Probably doesn't matter much.YTF said:Here's the thing that is most puzzling to me about Kelly. We all want him to find a level of consistency (that being in a GOOD way) from game to game, but he's having trouble finding that during a game and even within some at bats. The talent seems to be there, he looks amazing at times and then it all goes to shit. Heard it casually mentioned perhaps on Monday's broadcast (can't remember if it was radio or TV as I caught parts of the game on both) that Bob Tewksbury was traveling with the team. I'm wondering in what capacity. Seems at the moment the Sox could use the services of a team of sports psychologists. Has anyone heard similar or perhaps might be able to expand?
Trotsky said:Y'all realize that IF (and I know it's a little Eric Van here of me) Kelly had a quality start this past game his ERA would have been right at 4.0. For F's sake... what the hell has happened to all the posters here? Same with Porcello. These two guys are going to click- I can't believe how you can't see that just by watching them pitch. Yes, they are having problems, but a half decent scout could tell these two will be very very good and I hope to hell that Farrell and Ben continue to stick with them starting.
Add Miley to that group and you've got a core of very good pitchers all around a "no.2" (whatever that means) starting rotation pitcher on a good team. If Buchholz can keep pitching the way he has we'll be good with these 4 from here on out.
Haven't heard anything but Im a big believer in using sports psychologisys/coaching. The whole team could use it.YTF said:Here's the thing that is most puzzling to me about Kelly. We all want him to find a level of consistency (that being in a GOOD way) from game to game, but he's having trouble finding that during a game and even within some at bats. The talent seems to be there, he looks amazing at times and then it all goes to shit. Heard it casually mentioned perhaps on Monday's broadcast (can't remember if it was radio or TV as I caught parts of the game on both) that Bob Tewksbury was traveling with the team. I'm wondering in what capacity. Seems at the moment the Sox could use the services of a team of sports psychologists. Has anyone heard similar or perhaps might be able to expand?
Losing is a diseaseFinanceAdvice said:Haven't heard anything but Im a big believer in using sports psychologisys/coaching. The whole team could use it.
What's so great about Rubby? He's pitching somewhere around replacement level in Arizona. Still just a lottery ticket.BoredViewer said:^RDLR for Miley.
I agree. But he gets to strike out the pitcher every third inning, and Miley's stats are pretty similar across the board, as far as I can tell (except maybe the swinging strike %, stylistic differences). So far I'd say both teams did OK, as opposed to the Lackey deal.Stitch01 said:Not saying the trade was bad, but RDLR has been better than that this year. 3.30 xFIP, 3.37 SIERA, 12% swinging strike rate, BB/9 down almost a BB/9 to 2.14, K rate up. HR's are still his bugaboo, but there's some evidence he's a legit major league starter.
Yes, but De La Rosa has already had Tommy John and the organization was already concerned for his total innings pitched as a result of coming back from that. Miley has already pitched 200+ innings twice in his career and (I am going from memory on this one) was billed as a workhorse who can go deep in games. So they may have the same results but with less risk, which they may be willing to pay more for.BoredViewer said:RDLR doesn't appear to be any worse than Miley - a couple of years younger and costs $516k vs. 3/$20 million. They even had almost identical 2014 seasons.
It's not an epic loss, but if you're the Sox and you make a move like that... you're expecting to get better results from the guy you picked up... not just pay more for what you already had.
Jnai said:Kelly doesn't seem to be a prototypical guy you'd move to the pen. He holds his stuff through games. He doesn't have a wicked platoon split. He doesn't have a huge offspeed pitch that will play up if he only needs to go through three hitters. He doesn't have a middling fastball that will add crucial mph if he transitions into a relief role.
Troy O'Lovely said:Yes, but De La Rosa has already had Tommy John and the organization was already concerned for his total innings pitched as a result of coming back from that. Miley has already pitched 200+ innings twice in his career and (I am going from memory on this one) was billed as a workhorse who can go deep in games. So they may have the same results but with less risk, which they may be willing to pay more for.
Also, eight weeks.foulkehampshire said:They needed some stability in the rotation - which Miley was well suited to provide, albeit at a potentially lesser ceiling. Webster and/or RDLR were unlikely to provide that for a plethora of reasons (IP limits, inconsistency, etc). What we're seeing from RDLR was on the "less-likely" scale on the spectrum of expected projections. Nobody would be surprised if he was struggling quite a bit. Also - National League.
alwyn96 said:
Kelly holds his velocity through games, but his stuff really comes and goes. Or at least his command of it does. I think most pitchers' stuff does tend to play up in the bullpen, and if focus is his problem then it's generally easier to focus on one inning stints than over the course of a game. Plus if his already 97MPH four-seamer can get up 100MPH or something in relief, he might be able to get away with grooving one down the middle more often (as he tends to do).
I'm not saying the Red Sox should necessarily put him in the bullpen yet - a guy who can throw 98 deep in games and who can spin a sweet curve is always interesting and you want to give him every chance to be that top-flight starter - but unless he can keep his focus I think he'll end up there eventually.
BoredViewer said:RDLR doesn't appear to be any worse than Miley - a couple of years younger and costs $516k vs. 3/$20 million. They even had almost identical 2014 seasons.
Does that ERod for Miller trade mean that the FO and Ben get to keep their jobs for the time being?At some point, somone has to pay the price for these moves, whether that someone is Ben Cherington, John Farrell, or an overhaul of the sabermetric people in the front office. It's not just the Lackey trade: the Porcello contract does not seem very prudent and the Masterson signing (for 9.5 million plus incentives) was inexcusable.
Joe Kelly, when the Sox acquired him, had two traits that I thought made him a poor starter. One was the inability to translate his strong natural stuff into strikeouts. The other was inconsistency of command.O Captain! My Captain! said:
Kelly's problem isn't going to be solved by more velocity though. He already has elite velocity on his fastball, as well as fairly good movement. It never hurts to throw harder, but Kelly's issue is command of the fastball first and foremost. Despite the fastball velocity, he also doesn't strike out a ton of guys, so I'm not sure he's super suited towards a bullpen role.
nvalvo said:
Except for the fact that Miley threw literally twice as many innings in the majors.
Back on topic: if RDLR was so obviously worth keeping around because of his stuff and potential, wouldn't Joe Kelly be a very similar case?
O Captain! My Captain! said:
Kelly's problem isn't going to be solved by more velocity though. He already has elite velocity on his fastball, as well as fairly good movement. It never hurts to throw harder, but Kelly's issue is command of the fastball first and foremost. Despite the fastball velocity, he also doesn't strike out a ton of guys, so I'm not sure he's super suited towards a bullpen role.
I had mentioned previously that Kelly only pitched 73 innings in college and 348 innings in the minors. By comparison, in the article ranking #1 draft picks, Ben McDonald said: "From my sophomore year at L.S.U. through the Olympics and then through my junior season, I threw 352 innings in basically a 14-month period."For me the issues with Kelly's transition to starting is similar to Hanley's transition to LF: both appear to have the tools to make the switch (Kelly's raw stuff and ability to hold his velocity vs. Hanley's ability to play SS (if badly)), what they lack is the experience of reps at the position. In that sense both players are projects that will require patience as their experience catches up with raw ability. Obviously patience is in short supply around an under .500 team.
God for fuck balls, do it now.soxhop411 said:“@keithlaw: Joe Kelly: Still Not a Starter”
“@keithlaw: .@VirtualBoyd I’d put Kelly in the pen, where his skill set will work, and recall Brian Johnson for the rotation.”
What a sad state of affairs. Masterson and Porcello combining to make over $20 million to give the team negative-level performance.The Gray Eagle said:Or just put Wright back in the rotation.
Wait, we just sent him down to make room for Masterson.
Wright's 4.15 ERA is nothing great, but Kelly, Porcello and Masterson have all been horrendous. Those three have combined to go 8-15 with a combined ERA around 6.00 in over 190 IP.
I'd dump Masterson, put Kelly in the bullpen and put Wright in the rotation.
Isn't it closer to $30M?RedOctober3829 said:What a sad state of affairs. Masterson and Porcello combining to make over $20 million to give the team negative-level performance.
The Gray Eagle said:Or just put Wright back in the rotation.
Wait, we just sent him down to make room for Masterson.
Wright's 4.15 ERA is nothing great, but Kelly, Porcello and Masterson have all been horrendous. Those three have combined to go 8-15 with a combined ERA around 6.00 in over 190 IP.
I'd dump Masterson, put Kelly in the bullpen and put Wright in the rotation.
ivanvamp said:He very rarely has just mediocre starts (6 ip, 3 runs, 7 ip, 4 runs, that kind of thing). He's either very good or very bad. Looking at his game log, I see:
7 very good starts - Total line: 42.0 ip, 32 h, 10 er, 15 bb, 32 k, 2.14 era, 1.12 whip
6 very bad starts - Total line: 26.2 ip, 42 h, 33 er, 14 bb, 25 k, 11.14 era, 2.10 whip
1 mediocre start - Total line: 6.0 ip, 7 h, 4 er, 2 bb, 3 k, 6.00 era, 1.50 whip (this really should be considered a "bad" start, but it's closer to "mediocre" than "very bad")
The good Joe Kelly is dominating. The bad Joe Kelly isn't fit to pitch for AA Portland. Sadly, you just never know which Joe Kelly you're gonna get.
Plympton91 said:
In a lost season, it is worth keeping him in the rotation and building up his innings to see if the ratio of good to bad can become more favorable.
It also might be worth putting him in the bullpen to see if his stuff really does play up and he can be a Wade Davis/Luke Hochevar (pre-TJS) type relief ace.
I'm o.k. with either option, really. Last night the bases got loaded on 3 balls that fit the definition of BABip.
If I recall correctly, the Orioles tried Zach Britton as a starter before they put him in the bullpen. He is similar to Kelly at least with respect to the ovepowering fastball, and this decision has worked out quite well for the Orioles.The X Man Cometh said:
Do we have any reason to expect Kelly to be game changing in the pen?
I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to me like Kelly, besides being a hard-thrower, has much in common with generic "relief ace" types. Some of his big strengths (can throw 100 pitches a night, has a four-pitch mix) are minimized by pitching 1 inning per outing. Furthermore, its not like he has these two dominant pitches that he'll throw out of the pen with the burden of starting behind him. His secondary pitches don't seem so far behind his fastball in terms of effectiveness.
He is what he is, a developmental starting pitcher. And despite being developmental, he's outpitched Masterson and Wright so far anyway.
nattysez said:
From Dave Cameron's chat:
12:02
Comment From Sully
Why did anyone ever think Joe Kelly has value as a starting pitcher?
12:03
Dave Cameron: Because he’s thrown 392 innings as a big league starter and has a 3.92 ERA, 4.19 FIP, and 4.20 xFIP. The idea that he’s not a capable big league starter is an overreaction to a few bad months.
Edit: My own $.02 is that I have yet to see any evidence that Kelly's stuff is going to "play up" as a reliever. The hits he gave up last night were all belt-high in the strike zone -- I don't see how those kinds of location mistakes get resolved by moving to relief. As I consider this season to be a lost cause, I think not using the rest of the year to see if Kelly can work things out as a starter would be a mistake.
The X Man Cometh said:
Do we have any reason to expect Kelly to be game changing in the pen?
I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to me like Kelly, besides being a hard-thrower, has much in common with generic "relief ace" types. Some of his big strengths (can throw 100 pitches a night, has a four-pitch mix) are minimized by pitching 1 inning per outing. Furthermore, its not like he has these two dominant pitches that he'll throw out of the pen with the burden of starting behind him. His secondary pitches don't seem so far behind his fastball in terms of effectiveness.
He is what he is, a developmental starting pitcher. And despite being developmental, he's outpitched Masterson and Wright so far anyway.
ivanvamp said:
If they're thinking he can be effective out of the pen, then they've gotta be thinking that he can dominate for the first couple of innings, but that the longer he goes, the worse he gets.
Well this year, here are his numbers during his first and second innings of work:
First inning: 14.0 ip, 5.79 era, .264/.328/.472/.800, .279 babip
Second inning: 13.2 ip, 9.22 era, .356/.414/.525/.940, .396 babip
So maybe the babip suggests that the second inning he's been somewhat unlucky, but you can't say that about the first inning. The fact is, he's been BAD in the first inning or two. His best innings (not counting the 7th where he has only 2.1 ip) have been the 5th (3.09) and the 3rd (4.15).
So I don't know that there's any evidence to suggest that moving to the bullpen will improve him.