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 0.3513 seconds
39 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. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: July 26, 2011 at 01:45 AM (#3885206)Lackey has some uninspiring numbers of late but if you break it down start to start he has generally pitched well enough. He isn't giving them $18 million worth of performance but he is generally getting them some innings with 3-4 runs and that should be fine on an every fifth day basis.
Oddly, Bobby Jenks is a guy who could conceivably give them starter depth. If he could come back healthy (and that feels pie in the sky to me) then Aceves could slot into that 5th starter spot and that would be A-OK in my book.
Also, Lester is back tonight, and generally looks fine. The Sox are now replacing Weiland with Lester in the rotation - that's a big step to addressing the concerns expressed in this post.
Buchholz's session off a mound today went very well, it appears. They expect him back at full strength on or before September 1st. When he gets back, he takes probably takes Wakefield's starts. If Buchholz comes back on September 1st, that means we have deal with another seven Wakefield starts. If we win 4 of those 7 starts, that's fine.
I guess I just don't think the Sox are likely to get a starter so much better than Wakefield or Miller that it's worth the trouble. And in the playoffs, the #5 starter will never get a start, anyway.
Besides, the offense is good enough that the team can win half of the Miller/Wakefield starts, anyway. I'd rather have Aceves ready to pitch multiple innings out of the bullpen three times a week...
I'm hopeful about Lackey. He's pitched like a solid no.3 starter since getting rock by Toronto. He also pitched much better against Tampa Bay than his stat line showed because his defense (or just Scutaro) let him down.
Along with the results, his stuff is better. I don't know the numbers exactly but he seems to be sitting in the low-90s since he's come off the DL, which is a couple mphs faster than last year and before he went on. I just don't believe he's a lost cause with regard to his contract. He's still young enough, the stuff has bounced back and the track record is long. I think he's going to get some playoff starts and that was unimaginable for a while.
I'm not all that concerned about missing the postseason at this point, but I'd like a better #3 playoff starter option than Lackey if Buchholz can't go.
Those three got nothin' on Sabathia, Colon, and Garcia.
(Seriously, aren't we long past the time where Colon and Garcia should have turned into pumpkins?)
Verlander, Jimenez, Shields, Scherzer. Oh, wait, those are still just rumors with about a 1% chance of EITHER happening? Someone should remind the Detroit radio wonks that getting Wilson Betemit to essentially not be Brandon Inge was the easy part.
The Sox' pattern of no-pitching, no-problem probably isn't sustainable, but the good news is that the Yankees reliance on The Fluke Skywalkers will probably burn them as well.
I suspect when September hits, it will be a three-way race again.
Lackey's pitched fine in his last 3 games, but one was against a AAA lineup, one he gave up 10 hits in 5.2 innings, and the other was legitimately good start against an average hitting team. I won't believe Lackey's magically turned some corner until he faces a non-terrible team and doesn't get pummeled. The Red Sox are not a superteam - they're a very good team with some glaring problems that could catch up with them in a hurry, and I hope that the FO is pursuing whatever even marginal upgrades they can that won't hurt the team's future.
That is not impossible but right now the Angels are the only ones on a pace to exceed 86 wins and even they project for 86.5 wins so it's not like they are on pace to catch a Sox team that slips. I don't disagree that the Sox have flaws that could hurt them but last night was in fact a good night, not a bad night, with Lester looking sharp. The issue is simply becoming mathematical and the math works very very well for the Sox. There is enough head to head with Tampa, Cleveland and Chicago that something can go awry but the teams chasing them are running out of room for error.
The 2006 team at 61-39 had the pythagorean record of 57-43. The Yankees trailed them by 1.5, Toronto by 5.5, Chicago by 2, and Minnesota by 2. The 2011 team is 62-38 and has a pythagorean record of 63-37. The Yankees trail them by 2, LAA by 6.5, and Tampa by 9.5
If the Red Sox go 31-31 from here on out they have 93 wins. Tampa would have to go 40-21 from here on out to catch them. LAA would have to go 38-21 from here on out to catch them. Those are ridiculous records, and again, that would also include the Sox playing .500 ball the rest of the way. And it'd just be to tie.
There's a reason the Red Sox have such frighteningly good chances to make the playoffs, and that's because the combination of outcomes it would take for the Red Sox to miss the playoffs right now are extraordinary.
What are the glaring problems? Not just "wow they've been lousy here" but "going forward, compared to other contenders, the Red Sox really lack..." type problems.
Yep. The schedule helps Boston a lot. The Yankees and Angels have six games remaining against each other, and the Yankees and Rays have eight games remaining against each other. So it's going to be just about impossible for all three to end the year with a better record than Boston. Especially since Boston has nine games remaining against the Yankees and will probably sweep them.
It's also worth noting that the Tigers were 6.5 games better than the Red Sox in 2006, which meant that if one of the Central teams had played .700 ball or something, the Sox would've been behind the Tigers for the wild card, even without the epic collapse. This year, the Sox are five better than Texas, so even if the Angels go bonkers in the last two months the Sox still have a cushion to work with there. The way it gets dicey is if it's the Rays running the table from here on out.
Get outside, turn around, and spit! You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing?!
Pretty sure SG is a Yankee fan going for the reverse whammy.
The only concern I have with the Sox is the rotation. If Beckett goes down or Lester relapses, just how long can they keep winning games with 80% of the rotation being subpar?
The Red Sox can keep winning games with a crappy rotation as long as they continue to have the best lineup in the league by a wide margin. In July they gave up 4.4 runs per game, which is basically league average. It's just that they scored 6.7 runs per game in July. They're on pace to score 890 runs in a league where 715 runs will be average. I'm just going to keep saying it until it gets recognized a little: the Red Sox have a wRC+ of 122. An offense that is 22% better than the league as a whole hasn't happened since...the 1976 Cincinnati Reds who had a wRC+ of 123. The 2003 Red Sox and 1982 Brewers both were 121. The 2011 Red Sox are a historically great offense, so winning without pitching is to be expected.
That would require an injury to one of Beckett, Lester or Buchholz. That could happen if the Sox finish 105-57 just as easily.
1 vs. KC (1-0)
3 at CHW (2-1)
4 vs. CLE (3-1)
3 vs. NYY (2-1)
3 at MIN (2-1)
3 at SEA (2-1)
3 vs. TB (2-1)
4 at KC (3-1)
4 at TEX (2-2)
3 vs OAK (2-1)
3 vs. NYY (2-1)
3 vs. TEX (2-1)
4 at TOR (3-1)
3 at TB (2-1)
2 vs. TOR (2-0)
4 vs. TB (3-1)
4 vs. BAL (4-0)
3 at NYY (1-2)
3 at BAL (2-1)
Subtotal: 42-18
Total: 106-56
Summarized differently...
* 5-4 against NYY the rest of the way, with 6 of the 9 at Fenway.
* 4-3 against Texas
* 7-3 against Tampa, with 6 of 9 at Fenway
* 5-1 against Toronto
* 9-4 against CLE, MIN, CHW, OAK.
* 12-3 in 15 more games against the O's, Royals, and Mariners.
And that gets them to 106 wins.
Now... For them to fail to win 100 games, they need to lose at least 7 more games than in the strawman above. Go through that schedule and find at least 7 more losses. One against Texas, one against Tampa, one against Toronto... maybe one against CLE/MIN/CHW/OAK... maybe one against the cellar dwellers?
I mean, it's plausible they don't get to 100; there certainly are many ways in which they can fail to get there. At this point, I'm not expecting it.
.418 batting average with 16 doubles, 3 triples, and 15 HR. (.772 SLG)
38 RBI and 48 runs in 43 games.
9 out of 10 SB
I guess that's how you win without pitching.
We also need to fix the backend of the bullpen, and get the corner OF situation worked out.
Call me greedy, but I really want to see a Red Sox team win 100-plus games. I hope to hell Tito (and Theo) don't take their damn foot off the gas at the start of September.
36-24 for 100 wins seems pretty damn doable.
I agree it would be nice to land a starter, but who's available that's actually an upgrade and won't veto a trade?
Well, he's not in the lineup this afternoon: strained left elbow; they gave him a cortisone shot. "Hopes to play tomorrow."
And meanwhile, the Bucholz situation seems kinda ominous...Bedard anybody?
Almost everyone is an upgrade over Wake and Miller.
After yesterday's game, the Sox have gotten 50 starts from pitchers who aren't Lester, Beckett, or Buchholz so far this year. The starters in those games (Wakefield, Lackey, Matsuzaka, Miller, Weiland, and Aceves) are posting a joint ERA of 5.65 (with an RA of 6.17), a WHIP of 1.55, a K/BB ratio of about 1.4.
The Red Sox are 30-20 in these games.
In other words: What Joel W said in #24.
Adjusting their RPG to a 4.33 RPG context, here's how the Red Sox offenses of the last ten years look...
2011: 5.56 RPG
2010: 4.91 RPG
2009: 4.83 RPG
2008: 4.73 RPG
2007: 4.73 RPG
2006: 4.41 RPG
2005: 5.11 RPG
2004: 5.06 RPG
2003: 5.28 RPG
2002: 4.77 RPG
Relative to league average scoring, this is the best Red Sox offense in recent memory.
I'll keep looking, but it would surprise me if there's been a better Red Sox offense since the 70s (and possibly not since the 1950s).
a couple weeks ago my brother mentioned that this offense, relative to league average, is as good as any offense since the 1927 yankees. they're better than the 1999 cleveland team that scored 1009 runs (6.23/5.18) * 4.33 = 5.21. at least that's what i think he was saying.
2011: 5.56 RPG
2005: 5.11 RPG
2004: 5.06 RPG
2003: 5.28 RPG
There's then a gap -- 1988 narrowly misses the cut: adjusted to 2011, they scored 4.99 RPG
1981: 5.12 RPG
1978: 5.03 RPG
1977: 5.10 RPG
1975: 5.00 RPG
1972: 5.15 RPG
1970: 5.04 RPG
1967: 5.22 RPG
Another gap. Then the team I suspected would beat out the current team...
1950: 5.73 RPG (This team averaged 6.67 RPG in a league that averaged 5.04 RPG).
1949: 5.36 RPG
1948: 5.37 RPG
1946: 5.42 RPG
1944: 5.02 RPG
1942: 5.09 RPG
1941: 5.10 RPG
Then another gap.
1912: 5.05 RPG
1903: 5.30 RPG
So, um, there you have it. Thus far, the 2011 Red Sox have... well, the second-best offense in team history (so far), relative to the run-scoring environment in which they play.
Top ten Red Sox offenses of all-time, relative to their scoring environment (adjusted to the current 4.33 RPG environment):
1) 1950: 5.73 RPG
2) 2011: 5.56 RPG
3) 1946: 5.42 RPG
4) 1948: 5.37 RPG
5) 1949: 5.36 RPG
6) 1903: 5.30 RPG
7) 2003: 5.28 RPG
8) 1967: 5.22 RPG
9) 1972: 5.15 RPG
10) 2005: 5.11 RPG
I, for one, was surprised to see the 1903, 1967, and 1972 teams on this list.
SOSH Robo-Bedard Thread
If the Sox maintain their 121 OPS+, it will be the highest team OPS+ since the 1931 Yankees.
I'm not sure that I see the point of this trade. Lowrie just started a rehab assignment, so either they want to have 2 backup infielders who can play anywhere on the IF or one of these guys is going somewhere else in a trade.
He is arb eligible for the first time after this season.
This comes via Stephen Goldman, in re our discussion of the best offenses. So, uh, yeah, they're very good.
Saw this thread on the ST bar and figured I'd check it out. I'm patting myself on the back a bit here for my forecast but more importantly in a year when they have had many things fail spectacularly that Mike Aviles acquisition has been pretty good, he's got an .849 OPS with the Sox.
Of course if you could ignore the many many stupid things I've said in other threads, that would be sensational.
I got the rope...
___
Gotta give NN some props for this, IMO.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main