Send Jedi to the Glue Factory
- Thread starter Todd Benzinger
- Start date
Another bad start for Masterson, but this time at AA.
Justin Masterson went 4 2/3 innings, allowing 2 runs on 8 hits, a walk, a HBP and a WP; striking out 2.
Justin Masterson went 4 2/3 innings, allowing 2 runs on 8 hits, a walk, a HBP and a WP; striking out 2.
Had a friend that went to the game tonight. He's by no means a scout but he's a baseball guy, basically went up for the game just because he wanted to see Jedi - he said he was wild all night and he never saw him top 86.
I guess that "shoulder tendinitis" isn't healed yet….
Let's just hope he is WAY down the list of potential starting options. If Masterson isn't showing significantly better stuff than that, he shouldn't make another start for the Red Sox this year (or any other year).
Let's just hope he is WAY down the list of potential starting options. If Masterson isn't showing significantly better stuff than that, he shouldn't make another start for the Red Sox this year (or any other year).
Yeah, it seems like they kind of backed themselves into a bit of a corner with the suspicious injury narrative. If his velocity and control are both just as bad as when he was put on the DL, it would suggest that he is still "hurt," so why would you activate him? However, since you did start his rehab clock, the number of things you can do is really starting to drop. Maybe you can try to see if he can throw a little harder in short bursts, but my guess would be that he is already giving it all he's got. He might not be not be physically injured, but he sure appears broken.radsoxfan said:
Jason Mastrodonato @JMastrodonato 49s49 seconds ago
John Farrell says Justin Masterson has proved he's ready to come back to the Red Sox, but it may be in bullpen role. Masterson open to it.
John Farrell says Justin Masterson has proved he's ready to come back to the Red Sox, but it may be in bullpen role. Masterson open to it.
Corsi said:
Does anybody here think that Masterson is going to be more effective than Barnes or Light would be?
No, not really.kieckeredinthehead said:
Then again, Barnes wasn't exactly setting the world on fire either (4.24 ERA, 4.59 xFIP) and Light probably needs a little more seasoning, so I don't really mind this last ditch effort to get value out of Masterson.
I think the real question you could ask was why the front office thought he was worth signing in the first place.
I think it's entirely possible that Light might be better, but I also think that it makes sense to give Masterson a shot in the pen for a variety of reasons. Yes, the contract is a sunk cost, but there's no harm in seeing if we can get some value out of it before we write it off as a dead loss. Also, there's the whole "courtesy to a veteran coming off an injury" thing. Give him till the ASB to show he can contribute something, and if he can't, then bail.
If we were anything but a long shot to make the postseason at this point, that would be a whole 'nother ball o' wax.
If we were anything but a long shot to make the postseason at this point, that would be a whole 'nother ball o' wax.
Rasputin said:
Yeah but unless he somehow goes back to the guy from a few years ago that 9 million dollar contract will hinder any return unless the Sox want to eat most of it. I'd still imagine he'd be only worth the equivalent what we gave up for De Aza and is that worth 4 million dollars? I know people were pissed we gave up a RP with little value for De Aza, what will happen to this board if we pay 4 million dollars for one?
Red Sox hurler Justin Masterson won’t specifically say that he’ll ask for a trade, but he did acknowledge the possibility, as Jason Mastrodonato of the Boston Herald writes. “I dont know if it’s in my nature to do that, to say, ‘Beat it guys, trade me or put me in [the rotation],’” he said. “No, I don’t think that’s the time right now. Especially the way I see this team going and the way I believe in this team too.” Masterson, who is signed to a one-year, $9.5MM deal, could conceivably draw interest from a team in need of a starter. For his part, Masterson would much rather start than pitch in relief.
Mlbtr
Mlbtr
The decision to give Masterson more innings in the pen, at the expense of Wright (or Johnson or Barnes or Hinojosa or Aro) is another one which deserves to be assessed post facto when passing judgement on the front office. Do they really think Masterson is better than Wright? If they do, demerits to those who make these decisions if he comes up and gets lit up again with his 85 MPH "fastball". Or is the decision better explained by taking the course of least resistance and sticking with the dead ender vet you are overpaying rather than making the harder decision to cut bait and give a chance to players who have some plausible post 2015 future as MLB players.
I've stopped talking about him because I'm a softie and he just had a kid.jasail said:
So... I'll just point out that he has a 5.45 xFIP. And that he can't pitch in long relief. And that Wright can. And I'll leave it at that.
Rudy Pemberton said:
Depending on what flavor or WAR you like (if you like WAR), I think you could make a case that Miley and Buccholz are outperforming their 2015 salaries, but overall...yeah. The highest paid players have generally been the most disappointing. Not what you want to see.
Rudy Pemberton said:
The positive to put on this fact is that except for Craig and Castillo (who fortunately are still relatively young), all of the guys you list (and Napoli can be added as well) are off the books at the end of the year. It's a lot of seemingly wasted money now, but it's nothing that's going to hold the team back from improving the roster in the future.
I'm pretty sure the decision to play him is a combination of keeping the most assets and trying to get a few good weeks out of him so they can get a little something at the trade deadline.KillerBs said:
I think we are all reasonably skeptical that this is going to happen, but it's not unreasonable.
So, in the last week, we have benched and then sent to AAA our (hopefully) future RF to play a journeyman who provides no long-term value, purportedly because we are still focusing on putting the best team on the field each game and competing this year. But, we then sent down a decent if unspectacular pitcher in favor of a pitcher who has been terrible this and last year and shown very little likelihood that he's any better after his DL and rehab stint.
In isolation I don't have a big problem with either move, but they are contradictory. Either you are focusing on this year and you keep Wright in the majors unless you have someone clearly better, or you are taking the longer view and Castillo plays every day especially over de Aza (to say nothing of JBJ).
In isolation I don't have a big problem with either move, but they are contradictory. Either you are focusing on this year and you keep Wright in the majors unless you have someone clearly better, or you are taking the longer view and Castillo plays every day especially over de Aza (to say nothing of JBJ).
Red Sox philosophy has always been "keep your options open" -- i.e. when in doubt, any player with options is kept at AAA, and anyone without options stays on the big league roster unless they are a lost cause.
AB in DC said:
Yeah, this is probably the most consistent pattern underlying Red Sox roster moves over the past 10-15 years. They generally try to hoard as many guys as possible for as long as possible, and are loath to just cut someone.
I think this is kind of a last chance for Masterson anyway. If he comes back and puts up 2 or 3 low-leverage stinker relief outings with the same hittable stuff, he's probably gone and Wright (or whoever) is back up. I feel for the guy - I met Masterson many years ago, and he was probably one of the nicest people (not just baseball players) I've ever met. I really wish him all the best. A really nice, likable guy will often a second chance, whether that makes stone cold business sense or not.
McAdam has tweeted that Masterson is not listed as a reliever on today's lineup card, which may mean he's replacing Kelly in the rotation. I hope he's wrong.
Edit - slow fingers.
Edit 2 - I wonder if this is a spot start so Johnson can be worked into the rotation on full rest.
Edit - slow fingers.
Edit 2 - I wonder if this is a spot start so Johnson can be worked into the rotation on full rest.
“@TimBritton: You guys probably won’t like this, but Masterson is the likely starter Sunday. Johnson wouldn’t go on three days. http://t.co/JWE6cGtJtp”
soxhop411 said:
If that's temporary, fine, so be it. If it's intended to be permanent, then it's proof that the people running this team can't be trusted with it any longer.
This organization (probably John Farrell) has some kind of strange obsession (or fetish) for Justin Masterson. The first irrational move was the 9 million dollar contract; the second is the decision (assuming it happens) to give him another start. How did Masterson earn that start over Wright or even Joe Kelly? I'm surprised the organization has not yet resigned Masterson to a long term lucrative contract.
Rudy Pemberton said:
And here we go. I don't know how far he can go with that flat 85 MPH fastball.Rasputin said:
I wonder if he could generate some sort of trickle down effect though for the pitchers that follow him, the way that we theorize that knuckleballers do. I mean, after you've been hitting frozen ropes off of someone's 85 mph "heat", imagine how hard it will be to adjust to real pitching.Coachster said:
On the positive side…. Masterson could have easily gotten out of that game giving up no runs. The 1 ER was an infield hit, a passed ball, and seeing eye grounder up the middle. His slider had much better movement than before, lots of ugly swings against it. Also gave up no walks, so definitely some improvement in his control. Was looking a little Darren O'Day-ish out there.
On the negative side…. seemed like only marginal velocity increase compared to the last Oakland start, still mostly living in the 86-88 mph range, with a couple up to 90 mph, and then a handful of poorly located 83-84 mph nothing balls (change ups I guess). No walks, but also pretty wild in the strike zone, not hitting Swihart's target often, to go along with a HBP and a WP. He's simply not he same guy he was when he was a successful starter. Very difficult to see this stuff playing against a LH heavy lineup 2 or 3 times through the order for the rest of the year.
On the negative side…. seemed like only marginal velocity increase compared to the last Oakland start, still mostly living in the 86-88 mph range, with a couple up to 90 mph, and then a handful of poorly located 83-84 mph nothing balls (change ups I guess). No walks, but also pretty wild in the strike zone, not hitting Swihart's target often, to go along with a HBP and a WP. He's simply not he same guy he was when he was a successful starter. Very difficult to see this stuff playing against a LH heavy lineup 2 or 3 times through the order for the rest of the year.
Watched in person. Overall pretty sharp. Upper 80's fastball which was well located for the most part. The slider was nasty and was responsible for at least 3 K's. Would be nice to see him string a few together like today and maybe get a lottery ticket for him at the deadline.
Al Zarilla said:
This looks a little more encouraging than what you say WRT pitch speed.
I was going off the NESN gun, and didn't notice anything above 90 mph, but I also probably didn't see every pitch. Just eyeballing pitchfx, it looks like his average FB was around 88 mph, which would be slower than every season in his career not including this one (87.0 mph). Last season he was at 88.9 mph, and he was awful.
I'm glad he was better today, especially with the slider, but he's not "fixed".
FWIW, I think some sinker ballers can still be successful in the 88 mph range with their FB, velocity obviously isn't everything. Derek Lowe had many good seasons living in this range. Unfortunately, Masterson has never proven he can be one of those guys. He's only been a successful starter in the 92 mph fastball range, and I don't think his command is good enough if he's throwing this much slower.
Don't confuse Brooks' speed with PITCHf/x speed. PITCHf/x measures the speed 50 feet from home plate. Brooks uses that measurement to calculate the speed at 55 feet from the plate, which is closer to where it comes out of the pitcher's hand. Brooks' speed is therefore always slightly higher than PITCHf/x speed.radsoxfan said:
iayork said:
So the above chart is a little high then? I guess that means his PITCHf/x velo was mostly in the 86-88 range as the NESN readings suggested.
Regardless, the point is he's still pretty close to what he has been doing the last year and a half. Obviously the much more preferable outcome today would have been a significant velocity improvement, either due to a mechanical change or getting over some nagging injury. Unfortunately, we didn't see it.
Brooks chart is probably more accurate than PITCHf/x in that it's closer to what a scout with a radar gun would read the speed at. But I don't think NESN uses a radar gun; they get the speed off PITCHf/x directly, without doing the extra calculation step that Brooks does. If you're comparing speed between games, it doesn't matter which you use so long as you're consistent, but if you compare PITCHf/x directly to Brooks' calculated speed, that's not legit.radsoxfan said:
Here's a pure PITCHf/x comparison (sorry it took a while to download the full PITCHf/x database so I could get today's numbers):
Masterson was faster today than he's been for a few starts, but he's not even back to where he was at the beginning of the year, let alone to a couple years ago.
Yes, their numbers are all based on PITCHf/x, but they don't use the raw numbers, they add value by calculating back to make more realistic numbers. Here's what they explain (http://www.brooksbaseball.net/about.php):Al Zarilla said:
Lots of people don't realize this and have made embarrassing mistakes by comparing Brooks' numbers to raw PITCHf/x numbers.