Who will be the #5 Starter this year?

by Dailyrotopickups on Dec 11, 2008 2:34 PM EST Comment 33 comments

I wrote up an post who I think will be the fifth starter. What does everyone think?

http://www.rotosavants.com/2008/12/who-is-red-sox-5-starter.html

I use #5 only in name as I think several of these options could be higher choices in the rotation.

I don't believe any of the major free agents will be signed, but they are possibilities. Th emost likely in my opinion is Clay Buchholz, but Michael Bowden will be a Major Leaguer very soon.

Poll

Who Will be the 5th Starter?

Clay Buchholz

18 votes

Justin Masterson

6 votes

Michael Bowden

5 votes

Derek Lowe

9 votes

AJ Burnett

1 votes

Another Option

11 votes

50 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 33 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

As a technicality,

I would say that a better question would be “who will be #4,” as I consider Wake our number 5. That’s not really important though.

I think come opening day, Masterson will be in the pen, Buchholz and Bowden will be in the minors, Burnett will be a Yankee, and Lowe will be somewhere else (Atlanta? Philly?)

The currently vacated spot in the rotation could very likely be filled by a short-term contract with another starter on the market; somebody like Ben Sheets, Brad Penny, or John Smoltz. These guys could be injury risks, but we only need them as a bridge until our younger guys are ready.

by Schulz on Dec 11, 2008 2:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

#s 1-5 in the regular season depend on IP

Assuming everyone in the rotation is healthy, your #1 should make the most starts and, thus, would pitch the most innings. Wake is likely to throw more innings than Buchholz, Bowden, or Masterson (if he starts). Buchholz may be able to throw 180+ IP. But Masterson and Bowden would be capped. If the Sox sign a veteran, Wake may be the #5. Otherwise, he’s a #4 … until the playoffs.

The rotation will likely look like this:

Beckett
Lester
Dice-K
Wake
Young pitcher or rehabbing veteran (i.e. Penny)

Beckett
Lester
Dice-K
Established veteran
Wake

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Dec 11, 2008 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

When I assign numerical positions for starters

I usually do it how they would appear in the post-season.

is our ace. #2 & #3 each get two games in a seven game series, #4 gets one, #5 gets zero.

by Schulz on Dec 11, 2008 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep, that's all that matters

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Dec 11, 2008 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

That is why I said I use #5 only in name…they wouldn’t be the #5.

I don’t like Penny, but the other two as injury signings I would be all for to bridge the gap.

Visit my site - http://www.rotosavants.com

by Dailyrotopickups on Dec 11, 2008 2:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

No love for Penny?

Last year was rough, but I’d give him a shot.

by Schulz on Dec 11, 2008 2:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Last year was rough for Penny

But it was also in the NL West… I say Ben Sheets! Both are high risk with potentially high reward. But Sheets has a higher ceiling.

by A2004LoveAffair on Dec 11, 2008 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Ben Sheet is my guy. If we sign a FA starter, it should be him.

by Schulz on Dec 11, 2008 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I like Sheets alot too,

but he would be a lot more expensive than Penny. I’m in the Smoltz camp. Get him for one year and continue to evaluate Bowden/Buch in the minors.

by BTLove on Dec 11, 2008 9:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Triumph of hope over experience

(1) Beckett; (2) Lester; (3) Matsuzaka; (4) Buchholz (the not-suck version); and (5) Wakefield (also the not-suck version)

Rock me, sexy Jesus...

by nuthinboutnuthin on Dec 11, 2008 3:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Why the hate for Wake

The guy is a tank. He eats up innings (181 last year). Small contract ($4m). Above average pitching (ERA+ 112). The guy has pitched above average for 8 years straight and has had 1 season in the past 5 years that he has pitched less then 180 innings.

by drabidea on Dec 11, 2008 3:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Dec 11, 2008 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Whoops!

No hate for Wake. I just said pretty much what you said in a much-belated response in the Tex post. I was thinking about 2006 – which is a dark time in Wakestory, but an aberration admittedly. I’m much more worried about Buchholz truth be told.

It’s probably also cognitive bias stemming from personal memory of those crap-Wake games where he stalls out in the third inning and starts giving up hits and walks. So painful I end up thinking there are more of them than there actually are.

Rock me, sexy Jesus...

by nuthinboutnuthin on Dec 11, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wake Blow ups

You had me intrigued as to how many times Wake blew up last year. I counted about 5, depending on your definition of blowing up. Here is a recap:

May 11th @ Min 2.2 innings 6 runs
May 23rd @ Oak 5 innings 8 runs
Jul 26th NYY 5.1 innings 6 runs
Sep 6 @ Tex 1.2 innings 7 runs
Sep 17 @ TBR 2.1 innings 6 runs

I was also curious as to how many productive starts he had last season. I define this as 6+ innings with 2 runs or less or 7+ innings with 3 runs or less. (Does this sound acceptable?)

I counted 14 falling into the above criteria out of 30 games started. He also had 4 games with 6 innings and 3 runs.

Interesting Tidbits:
The game of Sep 12 against Tor (between the two blow up games) he pitched 8 innings 0 runs. He pitched 9 “Productive” games (see definition above) in a row between May 28th and Jul 12th.

by drabidea on Dec 11, 2008 4:23 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs

+1

On the definition of “productive starts,” the data, and the overall point.

Wake is intriguing to me because of the mysterious knuckler. Subjectively speaking (and with no normative suggestion), I think I tend to give up on Wake starts in rough going a bit too easily. It’s not like a pitcher who has “stuff,” where a pitch in the first or second inning is mislocated, fails to break, or is read correctly by the batsman who turns it around; sometimes Wakefield is lights-out, and sometimes he gets shelled, and it seems largely beyond his control – because its based on the vagaries of air density and currents.

Anyway, I’m more than happy to have him in the rotation – and if Buchholz can hold the # 4 spot based on superior performance, and Wakefield remains consistent, its a good year…

Rock me, sexy Jesus...

by nuthinboutnuthin on Dec 11, 2008 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Is this ever acceptable in a major league pitcher??

Wakefield is lights-out, and sometimes he gets shelled, and it seems largely beyond his control – because its based on the vagaries of air density and currents.

Now take the age of Wakefield and assume a lot of these bad starts are now due to age related deterioration. Now the unpredictably bad performances start becoming the norm. Why go there if we are a rich team and can afford more predictable talent. Are we really that desperate??

by NG on Dec 11, 2008 7:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is going to be your Christmas present from me:

http://cgi.ebay.com/FAR-SIDE-Mug-LIFE-AMONG-THE-CLOVER-1990-Excellent_W0QQitemZ220325438594QQcmdZViewItemQQimsxZ20081207?IMSfp=TL081207152002r22162#ebayphotohosting

Well, I will appreciate for you to keep my zingers out of your mouth!

by BoSox415 on Dec 11, 2008 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously?

Yes. Yes it is.

You asked, I answered. Accept my decree, ya sour-grapes bastid!

Rock me, sexy Jesus...

by nuthinboutnuthin on Dec 12, 2008 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ThaT'S NOT NICE!

I did not make fun of you! Some discussion point.

by NG on Dec 12, 2008 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

NG comment with complete disagreement in 5, 4, 3...

Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Dec 11, 2008 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I like the Young Pitcher Thought...

Wake’s career is ending soon, so we need someone to his place. I would say get a young pitcher to step into that role to get him experience. But hey I am just a salesfan…

~ ROLL TIDE ~

GO SOX!!

by Bama Sox on Dec 11, 2008 6:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

One of our young pitchers, or trade for a new one? Anyone in particular?

by BTLove on Dec 11, 2008 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Didn't the Sox offer Paul Byrd arbitration?

Did he accept? If so, decent chance he’ll hold down the #4 role until Buch or Bowden emerges.

by sggut95 on Dec 12, 2008 6:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

They offered. He refused.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Dec 12, 2008 9:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Magic 8-ball says...

The last rotation spot will begin the season with “Other” and end the season with “Buchholz”

"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.

by SoxDevil on Dec 12, 2008 2:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs