Is the actual rotation the worst in the last 10 Y?

[a700hitter]

Here's the thing about this rotation. They have looked bad, but their peripherals show that they have not been nearly as bad as their ERAs indicate, especially Clay. They will get better. It's almost impossible to sustain an underperformance of your xFIP by more than one run.

 

Compare each starter's ERA to his xFIP:

 

Clay ERA 6.03, xFIP 3.10

Kelly ERA 5.72 xFIP 3.27

Porcello ERA 4.38 xFIP 3.72

Miley ERA 7.15 xFIP 5.15

Masterson 5.18 xFIP 4.89

 

We should see significant improvement from Clay, Kelly, and Miley, and modest improvement from Porcello. They still won't be a great staff, but they will be better than what we've seen. They should be middle of the pack. The fact that they're all underperforming their peripherals is an enigma.

 

So, they haven't sucked up to this point, or you don't expect them to suck going forward or both? Also, what did Buchholz's numbers look like for 2014?

[iortiz]

Well going by your chart, am I correct to assume that you classify pitchers the following way:

 

5+ WAR = Ace

4-5 WAR = #1

3-4 WAR = #2

2-3 WAR = #3

 

If that's the case, then last year there were 18 number 1 pitchers in MLB and 15 number 2 pitchers. That would mean that about half of the teams don't have either a number 1 or a number 2 guy in their rotations, but there are a whole lot of 3-5 pitchers.

 

And that doesn't even make sense. If a pitcher is in the top 20% of all pitchers, he is a #1, next 20%, he's a number 2.

1. It's not about how many but the number. 2. There's a reason FG puts this chart, the same guys who calculate WAR every year (it is not my chart LOL!) . Sure year after year every single chart for every single metric change, but in this case, this represent pretty well a large sample to judge a player in terms of WAR, reason why it is called a good rule of thumb. If you are going to base a profile on a short sample and/or number of pitchers achieving certain number, I don't think you will find the answer you are looking for. This is why I think you are the only one around here who thinks that he is already a No. 2.

Edited May 9, 2015 by iortiz

[Spudboy]

Here's the thing about this rotation. They have looked bad, but their peripherals show that they have not been nearly as bad as their ERAs indicate, especially Clay. They will get better. It's almost impossible to sustain an underperformance of your xFIP by more than one run.

 

Compare each starter's ERA to his xFIP:

 

Clay ERA 6.03, xFIP 3.10

Kelly ERA 5.72 xFIP 3.27

Porcello ERA 4.38 xFIP 3.72

Miley ERA 7.15 xFIP 5.15

Masterson 5.18 xFIP 4.89

 

We should see significant improvement from Clay, Kelly, and Miley, and modest improvement from Porcello. They still won't be a great staff, but they will be better than what we've seen. They should be middle of the pack. The fact that they're all underperforming their peripherals is an enigma.

 

But this rotation is no enigma. It just plain sucks ass and no amount of statistical projection will improve it.

 

They just do not have the talent. Except for maybe Porcello.

[iortiz]

ERA estimators work fine in the long run, not that good in the short, specially since the guys behind the pitcher in the short run (ex. current season) will always be there for good or for bad. Also you have to take era estimators with a grain of salt since first off it is recommendable to evaluate several era estimators and see which one fits better for a certain pitcher.

 

The answer is not at era estimators. Our situation is pretty simple actually, the talent out there is not good enough to turn the ship around, we need to do something and quickly or things could take out of the hands very early.

Edited May 9, 2015 by iortiz

[a700hitter]

We are playing West Coast and Central teams from now until the end of May, mainly on the road. This will be a survival test for this team. It will be a very very tough stretch. They will be lucky to keep their head above water, and they will be in danger of sinking like a stone.

[a700hitter]

But this rotation is no enigma. It just plain sucks ass and no amount of statistical projection will improve it.

 

They just do not have the talent. Except for maybe Porcello.

 

Spud, we have to cut the FO some slack. They put together the best staff they could from what was available. All the better pitchers were taken by the other 29 GMs. Greedy bastards!

[User Name]

But this rotation is no enigma. It just plain sucks ass and no amount of statistical projection will improve it.

 

They just do not have the talent. Except for maybe Porcello.

 

That's not it either. They're clearly better than they've shown. But it's all a moot point if the team keeps getting shut out by s***** Aarons (Harang and Sanchez) as well as assorted suck.

[mvp 78]

The Sox lineup last night was assorted suck. Swihart should be in AAA still.

[SoxnCycles]

The Sox lineup last night was assorted suck. Swihart should be in AAA still.

 

Yeah, Leon and his .174 BA should be starting.

Swihart is the least of this offense's problems.

[mvp 78]

Yeah, Leon and his .174 BA should be starting.

Swihart is the least of this offense's problems.

 

He's not why they're losing. He's just not ready. Should be in AAA until 2016 just for development reasons.

[Kimmi]

So, they haven't sucked up to this point, or you don't expect them to suck going forward or both? Also, what did Buchholz's numbers look like for 2014?

 

They have stunk up to this point, but they haven't stunk as bad as their ERA reflects. I don't expect them to turn into a top rotation, but I do think they should be able to improve to middle of the pack.

[Kimmi]

1. It's not about how many but the number. 2. There's a reason FG puts this chart, the same guys who calculate WAR every year (it is not my chart LOL!) . Sure year after year every single chart for every single metric change, but in this case, this represent pretty well a large sample to judge a player in terms of WAR, reason why it is called a good rule of thumb. If you are going to base a profile on a short sample and/or number of pitchers achieving certain number, I don't think you will find the answer you are looking for. This is why I think you are the only one around here who thinks that he is already a No. 2.

 

The breakdown of pitchers WAR is pretty similar year to year. That's fine if that's what your definition of a #1 and #2 pitcher are, but if that's the case, only about half the teams each year have a #1 or #2 guy. And if that's the case, then people should not be so alarmed that we do not have a #1 or a #2 guy.

[Kimmi]

But this rotation is no enigma. It just plain sucks ass and no amount of statistical projection will improve it.

 

They just do not have the talent. Except for maybe Porcello.

 

{Sigh......}

[Kimmi]

That's not it either. They're clearly better than they've shown. But it's all a moot point if the team keeps getting shut out by s***** Aarons (Harang and Sanchez) as well as assorted suck.

 

^^This.

[Kimmi]

He's not why they're losing. He's just not ready. Should be in AAA until 2016 just for development reasons.

 

Just like last year JBJ was not the reason why our offense sucked. It's the other guys in the lineup who are supposed to be carrying this team, but aren't.

 

We are a major league worst 4-45 with RISP in the month of May.

[iortiz]

The breakdown of pitchers WAR is pretty similar year to year. That's fine if that's what your definition of a #1 and #2 pitcher are, but if that's the case, only about half the teams each year have a #1 or #2 guy. And if that's the case, then people should not be so alarmed that we do not have a #1 or a #2 guy.

 

Again, it's not my definition Kim., it's FG's. Sure, No. 1s and No. 2 do not grow in trees, but out there year after year are plenty via trade/FA ( like last year) and for teams like the RS who has resources, there's no excuses. The answer is not there Kim. This team bet a lot in a very good offense "on paper" (I still think it is) but risked a lot in a very weak pitching staff (IMO) instead of balancing the team with a better pitching even if that had meant not signing Panda and/or HR and/or the cubans. Some agreed with that strategy some not, we'll see how this ends up, though.

Edited May 9, 2015 by iortiz

[Spudboy]

{Sigh......}

 

Kimmi please do not get me wrong. I really enjoy the way that you look at the game and how your understanding and knowledge of stats help you form strong, rational opinions.

 

My comment is not meant as affront to you.

 

I just believe that there should not be any expectation that rotation will turn around and be decent to good enough to go to the post season.

 

And I can tell you that you are not the first woman that I have caused to sigh!!!

[Spudboy]

We are playing West Coast and Central teams from now until the end of May, mainly on the road. This will be a survival test for this team. It will be a very very tough stretch. They will be lucky to keep their head above water, and they will be in danger of sinking like a stone.

 

The Sox could be 10 games out when they return from this trip. I can see this happening with this team.

 

What a mess.

[Spudboy]

He's not why they're losing. He's just not ready. Should be in AAA until 2016 just for development reasons.

 

I fully agree with this.

 

Carry on.

[User Name]

Just like last year JBJ was not the reason why our offense sucked. It's the other guys in the lineup who are supposed to be carrying this team, but aren't.

 

We are a major league worst 4-45 with RISP in the month of May.

 

That's almost impossibly bad.

[sk7326]

A team that plays half its games in Fenway is current DEAD FLIPPIN LAST in the AL in doubles - that seems impossible.

[a700hitter]

A team that plays half its games in Fenway is current DEAD FLIPPIN LAST in the AL in doubles - that seems impossible.

 

Enigmatic

[Northern Star]

The Sox could be 10 games out when they return from this trip. I can see this happening with this team.

 

What a mess.

 

That's the way, think positive.

[Northern Star]

Swihart is the least of this offense's problems.

 

This is obviously false. He's hitting worse than Nava and Napoli and Craig. Another automatic out in a lineup that's maybe 1/3 full of them on most nights.

[MJantomaso]

This is obviously false. He's hitting worse than Nava and Napoli and Craig. Another automatic out in a lineup that's maybe 1/3 full of them on most nights.

 

That's the way, think positive.

 

what has he played? 5 games?

[Kimmi]

Again, it's not my definition Kim., it's FG's. Sure, No. 1s and No. 2 do not grow in trees, but out there year after year are plenty via trade/FA ( like last year) and for teams like the RS who has resources, there's no excuses. The answer is not there Kim. This team bet a lot in a very good offense "on paper" (I still think it is) but risked a lot in a very weak pitching staff (IMO) instead of balancing the team with a better pitching even if that had meant not signing Panda and/or HR and/or the cubans. Some agreed with that strategy some not, we'll see how this ends up, though.

 

That is not Fangraphs definition of a #1 or #2 pitcher. That is their breakdown of what a very good player, solid player, etc. is. That does not necessarily equate to rankings of pitchers as #1, #2, etc.

[Kimmi]

Kimmi please do not get me wrong. I really enjoy the way that you look at the game and how your understanding and knowledge of stats help you form strong, rational opinions.

 

My comment is not meant as affront to you.

 

I just believe that there should not be any expectation that rotation will turn around and be decent to good enough to go to the post season.

 

And I can tell you that you are not the first woman that I have caused to sigh!!!

 

Well, it's May 9. There is no way I'm giving up hope on this season, no matter how bad they look. If the offense hits like they're supposed to, I believe that the rotation can be good enough to get us to the postseason, or at least keep us afloat until a trade can be made or some of the youngsters are ready.

 

I may be a pollyanna, but my optimism is not blind optimism. There is reason to be optimistic that the staff will improve.

[a700hitter]

Well, it's May 9. There is no way I'm giving up hope on this season, no matter how bad they look. If the offense hits like they're supposed to, I believe that the rotation can be good enough to get us to the postseason, or at least keep us afloat until a trade can be made or some of the youngsters are ready.

 

I may be a pollyanna, but my optimism is not blind optimism. There is reason to be optimistic that the staff will improve.

 

It would be a long summer without hope.

[Kimmi]

It would be a long summer without hope.

 

Well it sure doesn't sound like there is much hope around here.

[a700hitter]

Well it sure doesn't sound like there is much hope around here.

 

There is hope. There is a lot of frustration, but there is hope. The people without hope stop watching. Oddly, the optimists often lose hope first.