If there was another lefty on this roster other than Bernardino, I feel like Chris Murphy showed some flashes last season that he could possibly be helpful as a multi-inning guy, or a hybrid type.. I’m wondering what the B’s think of him?
2024 Rotation and Bullpen
- Thread starter Rovin Romine
- Start date
Admittedly, this is tough because guys are so young that it's tough to glean much from them. But here goes:
Bello has a .725OPS against RHP but .856 against LHP (they crush him pretty good.)
Crawford is .691 and .772 (he's been good against both, but I don't know how to parse out his splits as a relief pitcher vs as a started pitcher due to platoon splits). His ERA as a starter is about 3 runs higher than as a relief pitcher though.
Gio has a revers split .770 vs RHB and .691 vs LHB.
Houck is .566 vs RHP and .763 vs LHP (again, I don't know how to parse out data as a starter vs the pen)
Pivetta is pretty neutral .755 vs RHP and .782 vs LHP.
Though I honestly think the "need" to have something or not is over-stated in terms of pitching.
The 2004 team had no LHPs in the rotation and they obviously did fine. 2018 had 3 LHPs in the rotation and by the time they got to the playoffs.
Honestly, I think mixing and matching in the bullpen is more important than in the rotation. In the rotation I think you just need good pitching and handedness is mostly irrelevant. Unfortunately, I don't think the Red Sox have nearly enough good pitching in their starting rotations (nor in AAA, nor in AA nor in A+).
Lot of emphasis among pitching coaches at the AAU 12 and up level about this believe it or not. My son's pitching coach focused on extension and forward momentum at the release (my son played at USF), something they also stressed at USF. The model was Verlander's delivery.
Andrew Bailey was on Bradfo's podcast today.
They talked about Giolito a bit and what they like about him, how they can get him back on track, etc. Interestingly, Bailey was then asked about pitchers currently on the staff that he finds intriguing to work with and try to maximize their potential. He said "the starters" and named three guys: Brayan Bello, Kutter Crawford and Nick Pivetta. Bailey only went into specifics on Bello. He called Bello's change-up "devastating" and went on to talk about leveraging Bello's best weapon as most often as possible. Bailey then compared him to Logan Webb and said he thought they were similar pitchers.
I think the Logan Webb comparison is pretty apt. Both him and Bello are sinker guys who get a lot of groundballs with changeups as their #1 swing and miss pitch. If you look at the changes Webb made during the course of his career under Bailey, they almost entirely scrapped his 4-seam in favor of his sinker as Webb's primary fastball. They also increased Webb's change-up usage from ~20% in Webb's rookie season up to a high of over 40% this past year.
I bet you'll see something similar with Bello. Scrap the 4-seamer, which he's still throwing about 20% of the time, and almost double his changeup usage.
They talked about Giolito a bit and what they like about him, how they can get him back on track, etc. Interestingly, Bailey was then asked about pitchers currently on the staff that he finds intriguing to work with and try to maximize their potential. He said "the starters" and named three guys: Brayan Bello, Kutter Crawford and Nick Pivetta. Bailey only went into specifics on Bello. He called Bello's change-up "devastating" and went on to talk about leveraging Bello's best weapon as most often as possible. Bailey then compared him to Logan Webb and said he thought they were similar pitchers.
I think the Logan Webb comparison is pretty apt. Both him and Bello are sinker guys who get a lot of groundballs with changeups as their #1 swing and miss pitch. If you look at the changes Webb made during the course of his career under Bailey, they almost entirely scrapped his 4-seam in favor of his sinker as Webb's primary fastball. They also increased Webb's change-up usage from ~20% in Webb's rookie season up to a high of over 40% this past year.
I bet you'll see something similar with Bello. Scrap the 4-seamer, which he's still throwing about 20% of the time, and almost double his changeup usage.
Bello scrapping the 4 seam is the biggest no brainer of all time especially considering the velocity he generates with his sinker.
I've been at this for a while, but I'd really like to see them extend PIvetta (and if not, trade him, but no way do I go into this season with him on the roster and just one year of control). I really think something along the lines of what Lugo signed for gets them pretty close, might have to go a bit more than that, but in that neighborhood. He's easily the most dependable pitcher on the staff and absolute worst case (performance wise) is that you have a legitimate bullpen weapon. Locking him in to be SP5 and do nothing but eat around 160ip per year while being right in the neighborhood of league average would be quite valuable for this team over the next 3 seasons.
NESN has a good interview with new Pitching Coach Andrew Bailey:
“I think we all know what the count-leverage tree looks like in terms of expected (slugging percentage) and damage as the at-bat goes on. First pitch strikes are huge for me. Winning the first three pitches — we have certain statistics that we track and monitor. I think putting some accountability, gamifying certain things. Being as open and honest and not hiding the ball from where guys are at and where they need to be. What is league average and if you’re not league average where are we going wrong?"
This is the first time I've heard a pro sports coach speak of gamification.
“I think we all know what the count-leverage tree looks like in terms of expected (slugging percentage) and damage as the at-bat goes on. First pitch strikes are huge for me. Winning the first three pitches — we have certain statistics that we track and monitor. I think putting some accountability, gamifying certain things. Being as open and honest and not hiding the ball from where guys are at and where they need to be. What is league average and if you’re not league average where are we going wrong?"
This is the first time I've heard a pro sports coach speak of gamification.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/01/16/sports/craig-breslow-red-sox-interview-globe/
So, this is looking as though it might be the pitching staff.
Starting Rotation as of today:
1 Lucas Giolito (lock)
2 Bello (lock)
3 Pivetta (lock)
4 Crawford (lock)
5 one of Houck, Whitlock or Winckowski.
Depth: two of (Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski) plus Murphy, Walter. Gonzalez in AA?
Bullpen as of today: This is based off the 40 man, with * indicating options (per fangraphs). Players are listed by lack of options, and hence a requirement to be on the ML staff, not skill. There's a 13 pitcher max for the 26 man roster. 5 starters, a max of 8 relievers.
There's still pressure in the bullpen, with no left-handers apart from Bernardino. That would mean 2 of the 10 names there would have to be dropped to AAA, traded, returned, or DFA'd. But I don't see them putting any of the 5-9 spots in AAA. So they're one over.
1 Jansen
2 Martin
3 Justin Slaten (Rule 5)
4 Bryan Mata
leaving 4 spots for:
5 Bernardino (LHP)*
6 one of Houck*, Whitlock* or Winckowski.*
7 one of Houck*, Whitlock* or Winckowski.*
8 Schreiber*
9 Isaiah Campbell* (Urias trade from SEA 11/17/23)
Also on the 40-man:
Chris Murphy (LHP)*
Brandon Walter (LHP)*
Joe Jacques (LHP)*
Zack Kelly*
Max Castillo* (Waiver claim from KCR 1/2/24)
Zack Weiss*
Greg Weissert* (Verdugo trade, 12/5/23)
Cooper Criswell* (FA signing 12/13/23)
Wikelman Gonzalez (AA)
Luis Perales (A+)
Notable but not on the 40 man:Richard Fitts (AAA), Wyatt Mills (AAA)
ST invites: Frank German, Helcris Olivarez, Cam Booser, Eddy Alvarez, Jorge Benitez.
Last edited:
Mata would have to show out in the spring and win a job, which would be a good thing, I would think.
I appreciate the summary RR. Doesn’t it seem like, if Bernardino is as decent as he seemed last year, he has a spot to start the year, and Campbell is optioned if Mata sticks?
If Mata doesn’t, then country to trade him before DFA (likely to a team interested who would want him a little more than gambling on getting him on waivers), and then that spot if Campbell or another lefty?
I appreciate the summary RR. Doesn’t it seem like, if Bernardino is as decent as he seemed last year, he has a spot to start the year, and Campbell is optioned if Mata sticks?
If Mata doesn’t, then country to trade him before DFA (likely to a team interested who would want him a little more than gambling on getting him on waivers), and then that spot if Campbell or another lefty?
Campbell is the only one of the group of Campbell, Slaten and Mata to have even appeared in the majors, nevermind had any success in them. Slaten is more interesting to me than Mata, too. Mata has had mountains of control issues. Slaten had a great campaign last year with fantastic strikeout numbers and a decently above average walk percentage. I doubt Mata makes the opening day roster over either of them. He's been terribly up and down in his career with his control and command disappearing Bardishly for very long stretches.
The rotation will be leave the pen in very bad shape by August unless there is a step forward from last year by all except Bello, a repeat of 2023 from him will be fine, maybe he gets better. We can hope for more starter innings than last year as, I hope< we do not need to use an opener. At least that is my hope. I understand that not allowing an opposing lineup to see a mediocre starter a third time is statistically a good idea, but it really does strain the bullpen.
I hate openers, too, but unfortunately with three healthy starters there was not much choice last year. I think you're onto something here, though. I'm really curious to see how Bailey and Breslow (and by extension, Cora) address the third time through this year. The numbers are pretty convincing, and I think a lot of teams are going to try to be innovative and creative with how they deal with it.
You're right that they really need development, more innings and better results from the rotation. I think we sometimes forget that things didn't look so bleak last year until the rotation fell apart and the bullpen just couldn't handle the load. I'm not sure any bullpen could have. I have to think that a top priority has to be to avoid a repeat of that at all costs.
That said though, as epic of a collapse as it was, it seems much of it was just shitty, shitty injury luck, and if they can't get out from under that horseshoe, I'm not sure that any amount of thought and preparation can overcome it. On the other hand, it was so bad that I think it's highly unlikely to be repeated, especially with Breslow and Bailey in the fold.
I find it pretty interesting to see all the changes and innovations to pitching in today's game, and I'm very glad to have both of those guys leading the way for my team right now. I hope I feel that way for a long, long time.
Can you take a moment and put some actual numbers on this?
Off the top of my head, I'd be guessing that within the past 2 years Giolito, Bello, Pivetta, Winckowski, and Crawford(?) have all pitched a full season's workload. For some (I'm thinking Winckowski) you'd have to look at their MiL and ML innings pitched combined.
Of the depth, Houck and Whitlock have been bobbled between roles, and both have been injured. But even there, Houck was on track for a complete season as a starter until he took a comebacker to his face.
In terms of going deep into games - that may be a problem. Or not with the new pitching coach. We'll see.
But even on that last point we have actual numbers we can look at.
How would we rate a bullpen by raw talent?
Without getting hung up on the exact number for each pitcher, I think mine would look something like:
1 Jansen
2 Martin
3 Houck
4 Schreiber
5 Whitlock
6 Bernardino (LHP)
7 Campbell
8 Murphy
***
9 Kelly
10 Slaten
11 Mata
12 Jacques
13 Walter?
I do the ordering by options, partially because the options will be a factor in someone making or not making the club. . .which is an indication that there might be a trade involving that player, etc. But I think it's also useful to consider the optimal talent stack. And in that stack, I don't see Slaten or Mata displacing other pitchers. (Although I haven't done a deep dive on Slaten yet.)
A bunch of caveats apply: injury, development, someone developing a new pitch, etc. Mata could be a monster if he's able to get it together in spring training or shortly afterward. Murphy may be stretched out as a starter in AAA. . .who really knows at this point.
Yeah, I think all of that makes sense, pretty much. I don't see any of those arms 9-13 displacing 1-8, especially given the lack of lefties in the pen. But someone always gets injured, so it's great we have those options. Much better than the poo poo platter of Ort and co from last year.
Slaten looks like he could be a real weapon if his stuff translates, though. A 13.0 K/9 versus a 3.0 BB/9, even at AAA, is pretty wild.
This is pretty imprecise and doesn't really answer the question but one very rough way of looking at things:
The average 2023 playoff team's top 5 starters by number of games started combined to start on average 128 games during the regular season. Let's bump that up to 130 games started after taking the Rays out (major outlier due to injuries and whatnot).
The 2023 Red Sox were pretty unlucky with only 110. Say they get up to ~130 total starts in 2024 with better health from a Giolito / Bello / Pivetta / Kutter / Houck starting 5. I don't think that's unreasonable and it still leaves room for the odd IL stint here and there.
That would mean you're looking at ~30 games started by the swing guys in the bullpen (Whitlock and Winckowski) or your AAA depth guys (Walter/Murphy? Fitts?). I still think they're going to sign someone like Ryu or Lorenzen to add to the mix.
Cross posting this @trs post from the rumors thread:
They all can keep to their routine, the only difference being that 2 know they’re coming in later in the game. That might not be ideal, but it’s not too far off what happens in an away game, where the starter doesn’t know how long the top of the first will go.
If you add Whitlock to the mix of Houck, Crawford, and Winckowski you have 4 starters, all of whom are not likely to go deep in games. Is it possible to to set up tandem starters where you can plan for 7-8 innings from 2 guys every 5 days… it won’t work out like you’ve drawn it up all the time, but it allows you to develop all 4 as starters while also limiting their innings and integrating them into the schedule of a 5 man rotation.
They all can keep to their routine, the only difference being that 2 know they’re coming in later in the game. That might not be ideal, but it’s not too far off what happens in an away game, where the starter doesn’t know how long the top of the first will go.
I may have missed it, but does anyone have any thoughts on Bello’s left-right and day-night splits?
They seem pretty extreme.
They seem pretty extreme.
Eno Sarris had a mailbag question on the Athletic where he talked about the Red Sox and their pitching:
https://theathletic.com/5209431/2024/01/19/eno-sarris-mailbag-red-sox-juan-soto/
He points out that Fenway is basically Coors Lite in terms of being a hitter's park:
He thinks the guys we have now are pretty good:
The ERA+ of these 4 guys last year: Bello 107, Pivetta 113, Crawford 113, Houck 91 (career 118).
Giolito was bad last year, but here are his ERA+ since 2019: 134, 128, 124, 81, 91. (Not a promising trend, which is why he was my personal last choice among the main free agent starters, but if Breslow and company can get him back close to where he was 2 years ago, that would be great.)
I think most of these guys will pitch pretty well next year but again, even the ones who do pitch well probably won't have good ERAs, due to the home ballpark. Hopefully we will score more than we give up most times.
If they can cut the runs allowed down under 750 or so, they should be a much better team this year IMO.
The woeful defense of the past few years has to be improved for this team to do anything. But they should be clearly better if decently healthy. Story had great numbers in September, if Grissom is not great but half decent, that would be a huge boost, and Rafaela could be a big boost whenever and wherever he plays.
Adequate defense would help the pitching so much.
Runs allowed per season, along with Fielding Bible Defensive Runs Saved rank in MLB:
2018: 647, 12th
2019: 828, 16th
2020: shortened season, horrendous pitching, 19th
2021: 749, 18th
2022: 787, 23rd
2023: 776, 24th (Story coming back was a huge boost at SS for September, or it would have been even worse)
Another possible boost would be improving back end of the staff, who pitched over 300 terrible innings last season. Reduce the number of innings the worst pitchers have to throw, and use pitchers who are just bad instead of godawful, and they will cut down on the runs allowed a lot.
One more useful starting pitcher and decent overall health luck, and I think they could get to around 750 or so runs allowed (the 2021 level).
What we have now isn't that bad, even though it looks like it.
https://theathletic.com/5209431/2024/01/19/eno-sarris-mailbag-red-sox-juan-soto/
He points out that Fenway is basically Coors Lite in terms of being a hitter's park:
He posted this chart, comparing our runs allowed to winning percentage:
He thinks the guys we have now are pretty good:
I was surprised to see an analytics guy talk about Pivetta having the upside of a #2. But again, Coors Lite.
The ERA+ of these 4 guys last year: Bello 107, Pivetta 113, Crawford 113, Houck 91 (career 118).
Giolito was bad last year, but here are his ERA+ since 2019: 134, 128, 124, 81, 91. (Not a promising trend, which is why he was my personal last choice among the main free agent starters, but if Breslow and company can get him back close to where he was 2 years ago, that would be great.)
I think most of these guys will pitch pretty well next year but again, even the ones who do pitch well probably won't have good ERAs, due to the home ballpark. Hopefully we will score more than we give up most times.
If they can cut the runs allowed down under 750 or so, they should be a much better team this year IMO.
The woeful defense of the past few years has to be improved for this team to do anything. But they should be clearly better if decently healthy. Story had great numbers in September, if Grissom is not great but half decent, that would be a huge boost, and Rafaela could be a big boost whenever and wherever he plays.
Adequate defense would help the pitching so much.
Runs allowed per season, along with Fielding Bible Defensive Runs Saved rank in MLB:
2018: 647, 12th
2019: 828, 16th
2020: shortened season, horrendous pitching, 19th
2021: 749, 18th
2022: 787, 23rd
2023: 776, 24th (Story coming back was a huge boost at SS for September, or it would have been even worse)
Another possible boost would be improving back end of the staff, who pitched over 300 terrible innings last season. Reduce the number of innings the worst pitchers have to throw, and use pitchers who are just bad instead of godawful, and they will cut down on the runs allowed a lot.
One more useful starting pitcher and decent overall health luck, and I think they could get to around 750 or so runs allowed (the 2021 level).
What we have now isn't that bad, even though it looks like it.
Thanks for posting this, hadn’t seen it.Eno Sarris had a mailbag question on the Athletic where he talked about the Red Sox and their pitching:
https://theathletic.com/5209431/2024/01/19/eno-sarris-mailbag-red-sox-juan-soto/
He points out that Fenway is basically Coors Lite in terms of being a hitter's park:
He posted this chart, comparing our runs allowed to winning percentage:
He thinks the guys we have now are pretty good:
I was surprised to see an analytics guy talk about Pivetta having the upside of a #2. But again, Coors Lite.
The ERA+ of these 4 guys last year: Bello 107, Pivetta 113, Crawford 113, Houck 91 (career 118).
Giolito was bad last year, but here are his ERA+ since 2019: 134, 128, 124, 81, 91. (Not a promising trend, which is why he was my personal last choice among the main free agent starters, but if Breslow and company can get him back close to where he was 2 years ago, that would be great.)
I think most of these guys will pitch pretty well next year but again, even the ones who do pitch well probably won't have good ERAs, due to the home ballpark. Hopefully we will score more than we give up most times.
If they can cut the runs allowed down under 750 or so, they should be a much better team this year IMO.
The woeful defense of the past few years has to be improved for this team to do anything. But they should be clearly better if decently healthy. Story had great numbers in September, if Grissom is not great but half decent, that would be a huge boost, and Rafaela could be a big boost whenever and wherever he plays.
Adequate defense would help the pitching so much.
Runs allowed per season, along with Fielding Bible Defensive Runs Saved rank in MLB:
2018: 647, 12th
2019: 828, 16th
2020: shortened season, horrendous pitching, 19th
2021: 749, 18th
2022: 787, 23rd
2023: 776, 24th (Story coming back was a huge boost at SS for September, or it would have been even worse)
Another possible boost would be improving back end of the staff, who pitched over 300 terrible innings last season. Reduce the number of innings the worst pitchers have to throw, and use pitchers who are just bad instead of godawful, and they will cut down on the runs allowed a lot.
One more useful starting pitcher and decent overall health luck, and I think they could get to around 750 or so runs allowed (the 2021 level).
What we have now isn't that bad, even though it looks like it.
I think the extreme hitters park thing is another reason why Breslow aims to trade more than rely on free agency to acquire pitching. Pitchers don’t typically sign with the Rockies except for as a last resort. (Mostly because they suck, but also because it’s a tough place to pitch and doesn’t help future prospects.)
Breslow has already made some sharp trades, and will probably do more once things start moving again.
It’s interesting, of course the flip side of that is wondering if the teams offense stinks (or at least is not nearly as good as it appears). They had a 700 OPS on the road last year; and have lost a few guys in Turner and (probably) Duvall who were better than that average.
Definitely. We need at least one more bat. But this is the pitching thread, so we can talk about that in a different thread.
It would be fascinating to hear what Breslow/Bailey think about Pivetta, Bello, Crawford, Houck along with Montgomery/Snell and the other FAs. I'm wondering if they don't see those top free agents as worthy targets for the money/years it would cost to get them. Obviously they see Giolito as a useful part of the rotation.
And I like Eno Sarris alot, so I'll re-post this portion of the article:
"I think Brayan Bello, Nick Pivetta, Cutter Crawford and Tanner Houck are all major-league starters, and Bello and Pivetta have the upside to be good No. 2 starters, even in a postseason environment."
The praise for Pivetta continues and I do take some comfort in Sarris's assessment of the current rotation.
Interesting story from Speier about Bailey's optimism about the current rotation.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/01/20/sports/far-red-sox-rotation-goes-optimism-reigns-supreme-new-pitching-coach-andrew-bailey/
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/01/20/sports/far-red-sox-rotation-goes-optimism-reigns-supreme-new-pitching-coach-andrew-bailey/
I love Bailey and I do love a pitching coach who takes the position that his guys are enough. I also think there is low hanging fruit with Bello in particular with pitch usage.
Having said that, if that is the starting pitching roster at the beginning of the season it’s a disaster. You are an injury away from a complete and total blow up.
They need more arms in AAA and the major league level.
Having said that, if that is the starting pitching roster at the beginning of the season it’s a disaster. You are an injury away from a complete and total blow up.
They need more arms in AAA and the major league level.
I am always skeptical coaches matter much - otherwise one who really made a difference would be paid $5 million.
But lets hope. In many ways we are back where we were at the start of '23 with the exception than Bello has proved himself. Right now we are still hoping Houck and/or Whitlock can be a dependable starter.
But lets hope. In many ways we are back where we were at the start of '23 with the exception than Bello has proved himself. Right now we are still hoping Houck and/or Whitlock can be a dependable starter.
Depends on wat you mean by full season workload. 100-120? Then yeah those guys have done that. On the other hand neither Crawford or Winckowski have ever thrown 150 innings in a year and the closest each guy came was back Dave Dombrowski was still the executive (127 for Winck back in 2019 and 143 for Crawford in 2018).
I really don’t think either of them are full time starters (Winck was bad when he tried and Crawford’s splits show his effectiveness dropping off rapidly after the first time through the order).
I don't think any coach has a magic wand that will fix any pitcher he encounters. However I do think that the right coach working with the right pitcher(s) can absolutely yield better results. Bailey clearly has some ideas that he thinks can help the pitchers the Sox already have. Chances are he's going to resonate with at least one or two of them. We can only hope that the ones with whom he resonates best are guys who can make a leap to mid-rotation+ level starters rather than it being a discard or two that elevate themselves into fringy okay bullpen arms (which seemed to be the extent of Dave Bush's magic wand...e.g. Bernardino, Schreiber, etc).
Pitcher A: 20 innings, 18.9 k%, 9.5 bb%, 7.29 era, 4.35 fip
Pitcher B: 38.2 innings, 26.6 k%, 7.0 bb%, 0.70 era, 2.48 fip
They’re both Ryan Brasier last year. The first set of numbers is his time with the Red Sox, the second set is with the Dodgers. What changed? They immediately added a cut fastball to his pitch mix which he had never thrown in his 5 years with the Sox. Coaching and more broadly, pitching development, matter.
Tomase with a “best shape of my life” piece about Whitlock.
https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/mlb/boston-red-sox/garrett-whitlock-more-like-granite-impressively-remade-red-sox-starter/581449/
Lotta interesting color in here.
“There are transformations, and then there's what the 27-year-old right-hander managed this winter…He hit the gym and basically didn't leave, solidifying his 6-foot-5, 222-pound frame into something that can best be described as granite.”
“Some of us (raises hand) have consistently advocated for Whitlock’s full-time return to the bullpen, where he was such a weapon in 2021. Teammates who have spent the offseason with him tell a different story.”
https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/mlb/boston-red-sox/garrett-whitlock-more-like-granite-impressively-remade-red-sox-starter/581449/
Lotta interesting color in here.
“There are transformations, and then there's what the 27-year-old right-hander managed this winter…He hit the gym and basically didn't leave, solidifying his 6-foot-5, 222-pound frame into something that can best be described as granite.”
“Some of us (raises hand) have consistently advocated for Whitlock’s full-time return to the bullpen, where he was such a weapon in 2021. Teammates who have spent the offseason with him tell a different story.”
Give me more of best shape of my life stories!!!
I want to believe Whitlock and Houck are putting the injuries in the past. I want them healthy and throwing well… SP or RP. They are good players when healthy and they are ours today.
Would really like to see Devers come in to camp in great shape. Verdugo last year clearly came to camp ready.
I want to believe Whitlock and Houck are putting the injuries in the past. I want them healthy and throwing well… SP or RP. They are good players when healthy and they are ours today.
Would really like to see Devers come in to camp in great shape. Verdugo last year clearly came to camp ready.
Moving this from the Let's Lay Off That Throttle thread to the What We Have Thread
I totally agree that this has been an issue with Houck, but I can see a bit of reason for optimism too.
Before the line drive last year, Houck's times through the order problem wasn't really an issue. Or at least, it wasn't really his issue, but rather the defense's.
Houck, April 1 - June 16 (13 starts)
1st time through order: .257 expected wOBA against | .241 actual wOBA against
2nd time through order: .344 expected wOBA against | .347 actual wOBA against
3rd time through order: .333 expected wOBA against | .371 actual wOBA against
So, yes, he's much better the first time through the order, which is the case for almost all pitchers. But those second and third times aren't bad at all. It looks like he was a little unlucky the third time through, which makes sense because he's a ground ball pitcher and we had an awful infield defense from April through June.
Here's how Houck's numbers compare to league average among all 2023 pitchers:
League average, 2023
1st: .312 expected wOBA against | .313 actual wOBA against
2nd: .329 expected wOBA against | .324 actual wOBA against
3rd: .345 expected wOBA against | .337 actual wOBA against
So, from these numbers, Houck looked roughly league average the second and third times through the order, and much better than league average the first time. There's no leaguewide wOBA vs. xwOBA penalty the third time through the order, so it looks like Houck was an outlier there.
Is it fair to look only at Houck's pre-injury numbers? Probably not. But look at this, his entire year x-stats (expected stats based on batted ball data) were arguably even better, at least in the problem area. His numbers the second and third time through improved (slightly) upon return.
Tanner Houck, all year 2023:
1st: .293 expected wOBA against | .288 actual wOBA against
2nd: .337 expected wOBA against | .328 actual wOBA against
3rd: .330 expected wOBA against | .395 actual wOBA against
When you factor back in his 8 starts in August and September, it looks like Houck's third time through the order luck was even worse than before. I can't tell how noisy this is or what to attribute it to. His command vs. LHB was much worse in those eight starts. By that time, we had Story, an excellent defensive shortstop, but we also had Urias at 2B, who graded out pretty poorly defensively in his short time here.
Let's compare to a few other guys that have been talked about around here. (Re-listing Houck's numbers for easy reference.)
Houck, pre-injury 2023
1st: .257 expected wOBA against
2nd: .344
3rd: .333
Houck, all year 2023
1st: .293
2nd: .330
3rd: .337
Cease, 2023
1st: .279
2nd: .344
3rd: .313
Luzardo, 2023
1st: .285
2nd: .305
3rd: .351
Montgomery, 2023:
1st: .272
2nd: .331
3rd: .328
Eduardo Rodriguez, 2023
1st: .274
2nd: .329
3rd: .335
Seth Lugo, 2023
1st: .298
2nd: .328
3rd: .352
Marcus Stroman, 2023
1st: .291
2nd: .332
3rd: .353
Houck's numbers look right in line with most of those guys, even favorably in some key cases.
I'm not saying that the narrative that Houck had difficulties with the third time through the order is false. It took hold for a reason. Here are his numbers by the same metric in 2021, the last year we have substantial data on him as a starter.
Houck, 2021:
1st time through the order: .274
2nd: .256
3rd: .434
So, lengthy post, thanks for reading to whoever made it this far. To me, these numbers suggest that Houck had made some considerable strides in 2023 with his past issue going deeper into ballgames, but those developments were masked by poor defense and a badly timed injury.
I'm sure luck played a significant part of it last year. In a blog post from last May, Fangraphs examined his second and third times through issues and suggested that his approach to hitters and ability to maintain his stuff deep into starts played a role too.
The splitter is nasty enough that it still got plenty of whiffs, he wasn't able to command it consistently with increase usage and it resulted in a negative run value. Ideally, you want to keep that pitch low and away against left handed hitters. But Houck's splitters far too often caught the middle of the plate. Here's a chart of Houck's splitter vs LHB in 2023 compared to a few right handed starters with heavy splitter usage and positive run values. The first chart is Houck. Then in order, Taijuan Walker, Alex Cobb, Kevin Gausman. Houck's grouping is less tight and even though he's keeping it down it's over the middle of the plate way too often. That's a pitch lefties can lefties can drive when they're not sitting fastball.
Houck's flashed the ability to pitch deeper into games and get lefties out at times. Just has never been able to do it with any consistency. Below is a breakdown of a start against the Angels last year when he was really commanding all of his pitches against the heart of the Angels' lineup second and third time through the order. He fooled Ohtani pretty badly on a handful of splitters and sliders. The first pitch in this video is actually a low splitter over the middle that probably catches some plate but in an 0-0 count with Ohtani expecting fastball based on his first AB, that's not a bad situation to throw that pitch (compare to the video linked above where Calhoun goes yard--same location but a 1-2 pitch to Calhoun). When Houck was ahead in counts in this game he was executing that splitter consistently low and away.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJNVMvXQv6w
Houck's issues with lefties is the other biggie (and part of why I'm higher on Crawford's ability to stick as a starter despite having similar issues with 2nd and 3rd times through the order). Neither his 4-seam nor his sinker have ever been effective against lefties. Houck's slider is an out pitch regardless of the batters' handedness similar to how Sale can bury sliders that start over the middle of the plate and end up near a right handed hitter's back foot. But the inability to throw his fastball in the zone with confidence that they won't get crushed is a big problem in that it allows lefthanded hitters to sit on in-zone sliders he's trying to throw for strikes, which are more hittable. Last year he tried to address this by both increasing his splitter usage and adding a cutter which he used almost exclusively against left handed hitters. Purpose of the cutter was to give him a fastball with a different movement profile to use inside against lefties, giving him something to throw inside that doesn't run back out over the plate. The cutter helped, but he struggled with splitter command at times.
The splitter is nasty enough that it still got plenty of whiffs, he wasn't able to command it consistently with increase usage and it resulted in a negative run value. Ideally, you want to keep that pitch low and away against left handed hitters. But Houck's splitters far too often caught the middle of the plate. Here's a chart of Houck's splitter vs LHB in 2023 compared to a few right handed starters with heavy splitter usage and positive run values. The first chart is Houck. Then in order, Taijuan Walker, Alex Cobb, Kevin Gausman. Houck's grouping is less tight and even though he's keeping it down it's over the middle of the plate way too often. That's a pitch lefties can lefties can drive when they're not sitting fastball.
Houck's flashed the ability to pitch deeper into games and get lefties out at times. Just has never been able to do it with any consistency. Below is a breakdown of a start against the Angels last year when he was really commanding all of his pitches against the heart of the Angels' lineup second and third time through the order. He fooled Ohtani pretty badly on a handful of splitters and sliders. The first pitch in this video is actually a low splitter over the middle that probably catches some plate but in an 0-0 count with Ohtani expecting fastball based on his first AB, that's not a bad situation to throw that pitch (compare to the video linked above where Calhoun goes yard--same location but a 1-2 pitch to Calhoun). When Houck was ahead in counts in this game he was executing that splitter consistently low and away.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJNVMvXQv6w
Last edited:
Josh Winckowski looks like a guy who might be able to become a decent pitcher with some better coaching. Look at his pitch locations. The cutter, slider, and four seamer are usually located perfectly. The changeup is either spotted right or hung. But that sinker, which he throws more than anything else, is always right down the middle. It doesn't make much sense. I wonder what he'd look like if he dropped the sinker entirely and just used the four seamer and cutters as the fastballs.
It's worth mentioning that if one scrolls down past the heat maps, you'll find that his sinker is by far his most hittable pitch for two years running: https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/josh-winckowski-670174?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb
Good find. Throwing your worst pitch all the time is obviously not a recipe for success. Hopefully they'll be able to either fix his sinker or get him to stop throwing it as his go-to pitch.
We should note though that overall he was very effective last year. If he can get better results from his baseline/go-to pitch. . .well, that's gonna be something.
It's also why I'm intrigued by him as a darkish horse candidate to start. Last year was his first as a reliever, and he got a lot of success out of his secondaries (which he had revamped over the winter). His revamped pitches might make him viable again as a starter, as he always had been prior to last year.
The argument against is that he got a 2mph velocity jumped from 94 to 96 on the sinker and the 4 seam. If that's a feature of him being in the pen only. . .maybe the slower Winckowski, even with the revamped pitches, won't work as a starter.
I would love love love to see him start the season in the Worcester rotation, which would allow us to give Mata a two month trial as a single inning reliever in the bigs and give Winckowski 8-10 starts in AAA with his new repertoire to see how that looks. Then we reassess.
Any particular reason you wouldn't slot him as one of the SP if Bailey thinks he can hack it?
Only that ideally we'd open the season with five more reliable options (impending FA signing, Bello, Giolito, and two of Pivetta/Whitlock/Houck/Crawford, with the other two in the 'pen). We badly need depth, and the AAA rotation will likely be something like Fitts (interesting IMO), Max Castillo, Brandon Walter, and Grant Gambrell. I like Gambrell fine, but he has swing-man upside. Walter and Castillo have both had cups of coffee in MLB, but their track records in the minors are pretty uneven and Castillo is rapidly following Walter into postprospectdom. Winckowski, meanwhile, has ~1.5 seasons of MLB service time, and if he can show he can do it, suddenly he's precisely the asset we need.
I guess I'm just saying that there's an opportunity for somebody to seize to show he can face a bunch of hitters three times in a night without getting clobbered. And I worry that Boston wouldn't be the place place to calmly pursue an experiment of that kind.
Sarris on the Athletic came out with Stuff+ projections for the top 150 starting pitchers.
https://theathletic.com/5224402/2024/01/29/eno-sarris-starting-pitcher-fantasy-baseball-ranking/
Here's how some familiar names did in his overall rankings:
Burnes 2
Yamamoto 8
Snell 14
Sale 38
Imanaga 39
Montgomery 44
Lugo 45
Pivetta 51
E-Rod 56
Eovaldi 57
Crawford 62
Bello 69
Houck 86
Giolito 95
Paxton 134
The top 70 get a blurb, all get a more complete breakdown that includes data other than just Stuff+, it's really interesting stuff.
The guys we have now:
Pivetta:
Crawford:
Bello:
Houck:
No blurb
Stuff+ 99, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 101, Health C projected innings: 132, projected ppERA: 4.32
Giolito:
No blurb.
Stuff+ 95, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 100, Health A projected innings: 171, projected ppERA: 4.73
So overall, they are projecting us to have a rotation that has no real top end guy but is overall pretty deep, with all 5 in the top 100.
They have the total projected innings for the rotation at 790 innings, compared to last season's 774 for all our starters, not just the top 5.
Last season's top 5 rotation of Sale, Paxton, Bello, Houck, and Crawford pitched around 591 innings. Pivetta last year pitched 87 innings as a starter and 55 as a reliever.
https://theathletic.com/5224402/2024/01/29/eno-sarris-starting-pitcher-fantasy-baseball-ranking/
ppERA and ppK%
Injury ratings
Here's how some familiar names did in his overall rankings:
Burnes 2
Yamamoto 8
Snell 14
Sale 38
Imanaga 39
Montgomery 44
Lugo 45
Pivetta 51
E-Rod 56
Eovaldi 57
Crawford 62
Bello 69
Houck 86
Giolito 95
Paxton 134
The top 70 get a blurb, all get a more complete breakdown that includes data other than just Stuff+, it's really interesting stuff.
The guys we have now:
Pivetta:
Stuff+ 116, Location+ 102, Pitching+ 106, Health A projected innings: 170, projected ppERA: 3.95
Crawford:
Stuff+ 107, Location+ 102, Pitching+ 103, Health C projected innings: 148, projected ppERA: 4.45
Bello:
Stuff+ 97, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 100, Health C projected innings: 169, projected ppERA: 4.40
Houck:
No blurb
Stuff+ 99, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 101, Health C projected innings: 132, projected ppERA: 4.32
Giolito:
No blurb.
Stuff+ 95, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 100, Health A projected innings: 171, projected ppERA: 4.73
So overall, they are projecting us to have a rotation that has no real top end guy but is overall pretty deep, with all 5 in the top 100.
They have the total projected innings for the rotation at 790 innings, compared to last season's 774 for all our starters, not just the top 5.
Last season's top 5 rotation of Sale, Paxton, Bello, Houck, and Crawford pitched around 591 innings. Pivetta last year pitched 87 innings as a starter and 55 as a reliever.
Thanks for posting that, I’d considered it.
Interesting to see where these metrics have got Jordan Montgomery.
Montgomery
Stuff+ 101, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 99, Health C projected innings: 181, projected ppERA: 4.44, ppK%: 20.8%
Compared with Houck, our notional #5.
Houck:
Stuff+ 99, Location+ 101, Pitching+ 101, Health C projected innings: 132, projected ppERA: 4.32, ppK%: 22.5
Last edited:
So much depends on whether he was making progress on this when he got zonked in the head last season. And I have no idea.
In favor: he started the season with a rough start in an ugly 9-5 win against Baltimore (in bad weather if I remember right), but then pitched pretty well over his next dozen appearances, posting a 3.97 FIP (about a run below his ERA, but weirdly without a high BABIP) and pitching 5.16 IP/start, including one 7 IP and three 6 IP starts. 5.16 * 31 = 160 IP.
Opposed: he came back (too quickly?) and pitched terribly: his FIP caught up with his ERA around 5, and he allowed an .820 OPS in his final eight starts, a span in which he failed to average 5 IP. Now, to be fair, he'd been *hit in the head,* and came back in the same season to make starts when the team desperately needed bodies, which clearly required some pretty serious grit. So there's a mulligan to be extended in that case.
But looking forward, I just don't know how to evaluate what kind of trajectory he's actually on.
I'm not 100% sure I agree with this. Certain teams tend to always have decent pitching - the Rays, the Cardinals even to a lesser extent the A's (based on compared salary)
The Cubs just signed a manager for 5/$40m, or about twice what he earned in his 14-year playing career.