5/18 Oakland

[Jasonbay44]

This loss is on Farrell. Velazquez had not thrown a single pitch at the MLB level, that should have been enough for Farrell to realize that he was going to suck tonight. This is why in the past, all MLB pitchers were required to pitch at least three games in the Major Leagues before they were allowed to pitch a game in the Major Leagues. Farrell's failure to realize that Velazquez was going to suck without any evidence for or against that outcome is inexcusable. If our manager cannot predict the future with 100 percent accuracy, what good is he?

You mean like the evidence that he was a mediocre pitcher in the Mexican League, who is 28 and was never considered a high prospect? but yeah True, I love just throwing out random guys to pitch, a day after an extra inning game where every reliever pitched, when I had Chris Sale as the scheduled starter geared up to pitch on regular rest!

[jacksonianmarch]

Velazquez was your best AAA pitcher. That's less an indictment on Farrell and more an indictment on DD/Cherington

[a700hitter]

The Toronto Blue Jays and Kansas City Royals have worse records than the Oakland Athletics.

after last night's games.

[a700hitter]

You mean like the evidence that he was a mediocre pitcher in the Mexican League, who is 28 and was never considered a high prospect? but yeah True, I love just throwing out random guys to pitch, a day after an extra inning game where every reliever pitched, when I had Chris Sale as the scheduled starter geared up to pitch on regular rest!

if he thought slotting a pitcher in between Porcello and Sale would help keep the pen from getting overworked, he picked the wrong night to do it after we used 8 pitchers in an extra inning game, and he picked the wrong guy to slot into the spot. Edited May 19, 2017 by a700hitter

[Bellhorn04]

Well I too am baffled why they decided to start Velazquez last night. Makes very little sense on the face of it. I've been trying to find some info on why the decision was made but I'm coming up empty so far.

[a700hitter]

Well I too am baffled why they decided to start Velazquez last night. Makes very little sense on the face of it. I've been trying to find some info on why the decision was made but I'm coming up empty so far.

Among the reasons that I heard as it was in its planning stages was to get someone slotted in between Porcello and Sale because it was hoped that it would reduce the strain on the pen from 3 games in a row after Porcello and Sale. Just dumb in concept and really poorly executed.

[Bellhorn04]

Among the reasons that I heard as it was in its planning stages was to get someone slotted in between Porcello and Sale because it was hoped that it would reduce the strain on the pen from 3 games in a row after Porcello and Sale. Just dumb in concept and really poorly executed.

 

I concur.

[Bellhorn04]

this loss is on farrell. Velazquez had not thrown a single pitch at the mlb level, that should have been enough for farrell to realize that he was going to suck tonight. this is why in the past, all mlb pitchers were required to pitch at least three games in the major leagues before they were allowed to pitch a game in the major leagues. farrell's failure to realize that velazquez was going to suck without any evidence for or against that outcome is inexcusable. If our manager cannot predict the future with 100 percent accuracy, what good is he?

 

Good one.

[harmony]

The Toronto Blue Jays and Kansas City Royals have worse records than the Oakland Athletics.

 

after last night's games.

The Toronto Blue Jays and Kansas City Royals had worse records than the Oakland Athletics before and after last night's games (all three won):

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/?date=2017-05-17

[SoxHop]

Velazquez was your best AAA pitcher. That's less an indictment on Farrell and more an indictment on DD/Cherington

 

This pretty much sums it up

[Station 13]

Nobody wants to start a thread on Chris Sale night?

[Maxbialystock]

This loss is on Farrell. Velazquez had not thrown a single pitch at the MLB level, that should have been enough for Farrell to realize that he was going to suck tonight. This is why in the past, all MLB pitchers were required to pitch at least three games in the Major Leagues before they were allowed to pitch a game in the Major Leagues. Farrell's failure to realize that Velazquez was going to suck without any evidence for or against that outcome is inexcusable. If our manager cannot predict the future with 100 percent accuracy, what good is he?

 

You surprised me with the irony which I completely missed the first 3 or 4 times I read it even though you were/are not being subtle. Just a brain cramp on my part.

 

Funny thing is, Velazquez wasn't all that bad. Oh, I'm not saying 6 runs in 5 innings is a quality start, but am saying our #2 pitcher just went 6 while giving up 4 in a game that ended up going 13 innings. The threshold for most MLB managers for pulling a starter is 7 runs, and Velazquez was 1 under that. Last time out, Pomeranz went 3 innings, and the time before that he went 4 and gave up 6.

 

And let's not forget that until Price is activated the Sox basically have Sale, Porcello, ERod, the redoubtable Pomeranz, and a pitcher to be named later.

 

Also, because Velazquez actually went 5 innings, Farrell only had to use 2 from the bullpen last night, leaving 5 or 6 reasonably well rested for tonight and the weekend.

 

I am not, FWIW, saying Farrell is always right, only that some of these very obvious mistakes he is accused of don't seem all that obvious to me.

[SoxHop]

You surprised me with the irony which I completely missed the first 3 or 4 times I read it even though you were/are not being subtle. Just a brain cramp on my part.

 

Funny thing is, Velazquez wasn't all that bad. Oh, I'm not saying 6 runs in 5 innings is a quality start, but am saying our #2 pitcher just went 6 while giving up 4 in a game that ended up going 13 innings. The threshold for most MLB managers for pulling a starter is 7 runs, and Velazquez was 1 under that. Last time out, Pomeranz went 3 innings, and the time before that he went 4 and gave up 6.

 

And let's not forget that until Price is activated the Sox basically have Sale, Porcello, ERod, the redoubtable Pomeranz, and a pitcher to be named later.

 

Also, because Velazquez actually went 5 innings, Farrell only had to use 2 from the bullpen last night, leaving 5 or 6 reasonably well rested for tonight and the weekend.

 

I am not, FWIW, saying Farrell is always right, only that some of these very obvious mistakes he is accused of don't seem all that obvious to me.

 

Velazquez was getting absolutely roped. Everything was hit hard, I can't remember a soft out. He was super luky to just give up the runs he did.

 

Farrell was gambling he could survive, and that we could get to Gray that has largely been horrible this year. After the home run it was done, and we couldn't get to Gray. His curve was on.

 

Why skip the Sale start, I have no idea. Why go with Velazquez. Well, he had been doing very well in AAA. He had no command last night, and his good show of command lately was why they brought him up.

 

Farrell gambled and lost on not using up the pen. I can't falt him on that. You play the cards delt to you.

[Maxbialystock]

Velazquez was getting absolutely roped. Everything was hit hard, I can't remember a soft out. He was super luky to just give up the runs he did.

 

Farrell was gambling he could survive, and that we could get to Gray that has largely been horrible this year. After the home run it was done, and we couldn't get to Gray. His curve was on.

 

Why skip the Sale start, I have no idea. Why go with Velazquez. Well, he had been doing very well in AAA. He had no command last night, and his good show of command lately was why they brought him up.

 

Farrell gambled and lost on not using up the pen. I can't falt him on that. You play the cards delt to you.

 

Velazquez went 5, and Farrell needed Ross and Barnes to cover 3 innings. Big deal. He's still got 5 or 6 for tonight who didn't pitch last night.

 

About Sales: am I the only one who noticed his ERA in April was 1.19 in 5 starts and so far in May it's 3.86 in 3 starts? Or that in his last two starts he went 6 and 7 innings? Maybe giving him an extra day of rest ain't such a bad idea.

 

And, as I have already pointed out, the Sox right now are not exactly knee deep in starters. Sale, Porcello, and ERod are fine, but after that not so fine until Price is back.

[Maxbialystock]

My thanks--again--to Station 13 for the sterling two game win streak and trying to nudge it to three.

[Maxbialystock]

Velazquez was getting absolutely roped. Everything was hit hard, I can't remember a soft out. He was super luky to just give up the runs he did.

 

Farrell was gambling he could survive, and that we could get to Gray that has largely been horrible this year. After the home run it was done, and we couldn't get to Gray. His curve was on.

 

Why skip the Sale start, I have no idea. Why go with Velazquez. Well, he had been doing very well in AAA. He had no command last night, and his good show of command lately was why they brought him up.

 

Farrell gambled and lost on not using up the pen. I can't falt him on that. You play the cards delt to you.

 

So far this season the Sox pitchers have had 40 starts. Of those, 19 have been quality starts by Sale, Porcello, or ERod. Another 2 QS's by Pomeranz and 1 by Wright, now gone. Pomeranz has started 7 games and averaged 5 innings per start with an ERA of 5.86. To me it's apparent last night was as good a time as any to see what our best minor league starter could do. Last night he was better than Porcello on April 14 when he gave up 4 dingers and 8 runs and only slightly worse than ERod is his first start this year when he gave up 4 in 5 innings with 2 dingers.

[SoxHop]

Velazquez went 5, and Farrell needed Ross and Barnes to cover 3 innings. Big deal. He's still got 5 or 6 for tonight who didn't pitch last night.

 

About Sales: am I the only one who noticed his ERA in April was 1.19 in 5 starts and so far in May it's 3.86 in 3 starts? Or that in his last two starts he went 6 and 7 innings? Maybe giving him an extra day of rest ain't such a bad idea.

 

And, as I have already pointed out, the Sox right now are not exactly knee deep in starters. Sale, Porcello, and ERod are fine, but after that not so fine until Price is back.

 

I'm super confused. You think Velazquez's outing was serviceable? What are you getting at? Our 5th pitcher can have an era of 9 or so? I hate to ask this, but did you see that game? That outing was horrific. The only good thing about it was our defense kind of kicked ass...

 

It was a throw away game after the homerun. It happens. But you have to aknowledge taking a loss to save the pen. Which it was stated that everyone other then Hembree was available last night.......

[Maxbialystock]

I'm super confused. You think Velazquez's outing was serviceable? What are you getting at? Our 5th pitcher can have an era of 9 or so? I hate to ask this, but did you see that game? That outing was horrific. The only good thing about it was our defense kind of kicked ass...

 

It was a throw away game after the homerun. It happens. But you have to aknowledge taking a loss to save the pen. Which it was stated that everyone other then Hembree was available last night.......

 

Not serviceable, just not a disaster. He made it thru 5 innings. Farrell only needed 2 guys to cover the other 3. Bullpen should be fine tonight for Sale. Wright, FYI, had 5 starts and an ERA of 8.25. But that knee injury, he might still be in the rotation.

 

I believe the primary reasons for starting Velazquez are because Farrell wanted an extra day of rest for Sale and wanted to give our best AAA starter a shot because right now our rotation is short-handed.

 

I did not watch the whole game, but did watch much of Velazquez's 5 innings. I liked that he had four usable pitches--fast ball, slider, curve, and changeup--but what scared me was that Oakland seemed to like all four too because at least two of the three dingers were on breaking balls. 67% of his pitches were strikes, which to me is par for the course, but whatever he threw was hittable. Was he telegraphing his pitches? Maybe.

Edited May 19, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[Kimmi]

Among the reasons that I heard as it was in its planning stages was to get someone slotted in between Porcello and Sale because it was hoped that it would reduce the strain on the pen from 3 games in a row after Porcello and Sale. Just dumb in concept and really poorly executed.

 

I'm not getting why everyone thinks it's such a stupid idea to try to separate the starts between Porcello and Sale. The idea makes a lot of sense, actually. It's really not so much about separating Porcello and Sale, but more about separating the other 3 starters who seem not to be able to go more than about 5 innings. Three games in a row like that does put a strain on the pen.

 

That said, I could agree with you that the execution was probably poor, in terms of the timing of it. However, pitching away in Oakland against a weak offense is as good a game as you can probably get to 'test' someone out.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not getting why everyone thinks it's such a stupid idea to try to separate the starts between Porcello and Sale. The idea makes a lot of sense, actually. It's really not so much about separating Porcello and Sale, but more about separating the other 3 starters who seem not to be able to go more than about 5 innings. Three games in a row like that does put a strain on the pen.

 

That said, I could agree with you that the execution was probably poor, in terms of the timing of it. However, pitching away in Oakland against a weak offense is as good a game as you can probably get to 'test' someone out.

 

It does appear that they had to use Velazquez in this series. If not last night they would have had to use him Sunday.

[a700hitter]

I'm not getting why everyone thinks it's such a stupid idea to try to separate the starts between Porcello and Sale. The idea makes a lot of sense, actually. It's really not so much about separating Porcello and Sale, but more about separating the other 3 starters who seem not to be able to go more than about 5 innings. Three games in a row like that does put a strain on the pen.

 

That said, I could agree with you that the execution was probably poor, in terms of the timing of it. However, pitching away in Oakland against a weak offense is as good a game as you can probably get to 'test' someone out.

Price should be up in the next couple of weeks which would solve the problem. In the meantime, we have an off day next week, so we could have skipped the 5th spot for another week. You don't split them up just to split them up by putting a complete tomato can in the rotation. What is the logic of that-- to forfeit 1 game out of every 5?

[a700hitter]

Not serviceable, just not a disaster. He made it thru 5 innings. Farrell only needed 2 guys to cover the other 3. Bullpen should be fine tonight for Sale. Wright, FYI, had 5 starts and an ERA of 8.25. But that knee injury, he might still be in the rotation.

 

I believe the primary reasons for starting Velazquez are because Farrell wanted an extra day of rest for Sale and wanted to give our best AAA starter a shot because right now our rotation is short-handed.

 

I did not watch the whole game, but did watch much of Velazquez's 5 innings. I liked that he had four usable pitches--fast ball, slider, curve, and changeup--but what scared me was that Oakland seemed to like all four too because at least two of the three dingers were on breaking balls. 67% of his pitches were strikes, which to me is par for the course, but whatever he threw was hittable. Was he telegraphing his pitches? Maybe.

The primary reason was not to get Sale an extra day of rest. They are on record that they want to split up the starts of Porcello and Sale by having someone in between them. This is not the guy unless the plan is to forfeit a game every fifth day.

[illinoisredsox]

Price should be up in the next couple of weeks which would solve the problem. In the meantime, we have an off day next week, so we could have skipped the 5th spot for another week. You don't split them up just to split them up by putting a complete tomato can in the rotation. What is the logic of that-- to forfeit 1 game out of every 5?

 

If Sale went Thursday, then it was going to have to be Pomeranz and ?? in some order or other on Friday and Saturday with ERod on Sunday. One way or another Velasquez (or some other clunker) was going to pitch one of the first 3 games and Sale was going to pitch one of the first 2.

[a700hitter]

If Sale went Thursday, then it was going to have to be Pomeranz and ?? in some order or other on Friday and Saturday with ERod on Sunday. One way or another Velasquez (or some ?other clunker) was going to pitch one of the first 3 games and Sale was going to pitch one of the first 2.

I guess that the day off is coming one day too late to skip the 5th starter. Next week the schedule looks to have the same problem, but I hope it works out better.

[a700hitter]

This Plan to separate Porcello and Sale doesn't appear to have much follow through. The Red Sox website shows Porcello pitching on Tuesday and Sale on Wednesday.