MLB (Non Phillies) News and Discussion 2025 Season

Would be pretty wild if Profar's 2024 was due to PEDs. The drug in his system is the same one Manny Ramirez got punished for in 2009 (and is usually in conjunction with steroids) so kind of hard to play the "contaminated supplement" or "I didn't know it was illegal" card in 2025.

Boston signs Garrett Crochet to a 6 year/$170 million extension:

https://www.mlb.com/news/garrett-crochet-red-sox-contract-extension

Another one for the list of odd injuries

Mentioned in here that Hector has already been DFAed by the Braves, who also really wanted Hoffman to be a starting pitcher for them before they bailed on the medicals.

They do get cap room from Profar's suspension.

Rookie second baseman Kristian Campbell and the Boston Red Sox are in agreement on a eight-year, $60 million contract extension that includes two club options, sources tell ESPN. Campbell, 22, is expected to be a franchise cornerstone and is now locked up through 2034.

— Jeff Passan ( @jeffpasan.bsky.social ) April 2, 2025 at 1:44 PM

No team has ever made the playoffs starting the season 0-7, but with more slots than ever the Braves can make history if they get in this year. And 0-7 starts are pretty rare to begin with. Happened 25 times since 1901.

None of those 25 teams made the playoffs. Not in the pre-division play era (1901–68) from which 13 of those teams hail. Not in the four-division era (1969–93), which produced five of those teams. Not in the six-division era (1994 onward, the first year of which was the postseason-killing strike), which accounts for the other seven of those pre-2016 teams. But wait, it gets worse. A combined 13 of those teams finished in last place in their league or division, however it was defined at the time. The cumulative winning percentage of those teams was just .384, which equates to a 100-loss team over a 162-game season. What's more, just two of those 25 teams finished at or above .500, namely the 1980 Braves (81–80) and '83 Astros (85–77). The high-water mark for a wild-card era team is the 2010 Astros, who went 76–86 (.469) in their final season before diving into their extreme rebuilding program.

I just glanced at past Phils playoff teams to see their longest losing streaks, see a bunch of 6s.

1976 team had a 7 game losing streak, the 2011 team had that 8 game losing streak in September. Two teams that won 100+ games.

No team in MLB is inclined to use the bullpen less (let alone carry an extra position player) it seems.

“....let us carry 14 pitchers,” Snyder said, “and I’ll put my hand in the air.”

“Ultimately we’re solving for winning games, and not five starters or six starters,” Red Sox chief baseball officer Craig Breslow said. “I think the knee-jerk reaction is, when you engage in risky behaviors, one way to mitigate risk is to do them less. But we have to think about the burden it places on others.”

Some of the burden is a byproduct of roster limits. Teams can carry no more than 13 pitchers, meaning a sixth starter would come at the expense of an eighth reliever, and teams are hesitant to make that concession. The burden would fall on that sixth starter to earn his keep, on every other starter to work deeper into games, on each reliever to pitch more often, on each manager to better allocate workload, and on each front office to maintain depth and flexibility. It’s more complicated than simply acquiring six starters and pitching them once a week.

And, frankly, there’s no guarantee a six-man rotation would solve the underlying issues of starting pitchers getting hurt or exiting games in the fifth inning.

“I don’t think you’re going to talk to many starting pitchers who are in favor of a six-man rotation,” Red Sox starter Lucas Giolito said. “It’s not really conducive to what we’re trying to do to help the team.”

The fatal flaw is that pitchers in a 6-man rotation don't really go deeper in games (and maybe the 6th guy is worse than the 5 others).

I really want people to experiment on something like a 4-man tandem rotation with 80 pitch limits.

and that you're taking five starts away from 2-3 much better pitchers (even if, in the Phillies' case, Wheeler was exempt).

But the Phillies did actually use a six-man for a while with Lorenzen. It certainly remains to be seen what they will do about Walker and Painter in the long run if they are indeed fortunate enough to have all seven (healthy/effective) options at once.

The 101 win '77 Phillies started out 0-4 and 1-7

I can't remember who though they did not stick with it long. Guessing they fell to the temptation of keeping the starter in too long so they could get 5 innings and be eligible for the win. It is long past time for that rule to go. I have always thought it strange to see a pitcher go 4.2 innings and leave with a lead and have a pitcher come in and get one out for the win.

A really good tandem starter could end up with like a 2-10 record and a 2.50 ERA since they were not eligible for most of the wins. In general the tandem idea means a starter never goes near 100 pitches and never really faces a lineup a 3rd time. This can be a good thing. Get 7+ innings out of your tandem starters and one really does not need much of a bullpen. Match LH and RH starters in the tandem and the second guy gets a platoon advantage often.