The Starting Rotation's Start

Status
Not open for further replies.

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
If we removed anyone's bad starts, they'd be a Hall of Famer. That's not how this works.

And last I checked, the Red Sox didn't play the Indians in the ALDS and Sale got knocked around pretty good in his start in that series. In fact, he has a career line of 5-1, 1.31 ERA, 0.708 WHIP, 12.2 K/9 against the Astros in 6 career regular season starts. Could have just been a bad day. Could have been he wasn't as sharp as he could have been because he'd racked up 200+ innings and 3400+ pitches and he was a bit worn down.

Going back to how deep Sale is going in games this year. His pitches per PA is currently 4.29. Last year, he was at 4.02. Year before 3.77. Year before that 3.88. Maybe, just maybe, he'd be pitching deeper into games even with Cora's directive to limit his pitch count if he was as efficient as he usually is. Not that I don't think that efficiency is coming when the weather heats up and Sale gets into a groove.
 

Sale4CY

New Member
Apr 6, 2018
101
If we removed anyone's bad starts, they'd be a Hall of Famer. That's not how this works.

And last I checked, the Red Sox didn't play the Indians in the ALDS and Sale got knocked around pretty good in his start in that series. In fact, he has a career line of 5-1, 1.31 ERA, 0.708 WHIP, 12.2 K/9 against the Astros in 6 career regular season starts. Could have just been a bad day. Could have been he wasn't as sharp as he could have been because he'd racked up 200+ innings and 3400+ pitches and he was a bit worn down.

Going back to how deep Sale is going in games this year. His pitches per PA is currently 4.29. Last year, he was at 4.02. Year before 3.77. Year before that 3.88. Maybe, just maybe, he'd be pitching deeper into games even with Cora's directive to limit his pitch count if he was as efficient as he usually is. Not that I don't think that efficiency is coming when the weather heats up and Sale gets into a groove.
I wasn’t suggesting we remove his bad starts but it is worth noting that Chris Sale has always struggled against that team no matter what time of year it was. They clearly have identified something that tips his pitches or whatever, but it’s a fact. The Indians probably cost him multiple Cy Young awards.
To your second point, if Sale really is reverting back to his 2016 strategy of pitching to contact (I hope not, it didn’t work very well) it could work against his pitch efficiency as its much easier for hitters to foul off a 92 mph fastball than it is a 96 mph fastball. Early on, I’ve noticed a lot more foul balls in his starts which is driving up that pitch count early.
 

uk_sox_fan

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,273
London, England
I wasn’t suggesting we remove his bad starts but it is worth noting that Chris Sale has always struggled against that team no matter what time of year it was. They clearly have identified something that tips his pitches or whatever, but it’s a fact. The Indians probably cost him multiple Cy Young awards.
To your second point, if Sale really is reverting back to his 2016 strategy of pitching to contact (I hope not, it didn’t work very well) it could work against his pitch efficiency as its much easier for hitters to foul off a 92 mph fastball than it is a 96 mph fastball. Early on, I’ve noticed a lot more foul balls in his starts which is driving up that pitch count early.
Sorry to destroy the narrative but this simply isn't true. Sale's last start with the ChiSox against Cle wasn't good but in his 6 previous starts against the Tribe dating back to Sep'14 he averaged 7IP 9.0 K/9 and a 2.35 ERA.
 

Martin and Woods

New Member
Dec 8, 2017
82
Sale last year:
- Apr-July: 21 g, 148.1 ip, 2.37 era, .541 ops, 0.88 whip, 12.8 k/9, 2 scoreless outings
- Aug-Sep: 11 g, 66.0 ip, 4.09 era, .733 ops, 1.19 whip, 13.2 k/9, 4 scoreless outings

From April through July, Sale was just incredibly consistently good. But from August through September, he was either great or pretty bad.

11 games
Great:
- at TB: 8.0 ip, 2 h, 0 r, 0 er, 1 bb, 13 k
- at NYY: 7.0 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 2 bb, 12 k
- at Tor: 7.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 11 k
- vs TB: 6.0 ip, 6 h, 0 r, 0 er, 1 bb, 8 k
- at Bal: 8.0 ip, 4 h, 0 r, 0 er, 0 bb, 13 k
TOT: 36.0 ip, 19 h, 1 r, 1 er, 4 bb, 57 k, 0.25 era, 0.64 whip, 14.3 k/9

Awful:
- vs Cle: 5.0 ip, 8 h, 7 r, 7 er, 1 bb, 5 k
- vs NYY: 7.0 ip, 7 h, 4 r, 4 er, 1 bb, 9 k
- at Cle: 3.0 ip, 7 h, 7 r, 6 er, 3 bb, 3 k
- at NYY: 4.1 ip, 7 h, 3 r, 3 er, 2 bb, 6 k
- at TB: 5.2 ip, 6 h, 4 r, 4 er, 3 bb, 9 k
- vs Tor: 5.0 ip, 8 h, 5 r, 5 er, 2 bb, 8 k
TOT: 30.0 ip, 43 h, 30 r, 29 er, 12 bb, 40 k, 8.70 era, 1.83 whip, 12.0 k/9
In the five games he was great, one was against a playoff team.
In the six games he was awful, four were against a playoff team.
So for the most part, the more stressful the innings/opponent at the end of a long year, the worse the numbers. Would seem to make sense. I'm all for the limited innings and possible mid-season DL stint, and at an early glance it appears they have the depth and bullpen to stick to the plan.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
To your second point, if Sale really is reverting back to his 2016 strategy of pitching to contact (I hope not, it didn’t work very well) it could work against his pitch efficiency as its much easier for hitters to foul off a 92 mph fastball than it is a 96 mph fastball. Early on, I’ve noticed a lot more foul balls in his starts which is driving up that pitch count early.
That wasn't my point at all. He's been less efficient in his four starts this year than he was in any of the previous three seasons (more actually, his ratio is higher than any season of his career). While it's still an incredibly small sample size, it doesn't suggest trying to pitch more to contact at all...the opposite, really. I'll re-iterate his 2016 P/PA, when you say he was trying to pitch to contact, was 3.77 (second lowest of his career after 2013). Pitching to contact is intended to reduce P/PA, not increase it.

I don't expect the inefficiency to continue, I was just pointing it out to note that his not getting deeper into games isn't just because of the manager's philosophy. Sale hasn't exactly been the model of efficiency he usually is. If his P/PA were equal to last year's, he'd have faced five extra batters so far this year without throwing an extra pitch. Maybe those batters would have been the sixth inning yesterday.
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,878
ct
Sounds like we have our first BABIP sacrifice candidate, hopefully not needed for a while, but in the bank nevertheless.
What did I say that was wrong or upsetting you? Honestly asking as I did not think I said anything controversial.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,651
So Price's stat line looks ok? what do we "need" from him, if we were to ignore his salary completely? what is a satisfactory season from Price? 3.50 ERA 175 innings?
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
16,856
A satisfactory season from Price = pitching well in many crucial innings as we go deep in the postseason.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,230
Portland
So Price's stat line looks ok? what do we "need" from him, if we were to ignore his salary completely? what is a satisfactory season from Price? 3.50 ERA 175 innings?
That's about what Jimmy Nelson did last year (3.49 and 175) and he was basically a 5 fWAR pitcher.
On the other hand, Arrieta had a 3.53 in 168 innings and was 2.5 fWAR.

I'd sign up for the Jimmy Nelson version mixed in with clutch wins against the Yankees, innings when the pen really needs it, and matching the other starter in any playoff series.
 

uk_sox_fan

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,273
London, England
The only thing we 'need' from Price is health. As with Sale, he's a guy that when healthy I trust completely to get the most out of what he has going into a game and give a quality start at the least and a dominating performance as often as not. These are front-line guys who are equipped to tear up the league this year and with the quality and depth behind them in Porcello, Pomeranz, ERod, Velaquez, Wright and Johnson as well as a very dependable bullpen I'm very optimistic for this season.

The offence is good and currently the top O in the league but it's the starting pitching that sets this team apart.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
As long as the Sox keep winning and Sale gives them quality starts, I could care less.
That's too bad. I'd have hoped you couldn't care less.

If Sale has a genuine stamina or muscle issue - I'd think the only (and best) way to optimize him would be to skip starts, not limit the number of pitches for each start.

I'm more curious, though, on what the medical impacts are that could lead to poor performance after x amount of starts a season. Is it muscle weakness? Tendinitis? Strains?

What are the potential physical causes of late season suckitude?
 

uncannymanny

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
9,097

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
On BSJ today, Sean McAdam offered this nugget: "Through 16 games, their starting pitchers have allowed either one run or none, a remarkable achievement. In almost a third of their games (five) this season, including Tuesday night, they’ve yielded four hits or fewer. They lead all of baseball in ERA and WHIP, arguably the two most-important statistical measuring sticks for a staff."

I wonder what the record is for consecutive starts (at any time in a season) with one run or less from the SPs.

It was nice to read in the box score this morning that Brian Johnson put up 3 scoreless innings in relief last night.
 

Wallball Tingle

union soap
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,518
On BSJ today, Sean McAdam offered this nugget: "Through 16 games, their starting pitchers have allowed either one run or none..."
Not true, right? Price vs Yankees, Rodriguez vs Rays off the top of my head. Oh and Velasquez gave up 2 vs the Orioles. Bum.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,494
Not here
Not true, right? Price vs Yankees, Rodriguez vs Rays off the top of my head. Oh and Velasquez gave up 2 vs the Orioles. Bum.
Bad cut and paste work by the editor. It looks like that sentence was supposed to end with a number of games qualifier and the next sentence begins with one so someone was working too quickly and fucked up.
 

pinkunicornsox

New Member
Oct 8, 2017
98
This is interesting. I wonder what money and years would get it done? Drew seems like he has the personality to handle Boston.
I see some similarities between Pom and Cobb. Both are effective pitchers when they are healthy enough to pitch. So i would say something like four years fifteen million per would be reasonable. I am on the fence about the Sox resigning Pom. On one hand he seems to pitch very well. On the other hand he has not had a healthy season the past three seasons and I don't see that changing as he ages.
 

Sale4CY

New Member
Apr 6, 2018
101
I see some similarities between Pom and Cobb. Both are effective pitchers when they are healthy enough to pitch. So i would say something like four years fifteen million per would be reasonable. I am on the fence about the Sox resigning Pom. On one hand he seems to pitch very well. On the other hand he has not had a healthy season the past three seasons and I don't see that changing as he ages.
Also have to keep in mind that Sale is only on the books for one more year and Kimbrel is a FA this offseason. We definitely can’t keep all of these guys.
 

Pozo the Clown

New Member
Sep 13, 2006
745
Chapman got 5/87. I'll bet Kimbrel will be closer to 100. I'd rather keep the rotation in tact.
Kenley Jansen got 5/80. Kimbrel may be predisposed to want to stay in/near Boston for his daughter's ongoing medical checkups which I recall reading will be an ongoing matter.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,671
What's been more impressive so far: the starting pitching (2.82 era, .214 baa, 9.84 k/9, 1.13 whip) or the offense (6.2 runs per game, slash line of .283/.356/.475/.831)?
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,433
Considering Pom as an extension candidate... I'm also intrigued. He was very good last season but definitely need this year to gauge more accurately.... Porcello has been pitching like a true ace and is gone after this season. Is shuffling Porcello's pay to Pom a good allocation of resources? He's still young.
With Sale needing to be resigned, and Price likely to opt in and be a Sox for the next 3 years. It's going to be important to have affordability in the rest of the rotation. Can EdRo step up and be consistent for another 2 years and can Valazquez be a quality bottom rotation guy?
I'm leaning towards "yes" on this. I just don't see Porcello sticking around after this season so if Drew is open to somewhere around 4/$15 that'd be a very good value signing
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,671
Porcello is signed through next year. They can't allocate his money to Pomeranz...at least not right away.
They could trade him if they want. If he comes off a terrific 2018, they probably could get a fair haul for him. Not saying they should. But they could.

(even an ASB trade, if the rest of the rotation is doing well, could work maybe - 1.5 years of a really good Porcello would be worth a lot, and if Sale, Price, Pom, EdRo, and Velazquez are pitching well, with Wright as insurance, maybe they could afford to deal Porcello and get back some quality prospects; then extend Pom - again, not advocating it, but they could do it)
 

uk_sox_fan

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,273
London, England
I am on the fence about the Sox resigning Pom. On one hand he seems to pitch very well. On the other hand he has not had a healthy season the past three seasons and I don't see that changing as he ages.
He did make 32 starts in 2017, which is pretty durable.
Pomeranz made his first start last year in the Sox's 7th game of the season. Thereafter, he never missed a start and his 32 GS tied with Sale for 2nd on the team behind Porcello (33). Down the stretch he was arguably the Sox's most consistent starter with 5 of his final 6 starts showing game scores of 60+ (of course that doesn't count, ahem, Game 2 of the ALDS which was a bit less impressive...)

Either you have him confused with someone else or you have an extremely demanding definition of a 'healthy season'.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,986
St. Louis, MO
Porcello is pretty valuable with 4 left handers in the rotation. If Pomeranz would sign 4/60 today I’d do it though, and figure out the rest later.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
They could trade him if they want. If he comes off a terrific 2018, they probably could get a fair haul for him. Not saying they should. But they could.

(even an ASB trade, if the rest of the rotation is doing well, could work maybe - 1.5 years of a really good Porcello would be worth a lot, and if Sale, Price, Pom, EdRo, and Velazquez are pitching well, with Wright as insurance, maybe they could afford to deal Porcello and get back some quality prospects; then extend Pom - again, not advocating it, but they could do it)
You ever heard of a team leading its division (or at least right in the hunt), as this team is likely to be in July, trading one of their best pitchers away? Come on now. They do something like that, and no question two starters will go down in August. The difference in prospects from July to December probably wouldn't be worth downgrading the rotation in a pennant race. If they were inclined to trade him (I wouldn't be), next winter makes more sense.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,671
You ever heard of a team leading its division (or at least right in the hunt), as this team is likely to be in July, trading one of their best pitchers away? Come on now. They do something like that, and no question two starters will go down in August. The difference in prospects from July to December probably wouldn't be worth downgrading the rotation in a pennant race. If they were inclined to trade him (I wouldn't be), next winter makes more sense.
I don't disagree. I'm just saying they could if they wanted to.
 

Pozo the Clown

New Member
Sep 13, 2006
745
So what do they do with Velazquez now? He's earned a few more starts but I gather they have no plans to include a sixth starter as long as the five are healthy?
They keep him stretched out at Pawtucket until a need arises for a spot starter. Depth is a wonderful thing!
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
They keep him stretched out at Pawtucket until a need arises for a spot starter. Depth is a wonderful thing!
Exactly. Velazquez sticks around until Poyner is eligible to come off the DL on Sunday (he made a rehab start in Portland yesterday) then he goes to Pawtucket to join their rotation.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
I should add, Poyner is eligible to return on Sunday but given where the team is and where they're headed, it wouldn't surprise me if he meets the team in Toronto on Monday rather than flying to Seattle for one game. So barring another injury, Velazquez has three more days before he's sent down.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,230
Portland
I wouldn't call Poyner a lock over Velazquez. I realize Johnson is a long man, but it couldn't hurt to have two if Cora wants to limit starter innings even more.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
I wouldn't call Poyner a lock over Velazquez. I realize Johnson is a long man, but it couldn't hurt to have two if Cora wants to limit starter innings even more.
I would if only because two potential spot starters (Velazquez and Johnson) sitting in the pen is essentially having no spot starters at all after a while. Barring injury or a long extra inning game, how frequent will the need for a true long-man be with this rotation? Certainly not enough to necessitate two guys who can throw 40-50+ pitches per outing when necessary. Without regular opportunities to throw that many pitches in a game, they're going to turn into 30 pitch maximum guys quickly.

Better to send Velazquez down (since you can't send Johnson) and allow him to keep throwing 80-100 pitches every five days so you have a guy who can spot start and go 5-6 innings.

Besides, if anything, Cora is eventually going to want to ramp up at least Sale, Price, and Porcello to a 105-110 pitch count rather than the 90-95 they've been on. They'll start going a bit deeper into games, ideally leaving fewer innings for the pen rather than more.
 
Jun 27, 2006
66
Would it be a bad idea to plan on piggy backing Velazquez after Pom for a few starts? Plan on him coming in and finishing the game except for maybe the ninth, acording to the score. That way he would have 3-4 innings and would sta stretched out.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Would it be a bad idea to plan on piggy backing Velazquez after Pom for a few starts? Plan on him coming in and finishing the game except for maybe the ninth, acording to the score. That way he would have 3-4 innings and would sta stretched out.
You can plan to do that in the minor leagues when the games don't really matter. However, it's a poor way to run a MLB rotation. There are just too many factors in play to map out that strategy and stick to it blindly.

The better plan is to tell both Velazquez and Johnson that they will "piggyback" for starters who get out to large leads (or have to leave early due to health issues). If Sale is given a 8-run lead, then pull him in the 5th and let either Velazquez or Johnson pitch for 3-4 innings, even if Sale could easily make it 7-8 IP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.