Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

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

   1. John DiFool2 Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:29 AM (#2594625)
I dunno where the Terry Francona who left Schilling in the 8th inning of a game vs. the Yankees so that Schill could give up a go-ahead homer to Jeter went to, but I'm glad he's gone and this more than competent imposter is in his place. Looking over the Rockies' next two starting pitchers, neither of whom strikes out very many people, doesn't engender much hope for Colorado.
   2. Dan Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:31 AM (#2594627)
Okajima was just ridiculous.
   3. Lassus Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:32 AM (#2594630)
Okajima gets an ER somehow instead of his seventh out and Tito's a horrendous moron who can't be trusted, I'm assuming.
   4. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:34 AM (#2594632)
I wish I was in the states right now. Becuase FREE TACO!!!!!
   5. Darren Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:35 AM (#2594633)
Okajima gets an ER somehow instead of his seventh out and Tito's a horrendous moron who can't be trusted, I'm assuming.


That sounds like a foolish way to judge things. Why would you do that?
   6. Lassus Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:37 AM (#2594636)
That's not what I would think, but I think the line here in this thread is that small as far as YAY TITO or TITO SUCKS, and judged by little else. That one out calls it.
   7. Dan Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:38 AM (#2594637)
Not really, Tito has been fantastic this post-season, the only move that everyone hated was Gagné in the 11th vs. Cleveland. And even then, he only had a few options. I think a lot of us would rather have had Lester in or whatever, but honestly, Tito has been great this post season, with his lineups, his pitching moves, everything. He's had an appropriately short leash on all the non-Beckett starters, which was been great, and is a well tailored strategy for the extended schedule this year. The bullpen is available pretty much every game, so he's willing to use them early and often in close situations, and it's a real credit to his managing.
   8. Lassus Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:39 AM (#2594639)
Let me also say that as soon as Schilling out and Oki was in I knew that we were freaking toast. I was begging in the chatter for Papelbon to come in so we had at least a CHANCE.
   9. Dan Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:42 AM (#2594641)
ANd as far as Okajima goes specifically, I hated leaving him in the third inning vs. Cleveland, because he had worked hard for his 2 innings, but tonight he was just cruising on something like 18 pitches from his first two innings, so it seemed absolutely great to get an out or two out of him.
   10. Xander Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:43 AM (#2594642)
I hated batting Manny 4th tonight.
   11. Darren Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:44 AM (#2594643)
That's not what I would think, but I think the line here in this thread is that small as far as YAY TITO or TITO SUCKS, and judged by little else. That one out calls it.


I hope you're not talking about me. I was critical of Tito yesterday despite his pitching moves working out fine. You may be right about the people who were disagreeing with me, who's argument boiled down to 'You're crazy. Beckett didn't get hurt so Tito was right.'
   12. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:44 AM (#2594644)
What a beautifully managed game. EDIT - except for the sacrifice bunt by Lugo

Papi missed that home run at the Pesky pole by a bees dick
   13. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:49 AM (#2594646)
What about the buntout by Lugo? That d-bag is INVENTING ways to make outs.

TACOBY 4 LYFE
   14. Darren Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:58 AM (#2594652)
Does anyone know the rule on the Lugo bunt play? McCarver was yammering about part of the batter's box being in fair territory but I don't see the relevance of that at all. If you're in the box and it hits you, it's foul, IIRC.

The part that I'm not sure about is what constitutes being in the box. Lugo had clearly NOT set his foot down outside the box when he was hit by the ball. However, his body may have been leaning out of the box.

I didn't like the Lugo sac-bunt either. Let Ellsbury steal then, if you want to bunt, do it to move him to 3rd.
   15. Nasty Nate Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:03 AM (#2594654)
great pitching. the only run allowed was kind of ticky-tack: a semi-cheapo HBP followed by an infield hit and sac fly.

Let Ellsbury steal then, if you want to bunt, do it to move him to 3rd.
I agree.
   16. John DiFool2 Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:07 AM (#2594660)
The replay I saw Darren, from behind home, clearly showed that the ball hit him about 2 feet fair in front of the plate.
   17. Dan Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:09 AM (#2594661)
Is it too early to look towards Saturday's game? I think if Daisuke can come out throwing 96 MPH heat like he did vs. Cleveland in Game 7, I like our odds on Saturday. If he comes out with the 89 MPH fastball he had most of the second half, he'll get tattooed.
   18. Darren Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:12 AM (#2594663)
The replay I saw Darren, from behind home, clearly showed that the ball hit him about 2 feet fair in front of the plate.


But neither of his feet had touched down outside the box and it's debatable whether his leg was even hanging outside the box at that time.

I'm curious about exactly what the rule says, though.
   19. Hugh Jorgan Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:25 AM (#2594665)
First of all, kudos to you Darren for airing your full marks to Tito on his handling of game 2. I know you've been a bit more critical of him in the past then the rest of us, but its good to see you give him a good wrap up when you think he's done good.
As far as the game was concerned, I couldn't have been more wrong about how it would play out. I was thinking one of those 9-7 deals with both starters getting hammered, yet Schill settled in nicely until his trouble in the 6th and the rookie looked decent...except for the walks.
Its nice to be up 2-0 no matter how you get there. Oki has just been downright ridiculous this post season and paps is what he is...dominant. I still like us in 5 games.
Is Fogg starting their next game?
   20. plink Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:31 AM (#2594667)
McCarver was yammering about part of the batter's box being in fair territory but I don't see the relevance of that at all. If you're in the box and it hits you, it's foul, IIRC.

The part that I'm not sure about is what constitutes being in the box. Lugo had clearly NOT set his foot down outside the box when he was hit by the ball.

Oddly enough, I think McCarver's right here. There's no in-the-box/out-of-the-box distinction in the rule book; if the ball hits you while in fair territory, you're out.

Do any hitters actually set up with a foot in front of the plate? Maybe against Wake....
   21. The George Sherrill Selection Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:40 AM (#2594671)
AWESUM

GOTITO!
   22. Answer Guy Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:42 AM (#2594673)
Well, we accomplished we needed to accomplish. It wasn't always pretty but some great pitching for the Sox and they managed to grind out a win on a night where they didn't get much good contact and seemingly every fly ball hit by either team just dying in the OF.

Essentially all the pressure is on the Rockies now.
   23. tfbg9 Posted: October 26, 2007 at 06:05 AM (#2594681)
I didn't like Tito leaving Schill in to BB Helton in the 6th, but that's my only quibble, a minor one, I suppose. At the time it didn't seem minor, however.

This is the best clutch team piching effort I've seen them pull off in some time, can't really think of anything else...maybe Game 6, 2004 ALCS. That was one seriously grim ballgame all the way through also.
   24. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: October 26, 2007 at 07:28 AM (#2594699)
I have a good feeling about Dice K. I thought he was great in Interleague, IIRC.

Just a hunch...
   25. ericr Posted: October 26, 2007 at 08:15 AM (#2594702)
This is the Sox' first 5-game winning streak of the season, if I'm not mistaken.
   26. bibigon Posted: October 26, 2007 at 09:22 AM (#2594712)
This is the Sox' first 5-game winning streak of the season, if I'm not mistaken.


This is actually the fourth such winning streak. We haven't had a six gamer yet however, which is indeed pretty damn odd for a team which had the best record in baseball.
   27. ericr Posted: October 26, 2007 at 09:49 AM (#2594715)
Ah I was getting it one off. Too eager to put away those regular-season demons, I suppose.

Is anyone else not at all as confident in a sweep as many (sox and non-sox fans alike) seem to be at this point? I mean, Dice and Lester are pitching the next two games.
   28. AuntBea Posted: October 26, 2007 at 09:57 AM (#2594717)
Does it really matter if it's a sweep? The sox odds of winning must be near 90% now.
   29. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: October 26, 2007 at 09:58 AM (#2594718)
I think we'll be seeing Beckett again. I'm not super confident in a sweep, but have faith in Dice K
   30. Answer Guy Posted: October 26, 2007 at 12:28 PM (#2594742)
I would certainly think the odds of the Rockies winning at least one the next two games would be pretty high, with the Sox having to sit Ortiz or Youks, with Manny in a spacious LF, etc.

Plus the offense really cooled off last night. Not that I expected what happened in Game 1 and the last three games vs. Cleveland to continue forever...
   31. Answer Guy Posted: October 26, 2007 at 12:46 PM (#2594759)
I would thought about yanking Varitek late in Game 1...with no Wakefield start (normally the time he gets a breather) he's probably catching every game and some rest, however minimal, may do him some good.
   32. ericr Posted: October 26, 2007 at 01:00 PM (#2594773)
He'll have at worst 1 day of rest in the middle of 5 games (6 days). I think he can handle it.
   33. Toby Posted: October 26, 2007 at 01:32 PM (#2594815)
I think we should have pinch-run for Ellsbury when he was on third base and Youks was up. Ellsbury could have been killed by one of those foul ball rockets Youks was hitting. I would have brought in Gagne to run for him, and while I was at it, Royce Clayton in for DeMarlo Hale to coach third.

Other than Tito's idiotic and reckless failure to do those things, he was great.
   34. Enrico Pallazzo Posted: October 26, 2007 at 02:16 PM (#2594842)
I cannot tell you how enjoyable it is to watch the TBS broadcasts. Rick Sutcliffe is hysterical. Not to say he's all the great at commentating, but he sure makes me chuckle. I am very glad that the Canadian broadcasts are TBS this year.
   35. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 26, 2007 at 02:24 PM (#2594852)
How about the pick-off of Holliday?

The Julio Lugo school of baserunning.
   36. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: October 26, 2007 at 02:31 PM (#2594862)
The sox odds of winning must be near 90% now.

According to Log5 percentages based half on Pythag W-L and half on actual W-L, the Rockies have a 4.0% chance of winning 4 straight and an 8.8% chance of taking 4 out of 5. That would give Boston an 87.2% chance of hosting a parade very soon.
   37. Toby Posted: October 26, 2007 at 02:46 PM (#2594886)
does Coors have an automatic tarp deployment machine? If so, I don't think we should risk Beckett in Game 5, if there's any chance of precipitation. Let's hold him back for Game 6 at Fenway.
   38. Toby Posted: October 26, 2007 at 02:47 PM (#2594890)
(I kid because I care, Darren. ;-)
   39. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: October 26, 2007 at 02:56 PM (#2594901)
Royce Clayton is funny as hell. The shots of him talking about his free taco on the bench had me in stitches.
   40. John DiFool2 Posted: October 26, 2007 at 03:05 PM (#2594908)
Is anyone else not at all as confident in a sweep as many (sox and non-sox fans alike) seem to be at this point? I mean, Dice and Lester are pitching the next two games.


You didn't look at the Rockies' starters very closely obviously. <g> They will be trotting out two guys who have struck out 5.10 and 3.30 batters/9 respectively.
   41. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 26, 2007 at 03:21 PM (#2594941)
We gotta keep not swinging at junk out of the zone. It's the only way we'll beat the Rockies.
   42. SoSH U at work Posted: October 26, 2007 at 03:36 PM (#2594959)
It's the only way we'll beat the Rockies.


I think there are a lot of ways we can beat the Rockies. That's just one of them.
   43. TomH Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:20 PM (#2595025)
advance scouting should get lots o' credit. Seeing Holiday's trend of stealing on the first pitch with two outs, and executing on such, was bee you tee full
   44. villageidiom Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:37 PM (#2595046)
advance scouting should get lots o' credit. Seeing Holiday's trend of stealing on the first pitch with two outs, and executing on such, was bee you tee full

After they won the 2004 WS, I recall one of the first bit of thanks Derek Lowe gave in postgame comments was to the advance scouts - that they did excellent work and were spot on with their analysis and recommendations. He gave a lot of credit to them. Our advance scouts rock!

I didn't like Tito leaving Schill in to BB Helton in the 6th, but that's my only quibble, a minor one, I suppose. At the time it didn't seem minor, however.

To his credit, in the postseason he always seems to have someone warmed up and ready to go at the right moment. Had the same thing happened in the regular season he probably wouldn't have even called the bullpen until that point. And in both cases, that's just what I want; you burn out the pen in the regular season if you warm them needlessly throughout 162, but in the postseason you have to take the chance (because leverage is higher) and you have more of an opportunity (more days off).
   45. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:40 PM (#2595052)
McCarver was yammering about part of the batter's box being in fair territory but I don't see the relevance of that at all. If you're in the box and it hits you, it's foul, IIRC.

The part that I'm not sure about is what constitutes being in the box. Lugo had clearly NOT set his foot down outside the box when he was hit by the ball.


Oddly enough, I think McCarver's right here. There's no in-the-box/out-of-the-box distinction in the rule book; if the ball hits you while in fair territory, you're out.


I am still puzzled about this one, too, in the same way as Darren. He hadn't set a foot down outside the box, though the ball hit his leg that hung outside the box in front of the plate.

I'd like to know the rule book definition of "fair territory". McCarver's claim sounded like the foul line ran right through the box to home plate, creating a fair portion of the box. That seems wrong to me. Maybe Tim just explained it poorly (McCarver? Never!).
   46. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:42 PM (#2595056)
does Coors have an automatic tarp deployment machine? If so, I don't think we should risk Beckett in Game 5

At this point in reading your post, I honestly figured you were worried that Josh could get Colmanized.
   47. SoSH U at work Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:44 PM (#2595058)
I'd like to know the rule book definition of "fair territory". McCarver's claim sounded like the foul line ran right through the box to home plate, creating a fair portion of the box. That seems wrong to me. Maybe Tim just explained it poorly (McCarver? Never!).


There definitely is a fair portion of the batter's boxes. Take the batter out of the equation. If the ball stops in the front, plate-side corner of the box, it's a fair ball.
   48. Foster Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:45 PM (#2595064)
The advance scouts: Schilling named them and gave credit for that play, in the postgame.

"In a billion dollar organization, it really comes down to the little things."

Honestly, it's the kind of thing I never considered, and I am glad it was pointed out.
   49. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:48 PM (#2595069)
advance scouting should get lots o' credit. Seeing Holiday's trend of stealing on the first pitch with two outs, and executing on such, was bee you tee full


After they won the 2004 WS, I recall one of the first bit of thanks Derek Lowe gave in postgame comments was to the advance scouts - that they did excellent work and were spot on with their analysis and recommendations. He gave a lot of credit to them. Our advance scouts rock!


This sort of objective data could even be discerned by a sophisticated program, much to my nerdy delight. Even without computer analysis, I strongly believe that DOZENS of scouts/advisors/coaches/interns should be reviewing game films and perhaps even pitch-by-pitch data to spot stuff like this.
   50. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: October 26, 2007 at 04:53 PM (#2595079)
There definitely is a fair portion of the batter's boxes. Take the batter out of the equation. If the ball stops in the front, plate-side corner of the box, it's a fair ball.

I would like to see the rule; I'd look it up myself, but I have to be AFK for a bit right now. I always assumed the whole box was foul. If it's partly fair, the ump would have to mentally extend the foul line through it to make a fair/foul call, which he might only have a split second to do.
   51. villageidiom Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:02 PM (#2595093)
I'd like to know the rule book definition of "fair territory". McCarver's claim sounded like the foul line ran right through the box to home plate, creating a fair portion of the box. That seems wrong to me. Maybe Tim just explained it poorly (McCarver? Never!).
From the rulebook:

FAIR TERRITORY is that part of the playing field within, and including, the first
base and third base lines, from home base to the bottom of the playing field fence and
perpendicularly upwards. All foul lines are in fair territory.


Also, rule 7.08(f) suggests that any runner is out and the ball is dead if the runner is hit by a fair ball while in fair territory. If you want to say he is a batter, not a runner, fine; rule 6.05(g) says he's out if his fair ball touches him before touching a fielder. The ball was definitely in fair territory, so Lugo is out no matter where he was at the time.
   52. Toby Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:03 PM (#2595094)
Getting Colemanized was exactly what I was alluding to, but only in the name of giving Darren a hard time.
   53. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:08 PM (#2595100)
Getting Colemanized was exactly what I was alluding to, but only in the name of giving Darren a hard time.

Well, I am shocked that I was unable to recognize a witty post. Mea culpa.
   54. The Ghost's Tryin' to Reason with Hurricane Season Posted: October 26, 2007 at 05:10 PM (#2595103)
Thanks vi, I actually had time looked it up myself. I wish they'd be more explicit about the batter's boxes.
   55. esturminator_CT Posted: October 27, 2007 at 05:03 AM (#2595553)
Nice job indeed by Francona. His handling of Schill and the bullpen in Game 2 was very good. And Okie Dokie, Paps, and the advanced scouts made his strategy look excellent. Fact is, Francona's handling of the pitching staff has in general been pretty solid throughout this post-season (other than burning the good part of the bullpen too early in the 6-6 game against Cleveland and having to turn it over to Lopez and Gagne in a key spot). OK, maybe he also left Daisuke in a little too long in ALCS Game #7, but the offense took care of that. He hasn't panicked, and he hasn't overworked anyone. In fact, Timlin and Delcarmen should be available for as much as 4 innings in relief of either Dice or Lester if needed leading to Okie and Paps.

ESPN is reporting that Youks is sitting Game #3.

I'm not sure that's the way I'd go, but something has to give. At least they'll have a good on-base guy to PH or replace Dice in a double shift scenario. Youk has been one of the best hitters, and his constant presence on base can be a key to getting hittable pitches for Papi and Manny. Considering how painful it looks for Papi to run even when he's only playing the offensive half of the game, I worry about him if he plays all three games in Colorado. I'd hate to see Papi play the 3 in Colorado and still have the Rox take two of three and then come back to Fenway with Papi too sore to play. Also as pointed out earlier in a post here, Papi as a regular DH and a clutch hitter might be a better PH option off the bench.

That being said, as the visiting team I might seriously consider the following line-up. RF-Youk, 2B-Dusty, 1B-Papi, LF-Bad Man, 3B-Lowell, CF-Drew, C-Tek, SS-Lugo, P-Dice. That gives the Sox the best chance to jump on the Rox in their home park and put up a large crooked number in the first. At any time thereafter, Coco can come in to play CF and replace any of the Youk, Papi, or Lowell threesome (or even Drew if you want to go there and leave Youk in RF). That could even happen before Youk ever plays an out in the OF if they take a big lead in the 1st. I know that might weaken the bench early in the game, but you still have Jacoby to PH for Dice and Hinske to replace Papi at first for defense late in the game.

Still betting Sox in 5, but I don't like the need to sit out one of the #2, #3, or #5 hitters for three straight games.
   56. BaBaBooey Posted: October 27, 2007 at 10:24 AM (#2595602)
What the is the over/under on the number of times dbag McCarver thinks Dice K throws a gyro ball (a pitch the hurler says doesn't exist)? Joe Buck is serviceable, providing we are not playing the Yankees (always has a hard-on for them), but McCarver repeats and repeats and repeats the same anecdotal information every game. Consider the following and feel free to offer others....

1. Dice K & gyro ball
2. Manny is a fearless 2 strike hitter
3. Okie looks away when he delivers
4. Mariano Rivera says that David Ortiz used to have some holes in his hitting...but he filled them

Collectively Fox has been better than TBS was in the division series, and yes I am a whiner. But T-Mac has got to go

...And don't forget the powder blue leisure suit he rocks every game...wtf?
   57. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 27, 2007 at 12:20 PM (#2595611)
Good article by Silverman in the Herald on Lowell, reactions to Game 2, and some hints at offseason plans:
“(Re-signing Lowell is) a priority for the offseason, and I’m sure we’ll be able to get something done,” Epstein said of his pending free agent. “We have a desire to keep him here a long time. He’s a core member of the organization. It’s just not the time to talk about that.”
Most of the non-Lowell options at 3B appear to me to be pony plans - trade for Ian Stewart! assume Jed Lowrie can play 3B right now! sign ARod! - but we'll see. It seems like everyone I know is a huge Mike Lowell fan, so that kinda sways me a bit, too. I don't mean to start a hot stove thread with World Series games, but hey, Theo said it.

I liked Lowell's quotes in the article, too. On taking third in the fourth:
“When J.D. first hit it, I though I had to be careful because I didn’t want to get picked off and doubled up,” Lowell said. “As I rounded second, I figured, ‘Hey man, it’s 1-0, one out,’ and I figured that it would take a perfect throw to get me out. It turned out it was pretty much a perfect throw.”
That was how I saw it, too. I was also surprised it was that close, but Lowell is right that the game state pretty much determined that he had to go for 3rd.
   58. Miko Supports Shane's Spam Habit Posted: October 27, 2007 at 12:55 PM (#2595620)
That was how I saw it, too. I was also surprised it was that close

Hawpe is uncanny in that way. He has a strong arm, but his amazing accuracy is what brings him to uncanny. I loved how McCarver said, "the throw was offline" or "the throw pulled Atkins away" or something like that.

Yeah, it missed the strike zone...from rightfield.
   59. Dave Cyprian Posted: October 27, 2007 at 02:46 PM (#2595662)
MCOA, that Theo quote re: Lowell was the best news (not-on-the-field division) I've heard in a while. As you said, the other options are sketchy at best at 3rd, and signing Arod means trading Manny so I'm firmly against that option.

So Lowell is clearly the best option, other than the money he will command. I think he has earned a contract, this club has plenty of cash with more and more younger players taking permanent spots on the roster. We can always trade him if the production becomes unacceptable in 2009 or beyond.
   60. Josh Posted: October 27, 2007 at 03:39 PM (#2595703)
I think he turned a corner 6 or 8 weeks ago, actually. Mags was quoted as saying something similar to that in the papers today/yesterday. I do think Drew will have a typical 850-900 OPS season next year -- but I thought he'd do that this year, too. I'm sure his Marcel will be near that, his PECOTA and his ZIPS should be near there, with the only caveat that he is getting older (but he doesn't look slower and he looks to be in good shape).
   61. esturminator_CT Posted: October 27, 2007 at 03:59 PM (#2595717)
Drew has very much looked more comfortable and confident at the plate over the past few weeks. He looked much more dialed in over the last few weeks of the regular season and his post-season has been relatively productive. His September/October splits were very good with an OPS of 1.072, his strikeouts down a bit, and his power numbers up. His divisional series wasn't great, but since the start of the ALCS, he's reached base 16 times in 25 plate appearances and knocked in 8 runs in the 9 games. With Youk out of the line-up tonight, I might like to see Drew batting in the top two in the order to set the table for Papi and Manny.

Still not sure how well he has fit in with the rest of the team. He seems to be somewhat of a loner staying out of all the rowdy celebration pictures after games etc.
   62. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 27, 2007 at 04:01 PM (#2595718)
I don't think the dressing room DISLIKES JD Drew. I don't think JD Drew dislikes his teammates. He just doesn't put empty beer boxes over his head.
   63. esturminator_CT Posted: October 27, 2007 at 04:02 PM (#2595720)
Sorry for the typo in #63. That should read on base 16 times in 35 plate appearances (not 25).
   64. esturminator_CT Posted: October 27, 2007 at 04:08 PM (#2595723)
I agree that JD Drew is probably just more reserved and business-like than many of the members of the Red Sox (like Paps, Youk, Lowell, Papi, Coco, Cora, Tek, Beckett, . . . who seem to like to loosen up and unwind in celebration after big games). And I don't mean to insinuate there is any dislike between the players. I'm just curious how much he feels he now fits in. I haven't seen much press coming from sit down chats with Drew. I hope he feels more a part of the team now that the post season is in full tilt, because it wasn't clear that he was embraced by the players or the fans upon his arrival and struggles. Since he looks to be here for a few more years, I hope he is getting comfortable and fired up to be a Red Sox.
   65. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: October 27, 2007 at 04:26 PM (#2595745)
I don't think the dressing room DISLIKES JD Drew. I don't think JD Drew dislikes his teammates. He just doesn't put empty beer boxes over his head.


I agree. He's an introvert in a team (and a sport) filled with mostly extroverts. He seems like a very inward-focussed guy. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it unnerves some people. We want players to show emotion - we want them to share how they feel so we can share in their joy or frustration. It helps us identify with them and brings the players and fans closer together. When a guy has maybe a different processing style, it sticks out. I think compared to a guy like Youkilis who is about as demonstrative as they come, Drew's reserve seems even more perplexing.

I have some sympathy for Drew because I'm typically pretty reserved myself. It can lead to being misunderstood sometimes, even though I'm pretty well-adjusted (for a Red Sox fan).
   66. Darren Posted: October 27, 2007 at 08:50 PM (#2595920)
Most of the non-Lowell options at 3B appear to me to be pony plans - trade for Ian Stewart! assume Jed Lowrie can play 3B right now! sign ARod! - but we'll see. It seems like everyone I know is a huge Mike Lowell fan, so that kinda sways me a bit, too. I don't mean to start a hot stove thread with World Series games, but hey, Theo said it.


Trying to sign the best player on the market is now a "pony plan"? Didn't it used to be called something more like "the best way to build a team" back when the player in question was Pedro? :)

The beauty of the situation with ARod is this: he has to opt out by 10 days after the World Series. Meanwhile, the Red Sox still have exclusive rights to bargain with Lowell until 15 days after the World Series. So the Red Sox will be able to know if ARod's out there (and therefore if the Yankees are interested in Lowell) before completing their deal with Lowell. Then again, Lowell would know that too, but I'm not sure if that's positive or negative.

I figured out the other day that if the Sox bring back Lowell at 12 and Schilling at 13, their payroll would be in the high 120s. That's a good place to be with a pretty complete team.
   67. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 27, 2007 at 08:58 PM (#2595929)
Trying to sign the best player on the market is now a "pony plan"? Didn't it used to be called something more like "the best way to build a team" back when the player in question was Pedro? :)
The "pony" part of the ARod thing to me is much more that I think there is less than a 10% chance he ends up on the open market. If he's a free agent, I have little doubt the Red Sox will be bidding.
   68. PJ Martinez Posted: October 27, 2007 at 09:44 PM (#2595958)
"We can always trade him if the production becomes unacceptable in 2009 or beyond."

We can? Oh, goodie!

Seriously, though, who will want an aging, well-paid third baseman whose production is "unacceptable"?

That said, I think re-signing Lowell is probably a good idea. Then again, I have a fairly irrational dislike for A-Rod, and am uncomfortable about him joining the Red Sox (at the inevitably gargantuan salary, at least).
   69. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 27, 2007 at 09:49 PM (#2595959)
That said, I think re-signing Lowell is probably a good idea. Then again, I have a fairly irrational dislike for A-Rod, and am uncomfortable about him joining the Red Sox (at the inevitably gargantuan salary, at least).
I agree with this, though the contract is irrelevant to me. (I think great players are always worth their contracts.) I doubt any of us will have to worry about it, because spending massive piles of money on ARod is so obviously in the interest of the Yankees that I see little reason to think they won't eventually do so. But it would be weird. I'm sure the Red Sox would bid, and I recognize that he's, like, the greatest player of the contemporary era, but I don't like him. I can't help it. It would be totally weird.
   70. Darren Posted: October 27, 2007 at 10:43 PM (#2595984)
There's the possibility that ARod decides he doesn't want to play in NY. I would not blame him for that after the way he's been treated.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
1k5v3L
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.3449 seconds
41 querie(s) executed