The Red Sox starting rotation -- long term

[mvp 78]

Agreed, so it's hard for me to bash Bloom senseless over not signing deGrom or the like.

 

I will say, Price looked like as good a signing as Scherzer at the time of the signings. Not many SP'er had the record Price and Scherzer had when signed.

 

deGrom would be leading our staff in fWAR!

[moonslav59]

deGrom would be leading our staff in fWAR!

 

But, who here wishes he was the guy we chose to go large on?

[Dipre]

Aaron Nola and Yoshinobu Yamamoto are UFA's.

[mvp 78]

But, who here wishes he was the guy we chose to go large on?

 

I'm sure there's somebody.

[mvp 78]

Aaron Nola and Yoshinobu Yamamoto are UFA's.

 

Nola will be 31 next year and his velo has ticked down a little year.

 

Also, he's only averaged 131 innings per year from 2020-2023!

 

Yamamoto is interesting due to his age, but is on the smaller side. He's supposedly better than Senga and you'd be getting him for his prime he's before he hits 30. I'd lean towards him.

 

I also don't see DD letting Nola leave.

[Dipre]

I can remember at least one more right hander with a slight build that worked pretty well for the Sox.

[mvp 78]

I can remember at least one more right hander with a slight build that worked pretty well for the Sox.

 

I guess Clay Buchholz was fine until they took the Bullfrog away and he napped while holding his baby.

[moonslav59]

I have not seen a FA SP'er I felt was "the guy" in a long time. Some of the older pitchers on shorter deals looked okay, but I still think trading for a young pitcher and extending him seems like the best chance at acquiring an ace, but trading way top prospects undermines a big part of the "plan."

[Dipre]

I guess Clay Buchholz was fine until they took the Bullfrog away and he napped while holding his baby.

 

That's two of 'em then.

[Bellhorn04]

I have not seen a FA SP'er I felt was "the guy" in a long time. Some of the older pitchers on shorter deals looked okay, but I still think trading for a young pitcher and extending him seems like the best chance at acquiring an ace, but trading way top prospects undermines a big part of the "plan."

 

That puts us in a tricky spot, since we can't draft and develop much in the way of starting pitchers.

[Dipre]

Sign Yamamoto and call it a day.

[mvp 78]

That's two of 'em then.

 

Clay and the baby?

[Dipre]

Clay and the baby?

 

I mean Pedro did have a baby face when we got him.

[moonslav59]

That puts us in a tricky spot, since we can't draft and develop much in the way of starting pitchers.

 

It's been a major flaw in our system since Lester, and even he was just one in 2 decades.

 

What is the difference, though, if we trade Mayer for a young ace vs just drafting and developing an ace on our own?

 

(I'm not arguing to trade Mayer.)

[MADSTORK]

Valuing a 24 year old pitcher in AA is delusional.

 

Yup: trolling.

 

Moon, read the Scouting reports then report back to this thread before you put a label on a specific post

 

Drohan doesn’t command the zone, delivery was said to be an issue thus to many “Walks” . I’ll be easy on you , just look at the IP and BB allowed, projected as a backend starter “if” the Player has any luck as a SP

 

He’s not the second coming of Koufax regardless of what Six Prospects might have you believe

 

Moon , those are the facts and the facts are undisputed

[MADSTORK]

Valuing a 24 year old pitcher in AA is delusional.

 

Yup: trolling.

 

Moon, read the Scouting reports then report back to this thread before you put a label on a specific post

 

Drohan doesn’t command the zone, delivery was said to be an issue thus to many “Walks” . I’ll be easy on you , just look at the IP and BB allowed, projected as a backend starter “if” the Player has any luck as a SP

 

He’s not the second coming of Koufax regardless of what Sox Prospects might have you believe

 

Moon , those are the facts and the facts are undisputed

[Hugh2]

I nominate Stork for internet Troll of the year award.

[moonslav59]

Moon, read the Scouting reports then report back to this thread before you put a label on a specific post

 

Drohan doesn’t command the zone, delivery was said to be an issue thus to many “Walks” . I’ll be easy on you , just look at the IP and BB allowed, projected as a backend starter “if” the Player has any luck as a SP

 

He’s not the second coming of Koufax regardless of what Six Prospects might have you believe

 

Moon , those are the facts and the facts are undisputed

 

I took you off ignore to see the absurdity and get a laugh.

 

1. Scouting reports are opinions not really facts.

2. Back end starters have "value." (I never said I valued him as an ace to be or even a #3 or 4.)

3. The guy has some value. We got Schwarber for Aldo Ramirez. Fact, right?

 

[Hugh2]

I took you off ignore to see the absurdity and get a laugh.

 

1. Scouting reports are opinions not really facts.

2. Back end starters have "value." (I never said I valued him as an ace to be or even a #3 or 4.)

3. The guy has some value. We got Schwarber for Aldo Ramirez. Fact, right?

 

 

It almost feels like some people are rooting for Red Sox prospects to fail

[moonslav59]

Here is a recent scouting report that I guess should be viewed as "Fact" by Stork reasonings (which is in itself an oxymoron.)

 

Ceiling of a mid-rotation starter. Even that projection might be light as there is a chance he takes another step forward with his stuff in the future. Already took a massive step forward during the 2022-23 offseason adding a cutter and increasing his velocity by a full grade. Now profiles as an athletic left-hander who will show four average-or-better pitches and a solid command and control profile. Strong pitchability and pitch utility. Can show hitters four unique pitches in distinct velocity bands that move in different directions. Changeup is a major league-quality out pitch and gives him a weapon against right-handed hitters. Cutter and curveball both are effective also and will flash bat-missing ability. Fastball is very effective at generating weak contact.

 

-soxprospects.com

 

Sounds like any hope of "value" is totally unfounded by facts.

 

[Dipre]

I nominate Stork for internet Troll of the year award.

 

I mean he makes good on his name

[Bellhorn04]

I mean he makes good on his name

 

I call him Daffy Duck now.

[Hugh2]

I made a bold and stupid comment on the gameday thread about 5 innings pitched being a "quality start" which by definition it is not. My line of thought yesterday was how the game of baseball has really changed over even just the past 10 years. Relievers are going longer and Starters are more and more throwing fewer innings. It's actually amazing to think how much more starters make than relievers in free agency given this closing gap (market inefficiency???).

 

My point was, in today's game, I don't think the Sox starters only going 5 innings or so is what is hurting this team. As a matter of fact, the best team in all of baseball with one of the better pitching staffs the Tampa Bay Rays does not do any better. Their starting pitchers only average 4.65 innings per game, and the Boston staff is averaging just over 5.05 innings pitched. For some perspective, I decided to look at a few other teams with great pitching staff as well.

 

Houston 5.5 IP per game

Minn. 5.6 IP per game

Texas 5.75 IP per game

ATL 5.25 IP per game

TB 4.65 IP Per game

Boston 5.05 IP Per game

 

I figured it fair to look up some of the other awful pitching staffs as well.

 

Oak 4.70 IP per game

COL 4.65 IP per game

Cinn 4.84 IP per game

 

Sox seem to be middle of the pack, but there is some relationship (which is obviously predictable here) that teams with better-starting rotations will have starters that throw more innings. What I want to know is, how much of that benefits the team in today's game, or how much of that is just a function of how well the rotation performs? probably a bit of both. But despite that relationship, you see teams like Tampa Bay that have starters who do not go many innings but they still have great pitching year in and year out. So how strong is it?. The Sox seem to average between 1/3 and 2/3 of an inning less per game than the best pitching staffs in all of baseball. Is needing those extra 1 - 2 outs a game the difference between one of the best pitching staffs and one of the worse? I think it might just all come down to the fact that the starting pitching overall has not been good. They've shown glimmers of hope, but they have yet to hit the ground with all cylinders firing at once.

 

It will be interesting to see how guys like Kluber and Pivetta do in the bullpen because the Sox need guys in there that can give you multiple-inning relief outings. That guy has so much more value in today's game. Earlier in the year I would have figured those guys to have been some combination of Houck/Whitlock/Paxton/Crawford but now you have to take Houck/Whitlock out of the left side of the equation and add in Pivetta/Kluber/Wink to the right side.

 

Sox are obviously hoarding depth at the MLB level because they don't have a lot of pitching depth in the minors, not at the AAA level at least. The point is, they can't wait too long on guys like Kluber and Pivetta out of the pen, especially if you're going to need your pen 3 1/3 to 4 innings most nights. The Tampas model works because they have that depth at the MLB level year after year and they perform.

[notin]

I took you off ignore to see the absurdity and get a laugh.

 

1. Scouting reports are opinions not really facts.

2. Back end starters have "value." (I never said I valued him as an ace to be or even a #3 or 4.)

3. The guy has some value. We got Schwarber for Aldo Ramirez. Fact, right?

 

 

You’re arguing with someone who repeatedly adds a year or two to a Sox prospect and then calls it a fact. Please tell me you don’t think his quotes from a scouting report on Drogon are real, too…

[moonslav59]

You’re arguing with someone who repeatedly adds a year or two to a Sox prospect and then calls it a fact. Please tell me you don’t think his quotes from a scouting report on Drogon are real, too…

 

Yes, it's a fact they are not real.

[notin]

I made a bold and stupid comment on the gameday thread about 5 innings pitched being a "quality start" which by definition it is not. My line of thought yesterday was how the game of baseball has really changed over even just the past 10 years. Relievers are going longer and Starters are more and more throwing fewer innings. It's actually amazing to think how much more starters make than relievers in free agency given this closing gap (market inefficiency???).

 

My point was, in today's game, I don't think the Sox starters only going 5 innings or so is what is hurting this team. As a matter of fact, the best team in all of baseball with one of the better pitching staffs the Tampa Bay Rays does not do any better. Their starting pitchers only average 4.65 innings per game, and the Boston staff is averaging just over 5.05 innings pitched. For some perspective, I decided to look at a few other teams with great pitching staff as well.

 

Houston 5.5 IP per game

Minn. 5.6 IP per game

Texas 5.75 IP per game

ATL 5.25 IP per game

TB 4.65 IP Per game

Boston 5.05 IP Per game

 

I figured it fair to look up some of the other awful pitching staffs as well.

 

Oak 4.70 IP per game

COL 4.65 IP per game

Cinn 4.84 IP per game

 

Sox seem to be middle of the pack, but there is some relationship (which is obviously predictable here) that teams with better-starting rotations will have starters that throw more innings. What I want to know is, how much of that benefits the team in today's game, or how much of that is just a function of how well the rotation performs? probably a bit of both. But despite that relationship, you see teams like Tampa Bay that have starters who do not go many innings but they still have great pitching year in and year out. So how strong is it?. The Sox seem to average between 1/3 and 2/3 of an inning less per game than the best pitching staffs in all of baseball. Is needing those extra 1 - 2 outs a game the difference between one of the best pitching staffs and one of the worse? I think it might just all come down to the fact that the starting pitching overall has not been good. They've shown glimmers of hope, but they have yet to hit the ground with all cylinders firing at once.

 

It will be interesting to see how guys like Kluber and Pivetta do in the bullpen because the Sox need guys in there that can give you multiple-inning relief outings. That guy has so much more value in today's game. Earlier in the year I would have figured those guys to have been some combination of Houck/Whitlock/Paxton/Crawford but now you have to take Houck/Whitlock out of the left side of the equation and add in Pivetta/Kluber/Wink to the right side.

 

Sox are obviously hoarding depth at the MLB level because they don't have a lot of pitching depth in the minors, not at the AAA level at least. The point is, they can't wait too long on guys like Kluber and Pivetta out of the pen, especially if you're going to need your pen 3 1/3 to 4 innings most nights. The Tampas model works because they have that depth at the MLB level year after year and they perform.

 

 

1. Tampa starting pitcher stats get skewed by usage of the opener.

 

2. It really is a bullpen game now, but there has to be some balance with not over relying on the bullpen…

[Hugh2]

News Flash....Young pitcher working on his command.

[Hugh2]

1. Tampa starting pitcher stats get skewed by usage of the opener.

 

2. It really is a bullpen game now, but there has to be some balance with not over relying on the bullpen…

 

Oh absolutely, but the Sox are not at the bottom of the league in IP for starters, they're more middle of the pack.

[notin]

Oh absolutely, but the Sox are not at the bottom of the league in IP for starters, they're more middle of the pack.

 

I still like the idea of putting Houck, Whitlock, Winckowski, Crawford and Schreiber in the bullpen (with Martin and Jansen). But it’s not remarkably practical…

[notin]

Yes, it's a fact they are not real.

 

I mean, this was a guy who, when he tried to say out was a mistake to trade Benintendi, could only come up with the selling points that Andrew was a “homegrown World Series Champion.” By that logic, the Sox should have kept Workman and Barnes, too…