176 replies to this topic

[BoSox Rule]

This is a team with elite potential their season doesn't depend on Bard as a starter. For all the talk about depth beer and chicken the biggest problem the last two years has been the inability of Buchholz and Youkilis to stay on the field.

[Sprowl]

Didn't he get roughed up in a B game his last time out, or am I mis-remembering? I could be, in which case I take back my eh.

It depends how often MLB updates this page. It might not include all games yet.

Beyond the small sample of data, Aceves has also shown that he can use all four pitches, while Bard is having trouble spotting the fastball and working in the changeup, and Doubront seems to be having trouble getting swinging strikes with his offspeed pitches (which is a surprise to me, based on his stuff in 2010 and 2011).

Padilla has been set back by injury, Cook and Ohlendorf look like they'll be stashed in the minors but are not ready to start in the majors yet. That leaves Aceves, Bard and Doubront competing for two spots with two weeks to go, with the additional possibility that one of Beckett, Buchholz or Lester develops an owie. There's no reason for the team to commit itself to one outcome yet.

[Montana Fan]

That leaves Aceves, Bard and Doubront competing for two spots with two weeks to go, with the additional possibility that one of Beckett, Buchholz or Lester develops an owie. There's no reason for the team to commit itself to one outcome yet.

If they start Aceves in the rotation I think he'll pitch well enough to keep his spot all year. He was consistent last year in different roles and that should continue as a starter.

Bard should also start the season in the rotation, he can easily transition back to the pen if the starter role doesn't work for him. As Plymp has pointed out, a bad inning (2-4 runs) should be easier for him to work through as a starter. It'll be real interesting to see if he's one of these, get through the first couple innings and put it on cruise control types.

Doubront as a swing man ready to step into the first starter opening (performance or injury related) seems to make sense. Let him get a better feel for ML hitters before he moves into the starter role for good.

It's funny how this all seems to be a big dilemma now but as Tito always said these things work themselves out.

[mabrowndog]

Clay got roughed up by the Orioles today. 5 IP, 86 pitches (56 strikes), 7 H, 5 ER, 3 K, 1 BB, with homers to Adam Jones & Nick Markakis. Several writers tweeted Adams' shot in the 1st inning was a "bomb".

Alex Speier tweeted he "looks listless on mound" ... "one almost wonders if Buchholz is under the weather today."

Edited by mabrowndog, 23 March 2012 - 02:29 PM.

[trekfan55]

Buchholz says he wasn't ready to start 2011; working to get innings to correct that this spring. #redsox http://www.weei.com/...-ready-start-11

Alex Speier on twitter

[Savin Hillbilly]

Buchholz, from the Speier link above:

....pitch counts don’t normally mean anything because it’s how many times you get up and down off the bench after long innings and going back out there pitching and throwing 20 pitches and sitting down for five minutes and going back out. Three and two-thirds and throwing 80 pitches doesn’t really work with getting your legs underneath you. The innings numbers are more important than the actual pitches."

That's interesting stuff. I never would have thought of it that way, but it makes sense.

[pokey_reese]

Given the results Aceves is getting today, you have to wonder how Bobby knows what spring results to count on and which to disregard. Sure, walking 3 guys is bad, but getting mostly ground outs is good. Conversely, Aceves has only walked one, but he hit a guy and is giving up as many fly balls as grounders, some of which are leaving the yard (granted, it's Florida).

Still, I think that the idea that walks are actually far less damaging to a pitcher like Bard (higher K rate, higher GB/FB ratio, fewer HR/9), is one that Bobby doesn't seem to be giving any account to. Maybe someone should explain how advanced pitching metrics work...

I am not saying that Bard is a better starter than Aceves, but I just hate the idea that something like, "he walked three guys" is going to be what costs him the job when he had a better outing last time than Aceves has today.

[Pumpsie]

Given the results Aceves is getting today, you have to wonder how Bobby knows what spring results to count on and which to disregard. Sure, walking 3 guys is bad, but getting mostly ground outs is good. Conversely, Aceves has only walked one, but he hit a guy and is giving up as many fly balls as grounders, some of which are leaving the yard (granted, it's Florida).

Still, I think that the idea that walks are actually far less damaging to a pitcher like Bard (higher K rate, higher GB/FB ratio, fewer HR/9), is one that Bobby doesn't seem to be giving any account to. Maybe someone should explain how advanced pitching metrics work...

I am not saying that Bard is a better starter than Aceves, but I just hate the idea that something like, "he walked three guys" is going to be what costs him the job when he had a better outing last time than Aceves has today.

Oh, I think that Aceves' showing today thrusts Bard right smack dab back into the rotation discussion. Doubront's doing well today, so it may be down to Doubront and either Cook or Bard for the last spot. I think Aceves is making a brilliant case for being placed back in the pen. He's just a complete mess today.

[Sprowl]

Oh, I think that Aceves' showing today thrusts Bard right smack dab back into the rotation discussion. Doubront's doing well today, so it may be down to Doubront and either Cook or Bard for the last spot. I think Aceves is making a brilliant case for being placed back in the pen. He's just a complete mess today.

Each of BAD (Bard Aceves Doubront) probably gets at least one more start before the decision is made. If Valentine wants to go with the hot hand, then Doubront leapfrogged both of Bard and Aceves today.

Aceves' arm slot appeared to be closer to sidearm today than it has in the past. Mechanical instability is a bad sign for fastball command (he was wild in the strike zone today, with most pitches coming in belt-high), and possibly for durability as well.

[mauidano]

So the pressure is on all three. Probably more so on Aceves after he shit the bed today. Bard will still end getting a shot come April at that last position. Unless he blows up again, it's his to lose. All three will be on the 25 man. At least there is flexibility there when someone goes down.

[Rasputin]

All this talk of spring training results making a damn bit of difference is giving me a facial tick.

[Reverend]

Buchholz, from the Speier link above:

That's interesting stuff. I never would have thought of it that way, but it makes sense.

If this is the case, why not incorporate it into the training regime in other ways as well? Like, go pitch another simulated inning or two after being pulled or something.

t also occurs to me to wonder if sitting in the dugout is sub-optimal for a pitcher. Never thought about it before.

[Pumpsie]

All this talk of spring training results making a damn bit of difference is giving me a facial tick.

It doesn't make a difference regarding the team's eventual outcome. It doesn't make a difference for established players like Beckett, Lester, Pedroia, Papi, Youks, etc. The final few games DO make a difference for players being considered for roles they've never done before, or coming off an injury, or in a battle for a particular roster spot.

[dbn]

I'm hoping the last two spots go to Doubront and Bard. Perhaps this is unfair, but I can't help but think of Aceves as a Julian Tavarez redux; his value is maximized as a long man and his flexibility (e.g., spot starter) is an asset, but if he winds up making 20+ starts, we'll be disappointed.

[Eric Van]

All this talk of spring training results making a damn bit of difference is giving me a facial tick.

Theo was so dismissive of teams that put stock in them that he used to dream of picking up someone good who had been put on waivers because of a lousy spring. Never really happened, though.

I have no idea whether Cherington puts as little stock in them, but I'd guess that his attitude can't be that far off. I agree with the take on Bobby V's public statements -- they seem aimed at player psyches rather than reflecting a real change of opinion.

[Toe Nash]

It doesn't make a difference regarding the team's eventual outcome. It doesn't make a difference for established players like Beckett, Lester, Pedroia, Papi, Youks, etc. The final few games DO make a difference for players being considered for roles they've never done before, or coming off an injury, or in a battle for a particular roster spot.

But there's a ton of noise in these results, even beyond the SSS, because they're competing against a lot of guys who are assured of a spot or not MLB-level talent. Bard faced a lineup with mostly Toronto's starters, but how do we evaluate his performance when Bautista's only been facing live pitching for a few weeks?

[Pumpsie]

But there's a ton of noise in these results, even beyond the SSS, because they're competing against a lot of guys who are assured of a spot or not MLB-level talent. Bard faced a lineup with mostly Toronto's starters, but how do we evaluate his performance when Bautista's only been facing live pitching for a few weeks?

That's why we have a manager and coaches, I thought.

[Clears Cleaver]

If the FO and Valentine determine that Bard is not a starter for them, do you think they try to trade him for a starter? Soem teams might be willing to let him get 35 starts and see what happens. Might be an attractive chip when the Sox need volumes of innings more than a 7th/8th inning guy. Just an idea...

[Buzzkill Pauley]

If the FO and Valentine determine that Bard is not a starter for them, do you think they try to trade him for a starter? Soem teams might be willing to let him get 35 starts and see what happens. Might be an attractive chip when the Sox need volumes of innings more than a 7th/8th inning guy. Just an idea...

This idea makes no sense.

It would make more sense to option Bard down to AAA to try to develop his pitches so that he can become a starter. Or to trade Bailey to the Reds so that Bard can close. Or to option Melancon down to AAA so that Bard can close and Bailey can set up.

Or to DFA Youkilis in order to fit Nate Spears' LHH bat on the roster. That's how much sense that idea makes.

Why would the Sox ever consider trading 4-years-club-control-with-a-154-career-ERA+ Daniel Bard, unless he alone could return someone like Mat Latos, Gio Gonzalez, or Michael Pineda? And maybe not even then...

[Clears Cleaver]

Why would the Sox ever consider trading 4-years-club-control-with-a-154-career-ERA+ Daniel Bard, unless he alone could return someone like Mat Latos, Gio Gonzalez, or Michael Pineda? And maybe not even then...

becasue his +154ERA is in 70 innigns and he might be a +105 if he pitched 175 innings. replacing 75 is a hell of a lot easier than finding 175

[Red(s)HawksFan]

becasue his +154ERA is in 70 innigns and he might be a +105 if he pitched 175 innings. replacing 75 is a hell of a lot easier than finding 175

And if he's putting up a 105 ERA+ over 175 innings for the 2012 Red Sox, the current debate over whether he should be in the rotation or the bullpen will be looked back upon as foolishness. You don't trade a starting pitcher with four years of club control if he has an ERA+ of 105. A 105 ERA+ from the fourth starter would be astronomically better than anything we saw last year.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

becasue his +154ERA is in 70 innigns and he might be a +105 if he pitched 175 innings. replacing 75 is a hell of a lot easier than finding 175

His 154 ERA+ might only drop to 125 ERA+ over 175 innings, though. You won't know unless you give him a chance.

But even if he would provide 175 innings of 105 ERA+ ball in 2012, how is that a bad thing from a young starter with three additional years of club control, or something to trade away? Acquiring a veteran innings-eater to GFIN is exactly what the Sox tried to do with Lackey, Penny, Wells, Clement, etc. So let's not assume that strategy is without some risk itself.

It's your proposition, so who exactly do you think trading Bard would net the Sox in return, to make losing him worthwhile?

[Savin Hillbilly]

175 IP of 105 ERA+ is almost exactly what Michael Pineda gave Seattle last year (171 & 103, to be exact).

Pineda was good for 2.8 bWAR with those numbers. Here's how many >2.8 bWAR pitchers teams had in their rotation last year:

4: PHI, SFG
3: LAA, CHI, NYY, OAK, SEA, TBR, TEX
2: ATL, BOS, LAD, MIL
1: nearly everybody else; there were three teams that didn't have any.

So yeah, I 'd be more than happy to see our 4th or 5th starter come up with numbers like that.

Edited by Savin Hillbilly, 26 March 2012 - 11:50 AM.

[Clears Cleaver]

so would I. you are all missing my point...what if the FO thinks he is not capable of that? that his September and spring #s are more representative of his potential as a starter than his +154 in 75 innings. His value in a trade might exceed his value as a reliever. I don't know if he can be a starter...there is nothing to suggest he can be. This experiment to have him start, while said to appease his desire to do so, might be a test for the FO to gauge his true value to the orgaznization. LEt's face it, it cost them virtually nothing to get Bailey and Melacon. It would cost them a heck of a lot more to get a Pineda/etc. if they view Bard as nothing more than a Bailey/MElacon, maybe Bard's value in a trade might never be higher.

Basically I am saying that if the FO can figure out whether he can start or now before anyone else, they might have a trade piece whose market value significntly exceeds his value to the red sox. I'd much rather have the starter than the reliever

[Eric Van]

what if the FO thinks he is not capable of that? that his September and spring #s are more representative of his potential as a starter than his +154 in 75 innings. His value in a trade might exceed his value as a reliever. I don't know if he can be a starter...there is nothing to suggest he can be. This experiment to have him start, while said to appease his desire to do so, might be a test for the FO to gauge his true value to the orgaznization. LEt's face it, it cost them virtually nothing to get Bailey and Melacon. It would cost them a heck of a lot more to get a Pineda/etc. if they view Bard as nothing more than a Bailey/MElacon, maybe Bard's value in a trade might never be higher.

Basically I am saying that if the FO can figure out whether he can start or now before anyone else, they might have a trade piece whose market value significntly exceeds his value to the red sox. I'd much rather have the starter than the reliever

But how could the Red Sox front office know now that Bard won't be a solid MLB starter and hence not be more valuable as a starter than as a reliever, despite the massively strong argument to the contrary?

They're not psychic, so it would requite either unpredented scouting or statistical acumen. And though they've been a very smart organization, they certainly have yet to display that level of smarts. No one has.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Basically I am saying that if the FO can figure out whether he can start or now before anyone else, they might have a trade piece whose market value significntly exceeds his value to the red sox. I'd much rather have the starter than the reliever

But didn't they already figure out that he is capable of that, before anyone else -- well aside anyone except Gammo.

That's why he's in line to be a SP rather than some relatively late-signing FA like Edwin Jackson.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

so would I. you are all missing my point...what if the FO thinks he is not capable of that? that his September and spring #s are more representative of his potential as a starter than his +154 in 75 innings. His value in a trade might exceed his value as a reliever. I don't know if he can be a starter...there is nothing to suggest he can be. This experiment to have him start, while said to appease his desire to do so, might be a test for the FO to gauge his true value to the orgaznization. LEt's face it, it cost them virtually nothing to get Bailey and Melacon. It would cost them a heck of a lot more to get a Pineda/etc. if they view Bard as nothing more than a Bailey/MElacon, maybe Bard's value in a trade might never be higher.

Basically I am saying that if the FO can figure out whether he can start or now before anyone else, they might have a trade piece whose market value significntly exceeds his value to the red sox. I'd much rather have the starter than the reliever

If they didn't believe Bard could cut it as a starter, and were just appeasing him by "giving him a shot" at the rotation while ultimately planning to move him back to the bullpen, I don't think they'd have traded for Bailey. Bard + Reddick/McDonald is cheaper and easier than Bailey + Sweeney/Ross, and they could have taken the savings to add another free agent starter or two to the rotation competition.

They moved Bard to the rotation in lieu of the alternative, which was to hand him the closer's spot. They attacked the off-season by adding not one, but two pitchers who were closers for their respective teams last season and gave exactly zero free agent starting pitchers a major league contract. Those are the moves of an organization that had confidence in Bard making the transition successfully, not one who had strong doubts and were placating him with a meaningless "tryout" before returning him to his previous role, or trading him away.

Edited by Red(s)HawksFan, 26 March 2012 - 02:00 PM.

[Rasputin]

If they didn't think Bard could cut it as a starter, they would stick him back in the pen and upgrade the offer to the Nats for Lannan.

[bakahump]

Serious question....

How good would a reliever have to be not to be worth trying to convert to a starter?

I realize that you basically need a crystal ball to know the exact breakdowns.

But would 75ip of 180ERA+ be worth keeping him in the pen if we knew the option would be 175ip of 100ip?
75ip of 200ERA+ instead of 175/100
75ip of 225ERA+ instead of 175/100
75ip of 250ERA+ instead of 175/100

Where is the tipping point? There must be a point where a drop dead reliever assassin is better then a league average starter.


Then couldnt you determine which is more likely? To find a league avg starter for the rotation and keeping your lockdown Bullpen ace where he is at. Or Finding another Bullpen ace who can provide you some epic ERA+ out of the pen while Bard throws his 175ip of League avg production.

[Plympton91]

Then couldnt you determine which is more likely? To find a league avg starter for the rotation and keeping your lockdown Bullpen ace where he is at. Or Finding another Bullpen ace who can provide you some epic ERA+ out of the pen while Bard throws his 175ip of League avg production.

But most of the evidence we have is that a lock-down ace reliever who converts to starter can be significantly better than league average. Derek Lowe, C.J. Wilson, Ogando, etc...

[czar]

But most of the evidence we have is that a lock-down ace reliever who converts to starter can be significantly better than league average. Derek Lowe, C.J. Wilson, Ogando, etc...

I don't know if this is true. Many ace RP (Gagne and Mo. Rivera come to mind) were failed starters who became top RP.

Ogando's also a bit of a weird case. He had 40 good IP in 2010, but has consistently outperformed his peripherals. I don't think we know if he's truly "significantly better than league average."

[SydneySox]

Jonah Keri at Grantland had a crack at that question and while light, it was an interesting read:

http://www.grantland...-become-starter

He acknowledges trying to make a study out of it is difficult:

Aside from the very small sample size, the list suffers from a bit of selection bias, since teams are more likely to give 20-plus starts to a pitcher who's at least holding his own. Plus, teams are more likely to convert pitchers they deem most likely to succeed as starters, based on a combination of physical and mental factors.

Additionally he only looks at the major league level for starters who became relievers, not really taking an interest in ace relievers who were drafted as/started as starters in the minors. But it was a good read and fairly relevant.

[Savin Hillbilly]

I don't know if this is true. Many ace RP (Gagne and Mo. Rivera come to mind) were failed starters who became top RP.

Why does this imply that relievers who convert aren't likely to be successful starters, though?

[aron7awol]

I don't know if this is true. Many ace RP (Gagne and Mo. Rivera come to mind) were failed starters who became top RP.

Mariano Rivera is not a failed starter. He was dominant as a starter in the minors, and started only 10 games in his rookie season in the majors before he was converted to relief. That's not failing as a starter; there are plenty of guys whose first 10 starts in the majors don't go so well. He didn't get a chance to adjust to the new league as a starter. Would he have successfully? I say it's very likely. He needed a similar adjustment period at AAA. His first 6 starts in AAA he had a 5.81 ERA. His next 7 starts he had a 2.10 ERA. The guy has thrown over 1200 innings now in the majors with a career ERA of 2.21. One pitch or not, guys who have seen him the most still do not hit him well. I'm very confident the guy would've been a dominant major league starter. We'll never know, and I'm sure Yankee fans are more than happy with his contribution, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have been more valuable throwing 200 innings per season all these years.

[czar]

Why does this imply that relievers who convert aren't likely to be successful starters, though?

It doesn't, neither does the comment "most of the evidence we have is that a lock-down ace reliever who converts to starter can be significantly better than league average."

Given his upside and the effort they've already expended in stretching him out, I want to see Bard at least tried in the rotation as much as the next guy. But Keri's look at the subject aside, there still are no overwhelming studies to indicate one way or the other the predictability of moving an ace RP to the rotation.

Playing the "replacement RP + Bard SP ?? Bard RP + replacement SP" is an interesting argument from a value-added perspective, but part of the inherent problem is it's tough to pin down Bard SP at this juncture.

[bakahump]

But most of the evidence we have is that a lock-down ace reliever who converts to starter can be significantly better than league average. Derek Lowe, C.J. Wilson, Ogando, etc...

I don't know if this is true. Many ace RP (Gagne and Mo. Rivera come to mind) were failed starters who became top RP.

I guess thats my point. That you could rightfully argue it either way.

What we do know is that past performance is pretty indicative or future performance. Bard has been very successful as a BP Ace.

To convert him to starter carries a great upside....but there is also a large risk that he will be worse then league average. Say 70% (20% well above league avg, 20 % a little above league Avg 20 League avg 10 % slightly below league avg )Successful....30% "failure"( 15% well above league avg 15% injury due to "overuse"). ( Your %'s may vary....)

Wouldnt you then need to take the "30%" "failure rate" into consideration? Contrast that with a 85% chance that you will continue to get "Relief Ace" production.

Again...the %'s I am using are representative discussion points and not intended to be hard fast scientific numbers. More importantly I think they represent the idea that "Well 175 innings of League Avg is way better then 75 of Relief ace production" isnt always as cut and dried as it seems.

[Pumpsie]

BTW, the Yankees just finalized their rotation today with Pineda's tendinitis problem clearing it up for them. So, the Sox are right on schedule with their own announcement tomorrow.

[rembrat]

"PeteAbe: Doubront is the No. 4 starter. #RedSox"

http://twitter.com/P...440517213618176

[Buzzkill Pauley]

PeteAbe: #ShankMyCHB to confirm with #CrazyAceves

------

ShankMyCHB: #PeteAbe is a goddamn sadistic bastard

------

PeteAbe: No more #BstnGlobe 10.0 for #ShankMyCHB

[rembrat]

?

[Buzzkill Pauley]

?

Just a little twitter mockery...hasn't it been PeteAbe who -- for all of the last week -- has been snarking about how aggro Aceves was going get if he was assigned to the bullpen?

FWIW, in all serious I think this is the absolute correct decision. Shores up the rotation with a quality pitcher, while also hedging against underperformance by Melancon.

[rembrat]

Bard is #5. Yahoooo!!

[bosockboy]

Perfect.....and Bard transitions back to the pen when Dice-K returns.

[rembrat]

"nickcafardo: Valentine hinted there's a bullpen injury that may have impacted a decision to keep aceves in pen. Wouldn't say who."

http://twitter.com/n...458075430010882

So it begins...

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Perfect.....and Bard transitions back to the pen when Dice-K returns.

Or Doubront takes over the Okajima/Embree role as LHP setup...

Or both, with Cook shoehorned into the rotation as well.

[aron7awol]

Perfect.....and Bard transitions back to the pen when Dice-K returns.

Or, what I think is most likely:
Bard is the 5th starter, allowing the team to skip his starts when possible and limit his innings. Doubront probably needs to have an innings limit much lower than Bard, so Dice-K takes his rotation spot when he returns. Of course, this may change if Doubront has been dominant for two months at that point, but that is unlikely.
If they make the playoffs, and if all of the starters are healthy at that point, then you decide if Bard is better in one of your playoff rotation slots or back in the pen. If Bard's starts are managed throughout the season, they could keep him under 200 innings for the year.

[aron7awol]

Or both, with Cook shoehorned into the rotation as well.

I could see, on May 1st, the Sox re-evaluating Doubront and perhaps giving Cook his rotation slot. Of course, it depends on Doubront's performance in April. This would be the best approach to maintain as much depth as possible, which is normally the approach taken this time of year.

[dbn]

It's been said already, but link to confirmation of Doubront number 4, Bard number 5:
http://sportsillustr...t2_a7&eref=sihp

[aron7awol]

From http://espn.go.com/b...ubront-rotation

"But there's no limit on it right now," Valentine said of the number of innings Bard could go as a starter.

[Tizzolator]

Aceves doesn't seem to be thrilled with this decision:

According to Aceves, Valentine told him that Felix Doubront made the rotation because he's lefthanded and that the organization wanted Daniel Bard to get the other spot.

"So I got no chance. It don't matter how good you throw, you're still not going to pitch," Aceves said.

http://www.boston.co...tt_questio.html