A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Interesting start for VTek tonight with Buch on the mound.

    The day off?

    The lefty pitching for the O's?

    Tito wanting to see if Vtek can keep Buch on track?

    A little of all?

    As I said this winter/spring, I'd rather see Vtek play against almost all leties and thereby allow Salty to catch all our starters. I don't like the personal caddy idea, unless it becomes obvious one pitcher does way better with a certain catcher than the other.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I was a bit surprised myself, considering Beckett goes tomorrow.
    Buch is high with his pitches. This has plagued him all year. If he's not down in the zone, he's fair game. I've noticed Tek targets around the belt. I think he's better off giving Buch a knee target.

    Remy mentioned in the last game in CA that Tito wanted to go with Tek catching Lackey by didn't want to push it (day game after night game). That tells me Tito is well aware of how this staff performs with Varitek. It also says volumes about his lack of confidence in Salty.

    The "personal caddy" thing may be necessary until pitchers find a rhythm and maintain consistent form. But I agree with you that it's not a good idea in the long run. I don't think the Sox can afford to mess around with what's working until they establish themselves and allow for some breathing room.

    They've yet to reach the .500 mark.

    Note: Johnson is in to pitch for the O's. This guy impressed me when I saw him last. He throws hard with excellent movement.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I wonder why CAM didn't play in lieu of Drew vs. the lefty. Isn't that why he's here?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    He should play for either Drew, CC or Papi vs lefties. Papi has been doing better vs lefties this year, so it should have been an OF'er.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I also thought the target was consistently high today Harness. He was showing at least 6 inches high to me.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    We remain extremely susceptible to LH pitching. I think we are probably going to make a move pretty soon if we can't start winning more games against LH pitching.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Where will they upgrade?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    They have to do something. Linares got 3 hits today but he hasn't been tearing it up recently. Maybe a RH hitting catcher who can actually hit? Russell Martin would have been ideal. They need one more really solid RH bat from somewhere and I think they need to play Cameron against LH pitching. I know he hasn't done well so far, in a small sample size, but they might as well trade him if he doesn't play against LH pitching.

    Here is a rapproachment with Softy. I've been picking on him for too long!

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I try not to question Tito too much because I know he knows more than I do. But I just did not get the line-up. If you believe in not messing with hot hands, you start Tek with Beckett on Wednesday. Playing Tek back to back seems kind of dumb.

    If Tito thought what fingers Tek puts down and his target was going to magically change Buch it did not happen tonight. 12 hits tonight and up in the zone all night, the only pitch Buch had command of was the change up. It is a miracle that he only gave up 4 runs giving up 12 hits. The difference between this start and Clay's opener in Texas? The carry of the ball and it was the O's and not the Rangers.

    And maybe you don't pull Crawford coming off of a decent game at the plate in his last game but Drew and Crawford? We have to be the only team in history with $35M in the 7-8 spots in the order. 

    While I certainly don't expect the RS to win every game and this game looked like a tough match up, not just a LH pitcher, but one the RS hadn't seen before and one that has been solid in every start.

    Upside was the bullpen held the Orioles in check.

    As for where do the RS tweak the offense, it would be the catcher position but there just isn't much out there which is why we have Tek and Salty right now. As for Cameron being traded if his PT is going to limited I am sure the RS see no reason to pay him to play elsewhere and the RS just aren't going to get much back for Cam and are going to have eat a lot of his salary, so regardless of PT for the money having his glove and still decent base path speed on the bench makes sense. Any market for Cam and for that matter any trades probably isn't going to evolve until mid to late June. If the RS have a major flaw they can't overcome with the sum total of the parts, they are in trouble IMO.

    Let's keep in mind this team still hasn't hit on all cylinders offensively, they really aren't hitting on 50% of them yet. With the pitching normalizing, once the offense picks up things should be fine.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The Redsox currently have made fewer errors than any team in the AL. As you can imagine, that's about the only thing we are leading in. We are drawing a lot of walks but we are hitting around .235. And pitching around a 4.50 ERA ( 3rd from the last ).

    Interesting stats are Crawford as a -18 UZR/150 in Left Field for God's sake. Down from around a consistent plus 20 in Tampa Bay. He is not showing us anything defensively yet.

    Ellsbury is coming in at around a -12 in CF so far. Drew is near a league leading Plus 35.

    Pedroia at Plus 13.5. Youk at -8.5.

    All small sample sizes but just about as I had perceived at least from watching the games. Crawford has not given us good defense in Fenway's LF. Youk is a step down defensively from Beltre ( who is a PLUS 30.1 at 3rd BTW ). 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    mlbtraderumors is all over the catching situation. Gammons has predicted some kind of catching move within 2 weeks. He also is speculating that Federowicz would be the guy called up if it is an internal solution. Good defense but has had a questionable stick for a while. He is hitting well this year though in AA ball at a .340 average so far.

    Some speculation that Werth would have been a better solution than Crawford. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Werth is currently hitting .218.  .307 OBP  .704 OPS.
    All this talk about Martin blindsides the fact he is suspect with his pitching staffs. You don't upgrade the hitting at the catcher position by compromising the pitching. We learned that with VMART.


    IMO, Youk's slow start and Cam's slow bat have played into the team's susceptibility vs. southpaws. They are pitching around Youk and pitching to AGONE/PAPI. Lowrie has been huge, but Cam has got to pick it up as his role is critical in stabilizing the line-up.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    There is not blood testing for HGH because of the racketeering MLBPA.

    Theo did a lousy job constructing the offense for the amount of money he spent. There is no doubt it will still be at or near the top  in the AL offense, but given the money he spent he did a lousy job of constructing it. Of course, it doesn't help that "Crawbury" has been a joke. Even when their numbers improve to within the career averages range, it's still a joke given what the team needs for 2011 and beyond are.

    They need to trade a lefty OF'er. Ellsbury is the best one to cut loose, as he will have the higher trade value and would enable the team to get back a good young corner RH OF bat. Teams aren't selling just yet, but the Red Sox need to be sellers and buyers when the trade season gets underway. 

    Theo is at fault for having nothing to replace Manny or Bay. Sorry, Carl Crawford replaces Ellsbury, not Manny or Bay. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    RACKETEERING MLBPA???
    Your mask is slipping again, dear.

    BTW: How can Jake have any real trade value if he is as poor as you depict him?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    No one can "pick it up" from the bench. Cameron has never been a natural stroke pure hitter, he either needs to play a lot or he's not going to hit anywher near the bottom of his career average range.

    We've learned that Buch and Lester were fine with VMart, and we've learned that you can't have Salty and old washed up Varitek near automatic outs who can't throw and can't block.

    We've learned that "Crawbury" is a joke, as the team has long term needs for a solid young RH corner OF"er.

    We've learned that Wakefield has no business on the active roster.

    We've leared that Oki's 2nd outing resulted in getting Matt Weiters out in a game that was not a blowout. 

    We've learned that Buch doesn't care for Jason Magic Fingers Varitek and is having adjusting to life without VMart. He will adjust, despite Varitek and Salty.

    We've learned that the Red Sox are likely to have at least 3 good starting pitcher performers for most of the season, the offense will be more than adequate, and the Red Sox are contenders despite Epstein wasting money on parts that didn't make a 2010 with a lot of injuries any better nor address the issue of obtaining a solid young RH corner OF"er.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Who is "We"?
    This is what you haven't learned:

    The bench can 'pick it up'. See Nava. See Supersubs. Cam is in a platoon, so he gets more time than Mac. He needs to step it up. 

    Crawbury hasn't been able to exploit it's potential yet. It will. The only joke is your bias.

    Lester had an ERA almost twice with VMART as with Tek - hardly "fine". Get a clue.

    Boasting about Oki getting a hitter who's yet to get untracked...in a 4-1 deficit - is hardly worth crowing about. You make ridiculous judgements on one-game samples. Impulsive opinions from an imposter.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Believe me GM...I dont learn much from you when it comes to baseball. Those emotional, bias comments that you try to pass of as fact...Those are YOUR OPINIONS, certainly not ours.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    We remain extremely susceptible to LH pitching. I think we are probably going to make a move pretty soon if we can't start winning more games against LH pitching.

    As bad as we have been vs LHPs so far, I think we are worse vs righties.

    I expect that to change soon.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Who is "We"?
    This is what you haven't learned:

    Too funny.

    His sample sizes are now down to one AB (when it suits his fancey) to make absurd judgements.

    Boom, UZR is a stat best used for sample sizes of about 3 years. You areusing it after 1/8th of a season. I admit, he has not done much that Ellsbury couln't have done as well in LF.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Crawbury hasn't been able to exploit it's potential yet. It will. The only joke is your bias.

    Look, old codger, I'm not going to let you get away with that meaningless rhetoric. Define "potential" for "Crawbury"? Why hasn't it gotten "untracked"?

    Lester had an ERA almost twice with VMART as with Tek - hardly "fine". Get a clu

    Provide the sample size. Get a clu!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Cameron hasn't done much of anything but sit on the bench. When he has played the OF this year, he and Drew are the best defenders.

    Is the sample size on Wakefield too small? And the sample size on Oki to small?

    I don't believe I said that Oki's last outing was definitive on whether he should remain on the active roster for the long haul. But, despite Harness' protests, his first outing wasn't a large enough sample size.

    Now, Wakefield's sample size is too large. He's really, really quite terible. He needs to go.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I don't want to ruffle any feathers here. I'm just stating my opinion. For the record:

    1) I'd take Victor back in a heartbeat compared to what we have now. I think Sciocia has it about right when it comes to CERA:


    It has been refuted all over the place as a major factor. It is a relatively small factor IMO, and there is a lot of underlying data which can skew the results a lot which are related to the pairing of individual pitchers and catchers. If a pitcher has a slow time to the plate how important is the catcher's ability to throw out runners? If the pitcher throws a "splitter" how much is the catcher's ability to keep those balls in front of him a factor? If the pitcher is not a rocket scientist, or is new to the league, how important is the catcher's intelligence and experience? I don't want to spend a hundred posts about it but substantial studies have indicated over and over that it is an overated factor. I do think it's a factor but it's overated. I think Sciosia has it about right. Pitches can even be called from the bench, successfully. I'd take Victor back in a heartbeat compared to what we have now.

    2) I know UZR/150 is best utilized by a 3 year sample as I've spent well over 2 hours reading the entire blog on UZR/150 criteria several years ago but then again most people here dumped all over Ellsbury's numbers in 2009, which were shown later in the year to not even be accurate, in a one year sample, even though he had plus defender numbers in years earlier. Even a two year sample is only an indicator with a wide standard deviation. My point here being that those numbers all correlated to what I was seeing on the field though, at least so far this year. Youk is not going to be Beltre defensively. Not even close. I ENVY Texas's left side infield D. It will eventually separate them in the AL West IMO and could well give them another title. 

    Crawford will be lucky to be more than a plus 10 defensively ever again in Boston, IMO. Crawford has not been a plus defender so far for us. I know he has been historically but he is overated defensively IMO. UZR/150 numbers are skewed big time by how player attributes fit into a particular park. And yes, I do know that they allow for "park factor" but not for a player's fit into that park factor. The data is reflective as much for how a player fits as it does for a players intrinsic ability. I've studied this quite a bit and that is my opinion.

    As I've mentioned earlier, Cameron, for example, is not suited any more for spacious CF parks as his numbers were way down in San Diego but in cozy Milwaukee he was recently a defensive star. He is not suited very much for spacious Fenway's CF area either. He's still a good defender but the park he is playing in is a very big factor in the UZR/150 numbers he will achieve. I don't think he will see above a plus 5 ever again in CF, at least in Fenway.

    3) I was not aware that Moon's contention that the Sox are not doing well against RH pitching either was correct but I trust that Moon wouldn't say that if he didn't have the data. Over time though, I think that LH will become more and more a factor in the overall offensive performance of this team.

    4) Theo of course did the best he could with what options were available to him but I think he messed up last winter. He paid way to much for Crawford, especially since Crawford is not optimized at all in Fenway. We should have kept Beltre and probably even Martinez. I think he wanted those draft picks badly, as this year's draft is going to be big, but we could have been a better team for less than half of this winter's spending spree. We are extremely vulnerable at catcher and Victor's bat would have been huge in this lineup in place of Tek and Salty. Russell Martin probably does stink as a catcher but he's probably a heck of a lot better than Salty. That would have been $5 - $6 mil well spent and possibly that was their objective and they just lost out to the Yanks. The reality is that Martinez probably wouldn't catch more than half the games but having him available makes us a lot better team in the playoffs especially. Considering that we are paying some of these other guys over twice as much as Victor would have cost, it would have been money well spent. He could have slid right into the DH spot next year and still given us a decent back up catcher.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    1) I'd take Victor back in a heartbeat compared to what we have now. I think Sciocia has it about right when it comes to CERA:


    It has been refuted all over the place as a major factor. It is a relatively small factor IMO, and there is a lot of underlying data which can skew the results a lot which are related to the pairing of individual pitchers and catchers. If a pitcher has a slow time to the plate how important is the catcher's ability to throw out runners? If the pitcher throws a "splitter" how much is the catcher's ability to keep those balls in front of him a factor? If the pitcher is not a rocket scientist, or is new to the league, how important is the catcher's intelligence and experience?

    When another one of the click posters on here posts something that makes total sense, read it, and read it good, and end the Varitek "magic fingers" soap opera nonsense. Salty has the last shoutout, but he can't throw, can't move to block balls, and has been a weak hitter. Now, Salty looks like Babe Ruth compared to Varitek.

    Varitek is heating up, with his 3'rd or 4th hit of the season.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom, I think that the decision to walk from VMart and Beltre were driven by more than the draft picks. Beltre's career as an offensive player has been up and down at best. I do believe there were real concerns about Victor's aging as a catcher and his value was as a catcher to the RS. The Tigers are going to extend his potential career span by using him primarily at DH. We can debate the wisdom of that as time goes on but a healthy fear of signing either guy to 4 years at 32 years of age was not irrational and at least an equal motivation to move on.

    Also keep in mind the RS had no control on where the players signed. Vmart went someplace besides Detroit it could be just a sandwich pick. If Beltre had not spurned offers from the A's and Angels, sandwich pick. In that case the Rs end up with no first rounders, give up three prospects in the A-Gon trade and commit an additional $140-$150M in long term contractual obligations. That makes me think this was deeper than the picks.  

    Making the trade for a 29 year old with A-Gon's resume made sense. He is younger than the other two and has been over his career a very consistent player and is well rounded with the execption of foot speed.

    Crawford? I am still waiting to see what Epstein saw here. Crawford is a better version of what the RS had in abundance in the system. He may have more speed than some (Kalish) and more power than some (Ellsbury) but he was a LH hitter who did not hit LH well, in a division where every team has a LH ace. They had a vision for the signing I am sure aside from his age but unfortunately not only is he not showing it, in the month of April he is vying for the worst RS signing in history. On the flip side while his defensive attributes may be somewhat muted by Fenway's LF, it will come into play even there and the RS do play 81 games outside of America's Most Beloved Ballpark.


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I would prefer to wait on Crawford until I see what he does with the short LF wall in Yankee Stadium.  That and the tailwind that comes off the Harlem River may lift his average a bit and give him some dingers.  Agon too.

    We'll see.
     

Share