Of course people are blaming Farrell for yesterday's implosion. Am I missing something? Can we blame relievers for having a bad day and not always have it be the manager's fault?
Bullpen 2017
- Thread starter nvalvo
- Start date
You're missing that John Farrell doesn't want to use his Best Reliever in the Highest Leverage situations.
As mentioned, most managers would agree with JF and not "think outside of the box" like that, but it's thinking outside of the box that gets you that 1 or 2 extra wins.
As mentioned, most managers would agree with JF and not "think outside of the box" like that, but it's thinking outside of the box that gets you that 1 or 2 extra wins.
I hate Farrell as much as the next guy, but the worst thing you could say about his reasoning is that was perhaps based on an insufficient sample size (so, perhaps the fault lies with the stats department?).
In 2017, Perez had hit 11 HR in 182 PA (1 every 16.5 PA) and a .887 OPS against righties versus 3 HR in 74 PA (1 every 24.7 PA) and a .723 OPS against lefties.
The career stats have a more even OPS (R vs. L) although Perez' HR per career PA rate is better against lefties.
I agree with this in principle, but Kimbrel's views also need to be taken into account. As others have pointed out, it's possible Kimbrel has said he wants to be used strictly as a ninth-inning guy barring unique circumstances (either because he's just more comfortable with that or for contract reasons - e.g. he may have incentives based on # of saves or want his stats to be as good as possible for the next time he hits FA, etc.).
Could the Red Sox just tell him to screw and pitch him in the 8th anyway? Sure, but then you've soured your relationship with the best reliever in the AL.
Now it's also possible Kimbrel would be more than happy to pitch in the 8th instead of the 9th occasionally and this is indeed all Farrell's fault - I'm just saying unless I've missed something we don't have enough info to determine that as of now.
Yeah, I think Farrell is a terrible in-game manager, but I thought his decisions yesterday were reasonably defensible. And, actually, I think his bullpen management this year has been a lot better than in years past.
On Kimbrel specifically, I agree that you want your best reliever in the game in the highest-leverage situations. But if a guy is used to timing his preparation around coming in for the 9th, you're taking a risk by pulling him out of that routine, and I think it makes sense to calculate whether that risk is worth it. I think it's totally defensible to say "get one extra out in a tough 8th" is on one side of the line and "rush through your prep an inning early because Barnes walked a guy" is on the other.
Ideally, of course, you'd have a guy whose role -- the one he prepares for every day -- is to come into put out fires in any situation, in any inning. Hopefully, that can be Smith by October.
On Kimbrel specifically, I agree that you want your best reliever in the game in the highest-leverage situations. But if a guy is used to timing his preparation around coming in for the 9th, you're taking a risk by pulling him out of that routine, and I think it makes sense to calculate whether that risk is worth it. I think it's totally defensible to say "get one extra out in a tough 8th" is on one side of the line and "rush through your prep an inning early because Barnes walked a guy" is on the other.
Ideally, of course, you'd have a guy whose role -- the one he prepares for every day -- is to come into put out fires in any situation, in any inning. Hopefully, that can be Smith by October.
No. I understand why he didn't do it yesterday, but in a vacuum, the right move is your best reliever in that situation and I would guess he'd do it in the playoffs or the stretch run.
Except he's come into the game in the 8th inning 3 times already this season and seems to have been 'prepared' because he did well.
Someone needs to sit down with him if he has an issue with this. Just 3 outs? Fine, if that affects his arm. But as long as he gets his X number of minutes/pitches warning, he should be prepared to pitch when he's needed, not just in the 9th inning.
It actually five times that he has come in to get more than three outs and both he and Farrell have said it was too much.
Ideally to me that means they would cut back on doing it but it seems instead they have eliminated it.
I assume we'll see "playoff Farrell" when/if needed at the end of the year but I don't think we'll see Kimbrell in the 8th inning any time soon.
Ideally to me that means they would cut back on doing it but it seems instead they have eliminated it.
I assume we'll see "playoff Farrell" when/if needed at the end of the year but I don't think we'll see Kimbrell in the 8th inning any time soon.
Kimbrel and his manager Fredi Gonzalez worked out his pitching for more than 3 outs at the end of games with the Braves in 2014. Craig was fine with it then. Article talks about 4 out saves, which was not the situation yesterday I know.
http://m.mlb.com/news/article/84145880/braves-closer-craig-kimbrel-might-get-more-multi-inning-save-chances/
NEW YORK -- When Braves manager Fredi Gonzalez brought Craig Kimbrel in to notch the final four outs of Thursday night's 3-1 win over the Mets, he led many of his club's fans to think about how the dominant closer sat in the bullpen as the Dodgers completed their eighth-inning comeback during the decisive Game 4 of last year's National League Division Series.
But Gonzalez's postgame comments likely delighted those fans who are still haunted by images of seeing an irritated and agitated Kimbrel in the bullpen moments after Juan Uribe hit his game-winning homer off David Carpenter with one out in the eighth inning.
An irritated and agitated Kimbrel...have we seen that Kimbrel yet?
http://m.mlb.com/news/article/84145880/braves-closer-craig-kimbrel-might-get-more-multi-inning-save-chances/
NEW YORK -- When Braves manager Fredi Gonzalez brought Craig Kimbrel in to notch the final four outs of Thursday night's 3-1 win over the Mets, he led many of his club's fans to think about how the dominant closer sat in the bullpen as the Dodgers completed their eighth-inning comeback during the decisive Game 4 of last year's National League Division Series.
But Gonzalez's postgame comments likely delighted those fans who are still haunted by images of seeing an irritated and agitated Kimbrel in the bullpen moments after Juan Uribe hit his game-winning homer off David Carpenter with one out in the eighth inning.
An irritated and agitated Kimbrel...have we seen that Kimbrel yet?
Last edited:
Yeah as I said if Kimbrel is open to the idea of pitching in the 8th (or earlier) and then having someone else pitch the 9th, or they haven't even broached the topic with him, then that is totally on Farrell and his staff.
But if they have asked Kimbrel and he's said that he'd really rather prefer pitching in the 9th only and he thinks having to be available in say any time in the last 3 innings would really mess up his routine, that's something else. I'm not saying they necessarily have to treat Kimbrel with kid gloves, but you also don't want to mess up his head too much, especially when he's on the kind of streak he is, so it's a fine line. My only point was just that we don't know what conversations have and haven't taken place so I hesitate to place all the blame on Farrell without knowing more.
But if they have asked Kimbrel and he's said that he'd really rather prefer pitching in the 9th only and he thinks having to be available in say any time in the last 3 innings would really mess up his routine, that's something else. I'm not saying they necessarily have to treat Kimbrel with kid gloves, but you also don't want to mess up his head too much, especially when he's on the kind of streak he is, so it's a fine line. My only point was just that we don't know what conversations have and haven't taken place so I hesitate to place all the blame on Farrell without knowing more.
He might have been "fine with it then," but he was asked to pitch more than an inning a grand total of ONE time for the remainder of that season. And he lost the game.
It's not just about Kimbrel's preference, it's about his effectiveness. I don't think it's insane to imagine that disrupting a routine pegged to coming in for the 9th inning might have a negative effect on a pitcher's performance. And I certainly think it's something Farrell would know more about than we would.
I also think the risk and reward of that disruption vary greatly depending on the situation. In this particular situation, you had R-R-L-R*-L (the asterisk due to Perez's reverse split) due up in a two-run game. Is your plan that Kimbrel should come in as soon as there's a runner on base? That seems aggressive unless you really have no faith in any of the other members of your heretofore excellent bullpen. So you aren't going to have him getting hot right away.
Barnes issues a walk. Do you get Kimbrel warming up then? Maybe. But Barnes is going to pitch to the next guy, and then you have Hosmer/Perez/Moustakas due and a guy in Scott who's been excellent against lefties. I think it's pretty reasonable to plan on him facing them.
Then Barnes issues another walk. Now, you could decide that you're going to want Kimbrel -- but in order to have him for Perez, you're really going to have to rush him. And then you're not just bringing him in early, you're messing with his warmup. And, of course, you're going to be using enough pitches that someone other than Kimbrel, Scott, Barnes, and Kelly will have to pitch the ninth.
My point is, I think you can agree that closers can and should be used beyond just the ninth inning without feeling like this was obvious malpractice on Farrell's part.
I also think the risk and reward of that disruption vary greatly depending on the situation. In this particular situation, you had R-R-L-R*-L (the asterisk due to Perez's reverse split) due up in a two-run game. Is your plan that Kimbrel should come in as soon as there's a runner on base? That seems aggressive unless you really have no faith in any of the other members of your heretofore excellent bullpen. So you aren't going to have him getting hot right away.
Barnes issues a walk. Do you get Kimbrel warming up then? Maybe. But Barnes is going to pitch to the next guy, and then you have Hosmer/Perez/Moustakas due and a guy in Scott who's been excellent against lefties. I think it's pretty reasonable to plan on him facing them.
Then Barnes issues another walk. Now, you could decide that you're going to want Kimbrel -- but in order to have him for Perez, you're really going to have to rush him. And then you're not just bringing him in early, you're messing with his warmup. And, of course, you're going to be using enough pitches that someone other than Kimbrel, Scott, Barnes, and Kelly will have to pitch the ninth.
My point is, I think you can agree that closers can and should be used beyond just the ninth inning without feeling like this was obvious malpractice on Farrell's part.
IIRC, the argument in the game thread was to bring him on for the heart of the order in the 8th.
Thanks for looking further. This year, in Kimbrel's > 3 out games, he has 2 wins and 3 saves. The only tainted one was the win in Toronto where he gave up the tying run on a homer by Morales in the 9th (Farrell pulling Sale with a 1-0 lead). Then the Sox got 3 in the 10th and Kimbrel finished it. So, Craig has a good record going after more than three out saves, but I guess he doesn't like it. He's the man and I wouldn't mess with him.
Edit, actually only three of them were intended to be > 3 outs.
That was certainly an argument, to try to come up with a cohesive strategy from that mess of opinions many of which are only mentioned after the current decision went wrong, is impossible.
In a world where the save statistic didn't exist Kimbrel may have started that inning but that isn't the world we live in.
People seem to be reading this quote as Kimbrel saying he didn't like pitching more than one inning/only wants to pitch the 9th. It may be that he physically didn't feel good after these outings.
Just because they didn't do it yesterday doesn't mean it has been eliminated rather than cut back. Five times in the first 60ish games this year after doing it all of four times last year is a big change. Making it six times times in 72 games doesn't really qualify as "cutting back" (it's dead on pace, really).
To get Kimbrel into the game before the lead was lost would have meant he was up before Scott came in...if he was to pitch to Perez. Otherwise, assuming Kimbrel was up immediately upon Scott entering the game, he's probably not ready to go until Moustakas, another LHH who Scott should be able to handle. Of course by then, it's worst case scenario as the lead is already gone.
Can't treat every game like it's life or death playoff time. That's a good way to burn out arms by August.
Related to your first part that is just my interpretation of what Farrell stated, I just get the feeling Kimbrel will be limited to the LaRussa type closer until the end of the year.
As for the rest of what you wrote, I agree completely.
He has said it's not up and down. It's the total number of pitches that gets him. Kimbrel said that. So 4 outs is quick and dirty 33% more pitches. Is that like a starter throwing 33% more pitches? I don't know. But it apparently affects him.
Last edited:
However with regards to yesterday, Hembree should have been up along with Scott. Scott was clearly not throwing well in the the first at bat. He was missing by 2 feet. When your loogy walks the guy he came in to get, you gotta get him out of there. You take your chances with the hard throwing righty vs Perez and Moose. Neither option was a good one, but again, the lapse was in not having a righty loose in case Scott shit the bed vs Hosmer- which he did.
I agree, I was just providing some logic to those saying there was no place for him to come in once the merry go round got started. In other words, once Barnes started doing whatever you call that appearance, there wasn't a good way for JF to bring Kimbrel into the game from a management or timing perspective.
What no one seems to be looking at is that Kimbrel is appearing more often this season than he did last season. In 2016 he pitched in 57 games, or 35.19% of all the team's regular-season games while this season he has already pitched in 30 games, which puts him on page to pitch in 41.67% of them. That is a pace to pitch in "10.5" more games than last season.
Also, this season, Kimbrel is averaging more pitches per plate appearance than any other season in his MLB career. His average is 4.21 pitch/PA while this season it is up to 4.37. If you look at it as pitches per game in relief you will find the numbers almost identical for 2016 (16.44 p/gr) vs. 2017 (16.47 p/gr).
If Kimbrel has any complaint, it should be that he is being used more often by the Red Sox this year over last.
Also, this season, Kimbrel is averaging more pitches per plate appearance than any other season in his MLB career. His average is 4.21 pitch/PA while this season it is up to 4.37. If you look at it as pitches per game in relief you will find the numbers almost identical for 2016 (16.44 p/gr) vs. 2017 (16.47 p/gr).
If Kimbrel has any complaint, it should be that he is being used more often by the Red Sox this year over last.
Somewhat ironically, Kimbrel's dominance is a factor is his pitch-per-plate-appearance numbers.
Batters are having tremendous difficulty putting his pitches in play. This inflates his K rate, but also the total number of pitches he's throwing to each batter.
Batters are having tremendous difficulty putting his pitches in play. This inflates his K rate, but also the total number of pitches he's throwing to each batter.
Kimbrel also pretty much missed the month of July last year (didn't pitch after 7/6 until 8/1) which affected his total usage in 2016
Except for Wednesday, the bullpen has been terrific, however given the starters (except Sale) inability to pitch deep into games the innings are going to continue pile up for many of them. In addition to 3B help, I think another trust worthy reliever is in order.
Forgot about that but the number of pitches he's thrown per game in relief is still almost identical.
The question I have is whether it is innings or appearances that has more effect on relievers (in general). Quite some time ago I took a quick look at relievers who had a jump in appearances in a season and it seemed that more of them tended to develop arm trouble not long down the road. It would take quite a bit of work but it might be a good study for someone to do.
It's not all Sale. The Sox starters in 2nd in the AL in innings pitched. They are only 1/3 of an inning behind Tampa Bay and have played 3 less games than the Rays. I'm with you that another trustworthy reliever is in order. The untrustworthy back end of the pen is applying the pressure on Kimbrel, Barnes, Kelly, and Hembree.
Carson Smith, get well soon.
Sox just claimed Fister. He used to be pretty solid but not sure if that's still the case. Perhaps they think either he or Velazquez can help the pen??
It couldn't hurt to try him there at this point, but even if they do, I couldn't see him getting called up to the pen this year. The guy has been a complete mess, having walked 60 in 69 innings. In the last 3 games, he's walked 8 guys twice. 20bb in his last 15.2. Over his last 47.1, he has 48bb/47k. I don't want him anywhere near Boston this year.
Well sure, yeah... not with those lines. But if (and really... the guy needs a last chance and moving him to the pen seems like it's just that...) if he somehow can get it together and reduce the BB's as a one inning pitcher, I wouldn't be opposed. I mean- hypothetical on top of a hypothetical here.....
You realize he's only 24, don't you? There's no question he has to gain better control to ever be successful, and maybe he will need to go to the pen to do so. Maybe that won't work, either. But he's not in last gasp/failed prospect territory yet. For comparison's sake, he's a year and a half younger than Johnson. Workman and Barnes were both 24 when they first broke into the bigs. On the flip side, EdRo is 4 months younger.
He probably would that. But in case he didn't it would be nice to give him one last shot at succeeding here, instead of seeing work out of the bullpen for some other team next year.
Barnes altered his delivery and is now pitching like Andrew Miller:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2017/06/27/matt-barnes-hoping-more-like-andrew-miller/g0Vv1e3r5W3oCbjv02C1xJ/story.html
Cool. So now we have a right-handed Andrew Miller (except 5 years younger and $8.5m cheaper). What's not to like?
I didn't watch him throw, but he had 6 strikes out of 8 pitches last night. Per B-Ref his strike percentage for the past two years was 60%. He threw more strikes in 2014 (69%) and 2015 (65%) but was not as effective. So who knows? Regardless, this could be a very good thing for him - more control never hurts.
As long as that lack of leg motion doesn't put additional strain on his arm. He's saying he got this from Andrew Miller though, who's doing fine with it.
Very funny... Then again there are a few empty bottles around here watching Travis Shaw OPS above .900
If we don't use Kelly on consecutive nights, should we use him for 2 inning stints going forward? We did that with Barnes last night, for the 7th and 8th in a late/tight situation. So Barnes is off tonight (maybe tomorrow also) and have Kelly available for 2 innings in late/tight for tonight's game.
My question is: Can we get more/better usage, while protecting their health, from a high-leverage set-up reliever by using them for 2 innings/night and then rest them for a night or two afterward?
Last edited:
Kelly since moving to the pen last year: 43 games, 0.94 era, 47.2ip, 6xbh (5 doubles, 1 HR) 1.028 WHIP, 18bb/44k, .185/.263/.232, .247 BAbip 23.7%K/9.7%BB. He also hasn't given up a run in his last 22 outings: 20.1ip, .983 WHIP, 7bb/19k, .183/.256/.225, .250 BAbip. Maybe he walks more than one would like, but it's next to impossible to get an XBH off Joe Kelly and 54/94 hit ball outs have been via groundball.
Joe Kelly's mL career as a MR
83 games, 145.2 IP, 2.41 era 140 hits, 40bb/146k 7 HRA
23.9% K Rate/6.6% BB rate 1.1% HR rate
.250/.311/.??? (not sure where to find doubles/triples hit against without looking through box scores)
Joe Kelly's ML career as a MR
76 games, 104.0ip, 2.16 era, 92 hits, 34bb/94k, 7 HRA
21.9% K Rate/7.9% BB rate, 1.6% HR rate.
.207/.304/.334, .294 BAbip.
Joe Kelly, relief ace?
Joe Kelly's mL career as a MR
83 games, 145.2 IP, 2.41 era 140 hits, 40bb/146k 7 HRA
23.9% K Rate/6.6% BB rate 1.1% HR rate
.250/.311/.??? (not sure where to find doubles/triples hit against without looking through box scores)
Joe Kelly's ML career as a MR
76 games, 104.0ip, 2.16 era, 92 hits, 34bb/94k, 7 HRA
21.9% K Rate/7.9% BB rate, 1.6% HR rate.
.207/.304/.334, .294 BAbip.
Joe Kelly, relief ace?
Problem with Kelly is that he's throwing at least 20 pitches to get through an inning
I think Farrell would use him for 2, if he had a quick 1st.
Kelly and Barnes both have kryptonite. Kelly pitching in consecutive days and Barnes' road woes. They need one more elite arm, if Smith isn't on course by mid month I imagine Trader Dave heads to the trade market.