Building a Bullpen, 2019 edition

Twilight

lurker
Nov 17, 2006
42
Not enough is made about Barnes willing and eager acceptance of the task. He’s embraced it and really flourished.
Absolutely, especially considering the potential financial penalty. Even if the Sox are progressive and make fair offers through arbitration regardless of saves, will some teams have less interest in him as a free agent if he hasn't racked up as many saves? He still has time to add to his resume for FA, but I'd think this would be a very tough decision for him and his family to make if this was his walk year.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,705
Maine
Consider someone like Andrew Miller. He had a total of two saves on his MLB resume when he hit free agency after 2014. Despite that, he was clearly one of the best relievers on the market and got "closer" money (4/$36M) and a closer job (36 saves in 2015). No reason that Barnes, should he continue on the track he's currently on as a relief ace rather than a true closer, won't be considered a top prize as a free agent.

Besides, that's still three years away and who knows how prevalent his particular usage pattern will be as more managers pick up on its effectiveness. Milwaukee used Josh Hader in a similar way last year and probably would still be doing so if not for some injuries in their pen (Knebel gone with TJS, Jeffress missed the start of the season, etc).
 

z-factor

lurker
Dec 30, 2010
8
To quote the article: “Barnes has faced 72 batters this season, and nearly 65 percent of them have come from the heart of the order. He has faced the No. 3 hitter 11 times, the cleanup man 14 times, the fifth spot 10 times, and the sixth spot 11 times. He has only drawn the No. 9 and leadoff hitters three times each.”

I apologize for my ignorance, but which pitching statistics would take this into account? It’s like Olympic divers that earn extra points for ‘degree of difficulty.’
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,724
Not enough is made about Barnes willing and eager acceptance of the task. He’s embraced it and really flourished.
For sure. In order for this to work you have to have the pitcher embrace it and buy in 100%. Barnes has done that.

Now down the road, he may get paid huge $$, but it’s still a “closer’s” world in terms of allocation of bullpen dollars. And “closer” = saves. Barnes is willingly giving that up in order to help the team.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
12,844
To quote the article: “Barnes has faced 72 batters this season, and nearly 65 percent of them have come from the heart of the order. He has faced the No. 3 hitter 11 times, the cleanup man 14 times, the fifth spot 10 times, and the sixth spot 11 times. He has only drawn the No. 9 and leadoff hitters three times each.”

I apologize for my ignorance, but which pitching statistics would take this into account? It’s like Olympic divers that earn extra points for ‘degree of difficulty.’

I dont think any particular stat would (and someone will correct me if that's wrong). But in comparing 2 pitchers, it might be useful to know that Pitcher A faced 3-6 65% of the time, and Pitcher B, with identical results, only faced 3-6 33% of the time. Quick and dirty would suggest that Pitcher A has done better.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,134
For sure. In order for this to work you have to have the pitcher embrace it and buy in 100%. Barnes has done that.

Now down the road, he may get paid huge $$, but it’s still a “closer’s” world in terms of allocation of bullpen dollars. And “closer” = saves. Barnes is willingly giving that up in order to help the team.
I don't think it matters in FA. Elite relievers get paid regardless of what role they were in. It may matter in arbitration.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,724
I don't think it matters in FA. Elite relievers get paid regardless of what role they were in. It may matter in arbitration.
Maybe. But here are the top paid relievers in MLB. See: https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/rankings/relief-pitcher/

Rank. Name, Team - 2019 salary - notes
1. Chen, Mia - $20m - Signed a deal before the 2016 season when he was a starter logging near 200ip a season. Just became a reliever this year, so he doesn't really count.

2. Jansen, LAD - $19.3m - Signed before the 2017 season, after saving 47 games in 2016 (and 127 from 2014-2016).

3. Melancon, SF - $19m - Signed before the 2017 season, following 51 saves in 2015 and 47 saves in 2016.

4. Davis, Col - $18m - Signed before the 2018 season, following 27 saves in 2016 and 32 saves in 2017.

5. Chapman, NYY - $17.2m - Signed before the 2017 season, following 36 saves in 2016, and 143 saves between 2013-2016.

6. Kennedy, KC - $16.5m - Signed before the 2016 season, when he was a starter, so like Chen, he doesn't really count here as he just became a reliever and his contract was a starter's contract.

7. Britton, NYY - $13m - Highest paid non-closer. Naturally...signed by the Yankees, who can afford such luxuries.

8. Chatwood, ChC - $12.5m - Signed before the 2018 season, when he was a starter, coming off 25 starts in 2017.

9. Martinez, StL - $11.7m - Signed before the 2017 season, coming off 195.1 innings and 31 starts in 2016. He then threw 205 innings in 2017, so his contract is a starter's contract.

10. Miller, StL - $11m - Signed before the 2019 season, as a non-save reliever.

11. Robertson, Phi - $10m - Signed before the 2019 season, as a non-save reliever.

Ok so of these top 11, four were starters when they signed their contracts (Chen, Kennedy, Chatwood, Martinez), three were non-save relievers (Britton, Miller, Robertson), and four were save-heavy closers (Jansen, Melancon, Davis, Chapman).

Note too that the three non-save relievers all have Yankee ties. Either their current contract was from NY (Britton), or they made big money with NY and then again with another team (Miller, Robertson).

Type: Ranking in the top 11
Starters: #s 1, 6, 8, 9
Non-save relievers: #7, 10, 11
Save-heavy closers: #2, 3, 4, 5

Taking the salaries for the top save-heavy closers and the non-save relievers, here's the averages:

- Save-heavy closers: $18.4 million
- Non-save relievers: $11.3 million

It's not that Barnes wouldn't get paid big bucks if he hit the FA market after this year. It's that he wouldn't get paid NEARLY as much as if he were a traditional save-heavy closer. Because for some reason, teams still value those guys more.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,134
Kimbrel didn't get paid and that's more recent. Not sure if that's a sign of things to come or just an isolated incident. I'm of the opinion FA bullpen arms are the most overpaid commodity in baseball anyway.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,724
Kimbrel didn't get paid and that's more recent. Not sure if that's a sign of things to come or just an isolated incident. I'm of the opinion FA bullpen arms are the most overpaid commodity in baseball anyway.
I think Kimbrel's pretty poor postseason performances, along with contract length, are scaring teams off. But who knows...after the non-penalty phase is up shortly, he may still get paid. I'm sure it will be more money than any non-save reliever gets.

And yes I agree - FA bullpen arms are the most overpaid commodity in baseball. I think Boston agrees with you. Here's what Boston's bullpen arms are making:

Thornburg: $1.75m
Barnes: $1.6m
Hembree: $1.31m
Workman: $1.15m
Brasier: $577k
Velazquez: $569k
Brewer: $557k
Walden: $555k
Weber: $555k

I mean, these guys TOTAL are making $8.6 million. And right now they've got the 5th best collective relief ERA in the AL, and the #2 collective relief K/9 mark in the AL.

Making probably half of what Kimbrel will eventually sign for per year.
 

judyb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,412
Andrew Miller and Cody Allen both had off years in 2018, and even though Allen was the one who got most of the saves when they were teammates, Miller still got a better contract.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,724
Andrew Miller and Cody Allen both had off years in 2018, and even though Allen was the one who got most of the saves when they were teammates, Miller still got a better contract.
The point is that if you compare the top-paid "closers" with the top-paid "non-save relievers", the "closers" on average get a LOT more money. That doesn't mean that every "closer" will make more than every "non-save reliever".
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
2,356
The point is that if you compare the top-paid "closers" with the top-paid "non-save relievers", the "closers" on average get a LOT more money. That doesn't mean that every "closer" will make more than every "non-save reliever".
I'm getting the sense that the history on this isn't going to hold in regards to "saves" any longer. Cora is definitely applying the correct usage of the best bullpen arms (yes, it'll still hurt horribly if your best BP arm comes in and preserves a lead in the 8th against the 3,4,5 hitters and then your second best reliever comes in to close and coughs up a lead to the 8 hitter... but the same situation could have played out in the 8th with your no. 2 BP arm coughing up the lead in the 8th, and, basing things on WHiP, may likely have even given up a bigger lead.....) and the league sees it and will make a correction. "Closer" money will likely just get bumped to "best BP arm" money and they'll be expected to pitch exactly how Barnes is pitching.
That said... I think we'll also see more and more teams attempting to find that guy other ways rather than paying big bucks to a FA. Will Kimbrell say "no thanks... I want to close... period"!!! if say the Astros or Twins offer him 3 years at $17M per season but say that the one condition is that he'll be pitching whenever the hell he's asked to pitch? I doubt it. I also doubt he's getting any kind of offer like that money and time at all, but that's beside the point
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,154
The wrong side of the bridge....
Kimbrel didn't get paid and that's more recent. Not sure if that's a sign of things to come or just an isolated incident. I'm of the opinion FA bullpen arms are the most overpaid commodity in baseball anyway.
If you examined it I bet you'd find that the average of dollars paid per win produced for FA relievers is not out of line with the figure for SPs and position players. It might even be lower. It's just that the standard deviation from that average will be much higher for relievers, because of volatility and also because of the closer fetish and the way it distorts the market. I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of relievers who are significantly underpaid for value produced after signing an FA contract is higher than for any other category of player. But some of the overpaid ones are really really overpaid, and that's who we notice.

I think what FA relievers really are is the best argument out there for a complete overhaul of the salary system to one in which a large percentage of each year's salary is paid according to a fixed formula based on service time and recent performance, with the signing team's offer as just the cherry on the sundae.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
12,844
I'm getting the sense that the history on this isn't going to hold in regards to "saves" any longer. Cora is definitely applying the correct usage of the best bullpen arms (yes, it'll still hurt horribly if your best BP arm comes in and preserves a lead in the 8th against the 3,4,5 hitters and then your second best reliever comes in to close and coughs up a lead to the 8 hitter... but the same situation could have played out in the 8th with your no. 2 BP arm coughing up the lead in the 8th, and, basing things on WHiP, may likely have even given up a bigger lead.....) and the league sees it and will make a correction. "Closer" money will likely just get bumped to "best BP arm" money and they'll be expected to pitch exactly how Barnes is pitching.
That said... I think we'll also see more and more teams attempting to find that guy other ways rather than paying big bucks to a FA. Will Kimbrell say "no thanks... I want to close... period"!!! if say the Astros or Twins offer him 3 years at $17M per season but say that the one condition is that he'll be pitching whenever the hell he's asked to pitch? I doubt it. I also doubt he's getting any kind of offer like that money and time at all, but that's beside the point
Well said. I think there will also be backlash from some quarters about the nerds ruining the game, as with defensive shifts. As though someone who was unquestionably great, like Mariano Rivera, would never have come along. (Which is complete bullshit for a thousand different reasons....)

The biggest caterwauling will come from the high-waister set. "We know 714, 56, 511, 406. How will we know who is a good reliever if saves become unimportant? Using some formula that's more complicated than calculus to come up with a number that no one understands that was created by someone who never played the game"?

As I once wrote to the late Mr. Cafardo when he wrote something very similar: "how do we know who is a good sportswriter? We look at their body of work, and because we're not stupid, we can decide whether they're any good."
 
Last edited:

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,134
If you examined it I bet you'd find that the average of dollars paid per win produced for FA relievers is not out of line with the figure for SPs and position players. It might even be lower. It's just that the standard deviation from that average will be much higher for relievers, because of volatility and also because of the closer fetish and the way it distorts the market. I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of relievers who are significantly underpaid for value produced after signing an FA contract is higher than for any other category of player. But some of the overpaid ones are really really overpaid, and that's who we notice.

I think what FA relievers really are is the best argument out there for a complete overhaul of the salary system to one in which a large percentage of each year's salary is paid according to a fixed formula based on service time and recent performance, with the signing team's offer as just the cherry on the sundae.
I just did a very quick search and it looks like most RP who hit FA don't even get contracts. Some get minor league deals. I would guess you are right that most are actually underpaid, but that's probably because they weren't very good before. I wonder how many even hit FA at a decent age. Quite a few of the Sox MR are in their 30s already and won't be FA anytime soon.

I guess that's kinda my point. There's no reason to pay someone $15 mil a year when there's cheaper options out there. You can sign a handful of guys and something is likely to stick.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
2,356
Serious question..... can the Sox stay in the race and get to the playoffs with the bullpen as it currently exists?
It seems that it's riiiiight there.... almost. I don't expect to get another Barnes quality reliever. I don't expect Kimbrell to be signed. The don't have the payroll space to add anyone at all really. Their best hope is to somehow unload one of Holt, Nunez or Pearce by adding them to a decent mL talent (Hernandez?) and getting a cost controlled reliever back with 3 years still on their contract.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,087
Hingham, MA
Serious question..... can the Sox stay in the race and get to the playoffs with the bullpen as it currently exists?
It seems that it's riiiiight there.... almost. I don't expect to get another Barnes quality reliever. I don't expect Kimbrell to be signed. The don't have the payroll space to add anyone at all really. Their best hope is to somehow unload one of Holt, Nunez or Pearce by adding them to a decent mL talent (Hernandez?) and getting a cost controlled reliever back with 3 years still on their contract.
Is this really a serious question? The pen is currently 5th in the AL and 10th in MLB in OPS allowed by the pen (yes I realize that is a simple stat). Given the strength of the lineup and rotation, having the "worst" part of your team still being in the top 10 in MLB certainly seems like it would be good enough to get to the playoffs.

Also, the Sox would make the playoffs today as things currently stand.

Edit: last year the Sox were 4th and 11th, respectively, in OPS against by the bullpen. And their OPS against was actually a tick worse (.700) than this year so far excluding today (.694)

Double edit: the Sox are 16-6 in their last 22 and 21-10 in their last 31... 21-10 is basically their entire 2018 season pace. I don't expect them to play .667 ball for most of the year like last year, but they don't have to in order to still be pretty good. .600 ball after the 6-13 start still gets them to 92 wins, which will get them into the tournament.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
2,356
Is this really a serious question? The pen is currently 5th in the AL and 10th in MLB in OPS allowed by the pen (yes I realize that is a simple stat). Given the strength of the lineup and rotation, having the "worst" part of your team still being in the top 10 in MLB certainly seems like it would be good enough to get to the playoffs.

Also, the Sox would make the playoffs today as things currently stand.

Edit: last year the Sox were 4th and 11th, respectively, in OPS against by the bullpen. And their OPS against was actually a tick worse (.700) than this year so far excluding today (.694)

Double edit: the Sox are 16-6 in their last 22 and 21-10 in their last 31... 21-10 is basically their entire 2018 season pace. I don't expect them to play .667 ball for most of the year like last year, but they don't have to in order to still be pretty good. .600 ball after the 6-13 start still gets them to 92 wins, which will get them into the tournament.
Yes.... like I said.... we're "riiiiiight there". I'm just not sure. Looking for others thoughts. I've never been a guy to need stress about the bullpen- I think one dominant guy, 2 good guys and 2 decent guys is enough to get to the playoffs.... and of course from there your dominant guy can turn into a turd and your turds can turn into BP aces.
Barnes is awesome.
The next group doesn't quite inspire me with the confidence despite some nice numbers so far. Walden and Workman still look like they're on the lucky side but might struggle when facing the Astros, Yankees, etc of the league.... of course, as any BP arm likely would. That's why I'm not sure
 

DanoooME

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
15,510
South Jersey
The shame is that at this point, with the loss of the draft pick compensation looming (and likely), that they didn't have just a wee bit more cap space to work with and sign Kimbrel anyway. They'd potentially only have to pay 2/3rds of a full year's deal, if it was a 1 year deal, since the AAV would only be what would actually be paid out on a 1 year deal. They are the one team that could sign him ahead of the deadline next week and not really lose anything since everyone else would be waiting until the deadline passes and the Sox would lose the pick at that point anyway. They only have about $6.5M up to the top tax threshold, which would be about $10M on a full 1 year deal, which probably isn't enough to entice him away. Somebody will probably throw him a multi-year deal next week. If that doesn't happen, then the system is really fucked.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
18,185
giant setback tonight. all but certain to move to five games over .500 for the first time this season (third chance to do so), against a team so anemic on offense that they hadn't won a game all season when trailing after 6 innings, never mind 8. and everyone but Barnes shat their pants.
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
34,150
Bullpen stats prior to today’s blowup



And before you say “SIGN CRAIG!” he is most likely going to have to spend 3 weeks in the minors to get up to game speed. It would be asinine to just sign him and plug him straight into the MLB pen. He is 100% not in “game shape”
 

StuckOnYouk

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
2,976
CT
I'm stunned we had a better bullpen ERA and BAA than NY before tonight's collapse especially considering how overworked our pen has been (2nd most IP)
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
18,185
Kimbrel's probably not going to be good this year if he signs. the track record of players coming in cold waiting until May/June is not good.

I'm fine with the decision to not sign him. The real problem is this team hasn't developed pitching in the past 10 years. They've used free agency / some trades to fill out a solid looking rotation for the next ~3-4 years (Sale, Price, Eovaldi, ERod). Both premiere reliever trades DD made (Smith, Thornburg) were complete busts. They need to develop some homegrown arms, badly, because now they're about out of prospect chips, so you can't keep plugging the hole every July 31st.

in hindsight, Brasier & Kelly being as good as they were in October last year was the biggest miracle of all.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
43,960
I'm stunned we had a better bullpen ERA and BAA than NY before tonight's collapse especially considering how overworked our pen has been (2nd most IP)
NY’s top four guys have been superb but there’s been a steep drop after that. Also when a team uses an opener, the long guy gets counted as a reliever when he’s essentially the starter, so that’s misleading.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
18,185
another thing mentioned tonight was that Buttrey (key piece going in the Kinsler trade last summer) has done quite well for the Angels so far in the majors.

does DD just not know how to evaluate relief talent? the track record is glaring and growing and giving fuel to the "Dumbrowski" crowd out there.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
12,844
another thing mentioned tonight was that Buttrey (key piece going in the Kinsler trade last summer) has done quite well for the Angels so far in the majors.

does DD just not know how to evaluate relief talent? the track record is glaring and growing and giving fuel to the "Dumbrowski" crowd out there.
I'm fine with giving fuel to the "dumbrowski" crowd. Makes it more likely they will set themselves on fire and never be heard from again. Assuming they can figure out how to operate the matches.

Workman was fine last night. 1 inning with no hits and a walk is not shitting pants.

To the extent there's a problem, and I'm not sure there is, because 1 game isn't a problem, its Brasier's recent run. And since the GM, or whichever ventriloquist operates his mouth, found a Brasier last year, he can probably find another one.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
2,234
There should be deals to make that won’t bump them over the cap. Hopefully DD can acquire a guy like Will Smith sooner rather than later.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
4,704
I don't think the issue is so much talent available but the price they would fetch. Even despite having one of the better bullpens in the game, it's not exactly a secret that they have issues finishing off games lately and any reliever that DD might ask about is likely going to cost a little more than maybe he would have a week ago; who is even available that another GM would want that the Red Sox are willing to give up? Methinks the list is very short and I don't think Boston's detritus is going to interest many or yield a decent return. Do they finally pull the trigger on JBJ? Do they deal Benintendi? If Devers is the long-term 3B, does Dalbec become extraneous? There does not appear to be a whole lot of valuable pieces that the team can afford to deal away.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
I don't think the issue is so much talent available but the price they would fetch. Even despite having one of the better bullpens in the game, it's not exactly a secret that they have issues finishing off games lately and any reliever that DD might ask about is likely going to cost a little more than maybe he would have a week ago; who is even available that another GM would want that the Red Sox are willing to give up? Methinks the list is very short and I don't think Boston's detritus is going to interest many or yield a decent return. Do they finally pull the trigger on JBJ? Do they deal Benintendi? If Devers is the long-term 3B, does Dalbec become extraneous? There does not appear to be a whole lot of valuable pieces that the team can afford to deal away.
Holy shit, this team is not trading Benintendi or Dalbec for an arm at the deadline nor is Dombrowski going to overreact to the sample size of one freaking week.

The bullpen is good. They're five-deep in above-average to great arms (depending on your opinion of Hembree, I personally find it him above-average and perfectly fine for a 5th option.) Even the best bullpens blow a game every once in a while, it's baseball, it happens.
 

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,287
Why wouldn’t they trade Dalbec? He doesn’t have a clear path to playing time on the MLB club anytime soon and neither is he forcing the issue with his current performance. (I’d add more, but there’s already a lot of discussion on Dalbec’s specific strengths and weaknesses in the “Future of the Corners” thread)
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
Why wouldn’t they trade Dalbec? He doesn’t have a clear path to playing time on the MLB club anytime soon and neither is he forcing the issue with his current performance. (I’d add more, but there’s already a lot of discussion on Dalbec’s specific strengths and weaknesses in the “Future of the Corners” thread)
Because you don't sell low.
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
12,882
The gran facenda
Put Eovaldi in the bullpen and let him stretch out and rehab there instead of Pawtucket.
How would that work? Starting pitchers stretch out by starting games not by just pitching relief innings. It's not like they could have him pitch some relief innings with the Sox and then send him back to AAA to start to stretch out more. Or even have him stretch out by throwing some simulated games. He needs to throw against actual hitters.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
4,704
Holy shit, this team is not trading Benintendi or Dalbec for an arm at the deadline nor is Dombrowski going to overreact to the sample size of one freaking week.

The bullpen is good. They're five-deep in above-average to great arms (depending on your opinion of Hembree, I personally find it him above-average and perfectly fine for a 5th option.) Even the best bullpens blow a game every once in a while, it's baseball, it happens.
Yes, but given how poorly this team started out of the gate, blowing any games is really costly. And I'm not the only one saying a move needs to be made (and I truly believe it does, despite what the stats say). Also, I think it's worth looking at how well the bullpen has performed against contenders and teams with strong offenses. How they've fared against bottom of the barrel teams like Baltimore, Toronto, and Chicago is not as telling as how they've fared against Houston, New York (who isn't even fully healthy), and now Cleveland. My guess is that the numbers don't look as good once you get rid of the chaff.

For example, BR has Brasier having one game apiece against New York and Houston and two against Cleveland. His combined stats in that (albeit very small) sample size are: .244 BAA, .411 OBP, .978 SLG, 3 HR allowed, 3 hits allowed, 3 BB, 2 K over 14 PAs. The batting average against isn't awful, but the 3 HR on 3 H and 3 BB are pretty concerning.

This bullpen has been good enough to beat mostly middle of the pack or worse opponents. But against the iron of the AL and the NL (who they haven't really faced yet), they might not be as presently constituted, especially in close games.

I don't think they're good enough and that those numbers are going to get worse over time as the level of competition increases, especially if there are any more injuries to key arms.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,516
St. Louis, MO
Holy shit, this team is not trading Benintendi or Dalbec for an arm at the deadline nor is Dombrowski going to overreact to the sample size of one freaking week.

The bullpen is good. They're five-deep in above-average to great arms (depending on your opinion of Hembree, I personally find it him above-average and perfectly fine for a 5th option.) Even the best bullpens blow a game every once in a while, it's baseball, it happens.
Brasier has been a lot longer than a week and has cliff dived. He’s not close to above average right now, and should probably be optioned to figure things out. Workman, Walden and Hembree are very solid 6th-7th inning guys and we have one elite late inning arm in Barnes. It’s not as bad as it’s looked the last week, but needs at least one late inning elite guy to take the pressure off Barnes. I’d be stunned if DD didn’t make a substantial move.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,724
Hembree's last 14 games: 12.2 ip, 0.71 era, 0.95 whip, 12.1 k/9

Brasier's last 11 games: 9.0 ip, 8.00 era, 1.56 whip, 6.0 k/9

Kinda heading in opposite directions....
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,877
deep inside Guido territory
It’s pretty clear they need a real, elite late inning arm. I don’t care what flyer guys like Walden are doing because at some point it’s going to turn the other way. Look at the other AL playoff teams. NY and Houston both have elite back ends that go 2,3, and 4 deep in NYs case. Sox have 1.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
4,704
It’s pretty clear they need a real, elite late inning arm. I don’t care what flyer guys like Walden are doing because at some point it’s going to turn the other way. Look at the other AL playoff teams. NY and Houston both have elite back ends that go 2,3, and 4 deep in NYs case. Sox have 1.
Yeah, that's the key. If Brasier rights the ship, the Sox have two high-end relievers. But there's only a one-season track record of him being an effective ML pitcher for a contending team. His big issue seems to be that when he's missing spots or just not right, the ball goes a long way when they make contact. He's not dying a death of a thousand cuts: it's from a fusillade of gopher balls.

Then again, keeping the ball in the park has been an issue all season for this staff, so at least he's fitting in.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
60,099
Oregon
The Red Sox are league average in allowing home runs. The MLB ave is 72; the Sox have allowed 71. NL teams have allowed an league average of 69, which you'd expect actually to be lower because of facing basically eight-hitter lineups.

The Red Sox have not had a problem "keeping the ball in the park." Every team has.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,707
The Red Sox are league average in allowing home runs. The MLB ave is 72; the Sox have allowed 71. NL teams have allowed an league average of 69, which you'd expect actually to be lower because of facing basically eight-hitter lineups.

The Red Sox have not had a problem "keeping the ball in the park." Every team has.
You and your fancy stats! Nerd.

You can keep your cold hard data - we want our takes and we want them piping hot!!!