Red Sox Starting Rotation 2023

[mvp 78]

If he gets to 20 GS'd, he will likely have earned it.

 

he might not get past 11 or 12 starts.

 

9 GS, 1 QS. He's been s***.

[moonslav59]

Mark Polishuk reports...

 

Garrett Whitlock threw 79 pitches in a Triple-A rehab start today, and Red Sox manager Alex Cora told reporters (including The Athletic’s Jen McCaffrey) that Whitlock will be activated from the 15-day IL in time to start Saturday’s game against the Diamondbacks. Whitlock’s return won’t push anyone out of the rotation for now, as Cora said that Boston will use six starters over their six games this week, sandwiched around Thursday’s off-day. The team will re-assess the pitching situation after this full turn through a six-man rotation, Cora said, taking advantage of another off-day on May 29 to reset the staff as necessary.

 

The probable starters? (With so many days off, I'm not sure a 6 man rotation is the best idea, but the extra rest should help, and maybe one more start might answer some questions- or raise more.) We have a doubleheader June 3rd but have the 5th off.

 

Mon Houck @ LAA v Barria

Tue Bello @ LAA v Canning

Wed Paxton @ LAA v T Anderson

Thu OFF

Fri Sale @ AZ

Sat Whitlock @ AZ

Sun Kluber (last start as a Sox?) @ AZ

Mon OFF

Tue Houck (+2 days rest) v CIN

Wed Bello (+2) v CIN

Thur Paxton (+2) v CIN

Fri Sale (+2) v TBR

Sat(1) Whitlock (+2) v TBR

Sat(2) Kluber? (+0?) vs TBR

Sun Houck (+0) v TBR

Mon OFF June 5th

 

We then play 9 straight games- most likely with a 5 man rotation (@CLE & NYY and at home COL)

day off, 10 straight, day off on June 26th

 

[moonslav59]

9 GS, 1 QS. He's been s***.

 

Nobody is arguing otherwise.

 

BTW....

 

GS/QS

8/1 Houck

8/1 Pivetta

6/1 Bello

3/0 Whitlock

2/0 Craw

 

They've all been s***, other than Sale, Paxton and Bello.

11/6 Sale & Paxton

17/3 Houck + Whitlock + Bello

9/1 Kluber

11/1 Pivetta + Crawford

 

 

 

[Maxbialystock]

Just to keep in mind.

 

Kluber will earn $500K when he starts 20 games, another $750K at 25 games started and finally another $750K at 30 games started.

 

Chicken feed. His guaranteed base is $10M--great for him; not good for the Sox. Meanwhile the Padres are paying Wacha $26M for four years. Wacha got off to a slow start, ERA 6.75 in April, but in 4 starts in May his ERA is 0.36 with 25 IP. His season to date ERA is 3.56 with 5 quality starts.

 

It sure looks like Kluber was a bad move, but, while Wacha right now looks terrific, we don't know how he will do over 4 years--which of course was the big stumbling block in keeping him.

[mvp 78]

Chicken feed. His guaranteed base is $10M--great for him; not good for the Sox. Meanwhile the Padres are paying Wacha $26M for four years. Wacha got off to a slow start, ERA 6.75 in April, but in 4 starts in May his ERA is 0.36 with 25 IP. His season to date ERA is 3.56 with 5 quality starts.

 

It sure looks like Kluber was a bad move, but, while Wacha right now looks terrific, we don't know how he will do over 4 years--which of course was the big stumbling block in keeping him.

 

Yeah, not sure I'd want Wacha for 4 years.

 

Sox did have an agreement in place for Eovaldi that was apparently more than what he got from the Rangers, but Nate originally said no. When he finally came back to them, the budget had already been spent. Why not just go over the CBT for him if you really wanted him?

[moonslav59]

Yeah, not sure I'd want Wacha for 4 years.

 

 

The thing is, Wacha at $26M/3 ($8.7M x 3) is probably better than Kluber at $10M x 1.

 

Wacha at $13M x 2 might be better.

 

He got $26M/4.

 

Sure, it's a risk, but it's spread out over 4 years.

[Maxbialystock]

Yeah, not sure I'd want Wacha for 4 years.

 

Sox did have an agreement in place for Eovaldi that was apparently more than what he got from the Rangers, but Nate originally said no. When he finally came back to them, the budget had already been spent. Why not just go over the CBT for him if you really wanted him?

 

You could be right about Nate although right now I'm pretty happy with the resurgence of Sale and Paxton, plus Bello showing signs of sticking. And, as I keep saying (so much everyone is sick of it), when Whitlock returns (soon), Cora will have 5 options for the final two starter slots: Houck and Kluber (the two their now); Crawford and Whitlock, who looked pretty good; and Pivetta, who just moved to the bullpen and is not happy about it.

 

Plus a pretty decent bullpen--aided by whoever among the 5 possibles doesn't start.

[notin]

The thing is, Wacha at $26M/3 ($8.7M x 3) is probably better than Kluber at $10M x 1.

 

Wacha at $13M x 2 might be better.

 

He got $26M/4.

 

Sure, it's a risk, but it's spread out over 4 years.

 

What if Wacha’s next two years look like Kluber this year? Is he still a better deal?

[Maxbialystock]

The thing is, Wacha at $26M/3 ($8.7M x 3) is probably better than Kluber at $10M x 1.

 

Wacha at $13M x 2 might be better.

 

He got $26M/4.

 

Sure, it's a risk, but it's spread out over 4 years.

 

Strangely enough, Wacha's career year was last year with the Sox: 23 starts, 124 innings, ERA 3.32, WAR 3.3. 2019 with the Cards, 2020 with Mets, and 2021 with the Rays weren't so hot.

[Maxbialystock]

What if Wacha’s next two years look like Kluber this year? Is he still a better deal?

 

I'm fine with anyone saying Bloom blew it on Kluber--even though he has been decent in 4 of 8 starts so far this year.

 

But to me the bigger picture has to include Sale, Paxton, and Bello--three pretty good starters. Plus five other possible starters--Houck, Kluber, Crawford, Whitlock, and Pivetta--who can start or help in the bullpen, which already looks pretty decent (even though Schreiber is out and the notorious Bleier is still in).

[Nick]

I think the Sox has 2 option years on Whitlock hoping he'd be a starter.

 

I believe that was the plan all along.

 

They are not ready to give up on that idea.

[moonslav59]

I think the Sox has 2 option years on Whitlock hoping he'd be a starter.

 

I believe that was the plan all along.

 

They are not ready to give up on that idea.

 

I just hope that if he fails as a SP'er, he can go back to his pen role and be as big a success as he was before.

[mvp 78]

The thing is, Wacha at $26M/3 ($8.7M x 3) is probably better than Kluber at $10M x 1.

 

Wacha at $13M x 2 might be better.

 

He got $26M/4.

 

Sure, it's a risk, but it's spread out over 4 years.

 

Why save money this year to take away from the next 3?

[mvp 78]

You could be right about Nate although right now I'm pretty happy with the resurgence of Sale and Paxton, plus Bello showing signs of sticking. And, as I keep saying (so much everyone is sick of it), when Whitlock returns (soon), Cora will have 5 options for the final two starter slots: Houck and Kluber (the two their now); Crawford and Whitlock, who looked pretty good; and Pivetta, who just moved to the bullpen and is not happy about it.

 

Plus a pretty decent bullpen--aided by whoever among the 5 possibles doesn't start.

 

My thoughts would have been Nate instead of Kluber IMO.

[moonslav59]

Why save money this year to take away from the next 3?

 

Why assume Wacha will suck years 2, 3 and 4?

[mvp 78]

I'm fine with anyone saying Bloom blew it on Kluber--even though he has been decent in 4 of 8 starts so far this year.

 

But to me the bigger picture has to include Sale, Paxton, and Bello--three pretty good starters. Plus five other possible starters--Houck, Kluber, Crawford, Whitlock, and Pivetta--who can start or help in the bullpen, which already looks pretty decent (even though Schreiber is out and the notorious Bleier is still in).

 

Per GSv2, he's only had 2 games with a game score above 50 out of 9 starts. Not ideal.

 

Sale: 5

Paxton: 2 (2 starts)

Houck: 3

Crawford: 1 (2 starts)

Whitlock: 1 (3 starts)

Bello: 3 (6 starts)

Pivetta: 2

[mvp 78]

Why assume Wacha will suck years 2, 3 and 4?

 

Why assume he'll continue to be good? He wasn't very good prior to 2022. He wasn't very good in April.

[moonslav59]

Why assume he'll continue to be good? He wasn't very good prior to 2022. He wasn't very good in April.

 

I'm not.

 

He'd basically cost $16M more than Kluber for those 3 "extra years." That's $5.3M x 3.

 

The risk on Nat is about as big and costs $8M more than Wacha- overall.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'm not.

 

He'd basically cost $16M more than Kluber for those 3 "extra years." That's $5.3M x 3.

 

The risk on Nat is about as big and costs $8M more than Wacha- overall.

 

Here's another thought (sure to get me hammered, so ball peen away): many researchers have posted data warning about the "overcost" of starting pitching, and the inevitability of most contracts turning into budget burdens -- and certainly in recent Red Sox history. Dice K, Beckett, Lackey, Price, Sale -- all have helped win rings in Boston, but all have also had periods of ineffectiveness or unavailability that have hurt their overall value.

 

But if winning one World Series makes it worth seasons of suckitude, then what fan really, truly cares if an Eovaldi or Wacha or the next (first?) semi-longterm signee eventually breaks down?

 

What does avoiding those guys who we know are good now really give us in the Bloom Era? When it comes to the starting rotation, all we've ever known about Chaim Bloom's coveted payroll flexibility is that he's just going to keep on moving on, every winter, to the next $10-million-dollar Richards or Perez or Kluber...

[Maxbialystock]

Here's another thought (sure to get me hammered, so ball peen away): many researchers have posted data warning about the "overcost" of starting pitching, and the inevitability of most contracts turning into budget burdens -- and certainly in recent Red Sox history. Dice K, Beckett, Lackey, Price, Sale -- all have helped win rings in Boston, but all have also had periods of ineffectiveness or unavailability that have hurt their overall value.

 

But if winning one World Series makes it worth seasons of suckitude, then what fan really, truly cares if an Eovaldi or Wacha or the next (first?) semi-longterm signee eventually breaks down?

 

What does avoiding those guys who we know are good now really give us in the Bloom Era? When it comes to the starting rotation, all we've ever known about Chaim Bloom's coveted payroll flexibility is that he's just going to keep on moving on, every winter, to the next $10-million-dollar Richards or Perez or Kluber...

 

That's not unfair. But I just glanced at a recent article in SI that argues that starting pitching is becoming less important to pitching staffs.

[Randy Red Sox]

Chaim Bloom is the king of the one yer deals. Not good for jersey sales lol

[Randy Red Sox]

I don't think Bloom had any interest in bringing Wacha back at all. He is a metrics guy and Wacha didn't fit. Bloom will just keep bring in Kluber, Richards, Wacha types on 1 yr deals and hope he hits on a few. Edited May 22, 2023 by Randy Red Sox

[moonslav59]

Here's another thought (sure to get me hammered, so ball peen away): many researchers have posted data warning about the "overcost" of starting pitching, and the inevitability of most contracts turning into budget burdens -- and certainly in recent Red Sox history. Dice K, Beckett, Lackey, Price, Sale -- all have helped win rings in Boston, but all have also had periods of ineffectiveness or unavailability that have hurt their overall value.

 

But if winning one World Series makes it worth seasons of suckitude, then what fan really, truly cares if an Eovaldi or Wacha or the next (first?) semi-longterm signee eventually breaks down?

 

What does avoiding those guys who we know are good now really give us in the Bloom Era? When it comes to the starting rotation, all we've ever known about Chaim Bloom's coveted payroll flexibility is that he's just going to keep on moving on, every winter, to the next $10-million-dollar Richards or Perez or Kluber...

 

I'm hopeful we break the $10M or less SP'er trend, next winter. (Maybe we make a deal at the deadline- then extend.)

[moonslav59]

I don't think Bloom had any interest in bringing Wacha back at all. He is a metrics guy and Wacha didn't fit. Bloom will just keep bring in Kluber, Richards, Wacha types on 1 yr deals and hope he hits on a few.

 

Wacha must have fit some metric, when they signed him.

 

It's time to throw out the metrics that led to Richards and Kluber.

 

On the others...

Wacha was a bargain.

Hill was worth $5M

Perez was signed a year or two, too early.

 

Bloom has not totally missed on cheap SP'er signings, but I think he needs to step up the budget spent on the rotation, of invest some trade capital to acquire a big boost.

[notin]

I don't think Bloom had any interest in bringing Wacha back at all. He is a metrics guy and Wacha didn't fit. Bloom will just keep bring in Kluber, Richards, Wacha types on 1 yr deals and hope he hits on a few.

 

I don’t think he wanted Wacha back on a multiyear deal. And I doubt Wacha wanted a one year contract again.

 

Very likely that simple…

[notin]

Why assume Wacha will suck years 2, 3 and 4?

 

There’s a few reasons.

 

Like that he wasn’t very good in 2019. And that he wasn’t very good in 2020. And he wasn’t very good in 2021. And in 2022, he looked good because of his ERA, but his FIP suggested he wasn’t quite that good.

 

One year? Probably worth a gamble. A multiyear deal and it wouldn’t be long before we were clamoring for his DFA…

[d-money]

White sox might be shopping giolito. Any interest?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

There’s a few reasons.

 

Like that he wasn’t very good in 2019. And that he wasn’t very good in 2020. And he wasn’t very good in 2021. And in 2022, he looked good because of his ERA, but his FIP suggested he wasn’t quite that good.

 

One year? Probably worth a gamble. A multiyear deal and it wouldn’t be long before we were clamoring for his DFA…

 

Ha. I want to say that's usually for guys who were never good in Boston, but there always seems to be a Braiser.

 

Just checked team stats = seven pitchers this year with negative WAR: Bleier, Braiser, Kluber, Littell, Ort, Pivetta, Whitlock.

 

A guy like Bleier has never been a good Red Sox (seriously, first pitch 3-run jack to Carpenter?), but it's understandable we cut Whitlock a little more slack...

[moonslav59]

There’s a few reasons.

 

Like that he wasn’t very good in 2019. And that he wasn’t very good in 2020. And he wasn’t very good in 2021. And in 2022, he looked good because of his ERA, but his FIP suggested he wasn’t quite that good.

 

One year? Probably worth a gamble. A multiyear deal and it wouldn’t be long before we were clamoring for his DFA…

 

You think a $5.3M x 3 contract is big risk?

 

You are for DFA'ing about that much in Kluber and Bleier, right now.

[Bellhorn04]

You think a $5.3M x 3 contract is big risk?

 

You are for DFA'ing about that much in Kluber and Bleier, right now.

 

Wacha's contract is one of those fancy ones with a team option and a player option after the first year. The team option is at a much higher price, similar to Paxton's.