A Realistic View at 2024: Part I

[jim_vh]

I was looking at Hunter Renfroe's statcast on Baseball Savant. What happened to him this year compared to 2021 and 2022? He's a free agent so he'd seem a logical candidate to bring to spring training but would he need a guaranteed contract?

[notin]

So let me know if I have your view correct. The Sox overall pitching is good enough to get to a WS so we can stand pat with where are currently at pitching wise???

 

Next time quote the post you want me to respond to, not the post you want me to respond to the response of. Assuming that makes sense.

 

No one said the Sox pitching was good enough and they should stand pat. I’ve thrown around names for pitching and defensive upgrades.

 

Here’s some facts

 

The DBacks gave up more runs than they scored.

 

The DBacks only won 84 games, a total would not have made the postseason in the AL and would have been 4th place in the AL East…

[notin]

I was looking at Hunter Renfroe's statcast on Baseball Savant. What happened to him this year compared to 2021 and 2022? He's a free agent so he'd seem a logical candidate to bring to spring training but would he need a guaranteed contract?

 

 

Probably just had one bad year.

 

Renfroe is Duvall workout the defense, but I can see him being a candidate if the Sox think they need a RHH outfielder…

[Old Red]

Next time quote the post you want me to respond to, not the post you want me to respond to the response of. Assuming that makes sense.

 

No one said the Sox pitching was good enough and they should stand pat. I’ve thrown around names for pitching and defensive upgrades.

 

Here’s some facts

 

The DBacks gave up more runs than they scored.

 

The DBacks only won 84 games, a total would not have made the postseason in the AL and would have been 4th place in the AL East…

 

Fortunately the DBacks aren’t in the AL East, and unfortunately the Red Sox are where they have been since Day 1 of divisions coming in to play.

[Bellhorn04]

Probably just had one bad year.

 

Renfroe is Duvall workout the defense, but I can see him being a candidate if the Sox think they need a RHH outfielder…

 

Renfroe must be a bad drunk or always hitting on other players' wives and girlfriends, because he gets sent packing by every team he plays for.

[notin]

Renfroe must be a bad drunk or always hitting on other players' wives and girlfriends, because he gets sent packing by every team he plays for.

 

Maybe he’s a Flat Earther. Or a Trekkie. Or a ferroequinologist (N-scale). Or a Scientologist.

 

There are lots of possibilities…

[notin]

Fortunately the DBacks aren’t in the AL East, and unfortunately the Red Sox are where they have been since Day 1 of divisions coming in to play.

 

We get that.

 

It it really didn’t change that the DBacks are in the World Series with a pitching staff that isn’t any better than Boston’s. And a pitching staff isn’t the top two pitchers…

[Old Red]

We get that.

 

It it really didn’t change that the DBacks are in the World Series with a pitching staff that isn’t any better than Boston’s. And a pitching staff isn’t the top two pitchers…

 

The DBacks are playing good ball when it matters most, and have knocked off the Dodgers, and Phillies. It doesn’t matter how they got it done, or by whom.

[Bellhorn04]

We get that.

 

It it really didn’t change that the DBacks are in the World Series with a pitching staff that isn’t any better than Boston’s. And a pitching staff isn’t the top two pitchers…

 

You also can't leave out the fact that the DBacks were extremely lucky to get in the playoffs with 84 wins.

[notin]

You also can't leave out the fact that the DBacks were extremely lucky to get in the playoffs with 84 wins.

 

Especially with an 80-82 Pythagorean…

[notin]

The DBacks are playing good ball when it matters most, and have knocked off the Dodgers, and Phillies. It doesn’t matter how they got it done, or by whom.

 

Not sure what your point is…

[Old Red]

You also can't leave out the fact that the DBacks were extremely lucky to get in the playoffs with 84 wins.

 

You wouldn’t take the Red Sox getting in with 84 wins? Luck, or not I’d take it.

[Bellhorn04]

You wouldn’t take the Red Sox getting in with 84 wins? Luck, or not I’d take it.

 

I'd take it. I'm just saying we can't count on 84 wins getting us in the playoffs next year.

 

Hey, isn't 84 the same number that much-despised 2019 Red Sox team won?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We get that.

 

It it really didn’t change that the DBacks are in the World Series with a pitching staff that isn’t any better than Boston’s. And a pitching staff isn’t the top two pitchers…

 

Ace quality starters don't have to be future Hall of Famers. But any good team needs a healthy #1 and #2 to maximize a long run in the postseason.

 

There are extremes, like the '15 Royals -- or the '70 Orioles, but this isn't rocket science or Classic science at Yale.

 

Gallen started the All-Star Game this summer, got Cy Young votes twice in the past, and will again this year. That's good enough for me... just like when Eovaldi was an All-Star and got Cy votes as top man on the '21 Red Sox (or '23 Rangers).

 

And yet, no one has answered the question from today's first post at sunrise: if the Red Sox somehow made this postseason, who the hell was going to start Game 1 and Game 2 in the Wild Card, LDS, ALCS and World Series?

[Bellhorn04]

Ace quality starters don't have to be future Hall of Famers. But any good team needs a healthy #1 and #2 to maximize a long run in the postseason.

 

There are extremes, like the '15 Royals -- or the '70 Orioles, but this isn't rocket science or Classic science at Yale.

 

Gallen started the All-Star Game this summer, got Cy Young votes twice in the past, and will again this year. That's good enough for me... just like when Eovaldi was an All-Star and got Cy votes as top man on the '21 Red Sox (or '23 Rangers).

 

And yet, no one has answered the question from today's first post at sunrise: if the Red Sox somehow made this postseason, who the hell was going to start Game 1 and Game 2 in the Wild Card, LDS, ALCS and World Series?

 

Sale and Pivetta, based on who was pitching best at the end of the season. Followed by Bello or Crawford.

[Old Red]

I'd take it. I'm just saying we can't count on 84 wins getting us in the playoffs next year.

 

Hey, isn't 84 the same number that much-despised 2019 Red Sox team won?

 

You will always have stuff like this as long as you have divisions, and just don’t put teams in by the most wins. At this point I’m not counting on 84 wins for the Red Sox next year anyway, but I hope things change on that senecio.

[moonslav59]

You're presenting no data as to why. This is based solely on the general premise that we need starting pitching more than anything, which I do agree with. But you'd have to do a dive into projected WAR to compare these players. I suspect Chapman's projected 2024 WAR will be a bit higher than Montgomery's, although Monty did have a higher fWAR in 2023.

 

It's just about who might have the higher WAR: it's about who they replace and that differential.

 

Adding Chapman unleashes a complicated formula on what is gained over the status quo. We may gain on D at 3B, but lose on D in LF (Yoshida DH>LF) and CF (Duran LF>CF,) and probably PAs would be taken away from Rafaela, Abreu and Refsnyder- maybe Urias, too. What is the net gain in WAR?

 

Adding a solid 150+ IP not only would be a major gain in the rotation WAR, but would also boost the pen WAR as someone like Houck or Crawford would move to the pen and replace Murphy, Kelly and a slew of lesser arms. I see the net plus on WAR by adding a solid pitcher as significantly more than Chapman adds. By how much? Who knows.

 

The simple theory is this:

 

Team A has a 1.0WAR 3Bman a 0.5 WAR SP.

 

Does signing a 5 WAR 3B add more to the team than a 4WAR SP'er?

 

(Then, what if the 0.5 WAR SP replaces a -0.2 RP in the pen, while the 1.0 WAR 3Bman helps the bench, but not at a 1.0 clip, due to way less playing time.

[moonslav59]

I think it's extremely unlikely we sign the top two targets. If we get one of Yamamoto, Snell or Nola we'll be doing well.

 

If we spend almost the same for Chapman as Gray or Montgomery, why would it have to be so unlikely?

[moonslav59]

Next time quote the post you want me to respond to, not the post you want me to respond to the response of. Assuming that makes sense.

 

No one said the Sox pitching was good enough and they should stand pat. I’ve thrown around names for pitching and defensive upgrades.

 

Here’s some facts

 

The DBacks gave up more runs than they scored.

 

The DBacks only won 84 games, a total would not have made the postseason in the AL and would have been 4th place in the AL East…

 

I get the argument that teams have won without great or even good SP'ing. The Royals were another example. It happens rarely.

 

That is not evidence to support the fact that adding 2 SP'ers instead of 1 SP'er and a decent RHB who plays plus 3B D is the better idea.

 

I can find many examples of teams winning despite a poor fielding 3Bman. How about starting with 2018?

[Bellhorn04]

If we spend almost the same for Chapman as Gray or Montgomery, why would it have to be so unlikely?

 

You must have mis-read my post, which was about signing Yamamoto and Snell.

[Duran Is The Man]

We get that.

 

It it really didn’t change that the DBacks are in the World Series with a pitching staff that isn’t any better than Boston’s. And a pitching staff isn’t the top two pitchers…

 

yeah, but their defense is the exact opposite of the Red Sox. i think the Dbacks and Rangers are ranked 1-2 in defense. maybe, just maybe good D has something to do with success. don't tell Max though.

[notin]

I get the argument that teams have won without great or even good SP'ing. The Royals were another example. It happens rarely.

 

That is not evidence to support the fact that adding 2 SP'ers instead of 1 SP'er and a decent RHB who plays plus 3B D is the better idea.

 

I can find many examples of teams winning despite a poor fielding 3Bman. How about starting with 2018?

 

Let’s start with a basic - how do you define “good starting pitching”?

[notin]

yeah, but their defense is the exact opposite of the Red Sox. i think the Dbacks and Rangers are ranked 1-2 in defense. maybe, just maybe good D has something to do with success. don't tell Max though.

 

One of my points!!!

[notin]

You must have mis-read my post, which was about signing Yamamoto and Snell.

 

Yamamoto scares me. I know nothing about this guy.

 

Snell is certainly a good target.

 

I’ve repeatedly expressed my thoughts on Gray.

 

Nola is a hard pass for me, although I am anticipating him wanting a deal in the neighborhood of 8 years $240 mill. Certainly there is some TBD figure I’d find him acceptable at, but that’s obvious.

 

Snell and even Gray might prove ridiculously costly. And there are figures where I hope the Sox hard pass as well…

[notin]

I get the argument that teams have won without great or even good SP'ing. The Royals were another example. It happens rarely.

 

That is not evidence to support the fact that adding 2 SP'ers instead of 1 SP'er and a decent RHB who plays plus 3B D is the better idea.

 

I can find many examples of teams winning despite a poor fielding 3Bman. How about starting with 2018?

 

Post 1071…

[Duran Is The Man]

One of my points!!!

 

sorry, i didn't catch that.

[moonslav59]

If we want to go with just anecdotal evidence, let's take the team we know the very most about: the Boston Red Sox.

 

Rotations: focus on 1-2 punches and how many GS outside the top 4-5 SP'ers.)

 

1967: Lonborg "and 3 days of rain." (He started 39 games in a different era.)

Lee Stange 2.77 is awesome, but he pitched in relief for 11 of his 35 games.

Gary Bell 3.16 for 24 starts was awesome, too.

Darrell Brandon 4.17 (19 GS and 20 RP gms)

56 GS by 8 others (including 11 Bennett & Santiago, 9 Morehead, 8 by Rohr & Waslewski)

By the stats, it looks like they had 2-3 solid SP'ers, but in that era, it was really only 1.

 

1972 (missed the ALCS by 0.5 games in the unbalanced games played strike year)

35 Pattin 3.24 (looks like an ace in today's game, but not then.)

30 Siebert 3.80 (a decent #2)

22 McGlothen 3.41

21 Curtis 3.73

19 Tiant 1.91

(27 GS by others, including 16 by Culp and 7 Krausse)

This was a decent rotation, and we don't know how they might have done had they made the 4 team playoffs.)

 

(The '73 team won more games than '72 but finished 6 games out: Tiant 35/3.34, Lee 33/2.75, Curtis 30/3.58, Pattin 30/4.32, 15 Moret 15/3.17 and only 19 GS by others.)

 

Here is where I feel "the era" changed...

 

1975 Does not checked either box, but Tiant, Wise and Lee were a better 1-2-3 than surrounding years.

35 Tiant 4.02 (Hero in the playoffs)

35 Wise 3.95

34 Lee 3.95

20 Cleveland 4.43

16 Moret 3.60

20 by others: 11 Pole 4.42

I'd argue this was a deeper rotation than previous seasons, but it still lacked a serious 1-2 punch.

 

1977 team won more games than 1975, but finished 2.5 out.

4 of the top 4 SP'ers by GS had ERAs over 4.26. (Tiant was at 4.53 and Jenkins was #2 at 3.68)

 

1978 won 99 games and missed playoffs due to 163 game loss to NYY

36 Torres 3.96

35 Eck 2.99

31 Tiant 3.31

24 Lee 3.46

16 Wright 3.57

(11 Ripley 5.55 & 10 by others.)

This team seemed to have the formula to win. A nice 1-2-3 punch with Lee as the #4.

 

1986 lost WS in 7 games to NYM

33 Clemens 2.48 (perhaps the best SP the Sox have ever had, along with Pedro.)

30 Boyd 3.78 (nice numbers, but I'm not sure we can say he was a solid #2 punch.)

26 Nipper 5.38 (Yikes!)

25 Hurst 2.99 (could be viewed as a solid #2)

16 Seaver 3.80

31 by others (10 Sellers 4.94/ 6 by Brown 5.34)

 

1995 finished first in 3 division AL

29 Erik Hanson 4.24

27 Wake 2.95

23 Clemens 4.18

21 Z Smith 5.61

14 Eshelman 4.85

32 by others (12 Cormier 4.07)

 

1998 a 92 win team that made the playoffs as a WC team thanks to Pedro

33 Pedro 2.89

33 Wake 4.58

31 Saberhagen 3.96 (a decent #2, that year)

23 Avery 5.02

10 Lowe 4.03

32 by others (8 by Wasdin 5.25, Schourek 4.30 and Rose 6.93)

 

1999 a 94 win team that lost in the ALCS

29 Pedro 2.07 (WOW!)

27 Portugal 5.51

26 Rapp 4.12

22 Saberhagen 2.95

18 Rose 4.87

40 by others (17 Wake 5.08)

 

(2002 won 93 games and missed the playoffs: (32 Lowe 2.58, 30 Pedro 2.26 was a great 1-2 punch! Then, 29 Burkett 4.53, 23 Castillo 5.07, 15 Wake 2.81 w 30 gms as RP) 33 GS by others (12 Fossum 3.46)

 

2003 We all know the story of 2003

33 Wake 4.09

33 Lowe 4.47

30 Burkett 5.15

29 Pedro 2.22

That's a lot of starts from the top 4, but no solid 1-2 punch)

14 Fossum 5.47

23 by others is low. (10 Suppan 5.57)

 

2004 First Ring in over 8 decades! Checked both boxes: Great 1-2 punch and minimal starts outside the top 4-5 in the rotation:

33 Pedro 3.90 124 ERA+ in this hitter's era

33 Lowe 5.42

32 Schill 3.26 148 ERA+

30 Wake 4.87

29 Arroyo 4.03 (120 ERA+)

Only 5 GS outside the top 5! Lowe and Wake did not have great seasons.

 

2005 won 95 games but lost in ALDS (No Pedro & Lowe)

33 Wake 4.15

32 Arroyo 4.51

32 Clement 4.57

30 Wells 4.45

16 W Miller 4.95

19 by others (11 by Schill 5.69)

It's amazing we won so many games with this rotation, but we did not get far in the playoffs.

 

2007 World Champs, again! (Beckett & Schilling as the solid 1-2 punch, but not much support beyond them.)

32 Dice-K 4.40

31 Wake 4.76 (almost 400 IP from our 3-4 SP'ers)

30 Beckett 3.27

24 Schilling 3.87

23 Tavarez 5.15

22 GS from others (11 by Lester at 4.57 and 7 by Gabbard at 3.73)

 

(2008 won 95 games and lost in the ALCS: 33 Lester 3.21, 30 Wake 4.13, 29 Dice-K 2.90- maybe a good #2, that year, 27 Beckett 4.03, 15 Buch 6.75) 29 by others. Once could argue this rotation had a pretty solid 1-2-3 and they should have gone farther.)

 

(2009 also won 95 games but lost in the ALDS: 32 Beckett 3.86, 32 Lester 3.41, 24 Penny 5.61, 21 Wake 4.58, 16 Buch 4.21 but 37 by others w 12 by Dice-K 5.76 and 8 by Smoltz at 8.33.) We had a decent 1-2 punch but not much more.)

 

2013 was the 3rd ring! 97 win team: Had a 1-2 punch but 28 GS outside the top 5.

33 Lester 3.75

29 Lackey 3.52

29 Dempster 4.57

27 Doubront 4.32

16 Buch 1.74 (WOW!)

Added Peavy 10 GS with a 4.04 ERA

 

(2016 won 93 games and lost in ALDS: 35 Price 3.99, 33 Porcello 3.15 was a solid 1-2, but then... 24 Wright 3.33, 21 Buch 4.78, 20 ERod 4.71 and 29 by others w 13 by Pom at 4.59.)

 

(2017 also won 93 games, but Price was hurt: 33 Porcello 4.65, 32 Sale 2.90, 32 Pom 3.32, 24 ERod 4.19, 15 Fister 4.88 and 26 by others w Price at 11/3.38)

 

2018 was the 4th ring year! It had a very decent 1-2-3 and even 1-2-3-4 punch- 5 with Nate added.

33 Porcello 4.28

30 Price 3.58

27 Sale 2.11 (WOW!)

23 ERod 3.82

11 Nate 3.33

38 by others does not "check the second box, but the trade for Nate explains some of this. 13 GS by Johnson 4.17, 11 by Pom 6.08, 8 Velezquez 3.28)

 

(2021 won 92 games and went farther than many imagined: 32 Nate 3.75, 31 ERod 4.74, 31 Pivetta 4.53, 22 Richards 4.87 some as RP, 22 Perez 4.74 some as RP, 25 by others w 13 by Houck at 3.52. Erod did not really provide the 2nd "punch.")

 

It's my contention that having a solid 1-2 (or 1-2-3) punch with fewer GS outside the top 4-5 best SP'ers does not guarantee a ring, but with very few exceptions, every ring year we had checked both boxes. Many seasons we came close also checked both boxes or checked one box with emphasis.

 

There are other ways to win rings. The Sox have not been very good at winning rings without 2-3 solid SP'ers in the rotation. This does not mean we cannot win, unless we have 2-3, but to me, pitching has always been the best key to winning. Not the only one, but the best.

 

[moonslav59]

You must have mis-read my post, which was about signing Yamamoto and Snell.

 

This was directed at notin vias your response to him.

[moonslav59]

Let’s start with a basic - how do you define “good starting pitching”?

 

I'll say "I know it when I see it."

 

I just laid out some of the Sox best teams since 1967. Almost all of them involved having solid SP'ers. Many had 2-3 solid SP'ers and fewer starts outside the top 4-5 in the rotation, mainly due to good health, having 4-5 decent SP'ers or not having any better depth.

 

Our ring years almost always checked both boxes:

 

2-3 SP'ers with more than 24 GS and very good ERA+'s

Under 30 GS by SP'ers not in the top 5, unless we traded for one like Nate, Pom or Peavy.

 

It's hard to deny good starting pitching has had a major impact on whether the Sox win or not. It's not an exact correlation, but you never find that in MLB.

[moonslav59]

Post 1071…

 

I've never discounted the value of defense.

 

I'd love Chapman of our team, despite knowing it will never happen.

 

His addition would improve our D at 3B and maybe hurt it in LF and CF. It would be a net gain on D. I'm not disputing this. It also makes all pitchers look better. I get that.

 

To me, the upgrade over what we have:

 

DH Yoshida

1B Casas

3B Devers

LF Duran/Ref

CF Raf/Abreu

 

to

 

DH Casas/Devers

1B Casas/Devers

3B Chapman

LF Yoshida

CF Duran/Raf

 

is significant and worthy.

 

I do not think it outweighs this:

 

SP Gray, Snell, Montgomery over Crawford or Houck

plus

Crawford or Houck in the pen over Murphy, Kelly or Bernardino.

It's basically, Gray replacing Murphy.

 

I see that as a bigger net gain.