A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : Right on. They are totally capable of averaging 8 runs a game for a 6 game stretch and only allowing 3 runs a game for that same stretch, which is the reverse of these six. By example Texas has averaged 7 runs a game and allowed just under 3 earned over 6. A six game losing streak naturally is magnified by the fact that it is at the start of the season. But to win 97 games (.600 ball) only have to go 97-51 the rest of the way (.630). While it is a humbling game at moments over 162 games things do seem to normalize and so while this stretch is so bad, they will have a stretch where they can do no wrong and in between they will play .600 ball IMO. Hope spring eternal. 
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    True dat, my good friends katz and harness.

    This is so unusual, and baffling.

    Still, why is it so impossible to believe in a better outcome? I think back to 2004 - and the name of that video: Still, we believe.


     

    Still, we believe - seven years later.  

    I believe.

    I choose to believe.

    What do the rest of you choose to do?

    Here endeth the lesson.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Pedroia is not a 3 hitter. Crawford needs to go to leadoff to say, Ellsbury to 9. Lester did his job, as I expected. There isn't any excuse for every player not knowing exactly what his role and lineup spot was going to be. Before the season started, only the delusional thought that Crawford belonged in the 3 spot. Adjustments still have to be made, and, as I said before the season, Crawford's only spot is leadoff in this lineup. I also said that management will be forced to make lineup adjustment with Crawford, and that won't be putting him at 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9. With 156 games to go, plenty of time to make the adjustments. Wakefield's ERA in a mop-up role isn't worthy of any comment. That roster spot needs to go to Aceves, so there isn't a single player who can only mop out of the pen.
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]

    I respect your opinion, and agree that Pedroia should not hit in the 3-hole. 

    But Crawford is one of the best 2-hole hitters in all of baseball, IMHO, based on his work at TBR.  And he has already said that he thinks the same.  He is not a true 3-hole hitter, IMO, not in the sense of a Yaz or a Ted Williams or even a Wade Boggs.

    Batting Pedey in the 3-hole baffles me, sure, but that may be a sign that the FO and Tito may have no clue as to what to do against a lefty pitcher, or that they may be over-thinking the whole L-R-L-R-L structure for the batting order.

    To my way of thinking, Ellsbury should lead off and Crawford should follow. Regardless.  A-Gon is a classic 3-hole hitter in the mold of a young Yaz or Ted Williams. Why not put him there permanently, and let the very impressive hitters (Youk, Papi) bat after him - maybe putting Papi in the 4-hole and Youk in the 5-hole against righties and flipping them against lefties? 

    The real concern, though, is the bottom of the order. But this needs to play itself out. Scutaro can hit better. Can Salty? We'll see, depending on the magic that Dave Magadan can work.

    And, no. It is not appropriate to panic.   

    So what if no team has ever won the World Series after going 0-6 to start the season? The same was said about a certain team in the ALCS in 2004, down 0-3 to the dreaded Yankees, before this happened:


     

    Yo, Derek!  The tag was late!!  Just so you know...

    Anyway, I am reminded of a classic moment in motion picture history:


     

    Way too early to panic, still.  The ship can be righted, and it will be.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Yes, harness; I remember your take on Ferrell and Tito. I thought the ideawas a good one. I still think Tito is much much better than nearly anyone else we have had since Dick Williams, but I have hesitated to be overly critical of him, because I think he is a good traditional manager and that is what Theo seems to want. I say thi because, unless Theo wants someone who breaks the paradigms I have spoken about, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't, then I don't see a need to replace Tito. The replacement might be worse.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]


    Grady Little was a traditional manager -- going by his gut and not looking at the stats reports that he was given. Remember, that's why he was fired.

    Francona is far more advanced than that, which is why he was hired. What he doesn't do, however, is manage strictly by the numbers, which is a good thing. Remember, the players aren't robots. They're human beings, and you have to take in the human element when you manage, which Francona does.

    And humans can change from year to year. Take Ortiz. Sure his effectiveness against LHP has gone down the past two years, but he had been very good against lefties. And he talked last year about working on his approach. You can't just assume that what someone that everything is going stay static. So far this year, he's been better against lefties -- yes, small sample that you can't read too much into. But maybe he is going to bounce back against lefties.

    Young players get better, so that has to be taken into consideration too. So sometimes the human element needs to take precedence over the stats.

    Now if a player never has been good in certain situation and is a veteran, then it does reach a point where stats element should take priority. It's a balancing act.

    Critics call it coddling the players, but in any profession, you need to have confidence in what you're doing. Players can't be looking over their shoulder expecting to be yanked the first time they fail. That Francona sticks with players in slumps has paid dividends in the end. And by treating a player who had been an every day play as a platoon player could do more harm than good in the player's psyche.

    What makes Francona an excellent manager IMO is that he balances the human element with new-school statistical analysis. You simply can't manager by looking at computer printouts of stats.

    I think the analysis you do is interesting and useful. I'm a stats junkie myself. It's what I love about baseball. But you can't focus simply on the numbers and ignore other aspects.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : Few thoughts: I must admit I never thought the RS would be in play on Crawford based on what they had in the minors (LH gap power guys with wheels), his price point and their history. I still think he is a puzzling "fit" and question the superstar paycheck but  also freely admit that Theo Epstein has forgotten more avout baseball, both in terms of player evaluation and valuation than I will ever know. But I got why the RS did not want to go with hands on deck in OF in 2011. Kalish was the best of the bunch of call ups in the OF but he was not nearly ready to be an MLB OF. And knowing Martinez was leaving, the RS knew they would lose a lot of offensive firepower from the catcher. The RS names appeared to be connected with a lot of catchers this winter so I can only assume that they wanted to have more options than they have but price and circumstance led them to the Salty-Tek tandem. The RS moves this winter with A-Gon and Crawford sort of demonstrate an eye not just on 2011 (where the OF was not an issue) but for the coming years as well. While "he whose name is not worth mentioning" blasted me for posting that it appeared Epstein and the RS were willing to pay bigger $$$ for a players early decline (age 33+) if the could get prime years of (30-32) in the contract. That certainly seems to be the case in the rumored A-Gon terms and the Crawford deal. And to do these moves the RS appear to have calculated in the payrol reductions of Drew and Cameron and probably Ortiz in their thinking. So while the RS maybe could have gotten by in 2011 with their OF by the end of this season it would have been a bigger issue and the FA after this season for OF is thin. And can anyone blame Epstein for not wanting to start the year with such an old OF as Cameron and Drew would have made the?. Cameron is a off the charts great 4th OF but as a starter he was a guy fast approaching twilight and coming off of a season lost to injury. I agree with Harness that the 2011 sample sets are too small to conclude anything, otherwise one would conclude hardly anybody on this team can hit and that just isn't the case. And while I don't get CC as a $140M man, I do tend to believe the RS know what they are doing and that in time I will see the logic.  Just my takes
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Toward the end of last year, I said Boston would go after CC in a big way.
    The reasons I gave, beyond them passing on VMART, were just as you described: An aging outfield at 2 positions:
    A thin FA outfield talent pool in 2012 (with Cam/Drew coming off the books).
    Also, I felt having CC would lessen the pressure on bridging Kalish or Reddick through his first year. The kids can learn a ton from him.
    I took a lot of flack for that post from some very reputable posters.

    UR take on Theo prioritizing player's prime years and dealing with mediocrity at the tail end of the contracts is extremely pertinent. You could have knocked me over with a feather when I learned CC was inked for 7 years at 20 per year. I was amazed the team would take it that far.

    I could see 4 years because that would allow the team a CRAWBURY speed tandem for the first three of them. That tandem will give this team an added dimension, which is why CC was as valuable to Boston as he was to CA. Beyond CRAWBURY, I wasn't crazy about the fit. After all, we don't play 81 games with a short RF porch.
    Paying heavily for those final 3 contractual years is mind boggling. Obviously, the FO weighed out all the factors between now and then. 

    For all we know, Henry, a brilliant businessman, might in fact be planning on selling the team after the next 4 years. And when you consider it strictlyfrom a business standpoint, it makes sense. The drafting loophole that has heavily favored High revenue teams will  soon close. That means more of a dependency on the FA market, which will favor NY. The farm may not be nearly as fruitful in 4 years as it has been.

    The opportunistic window for most of the starters is between now and 2013-14.
    In other words, this team will be peaking in several areas by then. It's a perfect time to sell, which means Henry won't be fiscally responsible for the anchor of Lackey's/CC's contracts.

    Of course, this is strictly hypothetical, but the point is, we really don't know what the intentions of this organization are by then.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Yes, harness; I remember your take on Ferrell and Tito. I thought the ideawas a good one.

    I still think Tito is much much better than nearly anyone else we have had since Dick Williams, but I have hesitated to be overly critical of him, because I think he is a good traditional manager and that is what Theo seems to want. I say thi because, unless Theo wants someone who breaks the paradigms I have spoken about, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't, then I don't see a need to replace Tito. The replacement might be worse.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I think it's possible that the AL East will be so competitive that no team may make 95 wins. I just don't see any magic number for wins needed to make the playoffs.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I'm gonna save that statement about the O's...just in case your posts mysteriously disappear...

    Save mine too.

    Wink

    Oh wait...nevermind...I'll still be here.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Grady Little was a traditional manager -- going by his gut and not looking at the stats reports that he was given. Remember, that's why he was fired.

    Too much "gut" to be a true tradionalist. That's why I said Tito was better than anyone since Dick Williams.

    Francona is far more advanced than that, which is why he was hired. What he doesn't do, however, is manage strictly by the numbers, which is a good thing. Remember, the players aren't robots. They're human beings, and you have to take in the human element when you manage, which Francona does.

    I agree, but it's a trade off. Keeping a .500 OPS batter hitting 5th i not good for the "human element" of the other players on the team. Putting Crawford up 3rd and demoting Youk or AGon or Papi (vs RHPs) down a slot is not using the "human element" correctly. Benching Cam, Lowrie and Vtek vs LHPs is not good for their moral when they know they could and should be playing not riding the bench.

    And humans can change from year to year. Take Ortiz. Sure his effectiveness against LHP has gone down the past two years, but he had been very good against lefties. And he talked last year about working on his approach. You can't just assume that what someone that everything is going stay static. So far this year, he's been better against lefties -- yes, small sample that you can't read too much into. But maybe he is going to bounce back against lefties.

    Yes, he can, but isn't a big gamble to hope ate age 35-36 he will? He's about .200-.300 points behind the guys on the bench vs LHPs. I'd bet on some other Red Sox players to do better. I'd try to get the whole team thinking the manager has faith in everyone on the team and plays players who deserve to play, when they best can succeed.

    Yes, it is a small sample, but even in the small sample size, my point is being missed. My position is not to take Papi out vs all LHPs and bench him vs all LH's starters. If there is nobody clearly better than Papi, then he shoudl start. However, it would be a rare time when he deserves to bat 5th vs all but about 5 LHPs. Let's look closer at the games this year vs LHPs:

    While he is 3 for 9 with an HR vs lefties this season, the HR came vs a RP, not vs a starter I would have sat him against. He was 0 for 3 vs Wilson, but I'm not sure anyone else had a better career vs him up to that point, so him starting that game was not a big deal. Him batting 5th was not a good idea in my opinion, but it is only one game. The game with Matt Harrison, he went 2 for 3. He had only 5 PAs against him before that game.

    It's good to see Papi start off well this year both overall and vs LHPs, but I still think others could do much better vs most LH'd starters this year.

    I hope he proves me wrong, and he will get a lot of opportunities to pove it (thanks to Tito's "loyalty").
    Young players get better, so that has to be taken into consideration too. So sometimes the human element needs to take precedence over the stats.

    Yes, Lowrie is young and could get even better vs LHPs.
    career: .919 OPS
    2010:    1.025 OPS


    Now if a player never has been good in certain situation and is a veteran, then it does reach a point where stats element should take priority. It's a balancing act.

    You mean like VTek vs LHPs? Being about .200 points higher than Salty vs LHPs, but being benched? Vtek has been over .800 vs LHPs for the last 3 years. Add to this his obvious CERA-related advantage over Salty and that was clearly a no-brainer in my mind.

    Critics call it coddling the players, but in any profession, you need to have confidence in what you're doing. Players can't be looking over their shoulder expecting to be yanked the first time they fail. That Francona sticks with players in slumps has paid dividends in the end. And by treating a player who had been an every day play as a platoon player could do more harm than good in the player's psyche.

    I meantioned this earlier. They don't have to look over their shoulders. Tito could have called Papi into his office and said: Look at the numbers. When we face these certain LH'd starters you will play and bat 5th or 6th. When we face these others, you may be used as a PH'er or bat 7th.  Telling Salty he will play only vs RHPs would not have been an issue. Using Cam over Drew already seems to be happening.

    What makes Francona an excellent manager IMO is that he balances the human element with new-school statistical analysis. You simply can't manager by looking at computer printouts of stats.

    I have never advocated this, or else I'd have had Cam batting 3rd vs LHPs and Lowrie leading off or at the #2 slot. Again, the "human element" issue is not as clear cut as you may think it is. Papi was moved down oncebefore in his career and it ignited one of his best 3-4 month stretches in his career, and "human element" extends to all players.

    I think the analysis you do is interesting and useful. I'm a stats junkie myself. It's what I love about baseball. But you can't focus simply on the numbers and ignore other aspects.

    I don't focus on just numbers. I use them to support my position. The lefty-right split has been someting many great managers have used to their team's advantage for years. It's not a fluke. Tito obviously respects it in some ways by his obsession with theL-R-L line-up thing, but to me, it is just plain wrong to expect Crawford to excell vs LHPs in a top slot. To expect Papi to reverse his output vs LHPs. Give him a chance to prove it from the 7 slot, then move him up, if he shows it. In the mean time, let Cam, Jed and VTek the feeling they matter. Kep them fresh and ready. Make it a team.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]IMO the line-up reflects the fact that RS really did not know what do with Carl Crawford but they were enamored with his talents and knew they were a card short in the OF. I have disagreed with this point since the moment they signed Crawford. Perhaps, we may have been a "card short" in the OF next season, but not this eason.  With Ellbury and Cameron returningfrom injury, the Sox biggest need wasnot OF: it was 3B (solved by the AGon deal), Catcher (apparently not solved), bullpen (Theo took a good stab at solving it), hitting vs LHPs (didn't get any better), and possibly starting pitching (understandable that Theo went wit what he had). I know I have beaten the dead horse on this one, and I am not saying this because of Crawford's small sample size poor start. I said it all along. The upgrade from "this to that" was not worth $20M. From: LF: Ellsbury/DMac      (Maybe a combined .775 OPS) CF: Cameron/Kalish   (Maybe a combined .750 OPS) RF: Drew/Cameron     (Maybe a combined .825 OPS) To: LF: Crawford/DMac    (.850?) CF: Ellsbury/Cameron (.775) RF: Drew/Cameron     (.825) $20M to gain about.075 OPS total between LF & CF, plus some defense and speed.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]Few thoughts:
    I must admit I never thought the RS would be in play on Crawford based on what they had in the minors (LH gap power guys with wheels), his price point and their history. I still think he is a puzzling "fit" and question the superstar paycheck but  also freely admit that Theo Epstein has forgotten more avout baseball, both in terms of player evaluation and valuation than I will ever know.

    But I got why the RS did not want to go with hands on deck in OF in 2011. Kalish was the best of the bunch of call ups in the OF but he was not nearly ready to be an MLB OF. And knowing Martinez was leaving, the RS knew they would lose a lot of offensive firepower from the catcher.

    The RS names appeared to be connected with a lot of catchers this winter so I can only assume that they wanted to have more options than they have but price and circumstance led them to the Salty-Tek tandem.

    The RS moves this winter with A-Gon and Crawford sort of demonstrate an eye not just on 2011 (where the OF was not an issue) but for the coming years as well. While "he whose name is not worth mentioning" blasted me for posting that it appeared Epstein and the RS were willing to pay bigger $$$ for a players early decline (age 33+) if the could get prime years of (30-32) in the contract. That certainly seems to be the case in the rumored A-Gon terms and the Crawford deal. And to do these moves the RS appear to have calculated in the payrol reductions of Drew and Cameron and probably Ortiz in their thinking.

    So while the RS maybe could have gotten by in 2011 with their OF by the end of this season it would have been a bigger issue and the FA after this season for OF is thin. And can anyone blame Epstein for not wanting to start the year with such an old OF as Cameron and Drew would have made the?. Cameron is a off the charts great 4th OF but as a starter he was a guy fast approaching twilight and coming off of a season lost to injury.

    I agree with Harness that the 2011 sample sets are too small to conclude anything, otherwise one would conclude hardly anybody on this team can hit and that just isn't the case. And while I don't get CC as a $140M man, I do tend to believe the RS know what they are doing and that in time I will see the logic.

     Just my takes
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    It was good to get that first win. If Crawbury doesn't work, then I'm ok with Ellsford (9-1).  It was gratifying to see Salty have a solid game.  I would have said Pedey too, Moon.  Go Sox!  Let's do it again tomorrow.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    When a guy starts out in mlb you expect some hitting problems, but the likelihood of the Salty train even becoming a .260-270 average guy is rapidly leaving the station. He looks like he has a good swing and word is he is handling the pitchers ok but the offensive results are not there across the board. In 2009, he hit .233 in 310 AB. Not a single projection has him above .251 this year and his OBP struggles to reach .320. the only thing to like in his offense is the probability of some power down the road. He seems to have an ok approach and can stroke a ball to LF even while hitting RH. He should be able to reach the wall for lots of doubles and a few HR. He just isn't doing it with enough frequency yet.

    The Sox struck lightning with Tek and they seem to like the similarities. They gambled. We are approaching well over 600 mlb AB though now and he's hitting .247 so far for his career and he's on a clear downward trend.

    Sometimes guys with an acute uppercut swing need a lot of AB to become successful. He may blossom in a year or 2 and give us 25 HR. He's decent defensively from all appearances. I think they thought they would win enough games with the talent they have and that that talent would carry them while he grew into that slot. If there is any key to our recent demise though, IMO it's Salty. No one on the staff is pitching well except maybe Lester now. No one seems to be hitting his spots. And he's hitting under .200 with virtually no power.

    We need to start Tek, tomorrow.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Thanks for the research harness. Looks like h's about like Napoli and VMart.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : The Indians are like a AAA team. It's not going to continue. Agreed?
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Agreed that it won't continue? Yes. Undoubtedly. 

    But last time I checked they are a Major League Baseball team that's won 7 in a row.

    Essentially, my point was more about what were the odds of that happening.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The jig is up, dude? You really need to get out more, you are paranoid and have some issues.


    It is Tito who has hosen only to use Wake when we are behind or in a mop up role, but it is obvious having a guy that can go 3-8 innings can comein handy.

    Wakefield's only been used in mop-up outings. You are dreaming if you think he comes in when "we are behind", which would include today's game and Lackey imploding early.

    Nothing about Wakefield "comes in handy". Any pitcher can go "3-8" innings, but Wakefield certainly can't go 3-8 quality innings or he would have been used today.

    Wakefield has earned his zero confidence reputation, the Red Sox simply haven't taken the step of getting him off the active roster. As with Lowell, they seem to think that a 25 man roster can be used for a injured reserve retread to sit around and mop up. Every roster spot is vital and should be used as such. I'd rather see Wally take the roster spot, as that would be more amusing than Wakefield. The team could have used Aceves in a few spots in one or two of those first 6 games, but the resident squater was taking up a spot.

    As for Wakefield returning to "pre-July, 2009" form, you need to point out all the many lousy years Wakefield had over his baseball career. Wakefield isn't going to return to anything but an old mop, and his earlier comment that he was going to retire at year end is his own admission that he's washed up. The fact that he later equivocated means nothing, other than the Red Sox should not enable him by offering another contract. He needs a lecture that he is taking advantage of the ownership's good will and needs to retire. If that brings his anger, they need to trade him or release him, something they would not follow through with on Lowell. A bottom dweller budget NL team might have a gig for him, in which case they should trade him. 

    The Red Sox have been way to generous and patient with Wakefield. It's a fiasco that sticks out like a stop sign. Most Red Sox fans are tired of it, though some are scared to admit it. When a near majority of Red Sox fans is openly protesting Wakefield on the active roster, the realy number is much larger than that. As far as the AL East, Wakefield is simply a softball pitcher.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Let's crush the Yanks like a bug today. We are due.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : His "cost" might be greater than you could imagine. Moon : I doubt Tek could handle that many starts. Not w/o going down or playing with broken bones...yet again. 45% is pushing it.
    Posted by harness


    Agreed; I was thinking if he caught Beckett (20%) + played v LHP (25-33%); this may be too much.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon: You must feel like ur teaching Howdy "GM" Doody.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II


    Well, maybe we'll win tomorrow...

    It can't be all Salty's fault...can it?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom, if management changes their mind now about Salty..after only 8 games,  they may just as well release him.  It would be that devastating to any confidence that he may have gotten.  To be honest, I'm more worried about Crawford than Salty.  Paying tons of money for a punch n' judy show, for me, is demoralizing. 

    It would probably be best if we all stepped back a bit and allowed 'tincture of time' to do it's work.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    ...and Softy who is clearly baseballGM behind ( again for the most part ).

    I choose to believe tom-uk over GM.

    tom says he caught softy red-handed. GM slipped by answering as softy, then quickly deleted his post.

    More evidence... we all know softy holds some pretty bizarre positions. What are the odds that GM has exactly the same positions and the same style and vitriol. The same enthusiastic level of bashing of precisely the same players softy despises.

    It's obvious softy's trying to save face by pretending he is not breaking his promise not to come on this thread.

    To me, he has proven his dishonesty countless times, so these actions do not surprise me.

    He's becoming such a pretender, I wonder if even he knows who he is anymore.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Head went 4 for 4 with 2 HR down in Greenville. Lot's of talent emerging this year. Jacobs has 3 mammoth HR so far. Quite a few guys starting hot.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]It was a seminar on the true art of pitching.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I haven't seen Beckett pitch like that in a long time. 2-3 yrs. His pitch selection baffled the Yanks. His command of the strikezone was extremely accurate (save for a few at-bats, but quickly got back on the horse).  Lets hope it's contagious. Not sure who deserved Player of the Game (although it's not particularly important), Beckett or Pedroia? Pedroia had me a little worried this past week complaining about the pin in his foot. Seems like the Sox should've won by soo much more. They're hitting, but having trouble scoring. And looking at this past week of 2-7 ball, not only was Texas off to a hot start, the Indians were too. Who knew?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II


    If it takes Tek to draw out Josh's 'A' game, it wouldn't bother me one bit if he caught every game he pitches.  What was it? 2 balls to the outfield? outstanding!  His velocity was great, breaking balls were great, and command was terrific....a guarantee for success.

    A secondary nice thing about the game tonight is that it hopefully takes some of the pressure off of Crawford.

    Boom, tried to go to that page..not sure if successful or not.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I lost respect a long time ago, but then he changed for awhile last winter. I am the forgiving type, but then he started misrepresenting nearly every point I ever had. Couple that with his always present super-sized ego and his taking credit for being first to hold every position that turns out right, was just too much to put up with.

    I was taught to never stand quiet for people telling lies and spouting hatred. I know it may have seemed extreme to answer every one of his lies--and there were many--but I felt I had to. Too many newbies and old enablers were falling for his tired old routines.

    It's ironic how he praised my thread for so long, then once I started criticizing him again, he bashed me, the thread and promised never to come here. Then, of course, he realized this was the best thread for talking serious Sox talk not related to one game threads and couldn't resist.

    He's an outright joke now. It's not even pathetic anymore. It's sick.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Wake & Lester may be Boston's two best bets when facing NY.
    They are the only ones can can negate those LH bats.
     

Share