Think I've finally gotten the Bloom Plan figured out re: pitching:Another poor daytime start for Bello. He really needs to get this figured out soon.
I'd chalk it up to weird but small sample size because it's not like it's every day game he ever pitches. His lines in his last three games were pretty similar and two out of the three were day games. You figure out which was which based on the line.Think I've finally gotten the Bloom Plan figured out re: pitching:
Step 1: develop homegrown pitchers who can't pitch effectively during the daytime
Step 2: sign these pitchers to below market deals because of that weakness
Step 3: vampire apocalypse, no more day games
Step 4: PROFIT
More seriously (maybe), is this day game thing still in the realm of "weird, but small sample size" or is there underlying evidence there's something else going on here? It does seem extremely bizarre that the results are so different.
Plenty of reasons, most of which have to do with continuing to develop him and build him up. Unless they think yesterday's outing was caused by him being worn down by workload or something, he should continue to pitch on a regular schedule until there are no games left to play. He threw 153 innings last year (minors and majors). He's at 157 innings now. Might as well push him past 160 if they want him to carry a similar or larger load next year. Give him more experience.So... is there any reason for Bello to make his next start? Seems to me it'd be just as well to put him in bubble wrap and let his arm start getting ready for 2024.
I'm writing this off, perhaps incorrectly, on jitters. Being named Opening Day starter is a big deal for a young kid.He seemed a bit shaky at times last night but on the whole, an encouraging start. I know it's game 1, but they're really going to need him to go more innings on a regular basis.
Same here. He was effectively wild, but not in the traditional way. Everything was moving way more than normal.I thought his pitches were moving like crazy
He was fortunate to get out of the first inning unscathed. Runners on 1st and 3rd with one out, and it took some very nice defense to barely turn the double play to keep a run off the board.Zero BB. Hitting 98 on the gun. Basically only made one bad pitch that was punished. He didn't look remotely shaky to my eyes.
It was also, as illustrated by the chart above, his first real game in which he scrapped a pitch he threw 20% of the time last year. It has to be a little weird for a pitcher to go from 20 times a game to zero with a pitch he's probably been throwing his whole life.He seemed a bit shaky at times last night but on the whole, an encouraging start. I know it's game 1, but they're really going to need him to go more innings on a regular basis.
This is true. But it's also true that "very nice defense" (or very not-nice defense) is frequently the difference between a good outing and a bad one. Obviously, we all hope that sort of defense is a feature, not an anomaly.He was fortunate to get out of the first inning unscathed. Runners on 1st and 3rd with one out, and it took some very nice defense to barely turn the double play to keep a run off the board.
If its and buts were candy and nuts.He was fortunate to get out of the first inning unscathed. Runners on 1st and 3rd with one out, and it took some very nice defense to barely turn the double play to keep a run off the board.
2 ER in 5 innings = 3.60 era
3 ER in 5 innings = 5.40 era
Just one more run but giving that up would have turned this performance into a pretty bad one actually.
But he didn't. So it was a good start. But yeah, he was shaky at the start.
So you’re saying that if the Sox don’t turn a double play in the first, it would have been a “pretty bad” start by Bello? But because they did turn the double play it was a good start? That’s pretty crazy. He pitched very well in a big spot.He was fortunate to get out of the first inning unscathed. Runners on 1st and 3rd with one out, and it took some very nice defense to barely turn the double play to keep a run off the board.
2 ER in 5 innings = 3.60 era
3 ER in 5 innings = 5.40 era
Just one more run but giving that up would have turned this performance into a pretty bad one actually.
But he didn't. So it was a good start. But yeah, he was shaky at the start.
Also, lets not overlook the fact that O'Neil hit the cutoff man on the single, keeping the double play in order. Small potatoes, to be sure. But last year they were jamming those potatoes into their own exhaust pipe.If its and buts were candy and nuts.
Here's the innning. The double play was routine even with the Valdez slight bobble. The Rodriguez double was a fantastic bit of hitting and the Polanco single was a little flare on a mediocre pitch.
View: https://youtu.be/9BLWtNlTDXY?t=87
joe dokes is Axel Foley?Also, lets not overlook the fact that O'Neil hit the cutoff man on the single, keeping the double play in order. Small potatoes, to be sure. But last year they were jamming those potatoes into their own exhaust pipe.
I mean, that's how it works, right? A season of giving up 3 runs in 5 innings is markedly worse than a season giving up 2 runs in 5 innings. And of course, if they don't turn the double play, not only does a run score, but maybe more on top of it.So you’re saying that if the Sox don’t turn a double play in the first, it would have been a “pretty bad” start by Bello? But because they did turn the double play it was a good start? That’s pretty crazy. He pitched very well in a big spot.
Blows my mind that Felix Hernandez is 6 years younger than Nelson Cruz (and the age gap looks bigger than that).If its and buts were candy and nuts.
Part of your reasoning is based on the false notion that he was bailed out by good defense when the double-play was routine. He did benefit from some nice defensive plays (Story in particular) but that didn't happen in the first.I mean, that's how it works, right? A season of giving up 3 runs in 5 innings is markedly worse than a season giving up 2 runs in 5 innings. And of course, if they don't turn the double play, not only does a run score, but maybe more on top of it.
The point is, I am comfortable with both saying that he was a bit shaky at times and also being happy with his start. I can hold both of those views with no difficulty.
This play really stood out to me. Bello and the rest of the staff will have so much more leeway with outfielders willing to hit the cutoff man this year.Also, lets not overlook the fact that O'Neil hit the cutoff man on the single, keeping the double play in order. Small potatoes, to be sure. But last year they were jamming those potatoes into their own exhaust pipe.
This is why we have advanced beyond these kinds of simplistic metrics when analyzing the quality of a pitcher, or an outing. And anyway, as CN has pointed out a couple of times, your characterization of the double play isn’t supported by the highlight he posted. It was a routine play, the result of a nice pitch that produced a room service bounce to the infielder. I encourage to look at it again. First and third (the result of a double off a good pitch by one of the game‘s best hitters and a humdrum flare to right that fell in) and Bello bears down and does a very nice job making a pitch that gets him out of the inning. Where you saw shaky I saw poised. I know you are a Bello fan, I’m not trying to suggest otherwise. I think you’re just trying too hard here to not come off as a homer. It was a really good start.I mean, that's how it works, right? A season of giving up 3 runs in 5 innings is markedly worse than a season giving up 2 runs in 5 innings. And of course, if they don't turn the double play, not only does a run score, but maybe more on top of it.
The point is, I am comfortable with both saying that he was a bit shaky at times and also being happy with his start. I can hold both of those views with no difficulty.
Really good point.Also, lets not overlook the fact that O'Neil hit the cutoff man on the single, keeping the double play in order. Small potatoes, to be sure. But last year they were jamming those potatoes into their own exhaust pipe.
I hear you, and I am a huge fan of him, and overall I'm happy. But I just disagree that it was a "really good" start. He was in trouble in the first which he was fortunate to get out of. He gave up a bomb a couple innings later, and only went 5 innings. Nothing wrong with that, especially against a good team in the season opener. But they're going to need him to be better than that over the course of the season.This is why we have advanced beyond these kinds of simplistic metrics when analyzing the quality of a pitcher, or an outing. And anyway, as CN has pointed out a couple of times, your characterization of the double play isn’t supported by the highlight he posted. It was a routine play, the result of a nice pitch that produced a room service bounce to the infielder. I encourage to look at it again. First and third (the result of a double off a good pitch by one of the game‘s best hitters and a humdrum flare to right that fell in) and Bello bears down and does a very nice job making a pitch that gets him out of the inning. Where you saw shaky I saw poised. I know you are a Bello fan, I’m not trying to suggest otherwise. I think you’re just trying too hard here to not come off as a homer. It was a really good start.
Loumer and Flemming were talking about Bello's ability to induce weak contact grounders with his sinker just before the DP.This is why we have advanced beyond these kinds of simplistic metrics when analyzing the quality of a pitcher, or an outing. And anyway, as CN has pointed out a couple of times, your characterization of the double play isn’t supported by the highlight he posted. It was a routine play, the result of a nice pitch that produced a room service bounce to the infielder. I encourage to look at it again. First and third (the result of a double off a good pitch by one of the game‘s best hitters and a humdrum flare to right that fell in) and Bello bears down and does a very nice job making a pitch that gets him out of the inning. Where you saw shaky I saw poised. I know you are a Bello fan, I’m not trying to suggest otherwise. I think you’re just trying too hard here to not come off as a homer. It was a really good start.
The two hits were BABIP-friendly. Reminds me a bit of Framber, where even if you somehow get a couple guys on, the DP possibility is good. Now that we have fielders at least.He was fortunate to get out of the first inning unscathed. Runners on 1st and 3rd with one out, and it took some very nice defense to barely turn the double play to keep a run off the board.
2 ER in 5 innings = 3.60 era
3 ER in 5 innings = 5.40 era
Just one more run but giving that up would have turned this performance into a pretty bad one actually.
But he didn't. So it was a good start. But yeah, he was shaky at the start.
As a kind of general comment bridging off this, we have to remember Bello is a GB pitcher. (Per Savant, in the 92nd percentile for 2023.) He's supposed to be generating a lot of opportunities for his infielders. Sometimes the resulting outs will be routine, sometimes they'll be a stretch. So it's to be expected that he'll be "bailed out" at points by good IF defensive plays - but is this really any different than pairing a flyball pitcher with a good defensive OF?Part of your reasoning is based on the false notion that he was bailed out by good defense when the double-play was routine. He did benefit from some nice defensive plays (Story in particular) but that didn't happen in the first.
Wild he had the season he did in front of an apocalyptically bad defense and with an absolutely meatball of a four seamer. 600 slugging? (Edit .646 thanks @Fishy1) Sheesh. Both changes bode well for the future.Bello has dropped his 4-seam fastball this year which is a good thing. Slugging percentage was over .600 against it last year. It probably means he won’t ever be a huge strikeout pitcher but should give up less hard contact. He should be a solid 2-3. The infield defense is huge for him and it was great last night.
If you told the Sox they could sign up for 2 runs in 5 innings from every Bello start this year they'd take that in a second. That'd be something like a 4 win player and a borderline all star.I hear you, and I am a huge fan of him, and overall I'm happy. But I just disagree that it was a "really good" start. He was in trouble in the first which he was fortunate to get out of. He gave up a bomb a couple innings later, and only went 5 innings. Nothing wrong with that, especially against a good team in the season opener. But they're going to need him to be better than that over the course of the season.
I'm just trying to call it as I see it.
I'm sure he will, but he just doesn't really need it. Being a three-pitch guy -- sinker, changeup, slider -- plenty of guys have made great careers that way. There's plenty of velo on the fastball but he doesn't get great extension or spin on the fastball. Whereas the changeup and sinker move like crazy.Can we assume, though, that he'll continue to work on the 4 seamer? If he can bring it back as an effective pitch (maybe situationally this year) he'd really go to the next level. I'd hate for him to lose it completely.
Plenty of pitchers have made great careers without either a two seam or a four seam fastball? Can you name some?I'm sure he will, but he just doesn't really need it. Being a three-pitch guy -- sinker, changeup, slider -- plenty of guys have made great careers that way. There's plenty of velo on the fastball but he doesn't get great extension or spin on the fastball. Whereas the changeup and sinker move like crazy.
I suspect the fastball was just something for batters to sit on last year when he was behind in counts. But he throws the sinker just as well for strikes, I would guess, and batters can't just jump all over it the same way.
I don't think I said that? I didn't say without a two-seamer. The sinker IS a two-seamer.Plenty of pitchers have made great careers without either a two seam or a four seam fastball? Can you name some?
Isn't a two-seam and a sinker basically the same thing? He was averaging 96.1 mph (per Statcast) on his sinker on Thursday. Seems like enough of a fastball to get by.Plenty of pitchers have made great careers without either a two seam or a four seam fastball? Can you name some?
I don't think I said that? I didn't say without a two-seamer. The sinker IS a two-seamer.
There are several other pitches that sink, like the curve, the splitter, etc., so I didn’t think the 2 seamer had the name sinker exclusively. I know the other “sink” pitches move much more horizontally. I’ll see what Mike Krukow calls the pitches today in the Giants - Pads game. He’s the best pitching expert around right now that I know.Isn't a two-seam and a sinker basically the same thing? He was averaging 96.1 mph (per Statcast) on his sinker on Thursday. Seems like enough of a fastball to get by.
I mean, no offense, but this is I'm 99% certain a consensus opinion. It is isn't something you need a pitch expert to know. A sinker is not thrown at the speed of other breaking pitches, it's thrown as hard as a 4 seamer. A two seamer and a sinker, there might be minute differences in definition, but they're functionally identical pitches. They move left to right, and they're thrown at or around the speed of a 4 seamer.There are several other pitches that sink, like the curve, the splitter, etc., so I didn’t think the 2 seamer had the name sinker exclusively. I know the other “sink” pitches move much more horizontally. I’ll see what Mike Krukow calls the pitches today in the Giants - Pads game. He’s the best pitching expert around right now that I know.