Or the ones who dominated were called up before getting enough games/innings to earn such an honor. The list of past Red Sox winners isn't exactly a roster of all stars, or even all top prospects.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Second Guesser's Club - Anyone watching?
- Thread starter absintheofmalaise
- Start date
It was sarcasm in response to the "none of them remind me of Hurst, Oil Can and Clemens"/comparisons to current pitching prospects. In Hurst's "dominant AAA season" (12-7; 2.87) his Krate was 5.7; BB rate 4.1.Byrdbrain said:
The walks are high, but are 7.2, 7.4 and 8.6 pedestrian K-rates? (Not being flip here).
Hurst was 23 during that season, also had a great season between A+/AA at age 21. At 25, he pitched 211 major league innings with a 107 ERA+
Webster and Ranaudo are 24, De La Rosa is 25, and Workman is 26, of them, only De La Rosa made it out of AA prior to his age 23 season, and only De La Rosa has an ERA+ as a starter of greater than 100.
Webster and Ranaudo are 24, De La Rosa is 25, and Workman is 26, of them, only De La Rosa made it out of AA prior to his age 23 season, and only De La Rosa has an ERA+ as a starter of greater than 100.
And then Hurst put up ERA+ figures of 106 and 95 the next two years. A 27 year old with an ERA+ of 95? Write him off!
There's certainly a big difference in the way pitching prospects are handled now as opposed to 1981. And of course the offensive landscape has changed, low K rates simply weren't as much of a concern 30+ years ago.
There's certainly a big difference in the way pitching prospects are handled now as opposed to 1981. And of course the offensive landscape has changed, low K rates simply weren't as much of a concern 30+ years ago.
Why would you do that? A still cost-controlled durable lefthander with 3-year ERA+ right around league average? Sounds like a perfect 4th starter. He developed into more than that, but that's gravy.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Now you're making more sense.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
My point being, you're already dumping on Ranaudo and pals for low ERA+ rates at their ages, but the guy you cite as an early success plateaued almost immediately.
And as you mention the game's context has changed dramatically from that earlier era. Mark Fidrych won 19 games with and ERA+ of 159 as a 21 year old with a 3.5 K rate; that simply wouldn't be possible today.
And as you mention the game's context has changed dramatically from that earlier era. Mark Fidrych won 19 games with and ERA+ of 159 as a 21 year old with a 3.5 K rate; that simply wouldn't be possible today.
No, I'm not dumping on them for low ERA+ rates, though I guess my last sentence could have left that impression. The more accurate way to say it would have been that with the exception of De La Rosa and his 101 ERA+, none of them have enough major league innings to even calculate a reliable ERA+, despite already being 24-26 years old. I'm dumping on them for having pedestrian K rates and poor walk rates in AAA, despite being at an age where many prospects have already graduated.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
I will end on an upbeat note though, in that we haven't heard whether the Red Sox are forcing them to use their second and third best pitches in AAA as a development tool, making the defense independent stats not entirely indicative. The curiously low HR rates are also worth further investigation, though my read is that there's no way that's sustainable.
Rudy Pemberton said:
I gotta say, I've been kinda bummed out by most of the young(ish) starters thus far. I haven't seen that much from Rubby, Ranaudo, Webster, Workman, or Kelly that makes me think any of them are destined for much. Kelly and Rubby do have some decent stuff, but it just hasn't translated into strikeouts for whatever reason, and they all walk more guys than you like to see. Maybe they can be mid-rotation innings eaters, but it's hard to get too excited about a lowish ceiling Steve Trachsel-type guy. Webster and Workman probably belong in the bullpen. Although I guess the Orioles are somehow dominating the division with a rotation full of mediocre starters, so maybe I should just get over it.
It's funny - Buchholz is similar in a way. He's always had really good stuff, but he's only been able to translate it into similarly impressive results in 2010 and 2013.Hopefully the younger guys will be able to harness their stuff with a little more consistency/durability.
The problem is that you just never know whether a pitcher is going to "get it" at 27 or not. Jake Arrieta had ERA+s of 89 (100 IP); 83 (119 IP); 68 (114 IP); and 58 (23 IP) before he figured out how to harness his stuff. Of course, Theo had the luxury of giving him the ball without caring how he did.
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Yup. Sometimes being a GM is hard. How much rope can you give a struggling young guy to figure it out without sinking the team, and when do you just cut bait? I think these are some of the most difficult calls for GMs to make, and they're the kind of calls the Red Sox front office is going to have to make this offseason and next year. None of the Red Sox younger players played that well this year (although you might be able to make a case for Betts), and it lead to a pretty disastrous season. Sometimes a guy will figure it out later, but I think that's a more unusual path, and late bloomers are generally going to have shorter (and often lower) peaks.