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 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Famous Original Joe C Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:41 AM (#2367836)
WEEI reporting Beckett to the DL, and Hansack called up to start tomorrow night.
   2. Famous Original Joe C Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:42 AM (#2367839)
Er, WRKO. Whatever.
   3. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:51 AM (#2367853)
Hansack can go for the 9-inning no-no this time.
   4. Xander Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:58 AM (#2367858)
They're playing well. Three more quarters of the season to go.
   5. Darren Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:03 AM (#2367862)
Beckett would only miss 2 starts if he came back on the 29th. This seems like the cautious, smart way to go. I would still have loved to see Buchholz, who had another solid start tonight. Lester pitches on Saturday for Pawtucket, so he may be back fairly soon too.

This team has really surpassed every expectation I've set for them. When they finished April 16-8, I was hoping they'd be able to go 16-12 in May. They're now 12-4 in May. In this Tigers series, I was hoping for a split, but they took 3 of 4.
   6. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:07 AM (#2367863)
FWIW...Hansack thus far w/ PAW.

          IP    SO   BB   H   ER   ERA
Hansack   34.2  37   9    35  15   3.89
   7. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:08 AM (#2367865)
Ah, feck. I tried.
   8. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:10 AM (#2367868)
I thought that this was going to be about Coco's OPS. Then I relaized that that's more like Lugo's #s.

I'm going to see these guys in NYC on Wednesday. Sounds like it might be a Hansack start.
   9. Darren Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:11 AM (#2367870)
I've mentioned how I'm not especially impressed by Hansack, but I'm glad he got another chance after that lousy relief outing. I'm sure he was somewhat nervous, and the team scored about 42 runs in the top half of the inning as he warmed. Must have been a long, tough wait.
   10. Darren Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:12 AM (#2367871)
I'm going to see these guys in NYC on Wednesday. Sounds like it might be a Hansack start.


Got any extra tickets? (never hurts to ask)

The guys on SOSH are saying that Tavarez will get that start.
   11. Bad Fish Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:16 AM (#2367874)
I'm not going to get too excited until I see them playing consistently well through July. I think this squad is a bit more sound than last years team, and they seem to be deeper, but that might only be because they haven't experienced any major setbacks or injuries, yet. Also, the Yanks don't have a stake through their heart yet, either.

All that said, the boy's pitching has been outstanding, and looks to stay that way, and some of the hitters still haven't woke up yet. There *could* be a LOT of upside to this team.
   12. Famous Original Joe C Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:24 AM (#2367884)
Rotoworld is saying Hansack will go friday, Gabbard sunday, and Tavarez wednesday in NY.
   13. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:25 AM (#2367886)
I get the sense Hansack is only coming up becuse it is his turn in the rotation anyway for PAW. On merit, ability and long-term considerations alone, it seems like Pauley or Gabbard would have been better choices.

I am sure some things will go badly soon that I am just not seeing at the moment. But Boston's depth is astounding. Hinske, Pena and Cora on the offensive side. Lester, Hansack, Gabbard and Pauley (to say nothing of Buchholz) should an SP or two go down.
   14. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:26 AM (#2367887)
Ah, Gabbard goes Sunday. Cool.
   15. Darren Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:31 AM (#2367890)
If Pauley puts up a good strong year in AAA, I'll start to consider him a prospect. Until then, he seems like he gives up too many HRs to make an impact in the league. IIRC, his stuff's not too impressive. Gabbard? He doesn't impress me much either.

If you want to give someone a ML start based on how they've performed, you'd give it to Buchholz. It would require moving someone off the 40-man (Kyle Jackson?), but that would be the guy.
   16. Xander Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:34 AM (#2367894)
Gabbard is good.
   17. PJ Martinez Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:37 AM (#2367895)
.700 through 40 games is great-- but what makes it really stand out is that the rest of the division has been terrible. The 2002 team was 29-11 through 40 games-- but the Yankees of 2002 went 25-15 over that stretch, so the Sox hadn't built up much of a lead. Once the teams reached the halfway point, they were tied.

I've no doubt that Abreu and Damon and Cano will all hit a bit better, plus they'll have Clemens and Hughes to start games soon, with Mussina possibly getting better as he heals up. The Yankees will make a run. But the Sox have done a great job to build a cushion that might sustain them.
   18. John DiFool2 Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:51 AM (#2367902)
I am worried a bit about Schill. Several guys on the live feed said he was only around 89 on the gun tonite (and the several Baseball Tonight clips I saw confirmed that). 6 K's was good but he was very very fortunate tonight, and with Beckett out his starts become more important.
   19. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:52 AM (#2367903)
Sorry, D. I gave it to my brother. I'll have to hit up New Britain next time Portland rolls through. I cou;dn't make it their last trip.
   20. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:55 AM (#2367907)
Schill is fine. He has the good FB when he needs it, as evidenced by the 92 MPH paintjob to Guillen in the top of the 1st with the bases full.

Like many of the other good older pitchers, he seems to have a keen understanding of what he can and cannot do, and just how much he has in the tank for a given night.
   21. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:58 AM (#2367911)
Hansack vs. Lerew
Daisuke vs. Smoltz
Gabbard vs. Hudson
Wakefield vs. Mussina
Schilling vs. Wang
Tavarez vs. DeSalvo

Well, if there's a time for the Sox to drop a bunch of their lead, it's this week. I would be very happy with 3-3 on this stretch.

One or two early losses, and I say you pull a McNally and delete teh thread.
   22. Darren Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:01 AM (#2367913)
The thread stays. It speaks only of how things are going and how they have gone. It doesn't say it will continue in the future. I was very careful about that because of the whole jinx/hoo doo factor.
   23. Darren Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:02 AM (#2367915)
Oh, and 3-3 would be awesome.
   24. Dr. Vaux Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:05 AM (#2367917)
The Tigers are not that good; the Red Sox taking three of four from them at Fenway is exactly what should be expected.

But I was just now thinking about the phenomenon of big leads early in the season (pre-August 15th or so, really). It seems that they disappear much more readily in the past several years than they did before: the Mariners in '02 and '03; the Phillies in some year led the East by 8 games at one point in June; the Twins in '01; the Tigers last year; the Astros in '02; the Dodgers in '04, etc. And it occured to me--it probably was obvious to everyone else already--that that's because of the unbalanced schedule. A large lead is clearly less safe the more games that the first and second place teams have left to play against each other. Divisional play also makes it easier for teams to roll up large leads while they happen to be hot, even though they aren't really good enough to maintain them. And, it seems that 15 years ago, teams that fell behind by 7, 8, 9 games by the beginning of June were more inclined to pack things in than they are now, perhaps because of the previous two observations.

Now, the Red Sox are a much better team than the '02 Phillies, but they still have 13 left against the Yankees.
   25. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:14 AM (#2367923)
The thread stays.
Of course. I hope that no one would think I was honestly advocating McNally mimesis.
   26. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:15 AM (#2367925)
Gahd. That's an 0-6 waiting to happen.
   27. Sean McNally Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:19 AM (#2367930)
One or two early losses, and I say you pull a McNally and delete teh thread.


I'm a verb! Cool.
   28. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:21 AM (#2367931)
I'm a verb! Cool.
A noun, actually.
   29. Döner Kebap Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:55 AM (#2367961)
The Tigers are not that good; the Red Sox taking three of four from them at Fenway is exactly what should be expected.


By what measure is Detroit no that good? They're 24-16 and they've scored 209 runs (tied for 3rd in the league with Cleveland).

With Tavarez and Wakefield pitching two of the games, expecting 3/4 is expecting alot.

but they still have 13 left against the Yankees.


12, actually. And just splitting them will leave the Yankees right where they are now. To catch up, the Yanks are going to have to actually beat teams hitting .221 and sitting in dead last in nearly every offensive category.
   30. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 18, 2007 at 05:07 AM (#2367971)
I don't believe in jinxes or hoodoo.

I've no doubt that Abreu and Damon and Cano will all hit a bit better

Yeah, but Jeter and Posada won't continue hitting as well as they have.
   31. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 18, 2007 at 06:27 AM (#2368003)
A noun, actually.

"You've been McNally'ed, biotch!"

Hansack vs. Lerew
Daisuke vs. Smoltz
Gabbard vs. Hudson
Wakefield vs. Mussina
Schilling vs. Wang
Tavarez vs. DeSalvo


Daisuke can rake.
   32. bibigon Posted: May 18, 2007 at 06:50 AM (#2368008)
They run the table these next six, and I'm calling it. Anything short of that is unacceptable.

Using profoundly unsound methodology, I see the Red Sox winning the first two Braves games, then dropping the 3rd. They take the Yankee opener, and drop the remaining two, for a 3-3 split, with two of those losses to the Yankees unfortunately. If they do that, they go into Thursday with at least a 6.5 game lead, which is kinda sorta tolerable.
   33. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: May 18, 2007 at 09:24 AM (#2368017)
yeh, I could handle 6.5.

After Opening Day I would have been happy with a 0.5lead at this stage
   34. villageidiom Posted: May 18, 2007 at 11:10 AM (#2368025)
Daisuke vs. Smoltz
I'll be there. And no, Darren, I don't have an extra ticket. I'd have to make a roster move on my family, and I'm not inclined to do it.
   35. Mister High Standards Posted: May 18, 2007 at 11:53 AM (#2368038)
Hansack vs. Lerew
Daisuke vs. Smoltz
Gabbard vs. Hudson
Wakefield vs. Mussina
Schilling vs. Wang
Tavarez vs. DeSalvo


Thats not all that tough of a 6 game stretch. Only the hudson game looks like a mismatch. With the Hanasack game, I think the sox may have 3 or so very small pitching advantages in these games. very small.
   36. plim Posted: May 18, 2007 at 01:48 PM (#2368095)
Ennui, how dare you? giving tickets to family instead of offering it to the primates?!

just playin...enjoy the game.

i'll probably be stuck watching them on YES...it sucks being a red sox fan in nyc/nj.
   37. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 18, 2007 at 01:56 PM (#2368103)
Oh, Veronica Mars was cancelled for next season.

FRAK!!!!!!!!!
   38. Nasty Nate Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:16 PM (#2368123)
any guesses about when exactly they will get the games in this weekend? it will be raining for the foreseeable future. I cant see how they would get tonights game in, or anything tomorrow until late in the day. I'm supposed to be going to the Dizzy/Smoltz game.

maybe play one late saturday and play two on sunday.

--tripleheader on sunday--
   39. chris p Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:19 PM (#2368129)
Oh, Veronica Mars was cancelled for next season.

so does that mean that you'll quit with the stupid nickname?
   40. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:27 PM (#2368139)
Hansack vs. Lerew
Daisuke vs. Smoltz
Gabbard vs. Hudson
Wakefield vs. Mussina
Schilling vs. Wang
Tavarez vs. DeSalvo


Any reason they are going with a six man for this stretch?
   41. chris p Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:33 PM (#2368145)
Any reason they are going with a six man for this stretch?

b/c of yesterday's doubleheader. schilling goes on his regular rest, but if tavarez went the day before schilling, he'd be going on short rest ... so, wakefield is pushed back a day to tavarez's spot and tavarez also gets an extra day rest, but that leaves a hole sunday.
   42. tfbg9 Posted: May 18, 2007 at 02:55 PM (#2368167)
Daisuke vs. Smoltz

This aint gonna be on TV except in ATL and BOS, is it? Stupid blackout rule!
   43. tfbg9 Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:18 PM (#2368185)
BTW, what thread did McNally "yank", so to speak?
   44. Dave Cyprian Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:23 PM (#2368186)
3-3 would be a nice stretch for this week.... BECAUSE WE HAVE A HUGE SWEET LEAD!

If anyone wants to join me in open celebration and not worry about jinxes and curses, you've just got to check out the "We're Doomed" thread over on NYYFANS. It's literally days of laugh out loud enjoyment. Recent comments: Damon is soft, half of them want to acquire Mike Lowell, and Phil Hughes is getting fitted for the HoF.

What a great last month or so. I was at the game on Monday, and was able to scream out "Dice Dealing!" for nine full innings.
   45. Sexy Lizard Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:43 PM (#2368207)
Daisuke v. Smoltz makes me think back to this game, Smoltz v. Nomo in Hideo's great first year. There was a lot of hype beforehand, both pitchers were really amped, there was a real playoff atmosphere, and Chipper won it with a homer with two outs in the ninth.
   46. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:44 PM (#2368209)
half of them want to acquire Mike Lowell

And the other half think he "sucks", which is just as funny.
   47. chris p Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:48 PM (#2368212)
wow, dave ... that thread is absurd! they want to move damon to 1b?!?!
   48. Xander Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:55 PM (#2368218)
Youkilis is 6th in the AL in runs created.

Oki is tied for 1st in baseball in pitching runs created.

Unfortunately, I do not think those will hold.
   49. Jorge Luis Bourjos (Walewander) Posted: May 18, 2007 at 03:57 PM (#2368219)
Vaux, even a diehard Tigers skeptic like you knows were very unlucky not to take a split in the last two games, especially the night game. A 3-4 road trip to the Metrodome and Fenway, starting 2 AAA pitchers, is not that bad. And fortunately, the biggest gaping hole of suck in the lineup is the easiest spot to fix . All we need is Leyland and DD to figure it out ASAP.
   50. Cowboy Popup Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:00 PM (#2368221)
"Yeah, but Jeter and Posada won't continue hitting as well as they have."

I'd say that the group of lefties that forgot how to hit is underperforming way more then Jorge and Jeter (especially Jeter) are overperforming. If the lineup starts hitting like it's projected to, the offense will get better.

Not that that will happen. Cano was obviously a fluke and Abreu is done. Damon will never get healthy because he will never rest and the Yanks will finish one game under .500.
   51. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:06 PM (#2368222)
Bowden v. Clemens in Trenton next week barring rainouts. Thought I would toss that in here.
   52. PJ Martinez Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:12 PM (#2368228)
NYYfans is always amusing, but the posters over at Bronx Banter are pretty down, too. Which is understandable, I guess, but I'm not nearly as down on the Yankees as so many of their fans seem to be right now. I agree with CP that Jeter and Posada are not overperforming to the same extent as Abreu, Damon and Cano are underperforming. Though I hope his subsequent predictions also hold true, of course.
   53. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:15 PM (#2368231)
I didn't say that they were overperforming to the same extent, I was just saying that their likely regression will balance it out a little if Abreu, Damon, and Cano turn it around.
   54. bibigon Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:16 PM (#2368232)
Not that that will happen. Cano was obviously a fluke and Abreu is done. Damon will never get healthy because he will never rest and the Yanks will finish one game under .500.


Cano actually was a fluke. Sort of at least.
   55. Josh Posted: May 18, 2007 at 04:38 PM (#2368250)
If I were a Yankees fan I'd be down, too.

In fact, I think I was down in the dog-days of last summer.
   56. John DiFool2 Posted: May 18, 2007 at 05:17 PM (#2368287)
#52 that is certainly interesting-I'm all over that game.
   57. Xander Posted: May 18, 2007 at 05:26 PM (#2368294)
Bowden v. Clemens in Trenton next week barring rainouts. Thought I would toss that in here.
I'm familiar with Bowden, who's the other one?
   58. chris p Posted: May 18, 2007 at 05:43 PM (#2368302)
Bowden v. Clemens in Trenton next week barring rainouts. Thought I would toss that in here.

I'm familiar with Bowden, who's the other one?


4th from the right
   59. Xander Posted: May 18, 2007 at 05:48 PM (#2368308)
Seems like a journeyman. You'd wonder why the Yankees would have minor league filler take up a roster spot that could have gone to a prospect.
   60. chris p Posted: May 18, 2007 at 05:55 PM (#2368316)
You'd wonder why the Yankees would have minor league filler take up a roster spot that could have gone to a prospect.

well, they had to call desalvo up to the big club.
   61. Roger Cedeno's Spleen Posted: May 18, 2007 at 06:42 PM (#2368360)
Oki is tied for 1st in baseball in pitching runs created.


I always thought that stat should be called "runs destroyed."
   62. plim Posted: May 18, 2007 at 08:11 PM (#2368443)
Oki is tied for 1st in baseball in pitching runs created.

I always thought that stat should be called "runs destroyed."


isn't it runs saved?
   63. rr Posted: May 18, 2007 at 08:59 PM (#2368509)
The Red Sox are now 28-12. They have a 9.5 game lead in their division. They just took three out of four from the team that had the 2nd best record in the AL. The 2nd game of tonight’s double header featured a lousy lineup, a terrible defensive OF, and a starting pitcher who seemed to have nothing. Still, Eric Hinske makes a diving catch and smashes a HR and they win 4-2. Things are going very well for this team right now, to say the least.

All in spite of being underdogs.
   64. dave h Posted: May 18, 2007 at 09:46 PM (#2368546)
Sure the Sox are 28-12, but the game between Oil Can Boyd's team and the New Haven Cutters was rained out today. I had seats next to Oil Can's dugout too for a whopping $12. Color me disappointed.
   65. jim in providence Posted: May 18, 2007 at 11:19 PM (#2368625)
All in spite of being underdogs.

You forgot "lovable." Oh wait, that's "lovable losers," isn't it? Scratch that.
   66. Darren Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:20 AM (#2369043)
All in spite of being underdogs.


No, I've been informed that they're not underdogs anymore. Whereas the Yankees used to comfortably outspend the Red Sox, their payrolls are now equal: $207 million to $143 million.
   67. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:35 AM (#2369052)
What COULD we get for Mike Lowell if we traded him?

Remember, we get 2 1st rounders if we don't offer him arbitration after this season, so... Mike Lowell trade thoughts? Mike Lowell packaged with Coco?
   68. Darren Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:41 AM (#2369056)
No, I think you have to offer him arb to get those, right? Or did that change?

I doubt we could get much for Lowell. People know he's a first half player. I can't believe I'm saying this, but they should look into signing him shortterm after this season.
   69. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:42 AM (#2369058)
Maybe I'm missing something. Why in the world would we trade Lowell?
   70. Xander Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:44 AM (#2369060)
You have to offer him arbitration to get the picks.

I wouldn't mind if he signed an effective extension after the year to 1 year/ 9 million. But if he does finish with strong numbers, you certainly can't blame him for taking advantage of one last pay-day. I wouldn't mind taking some draft picks for him.

Pray tell, if we trade him, who will be playing 3rd base. Eric Hinske? Come on. He's a good player guys.
   71. Darren Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:47 AM (#2369062)
I'm certainly not advocating trading him, unless you're getting something great back. Even then, you'd have to make sure you acquire a 1b/3b to replace him.
   72. Darren Posted: May 19, 2007 at 02:48 AM (#2369063)
10 game lead, BTW.
   73. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:27 AM (#2369087)
Frak, what did i mmean, I meant if we DO offer him arbitration. Me type bad.

I doubt we could get much for Lowell. People know he's a first half player. I can't believe I'm saying this, but they should look into signing him shortterm after this season.

I was thinking maybe Mike Lowell and Coco Crisp could be packaged so we could trade for a really really really big bat at 1B+maybe another bullpen arm, move Wily Mo into CF/RF permanantly, and bring up David Murphy.
   74. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:35 AM (#2369091)
I was thinking maybe Mike Lowell and Coco Crisp could be packaged so we could trade for a really really really big bat at 1B+maybe another bullpen arm

You're probably in fantasy land here. I don't see how Lowell/Crisp is worth a "really really really" big bat at 1B...and a reliever.
   75. PJ Martinez Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:35 AM (#2369092)
And that "really really really big bat at 1B" would be? And why would some team give him up for Lowell and Crisp?
   76. PJ Martinez Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:37 AM (#2369095)
The reason it doesn't make sense to trade Lowell is only a contending team would want him. So they wouldn't give us something that would help right now, because they'd want that for themselves.

I wish one of our OFs had more trade value... I could see one of them going along with a minor leaguer in some deal, but I fear the minor leaguer will have to carry most of the value, unless they're just picking up a reliever who might help or something.
   77. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:37 AM (#2369096)
Glaus?

I think that's an even trade. But Toronto would never do it.


I don't think Boston would ever do it. Glaus is too fragile.
   78. chris p Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:40 AM (#2369099)
why are we even discussing trading lowell? wok, this isn't a ####### roto team.
   79. PJ Martinez Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:46 AM (#2369109)
How does it shore up third to acquire an old third baseman who's a free agent at the end of the year?
   80. Xander Posted: May 19, 2007 at 03:54 AM (#2369116)
There's no option.
   81. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 19, 2007 at 04:01 AM (#2369119)
why are we even discussing trading lowell? wok, this isn't a ####### roto team.

Becuase his trade value is the highest it could ever be.

A package of Lowell and Crisp is somewhat attractive. Crisp is a young-ish OF who's got tools, and Lowell is a very good veteran player who doens't have long-term money tied up and could turn into 2 1st round picks.

I wish one of our OFs had more trade value... I could see one of them going along with a minor leaguer in some deal, but I fear the minor leaguer will have to carry most of the value, unless they're just picking up a reliever who might help or something.

Crisp and a minor leaguer for a really good bullpen arm would suffice for me. When do the NL teams with good bullpen arms start giving up on their season?
   82. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 19, 2007 at 04:42 AM (#2369139)
Crisp and a minor leaguer for a really good bullpen arm would suffice for me. When do the NL teams with good bullpen arms start giving up on their season?

This is selling too low on Crisp, disappointing as he's been. Plus our bullpen has been pretty damn good this season.
   83. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 19, 2007 at 04:46 AM (#2369141)
Really depends on the arm though. Rudy Seanez would be selling low. We might be able to get somebody in the fantastic range. I don't want Levski coming here and shitting on me, but Brian Fuentes would be kind of badass.
   84. Miko Supports Shane's Spam Habit Posted: May 19, 2007 at 06:20 AM (#2369183)
but Brian Fuentes would be kind of badass.

Lowell for Brian Fuentes? Oh, so you're that guy who always calls WEEI.
   85. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 19, 2007 at 06:24 AM (#2369185)
Damn, busted.
   86. chris p Posted: May 19, 2007 at 04:26 PM (#2369304)
####### wok. maybe you should go back to making race jokes.
   87. rr Posted: May 19, 2007 at 04:29 PM (#2369309)
No, I've been informed that they're not underdogs anymore. Whereas the Yankees used to comfortably outspend the Red Sox, their payrolls are now equal: $207 million to $143 million.

Yes, and as we all know, the only factor that determines who the underdog is is team payroll.
   88. Darren Posted: May 19, 2007 at 08:11 PM (#2369751)
Yes, we all know that.
   89. rr Posted: May 19, 2007 at 08:21 PM (#2369797)
Yes, we all know that.

Classic. You might want to check out that Todd Jones thread and see if you can make any connections. Nice gutsy win today by the Red Sox. Would've been 16-3 if the Sox had more money tied up in their payroll.

The Red Sox may well have the best team in baseball.
   90. Darren Posted: May 19, 2007 at 10:54 PM (#2370396)
I agree. Very gutty and gritty by the feisty Red Sox.
   91. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: May 20, 2007 at 12:18 AM (#2370661)
The Red Sox may well have the best team in baseball.

they don't have many weak spots. good bench, good pen, to go along with a solid rotation and a very good lineup. it's nice.
   92. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: May 20, 2007 at 02:46 AM (#2370995)
they don't have many weak spots. good bench, good pen, to go along with a solid rotation and a very good lineup. it's nice.

They struggle in the mud though...

:)
   93. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: May 20, 2007 at 04:39 AM (#2371071)
####### wok. maybe you should go back to making race jokes.

Back the F!@# of cracker, Brian Fuentes is badass.
   94. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: May 23, 2007 at 03:14 AM (#2375513)
That's three wins already in this stretch. Nice.
   95. PJ Martinez Posted: May 27, 2007 at 03:24 PM (#2380349)
The 2007 Sox have finally caught up to the 2002 Sox, record-wise.

The 2002 team went 7-2 over their next 9 games, to reach 40-17. Then the wheels began to loosen, and they went 6-15 to reach 46-31. They lost the division lead for good at 46-29. Needless to say, the 2002 Sox did not enjoy the kind of cushion this team has established.
   96. RobertMachemer Posted: May 27, 2007 at 03:44 PM (#2380356)
Top records for the Red Sox (from 1901 on) through 48 (completed) games...

year  thru48     pct  scored allowed
1946
:  39-9     .809    295    177

1978
:  33-15    .688    256    188
1986
:  33-15    .688    246    173
2002
:  33-15    .688    271    185
2007
:  33-15    .688    261    183

1904
:  32-16    .667    163    124

1940
:  31-17    .646    267    225
1969
:  31-17    .646    239    202

(eight Sox teams went 30-18


Well, that's not nearly as encouraging as I would have liked. Yes, 2007 is the Sox's second-best record through 48 games, but it's tied with 2002 and 1978 for that distinction (and in 2002 at least, the team was playing better by Pythagoras than it currently is).

And meanwhile, 1940? I didn't know the Sox were in first that late in a season betweem 1920 and 1946. (Despite the hot start in 1969, those Sox were still 3.5 games behind Earl Weaver's Orioles).
   97. PJ Martinez Posted: May 27, 2007 at 03:49 PM (#2380360)
Test.
   98. PJ Martinez Posted: May 27, 2007 at 03:51 PM (#2380361)
I read somewhere (Joy of Sox, maybe?) that the Sox have been in first at this stage seven times since 1999-- i.e., all but two of those seasons. I haven't checked that for accuracy, but it jibes pretty well with my memory.

That same site also mentioned, though, that the Sox biggest previous lead those six times was 2 games. So this season is a little different.
   99. Darren Posted: May 27, 2007 at 10:40 PM (#2380861)
12.5 games is big lead.
   100. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: May 27, 2007 at 11:06 PM (#2380877)
Indeed it is. I am very confident right now, to say the least.
Page 1 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
Guts
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6657 seconds
41 querie(s) executed