Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Joel W Posted: July 11, 2011 at 08:14 PM (#3874557)
I guess they can go after a lefty reliever, or a 4th starter, or something. What is the marginal upgrade at 4th starter over whomever we can expect to be there in the playoffs really worth? I know right now that person is Lackey or Wakefield or something, but it really can't be worth that much. Prospectus has the Red Sox as a .650 quality team, despite the putrid start, despite Carl Crawford sucking and then spending time on the DL, despite John Lackey posting an ERA just under 7, despite Tim Wakefield being our 2nd starter.

I say stand pat.
   2. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: July 11, 2011 at 08:40 PM (#3874581)
I'd like another reliever simply because it never hurts to have another reliever. Other than that I think a combination of the quality of the team and the lack of blockbuster trade chips is going to make this a fairly quiet deadline. Right field is the one place I'd like to see something done but I just don't see how that happens. I'm less sold on Reddick than you are.
   3. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 11, 2011 at 09:01 PM (#3874593)
Baker's signed through 12 ($6.5M next year) with a $9.25M option for 2013.

I can't see why the Twins would let go of 1.5 years at that price without a good return.
   4. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 11, 2011 at 09:09 PM (#3874596)
Baker's signed through 12 ($6.5M next year) with a $9.25M option for 2013.
Oops. I misread the years on Cot's. Yeah, he's staying in Minnesota.
   5. Dan Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:21 PM (#3874634)
Garza is the latest name I read the Sox are interested in. Obviously he wouldn't come cheap, but he's an interesting name.
   6. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:36 PM (#3874638)
If the Cubs are shopping Garza and interested in what the Red Sox have to offer, then sure, go for it, but I highly doubt the Cubs actually trade him. They're super-rich and they've got $45M in salary coming off the books this offseason. Why trade a good, cheap, young starting pitcher? The original report from the Chicago Tribune is one of those great unsourced and self-refuting rumors than somehow sports "journalists" have gotten the ok to publish:
The Red Sox have the Cubs' Matt Garza high on the list of pitchers they're pursuing for an injury-depleted rotation. He has pitched well against them. The Cubs would have to get a lot in that trade, including a majors-ready arm to replace Garza. Jim Hendry has said he isn't looking to deal players who can help the Cubs in the future, and Garza is under control through 2013.
   7. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:46 PM (#3874643)
And at any rate, if the Red Sox had a "majors-ready arm to replace Garza", they'd be using it.
   8. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:52 PM (#3874644)
Speaking of not cheap, there were those weird noises Ethier made a little while ago about playing in Boston. He'd be yet another LH OF and he would probably cost quite a bit in prospect blood since he's signed through 2012, but he could fill RF pretty well. I haven't heard anything indicating that the Red Sox have any interest there, however.

I don't really think the Red Sox will be taking on any significant players this year. Aren't they already bumped up pretty close to the luxury tax threshold?
   9. Dave Spiwak Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:53 PM (#3874645)
'Content I: Makin’ Moves' sounds like a reggae album.
   10. tfbg9 Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:54 PM (#3874647)
If they can improve by merely taking on $'s...then I'm for it. But otherwise, besides a minor loogy-style tweak, I'm with Joel W.'s assessment.

The farm needs to be grown some more; Gonzo did not come cheaply.

Unrelated note-is it just me, or does Kevin Youlkis get dinged-the-hell-up every damn game? I've never seen the likes of it.
   11. tfbg9 Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:57 PM (#3874648)
Doesn't Ethier rate as one of baseball's poorest-fielding RF'ers?
   12. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 11, 2011 at 11:29 PM (#3874670)
Doesn't Ethier rate as one of baseball's poorest-fielding RF'ers?
Yup. Dude is not fast - he'll be 30 next year, and he should probably be DHing already. I don't think Ethier's a fit for the Sox.
Unrelated note-is it just me, or does Kevin Youlkis get dinged-the-hell-up every damn game? I've never seen the likes of it.
He really does. My theory is that he's kind of a max effort player, which leads to higher injury rates. Unlike your more typical max effort players like Darin Erstad, Youkilis isn't a good athlete, so he doesn't even look good in the process of trying like crazy on every play. But like an Erstad, he's throwing his body at the game with everything he has in order to play at a star level, and that means he's going to miss games.
   13. chris p Posted: July 11, 2011 at 11:41 PM (#3874679)
He really does. My theory is that he's kind of a max effort player, which leads to higher injury rates. Unlike your more typical max effort players like Darin Erstad, Youkilis isn't a good athlete, so he doesn't even look good in the process of trying like crazy on every play. But like an Erstad, he's throwing his body at the game with everything he has in order to play at a star level, and that means he's going to miss games.

yeah, i fear he's due to tail off in the 2nd half. it wasn't until his 3rd full season that he figured out how to pace himself while playing 1st. i have a feeling that playing a harder position will take its toll.
   14. Dan Posted: July 11, 2011 at 11:51 PM (#3874686)
Ethier would be an awful, awful fit on the Red Sox. He's got terrible range in the OF, and Fenway has the toughest RF to play in baseball. He would be an unmitigated disaster out there. And he doesn't hit lefties at all either, which makes him a bat fit in the Red Sox lineup.
   15. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: July 11, 2011 at 11:55 PM (#3874688)
Yup. Dude is not fast - he'll be 30 next year, and he should probably be DHing already. I don't think Ethier's a fit for the Sox.
This. Especially not this year when you definitely already have Papi.

I know Reddick isn't going to flirt with .400 and an 1100 OPS all year, but barring an injury I don't see why you trade anything of value for Ethier right now.
   16. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: July 12, 2011 at 12:05 AM (#3874697)
I know he'd take something nontrivial, but what about Buehrle as a potential rental?
   17. John DiFool2 Posted: July 12, 2011 at 12:51 AM (#3874772)
And at any rate, if the Red Sox had a "majors-ready arm to replace Garza", they'd be using it.


They do, and they are-his name is Weiland (which is to say, he appears as "major league ready" as just about any top minor league starter does, with TINSTAAPP etc. applying).
   18. Darren Posted: July 12, 2011 at 01:05 AM (#3874800)
And at any rate, if the Red Sox had a "majors-ready arm to replace Garza", they'd be using it.


To be fair, maybe they meant "National-League Ready."

I agree with M: the Sox apparently could use another starter for the rotation and/or another lefty reliever. Why is Doubront not being used to fill one of these roles? He was pretty passable last year and looks to have decent numbers this year. Is he not all the way back yet?
   19. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 12, 2011 at 01:21 AM (#3874827)
HOW GOOD HAS THE RED SOX OFFENSE BEEN? (a mini hijack)

They have scored 19% more runs than an average team playing half the season at Fenway. The 2003 record setting offense scored 16% more.

Some numbers, adjusted to match 2007 offense levels for the Red Sox (as per bbref):

Ellsbury .336/.400/.522
Pedroia .306/.420/.473
Gonzalez .378/.439/.630
Youkilis .304/.422/.541
Ortiz .326/.416/.617

(hijack over)
   20. Darren Posted: July 12, 2011 at 01:37 AM (#3874853)
It really has been just the top 5 hitters being off-the-charts awesome and carrying this team. That Gonzalez # is particularly eye-popping!

Those guys have been so amazing that they have made up for the dreck the Sox have gotten from their corner OF: Drew, Crawford, McDonald, and Cameron.
   21. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 12, 2011 at 02:06 AM (#3874904)
Those guys have been so amazing that they have made up for the dreck the Sox have gotten from their corner OF: Drew, Crawford, McDonald, and Cameron.

.233/.294/.367 combined from LF and RF this year! It's incredible.
   22. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 12, 2011 at 02:32 AM (#3874971)
Also, [9] is awesome, and I am firmly in the "maybe add an extra 4th/5th OF and/or a bullpen arm at most unless something falls into their lap" camp.

A shame neither Reddick nor Drew are righthanded.
   23. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 12, 2011 at 02:39 AM (#3874988)
Don't forget the catchers - 2007 stats for Saltalatekkia are pretty good:

267/337/471 for Salty, 269/355/455 for Tek (better than he hit in actual 2007)
   24. Joel W Posted: July 12, 2011 at 02:51 AM (#3875008)
Darren I think that overstates it a bit. Red Sox catchers are 5th in baseball in wRC+. Red Sox shortstops are 14th in baseball in wRC+. RF has been beyond atrocious obviously, and LF has been just about "bad". So the Sox have 5 guys who are just crushing it, I actually find the Ellsbury translation the most shocking in a way. Then they have 2 positions that have been good to average, and two that just suck.

Despite this, and riffing off of Joe, the Red Sox have a wRC+ of 121. The 2007 Yankees, who scored 968 runs, had a wRC+ of 120, as did the 2003 Red Sox. So through half a season the Red Sox are hitting better than any team in the past decade. Also, Red Sox position players are on pace (assuming no regression, classic 'pace' concept) to have as many WAR as...the 2001 Seattle Mariners. Like I said, I'm content to stand pat.
   25. Darren Posted: July 12, 2011 at 03:00 AM (#3875026)
How far off is "So the Sox have 5 guys who are just crushing it," from "5 hitters being off-the-charts awesome and carrying this team"? I stated it perfectly. :)

I mean, you'd expect some decent to good players. What's made the team special, a historically great offense, is those 5 guys "crushing it." Now bow down to my knowledge!
   26. Norcan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 03:22 AM (#3875055)
I know the offense is just fine, great even but Beltran tempts me. I would love an above average right fielder to make the lineup even more dangerous. It's just icing on the cake that he's a switch hitter who could potentially make a difference in a playoff series if they face a bunch of lefties.

He's not going to come cheap, even though he's due to become a free agent. His free agency status probably precludes the Red Sox from making a viable offer because it seems doubtful that they'll try to sign him for multiple seasons. In any case, I'm thinking it's going to take at least maybe one really good prospect. To that end, it's good that a lot of position prospects have performed like gangbusters throughout the minors (the pitching prospects on the other hand have been a different story). Brentz, Lavarnway, Chiang and Middlebrooks have all been good or great and someone like Boegarts has been a really pleasant surprise (I assume he's untouchable). I wouldn't be opposed to offering a package of Middlebrooks and either Weiland or Alex Wilson. I don't know if that would be enough. Maybe it's too much for a half-season rental plus 1st round/or supplemental draft pick.
   27. Joel W Posted: July 12, 2011 at 03:48 AM (#3875073)
I guess i misread a little, but I did want to defend the honor of our catchers. They've been good! And the Lowrie/Scutaro tandem has been better than our game chatters have indicated.

Also, Norcan if we get average from our right fielder, and above average from our left fielder as I expect (Crawford was Crawford after April) I think they'll be excellent. We can also expect some regression from the other guys, but I think they'll remain this good all season more or less, and if that's what we can expect then really looking to upgrade it is asking to upgrade on one of the best lineups of the past 10 years, and I just don't know why they need to give up prospects to do that.
   28. Norcan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 03:54 AM (#3875075)
Also, if anyone is interested in the 18 year old shortstop Xander Bogaerts from the baseball hotbed of Aruba (projected however to outgrow the position and move to third base in the future) who went from the DSL directly to Low-A and is showing a ton of power, here's a short video of him taking batting practice. He has an outstanding swing.



Xander taking BP
   29. Dan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 04:02 AM (#3875079)
I agree with M: the Sox apparently could use another starter for the rotation and/or another lefty reliever. Why is Doubront not being used to fill one of these roles? He was pretty passable last year and looks to have decent numbers this year. Is he not all the way back yet?


Doubront just got sent down to Portland.
   30. Norcan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 04:08 AM (#3875084)
I guess i misread a little, but I did want to defend the honor of our catchers. They've been good!


I agree. After the first month, they've been good. Catcher has been an awful position for most teams. Salty and Varitek have been an relatively above average duo providing consistent hitting and more power than most teams have gotten out of the position. They've even thrown some guys out too, which, after the last two seasons of traumatizing throwing, has been good to see.

I don't think the Red Sox will go after Beltran and it's probably prudent not to. I just like watching him play and am greedy about making a great unit even greater. If the Red Sox were only an average offense, he'd be an excellent target but he's probably not going to be worth the cost relative to their need. I wouldn't be upset however about using Middlebrooks (whose pitch selection concerns me) or either Wieland or Wilson in a trade if it came to it.
   31. Norcan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 04:14 AM (#3875088)
Doubront just got sent down to Portland.


Not because he was bombing in Triple-A. He was sent down because Triple-A is off for their all-star break for a couple of days and they wanted to keep him on his normal schedule.

In any case, I'm not sure he fits as a viable option for a fourth starter if you're talking about the playoff rotation. He would have be outstanding for them to consider him in the playoff rotation and that's very unlikely to happen.
   32. Dan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 04:18 AM (#3875089)
I'd like to add Beltran to this lineup, and I don't think the cost will be prohibitive.

Going back to Garza, while I realize the source was basically just throwing #### at the wall, I think it's an interesting possibility. Obviously he'll cost more than a rental, but he'd be here for 2 more seasons after 2011, so he seems like more of the type of guy this organization would target. I can't remember Theo really paying much for a rental at the deadline; instead it's been guys like Jason Bay and Victor Martinez who have more than a year left on their contracts. Additionally the Cubs probably view Garza as somewhat of a disappointment with his ERA and record, even though his peripherals have actually been great. I don't think that will lower his cost a whole lot, but it might make the Cubs more willing to talk about a deal. I also think that he's a likely target for the Yankees (especially given his past success against the Red Sox), which means he's one less option for them to trade for if the Red Sox acquire him first.
   33. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 12, 2011 at 04:32 AM (#3875099)
here's a short video of him taking batting practice. He has an outstanding swing.
Thanks Norcan. Kid's got great power potential in that swing. (And I guess great power reality, based on his numbers so far.)

The other thing I noticed is that he looks pretty thick in the hips already. I've read that lots of people think he's ticketed for third base, and I think I can see why.
   34. Norcan Posted: July 12, 2011 at 05:02 AM (#3875116)
The other thing I noticed is that he looks pretty thick in the hips already.


Really, you thought so? I thought he looked pretty slim in the hips myself and slim overall. He has a good athletic, projectable build for a 18 year old. I think the idea that he might have to move from shortstop comes from him being 6'3 and (I'm not sure about this) not possessing great speed or otherworldly hands. It was possible to see Hanley maintain the athletic chops necessary to stay at short even when he was already big and going to get bigger because he had great speed. I don't know if the same can be said about Bogaerts.

The Bogaert with really big hips is his twin brother Jair, who is a catcher/DH/first basemen on the Red Sox Dominican team. His twin is an inch shorter and outweighs him by 55 listed pounds. They made a cute, I suppose, promotional video together and Xander clearly got the luckier draw.



Xander and Jair
   35. Dave Cyprian Posted: July 12, 2011 at 05:19 AM (#3875120)
You guys have to check out this story, the quotes are great and get better and better.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/al/2011-07-10-3794229625_x.htm
   36. tfbg9 Posted: July 13, 2011 at 02:33 AM (#3876182)
Sox medical people screw-up again, quite possibly, should Beckett's "precautionary" self-scratching from the ASG result in an agrravation of his knee owie from the last start.

He ought to have been ordered to stay home. Stupid stupid stupid.
   37. tfbg9 Posted: July 13, 2011 at 02:52 PM (#3876549)
35-I don't see what we're supposed to check out, Dave.
   38. Dave Cyprian Posted: July 13, 2011 at 07:01 PM (#3876835)
35-I don't see what we're supposed to check out, Dave.


Whoops. Here is the corrected link (hilarious quotes division):

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/al/redsox/2011-07-11-adrian-gonzalez-all-star_n.htm
   39. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: July 14, 2011 at 12:12 PM (#3877283)
Whoops. Here is the corrected link (hilarious quotes division):


I still don't get it.
   40. tfbg9 Posted: July 14, 2011 at 03:42 PM (#3877440)
Dave? Is the "joke" that the quotes concerning Gonzo are especially fawning? 'Cause they very much are, no?
They remind me of Wille B. from the Sammy Maudlin Show.
   41. Nasty Nate Posted: July 14, 2011 at 03:51 PM (#3877450)
I didn't read much once I saw the dreaded arrogant "big stage" cliche...
   42. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: July 19, 2011 at 05:57 AM (#3881086)
I'd be okay with another legitimate "not jeff Suppan" type of starter
   43. Dan Posted: July 20, 2011 at 07:14 PM (#3882324)
I am having way too much fun watching Reddick play to want Beltran at the price he's like going to cost. His price has probably gone up quite a bit with a quite few teams interested in acquiring him.
   44. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: July 20, 2011 at 07:35 PM (#3882348)
I'm enjoying Reddick but I fear the league is going to catch up with him. If he really has gained plate discipline, he's a heck of a player but I can't shake "Francoeuritis" when I think of Reddick.
   45. Joel W Posted: July 20, 2011 at 08:43 PM (#3882386)
Reddick is a) swinging outside the zone less, b) swinging inside the zone more, c) swinging less overall, d) making more contact, and e) swinging and missing less than last year. In Pawtucket this year he had 33 BBs and 39 Ks in 231 PAs, as compared to 25 and 73 in 481 PAs last year. This is all to say, take some medicine and get over your Francoeuritis.
   46. Dale Sams Posted: July 20, 2011 at 09:04 PM (#3882402)
Reddick's hole is right-handed sliders and curves way down and in. Apparently the league hasn't caught up cause I don't see him face those pitchs nearly enough.

Jerry and Don were talking about platooning with Reddick and McDonald for Drew. eff that. Let people succeed until they've proven they fail I say.
   47. Dan Posted: July 20, 2011 at 11:16 PM (#3882444)
Reddick is walking in ~10% of his PA. Jeff Francoeur he is not. He's up to around 100 PA and he hasn't forgotten his new approach yet.

I agree that sliders and cutters down and in sometimes fool Reddick, but in the past week I've seen him lay off of that pitch too, so it's not like he's an automatic out when pitchers go there.
   48. Joel W Posted: July 21, 2011 at 03:57 AM (#3882575)
You don't have to hit them if you can avoid swinging at them.
   49. Textbook Editor Posted: July 21, 2011 at 04:45 AM (#3882589)
Cutters down and in have fooled Varitek batting LH as far back as I can remember...
   50. Dan Posted: July 24, 2011 at 01:18 AM (#3884055)
For anyone who missed the game thread, Remy was caught with an open mic on MLB.tv ripping on Mike Lowell. Personally I don't think he was kidding and think he sounded really jealous of Lowell. But I could be wrong.
   51. Darren Posted: July 25, 2011 at 02:34 AM (#3884521)
The Sox must surely know they need a starter, right? Miller and Wakefield should change their names to bubble gum and chicken wire, or whatever teh expression is. My new target is Bedard.

If they don't get someone, they need to think seriously about whether Wake and Miller are really good enough to be in the rotation. They do have a couple of decent options in AAA.
   52. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: July 25, 2011 at 03:18 AM (#3884537)
It is crazy that this team is 62-37 (and 60-27 since the crappy 2-10 start) with a rotation that is Beckett and four hold-your-breathers. Lester's back on Monday, and Lackey is admittedly pitching better lately, so trading for a starting pitcher really comes down to when you think Buchholz will be back. It sounds like early August. If so, the question is: how much better is what you'd get than, say, Andrew Miller? How much would you pay for that upgrade? Garza's interesting because he gives you a strong #4 or #5 through 2013...but I'm not looking to pay through the nose for him...
   53. Joel W Posted: July 25, 2011 at 04:21 AM (#3884559)
They're about 100% to make the playoffs right now. Up 9 or 10 on a spot with 63 to play. So insofar as you need a starter it's because you think it's a huge upgrade over lackey/Wakefield for the 4 sport in the playoffs. This is totally reasonable since theyve both been pretty bad this year but I think lackey going forward isn't that much different than what we can expect on the trade market for a reasonable price.
   54. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: July 25, 2011 at 06:30 AM (#3884582)
Lackey's been a little better lately, but the Red Sox have been facing some weaker offenses. Since coming back from his "injury" on Jun 5, he's faced some mostly average to below average offenses and put up a lousy 4.99 ERA. Granted that's a vast improvement from his horrendous 8.01 ERA, but it's still pretty bad against generally below-average hitting teams. I don't know what's available on the pitching market, but an average starter would still be an improvement over "good" Lackey at this point.

Also, I'm certain Remy was joking there. He can be very dry sometimes.
   55. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 25, 2011 at 04:04 PM (#3884766)
So insofar as you need a starter it's because you think it's a huge upgrade over lackey/Wakefield for the 4 sport in the playoffs.
Buchholz still hasn't thrown off a mound yet, and is reporting back pain in between throwing sessions. If the upgrade is to the playoff #3 starter rather than the #4, it's a different calculation.

I really like Bedard as a possible target - the one problem is that he's on a really cheap contract (just 1 yr / $1M). He'd cost talent.
   56. Nasty Nate Posted: July 25, 2011 at 04:30 PM (#3884784)
They need SP depth. I don't think they should worry about whether or not someone they acquire will be good enough to start a playoff game. They should worry about the playoff rotation if/when that comes up.
   57. Joel W Posted: July 25, 2011 at 07:03 PM (#3884843)
@55 I agree with, but I thought the Clay news was more positive than that.

@56 I disagree with completely. BPro has them at 99.7% to make the playoffs. They're 8.5 games up on the Angels, and 9.5 games up on the Rays for the Wild Card with 63 games left. If they play .500 from here on out they'll win 93 or 94 games. LAA would have to go 39-22 in their last 61 to overtake the Sox. I can keep saying it in different ways, but it would take a pretty epic collapse at this point for the Red Sox not to make the playoffs, and they should be thinking about their roster as such.
   58. Textbook Editor Posted: July 25, 2011 at 07:51 PM (#3884902)
Does this count as a move:

Red Sox Sign Haeger, Assign Him to AA

This is also interesting:

Red Sox to place Drew on DL
   59. Nasty Nate Posted: July 25, 2011 at 09:16 PM (#3885031)
@56 I disagree with completely. BPro has them at 99.7% to make the playoffs. They're 8.5 games up on the Angels, and 9.5 games up on the Rays for the Wild Card with 63 games left. If they play .500 from here on out they'll win 93 or 94 games. LAA would have to go 39-22 in their last 61 to overtake the Sox. I can keep saying it in different ways, but it would take a pretty epic collapse at this point for the Red Sox not to make the playoffs, and they should be thinking about their roster as such.

I wouldn't consider losing an 8.5 game lead with 60 games an epic collapse. But whatever we call it, one of the only ways it could happen would be with 2 months of terrible starting pitching.

But, let's assume that they are a lock for the playoffs. I don’t think they let a playoff rotation dictate whether or not they trade for a SP for a couple of reasons. It is so far away, and pitching and pitching health so unpredictable, that they don’t know what shape their rotation will be at that time. Another pitcher, even if we predict him to be only equivalent to Lackey/Miller/Doubront, is still an asset come playoff time. It gives them an extra choice of who to use at that time, and that is the time when the choice is best made (not now based only on projections). With only one injury, the Sox could potentially enter an LCS having to get at least 2 starts from 5.50-ERA type guys if they make no trade. Even if all they can get in trade is a clone of Andrew Miller named Randrew ‘Randy’ Miller, they should do it because it gives them one more choice come playoff time, and they can pick from a larger list of mediocrities based on who is healthy and who is throwing well. This helps even if it is one playoff start plus mopup/long-relief.

In addition, even if they are a lock for the playoffs, they certainly aren’t a lock for the division title and homefield advantage for the first 2 rounds.
   60. Dan Posted: July 25, 2011 at 10:22 PM (#3885067)
The Red Sox have 5 of the top 10 hitters in the AL in wRC+ (among qualified hitters).
   61. Fourth True Outcome Posted: July 25, 2011 at 10:45 PM (#3885077)
According to NESN, Buchholz had a good bullpen session today. He said he had some soreness that went away with stretching, and pegged himself at about 80%. Francona said it was "night and day" from his last session, and Buchholz also gave some optimistic quotes, so he may be closer to returning than it seemed previously. It seems like a lot depends on how his full side session goes on Wednesday.
   62. Nasty Nate Posted: September 16, 2011 at 03:08 PM (#3926872)
Posts #56 to #59 prove I'm a genius!

Also, #61 just makes me depressed

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
JPWF13
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6480 seconds
41 querie(s) executed