A Realistic View at 2021: Part II

[moonslav59]

if this pan out all year long and moving forward (seems so), could be easily the major steal of the history of the Boston Red Sox lol

 

6.1 IP'd is a very small sample size. If he let's up 3 ERs in his next 2/3 of an inning he's at a decent 3.86 ERA. If he lets up 4, he's at 5.14 and a complete disaster (in the minds of some.)

[Nick]

I thought weather forecasts are simply based on past experience and not really predicting the future.

 

Under 'these' conditions, 'A' happened 75% of the time, then 'A' is predicted. They'll be wrong 25% of the time.

[moonslav59]

One thing that excites me a lot about tis team and Bloom & Co. is how well the most unsung additions are doing, and if that carries over to other players not yet on the big club.

 

We could be looking at striking gold (or silver), even if just half these guys come through- beyond Whitlock. Bloom pick-ups, yet to see action with the big club:

 

(Protecting Bazardo)

Downs

Seabold

Arauz

Ro. Hernandez ©

Rosario

Wong

German

Winckowski

Wallace

Koss

+3 PTBNL

 

Potts

[iortiz]

6.1 IP'd is a very small sample size. If he let's up 3 ERs in his next 2/3 of an inning he's at a decent 3.86 ERA. If he lets up 4, he's at 5.14 and a complete disaster (in the minds of some.)

 

Aside the numbers which sometimes are deceptive specially in small samples, IMHO the stuff seems to be there and is very encouraging. Very.

 

Said that, hopefully I'm not making a bad prediction as I did with Hambree who started rock solid and then we all know how it ended up.

[Nick]

6.1 IP'd is a very small sample size. If he let's up 3 ERs in his next 2/3 of an inning he's at a decent 3.86 ERA. If he lets up 4, he's at 5.14 and a complete disaster (in the minds of some.)

 

ERA is so distorted for relievers. 9 one inning stints without giving up a run or hit followed by an outing with three straight walks and get pulled. Next batter hits grand slam. You're charged with 3 earned runs and 0 innings pitched. Your season ERA is now 3.00 despite not giving up a hit. Just not a great metric for relief pitchers.

 

Giving up 5 runs in one outing shouldn't define effectiveness of a reliever.

[Nick]

One thing that excites me a lot about tis team and Bloom & Co. is how well the most unsung additions are doing, and if that carries over to other players not yet on the big club.

 

We could be looking at striking gold (or silver), even if just half these guys come through- beyond Whitlock. Bloom pick-ups, yet to see action with the big club:

 

(Protecting Bazardo)

Downs

Seabold

Arauz

Ro. Hernandez ©

Rosario

Wong

German

Winckowski

Wallace

Koss

+3 PTBNL

 

Potts

 

This is why we don't trade away the farm in July when we're 3 games back from wild card spot. The biggest addition will come way of Sale and Houck.

[moonslav59]

ERA is so distorted for relievers. 9 one inning stints without giving up a run or hit followed by an outing with three straight walks and get pulled. Next batter hits grand slam. You're charged with 3 earned runs and 0 innings pitched. Your season ERA is now 3.00 despite not giving up a hit. Just not a great metric for relief pitchers.

 

Giving up 5 runs in one outing shouldn't define effectiveness of a reliever.

 

This is very true, but one unique thing about these 12 games, is that it seems like most pitchers are giving us full innings.

 

(We have allowed 7 of 17 inherited runners to score, though.)

 

Here's OPS against in some tiny sample sizes (PAs against):

 

.087 Barnes (23) AMAZING!!!

.273 Whitlock (22) Stunning!

.387 Valdez (19) People want him demoted.

.400 Bazardo (5) 1 appearance

.411 Sawamura (21) Solid

.503 Eovaldi (66) Difference maker

.651 Perez (47) Over achieving?

.653 Andriese (27) Not entirely surprising

.671 ERod (40) Nice to see

.695 Houck (26) Will return

.707 DHern (27) Still, 6 BBs in 27 PAs- not good

 

.857 Brice (14) Teasing the DFA or phantom IL

.859 Ottavino (19) Needs to improve.

 

1.030 Richards (36) Can turn this around, today.

 

1.215 Taylor (23) May not get a second look.

 

[moonslav59]

This is why we don't trade away the farm in July when we're 3 games back from wild card spot. The biggest addition will come way of Sale and Houck.

 

What about 7 back of the WC? Or, 11?

 

What if we are 4 back, but Sale has suffered a set back and Eovaldi is on an extended IL stint (plus maybe more?)

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

This is why we don't trade away the farm in July when we're 3 games back from wild card spot. The biggest addition will come way of Sale and Houck.

 

Never in a million years will Bloom trade away the farm in July. But no matter where the Sox are in the standings, I expect him to add to it.

[moonslav59]

Never in a million years will Bloom trade away the farm in July. But no matter where the Sox are in the standings, I expect him to add to it.

 

I was kind of leaning towards the question of being seller not buyers. (I was not clear with my response or point.)

 

I think the only way we become a buyer is by trading players not under team control for long or by taking on a salary dump without giving up any youth.

[notin]

I was kind of leaning towards the question of being seller not buyers. (I was not clear with my response or point.)

 

I think the only way we become a buyer is by trading players not under team control for long or by taking on a salary dump without giving up any youth.

 

Well, if the Sox get a full strength Chris Sale back in August, it might be the best addition any team makes during he course of the season. (Noah Syndergaard arguments accepted.)

[mvp 78]

FanGraphs now has the Sox as 57% chance to make the playoffs (highest of any AL team not projected to win their division). https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds

[moonslav59]

Well, if the Sox get a full strength Chris Sale back in August, it might be the best addition any team makes during he course of the season. (Noah Syndergaard arguments accepted.)

 

Oh, I agree, and if things look good for Sale around the trade deadline, it will make it hard for us to consider being sellers, even if we are 7-11 games behind.

[cp176]

Ultimately, it's ownership's path - and ownership has not always been consistent in the path chosen. Obviously the platonic ideal is the Dodgers (and I guess to a lesser extent the Yankees) - a team that can do BOTH the "team with big money" stuff and the player development stuff well.

 

It's when ownership changes its mind rashly that I get annoyed. They definitely have had extremely thin skin.

 

I'm a huge fan of consistency when it proves successful. When an abrupt change occurs in anything that I am familiar with, I tend to get suspicious of what might have caused the change.

[moonslav59]

I'm a huge fan of consistency when it proves successful. When an abrupt change occurs in anything that I am familiar with, I tend to get suspicious of what might have caused the change.

 

This team changing GMs has been pretty consistent. Theo started spending big, and they went to Ben. DD started spending big and they went to Bloom.

 

This team has re-set the tax several times and splurged several times, when the time was right- mostly. Consistent there, too.

 

Can consistently changing, when needed, not be extreme?

[jad]

Where I am, they still can’t get snowfall totals right or the timing of precipitation. And they always seem to get the hurricane paths wrong.

 

Yeah, I get that, although I think hurricane path prediction is better than you suggest. Have you ever tried out the website "Windy"? "Windy" gives a fantastic view of what's going on (you're right, precipitation is a lot trickier to predict. I'm a sailor, so all I really care about is wind. If it rains, big whoop.)

[Nick]

I think we've had much shorter list of hopefuls in the past (age as of 12/31/21)

 

22 Bryan Mata

23 Jay Groome

24 Noah Song

24 Thaddeus Ward

25 Garret Whitlock

25 Tanner Houck

25 Darwinzon Hernandez

25 Conner Seabold

 

Not everyone will come through but there's some talent.

 

Don't forget the #4 draft pick this year. I'm hoping for college pitcher. Screw the high school kids. Go draft and/or sign younger players outside of US.

[mvp 78]

Yeah, I get that, although I think hurricane path prediction is better than you suggest. Have you ever tried out the website "Windy"? "Windy" gives a fantastic view of what's going on (you're right, precipitation is a lot trickier to predict. I'm a sailor, so all I really care about is wind. If it rains, big whoop.)

 

https://spaghettimodels.com/

[notin]

ERA is so distorted for relievers. 9 one inning stints without giving up a run or hit followed by an outing with three straight walks and get pulled. Next batter hits grand slam. You're charged with 3 earned runs and 0 innings pitched. Your season ERA is now 3.00 despite not giving up a hit. Just not a great metric for relief pitchers.

 

Giving up 5 runs in one outing shouldn't define effectiveness of a reliever.

 

As Adam Ottavino showed last season...

[mvp 78]

Renfroe 2021:

 

795 OPS vs LHP

388 OPS vs RHP

[Bellhorn04]

This team changing GMs has been pretty consistent. Theo started spending big, and they went to Ben. DD started spending big and they went to Bloom.

 

This team has re-set the tax several times and splurged several times, when the time was right- mostly. Consistent there, too.

 

Can consistently changing, when needed, not be extreme?

 

I can't argue when all 3 of those former GM's won titles, and the new guy looks like such a good one.

 

It's not like Henry is replacing good guys with bums.

[notin]

I think we've had much shorter list of hopefuls in the past (age as of 12/31/21)

 

22 Bryan Mata

23 Jay Groome

24 Noah Song

24 Thaddeus Ward

25 Garret Whitlock

25 Tanner Houck

25 Darwinzon Hernandez

25 Conner Seabold

 

Not everyone will come through but there's some talent.

 

Don't forget the #4 draft pick this year. I'm hoping for college pitcher. Screw the high school kids. Go draft and/or sign younger players outside of US.

 

I’m predicting the best pitching prospect in the organization will be the PTBNL from the Mets...

[Nick]

Me

ERA is so distorted for relievers. 9 one inning stints without giving up a run or hit followed by an outing with three straight walks and get pulled. Next batter hits grand slam. You're charged with 3 earned runs and 0 innings pitched. Your season ERA is now 3.00 despite not giving up a hit. Just not a great metric for relief pitchers.

 

Giving up 5 runs in one outing shouldn't define effectiveness of a reliever.

 

Notin

As Adam Ottavino showed last season...

 

Lets think outside of box.

 

ERA is more appropriate for starters. If you go back into history, it was common for starters go 9 innings. Projecting starter innings to 9 innings make sense to me. Basically it gives you an idea of how many earned runs are given up by a starting pitcher. Maybe this was the genesis of ERA. (earned runs per nine innings)

 

Not so fast for relievers in modern age. Many are one inning specialists. No one gives a damn about 9 inning projection. Relievers don't pitch nine innings. (exception of Eovaldi).

 

For relievers, I would simply take total earn runs given up divided by number of appearances with one modification. Earn runs given up in any outing exceeding one inning would be adjusted, pitcher's earn run would be runs given up divided by innings pitch. That's the run given up number for that outing. (ie restate the runs given up per one inning basis). So you come in and give up up 3 runs in 3 innings, your number would be 1.0 for that appearance.

 

Reliever's stats would be called Earned Runs per Appearance.

 

In above example, his 'ERA' would be 0.3. He gives up .3 runs per outing.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Nick

[Bellhorn04]

I’m predicting the best pitching prospect in the organization will be the PTBNL from the Mets...

 

Please elaborate.

[Bellhorn04]

Me

ERA is so distorted for relievers. 9 one inning stints without giving up a run or hit followed by an outing with three straight walks and get pulled. Next batter hits grand slam. You're charged with 3 earned runs and 0 innings pitched. Your season ERA is now 3.00 despite not giving up a hit. Just not a great metric for relief pitchers.

 

Giving up 5 runs in one outing shouldn't define effectiveness of a reliever.

 

Notin

As Adam Ottavino showed last season...

 

Lets think outside of box.

 

ERA is more appropriate for starters. If you go back into history, it was common for starters go 9 innings. Projecting starter innings to 9 innings make sense to me. Basically it gives you an idea of how many earned runs are given up by a starting pitcher. 8 runs given up is offset by shutouts.

 

Not so fast for relievers in modern age. Many are one inning specialists. No one gives a damn about 9 inning projection. Relievers don't pitch nine innings. (exception of Eovaldi).

 

For relievers, I would simply take total earn runs given up divided by number of appearances with one modification. Any outing exceeding one inning would be adjusted, have pitcher's earn run would be runs given up divided by innings pitch. (ie restate the runs given up per one inning basis).

 

Reliever's stats would be called Earned Runs per Appearance.

 

ERA is going to be a flawed stat regardless of whether you're a starter or reliever. A starter's ERA can often be affected by circumstances and managerial decisions. For a recent example you have Pivetta's last start. He had given up 1 run through 5 and the Sox were up 10-1. Cora elected to squeeze another inning out of him, trying to save the bullpen an inning in a blowout. Pivetta gave up 3 in the 6th.

 

If Cora had pulled him after 5, Pivetta would now have an ERA of 0.90. (1 run in 10 innings.) Instead he has an ERA of 3.27. (4 runs in 11 innings.)

[sk7326]

This team changing GMs has been pretty consistent. Theo started spending big, and they went to Ben. DD started spending big and they went to Bloom.

 

This team has re-set the tax several times and splurged several times, when the time was right- mostly. Consistent there, too.

 

Can consistently changing, when needed, not be extreme?

 

The team went the patient path in and then decided they wanted to splurge and then largely hung the GM out to dry in each case when it didn't work. It's ownership when it's successful and the GM when it's not. It's been pretty reactive. Bloom will certainly be safe until the first actual disappointing season - ownership has shown very very think skin about those. Each GM represented an organizational philosophy and Henry has veered between the two very sharply.

 

Now the roster this year resembles the 2013 in that there were no big splashes but some good depth signings - and enough quality in the position players that you can be confident there. If Cora and company can consistently piece together enough run prevention, it will be a fun summer.

[Nick]

Please elaborate.

 

There was a deep dive analysis of the trade and the PTBNL aspect of it. Based on players already received by the Sox in that trade, the analysis went on to say that Sox should expect pretty good player from the Mets. Sox will receive two more PTBNL from the Royals.

 

I'll see if I can find it. Maybe it was a piece in the 'mlbtraderumors'.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Nick

[notin]

Please elaborate.

 

I’m expecting something decent for Khalil Lee...

[cp176]

This team changing GMs has been pretty consistent. Theo started spending big, and they went to Ben. DD started spending big and they went to Bloom.

 

This team has re-set the tax several times and splurged several times, when the time was right- mostly. Consistent there, too.

 

Can consistently changing, when needed, not be extreme?

 

yes I do agree. This team has changed gm's on a consistent basis. Although they have been well paid for their efforts, I do sense that in part they have served as scapegoats.

[notin]

Please elaborate.

 

Or the long answer.

 

Using the Fagnraphs system, Khalil Lee has a Future Value of 45. The only Sox pitching prospect to better this is Mata with a 45+, and that was before he would miss all of 2021. Houck and Song also have a 45. Now if the Sox get a prospect of equal value, that would be 2019 second rounder J.T. Ginn (a name I have dropped a few times as this PTBNL). Or if the rumors are true about the fascination of the Mets GM with Lee, possibly Matthew Allan (FV: 50). But that might be too hopeful.

 

Obviously we have no guarantee it is even a pitching prospect. But if it is, I strongly suspect it would be Ginn and Fangraphs already has him at or with the top pitchers in the Sox minors...