2013 Lineup?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from oscars. Show oscars's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to HelloItsMeAgain1's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    He rarely hits near his career BA, so he's hard to project.

     

    He rarely hits near .325 as well. 

    Well, no matter how you slice it, 2011 sticks out from the rest as far as batting average goes.

     

    But now he gets to play half his games in a ballpark where he rakes

     




     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    You can almost pick this lineup out of a hat.  It certainly lacks pop in the middle, but at the same time, it doesn't have any big gaps.  You can look at the batters due up for any inning and not get too excited or discouraged.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from oscars. Show oscars's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to HelloItsMeAgain1's comment:

    In response to oscars' comment:
     

    But now he gets to play half his games in a ballpark where he rakes

     

    1) Very small sample size

    2) We heard the same thing about adrian gonzalez

    1) He's a pull hitter, and Fenway has ALWAYS heavily favoured pull hiiters(eg: Mike Lowell,Cody Ross)

    2) The left handed Gonzales inexplicibly morphed into a singles/doubles hitter. There is nothing to suggest the right-handed pull hitting Napoli will do the same.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    I doubt they start the year with Ellsbury in the 3 slot but wouldn't be at all surprised if he doesn't get there by mid year. It looks like he is healthy so who is the mos t likely to be our megastud? To me it is Ellsbury. Then you have Napoli, Ortiz, Middlebrooks seeing more fastballs with him on the bases also.

    I can see Victorino hitting 1st in his optimal splits but we still would need a good lead off guy.

    Say Jackie Bradley Jr. and tap your shoes three times.

    Heh, it's at least possible. Especially by year end. The kid put up søme tremendous on base numbers in the minors last year.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    If they then extend Ellsbury, then we are looking at a pretty cool team going forward with all the other young kids they have coming up. And with JBJ in LF and Victorino in RF you would have probably one of the best fielding outfield configurations in baseball.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    Get a bopper for 1st base and you have a great team.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Why do so many people think Napoli should be the number 4 hitter? Aside from 24 homers, his stats from last year look very unimpressive.

    We still don't have a true 4 slot hitter unless we bat Papi there and force a weakness somewhere else.

    Naps is the lesser of 9 evils. (I am not sure Middlebrooks is ready for that kind of pressure.)



    moon, you just acknowledged the psychological aspect of a hitter's spot in the lineup.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    Why do so many people think Napoli should be the number 4 hitter? Aside from 24 homers, his stats from last year look very unimpressive.

    We still don't have a true 4 slot hitter unless we bat Papi there and force a weakness somewhere else.

    Naps is the lesser of 9 evils. (I am not sure Middlebrooks is ready for that kind of pressure.)

     



    moon, you just acknowledged the psychological aspect of a hitter's spot in the lineup.

     

     



    I have never argued againstb that. I argue against the significance of moving players who know themselves to be weak in certain areas. Tell them the reason, and they should understand.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    He's a pull hitter, and Fenway has ALWAYS heavily favoured pull hiiters(eg: Mike Lowell,Cody Ross)

    Some strict pull hitters are harmed by Fenway, because opposing pitchers just pitch them away and dare them to go to RF.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

    You can almost pick this lineup out of a hat.  It certainly lacks pop in the middle, but at the same time, it doesn't have any big gaps.  You can look at the batters due up for any inning and not get too excited or discouraged.  




    that's a good way to put it rojas. although i think too many people are taking Papi for granted. I get excited every time he comes up to bat, you never know when he's going yard!!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    If they then extend Ellsbury, then we are looking at a pretty cool team going forward with all the other young kids they have coming up. And with JBJ in LF and Victorino in RF you would have probably one of the best fielding outfield configurations in baseball.




    now your speaking in a language i understand! :p

    the only way i see an OF of JBJ/#2/SV is if we get some serious pop from all our other positions. Even if Ells is putting up 2011 power numbers that OF still lacks pop and we'd have to make it up in other areas. Which is why i advocate (in the event Ells is resigned and JBJ is ready to go) that we trade SV and pickup a power hitting OF to stick in front of the monster.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from oscars. Show oscars's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    He's a pull hitter, and Fenway has ALWAYS heavily favoured pull hiiters(eg: Mike Lowell,Cody Ross)

    Some strict pull hitters are harmed by Fenway, because opposing pitchers just pitch them away and dare them to go to RF.

     



    Ive seen Napoli hit oppoisite field HRs.

     

    Long may it continue!

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to oscars' comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    He's a pull hitter, and Fenway has ALWAYS heavily favoured pull hiiters(eg: Mike Lowell,Cody Ross)

    Some strict pull hitters are harmed by Fenway, because opposing pitchers just pitch them away and dare them to go to RF.

     



    Ive seen Napoli hit oppoisite field HRs.

     

    Long may it continue!



    I'm not saying Naps can't go to RF, but some RH'd pull hitters have trouble in Fewnway. Also, if he does go for HRs to RF, he might come up short more often that at other parks.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Weak. One would think that over 150 million would get a better lineup. Bad hip, bad wheel, cast offs in multi-season statistical decline, and malingering malcontents.

    The smart move will be to go into the summer, poised to sell off the old deadweight like Dumpster, Napoli (even the last few months), Gomes, S. Drew et al, as well as Ellsbury and his bidding plans for next winter. They should take the best talent from AAA and AA, forget about the bean counting, and play them the last few months of 2013 and evaluate and anticipate the 2014 trade and FA market. Lester should be retained through the option because of how important it is to have major league proven starters (2nd or 3rd rate) under short term contract. Dumpster is ancient and has high miles and should be replaced via trade market or farm promotions. 



    I also see trading these guys as the only redeemable value they have to a team not destined to compete this year.

    However, using up a full year of team control to play our AAA players for a few extra games , or "beancounting" as you call it, is not a good idea. We gain little usable knowledge in an extra month sample size (August).

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    If they then extend Ellsbury, then we are looking at a pretty cool team going forward with all the other young kids they have coming up. And with JBJ in LF

    You don't know what you are talking about. JBJ's value is in CF, and I don't think the Red Sox are stupid enough to put him in LF and pay Ellsbury a fortune in his thirties.

     



    You've been calling them stupid since you came to this board. Has something changed your mind recently?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    If they then extend Ellsbury, then we are looking at a pretty cool team going forward with all the other young kids they have coming up. And with JBJ in LF

    You don't know what you are talking about. JBJ's value is in CF, and I don't think the Red Sox are stupid enough to put him in LF and pay Ellsbury a fortune in his thirties.

     




    i'd at least put JBJ into RF

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    However, using up a full year of team control to play our AAA players for a few extra games , or "beancounting" as you call it, is not a good idea. We gain little usable knowledge in an extra month sample size (August).

    "A few extra game"? What! A team with a 150 million a year plus payroll placing a priority on "another year of team control"? What!

    They should play the highest potential and fit experienced upper minor league talent for the last 40 to 60 games of the season! That's not "a few extra games", nor does it amount to anything of import for a team that is dumping big money on old men. The payroll for the Red Sox should be in the 110 to 130M range. There is no reason whatsoever to bean count and spend a fortune on old men when it is essential to evaluate minor league talent on the MLB stage for more than "a few games". And booting the timeline a year is malfeasance for a big market team whose essence should be to put the best team roster contstruction on the field in a market that has no value beyond the 110 to 130M range.




    more drive by drivel from the board stooge :p

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    If they then extend Ellsbury, then we are looking at a pretty cool team going forward with all the other young kids they have coming up. And with JBJ in LF

    You don't know what you are talking about. JBJ's value is in CF, and I don't think the Red Sox are stupid enough to put him in LF and pay Ellsbury a fortune in his thirties.

     



    I dont like the JBJ/Ells/Vic outfield either.  Having three defense first speedsters creates a power void that you have to fill by looking for offense in defense first positions.

    Lets get away from going with offensive shortstops and defensive left fielders.  Lets get back to being defensively strong up the middle with power at the corners.    

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    However, using up a full year of team control to play our AAA players for a few extra games , or "beancounting" as you call it, is not a good idea. We gain little usable knowledge in an extra month sample size (August).

    "A few extra game"? What! A team with a 150 million a year plus payroll placing a priority on "another year of team control"? What!

    We let players go to free agency all the time, and some we might have wished we had one more year. (Some- not)

     

    They should play the highest potential and fit experienced upper minor league talent for the last 40 to 60 games of the season! That's not "a few extra games", nor does it amount to anything of import for a team that is dumping big money on old men.

    Again, you show you have no clue about baseball. A September call-up does not effect the clock on years of service, so a trade at the deadline and bringing up a player for 40-60 games would really just be a 20-30 game difference, and a net loss of maybe a full year of team control. Get it? I thought not.

    We can call the kids up in September at no loss of control years, or do as you want and call them up on August 1st for 20-30 games more and lose a full year.

    Brilliant "stratgery" clown!

     

    The payroll for the Red Sox should be in the 110 to 130M range. There is no reason whatsoever to bean count and spend a fortune on old men when it is essential to evaluate minor league talent on the MLB stage for more than "a few games". And booting the timeline a year is malfeasance for a big market team whose essence should be to put the best team roster contstruction on the field in a market that has no value beyond the 110 to 130M range.

    Did I ever say I was for these winter signings? You know better, but still keep constructing a strawman, saying it is me, and then arguing with yourself.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2013 Lineup?

    Lets get away from going with offensive shortstops and defensive left fielders.  Lets get back to being defensively strong up the middle with power at the corners.    

    YES!

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share