Red Sox Rumors - Just Kidding

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
10,032
NJ
Given the current payroll status selling Sale for money would be criminal.

And if he does bounce back he’d be worth a ton at the deadline vs. this moment. You’d need legit player value in return to move him right now. Not money, not a flyer.
Exactly. Problem is, I can’t imagine anyone giving that value because of the injuries, even though they’ve been freak ones mostly.
 
Regarding Story’s arm at shortstop…. Article in the Athletic-
————————————————————————
It’s Story’s arm strength that’s at issue. According to Statcast, the 30-year-old Story threw at 79.1 mph in 2021 from shortstop while with the Rockies, 52nd of 58 shortstops with a minimum of 100 throws that season. He also missed time that year with elbow inflammation. Last year, upon moving to second base, Story’s average velocity on throws dipped to 76.1 mph, 61st among 70 qualified players.

By comparison, Bogaerts’ throws clocked in at 82.1 mph last season, 34th among shortstops, while fellow free agent shortstop Dansby Swanson averaged 79.2 mph on throws, 48th out of 50 shortstops.

——————————————————————————
Somehow Swanson is a wizard at SS but Story is unplayable due to noodle arm. If Story has an elbow condition doesn’t that condition still exist at 2B? Play Story at SS and be done with it. Segura at 2B.
I get that but throwing 76 mph from 2B seems to be just as much a risk of injury. On top of that I think he passed a physical to secure the contract.

Feels like a funky narrative that explains why he didn’t get signed quickly last year. It’s the mph of Swanson that I find interesting
Looking at the statcast data, Swanson ranked last among regular shortstops in arm strength, so clearly it's possible to play decent SS with poor arm strength. But 76 is a big jump down from Swanson's 79.2. The difference between Swanson and Story would be basically as large as the difference between Swanson and X, who is 8 spots above him.

Throwing from second is in no way equivalent to throwing from short. Anybody who has played even little league should be able to tell you this. Your throws are going to be much longer from short. I'm honestly not sure if the mph ratings on statcast are at release point or average over the course of the throw. Either way there are problems. If it's release point, then a 76 mph throw from short is going to have more time to decelerate than a 76 mph throw from second. If it's average, then it's going to take a harder throw to maintain a 76mph throw from short vs. second.

It's also harder to hit the target at a longer distance. Usually throwing harder means throwing with less accuracy, so it may be that Story can manage to hit the mark at full effort from second but can't do so as consistently from short.

Furthermore, there's going to be a tipping point where a lot of balls in play start turning into infield singles vs. outs depending on the bell curve of time to first running speed. Slower throws means giving the runner more time, even if it's just a fraction of a step. If you give up too many of those fractions of a step then suddenly a lot more runners are reaching base. A fielder could make up this difference by getting to the ball more quickly, transferring the ball more quickly, and releasing the ball more quickly on average. A shortstop who gets to the ball super effectively, recovers quickly after a dive, transfers quickly and accurately and rarely double clutches a throw can probably afford poor arm strength. If a player lacks those skills, then all the range in the world isn't going to overcome an inability to get the ball to first quickly enough.

I'm hoping this explanation makes it clear why Story could be a viable shortstop candidate but also might not be. Does Story have the supplementary skills to overcome his poor arm strength? Does he have the accuracy throwing at a level of effort that would be needed to get the ball to first quickly enough? Does throwing like this pose an unacceptable injury risk? Some of these questions are probably answerable by an observer who has paid a lot closer attention to Story than I have, but some are probably legitimate unknowns.
 

gehrig

lurker
Apr 18, 2008
22
Looking at the statcast data, Swanson ranked last among regular shortstops in arm strength, so clearly it's possible to play decent SS with poor arm strength. But 76 is a big jump down from Swanson's 79.2. The difference between Swanson and Story would be basically as large as the difference between Swanson and X, who is 8 spots above him.
Moving to SS adds 3 MPH, so they're actually rated as having the same arm strength: http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/article/statcast-arm-strength-for-fielders
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
29,600
If you can dump Sale without a lot of subsidy and sign Eovaldi you’re probably better off going forward.

I don’t know that many, if any, teams would do that—since many can execute the same swap on their own (eg the set of places Sale would approve is likely similar to places Eovaldi would sign)

I suppose someone—Dombrowski?—might still view Sale as a 1, too. Recent performance be dammed.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
83,754
Oregon
I suppose someone—Dombrowski?—might still view Sale as a 1, too. Recent performance be dammed.
He's not a good outfielder, but Castellanos might be available in a change of scenery swap. Not sure that would be helpful, though
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,820
Red Sox view the rotation as an area of depth??!? Even though they haven’t yet added a starter even though that was one of their goals? I’m really confused.

Merry Christmas, everyone!
They added Whitlock, Houck, Sale, and Paxton. Also it's not even 2023 yet and there are a bunch of good starters still available.

If you can dump Sale without a lot of subsidy and sign Eovaldi you’re probably better off going forward.

I don’t know that many, if any, teams would do that—since many can execute the same swap on their own (eg the set of places Sale would approve is likely similar to places Eovaldi would sign)

I suppose someone—Dombrowski?—might still view Sale as a 1, too. Recent performance be dammed.
Or they could just keep Sale and also sign Eovaldi. It makes 0 sense to dump Sale, the only reason it would make any sense at all to trade him right now was if someone gave them a crazy offer.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
9,741
They added Whitlock, Houck, Sale, and Paxton. Also it's not even 2023 yet and there are a bunch of good starters still available.
Who pitched 39.0, 13.1, 5.2 and 0.0 innings as starters last year, if I've added up the numbers correctly on my phone here.

I enjoy reading the continuing posts about all the good free agents we are eventually going to sign. Of course, as the off-season has gone on, the list has evolved from Judge, Correa and Rodon, to Swanson, Bassitt, and Abreu, and then to Haniger, Conforto and Gallo.

Remind me again who's still available. Segura, Profar, Kluber? Exciting stuff!
 
Last edited:

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,820
Who pitched 39.0, 13.1, 5.2 and 0.0 innings as starters last year, if I've added up the numbers correctly on my phone here.
Which is why it's fair to say they added them all. Unless you think they're going to throw about 60 innings in the rotation again this year because reasons.
 

jbupstate

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2022
161
New York, USA
I just don’t understand the Sale hate. He’s a high quality SP. I think if Sale starts out healthy it would be insane to trade him unless there is a godfather deal. The Sox need quality top of the rotation starters. He’s locked up for three years and the market price is high making the balance of his deal acceptable. Hes not super old. He’s two years from TJS and shouldn’t fall off a bike after getting smoke on the hand by a line drive.

Not sure how Eovaldi is less of an injury risk.
 

Delicious Sponge

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
1,251
Boston
California and New York don't seem to have a problem signing ballplayers. Not sure why this is going to a problem for Boston.
This is incredibly embarrassing to see in the John Henry-owned Globe. Gimme a break - an additional $40,000 in tax on every million dollars income over $1M has nothing to do with why the Red Sox haven’t signed players.

Look inward, John.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
44,020
Given the current payroll status selling Sale for money would be criminal.

And if he does bounce back he’d be worth a ton at the deadline vs. this moment. You’d need legit player value in return to move him right now. Not money, not a flyer.
Again though its heyman.
checking in could be
Team A: hey is sale available?
Sox: NO

that would qualify as “checking in” for Heyman
 

Diamond Don Aase

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2001
954
Merrimack Valley
No promises, but we can probably crowd-fund a phone for you that can look up both minor league stats and average number of innings pitched per ML starter.
Whitlock has never pitched more than 110 innings in a professional season. Houck has never pitched 120 innings in a professional season. Sale last pitched 160 innings in 2017. Paxton last pitched 160 innings in 2018, the only major league season that he has done so.

Some skepticism about the Red Sox’ ability to cover innings seems well-warranted.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I just don’t understand the Sale hate. He’s a high quality SP. I think if Sale starts out healthy it would be insane to trade him unless there is a godfather deal. The Sox need quality top of the rotation starters. He’s locked up for three years and the market price is high making the balance of his deal acceptable. Hes not super old. He’s two years from TJS and shouldn’t fall off a bike after getting smoke on the hand by a line drive.

Not sure how Eovaldi is less of an injury risk.
A bunch of people just say a guy will be hurt because he was hurt before. It's exhausting.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
2,594
Whitlock has never pitched more than 110 innings in a professional season. Houck has never pitched 120 innings in a professional season. Sale last pitched 160 innings in 2017. Paxton last pitched 160 innings in 2018, the only major league season that he has done so.

Some skepticism about the Red Sox’ ability to cover innings seems well-warranted.
I'd guess one of the Houck/Whitlock/Paxton group gets in the 150-160 IP range next year. I think Sale will too; that's where he was 2018-19, and he's projected at 151 for 2023.

160 is a bit of an arbitrary cutoff too, and doesn't even really mean what it used to; only 46 pitchers did that this year, compared to 91 in 2012. Starters are just used differently now.
 
Last edited:
Moving to SS adds 3 MPH, so they're actually rated as having the same arm strength: http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/article/statcast-arm-strength-for-fielders
That's interesting, but it does kinda assume that Story is physically capable of throwing the ball 3mph faster. That data looks to be examining aggregates of what players are expected to do on average, but surely there are some players who just can't physically manage the demands of a different position. For example, you clearly can't just stick every first baseman at third and expect them to be able to magically throw the ball 6 mph faster.
 

gehrig

lurker
Apr 18, 2008
22
That's interesting, but it does kinda assume that Story is physically capable of throwing the ball 3mph faster. That data looks to be examining aggregates of what players are expected to do on average, but surely there are some players who just can't physically manage the demands of a different position. For example, you clearly can't just stick every first baseman at third and expect them to be able to magically throw the ball 6 mph faster.
The extra MPH comes from getting a running start more often
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
9,741
Would you please forward your phone model to @Philip Jeff Frye?
Okay, let's just look at the 2022 playoff teams, shall we?

The Phillies had two starters over 160 innings, two more just under (ie more than 150).
The Cardinals had two over 160.
The Padres had two over 160, one just under.
The Mets had one, two more just under.
The Dodgers had two.
The Braves had three.

The Mariners had three.
The Blue Jays had three.
The Guardians had three.
The Astros had three, and one just under.
The Rays had two.
The Yankees had two, and one just under.

So virtually every playoff team had multiple starter throw over 160 innings.

Pivetta seems like a decent bet to give 160+ mediocre innings. Who else? Maybe a completely healthy Sale does it, maybe a breakout Bello does it. Are the Sox going to double Whitlock's innings this season? More than double Houck's?
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
14,721
I'd guess one of the Houck/Whitlock/Paxton group gets in the 150-160 IP range next year. I think Sale will too; that's where he was 2018-19, and he's projected at 151 for 2023.

160 is a bit of an arbitrary cutoff too, and doesn't even really mean what it used to; only 46 pitchers did that this year, compared to 91 in 2012. Starters are just used differently now.
I suppose 32 starts at 5 ip each is 160, so 160 sort of kind of implies season-long good health. Since 5 ip - maybe a fraction more than 5 - is about what you expect from most starters these days.

But not a lot of folks are going to actually give you 32 starts.

Pivetta was a bit over 160 ip last year, Bello just under (including minors). Would be nice to add another decent starter to the mix.
 

geoflin

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2004
619
Melrose MA
For. His most recent injuries aren't going to just keep happening. He's not Inspector Clouseau. I'm not sure he's still a #1 but he can eat innings or even, if his stuff is diminished as a SP, switch to relief.
$27.5 million seems a bit much to be paying a reliever. And if his stuff is diminished he wouldn't be useful in that role other than long relief when behind or mop-up.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,078
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Pivetta seems like a decent bet to give 160+ mediocre innings. Who else? Maybe a completely healthy Sale does it, maybe a breakout Bello does it. Are the Sox going to double Whitlock's innings this season? More than double Houck's?
You just answered your own question. And a splendid bit of guessing on your part, as with my nifty phone, I learned already-broken-out Bello made 31 starts last year for just under 160IP. https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=bello-001bra

I also learned that both Houck and Whitlock were put on the IL last year, and split roles between starting and the bullpen. And though it deeply taxes my brain, I seem to recall actually watching those things happen in real time, sometimes 5 months ago, and sometimes 10 whole months ago. Am I right about remembering that?

So, what complaint would you like to pivot to next?

May I suggest, "Are the Sox going to more than doubly quintupple Sale's innings this season?!" It has a nice insinuation of recklessness to it.
 

bloodysox

lurker
Sep 25, 2011
2,754
Louisville, Colorado
Going out on a limb here: teams are actually asking about Devers and wondering if taking on Sale’s contract will facilitate such a deal. At this point, SoSH’s favorite contract only has two years left on it, though, so why not just try to grit your teeth a see it through?
Man if we package Sale with Devers in a trade I’m probably going to have to take a break from the Sox.

I don’t want him traded either way but god forbid worst comes to worse and they trade him, I don’t want us to get back less talent because we forced our trade partner to take on Sale’s contract.

I’m not sure about this but I think it’s likely that they end up holding onto and extending Devers… Red Sox nation is NOT happy in general right now and the Sox FO/ownership has to have an idea that cheaping out on Devers could be very costly and damage fan support and even more.

Remember that this in Boston where we’re lucky enough to have the Bruins/Celtics playing at an elite level and even though the seasons don’t overlap too often, your average person can only spend so much money to go to games each year and the Bruins/Celtics have all the buzz right now.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
7,105
Whitlock has never pitched more than 110 innings in a professional season. Houck has never pitched 120 innings in a professional season. Sale last pitched 160 innings in 2017. Paxton last pitched 160 innings in 2018, the only major league season that he has done so.

Some skepticism about the Red Sox’ ability to cover innings seems well-warranted.
Funny how this was ignored in favor of more snark about phones and other sarcastic remarks.

And the Sox are absolutely not going to push these guys to make 160 innings. No organization would with those recent numbers of innings thrown. I’m not even sure how this turned into an argument it’s so obvious
 

sackamano

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2004
692
on the river
Man if we package Sale with Devers in a trade I’m probably going to have to take a break from the Sox.
Second time you've said that in the last couple of days. We get it. You don't like what's going on. The end result is not in yet and is a ways down the road.

This isn't an airport. No need to continue announcing your departure.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
18,680
Maine
I suppose 32 starts at 5 ip each is 160, so 160 sort of kind of implies season-long good health. Since 5 ip - maybe a fraction more than 5 - is about what you expect from most starters these days.

But not a lot of folks are going to actually give you 32 starts.

Pivetta was a bit over 160 ip last year, Bello just under (including minors). Would be nice to add another decent starter to the mix.
The standard for qualifying for rate stat honors (ERA, for example) is 1 IP for every team game played. I suspect that's why 160 (or 162) innings is used as a measuring stick for starter durability/reliability. Obviously that's changing, and is reflected in the numbers, as the way pitchers are deployed has evolved in recent years.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
782
This is incredibly embarrassing to see in the John Henry-owned Globe. Gimme a break - an additional $40,000 in tax on every million dollars income over $1M has nothing to do with why the Red Sox haven’t signed players.

Look inward, John.
You seem to be implying that John Henry wants to deflect criticism for the Sox failing to sign players and therefore directed Alex Speier to write an article about how the new tax is making it harder for the Sox to sign players. Is that your argument?

If that is your argument, how does it square with Henry doing nothing, year after year, to quash very critical coverage of the Red Sox, including this very offseason? And how does it square with Speier's well-earned reputation for integrity as a reporter? Are there other examples of Speier or other Globe writers carrying the team's PR water?

If that's not your argument, then why is it incredibly embarrassing for this article to be in the Henry-owned Globe? And why are you pointing out that the tax "has nothing to do with why the Red Sox haven't signed players" and imploring Henry to look inward?
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
23,055
You seem to be implying that John Henry wants to deflect criticism for the Sox failing to sign players and therefore directed Alex Speier to write an article about how the new tax is making it harder for the Sox to sign players. Is that your argument?

If that is your argument, how does it square with Henry doing nothing, year after year, to quash very critical coverage of the Red Sox, including this very offseason? And how does it square with Speier's well-earned reputation for integrity as a reporter? Are there other examples of Speier or other Globe writers carrying the team's PR water?

If that's not your argument, then why is it incredibly embarrassing for this article to be in the Henry-owned Globe? And why are you pointing out that the tax "has nothing to do with why the Red Sox haven't signed players" and imploring Henry to look inward?
I agree with this. Especially considering in the same edition of the same paper on the front page of the sports, Dan Shaughnessy and Bob Ryan both ripped FSG and Henry in particular new ones.

John Henry may own the Globe but I can almost guarantee he’s not dictating what the press should and shouldn’t cover like Charles Foster Kane.
 

Bread of Yaz

lurker
Mar 12, 2019
299
Okay, let's just look at the 2022 playoff teams, shall we?

The Phillies had two starters over 160 innings, two more just under (ie more than 150).
The Cardinals had two over 160.
The Padres had two over 160, one just under.
The Mets had one, two more just under.
The Dodgers had two.
The Braves had three.

The Mariners had three.
The Blue Jays had three.
The Guardians had three.
The Astros had three, and one just under.
The Rays had two.
The Yankees had two, and one just under.

So virtually every playoff team had multiple starter throw over 160 innings.

Pivetta seems like a decent bet to give 160+ mediocre innings. Who else? Maybe a completely healthy Sale does it, maybe a breakout Bello does it. Are the Sox going to double Whitlock's innings this season? More than double Houck's?
This is not out of the realm of possibility. The Rays, to take just one example, had Jeffrey Springs go from 44 IP in 2021 to 135 IP last year.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,078
Miami (oh, Miami!)
And the Sox are absolutely not going to push these guys to make 160 innings. No organization would with those recent numbers of innings thrown. I’m not even sure how this turned into an argument it’s so obvious
Possibly because no one is actually arguing that the Sox's plan requires Sale, Paxton, Whitlock and Houck to go 160 innings. Not even PJF.
 
Last edited:

jteders1

lurker
Dec 5, 2022
46
Man if we package Sale with Devers in a trade I’m probably going to have to take a break from the Sox.

I don’t want him traded either way but god forbid worst comes to worse and they trade him, I don’t want us to get back less talent because we forced our trade partner to take on Sale’s contract.

I’m not sure about this but I think it’s likely that they end up holding onto and extending Devers… Red Sox nation is NOT happy in general right now and the Sox FO/ownership has to have an idea that cheaping out on Devers could be very costly and damage fan support and even more.

Remember that this in Boston where we’re lucky enough to have the Bruins/Celtics playing at an elite level and even though the seasons don’t overlap too often, your average person can only spend so much money to go to games each year and the Bruins/Celtics have all the buzz right now.
Packaging Devers with Sale makes zero sense imo. There’s a big difference now then we anchored Price to Betts. Price was definietly cooked, and Sale may still be not only a good starting pitcher, but perhaps elite. In addition, this team is 40m under the first threshold right now, where they were way over budget with the Betts/Price deal. If the thought process is a total rebuild, fine. Trade Devers this off-season and then see if Sale has recouped some value over the first off of the season and maybe have the best pitching target available at the deadline. Putting them together to drop a contract where you’re already well under the tax threshold is not a great use of resources.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
14,454
Michigan
I would speculate that it is more related to arm-slot. Second baseman tend to throw from a lower (sidearm) position while Shortstops are able to throw more over top.
I’d speculate that it’s also necessity. Second basemen don’t need to throw as hard as they can as often as shortstops do.
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
5,720
Wouldn't the simpler answer be that they have more time at 2B and so can lop throws without having to gun each one?

edit, saw dhappy had same thought before me.
 

RobertS975

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
292
This is incredibly embarrassing to see in the John Henry-owned Globe. Gimme a break - an additional $40,000 in tax on every million dollars income over $1M has nothing to do with why the Red Sox haven’t signed players.

Look inward, John.
Taxes are still higher in both NYC and California even with the new MA millionaire surtax!
 

Delicious Sponge

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
1,251
Boston
You seem to be implying that John Henry wants to deflect criticism for the Sox failing to sign players and therefore directed Alex Speier to write an article about how the new tax is making it harder for the Sox to sign players. Is that your argument?

If that is your argument, how does it square with Henry doing nothing, year after year, to quash very critical coverage of the Red Sox, including this very offseason? And how does it square with Speier's well-earned reputation for integrity as a reporter? Are there other examples of Speier or other Globe writers carrying the team's PR water?

If that's not your argument, then why is it incredibly embarrassing for this article to be in the Henry-owned Globe? And why are you pointing out that the tax "has nothing to do with why the Red Sox haven't signed players" and imploring Henry to look inward?
I‘m not arguing that Henry directed Speier to do anything. Speier is a terrific and honest reporter. He says agents told him this. I have no reason to doubt that.

The tax question is such small potatoes in terms of attracting a free agent and something so easily addressed in negotiations with a team (I mean the Red Sox could pay $40,000 extra a year on amounts over $1 million and eliminate the impact of the new tax). Meanwhile New York’s tax rate is higher than Massachusetts (8.8% on all income and more if you live in NYC) and California’s is 13.3%. Are there examples of players making decisions on the basis of tax rate?

I do not understand why he wouldn’t have some counterpoint to this uncontested claim by the agents, or gotten any reaction from the team about this claim. Maybe he did and it got edited out. Or maybe he didn’t and he was just sloppy.

In my experience, the people who complain about the new tax are folks who have to pay it. I don’t hear about it from pretty much anyone else. So I made a presumption there must be some connection between the way this piece was written and the Henrys. I may have written this while annoyed. It seems to have pissed you off and I apologize for that to you and others who reacted that way.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
6,792
Boston, MA
Wouldn't the simpler answer be that they have more time at 2B and so can lop throws without having to gun each one?

edit, saw dhappy had same thought before me.
It's more geometry. The first baseman is in front of a shortstop whereas he's to the left of a second baseman. A shortshop is moving forward on his hardest throws and a second baseman has to plant and turn.
 

gehrig

lurker
Apr 18, 2008
22
I’d speculate that it’s also necessity. Second basemen don’t need to throw as hard as they can as often as shortstops do.
Statcast is only including the top 10% of throws for their arm strength rating. The ratio between top %10 velocity and highest velocity is similar to the ratio between a pitcher's average fastball velocity and highest velocity, which indicates that the infielders are throwing close to as hard as they for those top 10%.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
14,454
Michigan
Statcast is only including the top 10% of throws for their arm strength rating. The ratio between top %10 velocity and highest velocity is similar to the ratio between a pitcher's average fastball velocity and highest velocity, which indicates that the infielders are throwing close to as hard as they for those top 10%.
I get that Statcast measured top 10% of throws. I still think it’s rare for second basemen to throw to first at 100% effort because it’s rarely necessary.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,688
Twin Cities
I get that Statcast measured top 10% of throws. I still think it’s rare for second basemen to throw to first at 100% effort because it’s rarely necessary.
Yeah. Not just rarely necessary, but rarely effective. You’re 50 feet from the first baseman; you really want to wind up and throw that 80+ MPH?? Quick flick, sidearm release is more often more important. And as Gehrig suggested above, 2Bers rarely take two steps before launching their throws.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
$27.5 million seems a bit much to be paying a reliever. And if his stuff is diminished he wouldn't be useful in that role other than long relief when behind or mop-up.
The money is already spent, so they might as well get what they can from him. I'm not advocating for him to be a reliever, I'm just saying that if his starts are meh and someone else is killing it, send him to the pen where he can dial it up for an inning or two. Guys can have their stuff play down as starters and up in relief. We see it all the time.