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.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: September 11, 2011 at 01:18 PM (#3921713)
99 - I think sox therapy is exactly what you are describing 99% of the time. The fame chatters definitely not.
   102. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: September 11, 2011 at 01:25 PM (#3921714)
This, I think, is where you and I part ways in fandom, Jose (and allow me to point out that I don't think either is right or wrong):

At a moment like this one, I'm liable to post all sorts of crazy stuff in a Chatter thread in a mad gestalt of feelings about my team's plunging chances. I would not post the same thing in another thread; I try (and fail, I'm sure) to be less controlled by emotion and swayed by good argument in the site as a whole. I am far more likely to join in the "mob mentality" in a Chatter than elsewhere.
   103. bunyon Posted: September 11, 2011 at 01:54 PM (#3921721)
I think it should be noted that only Teddy and Ray got on RR with Teddy in particular crossing the line. I don't think anyone else said anything even remotely critical of him.


I apologize if it appeared I was saying anyone other than those two were out of line. They were the only folks I was meaning to argue with.
   104. bunyon Posted: September 11, 2011 at 01:56 PM (#3921722)
I'd also like to note that if someone simply comes here and agrees with the first posts premise - that the Red Sox are a bunch of choking dogs who have no chance - that THAT would not be trolling but saying it was a heck of a game is.

I get emotional response to tough losses. But Teddy Ballgame seems to have gone around the bend when his team is still in a commanding position. Weird.
   105. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:17 PM (#3921725)
I apologize if it appeared I was saying anyone other than those two were out of line. They were the only folks I was meaning to argue with.


How was I out of line? I commented that it was not unreasonable to think he was trolling. I didn't call him names, or cross any line. My tone was quite measured. And I didn't even comment in detail until he pretended it was unfathomable to think he was trolling.

As to the loss, I don't particularly care about it. I don't treat these games as if they're important to my life. They're entertainment, and, as I commented in the game chatter, I don't even mind if Tampa closes the gap further because I would then enjoy the pennant race feel to the games and start watching more. A pennant race for three weeks would be more exciting than playoff games, frankly.

So I don't care whether RR was trolling.
   106. Dale Sams Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:25 PM (#3921728)
then enjoy the pennant race feel to the games and start watching more


I also would in a heartbeat...were it not Lackey, Miller, Wakefield, and Weiland they were marching out. That's considerably worse than Jason Johnson, Jon Lester, Josh Beckett, Curt Schilling, and David Wells.
   107. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:27 PM (#3921730)
I was 99% sure that Weiland's first name was "Scott", and was stunned when I was wrong. Why on Earth did I think that?
   108. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:28 PM (#3921731)
Oh. Forget it.
   109. Jim Wisinski Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:37 PM (#3921734)
All while the BPro numbers still hold around 99%.


The ESPN numbers have the Rays at 6.7% to make the playoffs, I believe it was 4.3% before yesterday's game. To me that passes the smell test more than the 1.x% BPro has them at. They do actually control their own destiny, they can get ahead of the Red Sox from head-to-head matchups alone.

The bigger complaint I have about BPro's odds system is that a couple days ago the Yankees were at 100% to make the playoffs. Now they're at 99.8%. How does that make any ####### sense whatsoever? If they actually had a 100% chance of making the playoffs then there shouldn't be anything that could change that because if anything could make a difference then they wouldn't be at 100% in the first place.
   110. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:45 PM (#3921737)
Jim: all that means is that in the million simulations run a few days ago, the Yankees made the postseason every single time. Now they miss a couple times.
   111. tfbg9 Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:55 PM (#3921741)
You all forget he admits he hates the Red Sox and their fans as well, I think he's also posted that in the past.

He was trolling, and trying to make it look like he wasn't. He deserves what I gave him. He'll survive.

What team does rr root for, when not trolling?
   112. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:56 PM (#3921742)
Jim: all that means is that in the million simulations run a few days ago, the Yankees made the postseason every single time. Now they miss a couple times.

Probably 10,000 simulations. It takes a freaking long time to run even 100,000 simulations, unless you're just doing some fake binomial tree and ignoring SP, etc.
   113. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 11, 2011 at 02:57 PM (#3921743)
He was trolling, and trying to make it look like he wasn't. He deserves what I gave him. He'll survive.

I'd put that more as giving you ####. Since when can't we give fans of other teams ####? That's a huge part of baseball fandom.
   114. Darren Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:01 PM (#3921745)
Well, technically...

So, I need a password, separate from that to logon to BBTF to get in here?



"— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox"

It's always better if we get fans of other teams here who want to chime in on Sox-related issues, but is a blog specifically for Red Sox fans.

Without endorsing tbfg's response, I will ask what the point of RR's post was. I mean, it might make sense as a conclusion to the game chatter, but does it contribute to the discussion going on in this thread? Does it offer some kind of insight? I'm trying to imagine what result, other than the one he got, RR was hoping to get from posting it.

It seems like a post designed to tweak angry Sox fans minutes after a walk-off loss while being able to pretend that it was just an innocent observation.
   115. Darren Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:06 PM (#3921746)

I'd put that more as giving you ####. Since when can't we give fans of other teams ####? That's a huge part of baseball fandom.


I don't think that's the usual decorum on Primer, though maybe there's an exception in the game threads sometimes. Still, though, if it's okay to give someone ####, what's wrong with Teddy responding in kind?
   116. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:13 PM (#3921750)
I mean, it might make sense as a conclusion to the game chatter, but does it contribute to the discussion going on in this thread? Does it offer some kind of insight? I'm trying to imagine what result, other than the one he got, RR was hoping to get from posting it.


That's a hell of a standard. I think about my last ten posts, and I don't know if any of them "contribute to the discussion" or any of that other highfalutin' stuff. Do you maintain that each and every time you hit the "Submit Your Comment" button, your words inspire deep thought?
   117. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:16 PM (#3921752)
Also, these wars normally begin when one team or another is playing West Coast games while the other is on the East Coast, or if one team is playing while another has the day off. They always go away when that scheduling situation is resolved.
   118. tfbg9 Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:17 PM (#3921753)
Bpro this AM: BOS: 98.7%
   119. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:19 PM (#3921755)
I don't think that's the usual decorum on Primer, though maybe there's an exception in the game threads sometimes. Still, though, if it's okay to give someone ####, what's wrong with Teddy responding in kind?

Nothing, except he should mock Robinred based on how pathetic the Reds are, e.g. 15 games out of first, haven't won a World Series in 20 years, etc.

Personal attacks should be out of bounds.
   120. tfbg9 Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:21 PM (#3921757)
He was trolling. Its exactly the kind of move kevin used to makeall the time to NYY fans, except he'd do it in ChatterN and have the "class" to announe in one Chatter what he was about to go do in the other.

Is he fat? If he is, I suppose I feel kinda bad about that.
   121. Darren Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:30 PM (#3921763)
That's a hell of a standard. I think about my last ten posts, and I don't know if any of them "contribute to the discussion" or any of that other highfalutin' stuff. Do you maintain that each and every time you hit the "Submit Your Comment" button, your words inspire deep thought?


"Contribute to the discussion" is too high of a standard? Okkkaaayyyy.

Moving back to the discussion of the Red Sox implosion, did anyone notice anything about the usage of Papelbon? A couple days ago, they could have brought him down to replace a melting down Bard with 2 outs in the 8th. They didn't, of course, and lost the game. The following day Pete Abraham wrote that they had only used Pap for more than 1 inning twice that season and that using Pap for more than 1 inning was not part of the game plan.

And yet today, the Sox were perfectly okay with using Pap for 2 full innings. So does Abraham go back and reassess his previous claim? No, he just moves the goalposts: "Even though Jonathan Papelbon had thrown only 16 pitches, Terry Francona said that sending out back out for a third inning "wouldn't have been the best idea." Papelbon has not gone three inning since 2005. You don't endanger the heath of your closer to keep your lead in the wild card from falling to 4.5 games."

So he was fine using him for 2 full innings, so that's not the problem. So what is?
   122. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:38 PM (#3921768)
"Even though Jonathan Papelbon had thrown only 16 pitches, Terry Francona said that sending out back out for a third inning "wouldn't have been the best idea." Papelbon has not gone three inning since 2005. You don't endanger the heath of your closer to keep your lead in the wild card from falling to 4.5 games."


Francona gets it half right here. You _don't_ endanger the health of your closer to keep your lead from falling to 4.5 games. But there is absolutely no evidence that a third inning when he's only thrown 16 pitches "endagers his health." And he was pitching on 4 days rest, and had pitched once since August 31st.

I will note that Bard is a perfectly good pitcher, but he's not as good as Papelbon, and Papelbon had only thrown 16 pitches, and you don't know how many innings the game is going to go.
   123. Darren Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:46 PM (#3921770)
That was Abraham's conclusion, not Francona's.
   124. SG Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:48 PM (#3921771)
If they actually had a 100% chance of making the playoffs then there shouldn't be anything that could change that because if anything could make a difference then they wouldn't be at 100% in the first place.


Because it's not really 100%. It's 99.95-99.99%. It's never actually 100% until a spot is clinched.

It would look stupid to have everything displayed to three or four significant digits, so they round off.
   125. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: September 11, 2011 at 03:54 PM (#3921773)
I was 99% sure that Weiland's first name was "Scott", and was stunned when I was wrong. Why on Earth did I think that?


That's the Stone Temple Pilots/Velvet Revolver guy.
   126. Jim Wisinski Posted: September 11, 2011 at 05:39 PM (#3921810)
While looking up who Scott Weiland is earlier I came across his Dickipedia page which is an amazing website I'd never heard of before. The Mel Kiper one is my favorite of the few I've read so far.
   127. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: September 11, 2011 at 05:41 PM (#3921812)
Please, everybody kiss and make up. You don't have to like the same team, you don't have to share political viewpoints, all you have to do is agree that we're all here because there is no place better to go to, because the worst poster here is still way better than the best poster at other sports related sites.

KISS AND MAKE UP!! NOW!
   128. robinred Posted: September 11, 2011 at 05:45 PM (#3921816)
Sorry this thing became about me, guys. This stuff should be on political threads if it is anywhere. But bear with me, gotta say a couple of things:

Ray "never heard a word of his broadcast" DiPerna lecturing me about tone and context issues, is, as he likes to say, amusing, particularly since Ray, to my knowledge, has never admitted that there was any reason for people to take his making that remark on an Ernie Harwell eulogy thread in the wrong way. As I said at the top, if I actually wanted to show up here and troll the Boston guys, I would have said something sophomoric and obvious. I am not that clever. And I edited out the insult because, as I said, I thought better of it. And while Ray seems pretty concerned about my edited insult, he seems unconcerned about the unedited things said to me.

I appreciate Jose's comments, (and those of other guys) and I will keep it in mind. My comment would have been better in Game Chatter. I would like to add, though, particularly since Jose IIRC brought up the 2004 ALCS, that last night's game, while a tough loss for Boston in a very bad patch, was neither a postseason game nor an elimination game. It wasn't a game that tied the race or put them behind. No key Boston players were injured during the game or anything of that nature. Boston is no longer dragging the 86-year anchor. It was merely a very exciting game that reduced the Boston lead over TB to 4.5 games. Even I had been doing some obvious trolling, don't see it as blow-up worthy--unless the issue is personal.

Back to the BOS/TB race: Now that he has had a couple of bad outings and this thing has tightened up, I think the "Farnsworth Factor" will be part of the picture. The two guys Maddon brought in after Farnsworth both got the job done. Certainly Farnsworth will be out there again at the next opportunity to close, but I think his leash will be short.
   129. robinred Posted: September 11, 2011 at 05:49 PM (#3921818)
KISS AND MAKE UP!! NOW!


Sure. Come here.
   130. robinred Posted: September 11, 2011 at 05:54 PM (#3921823)
I'm trying to imagine what result, other than the one he got, RR was hoping to get from posting it.


Missed this. I was not hoping for any result. I was not attempting to provide any insight. It was intended as an entirely innocuous observation, and again, as you and I have some history, you would tend to look at it in a certain light.

"Still, though, if it's okay to give someone ####, what's wrong with Teddy responding in kind?"

Hmmm. You think that what he said was "responding in kind" to "heck of a game?"
   131. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: September 11, 2011 at 06:09 PM (#3921838)
RR, I'm not mad at you, and 2) I hear you're fat. I don't kiss fat guys.

Wait, that's not true. I kissed Dial when I saw him in Westchester Co. a few weeks ago. I guess I won't kiss you because I'm not mad at you?
   132. nick swisher hygiene Posted: September 11, 2011 at 06:16 PM (#3921843)
The essence of a game chatter is for fans of a particular team to present themselves in a way that would seem pathological to non-sports-fans.

On the other hand, we should all probably not be dicks to each other outside the game chatters.

And we should all recognize that Ray is hardly a troll; he's simply a lone dispassionate, objective observer in a world full of sloppy-thinking Ichiro! fanboys......

Finally, rr, you are either a fat son of a ##### or a skinny-ass ############. take your pick.
   133. McCoy Posted: September 11, 2011 at 06:20 PM (#3921846)
Is this the place where one mentions that the Rays are up 3-0 on the Red Sox?
   134. Swedish Chef Posted: September 11, 2011 at 06:24 PM (#3921849)
Is this the place where one mentions that the Rays are up 3-0 on the Red Sox?

Only if you're the sort that lives under a bridge and eats children.
   135. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: September 11, 2011 at 06:28 PM (#3921852)
That's a great site, Jim (#126). Thanks.
   136. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: September 11, 2011 at 06:51 PM (#3921872)
The Mel Kiper one is my favorite of the few I've read so far.


Kiper is a momsbasement guy just like the rest of us. He happened to get lucky and assimilated into the mainstream. Not sure what that says about baseball versus football, but there you are.
   137. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: September 11, 2011 at 07:29 PM (#3921904)
128 - You're right that it wasn't 2004 ALCS-level bad but it was the only example at the top of my head (as you might expect it often is).

At a moment like this one, I'm liable to post all sorts of crazy stuff in a Chatter thread in a mad gestalt of feelings about my team's plunging chances. I would not post the same thing in another thread; I try (and fail, I'm sure) to be less controlled by emotion and swayed by good argument in the site as a whole. I am far more likely to join in the "mob mentality" in a Chatter than elsewhere.


I don't think we're that different on this issue. I think if you go back and read ST (which you clearly do as you are about as regular a non-Red Sox fan poster there as anyone) I think you'll find the blow ups and over the top responses are the exception, not the rule. I think if you read through the posts from last night here (Teddy and Ray excepted) you'll find they were both clearly frustrated and reasonably worded on the whole. If you read the game chatter, well, I know my posts there were borderline art in their level of insanity.
   138. Dan Posted: September 11, 2011 at 08:11 PM (#3921962)
I'll be surprised if they don't lose the playoff spot at this point.
   139. Dale Sams Posted: September 11, 2011 at 08:55 PM (#3922020)
Here is my terribly hilarious impression of Matt. :>
   140. Darren Posted: September 11, 2011 at 08:56 PM (#3922022)
It's been very comforting to hear that there is no way the Sox lose this playoff spot. That is quite a relief.
   141. Dale Sams Posted: September 11, 2011 at 09:00 PM (#3922026)
I refuse to count the Sox out unless TOR beats them both games.
   142. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: September 11, 2011 at 09:04 PM (#3922030)
I apologize for going off on Jose in the gamechatter. I really am a terrible Sox fan. I know a lot about baseball history, but I can't tell you how to build a team and my knowledge of the rulebook is spotty. I can't analyze swings or defense for ####. I thought Crawford opened his stance more this year than he had in the past. Losses disappoint me, but they don't anger me. I don't hate anyone associated with the team; not even Francona, Varitek, or Wakefield. I only watch about a couple of games a week and I'm not sure why Youkilis is out.
   143. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: September 11, 2011 at 09:45 PM (#3922061)
GGC - I don't think you went off on me at all, your points were entirely valid. If I responded inappropriately I sincerely apologize. I don't hate anyone on the team either, I'm just incredibly frustrated right now.

Edit - not sure where it's coming fro but you are certainly not a bad fan. Again, if I suggested that I assure you that was inadvertent and not my belief.
   144. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 11, 2011 at 10:28 PM (#3922101)
In today's Game Chatter I posted that I was going to avoid GCs until they win a game. I may have to amend that to all Red Sox threads. These are becoming just too unpleasant to read.
   145. Dan Posted: September 11, 2011 at 10:38 PM (#3922115)
See you next April, Biff ;)
   146. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: September 11, 2011 at 11:30 PM (#3922161)
My post didn't seem rash to you? I guess it is hard to read tone into them. I suppose I am not a bad fan; just not as well informed on the current team as some here. Between work and my baseball history hobby, it is tough to find the time.
   147. Textbook Editor Posted: September 12, 2011 at 01:57 AM (#3922232)
Does anyone know a good dry cleaner?

Rays are in Baltimore for 3, we get the Blue Jays for 2. At this point, I'll just assume the Rays take 2 of 3 and we get 1 of 2, which would leave them 3 back going into the 4-game series. At that point, a split would leave them still 3 back, only now there's be just 10 to play and 7 of those 10 for the Rays are against the Yankees. Now, by that time the Yankees may well have wrapped up the division, but (a) they might not have, and (b) the Yankees might still be fighting to clinch home field. On top of this, the first 4 games against the Yankees are at YS and include a day/night DH in the middle day of the 3-day series and it's likely the Yankees won't have clinched anything by that point.

Of course, right after the Rays series we have a day/night DH and 4 games in 3 days against the Orioles--but at least it's at home.

...and of course our pitching for the entire Rays series is basically TBD at this point, and we're looking at Weiland or Dubront or someone like that to start one of the Orioles DH games... [sigh]

My question: Aceves has to get the Thursday start, right? No way Weiland gets it if they need an extra arm for the Orioles DH on 9/19. What about this for the pitching:

Thurs: Aceves
Fri: Lester
Sat: Beckett
Sun: Wakefield

Then for the DH on Monday you throw Lackey/Weiland and for the Tuesday game (9/20) you go to Aceves for the start. At this point Miller/Bowden's the mop-up man you bring in when Lackey gets shelled. Albers is the guy you bring in if you want to give up a big hit with the bases loaded.

I confess picking between Lackey/Miller is tough right now (would I like to be poisoned or electrocuted?), but I think Lackey gives you more chance of getting through 5 innings down just 5-0, whereas Miller could put you in a 7-0 hole after 2 IP.
   148. bunyon Posted: September 12, 2011 at 01:57 AM (#3922233)
Boring game today.


(I don't hate Sox fans, but I don't particularly care about you guys much, either (as a group). You were cute until 2004 and I was happy for you for a few months. Since then you've been just another annoying powerhouse. I'll not weep for any of you if, as you think likely, your team fails at the end.)

I could be wrong, Ray, but in the internet sites I habit, "troll" is a more vile insult than "a$$hole" or "pedophile" or "Republican".

If Robin had said today's game was a "heck of a game" it would have been trolling. Because today's game was a group of mouth-breathers quitting on the season.


(Yes, if you're curious, this post could well be labeled trolling. Watch it or I'll eat your ####### dog.)
   149. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: September 12, 2011 at 03:47 AM (#3922304)
Here's something I don't really understand about BPro's playoff odds - how can it take into account the team as presently constructed? It seems hard to believe that a team running out the current Red Sox pitchers would be the same as the one that ran out a healthy Beckett, Youkilis, and Buchholz/Bedard earlier. This team is currently worse, talent-wise, than the mean 2011 Red Sox team, and it seems like the true quality of the team varies quite a bit on the health of the roster.
   150. robinred Posted: September 12, 2011 at 04:05 AM (#3922325)
Here's something I don't really understand about BPro's playoff odds - how can it take into account the team as presently constructed?


Good question. Do they talk about that on the site?
   151. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: September 12, 2011 at 04:25 AM (#3922351)
Good question. Do they talk about that on the site?


They claim to have some kind of depth chart thing, but since the nature of the injuries to Beckett/Youkilis/Buchholz/Bedard are unclear, I'm not sure how it would be of much use. Their number seems falsely high, or at least contains a lot more variability/error than they indicate.
   152. tfbg9 Posted: September 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM (#3922476)
Bpro, this AM, BOS: 96.9%...hahahahahahaha!
   153. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 12, 2011 at 01:44 PM (#3922511)
Then for the DH on Monday you throw Lackey/Weiland and for the Tuesday game (9/20) you go to Aceves for the start.

Not many good options given the state of the Sox rotation, but a Lackey/Weiland double-header seems likely to involve the long reliever(s) at some point.
   154. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 12, 2011 at 03:25 PM (#3922568)
They claim to have some kind of depth chart thing, but since the nature of the injuries to Beckett/Youkilis/Buchholz/Bedard are unclear, I'm not sure how it would be of much use. Their number seems falsely high, or at least contains a lot more variability/error than they indicate.


Even if these things are worth another 10 percentage points - so make it 85% instead of 95% - they're not losing the wild card unless they plan to bring back Wes Gardner and Tom Bolton and have them make all the remaining starts.
   155. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: September 12, 2011 at 03:37 PM (#3922584)
they're not losing the wild card unless they plan to bring back Wes Gardner and Tom Bolton and have them make all the remaining starts.


Have you looked at the rotation?

ERA+
John Lackey - 66
Andrew Miller - 75
Tim Wakefield - 83
Wes Gardner - 94 (1988 & 1989)
Tom Bolton - 99 (1990 & 1991) in both cases their two fullish seasons as starters with the Sox
   156. SG Posted: September 12, 2011 at 03:47 PM (#3922602)
They claim to have some kind of depth chart thing, but since the nature of the injuries to Beckett/Youkilis/Buchholz/Bedard are unclear, I'm not sure how it would be of much use. Their number seems falsely high, or at least contains a lot more variability/error than they indicate.


According to their report, they set Boston and New York as a .577 wpct team and Tampa Bay as a .540 wpct team. Tweaking those can make a major difference.

If I set Boston and New York as .500 teams and Tampa Bay as a .700 team and run through the rest of the season 10,000 times I get:

New York: 56.5% Div, 27.5% WC, 84.0% PL (Div + WC)
Boston: 26.0% Div, 39.0% WC, 65.0% PL
Tampa Bay: 17.5% Div, 33.5% WC, 51.0% PL

My guess is that the gap is smaller than that, so Tampa Bay's odds are lower across the board, but I do think B Pro is under-selling them.
   157. SoSH U at work Posted: September 12, 2011 at 03:57 PM (#3922609)
Have you looked at the rotation?


You do realize these guys have been in the rotation pretty much all year (Wake 2/3 and Miller half the year). They've sucked all year, and the Sox have gone 32-28 in their starts. Yes, you'd rather send competent pitchers to the mound instead of this dreck, but their names don't actually equate to automatic L.

Second, 2/5ths of the Rays' rotation have sub 100 ERA+ (though not quite as far down). Where is the assumption that those clowns can't win.

Let's keep it dry fellas.
   158. Dale Sams Posted: September 12, 2011 at 04:29 PM (#3922641)
Optimisticlly, I have the Sox going 7-9* . I have the Rays going 11-6.**

Sox could do wonders for themselves in this scenario by sweeping TOR or splitting the Rays.

* 1-1 vs TOR
1-3 vs TB
3-1 vs BALT
1-2 vs NY
1-2 vs BALT

** 2-1 vs BALT
3-1 vs. BOS
2-2 vs. NY
2-1 vs. TOR
2-1 vs. NY

Keep in mind NY has a lot of injury problems right now, if you didn't already know that.

And a lot of the doubt about the Rays seems to be based on the assumption that right now, the Red Sox are a better team. Why would you think that a team that has gone 19-21 in Aug/Sept. is better than one that has gone 25-13? I think 6 weeks is a good sample size of the present state of a team. And the Rays are upgrading slightly with Moore. Is Tazawa gonna kick Albers out of the BP?

At the end of the day if I'm being kind it looks like a coin-flip between the two team. 93% is beyond absurd.
   159. Nasty Nate Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:07 PM (#3922692)
I'm so glad I was away from Boston all weekend and not watching the games. I haven't read all the threads, but there seems to be the expected gnashing of teeth. I think all the panicking is reasonable, although I expect the Sox to sneak into the playoffs but get blown out in the LDS - which would be just as disappointing to me. I knew they needed to acquire a SP at mid-season, but I didn't think they would need 2-3 of them. ...ah the hazy days of midsummer when sentiments around here were "Is this offense great, or one of the greatest of all time" and "why trade for a SP, if he's not someone good enough to pencil in to start a playoff game?".

I'm sure everyone has gone thru the permutations, but aren't the 7 TB-NY games a blessing? Tampa has to play a good team, or if they just steamroll NY and everyone else, the Sox only have to catch NY.
   160. SG Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:26 PM (#3922711)
Why would you think that a team that has gone 19-21 in Aug/Sept. is better than one that has gone 25-13?


a) Because we have more than six weeks of data to go on.
b) Actual W/L over a stretch can be misleading, and runs scored/allowed may tell us more
c) If there's some basis to believe this, the question is one of degree, because even if Tampa Bay is better than Boston right now, the question is whether or not they're better enough that they can make up the remaining deficit between them.

If we go by actual runs scored and allowed since August 1:
Boston: 197 runs scored, 195 allowed, Pythagenpat wpct: .502
Tampa Bay: 171 runs scored, 122 runs allowed, Pythagenpat wpct:.647

If we go by the linear weights of batting events for and against since August 1:
Boston: 203 runs scored, 182 allowed, Pythagenpat wpct: .552
Tampa Bay: 173 runs scored, 134 runs allowed, Pythagenpat wpct:.614

If we assume actual runs scored/allowed is a good proxy for how good both teams are right now, and assuming a .525 Yankee team, the postseason odds for them look like:

Boston: 14.2% Div, 49.5% WC, 63.7% PL
Tampa Bay: 11.3% Div, 31.3% WC, 42.7% PL

Using the linear weights instead:

Boston: 25.2% Div, 53.8% WC, 79.0% PL
Tampa Bay: 5.7% Div, 18.2% WC, 23.8% PL

Anything can happen over 20 games, so any postseason odds at this point are more for illustration than utility. It really doesn't take much to swing these things widely, especially given the way all these teams' fates are intertwined.
   161. Dale Sams Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:32 PM (#3922721)
aren't the 7 TB-NY games a blessing


If NY wern't reeling, I'd say so. I don't see the Sox recovering quite enough and NY to tank enough for the Sox to catch NY, But wouldn't that be awesome?

####, if it comes down to the last game and a healthy Lester or Beckett arn't scheduled to start, I say start Paps till his arm falls off, send in Bard, then let Aceves finish it.
   162. SG Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:34 PM (#3922723)
I'm sure everyone has gone thru the permutations, but aren't the 7 TB-NY games a blessing? Tampa has to play a good team, or if they just steamroll NY and everyone else, the Sox only have to catch NY.


Pretty much. The Red Sox are guaranteed to not lose ground on one of their two competitors seven times in the next 20 days. It looks like on the six days where the Yankees and Rays are playing, Boston is playing Baltimore on five of them and has an off day on one of them.
   163. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:40 PM (#3922729)
Boston Globe On-Line Poll - How worried are you about the Red Sox?
A. Extremely. I could see them blowing this. 70.38%
B. A little. They just don't seem quite right. 23.89%
C. Not at all. They'll get in gear when it counts. 3.42%
d. I'm keeping the faith. 2.3%

2011, the year the River Charles runs yellow?
   164. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:43 PM (#3922732)
See, now that's trolling.

EDIT: to be clear, that'd be trolling whether it were on Sox Therapy, the Newsblog, or the comments area at Jezebel. I guess you could say that more properly it's fanboy taunting, and not exactly trolling. Either way, it's something that we're usually lacking at BTF, and BTF is usually better for it.
   165. Dale Sams Posted: September 12, 2011 at 05:50 PM (#3922743)
I don't see that as trolling at all (just imo)...well, maybe a teeny bit.
   166. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 12, 2011 at 06:10 PM (#3922775)
See, now that's trolling.

I doubt anyone would feel that way if the screen name posting # 163 didn't show a certain affiliation. The post consisted of factual information on the extent of concern among Red Sox fans (to be taken with the usual caveats about online polls), followed up with an attempt at humor in keeping with the pants pissing meme in the title of the thread, which has also become a staple of numerous recent BBTF threads. Are only some people allowed to use it?
   167. Dandy Little Glove Man Posted: September 12, 2011 at 07:21 PM (#3922851)
Boston Globe On-Line Poll - How worried are you about the Red Sox?
A. Extremely. I could see them blowing this. 70.38%
B. A little. They just don't seem quite right. 23.89%
C. Not at all. They'll get in gear when it counts. 3.42%
d. I'm keeping the faith. 2.3%


These poll options are terrible. C and D appear to be identical viewpoints. B is vague and arguably non-responsive. How does "they just don't seem quite right" equate with any particular level of confidence? A is so broad that it could encompass almost any fan's opinion.

I'd think the options should be more like this to get a realistic sense of the cumulative reader perspective:
How worried are you about the Red Sox?
A. Extremely. I expect them to miss the playoffs at this point.
B. Somewhat. They'll probably make the playoffs, but I could easily see them blowing this and falling short.
C. A little. They'll almost certainly make the playoffs, but this doesn't feel like a championship-caliber team.
D. Not at all. They'll get in gear when it counts. I'm keeping the faith.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
greenback calls it soccer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.4735 seconds
41 querie(s) executed