Meh, Smith was pitching better of late but hardly the lights-out setup guy we traded for. Poyner should be as good or better. Thornburg is no safe bet either. We are going to need to acquire this year’s Addison Reed at some point.
Poyner is not close to Smith. But he’s a lefty - that’s something. The double last night which won the game for Oakland didn’t seem like a freak. Poyner for bad hitters and lefties only.Meh, Smith was pitching better of late but hardly the lights-out setup guy we traded for. Poyner should be as good or better. Thornburg is no safe bet either. We are going to need to acquire this year’s Addison Reed at some point.
People keep saying this but given the farm system I just can't see any Addison Reed-like trades being made because some other team will have a better offer. I think we need to get used to the idea that our current bullpen, plus the various guys on the Pawtucket shuttle, is what we are going to be dealing with come playoff time. And I don't even really think that's a major issue unless there are more injuries or guys like Kelly/Barnes really start to regress.We are going to need to acquire this year’s Addison Reed at some point.
Can you honestly even name any of the prospects dealt for Reed last deadline without looking it up?People keep saying this but given the farm system I just can't see any Addison Reed-like trades being made because some other team will have a better offer.
I can name 2 but I'm a minor league guru. Jamie Callahan, Gerson Bautista and there is someone else I don't remember. Not exactly a haul. I'm sure most people on the board don't even recognize those names.Can you honestly even name any of the prospects dealt for Reed last deadline without looking it up?
But yeah, for now and being this early in the season I'm certainly not holding my breathe waiting on DD to pull an early rabbit out of the hat there.
No, but those are three prospects they now don't have available to trade this year. You can't keep trading prospects for short-term rentals without somehow replenishing the farm system.Can you honestly even name any of the prospects dealt for Reed last deadline without looking it up?
Yes, you can, if you have a clear window to win the WS, which we do.No, but those are three prospects they now don't have available to trade this year. You can't keep trading prospects for short-term rentals without somehow replenishing the farm system.
It was here:I am sorry I might have missed it, but where did Smith say he has been used a lot? Also how can being used a lot during the first month of the season lead to a shoulder injury of this magnitude?
Can you be more specific on what stats you're looking at? His high lev stats were much better last year than 2016.
The control is an issue; I agree. But, 1) he's been successful in spite of it and 2) he's improved overall in spite of it. The facts do not agree with your eye test. He has become an above average reliever. It certainly isn't ideal (which is why I'm not a huge fan) for a relief ace or closer to have control issues, but he isn't being asked to be that guy. You constantly run him out there because he's a good (not great) reliever. "The same result" is better than average success. What is it you want? 4 Craig Kimbrels?
Your argument has no legs: no one is asking Kelly and Barnes to get us to Kimbrel. As Byrdbrain says, it's Smith and Kelly. Barnes is the 4th best reliever, assuming Thornburg doesn't return to form this season. Barnes isn't going to be asked to be an 8th inning guy in September/October. If that becomes the case, due to injury or underperformance of the other guys, I expect them to go get another setup man.
There's a very good chance a team going nowhere this season would be happy to save a million in two by divesting a reliever down the stretch, almost regardless of return.People keep saying this but given the farm system I just can't see any Addison Reed-like trades being made because some other team will have a better offer. I think we need to get used to the idea that our current bullpen, plus the various guys on the Pawtucket shuttle, is what we are going to be dealing with come playoff time. And I don't even really think that's a major issue unless there are more injuries or guys like Kelly/Barnes really start to regress.
But the issue is that the RS only have about 2 MM before they hit the next level in luxury tax. So the two things a team dumping an expiring contract would be salary relief or promising prospects. Unfortunately, the RS have very little to offer in both categories.There's a very good chance a team going nowhere this season would be happy to save a million in two by divesting a reliever down the stretch, almost regardless of return.
It's May 17th. The who may not even be available yet, but available in 2 months.But who exactly? Nate Jones from the CWS? Jake Diekman from the Rangers? Craig Stammen from the Padres? Who else is even remotely serviceable from a bad team with an expiring contract?
I feel like it is more likely that Beeks comes up as a reliever and we run with Carson and Thornburg as the core of our bullpen. I just dont know who we would even want or could trade for. Does anyone else know of any realistic targets that would be an actual upgrade? Sntiago Casilla with Oakland? Zach Britton seems like he would require a haul and be too expensive for us to pay for. Kelvin Herrera, but he seems like a target for loads of teams. The Nationals have more pieces than us and would be going for some of the more elite guys as well.
You know you suck when the Marlins get rid of you.Junichi Tazawa just DFA'd in Miami. I wonder if the Sox kick the tires? Although from his numbers maybe he's done.
Can you honestly even name any of the prospects dealt for Reed last deadline without looking it up?
I can name 2 but I'm a minor league guru. Jamie Callahan, Gerson Bautista and there is someone else I don't remember. Not exactly a haul. I'm sure most people on the board don't even recognize those names.
edit: Looking it up, the 3rd was Stephen Nogosek.
Note that Callahan would have needed to be added to the 40-man this offseason anyway. Odds are we have a guy who's an iffy use of a 2019 40-man roster spot who will end up being somewhat interesting to someone, at least if a $5 scratch off is stapled to him. That team mostly wants to get out of paying the available player half a season of salary when it should be evaluating prospects or taking a no real risk post hype dice roll. If we're going to leave said player exposed to the Rule 5 draft this winter anyway, then why not just trade the guy.No, but those are three prospects they now don't have available to trade this year. You can't keep trading prospects for short-term rentals without somehow replenishing the farm system.
The sample size gets way too small to be meaningful when you break down by things like inning or leverage situation a quarter of the way through a season.Baseball Reference has a stat under "Clutch Stats" Late and close
The Who are playing Tanglewood on June 15th. According to their site they're booked up through mid-August. But Townsend is 72 and Daltrey is 74 - I really don't think they'd be much help.It's May 17th. The who may not even be available yet, but available in 2 months.
Fair enough, I guess, but that is assuming the Red Sox are the only team bidding on a given reliever. If there is another team out there willing to take salary AND give a better prospect than the Sox can, the Sox lose out.There's a very good chance a team going nowhere this season would be happy to save a million in two by divesting a reliever down the stretch, almost regardless of return.
Perhaps Brad Ziegler but he might be too pricey....He is in the last year of his deal, making $9M for 2018But who exactly? Nate Jones from the CWS? Jake Diekman from the Rangers? Craig Stammen from the Padres? Who else is even remotely serviceable from a bad team with an expiring contract?
I feel like it is more likely that Beeks comes up as a reliever and we run with Carson and Thornburg as the core of our bullpen. I just dont know who we would even want or could trade for. Does anyone else know of any realistic targets that would be an actual upgrade? Sntiago Casilla with Oakland? Zach Britton seems like he would require a haul and be too expensive for us to pay for. Kelvin Herrera, but he seems like a target for loads of teams. The Nationals have more pieces than us and would be going for some of the more elite guys as well.
Wrong, wrong and wrong...............good callI wouldn't be surprised if Wright never pitches in Boston or the majors again.
I also don't see any danger in DFAing Johnson, I'm pretty sure he'd make it through and end up in Pawtucket.
That said they may still send Velazquez down first just to get some steady work.
Wright was an all star 6 weeks before Farrell fucked up his career. How is that bad??Price is unreliable but the guy who has hardly pitched since 2016 and has sucked when he has is reliable? It has also been shown repeatedly that Wright was bad before the infamous pinch running injury.
I have no idea how anyone can think that Wright belongs in the rotation, ideally he'd be in the minors showing he can at least get AAA hitters out but unfortunately he has to be activated.
It’s been widely documented that Wright was bad for several weeks before he hurt himself. If you can’t be bothered to look it up then I’m certainly not going to do it for you.Wright was an all star 6 weeks before Farrell fucked up his career. How is that bad??
Right now the Sox have an over-abundance of starters. But right now some aren't performing to expectations. Still -- you can get a reliever. You can do a 3team deal if need be.He was one of the only guys I could find in my preliminary search while watching the game that might represent an upgrade. He is getting older though so maybe they would be more prone to trade him. But might want an actual prospect for him. Don't see a lot of low cost decent set up guys. We are probably not playing in the Britton and Herrera market. But maybe Herrera would be a better signing than Kimbrel, considering his age?
I can't remember any post on the main board as spectacularly wrong as this one.It’s been widely documented that Wright was bad for several weeks before he hurt himself. If you can’t be bothered to look it up then I’m certainly not going to do it for you.
I hope I’m wrong and Wright ends up being good again but I don’t expect it.
Edit: on your first comment I was wrong on the first the second is incomplete and the third essentially happened with Velazquez pitching in Pawtucket tomorrow.
No team EVER has an overabundance of starters (see: Boston Red Sox 2006).Right now the Sox have an over-abundance of starters...
I can't remember any post on the main board as spectacularly wrong as this one.
Wright was injured Aug 7, 2016.
On Aug 5, 2016 he pitched a complete game shutout walking one and striking out nine.
You don't have to look it up because I did it for you.
In his 7 starts prior to the shutout, he had an ERA of 6.18 and a WHIP of 1.60.I can't remember any post on the main board as spectacularly wrong as this one.
Wright was injured Aug 7, 2016.
On Aug 5, 2016 he pitched a complete game shutout walking one and striking out nine.
You don't have to look it up because I did it for you.
You are spectacularly correct. He suckedDid you look up the games before that one?
June 25 4.2 In 7 hits 8 runs
July 1 5 In 8 hits 4 runs
July 6 6 In 9 hits 6 runs
July 15 6 In 3 hits 3 runs - hey that's not bad
July 21 8 In 4 hits 2 runs - that's good
July 26 4.2 In 9 hits 8 runs
July 31 5 In 10 hits 3 runs
So including the one excellent start his stats were:
8 games, 47 Innings, 53 Hits, 34 runs or a RA of 6.5.
I used RA instead of ERA because a knuckleballer has so many more unearned runs than a "normal" pitcher.
So yes even including that one excellent start he had stunk for over a month before he hurt himself.
Edit: Sorry for the crappy formatting.
And I can look at the 2013 Tigers with their stud 3 starters but ended up losing to the Sox in 6. Right now they have starters. It's not like you can say year-over-year every position is strong. Potentially the SOx have huge holes with relief pitching and catching. It could be mroe important to have all postiosn covered rather than just great SP. TheTigers of 2013 showed despite having super starting pitching - it wasn't enough. Not even enough to push the series to 7.No team EVER has an overabundance of starters (see: Boston Red Sox 2006).
Except that the RS just don't only have great SP, nor do they have a huge hole in the BP. Every team would like to have no holes and every position covered by potential all stars. However in the real world of 2018 where there is competition to acquire top players, this doesn't happen. The RS currently have the highest payroll in MLB, and in the next couple of years quite a few of their relatively inexpensive/reasonably priced stars are due to be eligible for free agency. This tremendously restricts their ability to spend money to fix these problems. They have a pitching staff that includes 2 Cy Young winners close to their prime years (Price, Porcello) + one of the top 3 pitchers over the last 5 years (Sale). The BP includes the game's best closer (Kimbrel) + 1 set up man who has proven to be outstanding thus far (Kelly) . They have two of the game's top 5 hitters (JD & Mookie), two potential young all stars (Devers, Beni10) one of the top 5 SS in the game (X) and a former MVP who is due back from the disabled list albeit in the later stages of his career (Pedey). Then they have 2 good defensive catchers, a great defensive center fielder (all of whom are struggling at the plate) and one excellent fielding first baseman (who is also hitting well) and another one who has been better then most expected offensively and defensively (HRam). Overall this is one of the best RS teams that have been assembled in the last 50 years.And I can look at the 2013 Tigers with their stud 3 starters but ended up losing to the Sox in 6. Right now they have starters. It's not like you can say year-over-year every position is strong. Potentially the SOx have huge holes with relief pitching and catching. It could be more important to have all positions covered rather than just great SP. TheTigers of 2013 showed despite having super starting pitching - it wasn't enough. Not even enough to push the series to 7.
Can you run down for me the AL teams that have three relievers who are clearly better than Barnes?Barnes is "ok" but not that good. He's okay for a 7th inning guy but there isn't much depth.
The Yankees.... that's probably it.Can you run down for me the AL teams that have three relievers who are clearly better than Barnes?
Feels almost like cheating to bring the Astros up, but Giles, Peacock and Devenski are assuredly better than Matt Barnes. I think most would agree that Will Harris and Hector Rondon are, and this year’s bullpen convert version of Collin McHugh seems to be too. Joe Smith is having some problems this year, but he was better than Barnes from 2016-17. By some metrics (FIP) the same could be said about Michael Feliz, a guy they traded away.The Yankees.... that's probably it.
And that's the damned thing (as you're obviously pointing out) that as okay as Barnes is... he's better than most 3rd options out of any team's bullpen.
Speaking of which..... what's the latest on Thornburg? He seemed to be on track to be rejoining the club and then?
He had a poor outing last Monday, so he was shut down until Friday when he had a decent outing (1 hit, 1 K, 1 inning). Not so great on Saturday (2 walks in 3 batters faced). No reports since but it would seem he isn't quite ready as he's struggling with back to backs.Speaking of which..... what's the latest on Thornburg? He seemed to be on track to be rejoining the club and then?
There were mitigating circumstances with a bunch of those starts though; I'll drag out my old post about it again:Did you look up the games before that one?
June 25 4.2 In 7 hits 8 runs
July 1 5 In 8 hits 4 runs
July 6 6 In 9 hits 6 runs
July 15 6 In 3 hits 3 runs - hey that's not bad
July 21 8 In 4 hits 2 runs - that's good
July 26 4.2 In 9 hits 8 runs
July 31 5 In 10 hits 3 runs
So including the one excellent start his stats were:
8 games, 47 Innings, 53 Hits, 34 runs or a RA of 6.5.
I used RA instead of ERA because a knuckleballer has so many more unearned runs than a "normal" pitcher.
So yes even including that one excellent start he had stunk for over a month before he hurt himself.
Edit: Sorry for the crappy formatting.
Now who knows if he can be that guy again after all the lost time, but the numbers for that stretch are certainly deceptive without context.Well, let's look at those 8 starts, or maybe 9 because I like bookends:
6/20: 9 IP, 1 unearned run (Shaw error and botched pickoff throw) on 5 H, 3BB, 6 SO. Kimbrel with the loss in the 10th.
6/25: 5 unearned runs in the fifth on errors by Xander and Hanley, and it's a Ross WP that lets in the last. Still, 3 earned in the fourth before that, and he admits he doesn't have the knuckle. Beaten by summer in Arlington, again.
7/1: after 5 scoreless, loses control as the sixth gets rainy. Double, HBP, walk, GS on a full count fastball where Farrell says he should have thrown the knuckle.
7/6: 5 good innings (1 unearned on a Pedey error) again, then 5ER across the 6th and 7th as he and Hanigan, with a 10 run lead, start trying to challenge with fastballs to go deeper and spare the pen in a blowout.
7/15: great through 5 scoreless, sitting down the first 14 in a row, loses control a bit in the sixth with a HPB and walk coming around for 2 of 3 ER, but finishes the inning.
7/21: 8 IP, 2 runs (1 earned) on 4 hits, 9 SO, 1BB. Maybe it doesn't count cause Twins?
7/26: a bad game. 9 runs (8 earned) on 8 hits, 3 BB, a HR to Miggy, wild pitches moving base runners.
7/31: not good either, but luckier. Somehow scatters 10 hits and 3 BB across 5 IP while only giving up 3, all in the 5th. Helps his own case by getting two putouts at home in the first alone.
8/5: 9 IP, 3 hits, 9 SO, 1 BB, complete game shutout.
That's a really interesting stretch with a bad couple games at the end of July, and it demonstrated an easy lesson that I think Farrell recognized: If Wright needs to rely on his fastball, you're in trouble. His knuckleball is clearly susceptible to rain and sweat, but you also need to be ready with a quick hook in the fifth or sixth if it falters with fatigue, and in those cases it's generally better to have him walk a couple guys while you get a reliever ready. All the trouble in those middle innings makes me think maybe he should be viewed primarily as a twice through the order guy, with leeway to go longer if he's having a dominant night.
But his flaws seem to be pretty manageable if you know what to look for, really. I think in my mind he's the fifth starter if he proves his shoulder has recovered next spring.
Why are we acting like a nine-game sample size tells us all that much about a pitcher one way or the other, especially when those nine games happened two years ago? Looking at Wright's overall numbers, he had very good ERA/FIP numbers in 2016 (3.33/3.77, although his xFIP was much higher at 4.57) and, in fewer innings, had worse but not terrible numbers in 2015 (4.09/5.01/4.85 ERA/FIP/xFIP in 70 or so innings).There were mitigating circumstances with a bunch of those starts though