This is probably more of a spring training discussion, but we'll start it here and move it over when we get the new forum up (note to self: pitchers and catchers report this weekend)

Assuming the Sox carry 12 pitchers on their 25-man this season--and there's no reason to think they won't--that means 7 bullpen slots to be filled.

Assume further that Bailey, Melancon, and one of Bard/Aceves are locks for 3 of those slots. I know Tracey disagrees with that last point, but he's wrong.

That leaves 4 slots to be filled, from the following list: Morales, Albers, Miller, Atchison, Maine, Bowden, Ohlendorff, Wilson, Padilla?, Carlson, Doubront, Tazawa.

Note: I didn't include Hill or Jenks, as I assume both will start the season on the DL.

Personally I think Morales and Albers are the most likely candidates from that list to earn pen slots. The other two names will be determined by who has options, who doesn't, what the needs are, and what ultimately happens with the 4th/5th rotation slots. But of course I could be wrong (and often am).

Your thoughts?

Add to this that Morales, Albers, Miller, Bowden, and Doubront are the one we lose if they don’t make the roster. Of those names, Miller seems like the only likely candidate to pass through waivers without being claimed by another team.

Obviously the 4th/5th starter affects this.

I agree with the premise that the Bard-as-starter experiment stretches into the start of the season even if he struggles to adapt early on. I agree with the premise that therefore Aceves is back in the bullpen and only gets his shot at anything more than a spot start if Bard is still struggling as of mid-May or so.

I don't know those things for sure, of course. And I don't know where that leaves the roster and non-roster guys, or the mythical Roy Oswalt, in the fight for whatever rotation spot(s) are left.

Definite:
1. Bailey
2. Aceves
3. Melancon
4. Morales

Probable:
5. Doubront – Not untouchable, but out of options, and his stuff's too good to let him go unless he really earns his way off the team.

6. Albers – He's cheap, and he really was an important and effective part of the bullpen last year until about mid-August. I don't know why he faded down the stretch, but unless he shows up significantly heavier than he already was, or has a disastrous spring, there's every reason to keep him.

7. Bowden – Reasonably effective in limited MLB relief duty last year, and very solid as a full-time reliever in Pawtucket. If he had options left, I'd think there was a good chance that he doesn't make the cut. Sans options, though, I think he gets a shot.

Possible
8. Padilla – I think he's more likely to either earn the 5th starter spot, or else (more likely yet) get stashed in Pawtucket until they need him.

9. Atchison – Wish there was a spot for him, but I think he'll hang around and help the team somewhere along the line.

10. Jesse Carlson – Could pitch his way into the last spot, but just as the roster guys have an edge over non-roster guys, I think the guy who has a history of helping this team (Atchison) gets an edge over the new guy.

11. Clayton Mortensen – I'm skeptical, but who knows.


Doubtful
11. Miller – I think it's 5th starter or bust.

Very unlikely
12. Ohlendorf – He was exclusively a starter with the Pirates, but I get the sense that he's more likely to be a reliever for the Red Sox. But even more likely still to be a reliever for the PawSox.

13. Tony Pena – Intriguing. Wouldn't rule him out for later in the year. Can't see him earning a job out of the gate.

14. Cook – I do think he has some potential to help the team as a starter, but I don't think he's on the radar at all as a reliever (or as a guy who will be pitching in Boston before he establishes himself in Pawtucket for a few starts).

15. Silva – He has closer potential…for the buffet line. Another "starter or bust" guy, I think.

Nope
16. Justin Germano – Why would he make the team?

17. John Maine – Not even a spring training invite.

18. Alex Wilson – He could be this year's Kyle Weiland, which one can only hope is not nearly as bad as last year's Kyle Weiland. But like Kyle Weiland (or Michael Bowden before him), he's only going to the pen when/if he doesn't cut it as a starter. Here's hoping that he's the ace of the PawSox staff.

19. Other people. Who is Chorye Spoon? I have no idea. Maybe Doug Mathis deserves a spot ahead of Germano or Maine...but he's still a "nope."

As you lay it out it seems pretty cut and dry. The only disagreement I have (and barely one at that) is that I am optomistic about Mortenson playing some kind of role during the 2012 season. Jenks and Hill make things interesting down the road, but who gets cut if the Dubront/ Albers/ Bowden group are performing well ?

And my only significant departure from this scenario as the most likely is that I'm just not a Bowden fan. He's going to have to have a spectacular spring before I'll feel anything but trepidation if he's handed a ball in any inning in a major league game.

I think it's about the lack of options more than anything else. I don't want to just throw him to the waiver wire without seeing what he can do as a big league reliever first.

I would guess that he has the least wiggle room/shortest leash of any of the guys I'm expecting to make the cut. I think he's a good candidate for one of those "our roster bubble guy for your roster bubble guy" trades, especially if any of the scrap heap guys really come on strong.

But as the roster stands today, I would want to stick with him until he earns his way out of a job. Maybe he's the righty specialist. Maybe he's in that Atchison role – a multi-inning guy in mop-up, a clean 6th inning guy otherwise. Even if he's strictly a garbage time pitcher, he should get a shot unless someone very clearly wrestles the spot away from him.

Also seem to have neglected Tazawa in that list. But I would sum him up as: Somewhere between Alex Wilson and Andrew Miller. He's either going to start in Boston or start in Pawtucket. As long as he has options, he's not under consideration for a bullpen role early in the season.

I see more of an up side for Bowden. 2011 was the 1st season he was used exclusively out of the bullpen and he really did have a strong season for the PawSox. He did underwhelm in his appearences with the Sox, but I see Bowden as a guy who's performance will improve as his ML innings increase. I predict he will grow on us....

Thin:

Thanks for this thread. With no real news for forever, we needed to get into some analysis, and get away from whining about the sky falling (not naming any names . . ).

Rom: Excellent analysis. With all the recent "sky is falling" talk, I'd have thought it to be much more murky, but I agree with your assessment: the guys without options start on the MLB roster, unless 1) they really suck in ST, and 2) someone else really shines.

Wild card in all this: I wouldn't be surprised to see some last minute trades of some of these guys. Some of our bubble pitchers might find a home somewhere else for a higher upside MiLB player . . .

The harrowing tale of Bobby Jenks

My reaction when I saw that this afternoon? Holy fucking shit.

The team has some sort of relationship with Mass General, right? I hope that's past tense by tomorrow.


And I guess we have an answer to where did the rest of Bobby Jenks go? I'm rooting for him big time now.

Those must have been some pretty big bone spurs.

Analyzing the Red Sox Bullpen Situation

in reading this it reinforces my belief that this group is not strong enough,its tough to get good bottom guys,but even at the top there are issues.

Good read. The author expresses my sentiments regarding Bowden very well. The article is yet another reminder for me that while the Sox bullpen has questions, who'd does not and we actually enter 2012 with a collection of quality young arms. It all comes down to performance now and not a lack of quality in my mind.

Exactly. Last year we had quality on paper without performance on the playing field, at least not in April and September.

Generally, that analysis is on target with what I guess would be conventional wisdom at this point. The part that I don't buy – mentioned in the Doubront analysis, but could just as easily have fit with Miller or Aceves – is:

I can’t envision Bobby V choosing a scenario where two of his starting pitchers are on 150-170 innings limits.

To begin with, there's just no way around it. You have converted relievers, or you have guys coming off of injury shortened seasons, or you have Andrew Miller.

As much as last year reminded us of the importance of starter innings, worrying about innings limits in the 150-170 range at the back of the rotation might not be very realistic in any case. Among the top 6 starting staffs in the AL last year by ERA*, none had five starters over 170 innings. Only one (Texas) had five starters over 150 innings. That kind of 5-horse rotation just doesn't exist. The rotation is made or broken (as it was last year, even while the lack of innings at the back of the rotation was a serious problem in its own right) by the guys at the top.

And, whether it's realistic or not, it isn't necessary. Dice-K seems likely to return. The team presumably/supposedly has left some room in the budget for a midseason acquisition. And the guys who would, according to this analysis, be penciled into the rotation without the 150-170 innings limit…could still be penciled in later in the year.

It's much more important to avoid last year's run of sub-5 IP starts than it is to get those back end starter innings from any single source.

But then that all just goes back to the starting rotation discussion. The bullpen changes, possibly quite significantly, with the selection of a 5th starter.


*I would have done top 5, but #3-6 are separated by 2/100 of a run.

andwe do have topof the rotation issues,how many innings is it realistic to get from clay,and at this stage of his career same issue with beckett,as for quality of arms depth wise the author of this clearly spells out there are a lot of issues to sort out.An awful lot of reclamations have to work to have a succesful season.i hope that bowdens outings ive seen are the realdeal,he has looked pretty sharp,he is healthy.

Red Sox Spring Profiles: Mark Melancon's AL East Return

Red Sox Spring Profiles: Michael Bowden, Former Prospect

Miller and Crawford will remain at JetBlue when the team heads north, rehabbing.

The Bullpen Without Andrew Bailey

Opportunity knocks for Mark Melancon

Clearly the Bailey situation is media heaven. They can write about it all season, stake a poition, change their minds, debate, wring their hands, complain about the management, insist a closer be named, write about closer by committee a few more times, question the Bard as starter decision, second guess letting Papelbon go, and on and on.


And so can we.

I was OK with Melancon before they got Bailey, so I'm not in much of a panic now.

Huh. Color me shocked on two counts:

- Bobby V named Aceves the new closer.
- The Sox will open the season with 13 pitchers on the roster.

Huh, indeed.

Maybe this is to placate Aceves? I hope he wants it, and expect that he does, but I'm surprised.

I have to think placating Aceves is part of it. He loses out on one high visibility role, but gets named to another. It seems a waste of Aceves' rubber arm to plug him in for just three outs in the ninth though. I wonder how many multiple-inning saves we'll see from him?

I guess I'm okay with allowing Melancon to fill the high-leverage stopper role Bard has been in for the past couple of years, but yeah, I'm surprised by this.

Allow me to complain than,i knew pabs was gone last spring,that was fine,but trading for players with injury histories when youare busy sighning more guys with injury history seemed bad.It is what iit is .I still believe that seeing bard 3-4 times a week to preserve wins is more valuble than is once or twice aweek outings to get not much more than quality starts.i was almost buying this til reports of cook pitching well started.if becket is out for meaningful time its hard to see this team getting off to a good enough start for ben not to go look for more dl types.id remind you this not the same mgt we have had,most of that braintrust looks to be gone,and tere havent been financial constraints in te henry period til now.

Trading for a closer with an injury history is not as good as trading for an equally competent closer without an injury history.

Signing starting pitching depth with injury histories is not as good as signing starting pitching depth with rock-solid track records.

Adding the depth that is available to you is much, much better than doing nothing if the perfect players aren't available.

If Bard turns out to be a low-inning starter with consistently mediocre results, then the experiment, at least in the short term, will have been a bad one. As has been acknowledged all along by everyone involved, this is a possibility.

Of course, Bard has yet to start a single Major League game in his career. It might be premature to be complaining about his performance.

:thumbup:

:huh: I would have though Melancon as well.


Wouldn't it be something though if Aceves pulls a Tom Gordon and becomes lights out in the role.

Hear that, St. Rita?

Just as I was OK with Melancon as closer, I'm OK with Aceves in any role, even Tom Gordon. :cheers:

i suspect that ifrin tin tin was named closer youd be ok. :wink: perception nationally is that this pitching staff is in dissaray now.

Rin Tin Tin might be OK in left field (where he could run and leap and catch but wouldn't have to throw :wink: ), but you're wrong. There are actual human pitchers I would not want as the closer on my team. I am however a fan of Alfredo Aceves. That doesn't mean I think he's the next Mariano, but I really am OK giving him a shot at closing, because he's good enough as a pitcher, and as Pete Abe pointed out, crazy enough. I also think he'll be better at it than Bard would be. In my humble fan opinion, Daniel has a starter's mentality, not a closers.

closer is the role i least want aceves for.he can give innings something that this potentily vulnerable pitching staff needs.the sox brought in melonchon and adverised him as a potential closer.with bard as closer off te table they should have stuck to the succesion.as for aceves wher he can give you lots of innings he is now set up to give the min.its plain dumb and that price could be paid potentially every game that lester doesnt start.

The explanation BV gave for naming Aceves was actually very Tito like.

He said that since this was relatively sudden and guys were working into their roles, having Aceves, who hadn't been part of the bullpen mix, take on the role that was vacated was less disruptive than shuffling everyone around to accommodate now having a guy who can pitch in any or all innings.

It makes some sense, but I never bought that kind of reasoning completely even from Francona.

I'm still OK with Aceves as closer, but he will have to show he can shrug off a failure in that role, and we're going to have to grant him a little bit of adjustment time.

Melancon is the one who concerns me. I expected that real game adrenaline was going to fix his blah results from ST.

But it's one game and the bottom line with this team is that they have to perform, they aren't going to get by on reputation.

I see this as the on going stuff in the post papelbon era.Sort of disaray,that may not ever evolve into some type consistant rotation,like aceves tobard to papelbon consisantly this is going to be a guess work.it was all so uneeded.

Fascinating.

Alfredo Aceves' Various Release Points

This is going to be fun to watch. I think Aceves is unique enough that looking at standard peripherals doesn't tell the story. Sorta like with Wake.

An inconsistent delivery could be the explanation for his occasional complete loss of command, but then ... how does he manage to get back, sometimes very quickly?

This analysis agrees with you.

Grading Alfredo Aceves the Closer