A Realistic View at 2022: Part I

[moonslav59]

He was taken out of the rotation before the regular season ended. I’m very well aware he pitched game 161, and what he did. I like Houck, but all I said was it would be risky to count on him as one of your starters next year. He was inconsistent as a starter this year (stats anybody), and hasn’t thrown that many innings in a year, which is the same as Whitlock.

 

People are taken out of the rotation for a number of reasons, some of which might be because he was greatly needed in the pen, an injury, a plan to limit IP'd, a returning SP'er or because his profile projects better as a RP'er, at this moment in his career.

 

I am pretty sure the plan was never to have him start 32 games, or even 22. We knew Sale was out, and ERod was given his first start a little late.

 

Houck had 2 starts in April:

5.0 IP 2 ER

4.1 IP 3 ER

 

He then went on the IL and missed about 3 months. That might be why he missed some starts, too. Upon his retrun, he pitched one 3 inning relief game and went back into the rotation when Perez and Richards were imploding.

 

In 10 starts, he had a 3.86 ERA/.641 OPS Against, despite a .321 BAbip. He wasn't yanked because he was doing poorly as a starter. He was yanked because Sale was back and the pen needed help, desperately.

 

Just because he's done much better as a RP'er, doesn't mean he sucked as a starter.

 

"Stats anybody..."

 

SP Numbers:

3.68/1.125 (.627 OIPS Against)

 

Career as SP:

2.97/1.070 (.591)

 

SOX 2021 Leaders as SP ONLY (10+ starts)

 

3.68 Houck

3.75 Eovaldi

4.56 Pivetta

4.77 ERod

4.77 Perez

5.22 Richards

 

WHIP

1.125 Houck

1.190 Eovaldi

1.312 Pivetta

1.398 ERod

1.520 Perez

1.650 Richards

 

OPS Against

.627 Houck

.696 Eovaldi

.735 Pivetta

.769 ERod

.844 Perez

.868 Richards

 

Pick on Richards or Perez, if you need a punching bag.

[Bellhorn04]

He was taken out of the rotation before the regular season ended. I’m very well aware he pitched game 161, and what he did. I like Houck, but all I said was it would be risky to count on him as one of your starters next year. He was inconsistent as a starter this year (stats anybody), and hasn’t thrown that many innings in a year, which is the same as Whitlock.

 

Houck as a starter in 2021:

 

3.68 ERA

1.13 WHIP

4.87 K/BB

.627 OPSA

 

All good.

[moonslav59]

Who is bad mouthing Houck?? You had had him penciled in the bullpen next year, and you said adding both Houck, and Whitlock into the rotation next year would be like adding 1 pitcher, and not 2, and 150 innings, and all I said was it would be risky counting on him to be a full time starter next year, so like I asked who is bad mouthing Houck?

 

You are bad mouthing him.

 

I want him as our closer, next year.

 

I'm not sure he would be better as a SP'er, but he'd be better than Perez, Richards and Pivetta (maybe ERod, too). Wanting him as a closer is not bad mouthing him.

 

If you can't see who is bad mouthing him, look in a mirror.

 

Is this what you call "good mouthing?"

 

...He was inconsistent as a starter this year... (implying that's why he was removed from the rotation)

[Bellhorn04]

You are bad mouthing him.

 

I want him as our closer, next year.

 

I'm not sure he would be better as a SP'er, but he'd be better than Perez, Richards and Pivetta (maybe ERod, too). Wanting him as a closer is not bad mouthing him.

 

If you can't see who is bad mouthing him, look in a mirror.

 

I wouldn't say Old Red is seriously bad mouthing him by calling him inconsistent. Maybe just undervaluing his performance as a starter.

[moonslav59]

Houck as a starter in 2021:

 

3.68 ERA

1.13 WHIP

4.87 K/BB

.627 OPSA

 

All good.

 

 

Not just good, but team leading in every starter category, except longevity.

 

[moonslav59]

I wouldn't say Old Red is seriously bad mouthing him by calling him inconsistent. Maybe just undervaluing his performance as a starter.

 

I said bad-mouthing not "seriously bad mothing," and it goes beyond just the "inconsistent" comment.

 

He doesn't even trust him in a relief role, next year. It's not just about starting. He's implying he was removed as a SP'er because he wasn't good enough and because he was babied.

 

Of course, there are doubts about any pitcher, next year, but this is who he singles out.

[notin]

Houck as a starter in 2021:

 

3.68 ERA

1.13 WHIP

4.87 K/BB

.627 OPSA

 

All good.

 

The real downside is the 69 innings and that he has a drastic dropoff after 4-5 IP.

 

If the Sox put Houck in the bullpen next year, along with Whitlock, that is absolutely not a problem. Teams don't count on starters for the heavy IP the way they used to anyway and the bullpen is actually getting to be more and more important. It's no longer primarily a place where ineffective starters get banished to.

 

The real downside here is the only starters the Sox know will be back are Eovaldi and Pivetta. So it is very possible that one or both of Houck and Whitlock move to the rotation simply because it seems like is easier to rebuild a bullpen than it is a rotation...

[Nick]

So it is very possible that one or both of Houck and Whitlock move to the rotation simply because it seems like is easier to rebuild a bullpen than it is a rotation...

 

bingo....

 

This is an organization that will look inward first....not just go out and spend money like a drunken sailor...We got Richards and Perez last year for about $15M. Not sure why everyone thinks Houck and Whitlock can't do better than those two. Whitlock was going to be a starter at some point. That was the plan no?

 

Moon bitches about lack of starter development but he's the first to count the two out? Come on Moon.

[moonslav59]

The real downside is the 69 innings and that he has a drastic dropoff after 4-5 IP.

 

If the Sox put Houck in the bullpen next year, along with Whitlock, that is absolutely not a problem. Teams don't count on starters for the heavy IP the way they used to anyway and the bullpen is actually getting to be more and more important. It's no longer primarily a place where ineffective starters get banished to.

 

The real downside here is the only starters the Sox know will be back are Eovaldi and Pivetta. So it is very possible that one or both of Houck and Whitlock move to the rotation simply because it seems like is easier to rebuild a bullpen than it is a rotation...

 

Hence the winter need for rotation help.

 

With just about all starters being yanked after the second time through a line-up having tow long men like Houck and Whitlock is an ideal situation.

 

I know starters cost more than RP'er but I think there is a better risk to reward chance with signing solid starters over RP'ers.

[sk7326]

In theory, a new tax system with a lower threshold that is less punitive and less of a deterrent to spending, but rakes in more tax money, would be better for just about everyone.

 

Heck, the players might agree to a salary cap ... as long as it locked in revenue share for the players. Right now - the players are getting all the downsides of "life with a salary cap" and none of the positives. The players should really be fighting for much, much, much larger minimum salaries. (since all of the future adjustments, including arbitration - build from there)

 

I also like the idea that any minor leaguer called up should get the big league minimum salary for a month - regardless of how long he is actually on the big club.

[sk7326]

Not just good, but team leading in every starter category, except longevity.

 

 

Houck won't see the third trip to the order until the team is confident he can do damage on his glove side of the strike zone. But he has been rock solid in his time here.

[moonslav59]

So it is very possible that one or both of Houck and Whitlock move to the rotation simply because it seems like is easier to rebuild a bullpen than it is a rotation...

 

bingo....

 

This is an organization that will look inward first....not just go out and spend money like a drunken sailor...We got Richards and Perez last year for about $15M. Not sure why everyone thinks Houck and Whitlock can't do better than those two. Whitlock was going to be a starter at some point. That was the plan no?

 

Moon bitches about lack of starter development but he's the first to count the two out? Come on Moon.

 

Nick, I never counted them out.

 

I think Houck would be a very good closer, and we have an opening there.

 

I have said Whitlock projects better as a SP'er and I offered two scenarios: one with Houck and Whitlock in the pen and one with Whitlock as a starter. Why are you misrepresenting my position?

 

If it were up to me, and I had $40M to spend, I'd spend it on SP'ing- either $30M on someone like Scherzer + $10M on a #4 starter type, and begin the season with Houck and Whitlock in the pen, but in no way am I locked into that idea. I might try to spend $20M + $20M on 2 solid SP'ers. We might end up with $25M on a SP'er, $10M on a 4th starter and $5M on a RP'er. Who knows?

 

I cn certainly see the value of starting Houck and Whitlock, next year, but then we have a mess of pen openings, including closer, and signing RP'ers is so hit or miss, I'm not liking that idea.

 

Remember, Bloom signed Richards, Perez, Andriese and Sawamura with mid-ranged deals. Would you say he did well, there? Do you want him doing that again, but with just RP'ers?

[sk7326]

I saw that the qualifying offer amount this year is going to be $18.6M. Personally, I absolutely offer Rodriguez the Qualifying Offer. If you could do 3 years for $50M or less, I'd take it. But that number I think is totally reasonable if Rodriguez just wants to take the QO and prove it in 2022.

[moonslav59]

Houck won't see the third trip to the order until the team is confident he can do damage on his glove side of the strike zone. But he has been rock solid in his time here.

 

They aren't even letting Big Nate see the third timers.

[moonslav59]

I saw that the qualifying offer amount this year is going to be $18.6M. Personally, I absolutely offer Rodriguez the Qualifying Offer. If you could do 3 years for $50M or less, I'd take it. But that number I think is totally reasonable if Rodriguez just wants to take the QO and prove it in 2022.

 

The one year risk is a big plus for the Sox and allows ERod a chance to reset his value. Win-win.

 

If he says no, we get a comp pick and have his $18.6M to spend on another pitcher.

[sk7326]

They aren't even letting Big Nate see the third timers.

 

In the regular season they have - they have had very quick hook with Houck even during the slog. Cora is ruthless in the playoffs - but starters giving innings just helps get through the 162.

[notin]

Hence the winter need for rotation help.

 

With just about all starters being yanked after the second time through a line-up having tow long men like Houck and Whitlock is an ideal situation.

 

I know starters cost more than RP'er but I think there is a better risk to reward chance with signing solid starters over RP'ers.

 

The starting options via free agency strike me as less than tantalizing. Scherzer is obviously the king, but is 37. There are a few other good ones that I have opinions on both ways like Stroman and Gausman, but how many years should the Sox commit to for either of these guys?

 

The reliever market, on the other hand, at the very least will require fewer years of commitment.

 

The trade market is probably one of the more likely options. But who will be the sox trade bait to get a good starter or reliever? I think Jarren Duran is probably high on the list, simply because it's very possible there is no real role for him in Boston even if Schwarber does not come back. If the Sox keep Kike in CF, then Duran does become expendable. And that he makes no money means he is not priced out of any team's budget.

 

When it comes to adding a starter, the first place the Sox need to look is Oakland, who is going to have a boatload of arbitration cases and will probably look to move a few. Their arbitration-eligible players include Frankie Montas, Sean Manaea, and Chris Bassitt just from the rotation. Also, they will have to deal with closer Lou Trivino, 3B Matt Chapman, 1B Matt Olson, RF Ramon Laureano, and Util Chad Pinder. No way they even try to sign them all. There is a reason they went all in on Starling Marte at the deadline; they knew this team was breaking up.

 

That Marte is leaving and Laureano is on the block does potentially mean that Jarren Duran should certainly be a player who garners some interest...

[moonslav59]

The starting options via free agency strike me as less than tantalizing. Scherzer is obviously the king, but is 37. There are a few other good ones that I have opinions on both ways like Stroman and Gausman, but how many years should the Sox commit to for either of these guys?

 

The reliever market, on the other hand, at the very least will require fewer years of commitment.

 

The trade market is probably one of the more likely options. But who will be the sox trade bait to get a good starter or reliever? I think Jarren Duran is probably high on the list, simply because it's very possible there is no real role for him in Boston even if Schwarber does not come back. If the Sox keep Kike in CF, then Duran does become expendable. And that he makes no money means he is not priced out of any team's budget.

 

When it comes to adding a starter, the first place the Sox need to look is Oakland, who is going to have a boatload of arbitration cases and will probably look to move a few. Their arbitration-eligible players include Frankie Montas, Sean Manaea, and Chris Bassitt just from the rotation. Also, they will have to deal with closer Lou Trivino, 3B Matt Chapman, 1B Matt Olson, RF Ramon Laureano, and Util Chad Pinder. No way they even try to sign them all. There is a reason they went all in on Starling Marte at the deadline; they knew this team was breaking up.

 

That Marte is leaving and Laureano is on the block does potentially mean that Jarren Duran should certainly be a player who garners some interest...

 

I think a trade for a starter makes a lot of sense. Lower salary.

 

I do think Scherzer is on the table, because he is 37. The term length shorter.

 

I hate spending on RP'ers- too hit and miss.

 

I also hate signing 4/5 starters like Perez and Richards, last winter, but I could make a long list of failed tries. Only a very few work out.

 

IMO, we only have 3-4 holes to fill not 10, like last winter, so we can afford to go large for at least one slot. I'd rather that be a starter than a closer (Iglesias?)

 

Trading for one and signing another or bringing back ERod would set us up nicely.

[sk7326]

The starting options via free agency strike me as less than tantalizing. Scherzer is obviously the king, but is 37. There are a few other good ones that I have opinions on both ways like Stroman and Gausman, but how many years should the Sox commit to for either of these guys?

 

The reliever market, on the other hand, at the very least will require fewer years of commitment.

 

The trade market is probably one of the more likely options. But who will be the sox trade bait to get a good starter or reliever? I think Jarren Duran is probably high on the list, simply because it's very possible there is no real role for him in Boston even if Schwarber does not come back. If the Sox keep Kike in CF, then Duran does become expendable. And that he makes no money means he is not priced out of any team's budget.

 

When it comes to adding a starter, the first place the Sox need to look is Oakland, who is going to have a boatload of arbitration cases and will probably look to move a few. Their arbitration-eligible players include Frankie Montas, Sean Manaea, and Chris Bassitt just from the rotation. Also, they will have to deal with closer Lou Trivino, 3B Matt Chapman, 1B Matt Olson, RF Ramon Laureano, and Util Chad Pinder. No way they even try to sign them all. There is a reason they went all in on Starling Marte at the deadline; they knew this team was breaking up.

 

That Marte is leaving and Laureano is on the block does potentially mean that Jarren Duran should certainly be a player who garners some interest...

 

I think if the Red Sox bring in starters from outside the organiztion, you're looking at guys with short deals with some upside - or some "done that before". Like Jon Lester is obviously close to washed - but is still durable and capable of some low level innings eating.

 

Dylan Bundy is still young enough to feel like the team could turn him around. Zack Greinke would be great on a 1-2 year deal - but I imagine he's staying in Houston on that sort of arrangement.

 

The Sox are signing relievers regardless. The one thing we know about Bloom - coming from the Tampa Bay tree - is that he's going to bring in a bout 75,000 live arms and just go through them until a bunch of them click. There is no way that Bloom is betting on Whitlock wearing the Superman cape again.

Edited October 13, 2021 by sk7326

[mvp 78]

Houck won't see the third trip to the order until the team is confident he can do damage on his glove side of the strike zone. But he has been rock solid in his time here.

 

If he was on the Rays, they'd just keep him in the rotation and pull him early.

[mvp 78]

They aren't even letting Big Nate see the third timers.

 

I wouldn't either at this point in the season.

[moonslav59]

I think if the Red Sox bring in starters from outside the organiztion, you're looking at guys with short deals with some upside - or some "done that before". Like Jon Lester is obviously close to washed - but is still durable and capable of some low level innings eating.

 

Dylan Bundy is still young enough to feel like the team could turn him around. Zack Greinke would be great on a 1-2 year deal - but I imagine he's staying in Houston on that sort of arrangement.

 

The Sox are signing relievers regardless. The one thing we know about Bloom - coming from the Tampa Bay tree - is that he's going to bring in a bout 75,000 live arms and just go through them until a bunch of them click. There is no way that Bloom is betting on Whitlock wearing the Superman cape again.

 

I agree, Bloom will bring in 75,000 Robles, Davis, Workman, Rios, Feliz, Gonsalves and Brice types, again, this year, but you know, we just barely made the playoffs and losing one or two games as we trial-and-error it for months might nnot work out so well in 2022.

 

We used 33 pitchers in relief, this year and 37 overall. That's a stunning number, especially when you figure 29 of them got 3 or more IP.

 

21 pitchers got 12+ IP.

 

17 got 24+

 

One important priority of Bloom, last summer and winter was to build 40 man roster and beyond depth. While he must still look to improve and build up that area, it is no longer such a high priority, IMO. We will also be adding 5-6 Rule 5 protectess to the 40 man, so that will lessen his need to add scrubs in hopes a few stick.

 

We should have about the same winter spending budget, but only 3-4 slots to fill instead of 10:

 

CF/2B Kike

RF Renfroe

SP Richards

SP Perez

P Whitlock

RP Ottavino

RP Sawamura

RP Andriese

UT Marwin

UT Santana

 

 

Edited October 13, 2021 by moonslav59

[mvp 78]

The starting options via free agency strike me as less than tantalizing. Scherzer is obviously the king, but is 37. There are a few other good ones that I have opinions on both ways like Stroman and Gausman, but how many years should the Sox commit to for either of these guys?

 

The reliever market, on the other hand, at the very least will require fewer years of commitment.

 

The trade market is probably one of the more likely options. But who will be the sox trade bait to get a good starter or reliever? I think Jarren Duran is probably high on the list, simply because it's very possible there is no real role for him in Boston even if Schwarber does not come back. If the Sox keep Kike in CF, then Duran does become expendable. And that he makes no money means he is not priced out of any team's budget.

 

When it comes to adding a starter, the first place the Sox need to look is Oakland, who is going to have a boatload of arbitration cases and will probably look to move a few. Their arbitration-eligible players include Frankie Montas, Sean Manaea, and Chris Bassitt just from the rotation. Also, they will have to deal with closer Lou Trivino, 3B Matt Chapman, 1B Matt Olson, RF Ramon Laureano, and Util Chad Pinder. No way they even try to sign them all. There is a reason they went all in on Starling Marte at the deadline; they knew this team was breaking up.

 

That Marte is leaving and Laureano is on the block does potentially mean that Jarren Duran should certainly be a player who garners some interest...

 

Per BTV:

 

Manea/Bassitt for Duran/Jimenez/Mata

[Maxbialystock]

I think a trade for a starter makes a lot of sense. Lower salary.

 

I do think Scherzer is on the table, because he is 37. The term length shorter.

 

I hate spending on RP'ers- too hit and miss.

 

I also hate signing 4/5 starters like Perez and Richards, last winter, but I could make a long list of failed tries. Only a very few work out.

 

IMO, we only have 3-4 holes to fill not 10, like last winter, so we can afford to go large for at least one slot. I'd rather that be a starter than a closer (Iglesias?)

 

Trading for one and signing another or bringing back ERod would set us up nicely.

 

Figuring this out is beyond my capability. That said, what Bloom did to "fix" the rotation last winter actually worked for the first half of this season with the Sox leading the AL East and even the AL. Then there's the Rays who move starters in and out like relievers and seem to get away with it because of their bullpen.

 

In this postseason the Sox rotation, which most of us think is in disarray, has looked better than the Rays rotation. I just looked at the Astros rotation, which, based on the ALDS, has one good starter, McCullers.

 

So right now I'm thinking Bloom should do a reverse-Dombrowski and avoid great starters and instead stay with Sale (who scares me), Eovaldi (ace), Pivetta, Houck, and even ERod, depending on his price and perceived value.

 

I agree with you on the relievers and right now think no closer is worth the money his agent will ask for.

Edited October 13, 2021 by Maxbialystock

[Old Red]

I said bad-mouthing not "seriously bad mothing," and it goes beyond just the "inconsistent" comment.

 

He doesn't even trust him in a relief role, next year. It's not just about starting. He's implying he was removed as a SP'er because he wasn't good enough and because he was babied.

 

Of course, there are doubts about any pitcher, next year, but this is who he singles out.

 

If saying someone is inconsistent, and that is called bad mouthing then Houston we have a problem. And where does it say that I don’t trust him in the bullpen next year?Where did I say that? And where does it say I said Houck was babied? You have lied about me before when you said I hated Cora, which was 100% not true just because I mentioned his cheating scandal. You over analyzing things, and because of people like you there are people like me to strike a balance, and keep an even keel. You said earlier that Cora has made less mistake than any other manager in baseball. How do you know that? Over analyzing, and having a crystal ball too. Must be nice.

[notin]

Per BTV:

 

Manea/Bassitt for Duran/Jimenez/Mata

 

Interesting.

 

Not so sure Mata, who is probably out until June or so, and even then hassome minor league work to do, is tht much of a trade entivement. But Oakland might be interested.

 

The one caveat is that if Oakland is able to offer arbitration with any players I listed, I would say Pinder is the most likely, followed by Bassitt...

[moonslav59]

If saying someone is inconsistent, and that is called bad mouthing then Houston we have a problem. And where does it say that I don’t trust him in the bullpen next year?Where did I say that? And where does it say I said Houck was babied? You have lied about me before when you said I hated Cora, which was 100% not true just because I mentioned his cheating scandal. You over analyzing things, and because of people like you there are people like me to strike a balance, and keep an even keel. You said earlier that Cora has made less mistake than any other manager in baseball. How do you know that? Over analyzing, and having a crystal ball too. Must be nice.

 

I apologized for saying all your Cora bashing meant the same as hating, but you can't let go. I can keep apologizing, but it won't help.

 

If having the best stats of any Sox starter is "inconsistent", then yes, that is bashing, IMO. Not overanalyzing, not exaggerating and not lying. It's an opinion, and I stand by my opinion- to "balance you out"- LOL.

 

You did criticize me for slotting Houck as next year's closer. That's another example of you not thinking Houck is as good as most do.

 

Since "mistakes" by managers in MLB are highly subjective, a statement like the one I made about Cora is an opinion not a fact. It's not overanalyzing, so you can drop that nonsense.

 

"People like you" -nice one.

Edited October 13, 2021 by moonslav59

[moonslav59]

Figuring this out is beyond my capability. That said, what Bloom did to "fix" the rotation last winter actually worked for the first half of this season with the Sox leading the AL East and even the AL. Then there's the Rays who move starters in and out like relievers and seem to get away with it because of their bullpen.

 

In this postseason the Sox rotation, which most of us think is in disarray, has looked better than the Rays rotation. I just looked at the Astros rotation, which, based on the ALDS, has one good starter, McCullers.

 

So right now I'm thinking Bloom should do a reverse-Dombrowski and avoid great starters and instead stay with Sale (who scares me), Eovaldi (ace), Pivetta, Houck, and even ERod, depending on his price and perceived value.

 

I agree with you on the relievers and right now think no closer is worth the money his agent will ask for.

 

We won a ring every time due to solid and at least 2 deep starting pitching. DD brought us Sale, Price and Porcello.

 

Just because we squeaked into the playoffs by one game, advanced in a wild card game and out-pitched the Rays in 3 of 4 games, does not make SP'ers less valuable.

 

We need at least one solid SP'er (a #2 at worst), and I'm counting on Eovaldi and Sale to be solid, next year. One or both may not be.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We won a ring every time due to solid and at least 2 deep starting pitching. DD brought us Sale, Price and Porcello.

 

Just because we squeaked into the playoffs by one game, advanced in a wild card game and out-pitched the Rays in 3 of 4 games, does not make SP'ers less valuable.

 

We need at least one solid SP'er (a #2 at worst), and I'm counting on Eovaldi and Sale to be solid, next year. One or both may not be.

 

My thinking is changing to reflect the changing approach towards starting pitchers. I've heard and read quotes indicating that the way the pitching staff won the WC and ALDS was planned by Cora and the Sox by limiting starters' innings... all season, since Spring Training.

 

Now, how does that reconstruct history of 2019's infamous "restgate"?

[Bellhorn04]

My thinking is changing to reflect the changing approach towards starting pitchers. I've heard and read quotes indicating that the way the pitching staff won the WC and ALDS was planned by Cora and the Sox by limiting starters' innings... all season, since Spring Training.

 

Now, how does that reconstruct history of 2019's infamous "restgate"?

 

How does that reconstruct?

 

a) Fans who like Cora have never blamed him much for that.

Fans who don't like Cora will still blame him just as much for that.