Bullpen 2015

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,449
Haiku
For some teams, the bullpen is the residual, and so it may be for the Red Sox in 2015.

Some roles are already assigned: Koji closer, Mujica RH closer-in-waiting, Tazawa RH setup.

Layne has a leg up as a left-handed specialist: good movement, good deception, multiple arm angles, and excellent command on slider, fastball, sinker and curve - but is he good enough against RHB to graduate to LH setup?

Badenhop (RH sinkerball specialist) is a free agent. He has earned his payday, but I doubt that it will come from the Red Sox. Nevertheless, he's good value in Fenway, and might return.

Wright looks like a good multi-purpose reliever and emergency spot starter. His knuckler appears to be more catchable than a Wakefield flutterby.

Starting out as relievers, graduating to starter: Kelly, Webster, de la Rosa, Workman, Barnes, Ranaudo, Escobar and Rodriguez could each start, relieve, ride the shuttle or be traded. I project Kelly and Webster to start; de la Rosa and Workman to the bullpen; Barnes, Ranaudo and Escobar to ride the shuttle; and Rodriguez in the minors to preserve club control.

On the bubble: Hembree RH, Britton LH, Wilson RH and Villareal RH will compete for the Justin Thomas Memorial Award as 25th Man on the April Roster. All are dirt-cheap, and have stuff: 93+ mph fastball, good breaking pitches. Count me here as a believer in Great Britton. He failed as a 2014 AAA reliever, but succeeded at the majors in several years. He's left-handed, which always helps, and I think his power stuff will develop in the majors. Wilson's no slouch: his fastball command has improved, and he's approaching his peak years. I'd like to keep them both. Hembree... we'll see. Villareal we might see too.

Additions: everyone's favorite Confederate General Miller - a bit like Badenhop, some other team will probably need him more than the Red Sox.

Tradables: every prospect and every reliever except Koji.

Assuming a 7-man bullpen and sign or trade for two starting pitchers, and pending further sign or trade, I project

SP1 (Lester or other signing)
SP2 (Iwakuma or other trade for Cespedes and SP prospect)
Buchholz: he'll have two great years in the next five, and 2015 will be one of them.
Kelly: 95 sinker and good movement on the slider and curve.
Webster: 2 great offspeed pitches and improving fastball command by throwing 93 instead of 95.

closer: Uehara
closer in waiting: Mujica
RH setup: Tazawa
LH setup: Layne
RH multiple innings: de la Rosa, Workman
25th man: Britton/Wilson/Hembree/Ranaudo/Barnes/Escobar
 
 
 
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think you're way too kind to Layne.  He lucked his way into a good looking era by way of an unsustainably low 6+ hits per 9.  His fip was 3.08 and the two times I think I saw him pitch live he got his ass kicked so, yes, my perspective is biased.  But I just don't see it.  6.6K/9 and 3.8BB/9.  Ehh.
 

lxt

New Member
Sep 12, 2012
525
Massachusetts
I'd love to see Miller return but I'm on the fence as to whether they need anymore additions in the pen. Your breakout speaks for itself. Unlike Rough I saw Layne pitch a good inning, no pressure, no one on but he retired all three he faced. I'm hoping Wilson makes it. And I finally found someone who picked Webster over RDLR.
 

67WasBest

Concierge
SoSH Member
Mar 17, 2004
2,442
Music City USA
Good analysis, but I 'm uncomfortable with Layne as LH setup.  I like him as a 2nd lefty on the squad, but the setup role is one he still has to earn.
 
I think by 2016, Escobar is a good candidate for that role, but that does not solve the 2015 issue.  Miller is the answer on many levels.  he safely fills the hole in 2015, while providing another layer of closer insurance.  He does the same in 2016, then takes the closer role in 2017.
 
The financials indicate with Lester and Miller on the 2016 squad, and Victorino, Napoli, Mujica, Cespedes and Craig departed, they would still have 517M to spend on a #2 pitcher, if they haven't identified that from in house options.
 

swingin val

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,162
Minneapolis
Going to be hard to dump all those salaries though. Cespedes and Napoli are the only two that have somewhat of a market, and even they are hampered by their warts (FA next year with no QO for Cespedes, FA next year with major injury concerns for Napoli) . The other guys you couldn't even give away at their current contract.
 

67WasBest

Concierge
SoSH Member
Mar 17, 2004
2,442
Music City USA
swingin val said:
Going to be hard to dump all those salaries though. Cespedes and Napoli are the only two that have somewhat of a market, and even they are hampered by their warts (FA next year with no QO for Cespedes, FA next year with major injury concerns for Napoli) . The other guys you couldn't even give away at their current contract.
None need to depart this year as they don't seem to be concerned with payroll for 2015; but I would suspect, at a minimum, Cespedes is somewhere else.  If none were dealt, Cespedes, Napoli,Victorino and Mujica depart as free agents next year, so the only piece they HAVE to move between now and the start of 2016 is Craig.  If they could acquire a cheap top of the rotation pitcher between now and the start of 2016, they could keep Craig.  A lot culd change, but as of now it appears they could sign both.
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
Sprowl said:
... Wright looks like a good multi-purpose reliever and emergency spot starter. His knuckler appears to be more catchable than a Wakefield flutterby.


closer: Uehara
closer in waiting: Mujica
RH setup: Tazawa
LH setup: Layne
RH multiple innings: de la Rosa, Workman
25th man: Britton/Wilson/Hembree/Ranaudo/Barnes/Escobar
So you give Wright some props then leave him out of the pen?
 
I have a desire for Steven Wright to be part of the 2015 Boston bullpen.   Vazquez can catch him.  Knuckleballers are a rare commodity and offer flexibility in usage. He pitched pretty well in his end of year call up.  I think he's ready.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
Staff thoughts:
 
I'd love to move Mujica and use his money on re-signing Badenhop. Should have a few shekels left over.
 
Get Miller @ 32MM for 4yrs and make him your 'closer-in-waiting'. 
 
Pen: Koji, Miller, Tazawa, Badenhop, Layne (loogy), Workman, RDR. (Barnes, Britton, Wright wait in the wings at AAA)
 
Webster to the rotation as the #5 for a 4-6 week audition and see if one of the LHP steps up at AAA (Owens, Johnson, Rodriquez)
 
Cespedes, Ranaudo, Cecchini get dealt for Anibal Sanchez. He's our #2
 
sign Lester as our #1
 
Buchholz and Kelly as our #3 and 4
 
then Ben can go to his local CVS, buy some sunscreen, and get ready for Florida.
 

mfried

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 23, 2005
1,680
benhogan said:
Staff thoughts:
 
I'd love to move Mujica and use his money on re-signing Badenhop. Should have a few shekels left over.
 
Get Miller @ 32MM for 4yrs and make him your 'closer-in-waiting'. 
 
Pen: Koji, Miller, Tazawa, Badenhop, Layne (loogy), Workman, RDR. (Barnes, Britton, Wright wait in the wings at AAA)
 
Webster to the rotation as the #5 for a 4-6 week audition and see if one of the LHP steps up at AAA (Owens, Johnson, Rodriquez)
 
Cespedes, Ranaudo, Cecchini get dealt for Anibal Sanchez. He's our #2
 
sign Lester as our #1
 
Buchholz and Kelly as our #3 and 4
 
then Ben can go to CVS, buy some sunscreen, and get ready for Florida.
This is my version of the contra-nightmare. Happy ending to the off-season.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
That bullpen is positively frightening. The collapse risk on Uehara is high, Mulica is very inconsistent, Tazawa. Has been been worked like a dog for 2 years in row, Layne is a 29 year old rookie, and the rest are failed starting prospects.

Now, There's talent in the failed starting prospects, and by September they may have identified 3 solid relievers out of the group, but there's a lot of blown saves and close games turned into blowouts in April and May while they cycle through them all to find the 3 that stick.

The reliever I have the most confidence in for 2015 is actuaLly Workman. Like Sprowl I'm irrationally high on Britton as a second emergent contributor.

So, they need to get a relief ace. If not Miller, then get on the phone with KC. Bowden on MLB radio yesterday again said they can't keep both Holland and Davis and improve their offense. One year of Cespedes for 2 years of Davis?
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
7,940
Monument, CO
That bullpen is positively frightening. The collapse risk on Uehara is high, Mulica is very inconsistent, Tazawa. Has been been worked like a dog for 2 years in row, Layne is a 29 year old rookie, and the rest are failed starting prospects.

Most relievers are failed starters. I think RDLR, Wokman, and Barnes could all be above average relievers. Particularly RDLR and Barnes.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Just a bit outside said:
Most relievers are failed starters. I think RDLR, Wokman, and Barnes could all be above average relievers. Particularly RDLR and Barnes.
I don't disagree that they could. However, would you want one of them coming into a 1 run game with runners on 1st and 2nd in the 7th inning of a game on opening day?

Right now, nearly the entire bullpen strategy is based on such wishcasting. However, a solid relief ace would provide the necessary protection for such experiments in the remaining slots.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,505
Rogers Park
I looked into Mujica's season a bit. 
 
He sucked out loud for his first nine innings pitched in a Boston uniform, allowing fourteen hits, ten runs and one home run, walking four while striking out six. That's a .341/.400/.537 line. He turned the league into a decent Miggy Cabrera facsimile. Surreally high LD%. 
 
Once the calendar turned over to May, he was decent. Until the end of the year: 51 IP in 54 appearances, 55 H, 16 ER, 5 HR, 10 walks to 37 K, a .284/.316/.443 line. That terrible April made his season numbers look hideous for pretty much the whole year. His final 21 IP, from August 1st, were pretty good: 22 h, 4 ER, 6 BB to 15 K, a .265/.315/.349 line. The walks are still pretty high for a guy who's whole deal is that he rarely walks anyone, but otherwise that's looking much better. The line drive percentages came back down to his normal high teens. 
 
I'm not saying he's anywhere near certain to be the relief ace we need, but after the way he ended the season, I wouldn't be rushing to eat money to get rid of him. September '13 and April '14 were both quite poor, but before that he'd been good to great since 2010. I think there's hope that he can get back to that form. Still, I see two issues in the splits: he showed a big platoon split in 2014 for the first time since 2009, but still faced almost as many lefties as righties. The other concern is that he was much worse at home, driven by a .356 BABIP. It will be interesting to see if those trends continue. 
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
The bullpen going into 2013 was supposed to be Hanrahan, Bailey, Uehara, Tazawa, Breslow, Miller, and Mortensen. That turned out to be a pretty good one, but not because of the resources they'd put into acquiring late inning aces. And it really wasn't a strength the first two months of the season. Thanks to some depth, some managerial flexibility, and some luck, they ended up a strength.
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
7,940
Monument, CO
Plympton91 said:
I don't disagree that they could. However, would you want one of them coming into a 1 run game with runners on 1st and 2nd in the 7th inning of a game on opening day?

Right now, nearly the entire bullpen strategy is based on such wishcasting. However, a solid relief ace would provide the necessary protection for such experiments in the remaining slots.
I would be willing to give it a try. Bullpens and relievers have great fluctuations from year to year. Everyone wants to point to the Royals but even their bullpen was a little lucky. Both Davis, who was being considered to start last spring, and Herrera, whose k rate dropped by almost 4 per nine innings, gave up no home runs last year. I have a hard time imagining that will happen again. There was even talk last year in the offseason that Hochavar and Collins would be the primary set up men for the Royals. Heck, the Giants just won the World Series with Santiago Casilla as their closer who took over for Sergio Romo. Not exactly relief aces.

I guess my point is that it would be great to have another proven bullpen arm but it is not a necessity and can be figured out as the year goes along.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
And how did it work out for the Tigers the past two years? Or the Nationals in 2012 and 2014? Sure, Workman could be just like Papelbon; or Schiraldi.

I'm also not sure that pointing to the acquisitions of Andrew Bailey and Joel Hanrahan make the point the poster thinks is being made. It is precisely that kind of potentially ace-level depth that is wholly absent from the current pen. As it currently stands, Uehara is Bailey, Mujica is a poor man's Hanrahan, and there's no one at all comparable to what Uehara and Breslow were going into 2013 behind them.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
Plympton91 said:
And how did it work out for the Tigers the past two years? Or the Nationals in 2012 and 2014? Sure, Workman could be just like Papelbon; or Schiraldi.

I'm also not sure that pointing to the acquisitions of Andrew Bailey and Joel Hanrahan make the point the poster thinks is being made. It is precisely that kind of potentially ace-level depth that is wholly absent from the current pen. As it currently stands, Uehara is Bailey, Mujica is a poor man's Hanrahan, and there's no one at all comparable to what Uehara and Breslow were going into 2013 behind them.
 
The average fWAR for the top 10 highest paid relievers in 2014 was 0.34. Take out Papelbon, and it was 0.18. Mean contract value for those 10 was about $8 million. So teams spending money on free agent relievers tend to spend between $24 to $40 million / WAR. Does that seem like good value to you?
 
RE24 can not predict reliever performance from year to year. 
xFIP, WHIP, and BB% do not correlate well from year to year, but K% does. Relievers start declining precipitously after age 28.
 
edit: In other words, saying that Hanrahan and Bailey were the key to the 2013 bullpen because of the depth they added is silly. So the lesson is we should go out and acquire two really expensive relievers so that we can luck into a few inexpensive solutions when they suck/get injured? 
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
You're smart enough to recognize all the logical and statistical fallacies in your own post. I don't need to point them out.

We'll just put you down as a vote for wish casting the 2015 pen, and agree to disagree.
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
7,940
Monument, CO
And how did it work out for the Tigers the past two years? Or the Nationals in 2012 and 2014? Sure, Workman could be just like Papelbon; or Schiraldi.

It did not work out well for the Tigers, partly because Soria fell apart after being traded. The Nationals had a good bullpen by most measures last year.

I just looked at an article from before last year talking about how good the Dodgers bullpen would be because of Brian Wilson, JP Howell, Jamey Wright, Brandon League, and Eddie Perez setting up for Jansen. Turns out they were pretty bad. On the other hand the Mariners had one of the best bullpens with Rodney, Farquhar, Furbush, Maurer, and Leone. Not sure anyone predicted that outcome. Another top bullpen was the MFY. Did anyone predict Betances would be unhittable? That Adam Warren would be so good?

Bullpens and relievers are volatile and change from year to year for most pitchers. I would be willing to into the year with Workman, RDLR, Barnes, Ranaudo, Britton, Wilson, and Hembree fighting for 2-3 spots until we find the right combination. Miller would be great but he is a luxury. I think there is a good chance that 2-3 of the above pitchers become above average relievers this year. I hold very high hopes for the starters stuff playing up if they are only pitching a few batters at a time.

Edit: RDLR and Barnes would both be throwing high 90's as relievers. I think they both have the ability to be shutdown relievers similar to Herrera.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Just a bit outside said:
I just looked at an article from before last year talking about how good the Dodgers bullpen would be because of Brian Wilson, JP Howell, Jamey Wright, Brandon League, and Eddie Perez setting up for Jansen. Turns out they were pretty bad. On the other hand the Mariners had one of the best bullpens with Rodney, Farquhar, Furbush, Maurer, and Leone. Not sure anyone predicted that outcome. Another top bullpen was the MFY. Did anyone predict Betances would be unhittable? That Adam Warren would be so good?

Bullpens and relievers are volatile and change from year to year for most pitchers. I would be willing to into the year with Workman, RDLR, Barnes, Ranaudo, Britton, Wilson, and Hembree fighting for 2-3 spots until we find the right combination. Miller would be great but he is a luxury. I think there is a good chance that 2-3 of the above pitchers become above average relievers this year. I hold very high hopes for the starters stuff playing up if they are only pitching a few batters at a time.

Edit: RDLR and Barnes would both be throwing high 90's as relievers. I think they both have the ability to be shutdown relievers similar to Herrera.
Rodney has been really good in two of the past 3 years now, which is one more than Pablo Sandoval over the same span.

We're not that far apart, as I'd also be happy to have all the kids fighting for, 2 to 3 spots at the back of the bullpen. The problem is that they are actually fighting for 3 to 5 spots, because Layne should in no way be considered proven, and Mujica may be in decline. RDLR got a chance to be a reliever in 2013, too, and wasn't very good at it.

Moreover, you need more than 7 relievers throughout the season, so everyone of them that wins a spot out of spring training gets subtracted from the future pool inevitably needed for depth. Several are out of options, so they'll likely get the first shot even if they aren't among the 3 to 5 best, just to keep as much depth as possible.
 

judyb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,444
Wilmington MA
I thought that might be the case, too, but it turns out that of the young pitchers, only Britton's out of options yet.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,662
If we don't land Andrew Miller, I'd like to see Cherington swing a trade for Mike Dunn. 
 
Left handed reliever in his second year arb on the Marlins, and will probably make $3 million in a bullpen where Cishek is also starting to get pretty expensive.
 
K% and BB % the last three years has trended like so:
 
2012: 22.6% / 13.9%
2013: 25.5% / 9.9%
2014: 27.4% / 9.0%
 
For comparison, Miller's last three years were:
 
2012: 30.2% / 11.8%
2013: 35.6% / 12.6%
2014: 42.6% / 7.0%
 
Of course Miller's better, but Dunn's the same age and not a ton far off.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,407
What do we think of Luke Gregerson? He seems generally considered to be a tier below Miller and Robertson - and certainly he's benefitted from pitching in Oakland and San Diego - but it's hard to deny that he's been pretty good over his career. He'll certainly come cheaper than Miller. I'd be interested in adding Hochevar also, assuming the price is low, of course. 
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,600
02130
Yeah, I'm with p91 here. Certainly you can build a good bullpen out of random spare pieces and converted starters, but if you're spending $60-80m on free agents as they seem likely to do and perhaps trading some of your youth for players in their prime, it seems like they are trying to be competitive this year. I'd hate for them to miss out on the division by a game or two and get bumped in the WC game because they were shuffling through RdlR / Barnes / Workman / etc. dropping winnable games while trying to figure out whose stuff best worked in short stints. With very little committed beyond 2015 it seems like an Andrew Miller or someone isn't going to keep them over the luxury tax limit two years in a row.
 
I'd like to see them add at least one competent established set-up guy who they can be pretty sure is going to be a solid part of the pen. Easier said than done, but Miller seems a pretty good bet for at least 2015. Since he'd only cost money he would be my first choice. Pat Neshek could be another solid FA choice. If they can get Jesse Crain on a low guarantee as he returns from injury, that may be a good option as well.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
Plympton91 said:
You're smart enough to recognize all the logical and statistical fallacies in your own post. I don't need to point them out.

We'll just put you down as a vote for wish casting the 2015 pen, and agree to disagree.
 
I just don't get the point of posting something like this. I'm not posting in bad faith. I don't think the Bailey + Hanrahan trades were a good move by Ben. I also don't think spending big in free agency for relief pitchers works out very often, and the stuff I linked to supports that. If you have problems with the argument, it would be helpful to know what they are. 
 
Plympton91 said:
Rodney has been really good in two of the past 3 years now, which is one more than Pablo Sandoval over the same span.

We're not that far apart, as I'd also be happy to have all the kids fighting for, 2 to 3 spots at the back of the bullpen. The problem is that they are actually fighting for 3 to 5 spots, because Layne should in no way be considered proven, and Mujica may be in decline. RDLR got a chance to be a reliever in 2013, too, and wasn't very good at it.

Moreover, you need more than 7 relievers throughout the season, so everyone of them that wins a spot out of spring training gets subtracted from the future pool inevitably needed for depth. Several are out of options, so they'll likely get the first shot even if they aren't among the 3 to 5 best, just to keep as much depth as possible.
 
I am in agreement that the bullpen is not complete yet. What I disagree about is the need for them to go out and acquire a "relief ace" because I don't think it's possible to do so. If it were easy to predict good relief performances, then more than one of the top ten highest-paid relievers wouldn't suck. If it were easy to predict good relief performances, then Uehara (11.59 K/9 past three years) and Tazawa (9.29 K/9) should be a fantastic back end of the pen. The fact that you're worried about them but not other available relievers with similar stats is that you pay more attention to their performance and recognize that it's inherently unstable. 
 
Miller is probably the best bet because of his high K%. I'm surprised there's not more interest in Robertson. Unfortunately, for every Papelbon there's like 8-9 Mujicas, Baileys, and Hanrahans. 
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,600
02130
kieckeredinthehead said:
 
 If it were easy to predict good relief performances, then Uehara (11.59 K/9 past three years) and Tazawa (9.29 K/9) should be a fantastic back end of the pen. The fact that you're worried about them but not other available relievers with similar stats is that you pay more attention to their performance and recognize that it's inherently unstable. 
 
This is a little disingenuous. Uehara is old, has a history of being fragile and wasn't great down the stretch last year. Tazawa has been very good but pitched on 0 days' rest 20 times last year, and is at best a solid set-up guy, not an elite one. Uehara is more likely to collapse than most, and thus it's reasonable to want another elite arm as backup, especially when that arm will get plenty of high-leverage innings even with Uehara healthy.
 
It's not like if one thinks Uehara may break at any moment that one would have the same lack of confidence in Miller who is ten years younger. There is a degree of uncertainty with all relievers, but it's quite pronounced with Koji.
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
I think Uehara's fragility is being overstated, but I'm in general agreement that another very good pitcher should be added to the bullpen.  Not because Koji may break at any moment, but his innings should be managed more conservatively.  Tazawa may need similar conservative management.
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,189
Boston
If the Red Sox go into the season with a bullpen of Koji, Taz and Mujica complemented by some combination of Tommy Layne, Drake Britton, Edwin Escobar, Matt Barnes, Brandon Workman, Steven Wright, Alex Wilson, Ruddy De La Rosa and Allen Webster, they could very well be good. However, there is a lot of risk there, not just because of the volatility of the position but because these guys are all rather unknown quantities.
 
Considering the importance of the bullpen in the current game and their payroll, they would be irresponsible if they did not add at least one or two proven arms. This strategy does not always work and there is an obvious risk that these arms may or may not pan out. That said, it gives them more depth, which provides them more pitchers to throw against the wall, an ability to break in younger pitchers in low leverage roles (i.e., build their confidence) and more protection against injury/burnout (e.g., Tazawa and Koji).
 
This results in them having to bring in 2-3 young arms.
 
I'd like to see Britton get a chance to be the 2nd lefty over Layne (assuming one of the arms they bring in is LH). First, he's out of options and Layne still has one remaining. Plus, I think he has a higher upside.
 
After that I imagine Workman gets one spot, having already been successful back there and demonstrating that his stuff plays up in relief. The last spot then comes down to RDLR, Wright, Webster, Hembree and Wilson. All of them have at least one option left. IMO, if Webster can build on this past September and wins that final rotation spot out of camp, then RDLR takes his rightful spot in the bullpen. If RDLR breaks camp as a starter, then Wright becomes the long man in the pen and Webster is sent back down to AAA to continue to refine his pitching. I don't really see Hembree and Wilson making the 25 man roster out of camp, but instead providing BP depth in Pawtucket. This likely means that Villarreal gets DFA'd and I'm okay with that considering he's far down the bullpen depth chart at this point (i.e., 5th RHP coming out of Pawtucket behind Barnes, Webster/Wright, Hembree, Wilson, and perhaps even Ranaudo).  Considering this he may even pass waivers and get reassigned. 
 
This gives the Sox a bullpen of Koji - Tazawa - LH SetUp - Mujica - Workman - Britton - RDLR/Wright.
AAA Rotation is: Owens - Barnes - Escobar - Johnson - Wright/Webster/Ranaudo
AAA Bullpen has: Wilson - Hembree - Layne - Ranaudo/Wright - Hinojosa - Ramirez
Rodriguez then starts at AA proving his last 6 starts weren't a fluke and is the first guy to make the jump to AAA when a spot opens.  
 
If they sign another bullpen arm then everyone moves down one spot and they have more depth to trade away to acquire an SP or backup C.
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,189
Boston
Toe Nash said:
This is a little disingenuous. Uehara is old, has a history of being fragile and wasn't great down the stretch last year. Tazawa has been very good but pitched on 0 days' rest 20 times last year, and is at best a solid set-up guy, not an elite one. Uehara is more likely to collapse than most, and thus it's reasonable to want another elite arm as backup, especially when that arm will get plenty of high-leverage innings even with Uehara healthy.
 
It's not like if one thinks Uehara may break at any moment that one would have the same lack of confidence in Miller who is ten years younger. There is a degree of uncertainty with all relievers, but it's quite pronounced with Koji.
 
I'm not sure I entirely agree with the bold statement. I think that his performance is largely tied to his use and over the past two seasons Farrel has given him the Quantrill/Sturtze treatment. As a result of his usage, his performance has been volatile. When he is rested he is very good, even borderline elite albeit prone to the long ball. 
 
Edit: Spelling
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
I think the best way to build a bullpen is with young power arms. Koji is an anomaly. Fortunately, Boston has a lot of young power arms that probably would play very well in bullpen roles: RDLR, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, Hembree, etc.
 

lxt

New Member
Sep 12, 2012
525
Massachusetts
Once BC settles the starting rotation down, other than Miller, he can take on strengthening the bullpen if he deems it necessary. There are a lot of potential arms available for the pen (Barnes, RDLR ...) but does the Sox deem them strong enough?
 
The Sox have shown that they are very focused on resolving what they deem a immediate necessity (Offense, 3B and Lester) before moving on to other concerns (Another starter, backup catcher and the pen). That's not to say they are ignoring other possibilities for the team (Talking to other teams, agents and such). However, they have priorities that they have set and address each accordingly. If you will they have a plan and the follow it until they have address all their concerns.
 
The winter meetings should settle the rotation concerns and Miller.
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
ivanvamp said:
I think the best way to build a bullpen is with young power arms. Koji is an anomaly. Fortunately, Boston has a lot of young power arms that probably would play very well in bullpen roles: RDLR, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, Hembree, etc.
I agree. I don't really buy that it's worth investing real money in relief. Too inconsistent and it's not that difficult to develop a decent SP prospect into a pretty good reliever. I'd much rather invest Andrew Miller money in a better #2 starter, bump another kid into the bullpen, see who is successful, and upgrade midseason if you have to. 
 
jasail said:
If the Red Sox go into the season with a bullpen of Koji, Taz and Mujica complemented by some combination of Tommy Layne, Drake Britton, Edwin Escobar, Matt Barnes, Brandon Workman, Steven Wright, Alex Wilson, Ruddy De La Rosa and Allen Webster, they could very well be good. However, there is a lot of risk there, not just because of the volatility of the position but because these guys are all rather unknown quantities.
It's funny the way you said that because in a position where everything is volatile, everybody is really a rather unknown quantity. What you're really paying for when you're paying big money to a reliever outside of a few really top guys is the illusion of certainty. I think a much more sensible strategy when you have such extreme volatility in the position and where young guys make such little money is to prefer quantity over certainty. Spread your bets around on enough good young arms - and we have plenty - and you're going to do better then betting big on a supposedly known entity. 
 

Stan Papi Was Framed

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
2,924
PrometheusWakefield said:
I agree. I don't really buy that it's worth investing real money in relief. Too inconsistent and it's not that difficult to develop a decent SP prospect into a pretty good reliever. I'd much rather invest Andrew Miller money in a better #2 starter, bump another kid into the bullpen, see who is successful, and upgrade midseason if you have to. 
 
It's funny the way you said that because in a position where everything is volatile, everybody is really a rather unknown quantity. What you're really paying for when you're paying big money to a reliever outside of a few really top guys is the illusion of certainty. I think a much more sensible strategy when you have such extreme volatility in the position and where young guys make such little money is to prefer quantity over certainty. Spread your bets around on enough good young arms - and we have plenty - and you're going to do better then betting big on a supposedly known entity. 
 
 
Rudy Pemberton said:
It's funny that folks are so unwilling to give the young kids a chance in relief, yet want to give big money to Andrew Miller. I mean, Miller has been a really good reliever for less than 2 years. Same goes for Wade Davis; the guy had a 5.32 ERA and 1.7 WHIP in 2013, but now after one awesome year, he's a proven quantity and someone the Sox should go after? Really?

The Sox have plenty of good arms, the bullpen will be fine (and frankly, they don't have a ton of room on the 40-man to be adding more relievers). I'm a hell of a lot more concerned about the rotation.
this all sounds right to me.  why not see if they can find 2-3 guys from the existing mix (i.e. Workman, Barnes, RDLR, Escobar, Hembree, Hinojosa, Ranaudo, Britton, Noe Ramirez (if he's still around after Rule V draft), Webster if he can't stick in the rotation, perhaps Wright)? obviously there's not room for most of these guys to start.  See what they can do in the pen in spring training, hopefully identify 2-3 to begin the regular season in the bullpen, with the others waiting in the wings if the 2-3 chosen to start the season don't work out.
 
These 2-3 would join Koji, Tazawa, Mujica, Layne perhaps Badenhop.  So, basically what Sprowl said…however, one issue I can see is that there aren't many lefties in this mix.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I sure wish you folks were running the Yankees the first time Mariano Rivera hit free agency.

I have to commend Rudy on getting two false dichotomies and one grand statistical obfuscation into the same post. That is quite a piece of work even for him.

Signing Miller is not incompatible with giving 2 to 3 young arms a chance. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise. They have only 3 veterans under contract, two finished last season terribly overworked and Mujica was below average to bad all season. That leaves 4 spots open; signing Miller or acquiring someone similar still leaves 3 open spots.

Signing Milker also doesn't preclude spending on the rotation, as we know Henry will go over the cap this season and next season offers the possibility of shedding $34 million with limited need for raises.

Finally, a question for discussion: are relief pitchers really inherently volatile, or is it just that the results are volatile because of small sample sizes? I mean, John Lester really sucked for about 60 innings in the middle of 2013, but nobody cares because there was time for his true talent level to average out over the whole season plus playoffs. I bet if you broke starting pitchers into random 60-70 inning samples they'd look a lot more volatile too, especially the 5th or 4th starter types that get moved to relief.

If the volatility isn't inherent, then what people are advocating is the "hot hand" theory of relievers. Is there evidence that's a real phenomenon for relief pitchers when it isn't for 3 point shooters? And, how do you know when the hot reliever is going to go cold? Hunter Stricland and Calvin Schitaldi say hi.

I just think this supposed stylized fact, that even really good relievers are more volatile than other positions, is based on lazy and/or substandard analysis. Examples of such poor analysis would be listing the leaders by WAR for the past four years or aggregating the WAR of the highest paid relievers in a single season (conveniently the one after Mariano Rivera retired). To be convinced, I'd need to see a multivariate analysis that incorporated some plausibly exogenous controls for underlying talent, like draft slot or signing bonus, fastball velocity, swing-and-miss percentages, the last minor league level they were a full time starter, and of course age and age of major league debut.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
Plympton91 said:
I sure wish you folks were running the Yankees the first time Mariano Rivera hit free agency.

I have to commend Rudy on getting two false dichotomies and one grand statistical obfuscation into the same post. That is quite a piece of work even for him.

Signing Miller is not incompatible with giving 2 to 3 young arms a chance. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise. They have only 3 veterans under contract, two finished last season terribly overworked and Mujica was below average to bad all season. That leaves 4 spots open; signing Miller or acquiring someone similar still leaves 3 open spots.

Signing Milker also doesn't preclude spending on the rotation, as we know Henry will go over the cap this season and next season offers the possibility of shedding $34 million with limited need for raises.

Finally, a question for discussion: are relief pitchers really inherently volatile, or is it just that the results are volatile because of small sample sizes? I mean, John Lester really sucked for about 60 innings in the middle of 2013, but nobody cares because there was time for his true talent level to average out over the whole season plus playoffs. I bet if you broke starting pitchers into random 60-70 inning samples they'd look a lot more volatile too, especially the 5th or 4th starter types that get moved to relief.

If the volatility isn't inherent, then what people are advocating is the "hot hand" theory of relievers. Is there evidence that's a real phenomenon for relief pitchers when it isn't for 3 point shooters? And, how do you know when the hot reliever is going to go cold? Hunter Stricland and Calvin Schitaldi say hi.

I just think this supposed stylized fact, that even really good relievers are more volatile than other positions, is based on lazy and/or substandard analysis. Examples of such poor analysis would be listing the leaders by WAR for the past four years or aggregating the WAR of the highest paid relievers in a single season (conveniently the one after Mariano Rivera retired). To be convinced, I'd need to see a multivariate analysis that incorporated some plausibly exogenous controls for underlying talent, like draft slot or signing bonus, fastball velocity, swing-and-miss percentages, the last minor league level they were a full time starter, and of course age and age of major league debut.
I didn't realize there was a valid statistical analysis that could rely solely on the biggest outlier of all time.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
kieckeredinthehead said:
I didn't realize there was a valid statistical analysis that could rely solely on the biggest outlier of all time.
His playoff dominance is certainly an outlier, but that's not predictable. His health may make him an outlier, also perhaps not.totally predictable. But in terms of overall dominance over a relevant period, he's got plenty of HOF comparables. John Smoltz, Dennis Eckersley, and the more traditional multi-inning stoppers of the pre Eckersley era.
 

SoxFanForsyth

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2010
258
Would love to see the Sox pick up Brandon Morrow and stick him in the pen.

Also really interested in Hochevar.

Bullpen of Uehara Mujica Tazawa Morrow/Hochevar Layne Barnes and RDLR could be pretty filthy
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
6,133
Rudy Pemberton said:
So Andrew Miller is Mariano Rivera? Or have I just made another false dichotomy?
From Lurker "EV": If you throw out his games vs. Min and Tor and all his Thursday appearances between April 6-Sept. 24, 2014 Miller = Mariano.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Of course, whether Miller or some othe ace they get through a trade (let's not turn this into another P91 is in love with player X nonsense), is as good as Rivera isn't at all the point.

That person would only need to be David Benoit, Scott Downs, or Jeremy Affelt to satisfy my definition of value on a 4 year, $30 something million contact. Basically the contact those guys got 5 years ago, adjusted for WAR inflation.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Oops, J. Benoit. Now, would anyone like to address the two main points of the posts (1. fundamental inconsistency vs statistical noise that looks like inconsistency and 2. If the latter, how can it be relied upon through the playoffs?), or is the focus on technicalities and throwaway lines an admission of an inability to do that?
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
Plympton91 said:
Oops, J. Benoit. Now, would anyone like to address the two main points of the posts (1. fundamental inconsistency vs statistical noise that looks like inconsistency and 2. If the latter, how can it be relied upon through the playoffs?), or is the focus on technicalities and throwaway lines an admission of an inability to do that?
 
I think the inconsistency is partially due to the small sample size effect (which would explain why K%, being of larger sample size, is more predictive than any measure of ERA), partially due to regression to the mean, and partially due to health/age-related declines. Yes, it would be nice to do a robust multivariate analysis, but in lieu of that using recent contracts gives a proxy for major league front offices' proprietary analysis. Based on that, even MLB teams are not good at figuring out which relievers to pay. 
 
Being a major league reliever is hell on the body. Even if there aren't major blow-outs, we've all seen repeatedly the toll the postseason takes on relievers in the following year. By the time they reach free agency, it just seems fundamentally difficult to predict how healthy they'll be, and the decline is often precipitous. Eckersley, Smoltz, and Rivera are exceptions. Gagne, Bailey, Hanrahan, Brian Wilson, and Jenks are all much, much more common. Think on our own best relievers last year, Uehara and Tazawa. If you're not paying much attention to the Red Sox, you look at the stats they put up last season and your best bet is that they perform just as well next year. Because they both got tired in August, we know we need to be worried about their performance. That has got to be true for most other relievers who perform exceptionally well for a season, but we don't watch other relievers as closely. 
 
As for the postseason, "sample size" is basically meaningless, and it comes down to next-level performance (see: Foulke 2004) and the managers' ability to identify the hot hands (see: Workman, 2013). The "hot hand" probably means the "not tired" hand. 
 
Mujica's 2014 seems like exactly the kind of season that you can project whatever reliever story you want onto it. He had three really good months and three really bad months (averaging about 40 PA in all of them). If you hadn't watched him pitch, you'd probably chalk it up to small sample size. But I sat through it, and the guy stunk. He wasn't unlucky, he just sucked. He couldn't get anybody out. Was he tired from the St. Louis postseason run in 2013? He gave up almost as many ER in September, 2013 (9 ER) as he did the entire rest of the season (11). His OPS against ballooned and his K/BB plummeted. St. Louis let him pitch 1 inning in the DS and 1 in the CS. Looks to me like he got tired and never got over it. Maybe a lingering injury. So what is with Mujica's performance last year? His acquisition was widely praised on this board. Was it small sample size, in which case we should expect a return to form? Was it related to the long 2013, in which case maybe the short season last year did him good? Or was it the fact that he's now hit that 29-year-old cliff, over which all non-hall-of-fame relievers will fall? Asking yourself what you expect from Mujica next year will probably tell you what you really think drives reliever inconsistency. 
 
edit: here's the original Mujica signing thread if interested
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
kieckeredinthehead said:
 
I think the inconsistency is partially due to the small sample size effect (which would explain why K%, being of larger sample size, is more predictive than any measure of ERA), partially due to regression to the mean, and partially due to health/age-related declines. Yes, it would be nice to do a robust multivariate analysis, but in lieu of that using recent contracts gives a proxy for major league front offices' proprietary analysis. Based on that, even MLB teams are not good at figuring out which relievers to pay. 
 
Being a major league reliever is hell on the body. Even if there aren't major blow-outs, we've all seen repeatedly the toll the postseason takes on relievers in the following year. By the time they reach free agency, it just seems fundamentally difficult to predict how healthy they'll be, and the decline is often precipitous. Eckersley, Smoltz, and Rivera are exceptions. Gagne, Bailey, Hanrahan, Brian Wilson, and Jenks are all much, much more common. Think on our own best relievers last year, Uehara and Tazawa. If you're not paying much attention to the Red Sox, you look at the stats they put up last season and your best bet is that they perform just as well next year. Because they both got tired in August, we know we need to be worried about their performance. That has got to be true for most other relievers who perform exceptionally well for a season, but we don't watch other relievers as closely. 
 
As for the postseason, "sample size" is basically meaningless, and it comes down to next-level performance (see: Foulke 2004) and the managers' ability to identify the hot hands (see: Workman, 2013). The "hot hand" probably means the "not tired" hand. 
 
Mujica's 2014 seems like exactly the kind of season that you can project whatever reliever story you want onto it. He had three really good months and three really bad months (averaging about 40 PA in all of them). If you hadn't watched him pitch, you'd probably chalk it up to small sample size. But I sat through it, and the guy stunk. He wasn't unlucky, he just sucked. He couldn't get anybody out. Was he tired from the St. Louis postseason run in 2013? He gave up almost as many ER in September, 2013 (9 ER) as he did the entire rest of the season (11). His OPS against ballooned and his K/BB plummeted. St. Louis let him pitch 1 inning in the DS and 1 in the CS. Looks to me like he got tired and never got over it. Maybe a lingering injury. So what is with Mujica's performance last year? His acquisition was widely praised on this board. Was it small sample size, in which case we should expect a return to form? Was it related to the long 2013, in which case maybe the short season last year did him good? Or was it the fact that he's now hit that 29-year-old cliff, over which all non-hall-of-fame relievers will fall? Asking yourself what you expect from Mujica next year will probably tell you what you really think drives reliever inconsistency. 
 
edit: here's the original Mujica signing thread if interested
Mujica to me is a guy who gets by on control and trickery, I imagine that is exactly the kind of guy who could have a run of luck that makes him appear to be good for a season or three and then the reversion to the mean or reversion to his true talent level happens.

It seems to me that you need to look at 3 year averages, and then adjust for trend and usage patterns. The usage point you make is exactly spot on. That seems pretty easy to control for in a multivariate analysis that I'd expect teams like the Rays, A's, and Red Sox to be doing. I'm surprised there's no widely available stat for "number of times warmed up and didn't enter the game" on some of these advanced analysis sites, which would further help highlight usage as a feature of the apparent inconsistency of relievers.

Of course, if usage is a major factor, then that bodes well for Miller. He wasn't needed as a bullpen ace in 2012, and his foot injury in 2013 kept lots of miles off his arm, and so he's not as broken in as a typical ace reliever that spent the past 2 years on teams that advanced to the playoffs. A team that signs him to a long term deal is also going to be more careful about burning him out than a typical reliever on a 1 year deal.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
This is both bullpen and roster construction related but I haven't seen this mentioned yet.
Does all this positional flexibility combined with a surplus of AAA pitchers with options increase the likelihood that the Red Sox carry 13 pitchers?
None of these hitters will need platoon mates and the only bat in the lineup to pinch hit for is Vasquez which will rarely happen anyhow. They have Nava or Victorino (however that shakes out) and Holt to back up the OF and IF respectively, and a tbd catcher.  The only other possible piece is a back up slick fielding SS or a burner.
 
I think carrying 13 - at least for those two week stretches and long road trips - would save a lot of wear and tear on the pen.  And it gives guys like Ranaudo, De La Rosa and Wright multi innings with the ability to rotate optioning them if they need to bring up a positional player for a dinged up player.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,401
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
grimshaw said:
This is both bullpen and roster construction related but I haven't seen this mentioned yet.
Does all this positional flexibility combined with a surplus of AAA pitchers with options increase the likelihood that the Red Sox carry 13 pitchers?
Very few hitters will need platoon mates and the only bat in the lineup to pinch hit for is Vasquez which will rarely happen anyhow. They have Nava and Holt to back up the OF and IF respectively, and a tbd catcher.  The only other possible piece is a back up slick fielding SS.
 
I think carrying 13 - at least for those two week stretches and long road trips - would save a lot of wear and tear on the pen and give guys like Ranaudo, De La Rosa and Wright multi innings with the ability to rotate optioning them if they need to bring up a positional player for a dinged up player.
Personally speaking I think they should carry 11 pitchers .. 13 is just nuts. It's hard enough getting enough work for 12 guys .. The 13th is going to be getting into a game once a week if he's lucky.

Not to mention completely hamstringing the bench. You are correct in that not many - if any - guys need platooning. But late inning matchups are still important. And most importantly 13 pitchers means 4 OFs .. Who goes? Nava? Victorino?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Personally speaking I think they should carry 11 pitchers .. 13 is just nuts. It's hard enough getting enough work for 12 guys .. The 13th is going to be getting into a game once a week if he's lucky.

Not to mention completely hamstringing the bench. You are correct in that not many - if any - guys need platooning. But late inning matchups are still important. And most importantly 13 pitchers means 4 OFs .. Who goes? Nava? Victorino?
See I prefer 12 because they had 6 guys with over 50 appearances last year, and that was with Lester and Lackey in the rotation eating up innings.
 
 I'll back off a bit on 13 because they could be screwed if more than one guy has to leave the game but I don't really see any late inning match up issues.  They all bat righty except for Ortiz and the switch hitters.  The only guy with a nasty platoon split was Xander.  Maybe you pinch hit Nava for Castillo or Vasquez but that's about it.  As for Vic - that situation has to resolve itself.  I doubt that it doesn't get resolved before spring training  ends..
 
Maybe I should rephrase to - It will be much easier for the Sox to carry 13 pitchers if needed because of their positional flexibility.
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
Wesley Wright was non-tendered yesterday. Probably a good pick up if they've moved on from Miller.
 

BarrettsHiddenBall

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
438
With optionable depth in both OF and pitching, and Pawtucket just down the road, I think we'll see the size of the pen go up and down a whole bunch during the year.