After the favorable early schedule, it gets really tough for several weeks. It would be highly desirable to be at something like full strength with the pitching staff by May. There are, however, tons of off days in the tough stretch.The latest timetable for the injured guys:
https://theathletic.com/4347035/2023/03/26/red-sox-garrett-whitlock-brayan-bello-james-paxton/
Whitlock's plan:
Bello:
Paxton:
The early schedule should be favorable, (though the Orioles are pretty good and not an easy matchup) hopefully they turn those favorable matchups into actual wins. The plan is to be aggressive with the bullpen early:
Good thing there are lots of depth options for the bullpen, since you can't expect to use them all aggressively for the entire season. We probably will to need to use a couple of the AAA starters as relievers in Boston as the season goes along.
For now, there aren't any actual decisions to be made about the rotation-- the current healthy starters will be the rotation at least until Whitlock is back:
Wait…. Where did you see this? Has Winchowski officially been put in the bullpen on the 26? If so the absolutely goodbye and sayonara OrtWickowski is already in the bullpen & Ort is hopefully already gone...& I also have not been informed of the exact rotation from June 1st on... but I like it.
With the injuries starting to pile up (5 pitchers on the 40-man are opening the season on the IL), Winckowski starting the year in the bullpen feels like a given. He'd be the long man/sixth starter until some guys start returning and that role shifts to Crawford or Houck.Wait…. Where did you see this? Has Winchowski officially been put in the bullpen on the 26? If so the absolutely goodbye and sayonara Ort
A few places. This wasn't one of them, but 1st one that popped up on search:Wait…. Where did you see this? Has Winchowski officially been put in the bullpen on the 26? If so the absolutely goodbye and sayonara Ort
There's literally a blue check lol Elon. But yeah, it wasn't new news so I was less diligent than usual in sourcing it.Let's link to an actual journalist rather than an anonymous twitter account with no verification (even if they happened to get this right).
https://www.masslive.com/redsox/2023/03/kutter-crawford-makes-red-sox-opening-day-rotation-josh-winckowski-on-team-as-long-reliever.html
Unless they're 100% sure they've ID'd some kind of issue, I'd flip the roles for Winckowski and Houck at this point.After today Houck has allowed 9 HR and 12 BB in 20+ spring training innings.
Houck shows a significant difference in effectiveness at the ML level between starting and relieving. If he's not part of the long-term plan to be part of the starting rotation this year, I'm not sure why you plug him in there when he's still showing the role isn't something he takes to.Martin, Jansen, Schreiber all have spring training ERA’s over 7.
Remember last year when Rich Hill had a 9.35 ERA in spring, and Wacha was at 6.60?
I don’t think it means anything .
This isn't really true. Houck has a 3.22 career ERA in 92.1 innings as a starter (3.39 xFIP) & a 2.68 ERA in 53.2 innings as a reliever (3.58 xFIP). If you get rid of the 6.1 innings of 3rd time through the lineup stats, Houck's ERA as a starter is 2.41. As a twice through the lineup guy, he has been extremely effective.Houck shows a significant difference in effectiveness at the ML level between starting and relieving. If he's not part of the long-term plan to be part of the starting rotation this year, I'm not sure why you plug him in there when he's still showing the role isn't something he takes to.
Which is the profile of a reliever, not a starter.If you get rid of the 6.1 innings of 3rd time through the lineup stats, Houck's ERA as a starter is 2.41. As a twice through the lineup guy, he has been extremely effective.
He’s been pretty bad, but lots of players have a horrible spring and a great season, and vice versa.After today Houck has allowed 9 HR and 12 BB in 20+ spring training innings.
Neither Houck or Whitlock has been great when facing batters for the 2nd or 3rd time through the order. But they are young and have relatively little experience trying to do so, if the org wants to develop starters prob going to need to let them take some lumps. While both guys would probably be better out of the pen, that’s likely true of everyone.Which is the profile of a reliever, not a starter.
18 batters does not mean going deep into games. How many times has he completed the 5th inning out of all his starts?
I agree.Unless they're 100% sure they've ID'd some kind of issue, I'd flip the roles for Winckowski and Houck at this point.
I mean, not really in 2023. Going deep into the game isn't particularly the goal. If he is going to pitch 150 innings at a 3.40 ERA as a starter or 75 innings at a 3.40 ERA as a reliever, you take those extra + innings as a starter, even if they aren't long starts.Which is the profile of a reliever, not a starter.
18 batters does not mean going deep into games. How many times has he completed the 5th inning out of all his starts?
He still had 25 K so it's not all grim news. 9 HR in 20+ IP is ridiculously bad though.He’s been pretty bad, but lots of players have a horrible spring and a great season, and vice versa.
He already technically has 4 pitches - 4-seam fastball, sinker, slider, splitter. He hasn't thrown his splitter much in the past & my understanding is he's working on a split change. Couldn't tell you how it's going, though.He was working on a third pitch, correct?
I wonder what the status of that is.
The conversational topic that was floated was whether Houck, given his feculent performances, should be given a couple of starts before Whitlock comes back or if Winckowski should get them.I mean, not really in 2023. Going deep into the game isn't particularly the goal. If he is going to pitch 150 innings at a 3.40 ERA as a starter or 75 innings at a 3.40 ERA as a reliever, you take those extra + innings as a starter, even if they aren't long starts.
Looks like 10 of 18.
I'm shifting the goalposts?The conversational topic that was floated was whether Houck, given his feculent performances, should be given a couple of starts before Whitlock comes back or if Winckowski should get them.
Are you shifting the goal posts because you're defending some kind of position vis-a-vis Houck that you've previously staked out? If so, assure you I am completely ignorant of it.
I just discounted that part of your post because it didn't match my preconceived ideas.That's not a true statement. His effectiveness has been very similar in either role, as I backed up with stats.
I'm surprised if anyone else even reads my sentences, let alone considers their content.I just discounted that part of your post because it didn't match my preconceived ideas.
You didn't expect me to consider all your sentences, did you?
If they are planning on him using the new pitch 10% of the time as a surprise in real games, but using it 50% of the time in spring training, it isn't surprising it's getting hammered.He was working on a third pitch, correct?
I wonder what the status of that is.
So you're saying he's worse than cromulent?The conversational topic that was floated was whether Houck, given his feculent performances, should be given a couple of starts before Whitlock comes back or if Winckowski should get them.
Are you shifting the goal posts because you're defending some kind of position vis-a-vis Houck that you've previously staked out? If so, assure you I am completely ignorant of it.
Not a setback or anything, but it seems like it would have been more helpful to face higher level hitters; but then again a rainout or rain delay would have been worse.Paxton was scheduled to make his next rehab start Tuesday for Triple A Worcester at Buffalo with Bello set for Wednesday. But with rain in the forecast for both days, Paxton and Bello are traveling to Fort Myers, Fla., Monday and will pitch there. Paxton is tentatively scheduled to start again in Buffalo Sunday.
If he's deemed to be sufficiently stretched out, I don't see why not. It's not like they have him make rehab starts because of the competition level. It's about the reps. I expect he'll probably make a start with Portland (at Manchester) or Worcester (home vs Columbus) next Tuesday though.Not clear what Bello's next start will be-- they wouldn't start him in the majors without facing real hitters even once, would they?
Curious as I thought cold weather favored the pitcher with more dense air and whatnot.So the starting pitching has been awful so far, but it's been quite cold (I know, both teams have to pitch in it, but the opponent's pitching has been horrible too). Through 4 games, Boston's starters are dead last in the MLB at 12.91 ERA. The relievers are middle of the pack (17 of 30) at 4.68 ERA. Remember, three of the planned rotation have not thrown a pitch yet. Keep saying to yourself, "help is on the way", help is on the way, help is on the way". At least, that's how I handle it.
Crawford is like a Kelly and Ort. Just a place holder until Whitlock, Bello and Paxton arrive.Not a whole lot of good to take out of Crawford's first start. A lot of rockets and hard contact, velocity was down from last year, the cutter and the fastball were far too hittable. I liked the changeups he threw, his slider got a few bad swings, and he stole strikes with the curve. Makes me think that some level of sequencing or repertoire change is in order, because he's throwing way too many non-competitive fastballs and cutters (six whiffs on 58 of them total is awful). That also makes me wonder if, barring a big velo jump, there's not really a boost for him going into relief aside from being a swingman.
Cot's has them at $215M 40 man payroll, not sure where the Spotrac numbers are coming from.OK, I was going to complain about the Sox having such shitty starters because they are a high-payroll team but then I went to Spotrac and they are ranked 14th in 2023 payroll. The Sox payroll is $101,420,865 lower than the Yankees' payroll at this moment. WTF? The Sox 2023 payroll is $167,533,182, league average is $148,676,855.
One bad turn through the rotation is to be expected a few times a year. Whether it's bad or putrid doesn't really matter, and if one of the turns is by a guy who won't be there for long, even less so. I'm mostly just mad the offense reneged on its plan to score exactly nine runs every game.So the starting pitching has been awful so far, but it's been quite cold (I know, both teams have to pitch in it, but the opponent's pitching has been horrible too). Through 4 games, Boston's starters are dead last in the MLB at 12.91 ERA. The relievers are middle of the pack (17 of 30) at 4.68 ERA. Remember, three of the planned rotation have not thrown a pitch yet. Keep saying to yourself, "help is on the way", help is on the way, help is on the way". At least, that's how I handle it.
That's adjusted dollars, which in some cases I'm not sure what they're getting at. For example, they have Sale at $17.5M for this year when his actual salary is $27.5M. The more important figures are the taxable salary, which for the Sox is at ~$207M per Spotrac.OK, I was going to complain about the Sox having such shitty starters because they are a high-payroll team but then I went to Spotrac and they are ranked 14th in 2023 payroll. The Sox payroll is $101,420,865 lower than the Yankees' payroll at this moment. WTF? The Sox 2023 payroll is $167,533,182, league average is $148,676,855.
Doesn't pretty much every hard thrower gain a few MPH on their fastball by moving to the pen and going max effort every pitch?Not a whole lot of good to take out of Crawford's first start. A lot of rockets and hard contact, velocity was down from last year, the cutter and the fastball were far too hittable. I liked the changeups he threw, his slider got a few bad swings, and he stole strikes with the curve. Makes me think that some level of sequencing or repertoire change is in order, because he's throwing way too many non-competitive fastballs and cutters (six whiffs on 58 of them total is awful). That also makes me wonder if, barring a big velo jump, there's not really a boost for him going into relief aside from being a swingman.
“This is different, man,” Cora said after a 7-6 Red Sox loss. “I’ve never seen anything like this so early in the season. The ball is flying here.”
There's certainly been an effect on fly balls, at least as far the eye test goes, but apart from Casas' ball, I don't think wind made a difference on the home runs. Just about all of them were rocked.“It was playing differently,” Cora said. “The ball that Casas hit was way foul and landed fair. That ball came back in fair territory. It’s different. It’s windy. It’s a little bit windy out there.”
28 pitches seems to me to be a very small sample size, so I would guess that yeah, our pitchers have had some bad luck.View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1643303497612288017?s=20
I don't ever post but I just saw this and it's completely absurd. What would explain why our pitchers get punished for middle-middle pitches so much more than other teams? Is this something we could expect to see regress back to the mean over the course of the season?
Considering we're talking about a four game sample, I think it's safe to say that we should see some regression. We're talking about 28 pitches. That's roughly 0.1% of the total pitches the team is likely to throw this year. It's the epitome of a small sample size.View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1643303497612288017?s=20
I don't ever post but I just saw this and it's completely absurd. What would explain why our pitchers get punished for middle-middle pitches so much more than other teams? Is this something we could expect to see regress back to the mean over the course of the season?
It's called depth, e.g., it's one if the reasons both the Celtics and Bruins are strong contenders for titles in their respective sports. The Sox OTOH are showing no sign of depth at the pitching position so far. SSS of course.Crawford is like a Kelly and Ort. Just a place holder until Whitlock, Bello and Paxton arrive.