Nick Pivetta to the 15-Day IL retroactive to April 6, with a right elbow flexor strain. (Bernardino called up)

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,209
Miami (oh, Miami!)
They signed a free agent pitcher.
And they acquired depth: Anderson, Criswell, Uwasawa, Fitts.

Nobody signs an uninjured ML starting pitcher to randomly stash them in AAA just in case two of their starters (Giolito/Pivetta) and two of their depth pieces (Murphy/Walter) might go down. Nobody.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,117
Maine
Yes, they should have. Pitchers get hurt and good teams prepare for that. For a big market team like the Red Sox, they should prepare for it by using their outsized financial resources to build up pitching depth, not be so afraid of pitching injuries that they never sign another free agent pitcher again.
Just curious, where do they keep this pitching depth that they should have built up more? Let's say they sign at least one more starter in addition to Giolito (Montgomery, Snell, whoever). That pushes one of the guys who is in the rotation now (Houck/Whitlock/Crawford) into the pen? Does that guy still count as rotation depth if he's a reliever? There's only so much depth a team can have such that they can survive severe injuries to two of their starters. The teams that have that kind of depth tend to be the ones who develop pitchers themselves, not shop for them on the open market. In other words, the "fix" for surviving Giolito/Pivetta injuries isn't really solved in the off-season.
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
And they acquired depth: Anderson, Criswell, Uwasawa, Fitts.

Nobody signs an uninjured ML starting pitcher to randomly stash them in AAA just in case two of their starters (Giolito/Pivetta) and two of their depth pieces (Murphy/Walter) might go down. Nobody.
Here's the current roster of MLB starting pitchers under control of the Dodgers:

Tyler Glasnow
Shohei Ohtani (IL)
Bobby Miller
Yoshinobu Yamamoto
Clayton Kershaw (IL)
James Paxton
Walker Buehler (IL)
Dustin May (IL)
Gavin Stone
Tony Gonsolin (IL)

Their strategy over the past several years has simply been "add as many quality arms as possible, at all times." As a result, they have been far better prepared to deal with the inevitable rash of injuries that hits all pitching staffs than the Sox. The Red Sox strategy vis-a-vis pitchers since 2019, on the other hand, has essentially been: "they're all too risky to sign."

Just curious, where do they keep this pitching depth that they should have built up more? Let's say they sign at least one more starter in addition to Giolito (Montgomery, Snell, whoever). That pushes one of the guys who is in the rotation now (Houck/Whitlock/Crawford) into the pen? Does that guy still count as rotation depth if he's a reliever? There's only so much depth a team can have such that they can survive severe injuries to two of their starters. The teams that have that kind of depth tend to be the ones who develop pitchers themselves, not shop for them on the open market. In other words, the "fix" for surviving Giolito/Pivetta injuries isn't really solved in the off-season.
You're looking at it solely through the lens of this past offseason. What we're seeing now in regards to the total lack of depth (just as we saw last year) is the result of a years-long strategy/fear on the part of the Red Sox to invest in pitching.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,791
Rogers Park
And they acquired depth: Anderson, Criswell, Uwasawa, Fitts.

Nobody signs an uninjured ML starting pitcher to randomly stash them in AAA just in case two of their starters (Giolito/Pivetta) and two of their depth pieces (Murphy/Walter) might go down. Nobody.
Right. In part, this is because you can’t get good, uninjured FA starters to sign to be your sixth starter.

A creative approach to this stuff is to supplement your depth with injured/talented guys, like we did with Paxton, but there’s no guarantee that the timing works out. And that approach to building depth got Bloom pilloried on this board, even though the Dodgers have been doing it for years to good effect.

I guess Hendriks is that sort of signing.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
17,016
Breslow speaking to media now:
Pivetta has a mild strain of the flexor.

Story has a fractured glenoid rim, will have surgery on Friday. Expected about 6 month recovery. You can do the math there.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Here's the current roster of MLB starting pitchers under control of the Dodgers:

Tyler Glasnow
Shohei Ohtani (IL)
Bobby Miller
Yoshinobu Yamamoto
Clayton Kershaw (IL)
James Paxton
Walker Buehler (IL)
Dustin May (IL)
Gavin Stone
Tony Gonsolin (IL)

Their strategy over the past several years has simply been "add as many quality arms as possible, at all times." As a result, they have been far better prepared to deal with the inevitable rash of injuries that hits all pitching staffs than the Sox. The Red Sox strategy vis-a-vis pitchers since 2019, on the other hand, has essentially been: "they're all too risky to sign."



You're looking at it solely through the lens of this past offseason. What we're seeing now in regards to the total lack of depth (just as we saw last year) is the result of a years-long strategy/fear on the part of the Red Sox to invest in pitching.
If your suggestion is to be like the Dodgers, that is not going to happen. Even if they wanted to, it wouldn't work. It would probably be more useful to compare them to any other ML team.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,641
If your suggestion is to be like the Dodgers, that is not going to happen. Even if they wanted to, it wouldn't work. It would probably be more useful to compare them to any other ML team.
Rangers seem pretty similar.

deGrom (IL)
Lorenzen (IL)
Mahle (IL)
Scherzer (IL)
Eovaldi
Gray
Heaney
Dunning
Bradford

Simple lesson seems to be that you need a ton of pitchers because pitchers get hurt.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,701
Ignoring money/cost for a minute, the reason the Dodgers and Rangers have so many SP candidates is because they knew some of the guys they already had would be hurt to start the season. As RR said upthread, you can't sign healthy SPs to any kind of meaningful deals and then just have them wait in AAA until needed.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Rangers seem pretty similar.

deGrom (IL)
Lorenzen (IL)
Mahle (IL)
Scherzer (IL)
Eovaldi
Gray
Heaney
Dunning
Bradford
They have $105m in salary on the IL right now, almost all of which are those SPs. DeGrom is owed like $130m after this year. So that might work out for them but it's not a model I would want to copy.

What you really want to copy is Seattle or Tampa, where you have depth in the upper minors who really are "next men up," not just emergency starters. I was all for Monty and keeping one of Houck or Whitlock in the pen and pushing everyone down a notch. Of course Monty hasn't even pitched yet, and might be no better than Uwasawa. But apart from that, the only foolproof system is the kind of development machine that will take a few years to build.
 

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
3,864
They have $105m in salary on the IL right now, almost all of which are those SPs. DeGrom is owed like $130m after this year. So that might work out for them but it's not a model I would want to copy.
How many WS rings would you need for it to be a model to copy?
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
If your suggestion is to be like the Dodgers, that is not going to happen. Even if they wanted to, it wouldn't work. It would probably be more useful to compare them to any other ML team.
It's not possible for the third richest team in the sport to act like the second??

Here's how easy it would've been for the Sox to build up the depth the Dodgers did, if they hadn't decided to take a four-year break from competing at the MLB level (I won't even mention the names Snell or Montgomery):

Brayan Bello
Eduardo Rodriguez (IL)
Nick PIvetta (IL)
Kevin Gausman
Garrett Whitlock
Kutter Crawford
Lucas Giolito (IL)
Kodai Senga (IL)
Tanner Houck
Shota Imanaga
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,643
How many WS rings would you need for it to be a model to copy?
More than 1?
And as I have said before, they had to deplete their farm system last season in order to trade for SP(S) to replace DeGrom going down.... Do they win the WS if they did not have the prospect capital to trade for those replacements last year?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,117
Maine
Rangers seem pretty similar.

deGrom (IL)
Lorenzen (IL)
Mahle (IL)
Scherzer (IL)
Eovaldi
Gray
Heaney
Dunning
Bradford

Simple lesson seems to be that you need a ton of pitchers because pitchers get hurt.
Thing with the Rangers and the Dodgers is a bunch of those pitchers on the IL were there before the season started. They knew they wouldn't have those guys until mid-season if not longer and brought in guys to fill in the gaps. That's not the case with the Red Sox who started spring training with 6-7 presumably healthy guys competing for the rotation. Hard to recruit or justify signing too many more starters for depth purposes when that's the case. And that's not a money thing, that's a roster size thing. They only have so many places on the 40-man for pitchers. Outside that, the depth options have to be internal or reclamation types on minor league deals (the Barracloughs and Littells of the world).
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
It's not possible for the third richest team in the sport to act like the second??

Here's how easy it would've been for the Sox to build up the depth the Dodgers did, if they hadn't decided to take a four-year break from competing at the MLB level (I won't even mention the names Snell or Montgomery):

Brayan Bello
Eduardo Rodriguez (IL)
Nick PIvetta (IL)
Kevin Gausman
Garrett Whitlock
Kutter Crawford
Lucas Giolito (IL)
Kodai Senga (IL)
Tanner Houck
Shota Imanaga
At least two of those names were not coming here. Free agents aren't bound to take an offer from the Sox. I get that you are frustrated but this scenario isn't very realistic.
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
231
Brayan Bello
Eduardo Rodriguez (IL)
Nick PIvetta (IL)
Kevin Gausman
Garrett Whitlock
Kutter Crawford
Lucas Giolito (IL)
Kodai Senga (IL)
Tanner Houck
Shota Imanaga
There are ten people on this list. Six are currently on the team. Gausman was not a Free Agent this off-season: that was 2022. So you're saying they should have signed three pitchers, two of whom are currently injured? I don't think it's as easy as you make it seem to suddenly have ten starting pitchers.

EDIT: I understand now you're saying that a four year break signing pitchers is the issue, Hence Gausman (and Senga, I suppose). Suffice to say: this is cherry picking over the last few years... and still, two of the four guys you'd have added are also hurt.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,012
Here's the current roster of MLB starting pitchers under control of the Dodgers:

Tyler Glasnow
Shohei Ohtani (IL)
Bobby Miller
Yoshinobu Yamamoto
Clayton Kershaw (IL)
James Paxton
Walker Buehler (IL)
Dustin May (IL)
Gavin Stone
Tony Gonsolin (IL)
That's a hell of a rotation on the IL for the Dodgers.
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
953
The update on Pivetta certainly seems encouraging so perhaps all is not lost. At the same time, no point in denying the obvious achilles heel of the team, which many urged the FO to address in the off season, was lack of SP depth. We are 10 games into the season and that concern seems it may be borne out sooner rather than later. IOW, I would feel a lot better if we had Imanaga or Montgomery or even Lorenzen signed, and Crawford or Houck in the pen as long man (eg, Chase Anderson type usage) only needing to be stretched out.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
How many WS rings would you need for it to be a model to copy?
Look up Scherzer and de Grom's stats and tell me that's why they won the WS. They won in spite of their spending spree on pitching. The big move they made was an in-season pickup of a guy they couldn't afford to re-sign because of all the injured guys they are paying $100m to this year.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
The update on Pivetta certainly seems encouraging so perhaps all is not lost. At the same time, no point in denying the obvious achilles heel of the team, which many urged the FO to address in the off season, was lack of SP depth. We are 10 games into the season and that concern seems it may be borne out sooner rather than later. IOW, I would feel a lot better if we had Imanaga or Montgomery or even Lorenzen signed, and Crawford or Houck in the pen as long man (eg, Chase Anderson type usage) only needing to be stretched out.
Breslow called it "mild" and said he wouldn't likely need more than the 10 days, apparently.
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
There are ten people on this list. Six are currently on the team. Gausman was not a Free Agent this off-season: that was 2022. So you're saying they should have signed three pitchers, two of whom are currently injured? I don't think it's as easy as you make it seem to suddenly have ten starting pitchers.

EDIT: I understand now you're saying that a four year break signing pitchers is the issue, Hence Gausman (and Senga, I suppose). Suffice to say: this is cherry picking over the last few years... and still, two of the four guys you'd have added are also hurt.
Yes, that is my entire point: pitchers get hurt. An incredibly rich team like the Red Sox should therefore be even more aggressive in adding them, thus exercising their economic advantage, not cower from the free agent pitching market like a small market team that cant afford to absorb the injuries.
 

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
3,864
Look up Scherzer and de Grom's stats and tell me that's why they won the WS. They won in spite of their spending spree on pitching. The big move they made was an in-season pickup of a guy they couldn't afford to re-sign because of all the injured guys they are paying $100m to this year.
That’s sort of my point, if a little tongue in cheek. It just seems like everyone is dismissing what two of the top teams are doing, the Rangers and Dodgers. I get everything is different but it frustrates me, especially on Opening Day, when we focus too much on spreadsheets and not enough on wins and losses.
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,597
I'm going home
Breslow speaking to media now:
Pivetta has a mild strain of the flexor.
He also said that Pivetta returning after the 15 days was "a reasonable goal" at this point. He said Nick was having some recovery issues between starts, and they are taking this time now to hopefully straighten it out.

He also said that thanks to the off-days, they indeed are moving up the rotation, and will take a few days to figure out what they are going to do at 5.
 

Benj4ever

New Member
Nov 21, 2022
381
More than 1?
And as I have said before, they had to deplete their farm system last season in order to trade for SP(S) to replace DeGrom going down.... Do they win the WS if they did not have the prospect capital to trade for those replacements last year?
Exactly. Counting de Grom or Ohtani is disingenuous, because neither team was expecting them to be available at this point
 

barbed wire Bob

crippled by fear
SoSH Member
Ignoring money/cost for a minute, the reason the Dodgers and Rangers have so many SP candidates is because they knew some of the guys they already had would be hurt to start the season. As RR said upthread, you can't sign healthy SPs to any kind of meaningful deals and then just have them wait in AAA until needed.
To follow up on this, the Dodgers currently have eight players on the injured list. Seven of the players are pitchers. From truebluela.com:

The first three Dodgers to land on the injured list came during spring training, with Tony Gonsolin, Dustin May, and Clayton Kershaw all placed on the 60-day IL as they recover from surgery. Gonsolin, after his Tommy John surgery in September 2023, is not expected to pitch in 2024. Kershaw and May might be ready at some point after the All-Star break.
Walker Buehler is coming back from his second Tommy John surgery, in August 2022, and will be on an innings limit in 2024. He was slow-played during spring and likely won’t be ready until about a month into the season. Emmet Sheehan was slowed during spring training and was placed on the injured list with right forearm inflammation when the Dodgers finalized their opening day roster on March 20 when the team started in Seoul, South Korea.
Relievers Brusdar Graterol (shoulder inflammation) and Blake Treinen (bruised lung) also started the season on the injured list, two of seven Dodgers pitchers opening the year on the IL.
So the Dodger pitching depth isn't as deep as it initially appears

https://www.truebluela.com/2024/3/24/24110516/los-angeles-dodgers-injured-list-tracker-2024
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
At least two of those names were not coming here. Free agents aren't bound to take an offer from the Sox. I get that you are frustrated but this scenario isn't very realistic.
Cool. Then swap them out for Chris Bassitt, or Nate Eovaldi, or Jameson Taillon, or Zack Wheeler, or. . .

The Red Sox haven't signed a starting pitcher to a multi-year deal since 2019, because they took a four-year break from caring about the MLB roster, and decided that managing the financial risk of pitching injuries would be the lodestar of their roster-building strategy. What happened to the staff last year (and what's going to happen to the staff this year) is what you get when you decide to do that.
 
Last edited:

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
That’s sort of my point, if a little tongue in cheek. It just seems like everyone is dismissing what two of the top teams are doing, the Rangers and Dodgers. I get everything is different but it frustrates me, especially on Opening Day, when we focus too much on spreadsheets and not enough on wins and losses.
Yeah, OK then. IMO the high-dollar version of building depth can work, I guess, but the low-dollar version not only preserves more flexibility (assuming your ownership has limits) but maybe lasts a little longer, if we are talking younger players? Not sure if that is true, young elbows seem to blow up too.

Every team right now is scratching around for solutions to the injury crisis, and the market for pitching is both super intense -- which drives prices up -- and also a total minefield. It may be that the only way to build an advantage is not huge sums of cash but an organizational approach to pitching that you can plug a lot of guys into. In other words, the Breslow/Bailey hirings, if it turns out that they have a way of getting pitchers to produce, might be our best hope that the Sox will prevent enough runs with whoever they put out there, while all around them big names are on the IL.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Cool. Then swap them out for Chris Bassitt, or Nate Eovaldi, or Jameson Taillon, or Zack Wheeler, or. . .

The Red Sox haven't signed a starting pitcher to a multi-year deal since 2019, because they took a four-year break from caring about the MLB roster, and decided that managing the risk of pitching injuries would be the lodestar of their roster-building strategy. What happened to the staff last year (and what's going to happen to the staff this year) is what you get when you decide to do that.
We have like 18 threads on the Eovaldi signing process. Stick another pin in the Chaim doll if you want, but it's water under the bridge now.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,117
Maine
It's not possible for the third richest team in the sport to act like the second??

Here's how easy it would've been for the Sox to build up the depth the Dodgers did, if they hadn't decided to take a four-year break from competing at the MLB level (I won't even mention the names Snell or Montgomery):

Brayan Bello
Eduardo Rodriguez (IL)
Nick PIvetta (IL)
Kevin Gausman
Garrett Whitlock
Kutter Crawford
Lucas Giolito (IL)
Kodai Senga (IL)
Tanner Houck
Shota Imanaga
So it's your opinion that Whitlock and Crawford and Houck and Bello would have been given opportunities to be in the rotation even with this strategy of retaining or signing free agents?

Based on this list (I know you're just throwing out hypotheticals), the 2022 rotation would have been E-Rod, Pivetta, Gausman, Houck, and Whitlock with Bello (and Sale presumably) maybe breaking through mid-season (perhaps when ERod went AWOL?). Of course there's no mention of Eovaldi who was still around then.

Then in 2023, you add Senga while losing none of the rest of them (except maybe Eovaldi). All of whom would also still be around and healthy for spring training 2024 when you add Giolito and Imanaga? I guess maybe E-Rod opts out like he did with the Tigers?

There's just no way. No way at all this works. Really the only way it's feasible is pushing Whitlock and Houck and Crawford to the pen full time (Bello stashed at Worcester?) which arguably eliminates them as starters by the end of last year and where's your depth then?

In retrospect, it's nice to say it all fits with those guys on the IL, but they weren't hurt this winter. They weren't hurt last year. Like I said before, this isn't even a matter of payroll. It's roster space.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,209
Miami (oh, Miami!)
The Red Sox haven't signed a starting pitcher to a multi-year deal since 2019,
Who cares?

During those years they acquired/promoted plenty of starters with multiple years of control. Pivetta, Houck, Whitlock, Winckowski, Crawford, Bello, Paxton, Giolito.

That's a multi-year commitment for a team.
Paxton as well.

Bello/Whitlock extensions also count as commitments.
 
Last edited:

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
The individual names don't matter. It's the broader strategy that does.
Sure, but what is the strategy? Last year they had like 7 starters lined up. They opened with Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Pivetta, and Whitlock, with Houck, Crawford and whoever else waiting in the wings. They know they need numbers. But there are like 26 teams taking the same approach, or trying to now, so it's not like this is all a mystery to them. It's just harder than it looks.

Monty seems like he would have been a fit, but not according to Monty. I really don't think they have given up on building any more depth. Just gotta wait for it to unfold, probably more like June or so before more arms become available.
 

RS2004foreever

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2022
812
They have $105m in salary on the IL right now, almost all of which are those SPs. DeGrom is owed like $130m after this year. So that might work out for them but it's not a model I would want to copy.

What you really want to copy is Seattle or Tampa, where you have depth in the upper minors who really are "next men up," not just emergency starters. I was all for Monty and keeping one of Houck or Whitlock in the pen and pushing everyone down a notch. Of course Monty hasn't even pitched yet, and might be no better than Uwasawa. But apart from that, the only foolproof system is the kind of development machine that will take a few years to build.
Man the Rays are decimated by injuries. Springs/Rasmussen/Mclahanan have missed a year each recently, and their depth in the minors at starter is not what it once was.
 

Benj4ever

New Member
Nov 21, 2022
381
Benj4ever said:
The Red Sox haven't signed a starting pitcher to a multi-year deal since 2019,


Who cares?

During those years they acquired/promoted plenty of starters with multiple years of control. Pivetta, Houck, Whitlock, Winckowski, Crawford, Bello, Paxton, Giolito.



Paxton as well.

Bello/Whitlock extensions also count as commitments.
Midnight Ryder Jones made the above quote, not I. In any event, I applaud the Sox for sticking to their plan of developing young pitchers instead of trading them away.
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
So it's your opinion that Whitlock and Crawford and Houck and Bello would have been given opportunities to be in the rotation even with this strategy of retaining or signing free agents?

Based on this list (I know you're just throwing out hypotheticals), the 2022 rotation would have been E-Rod, Pivetta, Gausman, Houck, and Whitlock with Bello (and Sale presumably) maybe breaking through mid-season (perhaps when ERod went AWOL?). Of course there's no mention of Eovaldi who was still around then.
Yes, I am just dealing in hypotheticals and the individual names don't matter The point is that the team has opted out of the free agent pitching market for five years, and has no pitching depth as a result.

But just to go along with your post, I mean, that seems like a totally fine pitching situation to have had in 2022? I'm really not sure what you think the problem with that would have been. Tanner Houck had a 4.32 ERA as a starter that year. Nick Pivetta finished at 4.56. It goes without saying that replacing either one of their workloads with Kevin Gausman would have given a team that won the Wild Card the year before a much better chance at getting back to the postseason.

Sure, I guess Houck would have spent more time in the bullpen and Bello would have spent more time in AAA but all that means is that the bullpen and minor league depth would have been better. Those are self-evidently good things.

Then in 2023, you add Senga while losing none of the rest of them (except maybe Eovaldi). All of whom would also still be around and healthy for spring training 2024 when you add Giolito and Imanaga? I guess maybe E-Rod opts out like he did with the Tigers?
Yes. Once again, you're not really laying out any problems here. You start 2023 with a rotation of Gausman, Senga, ERod, Sale, and whoever you want out of Houck/Whitlock/Kutter/Bello/Pivetta. Whoever you don't believe in long term you either shift to the bullpen, leave in AAA to provide the depth that team didn't have, or trade to improve other areas of the team. A team with that rotation would have entered the season as postseason favorites and then been easily able to weather the injuries that resulted.

There's just no way. No way at all this works. Really the only way it's feasible is pushing Whitlock and Houck and Crawford to the pen full time (Bello stashed at Worcester?) which arguably eliminates them as starters by the end of last year and where's your depth then?

In retrospect, it's nice to say it all fits with those guys on the IL, but they weren't hurt this winter. They weren't hurt last year. Like I said before, this isn't even a matter of payroll. It's roster space.
It is working, right now, for the best team in baseball. The Dodgers didn't let Kershaw walk in 2021 because Dustin May was ready to start. They just added more depth. They didn't pass on Trevor Bauer in 2022 the next season because Walker Buehler turned into an all-star in 2022. They just added more depth. They didn't pass on Yamamoto and Paxton this year because they would have Buehler and Keshaw coming back mid-season. They just added more depth, which allowed them to trade Pepiot, just as it would have allowed the Red Sox to trade assets to improve the team.

The Dodgers have simply decided to keep adding pitchers, through every mechanism available to them. As a result, they've lost the following guys to either injuries, sexual assault, or free agency over the past few years:

Walker Buehler
Dustin May
Tony Gonsolin
Trevor Bauer
Julio Urias
Max Scherzer

. . . and are nevertheless totally fine today.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,117
Maine
Yes, I am just dealing in hypotheticals and the individual names don't matter The point is that the team has opted out of the free agent pitching market for five years, and has no pitching depth as a result.

But just to go along with your post, I mean, that seems like a totally fine pitching situation to have had in 2022? I'm really not sure what you think the problem with that would have been. Tanner Houck had a 4.32 ERA as a starter that year. Nick Pivetta finished at 4.56. It goes without saying that replacing either one of their workloads with Kevin Gausman would have given a team that won the Wild Card the year before a much better chance at getting back to the postseason.

Sure, I guess Houck would have spent more time in the bullpen and Bello would have spent more time in AAA but all that means is that the bullpen and minor league depth would have been better. Those are self-evidently good things.


Yes. Once again, you're not really laying out any problems here. You start 2023 with a rotation of Gausman, Senga, ERod, Sale, and whoever you want out of Houck/Whitlock/Kutter/Bello/Pivetta. Whoever you don't believe in long term you either shift to the bullpen, leave in AAA to provide the depth that team didn't have, or trade to improve other areas of the team. A team with that rotation would have entered the season as postseason favorites and then been easily able to weather the injuries that resulted.



It is working, right now, for the best team in baseball. The Dodgers didn't let Kershaw walk in 2021 because Dustin May was ready to start. They just added more depth. They didn't pass on Trevor Bauer in 2022 the next season because Walker Buehler turned into an all-star in 2022. They just added more depth. They didn't pass on Yamamoto and Paxton this year because they would have Buehler and Keshaw coming back mid-season. They just added more depth, which allowed them to trade Pepiot, just as it would have allowed the Red Sox to trade assets to improve the team.

The Dodgers have simply decided to keep adding pitchers, through every mechanism available to them. As a result, they've lost the following guys to either injuries or sexual assult over the past few years:

Walker Buehler
Dustin May
Tony Gonsolin
Trevor Bauer
Julio Urias

. . . and are nevertheless totally fine today.
I'm not arguing that those staffs you present wouldn't have been more successful. I'm arguing that it's not a means of building depth. You don't build depth through free agency. You build it through developing pitchers. You can't do that if you leave no room on the roster for them (or rely on injuries to clear the way for them).
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,701
It is working, right now, for the best team in baseball. The Dodgers didn't let Kershaw walk in 2021 because Dustin May was ready to start. They just added more depth. They didn't pass on Trevor Bauer in 2022 the next season because Walker Buehler turned into an all-star in 2022. They just added more depth. They didn't pass on Yamamoto and Paxton this year because they would have Buehler and Keshaw coming back mid-season. They just added more depth, which allowed them to trade Pepiot, just as it would have allowed the Red Sox to trade assets to improve the team.

The Dodgers have simply decided to keep adding pitchers, through every mechanism available to them.
Well, not sure why the Dodgers have earned the title as 'best team in baseball', but leaving that aside, now dig into what they've done with shortstop? They did let Corey Seager walk, they did let Manny Machado (who played SS for them briefly) walk, they did let Trea Turner walk, they did use the offensive black hole Miguel Rojas (.612 OPS) there all of last year, and now they have moved their superstar RF there out of desperation. He is Mookie so he can do anything but every team has to make decisions.
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
I'm not arguing that those staffs you present wouldn't have been more successful. I'm arguing that it's not a means of building depth. You don't build depth through free agency. You build it through developing pitchers. You can't do that if you leave no room on the roster for them (or rely on injuries to clear the way for them).
You build depth by adding as many good players to your organization as possible. It literally does not matter how you add them.

I mean, in the scenarios I posit above, the 2022, 2023, and 2024 teams all do have significantly better depth that those teams did/do in reality. And at no point did I even posit a giant free-agent signing like Yamamoto or deGrom.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,117
Maine
You build depth by adding as many good players to your organization as possible. It literally does not matter how you add them.

I mean, in the scenarios I posit above, the 2022, 2023, and 2024 all do have significantly better depth that those teams did/do in reality. And at no point did I even posit a giant free-agent signing like Yamamoto or deGrom.
There are only so many roster spots though. If you have 10 starting pitchers, sure thats depth but some other position is going to be thinner as a result.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
5,697
They just added more depth, which allowed them to trade Pepiot, just as it would have allowed the Red Sox to trade assets to improve the team.
We are not at the point where it makes sense to be trading away assets. The Dodgers are one of the oldest teams in baseball and they're trying to win now. We're one of the youngest and trying to matriculate the next core.
 
Mar 30, 2023
199
We are not at the point where it makes sense to be trading away assets. The Dodgers are one of the oldest teams in baseball and they're trying to win now. We're one of the youngest and trying to matriculate the next core.
Three posts above you I created an incredibly realistic scenario wherein, with a few smart free agent pitching signings, the 2022, 2023, and 2024 teams all likely would have been competing for the postseason, and have been able to do so without having had to trade any members of a future core. That's the beauty of free agency! You don't need to weaken your minor league system to improve your MLB team!

I did say that those free agent signings would have allowed them to trade one or more of Houck/Whitlock/Kutter/Pivetta if they wanted to, but that they would'n't have needed to -- they just as easily could have held on to them and built both a stronger and cheaper bullpen, or that vaunted minor league depth that we're apparently after. What's the problem with that scenario?
 
Last edited:

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,048
Isle of Plum
There are only so many roster spots though. If you have 10 starting pitchers, sure thats depth but some other position is going to be thinner as a result.
It’s not about roster spot counting, it’s about the arm quality in the spots.

The FO wallet is what got got thinner - so the rotation was thinner so the bullpen was thinner.

A top o’ the line starter just pushes everyone into a more organic role. Maybe I’m taking crazy pills, this seems very non controversial.