Dojji

It's amazing how many people in this thread can praise the job Keith Foulke did for us in 04 while completely missing the boat on the fact that it doesn't even matter HOW the outs are gotten. Foulke was anything but overpowering and he got the job done in style for us that year because he had the right attitude to make a good closer, and he knew how to use his stuff to get outs. Why is that lesson ignored when discussing another veteran closer with World Champion credentials, I don't exactly know.

he'd be worth a flier, but I wouldn't sink any serious resources into acquiring him. He's unlikely to be that much better than the depth options we already have.

Then why wibble about his Pawtucket stats? Again, Owens' MLB peripherals last year were NOT. THAT. BAD. FOR. A. ROOKIE. 2 strikeouts per walk, less than a walk every 2 innings, (barely) less than 1 hit allowed an inning, and an acceptable WHIP, if one with room for improvement. Not bad. Not great, but not bad. The worst he was last year is a little prone to giving up the gopher ball, but with incremental improvements in other areas that can become an acceptable flaw. In fact after your Eeyoring about Owens I was very pleasantly surprised when I went to the stat sheet to get some intel of my own. He looks like he doesn't have to improve that much to be a stalwart in the lower middle of a rotation. That's about what I'd expect giving his profile of stuff.

Yes, if it was MLB you'd call that regression. but it's not MLB. Holy hell Jung.

Owens has shown no sign of regression in his fundamentals or peripherals, I don't know what Jung is talking about. the worst thing that happened to Owens so far is he got hit around a bit as a rookie. if you want to tell me that's the end of the world I'm gonna point out the dozens of ACE level starters who got shelled worse than Owens in year 1. Not saying Owens is an ace of course, but if you think the book is closed on the kid, you're putting the cart so far in front of the horse that they're on different continents. I'm sorry if you think it's the end of the world when the jury is out on a FREAKING ROOKIE, then you seriously need some kind of chill pill.

What's wrong with being a control-location pitcher? Legit question here. Some of the best pitchers the league has ever seen have been that kind of pitcher. I mean I'd take your criticisms more seriously if Owens was a finished product, but he really isn't. He's supposed to get better, and I think he can. I mean I think a rookie can have a few bad games as he's still getting his sea legs without histrionics about "folding like a cheap suit."

Doing all of those at the same time may be one for the diary.

Owens' peripheral numbers aren't that bad for a rookie, Jung. You really need to smoke a joint or take some laxative or get laid or something. Something is making you really really really excessively grouchy.

Umm he kinda is, Soxprospect says he sustains at 91 and tops out at 93. not exactly overwhelming. That said command isn't really his biggest problem, he tends to give up a lot of contact and in the big leagues that contact has been pretty hard. A FIP of 4.28 doesn't suggest a great pitcher.

i think we can't count on Rusney until he proves he can be counted on. The burden of proof is on Castillo right now.

Well of course he can only replace one, he's only one guy. But the question is, what happens if Sam Travis knocks the doors down?

That's true, but if the bat is adequate there, it might be a way to get into the lineup, in which case I'd expect the team to be willing to explore that kind of option before going outside to look for LF talent.

I think the possibility that at least one of Sandoval and Hanley failing to redeem their value is significant, and one of the advantage of having money is being able to eat a contract in order to sit a bad player. if Shaw is outperforming one of Hanley or Pablo, I think he'll play -- maybe not all the time, but certainly he'd hit against a lot of RHP.

that said, there's room to gamble in April, so I wouldn't be too shocked if it was Elias or Owens rather than Wright. Wright's value to the team will start to overcome the siren call of upside probably in early June, when the standings start to really shake out and teams start to figure out exactly how ahead or behind they are. but in the first couple months it can be worth trying some unconventional ideas -- as long as you have a high-floor Plan C to slot in if needed.

Well I'm thinking that's a possibility CP, but we may also wind up needing a left fielder depending on what we get from the utter wildcard that is Rusney Castillo

I actually suspect Moncada will follow Betts into the outfield. If I have to play Betts or Moncada at 2b, I'm playing Betts. Out of practice or no, he seemed to have the better 2b toolset.

I think Shaw is the leverage the team has on Pablo and Hanley, the guy who could outplay them and win their jobs. And I think they're playing him at third to send a message to Pablo in particular that he's going to have to earn his place. If Pablo starts slow, I doubt they'll hesitate to throw Shaw into the fire at third base, and ditto for Hanley at first. Of the three, Shaw had the best hitting record last year and I want to see him playing any time it made sense. I think there's a 0% chance that Shaw does not break camp with the team as it stands right now, he'd have to get hurt to not be on the 25 man, especially after his performance last year. I'm actually excited about the kid and want to see what he'll do with extended playing time. He has looked good. There's a possibility in my mind that Shaw is our 3B this August, and Sam Travis is our 1B. if dire predictions about the toxicity of our two troubled veterans bear out, and the team is otherwise competitive and has a chance at the playoffs if they can put those guys behind them, I honestly believe they will move on from both.

I'd hate to lose Pedroia but if he has to go it's nice to know we have some great depth behind his position.

That decision is understandable based on Elias' performance in 2014.

it depends on what you're trying to accomplish. Wright is the depth option with the most experience and the highest floor making him the safest choice. The depth option with the most upside and highest ceiling is probaly Owens. So do you want the high floor guy who's less likely to crap the bed or the high ceiling guy who could be terrible but might also break through and be awesome? It's really a question of priorities.

Wright is what they call a high floor option. Very likely to be a good bottom of the rotation guy, vanishingly unlikely to be much more than that. Still, there's value for a guy like that, especially a cheap one. I agree that he's the safe choice if there's a gap in the rotation on opening day.

The point here is that we definitely have some depth at SP, and some of the guys down there are worth a look. I'm actually heavily intrigued by what Wright could do if he gets a chance in the rotation. He's looked relatively solid in a starting role thus far. And Wright aside (who might be a good 5th starter in a pinch, at best), we do have other prospects besides Eddie who deserve a look if there's room in the rotation. Either of Owens or Johnson could "click" this year the way Eddie clicked last year if things go right for them. It will definitely be better to have eddie ready to go than not, he's the best bet we have for a young pitcher to really take over the 2-3 slot in the rotation and boosting the quality, but in terms of quantity, our depth is as good as nearly anyone's.

Seriously jung, there's time later to invent reasons to hate, we don't need that right now.