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

    I noticed in watching the replay of the Dice game that Remy mentioned how he felt C. Young was trying to get the same things across to Dice as Farrell did.

    Katz made mention of a rough relationship between Dice/Farrell. I never saw or read any indication it was any different than it was with any relationship Dice has had with Boston coaching/managerial/ownership.

    Dice did say he feared a demotion after his second start. I imagine losing face in his homeland can be quite a motivator!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Lowrie got a tired day off. Scutaro has a better track record against RHP, and had two hits and reached base 3 times. Plays much better defense than Lowrie, who continues to show almost no range at all.

    Salty had outstanding control and changed speeds with his fingers and worked the plate outside and in with his hand.

    I thought the big lead was a great spot to get Wakefield and his mop in. Instead, it was Wheeler.

    The very fact that Slav points out there have been no reported offers for Wakefield is proof positive that he has no business on the active roster. And being fine with trading him means he has no role. The continued claim that there is nothing in AAA better, other than Aceves, is pretty pitiful. Bowden was better in 2010, and so was Atchison. Claiming they haven't shown MLB success is laughable, since Wakefield certainly hasn't shown MLB success for a long time.

    I think the fans in Pawtucket would love to see Wakefield pitch. Since he's such a great home discount guy, he should be willing to agree to a AAA assignment so Aceves can return to the active roster. Frankly, I think Wakefield would get hammered in AAA, AA, and might have a little success in A ball. I also think it would be good for the minor league fans to see him. He's a tired and bad act in Boston. Most importantly, that spot should go to Aceves, a guy who can be productive as either a long guy or an inning guy.

    Going into the season, the Red Sox success depended upon Beckett or Slackey or DiceK joining Lester and Buch as solid starters. After his embarrassing 2010 where he was fat and bad, Beckett appears to be responding to his critics. The Red Sox will run away with the division if they have 3 solid starters producing for a full season. The offense, without Crawford, with AGon will be near or in the AL lead. If 3 starters perform well for a full season, the Red Sox will run away with the division.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Slav, I've only had one identity. But you should change yours, as it is synonymous with cronyism and out to lunch notions of Wakefield deserving an active roster spot.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    C'mon. GM.  Give Lowrie a break.  The guy is doing a great job.  So far, as good or better than anyone expected.

    What the heck, Youkilis had yesterday 'off'.  What about the 'days off' that Drew has?

    Scutaro had been a utility IF until late in his career.  What's so different between him and Lowrie except that Lowrie is younger?  And, maybe Scutaro's arm problems were the result of playing regularly.  Does Lowrie not deserve the same chance?

    I think Wakefield is getting a little long in the tooth, but what the hell, I was the one who a little while back suggested Matsuzaka was on the way down.  It goes to show you how fickle baseball(like golf) is and how opinions are so unpredictable..

    Don't forget that we're all on the same team.
     
  5. 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]C'mon. GM.  Give Lowrie a break.  The guy is doing a great job.  So far, as good or better than anyone expected. What the heck, Youkilis had yesterday 'off'.  What about the 'days off' that Drew has? Scutaro had been a utility IF until late in his career.  What's so different between him and Lowrie except that Lowrie is younger?  And, maybe Scutaro's arm problems were the result of playing regularly.  Does Lowrie not deserve the same chance? I think Wakefield is getting a little long in the tooth, but what the hell, I was the one who a little while back suggested Matsuzaka was on the way down.  It goes to show you how fickle baseball(like golf) is and how opinions are so unpredictable.. Don't forget that we're all on the same team.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    Not "all" of us. Some of us rant and rave like lunatics about players proven to be loyal to a fault, win 193 games and deserve better than janitorial service.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Amp, noted, and well said. Lowrie needs the rest, which will make him more effective in his role as a platoon SS, backup 3rd, backup 2nd, and backup 1st. With Youk DH'ing a little more against some LHP starters, Lowrie would then get about 100 to 110 starts. I think that's near the high end of what his fragile frame can handle. Given Scutaro has more range, a quicker release and stronger arm, and Lowrie is better suited to play backup 3B, 2B and 1B. Since Lowrie's career numbers are lower than Scutaro, v. RHP, it makes sense to keep Lowrie in a platoon at SS so he doesn't hurt himself. Both players will be well rested and more effective. However, to relegate Scutaro to a seldom used backup at SS and 2B is not in the best interest of the team. Lowrie will come back to his career ranges, as other teams become more familiar with a player who hasn't played a lot of MLB.  
     
  7. 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]Slav, I've only had one identity. But you should change yours, as it is synonymous with cronyism and out to lunch notions of Wakefield deserving an active roster spot.
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]
    878 posts in about a month. Gee...where have we seen that before?

    Go ahead and change your name but why lie about it?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Because the mods would nab him!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Yq9wxNHXc&feature=related
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Something to dwell on:
    This SR has shaken off the early season rust and is showing what they are capable of. They are in the midst of their best run in years. They are healthy and aren't compromised as they were last year (jury still out of Salty).

    Last Sept., a decision was made not to start Tek in all but 4 games. That SR was healthy in Sept. and capable of a roll - a roll many here thought was still in them.

    Moon and I spent a ton of time trying to tell this board that the 2010 pitching staff was being compromised. Posters thought I was daffy when I said last Sept."If they play Tek, they are capable of going on a roll. It's their only chance". Only chance? Playing a catcher who hit only .232? Well, now you can all ask yourself what might have happened had Tek caught primarily and VMART been used instead of Lowell.

    Tek has played in almost half the games this year, starting 9 of them.
    The staff has an ERA of between 2-2.4 with him catching them.
    They have scored 4.78 runs a game in his starts. Only twice have they scored more than 5 runs. Yet, they are 7-2 in those games. And keep in mind he's hitting .074 with poor run production.

    If last year's team, who scored 4.32 runs per game in the 2nd half, had played
    .700 -.750 ball in Sept., what were their chances? With Tek catching, there's a decent chance the run disparity would have been 1.5 - 1.75  between runs scored and runs allowed. The RedSox are now 25 - 11 since 2010...with MR. Varitek catching. And,for the most part, Tito has paired VMART ('10) and Salty ('11) with Lester/Buch.

    There's a long way to go, but we are already seeing a pitching staff that is allowed to perform closer to their capabilities. The decision to go with Lowell/VMART instead of VMART (at first base) and Tek cost the 2010 team any possible chance they had.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Well Moon, if the team didn't commit to CC, we'd be in another bind if there were a couple of key injuries.

    $20M is a lot to pay for insurance.

    Saying Youk/Pedey/Ells will be healthy is the hope, but it might not be a reality.

    True enough, but my guess is we will have less injuries than last year. I'm also saying it wouldn't have been CC vs nothing on offense. Much of that money would have been spent on a catcher and OF'er who could hit lefties (they are plentiful and cheap).

    CC should make Boston a more competitive road team.
    And I believe Theo has done everything he can to remove the RedSox from being a station-to-station ball club.

    I have never doubted that Cc will help us win some games we would not have won without him. My point is that we could have won more had we spread out the $20M more.

    Does CC solve the 2012 outfield issues? Well, the team only has to fill one position now - not two. And the farm could fill the 2nd. I gotta believe the mixture you advocated for this year (Kalish/Nava//Mac) and possibly Reddick will be ready to contribute in 2012.

    It's easy to fill LF in MLB. It's about the easiest to do, besides maybe 1B. Your argument was that we were losing Drew and Cam in 2012 and Crawford helped solve that year-away issue. It didn't. He can't play RF or CF, and Ells is better in LF. On paper, we will have 2 LF'ers and holes in CF and RF.

    No team in baseball has a proven speed tandem of CRAWBURY.
    How many games it will affect is anybody's guess.

    It only works if they get on base morethan their career or recent numbers.

    If you look at this as money spent more wisely in other areas, I can see UR point. Mine is  - there's no guarantee that $$$ would have been spent at all. They could have bet on Kalish/Cam and played it by ear - making a big move in July.
    They could have committed to a veteran catcher - and missed on Salty, who might just be a diamond in the rough. (A gamble to say the least).

    You may be right, but my point is that we could have spent the whole $20M and done better over 7 years.

    As I see it, the FO is hedging their bets on CC and handi-capping elsewhere.
    It's like bridge-burning in horse racing. A player bets 10 grand on a horse to show and is guaranteed $500.00 at about a 95% success rate. So, now he has $500.00 to invest in more profitable but riskier exotic bets.

    I understand Theo's gambit. I just don't agree. I'll be happy if I am proven wrong. I've been wrong before.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    What about the 'days off' that Drew has?

    Why sit Drew vs a righty when we have faced so many lefties lately? Was he hurt? 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    ...ask yourself what might have happened had Tek caught primarily and VMART been used instead of Lowell

    In hindsight, VTek's bat vs Lowell's would have about evened out. Who knows about the CERA.

    I tink Theo/Tito packed itin way too early last year and wanted to get a look at VMart as a catcher for their big off-season decision. Those games in September might have helped them make up their mind to let VMart walk.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Slav, I've only had one identity...

    Then, explain why you keep saying "I said _____" about things that happened months before you came to this board?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    1) I think they rested Drew because it was rainy and they didn't want him getting hurt with his "hammy"

    2) You can do a ton of good for a team with an extra $20 mil per year to spend over 7 years. Crawford is probably not going to replicate his 2010 year every year for the next 7 years, and that is what he would have to do to be worth that kind of money. 

    But it's done so let's just enjoy the excitement he will bring to the team when he gets going.

    It may be that Russell Martin alone would have been worth more to us than Crawford. Helping a very weak team area for us and hurting the Yanks.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Hey GM..seriously, why do you hate Jed so much(havent been here long enough to understand your distain for some Sox players)..I dont even think hes played enough the last 2 years to qualify to be hated. He a good quality middle infielder and a solid hitter. Iglesias will be here in 2012 so why not just enjoy the great start hes off to. It just baffles me how someone roots for a team, yet cant stand half the roster or the moves the team makes and is constantly complaining. Not ragging on you, just looking to understand.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    The Red Sox have won 13 out of the last 14 meetings with the Angels.


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The explanation on the Drew-Scutaro starts was that the Angels starter had actually been tougher on RH hitters in the early stages of 2011, so Francona felt it was a good day to get Scoot and Cam some PAs, to avoid rust. Much to the Coma clubs frustration, it worked, the replacements had good days.

    Few other thoughts. Salty did not become a genius overnight, the RS are pitching better as a collective. Even Gordon Edes who seems to love to stir the pot posted this after yesterday's game:

    Jarrod Saltalamacchia ended the exercise of comparing his catcher’s ERA to that of Jason Varitek, as he has caught both of Lackey’s starts and Lester’s start on this trip with terrific results.


    There are of course other issues with Salty's catching and to an extent I think the fact that the RS went with this tandem speaks volumes to how depleted the catching position is at the MLB level right now.

    The RS have made up a lot ground in a hurry and having such a good West Coast swing in the extended road trip is good. It isn't often you go West and go 5-1.

    Keep in mind that the Angels were coming off of a 5-1 road trip right before we came to town. That was a hot team getting excellent pitching that the RS just swept.

    Good signs though it is early...

    Harness, while everyone speculates that the RS FO and all the coaches were frustrated with DiceK, Farrell's reaction in 2009 to the interview DiceK gave the media in Japan spoke volumes about the relationship. I am not picking sides BTW but sides matter little.




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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Then, explain why you keep saying "I said _____" about things that happened months before you came to this board?

    I've never said anything of the kind. Any comment I've made have that predated this board were from reading other comments from other posters who referred to older dated comments.

    Harness, in that long nonsense post, you made the hysterical comment about Varitek's 2010 loss as the reason why the Red Sox lost any chance. You know that is nonsense.

    You then go on and on about Varitek and the pitching staff for this year. Did he catch Lackey's terrible starts or Lackey's last two starts? No, he did not.

    The CERA thing is a foolish notion you hung your hat on because it's post hoc rationalization for Varitek's free falling decline. The team would be fine without Varitek, Harness, and will be fine when he's forced out the door.

    I didn't see you gush over the superior last Buch start with Salty, over Varitek's next start with Buch. I also didn't see you gush over Salty's last shutout.

    You need to move on with Varitek, or call him and get a room.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    " Scutaro ... plays much better defense than Lowrie"

    Based on what?  Is this just your opinion or do you have more objective sources for this?  I really don't know either way TBH, but I don't recall seeing anything in print (other than posters here, which I don't exactly take as gospel) which indicates either is notably better fielding SS.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    southpaw,

    Remember, one has to be careful about using the word "hate" as a synonym for disagreement. And remember, one who doesn't agree with "civil unions" and "gay marriage" is not scared of or hates those who publicly profess homosexual relationships.  "Hate" and "Homophobe" are childish bugaboo words that are part of the ad hom smear campaign of the Democrat Party.

    Obviously, I don't have extreme hostility towards Lowrie. I've said he needs to remain in the role that has been working, platoon v. LHP SS and backup 3B, 2B and 1B, where he'll get over 100 starts. Given Suctaro's quicker feet, stronger arm and quicker release and better career avg. v. RHP, and given Lowrie's fragile history, why on earth would you want Lowrie as the everyday SS when his 2010 and 2011 role has been working?  Even assuming Lowrie lastest v. RHP sample size is a better gauge than his career sample, all the factors, defense, injury history, etc. do not warrant changing him from a role that has worked well.

    Lowrie is still under the radar. He played about a half a season in 2008, went down twice in 2009 and missed most of the season, and then came in for the last couple of months on a 2010 that was already out of realistic contention because of all of the injuries and the terrible pitching from Lackey and Beckett and the rest of the starters outside of Lester and Buch.

    Lowrie is still under the radar on Red Sox fan expectations, with one major exception, and he's under the radar on the opponents expectations. Other teams haven't really seen a lot of Lowrie.

    As the scouting reports fill out, Lowrie's numbers will decline. His numbers v. LHP should end up quite good, but his numbers v. LHP have benefited recently from bloop hits and poor team scouting reports on how to pitch him and where to position the outfielders for his hitting chart.
     
    But, let's just assume that Lowrie's v. LHP numbers will end up solid. Once the physical demands of playing everyday SS and the fan and opponent expectations rise, do you really think that Lowrie is this AS SS who is just waiting for a full season of everday SS to blossom?    

    If he is going to start over 100 games in the role he's been in, do you really think it's worth it to change that 2011 role?

    Frankly, Tito saying he's been "terrific" wasn't qualified and wasn't a good idea as far as the important fan expectation levels are concerned.

    Either way, if Lowrie does become the everyday SS, I'm going to find out where he end up during dog days. I believe SS offensive and defensive and Lowrie and Scutaro preform best if Lowrie platooning v. LHP and playing some 3rd, 2nd and 1st continues. If Lowrie plays everyday, I believe the SS range declines significantly, and I believe that Lowrie's offensive numbers will plumet way more than they would if he were kept in the role he's in.

    Whenever Lowrie does sit, isn't he a much better close game pinch hitter option than Scuatro? 

    Unless Lowrie is truly an everday SS 140 plus dirt dog that maintains the high slugging and offensive numbers for a full season, he should not be changed from the team role he fits much better than Scutaro. It's not like Scutaro is going to be the everyday SS, himself. He'll be splitting enough time to where he plays close to the same number of games as Lowrie.

    If it isn't broke, don't fix it. Lowrie's 2010 and 2011 role has been a lot of rest and split time, the notion that he's this Peter Abraham "rising star" who just  needs to be left in as an everday SS is simply overstated.

    And Peter, I know you read my comments, so you need to point out how Lowrie has excelled offensively in a role that is not an everday season SS role. You might want to put a caveat in for passing that test before calling Lowrie "a rising star". Might be premature, there, Peter.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    "Hate" and "Homophobe" are childish bugaboo words that are part of the ad hom smear campaign of the Democrat Party.

    Hmmm. Who posted something almost verbatim like this before? Nahhh! Couldn't be. He had a different moniker, or was that a handle? 

    But he's right, you gotta watch out for those bugaloos.





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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Few thoughts:

    No, it is not likely that Lowrie is an allstar SS, it is also established that Scutaro isn't either.

    As for Lowrie being a utlity player, so is Scutaro. In 10 seasons he has played 561 games at SS and 322 at 2B, with 98 at 3B and handful in the OF.  275 of SS games have been in the last two years. Before he went to Toronto he never had 500 PAs in a season.

    Heavens knows Lowrie is going to cool off. He is not a .400 hitter. Balls are not always going to find the grass. But while he is hot it is his job. He is vying for playing time with Marco Scutaro not Hanley Ramirez after all. The hot utility player is going to get his name penciled in and much of the "veteran edge" Marco had/has diminishes greatly the longer Lowrie stays hot.

    Will Lowrie slump at some point? Of course he will because the numbers always even out over a full season but for the moment this isn't much of a debate. It may be good foder on BDC but it won't change whose name is on the line-up card right now.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Lowrie will be an All-Star this year if he plays:

    1. The competition is poor.
     
    2. Hitting is over-valued in A-S selection.

    3. A hot start gets more attention than 3 above avg months.

    4. A.L. fans pick 9 players, one back-up player for each position are elected by the players, coaches, and managers.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Theo will wait and eventually sell low.

    It think that old poster will be right. It's convenient to call someone something else, but it's a convenient way to avoid being objective.

    With the day off, I find the decison to rest Lowrie to be a very odd decision if the "pencil in" notion had merit.  
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from canetime. Show canetime's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]southpaw, Remember, one has to be careful about using the word "hate" as a synonym for disagreement. And remember, one who doesn't agree with "civil unions" and "gay marriage" is not scared of or hates those who publicly profess homosexual relationships.  "Hate" and "Homophobe" are childish bugaboo words that are part of the ad hom smear campaign of the Democrat Party. Obviously, I don't have extreme hostility towards Lowrie. I've said he needs to remain in the role that has been working, platoon v. LHP SS and backup 3B, 2B and 1B, where he'll get over 100 starts. Given Suctaro's quicker feet, stronger arm and quicker release and better career avg. v. RHP, and given Lowrie's fragile history, why on earth would you want Lowrie as the everyday SS when his 2010 and 2011 role has been working?  Even assuming Lowrie lastest v. RHP sample size is a better gauge than his career sample, all the factors, defense, injury history, etc. do not warrant changing him from a role that has worked well. Lowrie is still under the radar. He played about a half a season in 2008, went down twice in 2009 and missed most of the season, and then came in for the last couple of months on a 2010 that was already out of realistic contention because of all of the injuries and the terrible pitching from Lackey and Beckett and the rest of the starters outside of Lester and Buch. Lowrie is still under the radar on Red Sox fan expectations, with one major exception, and he's under the radar on the opponents expectations. Other teams haven't really seen a lot of Lowrie. As the scouting reports fill out, Lowrie's numbers will decline. His numbers v. LHP should end up quite good, but his numbers v. LHP have benefited recently from bloop hits and poor team scouting reports on how to pitch him and where to position the outfielders for his hitting chart.   But, let's just assume that Lowrie's v. LHP numbers will end up solid. Once the physical demands of playing everyday SS and the fan and opponent expectations rise, do you really think that Lowrie is this AS SS who is just waiting for a full season of everday SS to blossom?     If he is going to start over 100 games in the role he's been in, do you really think it's worth it to change that 2011 role? Frankly, Tito saying he's been "terrific" wasn't qualified and wasn't a good idea as far as the important fan expectation levels are concerned. Either way, if Lowrie does become the everyday SS, I'm going to find out where he end up during dog days. I believe SS offensive and defensive and Lowrie and Scutaro preform best if Lowrie platooning v. LHP and playing some 3rd, 2nd and 1st continues. If Lowrie plays everyday, I believe the SS range declines significantly, and I believe that Lowrie's offensive numbers will plumet way more than they would if he were kept in the role he's in. Whenever Lowrie does sit, isn't he a much better close game pinch hitter option than Scuatro?  Unless Lowrie is truly an everday SS 140 plus dirt dog that maintains the high slugging and offensive numbers for a full season, he should not be changed from the team role he fits much better than Scutaro. It's not like Scutaro is going to be the everyday SS, himself. He'll be splitting enough time to where he plays close to the same number of games as Lowrie. If it isn't broke, don't fix it. Lowrie's 2010 and 2011 role has been a lot of rest and split time, the notion that he's this Peter Abraham "rising star" who just  needs to be left in as an everday SS is simply overstated. And Peter, I know you read my comments, so you need to point out how Lowrie has excelled offensively in a role that is not an everday season SS role. You might want to put a caveat in for passing that test before calling Lowrie "a rising star". Might be premature, there, Peter.
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]
     

Share