Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 5:49 PM EDT
- fivekatz
- Posts: 5134
- First: 9/18/2009
- Last: 8/26/2012
In Response to
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
Is Drew hurt? If not, I am seriously doubting some of Tito's line-up moves of late.
Posted by moonslav59
Could be one of 2 things. Drew is 4 for 23 versus Santana with 7 K's.
The other could be Drew has caught the same thing that took down Buch and Youk in the last few days.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 6:45 PM EDT
He could also be trying to let Drew work through a little slump while the game is well in hand. The Ump certainly was not helping him yesterday. When the ump is way off Drew is always going to tank.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 7:06 PM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
Why not let him rest vs a lefty?
We've faced a lot of them already.
We face one Saturday.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 7:51 PM EDT
- Hfxsoxnut
- Posts: 8431
- First: 5/30/2008
- Last: 5/21/2013
Drew is 4-23 against Santana, Cameron was 2-3.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 7:59 PM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
Small sample sizes, but if he needs a rest, I guess it's ok. I just think Tito sould have tried to work the rest day against a lefty. No biggie.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 9:17 PM EDT
- harness
- Posts: 19880
- First: 10/16/2007
- Last: 10/28/2011
Boom: I was very impressed with Navarro's glove/range in his short stint last year. He appeared to be very athletic. I'd take him (his "D") at SS in a pinch over anybody on the roster. I think he'd compliment Youk at 3rd.
I'd like to see more of Navarro, and if he continues to play as he has, I believe we will.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 9:21 PM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
It occurred to me that asking softy to state what it would take from Wake to make him happy-what it would take for him to admit he was wrong about wanting to cut him loose, and I realized he will never answer the question.
I also realize that if he doesn't even consider Wake's record from 2007 to mid 2009 a success and an asset to the team, then no wonder he'd want him cut.
He sees the opposite of what reality is. Any sane baseball fan would look at the Wake 45 starts before his injury in 2009 and see it for what it is: a heck of a stretch.
See for yourself:
45 starts
ER Gms W-L (ND)
0 7 4-0 (3*)
1 6 4-2 (0)
2 8 5-0 (3)
3 11 3-4 (4)
4 3 1-1 (1)
5 3 3-0 (0)
6+ 7 0-7 (0)
(*tough luck with 3 no decisions and zero ERs)
Team record 28-17 in his starts (which includes 6 tough luck losses)
21/45 starts with 0-2 ERs (13-2 with 6 NDs) 47%
34/45 starts with 0-3 ERs (17-7 with 10 NDs) 76%
37/45 starts with 0-4 ERs (18-8 with 11 NDs) 82%
More than 4 out of every 5 starts he put his team in a good position to win
He got paid about $6M for that year and a half.
20-14 (11 NDs)
4.36 ERA
1.21 WHIP
Remember, this was all done at ages 41-42. This proves he is not like "normal" pitchers as they age. It does not prove he can do it at age 44-45, but certainly there is a chance he can/does.
For argument's sake, let's assume Wake starts 16 games and gives us the same numbers as 2008-mid2009:
7-5 (4 NDs) 4.36 ERA 1.21 WHIP (Team 10-6)
Are these really numbers worthy of giving the player his outriht release?
Would these numbers still find constant bashing from softy?
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 9:46 PM EDT
- law2009a
- Posts: 6578
- First: 11/16/2009
- Last: 4/19/2012
m
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 10:20 PM EDT
- harness
- Posts: 19880
- First: 10/16/2007
- Last: 10/28/2011
In Response to
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
It occurred to me that asking softy to state what it would take from Wake to make him happy-what it would take for him to admit he was wrong about wanting to cut him loose, and I realized he will never answer the question. I also realize that if he doesn't even consider Wake's record from 2007 to mid 2009 a success and an asset to the team, then no wonder he'd want him cut. He
sees the opposite of what reality is. Any
sane baseball fan would look at the
Wke 45 starts before his injury in 2009 and see it for what it is: a heck of a stretch. See for yourself: 45 starts ER Gms W-L (ND) 0 7 4-0 (3*) 1 6 4-2 (0) 2 8 5-0 (3) 3 11 3-4 (4) 4 3 1-1 (1) 5 3 3-0 (0) 6+ 7 0-7 (0) (*tough luck with 3 no decisions and zero ERs) Team record 28-17 in his starts (which includes 6 tough luck losses) 21/45 starts with 0-2 ERs (13-2 with 6 NDs) 47% 34/45 starts with 0-3 ERs (17-7 with 10 NDs) 76% 37/45 starts with 0-4 ERs (18-8 with 11 NDs) 82% More than 4 out of every 5 starts he put his team in a good position to win He got paid about $6M for that year and a half. 20-14 (11 NDs) 4.36 ERA 1.21 WHIP Remember, this was all done at ages 41-42. This proves he is not like "normal" pitchers as they age. It does not prove he can do it at age 44-45, but certainly there is a chanc he can/does. For argument's sake, let's assume Wake starts 16 games and gives us the same numbers as 2008-mid2009: 7-5 (4 NDs) 4.36 ERA 1.21 WHIP (Team 10-6) Are these really numbers worthy of giving the player his outriht release? Would these numbers still find constant bashing from softy?
Posted by moonslav59
You said more than you can imagine.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 11:21 PM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
He has never even acknowledged the fact that those 45 starts were even decent. I can see maybe 3 reasons (faulty as they may be) for this:
1) He is blind and actually thinks those numbers are poor.
(This would justify his reason for wanting im off the 25 man, since in his eyes, Wake is 44 (he sees near 50) and has not been decent in 10 years.)
2) He expects "ace" numbers from all 5 starters.
(This doesn't make sense, since the same standard has not been applied to Dice-K and others.)
3) His bias against "good ole boys" clouds the logic center of his brain.
(I think it may be a little of all these choices, but this is probably the origin of his position.)
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/4/2011 11:24 PM EDT
- Critter23
- Posts: 900
- First: 2/13/2009
- Last: 5/21/2013
Moon, in regards to your last post, I thought of a Confucius quote I once read:
"You can't teach dead wood." With that in mind, I would respectfully suggest you direct your well thought out arguements, backed by relevant statistics and facts, to those here who can be nourished and sprout. I count myself lucky to be able share what you and others offer here. One here I don't read, but infrequently I read a little before seeing who it is. Seems just argumentative, taunting, sarcastic, a little mean spirited. Since it doesn't make me feel good, I don't read it. Maybe I miss something once in a while, but I don't miss enough to feel angry when I come here for fun. You can't teach dead wood.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 12:01 AM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
Although many of my posts seem directed at softy, I write them in hopes of solidifying us true fans to support our players, especially the most deserving ones.
I enjoy doing research and trying to show people other ways of looking at an issue or player. If some refuse to broaden their horizons, so be it.
It may sound like I am getting angry at times,but truthfully,I am laughing almost all of the time when responding to the clown. The other times I feel pity.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 12:44 AM EDT
A more appropriate parable might be "Do not cast pearls before swine".
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 1:32 AM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
And we all know who the "swine" is.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 1:51 AM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
Wake was finally used in a high leverage situation just a I suggested.
Cue absurd softy spin.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 1:52 AM EDT
- harness
- Posts: 19880
- First: 10/16/2007
- Last: 10/28/2011
What an insanely wild game this is. Both Oki/Wake in relevant "roles".
The baseball gods have a sense of humor...and dignity.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 2:15 AM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
Now all we need is VTek to crank an HR and we can all go to bed.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 3:24 AM EDT
- BurritoT
- Posts: 8051
- First: 9/29/2009
- Last: 6/19/2012
Uh......
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 4:01 AM EDT
It was just one of those games which the team has to go through. It didn't result in a win but they certainly came close. 2 guys were thrown out on the bases who both would have scored if they hadn't tried for the extra base. Oh well!
There is another tomorrow. It just won't have anyone available in the pen.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 4:34 AM EDT
- BaseballGM
- Posts: 1225
- First: 3/22/2011
- Last: 6/28/2011
Varitek, hit a homerun, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!! How about a pinch hitter for a guy who was missing by feet in the AB vs. the Angels closer.
Wakefield comes in and walks a guy and then gives up the fly ball that Ellsbury rubber arms a wounded duck off of 3rd base. Strike out needed, the great Wakefield who was so excellent before the injury just couldn't show that excellence.
The old coot who says that the great Wakefield and his terrific pre-injury pitching is to be expected for years to come. Sorry, old coot, but I haven't seen it. Coming in with a runner at 3rd, then leaving after doing next to nothing on "innings eater".
Obvious why expitch doesn't post much on this circle jerk.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 4:37 AM EDT
- BaseballGM
- Posts: 1225
- First: 3/22/2011
- Last: 6/28/2011
Now all we need is VTek to crank an HR and we can all go to bed.
We need an alternative to leadership that keeps promising more wealth redistribution for votes, but that aint gonna happen, either.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 7:42 AM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
2 guys were thrown out on the bases who both would have scored if they hadn't tried for the extra base. Oh well!
I wonder why certain people aren't making a big deal about this today.
Our baserunning was supposed to be better this year.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 8:40 AM EDT
- moonslav59
- Posts: 34447
- First: 9/27/2005
- Last: 5/21/2013
Parity in MLB?
Small sample sizes, but only 6.5 games seperate the worst team from the wildcard team.
You also have to figure the White Sox & Twins will not remain the worst teams in the AL.
Seattle may be the worst team, and they are only 3 back.
In the NL:
Not quite as close as the AL, but 8 games seperate the worst
(SD at 12-19) from the WC (Florida at 19-10)
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 10:39 AM EDT
- BurritoT
- Posts: 8051
- First: 9/29/2009
- Last: 6/19/2012
A "controlled" green light might be necessary - no reason for these two to have already been caught 5/18... unacceptable. Forget the other guys, these two should be more wise.
Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II
posted at 5/5/2011 1:08 PM EDT
- fivekatz
- Posts: 5134
- First: 9/18/2009
- Last: 8/26/2012
Few thoughts:
Dustin Pedroia needed a day off really badly, gladly he got it today.
Wheeler is proof how hard it is to build a bullpen through FA. Perhaps the most consistent middle of the bullpen guys for a few years is not right now.
Base running. We only remember when aggression does not work. The RS score two runs on Monday on extremely close plays at the plate (Els and CC) and it of course is just a product of their speed. If a team is going to be aggressive on the base paths you are going to have a few plays like last nights (you just hope there aren't two in the same game and/or they don't have the eventual consequences those two last night did). But the reverse side is you are going to score runs you wouldn't if you never challenged the defense to make perfect plays.
The fact that Scutaro is at 2B today sort states that SS is now Lowrie's job to lose.
Ellsbury is playing well right now, CC looks like he is coming out of the darkness and the pitching is at least normalized.
Listening to Francona this morning he said that JD Drew had a "little bout with vertigo" last night, hence the day off and that he was never inserted into the game.
We need Lackey to eat innings and have another Angel start. :)
Go Sox.
