Producing Relief Pitchers

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
8,357
Manchester, N.H.
I think we also need to consider what a "developed" relief pitcher represents. Taking 2018-2022, below are the lists of 4 WAR (accumulated as a reliever) pitchers - so an average of one win above replacement per full year (bonus or demerits for 2020 inclusive). I chose 4 WAR because 3.9 WAR is...Matt Barnes, so I felt it was pretty good since the source of the thread was that the last guy the Boston developed like that was Barnes. That produced, via fWAR, 26 names

(Note: This is a hugely inexact process of course, I am just trying to build a sample)

8 of those players played for 1 team from 2018-2022 - the remainder were multi-team guys (we'll get to those 18), Of those eight, two of them (Aroldis Chapman and Felipe Vazquez) were acquisitons after their debut of the team they gained value for - Vazquez accumulated in two years of note. That leaves six players who met all qualifications who didn't play for another MLB team prior:

Chad Green: He is currently rehabbing for Toronto, but from 2017-2021, he was normally a valuable relief cog for the Yankees and his year got cut short in 2022.The Yankees acquired him in a prospect for prospect trade in the post-season of 2015 and he debuted in 2016. This one is a lot more like Whitlock or Winckowski in terms of acquisition timeframe.

Devin Williams - He debuted in 2019 but accumulated much of his value from 2020-2022 for this project and has continued as an elite reliever this year. He was a failed starter prospect - drafted in the second round and played as an SP in the minors for two years before converting in 2019 officially to relief and taking off.

Scott Barlow: He spent much of the 2010s in the Dodgers minor league system as a sixth round pick and SP prospect who looked like he had some hope in AA but never could make it above that. KC picked him up as a minor league free agent, swapped him to RP, where he provided decent value in 2018-2020 and much stronger RP performance in 2021-2022. This year has been bad.

Jose Leclerc - He built his place on this list off of a great 2018 and a decent 2019, and has settled in as an alright reliever from there. The thing on Leclerc is that he was signed as a 17 year old IFA in 2010, and debuted in 2016, and only began adding value in 2018. That is an eight year run to get to that point. He was briefly tried as an SP but is one of the purer RP prospects on the list, but it was a very long process to get there.

Seth Lugo - He was a very late round draft pick of the Mets who did well but got rocked in AAA. The Mets plated him as an SP in 2017 and he was alright and had value, then they moved him to the pen where he was a lot better but had fewer innings

A.J. Minter - This is probably the closest pure RP success story. Atlanta took him in the second round and pretty much immediately put him into the RP role - he's never started in the minors. He hit the majors two years after being drafted, had some up and down years and has settled into being quite a decent relief pticher - not amazing but perfectly good


Now for the other 18 names, a handful are long term relief RPs who had 3+ teams - Taylor Rogers, Raisel Iglesias, Adam Ottavino, Collin McHugh, Dylan Floro, Chris Martin, and Brad Hand. In the interest of time it's probably not worth pursing these leads for the homegrown value RP project except Taylor Rogers (converted starter right before he got called up). For the other 11 with two teams

Liam Hendricks - SP with Minnesota converted to RP with Toronto earning that WAR with Oakland and Chicago much later
Edwin Diaz - Interesting one, he was a "failed" starter prospect but he was pretty good in the minors relative to other failed starters, Seattle converted him and his skills took off - the Mets acquired him in the Robby Cano/Jarred Kelenic deal
Josh Hader - Converted starter right before call-up and acquired via trade from the Oroles for Bud Norris with other stuff.
Ryan Pressly - Earned the value in Houston after being a worse reliever in Minnesota for five years.
Giovanny Gallegos - Developed by the Yankees, acquired by STL after his debut in the Luke Voit trade.
Blake Trienen - Came up as an SP, converted to the pen, acquired by Oakland from Washington and has earned value in Oakland and LA.
Kenley Jansen - Don't really need to recap him, one of the best RPs of the generation, stayed in LA for ages - as pure an RP prospect as you can imagine and the poster child for it really.
Kirby Yates - Bounced around to several teams before SD extracted two very good years from him, and then turned into a pumpkin.
Emmanuel Clase - Acquried by Cleveland in the Corey Kluber trade form the Rangers who acquired him in a trade from the Padres - mostly an RP in the minors
Hector Neris- Accumulated the value for PHI and HOU, took a couple years to start being good for Philly from his call up which was four years from his signing - mostly an RP in the minors.

I think you look through this and the trends are pretty obvious. You do have a small handful of homegrown, intentionally developed relief pitchers (Jansen, Minter) and some other focused RP prospects acquired reasonably, but the vast majority as SPs who served better out of the pen, reclamation projects and cheap trade targets from other teams, or proven FA signings. It's really not something that happens as often as we think it will. Now, will Felix Bautista show up on this list some time soon? Probably. But with the volatility of RP value year over year and the resources needed to develop a guy, and the success of downtiering SPs instead, I think teams are very particular at identifying pure RP prospects who are good enough to be impact guys in the bigs but whose arm or stuff won't survive a second time through the lineup. Relief value is heavily variable over years except for the elite of the elite and very few teams have even one of these kinds of guys who are homegrown and eating up good innings at the end. And in some cases, you particularly try to do that by drafting a relief stud real early and bringing him up like that and its just a big waste of resources.

Now as the 80-90 IP RP/Swing Guy comes back into vogue or co-starters become a more regular thing, that might be something teams could look at more to add value, especially as good RP prices are very high, but I find it hard to criticize Sox management for this most teams really don't invest in pitchers targeting lights out relief guys. Bloom is doing what a lot of smart, successful teams have done - target guys who may not be in their best role and move them there or look for undervalued players and get them in house. In the case if Kenley, it was pay out the nose, but in other cases it's those low value player swaps or taking a guy off the scrap heap and fixing a mechanic.

Edit: There's also the element that merely eating innings has huge value. If you ranked Nick Pivetta on this list - with two years as an SP and two split seasons, even with no value in 2019 or 2023, he'd be in the Top 10. Even a middling SP who can put in some value in RP is likely to mean more to a club than a good reliever.
 
Last edited:

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
15,316
It's good enough for a 4.20 era overall as a starter, which would put him #17 in the AL among qualified leaders (if (a) he had enough innings to qualify, and (b) we only counted his era as a starter).
You can't qualify when you don't average 5 innings per start. Like if he was a starter who pitched exactly 4 innings per start, his ERA would math out to probably around 3.11. I'm sure that places even higher on the qualified ERA leaderboard.

ETA: Meh, this math is bad, probably around 3.50, but the point is, ERA without the context of how deep a guy is getting into games isn't particularly useful.
 

Benj4ever

New Member
Nov 21, 2022
367
No judgment is final. Pitchers evolve (or devolve). But Crawford did start 12 games last season & will be 28 next season. He will need to take a jump to be someone you want as part of your rotation rather than someone you want pitching 2-3 innings once or twice a week. Of course it's possible, but I wouldn't assume him into that.
Sure. He's got to stretch some of those 4 - 5 inning starts into 6 innings. Looking at his starts the last two months, I see the potential for that to happen. And, yeah, if he trends downward you put him back in the pen.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
15,316
Side note on Crawford...he hasn't been good at Fenway.

5.68 ERA at home, 2.06 on the road.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
15,316
Sure. He's got to stretch some of those 4 - 5 inning starts into 6 innings. Looking at his starts the last two months, I see the potential for that to happen. And, yeah, if he trends downward you put him back in the pen.
Yeah. I guess I view it like I view the Sale thing. You have a bucket of guys who could be starters, and it's a matter of figuring out who is most prepared to be that before the start of next season.

Literally the only guy they have who I would hand a starting job to for next season right now is Brayan Bello. So you add 2 guys you absolutely would hand a job to, & let everyone else battle it out for 4th & 5th, with the losers in the pen or traded if anyone values them as starters.
 

Benj4ever

New Member
Nov 21, 2022
367
Side note on Crawford...he hasn't been good at Fenway.

5.68 ERA at home, 2.06 on the road.
That's definitely more problematic, but it makes it more likely that his value to other teams would be higher, and thus a more valuable trade chip. Sawamura is a fine example of what a reliever who can't pitch at Fenway looks like.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
15,316
That's definitely more problematic, but it makes it more likely that his value to other teams would be higher, and thus a more valuable trade chip. Sawamura is a fine example of what a reliever who can't pitch at Fenway looks like.
He was 4.50 at home last year & 6.51 on the road, so hard to say how much is noise. But it's pretty extreme so far this year.
 

Benj4ever

New Member
Nov 21, 2022
367
Yeah. I guess I view it like I view the Sale thing. You have a bucket of guys who could be starters, and it's a matter of figuring out who is most prepared to be that before the start of next season.

Literally the only guy they have who I would hand a starting job to for next season right now is Brayan Bello. So you add 2 guys you absolutely would hand a job to, & let everyone else battle it out for 4th & 5th, with the losers in the pen or traded if anyone values them as starters.
Yeah, I'm in on that. You would know better than I, but it seems like there's enough organizational depth right now not to panic about the last two spots.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
15,316
They have a whole bunch of guys in the system. I can get into details later if it would be helpful.
Red Sox Prospects & Their Relief Potential (rankings are mine)
#5 Luis Perales (20 y/o, A+) - I hope he can become a top of the rotation starter. Has probably the best stuff in the system. Needs to work on control, but certainly if he fails as a starter should make a high end relief arm. Will be added to 40-man this off season.

#8 Wikelman Gonzalez (21 y/o, AA) - Similar to Perales, but I think a higher chance to end up a high end relief arm. Will be added to 40-man this off season.

#9 Yordanny Monegro (20 y/o, A) - Gives big closer energy in terms of the post strikeout celebrations & his bouncy personality, but I'm still hopeful he can progress as a high upside starter.

#17 Luis Guerrero (23 y/o, AA) - Guerrero is the first bullpen only player on this list. He was in the Future Stars game this season & has been lights out for most of the season. He has a 1.52 ERA this season & has really limited the walks he was struggling with earlier in the year (Last 8 games: 10.2 IP, 0 ER, 3 hits, 2 walks, 14 strikeouts, 0.00 ERA, 0.47 WHIP). He was a 17th round pick by Bloom in '21 & has a fastball that tops out around 100, but usually sits 96-98.

#25 Isaac Coffey (23 y/o, AA) - Coffey has a funky sidearm delivery he uses to deceive hitters & get a lot of strikeouts (11.57 per 9) while having a low 90s fastball. He is the type of guy that unless he can bump up his fastball will have a hard time getting Major League hitters out multiple times, but whose stuff might play well in a higher-stamina Schreibery sort of way. He was the Red Sox 10th round pick in 2022 & received a very under slot $7,500 signing bonus.

#27 Angel Bastardo (22 y/o, AA) - Bastardo was recently promoted to Portland & is a guy who profiles best as a reliever because he has a plus fastball, ok curveball, and not very good changeup. He is Rule 5 Eligible & is someone I wouldn't be surprised if they left unprotected & he got drafted, or if they moved as part of a bigger deal for Major League talent, or for a further away flyer or two.

#28 Bryan Mata (24 y/o, AAA) - Mata is on the 40-man, but out of options. His mostly lost season due to injuries is extra problematic with him now being out of options (meaning he would have to clear waivers to be assigned to the Minor Leagues next season). Seems like a guy who could be traded to a not very good team where his stuff could definitely be useful out of the pen. He has an explosive fastball & decent secondary pitches, but hasn't shown the ability to maintain his stuff later into starts.

#33 Dalton Rogers (22 y/o, A+) - Rogers was the Red Sox 3rd round pick in '22. He has a really nice fastball/changeup combo, but his other pitches, as well as his control could use some work. He is a lefty with plus stuff, though, so could certainly carve out a bullpen role even if the rest doesn't come together fully. 12.69 k/9 as a starter in A+ this year.

#34 Ryan Fernandez (25 y/o, AAA) - Another relief only guy. Fernandez was dominant in AA this year (1.77 ERA, 3.11 xFIP), but has come back to earth in AAA (6.86 ERA, 4.60 xFIP). He throws 5 pitches & has a fast ball that sits in the high 90s, so there is potential for some interesting things. He is eligible for the Rule 5 draft after this season, though.

There are other guys like Hunter Dobbins (#19), Shane Drohan (#21, Rule 5 Eligible) & Grant Gambrell (#38, Rule 5 Eligible) who could definitely serve some sort of bullpen purpose if they fail as starters as well, but just picked some of the guys who seemed a bit more interesting in those roles to write about. & then they have bullpen only guys like Christopher Troye (#42), and some guys I have a bit further down, but SoxProspects are pretty high on like Alex Hoppe (#67) & Ryan Zeferjahn (#70, Rule 5 Eligible). Plus some guys who are further away, but have pitched really well in closer-type roles like Felix Cepeda (#71), Brock Bell (#91) & Jonathan Brand (#63).

Just a bit of a cliff's notes version. Shameless plug - if this sort of stuff is interesting to you, the MiLB daily threads & Prospect watch thread would probably be enjoyable reads.

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/8-29-2023-milb-from-the-future.40320/

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/top-250-red-sox-prospects-list-prospect-discussion-thread.40216/
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,231
Portland
I think we also need to consider what a "developed" relief pitcher represents. Taking 2018-2022, below are the lists of 4 WAR (accumulated as a reliever) pitchers - so an average of one win above replacement per full year (bonus or demerits for 2020 inclusive). I chose 4 WAR because 3.9 WAR is...Matt Barnes, so I felt it was pretty good since the source of the thread was that the last guy the Boston developed like that was Barnes. That produced, via fWAR, 26 names

(Note: This is a hugely inexact process of course, I am just trying to build a sample)

8 of those players played for 1 team from 2018-2022 - the remainder were multi-team guys (we'll get to those 18), Of those eight, two of them (Aroldis Chapman and Felipe Vazquez) were acquisitons after their debut of the team they gained value for - Vazquez accumulated in two years of note. That leaves six players who met all qualifications who didn't play for another MLB team prior:

Chad Green: He is currently rehabbing for Toronto, but from 2017-2021, he was normally a valuable relief cog for the Yankees and his year got cut short in 2022.The Yankees acquired him in a prospect for prospect trade in the post-season of 2015 and he debuted in 2016. This one is a lot more like Whitlock or Winckowski in terms of acquisition timeframe.

Devin Williams - He debuted in 2019 but accumulated much of his value from 2020-2022 for this project and has continued as an elite reliever this year. He was a failed starter prospect - drafted in the second round and played as an SP in the minors for two years before converting in 2019 officially to relief and taking off.

Scott Barlow: He spent much of the 2010s in the Dodgers minor league system as a sixth round pick and SP prospect who looked like he had some hope in AA but never could make it above that. KC picked him up as a minor league free agent, swapped him to RP, where he provided decent value in 2018-2020 and much stronger RP performance in 2021-2022. This year has been bad.

Jose Leclerc - He built his place on this list off of a great 2018 and a decent 2019, and has settled in as an alright reliever from there. The thing on Leclerc is that he was signed as a 17 year old IFA in 2010, and debuted in 2016, and only began adding value in 2018. That is an eight year run to get to that point. He was briefly tried as an SP but is one of the purer RP prospects on the list, but it was a very long process to get there.

Seth Lugo - He was a very late round draft pick of the Mets who did well but got rocked in AAA. The Mets plated him as an SP in 2017 and he was alright and had value, then they moved him to the pen where he was a lot better but had fewer innings

A.J. Minter - This is probably the closest pure RP success story. Atlanta took him in the second round and pretty much immediately put him into the RP role - he's never started in the minors. He hit the majors two years after being drafted, had some up and down years and has settled into being quite a decent relief pticher - not amazing but perfectly good


Now for the other 18 names, a handful are long term relief RPs who had 3+ teams - Taylor Rogers, Raisel Iglesias, Adam Ottavino, Collin McHugh, Dylan Floro, Chris Martin, and Brad Hand. In the interest of time it's probably not worth pursing these leads for the homegrown value RP project except Taylor Rogers (converted starter right before he got called up). For the other 11 with two teams

Liam Hendricks - SP with Minnesota converted to RP with Toronto earning that WAR with Oakland and Chicago much later
Edwin Diaz - Interesting one, he was a "failed" starter prospect but he was pretty good in the minors relative to other failed starters, Seattle converted him and his skills took off - the Mets acquired him in the Robby Cano/Jarred Kelenic deal
Josh Hader - Converted starter right before call-up and acquired via trade from the Oroles for Bud Norris with other stuff.
Ryan Pressly - Earned the value in Houston after being a worse reliever in Minnesota for five years.
Giovanny Gallegos - Developed by the Yankees, acquired by STL after his debut in the Luke Voit trade.
Blake Trienen - Came up as an SP, converted to the pen, acquired by Oakland from Washington and has earned value in Oakland and LA.
Kenley Jansen - Don't really need to recap him, one of the best RPs of the generation, stayed in LA for ages - as pure an RP prospect as you can imagine and the poster child for it really.
Kirby Yates - Bounced around to several teams before SD extracted two very good years from him, and then turned into a pumpkin.
Emmanuel Clase - Acquried by Cleveland in the Corey Kluber trade form the Rangers who acquired him in a trade from the Padres - mostly an RP in the minors
Hector Neris- Accumulated the value for PHI and HOU, took a couple years to start being good for Philly from his call up which was four years from his signing - mostly an RP in the minors.

I think you look through this and the trends are pretty obvious. You do have a small handful of homegrown, intentionally developed relief pitchers (Jansen, Minter) and some other focused RP prospects acquired reasonably, but the vast majority as SPs who served better out of the pen, reclamation projects and cheap trade targets from other teams, or proven FA signings. It's really not something that happens as often as we think it will. Now, will Felix Bautista show up on this list some time soon? Probably. But with the volatility of RP value year over year and the resources needed to develop a guy, and the success of downtiering SPs instead, I think teams are very particular at identifying pure RP prospects who are good enough to be impact guys in the bigs but whose arm or stuff won't survive a second time through the lineup. Relief value is heavily variable over years except for the elite of the elite and very few teams have even one of these kinds of guys who are homegrown and eating up good innings at the end. And in some cases, you particularly try to do that by drafting a relief stud real early and bringing him up like that and its just a big waste of resources.

Now as the 80-90 IP RP/Swing Guy comes back into vogue or co-starters become a more regular thing, that might be something teams could look at more to add value, especially as good RP prices are very high, but I find it hard to criticize Sox management for this most teams really don't invest in pitchers targeting lights out relief guys. Bloom is doing what a lot of smart, successful teams have done - target guys who may not be in their best role and move them there or look for undervalued players and get them in house. In the case if Kenley, it was pay out the nose, but in other cases it's those low value player swaps or taking a guy off the scrap heap and fixing a mechanic.

Edit: There's also the element that merely eating innings has huge value. If you ranked Nick Pivetta on this list - with two years as an SP and two split seasons, even with no value in 2019 or 2023, he'd be in the Top 10. Even a middling SP who can put in some value in RP is likely to mean more to a club than a good reliever.
Appreciate you doing all the leg work on this. The first prominent example I can recall of the Sox fast drafting a reliever to get up as quickly as possible was Craig Hansen. Durbin Feltman is a more recent example. I think we are starting to, and will see much more of teams placing higher value on lower round arms that lack even fringey 3rd pitches that can move quickly through the minors and be helpful 2-3 inning guys. The bust rate is extremely high on as there are precious few guys out there who have shots at legit careers, and you aren't getting them as often low first or 2nd round. Andrew Painter has a chance to be a Cy Young, but has already had TJ.

Maybe Murphy and Walter turn into reliable bulk guys and/or Drohan moves to the pen. Personally, I'd rather they keep amassing low ceiling guys who can at least contribute, and using chips to trade for established guys.

Edit: JM3 has many more listed. It's about accumulating as much depth as possible and hoping for a hit or two.
 
Last edited:

Sox Puppet

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2016
730
A bit tangential, but The Athletic just posted an article about Ryan Brasier and how the Dodgers were able to turn him around pretty quickly by teaching him a cutter.

In 26 appearances with the Dodgers, he has a 0.99 ERA, 0.73 WHIP and 3.86 strikeouts for every walk — numbers reminiscent of Brasier’s breakout 2018 season when he emerged from total obscurity to become a vital piece of a championship bullpen [....] What stands out most immediately is the cutter. The Dodgers added the pitch to Brasier’s repertoire during those initial bullpen sessions, and Brasier learned it right away. Throughout his career, Brasier had been a fastball-slider pitcher, and the cutter fits somewhere in between. The Red Sox never recommended the pitch. So, was that it? Was that the secret sauce? The Dodgers taught him one pitch, he started throwing it some 20 percent of the time, and poof, one of the game’s worst relievers became one of its best?
FWIW, Brasier himself also says the two weeks of rest he got after his release allowed him to reset and recharge, but that he never had a chance to do that with the Sox because he was being used so heavily. The article also hints at the hit-or-miss nature of such reclamations, crediting the Sox with getting something out of Schreiber, Pivetta, and Bernardino, among others.
 
Last edited:

Vermonter At Large

SoxFan
Moderator
SoSH Member
To the arguments about whether or not guys like Crawford, Winckowski and Whitlock should be included under the subset of "development," it should be pointed out that none of them have more than a few months of decent performance out of the bullpen. Whitlock in particular hasn't even been replacement level so far this year. So Matt Barnes ...

Beyond that, Red Sox starting pitchers have averaged 4.8 innings per start this year, so more than 40% of IPs have come from relief pitchers. According to Sportrac.com, the adjusted salaries for the 13 relief pitchers on active, injured or restricted sections of the 25-man roster are $44.2M (excluding salaries from guys on current minor league rosters, with another $10.3M in outlays to traded players (Barnes, Bleier, Brasier), so something like 30% of their 2023 payroll ($185M) is dedicated to bullpen pitchers ($28M to three primary guys - Jansen, Martin and Pivetta).

With all of the resources this organization puts into baseball operations, for analytics, coaching, scouting, physiotherapy, etc I certainly hope that our front office is doing more than drafting SPs only, converting failed starters and rejects from other organizations in hope that some of it "sticks."

Ten years ...
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,716
Whitlock and Winckowski came from other organizations. Houck was a first-round pick from 2017. I'm not getting a "development" vibe here.
Winckowski was a minor league player they traded for, why does that exclude him from consideration? He didn't go straight from the Mets to the Red Sox, he went from the Dunedin Blue Jays to Portland.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,330
To the arguments about whether or not guys like Crawford, Winckowski and Whitlock should be included under the subset of "development," it should be pointed out that none of them have more than a few months of decent performance out of the bullpen. Whitlock in particular hasn't even been replacement level so far this year. So Matt Barnes ...

Beyond that, Red Sox starting pitchers have averaged 4.8 innings per start this year, so more than 40% of IPs have come from relief pitchers. According to Sportrac.com, the adjusted salaries for the 13 relief pitchers on active, injured or restricted sections of the 25-man roster are $44.2M (excluding salaries from guys on current minor league rosters, with another $10.3M in outlays to traded players (Barnes, Bleier, Brasier), so something like 30% of their 2023 payroll ($185M) is dedicated to bullpen pitchers ($28M to three primary guys - Jansen, Martin and Pivetta).

With all of the resources this organization puts into baseball operations, for analytics, coaching, scouting, physiotherapy, etc I certainly hope that our front office is doing more than drafting SPs only, converting failed starters and rejects from other organizations in hope that some of it "sticks."

Ten years ...
You are certainly correct that the Sox have struggled for years to produce good pitching.
They’re beginning to do so now, but your criteria add up to exclude three of their brightest spots this season because Bello is a starter and Winckowski and Crawford (who’s obviously been starting) apparently haven’t been doing it long enough to qualify.

Beyond those three, in the minors right now, where an organization’s development occurs, the Sox have their most promising crop of arms in memory. The most advanced of them—but not the one with the highest ceiling—is now doing well in AA. They won’t all make it, but the odds are that some of them will.

If you want to remain skeptical that any of this, in the face of years of pitching development failure, represents a new day for the organization, that is certainly a reasonable stance. But there is plenty of evidence right now that it does.
 

Vermonter At Large

SoxFan
Moderator
SoSH Member
You are certainly correct that the Sox have struggled for years to produce good pitching.
They’re beginning to do so now, but your criteria add up to exclude three of their brightest spots this season because Bello is a starter and Winckowski and Crawford (who’s obviously been starting) apparently haven’t been doing it long enough to qualify.

Beyond those three, in the minors right now, where an organization’s development occurs, the Sox have their most promising crop of arms in memory. The most advanced of them—but not the one with the highest ceiling—is now doing well in AA. They won’t all make it, but the odds are that some of them will.

If you want to remain skeptical that any of this, in the face of years of pitching development failure, represents a new day for the organization, that is certainly a reasonable stance. But there is plenty of evidence right now that it does.
Bello certainly is a success story, but I'm not quite as sold on Winckowski and Kutter as some folks seem to be. Otherwise, we will have to wait and see. We've collectively found ourselves drooling over prospect reports many times during the past decade, with very little to show. Overall, I think that we've seen organizations (Dodgers, Giants, Braves, Astros, Rays, Guardians ...) who've managed to produce pitchers consistently, so it's not just a random, cyclical thing (most of those teams have been consistently good for a decade or more). Clearly (I think) that points to an organizational deficiency that just changing GMs has thus far failed to correct. It's fashionable to blame the GFIN strategy (i.e. Dombrowski) for that, but really very few of the prospects that were traded away appear to have panned out. It may be another five years before we see if Bloom has made the necessary organizational shifts to improve pitcher development. We should have a seriously stacked offense by then, but without sustainable quality pitching, we're going to revert back to those Sox teams of our collective youth.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
To the arguments about whether or not guys like Crawford, Winckowski and Whitlock should be included under the subset of "development," it should be pointed out that none of them have more than a few months of decent performance out of the bullpen. Whitlock in particular hasn't even been replacement level so far this year. So Matt Barnes ...

Beyond that, Red Sox starting pitchers have averaged 4.8 innings per start this year, so more than 40% of IPs have come from relief pitchers. According to Sportrac.com, the adjusted salaries for the 13 relief pitchers on active, injured or restricted sections of the 25-man roster are $44.2M (excluding salaries from guys on current minor league rosters, with another $10.3M in outlays to traded players (Barnes, Bleier, Brasier), so something like 30% of their 2023 payroll ($185M) is dedicated to bullpen pitchers ($28M to three primary guys - Jansen, Martin and Pivetta).

With all of the resources this organization puts into baseball operations, for analytics, coaching, scouting, physiotherapy, etc I certainly hope that our front office is doing more than drafting SPs only, converting failed starters and rejects from other organizations in hope that some of it "sticks."

Ten years ...
Ten years....In all fairness your last post offers that it may be a few years until we know what Bloom has developed. In the interim he has to see what he may salvage and yes in some cases what the team may develop from what he's been able to cull elsewhere. Additionally, a big thanks to @Fishercat and @JM3 for the time and effort put into their recent posts.
 

Vermonter At Large

SoxFan
Moderator
SoSH Member
Lots of folks who know way more about the prospects than I do have been throwing a few names around suggesting that the organization is doing better in recent years. That may well be, but I wanted to add this blurb from the most recent MLB Pipeline midseason organizational rankings (Sox were #16 overall):

"
"They're as thin as any organization in terms of pitching talent, though the international scouting department has helped by finding right-handers Wikelman Gonzalez, Luis Perales and Angel Bastardo."

https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-pipeline-2023-midseason-system-rankings?t=mlb-pipeline-coverage
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
15,316
Compare them to Fangraphs, though, who is more in line with most other publications, & who has us 4th & lists us with 23 pitchers graded 35 or higher which is among the most.

https://www.fangraphs.com/prospects/farm-system-rankings

They don't have a lot of high end Major League ready pitchers, but the volume of guys who might be guys is definitely increasing year over year, & they did recently graduate the few that have been heavily discussed itt.

They also definitely focus more resources on high end hitting talent & take more of "a lots of darts" approach to pitchers due to their high variance nature, but the fact that they have so much cost controlled hitting coming up will allow them to spend more freely on high end pitching to fill in any gaps.

& will also indirectly lead to more "misses" on starting pitchers who will become useful bullpen arms.
 

Tony Pena's Gas Cloud

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2019
374
This may be a naive question, but how many successful relievers were actually drafted as relievers and groomed that way all through the minors? The only guy who leaps to mind is Rod Beck, who famously said "I think the last time I pitched three innings was back in high school". All the recent Sox relievers - Barnes, Papelbon, DelCarmen, Bard - were starters when drafted. Even Lee Smith and Mariano Rivera were starters as rookies.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,226
This may be a naive question, but how many successful relievers were actually drafted as relievers and groomed that way all through the minors? The only guy who leaps to mind is Rod Beck, who famously said "I think the last time I pitched three innings was back in high school". All the recent Sox relievers - Barnes, Papelbon, DelCarmen, Bard - were starters when drafted. Even Lee Smith and Mariano Rivera were starters as rookies.
David Robertson and Mark Melancon were both always relievers, both drafted by NYY in 2006.
 

trs

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2010
557
Madrid
Is part of the issue here nomenclature? "Starter" and "reliever" probably began with very simple definitions, who started the game and who relieved the starter. Due to how the game was played originally, starting pitchers were the best pitchers because they were played in a way similar to the other position players, meaning they stayed in the game more or less until they started playing poorly or got hurt. Obviously the "tired" part played a role, but (and I'm trusting AI on this...) in 1920, 65% of games featured complete games by the pitcher. Now that is I'm sure a lower percentage than other position players who completed their games, but it is an extremely high number, and the expectation was that if you started, you would finish. The top pitchers of each team would then start and complete most of the games -- as we all know, even the best teams at that time would feature only 3 or 4 great pitchers. It didn't matter though, because they would pitch 50-70% of the innings, and do so effectively, making a .600 win percentage very possible.

Obviously the game has changed, in 2021, 1.7% of games featured complete games. Pitchers are of course no longer expected to complete games, and "starter" no longer has that expectation, even hope really. However "starter" has still retained the "best pitchers" connotation. This is why anyone drafted was certainly the best pitcher on their high school or college team and so therefore was a "starter." Here I will rely on anecdotal evidence, but starters in high school and college (especially the great ones who might get drafted) are still completing games or pitching a larger percentage of a team's innings than starters do in the MLB. However, this situation just doesn't exist anymore at the MLB level. After about 130 games so far this year, or around 10,500 innings per team, the top 10 in IP for pitchers ranges from 176 to 160. Or about 15-17% of the total innings. And these are the top 10! "Starting pitchers" are only pitching the majority of a team's innings in some rare occurrences (the Orioles for example, about 65%). So perhaps equating "starting pitcher" with "one of our best pitchers" is no longer helpful, at the MLB level and even below. To make matters worse, starters, by the very act of starting, are frequently pitching during the lowest leverage situations.

Would it make sense just to have "pitchers?" Similar to how cricket squads have "bowlers" and not "starting bowler" or "relief bowler?" Each pitcher would train to pitch in a way that made them the most effective -- 40 pitches at high intensity every 2 days? 80 pitches at moderate intensity every 4 days? Move through your roster as needed and "start" whomever fits the bill. I know teams are experimenting with this already and it has been discussed here previously, but what if an entire staff was organized like this? Has "starting pitcher" or "win" encouraged less-than-great decisions like the save stat in the past?

Anyway, it'd probably suck. I miss watching pitchers go toe-to-toe inning after inning, especially in the post-season, but has the game moved on from that?
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,330
Lots of folks who know way more about the prospects than I do have been throwing a few names around suggesting that the organization is doing better in recent years. That may well be, but I wanted to add this blurb from the most recent MLB Pipeline midseason organizational rankings (Sox were #16 overall):

"
"They're as thin as any organization in terms of pitching talent, though the international scouting department has helped by finding right-handers Wikelman Gonzalez, Luis Perales and Angel Bastardo."

https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-pipeline-2023-midseason-system-rankings?t=mlb-pipeline-coverage
Gonzalez, Perales, and Bastardo are three of the very prospects we have been talking about. MLB Pipeline is entitled to its opinions, of course, but Yordanny Monegro and Elmer Rodriguez-Cruz are generally considered better prospects than Bastardo, at least at this point. Regardless, they're all good pitching prospects, and only two of them are at AA yet. That MLB Pipeline has them ranked that low--and others have the system much higher--is probably partially a reflection of the fact that the Sox' best pitching prospects are still at AA and below. It takes time to build pitching depth, especially when the Sox have effectively stopped taking pitchers with their top draft picks. As some of those prospects--and more behind them--develop further and move up the ladder, MLB Pipeline will likely adjust its rankings.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,538
There are already bullpen threads floating around that discuss usage and/or in-game management, but the Sox organization hasn't produced a single quality relief pitcher from their farm system since Matt Barnes, nearly a decade ago. Seriously, that is incomprehensible - heck, they've probably drafted 100+ pitchers over that decade and signed at least as many international and domestic amateurs and not a single one has been converted to a late-inning (7th - 9th innings) quality relief pitcher? That decade transcends three front-office regimes as well. What am I missing? Discuss.
Using this as a jumping off point for developing SP (Home grown talent via the domestic draft and not international FA’s).

Seems pretty clear this is an organizational issue and not a Bloom (or GM) specific one.

The $1,000,000 question is whether it’s the program or the guys the front office is picking to participate in it.
The sox have been terrible at developing any home grown pitching going all the way back to the 2005 (Theo)
SP the red sox have drafted and developed (domestic draft not international FA’s)
2005: Buchholz
2006 Masterson
2017: Houck, Crawford

And i think thats pretty much anyone of note.

Not sure what is causing the Sox to have this much trouble developing so few SP.
https://soxprospects.com/dh.htm
 

zenax

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2023
360
Obviously the game has changed, in 2021, 1.7% of games featured complete games
On Sept. 7, 1908, Walter Johnson pitched his third straight shutout, all coming on the road against the Yankees on Sept. 4th, 5th, 7th (Game 1). In those three games, he gave up 12 hits (6,4,2), one walk and one hit batsman.

For the 2023 season, MLB starting pitchers have averaqed 5.2 IP/GS with 6.6 IP being the highest average for any given starter.
 

ookami7m

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,682
Mobile, AL
Using this as a jumping off point for developing SP (Home grown talent via the domestic draft and not international FA’s).

Seems pretty clear this is an organizational issue and not a Bloom (or GM) specific one.


The sox have been terrible at developing any home grown pitching going all the way back to the 2005 (Theo)
SP the red sox have drafted and developed (domestic draft not international FA’s)
2005: Buchholz
2006 Masterson
2017: Houck, Crawford

And i think thats pretty much anyone of note.

Not sure what is causing the Sox to have this much trouble developing so few SP.
https://soxprospects.com/dh.htm
A couple of guys named Lester and Paplebon may be considered "of note"
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,538
A couple of guys named Lester and Paplebon may be considered "of note"
As others have said. Thats my point. That was more than 20 years ago.
You would think they would at least “luck” into more than like 3 SP Since then.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,326
And one of them really didn't make it as a starter.

One name that should be on the list of developed starters is Michael Kopech. He didn't break into the majors in Boston but he was a Sox draftee.
15-25 in his career, and just got demoted to the bullpen. So a guy they drafted and turned into value, but probably not much more than that (although against my better judgment, he’s a guy I’d like to see the team take a flier on this off-season if avail).
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,948
Maine
15-25 in his career, and just got demoted to the bullpen. So a guy they drafted and turned into value, but probably not much more than that (although against my better judgment, he’s a guy I’d like to see the team take a flier on this off-season if avail).
If we're counting Houck and Crawford as successes for the purpose of this discussion, Kopech certainly fits even with his recent demotion.

Crawford: 9-14, 5.01 ERA in 186.1 innings
Kopech: 15-25, 4.28 ERA in 328.1 innings
Houck: 13-18, 3.86 ERA in 233 innings
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,446
15-25 in his career, and just got demoted to the bullpen. So a guy they drafted and turned into value, but probably not much more than that (although against my better judgment, he’s a guy I’d like to see the team take a flier on this off-season if avail).
If we're counting Houck and Crawford as successes for the purpose of this discussion, Kopech certainly fits even with his recent demotion.

Crawford: 9-14, 5.01 ERA in 186.1 innings
Kopech: 15-25, 4.28 ERA in 328.1 innings
Houck: 13-18, 3.86 ERA in 233 innings
Right, those numbers would make him the most-successful homegrown Red Sox starter between Buchholz and Bello
 

GreenMonsterVsGodzilla

Member
SoSH Member
At the risk of being the guy who says “go do this,” someone’s got to do the work on this or it’s just anecdotes. It’s all fine and good to say “the Red Sox have only developed X pitchers in X years,” but how does that compare to the league? How many have the Milwaukee Brewers developed? Where do the Sox rank, really? It’s certainly my impression that the Sox have been quite bad, but you know what that’s worth.
Set some criteria (how many years do they have to have been in the system? How many starts qualifies as an SP? Etc) and figure it out.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,326
I don’t think an exhaustive analysis needs to be done to confirm that the Red Sox claiming Houck, Crawford, and Kopech as the best starters they’ve acquired as amateurs in the last twenty years is terrible.