It could also be strategic approach and/or game preparedness.
I'd be curious to see how these numbers look from the POV of times through the lineup.
2023 Starting Rotation
- Thread starter Rovin Romine
- Start date
I'd be curious to see how these numbers look from the POV of times through the lineup.
It could also be pitchers getting hit hard, a high BABIP isn’t necessarily the defense’s fault. It could be, but I think we’d need more info. (Sale, Kluber, and Pivetta have hard hit rates of 49%, 53%, and 61% which are insanely high). The best FIP among Sox starting pitchers is Houck at 4.54, everyone else is 5.4 or worse.
Last edited:
Every team should start with a long-term plan. You have to build your foundation first in order to maintain success on a yearly basis. The idea that you can just go all-in, buy new starters in the offseason, and repeat every year is not a winning strategy in today's game.
Well of course! But not one GM has the luxury of starting from ground zero with a long term plan… Bloom inherited the remains from the earlier long term plan and had to deal and build around it until his long term plan could be viable at the ML level. It’s not an instant/all or nothing thing
Well, it depends if you choose to try to compete at the same time as you're rebuilding, teams like Houston and Baltimore basically started their rebuild with a blank slate because they didn't care if they went 40-122 or not. In fact, being terrible helped them quite a bit as they ended up with top picks like Correa and Rutschman.
True. I don’t think Sox fans would have been okay with that. Maybe a few SOSH types but otherwise no. Especially considering ticket cost
I would beg to differ regarding Bloom inheriting a long-term plan, thus my post.
Mata went 5 IP for WooSox tonight. Looks like he lacked control -- 92 pitches, 47 strikes (51%). Not a bad line despite that -- 4 H, 2 R, 4 BB, 6 K, 0 HR.
Just a placeholder note that Sale went 6 against the Twins giving up one run and striking out 11.
If this is replicable, it's a tremendously enheartening sign for the starting rotation and therefore the club.
Still a lot of unknowns, but even an 80%-peak-Chris-Sale would be a real asset in front of Whitlock, Bello, Pivetta, Paxton, Kluber.
If this is replicable, it's a tremendously enheartening sign for the starting rotation and therefore the club.
Still a lot of unknowns, but even an 80%-peak-Chris-Sale would be a real asset in front of Whitlock, Bello, Pivetta, Paxton, Kluber.
From a scouting and projection standpoint, you couldn’t ask for a better performance. The stuff was more like 95% Chris Sale. It very much plays, it simply comes down to command, which I think is fair to assume will improve just as he pitches more.
People aren’t really properly assessing just how much baseball he missed. It will take some time.
Stuff and health appear as non factors at this point. Two enormous boxes checked. If he can check the command box you’ve got you ace back.
It really was a remarkable return to old form for him. It's the first good start he's had this season, because he kept the ball in the park this time.
Command is still to be determined. He had the 11 Ks but walked 2 and had 2 HBP in 6 innings, so command likely isn't fully back. Most importantly, durability is obviously something to monitor; I'm glad Cora pulled him after 6.
Given that he's been exclusively a starter, I think we can count on him staying in AAA all season. He has plenty of time to fine-tune his command.
Mata's control issues have been persistent and serious at every level he's been at. He had his control under control, if you will, briefly in 2017 and 2019, but I don't think there's been any real or sustained improvement. Last year he walked 5.79/9 at AAA and still managed a FIP of 3.12.
If he wants to be a big-league pitcher as a starter he'll have to figure that stuff out, obviously. I don't see him getting called up any time soon, because while he's gotten away with the astronomical walk rates against minor leaguers, it won't fly at the big-league level.
If he wants to be a big-league pitcher as a starter he'll have to figure that stuff out, obviously. I don't see him getting called up any time soon, because while he's gotten away with the astronomical walk rates against minor leaguers, it won't fly at the big-league level.
Sure, but those issues have happened as he has moved up a level. What does he look like if he repeats a level? He has plenty of time right now. I'm not sure we will need him before 2025.
Maybe a matter of perspective? My sense is that the control issues have pretty much persisted. He's only posted a BB% below four a couple of times, at very low levels. I mean, he did repeat AA, albeit three years apart, and he posted a BB% above 4 each time.
Regardless, I agree that he's got time to sort this stuff out. I'm just saying that until we see a consistent BB% below 4 at high levels, he's probably not ready to start or even relieve in the big leagues.
Well we just spent the offseason with a rather large segment of Sox fans, including some here, saying that Bloom has no long term plan and that you should just go all in etc etc. Anyway, this page is full of agreement at least.
Do you have a sense of where the control issues come from? I suppose one outcome is that if he goes through AAA again and the walk rate doesn't come down, and it's more about one pitch than the others, then it may be time to think about the bullpen. Although even there I wouldn't rush him.
The other way to parse this is pre-TJ surgery v. post. 2018's walk rate was bad, but could be a blip. 2019 he was much better, jumped a level to AA and saw his rate creep just above 4. Then - pandemic and TJ in 2021. In any event, we've heard that TJ can affect control at least initially.
Post TJ - in 2022 he repeated AA and jumped to AAA. This year he's not off to a great start, but there's only 3 games of data.
I completely agree it's something to watch, but I wouldn't be alarmed until we see what he does in warmer weather.
Isn't this the big issue? By trying to win/not really trying/bridge year the Sox have not ever really rebuilt. They have assembled excellent teams in 2007 and 2018 (with lots of homegrown talent) and won 4 WS. But the down years have hurt and then not really helped (in terms of draft picks and the like).
But... let's see how the new generation of players develops down at the farm. And this includes Marcelo Mayer. The last 2 times the Sox had a high draft pick they missed. (Before Mayer that is)
Just curious - what draft picks are you counting as misses? I’m assuming one is 2013’s Trey Ball. The only other top 10 pick I can think of is Andrew B in 2015. Are you counting him as a miss?
edit: I think you’re counting 2016 as a high draft pick year since they drafted 12th, so I think the second is Groome?
Blanked on Benintendi, who while not a complete miss was not as expected (spectacular catch in 2018 nothwithstanding)
Trey Ball and Groome were my misses.
Hmm. I just want to say that any accounting of draft hits and misses that doesn't have Benintendi as a clear hit is pretty dubious IMO. He has 16 career bWAR! That's wildly good; he's already the 10th-best #7 pick of all time, and still active, with a five year deal in Chicago. If he plays to his career averages in WAR-terms (i.e. averages ~1.8 bWAR/season) for the next five years, he'll pass Prince Fielder and be the sixth best #7 pick of all time.
I will yield on Benintendi, who I had forgotten was picked # 7.
My original post was meant for Trey Ball and Jason Groome, who clearly were misses, even if not really top 10 picks.
This may not bear repeating, but I'll take my chances... When we look back on the Sox' misses in the draft, it's probably worth mentioning that the success rate of picking in the top five is not that much greater than in the middle of the draft. It's definitely better! But the bust rate is orders of magnitude beyond that of high NBA or NFL picks. This analysis is almost a decade out of date, so the numbers are probably better now (though a casual look makes me think the bust rate is still high), but we are talking 60% bust rate for top five picks and it gets worse from there.
https://community.fangraphs.com/success-rate-of-mlb-first-round-draft-picks-by-slot/
In the 2017 draft, for example, the 2nd pick was Hunter Greene and the 3rd was McKenzie Gore (sticking with pitchers and going back far enough so that we can judge the results). Greene is up to 2.7 bWAR, Gore below 1 still. The Sox got Tanner Houck (4.6 bWAR) with the 24th pick and got Kutter Crawford in the 13th round. So back to Trekfan's original post about not being helped by their down years, which meant not being able to exploit a high draft position, I don't think there's all that strong a correlation between drafting high (after losing seasons) and drafting successfully, so there is next to no incentive to tank in baseball. Only when you get to Astros-level abysmal-ness where you get the #1 overall pick year after year can you count on any real benefit from losing. If you are blowing multiple #1 overall picks then youare the Philadelphia 76ers maybe have something to bemoan.
https://community.fangraphs.com/success-rate-of-mlb-first-round-draft-picks-by-slot/
In the 2017 draft, for example, the 2nd pick was Hunter Greene and the 3rd was McKenzie Gore (sticking with pitchers and going back far enough so that we can judge the results). Greene is up to 2.7 bWAR, Gore below 1 still. The Sox got Tanner Houck (4.6 bWAR) with the 24th pick and got Kutter Crawford in the 13th round. So back to Trekfan's original post about not being helped by their down years, which meant not being able to exploit a high draft position, I don't think there's all that strong a correlation between drafting high (after losing seasons) and drafting successfully, so there is next to no incentive to tank in baseball. Only when you get to Astros-level abysmal-ness where you get the #1 overall pick year after year can you count on any real benefit from losing. If you are blowing multiple #1 overall picks then you
I'm not sure career WAR is the way to evaulate this. I mean, in one sense, it gives you an idea of the player's value, long term. But the draft pick gives the club so many MiL years to develop the player, so many option years, and so many years before arb and FA.
So your ideal draft pick is someone who gets through the MiL development process on the schedule you anticipated, has few growing pains at the ML level, can play for the drafting club by contributes in their cost-controlled then arb years. To the extent the pick has trade value, you don't want their stock to drop at any point by a poor showing at any level. If they're traded, I think you should look at the value they brought back. It may not be the player's fault they're traded, or it may be - but they bring back what they bring back, regardless of how they do afterward. (If you're canny enough to draft a C with a hit tool during a dearth of C prospects and then trade "up" - you, the club, are getting a lot of value out of that pick.)
Benintendi was drafted out of college and spent two years in the minors before being called up at the end of his second year. Excluding the callup, his bWAR was 2.8, 4.8, 1.8, and a disastrous -0.1, after which his final two years of control were traded for Cordero, Winckowski, and some scratch tickets. That's his value to the Sox.
Fielder's bWAR for his full seasons were -0.7, 3.6, 1.5, 6.3, 1.5, 4.5 before he was lost to free agency.
It's hard to say that Benintendi was a better #7 than Fielder in terms of immediate club value. But the ultimate value of that pick may be close to equal, depending on Winckowski.
Geez I forgot Winchowski was the Benintendi return. Right now that’s looking like a win for Bloom.
I looked at the career fWAR of pitchers drafted and signed by the Red Sox since 2012. I chose 2012 as the cut-off since that was the first draft done post-Epstein. I'm struggling to get a table to format so I'll just narrate but the results (ugly table in the second spoiler). It's not encouraging. By my count, only 25 pitchers drafted and signed since then have made it to the majors and thrown a pitch. The 25 have cumulatively produced 9.5 fWAR. The three most productive pitchers have been: Ty Buttrey (2.2), Michael Kopech (2.2; -.5 this year), and Tanner Houck (3.5; .1 this year). They were drafted in 2012, 2014, and 2017. Of the 24 drafted, only 7 are on a major league roster right now. Two of them are on the Red Sox - Houck and Kutter Crawford. One was selected in the this year's Rule 5 draft - Thad Ward. I've already mentioned Kopech. Can you guess who the other 3 are?
I know there was talk of a long term plan upthread. Any long term plan obviously starts with homegrown players. Of the 5 that are on a major league roster right now and not on the Red Sox, I don't think there's anyone that improves this year's rotation. It makes me question whether development is the only issue. It seems like scouting is too.
Gabe Speier on the Mariners, Stephen Nogosek on the Mets, and Jalen Beeks on the Rays
I know there was talk of a long term plan upthread. Any long term plan obviously starts with homegrown players. Of the 5 that are on a major league roster right now and not on the Red Sox, I don't think there's anyone that improves this year's rotation. It makes me question whether development is the only issue. It seems like scouting is too.
| Draft Year | Player Name | fWAR | 2023 WAR |
|
2012 |
Brian Johnson |
0.5 |
|
|
2012 |
Pat Light |
-0.3 |
|
|
2012 |
Jamie Callahan |
0.2 |
|
|
2012 |
Austin Maddox |
0.3 |
|
|
2012 |
Ty Buttrey |
2.2 |
|
|
2012 |
Justin Haley |
-0.2 |
|
|
2012 |
JB Wendelken |
0 |
|
|
2013 |
Kyle Martin |
-0.1 |
|
|
2013 |
Gabe Speier |
0.4 |
0.3 |
|
2014 |
Michael Kopech |
2.2 |
-.5 |
|
2014 |
Jalen Beeks |
1.4 |
-0.1 |
|
2014 |
Chandler Shepherd |
-0.1 |
|
|
2015 |
Travis Lakins |
0.4 |
|
|
2015 |
Ben Taylor |
-0.1 |
|
|
2015 |
Logan Allen |
-0.4 |
|
|
2015 |
Bobby Poyner |
0.2 |
|
|
2015 |
Nick Duron |
0 |
|
|
2015 |
Trevor Kelley |
-0.9 |
|
|
2016 |
Shaun Anderson |
0.5 |
|
|
2016 |
Mike Shawaryn |
-0.2 |
|
|
2016 |
Stephen Nogosek |
-0.3 |
0 |
|
2016 |
Kyle Hart |
-0.2 |
|
|
2017 |
Tanner Houck |
3.5 |
0.1 |
|
2017 |
Kutter Crawford |
0.5 |
0.1 |
|
2018 |
Thad Ward |
0 |
0 |
| TOTAL |
25 |
9.5 |
0.4 |
It becomes more encouraging if you consider international free agents and trades the club made for MiL pitchers who subsequently came up with the club.
Of those 25, three have produced at least 1.5 WAR. If you want to get generous, you could say 4 have produced 1.4 WAR, and Beeks will probably cross the 1.5 threshold soon and become a non-bust. That leaves 21 busts out of 25 picks, per the Fangraphs study I posted above from the same time period. That's an 84% bust rate.
Now, I realize you are only looking at Sox draftees who progressed to the majors, so it's not apples to apples. But again, the bust rate for all of baseball, looking ONLY at first round picks, most of whom do make the majors, was 74% in that study. I suspect that the bust rate gets progressively higher for all other rounds after the first. So for the Sox to produce only four worthwhile pitchers in 25 tries with actual ML talent is possibly quite normal and not a scouting issue.
Last edited:
Kluber gives up 3 in the first, so the trend continues. Walk, double, ground-out to score a run, then a 2-run homer.
Stuff looks real weak…. How do you go about dealing with this? He obviously needs a few more looks but if the trend continues he can’t be in the rotation while Crawford is throwing 6 inning shutouts
The game isn't particularly interesting so I decided to compare the Sox with other teams' drafted and signed pitchers between 2012 and 2018. 687 pitchers were drafted and made the majors and produced 859 WAR. Teams averaged 23 pitchers making the majors. The Red Sox, at 25, rank 8th. The teams ahead of them are:
New York Yankees 33
Kansas City Royals 30
Detroit Tigers 28
Toronto Blue Jays 28
Texas Rangers 27
Los Angeles Dodgers 27
Seattle Mariners 26
Kansas City Royals 30
Detroit Tigers 28
Toronto Blue Jays 28
Texas Rangers 27
Los Angeles Dodgers 27
Seattle Mariners 26
BUT! If you look at total fWAR, the Red Sox rank 26th with 10.5*. The only teams to have their signed pitchers produce less fWAR are the Angels (9.7), Mets (7.5), Diamondbacks (7.1), and Athletics (3). The closest AL East team is the Yankees at 22.8. Tampa clocks in at 26, Toronto at 42.2, and Baltimore at 47.3. They're definitely lagging behind other teams in the division there.
Using 1.5 fWAR to determine whether a pick was a bust (or not), the average team signed 4** pitchers that reached or exceeded that mark, so the Red Sox are decidingly average in that category as well and tied with the Yankees. The Rays and Blue Jays have 5 - tied for 9th - and the Orioles have 6 (5th best). The Cardinals top everyone with 9 non-busts.
Obviously this is all very rough and non-scientific, but I think you're correct... it's probably not as much of a scouting issue as it is a development one.
*I goofed in my original post with the Red Sox WAR total. I did everything manually for that post, but I caved and bought a FanGraphs membership so I could export data and use vlookups so these numbers are accurate.
**I added .1 to Beeks' total.
You could potentially swap Kluber with Crawford or Winckowski. Or you just drop him from the rotation and go with a 5-man. I don’t think he’s in significant danger in losing his roster spot until / if Paxton shows he’s healthy- there’s no one else in Worcester who seems ready. His next starts are against the O’s and Jays, if those don’t go well I think they’ll do something.
Great job! Right down to the **
That is fascinating. What is the difference between the "makes the majors" guys and the ones who succeed there? Can you attribute Tampa, Toronto and Baltimore getting more top-end quality because of draft slot? I don't actually see big names in there besides Stroman, Gausman and McClanahan. I guess they just got better depth. Which definitely sounds like development.
I think it's as simple as Kluber gets buried in the bullpen (or on the IL) once they decide to go back to a five man rotation. So he's got maybe one start left before decision time, assuming everyone else remains healthy. Generally, I'm a longer leash kind of guy, but when they have five other healthy starters (six if you count Crawford), they can't let a guy linger when he's not being effective. I take it as a sign they're done kid-gloving him leaving him in to go five and 103 pitches last night despite the struggles in the 1st and 3rd. Obviously there was an element of saving the pen, but I also got the impression that they want him to figure it the fuck out which he can't necessarily do in side sessions.
The thing is Bloom does have a long-term plan. You can see that simply by the fact that he's not trading prospects for the immediate gratification of going all in. If that's not a long-term plan, I don't know what is.
The two guys many think will (should?) end up in the bullpen have put up the two best and deepest starts of the season so far. Encouraging development if they can repeat it a few more times.
Add in the good start from Sale and Crawford’s scoreless six relief innings and the pitching is really looking good. Taking 5 out of their last 7 against good teams at home is what good teams do.
The Yanks are often lauded for drafting a guy who is at 91-92 and turning them into 95-96 relievers. Are they specifically drafting guys who fit a profile that shows that there is a likelihood of an extra 3-5 mph in the arsenal? Is there minor league development coaches that good. They are drafting behind the RS most every year so it’s not as if they are getting the highest profile draftees. Is it a myth that they develop pitchers better? Does statistical evidence back that up?
Everyone is a totally unique individual, so I think it's a series of occurrences rather than something you can repeat everywhere. I'm sure the Sox know all of the same tricks with grip, pitch mix, mechanics, etc., every time a player comes over from one of these other orgs there are no longer any secrets.
The 5 from the Blue Jays are Marcus Stroman (22nd overall), Matthew Boyd (175), Kendall Graveman (235), Jordan Romano (294) and Tim Mayza (355). So only Stroman was a first round pick, but his 22 fWAR outproduces the other 4 combined.
The Rays have McClanahan (31st overall), Dylan Floro (422), Joe Ryan (210), and Ryne Stanek (29). I was counting Drew Rasmussen (31st overall, 2017), but I didn't realize he didn't sign with them until looking at things again today. He was redrafted by the Brewers in the 6th round of the 2018 draft (185 overall). That round the Rays selected Miller Hogan who, ironically, was drafted but not signed by the Brewers in the 32nd round of 2017! They liked him enough to trade Adames for him but not enough to sign him after drafting him in the first round. Weird. Must've really been scared by his tommy john surgery in college.
The Orioles have Gausman (4th), Hader (582), Steven Brault (339), Tanner Scott (181), John Means (331), and Keegan Akin (54). The Yankees' to make the cut are Jordan Montgomery (122), Nestor Cortes (1094), Whitlock (542), and Jonathan Holder (182). The Red Sox pitchers drafted and signed that exceeded the 1.5 threshold are Houck (24), Ty Buttrey (151), Kopech (33), and Beeks (374).
To answer your question re: draft position, with respect to the Rays and their first round selections (ignoring Rasmussen now), only McClanahan and Stanek were first round picks. Stanek was drafted 29th overall in 2013. The Red Sox selected Trey Ball at 7 that year. In 2018, the Sox drafted before the Rays and took Casas at 26. The Red Sox never had a shot at Gausman. Stroman (22) almost fell to them in 2012 but alas, he didn't, and the Sox drafted Deven Marrero at 24. So when it comes to the Blue Jays and Orioles, draft position was definitely a factor, but the same can't be said of the Rays or Yankees.
The younger guys (Houck, Whitlock, Bello) pitching well and taking the place of the short term guys (Kluber, Paxton, Pivetta) is kind of the ideal scenario, right?
Anyone else shocked that Stroman has accumulated that much career WAR? Seems like a lot for a guy who has 69 career wins.
Anyone else shocked that Stroman has accumulated that much career WAR? Seems like a lot for a guy who has 69 career wins.
Not at all considering wins is a fairly outdated stat for evaluating pitcher quality. In nine seasons, he's made over 200 starts and thrown nearly 1200 MLB innings with a 3.56 ERA (3.61 FIP) and a 1.24 WHIP. That's a very good starting pitcher, so ~22 career WAR sounds about right.
Fair. It speaks to the relative lack of longevity amondquality starters in the league after you get past the older group of future HOF (Verlander, Greinke, Scherzer, Kershaw, Wainwright).
Career WAR of active pitchers under 35 (used bWAR)
Sale 45.1
Cole 34.8
Nola 29.6
Quintana 27.6
Gray 26.0
Wheeler 24.4
Hendricks 22.6
Stroman 21.0
Castillo 20.2
Gausman 19.8
The top WAR for those under 30 are Fried (17.2), Alcantara (16.5), Marquez (16.3), Bieber (16.2), and Urias (14.1).
I know we’ve discussed it before, but getting to 200 wins (while admittedly an outdated stat) is going to soon be like getting 300. Wonder how sportswriters, HOF voters, etc. will judge starting pitchers from an era in which they are seemingly less important than they used to be.
Career WAR of active pitchers under 35 (used bWAR)
Sale 45.1
Cole 34.8
Nola 29.6
Quintana 27.6
Gray 26.0
Wheeler 24.4
Hendricks 22.6
Stroman 21.0
Castillo 20.2
Gausman 19.8
The top WAR for those under 30 are Fried (17.2), Alcantara (16.5), Marquez (16.3), Bieber (16.2), and Urias (14.1).
I know we’ve discussed it before, but getting to 200 wins (while admittedly an outdated stat) is going to soon be like getting 300. Wonder how sportswriters, HOF voters, etc. will judge starting pitchers from an era in which they are seemingly less important than they used to be.
I'm curious about this last point, and apologies if this has been covered before, but I wanted to look closer at wins. Yes, we have corrected our past overvaluing but they still have value. I suppose they are marginally less important now, since they represent the individual contribution to a winning game by the SP, and he's more likely to have gone 5 IP than 7 now. But they do still occur every game, and a 33% downgrade in the top performer totals seems steep.
Logically, teams strongly prefer their starter to get to 5IP at least, so I suspect the number of wins taken off the table by managers is... not zero, you do see guys pulled in the fifth, just missing out on the qualifier, but not often. You also see guys pulled after 5 with the game not decided, whereas if they pitched into the 7th maybe by then they'd have it in the W column. So we for sure see some manager decisions that result in fewer wins. And the result is fewer 20 game winners.
https://www.baseball-almanac.com/pitching/pi20wcal4.shtml
This list of just AL pitchers goes back to 1976, so it ties to that era, if not quite the good ol days when pitchers threw 33 complete games a year and tickets cost 5 cents or whatever. You had 20 game winners every year there wasn't a player strike, until 2006 and again in 2009. Now we have gone three years straight without a single 20-game winner in the AL, although it's just two normal years (and the NL had a single 20+ guy both years). Before that, we saw two 20+win guys in 2016, 18 and 19. I'm just reading the chart now... point is, the 20-game threshold seems to be reached by fewer guys, but not a lot fewer.
Another list is here, the annual leader:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_annual_wins_leaders
In terms of the leading total, it also looks like wins have gone down a tick, but just. We haven't seen anyone hit 24 wins since 2011, but 20-22 isn't that far off. So, taking all that in, I think the win threshold for recognition of excellence will drop from 300, and we won't think of wins the same way anyway (of course). But you might still see the top guys getting to 250.