Your 2015 Boston Red Sox

[Yelling At Clouds]

Can someone explain to me the fascination with Steven Wright? Is there any reason to think he's a better option than Webster/Workman/Ranaudo (all of whom I'm lukewarm on) other than "remember how Tim Wakefield was good?" Numbers are just ok in AAA, and he's already 30.

 

[Fishy1]

Can someone explain to me the fascination with Steven Wright? Is there any reason to think he's a better option than Webster/Workman/Ranaudo (all of whom I'm lukewarm on) other than "remember how Tim Wakefield was good?" Numbers are just ok in AAA, and he's already 30.

I think people are excited, more than anything, by how few people he's walked this year. Wakefields issue was always walks and gopher balls. The latter seems to be every knuckleballers fate, but it doesn't have to be so with the former. And whenever these guys figure it out at the major league level, there's usually a significant corresponding drop in walks at the minor league level.

Looking at Dickeys numbers, that drop is evident in his time with the mariners - between 2007 and 2008 he dropped his BB/9 a full 1.5. It took a couple years for it to translate at the major league level (till he was with the Mets), as he still issued a lot of free passes as a Mariner.

Point being, as with any pitcher, control is a good thing. Wright has shown an ability over a half season to locate the knuckleball in the strike zone. He's walking 2 less guys per 9 innings than he was last year. That's going to get him outs.

Age, as we should all know by now, is immaterial for a knuckle baller. Any loss in velocity isn't going to kill him.

 

[Rasputin]

As to the class ahead of them, it is been a major disappointment clearly. Of the 4 young pitchers out of PAW we have given a shot to down the stretch, the only one who looks to justify any serious consideration as part of the rotation next year is Rubby.

This is ridiculous. It is way too early to be disappointed in this class is pitchers.

Also, in his last three starts, Webster has pitched five innings or more, allowed three runs or fewer (total of six), and struck out ten while walking just four. It's progress and if his control looks good come spring, you'd be silly not to have him in your rotation.

 

[bellowthecat]

Can someone explain to me the fascination with Steven Wright? Is there any reason to think he's a better option than Webster/Workman/Ranaudo (all of whom I'm lukewarm on) other than "remember how Tim Wakefield was good?" Numbers are just ok in AAA, and he's already 30.

 
High groundball rate, had a good run this year not walking people in AAA or so far in the majors, presumably less likely to get hurt because he doesn't throw hard, swinging strike rate in the majors is 9.4% in 26.1 innings (small sample for sure), works quicker than everyone else on the staff, 30 isn't really that old for a knuckleballer.
 
It isn't just "remember how Tim Wakefield was good", it's also seeing how good RA Dickey has been over the last few years.
 
I think a bigger part of it is that we still haven't seen enough of him to really get a feel for how good he can be. We've seen everybody else in the Pawtucket rotation get more innings than him and quite frankly, aside from RDLR at times this year, none of those guys have really shown much (though hopefully these innings are helpful for next year).
 
The Red Sox could do worse than a high groundballer likely to be healthy swinging from the pen to the 5th spot in the rotation.  He hasn't shown that he sucks yet, and that's quite possibly because he hasn't been given enough exposure to the league yet, but until the book gets out on him and the results start to change there is plenty of reason to see if he can keep it up. Not sure if he still has an option available next year, but if he does all the better.

 

[BeantownIdaho]

I'm not so sure that any of these guys end up in the starting rotation next year - Some are going to get traded - some to the pen as mentioned.
 
#1 - FA - Trade
#2 - FA - Trade
#3 - Buch
#4 - RDLR
#5 - Kelly (with competition)

 

[HomeRunBaker]

This is ridiculous. It is way too early to be disappointed in this class is pitchers.

Also, in his last three starts, Webster has pitched five innings or more, allowed three runs or fewer (total of six), and struck out ten while walking just four. It's progress and if his control looks good come spring, you'd be silly not to have him in your rotation.

It's too early to be disappointed for sure however any plans for Webster to be in our rotation next year would have to assume Ben doesn't go out and acquire two starters......which to me would be whatever word is worse than silly.

 

[seantoo]

Any sign that Lavarnway is doing a better job on either side of the ball than the last time he was with the big club?  Impossible for Swihart to ascend for 2015?

My best guess for Swihart is late next season. By the time he's ready to start the season with the Red Sox in 2016, Ortiz will be gone. I can see Swihart playing behind the plate splitting time with Vasquez and getting some DH at bats with the remainder of the DH at bats being spread around to give players off days while still keeping a good at bat in the line-up. 

 

[LostinNJ]

As to the class ahead of them, it is been a major disappointment clearly. Of the 4 young pitchers out of PAW we have given a shot to down the stretch, the only one who looks to justify any serious consideration as part of the rotation next year is Rubby.

It may be too early to pencil them in, but it's certainly too early to write them off.

 

[Laser Show]

My best guess for Swihart is late next season. By the time he's ready to start the season with the Red Sox in 2016, Ortiz will be gone. I can see Swihart playing behind the plate splitting time with Vasquez and getting some DH at bats with the remainder of the DH at bats being spread around to give players off days while still keeping a good at bat in the line-up. 

Just a nitpick, Ortiz is signed through 2016 with an option in 2017. He could very well be done by 2016, but I wouldn't bet too heavily on that yet.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

This is ridiculous. It is way too early to be disappointed in this class is pitchers.

 
Yes. This is especially true of the young pitchers, who typically take longer to get over the hump than position players. We just don't have enough data on these guys to be deciding how good they are yet.
 
Here are two pitchers' stats through the season where they lost rookie eligibility:
 
51 IP, 62 ERA+, 1.78 WHIP, 6.5 K/9, 5.6 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
82 IP, 60 ERA+, 1.62 WHIP, 5.9 K/9, 4.9 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
 
Which one is Allen Webster and which is Jim Bunning?
 
How about these two--totals through age 25 season:
 
168 IP, 90 ERA+, 1.45 WHIP, 7.0 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
186 IP, 88 ERA+, 1.46 WHIP, 7.5 K/9, 5.0 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9
 
Which is Rubby de la Rosa and which is Randy Johnson?
 
Another one. Again totals through age 25 season:
 
128 IP, 78 ERA+, 1.42 WHIP, 8.2 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
138 IP, 83 ERA+, 1.31 WHIP, 7.2 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
 
Which is Brandon Workman and which is Keith Foulke?
 
The point of these comps is not that Webster is Bunning, etc. It's just that the range of possible outcomes for these guys is still enormous.

 

[seantoo]

It absolutely will happen......right off School St. in Pawtucket, RI.

Unfortunately WMB may get another (final shot) by default. Unless Holt is kept and either plays SS with X moving to third or Holt playing 3B. The Sox now have the luxury to send JBJ down to Pawtucket, he has options, and let him regain his stroke and confidence and let him then sustain it for at least a few months.
Castillo does appear he can handle CF well and Cespedes should move over to right. Victorino/Nava/Craig/Betts are all either candidates to be play LF, be the fourth or fifth OF'ers or be traded. Craig, if healthy of course, I think would be a good candidate to play LF and take over first when Napoli is gone in 2016. Bradley could play everyday down in Pawtucket and actually be the main choice to fill in if a player is injured long term (30 days or more). 
 
I think alot ultimately depends on where Betts plays, I find that thread to be one of the more interesting of the off-season in an off-season of many interesting threads. 

 

[HomeRunBaker]

 
Yes. This is especially true of the young pitchers, who typically take longer to get over the hump than position players. We just don't have enough data on these guys to be deciding how good they are yet.
 
Here are two pitchers' stats through the season where they lost rookie eligibility:
 
51 IP, 62 ERA+, 1.78 WHIP, 6.5 K/9, 5.6 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
82 IP, 60 ERA+, 1.62 WHIP, 5.9 K/9, 4.9 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
 
Which one is Allen Webster and which is Jim Bunning?
 
How about these two--totals through age 25 season:
 
168 IP, 90 ERA+, 1.45 WHIP, 7.0 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
186 IP, 88 ERA+, 1.46 WHIP, 7.5 K/9, 5.0 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9
 
Which is Rubby de la Rosa and which is Randy Johnson?
 
Another one. Again totals through age 25 season:
 
128 IP, 78 ERA+, 1.42 WHIP, 8.2 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
138 IP, 83 ERA+, 1.31 WHIP, 7.2 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
 
Which is Brandon Workman and which is Keith Foulke?
 
The point of these comps is not that Webster is Bunning, etc. It's just that the range of possible outcomes for these guys is still enormous.

What....no Casey Fossum vs. Randy Johnson comparison? The outrage! /van

 

[oumbi]

I think people are excited, more than anything, by how few people he's walked this year. Wakefields issue was always walks and gopher balls. The latter seems to be every knuckleballers fate, but it doesn't have to be so with the former. And whenever these guys figure it out at the major league level, there's usually a significant corresponding drop in walks at the minor league level.

Looking at Dickeys numbers, that drop is evident in his time with the mariners - between 2007 and 2008 he dropped his BB/9 a full 1.5. It took a couple years for it to translate at the major league level (till he was with the Mets), as he still issued a lot of free passes as a Mariner.

Point being, as with any pitcher, control is a good thing. Wright has shown an ability over a half season to locate the knuckleball in the strike zone. He's walking 2 less guys per 9 innings than he was last year. That's going to get him outs.

Age, as we should all know by now, is immaterial for a knuckle baller. Any loss in velocity isn't going to kill him.

Good points on Wright. Just want to add that Wright did not turn to the knuckleball as his primary pitch until 2011 while in the Indians' farm system. For him, it is relatively new.

 

[seantoo]

We are a long way from worrying about what to do with Owens, Johnson and ERodriguez all in the rotation. They are all clearly slated for AAA next spring and we will wait and see.
 
As to the class ahead of them, it is been a major disappointment clearly. Of the 4 young pitchers out of PAW we have given a shot to down the stretch, the only one who looks to justify any serious consideration as part of the rotation next year is Rubby.
 
Webster (outside his last start, OK), Ranaudo and Workman have just been bad, with a combination of mediocre fringy stuff and poor control/command. I could support Webster and Workman being slotted into the back of the bullpen next year, as real older school long men, on the premise that the relief role might lead to a spike in velocity. But I don't see how you can go into 2015 planning on any of them being other than the 6, 7 or 8 on the SP depth chart at best. I would guess that all 3 have also made themselves virtually worthless on the trade market too.
 
I would rather see Wright or Barnes be given the 5th starter role next year than any of this trio. Lester, Buchholz, Kelly, Delarosa, Wright could give you a chance.

How can you state then when these guys have pitched more innings than they ever have before while jumping a level. Rubby has pitched alot more innings than ever before. Utility Lou stated the same when asked how much should we judge these young pitchers here in September based on what we see here in the last month his answer, which I agree with, is not much, besides being an extremely small sample size these guys are pitching fatigued. I think the goal is to get their feet wet, and have a battle for one or two spots in the starting rotation next season based on whose pitching best then, what their scouts offer in evaluations and actual past results have indicated, make an educated guess to who wins those spots.

 

[KillerBs]

To be clear I wasn't suggesting that Webster Workman and/or Ranaudo might not turn out to be good only that they have disappointed in their August/September trial run.

I grant that Webster of late has separated himself from the other 2. His change looks like a plus pitch, he has that slider and he was sitting 92 last night. That could be good enough, if he can throw strikes and otherwise command, which is very much in doubt. I am concerned about the lack of Ks but acknowledge that his last few starts suggest that he could be a (risky) option at the back of the rotation in 15.

Workman's velocity is way down and has been getting hit very hard. Ranaudo looks like a 2 pitch guy with sketchy control who is sitting at 92. 10 HRs in 30 plus IPs very much suggests not ready for prime time to me but it is the end of a long year for him. Is he a write off? Of course not. Could the Six justify planning on him being in the 15 rotation? I certainly hope not.

As to Wright how many knucklers have had his success at AAA and not been able to succeed in the bigs? If he can get that thing over at 75 mph, I like his chances to be league average and his upside is at least the equal of the other 3 IMO.

 

[seantoo]

Just a nitpick, Ortiz is signed through 2016 with an option in 2017. He could very well be done by 2016, but I wouldn't bet too heavily on that yet.

There was a good article just the other day based on a few other players who hit 30 HR and had 100 RBI's at 38, by 40 they were done.
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/40589/ortiz-surpasses-30-hr-100-rbi-for-8th-time.

 

[Laser Show]

There was a good article just the other day based on a few other players who hit 30 HR and had 100 RBI's at 38, by 40 they were done.
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/40589/ortiz-surpasses-30-hr-100-rbi-for-8th-time.

Interesting. I agree, I'm sure Ortiz's decline will happen quickly when it does (much like 2009 when we all thought he was done). My point was that assuming next year will be his last year seems premature right now.
 
EDIT: Eh, when I type it out it seems a lot less premature. Either way, the Sox will squeeze whatever they can from him the next 3 years.

 

[BeantownIdaho]

Tomas = Papi Jr.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

 
 
Which one is Allen Webster and which is Jim Bunning?
 
Which is Rubby de la Rosa and which is Randy Johnson?
 

 

 

[seantoo]

Good points on Wright. Just want to add that Wright did not turn to the knuckleball as his primary pitch until 2011 while in the Indians' farm system. For him, it is relatively new.

Akin to Wakefield whose career was dying as as firstbaseman in MILB and turned to the knuckler to save his career.

 

[seantoo]

Interesting. I agree, I'm sure Ortiz's decline will happen quickly when it does (much like 2009 when we all thought he was done). My point was that assuming next year will be his last year seems premature right now.
 
EDIT: Eh, when I type it out it seems a lot less premature. Either way, the Sox will squeeze whatever they can from him the next 3 years.

You are right, (in that it's hard to bet against the man) but at that age I'll go with the limited sample to base it on because that is all there is and his own comments about it.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 

 
What drives me nuts about this board sometimes is when you are careful to specify that you are not making point X, and then people respond as if you were making point X anyway.
 
I was not making the obviously idiotic point that because Jim Bunning was a shitty rookie, therefore the fact that Allen Webster has been a shitty rookie means he'll be as good as Jim Bunning. And I said that explicitly at the bottom of the $#@%ing post.
 
My point is that these guys' records to date aren't enough data to tell us much of anything about how good they will turn out to be. And I used the Bunning etc. examples just to underscore that point.
 
But, funny cartoon.

 

[snowmanny]

This is ridiculous. It is way too early to be disappointed in this class is pitchers.

Also, in his last three starts, Webster has pitched five innings or more, allowed three runs or fewer (total of six), and struck out ten while walking just four. It's progress and if his control looks good come spring, you'd be silly not to have him in your rotation.

You'd be "silly" not to have him in the rotation?
What is next year's pennant-winning rotation? De La Rosa, Buchholz, Kelly, Webster and Shields?

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

 
What drives me nuts about this board sometimes is when you are careful to specify that you are not making point X, and then people respond as if you were making point X anyway.
 
I was not making the obviously idiotic point that because Jim Bunning was a shitty rookie, therefore the fact that Allen Webster has been a shitty rookie means he'll be as good as Jim Bunning. And I said that explicitly at the bottom of the $#@%ing post.
 
My point is that these guys' records to date aren't enough data to tell us much of anything about how good they will turn out to be. And I used the Bunning etc. examples just to underscore that point.
 
But, funny cartoon.

 
Well, funny cartoon was really my main point, sorry it drove you nuts. But here's the deal: you're comparing one data point with one data point. Okay, three data points to three data points. There's a whole set of projections that could be made based on the entirety of rookie pitchers and their trajectories. We can look at how well, say, K/9 in your rookie year at age 24, 25 or 26 predicts K/9 in future years. Not just with single examples, but over the entire available set. And we can do it in both directions - across all pitchers who went on to win Cy Youngs, or become All Stars, or get in the HoF, or be considered "#1s", what was their K/9 in their rookie year? Where do the current crop of Red Sox rookies fall within that distribution? Or, conversely, given similar performances in the past to the current performance of Red Sox rookie pitchers, what is their expected career trajectory? 
 
Which statement is more informative:
 
A: Yeah, Rubby de la Rosa hasn't been quite as good as expected, but Randy Johnson sucked when he first started!
B: The mean career length for somebody with RDLR's perpiherals at age 25 is 5 +/- 3 years, and less than 1% of the pitchers with his peripherals turn into somebody like Randy Johnson.
 
Of course there's not enough data if you only compare the current pitchers to one other pitcher. But there are lots of other pitchers for comparison.

 

[LostinNJ]

Which statement is more informative:
 
A: Yeah, Rubby de la Rosa hasn't been quite as good as expected, but Randy Johnson sucked when he first started!
B: The mean career length for somebody with RDLR's perpiherals at age 25 is 5 +/- 3 years, and less than 1% of the pitchers with his peripherals turn into somebody like Randy Johnson.
 
Of course there's not enough data if you only compare the current pitchers to one other pitcher. But there are lots of other pitchers for comparison.

The point is, they might turn into something good. They are not worthless. The odds may be against them, but the odds are against every prospect. If you get too pessimistic, you can end up thinking it's a waste of time to draft anyone.

 

[snowmanny]

Good points on Wright. Just want to add that Wright did not turn to the knuckleball as his primary pitch until 2011 while in the Indians' farm system. For him, it is relatively new.

And to amplify the points made by oumbi and Fishy1, the fact that he is 29 doesn't mean much.  Wakefield joined the Red Sox at 28 and won 186 games.  Wilhelm made the majors at 29 and retired as the all-time leader in games pitched.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

The point is, they might turn into something good. They are not worthless. The odds may be against them, but the odds are against every prospect. If you get too pessimistic, you can end up thinking it's a waste of time to draft anyone.

 
Yeah, and my kid might come up with more than one Nobel-level ideas in physics. The odds might be against him. What kind of odds, though? We do have the data to figure that out. Pointing to one counterexample of a HoF pitcher that struggled is meaningless. 
 
Let's look at the top 10 starters in the AL by bWAR this year (Hernandez, Kluber, Sale, Scherzer, Porcello, Keuchel, Lester, Richards, McHugh, Smyly). What was their ERA+ the first time they pitched 100 innings, and how old were they when they did so? ERA+ in their first 100 IP season ranged from 78 to 144, with median 107.5. Age ranged from 20 to 27, with median 24. 
 
If you look back over the past 4 years, there have been 21 pitchers who have been in the top 10 in bWAR in the AL. Median age at which they first pitched 100 innings is 24; median ERA+ is 107. Only two of those pitchers had an ERA+ below 90 (that's where RDLR is right now, Workman and Webster are obviously lower): Gio Gonzalez and Keuchel. 
 
So, ~10% of pitchers who have had at least one season that was in the top 10 of bWAR since 2011 had an ERA+ lower than RDLR in their first season of 100 IP. None had an ERA+ as low as Webster or Workman. Is this a crummy way of looking at it? Probably. 100 IP is arbitrary, and certainly many of these starters struggled in their first season. But is it more informative than pointing at Randy Johnson as an example of what RDLR could be come?

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
Well, funny cartoon was really my main point, sorry it drove you nuts. But here's the deal: you're comparing one data point with one data point. Okay, three data points to three data points. There's a whole set of projections that could be made based on the entirety of rookie pitchers and their trajectories. We can look at how well, say, K/9 in your rookie year at age 24, 25 or 26 predicts K/9 in future years. Not just with single examples, but over the entire available set. And we can do it in both directions - across all pitchers who went on to win Cy Youngs, or become All Stars, or get in the HoF, or be considered "#1s", what was their K/9 in their rookie year? Where do the current crop of Red Sox rookies fall within that distribution? Or, conversely, given similar performances in the past to the current performance of Red Sox rookie pitchers, what is their expected career trajectory? 
 
Which statement is more informative:
 
A: Yeah, Rubby de la Rosa hasn't been quite as good as expected, but Randy Johnson sucked when he first started!
B: The mean career length for somebody with RDLR's perpiherals at age 25 is 5 +/- 3 years, and less than 1% of the pitchers with his peripherals turn into somebody like Randy Johnson.
 
Of course there's not enough data if you only compare the current pitchers to one other pitcher. But there are lots of other pitchers for comparison.

 
Fair enough, although I still think you're refuting a point I didn't make. But that's OK, because the point I was making wasn't that substantial, perhaps. I was arguing against some people here who seem to be implying that we already know who Rubby/Workman/Webster are, and they aren't good enough. And I think that's absurd, because at this stage of their careers (certainly Webster's, and arguably Workman's and Rubby's too), the error bars are simply too large. We need to see more. I was using Johnson etc. as symbols of the size of those error bars, not as "comps" in any rigorous sense.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

And to amplify the points made by oumbi and Fishy1, the fact that he is 29 doesn't mean much.  Wakefield joined the Red Sox at 28 and won 186 games.  Wilhelm made the majors at 29 and retired as the all-time leader in games pitched.

R.A. Dickey sucked balls until age 35 too. Wright's age not only isn't against him but he has history on his side even if it's a small sample

 

[Plympton91]

The point is, they might turn into something good. They are not worthless. The odds may be against them, but the odds are against every prospect. If you get too pessimistic, you can end up thinking it's a waste of time to draft anyone.

I think the point is people are pointing to random statistics in small samples iwith their heads buried in a computer screen instead of watching the games. The most important thing right now for these guys is their stuff and the trajectory of their command. Kelly and De LaRosa have 2 plus pitches that they've shown the ability to carry twice through the order. Each needs better command of a third pitch and better stamina to be a high quality starter. Because of their history, Kelly started pitching late and De la Rosa got derailed by injury, It is worth giving them another season to prove themselves. I group Barnes here, because he has fastball power and command to be at a minimum a good reliever (unlike Webster, who needs better command even for that, see below), but he likely still needs more AAA time for his secondary pitches to develop into a starter. I'd slate him for AAA rotation duty. Too early to relegate him to the pen role yet.

Brandon Workman as a starter has only 1 plus pitch, and he's shown that his already average velocity falls off as the game goes on. In contrast, when he's relieving, his velocity jumps to give him a second plus pitch. That's a relief pitcher, regardless of what the slash lines in the spreadsheet say.

Webster is tantalizing in that he flashes 2 plus pitches, but needs to develop a third and better command all 3 and develop more stamina. To me, he's got to get another season of starting every 5 days, and I agree with HRB that letting him do that in the majors based on performance to date and a presumed desire to not finish last again would be foolhardy.

Ranaudo as a starter has AAAA stuff. He's just not good enough. Brian arose, Dave Eiland, etc. I'd move him to the pen and see if his stuff plays up as much as workman's does. Otherwise, see what you can get.

Escobar, Owens, and Rodriguez are next up for me. Johnson will continue to have to prove he belongs in the same sentence. I am bullish on Wright, but he should be a reliever or plan B as a starter long as he has options. In the absence of trAdes that free up a rotation slot in Pawtucket, I'd keep him as a 12th pitcher.

So, Kelly and RDLR in the majors rotation, wright and workman in the majors bullpen

AAA rotation: Barnes, Webster, Rodriges, Escobar, Owens.

AAA bullpen: Ranaudo and Johnson

Of course some of these guys are getting traded.

 

[LostinNJ]

So, ~10% of pitchers who have had at least one season that was in the top 10 of bWAR since 2011 had an ERA+ lower than RDLR in their first season of 100 IP. None had an ERA+ as low as Webster or Workman. Is this a crummy way of looking at it? Probably. 100 IP is arbitrary, and certainly many of these starters struggled in their first season. But is it more informative than pointing at Randy Johnson as an example of what RDLR could be come?

But we don't need these guys to be top 10 in bWAR. We need them to fill out the back end of the rotation. They don't need to be Randy Johnsons. They can be Doug Fisters.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

But we don't need these guys to be top 10 in bWAR. We need them to fill out the back end of the rotation. They don't need to be Randy Johnsons. They can be Doug Fisters.

 
Great, so what's the probability that they turn into something like that? Nice to see folks offering their opinions based on "stuff," I don't have an eye for that. But there is data that can actually tell us something about the world. Fister's a weird choice since he was #6 in bWAR in 2011 and #5 this year. 

 

[LostinNJ]

 
Great, so what's the probability that they turn into something like that? Nice to see folks offering their opinions based on "stuff," I don't have an eye for that. But there is data that can actually tell us something about the world. Fister's a weird choice since he was #6 in bWAR in 2011 and #5 this year. 

Oh, he ranks higher than I would have guessed -- when surrounded by Verlander, Scherzer, and Sanchez, his light didn't seem to shine so bright. I was aiming for a good back-of-rotation guy.
 
The probability that all of them will turn out to be useful in a rotation is almost nil. The probability that one of them will is actually pretty decent. And one or two of them will have to, because there's no plausible way for the Red Sox to build a rotation in 2015 without deploying this resource.

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
Yes. This is especially true of the young pitchers, who typically take longer to get over the hump than position players. We just don't have enough data on these guys to be deciding how good they are yet.
 
Here are two pitchers' stats through the season where they lost rookie eligibility:
 
51 IP, 62 ERA+, 1.78 WHIP, 6.5 K/9, 5.6 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
82 IP, 60 ERA+, 1.62 WHIP, 5.9 K/9, 4.9 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
 
Which one is Allen Webster and which is Jim Bunning?
 
How about these two--totals through age 25 season:
 
168 IP, 90 ERA+, 1.45 WHIP, 7.0 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
186 IP, 88 ERA+, 1.46 WHIP, 7.5 K/9, 5.0 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9
 
Which is Rubby de la Rosa and which is Randy Johnson?
 
Another one. Again totals through age 25 season:
 
128 IP, 78 ERA+, 1.42 WHIP, 8.2 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
138 IP, 83 ERA+, 1.31 WHIP, 7.2 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
 
Which is Brandon Workman and which is Keith Foulke?
 
The point of these comps is not that Webster is Bunning, etc. It's just that the range of possible outcomes for these guys is still enormous.

I don't know what it took for Bunning and Foulke to begin excel but with RJ it was definitely attaining good control/command. He was averaging >5 BB/9 innings through his age 28 season. It was in the 3s and 2s for the rest of his career, allowing his off the charts nastiness to make him great. What can Rubby do to get consistently good? I've seen just a handful of his starts this year, some of the excellent ones and some of the bad ones. I suppose his command had to be better in the good ones but he was pretty inconsistent this year. Just inexperience? 

 

[The Gray Eagle]

It's basically impossible to figure out the Red Sox lineup and rotation for next year right now. I doubt the team themselves has a great idea of either, as lots of players will be traded and it's really likely a good starting pitcher is signed.
 
One thing about the Red Sox young starters: most of them really aren't that young. Next year will be Kelly's age 27 season, Workman's age 26 season, Rubby D's age 26 season, Ranaudo's age 25 year, Barnes' age 25, Webster's age 25. All of these guys would be much more exciting (and more valuable in trades) with the same exact stats if they were two years younger, or even one year younger.
 
On the other hand, Escobar and Owens both just turned 22 within the past couple of months. Owens will still be 22 until July 22 2015 and Escobar until August 27 2015. Eduardo Rodriguez won't be 22 until April.
 
It's kind of revealing about the potential trade value of our other six not-so-young starters that we got Escobar as part of the package for half a season of Jake Peavy, and Rodriguez for half a season of a reliever.
 
On the other hand, our other guys are closer to the majors than Escobar and Rodriguez were when we picked them up, so that should help a bit. But based on their ages, their K/walk rates, and the fact that Kelly's the only one who ever pitched a 120+ IP season in the majors, (much less a good 120+ IP season) none of them look like the kind of prizes that other teams would look for in trading a top of the line starter.
 
This team could really benefit from a "3 dimes for a quarter" trade, (or probably even two of those, one for a pitcher and one for a position player) but those trades are hard to pull off. Nobody wants to give up a really good player for a bunch of lesser players. Usually the only way those trades happen is if the other team has a good player whose contract they don't want to pay, or who demands to be traded.

 

[Plympton91]

Agree completely with Grey Eagle. Is there team with a bottom five farms system and a player the Red Sox need? That would be a match where the Red Sox might be able to make a case for quantity over quality. Can you trade the Reds Coyle, Renaudo, Johnson, and Britton for one of their 4 free agent to be pitchers?

 

[Rasputin]

 
 
 I doubt the team themselves has a great idea of either, as lots of players will be traded and it's really likely a good starting pitcher is signed.

 
This is a pretty commonly held--or at least expressed--belief around here, but I am not entirely sure it's true. At least, it's not as clear to me that it's as true as it was six or eight weeks ago.
 
Ask yourself, can we put together a good lineup with the players we have?
 
We pretty much can. Cespedes in left, Betts and Castillo in some combination in center and right, Bogaerts, Pedroia, Napoli, and Ortiz at short, second, first, and DH. And I think we all assume that Vazquez is going to get a bunch of time at catcher.
 
That basically means we have a hole at third, an excess player in Craig, and I think we all want some kind of veteran presence at catcher (I'd be cool if we kept Ross). Thing is, we know Craig is at the nadir of his value and giving him a chance to come back to life seems like a much better option than trading him.
 
We want a good, deep rotation, and we'll definitely bring someone in, but we have the depth and there are a number of pretty good free agents.
 
Third base and the top two starters is pretty big, but addressable by free agents.
 
I'm not saying we won't see a bunch of trades, because it's definitely a possibility, but I think it's far from guaranteed.

 

[Harry Hooper]

 
This is a pretty commonly held--or at least expressed--belief around here, but I am not entirely sure it's true. At least, it's not as clear to me that it's as true as it was six or eight weeks ago.
 
Ask yourself, can we put together a good lineup with the players we have?
 
We pretty much can. Cespedes in left, Betts and Castillo in some combination in center and right, Bogaerts, Pedroia, Napoli, and Ortiz at short, second, first, and DH. And I think we all assume that Vazquez is going to get a bunch of time at catcher.
 
That basically means we have a hole at third, an excess player in Craig, and I think we all want some kind of veteran presence at catcher (I'd be cool if we kept Ross). Thing is, we know Craig is at the nadir of his value and giving him a chance to come back to life seems like a much better option than trading him.
 
We want a good, deep rotation, and we'll definitely bring someone in, but we have the depth and there are a number of pretty good free agents.
 
Third base and the top two starters is pretty big, but addressable by free agents.
 
I'm not saying we won't see a bunch of trades, because it's definitely a possibility, but I think it's far from guaranteed.

 
 
The issue is there's too many prospects approaching their "Sell By" dates not to pursue multiple trades.

 

[LostinNJ]

I'm not saying we won't see a bunch of trades, because it's definitely a possibility, but I think it's far from guaranteed.

Mostly agree, but isn't there going to be a 40-man crunch once they start filling gaps with free agents? There's a lot of clutter on the roster now. A big question is what to do about Victorino and Craig. Can we imagine them both as bench players in 2015?

 

[OptimusPapi]

Isn't Craig and Nava redundant? Both can play left right and first. The big difference that I can see is Nava is good for a 750 to 800 ops and Craig has higher upside if he gets back to his old self.

 

[Plympton91]

 
 
The issue is there's too many prospects approaching their "Sell By" dates not to pursue multiple trades.

He's also proposing to start the season with only a change at 3b and backup catcher on a team that has averaged only 4 runs a game since trading a near ace starting pitcher for a left fielder with a 745 OPS and a sub .300 on base percentage over the past two years.

They need to do a lot more than tinker around the edges, and they need to stop treating Yoenis Cespedes like he's a middle of the order hitter. He's Jonny Gomes with better defense but worse plate discipline.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

They need to do a lot more than tinker around the edges, and they need to stop treating Yoenis Cespedes like he's a middle of the order hitter. He's Jonny Gomes with better defense but worse plate discipline.

 
Except the whole platoon split. 

 

[OptimusPapi]

And the power

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

2014 AL average OPS by batting order position:
 
720, 709, 784, 759, 719, 678, 681, 681, 613
 
Assuming you've got Ortiz (877) hitting third and Napoli (789) clean up, slotting Cespedes (754) to hit fifth seems like the least of the offense's problems next year.

 

[MakMan44]

And the average OPS for an AL LFer is .725 this season. 

 

[BoredViewer]

What's the average OPS by batting order position of playoff teams?
 
Another off season and how much (more?) of a decline can we expect from Ortiz?
Napoli appears to be a part-time player.
 
There are questions.

 

[Plympton91]

2014 AL average OPS by batting order position:
 
720, 709, 784, 759, 719, 678, 681, 681, 613
 
Assuming you've got Ortiz (877) hitting third and Napoli (789) clean up, slotting Cespedes (754) to hit fifth seems like the least of the offense's problems next year.

Taken in a vacuum, sure. That's perfectly consistent with the idea that Cespedes is a somewhat above average corner outfielder, not a franchise cornerstone. Yet people here think it was a great trade and several are looking to extend the guy for $15 to $20 million a season.

To the specifics of how to make lineup next season. The plan put forward was to have a rookie with what might by the end of the winter be 200 professional at bats outside of Cuba in CF, backed up by a guy with a career OPS in the mid-500s over a full season of plate appearances. Combined with a catching tandem that is OPSing below 600 this year. Combined with a $7 million 25th man who can't hit and whose best defensive position is DH. I'd say you're going to need lots of above average contributions to compensate for that.

Third, OPS over rates SLG and underweights OBP, so naturally a professional out maker like Cespedes looks better by that metric.

If you chicks could look past the long ball, it's not like Cespedes is the team's only option in LF. Under a scenario where Castillo is in center and Betts in RF. If Victorino is healthy, it is far from clear that Cespedes would out produce a platoon of Victorino vs lefties and Nava vs. righties. And it's far from clear that Cespedes should play over Nava against righties if they're both on the team with Betts and Castillo living up to the hype.

Of course that assumes Castillo and Betts avoid the Bradley/Bogaerts syndrome. Far from clear.

Ben Cherington is the worlds bestest GM though, I'm sure he's got a plan to avoid missing the playoffs for the 5th time in 6 years in 2015. It'll be an interesting offseason.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Really hoping that Betts sticks around.... not sure there's anyone I would trade Betts and X for now.  Trout obviously... but realistic trade targets.... none.   What's it going to take to get Latos (I hate him) or Cueto?   I wonder if we could trade Napoli and a few of the middling pitchers for Cueto and absorb the Votto contract?  Votto has been in a slight decline, but he's young and healthy and I could imagine a very good rebound year from him.  His OBP is still stellar.
Basically Reds get out from long contract and absolrb one year of Napoli subsidized so they could start to restock their system again.... since we'd be taking their biggest positional player albatross of a contract for them, they may lessen the demands of prospects coming back in.
Still need to deal with the Allen Craig problem and the 3rd base problem, along with top of the rotation starter:
 
Lester
Cueto
Clay
Kelly 
RDLR

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Latos was shut down a few weeks ago with an elbow injury ("bone bruise" is the official diagnosis; he did have surgery to remove bone chips in the offseason). No idea what the impact would be on any possible Latos trade, but it probably also means the Reds will be less likely to deal Cueto as a result. 
 
The list of pitchers via trade at the moment probably includes Hamels, Lee, and Samardzjia. Guys like Kazmir and Kennedy might be out there also, but those wouldn't really be reasonable replacements for Lester (not to say that the team couldn't use someone like that, although I don't think either would be a great option). Can anyone think of anyone else who might be a reasonable option? 

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Really hoping that Betts sticks around.... not sure there's anyone I would trade Betts and X for now.  Trout obviously... but realistic trade targets.... none.   What's it going to take to get Latos (I hate him) or Cueto?   I wonder if we could trade Napoli and a few of the middling pitchers for Cueto and absorb the Votto contract?  Votto has been in a slight decline, but he's young and healthy and I could imagine a very good rebound year from him.  His OBP is still stellar.
Basically Reds get out from long contract and absolrb one year of Napoli subsidized so they could start to restock their system again.... since we'd be taking their biggest positional player albatross of a contract for them, they may lessen the demands of prospects coming back in.

 
What indication is there that the Reds have any interest in getting out from under Votto's contract right now?  One injury plagued/shortened season at age 30 doesn't suddenly turn his contract into an albatross.  In fact, the only number that matters to the Reds right now is his annual salary, which next year is a perfectly manageable $14M.  They're never going to be pushing up against the luxury tax cap, so the AAV is meaningless.