That’s a really insightful and interesting article. Thank you for sharing.
That’s a really insightful and interesting article. Thank you for sharing.
I had the exact same response.As a reflection of how this season is going, when I saw this thread get bumped, I figured he was going on the IL.
Houck in the 1st round and Cutter in the 16th from Dombrowski. Also Bello was signed that summer. So the top three pitchers currently all brought in during his regime yet they needed to bring in Bloom to “rebuild” the farm.
Dombrowski wasn't fired because the farm system was light or weak. In fact, the people in charge of drafting and player development under Dombrowski remained there under Bloom and some even remain there now (or have been promoted) under Breslow, so apparently the powers that be thought something was working on that front.Houck in the 1st round and Cutter in the 16th from Dombrowski. Also Bello was signed that summer. So the top three pitchers currently all brought in during his regime yet they needed to bring in Bloom to “rebuild” the farm.
Kopech for Sale was a fantastic trade that you would do every time and twice on Sunday. Espinoza pitched 7 games in the MLB and had a ridiculous high BA ranking based on 40 innings of rookie ball when he was 17. It is weird you point out two good trades by Dombowski as negatives especially with two guys that contributed to WS win (Drew was way better in 2017 obviously).Dombrowski wasn't fired because the farm system was light or weak. In fact, the people in charge of drafting and player development under Dombrowski remained there under Bloom and some even remain there now (or have been promoted) under Breslow, so apparently the powers that be thought something was working on that front.
SoxProspects listed Houck at #7, Bello at #20, and Crawford at #29 on their list in September 2019 (when Dombrowski was fired). I don't think anyone is going to argue that they were/are Bloom guys. The only credit Bloom gets for them, and this is still important, is that he held on them rather than trading them for short term fixes (in the vein of Espinoza for Pomeranz or Kopech for Sale).
Where did I say they were negatives? I was just pointing out that Bloom could have moved any or all of them during his tenure and did not, and now it's paying off. By no means was that intended to be a slight toward Dombrowski or those trades.Kopech for Sale was a fantastic trade that you would do every time and twice on Sunday. Espinoza pitched 7 games in the MLB and had a ridiculous high BA ranking based on 40 innings of rookie ball when he was 17. It is weird you point out two good trades by Dombowski as negatives especially with two guys that contributed to WS win (Drew was way better in 2017 obviously).
Bloom sure does get a ton of credit for doing nothing.
Houck is pitching great once they great reduced his use of the cutter and four seam fastball. The slider has always been his killer pitch. Now he is locating his sinker and slider, and keeping his split finger in the zone, he has greatly reduced his walks. Between the slider, sinker (which he throws high in the zone away from where his slider locates), and split (which once again he is throwing within the strike zone instead of the dirt because the sinker sets it up well) he is still getting good whiff rates but does not need to move the ball out of the zone to keep hitters off guard. Hitters have to swing defensively against him and get awful contact. It is why he is pitching way further into games.
...and any attempt to credit Dombrowski for drafting those guys must be weighed against the consideration that he wished to continue his spend both money and prospects to "win now." The blind squirrel may be able to find the nut, but it takes a watchful squirrel not to lose it to one of his fellows.Where did I say they were negatives? I was just pointing out that Bloom could have moved any or all of them during his tenure and did not, and now it's paying off. By no means was that intended to be a slight toward Dombrowski or those trades.
And another thread turns to shit.Houck in the 1st round and Cutter in the 16th from Dombrowski. Also Bello was signed that summer. So the top three pitchers currently all brought in during his regime yet they needed to bring in Bloom to “rebuild” the farm.
Kopech for Sale was a fantastic trade that you would do every time and twice on Sunday. Espinoza pitched 7 games in the MLB and had a ridiculous high BA ranking based on 40 innings of rookie ball when he was 17. It is weird you point out two good trades by Dombowski as negatives especially with two guys that contributed to WS win (Drew was way better in 2017 obviously).
Bloom sure does get a ton of credit for doing nothing.
Houck is pitching great once they great reduced his use of the cutter and four seam fastball. The slider has always been his killer pitch. Now he is locating his sinker and slider, and keeping his split finger in the zone, he has greatly reduced his walks. Between the slider, sinker (which he throws high in the zone away from where his slider locates), and split (which once again he is throwing within the strike zone instead of the dirt because the sinker sets it up well) he is still getting good whiff rates but does not need to move the ball out of the zone to keep hitters off guard. Hitters have to swing defensively against him and get awful contact. It is why he is pitching way further into games.
He's throwing the split in the zone because it's not a split anymore. It's a changeup. Here's an excellent breakdown of how he's using it:Houck is pitching great once they great reduced his use of the cutter and four seam fastball. The slider has always been his killer pitch. Now he is locating his sinker and slider, and keeping his split finger in the zone, he has greatly reduced his walks. Between the slider, sinker (which he throws high in the zone away from where his slider locates), and split (which once again he is throwing within the strike zone instead of the dirt because the sinker sets it up well) he is still getting good whiff rates but does not need to move the ball out of the zone to keep hitters off guard. Hitters have to swing defensively against him and get awful contact. It is why he is pitching way further into games.
He’s also commanding the pitch better, with 41% of his pitches making it into the strike zone, while the strike rate has also improved from 53% to 62%. Normally, with a small sample, I’d chalk the newfound command of the pitch to a fluke, but because he’s transitioned to a more traditional changeup grip, I believe the improvement is legitimate. Although it’s early in the season, his changeup has been his most thrown pitch to lefties, representing a newfound confidence in the pitch. Many, myself included, have cited Houck’s lack of a strike-getting pitch to throw to lefties as an impediment to his success as a starter. Now, he may have found a consistent offspeed pitch to use both in and out of the zone, get strikes, and take control of at-bats where he’s on the wrong side of the platoon split.
40 k in 32.2 ip is 11.2 K/9, not 8.3 K/9. Maybe that’s the difference?Houck's game log...
6.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 10 k (W)
6.0 ip, 4 h, 0 r, 0 er, 2 bb, 7 k (W)
5.2 ip, 12 h, 7 r, 4 er, 0 bb, 2 k (L)
9.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 9 k (W)
6.0 ip, 5 h, 2 r, 2 er, 3 bb, 4 k (L)
6.2 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 0 bb, 9 k (ND)
TOT: 39.1 ip, 31 h, 10 r, 7 er, 5 bb, 41 k, 1.60 era, 0.92 whip, 9.4 k/9, 3-2 record
Current AL ranks (among qualified pitchers):
ERA: #3 (1.60)
Wins: #4 (3)
IP: #2 (39.1)
K: #3 (41)
K/9: #18 (9.4)
WHIP: #3 (0.92)
WAR: #6 (1.4)
I have a question about this WAR ranking. Houck is at 1.4 WAR while Blanco of Hou is at 1.9 WAR. But here's a comparison of the two:
Houck: 39.1 ip, 31 h, 7 er, 5 bb, 41 k, 1.60 era, 0.92 whip, 9.4 k/9
Blanco: 32.2 ip, 16 h, 6 er, 14 bb, 40 k, 1.65 era, 0.92 whip, 8.3 k/9
So Houck has pitched more innings, has the same whip, a better ERA, better K/9, but has a 0.5 fewer WAR? How does that make any sense at all?
Oh I misread. Yeah but ok, so here's the next question. When it comes to offensive players, we often hear that an out is an out, and there's no difference between a strikeout and a popup. So HOW a hitter makes an out really doesn't impact their WAR at all. But for pitchers, strikeouts DO impact their WAR? Why, if outs are just outs?40 k in 32.2 ip is 11.2 K/9, not 8.3 K/9. Maybe that’s the difference?
You're doing bWAR? Because by fWAR Houck leads Blanco 1.4 to 0.6. bWAR take Runs Allowed into its formula, while fWAR takes FIP. Houck has 10 runs allowed, though only 7 earned, while Blanco has 6 runs allowed. That's likely accounting for the difference. fWAR being more predictive and bWAR more descriptive/outcome based.Houck's game log...
6.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 10 k (W)
6.0 ip, 4 h, 0 r, 0 er, 2 bb, 7 k (W)
5.2 ip, 12 h, 7 r, 4 er, 0 bb, 2 k (L)
9.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 9 k (W)
6.0 ip, 5 h, 2 r, 2 er, 3 bb, 4 k (L)
6.2 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 0 bb, 9 k (ND)
TOT: 39.1 ip, 31 h, 10 r, 7 er, 5 bb, 41 k, 1.60 era, 0.92 whip, 9.4 k/9, 3-2 record
Current AL ranks (among qualified pitchers):
ERA: #3 (1.60)
Wins: #4 (3)
IP: #2 (39.1)
K: #3 (41)
K/9: #18 (9.4)
WHIP: #3 (0.92)
WAR: #6 (1.4)
I have a question about this WAR ranking. Houck is at 1.4 WAR while Blanco of Hou is at 1.9 WAR. But here's a comparison of the two:
Houck: 39.1 ip, 31 h, 7 er, 5 bb, 41 k, 1.60 era, 0.92 whip, 9.4 k/9
Blanco: 32.2 ip, 16 h, 6 er, 14 bb, 40 k, 1.65 era, 0.92 whip, 8.3 k/9
So Houck has pitched more innings, has the same whip, a better ERA, better K/9, but has a 0.5 fewer WAR? How does that make any sense at all?
I used the WAR listed on ESPN.com. Not sure what they use.You're doing bWAR? Because by fWAR Houck leads Blanco 1.4 to 0.6. bWAR take Runs Allowed into its formula, while fWAR takes FIP. Houck has 10 runs allowed, though only 7 earned, while Blanco has 6 runs allowed. That's likely accounting for the difference. fWAR being more predictive and bWAR more descriptive/outcome based.
Seems like the RA9def might be the difference. Houck's is 0.13, whereas Blanco's is -0.38.Houck's game log...
6.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 10 k (W)
6.0 ip, 4 h, 0 r, 0 er, 2 bb, 7 k (W)
5.2 ip, 12 h, 7 r, 4 er, 0 bb, 2 k (L)
9.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 9 k (W)
6.0 ip, 5 h, 2 r, 2 er, 3 bb, 4 k (L)
6.2 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 0 bb, 9 k (ND)
TOT: 39.1 ip, 31 h, 10 r, 7 er, 5 bb, 41 k, 1.60 era, 0.92 whip, 9.4 k/9, 3-2 record
Current AL ranks (among qualified pitchers):
ERA: #3 (1.60)
Wins: #4 (3)
IP: #2 (39.1)
K: #3 (41)
K/9: #18 (9.4)
WHIP: #3 (0.92)
WAR: #6 (1.4)
I have a question about this WAR ranking. Houck is at 1.4 WAR while Blanco of Hou is at 1.9 WAR. But here's a comparison of the two:
Houck: 39.1 ip, 31 h, 7 er, 5 bb, 41 k, 1.60 era, 0.92 whip, 9.4 k/9
Blanco: 32.2 ip, 16 h, 6 er, 14 bb, 40 k, 1.65 era, 0.92 whip, 8.3 k/9
So Houck has pitched more innings, has the same whip, a better ERA, better K/9, but has a 0.5 fewer WAR? How does that make any sense at all?
So there's this guy named Voros McCracken, and ~25 years ago he came up with an idea called DIPS, or defense-independent pitching statistics. This is the basis for a bunch of statistics like FIP and xFIP. McCracken observed (not for the first time) that many of the then-common pitching statistics, notably Wins and ERA, really recorded the efforts of a pitcher's team (and the official scorer) more than that pitcher.Oh I misread. Yeah but ok, so here's the next question. When it comes to offensive players, we often hear that an out is an out, and there's no difference between a strikeout and a popup. So HOW a hitter makes an out really doesn't impact their WAR at all. But for pitchers, strikeouts DO impact their WAR? Why, if outs are just outs?
But even so...a full have WAR more just because he has a better k/9 than Houck, even though Houck has pitched more innings and has more overall strikeouts and a better ERA? I don't understand the formula.
Rather long SABR article published in 2010 on McCraken's DIPS and some other people's work:So there's this guy named Voros McCracken...
Very surprised not to see Pedro on that list. But go Tanner!
Crawford and Houck are two of the best ten pitchers in MLB right now but neither is going to sniff Cy Young with the limited number of wins they will get plus splitting votes being on the same non contender.Tanner Houck... CY candidate? Utterly dominant start to the year. Barely walking anyone, Ks are rising again, pitching deep into games. Third time through the order OPS is only .614 (41 PAs).
Won't even sniff the Cy Young Award? I'll bet you $50 Jimmy Fund that they at least get one CYA vote between them, thus enjoying a "sniff".Crawford and Houck are two of the best ten pitchers in MLB right now but neither is going to sniff Cy Young with the limited number of wins they will get plus splitting votes being on the same non contender.
A vote is different then serious contention. They are probably were Tatum was with the MVP vote which I wouldn't consider a sniff. For a sniff you need to honestly think there is some shot you can win.Won't even sniff the Cy Young Award? I'll bet you $50 Jimmy Fund that they at least get one CYA vote between them, thus enjoying a "sniff".
Sniff: a trace, hint, or small amount. Sounds as though we are working off different definitions. Bet offer retracted. Enjoy your day.A vote is different then serious contention. They are probably were Tatum was with the MVP vote which I wouldn't consider a sniff. For a sniff you need to honestly think there is some shot you can win.
Yea I get what you are saying, I think I was coming more from the space it is annoying they are going to get screwed from being on the same mediocre team. People like Pablo Lopez will get more votes.Sniff: a trace, hint, or small amount. Sounds as though we are working off different definitions. Bet offer retracted. Enjoy your day.
I believe they'll get at least one vote AND YET I'm willing to take this bet because it's not been accepted otherwise. I am now actively rooting to be $50 poorer.Won't even sniff the Cy Young Award? I'll bet you $50 Jimmy Fund that they at least get one CYA vote between them, thus enjoying a "sniff".
Well, I was trying to get TomRicardo to stop being so negative, but we'll both cheer for you to lose, meaning one of Crawford or Houck pitch well enough to get at least one Cy Young vote. And if they both get a vote, I'll also donate $50 to the Jimmy Fund. You'll probably have to remind me of this,TPNJ, once they announce the votes.I believe they'll get at least one vote AND YET I'm willing to take this bet because it's not been accepted otherwise. I am now actively rooting to be $50 poorer.
Noting and setting a calendar reminder for myself. May they be excellent but the voters idiotsWell, I was trying to get TomRicardo to stop being so negative, but we'll both cheer for you to lose, meaning one of Crawford or Houck pitch well enough to get at least one Cy Young vote. And if they both get a vote, I'll also donate $50 to the Jimmy Fund. You'll probably have to remind me of this,TPNJ, once they announce the votes.
Wins don't carry as much weight as the once did. deGrom won back to back CYAs in '18 and '19 records of 10-9 and 11-8. Felix Hernandez won in 2010 with a 13-12 record and I'm probably missing a couple more. While it shouldn't really be a factor their body of work might have had something to do with their consideration, but if you are dominant pitcher there are far better indicators of worthiness besides win totals. What will be interesting to watch will be how Houck and Crawford's innings might be managed as the season wears on. If both remain healthy and effective they're likely to surpass their season highs for inning pitched.Crawford and Houck are two of the best ten pitchers in MLB right now but neither is going to sniff Cy Young with the limited number of wins they will get plus splitting votes being on the same non contender.
That said, the two of them set up a ~3 year window after this year where the Red Sox could compete. The issue is they are going to need to:
1) Launch Yoshida into space
2) Land a big bat
I don't think there is anything to can do with Story besides limiting his time on the field as well as have him take reps at 3B when Devers DH. Yoshida being a soft hitting LHH DH just doesn't work.
I know Bailey has made some changes into how the pitchers prepare as well. Perhaps there's something in that which mitigates some of the use?But do the Sox back off his workload at some point or just continue to ride him as a workhorse?
I think you doubled this somehow, it's 107 plus 23.2019 - 214 innings. +23 in the fall.
You look at him at 150 IP but he is 28 at some point you just have to let him go.Houck is on pace for well over 200 IPs, close to doubling his career high of 106. After tonight he should be number 2 in AL in IPs. If he finishes 2nd in the league in IPs with a 2.17 ERA that should get some Cy votes whatever the W-L.
But do the Sox back off his workload at some point or just continue to ride him as a workhorse? His ability to work deep into games -- ie be an "innings eater" everyone correctly said we needed -- has been immensely valuable, regularly giving the pen a chance to catch its breath when running on fumes. Looking beyond 2024 you have to wonder if riding him this hard all season can be justified; riding Houck to save the (already heavy) toll on many of the pen arms.
Thanks for the catch - I must have copied the "total" line as a single entry.I think you doubled this somehow, it's 107 plus 23.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=houck-000tan
I agree. Let him find the wall and see how he handles it. The only downside to doing that is if they are in contention come September and he's running on fumes. Thing is, I don't think they get to a place where they're contending in September if they're load managing Houck (or Crawford or Bello). Rather they fall a couple games short but push him to the limit. It will only make him a better and more valuable pitcher next year.You look at him at 150 IP but he is 28 at some point you just have to let him go.
To be clear, I'm advocating pushing Houck to whatever his innings limit might be but letting his body and performance dictate rather than setting a firm number and dancing around so he hits it precisely on the final day/week of the season. If he hits the proverbial wall in early/mid-September, and they're concerned he might hurt himself, then shut him down at that point. Odds are those last couple weeks aren't going to matter and it's an opportunity to give someone else a look (maybe a Wikelman Gonzalez gets a cup of coffee or something).I can see the logic in the above, but guys that ever pitch as well as Houck has in his first 9 starts this year are not common. We have him tied up until end of 2027 at least. It only makes sense not to unnecessarily endanger him this year, especially if we continue to sputter out of any reasonable chance to compete. The same could be said for Crawford too, for that matter.
I am inclined to trust Bailey and Breslow on this stuff and note that Houck is been allowed to go over 100 pitches only once this year, so I am not making any accusations about overuse, but I would have thought 175 IPs was closer to the max to reasonably expect from Houck this year.
I'm not sure how doable it would have been, but during this long stretch of games with just one day off I was hoping they might find a way to get Winckowski a start early on, send him down and bring him back up near the end. In effect going with a 6 man rotation twice during that period that would mimic two off days for the starters. I'm not sure if the effect that it might have on the pen (because someone would have to go down to make this happen) would be worth it, but it seems that any opportunity to spell these guys could be beneficial.I agree. Let him find the wall and see how he handles it. The only downside to doing that is if they are in contention come September and he's running on fumes. Thing is, I don't think they get to a place where they're contending in September if they're load managing Houck (or Crawford or Bello). Rather they fall a couple games short but push him to the limit. It will only make him a better and more valuable pitcher next year.