know if that would fare well. better of with Aceves i think.

[a700hitter]

I think they outsmarted themselves' date=' figuring they could start Bard instead of spending big on a FA, and then trade for a cheap closer like Bailey. It worked on paper, but now Bailey has invented still another injury in his short career, and they are up the creek without an oar. They either have Bard close, have Aceves start, or vice versa? Bard is better suited to close, but he may also be an excellent starter, so it's a tough call. Maybe they should just go with Melancon, and see how it works out. He had 20 saves last year, and Houston has a hitter's park.[/quote']Their lack of moves in the off season, namely the failure to get a starting pitcher, leaves them with little room for error, injury or under performance.

[a700hitter]

The surgery typically takes 3-4 months of recovery time. Given that Bailey is a pitcher, it could be longer given that he would need time to rebuild his arm strength and regain his command.

He's basically through for the entire season.

 

They need another arm. They will be stretched too thin right from the beginning.

[a700hitter]

Bailey could be out until September

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Red Sox will be without closer Andrew Bailey for four to five months, a club source said. Manager Bobby Valentine said after the game that it would be after the All-Star break, which is only three months, one week from now. Worst case, according to the rough guideline, Bailey would be back in early September. Best case, early August.

 

Bailey will have surgery tomorrow at the Cleveland Clinic, with Dr. Thomas Graham operating.

 

Both Mark Melancon and Alfredo Aceves said they did not know who would be closing games. Valentine said the identity of the closer will hopefully be revealed in save situations in Detroit.

[iortiz]

pffff...

[SoxFanForsyth]

The most logical decision would be to let Bard start for 1-2 months until DiceK and Cook are both ready, then you throw him in the closer role and let DiceK take reigns of the 5 slot.

 

Melancon and Aceves can handle the role for the first 1-2 months. Then Bard can come in and take over.

 

If Bard is throwing lights out by the time DiceK comes back, then you make a move. But for now, it's a waiting game, and the team will be fine during that. Wait to see who is going to step up for you. Melancon could develop into a very very good closer.