Time to move Joe Kelly to the pen?
- Thread starter ponchsox
- Start date
It looks like he has options left; I'd rather see him sent down to work out his issues. He's a starter, and still shows the stuff to be a good one. But it's not translating, and it needs to be figured out.
5 days ago, he gave up 2 ER over 7 IP with 7K, 1 BB and 7 H.
11 days ago, he gave up 1 ER over 6.2 IP with 1 K, 3BB and 5H.
My assumption is that his current problem is the same one he's had since he was a prospect -- his secondary pitches aren't good enough to fool anyone if his fastball isn't working on a given day. I don't think you can fix this by sending him to the minors, since his "not-my-best fastball" will probably still be good enough to get guys out in AAA.
So either you work hard during his side sessions to improve his secondary pitches or you give up and send him to the pen. I think the right approach is to leave him in the rotation, call him your fifth starter and prepare to deal with days like this by having Barnes rest the day before Kelly's starts so that Barnes can absorb some innings if Kelly doesn't have it.
If Kelly never shows any consistency, you can send him to the pen. But he's shown far too much promise to give up on him as a starter at this point.
11 days ago, he gave up 1 ER over 6.2 IP with 1 K, 3BB and 5H.
My assumption is that his current problem is the same one he's had since he was a prospect -- his secondary pitches aren't good enough to fool anyone if his fastball isn't working on a given day. I don't think you can fix this by sending him to the minors, since his "not-my-best fastball" will probably still be good enough to get guys out in AAA.
So either you work hard during his side sessions to improve his secondary pitches or you give up and send him to the pen. I think the right approach is to leave him in the rotation, call him your fifth starter and prepare to deal with days like this by having Barnes rest the day before Kelly's starts so that Barnes can absorb some innings if Kelly doesn't have it.
If Kelly never shows any consistency, you can send him to the pen. But he's shown far too much promise to give up on him as a starter at this point.
All 3 of his secondary pitches get plenty of whiffs and ground balls. His issue is lack of command. He seems to either throw right down the middle or misses badly with non-competitive pitches.
His SIERA is still around 4.00, which I don't think Eduardo would beat right now. I'd keep sending him out there for the time being.
His SIERA is still around 4.00, which I don't think Eduardo would beat right now. I'd keep sending him out there for the time being.
They can't afford to do anything right now. Ed-Rod is the next man up for when something inevitably happens. If you send Kelly to the pen, then he's up and then who's the next man up? These days, clubs are pretty convinced they need seven capable starters, and in this organization Kelly is definitely in the top 7. Probably still ranks #5, or even 4. So no, until they find another starter, he has to keep going out there.
Porcello also just got the snot beaten out of him. Let's move him to the bullpen also. And then Ortiz too!!! And then if Taz gets hit, move him in and out of the bullpen!!!
Kelly has never stuck out many batters (career 6.29 K/9, 7.7 minors) and his control is mediocre (career 3.4 bb/9). He throws hard and has good movement but has never been a dominant pitcher in the minor or major leagues. Most pitchers see their strikeout rate drop from minors to the majors, is there a subset that we'd expect an increase from? Kelly's ERA will finish lower this season than it is now but so will his strikeout rate.
Kelly's not as bad as his results have been, but he's not as good as some hoped. He's fine but at 26 with no outstanding seasons, he's not an exciting pitcher.
Kelly's not as bad as his results have been, but he's not as good as some hoped. He's fine but at 26 with no outstanding seasons, he's not an exciting pitcher.
If a AAA pitcher is coming up to replace Joe Kelly in the rotation, why would it be Rodriguez?
Brian Johnson has 283 innings in the Sox system under his belt, including 118 in Portland and 49 1/3 in Pawtucket. He was dominant in Portland and has been the best/most consistent pitcher on the Pawtucket staff, including his more talented teammate. He's 24 years old and he has a lot of "pitchability", meaning he has a long history of not doing what Joe Kelly just did.
Brian Johnson has 283 innings in the Sox system under his belt, including 118 in Portland and 49 1/3 in Pawtucket. He was dominant in Portland and has been the best/most consistent pitcher on the Pawtucket staff, including his more talented teammate. He's 24 years old and he has a lot of "pitchability", meaning he has a long history of not doing what Joe Kelly just did.
I would have agreed with this at the beginning of the year, but he had 28 K in his first 24 IP, and his May 20 start had 7 K and 1 BB in 7 IP. He had a 10.1% SwStr% through his first four starts, which would be in the top 30 in the league if he had kept it up. If he can get back to what he was doing there, that's a solid starter who is actually delivering on the good stuff that he had always shown.jk333 said:
Maybe he will never do that, but I'd like to give him more of a shot. He's still under team control for three more seasons and I'd like to keep the long-term in view -- weak AL East or no, I don't think they should go all-out for this year at the expense of next or future years.
Without cheating, which pitcher has been better? I don't know how to do tables so this is the best I can do.
Pitcher A: K rate=7.9, BB rate=3.7, HR rate=1.3, strand rate=61%, FIP=4.53, xFIP=4.00
Pitcher B: K rate=7.9, BB rate=2.6, HR rate=1.5, strand rate=70%, FIP=4.56, xFIP=4.07
Pitcher A: K rate=7.9, BB rate=3.7, HR rate=1.3, strand rate=61%, FIP=4.53, xFIP=4.00
Pitcher B: K rate=7.9, BB rate=2.6, HR rate=1.5, strand rate=70%, FIP=4.56, xFIP=4.07
Pitcher B is $20m per year man Porcello.
They need to draw a strike zone on a wall with circles at the four corners, and then have Kelly spend hours & hours trying to hit the circles with his throws.
Toe Nash said:
I'm not completely opposed to giving him more time because he does have the stuff to strike people out. But are there studies/data that show certain pitchers can have better K rates in the the major leagues (than the minors)? Because that's my issue, he's never done it before, so why would/should the Red Sox have expected it coming into this season? He was a nice pitcher before we got Porcello and Miley. He's better value than them but less effective.
I agree that the the previous month was interesting but the past 5 starts have been more typical of his career. To me, it looks like 3 of the April starts are the outliers. Again, he's not as bad as the last start, but the season is more of the same compared to his career. I'm OK if he gets a bit more time but its looking like he is who we thought he was.
Kelly keeps his velocity throughout his starts, so he is really built to be a starter. Just keep starting him.
Yes it will be volatile, but when (IF?) he develops fastball command his upside is worth having in the rotation.
I'm starting to feel that trading our studs at Triple-A for a proven starter(Hamels, Cueto, etc) may be a better route, we're still in this race after 45 games of dreadful play.
Yes it will be volatile, but when (IF?) he develops fastball command his upside is worth having in the rotation.
I'm starting to feel that trading our studs at Triple-A for a proven starter(Hamels, Cueto, etc) may be a better route, we're still in this race after 45 games of dreadful play.
I guess we haven't learned much from the Napoli turn-around. Every bad start, every bad game is followed by calls for drastic moves. The RS, albeit in a division where no team looks great, is only 2.5 games from the division lead while the traditional measurements of luck have not gone their way. The back up QB syndrome is rampant, yet the 1st play (Castillo) a recent call-up makes a mistake, the shine is off. Posters are off base claiming "Kelly is not an exciting pitcher", when he has truly elite movement and velocity. His stuff is certainly exciting and electric for a 26 yr old, although the results certainly are not consistent. If Kelly was in AAA, we would be calling for a promotion and claiming he was the savior.
Patience --- this team, while certainly not enjoying a good 7 week start is still a very good team. Yes improvements will need to be eventually made, assuming Masterson when he returns will likely be in the pen, most importantly a move for a #1/2 starter will be necessary for the RS to make a run. Kelly will likely continue to show flashes of brilliance and also stretches where he can't locate the ball, but if he stays healthy I would bet on him becoming a top of the rotation starter in the next 2-3 years.
Patience --- this team, while certainly not enjoying a good 7 week start is still a very good team. Yes improvements will need to be eventually made, assuming Masterson when he returns will likely be in the pen, most importantly a move for a #1/2 starter will be necessary for the RS to make a run. Kelly will likely continue to show flashes of brilliance and also stretches where he can't locate the ball, but if he stays healthy I would bet on him becoming a top of the rotation starter in the next 2-3 years.
Red(s)HawksFan said:
Didn't realize Johnson was not. Thanks.
I don't see why its such a bad idea to just live and die with Joe Kelly. He's got a rubber arm and throws 97 all day long. He's got a curve and slider that can put people away. When he's ahead he's fine, when he's down in the zone he's fine. He's by all accounts a good kid. He started pitching later than most. This is what coaches are for!
If you're putting someone in the rotation, it should be for Wright/Masterson. Who have performed worse so far in the aggregate and can't do what Joe did to the Yankees. And I don't want to trade any of the players it would take to get a clear upgrade.
In my lifetime said:
This board needs a winning streak more than the team does. This rotation still has a lot of potential, especially Kelly. It wouldn't surprise me if in 6 weeks or so everything straightens out and we get multiple threads about how it was silly to panic in the first place.
Remember, despite all of the struggles with both the offense and the pitching, they are still only 2 1/2 games out of first and no one in the division looks like a world beater. Let's give the guys a chance to work out their kinks for awhile before making drastic changes. Barely 1/4th of the season is over.
Since the rotation has collectively turned things around, and the pen is no longer gasping for air, they can be patient with Kelly.
I wish he would have figured out his command or learn to limit the big damage inning by his age 26 season, but if he's only going to be a #4 because of the occasional clunker, I'm ok with it. Reaching his ceiling isn't a pipe dream yet.
I wish he would have figured out his command or learn to limit the big damage inning by his age 26 season, but if he's only going to be a #4 because of the occasional clunker, I'm ok with it. Reaching his ceiling isn't a pipe dream yet.
I don't understand why Wright and Masterson are to be lumped together. Sure, Masterson has performed far worse, but Wright has a better ERA than all the other starters.The X Man Cometh said:
One thing about Kelly - it seems that he hasn't pitched a lot (something like 800 innings total). He was a outfielder in HS, converted to a reliever in college and had a limited career (73 innings total) and then didn't pitch a ton in the minors either (348 innings in 5 seasons).
Statistics: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/profile.asp?P=Joe-Kelly-4
So maybe it's a matter of Kelly getting more experienced, particularly if he doesn't have his best stuff (not necessarily velocity but location too).
Statistics: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/profile.asp?P=Joe-Kelly-4
So maybe it's a matter of Kelly getting more experienced, particularly if he doesn't have his best stuff (not necessarily velocity but location too).
Rudy Pemberton said:
Sullivan from JABO, fwiw
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/cincinnati-reds-johnny-cueto-aroldis-chapman-trade-052215
phenweigh said:
It's a very small sample, but Wright's career SIERA (56 IP) is 3.95. SIERA should account for Wright's knuckleball a bit better than FIP/xFIP which are each a touch higher (KN'ers have been shown to have below average BABIPs and HR/FB%, generally due to weaker contact on average -- guys like Wakefield and Dickey have sustained ~0.30 gap between DIPS-type and ERA). For perspective, Masterson has been under that mark once since 2011.
It depends on what the Red Sox exactly want, but Wright (to me) already looks like a ~1.5-2ish fWAR guy who can chew up innings at the back of a rotation. His upside probably isn't a lot higher (maybe 3ish fWAR?) and he'll probably have Wakefield-esque issues with more variability than a generic pitcher, but I think you gotta give him a little run to see if what he has shown so far is going to stick. I know Wakefield got a lot of crap while he was here and on a cold streak, but there are far, far worse #5 starters in baseball, even on contending teams.
Although a Redsox fan overal,I am a fan of the game and enjoy watching other teams. Ive seen Hahn of the A's shut down the Tigers yesterday, DeGrom of the Mets locating with perfection, and Lynn, and Wacha also able to locate the balland many many others. SO I really cant understand why the Sox pitchers can't locate better, throw strikes in the bootm of zone, mixing up pitches, working both sides of the plate. And if that doesnt work, ADJUST. I still think we need Hamels and should trade for him. Perhaps it could be Swihart callng? Then why not Farrell or Willis call the game? Frankly last in ERA, second to last in WHIP , near the top in BB's just isnt going to get it done.
grimshaw said:
Here's the actual article Rotoworld was citing:
So the issue is determining why he loses fb command, and it sounds like a concentration problem (since he's apparently not had this problem during his good starts). I'm unconvinced that he's going to discover something in the minors to straighten this out that he couldn't discover through good coaching and working hard during his side sessions at the major-league level. Part of me wonders if the Sox are trying to use the fear of demotion to get him to focus better.
I wasn't trying to compare pitchers. I did cite a few to simply pose the question that if many other pitchers can locate the ball an ge strike, not walk batters and pitch toboth sidesof the plate when needed, why cant the Sox' stating roatation?MakMan44 said:
The staff's struggles precede Swihart's promotion, so it's hard to pin the problems on him.FinanceAdvice said:
E5 Yaz said:
Came back clean (according to his agent)...
Anyway, Cueto remains a rental and prospect trades should be viewed in that light (which the referenced article does). I think the author makes a mistake in not including Kelly in that mix. He's better than most prospects and cost-controlled. I'll tell you what, any team gfin should salivate over a Cueto/Chapman package.
Question:
1. Would you rather have Cueto for 1/2 season (~ $5M) & Chapman for 1 1/2 seasons (~$4M + Arb in 2016...guess $10M?) in trade for Kelly-type + 2 mid-level prospects (including Rodriguez), or
2. Hamels for 4 1/2 seasons (~$100M) in trade for 2 high level prospects
In pure mathematics, option 1 costs something like 2 pitcher-seasons at ~$10M/ea + prospects/Kelly. Option 2 costs in the range of $22M/each(+ prospects/Kelly) for 4.5 pitcher-seasons
Am I making any sense?
Not an easy choice.
Article from Hardball Times on fastballs...
Executive summary:
1. Slow moving fastballs to the outside are as effective as high velocity (94+) fastballs to the inner 3rd (obviously higher velocity is typically better when down the middle)
2. Hard fastballs are more effective up in the zone than to the inner 3rd
3. High velocity / moving fastballs get more blown calls from umps, which makes throwing to the edges slightly problematic
He's essentially trying to take some of the shine away from pitchers who just throw hard. One of the comments addresses control, and where the fastball goes during a mistake. A slower fastball that drifts outside-inside is a disaster, as is (I guess) a hard inside fastball that drifts down and over the plate...meaning that the conclusions need to take into account how the pitcher (in this case, Kelly) fucks up - which direction.
Executive summary:
1. Slow moving fastballs to the outside are as effective as high velocity (94+) fastballs to the inner 3rd (obviously higher velocity is typically better when down the middle)
2. Hard fastballs are more effective up in the zone than to the inner 3rd
3. High velocity / moving fastballs get more blown calls from umps, which makes throwing to the edges slightly problematic
He's essentially trying to take some of the shine away from pitchers who just throw hard. One of the comments addresses control, and where the fastball goes during a mistake. A slower fastball that drifts outside-inside is a disaster, as is (I guess) a hard inside fastball that drifts down and over the plate...meaning that the conclusions need to take into account how the pitcher (in this case, Kelly) fucks up - which direction.
He's the #5 starter in the rotation right now. Used to be that a team would skip the #5 starter every now and then, if there was a day off. Whatever happened to that?
AB in DC said:
The guys on top started making a lot more money, therefore defaulting to a much more conservative approach in how one manages it's investment. Or at least that's my guess.
On topic, we knew Kelly was probably going to continue to be a project going in to this year, so it's really not worth getting too worked up over any one start. This discussion is at least a month premature imo.
Although i do find it somewhat puzzling that people are bringing up the possibility he gets demoted to AAA in such a casual manner. If it comes down to Kelly being bumped out of the rotation, I see a move to the bullpen and maybe try again latter approach being more probable then the AAA extreme.
I've been on the side of the fence that takes Cueto and Chapman in a deal where the Red Sox trade Owens, perhaps Margot, and a Marrero/Guerra type inclusion, depending on what the Reds prefer. If they want ERod, I'd still do it, but they don't get both Erod and Margot in the same package for these 2. The main reason the Sox aren't likely to move on Hamels is that they'd owe a guy over 30 years old 22 plus mil for 4 seasons, and they seem very skittish about guys who have crossed that line. Even though Cueto and Chapman only have 1/2 and 1 and 1/2 years of control, they also aren't associated with longer term commitments. I think that consideration trumps the potential value of having Hamels for 4 plus seasons at that rate. The current administration seems to prefer to be flexible with contracts, especially with pitchers, and especially with pitchers over 30. If the Reds put those 2 guys on the market, I expect the Red Sox to jump at the chance to bid on them.geoduck no quahog said:
This article may have been posted in the other Kelly thread, but I'll post it here again: Life without Molina.
Good thing the Red Sox have a pitching guru or two at Kelly's beck and call.
Good thing the Red Sox have a pitching guru or two at Kelly's beck and call.
For a guy who has struggled the most the first time through the order, a move to the pen is probably not wise.
1st time through - 890 OPS
2nd time through-734 OPS
3rd tme through-568 OPS
1st inning 8.0 ERA
2nd inning 9.3 ERA
How to get him more consistent in his starts is the key. Guy with his stuff they have to be patient. Control his bad starts with quick hooks and hope they are not too frequent.
1st time through - 890 OPS
2nd time through-734 OPS
3rd tme through-568 OPS
1st inning 8.0 ERA
2nd inning 9.3 ERA
How to get him more consistent in his starts is the key. Guy with his stuff they have to be patient. Control his bad starts with quick hooks and hope they are not too frequent.
Back to the hijack. I do the Reds deal in a heartbeat and convert Chapman to starting (and NO he is not Daniel Bard II).jasvlm said:
A rotation of Cueto, Chapman, Porcello, Buchholz, Miley and we'll see you in October.
What makes you think he could succeed as a starter and won't follow Bard's path? I have followed him closely the past two years and just can't see him blowing away guys for 5+ innings straight. He isn't terribly pitch efficient and walks a lot of batters. I see him as having been converted to a reliever for a reason, like Papelbon.benhogan said:
jasvlm said:
The Red Sox are a desperate team whose last three highly-touted prospects have been at best passable in the majors. There's no way I'm taking anything less than a Godfather package from the Red Sox for any top-line player, and I'd probably insist they take one of my bad contracts while I'm at it.
I'll summarize the tweaks leading up to Farrell's consistent emphasis on the curveball (apparently not taken to heart by Kelly)
1. Throw more 4-seamers with command (Schilling) - debunked
2. Throw more 2-seamers with command (Kelly) - debunked
3. Throw more sliders with command (Kelly) - debunked
4. Throw more curveballs with command (Farrell) - Kelly not listening
I guess the key here is my insertion of the word "command".
1. Throw more 4-seamers with command (Schilling) - debunked
2. Throw more 2-seamers with command (Kelly) - debunked
3. Throw more sliders with command (Kelly) - debunked
4. Throw more curveballs with command (Farrell) - Kelly not listening
I guess the key here is my insertion of the word "command".
I appreciate the complexity of the game and the Sox' situation. I guess I'm frustrated as many and searcing for answers. Re: my comment on the walks, I was referring to the enite pitching staff which ranks 13th in AL. I should have been more specific.MakMan44 said:
Some deals are "trades that keep giving." John Lackey for Craig and Kelly is a "trade that keeps subtracting." It would be pretty remarkable to see Kelly in AAA, along with Craig, the two pieces acquired for a few months of John Lackey (during a playoff run), followed by a year of John Lackey at league minimum.
At some point, somone has to pay the price for these moves, whether that someone is Ben Cherington, John Farrell, or an overhaul of the sabermetric people in the front office. It's not just the Lackey trade: the Porcello contract does not seem very prudent and the Masterson signing (for 9.5 million plus incentives) was inexcusable.
At some point, somone has to pay the price for these moves, whether that someone is Ben Cherington, John Farrell, or an overhaul of the sabermetric people in the front office. It's not just the Lackey trade: the Porcello contract does not seem very prudent and the Masterson signing (for 9.5 million plus incentives) was inexcusable.