User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5218 seconds
61 querie(s) executed
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. The Mohole* of David Wells (* - Piehole)It's certainly not unreasonable to think that might continue- in fact I wouldn't expect them to fall out of the top... 5 maybe? 7 or 8, to be more conservative, considering Strasburg will be shut down at some point? Gio, Strasburg, and Zimmerman form a very, very good top 3, with Edwin Jackson as an excellent 4.
You say that like it's unexpected. This is not like say, the Orioles or Royals having the best pitching in baseball. If Strasburg and Zimmerman stay healthy the Nats have a deep and talented rotation that's probably as good a bet as any to stay at the top of the league.
Whether they're as good as they projected to be in the pre-season is a different question.
The only team I had projected to allow fewer runs than them was San Francisco. The Angels projected better relative to league, but I'm with jmurph and AROM. The Nationals are probably going to be one of the top five pitching teams in baseball this year.
Good.
Insanely small sample size, but still....
ERA+ for the 5 starters:
Lester 73
Bard 75
Beckett 93
Buchholz 44
Doubront 80
Beckett: Up and down, still a decent or lucky pitcher
Buchholz: ?
Bard: Has 1 A pitch, a B pitch and a work in progress. But I like him.
Doubront: Stays out of big innings.
That's my forecast for the season. That's a lot better than most pitching staffs. MUCH better than last year when I was screaming to let Papelbon or anyone start over Wake and Lackey.
I was talking about a projection standpoint rather than a results so far standpoint. Like I said I haven't seen anything from Lester or Beckett that makes me feel like either guy is appreciably different from what he has been. I think Bard and Doubront have both looked competent which is all the Sox need. Neither guy has looked overmatched. Only Buchholz is of concern, coming off the injury the first two starts are a bit troubling but I'm willing to see a couple more starts before I panic on him.
I didn't get into it but I think the fact that guys like Cook, Ohlendorf and even Alex Wilson are doing well in Pawtucket is also part of the equation.
EDIT: Or what Dale said much more succinctly in #14.
As Andy (inadvertently) points out, the only thing that's really wrong with this club right now is their starting pitching. If they start getting results to match the "positives" we see, the Sox will be just fine - better than fine, they'll be big time contenders.
3 on road vs. Detroit
3 on road vs. Toronto
4 at home vs. Tampa
3 at home vs. Rangers
I'm thinking at best 3-3 on the road games, maybe 3-4 at home (2-2 Rays, 1-2 Rangers). Instead of 6-7 they're 4-8... and they're 0-3 in one-run games. And they aren't at full strength. All things considered I'm OK with where they are.
My issue is not so much where they are as where they are headed. I don't think we should overreact to early season action but it is new data that should be considered. The outfield, simply by the loss of Ellsbury is likely to be worse than we thought and I think the bullpen is shaping up to be less than we anticipated as well due to performance (Melancon) and injury (Bailey). What I am not seeing is anyone who has stepped up and vastly overachieved in a way that makes me think it's going to continue.
Despite some of my ravings during the game chatters I'm not saying the Sox are suddenly a 75 win team but if we knew when the season started some of what we now know I think the projections might have been a couple games less than they were. In this year's American League, that's important.
He was .737 last year and I think I'd take that neighborhood plus or minus a bit. The problem is I'm not sure how confident the Sox should be in Lavarnway. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Lavarnway wasn't a top ten hitting catcher right now but I wouldn't be surprised if he was limited like Shoppach to mashing lefties and occasionally flipping one over the Monster, I just don't feel like I can say either way with confidence.
I hate Saltalamacchia's defense. He often looks out of position, he cost the Sox a run in Toronto because he was wandering around 3 feet in front of the plate and there have been other moments during his time here. I have not seen nearly as much of Lavarnway but I have never watched him and thought he was overmatched defensively at all. He's not Johnny Bench but he's not helpless either.
There's some hedging, but basically the article's point is: THIS IS A DISASTER!
I think the jury is still out on that, but I suppose I wouldn't take the over of the line on Valentine's tenure was 1 year exactly.
My question: who, exactly, do people think we'd get as manager if we ####-can Valentine? Bogar? Magadan? The return of Francona?
I read the article, and this is what passes for evidence:He might as well have hired the US Magazine body language expert.
If the Sox have a bad season, I doubt Bobby V stays. The question is, how much evidence do we have that the Sox are actually a bad team that won't win bunches of games and contend for the postseason? I think we still have very little.
If the Sox indeed have a bad season under Valentine, he'll deserve a portion of the blame, and there's a good chance he'll be fired. All the people who hated the hiring can say they were right and I was wrong. But the Red Sox have only played twelve games so far. I have seen very little in the field that would change my pre-season opinion that the Sox have a playoff quality roster. If they make the playoffs, this will all look rather silly. That's why I'm not rushing to judgment.
They projected around 91-93 wins coming into the season. The injuries suck, but if Bard and Doubront keep pitching like they have, that will balance it out relatively easily. The big scary thing through the offseason was SP depth, and that's suddenly looking like a strength.
I find this thinking ... bizarre. 2011 was things NOT going right.
... from Lebwoski: "NOTHING IS ######???!?! THE GOD-DAMN PLANE HAS CRASHED INTO THE MOUNTAIN!"
On the pitching side, I wouldn't be shocked if Beckett falls significantly short of his 2011 stats. And that bullpen...yikes.
I'm pretty sure they're holding the 100th Anniversary Celebration for Fenway in Boston.
That's 4 guys out of 25 (or out of the 49 total they used), and really only 2 of them were possibly out of line with what could be expected in 2012. But as I think MCoA was saying, the good individual performances didn't translate into as many wins as you would expect.
I didn't go thru every hitter since I don't expect big things from the rest of the lineup. Reddick was an OK fill in but he's gone. They're not going to get significantly more offense wise at SS or C than last season.
EDIT: But seriously... Your point is valid.
The Sox projected about 70-100 runs worse (offense and defense combined, measured in component runs) than 2011. I don't disagree with anything you're saying about the 2011 club. But the question is, what is the baseline from which you're subtracting those runs? You're working at the level of individual performance, so we should use component runs. By component runs, the Sox were a 100 win club, so normal regression drops them into the low 90s. that's a playoff contending team.
I also wonder: would it really be awful to bring back Tito? I know it has 0% chance of happening...
Sorry, sentimentality is setting in...
The players on this team need to start playing well. If they want to ##### and cry that Bobby V. hurt their feelings they can go back and watch the way the ###### up last September and understand why they are stuck with this guy.
One thing my buddy noted today. As Buchholz kept giving up home runs there was never a time when anyone from the infield went in to talk to him on the mound. It seemed like he was out there by himself. Maybe it's something, maybe it's nothing, but while Valentine has made some bad moves the problem is the players. Per Buster Olney the Sox starters' ERA since September 1 is 6.72. Honestly I'm stunned it's that low. The fact is you could have Casey Stengel managing this club with Dave Duncan as pitching coach and Jesus Christ playing shortstop and you'd have a tough time winning with that kind of "effort."
See, Martin, Billy.
Today would have been the day for it.
Please...that's something the evil empire would do.
It took Tito a good long time before I would scream "What are you doing???", and those playoff appearances kept resetting my clock with him. It took Valentine about 10 days. I mentioned before ARod's HR how stupid it was to keep a guy out there who obviously cannot keep the ball down. He's not going to magically find his stuff in the fourth or fifth inning.
I'm reminded of Bugs Bunny in "Baseball Bugs"...."Wham A homer! Wham another homer! Wham Another homer!"
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsstand/discussion/maybe_red_sox_just_arent_very_good_nytimes.com
Until I realized that it wouldn't let me post (either). The Sox sux so bad they're breaking the forum software.
I was looking at the schedule yesterday and after the Yankees finish off this sweep the Sox schedule really is a cream puff for about a month. Now if this team is any good they should be able to occasionally beat good teams but it wouldn't shock me if they rip off a hot stretch against the weak teams. If they do that and right the ship they should be fine. Unfortunately they have put themselves in a position where that is necessary rather than useful. If they can't do a 14-8 or something like that between now and the road trip to Tampa and Philly then they are in trouble. I'm willing to wait but it's getting frustrating to have this conversation every ####### year.
No, but it is meaningful that their record is 4-9, that means that they're off the pace and is predicted to finish lower by a couple of games even if their true strength is estimated the same.
I've been pessimistic about this club since last season ended, but the two things that lead me to believe the Sox will contend is that there really aren't many teams in the AL that look like they'll be in the Top 5 mix, and only two of them are playing well anyway.
No, it's not. If you hire Bobby Valentine, you give him more than two weeks to show results. The time will be the All-Star break if the Sox are still struggling.
And Girardi brought in a just-called-up kid in the ninth with a four-run lead. I don't remember anyone doing this sort of thing in a meaningful game in Fenway in... forever. It really shows how much confidence Girardi had in his team's position and how much "no lead is safe in Fenway" was not a factor.
"No matter how you define a collapse, the 2011 Red Sox and 2011 Braves rank among the five worst pennant race folds of all time. One list for SI.com last year by Cliff Corcoran removed teams that played decently while blowing a big lead, such as the 1951 Dodgers (26-22 down the stretch) and 1978 Red Sox (25-22). Other teams turned red hot and passed them.
I like the idea of sticking with teams that blew a big lead and played poorly to define the worst collapses. So here is that list of the teams that suffered the biggest collapses -- the Red Sox and Braves would slot as the third and fourth teams on the list -- and I've added what happened to those teams the next year. As you can see, none of them made the playoffs in the year after the collapse and all but one of them posted a worse winning percentage:
Team Next Year's Record +/- WPct. Playoffs?
1995 Angels 70-91 -.103 No
2007 Mets 89-83 +.003 No
1969 Cubs 84-78 -.049 No
2010 Padres 71-91 -.118 No
2005 Indians 78-84 -.093 No
1983 Braves 80-82 -.049 No
1964 Phillies 85-76 -.040 No
2009 Tigers 81-81 -.028 No
1921 Pirates 85-69 -.036 No"
Byrd, so long as he isn't toast, is a big upgrade over Repko and McDonald.
No, it's not. If you hire Bobby Valentine, you give him more than two weeks to show results.
After the Yankees fired Billy Martin (for the 1st time), they announced his rehiring (for the following season, or was it the one after?) only a few days later as Martin was introduced on Old Timers Day. If the Red Sox wanted to give Francona the full-Martin treatment, the Fenway 100th Anniversary would have been pretty close. Which is not the same as saying it would have been a good idea.
It's not crazy talk and he's on the bad side of league average. Byrd, if he's not toast, is eighth or ninth man on a good team. He's not a revelation nor a good addition; he's a tiny drag on progress at 95-OPS+. Right now, he'll be a major improvement. That's not good. I'm not saying they shouldn't get him but he is what he is and next year he's more likely a part-timer on a good team or a starter on a bad team.
Byrd projects about league average. Average players are never a "drag on progress", unless you're the '27 Yankees.
Put me down as thinking this is another crap trade.
Watch Bowden go 7-0 or some nonsense for the Cubs. Blech.
Why the hell not? See if Anderson can hit his way into the lineup and play LF.
1) Yay rainout!
2) Yay Lars.
Also, 1 other thought:
1) Boo Bard to bullpen, even if just for a couple of games.
This is my take, too. I hope he hits but he hasn't hit for any real stretch since 2008. If he can mimic his AAA line with decent OBP and mediocre power he'd be fine for a short term. Of course, that is if he can play the outfield.
I think the ship has sailed on Lars as a middle of the order guy but I think he has a pretty good chance to be a Lyle Overbay type. Yeah the strikeouts are a concern but he walks a lot so I could see a useful OBP with a bunch of doubles.
Girardi didn't even wait for it to develop into a save situation. He would have had to let the kid allow one more baserunner for that to happen. Looks like the right choice in the circumstances though. If you ignored save situations and only brought Rivera in for a high leverage situation, the only way that can happen is if the kid allows multiple baserunners, probably a run or two in, and now you've got to face the good hitters, Pedroia-Gonzalez-Ortiz, in a situation where any of them can tie or win the game.
Good call to make sure it never got to that point.
Lyle Overbay was a .900 -.950 OPS guy in the minors. He wasn't a Lyle Overbay type. Unless Lars can make a seamless statistical leap from AAA to MLB he'll make Overbay look like Pujols.
What do you think a .900 OPS in Tucson translates to at Pawtucket? Probably not far off of Lars's numbers, honestly.
Agreed and I really don't think much of Bowden. At this point I'd rather have Bowden and just throw Linares in center and see what happens.
Except Linares has been having trouble staying healthy of late - Juan Carlos Linares missed his second straight game due to a strained groin, but he’s feeling better and is expected to return to games within the next few days.
Doesn't sound terribly serious, but what would they have done between now and then? For the record, I thought for sure they would have DFA'd Justin Thomas rather than Bowden. Having a "situational lefty" is only helpful if he can actually get anyone out.
maybe a Roberto Petagine type? :)
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main