We don't have starting depth, we have "I wonder if this guy is a starter" depth, and adding Junis would be further redundancy in that category. That would be fine if roster space was unlimited, but since it isn't we'd have to be making cuts to fit him in. Unless we're trading Jansen/Martin that most likely means optioning one of H/W/C/W for a guy with the same profile, which is a pretty bad look after everything they've all done in Boston.
I sincerely doubt they roster Mata over Campbell if it comes to cases. Campbell has proven major league stuff, and Mata hasn't posted a BB rate under 5 since 2019. But since we're talking about pitchers, what's more likely someone goes down and they have room for all of these guys.
I think we need to look at who with options is presumed to be on the 26 man roster or who you DFA in favor of a Junis type.
Didn’t Junis sign as a starter? Maybe he doesn’t want 100 innings out of the pen.
I've been trying to think of a way to say this all off-season, thank you for this and I'm admittedly going to use it also, so i want to give you credit. Nicely done.
Based on the information we have right now (Breslow saying that the team plans to have the assorted bullpen arms stretched out as starters) I personally am opposed to signing that kind of pitcher, yes.
Didn't Breslow already say they weren't going to sign a dedicated DH? Soler hasn't played any significant time in the field since 2021 when he was -10 OAA. He's the very definition of a dedicated DH. According to Cotillo it seems like they prefer Duvall, or if that fails Garrett Cooper. Not sure if they are offering either a starting job though, which might be what's most important to this caliber of free agent.
Right, we need an anchor, not a tryout guy. $7m seems like a lot for Junis.
All your opinions on the roster seem to rely on zero injuries or ineffectiveness, which just isn’t at all realistic. Sure, the lineup and pitching staff are full- if nobody is injured before opening day. I’m not confident in that happening and think more depth is needed. If Mata and Slaten and Criswell and whoemever else are all dominating and looking good, well that’s an ok problem to have and I’m sure trades could be made.
Sure, but the Sox are in this weird place where nearly every position appears to be "filled" in some capacity, so in order to draw someone on a one year deal, no matter the position, they are going to have to 1) promise that payer playing time at the expense of someone else, and 2) deal with the ramifications of that on the players already on the roster, and move someone off of the roster. The other thing about the roster is that I think you could reasonably assume league average production at nearly every position, and there aren't many players who would get a significant benefit from more time in AAA (Rafaela probably fits this bill, but I think he makes the entire team better by playing in CF even if his offense ends up being less than stellar).
I don’t think worrying about the 26 man is a huge concern at this point, because several pitchers will be injured or ineffective. I’m fine with not signing Junis, but I do think another pitcher is needed, and I also think another bat is too. There just isn’t enough depth (even if one could scrape out an ok 26 man roster on paper, right now). If they get to Opening Day and have too much talent to roster, I think I’d be ok with that (and imagine they could figure it out).
Unless the Red Sox sign someone else. I would imagine he is next in line to be outrighted
I think we need to be careful not to generalize and extrapolate what is an argument about one specific player into a argument about the entire off-season. No one arguing that Junis is not a fit for the Sox is saying that the roster is good enough as is. The argument being made is that Junis specifically doesn't address the real needs the team has. He's redundant with Houck and Whitlock already on board and he's expensive relative to whatever overall improvement to the roster he brings. If the goal is to bump Houck and Whitlock down the rotation depth chart, the money would be better spent on a pitcher who's clearly better than they are (which Junis is not). If the goal is to improve the bullpen spots that Mata and Slaten and Jacques appear at present to be penciled into, then the money could also be spent on a pitcher who is clearly better than they are for that spot (which Junis also is not).
To your last sentence - in a way the Sox have opened up themselves to that line of thinking due to their unwillingness to publicly articulate a plan. Every move they make leads to the question of how it fits into the bigger picture.
And the parts they did articulate (trading for a pitcher, acquiring a RH bat who can play multiple psoitins) that haven’t been acted upon bring up questions when players go off the board. Has the desire to get those types of players changed, perhaps? It’s fine to say that the org has enough talent under contract and don’t want to add these guys but that’s not really the argument they’ve made.
I agree that every move they make does and should spark that discussion of how it fits. Every move other teams make, framed in a "why didn't they sign that guy" way, doesn't need to spark that discussion though. Sometimes it's pretty damn obvious why the Red Sox didn't pursue a particular player and I don't need them spelling out their plans in detail to see it. And pointing out how that player doesn't fit isn't the same as making a case that the Sox don't need to acquire anyone and their roster is just hunky-fucking-dory.
Indeed, it is not.
First or second, yeah. He needs to show us something and fast.
Dodgers' rotation:
Man. When and if healthy (I realize that's the big question mark), I know this is a big statement, but is that the best starting 5 since the Maddux/Glavine/Smoltz 90s Braves? Yamamoto/Ohtani/Glasnow/Buehler/Kershaw, with May/Gonsolin/Miller taking a 6th spot/giving guys rest?
The first one? Because the second one can't pitch right now.
There's a bunch of weird buzz about the Phillies swooping in on Montgomery, which seems very clearly like a coordinated Boras campaign. There's a Nightengale report that says the Phillies are "a sleeper" on the top four FAs, and this report (summarizing a sports radio broadcast) suggests that Bryce Harper, another Boras client, is going to engineer a Montgomery signing.
The Phillies had the best rotation in baseball last year and are currently on track to exceed the CBT the third year in a row, which means Montgomery would cost them 50% more than other teams.
It'll be especially hilarious when they crash out in the division series again. The weight of expectations will not be kind to this team. Also these are names. Lots of people can actually throw a baseball, and which ones are doing it especially well in October is always tricky to predict. You can say their floor is "easy division title" though. They've bought themselves that much.
His FIP last year was 4.03, walks were up... I mean, he's very good I guess, but he's been in an extreme pitchers' park his whole life. Also let's just say he's not my kind of person.
One of the best parts of this post is that in the two years before Pedro's peak as posted above, he finished 1st and 2nd in Cy Young and went OPS+ of 219/163 and K'd 305/251 respectively. Wagon.
His total career in comparison to Pedro is pretty striking, although as you say Pedro's peak remains higher than his or, really, anyone ever (5 of 7 seasons in the middle of his career Pedro had an ERA+ above 200... which is fully insane. If we need to win one baseball game to save the world from aliens, 1999 Pedro remains my starting pitcher and I don't even have to think about it.)
| Pedro | Kershaw | |
| Innings Pitched | 2827.1 | 2712.2 |
| Wins | 219 | 210 |
| ERA | 2.93 | 2.48 |
| ERA+ | 154 | 157 |
| SO/9 | 10.0 | 9.8 |
| WHIP | 1.05 | 1.00 |
| Cy Young Awards | 3 | 3 |
| WAR (BRef) | 86 | 77 |
Sandy Koufax should be included with these two, I think (when speaking of peaks).
Kershaw's entire career is better than Pedro's entire career. So just so I'm clear with everyone...when I talk about Pedro being the best to ever do it, I fully recognize that lots of guys have had better overall careers than Pedro did. I am always just talking about their 5-7 year peaks, and while there obviously have been many incredible 5-7 year peaks, nobody's - not Seaver's, not Clemens', not Koufax's, not Ryan's, not Ford's, not Spahn's, not Randy Johnson's, not Maddux's, not Kershaw's...nobody's - has been better than Pedro's.
He doesn't really compare in terms of ERA+. His volume and era stand apart from the other two. Taking individual season ERA+ among the three, Pedro has 1/2/4/5/T6, Kershaw has 3/T6/8/9/11, and Koufax has 10/12/19/20/27(I think).
Is the argument that hitting was far stronger in Pedro's era? And a lower mound? Because Koufax had a pretty incredible stretch, especially when you look at innings, and complete games.
I hope this doesn't happen, because Mata has such tantalizing raw talent, but I agree that it's a potential. I believe he is out of options this year, and he really regressed last season. Even worse than the 6.33 era, 2.19 WHIP, and just 27 ip are the reports (relayed from SoxProspects) that he's been resistant to coaching and changing his overall approach. I guess I'm hoping they'll given him another shot--again, because of the talent--but I agree that he could easily just be let go.
