The Pen

[Kimmi]

I think a quality start should be this:

4+ IP 1 ER or less

5+ IP 2 ER or less

7+ IP 3 ER or less

9+ IP 4 ER or less

 

 

Personally, I don't think I'd call anything less than 6 innings a quality start. But I do think it's whack that 6 innings, 3 ER is a quality start, but 9 innings, 4 ER is not.

 

That said, I think the basic definition of a quality start is okay. It gives us a good sense that the pitcher went fairly deep in the game and kept his team in the game.

[Bellhorn04]

Personally, I don't think I'd call anything less than 6 innings a quality start. But I do think it's whack that 6 innings, 3 ER is a quality start, but 9 innings, 4 ER is not.

 

That said, I think the basic definition of a quality start is okay. It gives us a good sense that the pitcher went fairly deep in the game and kept his team in the game.

 

Game Score is probably better.

[Kimmi]

Reasons we could talk about all day.

 

What I'm really talking about in this case is the philosophy of postponing a needed move until the trade deadline.

 

I can agree with that.

 

That said, if Dombrowski is being reigned in by Henry in terms of finances, the longer Dave waits, the less money (prorated salary) he'll have to pay.

[Kimmi]

As notin has been saying all along, if the budget was that tight, why sign Pearce instead of a reliever?

 

My firm belief is that you don't have to spend big on relievers. I have no issues whatsoever with Dombrowski signing Pearce over a reliever.

[notin]

As notin has been saying all along, if the budget was that tight, why sign Pearce instead of a reliever?

 

 

I think DD needs to hire me to be some sort of “adviser” where my job includes things like watching him try to spend money on Pearce while letting 1/3 of his bullpen walk away for nothing, I get to hit him with a rolled up newspaper while yelling “No! No! NO! Bad Dave!! Bad Dave!!”

 

And when he gets some bullpen help, I would give him a treat and say “Who’s a good GM? Who’s a good GM? You are. That’s who. Now let’s go for your walkies.”

[Kimmi]

Game Score is probably better.

 

Agreed.

[notin]

My firm belief is that you don't have to spend big on relievers. I have no issues whatsoever with Dombrowski signing Pearce over a reliever.

 

 

It’s not about spending big. It’s bout spending at all.

 

If he had traded for a modestly priced reliever, or grabbed a good waiver claim or one of the many free agents with significant MLB experience who signed elsewhere, I’d be ok with it.

 

But this off-season, the relievers he added with the most MLB experience were Jenrry Mejia, Colten Brewer, and Erasmo Ramirez. Brewer has been off and on and the other two have a combined 3 IP this year in Boston..

[Kimmi]

It’s not about spending big. It’s bout spending at all.

 

If he had traded for a modestly priced reliever, or grabbed a good waiver claim or one of the many free agents with significant MLB experience who signed elsewhere, I’d be ok with it.

 

But this off-season, the relievers he added with the most MLB experience were Jenrry Mejia, Colten Brewer, and Erasmo Ramirez. Brewer has been off and on and the other two have a combined 3 IP this year in Boston..

 

Well my idea of 'spending big' and 'modestly priced' on relievers is different than most other people's. Many of the experienced relievers who signed elsewhere were too expensive, IMO.

[dannycater]

notin, incorrect. The 2003 season started with the idea that it was a Closer by Committee, it was the plan. It was scrapped after a month of blown saves by different guys. Ironically Fox won a WS title the same year with Marlins.

[dannycater]

Also, the 2003 plan was almost exactly the same mind thought as 2019. And the fact was that the Sox did have guys who were pretty good setup guys in closing situations--Timlin in particular..and Embree. And the relievers as a staff got the team one game away from a WS appearance.

[dgalehouse]

Which is the better way to operate ? Sign a quality free agent reliever or two for cash in the off season or wait until you are ten games out and then go shopping for an available arm that will cost you young prospects ? As far as signing Eovaldi and Pearce ; that was largely due to their World Series heroics , not their career records . It was the kind of move that Johnny from Burger King might make if he was G.M. for a day .

[notin]

notin, incorrect. The 2003 season started with the idea that it was a Closer by Committee, it was the plan. It was scrapped after a month of blown saves by different guys. Ironically Fox won a WS title the same year with Marlins.

 

 

Plan or not, no one got save opportunities except Chad Fox until he got hurt and Brandon Lyon took over pitching the ninth almost exclusively.

 

Kim tookover closing inJuly after a few games as a starter and finished out the year...

Edited June 28, 2019 by notin

[dannycater]

From a Bill James article on the '03 plan

On opening day of the 2003 season, the Red Sox in Tampa Bay, the Red Sox went into the bottom of the 9th with a 4-1 lead. Alan Embree gave up a single, a homer, and a single. Chad Fox got two outs but then gave up a walk and another homer. We lost, 6-4.

In the second game of the season we were up 8-6 going into the bottom of the eighth. Bobby Howry gave up a single and a homer, and the game went into extra innings, although the Red Sox eventually won it.

In the fifth game of the season, playing Baltimore, we went into the bottom of the 9th with an 8-3 lead. Ramiro Mendoza gave up six hits and four runs, and the Red Sox escaped with a one-run victory.

In the sixth game, Pedro Martinez pitched eight sterling innings, and the game was tied 1-1 going into the bottom of the ninth. Chad Fox walked in the losing run with one out.

In the eighth game, although the bullpen was never presented with a lead, they gave up three more runs in two and two-thirds innings, denying the offense a fair chance to come back and win the game.

In the tenth game of the season the Red Sox led 8-4 going into the bottom of the ninth. Mike Timlin gave up three runs, and the Red Sox escaped with another one-run victory.

The Red Sox haven’t even gotten to Fenway Park yet, and the bullpen has had SIX meltdowns. In Game 13, finally back in Fenway, the Red Sox led 5-1 through seven innings. Ramiro Mendoza gave up four runs without getting an out.

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Fox might have been the "intended" closer, but the team's entire pen fell apart early. With that said, the relief staff went on to win 30 games (most in MLB) and the irony was that Grady still had in his mind what if the pen collapses right now thought when he left in Pedro. Even though Tim-Bree was a beast v. Yankees during that series. And Cora said '19 wasn't anywhere like '03 because of the way today's relievers are all hard throwers with cutters and sharp breaking balls, etc. ********, I call out the ********, still have to have a designated guy to get saves. One role, and it has to be a guy who can handle the pressure.

[notin]

From a Bill James article on the '03 plan

On opening day of the 2003 season, the Red Sox in Tampa Bay, the Red Sox went into the bottom of the 9th with a 4-1 lead. Alan Embree gave up a single, a homer, and a single. Chad Fox got two outs but then gave up a walk and another homer. We lost, 6-4.

In the second game of the season we were up 8-6 going into the bottom of the eighth. Bobby Howry gave up a single and a homer, and the game went into extra innings, although the Red Sox eventually won it.

In the fifth game of the season, playing Baltimore, we went into the bottom of the 9th with an 8-3 lead. Ramiro Mendoza gave up six hits and four runs, and the Red Sox escaped with a one-run victory.

In the sixth game, Pedro Martinez pitched eight sterling innings, and the game was tied 1-1 going into the bottom of the ninth. Chad Fox walked in the losing run with one out.

In the eighth game, although the bullpen was never presented with a lead, they gave up three more runs in two and two-thirds innings, denying the offense a fair chance to come back and win the game.

In the tenth game of the season the Red Sox led 8-4 going into the bottom of the ninth. Mike Timlin gave up three runs, and the Red Sox escaped with another one-run victory.

The Red Sox haven’t even gotten to Fenway Park yet, and the bullpen has had SIX meltdowns. In Game 13, finally back in Fenway, the Red Sox led 5-1 through seven innings. Ramiro Mendoza gave up four runs without getting an out.

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Fox might have been the "intended" closer, but the team's entire pen fell apart early. With that said, the relief staff went on to win 30 games (most in MLB) and the irony was that Grady still had in his mind what if the pen collapses right now thought when he left in Pedro. Even though Tim-Bree was a beast v. Yankees during that series. And Cora said '19 wasn't anywhere like '03 because of the way today's relievers are all hard throwers with cutters and sharp breaking balls, etc. ********, I call out the ********, still have to have a designated guy to get saves. One role, and it has to be a guy who can handle the pressure.

 

 

You hit the nail on the head with the problem with that bullpen - not good pitchers. Same problem with the Sox pen this year. Barnes is good, but I have my doubts about the rest.

 

Having a designated closer isn’t the only way to go, especially if your bullpen blows lots of leads in the 7th and 8th innings (like the ‘03 pen did). This year, Tampa has one of the best bullpens in MLB, yet they have a 3-headed COMMITTEE handling save duties in the ninth. Conversely, the worst bullpen in MLB is the Mets, who added 3 successful closers (Diaz, Familia, Wilson) this past offseason alone...

[Bellhorn04]

As far as signing Eovaldi and Pearce ; that was largely due to their World Series heroics , not their career records . It was the kind of move that Johnny from Burger King might make if he was G.M. for a day .

 

Most people liked those signings at the time. And there were a number of teams in on Eovaldi.

[moonslav59]

Plan or not, no one got save opportunities except Chad Fox...

 

I was at the opening day game in Tampa that year. We blew the game in the 9th.

 

I know you were talking about the start of the year, but over the whole season, we saw this:

 

Sv- BS

16-3 Kim

9-3 Lyon

3-2 Fox

2-4 Timlin

1-0 Wakefield

1-0 B Arroyo

1-0 R Person

1-1 Embree

1-1 J Shiell

0-1 R Rupe

0-1 Sauerbeck

0-1 Seanez

0-2 Williamson

 

Team:

36 saves

21 blown saves

 

As for the closer by committee to start the year, here's what I uncovered:

 

To start the 2003 season (first 41 games)

gm1. BS Loss Fox

2. BS Howry (Win Lyon)

3. Save Fox

6. Loss Fox (no BS)

9. Save Fox

10. Win Timlin (no save)

12. Save Wakefield (April 13)

13. BS Win Timlin

14. Save Lyon (Win Fox)

18. Win Timlin

20. Save Fox

23. Save Fox

25. BS Fox/ Save Shiell

28. Save Lyon (Win Shiell)

29. BS Loss Mendoza (May 2nd)

31. Loss Timlin (No BS)

32. Loss Lyon (No BS)

34. Save Lyon

36. Save Lyon

38. Save Lyon

41. Loss Embree (No BS)

Edited June 28, 2019 by moonslav59

[dgalehouse]

Most people liked those signings at the time. And there were a number of teams in on Eovaldi.

 

The signings were certainly understandable at the time , especially with all of the good will following the Series . However , we already had Moreland under contract , so Pearce seemed kind of redundant. And Nate had a history of arm problems and inconsistency. Anyway , I really wouldn't complain about the signings except that they evidently precluded doing anything about the bullpen.

[dannycater]

The fear factor comes into play on Eavoldi more so than Pearce (knee-jerk signing). The fear that he will be a beast for another team and that the Sox couldn't afford to lose a guy who was multi-faceted and could be a reliever-SP-closer, whatever all in one. Break glass in case of emergency. Pearce just won the MVP. It's a perfect storm of feel good. It's hard when you have a team that was so loaded and the pieces of the puzzle to win it all were the guys who were either gonna be Orlando Cabrera or something better.

[moonslav59]

The signings were certainly understandable at the time , especially with all of the good will following the Series . However , we already had Moreland under contract , so Pearce seemed kind of redundant. And Nate had a history of arm problems and inconsistency. Anyway , I really wouldn't complain about the signings except that they evidently precluded doing anything about the bullpen.

 

I agree. Moreland was likely enough, although he does get hurt a lot and did get hurt again this year.

 

Had we known Chavis would be this good, the Pearce non-signing would have been easier. As it was, we had nobody to back up 1B, except unproven Chavis and the fragile Holt.

 

I do agree though, getting a pen arm instead of Pearce would have been better, but I had guys like Cody Allen in mind, so that might have failed, too.

[notin]

Most people liked those signings at the time. And there were a number of teams in on Eovaldi.

 

 

If I knew about the budget concerns, I would have been VERY opposed to signing Pearce.

 

And I didn’t like the Eovaldi signing for that money due to his spotty health history. I’d have preferred either Kimbrel or Keuchel (even though either probably cost a bit more at the time)...

[dannycater]

Keuchel I would have loved to add to staff. Oh well.

[Bellhorn04]

If I knew about the budget concerns, I would have been VERY opposed to signing Pearce.

 

And I didn’t like the Eovaldi signing for that money due to his spotty health history. I’d have preferred either Kimbrel or Keuchel (even though either probably cost a bit more at the time)...

 

Your reasons for questioning the signings are fine. I'm just tired of hearing about how they were only signed for their World Series heroics. There was some rationale behind the signings. They look bad at the moment, as signings usually do when the player gets injured.

[moonslav59]

I caught a lot of grief at the time and at the start of the 2018 season, but I think the bigger overpay between Moreland and Pearce was Moreland due to it being 2 years and his history of injuries and second half flame outs.

 

I was okay with the Pearce signing. I knew the Eovaldi signing was a gamble, but I was fine with bringing him back.

 

It wasn't about the playoff heroics, although that did reveal how much these two meant to the team and clubhouse.

 

We probably could have gotten Moreland for $9M/2 and Pearce for $4.5M/1 tops. That would have saved us $4M on the budget and allowed us to sign a RP'er and have a little left over for a summer pick-up.

 

Hindsight is 20-20,I know.

 

[Bellhorn04]

We probably could have gotten Moreland for $9M/2 and Pearce for $4.5M/1 tops. That would have saved us $4M on the budget and allowed us to sign a RP'er and have a little left over for a summer pick-up.

 

Hindsight is 20-20,I know.

 

 

That's not hindsight, it's pure speculation about what other teams were offering or would have offered.

[dannycater]

I caught a lot of grief at the time and at the start of the 2018 season, but I think the bigger overpay between Moreland and Pearce was Moreland due to it being 2 years and his history of injuries and second half flame outs.

 

I was okay with the Pearce signing. I knew the Eovaldi signing was a gamble, but I was fine with bringing him back.

 

It wasn't about the playoff heroics, although that did reveal how much these two meant to the team and clubhouse.

 

We probably could have gotten Moreland for $9M/2 and Pearce for $4.5M/1 tops. That would have saved us $4M on the budget and allowed us to sign a RP'er and have a little left over for a summer pick-up.

 

Hindsight is 20-20,I know.

 

 

As crazy as it sounds had the Sox not re-signed Moreland, they could very well be out of the Wild Card chase even now. He must have hit about 6 game-winning, game-changing home runs or doubles during this blah first half of the 2019 season. Moreland = Clutch, injuries and all. Pearce just happened to have the all-time great WS and owned hitting v. the Yankees.

I'll take Moreland overall, a great defensive 1b.

[moonslav59]

As crazy as it sounds had the Sox not re-signed Moreland, they could very well be out of the Wild Card chase even now. He must have hit about 6 game-winning, game-changing home runs or doubles during this blah first half of the 2019 season. Moreland = Clutch, injuries and all. Pearce just happened to have the all-time great WS and owned hitting v. the Yankees.

I'll take Moreland overall, a great defensive 1b.

 

Moreland does this every year. He does great for a month or two then gets hurt and or declines sharply for the last few months.

 

Yes, we may not have had the HRs he hit early this year to win games, but we'd have someone- maybe a good pen arm- instead.

 

I still think we overpaid Moreland. Many very good 1Bmen signed for much less.

 

[devildavid]

I think it's a bit of an overstatement to say that the use of bullpens has changed dramatically since 2003.

 

The 'bullpen game' and the 'opener' are changes, yes, but only the Rays are doing this consistently. What else has changed? Bullpens pitch more innings, because starters don't go as deep. That's about it.

 

No, that isn't about it. Teams started using top relievers earlier in games and went away from going from lesser relievers hoping to hold on until the closer could appear in the ninth. Bullpens have less specialists and more hard throwers that are easy to mix and match. The reason starters pitch less innings is to keep the hitters from seeing them more than twice in a game. There has been a major change in how entire pitching staffs are used, with less reliance on starters and more reliance on a parade of hard throwing relievers.

[Bellhorn04]

No, that isn't about it. Teams started using top relievers earlier in games and went away from going from lesser relievers hoping to hold on until the closer could appear in the ninth. Bullpens have less specialists and more hard throwers that are easy to mix and match. The reason starters pitch less innings is to keep the hitters from seeing them more than twice in a game. There has been a major change in how entire pitching staffs are used, with less reliance on starters and more reliance on a parade of hard throwing relievers.

 

Your points have merit.

 

It's true that a lot of the shortened appearances by starters are by design now.

 

But most teams still use a setup guy/conventional 9th inning closer approach rather than having a 'relief ace' who comes in whenever he's most needed.

 

We used Kimbrel as a conventional closer, and that's what he wanted to be and apparently still wants to be-the guy who gets the saves.

 

In the 2018 postseason we used Barnes, Kelly and Brasier as the setup guys or bridge to Kimbrel.

[Elktonnick]

Red Sox pen chalks up another blown save.

[a700hitter]

Barne doing his best to cement the loss for the bullpen.