2023 Starting Rotation
- Thread starter Rovin Romine
- Start date
Pivetta splits 2023
Starter: 40.0 ip, 6.30 era, 1.55 whip, 9.5 k/9
Reliever: 24.0 ip, 2.63 era, 0.92 whip, 11.6 k/9
Starter: 40.0 ip, 6.30 era, 1.55 whip, 9.5 k/9
Reliever: 24.0 ip, 2.63 era, 0.92 whip, 11.6 k/9
If Murphy can go 3 and Pivetta 4... that'd be a fine starter/long relief combo to keep the Sox glued together until Sale and/or Houck return
On the whole, Houck and Whitlock haven’t been good starters this year either. As the rotation gets thinner and thinner I don’t know why we shouldn’t give Pivetta another shot.
Agreed on Pivetta. Having him go four on the day Whitlock got injured would make sense for him to fill in at least the next go-round
They have only 3 actual starters right now. Opening with a Bernardino or something & then going to Pivetta for the bulk role makes sense.
& in the other opening you go Ort or something followed by Walter.
That way you can keep Murphy in the bullpen where he has pitched pretty well.
& in the other opening you go Ort or something followed by Walter.
That way you can keep Murphy in the bullpen where he has pitched pretty well.
I'm tossing my towel in for Whitlock as a starter. I still think it was the right decision to push it there to see how he'd respond. A good no. 3 stater is always going to be more valuable and harder to find than a 2-inning, never back-to-back day great reliever. I mean... Nick Pivetta might end up being that guy. They should be easier to find than a good mid rotation starter. But I think he needs to go back to the pen after he returns.
I'm not there yet with Houck who seemed to be finding ways to get past the 5th inning problems and was starting to change how he pitches later in the game.
Not sure what you regard as good. Houck has 7 quality starts in 13 appearances while working to establish himself as a starter. He's had one bad start (6 runs in 6IP) and three starts of 4 ER allowed; all the rest were high quality. His FIP is almost a run below his ERA. He's been very good IMO. Whitlock has been a bit more feast or famine but has had five excellent starts, while he too tries to build himself up into a starter. Are you just looking at ERA? I'd say it's misleading.
May as well do it here.
Day 1 - June 27 - Whitlock starts.
2 - June 28 - Ort opens (2 innings), Pivetta (3), Murphy (2)
3 - June 29 - Bello (7)
4 - June 30 - Paxton (7.2)
5 - July 1 - Crawford (5.2)
6 - July 2 - Whitlock (injury start), Pivetta (4) 67 pitches.
7 - July 3 - off day - normally Ort opener
8 - July 4 v. TEX - Bello regular rest or Ort opener
9 - July 5 v. TEX - Paxton regular or Bello.
10 - July 6 v. TEX - Crawford regular or Paxton
11 - July 7 v. OAK - TBD for Whitlock (Pivetta?) or Crawford
12 - July 8 v. OAK - Ort Opener or TBD
13 - July 9 v. OAK - Bello regular or Ort opener
14-18 ASB July 10 - 14.
I kind of think you have to keep everyone on the regular rest rotation, esp. with Texas coming to town. I don't see how or why you'd want to try to kludge together a committee start on July 4 after using one of your long guys on July 2.
I think Pivetta gets the start on July 7, maybe behind a 1 inning opener or something. Cora would have to call someone up for July 8, or keep a longman very fresh in the games leading up to that one. Or you could unofficially punt it. But it is Oakland.
The wildcard factor is the "scheduled off day." (And Paxton's paternity leave.)
Day 1 - June 27 - Whitlock starts.
2 - June 28 - Ort opens (2 innings), Pivetta (3), Murphy (2)
3 - June 29 - Bello (7)
4 - June 30 - Paxton (7.2)
5 - July 1 - Crawford (5.2)
6 - July 2 - Whitlock (injury start), Pivetta (4) 67 pitches.
7 - July 3 - off day - normally Ort opener
8 - July 4 v. TEX - Bello regular rest or Ort opener
9 - July 5 v. TEX - Paxton regular or Bello.
10 - July 6 v. TEX - Crawford regular or Paxton
11 - July 7 v. OAK - TBD for Whitlock (Pivetta?) or Crawford
12 - July 8 v. OAK - Ort Opener or TBD
13 - July 9 v. OAK - Bello regular or Ort opener
14-18 ASB July 10 - 14.
I kind of think you have to keep everyone on the regular rest rotation, esp. with Texas coming to town. I don't see how or why you'd want to try to kludge together a committee start on July 4 after using one of your long guys on July 2.
I think Pivetta gets the start on July 7, maybe behind a 1 inning opener or something. Cora would have to call someone up for July 8, or keep a longman very fresh in the games leading up to that one. Or you could unofficially punt it. But it is Oakland.
The wildcard factor is the "scheduled off day." (And Paxton's paternity leave.)
Last edited:
Pivetta's had a shot since 2020 and he's done nothing with it while showing no real consistent improvement. It's one thing if this team doesn't have other options because of injury, but I don't think there's anything more to discover about him. He is what he is.
I think the Whitlock and Paxton situation forces Bello to start tomorrow/Sunday. There just aren't enough starters available otherwise.
July 4: Bello
July 5: Walter bulk role (Ort/Murphy opener) -- called up to replace Whitlock
July 6: Crawford
July 7: Pivetta bulk role (? opener)
July 8: Paxton (returning from paternity leave)
July 9: Bello
Can probably put Bello on a quick hook Sunday since everyone's got four days off afterward.
As a starter, Pivetta sure seemed to face a lot of lineups stacked with hitters, particularly lefties, designed to crush him. He does less so as a reliever, with Cora’s deployment.
Pivetta as SP, 2023: 46% LHB
Pivetta as RP, 2023: 38% LHB
MLB league average: 40.7% LHB
Your plan makes sense to me.
Of the 6 starts you can get:
1 or 2 Bello starts (choose 2!)
1 Paxton
1 Crawford
1 Bulk Pivetta
1 Callup for Paxton (Walter? Sherrif?)
1 Callup for Whitlock, depending on medical results and time out?
Murphy has been used in 2 inning increments, and he's due as of July 2 to go again in that capacity.
Walter pitched 2 innings in AAA on June 30, so a regular time through would be July 5.
If Cora chooses 1 Bello start. . .I could sort of see it if there's creative roster shuffling (Kluber released or to the 60 day IL?) and the team is really going for 3 wins against Oakland.
They should be able to go 4-2 in this stretch. If they split or worse. . .
I look at quality starts and ERA+.
If one uses the 6 IP/3 ER definition of QS, Houck has 3 this season. Personally, given the state of starting, I also include 5 IP/ 2 ER, and that gives 1 additional QS. He’s also had 5 rather poor starts. So there’s no way I’d say he’s been “very good”.
I know a lot of folks here go all-in on FIP and “luck”, but I don’t. I care about actual outcomes *when assessing performance*. If one wants to say those things might suggest a better future, then fine. But in terms of actual outcomes in the real world, he hasn’t been all that good.
Whitlock hasn’t been any better: 4 QS using my criteria, 3 absolute dogs.
I really want these guys to be pillars of the rotation for the next several years. But I don’t get how many people have already pencilled them into those roles. They’ve both been below average in total this season. And Whitlock can stay healthy at all.
My whole point is that Pivetta warrants a spot in the rotation again.
The other option is to open with a crummy reliever.
Look, if people want to pitch a stiff like Orr for 1 inning then have Pivetta throw 6 and not call him a starter, have at it.
Agreed.
Houck's statcast xERA is even lower at 3.84. His xFIP is also around that number at 3.80. He's getting plenty of shitty contact....the defense behind him hasn't helped either. Houck has been pretty damned solid this year but has been unlucky with a putrid 64.5% LOB rate. His HR/FB has also been unusually high for him and nothing like his previous years.
I'd definitely like to keep running Houck out there once he's healthy. As others had mentioned, he recently started to go deeper into games and looked like he was figuring it out.
Whitlock seems more of a failure and it may be time to send him back to the bullpen where he excelled.
Understood, although Pivetta looked pretty lost as a starter so it's hard to ignore the risk there. But at this point I'm not sure there is much of a choice, apart from using an opener before what's otherwise a Pivetta day. And hey, that gets us two-fifths of the way to an all-British Columbia rotation, which is fine with me.
This is pretty incoherent if you stop to think about it. So you think they are predictive but they don't say anything about his past luck? What kind of sense does that make? You're not interested in FIP or batting luck, like, at all? Why not?
Besides, it seems a little odd, if you're focused on "actual outcomes" or whatever, to ignore seven years of Pivetta crapping all over himself. You can look back literally two relief appearances to Pivetta's last stinker, when he gave up two runs in only 3 1/3 innings. Is that a quality performance by your criteria? Or five relief appearances ago, when he gave up 3 BBs in 2/3 of inning to lose the game (one of which I remember being an ump-job, but still). Is that quality pitching deserving of a slot in the rotation?
I and others happen to be encouraged by Whitlock and Houck's peripherals and want to see if they can pitch their way into them the rest of the season. They've only had half a season this year and a little more than that counting the last two years. Given that starting pitchers are much more valuable and that this team needs starting pitchers, it seems like it behooves this team to give them a shot given the fact that their peripherals are encouraging. I don't think you really disagree... We all want them to be pillars. Pillars are great.
It's all moot, anyways. Pivetta is going to get a start sooner or later, there just aren't any other pitchers. And he'll probably do what he always does. Walk 4 guys, give up a couple of bombs, and look confused.
I don’t believe anyone is saying that Pivetta should start over Houck and Whitlock, both of whom are injured and not options, but that he should start over an “opener”. I guess that’s not cool in modern baseball, and if he comes on in the second or third and pitches 4-5 innings, so be it. But, they could and should just start him, not because he’s great (although he was a piece of what was long heralded as Blooms greatest heist) but because he’s, like, the only guy left.
I'm not sure how you go from these metrics to landing at Pivetta back to the rotation though. He's got 1/8 QS (with a 2nd by your 5 inning allowance) and I don't know how to get an ERA+ from just his starter split, but with an .885 OPS against it can't possibly be good.
It’s less a matter of aesthetics than minimizing your pitchers’ vulnerabilities to opposing lineups.
Bingo. If people want to twist themselves into knots to say that Houck has been a very good starter, then more power to them. I think that’s preposterous, but whatever.
But my point was that we have almost no healthy starters left, so giving Pivetta another shot is not the craziest idea.
I don’t know why that’s outlandish, but starting some crizappy reliever so Pivetta can come in the in the 2nd innings is smart.
I was simply saying that Those two are hurt, and weren’t exactly tearing it up when they were healthy. Meanwhile Pivetta stunk, but has been pitching much better out of the pen. So maybe start the former starter who seems to be pitching well lately? Since the other guys can’t pitch?
Man, my writing must be awful if that point didn’t come through.
... I'm sorry, am I being thick? If they aren't predictive of future results, then why would you look at them? Am I talking to David Hume or something? There's no necessary connexion!?
Obviously, there's literally no one else to take the spot besides Murphy and Brandon Walter. So yeah, Pivetta warrants another turn. I think you'll find most people in the thread were agreeing with you (But by my lights, it doesn't really matter if Ort comes in and pitches the first two innings or Pivetta does. Ort's got a career ERA of 6, Pivetta of 5. It's all very bad gravy.)
What people were critiquing were the methods you used to make your argument. If you want to argue from a perspective where it's impossible to evaluate someone's performance besides in terms of how many earned runs they gave up, then we really don't have very much to go on.
The other obvious point in all of this is that the Sox put in Pivetta for 62 and 67 pitches his last two outings, which is a clear indication that they're ramping him up for longer outings. And if using an opener helps, all the better.
Also, I like what I've seen from Murphy, for the most part, so I hope the Sox continue to hand him the ball on a regular basis.
Also, I like what I've seen from Murphy, for the most part, so I hope the Sox continue to hand him the ball on a regular basis.
I think you can get away with Pivetta (after an opener) for most of this month, yes, cause you can line him up to only face OAK/NYM. But unless we're trying to tank, I don't want it to be a regular thing.
The poster I was talking to said Houck was “very good”. I disagreed. His peripherals may suggest he may be very good in the future, but his actual results in the real world of baseball have not been very good in 2023. That’s it.
Look, I get some folks are 100% in on supposedly predictive metrics. That’s great. I’m not. I think that’s fine too. Apparently you disagree.
Opening Ort for Pivetta is dumb & pointless. Opening a lefty for Pivetta is smart & sensible.
Re: Houck - it seems to be an argument over whether we're looking at results or how well he has pitched.
His results have been mediocre, so he has not helped the team that much. But everything indicates that he has pitched pretty well & could pitch even better in the future. The 2 concepts can co-exist.
Re: Houck - it seems to be an argument over whether we're looking at results or how well he has pitched.
His results have been mediocre, so he has not helped the team that much. But everything indicates that he has pitched pretty well & could pitch even better in the future. The 2 concepts can co-exist.
We're starting to get into 2020 or 2022 territory here.
Kluber
Sale
Paxton
Houck
Bello
Whitlock
Crawford
Pivetta
Derrmody
Walter?
Sale
Paxton
Bello
Crawford
Pivetta
Walter?
"All in" is your own formulation. I'll just say there's a distinction between going all-in and using a variety of tools to try to get a better sense of if a pitcher might be having a bad run of luck. I don't think that xFIP or FIP is a pitchers "real" ERA. I just think it's useful to compare and can give us a better sense of what's real and what's mirage. I'll leave it at that.
I don't disagree that the actual results of the majority of his starts haven't been good. That said:
Code:
Split G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR SB CS BB SO SO/W BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+
Pitch 1-25 13 85 76 8 15 2 0 1 7 21 3.00 .197 .271 .263 .534 20 1 1 0 1 0 1 .255 56 50
Pitch 26-50 13 81 70 5 14 1 0 2 9 21 2.33 .200 .296 .300 .596 21 1 1 0 1 0 0 .250 74 66
Pitch 51-75 13 83 76 15 27 6 0 3 4 13 3.25 .355 .378 .553 .931 42 3 0 1 2 0 0 .387 166 148
Pitch 76-100 9 34 31 7 6 1 0 3 3 9 3.00 .194 .265 .516 .781 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 .158 120 104Generated 7/3/2023.
Those CS numbers are HRs, BTW.
But in any event, there's no mystery to be sussed out in his "peripherals" or "predictive metrics." The issue is simple and obvious; if he can fix his hitability issues from Pitch 51 onwards, he's a top-tier starter.
The root cause (and so the fix) might be mysterious, I'll grant you. But it's not like there's a very good pitcher in there waiting to be developed. He's already a very good pitcher, who for some odd reason, has a shelf life of 50 pitches.
The shoes have dropped: Garrett Whitlock to IL and James Paxton to paternity list. Brandon Walter and Tayler Scott recalled.
Tayler Scott is a 31 yr. old some-cups-of-coffee guy purchased from LAD by the Sox after he was DFA'd.
He's had some AAA and Japan league success, but his limited ML exposure tends to be a couple of shutout innings, or getting tattooed.
That leaves a returning Paxton v. OAK, and two ? starter games.
July 4: Bernardino Opener
July 5: Bello? (6 days rest)
July 6: Crawford?
July 7: Pivetta? (5 days rest, +? opener) Walter?
July 8: Paxton? (returning from paternity leave)
July 9: ? A bullpen game?
This is beginning to have the smell of a mini-punt about it, with the usual pie-in-the-sky, kick-the-can-down-the-road rationalization of "Oh well, we might get really hot after the ASB."
Tayler Scott is a 31 yr. old some-cups-of-coffee guy purchased from LAD by the Sox after he was DFA'd.
He's had some AAA and Japan league success, but his limited ML exposure tends to be a couple of shutout innings, or getting tattooed.
Well, we're committing to only one Bello start, which seems. . .not optimal. Still, if it's only one, at least it will be against TX and he'll be better rested. I'm curious if they bump Crawford as well - and he'll have the same better rest against Texas.
That leaves a returning Paxton v. OAK, and two ? starter games.
July 4: Bernardino Opener
July 5: Bello? (6 days rest)
July 6: Crawford?
July 7: Pivetta? (5 days rest, +? opener) Walter?
July 8: Paxton? (returning from paternity leave)
July 9: ? A bullpen game?
This is beginning to have the smell of a mini-punt about it, with the usual pie-in-the-sky, kick-the-can-down-the-road rationalization of "Oh well, we might get really hot after the ASB."
On Baseball-Reference, here's the Red Sox rotation right now:
Brayan Bello — 5-5, 3.09 ERA
Tanner Houck (15-day IL)
Chris Sale (60-day IL)
Corey Kluber (15-day IL)
Garrett Whitlock (15-day IL)
James Paxton (40-man)
(Paxton is on paternity leave and Crawford still has fewer starts than Kluber and Paxton for now.)
4+ starters in the original rotation all out at the same exact time-- sounds familiar, when have I heard that before?
The 2022 season will never end.
Brayan Bello — 5-5, 3.09 ERA
Tanner Houck (15-day IL)
Chris Sale (60-day IL)
Corey Kluber (15-day IL)
Garrett Whitlock (15-day IL)
James Paxton (40-man)
(Paxton is on paternity leave and Crawford still has fewer starts than Kluber and Paxton for now.)
4+ starters in the original rotation all out at the same exact time-- sounds familiar, when have I heard that before?
The 2022 season will never end.
Half of the opening day bullpen (Schreiber, Bleier, Brasier, and Kelly) are gone or on the IL too.
16 of the original 26 are active right now.
16 of the original 26 are active right now.
I know you're not saying it's the same team... Just adding that both last year and this year will hinge on the health of Chris Sale. Last year he was lost to a freak accident. This season, he's contributed much more but it appears he should be making a rehab start by the end of July. I do feel that the depth behind Sale, Eo and Wacha last year was much thinner than the depth behind Sale, Kluber and (I'll add Whitlock here as Paxton was nothing but a question mark to start the season). Depth and deep depth have been chewed up but that was the risks in the "maybe a team of young players and short term vets will stay healthy, not regress and steal into the playoffs" strategy.
Even when we get to the Next Great Red Sox team, pitchers, even young ones, will get injured and lose pieces of or whole seasons. Houck and Whitlock are both under 30 and should be in their prime, but both have missed big chunks of the past 1.5 seasons. It seems the Sox do a much better job of protecting their pitchers than years ago, but it's how the team's luck breaks.
If they brought in a shaman to deal with this situation I would be totally fine with it. Although they're all of German or English descent so I'm not sure which occult powers are even an option here.
Unleash the Bear Claw!
Signed from the indy league High Point Rockers, Kyle Barraclough has made 3 starts for the WooSox: 3 wins, 2.12 ERA, 5 or 6 innings in each start (17 innings total), only 5 hits total (but 8 BBs), 14 Ks (10! in his last start), and 1 HR.
He was a good RP for the Marlins for a few years, but then walks and HRs caught up with him. He's only started one game ever, in MiLB, until Chaim grabbed him.
He seems to be preparing for a "break glass" scenario.
Signed from the indy league High Point Rockers, Kyle Barraclough has made 3 starts for the WooSox: 3 wins, 2.12 ERA, 5 or 6 innings in each start (17 innings total), only 5 hits total (but 8 BBs), 14 Ks (10! in his last start), and 1 HR.
He was a good RP for the Marlins for a few years, but then walks and HRs caught up with him. He's only started one game ever, in MiLB, until Chaim grabbed him.
He seems to be preparing for a "break glass" scenario.
I hope they bring up Bear Claw this weekend. I was at his start on the 4th when he took a no-hitter into the 6th. He looked good-- not much velocity (around 91) but a lot of swings and misses on his slider. (I guess it was a slider? Maybe a curve? Was timed at around 77 mph consistently.) I could see why he probably wouldn't be able to get out major league hitters 2 or 3 times through the order but he could be decent for 2 or 3 innings if he is commanding his breaking ball. He went 6 IP, 1 hit, 2 walks, 2 runs, 10 Ks. 89 pitches, 56 strikes.
The only hit was a HR with 2 out in the 6th (hit very high but looked like about 370 feet to right center-- if so, it might have been catchable in Fenway.) The batter before the HR walked, after getting what looked like a generous ball called on a 2-2 count, then one that wasn't that close for ball 4. With a little more luck he could have gotten through the 6th without a run or even a hit.
He likely can't pitch again until Sunday, so they probably won't bring him up unless the staff is taxed and they need reinforcements by then. I was hoping they would have DFA'd Ort and brought up Bear Claw for Tuesday's game but it was not to be.
The only hit was a HR with 2 out in the 6th (hit very high but looked like about 370 feet to right center-- if so, it might have been catchable in Fenway.) The batter before the HR walked, after getting what looked like a generous ball called on a 2-2 count, then one that wasn't that close for ball 4. With a little more luck he could have gotten through the 6th without a run or even a hit.
He likely can't pitch again until Sunday, so they probably won't bring him up unless the staff is taxed and they need reinforcements by then. I was hoping they would have DFA'd Ort and brought up Bear Claw for Tuesday's game but it was not to be.