5/07 SOX @ Phillies 1:35PM ET

[moonslav59]

Max, I've actually said Houck should be given a chance to up his sample size the 3rd time through, and that I would not have complained, if Cora left him in, until he let a baserunner on by walk or hard hit ball.

 

My argument was you said the choice was "obvious" or something like that, because he was pitching very well up to yank time.

 

I showed how in just about every other game this year, Houck was pitching well or very well until he got to the end of the 2nd time through or the 3rd time, and then the wheels came off. How are we or Cora to know this time would have been different?

 

Houck has great numbers the first time through- by definition, that means he almost always looks good early. He looks to be cruising. He slips a little the second time through, but usually looks steady enough to leave in. He normally implodes on a major scale- time after time.

 

We'll never know, if this time would have been different. At some point, he will need to be given a chance to prove that 60 PA sample size was not who he really is. That game was close, and Cora chose not to let him go any farther.

 

I thought it was the right move, but with such weak 6th inning pitchers to choose from, I'd have been okay leaving him in.

 

I know you can't go totally by numbers, but these are hard to ignore:

 

OPS Against:

.374 1st time is off the charts amazing!

.883 2nd time is frightening

.967 3rd time is DFA material, if his overall numbers.

33 PAs 3rd time through shows Cora is letting him try to overcome this, but with little success. Maybe he yanked him to help him feel he is improving in this area. Here is an interesting fact: Houck has faced more batters the 3rd time, this year, than all his others combined, and it is early May.

 

Career: 63 PAs and .992 OPS Against 3rd time.

 

Other data:

 

.374 Pitch 1-125

.520 26-50

1.050 51-75

 

Career

.448 (1-25)

.646 (26-50)

.851 (51-76)

 

Let me add that Cora has often sent him out to face the 3rd timers. This was not the first time. I think he wants him to get over this hump or "blindspot," but he has a quick hook, and IMO, for good reason. He looked sharp in this game, but he looked sharp or even sharper in other before- only to get shelled in the 4th (.988) or 5th (1.150) innings.

 

It was an understandable choice made. He could have gone the other way, too.

 

[Bellhorn04]

It's Houck's numbers by inning that present the picture most clearly and starkly. Those numbers are probably easier to grasp than "times through the order" for Mr. Average Fan.

[Old Red]

One more time.

 

In the actual game, as opposed to all earlier games in which Houck has pitched for the Sox--

 

1. The Sox reliever, a lefty going against lefty Schwarber, did in fact give up a 2 run dinger. This is indisputable. It is not based on any statistical analyses about the Sox reliever, about Tanner Houck, or about Kyle Schwarber.

 

2. Before Houck was pulled in the 6th inning--and this is also indisputable because it happened--he had already pitched to the first four hitters in the Phillies lineup for the third time in the game. You and mvp78 and moonslav all seem to agree that no one should ever allow Houck to face any batting order three times. And you all continue to ignore the fact that it had just freaking happened.

 

3. On this third time thru the Phillies order, Houck got Bryson Stott, a lefty hitter, to pop up, Trea Turner, a righty hitter who is being paid $300M because he is a very good hitter against both righty and lefty pitchers, to strike out, gave up a single to lefty batter Bryce Harper, and got righty batter Nick Castellanos to ground out to 2b.

 

4. To that let me add something no one else has bothered to mention. Alex Cora agrees with me more than with any of you. Why? Because Alex Cora sent Tanner Houck to pitch the 6th knowing he would fact the 2d, 3d, and 4th hitters in the Phillies lineup for the third freaking time.

 

5. Let me repeat that. Without exception, you and your confreres would never have sent Tanner Houck out to pitch the sixth inning. We know that because of your collective insistence that Tanner Houck cannot be trusted to face a lineup for the third time.

 

6. Much has been made of the fact that the next batter, Kyle Schwarber, eats righty pitchers for lunch--especially worthless bums like Tanner Houck whom you and everyone else have assumed cannot get anyone out when he faces them for the 3d time in a game. Statistically--this season, anyway--Schwaber has hit 4 dingers in 46 at bats vs lefties and 4 dingers in 82 at bats vs righties. So Shwarber was more likely to hit a dinger against Bleier than against Houck.

 

7. So I continue to believe that leaving Tanner Houck in the game because of how well he was pitching while facing the Phillies lineup for the third time was the right move. It is beyond question he was throwing better stuff than Bleier.

 

You make some excellent points, but in my opinion it was time to make the move, and remove Houck. More importantly it was Cora’s opinion that it was time to remove Houck from the game. I guess you two just didn’t connect on this one since you, and Cora agree so often. Like I mentioned before relax, and have a Gansett. Tomorrow’s another day, and another game.

[Maxbialystock]

Here is where your reasoning becomes dubious. Over his career Schwarbs has hit .879 against righties and .682 against lefties. That's a gulf.

 

You are arguing that Cora should have respected the short sample over the long one. What makes you think that's statistically sound? Have you done research on this?

 

Actually, in this discussion, for the most part anyway, I have declared war on stats. My primary point is how Houck was in fact pitching to the top of the Phillies order for the third time right before he was pulled.

 

If I understand the arguments against Houck, he should have been pulled in the bottom of the 5th when leadoff hitter Bryson Stott came to bat for his third time. Instead, Cora left him in to get the third out. No big deal, just one guy--and Houck got Stott to pop up.

 

But when Houck went to the mound for the bottom of the sixth, he was defying everything everyone else has been saying on this thread. He was left in to pitch to the top (2d, 3d, 4th hitters) of the Phillies lineup for the the third time. And he got Trea Turner to K, gave up the single to Harper, and got Castellanos to ground out.

 

In other words, in my opinion Tanner Houck had already put to rest the "Houck can't get anyone out on his third time up" thesis. In fact, I thought he was throwing good stuff.

 

And guess who else thought that? Alex Cora, that's who.

 

But then came Kyle Schwarber, lefty vs. lefty. As I've already pointed out, he was more likely to hit a dinger off a lefty than a righty. But let me add that your "big swing" doesn't apply so much to this season--and we are in this season and not all of the seasons Schwarber has played. This season Schwarber's OPS vs. lefty pitchers is .622 and vs. righties is .753, which is not as big a swing as you claim (I think based on Schwarber lifetime).

 

In addition, and I can't emphasize this too much, Houck, was pitching great in the 6th. Bleier was not. And by that I don't mean that Bleier gave up the dinger, I mean that every reliever who comes into a game with a man on base is kind of an unknown quantity because he has yet to throw his first pitch.

 

So, no, I don't really care that much about the stats when I can see how well Houck was pitching in the sixth.

[Bellhorn04]

In addition, and I can't emphasize this too much, Houck, was pitching great in the 6th. Bleier was not. And by that I don't mean that Bleier gave up the dinger, I mean that every reliever who comes into a game with a man on base is kind of an unknown quantity because he has yet to throw his first pitch.

 

So, no, I don't really care that much about the stats when I can see how well Houck was pitching in the sixth.

 

And yet you dug up those stats on Schwarber this year in the attempt to bolster your argument. You made it your "Point No. 6". Now you're backpedaling on that point.

[Maxbialystock]

Max, I've actually said Houck should be given a chance to up his sample size the 3rd time through, and that I would not have complained, if Cora left him in, until he let a baserunner on by walk or hard hit ball.

 

My argument was you said the choice was "obvious" or something like that, because he was pitching very well up to yank time.

 

I showed how in just about every other game this year, Houck was pitching well or very well until he got to the end of the 2nd time through or the 3rd time, and then the wheels came off. How are we or Cora to know this time would have been different?

 

Houck has great numbers the first time through- by definition, that means he almost always looks good early. He looks to be cruising. He slips a little the second time through, but usually looks steady enough to leave in. He normally implodes on a major scale- time after time.

 

We'll never know, if this time would have been different. At some point, he will need to be given a chance to prove that 60 PA sample size was not who he really is. That game was close, and Cora chose not to let him go any farther.

 

I thought it was the right move, but with such weak 6th inning pitchers to choose from, I'd have been okay leaving him in.

 

I know you can't go totally by numbers, but these are hard to ignore:

 

OPS Against:

.374 1st time is off the charts amazing!

.883 2nd time is frightening

.967 3rd time is DFA material, if his overall numbers.

33 PAs 3rd time through shows Cora is letting him try to overcome this, but with little success. Maybe he yanked him to help him feel he is improving in this area. Here is an interesting fact: Houck has faced more batters the 3rd time, this year, than all his others combined, and it is early May.

 

Career: 63 PAs and .992 OPS Against 3rd time.

 

Other data:

 

.374 Pitch 1-125

.520 26-50

1.050 51-75

 

Career

.448 (1-25)

.646 (26-50)

.851 (51-76)

 

Let me add that Cora has often sent him out to face the 3rd timers. This was not the first time. I think he wants him to get over this hump or "blindspot," but he has a quick hook, and IMO, for good reason. He looked sharp in this game, but he looked sharp or even sharper in other before- only to get shelled in the 4th (.988) or 5th (1.150) innings.

 

It was an understandable choice made. He could have gone the other way, too.

 

 

So the other night I was watching the movie The Right Stuff and was again amazed at how everyone seemed terrified of "breaking the sound barrier," which mean flying faster than the speed of sound (350M/sec, give or take). When Chuck Yeager finally did it, it was no big deal--well, except that he set a new world record.

 

And my point here is that the bad stats on Tanner Houck must be disregarded if he is going to progress.

 

And the irony--ignored by almost everyone disagreeing with me--is that those bad stats were ignored yesterday when Cora allowed Houck to pitch to the first four hitters in the Phillies lineup for the third freaking time.

 

That was in fact a breakthrough.

 

But Old Red, MVP 78, Bellhorn and others seem to me to be saying, "what breakthrough? Nothing changed yesterday except that Cora finally got smart and yanked that dud Tanner Houck off the mound just in time."

Edited May 9, 2023 by Maxbialystock

[moonslav59]

So the other night I was watching the movie The Right Stuff and was again amazed at how everyone seemed terrified of "breaking the sound barrier," which mean flying faster than the speed of sound (350M/sec, give or take). When Chuck Yeager finally did it, it was no big deal--well, except that he set a new world record.

 

And my point here is that the bad stats on Tanner Houck must be disregarded if he is going to progress.

 

And the irony--ignored by almost everyone disagreeing with me--is that that were ignored yesterday when Cora allowed Houck to pitch the first four hitters in the Phillies lineup for the third freaking time.

 

That was in fact a breakthrough.

 

But Old Red, MVP 78, Bellhorn and others seem to me to be saying, "what freaking breakthrough? Nothing changed yesterday except that Cora finally got smart and yanked that dud Tanner Houck off the mound just in time."

 

It's not irony. Cora has left Houck in for the third time through more this year than his first 3 combined. He has been trying to progress Houck to more and more innings, despite him getting killed, often.

 

He finally took him out before getting killed, perhaps to try and boost his confidence for the next time allowing even more batters faced.

 

We will never know, if it was "just in time" or not.

 

Certainly taking him out had merit.

 

He's been struggling in these situations for a long time and struggles vs LHBs, while Schwarber kills RHPs.

 

It was the "book move." That doesn't mean it was surely the right choice. You have to weigh what you expected from Bleier, too.

 

My only beef with your position is that you are saying leaving him in was the obvious choice, and I don't think it was obvious, at all.

[Maxbialystock]

It's not irony. Cora has left Houck in for the third time through more this year than his first 3 combined. He has been trying to progress Houck to more and more innings, despite him getting killed, often.

 

He finally took him out before getting killed, perhaps to try and boost his confidence for the next time allowing even more batters faced.

 

We will never know, if it was "just in time" or not.

 

Certainly taking him out had merit.

 

He's been struggling in these situations for a long time and struggles vs LHBs, while Schwarber kills RHPs.

 

It was the "book move." That doesn't mean it was surely the right choice. You have to weigh what you expected from Bleier, too.

 

My only beef with your position is that you are saying leaving him in was the obvious choice, and I don't think it was obvious, at all.

 

Good points--especially that Cora has left Houck in longer/later this season than in any of the previous three. That I did not know.

 

I can't argue that leaving Houck in was the obvious choice, because clearly it was not. I just think he had a better chance getting Schwarber out than anyone else available. I also think that pulling Houck had no effect on the outcome. The Phillies were just better yesterday. The streak had to end sometime--better in a 6-1 game.

[moonslav59]

Good points--especially that Cora has left Houck in longer/later this season than in any of the previous three. That I did not know.

 

I can't argue that leaving Houck in was the obvious choice, because clearly it was not. I just think he had a better chance getting Schwarber out than anyone else available. I also think that pulling Houck had no effect on the outcome. The Phillies were just better yesterday. The streak had to end sometime--better in a 6-1 game.

 

I've always felt Houck would be better in the pen, but I'm fine giving him a shot at the rotation- a real shot.

 

I think Cora is trying to build him up to be a 7 IP guy, but he has to earn it.

 

With Whitlock's injuries, I'm rethinking his future role and may flip my positions on Houck and Whitlock.

 

I'd love for 5 other starters to win slots, and they both be in the pen, but the way things are going, finding 3 solid starters might be a tough.

 

Sale

Bello

Kluber

Paxton

Crawford

[Bellhorn04]

Good points--especially that Cora has left Houck in longer/later this season than in any of the previous three. That I did not know.

 

I can't argue that leaving Houck in was the obvious choice, because clearly it was not. I just think he had a better chance getting Schwarber out than anyone else available. I also think that pulling Houck had no effect on the outcome. The Phillies were just better yesterday. The streak had to end sometime--better in a 6-1 game.

 

Max, I have always maintained there are times managers are put in spots where there is no obvious right or wrong move and they essentially have to roll the dice. When to pull the starting pitcher is often the toughest call to make.

 

Just ask Kevin Cash (2020 WS Game 6).

[Bellhorn04]

Looking through the play by play log of the game, I think Cora's move there was eminently logical. Schwarber had singled on his previous AB. In the 6th Houck had retired the 2 RH batters and given up a hit to the LH batter. Now here comes one of the most dangerous LH batters in the game with a chance to turn it from a 1 run game to a 3 run game. Plus, Bleier only has to get one out because it'll be the last out of the inning. Totally sound move with lousy results.

 

Also, we could really use a better lefty in the pen.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Looking through the play by play log of the game, I think Cora's move there was eminently logical. Schwarber had singled on his previous AB. In the 6th Houck had retired the 2 RH batters and given up a hit to the LH batter. Now here comes one of the most dangerous LH batters in the game with a chance to turn it from a 1 run game to a 3 run game. Plus, Bleier only has to get one out because it'll be the last out of the inning. Totally sound move with lousy results.

 

Also, we could really use a better lefty in the pen.

 

Actually, I was envisioning Walter and his funky delivery helping the big club pen by mid-season -- but he's kind of regressed so far.

 

Wonder if Matt Strahm is available? His team is underachieving... bet we could acquire him for a Song.

[Bellhorn04]

Actually, I was envisioning Walter and his funky delivery helping the big club pen by mid-season -- but he's kind of regressed so far.

 

Wonder if Matt Strahm is available? His team is underachieving... bet we could acquire him for a Song.

 

Hah. That name, Song, has to resurface fairly soon one way or the other.

[notin]

Looking through the play by play log of the game, I think Cora's move there was eminently logical. Schwarber had singled on his previous AB. In the 6th Houck had retired the 2 RH batters and given up a hit to the LH batter. Now here comes one of the most dangerous LH batters in the game with a chance to turn it from a 1 run game to a 3 run game. Plus, Bleier only has to get one out because it'll be the last out of the inning. Totally sound move with lousy results.

 

Also, we could really use a better lefty in the pen.

 

Of course a lot of this should be overshadowed by the fact that the Sox only scored one run anyway…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Of course a lot of this should be overshadowed by the fact that the Sox only scored one run anyway…

 

Was thinking same; Verducci just wrote an article how the Sox can't possibly stay this hot with their current starting pitching.

 

His point is no one is very good (didn't even mention Pivetta), and only Sale has shown the stuff of someone who might be...

[mvp 78]

Looking through the play by play log of the game, I think Cora's move there was eminently logical. Schwarber had singled on his previous AB. In the 6th Houck had retired the 2 RH batters and given up a hit to the LH batter. Now here comes one of the most dangerous LH batters in the game with a chance to turn it from a 1 run game to a 3 run game. Plus, Bleier only has to get one out because it'll be the last out of the inning. Totally sound move with lousy results.

 

Also, we could really use a better lefty in the pen.

 

Joely is coming back. Sherriff is pitching well in AAA.

[Bellhorn04]

Of course a lot of this should be overshadowed by the fact that the Sox only scored one run anyway…

 

'Twas Max who turned that into a subplot.

[Bellhorn04]

Was thinking same; Verducci just wrote an article how the Sox can't possibly stay this hot with their current starting pitching.

 

His point is no one is very good (didn't even mention Pivetta), and only Sale has shown the stuff of someone who might be...

 

He might be selling Bello a little short.

[mvp 78]

Was thinking same; Verducci just wrote an article how the Sox can't possibly stay this hot with their current starting pitching.

 

His point is no one is very good (didn't even mention Pivetta), and only Sale has shown the stuff of someone who might be...

 

I don't think many people realistically think they'll make a run at the division. Make a run at the Wild Card? Maybe. The rotation just has to be ok.

 

Sale/Whitlock/Bello/Kluber/Pivetta/Paxton (take one out) is good enough to be average. If the offense hits and the bullpen doesn't turn into a faucet, they'll be fine.

[moonslav59]

I don't think many people realistically think they'll make a run at the division. Make a run at the Wild Card? Maybe. The rotation just has to be ok.

 

Sale/Whitlock/Bello/Kluber/Pivetta/Paxton (take one out) is good enough to be average. If the offense hits and the bullpen doesn't turn into a faucet, they'll be fine.

 

Exactly! Why many of us prefer a top 10 or 12 rotation, and think it is the major factor in improving a team's chances at winning a ring, it is not essential, if the rest of the team can take up the slack.

 

Having two major weaknesses- the rotation and defense, makes me think we should not win the division or a ring, this year, but stranger things have happened.

 

Our D may greatly improve with the return of Story and Mondesi, especially if Kike wins back the CF job. Maybe Paxton improves the rotation, but it could just be 2-3 of the guys already there that just start pitching like their norm that does the trick.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I don't think many people realistically think they'll make a run at the division. Make a run at the Wild Card? Maybe. The rotation just has to be ok.

 

Sale/Whitlock/Bello/Kluber/Pivetta/Paxton (take one out) is good enough to be average. If the offense hits and the bullpen doesn't turn into a faucet, they'll be fine.

 

The state of the rotation directly affects the state of the bullpen. Starters have to go longer and deeper or Cora's go-to guys will be toast by the trade deadline.

 

We've seen it too many times, and it's a peril that never seems to go away.

[moonslav59]

The state of the rotation directly affects the state of the bullpen. Starters have to go longer and deeper or Cora's go-to guys will be toast by the trade deadline.

 

We've seen it too many times, and it's a peril that never seems to go away.

 

It's a good point, but I think some context is needed:

 

1. 13 man staffs have changed that dynamic, a lot.

2. Our starters have not really been yanked early that often. We are 20th in SP IP at 180.1 IP, but #15 is at 184.1 IP, so we are just 3 IP from the midpoint. #10 is 189 IP.

3. We have a number of pitchers who are used to going 2-3 IP, and when add paxton and get Crawford & Whitlock back, we may have multiple long guys of high quality.

4. Our starters are improving, already, and have been going deeper, of late.

5. Our key RP'ers have not been overworked, except maybe Schreiber, a bit:

10.2 IP Jansen (11 gms)

10.0 IP Martin (10)

16.2 Schreiber (17)

(Wink has 23 IP in 13 games, but that is about what many starters have with 5-6 GS.)

 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

It's a good point, but I think some context is needed:

 

1. 13 man staffs have changed that dynamic, a lot.

2. Our starters have not really been yanked early that often. We are 20th in SP IP at 180.1 IP, but #15 is at 184.1 IP, so we are just 3 IP from the midpoint. #10 is 189 IP.

3. We have a number of pitchers who are used to going 2-3 IP, and when add paxton and get Crawford & Whitlock back, we may have multiple long guys of high quality.

4. Our starters are improving, already, and have been going deeper, of late.

5. Our key RP'ers have not been overworked, except maybe Schreiber, a bit:

10.2 IP Jansen (11 gms)

10.0 IP Martin (10)

16.2 Schreiber (17)

(Wink has 23 IP in 13 games, but that is about what many starters have with 5-6 GS.)

 

 

I think the biggest risk of injury/burn-out is with #3. The multi-inning reliever who throws every couple-three days is a relatively new creation. Tendons and ligaments (and hammys etc) have to adjust to a different workload then they're used to since maybe Little League...

[Maxbialystock]

I think the biggest risk of injury/burn-out is with #3. The multi-inning reliever who throws every couple-three days is a relatively new creation. Tendons and ligaments (and hammys etc) have to adjust to a different workload then they're used to since maybe Little League...

 

Agree that burning out multi-inning relievers is a risk. However, so far that applies to just one guy, Winckowski, with 13 appearances in 37 days, including six 2-inning games and 2 3-inning games.

 

And moonslav's point is that, with Paxton, Whitlock, and Crawford coming off the IL this month, Cora will be able to spread multi-inning relief jobs among more pitchers.

 

Our current rotation of Sale, Kluber, Houck, Pivetta, and Bello is far from perfect, but right now I think they are more reliable than Paxton, Whitlock, or Crawford. Kluber's the worst, but in his last 3 starts he went 6IP with 1 ER vs. the Orioles, then 5 IP with 3 ER vs. the Jays, and finally 5 IP with 3 ER vs the Phillies. And the Sox won all three games.

[Maxbialystock]

Of course a lot of this should be overshadowed by the fact that the Sox only scored one run anyway…

 

And I said that early on. I disagree with pulling Houck, but agree completely that decision had no effect on who would win the game. Leave Houck in, assume he gets Schwarber out, and the Sox still lose--and not just by 2-1. The Sox bullpen was determined to give the Phillies more runs, and the Phillies pitching had our hitters stymied.

 

If you believe in the "dud liberation movement," sending Bleier out was absolutely the right thing to do. He demonstrated his incompetence in tough situations.

 

Also, and I don't mind conceding this point to moonslav, by not letting Houck face Schwarber, Cora now has a starter who just did pretty doggone well against the 4 best Phillies hitters when he faced them for the 3d time: a popup, a K, a ground out, and a single.

[Maxbialystock]

The state of the rotation directly affects the state of the bullpen. Starters have to go longer and deeper or Cora's go-to guys will be toast by the trade deadline.

 

We've seen it too many times, and it's a peril that never seems to go away.

 

Interesting you should emphasize that point because right now talksox is rife with pronouncements that the dumbest thing Cora can do is let his starters go against opposing lineups a third time in a game. And there's plenty of statistical support for that view.

[moonslav59]

I think the biggest risk of injury/burn-out is with #3. The multi-inning reliever who throws every couple-three days is a relatively new creation. Tendons and ligaments (and hammys etc) have to adjust to a different workload then they're used to since maybe Little League...

 

It is an interesting topic. It seems like pitchers are dropping like flies, these days. Maybe pitching 2-3 innings every 3-4 days is better than 5-6 every 5 days or 1 IP 3 out of 5 days. I guess we'll find out, because it seems to be a trend.

 

With a 13 man staff, one can envision:

 

5 starters

4 long men

4 short men

[Maxbialystock]

I don't think many people realistically think they'll make a run at the division. Make a run at the Wild Card? Maybe. The rotation just has to be ok.

 

Sale/Whitlock/Bello/Kluber/Pivetta/Paxton (take one out) is good enough to be average. If the offense hits and the bullpen doesn't turn into a faucet, they'll be fine.

 

Me, I would probably stick with the current five: Sale, Kluber, Houck, Pivetta, and Bello. I dislike Kluber the most, but he's been decent his last 3 starts. Sale is the ace, but a tad too prima-donnish right now. Houck, Pivetta, and Bello are, to me, all decent starters. I honestly think Houck would have gotten Schwarber out in the 6th inning last Sunday. If he had, that would have been 6 IP, 1 ER, and getting through the first five Phillies hitters for the third time.

 

On the other hand, I don't trust Paxton or Whitlock to start right now. Crawford, maybe, but he's also been pretty good out of the pen.

 

The six best WAR's on the Sox pitching staff belong to relievers: Winck +1.0; Jansen +0.6; Schreiber +0.6; Crawford +0.5; Martin +0.4; and Bernardino +0.4.

[moonslav59]

Houck and the 3rd time through, this year:

 

Game 1: HR, K removed after 5 complete.

 

Game 2: Ground out. Removed after 5 complete.

 

Game 3: K. Removed after 4 complete.

 

Game 4: 2B, 2B (run), Ground out in 5th. 1-2-3 6th, and then 1B, lineout, ground out, HR, line out. Removed after 7.

 

Game 5: 1B (drove in runner from 2nd time batter), Sac Fly (another run from 2nd time batter), line out to end 5th. 6th inning L groundout, BB, K, pop fly out. Yanked after 6.

 

Game 7: pop out (end 5th), K, line drive 1B, ground out- yanked with 2 outs in 6th.

 

Pitches:

70

74

90

96

86

96

74

 

 

[moonslav59]

Me, I would probably stick with the current five: Sale, Kluber, Houck, Pivetta, and Bello. I dislike Kluber the most, but he's been decent his last 3 starts. Sale is the ace, but a tad too prima-donnish right now. Houck, Pivetta, and Bello are, to me, all decent starters. I honestly think Houck would have gotten Schwarber out in the 6th inning last Sunday. If he had, that would have been 6 IP, 1 ER, and getting through the first five Phillies hitters for the third time.

 

On the other hand, I don't trust Paxton or Whitlock to start right now. Crawford, maybe, but he's also been pretty good out of the pen.

 

The six best WAR's on the Sox pitching staff belong to relievers: Winck +1.0; Jansen +0.6; Schreiber +0.6; Crawford +0.5; Martin +0.4; and Bernardino +0.4.

 

I think we pretty much have to stick with Kluber, due to him doing better than almost everyone else but Sale, lately.

 

I think Bello deserves a long look. That makes 3.

 

The rest all have issues or concerns:

 

Paxton will get a look, and soon.

Pivetta is as steady as they come, even if not brilliant.

Houck has been going longer and longer into games and may win a slot more by default than proving he is more valuable as a SP'er than RP'er.

Crawford might be the wild card i this whole shuffle and sort.

 

4 guys for the last 2 slots, in my eyes.

 

Wink stays right where he is.

 

Drohan may double-jump up, late in the year.

Whitlock's health is always a concern, and maybe the pen is best for him.