I'd like to talk about Brian Johnson for a second

[moonslav59]

That's a quarter of a baseball season. When did that become a small sample size? The equivalent for a hitter would be around 180-200PAs.

 

A depth starter (as in, below the #5 guy) making 13 starts is actually doing a lot more work for his team than he was expected to.

 

 

 

Try using ERA+. It's there for a reason. Johnson put in an average season of pitching by that measurement.

 

He was also good for 1.5 bWAR. That's actually solidly above average for a half season, and lines up with his other numbers. Not too many teams got 1.5 WAR from their #5 and again, this is based on only half a season of work. Stretching that out over 170 innings, assuming reasonable consistency, puts him somewhere between 1.8 and 2.2 WAR, which starts to become a number that you should be taking a bit more seriously than you appear to be.

 

how many teams have a #5 that gave them 1.5 bWAR?

 

 

 

In other words, placing solidly in the bottom third

 

bWAR disagrees with that, giving Johnson 1.5, which is very respectable for a part time player

 

 

 

These are the numbers that will prevent Johnson from being more than a decentish bottom of the rotation guy. They don't change the fact that he's shaping up into a decentish bottom of the rotation guy.

 

Why the hell would you do that? We're trying to compare him to STARTING pitchers.

 

Maybe I'm in a minority, but 13 starts is a teenie tiny sample size. And, yes, 180-200 PAs is tiny, too.

 

I'm not down on Johnson, but he was not and is not a top 5th starter in MLB, IMO.

 

He might become one, and I'm not giving up on him after a decent season, but I hope we don't plan on him for 24+ starts next year.

 

[moonslav59]

I set the filter to SP'ers, so the 30 IP did not incluse RP'ers. I lowered the IP to 30, to see if any starters had a higher fWAR than Johnson, even with less IP, and there were quite a few. They may be higher rated than Johnson for next year. They may not be.

 

Why set the IP at just 60 IP, just because that is exactly what Johnson had?

 

Is that the magic number for you to call him a legitimate SP'er, and 50, 40 or 30 is not?

 

Stick to 60 IP, if you want, and Johnson placed 150th in fWAR. That's dead last out of 150 (30 teams x 5 starters).

 

BTW, I don't view Johnson as 150th, and the bWAR shows him to be much better, but I'm not cherry-picking fWAR. I never use BWAR. Ever.

 

I like Johnson, but there is no way, after 13 decent starts, I'm ready to anoint him a top 6 fifth starter in MLB.

[kenmeister]

He certainly may end up better than Gabbard did, but I remember a few Sox fans lovin' on Kason, too.

 

My heart broke when he was traded for Eric Gagne.

[moonslav59]

my heart broke when he was traded for eric gagne.

 

lol!

[Larry Cook]

And it was even worse when we had to watch Gagne pitch!!!!

[Dojji]

My heart broke when he was traded for Eric Gagne.

 

The Rangers broke Gabbard. It was so sad to watch.

[moonslav59]

The Rangers broke Gabbard. It was so sad to watch.

 

Or, he just never was as good as we thought he was or might be.

[Dojji]

Come on. Johnson and Gabbard's sample sizes are/were puny. To give Johnson extra points for consistency because he came up for very short stays of 4.1 IP one year and 27 IP another- both with WHIP's over 1.48 is not really fair.

 

True, Gabbard's 66.2 IP should not have been a projection of what was to come, but that's kind of the point I'm making about Johnson.

 

He certainly may end up better than Gabbard did, but I remember a few Sox fans lovin' on Kason, too.

 

Gabbard did a lot to earn that love, just like Johnson has in my opinion. Until he got hurt, he was looking at a trajectory through the league as a journeyman bottom of the rotation starter, roughly at the Wade Miley level. Then his elbow blew out and he was never the same since.

 

Gabbard came on the scene and spun some gems at a time when we were really hurting for SP depth, especially in late 2006 but also early to mid 2007 before Lester got reestablished when the team was so desperate that it was relying on the one and only Julian Tavarez for starts... in the middle of that time Gabbard threw a few really great games including a complete game shutout against the Royals. He averaged just under 6 IP/start at a time when our middle relief was getting utterly exposed and seemed to have a unique talent for wriggling out of trouble by inducing double play balls, which kept him in games longer than his raw talent should have let him..

 

Basically when Gabbard came up, we took to his relative competence on the mound like a starving man takes to a well cooked steak. He was a lot better than what else we were running in the rotation at the time (Kyle Snyder/Julian Tavarez) and was young enough to hope he might go on to have a respectably solid career. I was distressed when he was traded because cost controlled starting pitching depth was so valuable. The fact that we got a broken player in return did not help that impression either.

 

Similarly, Johnson came in while multiple Boston starters were down (I think Sale and E-Rod were both out of action at the time), and was refreshingly adequate. Johnson proved reliable as long as you did not ask too much of him and he stabilized his slot in the rotation to prevent our injury problems from snowballing us and exposing the team down the stretch.

 

And again, like Gabbard in 07, he's young enough that you can hope that with a little health, he'll improve a bit from his current level and make a go of it as a bottom of the rotation guy. If he doesn't you haven't lost a ton, but just like Gabbard, I think he's earned a chance to fail at it.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Dojji

[Dojji]

Or, he just never was as good as we thought he was or might be.

 

I remember the sequence fairly well. He was alright with Boston's defense behind him, but he struggled with the defensive ineptitute in Texas and that put extra strain on his arm. When you're a ground ball pitcher, lack of good defense really makes your job harder

 

The following season he actually started very well for Texas, and his arm exploded on him, he started struggling more and more and after a month of that he left the Texas rotation to have elbow surgery and that was the end of it. Gabbard always was a bit "effectively wild," but when he came back from that injury in 2008, his control was completely gone. Like, take a look at the numbers, after his injury/surgery it was painfully clear he had no idea where his pitches were going.

 

We actually picked him up after the Rangers released him, and gave him one last shot, but there was nothing left. It was sad. He had potential.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Dojji

[moonslav59]

Gabbard did not "do a lot" of anything. He barely pitched enough to determine anything- one way or another.

 

He showed some promise with us over a very limited sample size. He never pitched over 56 innings with Texas and his peripherals with Boston were never all that good, except for the 7 starts in 2007.

 

His time in Texas was similar to his numbers in BOS in 2006. Take away those seven starts with Boston in 2007 and there's nothing there to love.

 

WHIP

1.59 2006

1.12 2007 with BOS in 7 starts and 41 IP

1.72 2007-2008 TEX in 29 starts and 96 IP

 

Edited November 21, 2018 by moonslav59

[Dojji]

This is why you need to look at more than numbers. Numbers can tell you most of the story but never all of it. Especially if you don't look at intraseason numbers or take the trouble to understand why numbers happen.

 

Yes he struggled in Texas. He was a sinkerballer and had been traded to one of the most defensively inept teams in major league baseball at the time. He was also pitching in an era that can't be directly compared to today because in the last decade the PED standards have gotten much tighter and offense has dropped off fairly significantly.

 

Another pitcher with absolutely terrible peripherals by today's standards, who was considered a nice little success story at the time -- Tim Wakefield. Times change, and standards of effective pitching match the times.

[moonslav59]

This is why you need to look at more than numbers. Numbers can tell you most of the story but never all of it. Especially if you don't look at intraseason numbers or take the trouble to understand why numbers happen.

 

Yes he struggled in Texas. He was a sinkerballer and had been traded to one of the most defensively inept teams in major league baseball at the time. He was also pitching in an era that can't be directly compared to today because in the last decade the PED standards have gotten much tighter and offense has dropped off fairly significantly.

 

Another pitcher with absolutely terrible peripherals by today's standards, who was considered a nice little success story at the time -- Tim Wakefield. Times change, and standards of effective pitching match the times.

 

You need to read up on statistics and reread the chapter on sample sizes.

 

I have watched just about every pitch of every Sox game for over 2 decades.

 

I remember Gabbard well. I was very encouraged by those 7 starts in 2007. I had hopes he might be a diamond in the rough, but in no way was I convinced of anything based on 7 starts.

 

To think his quick demise was based on poor infield defense behind him in Texas is really pushing it. Frankly, with all due respect, I think this position is border line absurd.

 

The chances Gabbard would have gone on to become a good pitcher had he stayed in Boston will never been known for sure, but my guess is, he would have flopped with us, too (based on what actually happened after the trade).

 

[Bellhorn04]

Dojji, you seem to be a sort of champion of the underdog. Whether it's Brian Johnson or Kason Gabbard. It becomes kind of an emotional attachment. I was the same way with Daniel Nava. I always wanted him to do well.

 

moon is more of the cold-blooded fact man. Kidding!

[jacksonianmarch]

If Brian Johnson is your 5th starter, we are gonna win the season series almost by default. We maul lefties and will likely get stronger if the predictions of Machado to the Bronx are true. You cannot run 4 lefties out there and expect to survive the AL East. The Yanks are coming this offseason and they are loaded for bear. Their one offensive weakness is power righties.

[notin]

If Brian Johnson is your 5th starter, we are gonna win the season series almost by default. We maul lefties and will likely get stronger if the predictions of Machado to the Bronx are true. You cannot run 4 lefties out there and expect to survive the AL East. The Yanks are coming this offseason and they are loaded for bear. Their one offensive weakness is power righties.

 

 

Does he say stuff like this every year?

[S5Dewey]

Does he say stuff like this every year?

 

 

Yes. Back in April he'd awarded the WSC trophy to the Y's and was in the process of getting it bubble wrapped and sent to Yankee Stadium.

[kenmeister]

Dojji, you seem to be a sort of champion of the underdog. Whether it's Brian Johnson or Kason Gabbard. It becomes kind of an emotional attachment. I was the same way with Daniel Nava. I always wanted him to do well.

 

moon is more of the cold-blooded fact man. Kidding!

 

I'm with Dojii. I love the home-grown or at least rookie talent!

 

Thoughts on Juan Pena gentlemen?

[moonslav59]

Dojji, you seem to be a sort of champion of the underdog. Whether it's Brian Johnson or Kason Gabbard. It becomes kind of an emotional attachment. I was the same way with Daniel Nava. I always wanted him to do well.

 

moon is more of the cold-blooded fact man. Kidding!

 

LOL.

 

I loved Nava, and he did have a couple very good years.

 

I've been high on many young players who actually put up decent numbers for extended times.

 

I was high on Devers from day one. He kept doing well at every level the promoted him to. Guys like Johnson and Gabbard come along all the time. Some make it: most don't. I guess reality seems cold sometimes, but there's no way I'm planning on Johnson for anything significant next year. To me, he looks like a better pitcher than Gabbard was over his whole history with Boston and their farm, but he's still kind of a long shot to being a top 5 starter in MLB.

 

[moonslav59]

I'm with Dojii. I love the home-grown or at least rookie talent!

 

Thoughts on Juan Pena gentlemen?

 

Juan Pena

Phil Dumatrait

Anastacio Martinez

Abe Alvarez

Casey Kelly

Michael Bowden

Craig Hansen

Bryce Cox

Nick Hagadone

Stormy Pimental

Anthony Ranaudo

Allen Webster

Rubby de la Rosa

Henry Owens

Trey Ball

I'm sure I missed some...

 

 

 

 

 

[notin]

Juan Pena

Phil Dumatrait

Anastacio Martinez

Abe Alvarez

Casey Kelly

Michael Bowden

Craig Hansen

Bryce Cox

Nick Hagadone

Stormy Pimental

Anthony Ranaudo

Allen Webster

Rubby de la Rosa

Henry Owens

Trey Ball

I'm sure I missed some...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like Buchholz...

[kenmeister]

Juan Pena

Phil Dumatrait

Anastacio Martinez

Abe Alvarez

Casey Kelly

Michael Bowden

Craig Hansen

Bryce Cox

Nick Hagadone

Stormy Pimental

Anthony Ranaudo

Allen Webster

Rubby de la Rosa

Henry Owens

Trey Ball

I'm sure I missed some...

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think Henry Owens was the biggest bust of the list. He clearly couldn’t play at the mlb level and I don’t know why he was so highly regarded in the first place. Pena, Gabbard, Johnson, all had some initial impressive play.

[Bellhorn04]

I remember Pena. He had 2 nice starts, got injured and never returned to baseball. It can be a cruel game.

[Bellhorn04]

Does he say stuff like this every year?

 

He's especially fond of saying they're 'loaded for bear'. Maybe he's a big game hunter in his spare time?

[notin]

I remember Pena. He had 2 nice starts, got injured and never returned to baseball. It can be a cruel game.

 

I’m still waiting for his comeback. Any day now...

[kenmeister]

I remember Pena. He had 2 nice starts, got injured and never returned to baseball. It can be a cruel game.

 

2-0 with a 0.69 ERA, 13 innings pitched. He was supposed to be 'little Pedro'.

[moonslav59]

The world is full of pitchers who had brief moments of glory early in their career only to flame out or end with a serious injury.

 

Maybe I'm being a pessimist, but usually I'm accused of being too optimistic. Waiting it out for a larger sample size before getting all gah gah about some pitcher doing well for 2, 7 or 13 games out of the gate is just not my cup of tea, especially when they were never that dominating in the minors.

 

I admit, I fell for Owens. I fell for Espinoza and was pissed we traded him. My high hopes clouded my better judgement, but at least those guys showed serious flashes of brilliance in the minors. Johnson and Gabbard did not do poorly on the farm, but they never did anything to make me think they could be very special. I know we're just talking about Johnson as nothing more than maybe a decent or excellent 5th starter, but I'm choosing to suggest we don't pencil him in as our best bet for the 5 slot. I'm not even so sure about signing Eovaldi or the like and relying on Johnson to be our #6 guy, but certainly we could do worse or much worse like many teams' #6 guy.

 

I like Johnson. It seems like he's gotten over his emotional issues and might be able to improve some more, but I don't think he will continue having a key role with this team, if he can't improve upon his WHIP being over 1.43 all the time.

 

[Dojji]

God forfend we actually expect a rookie to improve his command and control as he gains experience in the league.

[notin]

God forfend we actually expect a rookie to improve his command and control as he gains experience in the league.

 

Brian Johnson turns 28 next month. At what age do you start to expect any improvements to be minimal at best?

[Jasonbay44]

I think Henry Owens was the biggest bust of the list. He clearly couldn’t play at the mlb level and I don’t know why he was so highly regarded in the first place. Pena, Gabbard, Johnson, all had some initial impressive play.

 

He might of been the worst talent wise, but biggest bust on that list probably Craig Hansen. I remember him being the "closer of the future" and the position being set for the next 10-15 years, etc, etc, and he was absolutely horrendous.

[moonslav59]

Brian Johnson turns 28 next month. At what age do you start to expect any improvements to be minimal at best?

 

Hope is one thing. Expecting is a big leap.