PDA

View Full Version : The Bullpen


The Thomenator
12-15-2007, 01:00 PM
The only locks I see are Jenks, Thronton and Linebrink. Among the options of Broadway, McDougal, Wasserman, Logan, Day (good winter currently) and trade/FA options, how do you guys see the rest of the 'pen panning out? I'd prefer Broadway in the long relief role with Wasserman in the mix as well. He's the only one (other than Jenks) that didn't crap his pants last year. The remaining 6th spot is wide open in my opnion. Otsuka would work well, with hopes Dr. Pain can get him in gear. I understand that'd leave us with only 1 lefty, but I could care less about matchups. I want guys that can pitch the ball over the plate.

BainesHOF
12-15-2007, 01:04 PM
Wasserman will be in our pen.

JRIG
12-15-2007, 01:07 PM
Wasserman will be in our pen.

Barring a trade MacDougal will be there too. He's out of options and is making $2 million this year. I'm looking for a bounce-back year from him. I think (no proof at all) he was hurt virtually all of last season. Something didn't seem right with his delivery. Of course, with his violent motion, injury always is a concern with him.

jabrch
12-15-2007, 01:12 PM
Barring a trade MacDougal will be there too. He's out of options and is making $2 million this year. I'm looking for a bounce-back year from him. I think (no proof at all) he was hurt virtually all of last season. Something didn't seem right with his delivery. Of course, with his violent motion, injury always is a concern with him.

I don't see the pen being as bad as it was last year. Between Linebrink being added, Wasserman being there the entire year, and the fact that McDougal can't really be worse (he'd be less worse if he wasn't here at all) I don't see any way it can be as bad as it was in the second half.

There's no way Dewon Day should be here next year. I'm not sure what happens with Massett, Logan, Sisco, Aardsma, etc... but I'm looking forward to a better pen in 2008 than in 2007. I don't see how it could be any worse.

sox1970
12-15-2007, 01:17 PM
Barring trades, I think the pen is set with Logan, Thornton, Wassermann, MacDougal (hopefully healthy), Linebrink, and Jenks. If they go with seven, I'd like to see Broadway or Egbert get the job.

drewcifer
12-15-2007, 01:19 PM
Barring trades, I think the pen is set with Logan, Thornton, Wassermann, MacDougal (hopefully healthy), Linebrink, and Jenks. If they go with seven, I'd like to see Broadway or Egbert get the job.

I hate McDougal. I'd be thrilled to never see him in a Sox uni again.

Broadway didn't get much of a look last year, but 14Ks in 10IP looked promising.

The Thomenator
12-15-2007, 01:23 PM
I hate McDougal. I'd be thrilled to never see him in a Sox uni again.

Broadway didn't get much of a look last year, but 14Ks in 10IP looked promising.

I also am not looking forward to McDougal in the pen as well. He is untradeable at this point and you don't just cut the guy because he's making some good money. I suppose I have to cross my fingers with him.....as well as Owens, Contreras, Danks, Floyd, and Richar. That's 6 people right there. If half of them contribute, we will be at least marginally successful. In this division it'll get 85 wins tops.

btrain929
12-15-2007, 02:03 PM
Jenks (closer)
Linebrink (RH set-up man)
Thornton (LH set-up man/7th inning guy)
Wasserman (ROOGY)
Logan (LOOGY)

Macdougal (he will either start the season in 6th inning situations or garbage time to prove he has his control back and can be effective, or he'll be traded this offseason).

Maybe a Broadway, Russell, or Day. I'd love one more veteran fresh body in there (by packaging Uribe/Macdougal/BA, etc). But I think our first 5 should be avg to above avg, and if Macdougal can go back to '06 form, it will definitely be above average.

Corlose 15
12-15-2007, 02:17 PM
Barring a trade MacDougal will be there too. He's out of options and is making $2 million this year. I'm looking for a bounce-back year from him. I think (no proof at all) he was hurt virtually all of last season. Something didn't seem right with his delivery. Of course, with his violent motion, injury always is a concern with him.

He had to have been. There is not way MacDougal is as bad as he pitched last year. I didn't think he'd be as good as he was in 06 but he dropped off the face of the earth.

Chez
12-15-2007, 02:22 PM
I think Massett (out of options) will be on the Opening Day roster. Otherwise, the McCarthy deal doesn't look as good.

chisoxmike
12-15-2007, 02:33 PM
I think Massett (out of options) will be on the Opening Day roster. Otherwise, the McCarthy deal doesn't look as good.

We have John Danks.

champagne030
12-15-2007, 02:35 PM
Barring trades, I think the pen is set with Logan, Thornton, Wassermann, MacDougal (hopefully healthy), Linebrink, and Jenks. If they go with seven, I'd like to see Broadway or Egbert get the job.

So, Masset and Aardsma are released? I guess those trades last season aren't looking so good if that happens.......

Edit: Didn't see your post Chez, yep you're right.

btrain929
12-15-2007, 02:47 PM
So, Masset and Aardsma are released? I guess those trades last season aren't looking so good if that happens.......

Edit: Didn't see your post Chez, yep you're right.

They don't look that bad.

Aardsma hasn't done anything, either has Cotts. We also got Vasquez out of it who is climbing the ladder in our system showing some promise. Advantage = us.

Masset has had bright spots, but McCarthy didn't shine either. Danks and his promising 1st half give us the edge in that trade too. Best case scenario is that Masset clears waivers and he can continue to work and progress in AAA. I think he'd be better out of the pen, not as a starter. He just needs to attack hitters more and stop nitpicking the corners.

We can solve this problem of guys with no options left by pulling off a trade or 2 in the next few months by packaging some of these arms together to get some more quality positional prospects in our system. We're not going to get the Maybins and Tulowitski's of the world, but we might be able to get guys comparable to Richar and Sweeney or even Quentin in our system. There should be mild-moderate interest in guys like Masset, Aardsma, Macdougal, Haeger, Day. We could even package Anderson and Sweeney with them for the right price. I find it hard to believe we can't get any solid SS/C/OF'ers/low level arms for those guys. Those types of moves won't hurt us in '08, but will definitely help us for the future.

SoxGirl4Life
12-15-2007, 02:48 PM
I thought Wasserman was pretty good last year.

At least I didn't get that queasy feeling when he was out there.

champagne030
12-15-2007, 02:56 PM
They don't look that bad.

Aardsma hasn't done anything, either has Cotts. We also got Vasquez out of it who is climbing the ladder in our system showing some promise. Advantage = us.

Masset has had bright spots, but McCarthy didn't shine either. Danks and his promising 1st half give us the edge in that trade too. Best case scenario is that Masset clears waivers and he can continue to work and progress in AAA. I think he'd be better out of the pen, not as a starter. He just needs to attack hitters more and stop nitpicking the corners.

We can solve this problem of guys with no options left by pulling off a trade or 2 in the next few months by packaging some of these arms together to get some more quality positional prospects in our system. We're not going to get the Maybins and Tulowitski's of the world, but we might be able to get guys comparable to Richar and Sweeney or even Quentin in our system. There should be mild-moderate interest in guys like Masset, Aardsma, Macdougal, Haeger, Day. We could even package Anderson and Sweeney with them for the right price. I find it hard to believe we can't get any solid SS/C/OF'ers/low level arms for those guys. Those types of moves won't hurt us in '08, but will definitely help us for the future.

Unless Kenny trades Aardsma and Masset (or they do a complete 180 over last season) for something good, we didn't win those trades at this point. McCarthy, injuries and all, had a better year than Danks and the Flubs still have Cotts and we have a guy who can't throw strikes in the minors.

santo=dorf
12-15-2007, 03:27 PM
We have John Danks.
...who put up worse numbers than McCarthy last year.

To the original poster, you say Thornton is a lock. Should I assume you meant that in a good way, or he's in because he's left handed?

chisoxmike
12-15-2007, 03:54 PM
...who put up worse numbers than McCarthy last year.

I think Danks will be fine. Not a stud, but he'll be solid. Last year was his first year and he got no support from his team. He should have had 4-5 more wins last year.

Danks isn't a problem. Floyd and Contreras on the other hand...

santo=dorf
12-15-2007, 04:14 PM
I think Danks will be fine. Not a stud, but he'll be solid. Last year was his first year and he got no support from his team. He should have had 4-5 more wins last year.
Oh please. He got screwed in a couple of games early on, but his team paid him back.

He had two consecutive cheap wins (getting a win by not posting a quality start) after a tough no decision, and that was after yet another cheap win. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/7808/gamelog;_ylt=AneGOcpBLME8MWRXWLEMWCiFCLcF
Look at June 25th-July 16th

JRIG
12-15-2007, 04:28 PM
Oh please. He got screwed in a couple of games early on, but his team paid him back.

He had two consecutive cheap wins (getting a win by not posting a quality start) after a tough no decision, and that was after yet another cheap win. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/7808/gamelog;_ylt=AneGOcpBLME8MWRXWLEMWCiFCLcF
Look at June 25th-July 16th

And, of course, nothing could be sillier than trying to judge a pitcher by the number of "wins" he recorded.

Every time Danks has jumped to a new level in the minors, it's taken him about a season to figure things out. His walk rate was a bit high last year, but I expect him to take another step forward. An ERA in the 4.70-4.90 range would be OK by me.

KyWhiSoxFan
12-15-2007, 04:36 PM
Oh please. He got screwed in a couple of games early on, but his team paid him back.

He had two consecutive cheap wins (getting a win by not posting a quality start) after a tough no decision, and that was after yet another cheap win. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/7808/gamelog;_ylt=AneGOcpBLME8MWRXWLEMWCiFCLcF
Look at June 25th-July 16th

The Sox also only scored more than one run in 5 of his last 7 starts.

You can pick apart any one part of a season--early, middle, or late--but the point is that Danks is only 22 and should have been in the minors last year, but he was thrown into the breach and did reasonably well. He could have done better and he could have been worse. 2007 was a good learning experience for him. He should be--he better be--better in 2008 and beyond.

I'll cut him some slack in 2007.

Save McCuddy's
12-15-2007, 04:46 PM
...who put up worse numbers than McCarthy last year.

To the original poster, you say Thornton is a lock. Should I assume you meant that in a good way, or he's in because he's left handed?

Beg to differ. Neither pitcher's numbers can be said to be good, but if I had to choose which of these lines I had to put in my '07 rotation, it wouldn't be a tough choice at all:

W L IP BB K WHIP ERA
5 10 101.7 48 59 1.56 4.87
6 13 139 54 109 1.54 4.74

Nearly double the k's with fewer walks per 9 is a significantly better season despite .87 higher ERA. ERA is somewhat dependent upon your defense, but walks and strikeouts tell the story.

Add to this the fact that one guy is two years younger pitching in his first major league action and a lefty -- not close. We won that trade going away whether Masset ever pitches again or not.

JB98
12-15-2007, 05:14 PM
My best guess:

Jenks
Linebrink
Thornton
Wassermann
Logan
MacDougal
Masset

They'll carry 12 pitchers, especially since Wassermann and Logan are both specialists. That's just how Ozzie manages the bullpen. MacDougal, unless he is dealt, will be on the big-league roster. He's out of options and making a lot of money.

They need a long guy, and I would make Masset the favorite for that role. Again, he's out of options. I'd prefer to keep Broadway starting in Charlotte, since he would be the first in line to take a spot in the rotation in the event of an injury. Keep him in the mode of having a starter's mentality.

The Thomenator
12-15-2007, 05:16 PM
...who put up worse numbers than McCarthy last year.

To the original poster, you say Thornton is a lock. Should I assume you meant that in a good way, or he's in because he's left handed?

At this point in time, Thornton is a lock by default, being the best lefty we have.

santo=dorf
12-15-2007, 05:17 PM
Beg to differ. Neither pitcher's numbers can be said to be good, but if I had to choose which of these lines I had to put in my '07 rotation, it wouldn't be a tough choice at all:

W L IP BB K WHIP ERA
5 10 101.7 48 59 1.56 4.87
6 13 139 54 109 1.54 4.74

Nearly double the k's with fewer walks per 9 is a significantly better season despite .87 higher ERA. ERA is somewhat dependent upon your defense, but walks and strikeouts tell the story.

Add to this the fact that one guy is two years younger pitching in his first major league action and a lefty -- not close. We won that trade going away whether Masset ever pitches again or not.
What is that 4.74 number? His ERA was 5.50, he gave up 28 homers in 139 innings which is funny because the Sox said McCarthy was too much of a risk of giving up home runs. (9 home runs in 101.2 innings.)

The Rangers still have McCarthy for awhile just like the Sox have with Danks, but Danks has more room and time for growing.

I'm not saying McCarthy is better than Danks and the Sox made a mistake, I think it is much too early to make a claim that we "won" the trade because McCarthy could still put up better seasons than Danks over the next three years.

Tragg
12-15-2007, 05:34 PM
Who are the non-boone logan LHRP possibilities? Thanks

The Thomenator
12-15-2007, 05:40 PM
Who are the non-boone logan LHRP possibilities? Thanks

The Sox could go the Johan Santana route and go with Gio Gonzalez in the bullpen, but that has never been their plan of action with any of their stud prospects. The Boonemiester will turn 24 in August. If he can get his stuff over the plate, we have plenty of years with a great lefty option out of the pen in our future. How soon that we will see it remains to be seen.

JB98
12-15-2007, 05:52 PM
The Sox could go the Johan Santana route and go with Gio Gonzalez in the bullpen, but that has never been their plan of action with any of their stud prospects. The Boonemiester will turn 24 in August. If he can get his stuff over the plate, we have plenty of years with a great lefty option out of the pen in our future. How soon that we will see it remains to be seen.

What about Carlos Vasquez? Logan gets the first shot as the second lefty out of the pen behind Thornton, but if he falters, I wonder if Vasquez would be ahead of Gonzalez. I think Gio will eventually be a middle-of-the-rotation starter for the Sox. It might be best to keep him in the minors on that track.

chisoxfanatic
12-15-2007, 05:54 PM
Wasserman looked pretty good sometimes during last season, so I hope he's still there. Massett will be there, and I hope they deal Aardsma and MacDougal (get draft picks or ANYTHING for them). I'm thinking that, if KW isn't able to sign or trade for anyone, Broadway might make the #5 slot in the pitching rotation. I know I'd rather see Broadway than the 80-year-old Contreras.

Optipessimism
12-16-2007, 02:44 PM
Wasserman looked pretty good sometimes during last season, so I hope he's still there. Massett will be there, and I hope they deal Aardsma and MacDougal (get draft picks or ANYTHING for them). I'm thinking that, if KW isn't able to sign or trade for anyone, Broadway might make the #5 slot in the pitching rotation. I know I'd rather see Broadway than the 80-year-old Contreras.

The only time I saw Wassermann look really bad last year was when Ozzie had one of his brain farts and left him in against like 3 lefties or something in a row. He got knocked around pretty bad, which is something that will always happen to him in that situation.

Also, and this in unrelated to your post, but can we please stop using this LOOGY/ROOGY crap? Bullpens have evolved and there are specific roles in them that need to be filled. Good lefty and righty specialists are important because they are the guys you bring in to face usually one batter in one of, if not the most critical situation of the game. You can't just stick some garbage in there and expect to get results because a guy is left handed or right handed. It's funny how people overrate closers when much of the time they are coming in for one inning with a two run lead and no one on base, while the specialists get crapped on even though those are the guys who are usually coming in to the game with RISP.

Frater Perdurabo
12-16-2007, 04:00 PM
How about allowing a reliever to remain in the game as long as he's continuing to get hitters out, or as long as he's doing what he needs to do to get hitters out (for example, if a pitcher induces what should be an easy double play grounder, but an infielder botches it and allows the runners to be safe, the pitcher should not be yanked)?

I'm sick of pulling an effective reliever just to go to a guy that supposedly has a "favorable matchup" based solely on the hand with which he pitches.

Save McCuddy's
12-16-2007, 08:10 PM
What is that 4.74 number? His ERA was 5.50, he gave up 28 homers in 139 innings which is funny because the Sox said McCarthy was too much of a risk of giving up home runs. (9 home runs in 101.2 innings.)

The Rangers still have McCarthy for awhile just like the Sox have with Danks, but Danks has more room and time for growing.

I'm not saying McCarthy is better than Danks and the Sox made a mistake, I think it is much too early to make a claim that we "won" the trade because McCarthy could still put up better seasons than Danks over the next three years.


As you can determine if you read the post (I concede that Danks' ERA was .87 runs higher than McCarthy's) that I mistyped the 4.74.

What you were saying in your previous post was that the Rangers have McCarthy who put up better numbers than Danks. I disagree with that emphatically. ERA is the not close to being the most important indicator of a pitcher's effectiveness. Strikeout ratios and WHIP are much more important. The argument is silly because neither pitcher had a statistically impressive year, but I would hate to be the team bringing back the guy with 58 k's and 49 bb's in 101 ip.

Optipessimism
12-16-2007, 09:44 PM
As you can determine if you read the post (I concede that Danks' ERA was .87 runs higher than McCarthy's) that I mistyped the 4.74.

What you were saying in your previous post was that the Rangers have McCarthy who put up better numbers than Danks. I disagree with that emphatically. ERA is the not close to being the most important indicator of a pitcher's effectiveness. Strikeout ratios and WHIP are much more important. The argument is silly because neither pitcher had a statistically impressive year, but I would hate to be the team bringing back the guy with 58 k's and 49 bb's in 101 ip.

Danks did post much better BB and K numbers but his HR rate was alarming while McCarthy cut his down considerably from where it was in 2006. The WHIPs were nearly identical.

Still, I like Danks. He's a battler and he just flat out looks like a pitcher. He has that self-depreciating competitive fire too. I don't know if I've ever seen a rookie mouth the F word at himself that many times during a season. He looks like he's going to be a hard worker, and he's fun to watch so long as he isn't giving up bombs.

Man Soo Lee
12-17-2007, 12:50 AM
I'm sick of pulling an effective reliever just to go to a guy that supposedly has a "favorable matchup" based solely on the hand with which he pitches.

Boone Logan's career splits:
vs. LHB .256/.346/.333/.679
vs. RHB .325/.393/.529/.922

At least in close games, Logan was rarely used against quality right-handed hitters. Still, righties hit him like all-stars and lefties like Jerry Owens. If he's in your bullpen, why wouldn't you try to limit his use to favorable matchups?

Wasserman faced so few lefties (and righties for that matter) that the stats don't mean much, but check out these splits:

vs. RHB in 75 PA .174/.227/.203/.430
vs. LHB in 19 PA .533/.632/.733/1.365

It would be nice to have quality relievers that you can trust to face anyone. Ozzie said as much last spring. When it turns out you only have one good reliever on your roster, what else can you do but try to play the matchups?

Fantosme
12-17-2007, 12:50 AM
What about Oneil Perez? He is dominating in the Winter League (0.55 ERA), and last year in AA he had a 2.10 ERA with 89 K's and 20 BB.

Frater Perdurabo
12-17-2007, 06:10 AM
Boone Logan's career splits:
vs. LHB .256/.346/.333/.679
vs. RHB .325/.393/.529/.922

At least in close games, Logan was rarely used against quality right-handed hitters. Still, righties hit him like all-stars and lefties like Jerry Owens. If he's in your bullpen, why wouldn't you try to limit his use to favorable matchups?

Wasserman faced so few lefties (and righties for that matter) that the stats don't mean much, but check out these splits:

vs. RHB in 75 PA .174/.227/.203/.430
vs. LHB in 19 PA .533/.632/.733/1.365

It would be nice to have quality relievers that you can trust to face anyone. Ozzie said as much last spring. When it turns out you only have one good reliever on your roster, what else can you do but try to play the matchups?

Well, obviously in those cases you play the percentages. Logan clearly is a LOOGY and Wasserman clearly is a ROOGY.

But Matt Thornton's three-year splits show that he gets righties (.749 OPS) and lefties (.757 OPS) out at nearly the same rates. In fact, in 2007 he was better against righties (.771 OPS) than lefties (.800 OPS). Yet Ozzie stubbornly played the same "matchup game" with Thornton, too. Why? I'm not one for making decisions based solely on stats, but in this case I'm not sure Ozzie ever looked at stat sheets (same thing with Erstad).