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

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Yeah, I've seen the numbers.  Harness has overwhelming evidence of that. I think with Salty it's a mental thing. He has, essentially, the basic tools.  The thought with Theo was probably the hope that Tuck and Varitek could help him overcome this.  His spring training numbers were great.  Yes, I know it was just spring training, which, to me, says that is a mental thing and not because he's physically unable. I know it's a big gamble, but it sure would be nice if he eventually lived up to his potentail.  I guess the big question is how long do you wait.  And, I remember seeing Pedroia playing in Seattle when he was hovering around the Mendoza line.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    Amp: My point isn't as reflective of his hitting - or lack of - as it is how he handles the staff. I agree with you that he's pressing offensively. But his game-calling skills, etc. aren't subject to the same type of pressure.

    In other words, he can be hitting .400 now, but he could still choke down in critical situations and become too predictable with his pitch selection. A catcher has a ton of responsibility. And for the RedSox to put him in the position he's currently in is borderline criminal.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Amp, I'm with you on giving Salty a chance. I think that Tito has been doing that, ergo starting him against Texas even against LH pitching ( his last team ). They are showing confidence in him. Hopefully it will pay off over time. 

    One guy who looks pretty solid is Gonzalez. The guy looks so professional as a hitter. He doesn't seem to sing hard but the ball flies off his bat. hits to all fields. Maybe he is the guy we want hitting 3rd after all. He seems to be able to hit for average and power. Kind of a perfect #3 it seems.

    Ellsbury
    Pedroia
    Gonzalez
    Youk
    Crawford
    Ortiz
    Drew/Cameron
    Salty
    Lowrie/Scutaro
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    It looks like Tito has no clue about the L-R thing at catcher. He missed a chance t hve VTek start vs at least one lefty in Texas, and now he is starting him vs a righty tonight.

    VTek has had an .800+ OPS vs LHPs for the last 3 straight years. Salty is under .600 vs LHPs. 

    Sorry, I just don't get it.

    As to the 2 lefties in a row to start the line-up: Ellsbury hits lefties equally or better than righties, so why should it matter at all?

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]No team with an 0-4 start have ever won the world series.  I remember a team down 0-3 in a 7 game series... 0-4 in a 162 game season isnot a worrisome record. Of ourse, i'm not happy about it, but our pitchers haven't even mad a complete rotaion yet. I take such stats with a grain of salt but it certainly means that some concern is warranted. Especially with the mediocre performances of Lackey and Beckett (Beckett had trouble cracking 90 miles an hour against a so-so Cleveland team).  They've only pitched one game! On the bright side Salty got a hit. This Dice K start is gonna be interesting. The bats will come alive. The pitching should too.

    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    No team with an 0-4 start have ever won the world series.  I remember a team down 0-3 in a 7 game series

    Do you expect lightning to strike twice? So because something happened ONCE in over 100 years of baseball we should expect it again?

    On the bright side Salty got a hit.

    But the way he tries to throw runners out is comical. He really looks like a lousy pick up.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    ...and to think we pay taxes to nab softy...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    You mean he fit in the studio door?
     
  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]The early positives (there aren't many) are that Ortiz clearly is not going to be awful out the gate this year unlike 09 and 10. The core of the bullpen aside from Bard's absolute meltdown in the opener and Papelbon's load em up strike out the side appearance on Sunday looks strong. And it looks like Francona has found a role for Wakefield in between spot starts For first appearances I thought that Buch and Beckett were OK (with run support those guys pitched winnable games), Lester had typical Lester April starts and Lackey.. well he got taken to the woodshed and was beaten like he stole something. Concerns are how much everyone not named Ortiz looks like they are pressing. Salty in particular is carrying a huge load on his back and it has showed at the plate. Crawford is the toy that nobody knows quite what to do with and he looks like a man trying to prove his salary is his value. Problem here is that he doesn't like to lead-off and it is not ideal to force a player into an uncomfortable role. But while his salary screams he is the best hitter on the team, he is not. The 7th spot in the order from Sunday is probably about right. The two spot isn't bad until you consider that because of the two lefties at the top of the order Tito put Pedey in the 3 slot. I find that maddening because at the end of the day no matter what order you put them in the 3-4 hitters are A-Gon and Youk until they produce large sample sets that prove otherwise. We went through a similar stretch last year to open the season and saw how quickly the RS were able to erase the deficit in May and early June before the injuries multiplied to the point where the RS had a AAA outfield and catching staffing. So we can't get too alarmed by how much a 4 loss streak is magnified when it is the first 4 games of the season. But if a team ever looked like they could use a couple of idiots in the locker room to lighten things up, the RS have looked like that team in the last two games and with the NYY being the home opening series after Cleveland the guys just getting loose can come none too quickly IMO. Just my take
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Tampa has 2 of our chief idiots and they are not helping those guys one bit! Manny and Damon. I agree though, this team is mega tight. The expectations were set ski high and they are trying to meet them.

    Someone should tell them that top favorites like them are usually skuttled by the mob somehow, eventually. When a team is this favored, the betting line will be skewed towards the sox. The mob, or whoever is involved in the betting industry, must have an influence or 2 still in the game.  Just my opinion. There is way too much money involved in that industry to have it completely clean. To think otherwise is unbelievably naive IMO. I'd rather have the Sox not be favored at this point. 

    Then again, maybe a slow start will temper the betting line significantly going forward.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Well, let's see what Crawbury can do today!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    No team with an 0-4 start have ever won the world series. 

    I remember a team down 0-3 in a 7 game series...
    0-4 in a 162 game season isnot a worrisome record. Of ourse, i'm not happy about it, but our pitchers haven't even mad a complete rotaion yet.

    I take such stats with a grain of salt but it certainly means that some concern is warranted. Especially with the mediocre performances of Lackey and Beckett (Beckett had trouble cracking 90 miles an hour against a so-so Cleveland team). 

    They've only pitched one game!

    On the bright side Salty got a hit. This Dice K start is gonna be interesting.

    The bats will come alive. The pitching should too.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ElBambino. Show ElBambino's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]No team with an 0-4 start have ever won the world series.  I remember a team down 0-3 in a 7 game series... 0-4 in a 162 game season isnot a worrisome record. Of ourse, i'm not happy about it, but our pitchers haven't even mad a complete rotaion yet. I take such stats with a grain of salt but it certainly means that some concern is warranted. Especially with the mediocre performances of Lackey and Beckett (Beckett had trouble cracking 90 miles an hour against a so-so Cleveland team).  They've only pitched one game! On the bright side Salty got a hit. This Dice K start is gonna be interesting. The bats will come alive. The pitching should too.

    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

     

    No team with an 0-4 start have ever won the world series.  I remember a team down 0-3 in a 7 game series

    Do you expect lightning to strike twice? So because something happened ONCE in over 100 years of baseball we should expect it again?

    On the bright side Salty got a hit.

    But the way he tries to throw runners out is comical. He really looks like a lousy pick up.


     

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    God, FOUR games into the season and people are concerned??  Please!!  Let's give it some time.

    Jid, if you're around and being an ex-catcher, I have a question for you about Salty.  Harness, I'd like your assessment also.  I noticed that at times, Salty extends his right leg before a pitch(I wish the hell I had that flexibility).  It seems that when he does this, it allows him to set a lower target.  I would think he would set up this way more often.  Any comments?
     
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule'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 : Jid can better answer that one, Amp. I'd say it was for balance - feeling comfortable and in a good position to block WP's. I do not like Salty's target-setting. He flicks it instead of setting it. Many pitchers like to see a constant target as they are starting their delivery.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I agree with the flicking.  It seems he actually sets the target..with no flicking when in that extended leg position.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II


    The odds are that the Sox will win tonight.  I mean, how often can the dealer beat a twenty with six being his upcard?  When they win tonight, and I think they will, the consensus will be it was because Tek was catching.  I don't think this is fair to Salty.

    I vote for letting Tuck and Varitek do their thing with him for half the season.  If it doesn't work out by then, then give him a kiss goodbye.

    I know you guys think I'm insane....probably with good reason.  When the Colt-45's came knocking on my door about 100 yrs ago, it wasn't because I had the greatest talent, it was because I never said die and worked my butt off.  I think that is what they saw...hard work and a winning attitude. So, I guess I just have a soft spot for the underdog.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    What is up with the velocities? Even Buchholz was setting around 90-91. It's early in the year but shouldn't our guys all be 2-4 mph faster given past experience? Is it the guns? Or the new pitching coach?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Compare his targets to that of Tek. Both make last second maneuvering, but Tek then keeps his target stationary for as long as possible. Salty's target is much too brief, IMO.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I totally agree.

    When Salty is in the conventional position, he's flexing his glove.  To me, if I were pitching, it would really be distracting.  There is a BIG difference with this when Tek is catching. 

    My point earlier is that in his extended leg position, a target is there the whole time.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I honestly think Softy deletes at least some of his own identities. After all, there is always another!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    Yeah, I've seen the numbers.  Harness has overwhelming evidence of that.

    I think with Salty it's a mental thing. He has, essentially, the basic tools.  The thought with Theo was probably the hope that Tuck and Varitek could help him overcome this.  His spring training numbers were great.  Yes, I know it was just spring training, which, to me, says that is a mental thing and not because he's physically unable.

    I know it's a big gamble, but it sure would be nice if he eventually lived up to his potentail.  I guess the big question is how long do you wait.  And, I remember seeing Pedroia playing in Seattle when he was hovering around the Mendoza line.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DasBabe. Show DasBabe'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 : Well that is part of the quandary with Crawford isn't it? He was signed based on the total package and not simply his batting prowess and is surrounded by a lot of accomplished hitters. The same snarky comments could be made about #2 hitters or lead-off I suppose but Crawford assets include his speed and defense and gap power. But at 3-4 you have guys like Youk and A-Gon who will flirt with .400 OBP every year and mid .900 OPS. Then you have Ortiz who is still a top 10 power guy. As long as Ellsbury and Pedroia are the 1-2 guys that puts Crawford at 6 at best, versus a LH pitcher the RS are unlike to sandwich Ortiz and Crawford so in that circumstance (like Sunday's game versus the Rangers) that puts Crawford in 7 hole. So while you make the point even though I suspect your intention is to taunt. Crawford's salary is creating expectations that are perhaps over riding the realities of where he fits into the line-up on this team. For darn sure he'd never be a 6 or 7 hitter in Tampa or with the Angels by example... 

    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    It wasn't a taunt. The sawx didn't sign him for 140M++ because of his fielding nor to have him hit from the 7 slot.

    You and I both know this.

     
  19. 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]I know it's probably too soon to broach this subject but is it possible that a more experienced catcher such as Varitek would have had a more calming influence over the pitching staff over the last 2 games and had some influence on the outcome of either game or did Texas' offense simply pour it on too hot and heavy for any relief? My concern is that Salty's lack of experience may have some bearing on knowing how to read the opposing hitters and knowing what changes to make with regards to pitches to throw under certain conditions.
    Posted by playball01[/QUOTE]

    Here's another way of saying it, Warden:
    Not including today's game, Salty has started 7 games for the RedSox, dating back to 2010. The RedSox are 0-7 in those 7 games.

    EDIT: Make that 0-8.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    It's to early too see any trend but we do know that our pitching staff might not just walk out there and shut down offenses. I'm hopeful for Buchholz to start out hot. If Gonzalez keeps going he is going to be in a strong negotiating position. He has a lot riding on how he does right now.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxPatsCelts1988. Show SoxPatsCelts1988's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In case no one else has noticed, the Rangers have put together one heck of a team also. One heck of a lineup and some solid pitching. They are for real.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    I said this in another post and I'll say it again.

    The Red Sox lost that series because of pitching and pitching only.  They scored enough runs to take 2 out of 3 but didn't because of an awful performance by Lester and a god awful performance by Lackey.

    To me, the Rangers have a bunch of guys that do nothing but swing for the fences.  That's going to work a lot of times but it will also result in streaky hitting.  If you think that the Rangers are going to hit like that all year, you are out of your mind.  Besides, I put that more in pitch execution than the Rangers bat.

    Also, I'm not all that impressed with the Rangers rotation.  I was rather unimpressed last year too, and that was with Lee.  I just don't think they have a true ace.

    I still think they win the west, but bottom line is the Rangers started off hot and the Red Sox started off cold.

    By the way, is anyone on my side in that they believe David Murphy is only in the big leagues because he only does well versus the Red Sox?  I can't stand this guy for that reason.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from SmileyBabe. Show SmileyBabe'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 : Didn't they already try?

    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Yup, but I'm pretty sure that they aren't gonna give up trying to land one because they missed out on lee.

    And the way this beantowne lineup looked against lefties this weekend I'm sure they would like to land one or two.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I think Natick is pretty much on target. A few pitches in misplaced spots and things can get completely out of control in Texas.

    I thought from looking at the game a little that Texas may actually have a huge fan base now but a ton of those people looked and acted like Redsox fans. We are taking over the Universe ( Look out Evil Empire ).
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The team lost, not just the pitchers. There will be games we lose 1-0 and 2-1. Our staff will be fine. Relax.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from SmileyBabe. Show SmileyBabe's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Anybody worried about how anemic the offense has looked against lefty starters so far?

    I mean, if you take out the two runs they got in the opener because of the bad error in RF, they would have only scored 3 runs in the two games off of lefty starters.

    Think the Yanks will be trying to add a lefty?

     

Share