Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

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

    Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    So far this board has had plenty of second-guessing, the ever popular 20-20 hindsight, to complain about Bobby Valentine's handling of the pitching staff.   Even the very estimable fivekatz has indulged in that favorite pastime. 

    My view is that it is virtually impossible for the manager of this current version of the Sox to make consistently good decisions with respect to who should pitch when and for how long.  Why is that so?  Simple.  The starters basically can't be trusted past the 5th or 6th inning or for more than, say, 100 pitches, and the bullpen is a disaster area.   The result is the worst ERA in MLB--in fact, the Sox ERA is a full half run per game worst than the 29th ranked ERA.  

    Those realities do not prevent the second-guessers from plying their trade.  Thus last night almost everyone--and certainly fivekatz--jumped on Bobby V for leaving Buchholz in too long.  They did this even though Buchholz only threw 107 pitches, even though Buchholz's two best innings were the 4th and 5th, suggesting he was finally settling down, and even though it took three relievers to get two outs, from a GIDP, while also giving up three hits, a walk, and a HBP, in the 6th inning after Buchholz came out.  

    To be honest, I kind of agree Buchholz should have come out earlier, but that's because I think he has been stinkingly bad this year with an ERA of almost 9.00. 

    But I refuse to second guess a manager who is trying to make the best of a very bad bargain.  Besides, sometimes you're even wrong when you're right. The first reliever after Buchholz left was Atkinson, and he threw two quick strikes to Mauer, followed by a fast ball well above the strike zone, a sucker pitch that Mauer went for and hit solidly. It should have been a strikeout or popup, but instead fed the Twins rally.   



     
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    So far this board has had plenty of second-guessing, the ever popular 20-20 hindsight, to complain about Bobby Valentine's handling of the pitching staff.   Even the very estimable fivekatz has indulged in that favorite pastime.  My view is that it is virtually impossible for the manager of this current version of the Sox to make consistently good decisions with respect to who should pitch when and for how long.  Why is that so?  Simple.  The starters basically can't be trusted past the 5th or 6th inning or for more than, say, 100 pitches, and the bullpen is a disaster area.   The result is the worst ERA in MLB--in fact, the Sox ERA is a full half run per game worst than the 29th ranked ERA.   Those realities do not prevent the second-guessers from plying their trade.  Thus last night almost everyone--and certainly fivekatz--jumped on Bobby V for leaving Buchholz in too long.  They did this even though Buchholz only threw 107 pitches, even though Buchholz's two best innings were the 4th and 5th, suggesting he was finally settling down, and even though it took three relievers to get two outs, from a GIDP, while also giving up three hits, a walk, and a HBP, in the 6th inning after Buchholz came out.   To be honest, I kind of agree Buchholz should have come out earlier, but that's because I think he has been stinkingly bad this year with an ERA of almost 9.00.  But I refuse to second guess a manager who is trying to make the best of a very bad bargain.  Besides, sometimes you're even wrong when you're right. The first reliever after Buchholz left was Atkinson, and he threw two quick strikes to Mauer, followed by a fast ball well above the strike zone, a sucker pitch that Mauer went for and hit solidly. It should have been a strikeout or popup, but instead fed the Twins rally.     
    Posted by maxbialystock


    Not to mention it clanked off Atchinson's foot. The way Aviles was positioned, that could just as easily been a double-play ball.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    I still support Bobby V. and Pedroia's comments a week ago only re-inforced that support. I want my team back.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from august271985. Show august271985's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    So far this board has had plenty of second-guessing, the ever popular 20-20 hindsight, to complain about Bobby Valentine's handling of the pitching staff.   Even the very estimable fivekatz has indulged in that favorite pastime.  My view is that it is virtually impossible for the manager of this current version of the Sox to make consistently good decisions with respect to who should pitch when and for how long.  Why is that so?  Simple.  The starters basically can't be trusted past the 5th or 6th inning or for more than, say, 100 pitches, and the bullpen is a disaster area.   The result is the worst ERA in MLB--in fact, the Sox ERA is a full half run per game worst than the 29th ranked ERA.   Those realities do not prevent the second-guessers from plying their trade.  Thus last night almost everyone--and certainly fivekatz--jumped on Bobby V for leaving Buchholz in too long.  They did this even though Buchholz only threw 107 pitches, even though Buchholz's two best innings were the 4th and 5th, suggesting he was finally settling down, and even though it took three relievers to get two outs, from a GIDP, while also giving up three hits, a walk, and a HBP, in the 6th inning after Buchholz came out.   To be honest, I kind of agree Buchholz should have come out earlier, but that's because I think he has been stinkingly bad this year with an ERA of almost 9.00.  But I refuse to second guess a manager who is trying to make the best of a very bad bargain.  Besides, sometimes you're even wrong when you're right. The first reliever after Buchholz left was Atkinson, and he threw two quick strikes to Mauer, followed by a fast ball well above the strike zone, a sucker pitch that Mauer went for and hit solidly. It should have been a strikeout or popup, but instead fed the Twins rally.     
    Posted by maxbialystock

    It's called the Valentine Paradox: either you stretch out a mediocre starting pitcher or you call on a horrendous bullpen. The people who are second-guessing Valentine do not seem to be operating with the assumption that everyone in the bullpen sucks. To be fair to the second-guessers, I think they're assuming, reasonably, that a fresh Albers or Padilla can't be worse than a tired Buccholz or Bard. But as we've seen, that is not the case. 

    Would the results have been better had Buccholz been relieved two batters earlier? I don't know, but I think it's irrational to believe that the odds would have been prohibitively better. Valentine is in a no-win situation- literally. 



     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    I honestly don't understand why Thomas is on the roster. If they need another lefty in the pen, trade for one or bring Britton up, he can do no worse.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    To wit, there has been much criticism, and rightfully so, of the starting rotation that, collectively are 5 inning pitchers, hopefully six.  This is one glaring fault, in my estimation, of the Francona/Farrell era.  They generally babied these guys, got them used to the idea of six and done.   Now, Valentine is trying to stretch these guys out a little, get them into six/hopefully seven territory.  This requires them to test the waters of fatigue, mental and physical.  Yes, April counts.  But you have to do this kind of thing in April.  Yes, Valentine should have pulled Clay earlier than he did.  But, he is testing limits.  That has to be part of a manager's equation, and never seems to be part of the second-guess armchair manager's critique.  
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    I agree, I have noticed BV will have these guys go 7 if they are able.... I always got the impression with Tito that even if a pitcher was doing really well it was 6 and done.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    Space, Burrito -- I think you're focusing too much on innings and not pitch count. I do agree that there were times when I felt Francona could have pushed the starters another inning, but I think when they came out had to do more with pitch county and not inning.

    The pitch count the Sox starters had when they came out were not out of line with most starters. I think there were times when you look at the pitch count and think the starter could have gone a bit further, but Francona, like a lot of managers, liked to bring in relievers to start innings clean. If a pitcher had 104 pitches after six innings, the thinking was that it was unlikely that the pitcher would be out of the inning in 10-12 pitches, so let's just bring in the reliever now.

    If you look at Bobby V., while he might be trying to push starters a bit more -- maybe -- their pitch counts are in line with what you typically see nowadays:

    Beckett's last three starts -- 8 IP, 94 pitches; 7 IP, 110 piches; 6 IP, 100 pitches.

    Lester (excluding his 2.2 inning game): 7 IP, 107; 8 IP, 116; 7 IP, 112.

    Buchholz (last three): 7 IP, 104; 6 IP, 103; 5.1 IP, 107.

    Doubront: 5 IP, 101; 5 IP, 96; 6 IP, 99.

    Bard: 5 IP, 96; 6.2, 111.

    Bobby V. did push Bard too much in the last start., but overall, pitch counts are in line with what Francona got from them. The innings come simply by how effecient they are.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSox_Giants_Devils_Nicks. Show RedSox_Giants_Devils_Nicks's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    look at Bobby V's face when things were going to sh!t last night......he doesn't need any piling on....hes dealing with enough already 
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    Meh.  The 5-6 inning thing is pretty familiar territory for anyone who has ever managed in April ... starters are still building up at this point.  As far as the second guessing goes ... it's natural especially in Boston.  But let's face it, even with a lot of guys not performing, BV has made bone headed moves at almost every turn.  Yeah, BV could have pulled Clay earlier but I won't second guess that (for now).  He had a six run lead and BV wanted to save the pen some work.  Questionable after there are two men on and only one out but, okay, fine by me.  

    What happened after is really perplexing ... six relievers combining for 3.2 IP?  Way to crush that pen Bobby!!!  First, I really don't understand sending Atch out there for just one batter.  He should have stayed in to finish that inning if he was going to be out there at all (check his L/R splits).  So then Atch is pulled for Thomas ... THOMAS??!! He stinks and we all know it.  More importantly, he is about to be cut so we really don't need to waste innings trying to give him a chance especially once the game is getting close. Atch should have stayed in or maybe he could have sent Taz out there instead.  Taz is likely to be shipped back to AAA soon since he has an option.  He hasn't pitched much yet and he hasn't pitched in four days.  Wouldn't it be nice to get him some innings so we know what we have before he gets demoted to make room for the next returning DL'er?  What about Padilla?  One and done, really? He's the long guy, if you're going to trot him out shouldn't he be saving someone else's arm?  This was pretty awful BP management even if you don't question his decision on Clay.  And yes it was actually pretty questionable ... once there were two men on base there's no way Buch should have pitched to those next two batters.  The game was still pretty well in hand and once two were on you send someone out there who can go 2+ innings and who hasn't been completely horrible.  You keep it from getting close and plan on not using the entire BP.  Blaaaaaaaaaarg!!!  Okay, I feel better now.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    If there is one thing I would agree with it is that this bullpen is bound to make a manager look inconsistent in his thought process because they have had their share of scary moments and nobody there is really established at all at executing the roles the manager has to put them into. In that regard it is hard to second guess BV right now and at the same time it leaves him subject to massive second guessing.

    My first thought watching the game last night was that Valentine should be getting Buchholz out sooner but then I watched the bullpen once he went to them and concluded there was nothing that happened in that bullpen last night that would encourage BV to be quicker with his hook when the starters hit the 90 pitch count range.

    Managing the pitching staff, how long you stay with starters and how often you go the BP really is like walking a tightrope. Many of the years Francona was here he would take his starters on batter past the point of failure because his BP ran only 2 or 3 relievers deep. With Curt Schilling, Tito seemed to never accept just how much Schill's effectiveness dropped after 95 pitches. In contrast Joe Torre famously burnt out relievers wholesale in his later years in NY and his short stay in LA.

    I am not very good at remembering each and every in game decision that is subject to question. Bard as noted was a a really strange decision given the pitcher's professional history, the weather conditions, pitch count, in game score and who the opponent was. And even as I question it, what has the BP shown that would have made BV comfortable in going to a quick hook in that situation?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    The funny thing about BV and Thomas is that Thomas has been uniformly awful and he keeps sending him out there.  I get that the state of the pen isn't Bobby's fault ... he's doing the best he can with what he has, right?  But it's like he's thinking Thomas is the lefty-lefty guy, so I will keep using him in all those high leverage L/L situations EVEN THOUGH I KNOW HE STINKS.  Bobby: is the role all that matters to you ... stats and performance be damned?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    The funny thing about BV and Thomas is that Thomas has been uniformly awful and he keeps sending him out there.  I get that the state of the pen isn't Bobby's fault ... he's doing the best he can with what he has, right?  But it's like he's thinking Thomas is the lefty-lefty guy, so I will keep using him in all those high leverage L/L situations EVEN THOUGH I KNOW HE STINKS.  Bobby: is the role all that matters to you ... stats and performance be damned?
    Posted by 111SoxFan111
    In fairness the sample set is small and the only way sometimes to get a GM to cut bait on guy on the 25 man roster is to use him and have the sample set scream at the GM to do something.

    And while the sample set is tiny Thomas' WHIP v. LH is 1.33 (not great for reliever) and is RH that have killed the guy (WHIP 4.80). If the manager has to use him LH v LH seems to be the way to go.


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    I haven't looked at his MiLB stats only the SSS career MLB numbers ... they don't indicate he is any better vs. LHH than RHH (the opposite actually).  Even assuming he should be a L/L guy, sure, use him that way but put him in there in lower leverage situations ... that's all I am saying.  I guess my basic premise is when there is a lefty batter coming up and it's a high leverage situation, there are better people to pitch even though they aren't L/L specialists.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    While we like to trash our starters for their hight ERA (and justifiably so) let's also keep in mind that a portion of those ER's are attributable to the ineffective BP. 
    Last night is a good example.  Had Atchison gotten a DP on the ball that went off his foot (not an unreasonable observation) Buck would have escaped with three fewer ER's to his credit.

    My point here is that while Buck didn't set the world on fire last night he also didn't pitch as badly as his final line would indicate.  He, like all the starters, needs a little help with inherited runners. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    While we like to trash our starters for their hight ERA (and justifiably so) let's also keep in mind that a portion of those ER's are attributable to the ineffective BP.  Last night is a good example.  Had Atchison gotten a DP on the ball that went off his foot (not an unreasonable observation) Buck would have escaped with three fewer ER's to his credit. My point here is that while Buck didn't set the world on fire last night he also didn't pitch as badly as his final line would indicate.  He, like all the starters, needs a little help with inherited runners. 
    Posted by S5


    This is why managers like to bring in relievers -- especially for starters -- to start the inning clean. It's less pressure on the reliever.

    Considering Buchholz was strong in the fifth and his pitch count wasn't out of hand, I'm really not second-guessing about bringing him back for the sixth. However, in his case, when you consider how he's done this year and the fact that he was battling most of the game, I wouldn't have complained if Bobby V. went to the bullpen to start the sixth. I would have given Buch more of a start he could have felt good about and build on.


     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    S5 - I like Buch, I think he should be given ample opportunity to figure things out and I think he will get it back on track.  But let's face it, he didn't have it last night.  He put 13 on-base while recording 16 outs.  He left with the bases loaded and only one out ... a situation in which it is unrealistic to expect the pen to not give up a run.  So yes, it would have been great if they saved him.  However, if Atch had gotten that double play, the line wouldn't have shown how bad Buch actually was.  
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    In Response to Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V : Not to mention it clanked off Atchinson's foot. The way Aviles was positioned, that could just as easily been a double-play ball.
    Posted by harv53
    Another example of the good positioning the Sox have shown all year. Too bad about the clank.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    In Response to Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V : In fairness the sample set is small and the only way sometimes to get a GM to cut bait on guy on the 25 man roster is to use him and have the sample set scream at the GM to do something. And while the sample set is tiny Thomas' WHIP v. LH is 1.33 (not great for reliever) and is RH that have killed the guy (WHIP 4.80). If the manager has to use him LH v LH seems to be the way to go.
    Posted by fivekatz

     
    I agree with everything you said in this assessment.  The guy stinks, but if you gotta use him, use him against lefties.  One assumes that puts him in the best position to succeed.  I expect to see him gone later today, when Hill is activated.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V

    In Response to Re: Something new--let's try "first-guessing" Bobby V:
    S5 - I like Buch, I think he should be given ample opportunity to figure things out and I think he will get it back on track.  But let's face it, he didn't have it last night.  He put 13 on-base while recording 16 outs.  He left with the bases loaded and only one out ... a situation in which it is unrealistic to expect the pen to not give up a run.  So yes, it would have been great if they saved him.  However, if Atch had gotten that double play, the line wouldn't have shown how bad Buch actually was.  
    Posted by 111SoxFan111


    And nobody has pointed out on this thread that the 13 base runners in 6 innings is against a team that looked more like a AAA squad's lineup than a MLB lineup.  Buchholz is one more bad start away from demotion, IMO.  If Cook has another good start, I would expect Cook to take Buchholz's spot in the rotation, at least for a start or two.  Maybe Buch can work his issues out in the pen.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share