Do The Red Sox Have a Ground Ball Fetish?

The Red Sox have tried to erase the painful feelings of their botched Jon Lester negotiations by completing a flurry of pitcher transactions. While that’s unlikely to fool people who still just want Lester back, the pitchers acquired (or reportedly acquired) — Wade Miley, Rick Porcello and Justin Masterson — all have one thing in common in that they generate a lot of ground balls. Before that, they acquired Joe Kelly, who also generates a great deal of ground balls. Are ground balls the hip new thing on Yawkey Way?

If they are, it is a very new thing. As we can see in the table below, in the brief time that we have data for ground ball percentage, the Red Sox have rarely been overly focused on pitchers who get grounders:

Red Sox Ground Ball Percentage, 2002-2014
All Pitchers Starting Pitchers
Year GB% Rank GB% Rank
2014 43.6 23 44.1 19
2013 42.9 23 43.5 22
2012 46.4 8 47.1 8
2011 42.3 28 42.9 22
2010 43.6 19 45.0 11
2009 40.9 29 43.3 16
2008 43.5 16 41.4 24
2007 42.6 21 42.5 20
2006 43.8 12 45.3 12
2005 42.4 23 42.9 20
2004 45.5 7 46.0 7
2003 44.9 9 45.9 7
2002 45.1 7 47.0 3

As you can see, the team had a bit of a groundballing thing going on more than a decade ago, but they haven’t been as heavy on them since. The team saw a brief spike in 2012, when Josh Beckett — who was the starter who generated the lowest percentage of ground balls — was essentially replaced for part of the season by the ultra-groundballing Aaron Cook. Going from Beckett’s 40.8 GB% to Cook’s 60.2% is about as dramatic a swing as you can have, and it helped push the team into the top 10 for the first time in eight years. So, there’s not a lot of historical precedent for the team targeting ground ball pitchers.

Of course, it’s also been awhile since the team had a plus defender at third base, which has been a sieve since Adrian Beltre left. Shortstop has been better — Mike Aviles and Stephen Drew were solid — but neither were spectacular compared to their peers, and they also didn’t play full seasons. So there wasn’t a real reason to prioritize ground balls.

In fact, the left side of the infield is not guaranteed to be better this year. Xander Bogaerts‘ overall defensive metrics don’t tell the full tale, as he performed far worse when he was thrown to the dogs at third base to make room for the immortal Drew. But that brings Bogaerts’ value from well below average up to just scratch. Perhaps, after two years of being jerked around, Bogaerts will blossom into an above-average defensive shortstop if he is left alone in 2015, but the jury is most certainly out. Sandoval should be a big upgrade, as he generally scores high marks for his defense, but his statistical record is more up and down. The Boston brass is betting on the good side of his profile, and that giving time for Sandoval and Bogaerts to gel will help improve Bogaerts’ performance.

They are making that bet, in essence, because getting these pitchers was, for now, the best they could fill out a rotation with minimal damage to the 2015 team and the bottom line. Getting Lester would have been great, but also expensive. The projected price of the three pitchers is $26 million ($12.2 million projected for Porcello and $4.3 million projected for Miley, according to our own Matt Swartz, and $9.5 million for Masterson), or $200,000 more than the average annual value of Lester’s new contract. That, as Victor Maitlind would say, is a neat trick.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

Another reason to make the rotation this way is that it is flexible. The team could go out and sign James Shields, and they could have pushed harder on Brandon McCarthy, but those are premium free agents who will command big deals. If one of them goes belly up while a rookie emerges, the team would be left in an unfortunate situation. And in Henry Owens, Eduardo Rodriguez and Matt Barnes, the team has three such prospects. If one of them is deemed ready early in the season, a pitcher like Masterson signed to a one-year deal doesn’t need to stand in his way. Kelly and Masterson both have experience in the bullpen, and can be shifted there without any trouble. The same is true for adding to the rotation at the front end. While the team may now be content with this rotation, they still have the wiggle room to go after a top-flight starter, as Dave suggested yesterday in the omnibus post. If the team lands Max Scherzer or Cole Hamels, then Kelly or Masterson can assume swingman duties.

These acquisitions also fit because the players traded away were surplus, perhaps not in the long run but definitely for 2015. The Angels needed to trade their stalwart second baseman, Howie Kendrick, to land Andrew Heaney. Now they have a hole at the keystone, one that is arguably bigger than the one they had in their starting rotation. The Tigers had to trade two of their better young players to net Alfredo Simon, and they have very few young players to deal — especially ones who could be part of their tired excuse for a bullpen by year’s end. Marcus Semien may not be a great player, but he was a definite factor in the White Sox’s 2015 plans before he was dealt in a package for Jeff Samardzija. The Marlins didn’t have to deal a great deal to get Mat Latos, but one of the players is close to the majors. And Latos himself comes with injury and performance questions — he was mediocre last season and he might not be better in 2015. But in trading away Yoenis Cespedes, Rubby De La Rosa, Allen Webster and Alex Wilson, the Red Sox traded away four guys who did not fit neatly into Boston’s 2015 plans. That makes these deals a big win.

What also makes them a win is that these guys are not exactly scrubs. August covered Miley yesterday, and much of what he said applies to Porcello as well. Porcello has reduced his walk rate as time has gone by, and while he is trading strikeouts for grounders, he is getting hitters to swing at the balls he wants — his O-contact% against went up last year, but not his Z-contact%. In other words, he is getting the contact he wants. The same is more or less true of Masterson. His swinging strike percentage has remained static, and his contact percentage was the same full season-low of 78 percent that it was in 2013, when he looked like a great extension candidate. But his defense in Cleveland didn’t cooperate in 2014. He did have some home run trouble in St. Louis, so that bears watching, but it was completely out of line with his career profile. Last season aside, Masterson is a good pitcher.

Certainly neither pitcher carries the cache that Hamels does, but their projections aren’t that much different — in fact, Steamer likes Porcello better than Hamels for 2015. It is possible that the Red Sox and Phillies can still come together on a deal, but the clear preference has been established — take lower ceiling players on in order to make the pieces fit rather than trade a bounty for the one pitcher they need, because that will just create more holes to fill. This makes perfect sense. As I outlined last week for the Boston Globe, the mission now for Ben Cherington and Co. is not to go out and find great players — they’ve already done that. The offense is littered with both proven and potential above-average players. The key now is filling in around them. This current five-man rotation — new recruits Masterson, Miley and Porcello, plus holdovers Kelly and Clay Buchholz — are a good bet to be just what they needed.

Time will tell if the Red Sox have a newfound fascination with ground ball pitchers. They haven’t in the past, but with Sandoval in the fold to go with Dustin Pedroia, the Sox now have two above-average infield defenders locked up for the foreseeable future, that plan may change. But the more likely explanation is that the team is simply trying to fill out the best roster they can, and this year, that means going heavier on position players than starting pitchers.





Paul Swydan used to be the managing editor of The Hardball Times, a writer and editor for FanGraphs and a writer for Boston.com and The Boston Globe. Now, he owns The Silver Unicorn Bookstore, an independent bookstore in Acton, Mass. Follow him on Twitter @Swydan. Follow the store @SilUnicornActon.

36 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Dr. Obvious
11 years ago

I like the plan if you have good defensive infielders…If that was the plan, I would have signed Headley instead of Sandoval…Pedroia is a stud & they could then live with a defensive stiff at SS…

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Obvious

The Red Sox have exactly what you describe; you’re just not giving credit to Sandoval’s defense. Over 4 seasons (really only about 3 seasons of playing time at 3B), he’s saved +13 runs according to UZR, +9 runs according to DRS, and +19 runs according to FSR.

mtsw
11 years ago
Reply to  Yirmiyahu

Yeah, but he’s fat so he’s bad at defense until proven otherwise for many fans.

Boourns76
11 years ago
Reply to  mtsw

Panda’s defense should continue to be good for at least a couple of years. Given his size, we can all see this deteriorating rapidly as he gets older, but that might make him a perfect replacement for Papi at DH.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  mtsw

“Please, please replace Papi with a guy who hasn’t cracked a 120 wRC+ since 2011”

-Fans of every other team in the AL East.

nerf
11 years ago
Reply to  mtsw

@Cool Lester:

From 2012-2014, here are the 15 guys who were primarily DHs. Only three averaged a wRC+ of over 124, and in no year in that span did more than four guys crack 124, which coincidentally exactly what Steamer sees from Sandoval in 2014.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=dh&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=17,d

Sure, by the time he’s potentially DHing, he may have aged a bit, but let’s not pretend that every DH is David Ortiz or E5.

Hank
11 years ago
Reply to  mtsw

Just to give a bit broader picture on Sandoval (no pun intended)
Last 3 years: UZR/150 -0.1, DRS -6 (so about -2/yr)
Last 5 years: UZR/150 3.2, DRS 10 (about +2/yr)
Career: UZR/150 2.2. DRS 0

He’s basically an average defender, and as defense tends to peak early, I’m not sure I see the plus (good) defender that folks refer to – in fact if one (just as arbitrarily) chooses 3 years instead of 4 years he may be starting to trend toward slightly below average.

I know talking up the “oh people are silly and they just judge him on his fatness” angle is fun, but perhaps others are overestimating his defense because he’s basically an average defender of late and pretty close to average over his entire career.

Between “good” and “bad” there is average. When someone says he is not a good defender, it doesn’t necessarily mean they think he’s bad defender.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  mtsw

Yeah, I just don’t buy Pablo suddenly being better than he was from 25-27 at age 28, especially considering that he’s declined each year since 2011.

I think it’s more likely that Panda’s wRC+ slips under 110 than that it jumps 13 points.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  mtsw

Carter, who had what would have been the third most valuable offensive performance of Sandoval’s career with a 123 wRC+ (Sandoval’s got a 122 wRC+ on his career), was worth 1.7 WAR last season.

So, in order for Pablo to be a league average player at DH, he’d need to improve on his career batting line at a point where he’s no longer physically capable of playing 3B.

I’m not a huge fan of those odds, personally.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  Yirmiyahu

Yeah, Pablo’s a good player, because he’s both a pretty good fielder and a pretty good hitter.

I just don’t trust his joints to hold up.

ElJimador
11 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Obvious

Except that Sandoval is a good defender too and a much better fit offensively for Fenway.

Cleveland Spiders
11 years ago

Do you blame them, playing half their games in Fenway?

Guest
11 years ago

Not to mention that their Division foes play in Rogers Centre, Yankee Stadium, Orioles Park, and that dump in St. Petersburg, none of which is excatly a pitchers’ paradise.

southie
11 years ago
Reply to  Guest

The Trop is precisely a pitchers paradise actually.

Guest
11 years ago
Reply to  southie

I didn’t really look far enough back before commenting. Just looked at 2014.
15th in the league in park factor last year, so excatly league average. Looking back further, yeah it is a pitcher’s park the three years before 2014, but the word “paradise” should not be said about any aspect of that hellhole.

nerf
11 years ago
Reply to  Guest

Dump? Come on, man.

Don Von Handburger
11 years ago
Reply to  nerf

Seriously. That comparison is an insult to dumps.

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  nerf

It’s definitely a pitcher’s park. But definitely a dump too. The circus tent in St. Petersburg and the concrete donut in Oakland are the worst in baseball.

jim S.
11 years ago
Reply to  nerf

Just checking, but have any of you guys actually been to the Trop? It is truly not bad at all, and given the rainy conditions here in Florida, it is a massive plus over any outdoor stadium.

Hendu for Kutch
11 years ago
Reply to  nerf

I’ve been to the Trop, and while I wouldn’t exactly give it a ringing endorsement, it’s way better than Oakland is or Montreal was. TB was just meh, the other two were genuinely places I couldn’t believe housed major league teams.

MidwesternNewEnglander
11 years ago
Reply to  nerf

The best thing about the Trop is the wacky ball rules, basically blernsball, if a fly hits off certain parts of the ceiling it’s still in play, but other parts it’s not. Can someone totally explain that and then do some stats analysis because I want to know how much it contributes to ball park effects.

Bpdelia
11 years ago
Reply to  nerf

I’ve been there many times and while it’s not a”dump ” it’s an extremely bland and utilitarian place. It generates no sense of excitement and kids excitement is what creates long term fan interest.

It’s completely inadequate as a long term home. Bad location, crappy view. Ugly outside, totally and completely unmemorable inside.

I’ve been to about 30-40 games there over the years and have been to about 25 different parks in my life. It’s less memorable than old Arlington stadium.

Less interesting than old memorial stadium.

Just a boring unimaginative seventies style “utilitarian building of the future” type structure.

It was built at precisely the wrong moment. In am effort to lure the giants and then the sox it came about quickly, cheaply and just before the renaissance of sport venue design that occurred in the mid 90s.

It’s like 3 rivers but indoors.

In conclusion and tldr the word that BEST DESCRIBES the trop (location, parking, design, food… Everything about it) is…

Meh.

Middaughsome
11 years ago

Maybe it’s just these were the guys available that they could get?

Ben
11 years ago
Reply to  Middaughsome

This. I see it as the market has swung a bit away from ground ball pitchers now that you can get a strike higher in the zone as opposed to a few years ago when you couldn’t.

BRH
11 years ago
Reply to  Ben

Except that it’s just the opposite. The strike zone has become substantially lower since Pitchf/x was incorporated. The evidence doesn’t support the claim that umpires are calling higher strikes.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-strike-zone-expansion-is-out-of-control/

Buck Rotgut
11 years ago

I can’t figure out why they kept jerking Bogaerts around. It’s almost like they didn’t want him to develop properly.

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  Buck Rotgut

That’s a bit of an exaggeration.

In 2013, he wasn’t called up until late August and didn’t have a set position until winning the 3B job from Middlebrooks in the postseason. Considering that he was a 20-year-old late-season callup on a contending team, the fact that they found playing time for him at all was good for his development.

And in 2014, he was the starting shortstop. Except for a 44 game period — when they were losing and desperate for offense at 3B — they signed Stephen Drew, and Bogaerts moved temporarily back to 3B until the Sox gave up on the season.

nerf
11 years ago

INB4 Red Sox bias.

gooooob
11 years ago

Regardless of whether you had a good infield defense or not, wouldn’t you want to prioritize ground ball pitchers in Fenway anyway simply because of the damage fly balls (particularly to left and left center field) do in that park?

The move from a scratch to average / plus defender on the left side shouldn’t be the reason the team changes their philosophy on pitching.

chris
11 years ago

Derek Lowe was mostly responsible for the 2004 and earlier numbers. He’s basically the last significant GB pitcher they’ve had.

Dan
11 years ago

Infield defense should definitely be better this year. Sandoval and Bogaerts should be above average on the left side, and obviously Pedroia will continue to be a defensive stud. I also think Napoli will turn in a good defensive season. Had a great year metrics wise in 2013, and a surprisingly bad one last year, but he’s regarded as a good glove at 1B, so I think he will bounce back and have a better defensive year this year.

Boourns76
11 years ago

This team, as currently constructed, should be strong enough to be a contender for a playoff spot. They can decide in June or July whether they want to add an “ace” but there should be at least a few available via trade (Price, Cueto, Zimmerman, etc.)

everdiso
11 years ago

am i missing something on Panda?

unless i’m reading the splits here on FG incorrectly here are the red sox infielders defensive numbers over the past three years:

Sandoval @ 3B: 3259.2inn, -6drs (-2/yr), -0.1uzr/150, 5.3df (1.8/yr)
Bogaerts @ SS: 932.2inn, -7drs (-7/yr), -1.1uzr/150, 3.8df (3.8/yr)
Pedroia @ 2B: 3801.1inn, +43drs (+14/yr), +14.3uzr/150, 45.6df (15.2/yr)
Napoli @ 1B: 2265.1inn, +17drs (+6/yr), +8.1uzr/150, -6.8df (-2.3/yr)

not sure panda can be considered plus defensively anymore.

Jim Lahey
11 years ago

I look at the strength of this team [defensively] being the whole center/right side of the field. Napoli, Pedroia, Victorino, and expecting Castillo, Betts to all be above average defensively, if not among the best at their position.

Any chance these guys generate a disproportionate amount of contact to the right side?

This group of pitchers will definitely give Xander a ton of practice.. whether that’s good or bad depends what you think of his range.

Ben HallMember since 2016
11 years ago

Paul–like the Beverly Hills Cop reference.

Grammar Police
11 years ago

cachet, not cache