Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from -EdithBunker-. Show -EdithBunker-'s posts

    Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    TORONTO — Clay Buchholz has started throwing again and the hope is that he can return to the Red Sox close to the end of the season. His back feels good, with the caveat that he has yet to throw off the mound.

    Let's assume for a second that Buchholz suffers no setbacks and by the start of the postseason has built up sufficient arm strength to throw 50 or so pitches in a game.

    Here's my crazy idea: Start him.

    Who would you rather see in Game 4, Clay Buchholz for 3+ innings followed by Alfredo Aceves for three innings or John Lackey?

    Buchholz has virtually no experience out of the bullpen. He has pitched in relief twice in the majors, the last time in 2008, and twice in the minors. Yesterday, when asked about the idea of pitching in relief, Buchholz made a face. His answer was a meandering sentence that loosely translated to, "Well, if I really, really have to, I guess so. But I'd hate every second of it."

    It seems a little crazy to thrust a guy coming off an injury into an unfamiliar role. So before the series, get Buchholz on his five-day routine, set him up for Game 4 and tell him to go as long as he can. Then unleash Loony Tunes Aceves and his sweaty hat to get the ball to Daniel Bard.

    That seems a lot more productive than putting Buchholz in the bullpen and telling him wait for the phone to ring.

    Starters are finicky dudes. Buchholz likes walking around on his start days with his Beats by Dr. Dre headphones on and his game pants rolled up around his knees. He tunes out the world and gets ready in his way. You can't do that in the bullpen.

    The Red Sox are 56-18 when they score first this season. The chances of scoring first are a lot better with Buchholz on the mound than Lackey, who has a 5.62 ERA in the first inning. Buchholz has a 3.21. He's also a guy who pitches to contact and gets a lot of groundballs. The odds of him going 3+ innings on a limited pitch count aren't too bad.

    The real beauty of this plan is if it works in the first series, Buchholz could go a little deeper in his next game. If he throws an inning in relief, nothing much changes.

    The one downside is that it takes Aceves out of the bullpen mix for other games. But come the postseason, with the days off, you can lean on Bard and Jonathan Papelbon for 7-9 outs instead of six. I'm also assuming that Matt Albers/Franklin Morales/somebody else can get you an out or two.
    So there you have it, The Buchholz Plan.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    Peter is asking for feedback on his column via the dingbat Edith.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    Yup.

    I was thinking this all along. If you put this in spring training terms, he should be halfway or 3/4 through spring training by the time of the playoffs start, right around the time pitchers are starting to be extended. If it's the latter part, he might be able to go as much as five innings (it is the playoffs) if he's pitchign well.

    I don't think he should automatically be written off as a possible start. Although they hven't said it publicly, the Sox are are probably keeping all options on the table.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?:
    [QUOTE]Yup. I was thinking this all along. If you put this in spring training terms, he should be halfway or 3/4 through spring training by the time of the playoffs start, right around the time pitchers are starting to be extended. If it's the latter part, he might be able to go as much as five innings (it is the playoffs) if he's pitchign well. I don't think he should automatically be written off as a possible start. Although they hven't said it publicly, the Sox are are probably keeping all options on the table.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    I think he's more in the January mode...the biggest obstacle for Clay is that the minor leagues are wrapping up and he's still at least a week or more away from throwing bullpens...let alone pitching to live hitters. My guess is that if he pitches in the last series of the season there's a chance he might make the post season roster...
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    I like the plan and if Buchholz isn't ready to pitch I'd use Wake+Aceves.  Lackey isn't an option for the playoffs IMO ... I don't care how many digits are on his contract.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from aquachuck. Show aquachuck's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?:
    [QUOTE]I like the plan and if Buchholz isn't ready to pitch I'd use Wake+Aceves.  Lackey isn't an option for the playoffs IMO ... I don't care how many digits are on his contract.
    Posted by 111SoxFan111[/QUOTE]

    The thought of Wake pitching in the playoffs isn't very comforting to me, the minute someone gets on 1st, they'll be at 3rd before you blink twice.  As much as it pains me to say it, I'd almost rather see Lack than Wake in a playoff start. 






     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    I think Abraham makes a good case for starting Buchholz in the playoffs--actually, in game 4 of the playoffs.  His point is that Buchholz is better than Lackey and that starting and pitching only 3 innings is better than spot relieving. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    Fine in theory but what is Beckett or Lester tank early and Aceves has to be used for 3+ innings in one of those games?
    If Buchholz can't go 7+ (albeit we could barely get 5 out of him before), he either comes out of the pen or stays home.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from phxvlsoxfan. Show phxvlsoxfan's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    If Clay proves he's healthy before the post season it could be a good strategy.  I would not want a pivotal game 4 to be his first live game action post injury.  Too many things could go wrong with location in and out of the zone, and you can get into a 3 or 4 run hole real quick.

    If you are willing to use Aceves in relief for 3+ innings in game 4 after Buch, what about just starting him?  Right now I would have more faith in him for 5 innings than Bedard, Wake or Miller.  Wake could be the emergency reliever in this scenario.  He may be more effective out of the pen after the other team is already geared to fastballs.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    anyone but Wakefield
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    Not sure about this. Thinking out loud here.

    What are his mechanics like now that he has mentally and physically compensated for his back issues?

    What if he starts and gets pounded right out of the gate?

    That would mess with his head.

    But if we turn to him and say, Buch, we needs youse.

    What the heck. I say yes.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    If he is up to it , I absolutely have him start a game and go as long as he can. Who knows , maybe he can go five or six. What is there to lose?  If a long reliever is needed and Aceves is not available , you simply use the guy who would have started if Clay did not.  There is no point in starting a pitcher with an ERA of 5.00 or 6.00 if a better option is available.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    It's Starter by commitee for one game. Yeah, lets try it. Our options are dwindling fast.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from WC5842. Show WC5842's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    Gammons was on WFAN yesterday and said point blank, Bucholtz will not be back this year.  If Gammons says it, then that is what is going on. Any other information that is fed out to the "other guys" in the media is merely window dressing to keep the writers feeling satisfied.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from stormcrow7878. Show stormcrow7878's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    The plan in theory is a good one, the only problem is .... the BoSox are going to be a contender for the forseeable future, do you want to risk rushing Clay back for this year, at the expense of HIS future. Starting pitching is at a premium in MLB, especially the AL East, and the Sox are going to need Clay for the next 5 yers, not just this one. Rushing him back could cause him to have a setback, or worse a major negative impact on his career as a whole. Just something to think about.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    "Alibiike: Fine in theory but what is Beckett or Lester tank early and Aceves has to be used for 3+ innings in one of those games?"

    IDK, I think if they need long relief in a Beckett or Lester start we're in enough trouble that the plus value of Aceves in long relief is probably outweighed by his plus value in contributing to a hopeful QS (i.e., value over Lackey).  In other words, if the Beckett/Lester meltdown were to happen, I think I'd rather see Lackey coming out of the pen and Aceves as a pseudo-starter in game 4.  IDK, maybe we should just hold some 3-man combination of Buch, Lackey, Wake, Miller and Aceves in reserve as long relievers / Game 4 by committee.  If we don't need long relief in the first three games, we could potentially use all three to pitch a full game 4.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from wideright. Show wideright's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Peter Abraham's 'The Buchholz Plan'?

    Sure, Lackey has to go to the bullpen and Aceves start. Lackey has been worse than AJ Burnett and Wakefield not much better. Lets hope Miller and or Weiland can give something.
    Starting pitching is killing us right now

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share