sk7326

Pedro's Age 18 season was in a partial season league - and he had a WHIP then of 1.48. They actually track pretty closely with regards to Age 18 seasons. Espinoza just pitched more innings (100 vs 77) in a higher level of baseball (a full season league).

My hope would be for the league to give the sox an extra sandwich round pick. It's the lowest cost, least disruptive way to address this I think commesurate to the offense.

I think that is fair - and bWAR starts with actual runs allowed in real life, so that could be better for a backwards looking metric. Kluber is the runaway leader in pitcher's bWAR.

Not really ... first of all, walks and strikeouts hardly correlate at all (among qualified ML starters, the correlation was tiny, like -0.05). K/BB implies there is a zero-sum nature to this which is not borne out by any sort of evidence. Second, if not making good contact can drive positive results (evidence is there that this is true, but it's not high) - the list of players who can induce weak contact without inducing NO contact is small (and perhaps non-existent). Strikeout rate is your best evidence of dominant stuff, that your pitches work. The best pitchers pitch to contact - the hitter still can't actually hit it though.

Now if you wanted to be creative - and I would not be surprised if it at least came up in the org meetings - perhaps you think about seeing if Ramirez is comfortable moving over to 3B. So instead of carrying Hill, look at Ramirez at 3B and Chris Young at 1B as your lefty platoon, while just letting Benintendi ride in LF. Now I am certain this won't happen - but I'd at least consider it.

Possible. I think they need to figure out if they think he can help at all. His bullpen experience in the past means you have to at least consider him.

Zero chance - indeed the Padres did not break any statutes. I mean they violated league understanding - and best practices and ethics ... hence the suspension. The BEST you can get is some additional negotiation. And I am not betting that.

well it's relief pitching - just stack bodies and bodies (preferably bodies with wipeout pitches) and attrition it out.

It is useful to look at them both ... here is a good explanation of the differences: http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2012/8/28/3273844/which-war-works-best-pitching-version There is a case for bWAR - because you are dealing with actual runs allowed - and you are trying to evaluate who delivered the most value in the past. Kluber is significantly in the lead there. fWAR is better for predictive value

No, K's mean a pitcher IS dominating ... the reason K's for hitters matters less is that from the hitter's view it is them against the defense ... quickly exporting fangraphs data on this stuff K-BB rate correlates at a -.411 rate with runs allowed K rate is -.51625 So the K% (which is the right stat to go with here, not K or BB per 9) tracks better. K rate correlates to WHIP even better (-.56025). Strikeouts - in a large sample, in the long run - is your most likely path to the other stuff (allowing baserunners which goes to allowing runs) OPS is the a terrific training wheel stat if you don't want to deal with advanced stuff - but of course it is profoundly flawed. (mismatched denominators, mismatched scale, severely underrating half of it) Runs allowed is all that matters - the most likely way to get there is the guy who does not allow baserunners. The guy who does that most likely is striking people out. I think it's a toss up between Sale, Kluber and Porcello - and Porcello will probably win (even if some of the voters will use the wrong logic - Pedroia 2008 MVP).

GOod call - as bell's post above indicates, I forgot he existed. Again, it is striking that this is a tough decision because everybody's form is good. Imagine saying that in July. The tricky thing is with Pomeranz in the pen, would he get some of Ross' work or is he kept in a glass case in case of a bad start only. And do you carry 12 pitchers vs 11?

I stand corrected - so basically he is striking out in Mike Napoli territory (his worst seasons). As I've noted before, how much of that is "can't" vs "conscious decision (Napoli)" is something which the scouting should answer.

For the staff: Porcello, Price, Rodriguez and Buchholz are probably your 4 starters Pomeranz goes to the pen Kimbrel, Uehara and Ziegler are locks ... that leaves 3 pitchers if you want an 11 man staff (my preference), 4 if you want 12. Now personally, I would be content with zero LOOGYs, as neither Abad nor Scott has proven enough to say they deserve one of the three spots. Kelly has been outstanding since coming back, and he can get 6 outs at a time as needed, so he is one of the choices for me. Hembree has dominated righties all season and he also can stretch out as needed The question for 1 spot to me is Barnes v Tazawa v Scott/Abad ... I don't know if I trust Scott on such a small amount of data to be able to get a lefty when it matters. Abad has been shaky but has a better track record. With the other pitchers you have the luxury to go with a 3 out guy here. Tazawa has looked good recently and has been well rested, and I cannot get behind Barnes still. So I'd go Kimbrel-Uehara-Ziegler-Kelly-Hembree-Tazawa + Pomeranz as my pen. The best thing I can say is that it's a really hard decision - and that is a compliment I never expected to utter.

Struck out nearly 40% of the time ... against AA pitchers. The swing and miss is real - there is a lot of work still at the plate. The numbers provide a sense of how crazy his ceiling is though.

Semi-off topic question ... The Red Sox clinched a tie last night with the Jays. If the unthinkable happened - would the Sox and Jays play it out if both were guaranteed playoff spots? (since the bye to the division series is a legitimate advantage)

I saw something on sportscenter yesterday ... only four times or something in the last 15 years the team with the best record won it all? Twice were Boston titles.

Scherzer's biggest competition is probably the kid - for obvious reasons. On the bright side, Fernandez DID lead the ML in fWAR. In reality, too few innings - but the innings were of such significantly higher quality than anybody else's.

About the same - though he has had a better season (helps to not have a suspension). Andrew Miller might have been better than either.

Put another way, I wouldn't want to pay ANYBODY a ton of money to work a particular designated inning (even the 9th, but the horse has left the barn there).

i don't think it is that so much as simple habit - teams do not align their bullpens that way except for rare exceptions ... pitchers like knowing when they will work, the way starters do - and I imagine build routine around that. In this specialized era, finding guys who can sort of work without that net is hard ... and it also means messing with creatures of habit who might get usurped by this dude. Obviously there are exceptions - Francona used Papelbon for 6 outs regularly in the postseason, and treated Foulke very much like a relief ace in 2004. But Foulke was a unique bird too.

Oh I don't know - the org decision to not spend stupid money on a reliever I am generally on board with. And they turned him into a quality young starter! For all the whining about the Red Sox not being able to develop pitching, Andrew Miller was an incredible triumph.

I don't think the outfield is etched in stone - after all the Red Sox have three capable CFs right now, and could easily deal one of them. And Devers might end up being the one at 3B anyway - and yes, he could also be dealt, but Dombrowski has been less inclined to be cavalier with elite position talent.

Watching Papi crying really got to me ... damn

Braves have been playing really well - amazingly ... so it'd be fun if the Tigers spit the bit on that series.

He shouldn't (those 20 extra innings of value!) - but the Cubs narrative will be very very strong.