Allen Craig

[mwonow]

Leaving the toughness thing aside, how about the "smart enough and skilled enough to play ML baseball (for Craig - not Buch).
 
I'm not sure what's worse - the pathetic ABs or the brain fart in the field (okay, I do know - the ABs just sucked, the fielding thing was seriously inexcusable).
 
Is Craig an "asset" or a "sunk cost"?

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

"Danny Valencia then flied out to Allen Craig in right, who apparently thought he had caught the third out and took his time getting the ball in. John Mayberry Jr. scored from second on the play."

I mean, what?

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Isn't this a tradition among Red Sox RFers?

 

[Drek717]

Isn't this a tradition among Red Sox RFers?

He didn't pitch it into the stands a la Trot Nixon, so that's something I guess?

 

[j44thor]

At least Lackey was shelled last night.  This could well end up the trade that both teams lose on.

 

[twibnotes]

At least Lackey was shelled last night.  This could well end up the trade that both teams lose on.

Kelly shows promise. Not sure Craig needs to be good for the Sox to win the trade

 

[JimD]

Way too early to judge the Craig portion of the trade.  Let's see how he does after he's had a full offseason and see if he heals.

 

[BeantownIdaho]

Who needs team doctors when you can self diagnose on webmd.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Kelly shows promise. Not sure Craig needs to be good for the Sox to win the trade

 
I'm happy enough to be able to turn the clock back two years, and resume actively hating John Lackey again.
 
Four more years of Joe Kelly would have been a good trade for Lackey's last season, considering how much shitstorm that minimum-salary option year was likely to be stirred up into by the Boston media, especially after 2014's last-place finish.
 
Hopefully, Craig's bat can also turn the clock back to 2012.  But even then, I doubt he'll be much good at playing anything other than 1B/DH.

 

[j44thor]

Kelly shows promise. Not sure Craig needs to be good for the Sox to win the trade

 
Since when is a 1:1 BB/K ratio promise to go along with a 6.23 K/9 and a 1.33 WHIP?
I guess when compared to the rest of the Sox back end (Webster, Ranaudo) it looks promising but this might be the worst starting 5 the Sox have finished a season with in the last 20 yrs.  

 

[twibnotes]

 
Since when is a 1:1 BB/K ratio promise to go along with a 6.23 K/9 and a 1.33 WHIP?
I guess when compared to the rest of the Sox back end (Webster, Ranaudo) it looks promising but this might be the worst starting 5 the Sox have finished a season with in the last 20 yrs.  

 
He just turned 26 and has great stuff - I consider that "promise."  If he were bona fide, the Cards wouldn't have traded him for Lackey.
 
Also, I think you mean he has a 1:1 K/BB ratio, not BB/K.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

 
Since when is a 1:1 BB/K ratio promise to go along with a 6.23 K/9 and a 1.33 WHIP?
I guess when compared to the rest of the Sox back end (Webster, Ranaudo) it looks promising but this might be the worst starting 5 the Sox have finished a season with in the last 20 yrs.  

Kelly has only had 6 starts here and those numbers you post are skewed by the one outlier against the Astros (7 runs, 7 BBs?). Four of the other five is consider a plus start with the other solid at worst.

 

[twibnotes]

Um, wouldn't it be the same?.

No.

The first number listed is the number that occurs for every one of the second number. Saying the BB:K ratio is 1.1 implies that he's walked more guys than he's K'd, and it's actually the other way around. He has more Ks than walks. The ratio is even more favorable if you include his time in St. Louis. The real K/BB ratio for '14 is 1.5

 

[MakMan44]

A 1:1 BB/K ratio would mean that for every BB he gives up, he gets a K. So that would be the same thing for K/BB.

 

[twibnotes]

A 1:1 BB/K ratio would mean that for every BB he gives up, he gets a K. So that would be the same thing for K/BB.

 
sorry - I was reading it as 1.1 not 1:1...it happens that his K/BB ratio w/the Sox is 1.1, so I thought the poster was mixing up the K/BB.
 
In either case, he is NOT walking as many guys as he is striking out this year:
 
49Ks
32 Walks
 
So, the point holds but please ignore my math lesson while I go practice my reading comprehension...

 

[Plympton91]

The low K rates for both Kelly and De la Rosa are tempered by each having plus-plus fastballs. The K rates will improve quickly if their command improves even a little. They also both would likely play up out of the bullpen (Kelly as a reliever has an 8.5 K/9 and 3/1 K/BB). Getting 4 years of Kelly, either as the 4th starter he's been ($40-50 million of value based on the Vargas/Feldman contracts) or as a set up man, ($20-25 million of value based on the Jenks/Downs/Benoit contracts) is well worth it.

He'd need to be little better than a 4th starter to make it worth absorbing Craig's contract. That seems a pretty good bet. If they continue to allow Craig to pile up negative WAR rather than eat the sunk cost, that's not on Kelly's conscience.

 

[Adrian's Dome]

this might be the worst starting 5 the Sox have finished a season with in the last 20 yrs.  

 
I can't be the only one still scarred by Jason Johnson and Kevin Jarvis, right?

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

 
I can't be the only one still scarred by Jason Johnson and Kevin Jarvis, right?

 
Heck, even the guy who took over for them still is!
 

 

[nvalvo]

 
I can't be the only one still scarred by Jason Johnson and Kevin Jarvis, right?

 
The adjusted numbers are probably worse for this year's late season rotation (in a pitcher's year) than they were in 2006, but at least many of these guys have considerable upside. 

 

[richgedman'sghost]

 
Since when is a 1:1 BB/K ratio promise to go along with a 6.23 K/9 and a 1.33 WHIP?
I guess when compared to the rest of the Sox back end (Webster, Ranaudo) it looks promising but this might be the worst starting 5 the Sox have finished a season with in the last 20 yrs.  

Hello..Do you remember the rotations at the end of either the 2006 or 2001 seasons? I would think either of those years was worse. Plus at least this year's rotation has promise. Kevin Jarvis and Jason Johnson had no future in the Red Sox organization. 

 

[Sprowl]

Hello..Do you remember the rotations at the end of either the 2006 or 2001 seasons? I would think either of those years was worse. Plus at least this year's rotation has promise. Kevin Jarvis and Jason Johnson had no future in the Red Sox organization. 

 
2006 ended in cancer, heart murmurs, despair and shell-shock. It was nothing like 2013, which will end with 5 position players (Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, Holt and Middlebrooks), 5 starters (Kelly, de la Rosa, Webster, Ranaudo and Escobar) and 5 relievers (Workman, Wilson, Layne, Hembree and Britton) accumulating two month's worth of major league exposure (sorry Brandon, but let's get real). The value of that accumulation is hard to calculate, but cumulatively large. It will also rehab Pedroia (thumb, cumulative), Buchholz (squirrels, cumulative). September is important for all of these players.