Red Sox sign Kenley Jansen

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
21,203
In 2013, when Koji stepped onto the bump, I was cool as a cucumber. Those were the days, my friend.
That's the only time in my life when I felt like there was NO WAY the Sox were going to lose, when Koji took the mound holding onto a lead in the 9th inning. I've never ever been more confident in a pitcher - even over Pedro, which is saying something if you know my affection and respect for Pedro. There's never been - and never will be - anything like the feeling of a Sox' lead with Koji taking the mound.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
3,426
Player Saves Opportunities Blown Saves BS/Opp
Hansel Robles
2​
8​
6​
75.00%​
Matt Strahm
4​
8​
4​
50.00%​
Ryan Brasier
1​
5​
4​
80.00%​
John Schreiber
8​
11​
3​
27.27%​
Jake Diekman
1​
4​
3​
75.00%​
Matt Barnes
8​
10​
2​
20.00%​
Garrett Whitlock
6​
8​
2​
25.00%​
Tanner Houck
8​
9​
1​
11.11%​
Kaleb Ort
1​
2​
1​
50.00%​
Austin Davis
0​
1​
1​
100.00%​
Jeurys Familia
0​
1​
1​
100.00%​


Edit - changed BS% to BS/Opp. I agree that the use of the word "Opportunity" is dumb here, but blame MLB for making me reverse engineer where the blowns saves came from - https://www.mlb.com/redsox/stats/pitching/save-opportunities
 
Last edited:

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
3,580
Worcester
This is obviously a wildly wrong stat, how can anyone think any MLB team only had 11 successful saves in a full season? I don't know how many blown saves they had (keeping in mind that is a dumb stat as guys can blow saves in the 7th or 8th or even earlier) but they had 39 successful saves, not 11 (!!!).
It's almost like the person looked at BS/SV as Comp/Att (or FG/FGA).
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
67,314
It's a pretty silly stat, but here it is:

Team Blown Saves Opportunities Blown Save%
Pirates
28​
60​
46.67%​
Rangers
29​
64​
45.31%​
Rays
36​
80​
45.00%​
Diamondbacks
26​
58​
44.83%​
Marlins
31​
71​
43.66%​
Red Sox
28
65
43.08%
Reds
22​
52​
42.31%​
Twins
27​
64​
42.19%​
Athletics
24​
57​
42.11%​
Angels
27​
65​
41.54%​
Cubs
30​
74​
40.54%​
Royals
21​
53​
39.62%​
Nationals
17​
45​
37.78%​
Brewers
30​
81​
37.04%​
Blue Jays
25​
70​
35.71%​
Giants
21​
61​
34.43%​
Rockies
21​
62​
33.87%​
Braves
27​
81​
33.33%​
White Sox
23​
70​
32.86%​
Padres
22​
69​
31.88%​
Yankees
21​
66​
31.82%​
Phillies
18​
59​
30.51%​
Tigers
16​
53​
30.19%​
Cardinals
16​
53​
30.19%​
Dodgers
18​
61​
29.51%​
Mariners
15​
54​
27.78%​
Mets
15​
55​
27.27%​
Guardians
18​
68​
26.47%​
Astros
16​
68​
23.53%​
Orioles
13​
58​
22.41%​


(took the stats from here https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/mlb/most-blown-saves-mlb-2022-sgc/ & added a % column because that seemed more interesting than the raw # of blown saves)
That's not right either since the Red Sox had 39 actual saves, that says 37.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
61,105
Rotten Apple
Two years at reasonable money. It's an improvement but buckle up for sure. Twitter is full of fans who were happy to be off his ride when he moved on. It's more a statement of how bad we are in the save department and how the other options aren't that great either. Having an actual closer puts all the other pieces into a more firm place and usually that is a net positive. It'll mostly be fine but keep the Pepto handy.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
3,426
That's not right either since the Red Sox had 39 actual saves, that says 37.
Yeah, not sure what metric is being used for "opportunities" & if blown saves in the same game as saves counts only once or something. The general point is that the Red Sox bullpen kind of sucked last year - mostly because of all the bad pitchers who pitched.

ETA - probably more likely a 3 inning save in a game that isn't close might not count as a save opportunity but counts as a save?
 

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
5,391
from the wilds of western ma
Two years at reasonable money. It's an improvement but buckle up for sure. Twitter is full of fans who were happy to be off his ride when he moved on. It's more a statement of how bad we are in the save department and how the other options aren't that great either. Having an actual closer puts all the other pieces into a more firm place and usually that is a net positive. It'll mostly be fine but keep the Pepto handy.
Still have a good supply leftover from Kimbrel.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
42,470
Jansen is a good pitcher but as has been noted upthread, he can put runners on base. Those expecting lots of saves may not be disappointed but people hoping for lots of clean innings may be in for a rude awakening.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,288
02130
It’s an imperfect statistic but 79 saves in 91 opportunities over last 2 seasons. I haven’t looked at the Sox’s team statistics but I am very doubtful that he’s “going to lose you some more games.”
Some more in comparison to using your best reliever in the optimal situations. I am not saying that Jansen is worse than what they had on the roster last year.

Ideally the Sox would have pitchers better than Jansen in the highest-leverage places in the 6-8 innings if they're going for the postseason. Or if Jansen ends up being your best reliever you use him earlier on. But that's not what's going to happen because he is a "Proven Closer."

It's not going to be optimal usage to always give Jansen the save opportunities, but that's sort of the price of buying this kind of guy. On the flip side, it's hard to find elite relievers in general and there is value in not having to worry about the 9th even if you hope to get better relievers than your closer on the roster. That's all I was saying.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
6,513
Right Here
We hand-wring on Xander, and his leaving is potentially a big hole, but all through 2022, the biggest weakness in a glut of glaring weaknesses was the bullpen.

This helps. It's not an onerous contract that we'll be cursing for years to come.

Is he a shutdown closer? I don't follow the Dodgers closely enough to tell, but he did have a habit of coming up small in big moments in the post-season. For this to adversely impact the Sox, of course, they actually have to make the post-season. Having gone through the Craig Kimbrel experience in 2018, this isn't a showstopper.

Count be down as for the signing.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
21,203
Jansen "coming up small" in the postseason.... Here's his postseason game log.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=janseke01&t=p&year=0&post=1

59 appearances
2.20 era
0.79 whip
12.9 k/9
12 games he gave up a run or more (12 games in 59 = 1 out of 5)
5 games he gave up 2 runs or more (5 games in 59 = 8%)
20 saves
4 blown saves
3 wins, 2 losses, 2 holds

He had one meltdown game in 2016, when he went 0.1 ip allowing 4 er. Take that away (I know you can't, because it happened, but still, work with me) and his numbers are: 65.0 ip, 32 h, 14 r, 12 er, 17 bb, 94 k, 1.66 era, 0.75 whip, 13.0 k/9

I mean, it's not Mariano (who is?) but those are pretty darned good playoff numbers. And of course keep in mind that these stats are going up against the best teams always because that's how it works in the playoffs.

Here was his 2021 playoff run: 7.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 1 bb, 14 k, 0.00 era, 0.57 whip, 18.0 k/9

Last 2 seasons' playoff stats: 9.0 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 1 bb, 16 k, 1.00 era, 0.56 whip, 16.0 k/9

He's been actually pretty incredible in the playoffs. Like, dominant. His playoff numbers are as good as, or better than, his already impressive regular season numbers.

Yes, I too, was shocked to actually see the data, because I know how it "feels".
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
3,677
Here's something interesting.

Among the 473 MLB pitchers who threw at least 500 pitches last year, Kenley Jansen gave up the third-highest rate of fly balls hit to right field-per-pitch thrown, per Savant. But the average exit velocity of those fly balls is only 87.4 mph, which ranks 315th of those 473 pitchers.

Fenway Park is a pretty good place for a pitcher who gives up a lot of lazy fly balls to right field.

Also interesting is that the Yankees currently staff the three MLB pitchers who were least likely to give up a fly ball to right field in 2022: Lou Trivino, Clay Holmes and Albert Abreu.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
5,061
I'm a fan of anything that allows all the other relievers to move up by an inning. Kanley got things done last year with not the highest velocity but excellent spin rate, so that is a good sign for preventing an age-related dropoff.

Edit: i.e. Full tilt PART time.
 

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,836
Calgary, Canada
Player Saves Opportunities Blown Saves BS %
Hansel Robles
2​
8​
6​
75.00%​
Matt Strahm
4​
8​
4​
50.00%​
Ryan Brasier
1​
5​
4​
80.00%​
John Schreiber
8​
11​
3​
27.27%​
Jake Diekman
1​
4​
3​
75.00%​
Matt Barnes
8​
10​
2​
20.00%​
Garrett Whitlock
6​
8​
2​
25.00%​
Tanner Houck
8​
9​
1​
11.11%​
Kaleb Ort
1​
2​
1​
50.00%​
Austin Davis
0​
1​
1​
100.00%​
Jeurys Familia
0​
1​
1​
100.00%​
This isn't correct either.... as there are many times you come into a game and don't get a save or a blown save, but it's still a potential save opportunity. Example: you enter the game in the 6th inning with a 10-0 lead... get a couple of outs and are replaced. That doesn't show up on the table above, BUT if you gave up 10 runs you'd have been charged with a blown save, since it was a "potential" save situation. (Or more realistically, you come in the game in the 8th inning up 2-1, and have a clean inning, and hand it off to the closer in the 9th - again, you don't get a save, but if you gave up a run you would have a blown save). The correct metric should be blown saves / save opportunities. I *think* a save oppporutnity is blown saves + saves + holds.

You can have multiple blown saves in a single game..... even if you win that game, so it's just a completely useless stat IMO.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
3,426
This isn't correct either.... as there are many times you come into a game and don't get a save or a blown save, but it's still a potential save opportunity. Example: you enter the game in the 6th inning with a 10-0 lead... get a couple of outs and are replaced. That doesn't show up on the table above, BUT if you gave up 10 runs you'd have been charged with a blown save, since it was a "potential" save situation. (Or more realistically, you come in the game in the 8th inning up 2-1, and have a clean inning, and hand it off to the closer in the 9th - again, you don't get a save, but if you gave up a run you would have a blown save). The correct metric should be blown saves / save opportunities. I *think* a save oppporutnity is blown saves + saves + holds.

You can have multiple blown saves in a single game..... even if you win that game, so it's just a completely useless stat IMO.
I mean...it's correct. It's just not necessarily that descriptive or useful.

The important thing is, the less bad pitchers who you pitch when you are winning, the less saves you will blow. Also, the less leads you have, the less saves you will blow, but that seems like a bad strategy overall.
 

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,836
Calgary, Canada
I mean...it's correct.
Disagree.

Any pitcher that enters the games after the 5th inning with a lead has a save opportunity, whether or not there is any intention of him pitching the rest of the game. That number does not show up in that table. It only shows the subset of instances where that pitcher gave up the lead (blown save) or finished the game and held the lead (save). The vast majority of relief appearances are missing from that table.

It's just not necessarily that descriptive or useful.

The important thing is, the less bad pitchers who you pitch when you are winning, the less saves you will blow. Also, the less leads you have, the less saves you will blow, but that seems like a bad strategy overall.
Agree.
 

Skiponzo

Member
SoSH Member
In 2013, when Koji stepped onto the bump, I was cool as a cucumber. Those were the days, my friend.
One of my favorite family memories was when Koji came in to close out the 2013 World Series. As they came back from commercial, and showed Koji warming up, my then 6 year old son turns to me (I can vividly see this happening) and says "It's about to get really loud in here." Even a 6 year old knew it was over when Koji came in to pitch.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
25,384
Alamogordo
I mean...it's correct. It's just not necessarily that descriptive or useful.

The important thing is, the less bad pitchers who you pitch when you are winning, the less saves you will blow. Also, the less leads you have, the less saves you will blow, but that seems like a bad strategy overall.
No, it isn't correct. Austin Davis, for instance, also had 3 holds, which also come in games where he had an opportunity to blow a save. So his 100% rate you have is actually 25%, and therefore wrong.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
36,712
All I think about with Jansen is the 2018 World Series when he was not great. But that was a particularly potent offensive team.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
3,426
No, it isn't correct. Austin Davis, for instance, also had 3 holds, which also come in games where he had an opportunity to blow a save. So his 100% rate you have is actually 25%, and therefore wrong.
Yeah, the name of that category is wrong/misleading.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
6,513
Right Here
Jansen "coming up small" in the postseason.... Here's his postseason game log.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=janseke01&t=p&year=0&post=1

59 appearances
2.20 era
0.79 whip
12.9 k/9
12 games he gave up a run or more (12 games in 59 = 1 out of 5)
5 games he gave up 2 runs or more (5 games in 59 = 8%)
20 saves
4 blown saves
3 wins, 2 losses, 2 holds

He had one meltdown game in 2016, when he went 0.1 ip allowing 4 er. Take that away (I know you can't, because it happened, but still, work with me) and his numbers are: 65.0 ip, 32 h, 14 r, 12 er, 17 bb, 94 k, 1.66 era, 0.75 whip, 13.0 k/9

I mean, it's not Mariano (who is?) but those are pretty darned good playoff numbers. And of course keep in mind that these stats are going up against the best teams always because that's how it works in the playoffs.

Here was his 2021 playoff run: 7.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 1 bb, 14 k, 0.00 era, 0.57 whip, 18.0 k/9

Last 2 seasons' playoff stats: 9.0 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 1 bb, 16 k, 1.00 era, 0.56 whip, 16.0 k/9

He's been actually pretty incredible in the playoffs. Like, dominant. His playoff numbers are as good as, or better than, his already impressive regular season numbers.

Yes, I too, was shocked to actually see the data, because I know how it "feels".
I knew I was somewhat setting myself up for this post, but my main source of memories were the 2018 World Series. 2 consecutive games with blown saves (so half of his post-season BS) and a scoreless/hitless third appearance in the 5 -1 finale.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
50,946
Disagree.

Any pitcher that enters the games after the 5th inning with a lead has a save opportunity, whether or not there is any intention of him pitching the rest of the game. That number does not show up in that table. It only shows the subset of instances where that pitcher gave up the lead (blown save) or finished the game and held the lead (save). The vast majority of relief appearances are missing from that table.
Yeah--you only show up as a middle reliever on that table if you did a bad thing. Is "blown hold" a thing? It should be "holds" + "saves" on one side of the ledger and blown saves on the other..
 

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,836
Calgary, Canada
Yeah--you only show up as a middle reliever on that table if you did a bad thing. Is "blown hold" a thing? It should be "holds" + "saves" on one side of the ledger and blown saves on the other..
Exactly. A "blown hold" is classified simply as a "blown save" when everyone knows there was zero intention of having the reliever stick around for the save.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
3,426
Here is the information I was actually trying to convey in simpler terms. The point being to show that most blown saves come from middle relievers not closers, so Kenley's save % isn't really that big of a deal, but his overall effect on the quality of the innings that are being pitched is.

Player Saves Blown Saves
Hansel Robles
2​
6​
Matt Strahm
4​
4​
Ryan Brasier
1​
4​
John Schreiber
8​
3​
Jake Diekman
1​
3​
Matt Barnes
8​
2​
Garrett Whitlock
6​
2​
Tanner Houck
8​
1​
Kaleb Ort
1​
1​
Austin Davis
0​
1​
Jeurys Familia
0​
1​




The "Opportunities" comes from mlb.com & made me reverse engineer the blown saves. They seem to completely misdefine that column, though:

https://www.mlb.com/redsox/stats/pitching/save-opportunities
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
50,946
Exactly. A "blown hold" is classified simply as a "blown save" when everyone knows there was zero intention of having the reliever stick around for the save.
It's kinda like this other little baseball stat quirk that always stuck with me--well not really anymore, cuz fielding percentage ain't really a thing any more, but you'd add up putouts, assists, and errors, and get total chances. But OFers would get a lot more chances that never show up--ball hit in gap, OF has to hustle, makes play cutting off ball, fires strike back to IF to hold runner to single. ZERO total chances.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
25,384
Alamogordo
Here is the information I was actually trying to convey in simpler terms. The point being to show that most blown saves come from middle relievers not closers, so Kenley's save % isn't really that big of a deal, but his overall effect on the quality of the innings that are being pitched is.
I get what you are trying to convey here, but I really think you should add the Holds data in there, because it is important for this context.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
3,426
I get what you are trying to convey here, but I really think you should add the Holds data in there, because it is important for this context.
Player Saves Holds BS Fail %
Jeurys Familia
0​
1​
1​
50.00%​
Hansel Robles
2​
7​
6​
40.00%​
Kaleb Ort
1​
1​
1​
33.33%​
Austin Davis
0​
3​
1​
25.00%​
Ryan Brasier
1​
13​
4​
22.22%​
Matt Strahm
4​
13​
4​
19.05%​
Jake Diekman
1​
12​
3​
18.75%​
Garrett Whitlock
6​
4​
2​
16.67%​
Matt Barnes
8​
4​
2​
14.29%​
Tanner Houck
8​
1​
1​
10.00%​
John Schreiber
8​
22​
3​
9.09%​
Tyler Danish
0​
3​
0​
0.00%​
Hirokazu Sawamura
0​
3​
0​
0.00%​
Zack Kelly
0​
1​
0​
0.00%​
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Jansen "coming up small" in the postseason.... Here's his postseason game log.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=janseke01&t=p&year=0&post=1

59 appearances
2.20 era
0.79 whip
12.9 k/9
12 games he gave up a run or more (12 games in 59 = 1 out of 5)
5 games he gave up 2 runs or more (5 games in 59 = 8%)
20 saves
4 blown saves
3 wins, 2 losses, 2 holds

He had one meltdown game in 2016, when he went 0.1 ip allowing 4 er. Take that away (I know you can't, because it happened, but still, work with me) and his numbers are: 65.0 ip, 32 h, 14 r, 12 er, 17 bb, 94 k, 1.66 era, 0.75 whip, 13.0 k/9

I mean, it's not Mariano (who is?) but those are pretty darned good playoff numbers. And of course keep in mind that these stats are going up against the best teams always because that's how it works in the playoffs.

Here was his 2021 playoff run: 7.0 ip, 3 h, 0 r, 0 er, 1 bb, 14 k, 0.00 era, 0.57 whip, 18.0 k/9

Last 2 seasons' playoff stats: 9.0 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 1 er, 1 bb, 16 k, 1.00 era, 0.56 whip, 16.0 k/9

He's been actually pretty incredible in the playoffs. Like, dominant. His playoff numbers are as good as, or better than, his already impressive regular season numbers.

Yes, I too, was shocked to actually see the data, because I know how it "feels".
Also, for people complaining about postseason stats, do they not know that in the postseason you can't fatten up on the Rangers and Tigers? These are his numbers against the top competition. They should look worse than his regular season numbers. And they still look pretty solid!
 

Benj4ever

lurker
Nov 21, 2022
146
They are running out of room, especially if they are planing on signing another starter.

Sale, Pivetta, Paxton, Bello, Whitlock

Granted, injuries will happen but the roster is getting crowded with pitchers .
I don't think you can count on Sale. I think Paxton is iffy at best.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,841
I wanted Houck to be the closer, I think over a full season he'd put up pretty similar numbers to Jansen, but maybe they're concerned about his back. Or if he does end up being the centerpiece of a trade for a useful position player then this would make much more sense. They seem overloaded with RHPs in the pen right now.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
8,486
Can you ever too many good RH relievers, though? I think Houck can probably be even more useful in a relief ace / Whitlock type role. Or, of course he could start or be trade bait. Nice to have some options. Can’t have too many good arms.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
21,203
The point of course is that every WS team had a dominant closer. Whether Jansen is the next one is yet to be determined but personally I like the idea of having a 9th inning guy.
The 2018 Red Sox didn't have a dominant closer. Kimbrel was very good, especially in the regular season. But he was an absolute mess in the playoffs.

He pitched in 9 games in the playoffs, and allowed runs in 5 of those 9 games. Here was his postseason stat line that year:

10.2 ip, 9 h, 7 r, 7 er, 8 bb, 10 k, 5.91 era, 1.59 whip, 8.4 k/9

He didn't technically blow any saves, but that was only because he never came into a game with just a one-run lead. In the four games he pitched where he didn't allow any runs, they had leads of 4-1, 8-4, and 4-2, and in one game they were tied 1-1.
 

bosox188

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 11, 2008
2,724
Westerly, RI
The 2018 Red Sox didn't have a dominant closer. Kimbrel was very good, especially in the regular season. But he was an absolute mess in the playoffs.
Sure, but he was a key element in racking up all those regular season wins to let them cruise into the playoffs and keep homefield throughout. That campaign probably provided some secondary effects that paid off in October. And a steady closer giving a few extra wins might be huge now if it's the make or break in having a bye.