What does 2023 look like?

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,531
What exactly are they supposed to do with Pivetta? They're not just going to DFA him - he was worth 1.5 fWAR last year and led the team in IP. He's worth 2.5 according to BTV, so that gets you essentially a lottery ticket in a trade. Can you imagine the absolute vitriol that'd get spewed here when Sale/Paxton are pitching on a short leash through April, the bullpen is already taxed, and meanwhile Pivetta is humming along in the back of a rotation in San Diego or Milwaukee in exchange for a middling prospect in AA?

Even if he pitches the same as he's done in the 2 years he's been in Boston, that's still 165 IP of 96 ERA+ ball, which is essentially league average. How are you going to fill the innings he's projected to throw? Do you really think that Crawford (87 IP/4.71 ERA) and Winckowski (93 IP/4.65 ERA) will be that much better? The projections sure don't.
Pivetta pitches less than 5 1/2 innings per start. He's not saving the bullpen - he's preventing other, probably better, starters from starting.

Baseball Reference may project Pivetta for a 4.36 ERA, but the average of the 6 Fangraphs projections is 4.72 for Pivetta, 4.61 for Crawford & 4.54 for Winckowski. They also don't need to be significantly better to be more valuable because they have options.

Are we really going to start Whitlock in the bullpen or Bello in the minors to let Pivetta pitch if Sale & Paxton are ready to go to start the season?

Here are all the Red Sox starting options on BR's Marcel projections that you cited...

Whitlock 3.27
Houck 3.45
Sale 3.76
Bello 4.12
Kluber 4.20
Paxton 4.20

Pivetta 4.36
Winckowski 4.65
Crawford 4.71

Even citing BR where he's 7th of 9 instead of 12th of 12 like on Fangraphs, there is still an opportunity cost to starting him in the rotation (assuming health & that he has not somehow become a significantly better pitcher in the off season).
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Hey, it’s only February but congrats on the most condescending post of the year.

What do you think the Sox should do with Pivetta?
Thanks! Also I don't see what's condescending, it's simply a fact that you -- and others -- have frequently expressed concern about injured guys getting injured again while others here keep pointing out that if they have healed, then they've healed.

I'd say Pivetta should be Paxton's piggyback reliever until we see what we have. IMO Paxton may be healed but that doesn't mean he'll be built up for long starts. Pivetta isn't really a reliever but he could be fine knowing he's starting the 5th. The lefty-righty switch has its benefits too.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,531
Thanks! Also I don't see what's condescending, it's simply a fact that you -- and others -- have frequently expressed concern about injured guys getting injured again while others here keep pointing out that if they have healed, then they've healed.

I'd say Pivetta should be Paxton's piggyback reliever until we see what we have. IMO Paxton may be healed but that doesn't mean he'll be built up for long starts. Pivetta isn't really a reliever but he could be fine knowing he's starting the 5th. The lefty-righty switch has its benefits too.
If everyone is healthy, I'd much rather use Houck for that role.

Last year, Pivetta:

3.94 xFIP against righties
4.59 xFIP the first time through the order

Last year, Houck:

3.27 xFIP against righties
3.46 xFIP the first time through the order

Career, Pivetta:

3.94 xFIP against righties
4.02 xFIP the first time through the order

Career, Houck:

3.04 xFIP against righties
3.14 xFIP the first time through the order

Side note - I have no issue with thinking players like Sale & Paxton have a higher risk of injury than players like Pivetta. The problem is the closer to 100% you ascribe to Sale/Paxton & the closer to 0% you ascribe to Pivetta, the sillier the mental exercise is.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
If everyone is healthy, I'd much rather use Houck for that role.

Side note - I have no issue with thinking players like Sale & Paxton have a higher risk of injury than players like Pivetta. The problem is the closer to 100% you ascribe to Sale/Paxton & the closer to 0% you ascribe to Pivetta, the sillier the mental exercise is.
Hm maybe. In the 7-healthy-starter scenario maybe there are two piggyback roles to fill.

I'd only add on injuries that nothing we know suggests that Sale's risk is higher than Pivetta's going forward. From what little I know (albeit firsthand) about ligaments, post-repair they are as good as new, which is probably more than you can say for Pivetta's. Sale's other issues are neither chronic nor a function of his pitching motion. Paxton is healed but the way stuff has cropped up makes me wonder at least a little if he won't be battling sore this or that. [The lat tear was odd.] But he's the magical two years out from TJ so hopefully this is when all the moving parts are finally ready to go.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,853
San Diego
Pivetta pitches less than 5 1/2 innings per start. He's not saving the bullpen - he's preventing other, probably better, starters from starting.

Baseball Reference may project Pivetta for a 4.36 ERA, but the average of the 6 Fangraphs projections is 4.72 for Pivetta, 4.61 for Crawford & 4.54 for Winckowski. They also don't need to be significantly better to be more valuable because they have options.

Are we really going to start Whitlock in the bullpen or Bello in the minors to let Pivetta pitch if Sale & Paxton are ready to go to start the season?

Here are all the Red Sox starting options on BR's Marcel projections that you cited...

Whitlock 3.27
Houck 3.45
Sale 3.76
Bello 4.12
Kluber 4.20
Paxton 4.20

Pivetta 4.36
Winckowski 4.65
Crawford 4.71

Even citing BR where he's 7th of 9 instead of 12th of 12 like on Fangraphs, there is still an opportunity cost to starting him in the rotation (assuming health & that he has not somehow become a significantly better pitcher in the off season).
If I'm putting together the staff, I'd go with:

Sale
Bello
Kluber
Whitlock
Pivetta

Houck is in the bullpen, Crawford and Winc are in AAA, and Paxton might still need some ramp-up before slotting into the rotation. If and when he's ready, then yeah, maybe it's time to look at moving on from Pivetta. I just think you need to let the rotation play out a little before cutting one of the only two guys projected to pitch 150+ innings this year.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
Even if he pitches the same as he's done in the 2 years he's been in Boston, that's still 165 IP of 96 ERA+ ball, which is essentially league average. How are you going to fill the innings he's projected to throw? Do you really think that Crawford (87 IP/4.71 ERA) and Winckowski (93 IP/4.65 ERA) will be that much better? The projections sure don't.
JM3 has addressed this but what projections are you looking at? The ones I'm seeing pretty much all project Crawford and Winckowski to be as good or better, and they're both guys we want to develop at the major league level to see if they can occupy a rotation spot in 2025.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
13,412
JM3 has addressed this but what projections are you looking at? The ones I'm seeing pretty much all project Crawford and Winckowski to be as good or better, and they're both guys we want to develop at the major league level to see if they can occupy a rotation spot in 2025.
How accurate are these projections, historically? They seem really bullish on minor league pitchers, for whatever reason. Crawford has a career 5.20 ERA in AAA. But, we want to pitch these guys in the big leagues next year…to see if they can pitch in the big leagues the year after? Is that the plan?
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,124
Rogers Park
Crawford's first stint in AAA had a K/9 over 12, a BB/9 under 3, a HR/9 under 1, and a BABIP of .370, but sure, let's just keep evaluating pitchers using ERA on the main board for some reason.

His two brief AAA stints in 2022 are weirder, but don't seem much more representative. He had six starts total in AAA. He was basically great in four of them (6 ER total), but the other two were a disaster. These two were consecutive, but with a month-long break for an injury in between; both came against the Syracuse Mets. He got roughed up both times — ERA over 11 across that span.

Then he came back up the next week and threw five innings in Seattle, allowing one hit and four walks.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,531
I'm only a smidge optimistic about Crawford & not really optimistic at all about Winckowski.

I was just messing around on Kutter's Baseball Savant page & enjoyed his list of similar pitchers based on velocity & movement, though:

1) Justin Verlander
2) Jameson Taillon

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/affinity-pitchers-bySHV#players=pitchers&player=676710-R&s=0.6

I think Crawford is probably going to start throwing his changeup a bit more to lefties & his slider a bit more to righties & see improvement as a result as well. & I do like that he throws 5 pitches compared to Pivetta's 3.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
Ahh, I see, thanks. My understanding is that Marcel is a basic 3-2-1 model and has been lapped by the other systems.
How accurate are these projections, historically? They seem really bullish on minor league pitchers, for whatever reason. Crawford has a career 5.20 ERA in AAA. But, we want to pitch these guys in the big leagues next year…to see if they can pitch in the big leagues the year after? Is that the plan?
Here’s a study. A lot of them are designed for fantasy which is obviously not what we’re talking about, but they’re incentivized to take more factors into account than Marcel would.

Also, yes? It happens all the time that organizations clear a lane at the major-league level for young players to seize. Assuming a top 5 rotation of Sale, Bello, Whitlock, Kluber and Paxton, the Sox have six other young starters on the 40-man besides Pivetta — quite a lot! I’ll comb through other 40-man rosters later but my hunch is that no other team has that situation.

Those guys are at different stages, but we definitely do want more information about how they can hang in the majors — it’s the difference between playing a healthy Crawford in the #5 slot vs. signing a guy like Wacha to that 4/$24 deal — and the practical difference between penciling in any of their projections as our #7 starter vs. penciling in Pivetta’s are so microscopic that it’s worth it to open up a little bit more of a lane for them.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
13,412
Ok, but then why stop there? What’s the point of investing in Kluber and Paxton (two guys who won’t be here in a year or two) when the projections are so good for two guys like Mata and Walter? I guess I’m confused as to how pretty much everyone can agree that the Sox don’t have high level pitching prospects beyond Bello…yet the projections for guys like Crawford, Murphy, etc can be so good, even for this year!
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,531
Ok, but then why stop there? What’s the point of investing in Kluber and Paxton (two guys who won’t be here in a year or two) when the projections are so good for two guys like Mata and Walter? I guess I’m confused as to how pretty much everyone can agree that the Sox don’t have high level pitching prospects beyond Bello…yet the projections for guys like Crawford, Murphy, etc can be so good, even for this year!
I don't think the projections for the other pitchers are great as much as the projections for Pivetta are awful...

Whitlock 3.44 to 4.02
Sale 3.47 to 3.98
Houck 3.58 to 4.14
Walter 3.68 to 4.28 (seems...optimistic)
Bello 3.85 to 4.27
Paxton 4.05 to 4.80 (2nd highest is 4.29)
Murphy 4.09 to 4.86
Winckowski 4.20 to 4.92
Mata 4.22 to 4.96
Crawford 4.23 to 4.75
Kluber 4.51 to 4.76
Pivetta 4.63 to 4.99

The Walter one is obviously a pretty big headscratcher, though.
 

jteders1

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2022
136
Crawford's first stint in AAA had a K/9 over 12, a BB/9 under 3, a HR/9 under 1, and a BABIP of .370, but sure, let's just keep evaluating pitchers using ERA on the main board for some reason.

His two brief AAA stints in 2022 are weirder, but don't seem much more representative. He had six starts total in AAA. He was basically great in four of them (6 ER total), but the other two were a disaster. These two were consecutive, but with a month-long break for an injury in between; both came against the Syracuse Mets. He got roughed up both times — ERA over 11 across that span.

Then he came back up the next week and threw five innings in Seattle, allowing one hit and four walks.
So basically what Pivetta does on the big league level. I'm no fan of Pivetta, but he's the only starter that has consistently given 150+ innings for the last two seasons. Based on injury history with other starters, I'd be hesitant to move him to the pen, and I certainly wouldn't do it for a guy who hasn't proven consistency at the AAA level. If you're telling me we're going with a rotation of Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Bello, and Whitlock, than fine, but I'm not as convinced as others that Sale and Paxton will start the season not on the IL.

Now, if you want to trade him, I'm listening, because if we're starting Pivetta due to Sale and/or Paxton missing signifigant time due to injury, then we probably aren't a playoff team anyway, let's get some lotto tikets and move on.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,255
Ahh, I see, thanks. My understanding is that Marcel is a basic 3-2-1 model and has been lapped by the other systems.
Not for nothing, but I'm "guilty" of liking the Marcel projections as well, especially in terms of older players (those past their age 32 seasons). I understand the limitations of Marcel, and generalizations overall, but I am one whom subscribes to the rough idea of a player developing up to around age 26, having their prime as ages 27-32 or 33 and then declining from there on. Obviously there are exceptions on all sides of the equation, but I do like the simplicity of the 3-2-1 weighted projections AND that they're totally focused on results and actual outcomes.

Clearly I hope Sale follows the Justin Verlander / Max Scherzer route and ends up being a stud for the Red Sox in his age 34 and 35 seasons. Though I remain skeptical, and if I were betting think something looking more like Perdo's line his age 34-37 seasons is more likely.
 

walt in maryland

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
223
Woodbine, MD
If I'm putting together the staff, I'd go with:

Sale
Bello
Kluber
Whitlock
Pivetta

Houck is in the bullpen, Crawford and Winc are in AAA, and Paxton might still need some ramp-up before slotting into the rotation. If and when he's ready, then yeah, maybe it's time to look at moving on from Pivetta. I just think you need to let the rotation play out a little before cutting one of the only two guys projected to pitch 150+ innings this year.
I think the chances of all seven starters being healthy, ramped-up and pitching effectively at the end of spring training are extremely slim. Pivetta can eat innings, and that has value. But there's no need to carve anything in stone in February.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
I think the chances of all seven starters being healthy, ramped-up and pitching effectively at the end of spring training are extremely slim. Pivetta can eat innings, and that has value. But there's no need to carve anything in stone in February.
Maybe, but there also seems to be a recency bias in how we're anticipating injuries. Last year brought more league wide injuries due to the lockout and short spring training. Sale's various maladies have left a strong impression, but two of them have been freakish and another was COVID-related.

But I'm with you that we'll probably just see how it goes. There are always a few pitchers who learn of significant injuries in spring training, and my guess is that Pivetta would be a decent stopgap for a team in one of those situations.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
Including the one he's on.

And as I type, I see the first pitcher shutdown has occurred in Fort Myers and it is...Brayan Bello.

View: https://twitter.com/alexspeier/status/1626623592829177856
That's concerning re Bello, but I'm not sure it moves the needle much for me about how much we need Pivetta.

Put another way, does it make sense to sign a #7 or 8 starter to a 2/$13 or $14M contract? Because that's essentially the pact we've got with Pivetta right now.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
13,412
That's concerning re Bello, but I'm not sure it moves the needle much for me about how much we need Pivetta.

Put another way, does it make sense to sign a #7 or 8 starter to a 2/$13 or $14M contract? Because that's essentially the pact we've got with Pivetta right now.
No, he is on a one year deal, they don’t owe him anything beyond this year. It’s a one year deal with a club option, essentially. Which seems reasonable for a pitcher of his likely production / age, based on the market.

Sure, he could be the 7th-8th best starter on the team, or maybe the third. Like he was for the 2021 “two games to the WS” Red Sox.

Trading him in March could make sense, but now? To whom and for what?
 
Last edited:

grepal

New Member
Jul 20, 2005
193
so off to an optimistic start, I read today Pivetta is coming off a severe bout of covid and threw one entire pitch before leaving and our young stud to be Bello has the weekend off sue to the dreaded forearm soreness. Not to panic, but yeah i am starting to get an ominous feeling.
 

Stan Papi Was Framed

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
2,986
so off to an optimistic start, I read today Pivetta is coming off a severe bout of covid and threw one entire pitch before leaving and our young stud to be Bello has the weekend off sue to the dreaded forearm soreness. Not to panic, but yeah i am starting to get an ominous feeling.
stuff happens. this is why it's good to have more than 5 potential starters.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
so off to an optimistic start, I read today Pivetta is coming off a severe bout of covid and threw one entire pitch before leaving and our young stud to be Bello has the weekend off sue to the dreaded forearm soreness. Not to panic, but yeah i am starting to get an ominous feeling.
i thought we had Dan Shaugnessey’s IP address blocked?
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
No, he is on a one year deal, they don’t owe him anything beyond this year. It’s a one year deal with a club option, essentially. Which seems reasonable for a pitcher of his likely production / age, based on the market.

Sure, he could be the 7th-8th best starter on the team, or maybe the third. Like he was for the 2021 “two games to the WS” Red Sox.

Trading him in March could make sense, but now? To whom and for what?
Sure, I'm aware it's a one year deal, just saying that the value of keeping him around while we have him under team control is not great. And I think the proponents of the Pivetta-as-safety net philosophy are seriously underestimating the opportunity cost he represents in making it harder for these half-dozen promising young pitchers get some major league innings.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,250
Boston, MA
Sure, I'm aware it's a one year deal, just saying that the value of keeping him around while we have him under team control is not great. And I think the proponents of the Pivetta-as-safety net philosophy are seriously underestimating the opportunity cost he represents in making it harder for these half-dozen promising young pitchers get some major league innings.
Aside from Bello, none are particularly promising. I'd bet on Pivetta outperforming any of them over the next 5 years.
 

thisyearisthe

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 25, 2002
1,394
Bethel, CT
The less I see of Nick Pivetta, the better. I’m happy he’s on the team. If nothing else, he’s insurance for the rotation. Occasionally he even has a really nice outing. But mostly, he’s just frustrating to watch. This has been my Ted talk.
 
Last edited:

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,869
If only the Red Sox had thought of harnessing his talent. If only Pivetta could force himself to be more consistently good. Why, if he just tries harder, he could be better!

To focus in on a small part of the season and use that as proof that he is something other than what he is, while ignoring the rest of the season, is just cherry picking. Who knows why Pivetta did what he did? Some luck probably, good during his hot streak, bad during the rest of the year. Chawson makes a good point about his fielding support - certainly, recent Sox teams have not really helped pitchers in the field. Maybe he made some adjustment that caused him to pitch well in those 11 games, the league figured it out and batters adjusted accordingly, and then he was unable to make the next adjustment. Maybe he had some nagging injuries that meant he wasn't able to pitch the way he did during the good spell.

He certainly pitches better when he doesn't walk the ballpark, but he's shown very little if any ability to do that on a consistent basis. He walked only six batters in 38 innings in May. The Sox went 5-2 in those starts and he won 4 of them. He pitched to a 2.11 ERA. But he basically doubled that walk rate in every other month of the season, most of which were not good results-wise.
seriously not even close to what I posted.
Aside from Bello, none are particularly promising. I'd bet on Pivetta outperforming any of them over the next 5 years.
I like Pivetta’s chances of having a good year (say…. 4.00 ERA and getting hisHR rate and BB rate down) more than most Sox pitchers younger than him not named Bello, Houck or Whitlock but I can see Crawford turning into a better pitcher in 2+ more seasons and that only happens by facing ML pitching at this point.
I think it makes sense to have Crawford, however, starting in AAA but I also won’t hold lackluster results there as indicative of his ML potential… as I hope he’d be focused more on process over results while there.
Behind Crawford, Winckowski has less potential but I can see him being what Pivetta is currently- and for less $ that’s more valuable (again…. I’m saying this as someone that thinks Pivetta needs to be part of the rotation ((5 or 6 man)) to start the season) but that projection needs to be handled cautiously, and only if I’m wrong in my projection of Pivetta making a step forward.
I can’t really comment on anyone further down- Mata, Walter, etc…. and seriously hope the Sox don’t need to see any of them until roster expansion
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,675
Chicago, IL
The less I see of Nick Pivetta, the better. I’m happy he’s on the team. If nothing else, he’s insurance for the rotation. Occasionally he even has a really nice outing. But mostly, he’s just frustrating to watch. This has been my Ted talk.
The odd thing about Pivetta is that he throws a nice outing more than just occasionally. He will have streaks of a few good starts in a row (12 QS in 2022, leading the team, albeit he had the most games started). And when he pitches well, his stuff, to the eye test, looks excellent - really good movement. And then he'll really suck for a while. It feels like he's talented, but inconsistent. Could he get better still? Maybe. Is he what he is? Probably. But what he is is a guy who is sometimes very good, sometimes okay, and sometimes shitty. But who stays healthy. Sounds like a typical 5 to me.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,478
Pivetta in 2021-22...

2021: 155.0 ip, 4.53 era, 4.28 fip, 103 era+, 1.30 whip, 10.2 k/9
2022: 179.2 ip, 4.56 era, 4.42 fip, 92 era+, 1.38 whip, 8.8 k/9

In 2021, out of 30 starts, he gave up the following runs this many times:

6+ runs: 2 times (6.7%)
4-5 runs: 9 times (30.0%)
2-3 runs: 11 times (36.7%)
<2 runs: 8 times (26.7%)

In 2022, out of 33 starts, he gave up the following runs this many times:

6+ runs: 3 times (9.1%)
4-5 runs: 8 times (24.2%)
2-3 runs: 11 times (36.7%)
<2 runs: 11 times (36.7%)

So in the past two seasons, he's allowed 3 or fewer runs in a start 41 times out of 63 starts (65.1%). He rarely gets absolutely bombed. He's excellent far more often than he's abjectly terrible. It's just that he has a lot of meh starts. Because what I didn't share in there is how many innings he pitched for those starts. He has had a lot of 5 inning, 3 er (5.40) kind of starts.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,005
The thing that is not coming up is the impact of COVID on the season. I think the positional flexibility will be really important, along with the ability to bring up guys from AAA who can fill in as needed.

Anecdotally, I've seen a lot of people who are fully vaccinated testing positive over the last 2 months. The symptoms aren't terrible but the impact on energy/endurance is huge and takes 6+ weeks to get back. It sounds like Pivetta was pretty sick and is still not feeling great. It could be a while before he is able to fully work out.

Which is a long way of saying that the Sox will be well served by keeping as much pitching depth as possible.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
Pivetta in 2021-22...

2021: 155.0 ip, 4.53 era, 4.28 fip, 103 era+, 1.30 whip, 10.2 k/9
2022: 179.2 ip, 4.56 era, 4.42 fip, 92 era+, 1.38 whip, 8.8 k/9

In 2021, out of 30 starts, he gave up the following runs this many times:

6+ runs: 2 times (6.7%)
4-5 runs: 9 times (30.0%)
2-3 runs: 11 times (36.7%)
<2 runs: 8 times (26.7%)

In 2022, out of 33 starts, he gave up the following runs this many times:

6+ runs: 3 times (9.1%)
4-5 runs: 8 times (24.2%)
2-3 runs: 11 times (36.7%)
<2 runs: 11 times (36.7%)

So in the past two seasons, he's allowed 3 or fewer runs in a start 41 times out of 63 starts (65.1%). He rarely gets absolutely bombed. He's excellent far more often than he's abjectly terrible. It's just that he has a lot of meh starts. Because what I didn't share in there is how many innings he pitched for those starts. He has had a lot of 5 inning, 3 er (5.40) kind of starts.
Doesn't look that bad broken down this way, even though it obscures a few factors.

However, is it a substantial difference than these?

In 2022, out of 14 starts, ______ gave up the following runs this many times:

6+ runs: 3 times (21%)
4-5 runs: 2 times (14%)
2-3 runs: 7 times (50%)
<2 runs: 3 times (21%)

Josh Winckowski

Or, in 2022, out of 13 starts*, ______ gave up the following runs this many times:

6+ runs: 1 time (8%)
4-5 runs: 4 times (31%)
2-3 runs: 3 times (23%)
<2 runs: 5 times (38%)
* includes one 5+ inning bulk relief outing

Kutter Crawford
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
13,412
Don’t we have to take into account the competition faced, as well as peripherals? Over half of Pivetta’s starts were against the AL East, less than a third for Winckowski. Regardless, Winckowski gave up 1.3 HR / 3.5 BB / 5.6 K per 9; that’s awful. He had a 6.97 ERA from July on. Crawford had his moments, but was absolutely shelled in August, and then shut down.

The biggest complaint about last years team is all the starts given to guys like Crawford, Winckowski, et al. But now we want to proactively dump a legit big league pitcher because we need to give more starts to….Crawford and Winckowski?

Not saying these guys couldn’t eventually be useful and our pitch Pivetta (or Kluber or Paxton, etc.) but not sure we need to pace the way for them to get more starts at this time.
 
Last edited:

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,531
Don’t we have to take into account the competition faced, as well as peripherals? Over half of Pivetta’s starts were against the AL East, less than a third for Winckowski. Regardless, Winckowski gave up 1.3 HR / 3.5 BB / 5.6 K per 9; that’s awful. He had a 6.97 ERA from July on. Crawford had his moments, but was absolutely shelled in August, and then shut down.

The biggest complaint about last years team is all the starts given to guys like Crawford, Winckowski, et al. But now we want to proactively dump a legit big league pitcher because we need to give more starts to….Crawford and Winckowski?
I want to give starts to...

Sale
Bello
Whitlock
Paxton
Kluber
Houck

Crawford

Then there's that whole next group which includes Pivetta & 4 other guys.

But let's break down the quality of opponents thing (since my wife is currently driving on our road trip & YOLO). Because AL East v. not AL East isn't a particularly useful metric.

Pivetta:
Yankees - 4.98
Twins - 4.30
Blue Jays - 4 78
Blue Jays - 4.78
Orioles - 4.16
White Sox - 4.23
Angels - 3.85
Rangers - 4.36
White Sox - 4.23
Orioles - 4.16
A's - 3.51
Angels - 3.85
A's - 3.51
Cardinals - 4.77
Guardians - 4.31
Blue Jays - 4.78
Rays - 4.11
Yankees - 4.98
Yankees - 4.98
Guardians - 4.31
Brewers - 4.48
Royals - 3.95
Braves - 4.87
Pirates - 3.65
Orioles - 4.16
Rays - 4.11
Rangers - 4.36
Rays - 4.11
Yankees - 4.98
Royals - 3.95
Yankees - 4.98
Blue Jays - 4.78
Rays - 4.11
Average - 4.46
League Average - 4.29

Crawford:
Mariners - 4.26
Cardinals - 4.77
Yankees - 4.98
Rays - 4.11
Blue Jays - 4.78
Guardians - 4.31
Astros - 4.55
Royals - 3.95
Yankees - 4.98
Orioles - 4.16
Blue Jays - 4.78
Twins - 4.40
Average - 4.50

Winckowski

Too lazy to do this right now, but his schedule looks really easy lol
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
Don’t we have to take into account the competition faced, as well as peripherals? Over half of Pivetta’s starts were against the AL East, less than a third for Winckowski. Regardless, Winckowski gave up 1.3 HR / 3.5 BB / 5.6 K per 9; that’s awful. He had a 6.97 ERA from July on. Crawford had his moments, but was absolutely shelled in August, and then shut down.

The biggest complaint about last years team is all the starts given to guys like Crawford, Winckowski, et al. But now we want to proactively dump a legit big league pitcher because we need to give more starts to….Crawford and Winckowski?

Not saying these guys couldn’t eventually be useful and our pitch Pivetta (or Kluber or Paxton, etc.) but not sure we need to pace the way for them to get more starts at this time.
Why do you persist in framing it as though we want to “dump” Pivetta (let alone “proactively dump” here, which I don’t know what that means). No big deal, but it’s a mischaracterization! You’ve said it like half a dozen times.

I don’t want to DFA the guy; I’m advocating that we trade him for a player that fills another need. Given his current status as a #7 starter, the difference between him and Crawford or Winckowski — guys we want to develop — really seems like no big deal! And if we get to the point of needing a #7 starter, we’re probably not making the playoffs anyway, so why not see what we’ve got?

Anyway, we’re both repeating the same points again and again, so I’ll drop it. Maybe Bello and Sale go down and he comes in handy.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
13,412
Why can’t Crawford and Winckowski develop in the minor leagues? They were absolutely shelled down the stretch last year - there isn’t much evidence that they are ready to pitch in the bigs now (and hell, a good chance one of them makes the team anyways). They aren’t really prospects. I’m not sure the team really wants to develop them at all- are they really a big part of the teams future- but I’m less sure that they should be pitching big league games instead of Pivetta (or Kluber, or Paxton) for a team that is trying to win major league games.

Pivetta was the third best starting pitcher on a really good team two years ago, dominated in the playoffs, and he’s 30. If he’s the 7th or 12th best starter- then this team will win 100, easily.

Why not wait until the end of spring, see where the team is at, and figure it out then?

Hell I don’t even really like Pivetta all that much but I’d not really get the urgent desire to move him, now. And for what?
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
Why can’t Crawford and Winckowski develop in the minor leagues? They were absolutely shelled down the stretch last year - there isn’t much evidence that they are ready to pitch in the bigs now (and hell, a good chance one of them makes the team anyways). They aren’t really prospects. I’m not sure the team really wants to develop them at all- are they really a big part of the teams future- but I’m less sure that they should be pitching big league games instead of Pivetta (or Kluber, or Paxton) for a team that is trying to win major league games.

Pivetta was the third best starting pitcher on a really good team two years ago, dominated in the playoffs, and he’s 30. If he’s the 7th or 12th best starter- then this team will win 100, easily.

Why not wait until the end of spring, see where the team is at, and figure it out then?

Hell I don’t even really like Pivetta all that much but I’d not really get the urgent desire to move him, now. And for what?
Did he dominate in the playoffs? He was shelled in G1 against the Rays, then pitched well in an emergency extra-inning relief outing and then another solid 5 inning start against the Astros. His playoff FIP was 5.07, his ERA 2.63, in 13 2/3 innings.

Crawford and Winckowski likely will develop in the minor leagues.

This in-depth analysis of Crawford from mid-August last year graded him with above-average stuff for a starter. He was shelled in his last few starts, but IL’d because he was hurt with a shoulder impingement. I don’t know why we’d conclude that the 4 shellings before he got hurt represent the true version of him and discard his dominant 8-start stretch against the best teams in baseball.

Winckowski needs another pitch, but he was over his skis a bit in the majors last year, and a little unlucky. I’d like to see how he does with a competent infield — most of his bad outings came with Story absent and one of the worse defensive shortstops in MLB — and after another year or two of development.

I think even looking at Pivetta’s own development arc helps prove my point. In his rookie season at age 24, had a 4.87 FIP and 6.02 ERA in 24 starts. (Crawford put up a 4.34 FIP in his rookie year, Winck a 4.95) But he got better, partly because he had a full season of starts the next year.
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
13,412
I think Crawford is interesting. I suspect he makes the team as a long man, and if a starter falters, he will be one of the first to be moved into the rotation. I don’t think he’s so good that I’d move anyone to create playing time for him; opportunities will be there if he deserves it. If the rotation the Sox break camp with never needs a 6th (or 8th or 12th) starter, that is probably a good thing.

But yeah, think we can agree to disagree on this one!
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,700
I think Crawford is interesting. I suspect he makes the team as a long man, and if a starter falters, he will be one of the first to be moved into the rotation. I don’t think he’s so good that I’d move anyone to create playing time for him; opportunities will be there if he deserves it. If the rotation the Sox break camp with never needs a 6th (or 8th or 12th) starter, that is probably a good thing.

But yeah, think we can agree to disagree on this one!
It’s an interesting topic to debate, hardly something I could get heated about. But you’re right.

I think the missing variable is how much another team might give up for someone like Pivetta. If it’s one or two of another teams’ low-level, #20-30 prospects, then probably best to keep him. If it’s someone more interesting (paired with Dalbec or Duran), then I’d say yeah.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,250
Boston, MA
Pivetta has value. In parts of three seasons with the Sox, Pivetta has a 4.33 FIP, a 99 ERA+ and 5.8 bWAR. Yes, he swings wildly from month to month but maybe with a lower leverage role he can be more consistent. And no more complete games, as fun as that was.
Why not? He threw 7 of 8 quality starts after his CG. When you have the good Nick Pivetta for a night, let him throw as long as he wants.
 

Pmoose82

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
137
I don't know if this is the right place to put this but if it's in a bad place or unwanted please just delete it.

https://sports.yahoo.com/john-henry-theres-false-narrative-014900055.html
"There is a false narrative surrounding the club," Henry wrote to McCaffrey. "It really took hold in 2022. There were even false reports of booing at Fenway Park during the Winter Classic. I think those factors and losing Xander to San Diego were the biggest factors. Those are the fans you would believe are the least likely to try to shout us down, but it happened. Did anyone report the standing ovation at the end?"
This man is delusional.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,768
Henry is better off remaining silent, if that's the best he can do. All he did was give Tomase and others the green light for another round of potshots at him and the club during a time when many fans are slowly starting to take interest in the Sox and realizing that they may be fun team after all in '23.

Sam Kennedy had the right tone in his comments, IMO. They know the team needs to improve this season and that the fanbase has a right to be restless.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,531
@Big Papi's Mango Salsa - This thread seems as good as any for this conversation. I definitely don't feel like having it in one of the dedicated Bloom-bashing threads.

Anecdotally - I think when you're breaking in so many young players, it's a good idea to have some stability around them. Obviously this isn't quantifiable, and I admit that.


From a more analytical standpoint, if I assume we're around .500 anyway with what we have, (just for the sake of optimism I'll call that 82-80), and we had Abreu instead of Turner, Bassitt instead of Kluber and Segura (Arroyo on the bench, Refsnyder gone), I think you're closer to what Steamer projects and those three are about a 4.2 win upgrade (if I added correctly) and you're at 86 - 78 and in (I believe) a one game playoff with TB for the last wild card spot based on last year's standings.

Also, Abreu is 2 years younger than Turner and Bassitt is 3 years younger than Kluber, so I'd bet it to be more likely that those guys are able to outperform Tuner and Kluber than lets say Martin, Rodriguez, Brasier and the like are of out-performing a myriad of guys from the Tampa approach.

How much would Abreu and Bassitt hamstring us in 2025, I suppose that depends on how they age. But at least assuming baseball savant data is predictive, the data for Abreu and Bassitt both look considerably better than for Turner and Kluber, respectively, so I'm betting on the two younger players with better "profiles" for lack of a better term.

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/jose-abreu-547989?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb
https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/justin-turner-457759?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/chris-bassitt-605135?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb
https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/corey-kluber-446372?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb



*Either way, I'll respectfully agree to let you - or anyone else - have the last word and not respond as I realize that there is nothing in my last two posts specifically about Matt Barnes or Bleier, even though it was a discussion of bullpen spending for how we got here, it's not the point of the thread and I don't want to further annoy anyone thinking these posts are about those two players.
Define stability? Turner & Kluber are known great clubhouse guys who can be positive role models on younger players. I don't really know about Abreu/Bassitt, but Segura is apparently a known bad teammate:

https://theathletic.com/3718127/2022/10/22/jean-segura-phillies-playoffs/

I think that's a link that says stuff like that? Some day I will get around to subscribing...

Plus, if things go great with them, they could re-sign them for '25, or anyone else rather than being locked in down the road.

But let's get to your hypothetical...

All salaries Spotrac Luxury Tax #s for '23:

In:
Bassitt ($21m)
Abreu ($19.5m)
Segura ($8.5m)
Min Salary #1 ($720k)
Min Salary #2 ($720k)
Min Salary #3 ($720k)
Total: $51.16m

Out:
Turner ($10.85m)
Kluber ($10m)
Martin ($6.75m)
Joely ($2m)
Brasier ($2m)
Refsnyder ($1.2m)
Total: $32.8m

So we're increasing luxury tax payroll by about $18m this year (& making us a tax team...unless we're also getting rid of Jansen in this hypothetical, but I think you wanted to keep him?). This also pre-supposes that guys like Abreu & Segura would take the exact same salary to play in a state with a state income tax rather than in ones without, & that Abreu would be cool with DHing.

So what does this do for us baseball-wise? Well...it severely limits our flexibility insomuch as we now have 3 outfielders + Arroyo + Hernandez who is starting at SS, & Abreu/Casas can only play 1B or DH.

But let's pretend things like positional flexibility aren't important...

Going to use ZIPS since it's the one with 3-year projections, which will be important later & so using 1 system for consistency. Also, for the record, my understanding is that things like those Baseball Savant bars are factored into the ZIPS projections, along with many other things, so they should be baked in.

ZIPS fWAR in for '23:
Abreu 2.8
Segura 2.4
Bassitt 2.3
Total: 7.5

ZIPS fWAR out for '23:
Turner 3.2 (ZIPS loves him much more than any other projection, so take with grain of salt)
Kluber 1.6
Refsnyder 1.3 (a bit higher than other projections)
Joely 0.5
Martin 0.4 (ZIPS likes him less than every other projection)
Brasier 0.1
Total: 7.1

One can project out a positive fWAR impact from the minimum salary players...but of course the issue with that is without Martin/Joely/Brasier, those players who would move up a notch like Mills/Ort/Kelly/Sherriff or whoever, are no longer the deep depth & are now needing depth themselves.

Regardless, though, even if you deeply discount Turner here, you appear to be looking at spending an extra $18m for an extra win or two this season - even disregarding positional flexibility & the locker room.

& then in '25, you are locked in to Bassitt + Abreu at a total of $40.5m for a projected 2 fWAR (1.3 + 0.7). So you are going into the luxury tax now to improve your team by a maximum of 2 games, for the privilege of paying $20m/fWAR in '25. & it doesn't matter if Bassitt/Abreu are better than Turner/Kluber in '25, because we aren't obligated to overpay Turner/Kluber in '25.