Sox Pitching Staff Discussion

[Bellhorn04]

JF said the other night that Buch still has "his stuff" and that he's "just not placing it in the right place".

 

When it comes to pitchers the Sox don't seem to be able to diagnose jackshit.

[mvp 78]

When it comes to pitchers the Sox don't seem to be able to diagnose jackshit.

 

Or he's just trying to maintain his confidence? Idk. I just don't take what Farrell says to the media as gospel. It's all PR spin to me.

[southpaw777]

The Sox scouting have completelY whiffed on pitching. Hopefully Espinoza and Kopech work out. But besides those two, and they havent done anything yet, who was the last real successful homegrown pitching prospect?

I know you cant groom Aces types all the time, but for christ sakes, youd think we could draft and develop a few more reliable starters...hows Trey friggin Ball working out with the #7 Ben? Brian Johnson, Pat Light, and Kopech/Espinoza still in A ball...Jamie Callahan(2) Teddy Stankiewicz(2)

 

Theos first round and comp round pitchers selected.

Paps(4)

Masterson(2)

Alex Wilson(2)

Brandon Workman(2)

Craig Hanson

Clay Buchholz

Michael Bowden

Daniel Bard

Kris Johnson

Caleb Clay

Nick Hagadone

Casey Kelly

Bryan Price

Anthony Ranaudo

Matt Barnes

Henry Owens

 

International

Doubront

Dice K

Okajima

Tazawa

 

Under Mike Hazen/Dombrowski This year we picked Jason Groome with the first pick, but hes yet to sign.

 

Besides a small handful of names and a couple potential highly rated prospects, there hasnt been much of anything. I might have missed a name. Not sure when Anibal Sanchez was drafted, but he was an international signing we used to get Beckett. This list is all 1st rounders (unless marked differently) since the 2003 draft. I figured 13 years was plenty. Lester was a 2nd rounder in 2002 under Mike Port.

You would think there would be a few more success stories in there over the last 13 years. I know we mostly picked later 1st round, but still...

IMO, Scouting and drafting starting pitching has not been very successful since Theo took over as GM....Please feel free to add a name i may have missed or any correction needed.

[robert vonhalle]

True, but IMO, your criteria is flawed. Your criteria neglects to take into account career norms, injuries and trends.was not a SP'er all of 2015. How is that not a factor in deciding to sign him or not? The guy has been the poster boy for the DL and DFA over his whole career. Like Buch, he's always had nasty stuff when healthy and in form, but his career has been more spotty than anyone I know.

 

Of course, in hindsight Hill was a much better choice. Of course, there were plenty of people who said so last fall/winter, but just because Hill has done better this year, does not prove anything about what criteria should be used by GMs. Your criteria worked this time in history. IMO, the longer view (with more emphasis on recent performance) has a better success rate. Buch was pitching very well last year. That's pretty recent.

 

Note: the no-brainer was to accept Buch's option. To me, even hindsight hasn't changed that. I'd do it again and again under the same circumstances. The part that was not a no-brainer was deciding to keep him, instead of trading the risk/gamble to another team. Had we done that, then signing a guy like Hill, Fister or both would have made more sense.

 

There's a reason Hill

buchholz is still young so i do not know why he lost it so soon.

[Nick]

Is Shaun Anderson someone that can arrive as a relief pitcher in majors as early as 2017?

[Hugh2]

Buchholz is going to be 32 in a month, he's not young for a baseball player by any means. Many pitchers never make it out of their 20's, it only seems like they do because you recognize the names of the guys who stick around.

[Slasher9]

it appears he has used up his supply of bullets. it happens. for some even before they turn 30.

[Kimmi]

So, you don't want at least a decent single-A prospect for free?

 

I would have been okay if the Sox had traded Buchholz away for someone decent, though I was not advocating for him to be traded. I thought he had a good chance of being our #2 pitcher behind Price. At worst, I figured he'd round out the bottom of the rotation nicely. I could have foreseen an injury, but I did not foresee him having his career worst year.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

I could have foreseen an injury, but I did not foresee him having his career worst year.

 

Why not?

 

It's not like he hasn't been terrible before. He's like the SF Giants lately, except he sucks on the even numbered years.

[Kimmi]

Why not?

 

It's not like he hasn't been terrible before. He's like the SF Giants lately, except he sucks on the even numbered years.

 

Why would I foresee a career worst year after the way he pitched 2 out of the last 3 years? Even in 2014, his peripherals, while not good, were not as bad as his ERA or his W-L record would indicate.

 

I could foresee a down year where he would at least pitch well enough to be our #5, but I wouldn't think he'd be this bad.

[User Name]

.....and gets injured on the odd ones.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Why would I foresee a career worst year after the way he pitched 2 out of the last 3 years? Even in 2014, his peripherals, while not good, were not as bad as his ERA or his W-L record would indicate.

 

I could foresee a down year where he would at least pitch well enough to be our #5, but I wouldn't think he'd be this bad.

 

It didn't come as too big of a surprise to me.

[FredLynn]

The Sox scouting have completelY whiffed on pitching. Hopefully Espinoza and Kopech work out. But besides those two, and they havent done anything yet, who was the last real successful homegrown pitching prospect?

I know you cant groom Aces types all the time, but for christ sakes, youd think we could draft and develop a few more reliable starters...hows Trey friggin Ball working out with the #7 Ben? Brian Johnson, Pat Light, and Kopech/Espinoza still in A ball...Jamie Callahan(2) Teddy Stankiewicz(2)

 

Theos first round and comp round pitchers selected.

Paps(4)

Masterson(2)

Alex Wilson(2)

Brandon Workman(2)

Craig Hanson

Clay Buchholz

Michael Bowden

Daniel Bard

Kris Johnson

Caleb Clay

Nick Hagadone

Casey Kelly

Bryan Price

Anthony Ranaudo

Matt Barnes

Henry Owens

 

International

Doubront

Dice K

Okajima

Tazawa

 

Under Mike Hazen/Dombrowski This year we picked Jason Groome with the first pick, but hes yet to sign.

 

Besides a small handful of names and a couple potential highly rated prospects, there hasnt been much of anything. I might have missed a name. Not sure when Anibal Sanchez was drafted, but he was an international signing we used to get Beckett. This list is all 1st rounders (unless marked differently) since the 2003 draft. I figured 13 years was plenty. Lester was a 2nd rounder in 2002 under Mike Port.

You would think there would be a few more success stories in there over the last 13 years. I know we mostly picked later 1st round, but still...

IMO, Scouting and drafting starting pitching has not been very successful since Theo took over as GM....Please feel free to add a name i may have missed or any correction needed.

 

Good post Southpaw. Its pretty clear that while Epstein developed some excellent positional players his record with drafting and developing pitchers was pretty horrible. Same with Cherington. Its going to take Dombrowski more than a year to fix the mess he was left with in terms of SPing.

[Kimmi]

It didn't come as too big of a surprise to me.

 

Well, the fact that Buchholz' performance doesn't come as a surprise to you doesn't come as a surprise to me.

 

If he were on the Yankees, would you have wanted his option picked up?

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Well, the fact that Buchholz' performance doesn't come as a surprise to you doesn't come as a surprise to me.

 

If he were on the Yankees, would you have wanted his option picked up?

 

Tough call.

 

And if so I would have only to trade him. I think he's a guy who could benefit from a change of scenery.

 

But between his constant health issues and inconsistent performance he's not a guy I would want on my team.

[Kimmi]

Tough call.

 

And if so I would have only to trade him. I think he's a guy who could benefit from a change of scenery.

 

But between his constant health issues and inconsistent performance he's not a guy I would want on my team.

 

I do agree with you that he could benefit from a change of scenery.

 

I understand why Sox fans do not want him on the team. The business decision of picking up the option is another matter.

[mvp 78]

There's no excuse for foolish business decisions like that.

[moonslav59]

Buchholz is still young so i do not know why he lost it so soon.

 

Buch "lost it" at age 23 (2008 69 ERA+).

 

Buch "lost it" at age 27 (2012 92 ERA+)

 

Buch "lost it" at 29 (2014 75 ERA+)

 

I'm not surprised he "lost it" at age 32. I'm more surprised that people are surprised.

 

That being said, Buch's career has been a yo-yo, if ever there was one, and those that are writing him off as toast are forgetting the he had two of the greatest ERA+ seasons (or half seasons) in the last 45 years (2010s' 187 ERA+ and 2013's 237 ERA+). He's also had some decent seasons and half seasons scattered in between the horrible and the great (2009"s 111 ERA+, 2011's 124 ERA+ and 2015's 130 ERA+).

 

Teams take chances on injury prone pitchers who have never come close to what Buch has shown he can do time and time again. Take Brett Anderson as an example. He's started over 19 games just twice in 7 seasons. Before last year's 3.69 ERA, he's been a yo-yo similar to Buch. Every odd year he had an ERA over 4.00, and every even year, he had an ERA below 2.91. He's never had an ERA+ above 153 (see Buch's 187 and 237). Yeah, he's been a little more consistent with his ERA+ with 5 of 7 seasons above 100 to Buch's 5 out of 9, but change the number to 108 and Anderson has been over 108 just 3 of 7 seasons, while Buch has been 5 of 9.

 

Games started:

Anderson 112 in 7 seasons (16 per season)

Buchholz 187 in 9 seasons (21 per season)

 

IP

Anderson 674 in 7 seasons (96 IP/season)

Buchholz 1086 in 9 seasons (121 IP/season)

 

The Dodgers are paying Anderson $15.8M this year, and he has yet to pitch an inning for them in 2016. He made $10M last year, but he did give them 31 starts- something Buch hasn't done in a while. Prior to 2015, however, Anderson had 19, 13, 6, 5 and 8 starts.

 

Talk about unreliable pitchers getting big money for squat; it happens more often than you know.

 

[mvp 78]

Brett accepted the QO, being the 3rd ever to do so. Did the Dodgers expect Brett to take the QO, or did they hope to get a 1st rounder instead?

[mvp 78]

Anderson also outperformed Buchholz last year.

[sk7326]

Brett accepted the QO, being the 3rd ever to do so. Did the Dodgers expect Brett to take the QO, or did they hope to get a 1st rounder instead?

 

given their money - i am not sure they were that worried either way. Anderson is clearly a good pitcher when healthy (which is not often). That price is probably fair for an upside play like him.

[mvp 78]

@alexspeier Bannister will be in uniform before games, then watch games from clubhouse or behind stands, working w/Carl Willis to help Sox big lg staff

[mvp 78]

given their money - i am not sure they were that worried either way. Anderson is clearly a good pitcher when healthy (which is not often). That price is probably fair for an upside play like him.

 

Teams with large payrolls can afford an upside play or two. However, the Sox hoped for upside plays for 4/5's of the rotation. Not a smart call imo.

[sk7326]

Teams with large payrolls can afford an upside play or two. However, the Sox hoped for upside plays for 4/5's of the rotation. Not a smart call imo.

 

What is interesting is that the gambles have actually largely been ok ... Wright has been terrific, and Porcello has been a very solid upper-mid rotation guy. The issues have been the guys you expected underachieving - Uehara in the pen, Price's form being all over the map, Buchholz being so terrible (the question was about durability - not whether he could be a decent pitcher - by this time last year, he was legitimately good). The bet was on Buchholz quantity, not the quality - which has been the real bummer.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

What is interesting is that the gambles have actually largely been ok ... Wright has been terrific, and Porcello has been a very solid upper-mid rotation guy. The issues have been the guys you expected underachieving - Uehara in the pen, Price's form being all over the map, Buchholz being so terrible (the question was about durability - not whether he could be a decent pitcher - by this time last year, he was legitimately good). The bet was on Buchholz quantity, not the quality - which has been the real bummer.

 

I disagree about buch, his "quality" has varied greatly over the years. It certainly was a bet on both quality as well as quantity.

[moonslav59]

Brett accepted the QO, being the 3rd ever to do so. Did the Dodgers expect Brett to take the QO, or did they hope to get a 1st rounder instead?

 

Don't know, but they obviously felt okay with paying him $15M with a worse injury history than Buch and less upside past performance record.

 

My point is only to say, that some one like the Dodgers would have gladly traded a decent prospect for Buch at $13M last winter.

 

The giving of the option was a "No Brainer".

 

The not trading him was the ONLY mistake made--both in foresight and in hindsight.

[moonslav59]

Anderson also outperformed Buchholz last year.

 

I guess, but it was his only full season since 2009.

 

BR has Buch's 2016 WAR at 2.7 and Anderson's at 1.5. The park factor, DH-no DH, strength of offenses faced plays a role in comparing numbers.

 

Fangraphs has...

 

.... Buch Andrsn

 

WAR 3.2 1.7

xFIP 3.30 3.51

ERA- 77 99

xFIP- 82 91

 

Yes, Anderson beat Buch in GS (+13) and IP (+100) soundly, but I sure wish we had Buch's 2015 eighteen starts to close out 2016.

[mvp 78]

BR has Buchholz's WAR at -0.9 in 2016

[Kimmi]

Don't know, but they obviously felt okay with paying him $15M with a worse injury history than Buch and less upside past performance record.

 

My point is only to say, that some one like the Dodgers would have gladly traded a decent prospect for Buch at $13M last winter.

 

The giving of the option was a "No Brainer".

 

The not trading him was the ONLY mistake made--both in foresight and in hindsight.

 

I disagree that not trading him was a mistake in foresight.

 

There was risk in keeping him, but there was also a good chance that he pitched well for us.

[mvp 78]

Don't know, but they obviously felt okay with paying him $15M with a worse injury history than Buch and less upside past performance record.

 

My point is only to say, that some one like the Dodgers would have gladly traded a decent prospect for Buch at $13M last winter.

 

The giving of the option was a "No Brainer".

 

The not trading him was the ONLY mistake made--both in foresight and in hindsight.

 

It took no brains to re-sign him and not have a fallback plan. Brainless indeed.