Fix This Team: A Speculative Alternative to the Roster Shakeup Thread

[koufax32]

This doesn't mean we go into a EEI style trade proposal fest. If you have trade ideas as well as call ups and demotions feel free. Just make it reasonable please.

My two candidates for removal from the rotation are Buchholz and Kelly. Kelly is the easy one. Buchholz would probably require dumping. Oh well.

I think the bullpen is the last thing to be fixed. It only gets added to if rotation and lineup changes do their job.

Lineup changes would include Craig to AAA, trading Nava for a lottery ticket, and putting Castillo into the lineup. No changes at catcher yet. That position is pretty much a lost cause offensively in my mind. Swihart goes back down after RH returns. No trade to upgrade there though.

Reengage RAJ about Hamels. Not trying to bring this discussion up again but pay a bit extra if you need to. Just no Blake or Mookie.

I may regret this. If it gets silly quickly I'll be the first to suggest shutting things down. Have at it folks.

 

[grimshaw]

This is what I would do:
Clay, Porcello and Kelly stay in the rotation.  Those are the three most likely to give you 6+ innings.  As bad as Kelly looked today, those flashes are still there, and he has the highest ceiling.  He managed to squeeze a few more innings against the best AL offense.
 
I would move Masterson first to the pen, and Johnson into the rotation.  Jedi is the easiest one to part with because of his contract.  If he's awful, adios.  If Miley continues to be awful, I would give Wright a shot and move Miley to the pen.
 
I have read a few scouting reports lately about E-Rod where his secondary pitches are still  mostly average, and his fastball could use a little better command.  Right now, he'd probably be a left handed version of last year Kelly which we could use, but he wouldn't be a finished product yet.
 
The AAA pen isn't so hot, so they have to live with the marginal talent until teams start trading.  One guy I hope they try and acquire is Tanner Roarke who is buried as a 7th inning guy.  Something with Marrero would probably help shore up the defense since Desmond has been a butcher.'
 
 
Eventually Rusney will be up and Craig and Vic will be long gone.  The offense isn't going to stay down forever.

 

[JBJ_HOF]

Betts
Sandoval
Ramirez
Ortiz
Pedroia
Bogaerts
Napoli
Castillo
Swihart
 
Buchholz, Porcello, Miley, Kelly, Johnson (Another month of two for Rodriguez)
 
Uehara CL, Tazawa SU1, Ogando SU2, Layne LOOGY, Barnes Mid, Ross Mid, Masterson Long
 
Then ride it out for a month.

 

[Papo The Snow Tiger]

I'm all for sending Craig to AAA or the unemployment line and bringing up JBJ. I thought they were making a mistake by starting JBJ off in the big leagues in '13. He had a good spring training that year, but I always believed it was a mistake to base any roster decision on a young player on spring training numbers. But now that JBJ"s has spent some real time in AAA it's time to see if he really can play in the big leagues.
 
I'm also hoping they can find some serviceable veteran catcher to fill in until Hanigan gets better and send Swihart back to AAA. I just don't believe that he's ready to hit big league pitching consistently yet. I always believed that it's better top have a young player spend too much time in the minors than not enough. See JBJ.
 
Jedi to the pen is an easy one. Send him to the pen and wave so long to Breslow. Craig Breslow is a very intelligent man and I'm sure he's a fine human being, but he's just not a very good pitcher anymore. I'd bring up Steven Wright and put him in the rotation. Why not. You're only fooling yourself if you think this team  is going anywhere, so see what you have in Wright. Wright's in his ninth professional season, so if he works out, great. If he doesn't at least you buy some more time for the kids in Pawtucket to develop.
 
I doubt anyone would be interested, but entertain offers for Nava, Napoli, and I hate to say it, Vic. If Nava or Vic can be traded it's Rusney time. If you can find Napoli a new home tell Hanley nice try in left field and give him a first baseman's mitt.
 
If the Phillies call I'd tell Ruben Amaro to stick Cole Hamels where the sun doesn't shine. Let Carl Willis have a shot at straightening out  Buchholz, Miley and Kelly. The only starter I feel reasonably good about is Porcello.

 

[WenZink]

Based on their careers, the two most likely starters to achieve some level of consistency are Porcello and Miley.  it's crtical since they have a better chance of making most of their starts and going deeper into games.  Miley has had two disastrous starts this year, but his last two have been decent.  If the Sox can't get 400 IP out of Porcello and Miley this year, they're in deep shT, and the bullpen will end up exposed if not ravaged.
 
Kelly can be sent to the minors, and if Farrell/Willis concur, he might be sent down to either get his starting back on track or to be converted to reliever. Kelly just has too much talent to be allowed to flail without some plan.   In that case Steven Wright would take Kelly's spot in the rotation.
 
Buchholz and Masterson remain in the rotation.  How they perform over the next few starts may dictate if Kelly comes back as a starter or reliever.
 
We wait and see how Barnes works out in the bullpen, before making any more moves.  You don't want to go releasing what you have and then find out the AAA callups are even worse.  Replace them one at a time.  How Barnes works out in the pen also impacts your long-term plan for Kelly.
 
btw, all of you seem to discount the chance of Craig finding his hitting stroke with the advantage of regular playing time at AAA.  It's not that much of a long-shot.  Given the amount of money he's owed for 2016/17 he could be the Sox 1B after Napoli moves on.

 

[Toe Nash]

Find and fix whatever's wrong in the scouting / coaching / analytical departments. We've seen two consecutive teams with a lot of different players underperform. I don't think it's just the players.
 
Otherwise, pray to BABIP. You can make a few changes on the edges (I'd bring up Castillo and dump Victorino right now) but otherwise this is basically the team we have. 

 

[nattysez]

Along the lines of Toe Nash's comment, why are Sox prospects so prone to scuffling?  Just bad luck?  Are the prospects overhyped?  
 
Out of all their superstar prospects, the Cubs have had Bryant, Rizzo, Russell and Soler perform around expectations, with only Baez disappointing.  I'd say the Sox are currently 0-4 with JBJ, Mookie, X and Swihart, though JBJ was never at the level of the Cubs group.
 
I understand that this is pretty out there, but I'd at least consider sending down Mookie and Swihart, and maybe even X, so they can get some instruction and get their swings back in shape in AAA.  I don't think they are getting much useful instruction in the majors, as it's too hard to "work on things" in the heat of the MLB season.  Swihart I wouldn't bring back up until next year at the earliest.  Rusney, X and Mookie I'd bring up around the ASB, assuming they're all hitting at that point.
 
 
Since JBJ now seems to have his groove back, I'd bring him up to play CF and have Holt play SS.  I'd find any reasonable cast-off C I could to play with Leon.
 
All of this means that the team will be worse rather than better in the short term.  However, if the team calls up three good-hitting minor-leaguers at the ASB, it should be much better in the second half, and all of the young guys will be better in the long term with the proper amount of time in the minors.
 
I understand that going to the minors is hardly a cure-all, but continuing to hope the young players "break out" without any evidence that the major league coaching staff has the ability to help them do so seems foolhardy.  That said, if others believe allowing the guys to figure it out in the majors is the better path, I'm more than open to hearing that -- this is really just spitballing to fix what seems like a broken situation.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

Mookie Betts is doing fine. With a little more luck, he's an all-star at 22 years old.

Still on pace for 20+ HR & 45+ doubles

 

[LesterFan]

Buchholz's peripherals look too good to give up on him right now. His FIP is actually 3 (!!) runs lower than his ERA. 11.49 K/9, 2.87 BB/9, 48.4% GB rate. Both his strikeout and walk rates are at a career best and the GB rate is right in line with his career. He's been a victim of a .407 BABIP, highest in the majors among qualified starters.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

Buchholz's peripherals look too good to give up on him right now. His FIP is actually 3 (!!) runs lower than his ERA. 11.49 K/9, 2.87 BB/9, 48.4% GB rate. Both his strikeout and walk rates are at a career best and the GB rate is right in line with his career. He's been a victim of a .407 BABIP, highest in the majors among qualified starters.

Peripherals like FIP assume a specific distribution of hits. When you have bases empty / men on splits like Buchholz does the peripheral predictions are going to fall apart. The more hits he gives up, the more hits he's going to give up. That's a recipe for the disaster you've witnessed the past two calendar years. It's not bad luck. Clay is phenomenally bad with runners on, which when you think about it is probably the worst thing you could be as a pitcher.

 

[czar]

Peripherals like FIP assume a specific distribution of hits. When you have bases empty / men on splits like Buchholz does the peripheral predictions are going to fall apart. The more hits he gives up, the more hits he's going to give up. That's a recipe for the disaster you've witnessed the past two calendar years. It's not bad luck. Clay is phenomenally bad with runners on, which when you think about it is probably the worst thing you could be as a pitcher.

 
So, like 200ish innings ago, when Buchholz was the complete opposite...?
 
I wrote about this at Fangraphs earlier this week, but there has not be a pitcher in the xFIP era with the kind of split (between ERA and peripherals) that Buchholz has right now. Even if you assume that he's the suckiest suck of peripheral suck, his ERA should be at least 2 runs lower based on a sample of nearly 1000 pitchers.
 
Either he's the biggest outlier we've seen amongst this generation of starting pitchers or he's getting (at least a little) unlucky.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

 
So, like 200ish innings ago, when Buchholz was the complete opposite...?
 
I wrote about this at Fangraphs earlier this week, but there has not be a pitcher in the xFIP era with the kind of split (between ERA and peripherals) that Buchholz has right now. Even if you assume that he's the suckiest suck of peripheral suck, his ERA should be at least 2 runs lower based on a sample of nearly 1000 pitchers.
 
Either he's the biggest outlier we've seen amongst this generation of starting pitchers or he's getting (at least a little) unlucky.

Yeah, I do mean like 200 innings ago when Clay was the complete opposite because he was a completely different pitcher then. As has been discussed ad nauseam in the thread devoted to him. It's not surprising at all that the differential you wrote about is so large, but you ignored two possibilities: one, that maybe Clay's peripherals end up catching up with his actual performance (I.e. his xFIP gets higher to match his ERA), which seems unlikely. The other possibility, which I'll state again, is that when you give up 20% line drives, xFIP assumes that 20% follows whatever distribution has been observed for the entire group of pitchers. Giving up line drives are probably not entirely independent events, but they're also not correlated the way Buchholz' have been. If you don't give up any line drives for four innings, then you walk the lead off batter in the fifth and give up seven straight shots, your xFIP will look great but your fans will hate you. Show me the list of pitchers who have worse splits with men on base than Clay and I'll show you a group of pitchers who wildly underperform their xFIP. You can start with your boy 2009 Ricky Nolasco, whose OPS against was over 300 pts higher with men on base. Or you can start with another player who historically underperformed his xFIP, 2014 Clay Buchholz.

 

[NDame616]

Along the lines of Toe Nash's comment, why are Sox prospects so prone to scuffling?  Just bad luck?  Are the prospects overhyped?  
 
Out of all their superstar prospects, the Cubs have had Bryant, Rizzo, Russell and Soler perform around expectations, with only Baez disappointing.  I'd say the Sox are currently 0-4 with JBJ, Mookie, X and Swihart, though JBJ was never at the level of the Cubs group.
 
I understand that this is pretty out there, but I'd at least consider sending down Mookie and Swihart, and maybe even X, so they can get some instruction and get their swings back in shape in AAA.  I don't think they are getting much useful instruction in the majors, as it's too hard to "work on things" in the heat of the MLB season.  Swihart I wouldn't bring back up until next year at the earliest.  Rusney, X and Mookie I'd bring up around the ASB, assuming they're all hitting at that point.
 
 
Since JBJ now seems to have his groove back, I'd bring him up to play CF and have Holt play SS.  I'd find any reasonable cast-off C I could to play with Leon.
 
All of this means that the team will be worse rather than better in the short term.  However, if the team calls up three good-hitting minor-leaguers at the ASB, it should be much better in the second half, and all of the young guys will be better in the long term with the proper amount of time in the minors.
 
I understand that going to the minors is hardly a cure-all, but continuing to hope the young players "break out" without any evidence that the major league coaching staff has the ability to help them do so seems foolhardy.  That said, if others believe allowing the guys to figure it out in the majors is the better path, I'm more than open to hearing that -- this is really just spitballing to fix what seems like a broken situation.

 
His BAbip is way down from last year, while his LD% is slightly up. The guy isn't raking by any means, but he is nowhere near a "problem" on the team that you need to "fix". 
 
He also has the same number of HRs as he hit last year in about 60% of the games.

 

[Toe Nash]

The Sox currently have the worst BABIP in the majors. While they're not the fastest team, Fenway usually gives teams a high BABIP, so this is very likely to improve. Here's the team's career BABIP compared to this year along with their wRC+. I find this instructive:
 
Career BABIP / 2015 / wRC+:
Betts: .293  / .237 / 103
-Had much higher BABIPs in the minors and appears to be hitting the ball hard. Should improve. That's great considering he's above-average offensively already and has shown solid D, and is 22. Sending him down is frankly stupid.
 
Pedroia: .312 / .286 / 124
-A little unlucky, but not incredibly so. Should remain solid if healthy.
 
Holt: .337 / .383 / 134
-Not likely to keep this up, but if we get a real right fielder, he can go back to being a super-utility player.
 
Hanigan: .277 / .268 / 94
-Contributed more than expected, but doesn't matter now.
 
Bogaerts: .301 / .316 / 88
-He's improved the plate discipline numbers but isn't hitting the ball hard as noted. That may come. Tough to project him still. Personally I'm down on him, but so long as the defensive improvement is real you could do worse than a 2-3 WAR shortstop for the league minimum.
 
Sandoval: .314 / .347 / 117
-A little lucky, but regression wouldn't kill his numbers. Doing about what was expected of him. You'd think the power numbers would improve as time goes on.
 
Ortiz:  .301 / .257 / 100
-His career BABIP came from times when he was a different player...he had a .256 BABIP last year. This may be what we get from him, which may be an issue.
 
Hanley: .331 / .229 / 143
-Like Betts, he seems to be hitting rockets and has an unlucky BABIP. If he remains healthy, expect him to get lots of doubles to go with the HR. His SLG may drop, but his BA and OBP should rise.
 
Craig: .321  / .182 / 24
Nava:  .327 / .171 / 13
-Frustrating to run these guys out there, but glad they are making the right move. If Victorino doesn't hit, hopefully he doesn't get much rope. RF should improve in the near future one way or another.
 
Napoli: .307 / .186 / 51
-It seems unlikely that he became useless overnight. Maybe he's declining at age 33, but he'll be better than a .246 wOBA. In any case, they have to stick with him.
 
So far the main problem offensively is that the two best hitters are getting unlucky, and they're getting nothing from 3 lineup spots. I don't think Swihart / Leon is going to be much of an asset this year, but RF and 1B should improve. DH and SS may remain average, but there's reason to believe 3B, 2B, LF and CF will all be plus offensive spots.
 
Like the pitching, you can say that their results will continue to underperform their defense-independent stats because they just suck and you want something to complain about. It may be the case in isolated incidents (Craig or Nava may just be done). But on a team-wide level, there's no way they are going to keep hitting balls at people as much as they have.

 

[czar]

Yeah, I do mean like 200 innings ago when Clay was the complete opposite because he was a completely different pitcher then. As has been discussed ad nauseam in the thread devoted to him. It's not surprising at all that the differential you wrote about is so large, but you ignored two possibilities: one, that maybe Clay's peripherals end up catching up with his actual performance (I.e. his xFIP gets higher to match his ERA), which seems unlikely. The other possibility, which I'll state again, is that when you give up 20% line drives, xFIP assumes that 20% follows whatever distribution has been observed for the entire group of pitchers. Giving up line drives are probably not entirely independent events, but they're also not correlated the way Buchholz' have been. If you don't give up any line drives for four innings, then you walk the lead off batter in the fifth and give up seven straight shots, your xFIP will look great but your fans will hate you. Show me the list of pitchers who have worse splits with men on base than Clay and I'll show you a group of pitchers who wildly underperform their xFIP. You can start with your boy 2009 Ricky Nolasco, whose OPS against was over 300 pts higher with men on base. Or you can start with another player who historically underperformed his xFIP, 2014 Clay Buchholz.

 
But here's the thing about Clay and men on base. His batted ball splits actually look BETTER from the stretch in 2015.
 
Bases empty:
LD% 22%
HardHit 31.2%
GB% 40%
K%-BB% 22%
BABIP .300
 
Men on:
LD% 18.6%
HardHit 32.4%
GB% 58%.
K%-BB% 19%
BABIP .537
 
And, yes, I understand folks'll probably try to take these stats and say "well, Buchholz clusters the REALLY bad hits into one inning each time he has runners on base, instead of every time he has runners on base." But we have no historical evidence to support that these pitchers exist. Again, Buchholz may truly be the most anti-peripheral pitcher ever, but he'd be in a class by himself.
 
But I really should be done beating this peripheral-ERA thing to death. I'll gladly put $10 to the Jimmy Fund against any person who thinks (going forward) Buchholz's ERA-xFIP split > 1.00 for the RoS. I mean, if he really does have magic anti-peripheral pixie dust, my guess is everyone'll jump at that.

 

[CSteinhardt]

Peripherals like FIP assume a specific distribution of hits. When you have bases empty / men on splits like Buchholz does the peripheral predictions are going to fall apart. The more hits he gives up, the more hits he's going to give up. That's a recipe for the disaster you've witnessed the past two calendar years. It's not bad luck. Clay is phenomenally bad with runners on, which when you think about it is probably the worst thing you could be as a pitcher.

 
It's usually the case that people end up overcorrecting something like FIP for another reason too: when you turn hits into outs based upon luck, you have to factor those outs into the number of innings.  In other words, 11.49 K/9 is happening in part because he can't seem to get people out when they put the ball in play, the latter regresses to the mean, the strikeout rate will go down accordingly.

 

[czar]

 
It's usually the case that people end up overcorrecting something like FIP for another reason too: when you turn hits into outs based upon luck, you have to factor those outs into the number of innings.  In other words, 11.49 K/9 is happening in part because he can't seem to get people out when they put the ball in play, the latter regresses to the mean, the strikeout rate will go down accordingly.

 
xFIP kind of builds this dependency implicitly in by essentially calculating a K/BB ratio (K's are good, BB's are bad, both /9 rates go up if you give up a lot of hits on BIP).
 
SIERA uses K% and BB% (which removes errors associated with /9 and high BABIP), and SIERA is generally extremely highly correlated with xFIP, except in cases where pitchers give up wildly different batted ball profiles than expected (Buchholz is not in this class so far in 2015).

 

[WenZink]

 
... Again, Buchholz may truly be the most anti-peripheral pitcher ever, but he'd be in a class by himself.
 
....

 
I've been watching baseball for over 50 years, and Buchholz is indeed one of a kind.  So when I see comments such as these (and I'm not at all diminishing your overall analysis), I have to stop and think.  If there is ever a candidate for "Mr. Outlier," it would be our boy Clay.  And I'm not entirely joking.  I can't recall an elite athlete, who, at times, seemed more uncomfortable with his body.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

 
But I really should be done beating this peripheral-ERA thing to death. I'll gladly put $10 to the Jimmy Fund against any person who thinks (going forward) Buchholz's ERA-xFIP split > 1.00 for the RoS. I mean, if he really does have magic anti-peripheral pixie dust, my guess is everyone'll jump at that.

But your point isn't just that his performance and peripherals should end up similar, it's also that his performance is definitely going to improve. Reframe this about Clay's ERA going down to match his xFIP and I'd gladly take you up on it.

 

[czar]

But your point isn't just that his performance and peripherals should end up similar, it's also that his performance is definitely going to improve. Reframe this about Clay's ERA going down to match his xFIP and I'd gladly take you up on it.

 
I am not arguing that. Essentially every post I've been in, I've fully acknowledged that Buchholz's xFIP could move up based on whether or not he can sustain career high K% and BB% marks. In fact, it wouldn't shock me to see them track back a bit just based on the air he's in. I've been arguing the notion that to date everyone believes he's been an epically terrible pitcher as opposed to being unlucky given the stats we have on hand.
 
It would seem foolish for me to argue that SSS xFIP is immediately predictive in that he'll throw a 2.9whatever ERA RoS. I do have enough faith in his xFIP the last two years that I'd project a <4.00 ERA for the RoS. 4.00 is right in line with his career averages, but if he really is a worse player the past 2 years relative to his early career, that seems like easy money.

 

[Rough Carrigan]

Move Craig down to AAA.
Bring JBJ up, give him some at bats, if he hits, he's the centerfielder.  If he doesn't hit he goes back down to work toward hitting at the big league level.
If JBJ's the centerfielder, see if Mookie can play right. 
Release Victorino if he doesn't show that he's got "it" back pretty quickly.  Don't give him 100 more terrible plate appearances as a thank you for 2013.
Take Masterson out of the rotation and make him a ROOGY/long man.
Bring up Eduardo Rodriguez and put him in the rotation. 
Trade Varvaro for whatever you get and bring up Steven Wright and put him in the pen.
 
It'd be nice if Bogaerts would field better and hit better than a .680 OPS but they don't have a whole lot of options for SS right now.
It'd be nice if Napoli would hit but he doesn't "look" bad and the best option there is probably to just wait out this slow start. 
It'd be nice if the whole fvcking team would do something better than 5-59 with RISP but that's also a matter to wait out and not try to fix with roster moves.
 
A lot of what you'd like to do with this roster you really can't.  Shitcanning Clay would feel cathartic for his exasperating responses to big innings but you can't completely ignore those peripherals.  And there aren't a ton of good options.  The guys on MLB network were stunned at how inconsistent Joe Kelly's delivery is.  What can you do with him?  Don't you have to see if Carl Willis can straighten him out?  His stuff is still very good, unlike Masterson.  I don't know what to think about Miley but I don't think his stuff has really deteriorated.  That's another case where waiting is probably the wise move.
 
Hope some more bats get going, and some hitting with RISP improves, change the rotation and pen a bit and lineup a bit.

 

[Rough Carrigan]

 
I am not arguing that. Essentially every post I've been in, I've fully acknowledged that Buchholz's xFIP could move up based on whether or not he can sustain career high K% and BB% marks. In fact, it wouldn't shock me to see them track back a bit just based on the air he's in. I've been arguing the notion that to date everyone believes he's been an epically terrible pitcher as opposed to being unlucky given the stats we have on hand.
 
It would seem foolish for me to argue that SSS xFIP is immediately predictive in that he'll throw a 2.9whatever ERA RoS. I do have enough faith in his xFIP the last two years that I'd project a <4.00 ERA for the RoS. 4.00 is right in line with his career averages, but if he really is a worse player the past 2 years relative to his early career, that seems like easy money.

Well, he doesn't have the fastball, the last 2+ years that he had in his first couple years.  I was at his start against that shitty Tampa lineup and I think Clay threw one fastball 93 mph.  Most seemed to be 90 with some 91's.  He used to sit at 93 and hit 94-95.  And that makes his K% this year a little harder to explain.

 

[O Captain! My Captain!]

Well, he doesn't have the fastball, the last 2+ years that he had in his first couple years.  I was at his start against that shitty Tampa lineup and I think Clay threw one fastball 93 mph.  Most seemed to be 90 with some 91's.  He used to sit at 93 and hit 94-95.  And that makes his K% this year a little harder to explain.

 
pitchers tend to have their best fastballs in the middle of the season. his fastball velocity looks closer to his trends in his good (early) 2013 rather than 2014

 

[tims4wins]

Cluster Clay kind of shows up again today - 5 hits allowed through 5, but in 2 of the 3 innings he gave up a hit, he gave up multiple hits. When do we start to consider this as not just an outlier? Would be curious in this stat: hits allowed per inning in which the pitcher gives up at least one hit. Guessing Clay would be at least one SD high and maybe multiple. Also wonder how his career / multi year trends would look on this.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

Cluster Clay kind of shows up again today - 5 hits allowed through 5, but in 2 of the 3 innings he gave up a hit, he gave up multiple hits. When do we start to consider this as not just an outlier? Would be curious in this stat: hits allowed per inning in which the pitcher gives up at least one hit. Guessing Clay would be at least one SD high and maybe multiple. Also wonder how his career / multi year trends would look on this.

Any reason to think this would show something different than his windup/stretch splits, which are about a hundred times easier to examine (and have been in this and his namesake thread)?

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

 
I am not arguing that. Essentially every post I've been in, I've fully acknowledged that Buchholz's xFIP could move up based on whether or not he can sustain career high K% and BB% marks. In fact, it wouldn't shock me to see them track back a bit just based on the air he's in. I've been arguing the notion that to date everyone believes he's been an epically terrible pitcher as opposed to being unlucky given the stats we have on hand.
 
It would seem foolish for me to argue that SSS xFIP is immediately predictive in that he'll throw a 2.9whatever ERA RoS. I do have enough faith in his xFIP the last two years that I'd project a <4.00 ERA for the RoS. 4.00 is right in line with his career averages, but if he really is a worse player the past 2 years relative to his early career, that seems like easy money.

That's a fair bet. I'll take it and spot you today's start. If Clay is under 4.00 the rest of the season, I'll pay $10 to charity of your choice.

 

[czar]

That's a fair bet. I'll take it and spot you today's start. If Clay is under 4.00 the rest of the season, I'll pay $10 to charity of your choice.

 
Cool beans (although I don't think anyone says "cool beans" anymore).

 

[Gash Prex]

Along the lines of Toe Nash's comment, why are Sox prospects so prone to scuffling?  Just bad luck?  Are the prospects overhyped?  
 
Out of all their superstar prospects, the Cubs have had Bryant, Rizzo, Russell and Soler perform around expectations, with only Baez disappointing.  I'd say the Sox are currently 0-4 with JBJ, Mookie, X and Swihart, though JBJ was never at the level of the Cubs group.
 
I understand that this is pretty out there, but I'd at least consider sending down Mookie and Swihart, and maybe even X, so they can get some instruction and get their swings back in shape in AAA.  I don't think they are getting much useful instruction in the majors, as it's too hard to "work on things" in the heat of the MLB season.  Swihart I wouldn't bring back up until next year at the earliest.  Rusney, X and Mookie I'd bring up around the ASB, assuming they're all hitting at that point.
 
 
Since JBJ now seems to have his groove back, I'd bring him up to play CF and have Holt play SS.  I'd find any reasonable cast-off C I could to play with Leon.
 
All of this means that the team will be worse rather than better in the short term.  However, if the team calls up three good-hitting minor-leaguers at the ASB, it should be much better in the second half, and all of the young guys will be better in the long term with the proper amount of time in the minors.
 
I understand that going to the minors is hardly a cure-all, but continuing to hope the young players "break out" without any evidence that the major league coaching staff has the ability to help them do so seems foolhardy.  That said, if others believe allowing the guys to figure it out in the majors is the better path, I'm more than open to hearing that -- this is really just spitballing to fix what seems like a broken situation.

 
What are you talking about?  Mookie is 8th in MLB in total WAR - even considering his terrible luck this year with a sub .250 BABIP.  In fact, so far the metrics have him as #6 in CF on fangraphs and #4 is defensive WAR on b-ref.  
 
The last thing this team needs to do is touch anything that Mookie is doing as a 22 year old playing CF.  

 

[O Captain! My Captain!]

Along the lines of Toe Nash's comment, why are Sox prospects so prone to scuffling?  Just bad luck?  Are the prospects overhyped?  
 
Out of all their superstar prospects, the Cubs have had Bryant, Rizzo, Russell and Soler perform around expectations, with only Baez disappointing.  I'd say the Sox are currently 0-4 with JBJ, Mookie, X and Swihart, though JBJ was never at the level of the Cubs group.

 
Let's remember that Rizzo was a former Red Sox prospect and has more games in the Sox system than in the Padres' or Cubs' combined.

 

[grimshaw]

Along the lines of Toe Nash's comment, why are Sox prospects so prone to scuffling?  Just bad luck?  Are the prospects overhyped?  
 
Out of all their superstar prospects, the Cubs have had Bryant, Rizzo, Russell and Soler perform around expectations, with only Baez disappointing.  I'd say the Sox are currently 0-4 with JBJ, Mookie, X and Swihart, though JBJ was never at the level of the Cubs group.
 
 
 
 

If we're going by how they are supposed to perform this year, Betts is killing his projection by the most.
 
He's on pace for a 5 WAR+ season.  He was projected to reach 3.  His wRC+ is 107 which is below the wRC+ 116 he has now, but his base running and fielding value has been higher.
 
Russell and Soler both had very modest Steamer projections and are on track to combine for about 1.5 WAR and league average in wRC+ (94 and 104).
Bogaerts is behind his age 22 season projection with the bat, but has exceeded the projections in the field.  He is still comparing favorably with Soler and Russell.
 
Bryant OTOH hasn't been performing up to expectations.  He has gotten on base a ton, but hasn't hit for power.  He was projected to reach 2.5 wins in 419 AB's and hasn't reached half a win yet in 100.  He's also the oldest member of the bunch.
 
Russell and Bryant also have much higher pedigrees as 1st round draft picks, and Bryant was paid 4 million dollars to sign.  Bogaerts got 400k, and Betts was a 5th rounder.  I don't think you can make any conclusive case that the Cubs have won in that department based on expectations, and there is no way you can throw in Swihart after 1 week on the job as a catcher.

 

[jasvlm]

Here is my quick take:
When Vic is activated, platoon him and JBJ in RF, Mookie stays in CF, Hanley in LF.
Infield stays Napoli at 1b, Pedroia at 2b, X at ss, Panda at 3b.  Ortiz DH, Swihart/Leon catch. Nava, Holt bench.
If(when) Vic can't stay healthy, or hit, he gets released and Castillo comes up to play RF full time, JBJ 4th OFer.
 
The pitching is a mess.  Here is one solution:
Rotation: Buchholz, Porcello, Miley, Masterson,  Johnson (up from AAA).  Kelly to the pen to be a long man/swing starter.
Pen: Koji closes, Tazawa sets up, Ogando,  Barnes, Layne and Breslow round it out.
 
Then, if Masterson can't figure it out, or remains way down on his velocity, ERod comes up and Masterson hits the DL until he gets right.  
 
Let this roster play it out over the next 3 weeks, and if they are in a better position, start considering trades to add talent, especially to the pitching staff.  

 

[reggiecleveland]

There is no roster fix. Either guys start pitching better or they are a bad team. The latter is more likely. They should not rush, or mess with development of players to save this flawed team. It would be better to take the lumps and solve long term problems, re-evaluate people.
 
I expect one reason for a lack of big spending or going for it moves on a starter this off season is a realization that this type of team was possible. The jury is still out on where Ortiz, Pedroia are too,
 
All they can really do is dump Craig, wait for Rusney, maybe change one guy in the rotation,

 

[ehaz]

Kenley Jansen is returning from an injury and it looks like Chris Hatcher appears to be the odd man out of the Dodger 'pen when Jansen is back.  LA's pen is loaded, and Hatcher is the one pitcher with the least success (also out of options).  The 7.20 ERA is unsightly, but he's got high 90's heat, a 1.66 FIP, 13.5 K/9, and doesn't walk a ton of guys.  Last year he was one of Miami's better options out of the pen (2.56 FIP in 55 innings).  
 
Not the sexiest 'roster shakeup' but these are the guys who are available in May...

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
What are you talking about?  Mookie is 8th in MLB in total WAR - even considering his terrible luck this year with a sub .250 BABIP.  In fact, so far the metrics have him as #6 in CF on fangraphs and #4 is defensive WAR on b-ref.  
 
The last thing this team needs to do is touch anything that Mookie is doing as a 22 year old playing CF.  

 
 

If we're going by how they are supposed to perform this year, Betts is killing his projection by the most.
 
He's on pace for a 5 WAR+ season.  He was projected to reach 3.  His wRC+ is 107 which is below the wRC+ 116 he has now, but his base running and fielding value has been higher.

 
While I agree that the team shouldn't be considering sending Mookie down, using defensive metrics, or stats that include a defensive metric component are incredibly unstable in a sample as small as ~20% of the season. That he's on pace for 5 WAR when it's heavily driven by his defensive as it is doesn't mean nearly as much as we'd like it to, and isn't a compelling reason to do one thing or the other.
 
WAR is a nice stat over large samples, but it's virtually useless in this context. FWIW, I would also argue against demoting Bogaerts. Both guys are hitting fairly well, given their age, and neither appears to be a negative defensively (with Mookie looking to the eye test to be a solid defensive CFer at worst), so letting them get their lumps in at the major league level is probably the best thing for their development. The gap between MLB and AAA is pretty huge, and I don't think seeing more AAA pitching is likely to do much to help them start hitting the higher quality pitches they are seeing at this level.

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

Gordon Edes ‏@GordonEdes  22s23 seconds ago
Sox GM Ben Cherington is joining the team in Oakland. So is OF Shane Victorino
 

 

[grimshaw]

 
 
 
While I agree that the team shouldn't be considering sending Mookie down, using defensive metrics, or stats that include a defensive metric component are incredibly unstable in a sample as small as ~20% of the season. That he's on pace for 5 WAR when it's heavily driven by his defensive as it is doesn't mean nearly as much as we'd like it to, and isn't a compelling reason to do one thing or the other.
 
WAR is a nice stat over large samples, but it's virtually useless in this context. FWIW, I would also argue against demoting Bogaerts. Both guys are hitting fairly well, given their age, and neither appears to be a negative defensively (with Mookie looking to the eye test to be a solid defensive CFer at worst), so letting them get their lumps in at the major league level is probably the best thing for their development. The gap between MLB and AAA is pretty huge, and I don't think seeing more AAA pitching is likely to do much to help them start hitting the higher quality pitches they are seeing at this level.

I don't disagree - I was arguing that the Cubs guys weren't outperforming the Red Sox youngsters with embarrassingly small sample sizes.

 

[pokey_reese]

Cluster Clay kind of shows up again today - 5 hits allowed through 5, but in 2 of the 3 innings he gave up a hit, he gave up multiple hits. When do we start to consider this as not just an outlier? Would be curious in this stat: hits allowed per inning in which the pitcher gives up at least one hit. Guessing Clay would be at least one SD high and maybe multiple. Also wonder how his career / multi year trends would look on this.

Wait, I think that there is something amiss here in the underlying assumption. If a guy is going to give up 5 hits in 5 innings, why would you assume that a normal distribution is 1 hit per inning? In fact, given that teams group their best hitters together in the line-up, I would think that it would be more likely for hits to come in bunches. I don't know that there is anything to suggest that hits "should" be evenly distributed throughout a start. It might be the case, but I don't think that we can start from that assumption.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Wait, I think that there is something amiss here in the underlying assumption. If a guy is going to give up 5 hits in 5 innings, why would you assume that a normal distribution is 1 hit per inning? In fact, given that teams group their best hitters together in the line-up, I would think that it would be more likely for hits to come in bunches. I don't know that there is anything to suggest that hits "should" be evenly distributed throughout a start. It might be the case, but I don't think that we can start from that assumption.

Not to mention the fact(?) that pitchers generally are less effective pitching from the stretch

 

[bellowthecat]

Wait, I think that there is something amiss here in the underlying assumption. If a guy is going to give up 5 hits in 5 innings, why would you assume that a normal distribution is 1 hit per inning? In fact, given that teams group their best hitters together in the line-up, I would think that it would be more likely for hits to come in bunches. I don't know that there is anything to suggest that hits "should" be evenly distributed throughout a start. It might be the case, but I don't think that we can start from that assumption.

 
I think you are correct to challenge that assumption.  All pitchers see hits increase once a runner is on base, probably due to a combination of defensive positioning to hold the runner on, the clumping of best hitters together in the lineup, and pitching from the stretch itself. However, I'm not sure there's enough information to declare any of these the largest contributing factor.
 
I am probably in the minority here, but I don't outright dismiss SSS defensive numbers. Granted I'm not living and dying by them, but I have little trouble believing that defensive performance can fluctuate wildly throughout the season. 

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

I am probably in the minority here, but I don't outright dismiss SSS defensive numbers. Granted I'm not living and dying by them, but I have little trouble believing that defensive performance can fluctuate wildly throughout the season. 

 
It's not a matter of performances fluctuating wildy over the course of a season, it's a matter of the metrics themselves not stabilizing until we have roughly three seasons worth of data. It's right there in the write up for UZR.
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/library/defense/uzr/
 
And you can read more about it here.
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Everything-you-always-wanted-to-know-about-UZR?urn=mlb,212311
 
They mostly talk about the pitfalls of using just one season of UZR data. We're discussing the value of about 5 weeks. Also, think about what needing a three year sample means and how many things can impact a player's UZR in that span that up the noise factor in the data. Has the player been moving around the diamond in those three years? Have they changed ballparks and had to learn new field dimensions? How good are the defenders to either side of them? How good is the defensive positioning on the team they are playing for? Have they changed teams and gone from a team that's not good at positioning their fielders to one that is? How often do they shift? Which shifts do they employ? What is the GB/FB ratio for the pitching staff and how does that relate to the defensive position that player plays? 1000 innings in left field for a fly ball heavy staff that induces a lot of pull contact against right handed batters is not going to be the same as 1000 innings in left field for a team that induces a ton of ground balls with a more normal distribution of fly balls in the outfield.
 
There are a ton of factors that can impact a player's UZR from year to year and that meas that b the time they get those three years under their belt, there are other reasons not to fully trust the data. Yes, it adjusts for parks and leagues, but even park factors vary from season to season based on a number of variables. And all of this is before we start considering age related decline and injuries.
 
UZR and WAR are problematic enough looking at a full season. They're almost useless in evaluating players when you're roughly 20% of the way through the season, especially when they're being used to predict where a player is going to end up. Mookie may well be a 5 WAR player this season. His WAR on May 11th doesn't really do much to support that argument, though.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

The WAR discussion has kind of obscured a point that needs making -- anyone who thinks Mookie needs to be sent down to get his swing together is totally ignoring the fact that that swing has delivered a 1.000+ OPS over the past two weeks. Sure, that's a small sample, but so was the prior period that made him look like he needed fixing. We're such New England Calvinists around here that we are much more alive to the perils of SSS-based optimism than SSS-based pessimism. But they are both equally likely to mislead.
 
Betts now has a 110 OPS+ for this season, and a 122 over about a half-season's worth of PA for his career. And he's playing good CF by the eye test, even if the early-season metrics are not reliable. If Ben is even considering sending Mookie down right now, his sanity should be questioned.

 

[radsoxfan]

The WAR discussion has kind of obscured a point that needs making -- anyone who thinks Mookie needs to be sent down to get his swing together is totally ignoring the fact that that swing has delivered a 1.000+ OPS over the past two weeks.
 
If Ben is even considering sending Mookie down right now, his sanity should be questioned.

 
Agreed.  Forget WAR if the limited data input leads the the same tangential argument about its validity over small samples.
 
Mookie (even with his bad luck) has been the best player on the team so far this year in my opinion. Even if you disagree, I don't think you can even start to make an argument that he hasn't been one of the top 4 players on the team. WAR isn't required to recognize that, and sending him to AAA would be straight up lunacy. 

 

[bellowthecat]

I generally agree with what you're saying.  I'm not trying to advocate using them to project future performance or to sway an argument.  UZR in particular is messier now because teams are shifting so often and they don't account for those plays.  In general though I'll look at DRS, Inside Edge, and UZR to see what story they're telling about recent past performance.  I try to consider whether someone is playing in a new ball park or a new position and that shift use is exploding.  To me it's like April performance, yeah it doesn't mean much but things still happen and there's still a story being told.
 
Projecting defense is very difficult and requires loads of regression, so understand I'm not advocating taking a SSS UZR/150 and projecting that over a full season.  TBH I hate UZR/150 because it implies that defensive performance isn't highly variable.
 
As far as incorporating defensive stats into WAR, I really can only say I don't know.  How much credit do fielders deserve for being where the manager shifts them?  Well, what if they make a really nice place while shifted, and it's at an unfamiliar angle?  How much credit does the pitcher deserve?  The WAR model does a decent job for a macro look at the league, but again, I'm not going to pretend it's infallible or particularly useful for predicting future performance.  I'm just trying to look at all the data in real time and see what kind of story it tells about the past.

 

[bosockboy]

 

Maybe he can take Kazmir back with us.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I've been busy lately, so following the team for the past week and a half has been spotty at best.  
 
I didn't quite know where to put this on the board, but skipping chunks of games gives an interesting perspective.  I don't know how the team is "playing" - what the energy level is, how crisp the plays are, if they're battling or not.  But the box score is always very bottom line.  Hanley, for example - he's back but 2 for 12 (didn't really know that till I looked this AM).  Back too soon?   Or RF in general - JBJ is on the team but that position remains a black hole of suck for the second year running (mostly).  Napoli continues as a big zero. 
 
I wonder if instead of blowing things up, Farrell ought to tinker with the lineup on a game by game, hot/cold basis.  To the extent such is psychologically practical.  I realize Ortiz is a fixture, but 2015 plus a temporarily gimpy Hanley create a sort of flat spot before Sandoval.  Who is followed by Napoli, who can't be all that intimidating to opposing pitching.  
 
I wonder if Pedroia, Sandoval and Holt aren't getting a bit too spread out.  And, to a lesser extent, Betts, Ortiz, and Bogaerts.   Hanley's dinged up for the moment, but is a crucial piece of the offense.  1B RF and C are, for the moment, black holes, with only 1B seeming to have a fix possible.   (Napoli, Vic, Nava, Craig may be toast.  Ortiz may be getting there.  Castillo is missing.)  
 
Overall I feel like the offense (from what little I've seen) is underperforming and getting sort of lucky when they do score.   Similarly, the starting pitching is underperforming (to an extent).  I wish I'd seen Barnes last night.  I don't know what his appearance was like (outside the box score) but when I start watching again, I'm hoping (win or lose) to see smart aggressive baseball.   Those clustered bad innings and mediocre performances really kill my fire for the team. 
 
***
And Clay's new nickname should really be "General Cluster."  We need a photoshop of Clay in Custer's hat.

 

[Pedro 4 99MVP]

I am not saying this should be the 1st step to happen, so don't shoot down this idea based on SSS. IF Kelly doesn't gain some consistency as a SP, and we have already used Johnson to replace Masterson (which could be the 1st step), then Kelly to the bullpen as a late inning ace would be an awesome idea. Maybe Rodriguez is ready to join the rotation by then. I think his stuff is better than Taz, and he could give you multiple innings. Also maybe a future replacement for Koji as the closer. If he goes multiple innings and needs a couple days rest, you still have Taz and (hopefully) Barnes to handle 7/8 inning duties.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

And Clay's new nickname should really be "General Cluster."  We need a photoshop of Clay in Custer's hat.

 
A bit kludgey, but the best I can do on my lunch break:
 

 
 

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

I am not saying this should be the 1st step to happen, so don't shoot down this idea based on SSS. IF Kelly doesn't gain some consistency as a SP, and we have already used Johnson to replace Masterson (which could be the 1st step), then Kelly to the bullpen as a late inning ace would be an awesome idea. Maybe Rodriguez is ready to join the rotation by then. I think his stuff is better than Taz, and he could give you multiple innings. Also maybe a future replacement for Koji as the closer. If he goes multiple innings and needs a couple days rest, you still have Taz and (hopefully) Barnes to handle 7/8 inning duties.

 
Kelly doesn't lose velocity as he gets into the later innings, so I think you have to give him a ton of rope as a starter. He's, on average, the hardest throwing starter in the game right now. If he can harness his stuff, even a little, he can be really good. Sure, he's could also be a really good reliever, but his difficulties this year have been mostly in the first inning, so I'm not sure that transition is necessarily going to solve anything.

 

[phenweigh]

I think trying Wright in the rotation instead of rushing one of the youngsters is probably a better idea.  He'll be out of options next year, so let's see what we've got with him.

 

[EricFeczko]

I am not saying this should be the 1st step to happen, so don't shoot down this idea based on SSS. IF Kelly doesn't gain some consistency as a SP, and we have already used Johnson to replace Masterson (which could be the 1st step), then Kelly to the bullpen as a late inning ace would be an awesome idea. Maybe Rodriguez is ready to join the rotation by then. I think his stuff is better than Taz, and he could give you multiple innings. Also maybe a future replacement for Koji as the closer. If he goes multiple innings and needs a couple days rest, you still have Taz and (hopefully) Barnes to handle 7/8 inning duties.

It's an interesting idea, since Kelly's experience in college was as a closer. However, Kelly's velocity (noted by Snod) provides tremendous upside as a starting pitcher.
 
Furthermore, he's only been a starting pitcher since 2010. He was never a starter in college or high school; he has started, literally, 122 games in his life (minor league + major league). Chris archer, his closest comp according to Bref, has been a starter since high school and has pitched 225 games over his minor/major league career, and didn't start contributing until after ~160. Kelly's lack of command may simply be driven by a lack of starting.

In other words, Kelly may be a late bloomer who just needs to start more at the MLB level to develop because he has a weird history. The upside of a Kelly with decent command far outweighs what he could contribute as a reliever.