The 2025 Boston Red Sox and The Concept of a Six Man Rotation

[TrotNixonRing]

For some reason when I look at this team I just keep thinking about a six man rotation and those recurring thoughts increased when the Sox signed Crochet.

It's not like a six man rotation is some new concept. A quick news search shows that the Dodgers have been discussing it for 2025, with Ohtani's return a consideration. It's been done in the past and it will be done again by other teams.

The drawback is obvious. One less valuable roster spot that could have gone to a bench hitter or reliever. It can really give the manager headaches. You also need six good starters or what's the point. I also don't know if it's been studied and this throws pitchers off or not, i.e. reduces performance in some way.

The advantages are obvious as well. You get to start the year with 6 bona fide MLB starters who don't have options and are established. They get more rest and will presumably have more bullets left in the tank when the playoffs arrive. You can always switch back to a 5-man and when you do, the remaining starters are better rested.

The 2025 Boston Red Sox should consider this. I am interested in reading feedback on this concept more because I am undecided, but consider who could benefit from a six-man rotation:

• Crochet: Has an injury history and was only converted to full-time starter last year. This would keep his innings down while still allowing him to work deep into games.
• Houck: Had a huge innings jump from '23 to '24 and tired a bit midseason.
• Bello: He probably benefits the least from a six man rotation.
• Crawford: Similar to Houck, he increased innings significantly from '23 to '24 and was better in the first half.
• Giolito: Coming back from season-ending elbow surgery.

The Sox are reportedly going after another SP, as they absolutely should be. So, do you trade one to get back to five? I say no, let's consider the six-man rotation.

Let's face it, someone is going to get hurt or be ineffective. So, when that transpires, you drop that person and go with your best/healthiest 5. If everyone really does stay healthy, it won't happen but if, you trade one at the deadline. Or keep them all and gain the ability to play matchups better in the playoffs, go with who's hot, etc.

Thoughts?

 

[benhogan]

5-man staff with a AAA pitcher (Fitts, Criswell, Preister, etc) that comes up for a week when the schedule gets meaty. He makes 2 starts, then goes back down. Do this once a month for the first 3-4 months of the season, see how it plays out.

It gives your 5 starters 2 extra days a month.
Further develops your AAA arms while not wasting their bullets in Worcester.

 

[TrotNixonRing]

Sure but when someone goes down, now Fitts is a rotation staple and next in line is the fill in. Not as good as being able to fill that spot from the MLB roster and still have Fitts if/when the second injury hits.

 

[TomRicardo]

Thoughts?

With the 26 man roster is it is more feasible than when spoke about in years past, the issue would be bullpen depth. A guys like Chase Shugart becomes a lot more important to pull it off.

 

[HangingW/ScottCooper]

When off days are factored into it, I think a 6 man rotation can become increasingly problematic. Where I like a 6 man rotation is when you have one (or more) guys that can be on the Worcester shuttle at the back end of the the rotation. The other variable here is that in December, everyone is healthy(-ish). Someone will get injured, it's inevitable.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

They're not going to go with a six man rotation. Certainly not as a full time plan. It's really only doable if you have a bunch of optionable relievers that you can shuttle up and down. They do not have that and they likely will not have that, since you can't get that from free agency. If they acquire another starter, they'll simply push the 6th guy to the bullpen or Worcester assuming everyone is healthy. And if they aren't comfortable doing that to Crawford (the most likely 6th starter in this scenario), they look to trade him and try to further upgrade the shuttle stable that currently includes Criswell, Fitts, and Priester.

 

[Manramsclan]

I do like the idea but I only think it works if the added starter slots in above Houck. Burnes is obviously that, and perhaps one of the Seattle starters if a trade materializes. Flaherty arguably is that as well. Buehler maybe is? To take up a roster spot when there are three candidates in the minors who good do a cromulent job of filling that sixth spot probably isn't worth it.

Our starter depth in the minors is better than maybe I have ever seen it. Criswell's additional option year sure does make this easier on the Sox. He was pretty solid last year and will only need his roster spot when he starts. Together with Fitts and Preister that'll do.

Whatever they decide, obtaining another starter is essential. Giolito cannot be counted on imo. Just look at Walker Beuhler's return from surgery.

 

[Brohamer of the Gods]

A full time 6-man rotation also means one fewer arm in the bullpen with the 13-pitcher limit on the 26 man.

 

[donutogre]

I feel like this literally comes up every single year, and I don't think any team has implemented it for more than a couple turns through a rotation, for all the reasons we've discussed over the years. Nothing personal @TrotNixonRing but I'd be pretty shocked if this came to pass; they're just go with the best/healthiest five guys they have.

 

[flredsoxfan]

I could see this if they had a couple of guys coming from Japan that were brought through their minors and were on a once a week starting regimen but I don't foresee that in Boston. I would rather they use the bullpen start in an emergency if needed. I was also hoping the new regime would concentrate on extending innings for starters too - no more 5 inning starts - even one more inning takes a lot of stress off the pen.

 

[allmanbro]

I wish MLB would do something to incentivize 6 man rotations. I know it's hard to study, so no proof, but it seems likely that 1) pitchers going every 6th day are a little more likely to go deeper in games and 2) a little less likely to get hurt. It seems worth trying.

Here's my pitch: as long as you run a six man rotation (like, actually go 1-6), you get an extra roster spot for that 6th starter. As soon as you stop, it goes away. Shenanigans get penalties.

 

[Saints Rest]

Wouldn’t the logical follow to a six man rotation be to use your starter out of the pen after 3 days rest?

 

[beautokyo]

That would sure change the financials per start wouldn't it? You're paying guys for hopefully 30 starts per year.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I feel like this literally comes up every single year, and I don't think any team has implemented it for more than a couple turns through a rotation, for all the reasons we've discussed over the years. Nothing personal @TrotNixonRing but I'd be pretty shocked if this came to pass; they're just go with the best/healthiest five guys they have.

Andrew Friedman said at the winter meetings that LA will be going to a 6 man this year. Certainly it makes it a lot easier to have 2 Japanese pitchers in the rotation who are used to it. Combine that with having great but not so durable guys in Glasnow/Snell/Dustin May and a guy coming off of TJ in Gonsolin and a 6 man makes a ton of sense. For the Sox, I don’t think so.

 

[Hondo33]

To the extent the schedule factors into the analysis, the Sox open with:

• Games on 5 consecutive days (4 at Texas, 1 at Baltimore)
• An off day
• Games on 15 consecutive days (2 at Baltimore, 7 at home, 3 at CWS, 3 at Tampa)
• An off day
• Games on 10 consecutive days (7 at home, 3 at Cleveland)​

I haven’t looked back, but 30 games in the first 32 days seems like more than I recall. But maybe my recollection is influenced by April rainouts.

Anyhow, barring rainouts or games started by an opener, a lot of early season starts for starters.

Indeed, the April stretch of 15 consecutive days with a game scheduled is the longest such stretch of the season. As mentioned it’s followed by a stretch of 10 consecutive days with a scheduled game, then an off day scheduled on April 28. Beginning with the game scheduled for April 29, the rest of the season looks like this for consecutive days with games:

6
9
13
6
6
6
6
6
10
All-Star Break
6
6
6
6
5
14
6
3
6
6

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I wish MLB would do something to incentivize 6 man rotations. I know it's hard to study, so no proof, but it seems likely that 1) pitchers going every 6th day are a little more likely to go deeper in games and 2) a little less likely to get hurt. It seems worth trying.

Here's my pitch: as long as you run a six man rotation (like, actually go 1-6), you get an extra roster spot for that 6th starter. As soon as you stop, it goes away. Shenanigans get penalties.

The best way to incentivize it, or just ease the burden on 5-man rotations, is to make the schedule more uniform and mandate one day off per week for every team. Minor league schedules are already set up that way. Mondays (usually) are off-days/travel days, and teams play games Tuesday through Sunday. Each week is its own 6-game series as well (so less travel). Each starter in a 6-man rotation gets six days off between starts, but even if they go with a 5-man rotation, they still get at least five days off most weeks. Most starters in MLB now, operating in a 5-man rotation, pitch more on four days rest than any other interval. Tanner Houck in 2024 for example, pitched on 4-days rest 14 times, 5-days rest 11 times, 6-days rest twice, 10-days rest once (which doesn't account for his ASG appearance), and 13-days rest once (skipped a start in September).

Problem is that scheduling 30 teams across four time zones in 2-3-4 game series is challenging enough when you have off-days floating around as needed. If you lock in a specific day for everyone, it only makes it more complicated to pull off. They'd also have to add a week, more likely two, to the schedule to accommodate the extra off-days. Currently, teams play 162 games in 180 days and that includes a cluster of 4 off-days at the all star break. So it's roughly 25.5 weeks to complete the season (game 1 is on a Thursday/Friday, game 162 is on a Sunday). Going to a six-game a week schedule requires at least 27 weeks (162/6=27) and probably 27.5-28 in order to include the ASB. Regular season games beginning around St Patrick's day or ending mid-October seems like a non-starter.

 

[jon abbey]

Evidently almost 2/3 of starts already are with more than 4 days rest between, I would not have guessed that.

https://bsky.app/profile/jamessmyth621.bsky.social/post/3lcdrfkje322q

 

[Niastri]

Evidently almost 2/3 of starts already are with more than 4 days rest between, I would not have guessed that.

https://bsky.app/profile/jamessmyth621.bsky.social/post/3lcdrfkje322q

Teams see the benefit, but won't commit to it....?

 

[Robert Plant]

I would love to see them get Flaherty. They could go with a 5 man rotation but every 10-15 days just as their most recent pitcher is activated another pitcher would go on the DL with "Arm fatigue" or "Muscle Soreness". MLB probably wouldn't let them get away with this but it would be another great way to keep innings down.

 

[Norm loves Vera]

I didn't see this Passan article referenced here re a 62 page study on pitching injuries he posted yesterday. As he writes there isn't any "aha!" data proported, but the report did show some trends that should be further looked at.

"Twenty years ago, about 55% of major league starts and just over 50% of minor league starts came on five or fewer days' rest. In 2024, that dropped to about one-third of starts in the big leagues and barely 10% in the minor leagues. The same trend applies to relief pitchers: Big league relievers pitch on back-to-back days around 16% of the time; in the minor leagues, it's closer to 2%. Want to know why the number of major league starts going at least five innings has dropped from 85% to 70% in the past two decades? Maybe it's because over the same period, minor league starts of that length have gone from around 70% to less than 40%. "

"In each of the past four years, teams have averaged more than 32 pitchers used per season. In 2010 that number was 22.8, in 2000 22.5, in 1990 20 and in 1980 15.1. "

Free ESPN + content

I couldn't find a link to the actual report, but here is the article on MLB.COM all the others referenced in their write ups:
MLB

 

[The Gray Eagle]

Speier in the Glob has a look at this:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/12/28/sports/mlb-pitching-rotation-trends/

A growing number of teams are either considering or have committed to the use of six-man rotations in 2025, increasing the demand for the already scarce commodity of starting pitching.

Intuitively, the easiest way to limit the risk of a major injury is by limiting the frequency with which they throw. Additionally, the best way to withstand a major rotation injury is by having enough healthy major league starters to endure a pitcher’s prolonged absence.
A six-man rotation seemingly accomplishes both of those goals, resulting in growing plans to employ the tactic — particularly by teams who have starters coming from Japan’s Nippon Professional Baseball, where pitchers typically throw once a week.

Breslow said the idea of using a 6-man rotation was "on the table," and Speier notes that "they are willing to consider it," though without any sort of indication that they would actually try it:

“Being creative — a six-man rotation, openers — everything needs to be on the table,” said Breslow.

The Red Sox had more starts on four days of rest (68) than any other team last season, and were one of just six teams to have only five starters make 10 or more starts. But they are willing to consider a six-man, and other measures in an effort to make their staff healthier, deeper, and more effective.

The main arguments against the 6-man rotation:

There are tradeoffs to a six-man rotation. Foremost, it means one fewer bullpen arm — thus increasing the need for longer starts and/or multi-inning relievers. And more rest doesn’t necessarily equate to better health or better performance.
Since 2021, there are 189 instances of pitchers who had at least 10 starts on four days of rest and 10 starts on five days. Ninety were better on the four, versus 98 one the five and one whose ERA was the same.
In the case of the Sox, Houck, Crawford, and especially Bello (3.56 ERA on four days of rest; 7.16 ERA on five days) were all notably better with less rest last year. The Mariners and their MLB-rest rotation last season ranked fifth in the number of starts on four days of rest (62).
Meanwhile, even though the Dodgers had the fewest starts on four days of rest, they lost more games to injury (1,834) than any other team according to Baseball Prospectus, and had just two pitchers log 100 innings.

With 6 starters currently healthy and 4 or 5 optionable starters and several optionable relievers in AAA, the Red Sox are currently positioned better to try it this year than in the past.
Relievers riding the AAA shuttle would help with the issue of having one fewer reliever than usual on the 26-man.
I think we may see a 6-man rotation at times this coming season, probably for parts of April at least. Giolito missed all of last year, Beuhler missed part of the year, and Crochet was on an innings limit, so they might be smart to give them extra rest early on, at least if/when all 6 guys are healthy.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Giolito is not a fan:

I don’t love 6-man rotations. I feel like when I’m in a good grove of that 4-day rest, that feels right for me personally. I’m not going to be holding a picket sign, if it benefits the team, I get it.

LINK

 

[Max Power]

The takeaway I had from the article was that there's no evidence of a health benefit in going to a 6-man rotation. If anything, there's a negative correlation, in that the teams with fewer injuries had the most games with only 4 days of rest and the ones with more injuries had more starts of 5+ days. It's possible that the cause and effect are reversed, in that having an injured staff leads a team to build in more days of rest, but it does not seem to be the magic bullet for avoiding arm problems.

 

[Mike473]

The "6 man rotation" and also "closer my commitee" are ideas that pop up from time to time but never seem to stick.

 

[YTF]

The "6 man rotation" and also "closer my commitee" are ideas that pop up from time to time but never seem to stick.

IMO the six man rotation never seems to stick because almost no team has six starters worthy of going with a six man rotation and those who may are sure to experience injuries that forces them to go with a more traditional set. Also, in today's game it's a bit risky to have one less arm in the bullpen in favor of an additional starter. There are certainly circumstances where a six man rotation can be utilized, but generally it's not really viable over the course of a season.

 

[jon abbey]

Also most pitchers dislike it as they’re used to the 5 day routine, as you saw with Giolito’s quotes a few days ago.

 

[SouthernBoSox]

Also most pitchers dislike it as they’re used to the 5 day routine, as you saw with Giolito’s quotes a few days ago.

Yea but Gioltos is a grizzly vet. The norm now in the minors is 5 days rest plus rotation skips and a lot of side work.

 

[TomRicardo]

The "6 man rotation" and also "closer my commitee" are ideas that pop up from time to time but never seem to stick.

Closer by committee is way more common now.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Breslow yesterday on possible use of 6-man rotation. He noted the Sox have multi-inning relievers available:

“Philosophically, I am supportive of anything we can do to keep our best players on the field performing at a really high level, and this potentially could be one of them,” he said. “It necessitates particular construction of a bullpen as well. We need to have relievers who are capable of throwing multiple innings.

“I think we have that when you think about guys like (Josh) Winckowski, guys like Whitlock, who has done this in the past, and Criswell, who bounced back and forth between the rotation and the bullpen. I do think that we’re well-positioned to implement a six-man rotation if that’s the direction that we want to go.”

Cotillo

 

[billy ashley]

To state the obvious: It's really hard tot keep pitchers healthy.


Going into 2025 they have the following established SPs

1. Crochet - experienced a significant IP jump last season
2. Houck - experienced significant IP jump last season
3. Buehler - 1 year contract, probably not too concerned about abuse
4. Bello - least risky SP based on track record and workload. Of course SPs break all the time
5. Crawford - significant IP jump last season
6. Giolito - coming back from TJS, may not be ready for opening day but should be available early in season
7. Whitlock - coming back from injury, will be back early to mid season
8. Sandoval - coming back from TJS, may not pitch at all, if he does it's in the 2nd half.

They have the following 40 man depth options that could fill in if need be or could prove themselves ready in the minors/bullpen:

1. Quinn Priester - they clearly like him to a degree, has really intriguing stuff, but is not knocking down the door right now
2. Richard Fitts - Acceptable in a pinch, no swing and miss
3. Hunter Dobbins - Interesting, could be a back end SP or RP. No knocking the door down right now
4. Josh Wincowski - very good in short relief, probably passed by the names above in the depth chart, might be full time reliever down the line
5. Michael Fulmer - could be a reliever, some discussion of him as a SP, don't think he makes the team. Is a NRI.

1st point - This is awesome depth. That starting 5 is excellent.

2nd point - it's not likely that all 8 of the names in list 1 make it through the season healthy. People are going to get hurt.

Rather than going with a 6 man rotation, I think Boston should be looking to regularly sub out guys from the rotation with phantom DL trips to manage their innings. Between regular attrition and scheduled DL rest periods, the combination of Crawford, Giolito, Whitlock, Sandoval, Priester, Fitts should be able to cover the missed time.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

To state the obvious: It's really hard tot keep pitchers healthy.


Going into 2025 they have the following established SPs

1. Crochet - experienced a significant IP jump last season
2. Houck - experienced significant IP jump last season
3. Buehler - 1 year contract, probably not too concerned about abuse
4. Bello - least risky SP based on track record and workload. Of course SPs break all the time
5. Crawford - significant IP jump last season
6. Giolito - coming back from TJS, may not be ready for opening day but should be available early in season
7. Whitlock - coming back from injury, will be back early to mid season
8. Sandoval - coming back from TJS, may not pitch at all, if he does it's in the 2nd half.

They have the following 40 man depth options that could fill in if need be or could prove themselves ready in the minors/bullpen:

1. Quinn Priester - they clearly like him to a degree, has really intriguing stuff, but is not knocking down the door right now
2. Richard Fitts - Acceptable in a pinch, no swing and miss
3. Hunter Dobbins - Interesting, could be a back end SP or RP. No knocking the door down right now
4. Josh Wincowski - very good in short relief, probably passed by the names above in the depth chart, might be full time reliever down the line
5. Michael Fulmer - could be a reliever, some discussion of him as a SP, don't think he makes the team. Is a NRI.

1st point - This is awesome depth. That starting 5 is excellent.

2nd point - it's not likely that all 8 of the names in list 1 make it through the season healthy. People are going to get hurt.

Rather than going with a 6 man rotation, I think Boston should be looking to regularly sub out guys from the rotation with phantom DL trips to manage their innings. Between regular attrition and scheduled DL rest periods, the combination of Crawford, Giolito, Whitlock, Sandoval, Priester, Fitts should be able to cover the missed time.

This makes the most sense. If Sasaki was a realistic possibility of coming to Boston (it's not) then maybe the 6 man would be an option but otherwise I think this will be how Breslow and Cora will manage the rotation.
I'm hoping that Cora will utilize Wincowski, Criswell (noted that you missed him on your list here), Whitlock and possibly Crawford as 2-3 inning relievers on a regular basis. He seemed to rarely use any of the BP arms for more than the standard 1 inning last season- whether that was because of the lack of those types of arms or just his adherence to standards is up for debate I guess... but this group is hard to argue with that they shouldn't be employed for multiple inning BP stints.

 

[YTF]

To state the obvious: It's really hard tot keep pitchers healthy.


Going into 2025 they have the following established SPs

1. Crochet - experienced a significant IP jump last season
2. Houck - experienced significant IP jump last season
3. Buehler - 1 year contract, probably not too concerned about abuse
4. Bello - least risky SP based on track record and workload. Of course SPs break all the time
5. Crawford - significant IP jump last season
6. Giolito - coming back from TJS, may not be ready for opening day but should be available early in season
7. Whitlock - coming back from injury, will be back early to mid season
8. Sandoval - coming back from TJS, may not pitch at all, if he does it's in the 2nd half.

They have the following 40 man depth options that could fill in if need be or could prove themselves ready in the minors/bullpen:

1. Quinn Priester - they clearly like him to a degree, has really intriguing stuff, but is not knocking down the door right now
2. Richard Fitts - Acceptable in a pinch, no swing and miss
3. Hunter Dobbins - Interesting, could be a back end SP or RP. No knocking the door down right now
4. Josh Wincowski - very good in short relief, probably passed by the names above in the depth chart, might be full time reliever down the line
5. Michael Fulmer - could be a reliever, some discussion of him as a SP, don't think he makes the team. Is a NRI.

1st point - This is awesome depth. That starting 5 is excellent.

2nd point - it's not likely that all 8 of the names in list 1 make it through the season healthy. People are going to get hurt.

Rather than going with a 6 man rotation, I think Boston should be looking to regularly sub out guys from the rotation with phantom DL trips to manage their innings. Between regular attrition and scheduled DL rest periods, the combination of Crawford, Giolito, Whitlock, Sandoval, Priester, Fitts should be able to cover the missed time.

I see the six man rotation being utilized just a few times during the season and that would typically be during those long stretches during the summer when a team may go 3 weeks or so with no day off. During those stretches starting pitches don't benefit from that occasional extra day off that is built into the schedule. Throwing a sixth starter during a stretch like that affords the others that extra day.

 

[BrandyWhine]

Setting aside the Tokyo Series (March 18-19); the 2025 MLB season starts on March 27 and ends 186 days later on Sept. 28.
So, if a team has significant injury concern (data based or anecdotal) related to a five man rotation, it would seem possible, if the team has adequate depth (as the Sox seem to) to give starters five (or more) days off between starts most of the time.
An example: You tell your e.g., four 'proven vets 'you'll be pitching every sixth day' and for the other two, three or four spot starters you tell them 'mostly you're in the pen for long relief' or you tell them 'you'll be here in Boston some weeks and with the Worcester team other weeks'.
That is, maybe the focus should be on having your best starters hear, 'you're going to pitch every sixth day' vs. we have a five or six man rotation.

 

[YTF]

Setting aside the Tokyo Series (March 18-19); the 2025 MLB season starts on March 27 and ends 186 days later on Sept. 28.
So, if a team has significant injury concern (data based or anecdotal) related to a five man rotation, it would seem possible, if the team has adequate depth (as the Sox seem to) to give starters five (or more) days off between starts most of the time.
An example: You tell your e.g., four 'proven vets 'you'll be pitching every sixth day' and for the other two, three or four spot starters you tell them 'mostly you're in the pen for long relief' or you tell them 'you'll be here in Boston some weeks and with the Worcester team other weeks'.
That is, maybe the focus should be on having your best starters hear, 'you're going to pitch every sixth day' vs. we have a five or six man rotation.

The drawback with going with a full blown 6 man rotation is that you now have a 7 man bullpen vs an 8 man bullpen and we've all seen how an 8 man pen can get gassed from over usage.

 

[Margo McCready]

The drawback with going with a full blown 6 man rotation is that you now have a 7 man bullpen vs an 8 man bullpen and we've all seen how an 8 man pen can get gassed from over usage.

Maybe it’s the shell shock of seemingly cromulent bullpens disintegrating post-All Star Break these past two seasons in a row, but this here is a big concern. What are the non-Ohtani instances of teams rolling with a planned 6-man rotation for an extended period? I don’t doubt that it’s happened, I’m not recalling a team pulling it off. There’s a reason a unicorn like Ohtani makes it feasible.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

This makes the most sense. If Sasaki was a realistic possibility of coming to Boston (it's not) then maybe the 6 man would be an option but otherwise I think this will be how Breslow and Cora will manage the rotation.
I'm hoping that Cora will utilize Wincowski, Criswell (noted that you missed him on your list here), Whitlock and possibly Crawford as 2-3 inning relievers on a regular basis. He seemed to rarely use any of the BP arms for more than the standard 1 inning last season- whether that was because of the lack of those types of arms or just his adherence to standards is up for debate I guess... but this group is hard to argue with that they shouldn't be employed for multiple inning BP stints.

The reason most relievers only go an inning at a time is that managers want as many of them available as possible as often as possible for maximum flexibility. If they come in and throw 10-12 pitches to get 2 or 3 outs, they're usually available for similar usage the next day. If they're going 25-30-35+ pitches to cover multiple innings, they're guaranteed out the next day and probably the day after. I think the Whitlock usage rule of thumb in 2021 was a day off for every inning pitched. With multiple long relievers, I suppose you rotate them like starters so they can get the requisite rest between outings.

The trouble with any such plans is that it always looks better on paper than in practice. It can go to shit the moment you have guys failing to get as many outs as expected in a given game. If you have a starter or two get chased early (or hurt), and/or your designated long man for the day just doesn't have it, you're scrambling. And if it happens two games in a row, or two out of three, getting back on track becomes even more difficult. And that's not even taking into account there are times where match-ups and game situations will dictate who is used rather than a plan/desire to get multiple innings from one guy.

I expect Criswell will be in the Worcester rotation unless needed to make a spot start or two. Winckowski will probably be a short reliever. That leaves Whitlock and Crawford as potential long men. I suspect as the season goes on, they'll both end up sliding toward shorter and more frequent outings unless one of them (Crawford more likely) is forced into the rotation.

 

[joe dokes]

PeteAbe points out something to keep in mind...

From May 29 to Aug, 14, the Sox are scheduled to have every Thursday off other than July 10. Two of those days off will come in the middle of road trips.