A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Good data, Moon.
    Wake would be proud.

    Boston's right-handed pitchers don't match-up well w/NY.
    Wake can negate lefty bats.
    I wonder if Tek will catch Josh tomorrow.
     
  2. 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]harness, while you were gone I openly wondered about us getting Martin to catch. What are your views on his CERA-related abilities?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Well, he's been a work horse for the Dodgers, so there's not much to go on.
    Here's some data dating back to his Rookie year: (Keep in mind the short sample sizes):

    D. Lowe  w/Martin    3.30 ERA
                 w/Navarro: 1.69 (32 IP)

    C. Billingsly (2010) w/Martin:  4.18 ERA  (97 IP)
                                w/Bajaras: 2.43 ERA (40 IP)
                                w/Ellis:     2.50 ERA  (36 IP)

    Kershaw: (2009)    w/Martin:  3.33 ERA (127 IP)
                               w/Ausmus: 1.29 ERA (42 IP)

    Kershaw: (2010)   w/Martin:  2.94 ERA (137 IP)
                               w/Barajas: 2.53 EEA (32 IP)

    H.Kurota (2010)    w/Martin:  3.56 ERA (116 IP)
                              w/Barajas: 2.11 ERA ( 36 IP)

    These are all I could find for the key starters with more than 30 IP.
    The consistency against Martin raises a warning flag.
    Offensive-minded catchers tend to be that way because that's where their skill-set lies. There are obvious exceptions.

    I'm not sure how much of an upgrade, if any, he is over Posada.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom'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 : That was also the Word with VMART early on last year. But the data says otherwise. Salty does not have good numbers handling his pitchers, going back to his rookie season. But I believe he has more potential for improvement than a veteran like MARTIN or NAPOLI or POSADA or VMART. In ur other post, were you refering to spending some time on the BDC Private forum ?  
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Heh, Harness. Tek showed the kid how it is done tonight didn't he. And it is fantastic to see Beckett rounding into shape. Lester and now Beckett are getting in form. Others soon to follow hopefully...the juggernaut begins starting this series hopefully.

    Did I hear that Longoria is out for a while, and now Manny. Something tells me the Rays are going to have difficulty scoring runs for a while.

    The forum I was discussing is below. They are not sending out approval emails. Just apply and probably within a day you, Moon, Amp, Crit...etc. will be approved ( I'm sure ) and then we can for the most part leave the trolls behind, and Softy who is clearly baseballGM behind ( again for the most part ).

    Anyone here can impersonate the style and the sorts of things that each of us say. None of us know pretty much anything for certain regarding who is who but I' around 90 % sure Softy is baseballGM. Even if he isn't I'm not thrilled with him anyway!

    Regarding the private forum, there will be more to come on it in the future. It's still very limited, and quite buggy, but I think it's worth being involved in and it has quite a bit of personalization potential. Some time savings fetures also. I think we should join it and check it out. Most of you guys still haven't applied it seems to me. Cater is there, Fivekatz and others but I hope more of you do take part. Below is the one I was describing:

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    danny, you make some great points, but I don't recall anyone sayingwe were "surefire"...

    Is anybody ever "surefire"?

    Do many other teams have much less "issues" than we do... on paper?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    One thing is for certain, the Dodgers didn't want to keep Martin really for the past 2 years. He was their golden boy and then, whoops, how can we get rid of him. He sure looks like he can hit though, still.

    I think we thought maybe Salty could play some wall ball for us in Fenway and maybe we could score a decent catcher on the cheap. I'm still  waiting. The sample size is getting bigger every day. He didn't hit or win last year. He's not hitting or winning this year. Close to sub Mendoza line hitting in over 20 games now isn't it as a Redsox plus he is losing almost every single game. If I were managing I think I'd start playing Tek for at least 2-3 games in a row.
     
  6. 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 : 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?
    Posted by emp9[/QUOTE]

    If you recall, when they interviewed C. Young during the game, he was asked about the difference in Beckett between last night and his fir t start.

    Young replied (paraphrasing) that he mixed his pitches up better and had a good rhythm with Varitek.

    They also posted these numbers (updated):
    Josh w/Tek: 61-27.
    Josh w/o Tek: 11-14.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I was at a game in Anaheim last year in which Beckett threw i think 6 innings, but had the same type of dominating type of stuff. It was refreshing to see Varitek catching him and Beckett just completely keeping the ball on the inside half of the plate to the lefties and firing high fastballs on 1-2 or 2-2 to strike guys out. Bravo, Josh. A senior stopper type performance.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tommy99712. Show tommy99712's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I watched the Sox vs Yankees game today....I think the Sox have a great team....
    But something is missing...Earlier today, I was thinking that the Yankees had better personnel if one copmpares them with the Sox on a man to man basis...But that is not it...The Yankees looked like they were better prepared to play major league baseball....Could it be that the Sox' coaching is sub-par. I am beginning to wonder.
     



     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1for89. Show 1for89's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Check out Pawtucket's result from tonight. Life is Good!: http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2011_04_11_pawaaa_bufaaa_1
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    What?  No polo league results?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Yeah. I'm in it, Boom. You probably missed my posts. But it's got too many software issues for me right now.
    Let 'em work the bugs out.

    Josh owned the Big Apple tonight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  11. 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]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 okbut 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.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    That was also the Word with VMART early on last year. But the data says otherwise. Salty does not have good numbers handling his pitchers, going back to his rookie season. But I believe he has more potential for improvement than a veteran like MARTIN or NAPOLI or POSADA or VMART.

    In ur other post, were you refering to spending some time on the BDC Private forum?  
     
  12. 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]Not only do we have to see how badly the Sox are doing, with Sabathia pitching tomorrow. We have to hear about how GREAT the Orioles are. Enough already Harness! 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    That's just the point, Boom. Most here say the O's will not contend this year. I say they will be major contenders. I equate this to playing a 35-1 horse. In Harness racing, that means collecting 7-8 grand in two minutes. It's rare as hell to find a horse like this.

    Back in late March, I projected them to:
    WIN 90(+) GAMES  and/or
    FINISH 2ND     and/or
    BEAT OUT NY.

    I offered a wager (on another thread) to anyone who wishes to take me up on this, allowing me 35-1 odds. The offer still holds.

    You'll have to indulge me, Boom. I have a pension for longshots.
    I came up short on my 100 win projection in 2009.
    I came up short in my 2010 projection that the Sox would have their best road record of the last decade.

    If the O's go 84-80 over the remainder of the season, I hit my greatest baseball longshot. And even better, I can rub it in to Softy that he was WRONG!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In all honesty I've never been all that enamored with Crawford's defense. I'm just not seeing the gold glove. He's fast but that's it. He misplays a lot of balls. He seems lost out there quite often and the arm is not even average. I thought he might be able to play RF for us but now I don't think so. He's like Jeter. It's his name, his speed and rep as a hitter. No way he should be winning Gold Gloves in LF.

    I know LF is generally not a fielder's position. I think Ellsbury would have been a better LF than Crawford, ergo why he is in CF right now ( the more important defensive position ).

    I'm ready to make a call. I never liked the Crawford signing for the money and fit from day one and even though he does a lot of great things we are probably going to regret that signing. He just isn't worth the cash and I'd rather have a bopper in Fenway's LF. Jason Werth would have been a much better fit, for less cash. Crawford is a great guy and he puts up great numbers but that's a lot of Moolah. It's just way too long a contract for obscene cash. I love what he does running the bases though and he does give us a lot of intangibles, like scoring from 1st today on a double and knocking the ball through the SS hole when Ellsbury ran. He intentionally did that play as a run and hit. It was perfectly done.

    Is sure hope he just works so hard that he proves me wrong. That is what everyone says, that he is extremely hard working. He seems like a top notch guy also. I'm still rooting for him!


    Hopefully we will see Cameron tomorrow. He isn't getting that much PT so far. Drew has played well though overall.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    moonslav,
    I've opined from time to time on this thread, often to criticize Theo for wasting money (and a lot of it) even though the counter argument - that all gms (eg, Cashmen) do so as well - is true. But as this season starts I really just want to chime in and truly congratulate you for these threads you have created, right here in the public domain, for all to participate in. And, thanks for keeping it up in the face of agreement, disagreement, disparagement, Yankee-fan trolling, winning, losing, etc.


    Thanks. Please feel free to comment here.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE] I just caught up on about a dozen pages of comments; you guys are very prolific in your comments when things are going badly! I'm certainly not happy with the start, but I've always been a "glass half-full" kind of guy and I feel it's way too early to panic. In fact, I think Tito's lineup shuffling could be interpreted as panic and is an early over-reaction to the bad start. The bad start is primarily at the feet of the starting pitching which is putting the team behind early and forcing the hitters to play catch-up. The result is a lineup that is pressing to do too much with each at bat. They are too good top to bottom to not right the ship, and I'm sure we'll be looking at a 6 and 9 or 7 and 10 team before much longer.  Amp to answer your questions about Salty I will tell you that I think he is blameless as far as the pitching is concerned. The pitchers are simply not hitting spots and when they are the pitches have very little life and are very hittable. I think he sets a great target when no one is on base, especially for a guy who stands 6'4" or more. The issue about his moving target is maybe something I'm missing. When the sign is given the location is established and setting the target too early can tip off a hitter, especially with runners on to relay the location to the hitter. If a pitcher is relying on glove location for their target, instead of body location on the catcher's body, then that goes against any pitching/catching philosophy that I have ever played with.  With runners on, he gets into a "throwing" position and actually gets rid of the ball quite well for such a tall guy. He has had a few throws sail on him, which is a sign of his pressing just a little, just as his at bats indicate that he is pressing. He receives and frames balls very well, handles pitches in the dirt very athletically and seems to have a solid rapport with the pitchers. I really like his swing as well and feel he will hit. Boom is a little too harsh in his criticism citing 600 at bats as a good enough sample size. But when those at bats are stretched out over four seasons it is not a significant sample size.   I also know that Crawford is overpaid (who isn't in MLB??) and to date is underperforming. But he too is putting too much pressure on himself and he will be fine. I think he may possibly sit tonight against CC to get his head together and I also think he would benefit from NOT moving around the batting order. Unfortunately, with all of our rehabbing players Tito could not effectively use Spring Training to establish the best batting order and I'm not sure I've got a surefire winner either. But I do believe that moving hitters around this early only adds to the pressure they are already putting on themselves.   We need Becket to throw a beauty tonight and get the bats working against CC, a tall order in and of itself. But I refer back to my first paragraph about soon seeing a 6 and 9 or a 7 and 10 team before much longer.
    Posted by jidgef[/QUOTE]
    I just want to make sure everyone knows that I'm rooting big time for both Salty and Crawford. I think Crawford will do very well for us. My thinking is that he just wasn't an ideal fit. Our small LF area doesn't utilize his speed that well and he isn't a power hitter who could make much use for the wall. I look at our LF as one of the easiest OF slots in baseball to play in terms of speed and coordination. It's perfect for slotting a Manny type BIG Hit / bad field OF. Ellsbury isn't a ideal fit and Crawford isn't either. When you throw in the $140 mil factor I didn't see signing him. When Gammons first projected I thought he was completely off target.

    The only way I can really explain it is in wanting to win now and he was the guy available. Plus wanting to bump NESN ratings.

    I hope Salty makes it but we should be realistic in our expectations. No one is projecting him to hit higher than .251 this year with a .320 OBP. Maybe 12 HR. If he tops that it will be a pleasant surprise. We went cheap at the catcher slot. He is maybe an average defender. That is good value if we can get those overall numbers.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    AMP: I'm not holding anything back on Salty. I sincerely hope you are right. It's just too early for me to make any definitive distinction one way or the other. In fact, what you say about him is true. He could very well be a diamond in the rough.

    Last year, I wouldn't commit myself (regarding VMART) one way or the other until after around 65 games. (I did b*tch about his poor hitting in the first 6 weeks as he was hurting the line-up). And keep in mind, VMART had a long history of being a liability with his pitching staffs year after year in Cleveland. Like you, I was hoping being around influences that hopefully put more emphasis on game calling would rub off.

    Perhaps it did. But we'll never know to what degree he improved, if any.
    Now Salty's in the same boat. And after 60-65 games, we'll see what data evolves.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Geez. He's Softy with added dementia.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    .250  12 HRs is not bad from the caching position in MLB today, provided he handles the staff well. If Tito would rest him more vs LHPs, perhaps his BA & OBP could be a little higher. I do not think his bat will be the reason we make or don't make the playoffs.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I can't blame Saltalamachia for Dice-k's outing last night.

    I never blame any game loss on one player, nor do I judge players by sample sizes of 1, 2, 7,or even 20 games. I rarely ever even use sample sizes smaller than a season, and if I do, I almost always mention that it is a small sample size.

    The jury is still out on Salty, but the jury came in on VTek long ago. The guy can handle a staff (or at least this one) as well as anyone in MLB.
     
  20. 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]Thanks for the research harness. Looks like h's about like Napoli and VMart.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Your welcome, Moon.
    I don't know if I'd put him in that category - at least not until there's more compelling evidence. Let's see how the NY starters will fare with him.
    Should be interesting.

    Well Boom, the O's took a thrashing in game 2.
    Never let it be said I only tell half a truth:)
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]...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.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]








    But, any of us could be baseballGM, or Tom, or Burrito or really anyone. Completely matching a writing style is difficult and I would think not all that much fun but some people chose to 
    spend their life doing it.














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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I'm happy. Seeing the laser show in action today was great! It's just too bad that it was 1 guy against 9!

    How is it that the Yanks just seem to come alive against us. Maybe they take it more seriously? It could be that Tito needs to stop being quite so warm and friendly. There is a time in every team's life when someone needs to kick a ss. they always seem to compete more aggressively in the head to heads. They want to throw dirt over our heads right now.

    Lowrie stepped up today. It would seem that his bat could help the lineup right now and his glove won't hurt us any compared to Scutaro.

    That play Pedey made today was classic wasn't it. It should go on his lifetime highlight reel, which is going to be extensive before he's through.

    Pedey in the HOF....it's possible. Sometimes being funny and such a competitor will get him some votes when maybe the numbers aren't quite there but if he runs off 7-8 solid years going forward who knows? 20 HR years are decent for a 2nd baseman and his fielding is solid.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The Red Sox should near the summer trade deadline shop Ellsbury and Lackey to the NL to get out from under Lackey's contract

    This might be the dumbest thing written here all day. Vintage Insecure One.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II: But that was some HR by Boone. Thanks, Wake.
    [QUOTE]Moon : You must feel like ur teaching Howdy " GM " Doody. Taking him to the toolshed is more like it. Wake & Lester may be Boston's two best bets when facing NY. They are the only ones can can negate those LH bats. As much as softy GM hates to admit it, it appears Wake is earning a chance to go beyond "mop up". Wake vs the Yanks: '11  2 IP          0 ER  0 H    0 BB (.000 OPS) '10  14.1 IP    6 ER  11H   3 BB (.615 OPS) '09  6 IP          3 ER   6 H   3 BB (.953 OPS) '08  21.2 IP  12 ER  22H  6 BB  (.774 OPS) When you consider the Sox staff as a whole has these numbers vs the Yanks: '11   18 IP  14 ER  21 H 8 BB (without Wake: 16 IP/14ER  21H/8BB) '10   5.30 ERA  .797 OPS '09   5.28 ERA  .876 OPS '08   5.09 ERA  .760 OPS Wake vs Yanks 2010-2011: 16.1 IP  6 ER  11H  3 BB  (3.31 ERA  0.857 WHIP) Wake vs Yanks 2009-2011: 22.1 IP  9 ER  17H   6 BB (3.63 ERA  1.030 WHIP) Wake vs Yanks 2008-2011: 45 IP  21 ER  29 H   12 BB (4.20 ERA  0.911 WHIP) All some people want to remember is Boone's HR.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

     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.


    The only reason I didn't save it is because I didn't hit reply to post.  I was about to add a post when it blanked and when it came back his post was deleted. Then he put it where he intended.

    Hey Mr Moon youth over age Lowrie over Scut.Wink  Hot start Lowrie plus slow start for Scut, I think will lead to a change.

    Side note:  Softly and I asked Chip if we could write for EPSN, he said no. So we are going to do a debate series on jedlowrie.net The site hasn't had a baseball comment in 2 years (mostly Viagra spam), but I think we can revive it.  Topic suggestions are welcome.  First debate is on famous switch hitting SS with gapped teeth who like unions. Softy only agreed when I told him he could have two names.Smile
     

Share