Bullpen 2017

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Because he gets on base more often?

Seriously, I meant right now, while JBJ is scuffling, hitting .180 and Margot is leading off for SD. And by "most people" I didn't mean Red Sox management, but instead the gloom-and-doomers here who think all is lost because the team is only a game over .500 in early May. Still, even in that context, it's probably not "most people." I'll try to write with more exactitude. Mea culpa.

FWIW, as much as I love him, I'd trade JBJ straight up for Margot tomorrow if only because of age/upside/money/control. I'm not a JBJ basher, just think he's maddeningly streaky.
Is there a reason you simplified down Margot's offensive contribution as "leading off" there, instead of specifying that less then stellar batting line (.258/.306/.403) that is still being reasonably fluffed up by his fluky fast start out the gate (he's slugging .337 the last 28 days)?

This team is already fairly RHH heavy. I'm not sure trading Bradley in the name of opening up a spot for Margot's bat this winter, following Ortiz's retirement no less, would of went over all that well for DD either.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,725
Michigan
Is there a reason you simplified down Margot's offensive contribution as "leading off" there, instead of specifying that less then stellar batting line (.258/.306/.403) that is still being reasonably fluffed up by his fluky fast start out the gate (he's slugging .337 the last 28 days)?
Absolutely. "Leading off" sounds way better than "fluky fast start" and .258 BA. But that sounds better than "freaky slow start" and .175 BA.

I wasn't pitching a trade. I don't think SD would do it anyway. And I think JBJ will come around. I'm a JBJ fan.


[/quote]This team is already fairly RHH heavy. [/quote]

Yes, but my original comment was in the context of last year's Margot(plus three)-for-Kimbrel trade. Had the Sox traded JBJ instead back then for whatever other closer, they'd presumably addressed the L/R balance some other way.


I'm not sure trading Bradley in the name of opening up a spot for Margot's bat this winter, following Ortiz's retirement no less, would of went over all that well for DD either.
Since we're nitpicking, no one said anything about trading JBJ for Margot last winter. I was musing with hindsight about the Kimbrel trade two years ago and made an offhand comment about how given JBJs miserable start, a lot of people might wish We had Margot in the 9 spot instead.
 

charlieoscar

Member
Sep 28, 2014
1,339
In my opinion, Bradley is the most replaceable of the three B's and if Margot was still Boston's property they should think about trading Bradley.

I also presented some stats that to me show overall that Red Sox outfielders are rated higher by many on this board than they should be, particularly in regards to throwing.

Is that easy enough for you people to understand?
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
Could you be more of a condescending dick?

The first bit you said is reasonable though it has been pointed out it makes the team very right handed. As for the stats it was pointed out that they seem rather narrow and of somewhat limited value.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,725
Michigan
One funny thing about the JBJ/Margot discussion/digression is that it appears that JBJ is about to lose his full-time job to Young.

Another is that the thread is about the Sox bullpen.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,807
Melbourne, Australia
RE: the bullpen, seems like Tyler Thornburg is progressing toward his rehab assignment (what does Drellich mean by "lengthy rehab assignment" anyway?), but I can't recall if there has been any news since 11th April on Carson Smith?
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,725
Michigan
RE: the bullpen, seems like Tyler Thornburg is progressing toward his rehab assignment (what does Drellich mean by "lengthy rehab assignment" anyway?), but I can't recall if there has been any news since 11th April on Carson Smith?
Does Cason Smith really exist? Or is this like Waiting for Godot?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,680
Maine
RE: the bullpen, seems like Tyler Thornburg is progressing toward his rehab assignment (what does Drellich mean by "lengthy rehab assignment" anyway?), but I can't recall if there has been any news since 11th April on Carson Smith?
Google is your friend. From Monday's Herald: "Both Tyler Thornburg and Carson Smith have extended their rehab throwing programs to 150 feet. Smith is scheduled to get on a mound tomorrow, and Thornburg could throw a bullpen soon after."

Evan Drellich confirms that Smith did indeed get on a mound on Tuesday.

Evan Drellich @EvanDrellich
Carson Smith threw off the mound today and Tyler Thornburg is out to 150 feet.
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,870
ct
I must have missed it but why is Robbie Ross with the Pawsox? Is he injured? I totally missed it when he was sent down. Was he the only pitcher with options? Sorry for not paying attention but I thought he was one of our top relievers coming into the season.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,766
I must have missed it but why is Robbie Ross with the Pawsox? Is he injured? I totally missed it when he was sent down. Was he the only pitcher with options? Sorry for not paying attention but I thought he was one of our top relievers coming into the season.
He was, until then he absolutely sucked in ST and didn't inspire much confidence right away in Boston. I think the bottom line is Scott's been better, Abad has no options and they don't want a third lefty in the pen.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Price really can't back quickly enough. The pen is getting worked pretty hard even with Porcello and Sale getting their innings in. With Kendrick not likely to have many starts more than 5 innings, it is a bit of a strain on two key guys - Hembree and Kelly. Farrell gets killed here for trying to steal outs when starters appear toast, but I think he's trying to save the pen for that reason.

Roughly 20% in, Hembree is on pace for 80 innings (64 last year) and 70 appearances. Kelly on pace for 85 and 75 appearances. Kimbrel is on pace for 70 innings, but that's more a good sign than bad, since he's closing games 90% of the time but he could wear down eventually. Kelly is also injury prone, so there is that too.

It's going to get worse with Kendrick in the rotation, so I hope they start skipping him with 3 Monday off days in a row where he can work in long relief.

I'd also like to see something like an order of Sale, Pomeranz, Rodriguez, Porcello, and Kendrick/#5 guy, so there isn't the risk of 2 bullpen days in a row with Pomeranz/Kendrick. Tonight is going to be a major struggle, and it's not hard to see an early exit or one where he takes one for the team and gives up 7+.
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,395
Joe Kelly. 100 mph fastball, nasty slider. 18.0 ip, 8 k, 4.0 k/9
Craig Kimbrel. 99 mph fastball, nasty curve. 15.2 ip, 31 k, 17.8 k/9

Kelly makes me think of Kyle Farnsworth. Another guy who had a nice breaking ball and a huge fastball, but just wasn't nearly as good as you'd think he should have been.

And yet Farnsworth was WAY better at striking out batters than Kelly is.

Kelly career: 6.7 k/9
Farnsworth career: 8.8 k/9

How does a guy with 100 mph heat and a pretty nasty slider only strike out 6.7 guys per nine innings?
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,085
Joe Kelly. 100 mph fastball, nasty slider. 18.0 ip, 8 k, 4.0 k/9
Craig Kimbrel. 99 mph fastball, nasty curve. 15.2 ip, 31 k, 17.8 k/9

Kelly makes me think of Kyle Farnsworth. Another guy who had a nice breaking ball and a huge fastball, but just wasn't nearly as good as you'd think he should have been.

And yet Farnsworth was WAY better at striking out batters than Kelly is.

Kelly career: 6.7 k/9
Farnsworth career: 8.8 k/9

How does a guy with 100 mph heat and a pretty nasty slider only strike out 6.7 guys per nine innings?
He has the strangest fastball I've ever seen. He is basically the master class of "velocity doesn't tell all"

I would love to compare the contact rates of Kelly's high heat compared to Koji's salad. Something about Kelly's delivery/movement make it a pitch you can make contact with. Its truly unreal. They just "see" it. Where as Kimbrel has an invisible fastball that is in the mit before you pick it up.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
Kelly has been effective. 2.00 ERA.... smoke and mirrors or weak contact or whatever... it's working and he was dominating at the end of last season also.
I'll take it and keep my fingers crossed
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
I think it is smoke and mirrors but everyone else sucks too(except Kimbrel obviously) so my guess is JoKe our next 8th inning guy.

Edit: Though I love seeing Farrell be willing to use Kimbrel in some non-traditional situations instead of just using a preset formula.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,251
He has the strangest fastball I've ever seen. He is basically the master class of "velocity doesn't tell all"

I would love to compare the contact rates of Kelly's high heat compared to Koji's salad. Something about Kelly's delivery/movement make it a pitch you can make contact with. Its truly unreal. They just "see" it. Where as Kimbrel has an invisible fastball that is in the mit before you pick it up.
It may be that you didn't have to put "see" in quotes. I've heard analysts say for a long time that some pitchers hide the ball better than others. A 100 mph fastball that you can pick up from the moment the pitcher winds up is easer to hit than 90 that you dont see until the pitcher is already striding. (something like that). I dont know enough about mechanics or hitting to say if that's Kelly's problem.)
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,260
Mystery man
Farrell acknowledged that the status of righthanded reliever Tyler Thornburg is “a little bit of a puzzle for all involved here, including Tyler.”

Thornburg has not pitched off a mound since March 24. He was shut down for what was said to be a shoulder impingement. Now it’s a matter of gaining strength in the shoulder via endless sessions of long toss.

Farrell said the inflammation is gone and Thornburg’s MRIs are clear. But he has not been able to throw with the needed intensity.

If Thornburg does return this season, it will not be any time soon.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,073
Hingham, MA
A few fun Kimbrel notes:
Righties are 0 for 28 against him with 2 BB and 16 K. That is a .067 OPS.
He has 20 Ks in his last 9 IP
22 Ks in his last 9 2/3 IP
24 Ks in his last 10 2/3 IP
On 0 days rest, he has faced 9 batters: 0-9, 8 Ks
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Joe Kelly. 100 mph fastball, nasty slider. 18.0 ip, 8 k, 4.0 k/9
Craig Kimbrel. 99 mph fastball, nasty curve. 15.2 ip, 31 k, 17.8 k/9

Kelly makes me think of Kyle Farnsworth. Another guy who had a nice breaking ball and a huge fastball, but just wasn't nearly as good as you'd think he should have been.

And yet Farnsworth was WAY better at striking out batters than Kelly is.

Kelly career: 6.7 k/9
Farnsworth career: 8.8 k/9

How does a guy with 100 mph heat and a pretty nasty slider only strike out 6.7 guys per nine innings?

Some if it is sample size. Over the last 8ip, he has 7 of his 8 strikeouts. 6 walks too.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Kelly has been effective. 2.00 ERA.... smoke and mirrors or weak contact or whatever... it's working and he was dominating at the end of last season also.
I'll take it and keep my fingers crossed
Smoke and mirrors seems like the smart play.

1) 4.98 SIERA, 2.00 ERA looks pretty unsustainable.

2) .349 xBABIP allowed, .218 BABIP allowed looks even more unsustainable.

His batted ball/discipline/contact allowed numbers resemble Xander's more than anybody's, except that

(1) Xander is getting Soft contact almost as often as Hard contact (both a little over 25%). Kelly is allowing Soft contact less than 10% of the time, and Hard contact more than 35% of the time.
(2) Kelly's batters are walking almost twice as often as Xander.

So, the league is hitting against Kelly much like 2017 Xander Bogaerts, except hitting the ball much harder and walking twice as much. And the result is a .218 BABIP and a .190/.292/.238 slash line allowed. To say this makes no sense is an insult to things that make no sense.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Joe Kelly's last 9 games: 23.7% K rate vs 38 batters face. In his first 6 games and the same 38 batters faced his K rate was 2.6%.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
The man is broken for serious. Very disappointing.
Mauricio Dublin is hitting 294 with a 351 OBP in AAA. Shaw is productive in the big leagues at the position the Red Sox are most desperate to improve.

This trade didn't make any sense when Thornburg was supposed to be the primary set up man. Now it's just plain maddening.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mauricio Dublin is hitting 294 with a 351 OBP in AAA. Shaw is productive in the big leagues at the position the Red Sox are most desperate to improve.

This trade didn't make any sense when Thornburg was supposed to be the primary set up man. Now it's just plain maddening.
Just to inject some accuracy, Dubon's .704 OPS is in AA.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
He does have 18 sb in 22 attempts. The power he showed last year is most likely a fluke but he can get on base and steal a bag. Of course the trade actually made sense but it would be nice to have Dubon in the system.
Since when does SoSH think trading position players with 5 years and 6 years of control plus multiple option years remaining for a single middle reliever with 3 years of control is a good idea? If the Yankees had made that trade it would have been subjected to universal ridicule here. But, because we want things to work out for "our" team, we all constructed narratives that rationalized something that none of us would have recommended ex ante. Thornburg was a known injury risk with one and half good years behind him. Giving up both Shaw and Dubon was an overpay even. Wrote his arm has seemingly imploded. The curiosity in Dombrowskis reasoning on this trade is compounded by the fact that the trade was from a position of acute weakness in the organization for 2017 and yet they didn't backfill even Shaw's low production/solid defense with a free agent.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Since when does SoSH think trading position players with 5 years and 6 years of control plus multiple option years remaining for a single middle reliever with 3 years of control is a good idea? If the Yankees had made that trade it would have been subjected to universal ridicule here. But, because we want things to work out for "our" team, we all constructed narratives that rationalized something that none of us would have recommended ex ante. Thornburg was a known injury risk with one and half good years behind him. Giving up both Shaw and Dubon was an overpay even. Wrote his arm has seemingly imploded. The curiosity in Dombrowskis reasoning on this trade is compounded by the fact that the trade was from a position of acute weakness in the organization for 2017 and yet they didn't backfill even Shaw's low production/solid defense with a free agent.
They took a gamble and traded mediocre talent for a potentially elite one and it hasn't worked out. Plus, they still have Devers in the system and Dalbec. Sandoval, Holt, Marco, Rutledge... How many options do they need? How many of the other potential options panned out? Plouffe has been awful this year.
 

jerry casale

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
91
The man is broken for serious. Very disappointing.
He getting close to Bailey, Melancon, Jenks, Gagne status. It just seems the Sox are destined to fail when trading for a reliever. Too bad they have so much trouble developing pitching.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Yeah because that Kimbrel trade was such a failure...
That's one out of 5. Though Jenks was a stupid FA signing, not a trade. Hanrahan was immediately injured when they got him too, although we forgive that one because Holt has exceeded expectations by so much.

They trade prospect after prospect to fill the bullpen, often with players that have a history of injury (Bailey, Hanrahan) or a short track record of success (Melancon, Thornburg) then let a couple million a year come between them and Andrew Miller two FA signing periods ago. The "strategy" baffles me.
 

luckysox

Indiana Jones
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2009
8,078
S.E. Pennsylvania
He getting close to Bailey, Melancon, Jenks, Gagne status. It just seems the Sox are destined to fail when trading for a reliever. Too bad they have so much trouble developing pitching.
I'm not disappointed in the trade, per se; I mean, you gotta do what you gotta do. DD needed a strong relief corp if he was choosing pitching and defense over replacing Papi. I'm just disappointed that we don't get to see what that would have looked like. No Thornburg and no Smith have turned the bullpen into a hot mess of relying on Barnes and Hembree (especially, but really, everyone) to be more than they are. Who would have thought resigning Koji would have been a better injury bet than trading for Thornburg?

Kimbrel, 2016 Thornnburg, Joe Kelly (who has been unspectacular but quite effective) and the mixing and matching of Hembree, Barnes, Ross, and Scott/Abad against guys they might have better chances of getting out would be pretty damn good. That doesn't even account for Smith, or for any of those fancy 6 starters we had back in February. Instead, we're moving Barnes and Hembree into high leverage roles in the 7th and 8th innings, watching Abad, Scott and Ben freaking Taylor come in to clean up early messes AND match up in the late innings if need be, and hoping Kimbrel can go 4-6 outs every 3rd day, and 3 outs when he can't go 6.

I get that the trade looks terrible right now - but Shaw turned into a pumpkin late last season (like, he was REALLY bad in the 2nd half -.194/.259/.360) and was pissy about losing playing time when he did. If you were going to lose a guy on the 25 man and actually get something decent back, it was him. He was inconsistent and seemed redundant with Pablo coming back. The gamble, obviously, has not paid off. And it does not look like it will this season, no matter if Shaw sucks so badly in the 2nd half that the Brewers release him, because they can't even figure out what is wrong with Thornburg, let alone get him through it.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,395
They trade prospect after prospect to fill the bullpen, often with players that have a history of injury (Bailey, Hanrahan) or a short track record of success (Melancon, Thornburg) then let a couple million a year come between them and Andrew Miller two FA signing periods ago. The "strategy" baffles me.
I've always thought the best way to develop a major league bullpen is to bring up guys from your minor leagues who you either groom to be premier relievers or guys who just couldn't quite make it as starters (92 mph fastball, not enough quality pitches to get through 6 innings), but who, in a relief role, could ramp up to 94-95 with one other excellent secondary pitch (change, slider, etc.), who only needed to be able to get through 1-2 innings. Develop those guys in-house. Just because they can't make it as starters doesn't mean they couldn't be quality bullpen guys.

Joe Kelly (not a Sox prospect, of course) is a good example of this (though his FB velocity is largely the same).

Career numbers
- As starter: 4.13 era, 1.44 whip, 6.4 k/9, .741 ops
- As reliever: 2.52 era, 1.24 whip, 8.1 k/9, .662 ops

I know that it's obviously more valuable to get 200 innings of good pitching than 60 innings of really good pitching, but it's also better to get 60 innings of good pitching than to have a guy as a complete washout as a pitcher because all you do is try him as a starter.

Other teams seem to be able to do this pretty well. Why not the Red Sox?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
The sox do it as well. Tazawa, Barnes, Workman, Noe Ramirez, Pat Light, Jamie Callahan, Ty Buttrey, etc. They just haven't had great results developing pitching in general, starters or relievers.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
They do at least have some bullpen arms they are developing in the minors. Jamie Callahan was lights out in AA (12 innings and 20 k's with no walks) and was just bumped up.

Ty Buttrey has 25k's and 10 hits allowed in 16 innings in AA (though 24 now). Chandler Shephard is still interesting (19 k's in 12 innings), though he has given up 9 ER.

I realize bullpen arms are failed starters and not really prospects, but now that free agents are getting more expensive it's a smart move.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
They have Jake Cosart too who has been a huge disappointment so far this year. 9.1ip, 5 hits, 11k/21bb.
 

trekfan55

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 29, 2004
11,588
Panama
He getting close to Bailey, Melancon, Jenks, Gagne status. It just seems the Sox are destined to fail when trading for a reliever. Too bad they have so much trouble developing pitching.
While I totally agree that Bailey was a failed trade (and the Sox eneded up missing Reddick a lot that year) and Jenks was a dumb signing I disagree on the other two.

Melancon was the Sox running out of patience too soon. He was killing it in AAA, became a quality closer in Pittsburgh, went to Washington and replaced Papelbon, and is now a big money closer in SF (another place that seems to turn good relievers into junk lately). Now trading him returned Holt, who as was said above exceeded all expectations so at least there is that but I still think that the Sox could have had a very good to excellent setup man and future closer with Melancon.

Gagne turned possibly the worst performance vs expectations of any incoming Sox player. But he did not cost the team much (maybe David Murphy could have played or brought something else) and at the end the Sox did win the WS (I know it was probably despite his efforts but still they did).
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,101
While I totally agree that Bailey was a failed trade (and the Sox eneded up missing Reddick a lot that year) and Jenks was a dumb signing I disagree on the other two.

Melancon was the Sox running out of patience too soon. He was killing it in AAA, became a quality closer in Pittsburgh, went to Washington and replaced Papelbon, and is now a big money closer in SF (another place that seems to turn good relievers into junk lately). Now trading him returned Holt, who as was said above exceeded all expectations so at least there is that but I still think that the Sox could have had a very good to excellent setup man and future closer with Melancon.

Gagne turned possibly the worst performance vs expectations of any incoming Sox player. But he did not cost the team much (maybe David Murphy could have played or brought something else) and at the end the Sox did win the WS (I know it was probably despite his efforts but still they did).
Agree completely with you on Gagne. When the Gagne trade happened, Schilling was on the DL with a sore shoulder. That left the Sox with a rotation of Beckett, Dice-K, Wake, Julian Tavarez, and Jon Lester; the same Lester that had all of 2 meh starts up to that point of the season. Finding starting pitching to be prohibitively expensive, Theo decided to shore up the pen in an attempt to manage the workload of Hideki Okajima, who was basically an unknown quanitity going into that season. Noone can realistically blame the Sox for rolling the dice on a guy that had a 213 ERA+ at the time of the trade. Gagne also had a BABIP of 0.515 in August and 0.333 in September.

Also, I'm not sure why Dombrowski should be blamed for Theo's an Cherington's less successful trades.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Learn what, that it's better to focus on how things "should be" rather then what it is and how best to *actually* go about doing it? Because that basically sums up about 90% of the complaining imo every time the subject comes up on how best to approach bullpen upgrades.

Giving up that Shaw/Dubon package (which got completely overvalued in the aftermath by people clinging to outdated anti-RP WAR values, and a fairly reach'y notion that the package in question actually held some kind of static value that could easily be cashed in elsewhere) in a legitimate attempt to upgrade an area of need on the 25 man roster really wasn't the problem here. I'd of personally been more pissed had DD stood pat and done nothing.

Now whether or not they did enough homework to identify that Thornburg return in itself as a potential dud, or got too carried away buying into some miraculous Pablo comeback possibility that they didn't recognize the complete and utter concession that was being made at 3B for 2017 by trading away the only even remotely decent bet we had for a full time starter coming out the gate.....is somewhat debatable atm/imo.