72 replies to this topic

[Super Nomario]

I'm a Bard-to-the-rotation pessimist, but there's no harm in having him continue starting in Pawtucket. The bullpen looks OK right now, and even if someone gets hurt or flames out they have Melancon, Tazawa, and Mortensen waiting in the wings. Starting depth is a lot more of a problem. I don't see any reason they can't give Bard five or six more starts in Pawtucket and them move him to the 'pen if it's still not working out.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Or, he could come back as the Sox closer.

[OttoC]

Or, he could come back as the Sox closer.

Lest we forget, coming into this season Bard had a 5-13 record out of the pen with 13 blown saves (12 in the last two years), while recording 5 saves. Seven of the blown saves were concurrent with losses. He has already pitched 55 innings this year, which is nearly 75% of his highest yearly ML total. Does this, coupled with his melt-down in the starter role, inspire confidence?

[ctsoxfan5]

Lest we forget, coming into this season Bard had a 5-13 record out of the pen with 13 blown saves (12 in the last two years), while recording 5 saves. Seven of the blown saves were concurrent with losses. He has already pitched 55 innings this year, which is nearly 75% of his highest yearly ML total. Does this, coupled with his melt-down in the starter role, inspire confidence?

Talking about the number of saves and blown saves for a non-closer is not very helpful. Bard was usually pitching in the 7th or 8th inning. If he did his job, he got a hold. If he blew it, he got a blown save. He didn't have the chance to pick up saves. In that same time period, he had 79 holds.

I don't know if he can recover from whatever is ailing him right now, but his history prior to this season does inspire confidence. Prior to this season, he had 197 IP, 2.88 ERA, 1.06 WHIP, 9.7 K/9, 3.5 BB/9, 2.8 K/BB, 0.7 HR/9, nearly a 50% GB%, and a 153 ERA+.

[OttoC]

Talking about the number of saves and blown saves for a non-closer is not very helpful. Bard was usually pitching in the 7th or 8th inning. If he did his job, he got a hold. If he blew it, he got a blown save. He didn't have the chance to pick up saves. In that same time period, he had 79 holds....

Yes, he had a lot of holds but he did not do particularly well in save situations, did he? His career record in save situations is 0-8 and he faced exactly the same number of batters, 399, as in non-save situations (that figure does include his starts).

http://www.baseball-...tco_extra::none

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Yes, he had a lot of holds but he did not do particularly well in save situations, did he? His career record in save situations is 0-8 and he faced exactly the same number of batters, 399, as in non-save situations (that figure does include his starts).

http://www.baseball-...tco_extra::none

You're misreading those numbers, as batters faced as a setup man in the 7th and 8th also count as batters faced in save situations.

CTsox has the right of it: Bard got all the opps for blown saves but none to pick up saves, so using blown saves as a point against a setup man is highly misleading. The holds number is a good indicator of the quality of his work in that role.

[OttoC]

He can't handle starting; why in hell would one think he can handle closing, especially as he hasn't done that well in closing situations heretofore. If he is going to be converted to a closer, then that should be his role in Pawtucket.

[Rasputin]

He can't handle starting; why in hell would one think he can handle closing, especially as he hasn't done that well in closing situations heretofore. If he is going to be converted to a closer, then that should be his role in Pawtucket.

Yes, a guy with a successful history of short relief who struggles when starting is going to have a problem closing because the ninth inning is magic.

[Dick Pole Upside]

He can't handle starting; why in hell would one think he can handle closing, especially as he hasn't done that well in closing situations heretofore. If he is going to be converted to a closer, then that should be his role in Pawtucket.

Especially since he was vocal in saying he wanted to start instead of closing. A guy who is successful in short relief who declares that he prefers NOT to close doesn't exactly instill confidence.

[JimBoSox9]

You're misreading those numbers, as batters faced as a setup man in the 7th and 8th also count as batters faced in save situations.

CTsox has the right of it: Bard got all the opps for blown saves but none to pick up saves, so using blown saves as a point against a setup man is highly misleading. The holds number is a good indicator of the quality of his work in that role.

Fangraph's Shutdowns and Meltdowns is also a pretty good way to look at it, maybe better than holds. Between 2010-2011 Bard recorded 73 Shutdowns and 21 Meltdowns. Those 73 Shutdowns led MLB over that period. The Meltdowns number is higher than you'd like - out of the 20 relievers who recorded 60 or more Shutdowns in that period, he is one of only two with 20 or more Meltdowns (Tyler Clippard leads the way with 28, somewhat surprisingly). The numbers do not support the idea that Bard isn't suited for closing, but they do perhaps support the notion that Bard is a dominant pitcher who has more-than-usual struggles keeping to his mechanics, and correspondingly is more likely to have a day where he just Doesn't Have It.

[SumnerH]

He can't handle starting; why in hell would one think he can handle closing, especially as he hasn't done that well in closing situations heretofore.

Because starting requires pitching 5+ innings, while closing doesn't?

There's a good chance he's screwed up physically this year (either mechanics or injury)--if that's the case he should be DL'd or doing whatever's needed to fix his mechanics (which could be starting over at A-ball, or could be staying stretched out to get a lot of reps, or could be returning to a role he's more comfortable in).

But if he isn't screwed up, he's already shown he's a shutdown reliever. Being a closer is exactly what he has excelled at, only one inning later--we've seen excellent evidence that he's more than capable of that. The only reason to think he isn't is if you place a ton of import on closers having a special "closing" mentality/skill, and even if you think that exists the only way I can think of to see if Bard has it is to give him a shot.

But to date, http://www.baseball-...year=Career&t=p

If you insist on the meaningless "how has he done in save situations", the answer is: 9.9 K/9, 1.014 WHIP, .561 OPS against. Those are wildly successful numbers. They also include earlier appearances, but:
9th inning: 9.9 K/9, 0.81 WHIP, .393 OPS against; too small a sample to take much from, but there's certainly nothing there to suggest 9th inning jitters.

[Myt1]

Especially since he was vocal in saying he wanted to start instead of closing. A guy who is successful in short relief who declares that he prefers NOT to close doesn't exactly instill confidence.

Why not? Starters make more money.

[Rasputin]

Especially since he was vocal in saying he wanted to start instead of closing. A guy who is successful in short relief who declares that he prefers NOT to close doesn't exactly instill confidence.

I don't recall him ever saying he'd prefer not to close, just that his preference was to start. You make it sound like he was afraid to close when he has never, to my knowledge, said anything but that he preferred to start but he'd do whatever they asked of him.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Why not? Starters make more money.

A lot more. Papelbon just got the highest contract for a closer ever. It's still 30 million less than that useless pustule Lackey got. It should shock no one that Bard saw the benefits of switching to starting.

[Toe Nash]

He can't handle starting; why in hell would one think he can handle closing, especially as he hasn't done that well in closing situations heretofore. If he is going to be converted to a closer, then that should be his role in Pawtucket.

Just because you say the same thing a different way doesn't make it true.

We had some good discussion when TomRicardo raised this same "Bard can't close" canard in the offseason:

http://sonsofsamhorn...age__p__3858232

Particularly of interest, from Savin Hillbilly:

(BTW, BBRef lists a stat, SVSit, which is much more useful than SVOpp for setup guys, because it includes the holds. So we can say that Clippard over the past three years entered in save situations 84 times and converted (i.e. got a hold or a save) 65 times, for a 77% mark. By this measure, Bard's percentage over his three years with the Sox is 85%. Papelbon's mark over the same 3-year period is 88%. So, slightly better, but only slightly. (Just by way of comparison, Madson's three-year mark is 87%. Bell's is 90%. Jon Rauch's is 80%.)

Going through his gamelogs it looks like he has one career blown save when he came in in the 9th inning (thus that he was the anointed "closer" for that game), on June 10, 2010. He has 4 saves, 3 when he came in in the 9th (when Paps was presumably unavailable) and one when he came in in the 13th.

If you think there's something special about the 9th inning, he has allowed a career .393 OPS then (most either tie games or games when the Sox were ahead by >3 runs).

If Bard is "right," there is no evidence he can't be a top closer.

[uncannymanny]

His career record in save situations is 0-8

I'm not sure why you're using W-L for a reliever at all, and more particularly for save situations. How does one manage to earn a win in a save situation?

Edit: early morning brain fart...yes, there is the BS-W, but I'm still not sure what that win would ultimately prove in this situation.

Edited by uncannymanny, 06 June 2012 - 12:55 PM.

[TomRicardo]

I never thought Bard couldn't handle the role of closer, I just had no desire to see him in the role of closer. I had less desire to see him as a starter. I think he was born to be an ace reliever.

[Toe Nash]

I never thought Bard couldn't handle the role of closer, I just had no desire to see him in the role of closer. I had less desire to see him as a starter. I think he was born to be an ace reliever.

You're right, sorry for misquoting you.

We did have the exact same argument re: blown saves vs. holds further down the thread.

[Plympton91]

What I hope they do is let him start, but tell him to throw at maximum effort for as long as he can sustain it. Then, if he's gassed by the 4th inning, they can take him out. But, I wonder if he's overcompensating for how much he has to back off his fastball in order to pitch into the 7th regularly.

[glennhoffmania]

Yup, that's exactly what I've been saying. I love it when P91 and I agree on something.

[deconstruction]

Bard will make his first AAA start tomorrow.

Who's sharing their milb.tv subscription? WE NEED TO SEE THAT ARM SLOT!!!

Edited by deconstruction, 07 June 2012 - 05:22 PM.

[lexrageorge]

It was a worthwhile experiment, which so far hasn't worked. As for potentially "screwing him up", if starting for a couple of months "screwed him up", he likely wasn't that good to begin with. Or already screwed up due to something that had nothing to do with starting or relieving.

[Doctor G]

The mistake was to say there was a competition for the fifth starter slot to begin with in ST. That Bard was declared the "winner" certainly did not pass the smell test.
When we hear Bard's comments on how his grooming as a starter threw him off what made him successful in the past, it is obvious that the team had a plan in place to convert Bard before the so-called competition .This was a decision made with a firm eye planted on the future payroll for starters.

Bard has to know that he didn't really win the job in ST. It is a credit to Aceves' competitive nature that he has pitched as well as he has as the closer. He really deserved to get the chance to prove himself in a starting slot.
Depending on Bailey and Matsuzaka's performance coming back, the Red Sox might get a chance for a do-over, if Bard can find himself in Pawtucket.

This is why Belichick doesn't stage phony competitions for jobs in Foxborough.

Edited by Doctor G, 08 June 2012 - 10:43 AM.