Can The Red Sox Survive Their Starting Rotation?

[Rasputin]

So Chapman is the new Giancarlo Stanton around here - if we wishcast hard enough, the Reds might actually make him available!

 
It doesn't take wishing to think the Reds would make him available. He's a free agent after 2016 so if the Reds decide they're in rebuilding mode, they're going to trade him and the only question is whether it's at the deadline in 2015, the off season, or the deadline in 2016.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Has there been a single report suggesting it's happening anytime soon? 

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

 
It doesn't take wishing to think the Reds would make him available. He's a free agent after 2016 so if the Reds decide they're in rebuilding mode, they're going to trade him and the only question is whether it's at the deadline in 2015, the off season, or the deadline in 2016.

 
It didn't seem like it would take wishing that Stanton would be made available either, with the Marlins being who they are and Stanton on the verge of getting very expensive in arbitration and then free agency.  The Marlins were surely going to move him eventually...until they signed him to a 13 year deal with a no-trade clause.
 
Until there's a clear sign that Chapman is on the block, any talk of the Red Sox (or anyone else) trading for him is the definition of wish-casting.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

While I think Papelbon would probably be a solid reliever, as he's figured out how to succeed without the stuff that carried him through his prime, he's not the answer for fixing this pen. He's going to get hit by good lineups at times, so if he returns to Boston, I imagine there will be a handful of meltdown innings and the love would be lost pretty quickly. He doesn't throw hard anymore... at all.
 

 
If he's not the high leverage guy, he's great depth in a pen, but I don't think he's going to have a great year this year and I'd really prefer to have Barnes around to step in as that bullpen ace down the stretch. I'm not sure Papelbon would accept not being the guy, though.

 

[cahlton]

 
It didn't seem like it would take wishing that Stanton would be made available either, with the Marlins being who they are and Stanton on the verge of getting very expensive in arbitration and then free agency.  The Marlins were surely going to move him eventually...until they signed him to a 13 year deal with a no-trade clause.
 
Until there's a clear sign that Chapman is on the block, any talk of the Red Sox (or anyone else) trading for him is the definition of wish-casting.

Reportedly he and Cueto were both on the block during the offseason. Presumably they still are.
 
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/09/the-reds-are-reportedly-open-to-trading-aroldis-chapman/

 

[Plympton91]

Papelbon is a junk finesse guy now. Pass. The AL East would treat him rudely.
 
If he's a throw-in and part of the cost of acquiring Hamels for lesser prospects, I'm OK with it. I have no delusions of him being great again, however.

Is the AL East still better than the NL East? Was it last year? This isn't 2004 anymore. And, the closer doesn't face opposing pitchers very often. Papelbon's "finesse/junk" is still more formidable than at least two-thirds of the Red Sox bullpen, in part because he can still command his stuff, much like Uehara.

 

[jon abbey]

Is the AL East still better than the NL East?

 
Offensively it's almost certainly at least a notch or two tougher, even if you throw out Boston and Philly for purposes of talking about Papelbon moving specifically. Right now 4 of the top 6 run scoring offenses are in the AL East.

 

[MikeM]

Papelbon has made it clear that he's not going to accept a trade to a team that's not going to use him as a closer, hasn't he? Are they going to suddenly be cool with giving Uehara or Papelbon that kind of money to act as a set up man, when they wouldn't do it for Miller? I don't see any way they are willing to add that kind of payroll unless the Phils take on Buchholz and Mujica or Craig or something.

 
I only recall a lot of speculation this winter on him wanting his 2016 option guaranteed if traded. But yeah, beyond the surface desire to improve our bullpen i just can't see how anybody is connecting the dots to Papelbon being a realistic option atm unless Papelbon himself is pushing the "i'll be a setup guy" angle.
 
Veteran politics and all. Unless he was on board with the idea, Koji would have to really struggle for an extended period of time before seeing his role get yanked out from under him.  

 

[threecy]

 
I only recall a lot of speculation this winter on him wanting his 2016 option guaranteed if traded. But yeah, beyond the surface desire to improve our bullpen i just can't see how anybody is connecting the dots to Papelbon being a realistic option atm unless Papelbon himself is pushing the "i'll be a setup guy" angle.
 
Veteran politics and all. Unless he was on board with the idea, Koji would have to really struggle for an extended period of time before seeing his role get yanked out from under him.  

...and Koji's under contract this season and next for $18M...

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
Offensively it's almost certainly at least a notch or two tougher, even if you throw out Boston and Philly for purposes of talking about Papelbon moving specifically. Right now 4 of the top 6 run scoring offenses are in the AL East.

That could just as easily be attributed to poor pitching by AL East teams, couldn't it? O's, Jays and Red Sox are 13, 14 and 15 in team ERA. Well, Yankees and Rays are 3rd and 5th. AL East have also been playing each other an inordinate number of times so far, feasting on each other's rough pitching. Hard to say right now who's good and who's not. Houston team ERA is best in the AL right now.

 

[O Captain! My Captain!]

Nice piece on Fangraphs today  about the Cleveland Indians' ERA/FIP gap, which applies just as well to the Sox. The author attributes a lot of it to poor defense, and DRS rates the Red Sox merely one run better than Cleveland's. SSS is obviously the caveat here.
 
Where it gets interesting is that the Indians' bad defense both passes the smell test and Fangraphs' own projections. Meanwhile, I'd suspect the Red Sox are at least an above-average defensive team, and Fangraphs had them projected for fifth with +25 DRS over the season.
 
There are obviously differences between what was projected and what actually happens, especially with regards to playing time, where the team probably misses Vasquez and (to a lesser degree) Victorino on defense. Another thing that sticks out is the LF defense projection, where Fangraphs projected a moderately above average number for Ramirez, where that obviously hasn't been the case (numbers and smell test agree). Whether he'll improve with more time is it's own matter.

 

[The Gray Eagle]

That could just as easily be attributed to poor pitching by AL East teams, couldn't it? O's, Jays and Red Sox are 13, 14 and 15 in team ERA. Well, Yankees and Rays are 3rd and 5th. AL East have also been playing each other an inordinate number of times so far, feasting on each other's rough pitching. Hard to say right now who's good and who's not. Houston team ERA is best in the AL right now.

By my adding up records by hand, I've got the AL East at 14-7 against all other divisions. The NL East is 8-15 against all other divisions. Obviously it's still really early, but so far, the AL East looks strong, with lots of good hitting and all the teams bunched together. 

 

[Al Zarilla]

By my adding up records by hand, I've got the AL East at 14-7 against all other divisions. The NL East is 8-15 against all other divisions. Obviously it's still really early, but so far, the AL East looks strong, with lots of good hitting and all the teams bunched together. 

OK, thanks for the research. Back to old norms if that continues.

 

[soxhop411]

@BNightengale: The #Brewers, 5-18, are letting teams know they will make their veterans available on trade market: Kyle Lohse, Matt Garza, Aramis Ramirez.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

@BNightengale: The #Brewers, 5-18, are letting teams know they will make their veterans available on trade market: Kyle Lohse, Matt Garza, Aramis Ramirez.

 
Neither of those guys strike me as upgrades to the current rotation.
 
Lohse = 5 starts, 29.2 IP, 7.28 ERA, 6.02 FIP
Garza = 5 starts, 29.1 IP, 4.60 ERA, 5.54 FIP
 
I only point those stats out to demonstrate they're not pitching any better (or getting any better results) than what the Sox have currently, so if anyone expects Lohse or Garza to be better going forward, I don't see why the same optimism can't be applied to Buchholz, Miley and company.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Papelbon is a junk finesse guy now. Pass. The AL East would treat him rudely.

 
What was Koji in 2013?
 
(Not that I want to see Pap in a Red Sox uniform before an old-timer's game.)

 

[soxhop411]

Hamels got hit hard again today

 

[donchoi]

Nice piece on Fangraphs today  about the Cleveland Indians' ERA/FIP gap, which applies just as well to the Sox. The author attributes a lot of it to poor defense, and DRS rates the Red Sox merely one run better than Cleveland's. SSS is obviously the caveat here.
 
Where it gets interesting is that the Indians' bad defense both passes the smell test and Fangraphs' own projections. Meanwhile, I'd suspect the Red Sox are at least an above-average defensive team, and Fangraphs had them projected for fifth with +25 DRS over the season.
 
There are obviously differences between what was projected and what actually happens, especially with regards to playing time, where the team probably misses Vasquez and (to a lesser degree) Victorino on defense. Another thing that sticks out is the LF defense projection, where Fangraphs projected a moderately above average number for Ramirez, where that obviously hasn't been the case (numbers and smell test agree). Whether he'll improve with more time is it's own matter.

 
Was just noticing the same gap. As of this morning, the Red Sox have a team 4.92 ERA, tied for dead last in the Majors, but their 3.93 xFIP would place them 16th. The starters have an ERA of 5.52, worst in baseball, and an xFIP of 3.88 (tied for 15th).
 
Bringing in all those ground ball pitchers has resulted in a 45.5% GB rate, very mediocre (the starters are at 47.9%, which is 10th overall). I was worried about not having enough strikeouts coming in to this year, but the starters have pleasantly surprised on that front, with 8.52 K/9, which is 6th best.
 
The fielding has been an issue. As a team, DRS has the Sox at -10 (tied for 25th in baseball) and UZR says -2.9 runs, which is 21st overall. The outfield is down for -4 by DRS, tied for 20th in baseball, and their UZR is -1.0, which ranks 19th. That means this infield, which was supposed to be pretty good, is not keeping up their end of the bargain.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Something I think we've all been feeling:
 

Red Sox pitchers have the second-lowest first-pitch strike percentage in the majors, and their starters are seventh-worst
 

 
Joe Lemire thinks that's irrelevant. He cites data to show that the difference between 1-0 and 0-1 is .327 to .321, a minor drop. That makes no sense (as some of the players point out) because it's harder to get to the vaunted 1-2 (.164) if you start out with a ball.
 
(I think it must be the same concept in reverse with hitters taking first pitch strikes. 0-1 can lead to 1-2)

 

[Rasputin]

Something I think we've all been feeling:
 
 
Joe Lemire thinks that's irrelevant. He cites data to show that the difference between 1-0 and 0-1 is .327 to .321, a minor drop. That makes no sense (as some of the players point out) because it's harder to get to the vaunted 1-2 (.164) if you start out with a ball.
 
(I think it must be the same concept in reverse with hitters taking first pitch strikes. 0-1 can lead to 1-2)

 
He's an idiot. He's citing batting averages on at bats that end 0-1 and 1-0, not the difference between starting 0-1 and 1-0. He says "First-pitch strikes have value, of course, but more as a means to two-strike counts and potentially going deeper in games than as an inherent end. " which is ridiculous. Throwing the first pitch strike to get ahead and get to the two strike count isn't "more" anything, it's the entire fucking point which means he's essentially arguing against an argument that nobody is making.

 

[Toe Nash]

Yeah, they have the splits on b-ref after the count is either 0-1 or 1-0. So, adding every PA that included either count at some point:
In 2014 for all MLB: 
After 1-0: .267/.373/.420 for an OPS of .792
After 0-1: .221/.261/.331 for an OPS of .592
 
If the first pitch was put into play, hitters hit .336/.341/.526 (.867) on it, so you don't want to go too far and start throwing predictable meatballs...but you definitely want to get ahead when you can.

 

[soxhop411]

Ryan Hannable ‏@RyanHannable 10m10 minutes ago
Farrell indicated he's maybe done more 1-on-1 work with the pitchers than he's done in the past given the early season struggles.

 

[soxhop411]

@RyanHannable: This is the 8th game out of 25 (32 percent of the games) where the Red Sox starter has allowed 5 or more runs.

 

[Harry Hooper]

That can't be a good sign for Juan Nieves, can it?

 
Does suggest an escalating response to unsatisfactory results.

 

[foulkehampshire]

This is starting to get a bit out of hand. 

 

[charlieoscar]

For the past ten seasons starters have accounted for approximately 70% of the decisions. To simplify things, let's say that is 115 decisions per team per year, or 23 decisions per starter (based on a five-man rotation). If each of the starters goes 13 and 10, then they would account for a 65-50 record, which leaves 47 games for the relievers to decide. If the relievers pitch about .500 ball, then they would have a 24-23 record. That would give the team an 89-73 record.
 
If one starter is replaced by an "ace," who goes 18-5, then the team's record would improve to 94-68, assuming all else remains the same. The question with regard to the Red Sox is whether the four remaining startes will be able to combine for 52-40 and whether the bullpen can contribute .500 ball. In other words, from what I am seeing thus far, the club needs more than an "ace."

 

[Rustjive]

This is starting to get a bit out of hand.

It's probably more 'in hand' right now than at any point in the season thus far...4.01 ERA for Sox starters in the past 4 games, since Farrell had a meeting w/ the pitching staff and catchers.

 

[WenZink]

It's probably more 'in hand' right now than at any point in the season thus far...4.01 ERA for Sox starters in the past 4 games, since Farrell had a meeting w/ the pitching staff and catchers.

 
Nice selected sample... it excludes Clay from a full turn of the rotation!  Let's wait until ALL the precincts are counted!

 

[Rustjive]

Nice selected sample... it excludes Clay from a full turn of the rotation!  Let's wait until ALL the precincts are counted!

This was to point out that maybe Farrell's talk actually has been effective...

 

[TheoShmeo]

Maybe it takes a humiliating Yankees series to take action.  But action they need to take.  They simply cannot win with this collection of starters and it's not a "panic" move to realize that and begin to address it.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Maybe it takes a humiliating Yankees series to take action.  But action they need to take.  They simply cannot win with this collection of starters and it's not a "panic" move to realize that and begin to address it.

Hard to really blame the starters for getting swept by the scores of 3-2, 4-2, and 8-5. Quality starts in two out of three games. Yesterday was ugly, but let's not paint the whole series as a failure of the pitching staff,

 

[TheoShmeo]

Hard to really blame the starters for getting swept by the scores of 3-2, 4-2, and 8-5. Quality starts in two out of three games. Yesterday was ugly, but let's not paint the whole series as a failure of the pitching staff,

My comment was not prompted by this series alone, though last night's performance was indeed consistent with what we have seen too much of.  Our starter put the team in a huge hole, again, and made winning one of the three games very difficult.
 
But Yankees series or no Yankees series, my view of whether this collection of starters can win the division or a wild card remains the same: I seriously doubt it.  They can't sack them all, nor should they.  But standing pat is a recipe for disaster in my opinion, and my point was that I hope the sting of getting swept by those MFers to the south helps grease the wheels of change.  Not that I think they should need that help.

 

[ivanvamp]

Maybe it takes a humiliating Yankees series to take action.  But action they need to take.  They simply cannot win with this collection of starters and it's not a "panic" move to realize that and begin to address it.

 
Porcello:
- Career era:  4.33 (97 era+)
- Career era pre-2015:  4.30 (97 era+)
- 2015 era:  5.34 (78 era+)
 
Masterson:
- Career era:  4.25 (94 era+)
- Career era pre-2015:  4.24 (94 era+)
- 2015 era:  4.71 (88 era+)
 
Kelly:
- Career era:  3.59 (106 era+)
- Career era pre-2015:  3.41 (111 era+)
- 2015 era:  5.72 (73 era+)
 
Buchholz:
- Career era:  3.97 (107 era+)
- Career era pre-2015:  3.92 (109 era+)
- 2015 era:  5.76 (72 era+)
 
Miley:
- Career era:  3.91 (100 era+)
- Career era pre-2015:  3.79 (103 era+)
- 2015 era:  7.15 (58 era+)
 
So the five starters' era+ numbers before this season were:  97, 94, 111, 109, 103.  
This season, those same starters' era+ numbers are:  78, 88, 73, 72, 58.
So these guys are, relative to their career era+ numbers before 2015:  -19, -6, -38, -37, -45.
 
I mean, just by random chance you'd figure that at least ONE of the starters would be performing AT or ABOVE his career numbers.  But nope.  All five of them - EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM - is underperforming his career era.  And all but one of them aren't even close.  
 
So this is the worst-case scenario among the starters being played out.  They'd be in first place if they were performing at their career era numbers.  But all five are woefully underperforming.  
 
It's depressing.  There are two schools of thought, right?  (1) They really are this bad and it's going to be an awful season unless they make some moves, or (2) They really are better than this (as their career numbers suggest) so it can only get better from here, right?

 

[Plympton91]

My comment was not prompted by this series alone, though last night's performance was indeed consistent with what we have seen too much of.  Our starter put the team in a huge hole, again, and made winning one of the three games very difficult.

 
Well, don't forget that the bullpen played it's crap hand in 2 of the 3 games as well.  Breslow is a big problem on this staff, and Tazawa is a below average setup man on a playoff team.  They need Breslow gone, and Barnes needs to be up.  And they need to begin thinking about Joe Kelly taking over for Mujica in the pen, with a starting pitcher who doesn't suck brought in from somewhere.  Eventually, you'd hope that either Barnes or Kelly would knock Tazawa back to the 7th inning role that he's better suited for.

 

[smastroyin]

I think the most disconcerting thing is the tacit assumption that was made that the Red Sox had unlocked some secret vault by focusing on pitch framing and ground ball pitchers.  16% of the season is still a small enough sample that we can't simply throw out this strategy, but it certainly seems that the emperor has no clothes, and in fact his wardrobe seems to also be on fire at this point.
 
The answer to the question is that the Red Sox can absolutely survive the starting rotation if the starting rotation was performing at a level even close to expectation.  They can't survive at the current level, and the catching carousel is probably not helping, but they are going to need to figure it out soon.

 

[ivanvamp]

I think they just need to hang around, within 5 games of the division lead, and that buys them time.  But yeah, at *current* performance levels, they have no shot at all.  If the starters give them, from here on out, what was expected of them (just give us your career era+ please!), they'll be pretty solid, I think.
 
Doesn't help that they let two crummy pitchers - Sabathia and Eovaldi - shut them down in Fenway….

 

[lexrageorge]

I think the most disconcerting thing is the tacit assumption that was made that the Red Sox had unlocked some secret vault by focusing on pitch framing and ground ball pitchers.  16% of the season is still a small enough sample that we can't simply throw out this strategy, but it certainly seems that the emperor has no clothes, and in fact his wardrobe seems to also be on fire at this point.
 
The answer to the question is that the Red Sox can absolutely survive the starting rotation if the starting rotation was performing at a level even close to expectation.  They can't survive at the current level, and the catching carousel is probably not helping, but they are going to need to figure it out soon.

I do not believe that was the assumption of the Red Sox front office.  I do believe they felt they had an excellent defensive catcher in Vazquez, and a reasonably competent backup in Hannigan.  Both assumptions were correct, but injuries happen.  
 
The ground ball pitcher theory may simply be "young, cost-controlled pitchers available on the trade market".  
 
But right now the poor performance of both the starting pitching and the bullpen is feeding on itself in a vicious cycle.  I'm not as willing as P91 to declare Tazawa toast; A-Rod, is, after all, a good hitter.  But I agree that something will likely need to be done. 

 

[ivanvamp]

The bullpen will continue to pitch worse and worse as the starters force them to pitch more innings.  Ideally, the starters go 6-8 good innings, leaving the bullpen with not a lot of work to do, and then you can work individual matchups instead of needing guys to go longer, day after day.  

 

[Rustjive]

I think the most disconcerting thing is the tacit assumption that was made that the Red Sox had unlocked some secret vault by focusing on pitch framing and ground ball pitchers.

I don't think that is necessarily disproven. With regards to pitch framing, the downgrade from Vazquez/Hanigan to Hanigan/Leon is huge - +1.8/+.23 calls a game last season for the former pair, +.36/-2.62 calls a game this season for the latter.

As a starting staff, they're 6th in K/9 (although they're also 8th worst in BB/9), so we can't even be sure that they could be classified as a ground ball focused staff. They're give up the 5th fewest line drives, induce the 11th most ground balls, and are 15th for FB%. Even for HR/FB, they're 17th.

Again, it comes to strand rate: at 60.1% they're the absolute worst team in the league, especially since the White Sox at 29th is at 64.7%. There could be a real issue pitching out of the stretch, or it could just be bad luck. But again, this shouldn't do anything to disprove the theory behind how the Sox built their staff.

Edit: Also wanted to add that Red Sox pitchers have a 4.34 ERA throwing to Hanigan and 6.45 ERA throwing to Leon/Swihart. With Hanigan, Sox pitchers have pitched very slightly worse than league average - with Leon/Swihart they've performed as if all opposing lineups are made up of Jose Bautistas. Even more simply, the Red Sox are 10-7 where Hanigan is the starting catcher, 2-6 when not.

 

[smastroyin]

I do not believe that was the assumption of the Red Sox front office.  I do believe they felt they had an excellent defensive catcher in Vazquez, and a reasonably competent backup in Hannigan.  Both assumptions were correct, but injuries happen.  
 
The ground ball pitcher theory may simply be "young, cost-controlled pitchers available on the trade market".  
 
But right now the poor performance of both the starting pitching and the bullpen is feeding on itself in a vicious cycle.  I'm not as willing as P91 to declare Tazawa toast; A-Rod, is, after all, a good hitter.  But I agree that something will likely need to be done. 

 
Young, cost-controlled, and terrible is no way to build a baseball team.
 
The point is, though, when you acquire these types of players, where you are banking on these limited resumes of good performance to be indicative of future performance, you are also buying into the idea that you have the ability to predict or manipulate that performance to improvement.  Again, it is a small sample size but it remains an issue when every player performs below expectation.  And it's also worth noting that this is not a single year blip.  In 2014 the rotation was pretty bad outside of Lester and to a lesser extent Lackey, and the bullpen was up and down even with career years from Badenhop and Miller.
 
I assume they will get it together.  The offense as well.  But I assumed that last year, too, at least before the trades.  And if it goes on too long again, we absolutely have to start to question the approach in talent acquisition in terms of scouting and development.

 

[MakMan44]

What about Jeff Samardzija? The White Sox are playing even worse than the Sox, and Dave Cameron suggested they need to start making big decisions on 2015 now. 
 
I think Shark is a notable step down from Hamels and Cueto, but that also means his price tag is going to be lower. His early season results aren't much better than our current rotation, but there's signs that he's not as bad as his ERA suggests. 

 

[foulkehampshire]

What about Jeff Samardzija? The White Sox are playing even worse than the Sox, and Dave Cameron suggested they need to start making big decisions on 2015 now. 
 
I think Shark is a notable step down from Hamels and Cueto, but that also means his price tag is going to be lower. His early season results aren't much better than our current rotation, but there's signs that he's not as bad as his ERA suggests. 

 
That could be said about every pitcher in our rotation.

 

[MakMan44]

 
That could be said about every pitcher in our rotation.

True. 
 
I was attempting to throw a name into the "ace" ring alongside Hamels & Cueto

 

[dynomite]

True. 
 
I was attempting to throw a name into the "ace" ring alongside Hamels & Cueto

I really like the Shark idea in theory, but in practice I can't imagine the White Sox will sell on him after a month, especially not after trading such a haul for him in December (Semien, RHP Bassitt, and 2 others).

 

[koufax37]

I join the crowd at being very frustrated with our starting rotation, and a combination of "the lack of talent we feared", small sample sizes, change in catchers, and a few psychological group momentum things have added up to some yuck.
 
I'm still bullish on Porcello and Miley to settle in to the new environment and get on track and be middle of the rotation reliable inning eaters.
 
Masterson as others have pointed out, is actually one bad inning away from looking fine, and is pitching much better than last year when injuries really took a hit on command and late movement, and I think he is also on track to be close to what we had hoped from him and a valuable part of the rotation.
 
What that leaves us with is Joe Kelly and Clay who are both much bigger question marks.
 
I'm really disappointed with Kelly's approach and execution of pitches.  Last night (but really all season) he failed to execute pitch after pitch after pitch, even when it didn't hurt him.  Missing spots badly, throwing non-competitive balls, catching a lot of the plate.  His fastball always feels fast but not electric, and on days where he doesn't command it and one of his secondary pitches, he is going to be very frustrating.  He is young enough that he can develop, and these are some of the same criticisms I had for Lester before he somehow got back to acting like an excellent pitcher after a prolonged slump.
 
But what Kelly can't do is continue to be who he is right now and has been doing the last couple years, and think he is a mature and polished pitcher who can just try to do what he has been doing a little better.  He really needs to change his approach to the craft and have a turning point in his career, and that is harder to do in a struggling rotation with a variable catching situation.
 
I'm not going to waste words on Clay right now. Everything that can be said about him has been said about him. Hope for health and one of his prolonged hot streaks, but right now I have no clue about who he really is and what he is likely to do, other than some tempered optimism without high expectations.

 

[johnnywayback]

Generally speaking, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to trade for one ace pitcher right now.  If the starters really are as bad as they've been (or if the reason they've underperformed so badly is a scouting or coaching or catching problem and not just bad luck), it won't make enough of a difference to replace just one of them (and, of course, the team will likely not be in a place where going for it is worth the cost).  
 
Specifically, given that they've made long-term commitments to Miley and Porcello (and clearly had the tantalizing prospect of Kelly figuring it out over the long term in mind when they traded for him), it makes all the sense in the world that they would at least give it another month before deposing them from the rotation.  Meanwhile, I know nobody likes Clay Buchholz, but there's enough upside there to give him some rope, as well.  And Masterson is Masterson -- certainly the easiest piece to slide to the bullpen if and when it seems like we're one ace away from where we want to be, but also the guy who's come the closest to looking like himself so far.

 

[joe dokes]

Maybe if Kelly 'only' threw the fb at 94-95 he'd have better command with it?

 

[In my lifetime]

Maybe if Kelly 'only' threw the fb at 94-95 he'd have better command with it?

 
I think the biggest improvement would be if he started throwing more 4-seam fastballs and fewer 2-seamers.  To this point in the season he has thrown 38.5% 2-seam as compared to 30.0% 4-seam fastballs.
According to F/X, he has thrown 2 seam fast ball for a strike 59.5% compared to his 4 seam fastball at 68.2%.  This is not a surprise for most since his (and almost every pitcher's) 2 seamer has more horizontal movement.  However, he is getting 8.8% swing and misses with the 4 seamer as compared to only 2.6% with the 2 seamer.  So Kelly like most controls the 4 seamer better and it has also been harder for batters to put the ball in play.  Yet he is throwing almost 30% more 2 seam fastballs as compared to 4 seam fastballs.
 
Considering he is throwing the 4 seam at 96-97 mph, it is not the speed that is needing adjustment, but the pitch selection.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

 
I think the biggest improvement would be if he started throwing more 4-seam fastballs and fewer 2-seamers.  To this point in the season he has thrown 38.5% 2-seam as compared to 30.0% 4-seam fastballs.
According to F/X, he has thrown 2 seam fast ball for a strike 59.5% compared to his 4 seam fastball at 68.2%.  This is not a surprise for most since his (and almost every pitcher's) 2 seamer has more horizontal movement.  However, he is getting 8.8% swing and misses with the 4 seamer as compared to only 2.6% with the 2 seamer.  So Kelly like most controls the 4 seamer better and it has also been harder for batters to put the ball in play.  Yet he is throwing almost 30% more 2 seam fastballs as compared to 4 seam fastballs.
 
Considering he is throwing the 4 seam at 96-97 mph, it is not the speed that is needing adjustment, but the pitch selection.

 
Schilling was saying the same thing during the telecast last night.  He pointed out that the 2-seamer was extremely hittable since while it has a good deal of horizontal movement, all of its movement stayed on the hitter's swing plane so hitter's weren't missing it even when they were "off" in where they anticipated bat and ball connecting.
 
I have to say, as Schilling was explaining this, Kelly was pouring 4-seamer after 4-seamer at 96-97 on the black on both sides of the plate and looking really good in the process (top 2nd).  How is it that analysts can see and Kelly and the coaching staff can't make the appropriate adjustments.

 

[m0ckduck]

If I'd told you that Justin Masterson would be locked in an exact tie with Jon Lester for ERA at this point in the season, you'd figure that's good news. Until I told you that they are tied for 83rd among qualified MLB pitchers.