Showing posts with label Boston Red Sox. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boston Red Sox. Show all posts

Thursday, January 23, 2014

Red Sox sign Grady Sizemore!

It came out last night that the Red Sox have signed outfielder Grady Sizemore to a one year, $750,000 contract. When I found out, my reaction was to run around my apartment all giddy-like. You can ask my wife, I really did that.

This is a great signing, and I'm not just biased because Sizemore is one of my favorite players of all time. First off, Sizemore is not going to be the player he was from 2006 to 2008. Injuries aside, nobody is. Still, that player from 2006 to 2008 was pretty amazing. According to Fangraphs*, the best players in the game for that three year stretch by WAR, and then their WAR from 2011 to 2013: 



Player2006-0820011-13
Pujols, Albert24.78.7
Utley, Chase22.510.8
Sizemore, Grady21.10.1
Wright, David20.015.1
Beltran, Carlos20.09.7
Rodriguez, Alex19.56.5
Jones, Chipper*18.34.6
Reyes, Jose17.112.1
Holliday, Matt16.814.0
Ramirez, Hanley16.88.9

*Note: I usually prefer Baseball Reference's WAR calculator, but they are pretty close for offense and FanGraphs makes it much easier to sort by multiple years.

*Note 2: Chipper Jones retired following the 2012 season

Anyhow, everyone dropped off. The smallest dropoff was Holliday, who a) is riding a long peak into a possible Hall of Fame career, and b) B-Ref's calcluation is MUCH less impressed with over the past three years. The group includes two definite Hall of Famers (Jones and Pujols), one more who should be a definite Hall of Famer but the voters can't be counted on to not be morons (Utley), a borderline player I'd vote yes on today (Beltran), and a player who would've been a sure thing, except for three years of disaster (Rodriguez). For the other five, Wright, Reyes, Holliday and Ramirez can both play themselves in, leaving Sizemore. Basically, if he'd stayed healthy he'd be a borderline Hall of Famer already. And he's still only 31!

Ok, so he didn't stay healthy. At all. In the last five years he's played 210 games, and in the last two he's played zero. And when he did play, he wasn't nearly what he used to be, hitting .234/.314/.413.

So what's the point, you ask? Well, the Red Sox have some outfield depth, but it isn't necessarily quality depth. And Sizemore's 2009-2011 line, while nothing amazing, looks better in context. The average AL right fielder hit .263/.323/.418 in 2013, and the average left fielder hit .256/.318/.406. Sizemore isn't a center fielder anymore, and the Red Sox shouldn't fool themselves into thinking he is. But as a very-low cost backup with some upside, Sizemore is exactly what the Red Sox need. 

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

The unstated problem with the Yankees: Brian Cashman is a bad GM

In the last 48 hours, the Yankees have signed Brian Roberts to a $2 million dollar, one-year contract to be their starting second baseman. They have signed left-handed reliever Matt Thornton - most recently seen being left off of the Red Sox postseason roster - to a two-year, $7 million dollar deal. And Rany Jazayerli, one of the best baseball analysts alive, wrote a fantastic piece over at Grantland about the Yankees problems and the lack of a coming correction. 

In his piece, which is quite long but deserves the full treatment, there were two passages that I found especially telling.


Cano was worth 7.6 Wins Above Replacement in 2013. McCann, Beltran, and Ellsbury were worth 10.4 bWAR combined. Losing Cano wipes out most of the gains made by signing the other three players, and while Cano will make $24 million in Seattle next year, the Yankees will pay the other three $53 million

 And, the conclusion:

The culprit in the Yankees' downfall is mundane, but real: They're simply not talented enough to contend. Talent was something the Yankees could always buy in the past, but no one's selling it anymore. With few ways to acquire that ability, it looks like the Yankees will be living unhappily — if not ever after, then certainly for a lot longer than their front office and fans are prepared to stomach.
Talent. That makes it sound so simple - but the piece overlooks the major point. Yes, it's less easy now to buy talent, but there is still talent available. The Yankees just don't have any of it. Why is that? Because they are failures at identifying talent. They can't draft. They don't sign international free agents of any quality. They don't get contributing scrap-heap pickups. They've been building their team, for 10 years, almost exclusively on paying top dollar for other teams free agents.

While a Red Sox vs. Yankees comparison may seem overwrought, it reflects an important point of how these teams have been built. A note about terms: "Blockbuster Free Agent" is anyone signed to an AAV of $20 million. "Big Free Agent" is anyone between $10 million. "Mid-level" is over $2 milliong. Bargains are less than that. I've taken all the players projected to be at least 1.0 WAR players from Fangraphs "STEAMER" projection. It's not perfect, but I'm not looking for a perfect projection, just to illustrate a point.



NameWARHow acquired
CC Sabathia 3.9Blockbuster Free Agent Signing
Jacoby Ellsbury3.7Blockbuster Free Agent Signing
Hiroki Kuroda3.5Big Free Agent Signing
Brian McCann3.3Big Free Agent Signing
Ivan Nova3.1Rule 5 Draft
David Phelps2.1Drafted 2008
Mark Teixeira 2.0Blockbuster Free Agent Signing
Brett Gardner2.0Drafted 2005
Carlos Beltran1.8Big Free Agent Signing
David Robertson1.4Drafted 2006
Derek Jeter 1.4Drafted 1992
Alex Rodriguez1.2Blockbuster Free Agent Signing
Kelly Johnson1.1Bargain signing




NameWARHow acquired
Dustin Pedroia 3.9Drafted 2004
Jon Lester3.5Drafted 2002
John Lackey3.4Big Free Agent Signing
Xander Bogaerts3.0International Signing
Shane Victorino 2.6Big Free Agent Signing
David Ortiz2.4Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Will Middlebrooks2.4Drafted 2007
Clay Buchholz2.4Drafted 2005
Jake Peavy2.4Trade
Felix Doubront2.4International Signing
Jackie Bradley2.1Drafted 2011
Mike Napoli2.1Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Koji Uehara2.1Mid-level Free Agent Signing
A.J. Pierzynski1.3Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Daniel Nava1.2Undrafted free agent
Jonny Gomes1.1Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Junichi Tazawa1.1International Signing
Brandon Workman1.0Drafted 2010
Ryan Dempster1.0Big Free Agent Signing

The first thing that stands out is how many more good players the Red Sox have than the Yankees. The second, though, is the varied ways the Red Sox acquired their talent. Some were drafted over a decade ago, others quite recently. There are international signings, mid-level free agents, everything. The Yankees? Their top four players were all major signings. Ivan Nova was the one "find" in the group. They have three chosen in the draft in the last ten years. Let's resort the list, filtering out all of the Big and Blockbuster free agents, and players drafted 10 years ago (note - this works quite well, since it eliminates both Jeter and Lester, who were chosen by previous regimes).



NameWARHow acquired
Dustin Pedroia 3.9Drafted 2004
Ivan Nova3.1Rule 5 Draft
Xander Bogaerts3International Signing
Clay Buchholz2.4Drafted 2005
Will Middlebrooks2.4Drafted 2007
Felix Doubront2.4International Signing
David Ortiz2.4Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Jake Peavy2.4Trade
David Phelps2.1Drafted 2008
Jackie Bradley2.1Drafted 2011
Mike Napoli2.1Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Koji Uehara2.1Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Brett Gardner2Drafted 2005
David Robertson1.4Drafted 2006
A.J. Pierzynski1.3Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Daniel Nava1.2Undrafted free agent
Kelly Johnson1.1Bargain signing
Junichi Tazawa1.1International Signing
Jonny Gomes1.1Mid-level Free Agent Signing
Brandon Workman1Drafted 2010

There is a lot more red there than blue, including seven of the eight best players. 

The Yankee problems are often attributed to the Steinbrenners or the nature of sports in New York or Alex Rodriguez's ego or other such things, but the only good players they can identify are the ones that the league has already identified as good. It doesn't take any skill at all to figure out spending more money than every other team on the best players.

Note: As Jazayerli points out, this offseason they failed even at that - they replaced their best player with a series of inferior expensive ones. The combination of Ellsbury, McCann, and Beltran will probably produce more than Cano, but they are being paid more than twice as much, and do it while taking roughly 2.5 times as many at bats. 

Instead of filling additional spots with minimum cost youngsters or flawed players looking for a shot, it seems Cashman's go-to player is simply old guys that aren't nearly as good as they used to be. In the last year and a half he's brought in Vernon Wells, Ichiro Suzuki, Travis Hafner, Alfonso Soriano, and now Brian Roberts. He's like Montgomery Burns, who tries to fill his company softball team with ringers, but only knows of players from the previous century. I'm waiting for the Yankee equivalent of Waylon Smithers to inform him that "your right-fielder has been dead for a hundred and thirty years."

The general managers job is talent identification. He doesn't do all of it himself, but he puts the team in place that does. Cashman's team has failed. The Yankees are bad not just because the economics of baseball have changed, but because their general manager can't identify good players. 

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Red Sox fans should blame Farrell, not umpires

As my regular readers know, I am a Red Sox fan. Many of my posts are from a Red Sox viewpoint, so while I often try to remain objective (unbiased is the wrong word - all commentary should have a bias), that viewpoint is important to keep in mind. So, with that in mind...

I obviously have thoughts on last night's game. About 10 minutes after, when it became clear that the call was correct* it was that the only thing worse than losing a game on a bad call is losing on a good one. In hockey and basketball there is often a mentality of "let the teams play," meaning that the calls should only be on egregious fouls rather than decided by officials. Baseball isn't like that. Every play has a call, even if it isn't necessarily a close call. Hit a routine ground out to the shortstop? The first base umpire still calls you out. When your favorite team loses on a bad call, there is an outlet for the frustration. "Those stupid umpires blew it for us!" When it's the right call, though? All you can do is shake your head and find other outlets for the frustration. In this case, Red Sox manager John Farrell left us with plenty.

*There's really no debate about this. Middlebrooks was in the base path. If you are one of the many people who has posted the picture of a clear baseline on facebook or another social media outlet, stop it. The baseline is not the base path, and if you played little league baseball or have watched more than a half-dozen games in your life, YOU KNOW THAT. Complaining about the umpires is a big reason why people hate Red Sox fans. You're contributing to people hating me, so stop it.

John Farrell's night last night was almost a complete disaster. He started the game out decently, finally giving Daniel Nava a start over Jonny Gomes' winning enthusiasm. I like Gomes and all, but the Red Sox were beating right-handed pitching in spite of him, not because of him. Nava was one of the best hitters against right-handed pitching in baseball in 2013, and he wasn't allowed to play against them in the playoffs, and it put the team's chances in peril. On Saturday, Nava got the start and excelled. It was unsurprising.

The wheels started to come off of the Farrell managerial machine in the late innings. There has been some talk about the decision to replace Stephen Drew with Will Middlebrooks - Middlebrooks went 0 for 2, an infield hit to Bogaerts likely would've been an out if Drew was there, Adams' double might have been an out with Bogaerts at third, and, of course, the final play of the game. To me, though, that's criticizing the result more than the decision. Drew looked lost at the plate, and Middlebrooks gained a platoon advantage at a time it was needed. The risk was obvious in the move, but the potential reward made it a sensible move.

The mistake came when it came to Brandon Workman. When he entered the game, he came in the #9 spot in the lineup- due up second in the top of the ninth inning. Farrell could have double-switched David Ross into that spot, giving the team a defensive upgrade and a short-term offensive one - if Saltalamachhia's spot comes up again, either the Red Sox had a big inning, or they'd gotten into extras. Farrell didn't do that, leaving Workman's spot in the lineup.

That would have been defensible, if - IF - Farrell's plan all along was to bat Napoli in the ninth inning for Workman. No reason, after all, to burn the backup catcher when there's an even better offensive upgrade to be made. But Farrell did not do that. He let Brandon Workman bat in the ninth inning of a tie game of the World Series.

Read that last sentence again.

With one out and nobody on in the ninth inning of the World Series, John Farrell sent up his pitcher to hit. And it wasn't his shutdown reliever Koji Uehara, it was set-up man, fourth-guy-out-of-the-pen Brandon Workman. Okay.

So Workman strikes out, of course, because it's the first time he's had a bat in his hands since 2008 and the pitcher throws 100. Workman comes back out for the ninth, he pitches to only two batters! The guy so indispensable that he couldn't be removed for a pinch hitter who is the second-best power hitter on the entire team was taken out after two batters!

Let's take a little trip down memory lane. Remember 2003? The Red Sox were leading Game 7 of the ALCS. Grady Little left a gassed Pedro Martinez in to lose the lead. The move led to Pedro Martinez getting fired.

How about 1986? Bill Buckner remained in the game instead of Dave Stapleton, a superior defensive player. It took 18 months, but John McNamara got fired. In Lou Gorman's book One Pitch From Glory, he makes it clear that Jean Yawkey had wanted to fire McNamara immediately after the series.

Farrell's managing last night was much, much worse than either of those managing blunders. Pedro Martinez was the greatest pitcher of his time - Little trusted him too much to get out of a jam. It was a mistake, but when it was made, everyone rooting for Boston wasn't saying - "boy, that was dumb." We were rooting for Martinez to make it through, because he was all of our favorite pitcher. We were scared it was a mistake, but not convinced of it.

I was too young to remember Buckner in 1986, but beyond McNamara infamously wanting him to be on the field to celebrate, Buckner was the superior hitter to Stapleton. Leaving him in the game may have had some logic in it.

Last night, though? Leaving Workman hit, even though Uehara was ready to come in and Workman was only going to pitch to two more batters? It's not second-guessing to call that foolish - it was obviously nuts at the time. It was - at the risk of exaggerating - the worst mistake I can remember a manager making. John Farrell clearly does a good job with game preparation, and the team plays hard for him. But game strategy is important, and like Ron Washington and Texas, Farrell is bad at it. It's crazy to think about after this years turn-around, but if he doesn't improve on his tactics, it will be a short stint in the Red Sox dugout.

Friday, October 04, 2013

10/4/13 playoff marathon liveblog!

12:55: Four games today. Over/under on time of games? 13:30?

12:57: Gerrit Cole is getting the start for Pittsburgh. Two notes about this. One, I'll always have a soft spot for Cole, because I saw his major league debut on TV in a bar in Monterey, CA, as part of one of the best vacations I've ever taken. Second, Cole deserves the full-on phenom treatment. Maybe we have phenom burnout? I dunno, but Cole is really, really good.

12:58: Chris Carpenter with the ceremonial first pitch. I can't remember another time with a technically active player throwing out a ceremonial first pitch.

1:02: Bob Costas calling a playoff game!!

Saturday, September 21, 2013

The Red Sox won the division because all of their players are good

The Red Sox clinched the American League East last night. A lot is being written about their quick turnaround, which is probably appropriate, considering they lost 93 games last year and traded one of their best players. The how is pretty interesting, and I encourage you to check out this piece from the tireless Alex Speier of WEEI.com, and really any of the work Speier has done this year. He's done a ton of great work and seems to have a lot of access, so I'm hoping he writes a book when the season is said and done. He can be a little uncritical at times, taking the words of team officials at face value, but face value can be informative and helpful, especially when written so well. 

I won't get into the how of the roster construction, however. I don't have the access for such a thing anyway. What I just wanted to point out was the why.  The Red Sox are good this year because they basically have an entire team of good players. The Red Sox have eight players with a rWAR of at least 3.0, and 17 at over 1.0 (including the now-departed Jose Iglesias). By the same measure, they have the fifth (Pedroia), seventh (Victorino), and ninth (Ellsbury) best position players in the American League. 

When every single player on the team is good, the team wins. That some of the players have played over their expectations (Victorino, Nava, Uehara) is helpful, but the team is full of good players having good seasons. That's easier said than done, but the success is probably less surprising than it should have been.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

John Lackey, Cole Hamels latest examples that pitcher wins are dumb

John Lackey can't catch a break.

Ok, obviously his 2011 and 2012 were much worse, for both off-field and on-field reasons. Before the 2013 season, he clearly devoted himself to losing weight, and with a repaired elbow and lithe frame, Lackey is doing his best pitching since 2007 when he led the American League in ERA. In 2013, he is eighth in the league in ERA+, eighth in BB/9, and sixth in K/BB. Yet, despite all of this on baseball's third highest scoring team, Lackey is, inexplicably 8-11. Why? The Red Sox don't score any runs when he pitches.

Now, Lackey has had better run support than a number of pitchers. At 3.5 RS/9, he ranks 99th out of 130 pitchers, which doesn't sound so bad. However, his team scores 5.3 runs per nine innings. No other player with such a low run support number pitches for a team that scores more than 4.6 per nine.

Let's go to the breakdown.



PlayerTm R/9RS/9IPLuck
Scott Kazmir4.76.31.6
Matt Moore4.66.11.5
Justin Grimm4.55.91.4
Jordan Lyles4.15.41.3
Hyun-jin Ryu45.21.2
Yovani Gallardo4.15.31.2
Scott Feldman4.25.41.2
Max Scherzer5.66.81.2
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Chris Archer4.63.4-1.2
Dan Straily4.63.4-1.2
Cole Hamels3.92.7-1.2
Kris Medlen4.43.1-1.3
Chris Capuano42.6-1.4
John Lackey5.33.5-1.8

No pitcher has been as unlucky as Lackey has been this year. In fact, no pitcher has been as lucky as Lackey has been unlucky. 

Still, I suppose it's better to be Lackey than Cole Hamels. Hamels is 5-13, despite a solid (though unspectacular 106 ERA+. As anemic as the Philadelphia offense tends to be every night, they simply don't show up with Hamels is on the mound. Eight times this season, the Phillies have scored zero or one run when the lefty pitches. When he allows more than one earned run, his record is 0-13. In nine starts where Hamels has given up exactly two earned runs, he's 0-6. 

Still, pitching for a team that can't hit isn't really "unlucky," it's just sort of a crummy circumstance. John Lackey pitches for a good hitting team, and they just don't hit when he pitches. 

Friday, June 28, 2013

Koji Uehara is better than Jonathan Papelbon

The ninth inning has been something of a sore spot for the Red Sox this season. Joel Hanrahan was terrible, then hurt (or hurt because he was terrible). Andrew Bailey was excellent in April, but struggled after coming back from his injury, bottoming out this month. Something of a panic broke out last week, when Bailey blew two games in three days, that the Red Sox needed to acquire a new closer.

Yes, I agree with you - the idea of the closer is, itself, dumb. Saving your best pitcher for in case you're winning makes no sense. You're preaching to the choir. The fact is, teams use a closer, and it's a good idea for your closer to be a good pitcher. Moving on. 

Anyhow, one prominent suggestion was that the Red Sox should work out a deal with a Phillies team stuck in baseball purgatory for Jonathan Papelbon. This is a bad idea. One reason that it's a bad idea is that it's dumb to trade for saves. Pitchers with saves cost more money than pitchers without saves, even though they aren't generally better. SOME are better. Mariano Rivera and Craig Kimbrel and Billy Wagner and Dennis Eckersley are/were mcuh better than their contemporaries. But, as the Red Sox have learned the hard way THREE @#$%^& TIMES in the last two years, trading for Joel Hanrahan and Andrew Bailey and Mark Melancon because they had saves isn't a panacea. Trading for pretty good pitchers and making them closers? Yes! Trading for pretty good pitchers who have racked up saves? No!

Jonathan Papelbon is a pretty good pitcher. From 2006 to maybe 2009 he was a great pitcher. In 2010 he was mediocre. Since 2011, he's been between good and very good. The problem is, he won't cost what a good to very good pitcher will. That's one reason the Red Sox shouldn't trade for him. The other is that they have a reliever who is better.

Actually, they might have two who are better, but Junichi Tazawa's track record is short, even if his K/BB ratio isn't.

Anyhow, let's go to the old comparison chart! These numbers are since the start of the 2012 season.


Year ERASVIPERA+WHIPH/9HR/9BB/9SO/9SO/BB
PLAYER A2.3253100.21741.00371.12.110.65.17
PLAYER B1.85468.02380.7215.21.11.311.88.9

Since you've already read the title to this piece, you know that Player A is Jonathan Papelbon and Player B is Koji Uehara. Papelbon beats Uehara is saves. He also is ahead in innings, so if you want to argue that he's more durable, you might be right, but the difference in their chances of getting hurt in the second half of 2013 is not worth what the Red Sox would have to give up for Paps. Since the start of last year, Uehara has struck out more batters, walked fewer, and been harder to hit. As a result, he gives up runs less frequently

If the Red Sox are going to use the traditional closer - and as a first place team following three straight playoff misses, they are - Uehara is a perfect choice.

Aside: The Red Sox aren't an ideal candidate for revolutionary bullpen usage. And by "revolutionary," I mean "what they did in 1987." 

Uehara's home run rate is a touch higher than I'd like to see, but there are so few runners on when he pitches that they are that they are likely to be solo shots. Indeed, three of the four he's allowed in 2013 have been with the bases empty. More importantly, Uehara represents an opportunity for the Red Sox to finally create their own closer, the way they did seven years ago with Papelbon. Uehara is a one-inning guy, so it's not like using him for short stints otherwise jeopardizes his usefulness. (Farrell continues to use Tazawa for one-inning stints as well, which is a soap box that I'm not planning to get off of.)  He came cheap.

The idea that someone the Red Sox could acquire is likely outperform Uehara over the next four months by such an amount as to justify the cost of that acquisition is kind of crazy. He's been one of the better relievers in baseball since the Orioles moved him there at the start of 2010, and has brought that to another, elite level over the last year and a half.

You may say that the Red Sox need now to fill the role Uehara is vacating if they use him as closer, and that's true to an extent. However, getting a "middle reliever" from outside the organization is much less expensive than getting Jonathan Papelbon, and the Red Sox have internal options for the role as well. Alex Wilson, Rubby De La Rosa,  and Brandon Workman could all be solid relievers right now, and Jose De La Torre could as well. Another option would be to not get into such rigid usage patterns with the current crop of guys. Craig Breslow, Andrew Miller, and Junichi Tazawa can pitch multiple innings. Farrell needs to let them do that sometimes. Burning through five relievers to get 11 outs is incredibly inefficient. It's one of the reasons there has been talk of the Red Sox pen being "overused" despite the fact they've gotten an above-average number of innings from their starting pitching.

The Red Sox are in first place, and they have one of the best relievers in the game as the closer. Since taking over the role, he's retired all six batters he's faced, four via the strikeout. He gives the best high-fives in the game, which is worth something. If you want to argue that Uehara doesn't have the "closer's mentality," I don't know what to tell you. I'm pretty sure the idea of a "closer's mentality" is made up, but if anyone has it then it's Uehara - he comes into the game with his sort of crazed intensity that I certainly wouldn't want to be in the way of.

Instead of giving up prospects for a closer, the Red Sox just need to trust the best reliever they have to do the job.

Thursday, January 03, 2013

Red Sox assign new uniform numbers!

It's so cold today that even I'm cold. It's the coldest day in Boston in at least two years, and while I generally welcome the winter freeze, it's the sort of day where even I need something soul-warming. Thankfully, the Red Sox have me thinking of spring training with today's announcement (courtesy of the Boston Globe) - the assignment of new uniform numbers!

I believe the Red Sox failure in 2012 is tied directly to the fact they had too many players with high uniform numbers. Teams would see numbers like 61, 64, 66, and 77(!) in the starting lineup every day and get an extra dose of confidence, thinking they were playing a spring training game against the third stringers about to be assigned to Double-A. Sure, you may think the Red Sox lost because of their vast array of injuries, an incompetent manager, or the fact that Scott Atchison ended up being their most valuable pitcher (according to rWAR), but you will be unable to convince me that it was something other than the uniform numbers.

Sunday, July 08, 2012

July 7, 2012: Red Sox 9, Yankees 5; Pedro Ciriaco ignites Boston

PE-DRO! PE-DRO! PE-DRO!

My wife's brother was in town for the weekend, so their sister got the four of us Red Sox vs. Yankees bleachers tickets for last nights game, the second of a doubleheader.
Fenway with the wife & in-laws



After an awful week for the Red Sox, a miserable first inning had me in a typically grumpy mood. However, the bats started to turn around, led by middle infielder Pedro Ciriaco. Down 3-2 going into the bottom of the sixth, the Red Sox scored three, gave one back in the top of the seventh, then scored another four to take a commanding lead. At the heart of both rallies was minor league veteran Pedro Ciriaco. 

Originally signed back in 2005, Ciriaco got a couple stints with the majors with the Pittsburgh Pirates. Known for his glove, he was having his best offensive season for Pawtucket, making the International League All-Star game. His contract was purchased by Boston before Friday, and he went 0 for 4 in his Red Sox debut in game one of the doubleheader. 

In game two, though, he had a game to be remembered. Ciriaco went 4 for 5 with two doubles, driving in four of the Red Sox' runs. He also made several very nice plays at shortstop, which is really the reason he's made the major leagues. When he came to bat in the 8th, Ciriaco received a standing ovation from the grateful Fenway crowd, hungry for something that would spark the .500 Dead Sox, losers in seven of their last nine, to life. During the at-bat, chants of Pe-dro harkened back to the Pedro Martinez era.

While it's crazy to think that a shortstop with a .281 OBP at Triple-A will continue to be the team's offensive leader, it was a fantastic game to be present at, with real electricity and excitement, rather than seven and a half innings of dullness and then "Sweet Caroline," followed immediately by a steady stream toward the exits. 

-----

Beyond the Ciriaco-inspired jubilation, some thoughts from the game, and on the Red Sox and Yankees in general:

-Nick Punto, career .247/.324/.326 but not hitting anywhere near that well this year, was batting second. The idea that the #2 hitter needs to be able to "handle the bat" is ridiculous. The #2 hitter needs to be able to hit well, it's one of the most important positions in the lineup, and putting a bad hitter there leads to a lot of unnecessary outs and the middle of the order batters getting too few RBI opportunities.

-Mauro Gomez played third base, despite the fact that he can't really. In fact, he got his fourth consecutive start at the position. On the first batter of the game, he managed to make two errors on a Derek Jeter grounder. Two batters later, a three run home run put the Red Sox in a hole. Gomez had 71 career minor league games at third base, zero since the start of 2010. The guy can hit, but even on a night where he went 3 for 4 with two doubles, he may have only evened out. It happens that someone needs to play out of position in an emergency, but continuing to put someone clearly out of position will end up having consequences. Jeter tried to bunt for a single toward Gomez in the seventh, but a very nice play by Matt Albers getting off the mound quickly and throwing Jeter out prevented that. It was a smart play by Jeter though, as Gomez wouldn't have had a chance to get him.

-Jarrod Saltalamacchia (who now has a .287 OBP) was batting cleanup. I know having a catcher who can hit for power is fun and all, but let's not trick ourselves on Salty. He's an all or nothing hitter who strikes out a ton and makes too many outs, and was used to separate Adrian Gonzalez and David Ortiz in the lineup. I know the common strategy is to separate the lefties in the lineup, but against a team who has Boone Logan and Clay Rapada as the lefties in the pen? Valentine needed to split his two best hitters up because he was scared they would have to consecutively face Boone Logan or Clay Rapada? As a result of this strategy, Gonzalez went 0 for 0 with runners on base. 

-Felix Doubront really showed some poise by settling down after a round first inning against a tough lineup. He struck out 6 in 6.1 innings, and he remains fourth in the American League with a K/9 ratio of a tick over 9.0. He'll be one of the players to watch in the second half for Boston. Will he make adjustments as he starts getting repeat appearances against teams, and start to get the home runs down a little bit? Will the adjustments go the other way, and will teams begin to hit Doubront better the more they've seen him? Will he begin to tire under what is already nearing a career-high in terms of innings pitched? He's at 96.0, nearly 30 away from his career high of 129.1 in 2008. Like Saltalamacchia, it's easy to overstate how good he's been because of how poorly others around him have done, but there are positives with Doubront and the Red Sox have to be thrilled with what he's given them.

-On the Yankees side, Russell Martin finally got a hit, ending an 0-for-30 slump. His swing looks terrible, and he's batting only .179. Unless Brian Cashman really believes his low BABIP is a result of bad luck rather than his slow bat, this is a position that the Yankees will likely try to upgrade at the deadline. The question is, how? The catching position is weak around the league, and the Yankees best prospects in the high minors, Banuelos and Betances, have really disappointed this year. In-house replacements Chris Stewart, Francisco Cervelli and Gustavo Molina are not upgrades. This may be a position the Yankees will simply have a disadvantage at for the time being.

-Girardi's decision to pinch-hit A-Rod for Martin the ninth inning of a game they were losing by five runs at the time was a rather curious one. It seemed to do little more than give Red Sox fans an extra opportunity to boo the guy.

-In a nice game where he went 3-for-5 with two doubles, Adrian Gonzalez extended his hitting streak to 18 games, during which time he has hit .377/.400/.481. That sounds nice, until remembering that Gonzalez hit .338/.410/.548 for the entire season in 2011. That's probably too much to expect in the second half, but the Red Sox will need something closer to player to get any chance of getting back into the race.

-Like I said above, it's crazy to think Ciriaco is actually a player who can hit enough to make a difference for the Red Sox, but maybe it's time to think a little crazy? Pe-dro! Pe-dro!

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Monday, June 25, 2012

Good luck, Youk

So, I arrived home last night from an amazing two-week honeymoon to Austria, Slovenia, and Croatia to find that Kevin Youklis was traded to the Chicago White Sox yesterday in exchange for right-handed pitcher Zach Stewart and utility infielder Brent Lillibridge. The trade analysis is almost painfully simple. The Red Sox have had a better designated hitter and a better first baseman for a couple years now, and with the emergence of Will Middlebrooks, have a better third baseman. Youkilis - one of the best hitters alive from 2008-2010, with a .308/.404/.560 line - no longer had a place in the Red Sox lineup.

It's been a bit of a crazy few months for us Red Sox fans. First, Tim Wakefield officially retired. Then, a few days later, Jason Varitek followed suit. Now Youkilis has been traded, leaving David Ortiz as the only player with a 2004 World Series ring left with the team.

Red Sox fans have been following Youkilis since even before his famous inclusion in Moneyball. The 2001 tenth rounder out of the University of Cincinnati had been tearing up the minor leagues, rising fairly quickly through the Red Sox system until he reached Pawtucket, where he continued to mash but waiting a long time for his chance. Injuries got him some playing time in 2004, and the poor play of Kevin Millar led to calls from several circles to give him playing time the following year. Finally, in 2006 he beat out J.T. Snow for the starting first baseman job. (Admit it. You forgot J.T. Snow was on the Red Sox).

He played fairly well that year, came into his own in '07, and turned into a star in '08. In all, he spent six excellent years as a starter, working deep counts and ripping doubles inside the left field foul line. His grimacing (I believe it was Joe Magrane who said the look he makes after a called strike resembled a "bitter beer face") and bat throwing and shouting made him into something of a lightning rod, being a player that people either loved or loathed, but even his detractors appreciated his production.

Losing his job to Will Middlebrooks this year seemed almost poetic, as this season has marked something of a generational shift in the Red Sox. Varitek, Wakefield, Youkilis, Papelbon, Drew, Epstein and Francona are now all gone. A year ago, the departure of any one of them wouldn't have been surprising, but the loss of all of them in such a short time seems almost seismic. The current Red Sox would be unrecognizable to someone who saw them only one year ago. I can visualize my mother, listning to the game on the radio and asking me "who are these guys?"

Even though the move is sensible, it's impossible not to be sentimental. Youkilis was immediately recognizable, fiery, and really, really good. I miss that bitter beer face already.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

An evening at Fenway: Red Sox 6. Tigers 3

I was lucky enough to get to go to the Red Sox game last night. A friend called last week and said he had extra tickets, which made me excited. Then I found out that Justin Verlander was scheduled to start, which made me even more excited. Then the Red Sox won on Monday, meaning that a win on Tuesday would bring them above .500 for the first time all season, and that made me apprehensive. After all, they'd been .500 six times already, and were 0-6 in games that would put them over the hump. With the seeming mismatch of Daniel Bard vs. Verlander, it seemed like they could be in line to make it 0-7.

Anyhow, my fears were allayed as the Red Sox won. The lessons from the night are that a) you don't pitch against the opposing starting pitcher, you pitch against the opposing team - this is important, because the Red Sox offense is excellent, and the Tigers really stinks, b) David Ortiz is really, really good, once again. 

From our seats up in the right field roof boxes, it was tough to tell how sharp either pitcher was. Verlander didn't get the results he normally does, but his fastball was hard, and it seemed like he had a good changeup. It looked as though the Sox really just did a good job hitting. The same cannot be said of the Tigers, baseball's most disappointing team right now at 23-26. After the signing of Prince Fielder, it looked like they were to be one of the better teams in the game, but they are eighth in the American League in scoring while allowing the fourth most runs in the league. While the pitching should come around - Scherzer is pitching better after his usually early-season troubles, and the rest of the starting rotation seems sound - the offense may be in more trouble. After Cabrera, Fielder and the injured Austin Jackson, they haven't received that much of an offensive contribution elsewhere. Alex Avila was in an awful slump but has brought his slugging percentage back over .400. The bigger issues are the sub .300 OBPs from right-fielder Brennan Boesch and designated hitter Delmon Young, along with the vortex that has been their second base position. Led by Ryan Raburn and Ramon Santiago (combined -2.1 WAR), Tigers' second sackers are batting .175/.253/.250, which probably has 55-year old Lou Whitaker interested in a comeback. The Tigers have built a pretty deep hole for themselves, and without some upgrades, will not be able to dig out of it.

As far as Ortiz, it's really a treat getting to watch him. My guess is that this won't actually be his last year in Boston, but it could, so I'm glad I got the chance to see him again. Ortiz went 3 for 4 with two doubles and a laser beam home run over the Green Monster. He's been one of the best hitters in the American League this year, and now has 331 home runs in a Red Sox uniform. I'm lucky to have had the chance to see him so many times.

Daniel Bard, who I wrote about this past weekend, had a nice game, though it's hard to say anything definitive. He was generally throwing about 93, where he's been all season, but did seem to have a few more topping out in the 95-96 range. It took him 94 pitches to get through 5.1 innings, and he allowed two home runs after only allowing three in his first nine games. Without Jackson in the lineup, the Tigers lineup wasn't Bard's toughest test, but it was a solid outing.

As far as the experience goes, the game was a blast, as Fenway Park almost always is. We had about a 45 minute rain delay as some pretty crazy thunderstorms moved through in the eighth. After that, it took only about 15 mintues to close out the game. I like the right field roof box seats, which give a nice open view of the field at a reasonable price. It's amazing to walk through and look at the changes made in the 10 years since the new ownership came on. Some of it is obvious to those watching at home, like the Green Monster seats and the roof deck over where the retired numbers are. 

My personal favorite is the concourse and picnic area in what used to be a storage area between the grandstand in the bleachers. It's a wide open area filled with food vendors and maintains the feel of the park, while also fixing what was once the biggest flaw of Fenway - the fact you couldn't walk all the way around it. If you had bleacher tickets, you were stuck either in the bleachers, or the area underneath. Now you can enter in any gate. 

My least favorite improvement is the shutting down of Yawkey Way on game day. It detracts from the whole "downtown ballpark experience" in my view. Part of the fun of having a park in a busy city location is all the people who don't have tickets walking around, enjoying the area - and just living. People who live over on Brookline Ave. or Boylston Street are just there. Now, though, if you want to get around the park on the outside, you have a pretty long route to navigate, making a miserable experience for the neighbors. I agree with closing the street to vehicle traffic, but you shouldn't need a ticket to walk down Yawkey Way.




Sunday, May 27, 2012

The development of Daniel Bard and Clay Buchholz

Developing players is hard.

It seems like it should be so simple. Draft a guy, move him slowly, but not too slowly, through the minor leagues. In a couple years, they break into the major league rotation. They take their lumps for a couple years, before turning into a front end starting pitcher.

It's a tempting narrative, and it happens - C.C. Sabathia, Justin Verlander, Clayton Kershaw. All high draft picks, all with somewhat fast trips through the minors, all with some struggles when they first came up, and all, now, with Cy Young Awards. We see the 2011 draft giving us a truly incredible amount of pitching talent: Gerrit Cole, Danny Hultzen, Trevor Bauer and Dylan Bundy (who still hasn't given up a run) went in the top 4. Other first rounders like Jose Hernandez, Matt Barnes and Tyler Anderson are all pitching incredibly well. All of their teams - and the fans of these teams - are beaming, thinking of their shiny new 2015 Opening Day starter.

And that's ok - it's fun to dream about the new toy. That's why we spend so my time on prospect manuals, studying the draft, comparing an incredible number of lists. We wait breathlessly for those "Top 100" Lists that come out every preseason, especially the ones from the guys who really do know who and what they're talking about - Keith Law, Jim Callis, John Sickels, and the Baseball Prospectus Team.

Sometimes players become stars, and everyone is happy. Sometimes they bust, and we chuckle years later about how Andy Yount was going to save the Red Sox. There are a lot of guys in between, though, and they're the hard ones to deal with. Kerry Wood retired this week, and Joe Posnanski had a wonderful retrospective on appreciating Wood for what he was, rather than what we hoped he could become. They just had Pat Burrell Day in Philadelphia, which seems strange because he spent his entire time in Philadelphia failing to live up to the unreasonable expectations fans had built up for him.

That brings us to Clay Buchholz and Daniel Bard. Buchholz was the third of five first rounders selected by the Red Sox in 2005. Bard was the second of four first rounders the Sox took in 2006. Both were top prospects in the Red Sox system, both have had success in the major leagues, both are in the Red Sox starting rotation, and both are pitching not all that well.

The Red Sox, through last season, had accumulated more value from their draft picks since 2002 than any other organization, per this article in Fangraphs. So it seems incorrect to draw the conclusion that the Red Sox are simply incompetent. So, something else is going on here. Let's dig into both pitchers individually.

I'll start with Bard. I've written many times in this space that the best place for a team to find starting pitching help may be its own bullpen, and that pitchers who perform well in the bullpen are also likely to do so as starters. While I believe this to be true, it is also an oversimplification. The reason many successful relief pitchers turn into successful starters is because they were successful starters in the minors before being put in the bullpen to fill a need at the major league level. Derek Lowe, C.J. Wilson, Chris Sale, Neftali Feliz... all successful minor league starters.

Daniel Bard was never a successful minor league starter.

That is a big deal. I don't write it because I believe it makes him unable to transfer to the rotation, but it means he never adjusted to the way a starter pitches in the major leagues. Whenever we talk about a pitcher transitioning from the bullpen to the rotation, we talk about the pitcher learning to pace himself.  While that's part of the transition, that's an entirely incomplete description - it is not as though a pitcher just needs to throw a little bit slower, giving him the endurance to pitch for a longer time. A pitcher also needs to learn to cycle in his pitches, keep repeating his mechanics, set up batters not only for later pitches in the at-bat but for later at-bats within the game. Daniel Bard never learned to do that in the minor leagues. He came into games, threw close to 100 miles an hour, and occassionally made batters look silly with his slider and change-up, got between one and six outs, and hit the showers. It's certainly not as easy as that last sentence would have you believe, but he'd never learned to start in professional ball.

When Bard was drafted in 2006, he was a starting pitcher at the University of North Carolina. The #2 starter there, in fact, behind #7 overall pick and current teammate Andrew Miller. Though he struggled some with his control in college, his stuff and general results were excellent, and the Red Sox, already with one of the better minor league systems on the strength of that 2005 class, could afford a higher-risk guy like Bard. Bard also interviewed quite well, a bright guy and a real student of the game.

Because he pitched in the College World Series, the Sox decided not to have Bard pitch in 2006, instead waiting until 2007 to debut him at High-A Lancaster. In hindsight, the high-powered offensive environment of Lancaster might have been a poor fit for a guy like Bard to begin his career. He made five starts, pitching only 13.1 innings, compiling a 10.12 ERA, walking 22 batters and striking out 9. (That is not a misprint - he struck out less than half as many people as he walked). Bard was so bad that the Red Sox have not, to my knowledge, debuted a pitcher in High-A since then, even though they have long since left Lancaster for Salem, NC. He was placed on the disabled list at the beginning of May, and essentially given a month off to get his head straight before beginning June in Greenville. His results were little better: Bard made 17 starts, pitching only 61.2 innings with a 6.42 ERA, walking 56 and striking out 38.

The Red Sox converted him to a reliever and sent him to the Hawaii Winter League. He immediately turned things around, winning his Winter League's player of the year honor, then tearing through the minors. In 57 games at Greenville, Portland and Pawtucket from April 2008 through May 2009, Bard threw 93.2 innings, compiled a 1.44 ERA, allowed only 48 hits, walked 35 and struck out 136(!!!), earning a call-up to the majors, for good, on May 10. 

From then until the end of last year, he was a reliever, and generally an excellent one. He compiled a 2.88 ERA in 197.0 innings pitched, striking out 213, walking 76, and allowing 16 home runs - essentially spreading C.J Wilson's 2011 season over three years. Like just about every Boston pitcher, Bard ended 2011 poorly, but the common thought was that he would replace Jonathan Papelbon as the club's closer in 2012. Instead, Bard let the front office know that he was interested in trying to start, and the club, hoping to maximize his value, was inclined to give him that shot. (Seeing the difference between the contracts signed by Jonathan Papelbon and C.J. Wilson probably did little to deter Bard from believing that a move to the rotation was worth trying out).

So far in 2012, Bard's results have been uneven. Through nine games (eight starts) he has a 4.69 ERA in 48 innings. He's allowed 46 hits, and only 3 home runs, which are both encouraging numbers. On the other hand, he's walked 29 and struck out 28. A drop in strikeout rate is expected on some level, but usually the "rule of 17 applies" - strikeout rate usually drops about 17% in a move from the bullpen to the rotation - but Bard's has fallen off by over 40%. .Meanwhile, the increase in his walk rate goes back to the second half of last year. The confluence of the two has resulted in fears that even that mediocre 4.69 ERA is unsustainable - his FIP is 4.77, and his xFIP measures 5.22.

While those are numbers appear frustrating from someone who was a dominant reliever, they are quite impressive considering that he was never a successful starting pitcher in the minor leagues. Bard is still learning how to start, and patience is necessary. The difference between what starters and relievers get paid is appropriate - starters face three times as many batters, and when dominant can essentially win or lose games on their own. If Bard can be even a #3 starter, he'll be more valuable than the very good reliever he was.

The question then becomes whether Bard can get there while pitching in the major leagues. With options remaining, should Bard be getting his feel for starting down in Triple-A Pawtucket? In order to get a feel for cycling all his pitches while becoming comfortable with his mechanics as a starter, perhaps he needs to overmatch a few Triple-A hitters. If Bard is committed to the idea of being a stater long-term, would he be willing to sacrifice two to three months of service time in order to experience some sustained success as a starter?

-------------------------

Clay Buchholz is a much more difficult situation. Unlike Bard, Buchholz has obviously been a successful starting pitcher - not just as a professional, but in the major leagues. Everyone remembers his no-hitter in 2007, but his excellent 2010 season, where he had a 2.33 ERA and allowed only 9 home runs all year seems almost a mirage. He was solid last season, with a 3.48 ERA before being shut down for the season in June with a stress fracture in his back. Upon his return this year, something is quite obviously wrong - whether he isn't healthy, has lost his mechanics, or his confidence is shot, through 9 starts Buchholz has 7.84 ERA, worst among qualifiers in the major leagues. In 49.1 innings, he has allowed 67 hits, 11 of which have been home runs. He's walked 27 and struck out 27. His curveball has been flat, his fastball slow, a terrible combination.

Buchholz starts today against the Tampa Bay Rays, and another bad start will lead to some serious decisions. Daisuke Matsuzaka pitched very well yesterday in rehab start with Pawtucket, allowing only 1 hit and 1 walk in 5.0 innings. Ross Ohlendorf has a June 1 opt-out clause, and while he hasn't been fantastic with the PawSox, his 4.07 ERA and BB/9 rate under 2.5 look awfully inviting compared to Buchholz's struggles. Buchholz has not looked at all like a major league pitcher, and with an option remaining, woud he, like Bard, be a candidate for a demotion?

Unlike Bard, I think the decision here is more clear cut. Buchholz has been in this position before. After a terrible 2008 season, Buchholz began 2009 in the minor leagues. He worked closely with Rich Sauveur (the Pawtucket pitching coach) on rebuilding his delivery as well as his pregame preparation. If Sauveur can work his magic again, Buchholz and the Red Sox will both be better off. Unless he pitches well today, I would not be surprised to see the Boston front office send a pitcher - who only two years ago finished sixth for the Cy Young Award - back to the minor leagues.

Tying the question back to player development - is this a failure of the Red Sox? I don't believe so. While the Red Sox development of players is impressive, it hasn't been perfect - Craig Hansen was developed terribly, in one especially memorable example. Buchholz, though, doesn't resemble Hansen at all. In the case of Buchholz, in order to criticize the Red Sox, one would have to identify what they've done wrong. Specifically. Short of such evidence, the organization has earned the benefit of the doubt. Buchholz has proven to be a difficult guy to develop, and it's just as possible that another organization wouldn't have gotten nearly as much of a contribution as the Red Sox have from him.

Friday, February 17, 2012

Thank you, #49

Tim Wakefield, throwing his famous knuckleball: (By Waldo Jaquith on Flickr [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons)


As you probably know by now, Tim Wakefield will announce his retirement at a news conference tonight. I've written about Wakefield a few times here, and I'm not the one to write a full retrospective, of which I'm sure we'll get several, but I wanted to just run through some interesting facts from Wakefield's career:

  • You probably know that Wakefield was drafted as a first baseman out of the Florida Institute of Technology. He was taken in the 8th round of the 1988 draft, 200th overall. The 199th pick belonged to the Red Sox, and was used on Wakefield's future teammate Tim Naehring.Wakefield is the only player from the Florida Institute of Technology to play in the major leagues.

  • Other than Naehring, players named Tim who Wakefield played with: Tim VanEgmond, Tim Harikkala, Tim Young, and Mike Timlin.

  • Wakefield was the 200th pick in the draft, and won exactly 200 games.

  • Wakefield played exactly one year each with Barry Bonds (1992), Dennis Eckersley (1998), Rickey Henderson (2002).

  • Wakefield debuted on 7/31/1992 with a 10-strikeout complete game victory against the Cardinals (box score). His first strikeout was Luis Alicea. Wakefield made his first appearance with the Red Sox on 5/27/95 (box score). Alicea was his second baseman in that game, going 3-4 with a home run and a double, helping Wakefield to a 12-1 win.Alicea was later the first base coach on Wakefield's Red Sox.

  • Wakefield has more starts against the Tampa Bay Rays than any other pitcher, with 36. He finishes his career with a 21-8 record against Tampa, with a 3.71 ERA.

  • Wakefield retires with a 105 ERA+. Exactly the same as Jack Morris.

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Friday, February 10, 2012

Neftali Feliz or Daniel Bard?

Yesterday at Baseball Nation, Jeff Sullivan came out with a pretty good response to a kind of silly article by Jon Heyman regarding the "cheapness" of the Boston Red Sox this offseason. Of course as most people know, the Red Sox sudden thrift has been largely overstated. Read Sullivan's article for the entire explanation, but the gist is that a lot of the players on the 2012 roster are holdovers who are getting paid more than they were last year.

However, there was one line of Sullivan's article that struck me as off:

Daniel Bard is supposed to take one of the rotation slots, and it's hard to see how he's a worse bet than Neftali Feliz.
Is Daniel Bard really as good as Neftali Feliz? And if so, does that make him as likely to succeed as a starter? My gut told me no (on both counts), but I figured it would be worth looking into. So, for the record, this is a response to a response. Considering the line (CBS -- Baseball Nation -- Me) the law of diminishing returns applies here. I'm going to guess several thousand people read Heyman's article, several hundred read Sullivan's response, and... well, if you're reading this, that means somebody read my response to the response. It's all good.

Ok, let's dive in:


YearTmWLERAGSVIPHRERHRBBSOERA+WHIPHR/9BB/9SO/9SO/BB
FelizTexas762.5515474162.298494611561641780.9470.63.19.12.93
BardBoston5132.881925197132716316762131541.0560.73.59.72.8

Bard and Feliz were called up within a couple months of each other in 2009, so their careers are nicely comparable. I considered taking W/L record and saves out of the stat line, because they are essentially white noise - Bard wasn't a closer, so of course he isn't going to get the same number of saves. Going straight to the other stats, Feliz has slight advantages is HR/9, BB/9 and ERA. However, considering that Arlington is a tougher place to pitch than Boston, Feliz actually has a pretty notable advantage in ERA+. Not that Bard is a slouch in any of these categories. His walk rate is high, but not exceptionally so, and  makes up for it with an extremely impressive K rate. Feliz has the slightly better numbers, but Sullivan is right - based on their careers so far, it's hard to say that Feliz has been so much better that you'd risk your Nolan Ryan rookie card on the fact he'll continue to be better.

Still, what stat tends to change the most when a pitcher moves from the rotation to the bullpen (and back again)? It's the strikeout rate. Since a pitcher knows he's only throwing for an inning or two, he tends to throw harder and hold back less than one who might have to pitch multiple innings. This isn't just conjecture, it's statistically verifiable. In 2011, American League relievers struck out 7.7 per nine innings, while starters struck out 6.6. In 2010, it was 7.4-6.6. In 2009, 7.6-6.5. Way back in 1993, it was 6.4-5.5. The trend holds. If we can expect a starting pitcher to strike out 10% fewer batters, that hurts Bard more, because his strikeout advantage will be slightly blunted, make the fact that he's done everything else slightly worse than Feliz even more notably. 

Next, the age factor. While Bard and Feliz were called up around the same time, Bard was allegedly born June 25, 1985, while Felix was allegedly born May 2, 1988. So Feliz is younger by two years, 10 months and 8 days. Feliz's 178 ERA+ through age 23, or Bard's 154, in a similar inning count, through age 26? At the very least, that should say something about Feliz's "upside," shouldn't it?

Then, there's the fatigue factor. Much was made about Feliz's slow start last season. Could it be that the 77 appearances in 2010 has tired him out? Possibly. It's also possible that it was a sample size issue. In the first half, through 34 innings pitched, Feliz had a 3.18 ERA, and even more distressingly, only 23 strikeouts to 18 walks. While that's ugly, it's important to remember that it was in only 34 innings. That's about 6 starts. Six! One bad month. In the second half, though? 28.1 innings, 31 strikeouts, only 13 walks, and a 2.22. Again, a small sample, but considering the rest of his career line, the first half last season is a bit of an outlier.If the problem was fatigue, he overcame it.

On the other hand, Bard's splits were in the other direction. In 26 appearances from May 27th to July 31st, he gave up zero runs. Zip. Zilch. At the end of July, Bard had compiled 51 innings pitched, giving up 29 hits, only 10 earned runs (a 1.76 ERA), 13 walks, and 49 strikeouts. On August 1, it all fell apart, giving up 3 runs in the 8th inning in a loss to Cleveland. From then on, Bard pitched 22 innings, and gave up 17 earned runs (a 6.95 ERA), walking 11, and striking out 25. The strikeout rate remained high, but everything else went in the wrong direction.

Of course, that's also a small sample size issue. Still, we're talking about which of the two is more likely to make the transition to starting pitcher. With that in mind, wouldn't you bet on the guy who pitched less well at the beginning of the year, rather than the guy who imploded after 51 innings? Particularly since this was the second year in a row where Bard's walk rate increased significantly in the second half. On the other hand, Bard had several more appearances in 2011 of over 1 inning, and he was extremely effective in them. Feliz had only one save where he retired more than three batters. In-game, Bard did not show any signs of fatigue that would lead you to believe that he necessarily couldn't handle a longer role.

So, we've gone through past performance, age and fatigue, and find that Feliz looks better than Bard. All this without getting into the most important distinction - Feliz was made a reliever because the Rangers needed a reliever, while Bard was made a reliever because he was so bad as a starter in 2007 in Single-A that the Red Sox never used him to start another game.

I don't have the starter/reliever splits, but take a look at the minor league numbers of Feliz: he made 53 starts from the time he signed with the Braves in 2006 until he was converted to the bullpen in 2009 (plus one more start on rehab in 2011 where he pitched only the first inning). In 2008, as a 20-year old, Feliz pitched 127.1 innings, with a 2.69 ERA, 153 strikeouts, 51 walks, and only three home runs allowed. This made him Baseball America's #10 prospect in all of baseball going into the 2009 season. The pitchers ahead of him were David Price, Tommy Hanson, Brett Anderson and Madison Bumgarner. He followed that with another dominant season in 2009 between Triple-A and the majors (not quite exhausting rookie status), and Baseball America made him their #9 prospect. He then won the 2010 Rookie of the Year award, as a closer.

Now take a look at Bard's minor league numbers. After being taken 28th overall in the 2006 draft out of North Carolina (where he was the #2 starter behind future Red Sox teammate Andrew Miller), the Red Sox challenged him with an aggressive placement in High A. He made five very poor starts, and they moved him down to the South Atlantic League, where things continued to go badly. How badly? In 22 starts across the two levels, he managed only 75 innings. He walked 78 and struck out just 47. His ERA ended up at 7.08. Fearful they'd drafted a bust, the Red Sox moved him into the bullpen in 2008, with outstanding results, and he's been in the pen ever since.

I don't think 22 bad starts in 2007 mean Bard will fail as a starter. In fact, I think the opposite - he's been a very good pitcher in the bullpen, and very good pitchers in the bullpen tend to be able to convert to starters or at least an acceptable level. Not always, but usually. Plus, Bard wants to start - the worst case scenario here is that he ends up going back to the bullpen. After working out as a starter, that should at least work to counteract those possible fatigue issues.

But as for the assertion that Bard is as likely to succeed as Feliz? Feliz is three years younger, has been a slightly better reliever in the majors, and was an extremely successful starter in the minors, which Bard was definitely not. Which one would you rather bet on?


Table made with TABLEIZER!

Wednesday, February 08, 2012