May 30th Orioles & Red Sox

[dgalehouse]

I understand the debate over Whitlock's role. As a starter , he may only pitch five innings every five or so days in games that could be blowouts. As the closer , he would be available to close out the win in several tight games. Which would be more valuable at this time? However , the Sox obviously see Whitlock as a key part of the rotation going forward. And they do have Houck as an alternative to close. Hard to understand why they haven't done that. By the way , I still feel that Sale would would be a great choice to close. I think that could give the whole bullpen a major boost.

[redsoxrules]

And it's the day after Memorial Day and the Sox are 10.5 back. Season is basically over. I think hurting the starting rotation by pulling Whitlock is a bigger issue. I think just making Houck the closer fixes that issue.

 

Season over? There's more playoff teams added this year. It's far from over.

[mvp 78]

Season over? There's more playoff teams added this year. It's far from over.

 

Matt Albers has sung.

[Maxbialystock]

I understand the debate over Whitlock's role. As a starter , he may only pitch five innings every five or so days in games that could be blowouts. As the closer , he would be available to close out the win in several tight games. Which would be more valuable at this time? However , the Sox obviously see Whitlock as a key part of the rotation going forward. And they do have Houck as an alternative to close. Hard to understand why they haven't done that. By the way , I still feel that Sale would would be a great choice to close. I think that could give the whole bullpen a major boost.

 

I have a question for you and all the other proponents of "the Sox absolutely must have a quality closer because that's how you win."

 

And here it is. Last year the Sox were way more successful in the postseason than any of us expected.

 

How many saves did the Sox have in the six postseason games they won against the Yankees, Rays, and Astros last year? Answer: no saves.

 

In the ALCS vs. the Astros, game 1, Robles got a blown save, but it was way back in the 6th inning. In the other three losses to the Astros, the Sox scored a total of 3 runs and never had a chance to blow a save. In their one loss to the Rays, they were shut out, 5-0.

Edited May 31, 2022 by Maxbialystock

[Maxbialystock]

Matt Albers has sung.

 

I don't know about singing, but I think I can hear some humming.

[Old Red]

1. The Sox are 23-26 with 12 blown saves. The Rays are 28-20 with 10 blown saves, the Padres 30-18 with 9 blown saves, the Jays 27-20 with 10 blown saves, the Angels 27-22 with 9 blown saves, the Mets 33-17 with 9 blown saves, and the White Sox 23-23 with 9 blown saves. The Reds and Nationals each have just 4 blown saves, but are 16-31 and 18-32. Tentative conclusion: saves are nice, but they are not the be-all and and end-all of winning games.

 

2. In 1+ seasons and 56 appearances, Whitlock has 3 saves and 4 blown saves, which suggest that closing ain't his thing. However, he has been a long reliever and has 14 Holds.

 

3. Whitlock has starter potential and can eat more innings as a starter than as a reliever--unless, as he was last year, he is a long reliever.

 

4. While I will agree good/great closers are special and can make a difference, I must also point out that the current rules of MLB in fact allow opposing teams to score runs in any freaking inning. The job of a team's pitching staff is to prevent runs from being scored in as many innings as possible. So my thought is that effective long relievers, which the Sox have used to good effect since Cora got here, are not wasted because they can keep the Sox in games long before it's closing time. It does no good to save Whitlock for a save situation that doesn't come because the Sox are behind or way ahead by the 9th inning.

 

Short sample size for Whitlock being the closer, and how many of those blown saves were in the 9th inning closer role like opening day this year when Whitlock was brought in to get a 4 inning save. If the Red Sox had just cut the blown saves in half this year what would their record be? It has nothing to do in my opinion if Whitlock has starter potential, or not, but what the biggest need for him this year., so if you say it doesn’t do any good to save Whitlock for a save situation, but it does to start him when the team so far has a 3-4 record in his starts this year then I guess you don’t care about the Sox win-loss record This Year.

[Old Red]

I have a question for you and all the other proponents of "the Sox absolutely must have a quality closer because that's how you win."

 

And here it is. Last year the Sox were way more successful in the postseason than any of us expected.

 

How many saves did the Sox have in the six postseason games they won against the Yankees, Rays, and Astros last year? Answer: no saves.

 

In the ALCS vs. the Astros, game 1, Robles got a blown save, but it was way back in the 6th inning. In the other three losses to the Astros, the Sox scored a total of 3 runs and never had a chance to blow a save. In their one loss to the Rays, they were shut out, 5-0.

 

Last year is long gone, and has nothing to do with this year, and if it did the Sox wouldn’t have a sub 500 record. 2018 had not carry over to 2019, and 2019 had no carry over to 2020, and 2020 certainly had no carry over to 2021. Once again what would the Red Sox record be a present time if only half the saves hadn’t been blown? Playoffs! Did someone say playoffs?

[moonslav59]

Short sample size for Whitlock being the closer, and how many of those blown saves were in the 9th inning closer role like opening day this year when Whitlock was brought in to get a 4 inning save. If the Red Sox had just cut the blown saves in half this year what would their record be? It has nothing to do in my opinion if Whitlock has starter potential, or not, but what the biggest need for him this year., so if you say it doesn’t do any good to save Whitlock for a save situation, but it does to start him when the team so far has a 3-4 record in his starts this year then I guess you don’t care about the Sox win-loss record This Year.

 

Unless we agree with you, we don't care about- our win-loss record?

 

Maybe go 0-7 in Whitlock starts, had we started someone else.

 

Maybe Whitlock would not cut our blown saves in half, had we used him as just a one inning relief guy only, something he's never done in his career.

 

It's easy to look at the 3-4 record when Whiltock starts and in hindsight, say it didn't work, but he really had just 2 bad starts.

 

If you want to look at his record in hindsight, why not look at how he has seemed to do much better in 2+ innings than just 1-1.2 IP games. Wouldn't that maybe show using him as atradional 1 IP pitcher would not be a good idea?

 

All this being said, I wish Cora had tried Houck or Whitlock as "the closer," but we'll never know if it would have worked better, of if the guy used to take their place would have lost more games for us than the switch might have gained.

 

[dgalehouse]

I have a question for you and all the other proponents of "the Sox absolutely must have a quality closer because that's how you win."

 

And here it is. Last year the Sox were way more successful in the postseason than any of us expected.

 

How many saves did the Sox have in the six postseason games they won against the Yankees, Rays, and Astros last year? Answer: no saves.

 

In the ALCS vs. the Astros, game 1, Robles got a blown save, but it was way back in the 6th inning. In the other three losses to the Astros, the Sox scored a total of 3 runs and never had a chance to blow a save. In their one loss to the Rays, they were shut out, 5-0.

 

That is a classic case of cherry picking an example to disprove an obvious truth. You are getting pretty good at it.

[Old Red]

Unless we agree with you, we don't care about- our win-loss record?

 

Maybe go 0-7 in Whitlock starts, had we started someone else.

 

Maybe Whitlock would not cut our blown saves in half, had we used him as just a one inning relief guy only, something he's never done in his career.

 

It's easy to look at the 3-4 record when Whiltock starts and in hindsight, say it didn't work, but he really had just 2 bad starts.

 

If you want to look at his record in hindsight, why not look at how he has seemed to do much better in 2+ innings than just 1-1.2 IP games. Wouldn't that maybe show using him as atradional 1 IP pitcher would not be a good idea?

 

All this being said, I wish Cora had tried Houck or Whitlock as "the closer," but we'll never know if it would have worked better, of if the guy used to take their place would have lost more games for us than the switch might have gained.

 

 

No Moon I don’t want you, or anyone on here to agree with me on anything. I get plenty of that on all the other venues I visit. I keep on saying my opinion has nothing to do with if I think he can be a good starter, or not, but 100% on where I think he would be the most valuable right now this year. I keep on asking what the Red Sox record would be if only half the saves hadn’t been blown. I don’t even know if Whitlock could be an effective closer, or not, but the fact that he hasn’t been tried on a team leading the league in blown saves, and having a sub 500 record just doesn’t sound like smart baseball judgement to me. If Sale hadn’t gotten hurt, and Houck had been vaxed I don’t believe Whitlock would be starting now. I know most on here want Whitlock to start, because that is Cora’s, and Bloom’s master plan, but not having a reliable closer is not working. Cora, and Bloom do not walk on water, and in some cases steps in puddles.

[moonslav59]

No Moon I don’t want you, or anyone on here to agree with me on anything. I get plenty of that on all the other venues I visit. I keep on saying my opinion has nothing to do with if I think he can be a good starter, or not, but 100% on where I think he would be the most valuable right now this year. I keep on asking what the Red Sox record would be if only half the saves hadn’t been blown. I don’t even know if Whitlock could be an effective closer, or not, but the fact that he hasn’t been tried on a team leading the league in blown saves, and having a sub 500 record just doesn’t sound like smart baseball judgement to me. If Sale hadn’t gotten hurt, and Houck had been vaxed I don’t believe Whitlock would be starting now. I know most on here want Whitlock to start, because that is Cora’s, and Bloom’s master plan, but not having a reliable closer is not working. Cora, and Bloom do not walk on water, and in some cases steps in puddles.

 

Your comment about us not caring about winning was a bit out of line, IMO.

 

 

I get your point. We'd have many more wins, had we been able to cut our blown saves in half, without adding losses elsewhere by removing a good pitcher from his previous role/slot.

 

Once we started the season with the roster we had, there was little hope of adding a closer from outside the system. It had to come from the minors or from a pitcher already being used in another role.

 

I think the vast majority of us feel Cora should have tried Houck or Whitlock or even both at closer, at some point, this season, so far. It may or may not have worked. Even if it worked, we may have lost as much from the role they vacated as we gained in the role they switched to.

 

It obvious, the plan did has not worked, so far. The Sale injury, the continued troubles from Barnes, Robles and others counted on to do better than they have all hurt the plan. I never liked the Diekman signing from the start. I guess Strahm and the Scheiber call up moved cancel out some of the bad choices, but pen choices are always pretty much a shot in the dark. That's not meant to defend Cora or Bloom, but many felt the exact same way about the pen, last year, and it seemed like it worked way more often than it didn't, despite Ottavino being pretty much a flop, and Andriese barely making it half way through the season.

 

Maybe, something happens, this year, like last year. Maybe a deadline move or two helps as much or more than Robles & Davis did, last year. Maybe the return of Sale and or Paxton allows us to move a starter into a key relief role, and they'll do even better than Richards did in relief, last year. It's hard to know or predict.

 

I'm not sure anyone felt good about our pen going into the season, but with a limited winter spending budget, Bloom chose to spend in other areas. I scratched my head at some of his moves and signings, and I realize no GM is perfect, but I still like the overall direction Bloom is taking us, and I still think Cora gets the most out of most of our players, most of the time. I disagree, often enough, but I still am glad we have both. No, they don't walk on water, and do occasionally step in muddy puddles.

[Old Red]

Your comment about us not caring about winning was a bit out of line, IMO.

 

 

I get your point. We'd have many more wins, had we been able to cut our blown saves in half, without adding losses elsewhere by removing a good pitcher from his previous role/slot.

 

Once we started the season with the roster we had, there was little hope of adding a closer from outside the system. It had to come from the minors or from a pitcher already being used in another role.

 

I think the vast majority of us feel Cora should have tried Houck or Whitlock or even both at closer, at some point, this season, so far. It may or may not have worked. Even if it worked, we may have lost as much from the role they vacated as we gained in the role they switched to.

 

It obvious, the plan did has not worked, so far. The Sale injury, the continued troubles from Barnes, Robles and others counted on to do better than they have all hurt the plan. I never liked the Diekman signing from the start. I guess Strahm and the Scheiber call up moved cancel out some of the bad choices, but pen choices are always pretty much a shot in the dark. That's not meant to defend Cora or Bloom, but many felt the exact same way about the pen, last year, and it seemed like it worked way more often than it didn't, despite Ottavino being pretty much a flop, and Andriese barely making it half way through the season.

 

Maybe, something happens, this year, like last year. Maybe a deadline move or two helps as much or more than Robles & Davis did, last year. Maybe the return of Sale and or Paxton allows us to move a starter into a key relief role, and they'll do even better than Richards did in relief, last year. It's hard to know or predict.

 

I'm not sure anyone felt good about our pen going into the season, but with a limited winter spending budget, Bloom chose to spend in other areas. I scratched my head at some of his moves and signings, and I realize no GM is perfect, but I still like the overall direction Bloom is taking us, and I still think Cora gets the most out of most of our players, most of the time. I disagree, often enough, but I still am glad we have both. No, they don't walk on water, and do occasionally step in muddy puddles.

 

Watching the Baseball Show after the Sox game last night and the #1 topic was the lack of a Red Sox bullpen. Watching a show I’m on now, and they are talking about the same thing the BP, and how Bloom just keeps recycling the same pitchers to Worcester, and back like the Bra Man, The Sour Man, and Valdez some after only a day, or so. Bullpen, Bullpen, Bullpen is the biggest problem for a losing record, and it’s being talked about everywhere. It was just brought up 8 losses after being tied, or having a lead in the 8th inning, and still yet at least Houck hasn’t been given a shot at closing.

[Bellhorn04]

The only reason I can see for not making Houck closer is the future-oriented part. They probably have a certain number of innings they want him to pitch this year, and if they make him closer he won't reach that number.

[moonslav59]

Watching the Baseball Show after the Sox game last night and the #1 topic was the lack of a Red Sox bullpen. Watching a show I’m on now, and they are talking about the same thing the BP, and how Bloom just keeps recycling the same pitchers to Worcester, and back like the Bra Man, The Sour Man, and Valdez some after only a day, or so. Bullpen, Bullpen, Bullpen is the biggest problem for a losing record, and it’s being talked about everywhere. It was just brought up 8 losses after being tied, or having a lead in the 8th inning, and still yet at least Houck hasn’t been given a shot at closing.

 

He made his bed.

 

I doubt anyone is willing to trade us a solid RP'er, right now.

 

We can keep saying it over and over, but at this point, there is likely no outside-the-system solution.

 

It's Houck or Whitlock or a prayer that someone else improves and takes over the role. It's not promising, but it is what it is.

 

Perhaps the success of last year hurt us in more ways than this.

[moonslav59]

The only reason I can see for not making Houck closer is the future-oriented part. They probably have a certain number of innings they want him to pitch this year, and if they make him closer he won't reach that number.

 

We don't really have a solid 8th inning guy either, unless you count Schreiber, so he could be a 1-2 inning closer and maybe reach that IP goal.

[Bellhorn04]

He made his bed.

 

I doubt anyone is willing to trade us a solid RP'er, right now.

 

We can keep saying it over and over, but at this point, there is likely no outside-the-system solution.

 

It's Houck or Whitlock or a prayer that someone else improves and takes over the role. It's not promising, but it is what it is.

 

Perhaps the success of last year hurt us in more ways than this.

 

The success of last year didn't hurt us.

[moonslav59]

The success of last year didn't hurt us.

 

Maybe in the sense that Bloom and Cora felt they could repeat last year's success with an unheralded pen.

 

The other sense was about the idea that winning may have prevented the fans from more readily accepting a more extreme rebuild, including this coming trade deadline and winter.

 

Had we really sucked, last year, and truly wanted to start winning this year, we'd have likely not tried to repeat the same pen plan, again. Just my opinion.

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe in the sense that Bloom and Cora felt they could repeat last year's success with an unheralded pen.

 

The other sense was about the idea that winning may have prevented the fans from more readily accepting a more extreme rebuild, including this coming trade deadline and winter.

 

Had we really sucked, last year, and truly wanted to start winning this year, we'd have likely not tried to repeat the same pen plan, again. Just my opinion.

 

If we really sucked last year maybe they would have signed some expensive free agents that didn't work out.

 

You can come up with all kinds of alternate realities.

[Old Red]

If we really sucked last year maybe they would have signed some expensive free agents that didn't work out.

 

You can come up with all kinds of alternate realities.

 

Lots of the big money FA signed this past offseason have not worked out to well so far this season.

[Old Red]

Maybe in the sense that Bloom and Cora felt they could repeat last year's success with an unheralded pen.

 

The other sense was about the idea that winning may have prevented the fans from more readily accepting a more extreme rebuild, including this coming trade deadline and winter.

 

Had we really sucked, last year, and truly wanted to start winning this year, we'd have likely not tried to repeat the same pen plan, again. Just my opinion.

 

Agree with most, but I don’t think most fans in Red Sox Nation will except any kind of extreme rebuild unless it produces immediate dividend’s especially if it includes losing fan favorite like Bogey, and Raffy after losing Mookie. Attendance is already down, and NESN ratings aren’t high either.

[moonslav59]

If we really sucked last year maybe they would have signed some expensive free agents that didn't work out.

 

You can come up with all kinds of alternate realities.

 

Very true, but I really think they thought they could repeat what they did with the pen, again, this year. (There is still time for miracles.)

 

I'm not saying we'd have struck gold with a big closer signing, but the plan has not worked like last year.

Edited May 31, 2022 by moonslav59

[moonslav59]

Agree with most, but I don’t think most fans in Red Sox Nation will except any kind of extreme rebuild unless it produces immediate dividend’s especially if it includes losing fan favorite like Bogey, and Raffy after losing Mookie. Attendance is already down, and NESN ratings aren’t high either.

 

The rebuild before 2013 was highly criticized by the media and fans. Somehow, it worked, but we did suck in 3 of the years surrounding that ring season.

 

I agree, I don't think fans will ever except a quick, total scrap and clean slate restart.

 

It seems like some fans are not liking the slower approach either.

 

Impatience is something Sox fans have no shortage of.

 

I prefer the long approach. I expected a very bad stretch, and it wasn't as long as I thought it might be.

 

I'm not for totally hoarding prospects, and I think some sort of balanced approach can be established, but only after the farm reaches a certain level, and the budget is flexible enough to supplement the influx of young talent.

 

I feel like we are on the right path, so an disappointing season or two along the way does not upset me as much as it appears to upset others.

 

This team is not "close enough" to make several drastic moves to make us a top contender. Someday, we will get to that point, and I think henry will know when that is, and open the wallet wider to make a strong push for our 5th ring, without dismantling the future.

[Old Red]

The rebuild before 2013 was highly criticized by the media and fans. Somehow, it worked, but we did suck in 3 of the years surrounding that ring season.

 

I agree, I don't think fans will ever except a quick, total scrap and clean slate restart.

 

It seems like some fans are not liking the slower approach either.

 

Impatience is something Sox fans have no shortage of.

 

I prefer the long approach. I expected a very bad stretch, and it wasn't as long as I thought it might be.

 

I'm not for totally hoarding prospects, and I think some sort of balanced approach can be established, but only after the farm reaches a certain level, and the budget is flexible enough to supplement the influx of young talent.

 

I feel like we are on the right path, so an disappointing season or two along the way does not upset me as much as it appears to upset others.

 

This team is not "close enough" to make several drastic moves to make us a top contender. Someday, we will get to that point, and I think henry will know when that is, and open the wallet wider to make a strong push for our 5th ring, without dismantling the future.

 

The biggest thing to me is that accepting a disappointing season, or two you’re also wasting away the talent of players like Bogey, Raffy, and JD, and that to me is not good baseball strategy, and listening to other different programs on radio, and TV I know lots of fans agree.

[moonslav59]

The biggest thing to me is that accepting a disappointing season, or two you’re also wasting away the talent of players like Bogey, Raffy, and JD, and that to me is not good baseball strategy, and listening to other different programs on radio, and TV I know lots of fans agree.

 

I get it. I'm not trying to act like I'm better than other fans.

 

I hate seeing those stars "wasted," too, but they did get a ring and 3 straight division wins, so not all was wasted. Devers may be around for more.

[moonslav59]

The biggest thing to me is that accepting a disappointing season, or two you’re also wasting away the talent of players like Bogey, Raffy, and JD, and that to me is not good baseball strategy, and listening to other different programs on radio, and TV I know lots of fans agree.

 

You are very good at criticizing the plans of Bloom and some of posters suggested ideas, but you rarely give your own plan or solutions.

 

How can we win now AND set up the future for continued winning? (Please don't say Henry should spend more.)

[Old Red]

You are very good at criticizing the plans of Bloom and some of posters suggested ideas, but you rarely give your own plan or solutions.

 

How can we win now AND set up the future for continued winning? (Please don't say Henry should spend more.)

 

Moon you need to get out more often, and see what Red Sox fans are saying outside of this forum. It’s just like on here I’m in the minority of the opinion that Whitlock should be the closer, but outside of here it’s more the other way. Outside of here especially Bloom is nowhere near as popular, or his big plan of prospects prospects is as well received, so to waste major talents like I have mentioned to plan on guys who may, or may not be good ball players in Boston just doesn’t make sense to me. Bogey’s, Raffy’s, JD, and Mookies don’t grow on trees, or come along everyday.

[Old Red]

Mookie hasn’t been replaced, and it will be hard to replace Bogey, JD, and Raffy if it comes to that too. Do you think the majority of Red Sox fans are going to accept that? Edited June 1, 2022 by Old Red

[Bellhorn04]

Moon you need to get out more often, and see what Red Sox fans are saying outside of this forum. It’s just like on here I’m in the minority of the opinion that Whitlock should be the closer, but outside of here it’s more the other way. Outside of here especially Bloom is nowhere near as popular, or his big plan of prospects prospects is as well received, so to waste major talents like I have mentioned to plan on guys who may, or may not be good ball players in Boston just doesn’t make sense to me. Bogey’s, Raffy’s, JD, and Mookies don’t grow on trees, or come along everyday.

 

But then you say you wouldn't want Mookie's contract, he didn't want to be here, and he wasn't that good last year. Sometimes you sound like you're on both sides of the argument.

[moonslav59]

Moon you need to get out more often, and see what Red Sox fans are saying outside of this forum. It’s just like on here I’m in the minority of the opinion that Whitlock should be the closer, but outside of here it’s more the other way. Outside of here especially Bloom is nowhere near as popular, or his big plan of prospects prospects is as well received, so to waste major talents like I have mentioned to plan on guys who may, or may not be good ball players in Boston just doesn’t make sense to me. Bogey’s, Raffy’s, JD, and Mookies don’t grow on trees, or come along everyday.

 

This has nothing to do with the question at hand.

 

I know many Sox fans are not Bloom supporters. I still talk to a lot of my friends in Maine, and go there for 4-7 weeks every summer.

 

So, since you won't answer my question, can I assume you'd trade the farm away like DD for a 1-2 year window. Remember, it's Henry who decides how much we spend, but you act like it's Bloom.

 

Bloom got us Story, an all around player to replace Fred Flintstone. He got us Wacha and Hill to replace Richards and Perez. He got us Strahm and Diekman to replace Ottavino and Andriese, and we are worse than last year. You and all the talk show callers can bash away at Bloom all you want, it doesn't change my opinion, and my idea of what a good long term plan for sustained winning looks like.

 

Just because DD's trades all look good in hindsight, doesn't mean the guys we trade, now will suck like most of DD's ended up doing.

 

There was a time talk show callers were wanting to trade the stars we have now, when they were "valueless" prospects.

 

There is a time to go for broke, and a time not to. Blame who you wish. I'm not blaming Bloom, Cora or last of all Henry, but your beef should be with Henry more than Bloom

[moonslav59]

But then you say you wouldn't want Mookie's contract, he didn't want to be here, and he wasn't that good last year. Sometimes you sound like you're on both sides of the argument.

 

He's against everything and for nothing but criticizing everything and anything.