2022 Starting Rotation Thread

[JDavis76]

Nope, the truth is that Eovaldi seems very healthy.

 

Nope, the truth is having basically 2 seasons of being healthy does not equate to being an iron man.

[Bellhorn04]

Nope, the truth is having basically 2 seasons of being healthy does not equate to being an iron man.

 

Who said it did?

[Old Red]

He should have told them "get more runs." What a mistake.

 

If the team wasn’t so listless they might have scored more runs, so telling them to score more wouldn’t have done much good.

[Kimmi]

We have to control the things we can control, in this case string together the wins!

 

Everybody picks each other up and we rely on pitching, defense and timely hitting.

 

We have to take care of our own business, otherwise, it doesn't matter what any other team does. One game at a time.

[Kimmi]

You have to look at the specifics of the game, too.

 

Sox ahead 2-0. Wacha is left in to face Ward and Trout for the third time each. Trout gets on and Ohtani is up with a chance to tie the game. Cora goes to the lefty.

 

People don't like it. Heck, I don't even like it. I would have left Wacha in the game. But the numbers don't lie. Even when a pitcher is dealing, the 3rd time through the order penalty kicks in, and things can and do turn for the worse in a hurry. I'm just glad that the pen did not blow that game.

[Kimmi]

I think Eck shares my sentiment and I'm good with that...'babying" or whatever you want to call it. I call it 'babying'.

 

It's interesting to follow Cora's strategy. There are games he manages very tight but at other times he'll put the worse hitting lineup possible without a care in the world.

 

His record speaks for itself so I'm good with that.

 

One gripe that I have about Cora is that he will often rest multiple starting players in the same game. I understand the need to rest players, but why not rest one starter at a time?

 

Even with that, Cora gets the benefit of the doubt. I trust him.

[moonslav59]

What Cora does works way more than not, so it's hard to complain, too much, for me anyway, but I wonder why, when the numbers don't seem to support it, he's more than willing to keep Eovaldi in games through the third time through a line-up, but not guys like Wacha and Hill, who both had better 2021 and career numbers in 3rd PAs. So far, this year, Big Nate has done fine through 3 PAs, but I wonder if his size and just looking stronger than Wacha plays into the choices a little bit.

 

Again, I'm not complaining about Cora's choices, I just wonder about the thought processes and what other information he sees that supports his choices.

[Old Red]

What Cora does works way more than not, so it's hard to complain, too much, for me anyway, but I wonder why, when the numbers don't seem to support it, he's more than willing to keep Eovaldi in games through the third time through a line-up, but not guys like Wacha and Hill, who both had better 2021 and career numbers in 3rd PAs. So far, this year, Big Nate has done fine through 3 PAs, but I wonder if his size and just looking stronger than Wacha plays into the choices a little bit.

 

Again, I'm not complaining about Cora's choices, I just wonder about the thought processes and what other information he sees that supports his choices.

 

You always complain about Cora’s choices, but you just don’t think you do, or would admit it. Remember your famous I don’t agree with Cora, but I don’t think he’s wrong statement. You were doing it then too.

[Bellhorn04]

moon agonizes over stuff much more than the average fan. I just go with the belief that Cora and Bloom have pored over the data and in general make good decisions, much better than I would, so I have no need to second-guess them on in-game strategy.

[Larry Cook]

Except for the meatball he served up, Whitlock was outstanding today! He had his stuff working today! Fun to watch.

[moonslav59]

moon agonizes over stuff much more than the average fan. I just go with the belief that Cora and Bloom have pored over the data and in general make good decisions, much better than I would, so I have no need to second-guess them on in-game strategy.

 

I don't see everything as black and white. I love my wife, but she does things that bug me. It doesn't mean I want a divorce.

 

It's not a contradiction to disagree with someone on a few things but still like the overall job they are doing by a long shot. These guys make dozens of decisions, so not agreeing on a few does not mean I write them off.

 

Also, disagreeing with someone does not always mean I think the other person is necessarily wrong. For one, I know I don't know all the stuff Cora nd Bloom know on every decision. I recognize my opinion may be wrong, and often times, the end results work out fine, despite my suggested alternative choice. There is a lot of gray area in between choices. For example, and this isn't meant to cause a political debate, I'm pro-choice, but I'd never call someone who is anti-abortion wrong. They believe abortion is murder, so I can see their point and can't say they are wrong to think murder is wrong.

 

I don't think I agonize over much. Hell, I think I'm one of the more level-headed posters on this sight. These game threads seem to show way more agonizing than I ever feel or display. More people agonized over me simply scratching my head than my actual head-scratching was, in terms of agonizing.

 

I guess I just see stating one's opinion as not always being meant as "second-guessing." I verbalize what I'm thinking at the time, and have been persuaded several times that my initial thought was or may have been short-sighted or flat out wrong. That doesn't bother me, as much as it seems to bother others. I've been wrong a lot, but when you state as many opinions as I do, being wrong a lot does not mean I've been wrong more than right.

 

I loved the Bloom hiring and felt he's the type of guy we needed for a long rebuild. The rebuild has gone better and more quickly than I ever imagined it could, under the system designed to penalize big spenders and winners. I'm happy to admit I was wrong about the speed it took to rebuild, and I have credited DD for a lot of it- someone I was critical of for dealing away so much of the farm, but also someone I was overall happy with as a GM. Again, I don't see that as being wishy-washy or contradicting. He brought us 3 nice first place finishes and the greatest Sox team, ever. To me, that outweighs the bad.

 

I loved the Cora hiring and still think he's a great manager, who gets the most out of what he's given, and knows his s*** when it comes to in game choices and taking the long view on a 162 game season. I don't pretend I know more or better, but I do have opinions that differ from his. If people view my comments as being overly critical or excessive second-guessing, so be it. Maybe I am a bit hypercritical, at times, but I'm thrilled we have Cora and Bloom as our leaders.

 

In the total scope of this board, I don't see myself as being more of a second-guesser than the average poster- it's just that I post more than most. As a percentage, most of my posts are supportive of Cora, Bloom and the team. I'm usually the optimist and I think I have more patience with slumping players and teams than many here do.

 

[moonslav59]

Except for the meatball he served up, Whitlock was outstanding today! He had his stuff working today! Fun to watch.

 

He's the best pitcher we have.

[Old Red]

I don't see everything as black and white. I love my wife, but she does things that bug me. It doesn't mean I want a divorce.

 

It's not a contradiction to disagree with someone on a few things but still like the overall job they are doing by a long shot. These guys make dozens of decisions, so not agreeing on a few does not mean I write them off.

 

Also, disagreeing with someone does not always mean I think the other person is necessarily wrong. For one, I know I don't know all the stuff Cora nd Bloom know on every decision. I recognize my opinion may be wrong, and often times, the end results work out fine, despite my suggested alternative choice. There is a lot of gray area in between choices. For example, and this isn't meant to cause a political debate, I'm pro-choice, but I'd never call someone who is anti-abortion wrong. They believe abortion is murder, so I can see their point and can't say they are wrong to think murder is wrong.

 

I don't think I agonize over much. Hell, I think I'm one of the more level-headed posters on this sight. These game threads seem to show way more agonizing than I ever feel or display. More people agonized over me simply scratching my head than my actual head-scratching was, in terms of agonizing.

 

I guess I just see stating one's opinion as not always being meant as "second-guessing." I verbalize what I'm thinking at the time, and have been persuaded several times that my initial thought was or may have been short-sighted or flat out wrong. That doesn't bother me, as much as it seems to bother others. I've been wrong a lot, but when you state as many opinions as I do, being wrong a lot does not mean I've been wrong more than right.

 

I loved the Bloom hiring and felt he's the type of guy we needed for a long rebuild. The rebuild has gone better and more quickly than I ever imagined it could, under the system designed to penalize big spenders and winners. I'm happy to admit I was wrong about the speed it took to rebuild, and I have credited DD for a lot of it- someone I was critical of for dealing away so much of the farm, but also someone I was overall happy with as a GM. Again, I don't see that as being wishy-washy or contradicting. He brought us 3 nice first place finishes and the greatest Sox team, ever. To me, that outweighs the bad.

 

I loved the Cora hiring and still think he's a great manager, who gets the most out of what he's given, and knows his s*** when it comes to in game choices and taking the long view on a 162 game season. I don't pretend I know more or better, but I do have opinions that differ from his. If people view my comments as being overly critical or excessive second-guessing, so be it. Maybe I am a bit hypercritical, at times, but I'm thrilled we have Cora and Bloom as our leaders.

 

In the total scope of this board, I don't see myself as being more of a second-guesser than the average poster- it's just that I post more than most. As a percentage, most of my posts are supportive of Cora, Bloom and the team. I'm usually the optimist and I think I have more patience with slumping players and teams than many here do.

 

 

Pat your self on the back. Most level headed? Are you serious?

[cp176]

I understand that the numbers don't lie and that the information is useful to have but every now and then don't you just have to go with the gut and manage? I did not see the game last night but Whitlock threw 78 pitches over the course of 5 innings and then was pulled. Unless there was something going on that I'm not aware of or possibly another plan for him, I don't get it. I would think that the time has come to see what you can get out of your starter if they are in the middle of a good one with a low pitch count. What are the numbers saying about our current success rate once the game is turned over to this bullpen? If winning is important, I think that I wouldn't be quite so quick to pull a successful starter.

[mvp 78]

I understand that the numbers don't lie and that the information is useful to have but every now and then don't you just have to go with the gut and manage? I did not see the game last night but Whitlock threw 78 pitches over the course of 5 innings and then was pulled. Unless there was something going on that I'm not aware of or possibly another plan for him, I don't get it. I would think that the time has come to see what you can get out of your starter if they are in the middle of a good one with a low pitch count. What are the numbers saying about our current success rate once the game is turned over to this bullpen? If winning is important, I think that I wouldn't be quite so quick to pull a successful starter.

 

It was the longest outing of his MLB career. I'm not sure you can just expect him to pitch late into the game just yet.

[cp176]

It was the longest outing of his MLB career. I'm not sure you can just expect him to pitch late into the game just yet.

 

I don't disagree with you about trying to get too much too soon out of him but 78 doesn't seem to be excessive. I'm thinking at least start the 6th. In general, I see a trend here with Cora.

[harmony]

Is Connor Seabold ready?

 

https://www.milb.com/player/connor-seabold-657756

 

https://www.milb.com/gameday/red-sox-vs-mud-hens/2022/05/04/664473#game_state=final,lock_state=final,game_tab=box,game=664473

[Bellhorn04]

Is Connor Seabold ready?

 

https://www.milb.com/player/connor-seabold-657756

 

https://www.milb.com/gameday/red-sox-vs-mud-hens/2022/05/04/664473#game_state=final,lock_state=final,game_tab=box,game=664473

 

I think we'll find out very soon.

[Nick]

Lets be realistic.

 

For Whitlock to peggy back Hill as an example will almost make him a starter. I guess if the game is out of hand, either way, Whitlck would be held out for another time.

But if comes in to peggy back for someone else, then he probably won't be available when Hill starts next time.

 

What I'm saying is that it's a stupid plan, plain and simple.

 

Now if he's the closer and does go two innings, can he pitch on consecutive nights? Probably not.

 

That means he should mostly be a one inning guy. The ninth inning guy.

 

If Whitlock comes in a high leverage situation say in 7th inning, we may still lose because someone else is closing.

 

I need for all of you to lay out a pitching plan for Whitlock.

 

Don't simply say he can pitch 3-4 times a week. Tell me when, how many innings, which innings, etc.

 

All of you are making generalized comments....Give me a f***ing plan.

 

My plan is to make him an ace and start every fifth day. Not much thinking involved.

 

What if he's the next Pedro Martinez?

 

I want to BUILD A PLAYOFF CONTENDER. IDENTIFY THE CORE PLAYERS AND THEIR POSITIONS.

 

1 3B....Devers

2 SP.....Whitlock

3 SP.....Eovaldi

4 SP....Sale, next time he's hurt, he's our next David Price

5 2B/SS..Story

6 SS...Xander....not sure if he can be extended

7 DH...JD...not sure if there are any upgrade guys at this position

8 SP/Closer....Houck..

 

I'm not sold on Verdugo as an example. There are other, worse problems with this team so Verdugo gets a pass at this time.

I'm not sold on Vaz as long term catching solution. This position should be upgraded.

I'm not sole on Arroyo as a full time starter. He's a utility guy.....

Edited May 5, 2022 by Nick

[Old Red]

What’s so hard to understand? He pitches the 9th with an occasional 4 out save, which I said before, and I even gave examples like 4 out save last Sat, and last night in the ninth in the same situation. 3-4 times a week if the save situation is there.

[Bellhorn04]

I agree with Nick that Whitlock should be starting. You always want your best pitcher starting. That's pretty old school, isn't it?

[Old Red]

I agree with Nick that Whitlock should be starting. You always want your best pitcher starting. That's pretty old school, isn't it?

 

Not when you don’t have a closer, and you’ve lost games because of it. How has it worked with Whitlock starting? I’ll ask again do you think the Red Sox would have more wins if Whitlock had been closing since opening day. If you say no then we’ll just have to agree to disagree, but 10-15 to me says this way is not working.

[moonslav59]

I think Houck should be the closer, but he has to be available to pitch.

 

Vax or trade him to Baltimore. Tell him that, and who cares if he goes public.

 

Call up Seabold, if we need to use Whitlock as the closer or long man.

[mvp 78]

I don't disagree with you about trying to get too much too soon out of him but 78 doesn't seem to be excessive. I'm thinking at least start the 6th. In general, I see a trend here with Cora.

 

I think he sees it as warmups to start the game, plus the 78 pitches plus the warm up pitches during the game.

[Nick]

Not when you don’t have a closer, and you’ve lost games because of it. How has it worked with Whitlock starting? I’ll ask again do you think the Red Sox would have more wins if Whitlock had been closing since opening day. If you say no then we’ll just have to agree to disagree, but 10-15 to me says this way is not working.

 

You are selective with your stats.....what happened against the Yankees? Whitlock couldn't hold a one run lead and despite me protesting to my TV, Cora pulls him out.

 

Point is because of that outing, Whitlock still had to rest up for his next outing......

 

But I respect your opinion about Whitlock being a closer.....My final point is to quit jerking him around. It will backfire. Count on it.

[cp176]

I think he sees it as warmups to start the game, plus the 78 pitches plus the warm up pitches during the game.

 

hmmm -

[Old Red]

You are selective with your stats.....what happened against the Yankees? Whitlock couldn't hold a one run lead and despite me protesting to my TV, Cora pulls him out.

 

Point is because of that outing, Whitlock still had to rest up for his next outing.......

 

But I respect your opinion about Whitlock being a closer.....My final point is to quit jerking him around. It will backfire. Count on it.

 

I’m with you about not jerking Whitlock around. I don’t think I’ve been selective in my stats. Whitlock couldn’t hold a 1 run lead opening day, but he was pitching in long relief, which is almost like a starter, and Cora said he would have gone 4 innings that day if he had held the lead. It’s just my opinion to make him the closer, and I’ve heard opinions on both sides. I would be on the starting side too if the Red Sox had a good reliable closer, but they don’t, and it has cost the Red Sox games.

[notin]

I agree with Nick that Whitlock should be starting. You always want your best pitcher starting. That's pretty old school, isn't it?

 

 

It is.

 

But if you’re playing “18 hitters max,” you’re emphasizing a bullpen game.

 

10 years ago, teams expected 900-1000 IP from starters and 500-600 from the bullpen. But now it seems to be getting 700-800 from each. The notion of a pitcher being “banished to the bullpen” is long gone because it’s harder to hide ineffectivity there than it used to be…

[moonslav59]

I agree with Nick that Whitlock should be starting. You always want your best pitcher starting. That's pretty old school, isn't it?

 

Well, all your best pitchers who can go 4-6+ innings.

 

I'm not sure Koji should have been a starter, but I get your point and agree.

 

Whitlock should start.

 

Houck should be the closer.

[notin]

I’d be fine with Whitlock starting and Houck closing. But this idiotic strategy of using Houck only on days Hill pitches and (potentially) pulling Hill before a runner even gets into scoring position seems like a waste of Houck and Hill.

 

Sure Hill is 42. But he isn’t dead. He has a long injury history, but again, he’s 42. Let him pitch. You don’t need to make sure you don’t prematurely end his career by overuse at this point..