A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    katz, there is no reply button, so I'm down here.
    I agree that this club is better equipped physically than the 2004 one to run the bases.
    Right, burners will occasionally get picked off, in part because they try to cheat an extra step.  But, again, there's the situation.  It's a tough call. When a man is the winning or tying run, he wants every advantage he can get.  But the opposition is thinking that too.  My pitching coach in college advised us in that situation especially to keep throwing over and/or keep stepping off.  Wear the guy out. It takes some energy to dive back each time.  Most talk is about how speed can affect the pitcher's concentration. It works the other way around too. Our coach would say, "In that situation, you CANNOT get picked off." Of course, he felt that way about every situation. Ho.
    I have to admit that I have great unease about getting doubled up. I've spoken at length about it on another thread.  I believe in telling players that it should never happen and why but perhaps making an exception -- only once in a blue moon. 
    Great discussion.  
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    But my point is that when his aggression results in runs it goes unnoticed but when it results in a out at the plate it is a matter of great angst among fans.

    This is a generalized conclusion that is meaningless because it lacks any specifics on circumstances.

    Scutaro was out easily, even if the catcher could have fumbled or the throw could have been off line. It makes a difference whether it's a very close play or not. It also makes a difference when the play isn't that close. It also makes a difference if it's late in the game, if the score is tied, if it's the home team trying to score, and if there is only one out at the time. Is it cold? Is it windy? Is the runner fast, average speed, slow? Nothing about that play made it a hard decision for this runner on that play in that situation to hold up at 3rd, where the odds increase dramitically that he has a better chance of scoring by holding up at 3rd than not being throw out trying to score from 1st, on a cold night, on a green Monster wall ball. It was late, the Red Sox were the home team, the game was tied.

    For a management team that claims to paint by numbers, they obviously don't have a clue about the odds and situations where a baserunner goes or doesn't go, or takes a big lead and leans off 2nd base, bases loaded, one out, line drive.

    If this management team wants to improve, it needs to learn from it's mistakes. The baserunning won't likely define the season outcome, but that doesn't mean management has constructed a team that is quite embarrassingly lousy and running the bases. This was a problem, last year, as well, and without jogging the memory banks, it's obviously a systemic problem that management has failed to emphasize preparation of the fundamentals in what appears to be an area that is not of great importance on the priority chain.

    It reminds me of how so many member of the MLBPA are pitiful at the sacrifice because they don't practice it enough because it's not usually part of the job description.

    The Red Sox consumer should demand better baserunning from the Red Sox MLBPA members and the managment team assembled by ownership. Expitch gets it, and there is no excuse for it. It's not about making some mistakes, it's about making foolish baserunning mistakes on a regular basis.

    Lowrie hits what ends up a bloop double, but he's watching the ball and slow out of the box and ends up trotting into 1st. No excuse for the posing on the homers with any doubt. No excuse for not running hard on contact on anything that might be in play, unless a player has a legitimate leg or injury issue that could easily become a bigger problem by running hard on contact.

    Tito is more of a babysitter than a manager. He's good at keeping players positive through the highs and lows of a season, but he's certainly not strong in demanding his players be accountable to the basic fundamentals of the game.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    BaseballGM, you as usual are long on generalizations and short on specifics.

    You claim Lowrie loitered going to first, but ignored that on Sunday he kept running on a very catchable fly to Ichiro that he missed and Lowrie got all the way to 3B.

    Scutaro's trying to go home from first on a wall shot was bad play by both him and the 3B coach, granted.  But it keeps coming up as though that's all the Sox ever do.  Get some new material.

    As for Cameron going to 3B on a freak play, I agree with Katz--it was worth the gamble.

    Speaking of which, Gonzalez is a big-time gambler.  Not on the basepaths, but at 1B.  He has repeatedly field grounders and fired ahead of the runner instead of just tagging 1B.  In a game the Sox won, the three across the diamond to Youk on a play that was not a forceout--and it worked.  But at least once I know of he threw for a force out at second and the runner won. 

    Also, you love to cite a myriad of considerations for baserunners and the 3B coach as though, once the play starts, that kind of analysis is possible.  It isn't.  The 3B coach and/or baserunners have to think about that stuff ahead of time, but they also, absolutely must evaluate what they are seeing on the field. Because of this, I give them the benefit of the doubt.

    Also, you attack what you belief is lousy baserunning, but never, ever comment on strong points with the Sox, who have several pretty good baserunners, not just Ellsbury and Crawford.   
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from kbev97. Show kbev97's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Max, you have almost 1000 posts on here and thus are not a newbie. You should know Softlaw GM by now. It is your time to squander, do as you please.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    BaseballGM can you please explain in detail Wakefields performance tonight against the AL's worse offense?  And please let us know how well the catcher did in regards to Tim's performance.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to www.boston.com/community/forums.html?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aSportsForum%3a81df60f3-70ee-4ca3-9336-8cf2c0a8301aDiscussion%3a9c96abc8-b965-40eb-a1b5-55a2babfd458&plckFindPostKey=Cat:SportsForum:81df60f3-70ee-4ca3-9336-8cf2c0a8301aDiscussion:9c96abc8-b965-40eb-a1b5-55a2babfd458Post:99ba65e9-59aa-4111-aee9-6f037768dfbf">Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    Moon, we already have 17 losses on May 5 there is a chance we could have 26 to 28 by june that is very alarming to me is it to you? Or is it still to small of a sample size.  I know the league is balanced now and our schedule a tougher than most team's, but I really think this team is too good to continue near .500 ball.

    Posted by moonslav59


    Really? They haven't given any indication of being "too good".

    There are a lot of good indications and I have confidence that other players will start playing up to their abilities... the wins will start coming.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Both Ranaudo and Hernandez are tearing it up in the minors so far. 2 more solid outings today. 

    I was most encouraged today by Gonzalez's HR. That one was well up on the monster. I've been concerned that maybe he has lost some power from the surgery, and maybe he has but that HR showed he has plenty to knock it over the monster even LH.

    We should be putting up a lot better numbers offensively. When we can combine some hot hitters together we should have much better numbers.

    Lowrie has not been good so far defensively at SS. We still have a significant problem defensively at SS. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Lowrie has not been good so far defensively at SS. We still have a significant problem defensively at SS. 

    Boom, I'm glad you have come to this realization.

    His range has always been in question, but he was supposed to be sure handed with an acurate arm.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    All the more reason we see if Navarro can cut it in the bigs.

    I got to laugh at Burrito's trembling need to have his hand held by a clown.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Sox OPS the last 14 days:

    AGon   .943
    Youk    .925
    Ellsb    .900
    Ortiz   .900
    Cam    .850
    Craw   .798
    Scut    .776
    VTek   .668
    Led     .660



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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Small sample sizes, but...

    Tha Yanks have 11 pitchers with ERAs under 3.86 and 12 under 4.08.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    ...but it is interesting they have 3 positions with
    an OPS under .620:

    SS, RF, & DH
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    BaseballGM, you as usual are long on generalizations and short on specifics.

    You claim Lowrie loitered going to first, but ignored that on Sunday he kept running on a very catchable fly to Ichiro that he missed and Lowrie got all the way to 3B.

    In fact, you are unable to put together a coherent response to an issue that required specifics. Katz failed to provide specifics in his generalization.  I provided the specifics.

    You write like a little kid, one who isn't very intelligent. "As if that's all the Sox do"? The Sox do a lot of other things, but running the bases well isn't one of them. Ellsbury and Crawford have speed, which is not a litmus test for being a good baserunner.  
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Slav, very cowardly for you to make no comment on Wakefield, pitiful that he was. I think that says it all. His personal propaganda spinner, pretending as though the game was about a 14 day OPS. Now, ride it out and bury your head in the sand and try and gloat in Wakefield's next mop-up performance.

    You get one thing right, as in hand grendades, and that is Lowrie having the defensive reflexes of a 50 year old, with a slow release and below average infield throwing velocity. He's a 2nd baseman, pretending to be an everyday SS. Theo will sell low, without a doubt. Anyone that young who is that weak, defensively, is never going to cut it as a career everyday SS. 

    Wakefield should be asked to accept a DL and AAA revolving rehab or be released. Carrying him as a de facto DL on the active roster is about as embarrassing as management can get.

    The worst laid plans of mice and bust contracts do not a well performing team make.

    Management needs to address the lack of player accountability on poor fundamentals, who belongs on the active roster, and how to properly allocate playing time with what is in place. They also need to anticipate the likely trades that will need to be made to turn this team into a better balanced and performing team.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Im afraid I don't know who to blame, Salty or Wake?  Which one?  Thankfully Tek did not catch this one or harness would have been in tears.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Yes, Harness' baby blanket, Varitek.

    Yes, Slav's baby blanket, Wakefold.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Is Moon supposed to whine like you two because Wake didn't duplicate his last start when he out-pitched the reigning CY Young winner? How many starters in the last 15 years have been asked to pitch three times in 6 days?

    Take you bozo act elsewhere. This thread isn't the children's hour.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The 2007 Colorado Rockies were also 14-18 after 32 games, fell to 14-20 and later to 18-27 before coming back to win the National League pennant after posting a 90-73 regular-season record.

    On the other hand, the 2010 Pittsburgh Pirates were 14-18 after 32 games before finishing at 57-105.

    The 2011 Boston Red Sox will probably fall somewhere in-between.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Oh, I think this squad is very capable of winning over 90 games, Hill.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Its easy to be negative but to be positive in the face of disaster is just reckless.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Wake didn't "outpictch" Felix, you dolt. Take a look at the stat lines, and the anemic Mariner offense as opposed to the Red Sox offense.

    Take your old coot act elsewhere. This thread is geriatrics hour.

    Just as I thought, silence after that embarrassing meltdown. The guy is on the fast track to 50, but will have to be kicked out of the game. He won't go until MLB kicks him out.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Oh, now we look at stat lines. You obviously didn't watch that game.
    Wake pitched shutout ball, bright bulb. Jenks blew it.
    You are as phony as a day is long. I'll bet you were playing golf while Wake was putting up zeroes, despite erratic defense early on.
    It wasn't much better tonight.

    As for offenses, where do the Mariners play?
    Where do the RedSox play?
    How does Boston traditionally hit in Safeco?
    How do the Mariners historically hit at Fenway.

    Your act is pathetic.
    The clown behind your GM suit is older than "pushing 50" but is trying to pass off this transparent identity as a young coot. So you use Wakefield to deflect your own self image.

    Geez. You are really sad.
     
  23. 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]Lowrie has not been good so far defensively at SS. We still have a significant problem defensively at SS.  Boom, I'm glad you have come to this realization. His range has always been in question, but he was supposed to be sure handed with an acurate arm.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Before the beginning of the year I pushed a thread basically saying "I know it isn't going to happen but we would be a better team with Iglesias at SS compared to Scutaro or Lowrie". I also pushed Beltre at 3rd. Our left side defense is the biggest flaw with this team. As long as it's not fixed we may not make the playoffs. Wakefield would have given up half of those runs if his defense held up for him. Lowrie had a baserunner in front of him causing one of those problems but the other one he almost looked like he was on the take letting it go through.

    And Scutaro's range isn't much better. Gonzalez hasn't been as advertised either defensively, maybe because he doesn't want to dive for balls as much any more due to the shoulder. Again, his HR was extremely encouraging though.

    As much as we like our talent level, there are real flaws with this team. We are in a Nomar situation maybe and the sooner it is corrected the better. I still like Lowrie and Scutaro as super subs but I want a better defensive starting SS and Iglesias is not the answer yet. Maybe by the all star break he will be but that is not likely.

    I don't like signing FA who go into prolonged slumps or won't dive for balls any more. Are we looking at 7 years of not diving for baseballs any more at 1st? No wonder he can play every game. He rarely hits the ground. 

    I prefer the current Rays approach. 12 top picks in this year's draft. I'd much rather have the young guy like Rizzo who is on the way up and still hitting the dirt helping his team win, and costing us very little with 6 years of controlability. The Rays will soon be back at the top.

    The Yanks are playing out of their rears. Colon and Garcia are currently tremendous pick ups. Ivan Nova was NOTHING in the minors until 2009, giving up a lot more hits than innings pitched with an ERA around 4.50 in A ball. But, he's from the DR so everything turns out great in the end, as it does with so many of our DR players. He suddenly becomes superman in AA ball. They stink for a while in the minors and then find religion eventually. It happens regularly. I'm sick of it. Navaro. Tejeda. It happens all the time and everyone in baseball knows it. It's too frequent to not be noticed. Hanley is a skinny kid who barely gets 10 HR a year in the minors but they put him in the majors and all the sudden it's 30 HR  year.

    If Almanzar suddenly becomes Babe Ruth that's it. I'm done.

    It's like every player has potentially 6 tools. Speed...check. Power....check. Access to and willingness to use PEDs...check.

    It is a huge disapointment so far this year but we did see a lot of it coming. I just thought the strengths would outweigh the weaknesses enough to win still.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20'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 : Before the beginning of the year I pushed a thread basically saying "I know it isn't going to happen but we would be a better team with Iglesias at SS compared to Scutaro or Lowrie". I also pushed Beltre at 3rd. Our left side defense is the biggest flaw with this team. As long as it's not fixed we may not make the playoffs. Wakefield would have given up half of those runs if his defense held up for him. Lowrie had a baserunner in front of him causing one of those problems but the other one he almost looked like he was on the take letting it go through. And Scutaro's range isn't much better. Gonzalez hasn't been as advertised either defensively, maybe because he doesn't want to dive for balls as much any more due to the shoulder. Again, his HR was extremely encouraging though. As much as we like our talent level, there are real flaws with this team. We are in a Nomar situation maybe and the sooner it is corrected the better. I still like Lowrie and Scutaro as super subs but I want a better defensive starting SS and Iglesias is not the answer yet. Maybe by the all star break he will be but that is not likely. I don't like signing FA who go into prolonged slumps or won't dive for balls any more. Are we looking at 7 years of not diving for baseballs any more at 1st? No wonder he can play every game. He rarely hits the ground.  I prefer the current Rays approach. 12 top picks in this year's draft. I'd much rather have the young guy like Rizzo who is on the way up and still hitting the dirt helping his team win, and costing us very little with 6 years of controlability. The Rays will soon be back at the top. The Yanks are playing out of their rears. Colon and Garcia are currently tremendous pick ups. Ivan Nova was NOTHING in the minors until 2009, giving up a lot more hits than innings pitched with an ERA around 4.50 in A ball. But, he's from the DR so everything turns out great in the end, as it does with so many of our DR players. He suddenly becomes superman in AA ball. They stink for a while in the minors and then find religion eventually. It happens regularly. I'm sick of it. Navaro. Tejeda. It happens all the time and everyone in baseball knows it. It's too frequent to not be noticed. Hanley is a skinny kid who barely gets 10 HR a year in the minors but they put him in the majors and all the sudden it's 30 HR  year. If Almanzar suddenly becomes Babe Ruth that's it. I'm done. It's like every player has potentially 6 tools. Speed...check. Power....check. Access to and willingness to use PEDs...check. It is a huge disapointment so far this year but we did see a lot of it coming. I just thought the strengths would outweigh the weaknesses enough to win still.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

     Boomer, spot on. Iggy will be here soon, the off season movements I advocated for, was to keep Youk at 1B, put Lowrie at 3B and to sign Werth. I really didn't like the jumbo mortgage for A-Gon, especially when factoring in the surgery recovery. The experts called the procedure, minor, and having had "minor" surgery myself, I know the healing is never overnight. I also called for releasing Wakefield, and trading Paps. Only Paps has been respectable, and given so few chances to actually save a game, he's not really "worth" it, is he?
     
  25. 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:
    [QUOTE]Oh, now we look at stat lines . You obviously didn't watch that game. Wake pitched shutout ball, bright bulb. Jenks blew it. You are as phony as a day is long. I'll bet you were playing golf while Wake was putting up zeroes, despite erratic defense early on. It wasn't much better tonight. As for offenses, where do the Mariners play? Where do the RedSox play? How does Boston traditionally hit in Safeco? How do the Mariners historically hit at Fenway. Your act is pathetic. The clown behind your GM suit is older than "pushing 50" but is trying to pass off this transparent identity as a young coot . So you use Wakefield to deflect your own self image. Geez. You are really sad.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]


    Wow. Your truth-based smack skills are good.

     

Share