Time to move Joe Kelly to the pen?

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Here's the thing that is most puzzling to me about Kelly. We all want him to find a level of consistency (that being in a GOOD way) from game to game, but he's having trouble finding that during a game and even within some at bats. The talent seems to be there, he looks amazing at times and then it all goes to shit. Heard it casually mentioned perhaps on Monday's broadcast (can't remember if it was radio or TV as I caught parts of the game on both) that Bob Tewksbury was traveling with the team. I'm wondering in what capacity. Seems at the moment the Sox could use the services of a team of sports psychologists. Has anyone heard similar or perhaps might be able to expand?   
 

Jnai

is not worried about sex with goats
SoSH Member
Sep 15, 2007
15,671
<null>
Kelly doesn't seem to be a prototypical guy you'd move to the pen. He holds his stuff through games. He doesn't have a wicked platoon split. He doesn't have a huge offspeed pitch that will play up if he only needs to go through three hitters. He doesn't have a middling fastball that will add crucial mph if he transitions into a relief role.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,518
YTF said:
Here's the thing that is most puzzling to me about Kelly. We all want him to find a level of consistency (that being in a GOOD way) from game to game, but he's having trouble finding that during a game and even within some at bats. The talent seems to be there, he looks amazing at times and then it all goes to shit. Heard it casually mentioned perhaps on Monday's broadcast (can't remember if it was radio or TV as I caught parts of the game on both) that Bob Tewksbury was traveling with the team. I'm wondering in what capacity. Seems at the moment the Sox could use the services of a team of sports psychologists. Has anyone heard similar or perhaps might be able to expand?   
Probably doesn't matter much.

Pitching is a form of overpracticed throwing. If one pitches in a variety of contexts, one may learn how to subconsciously correct for errors. For example, most MLB pitchers probably started pitching before their bodies fully matured, which gives them experience in how to adjust their body to throw more accurately.
 
The problem is simply that Kelly hasn't had this experience because he only started pitching in the past five years. He's got great stuff, but he has less experience than most 21-22 year-old AA starters. The only possible solution is for kelly to continue pitching frequently (i.e. starting).
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,634
Y'all realize that IF (and I know it's a little Eric Van here of me) Kelly had a quality start this past game his ERA would have been right at 4.0.  For F's sake... what the hell has happened to all the posters here?  Same with Porcello.  These two guys are going to click- I can't believe how you can't see that just by watching them pitch.  Yes, they are having problems, but a half decent scout could tell these two will be very very good and I hope to hell that Farrell and Ben continue to stick with them starting.
Add Miley to that group and you've got a core of very good pitchers all around a "no.2" (whatever that means) starting rotation pitcher on a good team.  If Buchholz can keep pitching the way he has we'll be good with these 4 from here on out.  
 

BoredViewer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,092
Trotsky said:
Y'all realize that IF (and I know it's a little Eric Van here of me) Kelly had a quality start this past game his ERA would have been right at 4.0.  For F's sake... what the hell has happened to all the posters here?  Same with Porcello.  These two guys are going to click- I can't believe how you can't see that just by watching them pitch.  Yes, they are having problems, but a half decent scout could tell these two will be very very good and I hope to hell that Farrell and Ben continue to stick with them starting.
Add Miley to that group and you've got a core of very good pitchers all around a "no.2" (whatever that means) starting rotation pitcher on a good team.  If Buchholz can keep pitching the way he has we'll be good with these 4 from here on out.  
 
That's not true.  If Kelly had a quality start (6IP 3ER) it might have reduced his ERA to 5.00.  Out of 110 qualified starting pitchers, Kelly is roughly #106 in ERA and Porcello is around #95.  These 2 guys have stunk.  I would expect any AAAA pitcher should be able to come up and exceed those levels of production.  That is how bad they have been.
 
Good pitchers have mostly good games.  Mediocre pitchers have a mix.  And, even bad pitchers have some good games.  I feel like a lot of times our evaluation of Sox players only emphasizes the positive results... "if X could just perform consistently like he did last game..."  Yeah - and if he could, then he wouldn't be a bad player.  But he doesn't, so....
 
*I'm not blind to Kelly's potential - but as long as half of his games are virtually unwinnable, maybe he should work out his issues somewhere other than the major league mound.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,634
Sorry, you're right.  I remembered before his last start thinking that he could get his ERA "into the 4's" with a QS and it turned into "4.0" in my misremembering my memory.  
I'm still confident in the guy and I'm fine with another lost year for the development of all these guys (and facing AAA hitters doesn't freakin' help!), since I'm thinking that Ortiz is toast.   He looks god awful.
 

FinanceAdvice

lurker
Apr 1, 2008
167
Albany, NY
YTF said:
Here's the thing that is most puzzling to me about Kelly. We all want him to find a level of consistency (that being in a GOOD way) from game to game, but he's having trouble finding that during a game and even within some at bats. The talent seems to be there, he looks amazing at times and then it all goes to shit. Heard it casually mentioned perhaps on Monday's broadcast (can't remember if it was radio or TV as I caught parts of the game on both) that Bob Tewksbury was traveling with the team. I'm wondering in what capacity. Seems at the moment the Sox could use the services of a team of sports psychologists. Has anyone heard similar or perhaps might be able to expand?   
Haven't heard anything but Im a big believer in using sports psychologisys/coaching. The whole team could use it.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
When your starting rotation has ERAs of:  5.37 (Porcello), 4.33 (Buchholz), 4.47 (Miley), 6.24 (Kelly), and 6.37 (Masterson), you know you're in deep trouble.  Now, Masterson is out and Wright (3.68 so far) is in, so that's one step forward.  
 
Another step forward is Miley.  His last 5 starts have all been either solid or really good.  His combined numbers over that time:  34.2 ip (nearly 7ip per start), 2.60 era, 1.10 whip.  He really has had only two bad starts all season long.  But boy, they were REALLY bad.  
 
And one more step forward is Buchholz.  Last 4 starts:  29.0 ip (7.1 ip per start), 2.48 era, 0.97 whip.  So he's been terrific lately.  
 
Thus, three of the five starters are now doing well:  Wright, Miley, and Clay.  That's a big positive.  
 
Kelly has been an unmitigated disaster, really.  Out of 9 starts, he's had 4 good ones, and 5 horrendous ones.  Nothing mediocre (6 ip, 3 r kind of thing).  It's all or nothing with him, and it's been more nothing than all, and his nothings have been colossal failures.  
 
Porcello looked like he was righting the ship, with 4 good starts in a row.  But then his last two have been godawful.  So who knows.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,614
Springfield, VA
And yet his peripherals really are not half bad. xFIP at 3.99 right now even after the latest meltdown. Arguably, one of his best outings was vs. Toronto at the end of April: 6 IP, 10 Ks, only eight batters reached base.  But five of the eight scored.  It's like he's acquired the Buchholz disease of giving up all his hits in bunches rather than being consistently average.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Not saying the trade was bad, but RDLR has been better than that this year.  3.30 xFIP, 3.37 SIERA, 12% swinging strike rate (was 8 and change last year) BB/9 down almost a BB/9 to 2.14, K rate up.  HR's are still his bugaboo, but there's some evidence he's a legit major league starter.  Not a star or anything, but a cost-controlled guy who could be a 4/5 guy on a good team.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Stitch01 said:
Not saying the trade was bad, but RDLR has been better than that this year.  3.30 xFIP, 3.37 SIERA, 12% swinging strike rate, BB/9 down almost a BB/9 to 2.14, K rate up.  HR's are still his bugaboo, but there's some evidence he's a legit major league starter.  
I agree. But he gets to strike out the pitcher every third inning, and Miley's stats are pretty similar across the board, as far as I can tell (except maybe the swinging strike %, stylistic differences). So far I'd say both teams did OK, as opposed to the Lackey deal.
 

BoredViewer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,092
RDLR doesn't appear to be any worse than Miley - a couple of years younger and costs $516k vs. 3/$20 million.  They even had almost identical 2014 seasons.
 
It's not an epic loss, but if you're the Sox and you make a move like that... you're expecting to get better results from the guy you picked up... not just pay more for what you already had.  
 
BoredViewer said:
RDLR doesn't appear to be any worse than Miley - a couple of years younger and costs $516k vs. 3/$20 million.  They even had almost identical 2014 seasons.
 
It's not an epic loss, but if you're the Sox and you make a move like that... you're expecting to get better results from the guy you picked up... not just pay more for what you already had.  
Yes, but De La Rosa has already had Tommy John and the organization was already concerned for his total innings pitched as a result of coming back from that.  Miley has already pitched 200+ innings twice in his career and (I am going from memory on this one) was billed as a workhorse who can go deep in games.  So they may have the same results but with less risk, which they may be willing to pay more for.
 

alwyn96

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2005
1,351
Jnai said:
Kelly doesn't seem to be a prototypical guy you'd move to the pen. He holds his stuff through games. He doesn't have a wicked platoon split. He doesn't have a huge offspeed pitch that will play up if he only needs to go through three hitters. He doesn't have a middling fastball that will add crucial mph if he transitions into a relief role.
 
Kelly holds his velocity through games, but his stuff really comes and goes. Or at least his command of it does. I think most pitchers' stuff does tend to play up in the bullpen, and if focus is his problem then it's generally easier to focus on one inning stints than over the course of a game. Plus if his already 97MPH four-seamer can get up 100MPH or something in relief, he might be able to get away with grooving one down the middle more often (as he tends to do).
 
I'm not saying the Red Sox should necessarily put him in the bullpen yet - a guy who can throw 98 deep in games and who can spin a sweet curve is always interesting and you want to give him every chance to be that top-flight starter - but unless he can keep his focus I think he'll end up there eventually.
 

foulkehampshire

hillbilly suburbanite
SoSH Member
Feb 25, 2007
5,094
Wesport, MA
 

Troy O'Lovely said:
Yes, but De La Rosa has already had Tommy John and the organization was already concerned for his total innings pitched as a result of coming back from that.  Miley has already pitched 200+ innings twice in his career and (I am going from memory on this one) was billed as a workhorse who can go deep in games.  So they may have the same results but with less risk, which they may be willing to pay more for.
 
They needed some stability in the rotation - which Miley was well suited to provide, albeit at a potentially lesser ceiling. Webster and/or RDLR were unlikely to provide that for a plethora of reasons (IP limits, inconsistency, etc). What we're seeing from RDLR was on the "less-likely" scale on the spectrum of expected projections. Nobody would be surprised if he was struggling quite a bit. Also - National League. 
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
foulkehampshire said:
They needed some stability in the rotation - which Miley was well suited to provide, albeit at a potentially lesser ceiling. Webster and/or RDLR were unlikely to provide that for a plethora of reasons (IP limits, inconsistency, etc). What we're seeing from RDLR was on the "less-likely" scale on the spectrum of expected projections. Nobody would be surprised if he was struggling quite a bit. Also - National League. 
Also, eight weeks. 
 

O Captain! My Captain!

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 3, 2009
3,532
alwyn96 said:
 
Kelly holds his velocity through games, but his stuff really comes and goes. Or at least his command of it does. I think most pitchers' stuff does tend to play up in the bullpen, and if focus is his problem then it's generally easier to focus on one inning stints than over the course of a game. Plus if his already 97MPH four-seamer can get up 100MPH or something in relief, he might be able to get away with grooving one down the middle more often (as he tends to do).
 
I'm not saying the Red Sox should necessarily put him in the bullpen yet - a guy who can throw 98 deep in games and who can spin a sweet curve is always interesting and you want to give him every chance to be that top-flight starter - but unless he can keep his focus I think he'll end up there eventually.
 
Kelly's problem isn't going to be solved by more velocity though. He already has elite velocity on his fastball, as well as fairly good movement. It never hurts to throw harder, but Kelly's issue is command of the fastball first and foremost. Despite the fastball velocity, he also doesn't strike out a ton of guys, so I'm not sure he's super suited towards a bullpen role. 
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,016
Rogers Park
BoredViewer said:
RDLR doesn't appear to be any worse than Miley - a couple of years younger and costs $516k vs. 3/$20 million.  They even had almost identical 2014 seasons.
 
Except for the fact that Miley threw literally twice as many innings in the majors. 
 
Back on topic: if RDLR was so obviously worth keeping around because of his stuff and potential, wouldn't Joe Kelly be a very similar case?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
27,341
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.
Does that ERod for Miller trade mean that the FO and Ben get to keep their jobs for the time being?
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,542
O Captain! My Captain! said:
 
Kelly's problem isn't going to be solved by more velocity though. He already has elite velocity on his fastball, as well as fairly good movement. It never hurts to throw harder, but Kelly's issue is command of the fastball first and foremost. Despite the fastball velocity, he also doesn't strike out a ton of guys, so I'm not sure he's super suited towards a bullpen role. 
Joe Kelly, when the Sox acquired him, had two traits that I thought made him a poor starter.  One was the inability to translate his strong natural stuff into strikeouts.  The other was inconsistency of command.
 
His K/9 so far this season is 7.90.  That is more than one and a half K/9 higher than his career best (6.31, 2012 with the Cardinals).  He is a little high on the BB/9 at 3.67 when he normally lives in the low 3's.  The big negative outliers this season are HR/9 at 1.29 versus a career average of 0.84, LOB% of 61.1% versus a career average of 74.2%, and a GB% of 47.1% versus a career average of 51.7%.  His xFIP right now is better than any previous season.  His FIP is a 4.51, well in line with his career norms.
 
I'd argue that Kelly is showing the growth you're looking for out of him, it just isn't all coming at once.  If the front three guys were getting results up to expectations (Buch and Porcello as solid #2's with mid 3's ERAs, Miley as a solid #3 with a high 3's ERA) we would all likely feel just fine giving Kelly the rope to see if he can polish off his arsenal and live up to the raw potential present there.  He's also only thrown 376 ML innings.  Guy has a lot of development left in him.
 
Personally, I don't see how he's so much worse a bet to be in the rotation than Masterson, Wright, and possibly Miley.  He's shown more dominant moments than any of them this season.  Henry Owens looks like he needs more time in AAA to polish off before coming up, Brian Johnson is promising but isn't on the 40 man yet so if they can avoid bringing him up they can save an entire season of control for a high floor/low ceiling back of the rotation guy (i.e. likely a valuable year).
 
I have no problem with the club riding with Kelly for a while longer.  I'd rather see EdRod take the Masterson/Wright spot in the rotation, moving Wright to long man and letting Barnes settle in as part of the 7/8/9 late game one inning guys.
 

BoredViewer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,092
nvalvo said:
 
Except for the fact that Miley threw literally twice as many innings in the majors. 
 
Back on topic: if RDLR was so obviously worth keeping around because of his stuff and potential, wouldn't Joe Kelly be a very similar case?
 
And RDLR pitched 60 innings at AAA.  There wasn't a huge difference in their workloads for 2014.  
 
My point was that Cherrington needs to win more of these trades.  At present, I don't think anyone would call the Miley trade a win for the Sox.  Maybe it's a draw - but I think most would see AZ as winning, so far.  
 
I mean look... the team kind of sucks and we've got a $200 million payroll.  They haven't done a good job with a lot of things.
 

alwyn96

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2005
1,351
O Captain! My Captain! said:
 
Kelly's problem isn't going to be solved by more velocity though. He already has elite velocity on his fastball, as well as fairly good movement. It never hurts to throw harder, but Kelly's issue is command of the fastball first and foremost. Despite the fastball velocity, he also doesn't strike out a ton of guys, so I'm not sure he's super suited towards a bullpen role. 
 
Well, some guys' command can improve with a move to the bullpen, and their strikeout rates often improve for whatever reason. Andrew Miller didn't have a particularly exciting strikeout rate before his move to the bullpen either, but moving to the bullpen tends to make guys better. I think almost everyone pitches better in the bullpen, regardless of repetoire. I think the real sticking point is at what point you give up on them in a starting role.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
1,975
I think the whole "6 man rotation" was kicking the can down the curb and hoping Wright or Kelly threw a stinker the past few weeks. But they didn't which means sooner rather than later they have to decide. I think Wright is the odd man out, whether it's to the pen or AAA. Jedi doesn't exist in my mind. I think he will have another "injury" to restart his rehab clock in hopes he can put it back together
 

iayork

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2006
639
I'm an unabashed Kelly fanboy, but even if I wasn't I couldn't imagine that he is due for the pen.  Since Willis arrived, four of Kelly's five starts have been good to very good (1, 2, 7, 2, and 1 ER in 6.1, 7.0, 1.2, 5.0, and 6.0 innings).  What's more, since his pitching style changed with Willis's arrival in exactly the way Willis said he wanted it to change, there's a good reason to believe that New Joe is real, not just a couple lucky starts.  (Specifically, he's slowed his fastball down from 98-99 to 95-96 mph, especially in the early innings.)
 
Wright has been pretty good, but the flexibility that goes with being a knuckleballer means that he's a good candidate for long relief, a couple innings for several days in a row, as well as being able to step in with a spot start here and there.  Also, as a less important consideration, he's indicated his willingness to go wherever he's asked.  
 
I'll be surprised, and the fanboy in me will be deeply disappointed, if it's not Wright to the pen.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
For me the issues with Kelly's transition to starting is similar to Hanley's transition to LF: both appear to have the tools to make the switch (Kelly's raw stuff and ability to hold his velocity vs. Hanley's ability to play SS (if badly)), what they lack is the experience of reps at the position. In that sense both players are projects that will require patience as their experience catches up with raw ability. Obviously patience is in short supply around an under .500 team.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
27,341
For me the issues with Kelly's transition to starting is similar to Hanley's transition to LF: both appear to have the tools to make the switch (Kelly's raw stuff and ability to hold his velocity vs. Hanley's ability to play SS (if badly)), what they lack is the experience of reps at the position. In that sense both players are projects that will require patience as their experience catches up with raw ability. Obviously patience is in short supply around an under .500 team.
I had mentioned previously that Kelly only pitched 73 innings in college and 348 innings in the minors. By comparison, in the article ranking #1 draft picks, Ben McDonald said: "From my sophomore year at L.S.U. through the Olympics and then through my junior season, I threw 352 innings in basically a 14-month period."

Maybe Kelly isn't going to figure things out but he really does need to put innings under his belt.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
42,609
“@keithlaw: Joe Kelly: Still Not a Starter”

“@keithlaw: .@VirtualBoyd I’d put Kelly in the pen, where his skill set will work, and recall Brian Johnson for the rotation.”
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,257
Not here
soxhop411 said:
“@keithlaw: Joe Kelly: Still Not a Starter”

“@keithlaw: .@VirtualBoyd I’d put Kelly in the pen, where his skill set will work, and recall Brian Johnson for the rotation.”
God for fuck balls, do it now.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
15,271
Or just put Wright back in the rotation. 
 
Wait, we just sent him down to make room for Masterson. 

Wright's 4.15 ERA is nothing great, but Kelly, Porcello and Masterson have all been horrendous. Those three have combined to go 8-15 with a combined ERA around 6.00 in over 190 IP.
 
I'd dump Masterson, put Kelly in the bullpen and put Wright in the rotation. 
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
52,927
deep inside Guido territory
The Gray Eagle said:
Or just put Wright back in the rotation. 
 
Wait, we just sent him down to make room for Masterson. 

Wright's 4.15 ERA is nothing great, but Kelly, Porcello and Masterson have all been horrendous. Those three have combined to go 8-15 with a combined ERA around 6.00 in over 190 IP.
 
I'd dump Masterson, put Kelly in the bullpen and put Wright in the rotation.
What a sad state of affairs. Masterson and Porcello combining to make over $20 million to give the team negative-level performance.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
He very rarely has just mediocre starts (6 ip, 3 runs, 7 ip, 4 runs, that kind of thing).  He's either very good or very bad.  Looking at his game log, I see:
 
7 very good starts - Total line:  42.0 ip, 32 h, 10 er, 15 bb, 32 k, 2.14 era, 1.12 whip
6 very bad starts - Total line:  26.2 ip, 42 h, 33 er, 14 bb, 25 k, 11.14 era, 2.10 whip
1 mediocre start - Total line:  6.0 ip, 7 h, 4 er, 2 bb, 3 k, 6.00 era, 1.50 whip  (this really should be considered a "bad" start, but it's closer to "mediocre" than "very bad")
 
The good Joe Kelly is dominating.  The bad Joe Kelly isn't fit to pitch for AA Portland.  Sadly, you just never know which Joe Kelly you're gonna get.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
1,975
The Gray Eagle said:
Or just put Wright back in the rotation. 
 
Wait, we just sent him down to make room for Masterson. 
Wright's 4.15 ERA is nothing great, but Kelly, Porcello and Masterson have all been horrendous. Those three have combined to go 8-15 with a combined ERA around 6.00 in over 190 IP.
 
I'd dump Masterson, put Kelly in the bullpen and put Wright in the rotation. 
 
I'm guessing Kelly has "fatigue" and will go to the DL and AAA and Wright gets brought back up and takes Kelly's slot
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
ivanvamp said:
He very rarely has just mediocre starts (6 ip, 3 runs, 7 ip, 4 runs, that kind of thing).  He's either very good or very bad.  Looking at his game log, I see:
 
7 very good starts - Total line:  42.0 ip, 32 h, 10 er, 15 bb, 32 k, 2.14 era, 1.12 whip
6 very bad starts - Total line:  26.2 ip, 42 h, 33 er, 14 bb, 25 k, 11.14 era, 2.10 whip
1 mediocre start - Total line:  6.0 ip, 7 h, 4 er, 2 bb, 3 k, 6.00 era, 1.50 whip  (this really should be considered a "bad" start, but it's closer to "mediocre" than "very bad")
 
The good Joe Kelly is dominating.  The bad Joe Kelly isn't fit to pitch for AA Portland.  Sadly, you just never know which Joe Kelly you're gonna get.
 
In a lost season, it is worth keeping him in the rotation and building up his innings to see if the ratio of good to bad can become more favorable.
 
It also might be worth putting him in the bullpen to see if his stuff really does play up and he can be a Wade Davis/Luke Hochevar (pre-TJS) type relief ace.
 
I'm o.k. with either option, really.  Last night the bases got loaded on 3 balls that fit the definition of BABip. 
 
Dec 13, 2013
390
Plympton91 said:
 
In a lost season, it is worth keeping him in the rotation and building up his innings to see if the ratio of good to bad can become more favorable.
 
It also might be worth putting him in the bullpen to see if his stuff really does play up and he can be a Wade Davis/Luke Hochevar (pre-TJS) type relief ace.
 
I'm o.k. with either option, really.  Last night the bases got loaded on 3 balls that fit the definition of BABip. 
 
Do we have any reason to expect Kelly to be game changing in the pen?
 
I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to me like Kelly, besides being a hard-thrower, has much in common with generic "relief ace" types. Some of his big strengths (can throw 100 pitches a night, has a four-pitch mix) are minimized by pitching 1 inning per outing. Furthermore, its not like he has these two dominant pitches that he'll throw out of the pen with the burden of starting behind him. His secondary pitches don't seem so far behind his fastball in terms of effectiveness.
 
He is what he is, a developmental starting pitcher. And despite being developmental, he's outpitched Masterson and Wright so far anyway.
 

Joe Shlabotnick

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
2,897
Baltimore, MD
The X Man Cometh said:
 
 
Do we have any reason to expect Kelly to be game changing in the pen?
 
I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to me like Kelly, besides being a hard-thrower, has much in common with generic "relief ace" types. Some of his big strengths (can throw 100 pitches a night, has a four-pitch mix) are minimized by pitching 1 inning per outing. Furthermore, its not like he has these two dominant pitches that he'll throw out of the pen with the burden of starting behind him. His secondary pitches don't seem so far behind his fastball in terms of effectiveness.
 
He is what he is, a developmental starting pitcher. And despite being developmental, he's outpitched Masterson and Wright so far anyway.
 
If I recall correctly, the Orioles tried Zach Britton as a starter before they put him in the bullpen.  He is similar to Kelly at least with respect to the ovepowering fastball, and this decision has worked out quite well for the Orioles.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
6,627
From Dave Cameron's chat:
 
12:02
Comment From Sully
Why did anyone ever think Joe Kelly has value as a starting pitcher?
 


12:03
Dave Cameron: Because he’s thrown 392 innings as a big league starter and has a 3.92 ERA, 4.19 FIP, and 4.20 xFIP. The idea that he’s not a capable big league starter is an overreaction to a few bad months.
 
 
Edit:  My own $.02 is that I have yet to see any evidence that Kelly's stuff is going to "play up" as a reliever.  The hits he gave up last night were all belt-high in the strike zone -- I don't see how those kinds of location mistakes get resolved by moving to relief.  As I consider this season to be a lost cause, I think not using the rest of the year to see if Kelly can work things out as a starter would be a mistake.
 
Jun 15, 2015
206
I have not given up on the idea of Kelly as a starter but if the Sox feel the can gain ground one of Kelly or Porcello need to go. The offense seems to have come around and three fifths of the rotation is doing decently. So it might be a few bad months but at this point the Lesh has broken and it's time to try something else.
 

alwyn96

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2005
1,351
nattysez said:
 
From Dave Cameron's chat:
 
12:02
Comment From Sully
Why did anyone ever think Joe Kelly has value as a starting pitcher?
 


12:03
Dave Cameron: Because he’s thrown 392 innings as a big league starter and has a 3.92 ERA, 4.19 FIP, and 4.20 xFIP. The idea that he’s not a capable big league starter is an overreaction to a few bad months.
 
 
Edit:  My own $.02 is that I have yet to see any evidence that Kelly's stuff is going to "play up" as a reliever.  The hits he gave up last night were all belt-high in the strike zone -- I don't see how those kinds of location mistakes get resolved by moving to relief.  As I consider this season to be a lost cause, I think not using the rest of the year to see if Kelly can work things out as a starter would be a mistake.

 
 
I guess I have yet to see any evidence why Kelly's stuff wouldn't play up as a reliever, as it generally seems to for most pitchers who have made the transition throughout baseball history, regardless of repetoire. Command and stuff tends to improve as starters move to the pen, for whatever reason.
 
Although I'm juuuuuust about ready to throw in the towel on this season, so I'm not sure I care what they do with him right now. I still think he's destined for relief, though.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
The X Man Cometh said:
 
 
Do we have any reason to expect Kelly to be game changing in the pen?
 
I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to me like Kelly, besides being a hard-thrower, has much in common with generic "relief ace" types. Some of his big strengths (can throw 100 pitches a night, has a four-pitch mix) are minimized by pitching 1 inning per outing. Furthermore, its not like he has these two dominant pitches that he'll throw out of the pen with the burden of starting behind him. His secondary pitches don't seem so far behind his fastball in terms of effectiveness.
 
He is what he is, a developmental starting pitcher. And despite being developmental, he's outpitched Masterson and Wright so far anyway.
 
 
If they're thinking he can be effective out of the pen, then they've gotta be thinking that he can dominate for the first couple of innings, but that the longer he goes, the worse he gets.
 
Well this year, here are his numbers during his first and second innings of work:
 
First inning:  14.0 ip, 5.79 era, .264/.328/.472/.800, .279 babip 
Second inning:  13.2 ip, 9.22 era, .356/.414/.525/.940, .396 babip
 
So maybe the babip suggests that the second inning he's been somewhat unlucky, but you can't say that about the first inning.  The fact is, he's been BAD in the first inning or two.  His best innings (not counting the 7th where he has only 2.1 ip) have been the 5th (3.09) and the 3rd (4.15).  
 
So I don't know that there's any evidence to suggest that moving to the bullpen will improve him.  
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
42,609
“@RyanHannable: Farrell on @DaleHolleyWEEI says he hasn’t spoken to Joe Kelly, but certainly seemed like the team plans on taking him out of the rotation.”
 

alwyn96

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2005
1,351
ivanvamp said:
 
If they're thinking he can be effective out of the pen, then they've gotta be thinking that he can dominate for the first couple of innings, but that the longer he goes, the worse he gets.
 
Well this year, here are his numbers during his first and second innings of work:
 
First inning:  14.0 ip, 5.79 era, .264/.328/.472/.800, .279 babip 
Second inning:  13.2 ip, 9.22 era, .356/.414/.525/.940, .396 babip
 
So maybe the babip suggests that the second inning he's been somewhat unlucky, but you can't say that about the first inning.  The fact is, he's been BAD in the first inning or two.  His best innings (not counting the 7th where he has only 2.1 ip) have been the 5th (3.09) and the 3rd (4.15).  
 
So I don't know that there's any evidence to suggest that moving to the bullpen will improve him.  
 
Andrew Miller:
First inning: 12.0 IP, 6.00 era, 319/393/404
 
Zach Britton:
First inning: 45 IP, 6.80 era, 340/389/492
 
Wade Davis:
First inning: 88 IP, 4.91 era, 297/372/454
 
Guys change when they get to the bullpen. You see the same pattern with a lot of starters who make the transition.