A Realistic View at 2021: Part I

[notin]

If Jimy let Lowe get three outs in the 9th, it would've been 2 2/3 IP. Derek was 6'5, 230 and may just have had enough energy and adrenaline to finish. It could've changed history, but it's all hindsight. It's what we do.

 

Did you mean 8th or 9th?

[mvp 78]

If Jimy let Lowe get three outs in the 9th, it would've been 2 2/3 IP. Derek was 6'5, 230 and may just have had enough energy and adrenaline to finish. It could've changed history, but it's all hindsight. It's what we do.

 

It would have been 3 2/3rds if he finished the game. If Lowe pitches the 8th, maybe Gordon comes in for the 9th and blows it then?

[Bellhorn04]

Today's athletes are bigger , stronger , faster and better conditioned than those of the past . But not tougher or more durable. Some of it could be due to today's much higher salaries plus a general change in attitudes.

 

In general I would agree, and the big money is definitely part of it.

 

There are exceptions in every sport too - guys who are just as tough and durable as the old time guys in spite of the money - LeBron, Tom Brady etc.

[notin]

In general I would agree, and the big money is definitely part of it.

 

There are exceptions in every sport too - guys who are just as tough and durable as the old time guys in spite of the money - LeBron, Tom Brady etc.

 

 

It also helps that we only remember the greater players. Sure a lot of you guys recall Bob Gibson and talk about him lie he was the epitome of an MLB pitcher in 1968. But for every Bob Gibson, there were 100 Hal Gilson’s...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Did you mean 8th or 9th?

 

8th, sorry; that's when Gordon blew it, facing batters Lowe didn't even get to pitch to yet. Gordon was great all year, in 73 games, 79.1 IP... but that's not too many multiple-frame outings.

[jad]

Today's athletes are bigger , stronger , faster and better conditioned than those of the past . But not tougher or more durable. Some of it could be due to today's much higher salaries plus a general change in attitudes.

 

I don't think it has anything to do with toughness (although armchair fans love to complain that professional athletes are far less bad-ass or tough than they themselves are). It likely has more to do with physics. Can't remember the equations but essentially muscle strength increases in what is essentially two dimensions (a muscle is as strong as its cross-section). What it has to do (act against) often increases in terms of volume (three-dimensions). (Or with, say, speed, in one dimension) So in certain situations, if you double the 'load' you have to quadruple the size of the muscle. (elephants do not have the same body proportions as do mosquitoes). Probably most noticeable in football, where a small increase in force requires a disproportionate increase in protective equipment. What human bodies evolved to do is deal w/ 'run-of-the-mill' activities. When you get to extremes, the 'ordinary' proportions of humans will no longer be up to the job. And most pro athletes are at those extremes. That's why they get injured more than those of us who sit around drinking beer, as God and Darwin intended.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I don't think it has anything to do with toughness (although armchair fans love to complain that professional athletes are far less bad-ass or tough than they themselves are). It likely has more to do with physics. Can't remember the equations but essentially muscle strength increases in what is essentially two dimensions (a muscle is as strong as its cross-section). What it has to do (act against) often increases in terms of volume (three-dimensions). (Or with, say, speed, in one dimension) So in certain situations, if you double the 'load' you have to quadruple the size of the muscle. (elephants do not have the same body proportions as do mosquitoes). Probably most noticeable in football, where a small increase in force requires a disproportionate increase in protective equipment. What human bodies evolved to do is deal w/ 'run-of-the-mill' activities. When you get to extremes, the 'ordinary' proportions of humans will no longer be up to the job. And most pro athletes are at those extremes. That's why they get injured more than those of us who sit around drinking beer, as God and Darwin intended.

 

I applaud your applause of those of us who choose to drink beer and sit around. If we got up and moved around, we might bump into somebody else.

 

Football players, on the other hand, want to run into somebody else -- at full speed -- with themselves...

[jad]

I applaud your applause of those of us who choose to drink beer and sit around. If we got up and moved around, we might bump into somebody else.

Football players, on the other hand, want to run into somebody else -- at full speed -- with themselves...

 

The one good thing about this this past year is that that hasn't been a problem!

[moonslav59]

I'm back from Mexico, safely.

 

Had a good time, although some of the tasks we had were more stressful and difficult than we expected.

 

Part II is coming soon.

[Nick]

I don't get the inflexibility of having 14 pitchers on opening day. Why? Why not ride the hot bat of Chavis to start the season? Why in the hell do we need 14 pitchers in first ten games? We have two off days before our 8th game is played.

 

Can't you simply send down Chavis and bring up a pitcher? More than likely one of position player will get hurt and the whole thing becomes moot.

 

Am I stupid? I want to hear from pitching experts.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm back from Mexico, safely.

 

Had a good time, although some of the tasks we had were more stressful and difficult than we expected.

 

Part II is coming soon.

 

Good to hear. When I first read this, I thought your last sentence meant you had to go back there.

[oldtimer]

I don't get the inflexibility of having 14 pitchers on opening day. Why? Why not ride the hot bat of Chavis to start the season? Why in the hell do we need 14 pitchers in first ten games? We have two off days before our 8th game is played.

 

Can't you simply send down Chavis and bring up a pitcher? More than likely one of position player will get hurt and the whole thing becomes moot.

 

Am I stupid? I want to hear from pitching experts.

 

I agree. Better to find a way to break camp with Chavis on the roster and one less pitcher.

[moonslav59]

I don't get the inflexibility of having 14 pitchers on opening day. Why? Why not ride the hot bat of Chavis to start the season? Why in the hell do we need 14 pitchers in first ten games? We have two off days before our 8th game is played.

 

Can't you simply send down Chavis and bring up a pitcher? More than likely one of position player will get hurt and the whole thing becomes moot.

 

Am I stupid? I want to hear from pitching experts.

 

I agree 100%, and we can actually go with 13 pitchers for the first 15 games or so. We play 7 in the first 9 days, then we could go 5 straight days with just 13.

 

I remember the days when, with a 25 man roster, the choice was between 11 or 12 pitchers. 14 is absurd, unless you plan on having bullpen games or your starters can only go 3-5 IP, and you play 28 games in 30 days.

 

Start with 13 seems like a no-brainer.

[Kimmi]

I don't get the inflexibility of having 14 pitchers on opening day. Why? Why not ride the hot bat of Chavis to start the season? Why in the hell do we need 14 pitchers in first ten games? We have two off days before our 8th game is played.

 

Can't you simply send down Chavis and bring up a pitcher? More than likely one of position player will get hurt and the whole thing becomes moot.

 

Am I stupid? I want to hear from pitching experts.

 

It's interesting that the consensus here seems to be to go with 13 pitchers. Personally, I think going with 14 pitchers is an obvious choice. The bench guys are versatile enough to give Cora plenty of options. I'm thinking a lot of innings will need to be covered by the pen early on due to limited pitch counts of the starters.

[moonslav59]

It's interesting that the consensus here seems to be to go with 13 pitchers. Personally, I think going with 14 pitchers is an obvious choice. The bench guys are versatile enough to give Cora plenty of options. I'm thinking a lot of innings will need to be covered by the pen early on due to limited pitch counts of the starters.

 

It's the 2 days off in the first 9 days and the following 4-5 games played afterwards brings the high need time to about 14 days into the season.

 

For years, teams have gotten by with 11-12 pitchers. 13 seemed like overkill.

 

Since you can't bring guys in for 1 batter, anymore, I doubt we'll need 14 pitchers. We also have a few guys who can go 2+ innings: DHern, Andriese, Sawamura and at times, Taylor, Valdez and Brice.

 

If someone gets hurt, bring up Houck or or someone else.

 

We have some issues with our non pitchers.

 

1) Our defense sucks in some areas and could benefit from late inning defensive replacements or switches.

2) We have some weak hitters vs certain handed pitchers, and having the ability to PH several times in a game could be worth more than keeping Valdez in the pen.

3) I've never been a big fan of Chavis, but he seems like he deserves a chance to prove himself once and for all. He's been hot, so let it ride.

 

[jacksonianmarch]

26 players, I think 14 pitchers is too many. I get having super utility guys on the roster, but you need to have the bodies there to rest your regulars, especially early. This is the first full season these guys are gonna face since 19, so everyone's endurance will be a bit off

[notin]

26 players, I think 14 pitchers is too many. I get having super utility guys on the roster, but you need to have the bodies there to rest your regulars, especially early. This is the first full season these guys are gonna face since 19, so everyone's endurance will be a bit off

 

No one is going to need that rest more than the pitchers. From what I understand, that is the entire logic behind the 14 man staff...

[mvp 78]

No one is going to need that rest more than the pitchers. From what I understand, that is the entire logic behind the 14 man staff...

 

Agree.

[mvp 78]

It's the 2 days off in the first 9 days and the following 4-5 games played afterwards brings the high need time to about 14 days into the season.

 

For years, teams have gotten by with 11-12 pitchers. 13 seemed like overkill.

 

Since you can't bring guys in for 1 batter, anymore, I doubt we'll need 14 pitchers. We also have a few guys who can go 2+ innings: DHern, Andriese, Sawamura and at times, Taylor, Valdez and Brice.

 

If someone gets hurt, bring up Houck or or someone else.

 

We have some issues with our non pitchers.

 

1) Our defense sucks in some areas and could benefit from late inning defensive replacements or switches.

2) We have some weak hitters vs certain handed pitchers, and having the ability to PH several times in a game could be worth more than keeping Valdez in the pen.

3) I've never been a big fan of Chavis, but he seems like he deserves a chance to prove himself once and for all. He's been hot, so let it ride.

 

 

Arroyo and Munoz have been hitting well in ST too. Not sure the "hot hand" in Spring Training necessarily carries over.

[notin]

It's the 2 days off in the first 9 days and the following 4-5 games played afterwards brings the high need time to about 14 days into the season.

 

For years, teams have gotten by with 11-12 pitchers. 13 seemed like overkill.

 

Since you can't bring guys in for 1 batter, anymore, I doubt we'll need 14 pitchers. We also have a few guys who can go 2+ innings: DHern, Andriese, Sawamura and at times, Taylor, Valdez and Brice.

 

If someone gets hurt, bring up Houck or or someone else.

 

We have some issues with our non pitchers.

 

1) Our defense sucks in some areas and could benefit from late inning defensive replacements or switches.

2) We have some weak hitters vs certain handed pitchers, and having the ability to PH several times in a game could be worth more than keeping Valdez in the pen.

3) I've never been a big fan of Chavis, but he seems like he deserves a chance to prove himself once and for all. He's been hot, so let it ride.

 

 

Last year, no pitcher threw more than 84 IP.

 

I think the logic behind 14 pitchers is to not wear down the staff. If other teams are not doing it, it might become an advantage for the Sox, even if one of the pitchers is Austin Brice...

[notin]

Arroyo and Munoz have been hitting well in ST too. Not sure the "hot hand" in Spring Training necessarily carries over.

 

Of course it doesn't. If it did, our staring shortstop would still be Pedro Ciriaco.

[mvp 78]

Last year, no pitcher threw more than 84 IP.

 

I think the logic behind 14 pitchers is to not wear down the staff. If other teams are not doing it, it might become an advantage for the Sox, even if one of the pitchers is Austin Brice...

 

The math doesn't check out.

[a700hitter]

Last year, no pitcher threw more than 84 IP.

 

I think the logic behind 14 pitchers is to not wear down the staff. If other teams are not doing it, it might become an advantage for the Sox, even if one of the pitchers is Austin Brice...

Have Rosters been expanded to 26 or are they still at 25. If they are still at 25, that would leave us with a 1 man bench because you have to carry a second catcher. I can’t see that working.

[mvp 78]

Have Rosters been expanded to 26 or are they still at 25. If they are still at 25, that would leave us with a 1 man bench because you have to carry a second catcher. I can’t see that working.

 

26.

[moonslav59]

Arroyo and Munoz have been hitting well in ST too. Not sure the "hot hand" in Spring Training necessarily carries over.

 

Munoz would need to be added to the 40 man roster- no biggie, as our 40th man is not all that promising, but the idea is to keep as many options on the table in April.

 

Arroyo probably makes the 26 man roster, anyway. There's room for him & Chavis. Maybe you meant Arauz.

 

soxprospects.com has Sale, Brasier and Cordero listed as "inactive". (IL or C-19) and Marwin starting in LF.

 

They have 14 pitchers, including Brice & Brewer (not Valdez). The 3 bench players listed are Plawecki, Arroyo and Chavis, with Duran, Arauz, Munoz, Downs and Houck starting at the Alternative Training Site. It's interesting they also show Chavis in AAA, which begins in May.

 

To me, an argument could be made to go with 12 pitchers, but I won't go there. Let's assume it's between 13 and 14 pitchers and 3 or 4 bench players.

 

I see it coming down to this:

 

Pitchers (13 or 14):

Brice as #13 (not my choice), if we go with just 13 pitchers.

Valdez, Brewer or Houck as #14, if we go with 14 pitchers. (It looks like Houck is not a choice, but one can argue he should be.)

 

Bench (3 or 4):

Plawecki is a lock, so the choices are then 2 or 3 from:

Arroyo (I think he's a lock.)

Chavis (based on showing some MLB success and a hot spring, one can argue he deserves it)

Duran (If Cordero looks to be out a while, he might be the best choice)

Arauz (Hot spring not enough. He's young and needs more seasoning and proof he belongs.)

Munoz (He might be the best choice, since he can play OF, too, but he's not on the 40 man.)

Downs (I don't see it.)

 

Personally, I'd DFA or trade Brice and go with Valdez or Brewer as the 13th pitcher, and have my bench start out with Plawecki, Arroyo, Chavis and Duran, since AAA does not start until May, and Cordero is out.

 

The real choice gets made when Cordero comes back. I'd send Duran down, but Chavis could be the choice to be demoted.

 

If Cordero starts the season on the big club, Marwin and Arroyo fill the 2 slots on the bench next to Plawecki, and it comes down to Brewer or Valdez as the 14th pitcher or Chavis/Duran/Arauz as the 4th bench guy.

 

[a700hitter]

26.

So that would be a 2 man bench plus a catcher. I can’t see doing any significant stretch like that.

[mvp 78]

So that would be a 2 man bench plus a catcher. I can’t see doing any significant stretch like that.

 

It's the same bench as they would have had back in the 25 man days when they'd go with 13 pitchers (which would happen most often at the start of the year).

 

Sox have over and over stated this offseason that they grabbed Marwin and Kiké for their versatility and that they want to go with a 2 man bench.

[mvp 78]

Munoz would need to be added to the 40 man roster- no biggie, as our 40th man is not all that promising, but the idea is to keep as many options on the table in April.

 

Arroyo probably makes the 26 man roster, anyway. There's room for him & Chavis. Maybe you meant Arauz.

 

soxprospects.com has Sale, Brasier and Cordero listed as "inactive". (IL or C-19) and Marwin starting in LF.

 

They have 14 pitchers, including Brice & Brewer (not Valdez). The 3 bench players listed are Plawecki, Arroyo and Chavis, with Duran, Arauz, Munoz, Downs and Houck starting at the Alternative Training Site. It's interesting they also show Chavis in AAA, which begins in May.

 

To me, an argument could be made to go with 12 pitchers, but I won't go there. Let's assume it's between 13 and 14 pitchers and 3 or 4 bench players.

 

I see it coming down to this:

 

Pitchers (13 or 14):

Brice as #13 (not my choice), if we go with just 13 pitchers.

Valdez, Brewer or Houck as #14, if we go with 14 pitchers. (It looks like Houck is not a choice, but one can argue he should be.)

 

Bench (3 or 4):

Plawecki is a lock, so the choices are then 2 or 3 from:

Arroyo (I think he's a lock.)

Chavis (based on showing some MLB success and a hot spring, one can argue he deserves it)

Duran (If Cordero looks to be out a while, he might be the best choice)

Arauz (Hot spring not enough. He's young and needs more seasoning and proof he belongs.)

Munoz (He might be the best choice, since he can play OF, too, but he's not on the 40 man.)

Downs (I don't see it.)

 

Personally, I'd DFA or trade Brice and go with Valdez or Brewer as the 13th pitcher, and have my bench start out with Plawecki, Arroyo, Chavis and Duran, since AAA does not start until May, and Cordero is out.

 

The real choice gets made when Cordero comes back. I'd send Duran down, but Chavis could be the choice to be demoted.

 

If Cordero starts the season on the big club, Marwin and Arroyo fill the 2 slots on the bench next to Plawecki, and it comes down to Brewer or Valdez as the 14th pitcher or Chavis/Duran/Arauz as the 4th bench guy.

 

 

If I had to guess, the Sox would go with 14 pitchers including Brice and Brewer and the bench would include Arroyo and Gonzalez (add Chavis if Cordero is on IL).

[moonslav59]

If I had to guess, the Sox would go with 14 pitchers including Brice and Brewer and the bench would include Arroyo and Gonzalez (add Chavis if Cordero is on IL).

 

Is Cordero on the IL or C-19 list?

[moonslav59]

I'd go with 13 pitchers until April 15 or 16, when we are 4-5 games into a long stretch or no days off and after we have 2 days off in the first 9 days of the season.

 

We might go longer, depending on how deep we had to go into the pen over the first 2 weeks of the season. I can't see Brice and Brewer being overused by the 14th or 15th game of the season. Chances are even having just one of the two won't see overuse.

 

I never thought I'd hear myself says this, but I want Chavis on the opening day roster. (I also think we need Arroyo or Arauz, too.) IMO, the only argument against Chavis is Duran not Brewer, but I guess it is what it is.

 

We have a few guys that can go long innings in relief, in case a starter gets booted early a few times in the first 2 weeks. They can go long (3-4 IP) maybe 3-4 times in the first 14 days, so the one inning RP'ers should not be overused. If things fall apart, early, then make a roster move once you look to short-handed in the next game. These guys at the alternative site should be readily available and on-hand in less than 24 hours.