A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    They Yankees do have some pitching problems but help might not be far away in Colon and that Left handed prospect they still have down on the farm.

    I think the Sox can still win 95 but they have got to turn things around right now. They are not facing Sabathia this series right. That should help a lot.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    m
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    As far as the prowess of the two catchers versus LH pitching, given that the organization is committed to Salty, there was little chance that Tek was going to get 3 of the first 5 starts. And as far as starting the opener versus Cleveland versus Salty I can understand Tito's reluctance on two fronts. He is trying to get his young catcher going first of all and probably does not want to set up the whole personal catcher thing with Beckett and Tek.
     (katz)
    He could have played 2 of 5, or even the 1 of 5 vs a lefty not a righty. We will face plenty of righties in dueime for Salty to have his chance to get into a groove.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from softlawAAA. Show softlawAAA's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Wakefield has pitched poorly in nothing but mop-up appearances. He needs to go.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    IMO the line-up reflects the fact that RS really did not know what do with Carl Crawford but they were enamored with his talents and knew they were a card short in the OF.

    I have disagreed with this point since the moment they signed Crawford. Perhaps, we may have been a "card short" in the OF next season, but not this eason. 

    With Ellbury and Cameron returningfrom injury, the Sox biggest need wasnot OF: it was 3B (solved by the AGon deal), Catcher (apparently not solved), bullpen (Theo took a good stab at solving it), hitting vs LHPs (didn't get any better), and possibly starting pitching (understandable that Theo went wit what he had).

    I know I have beaten the dead horse on this one, and I am not saying this because of Crawford's small sample size poor start. I said it all along. The upgrade from "this to that" was not worth $20M.

    From:
    LF: Ellsbury/DMac      (Maybe a combined .775 OPS)
    CF: Cameron/Kalish   (Maybe a combined .750 OPS)
    RF: Drew/Cameron     (Maybe a combined .825 OPS)

    To:
    LF: Crawford/DMac    (.850?)
    CF: Ellsbury/Cameron (.775)
    RF: Drew/Cameron     (.825)

    $20M to gain about.075 OPS total between LF & CF, plus some defense and speed.



     
  7. 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]IMO the line-up reflects the fact that RS really did not know what do with Carl Crawford but they were enamored with his talents and knew they were a card short in the OF. I have disagreed with this point since the moment they signed Crawford. Perhaps, we may have been a "card short" in the OF next season, but not this eason.  With Ellbury and Cameron returningfrom injury, the Sox biggest need wasnot OF: it was 3B (solved by the AGon deal), Catcher (apparently not solved), bullpen (Theo took a good stab at solving it), hitting vs LHPs (didn't get any better), and possibly starting pitching (understandable that Theo went wit what he had). I know I have beaten the dead horse on this one, and I am not saying this because of Crawford's small sample size poor start. I said it all along. The upgrade from "this to that" was not worth $20M. From: LF: Ellsbury/DMac      (Maybe a combined .775 OPS) CF: Cameron/Kalish   (Maybe a combined .750 OPS) RF: Drew/Cameron     (Maybe a combined .825 OPS) To: LF: Crawford/DMac    (.850?) CF: Ellsbury/Cameron (.775) RF: Drew/Cameron     (.825) $20M to gain about.075 OPS total between LF & CF, plus some defense and speed.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon, with all due respect, I think 6 games is a bit premature on making a call on the 7-year Crawford deal not worth the 20 mil a year upgrade.
    There are many elements to consider. Let's just wait and see how it all pans out.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I certainly agree that Ellsbury could bunt more often. All that time in Arizona last year would have been well served developing that ability. Nonetheless, opposing pitchers have painted the lines on him this year. A little luck would have had him on base several more times. He's going to be fine IMO.

    Have you guys ever hit in 30 degree temperatures. It's no fun at all.

    Hopefully we start the turnaround in Fenway. Look at the numbers. It's got to get better than this!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    1. Lackey is a bust in year 2 of a 5 year ball and chain contract
    2. Salty is a Ranger castoff for a reason
    3. Despite the solo shots, Buch looked good in the high winds
    4. Papelbon is still a very good relief pitcher, even if he isn't 2007 dominant
    5. Lester started slow but will still have another solid year
    6. 2011 Jacked-up opening series Rangers are inferior to 2010 Rangers
    7. Pedroia looks fully recovered
    8. Youk isn't fully recovered but is on the road to full recovery
    9. Ortiz looks confident, even against commercial lefthanded pitching
    10.Reyes has decent lefty specialty stuff (overused of late)
    11.Aceves should replace Wakefield
    12.Crawford has no business hitting 3rd and shoud leadoff and just get on base
    13.Scutaro and Lowrie are 2nd basemen, Iglesias should start by the summer
    14.Wheeler is going to do a good job in the middle of the pen (overused of late)
    15.Ellsbury is a weak defensive CF'er who can't run with a quiet upper body 16.Cameron looks very smooth in the OF
    17.Cameron should start when Drew sits against Lefties, Not Mac
    18.Mac, Scutaro or Lowrie should pinch late for catcher in minus 1-3 R
    19.Trade for or call-up a veteran but fit decent overall catcher to replace Salty
    20.Either Dicek or Beckett's pitching well will be the key to the season
    21.Ellsbury should hit 9th to turn the lineup over better & Ped Youk & AGon 2-4
    22.Ellsbury has an ugly reverse pivot swing and needs to slap hit under the gun (0-5 and 3 K's and never hit the ball out of the infield, tonight)
    23.AGon isn't fully recovered but is a natural hitter with a terrific swing
    24.Team will have no problem scoring enough runs to win the division
    25.The team needed a solid catcher combination and better pitching and Crawford didn't address a single 2011 team need
    26.Luchino needs to shorten the leash on Epstein and make some immediate adjustments
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom, don't you think 95 wins will get us in?

    95-61 is .609 ball.
    94-62 is .603 ball.
    93-63 is .596 ball.

    96-60 is .615 ball.
    97-59 is .623 ball.
    98-58 is .628 ball
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    hey Mr Moon

    I think Scut/Lowrie are 1 for ??? at SS so far and that one hit was a dribbler by Scut last night.  oooyyy

    I was surprised a bit to read this today. The average catcher hit only .245/.312/.374 last year
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    John Lester just pitched a good game didn't he?  I see hope.
     
  13. 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]BTW: I wish folks would stop using CERA and apply other factors... That's why I try to use the term: "CERA-related". We need a shorter term.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yeah. CERA-RELATED is good.
    What a ball-buster. The Sox debut 2011 with a f-riggin' slump.
    This franchise will do anything to become underdogs!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    On the whole Salty thing a few thoughts.

    First the organization (Theo) makes certain decisions and the manager's job is to implement them. The organization has made a commitment to give it a go with Salty as the primary catcher. While Tito now gets get credit for sticking with Pedroia in 2007, I am sure Francona was tempted to play Cora much more often in April of that season.

    As far as the prowess of the two catchers versus LH pitching, given that the organization is committed to Salty, there was little chance that Tek was going to get 3 of the first 5 starts. And as far as starting the opener versus Cleveland versus Salty I can understand Tito's reluctance on two fronts. He is trying to get his young catcher going first of all and probably does not want to set up the whole personal catcher thing with Beckett and Tek.

    Tonight's game certainly does not fuel the case that Salty is what ails this team. Untimely poor pitching (yes it was Reyes and not Tek who could not find home plate) and a lack of timely hitting are killing these guys.

    But I can just imagine if it was Salty who played a tag play at home like a force out the screaming about his failings as a catcher. That play total changed the complexion of the inning and the home run that followed at this point (I am writing as the game is in progress) certainly is making for a difficult hill to climb again tonight.

    It was nice to see Gonzalez hit a HR :)
     
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    harness, I went out of my way to say I felt this way the day they signed him and I was not judging in a 6 game sample size. You know me better.

    I was responding to katz sayin we were "missing a card" in the OF. I did not feel that way then, and I still feel that way now. I think we should have spent the money on higher need areas. It has nothing to do with 6 games.

    Anyways, some of the guys I wanted intead of Crawford are doing just as bad.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Well Katz, the best time for a true line-up shake-down is in desperate times.
    That's when even "unhappy"layers will sacrifice for the team's good.
    I agree hitting Pedey 3rd takes him out of his element, and distorts the line-up.
    One of the speed guys will have to hit 9th.

    I also think the fan base is better served by redefining team expectations.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Yeah, it's Wake fault that Wheeler and Reyes have plus 10 ERAs.

    Too bad we didn't cut Wake and his 4.50 ERA so we could keep more plus 10's.

    Opponent's BA off...
    Wake : .143
    Buch:  .238
    Beckett: .263
    Lester: .273
    Dice-K: .300
    Reyes:  .333
    Papelbon: .400
    Wheeler: .417 
    Bard: .444
    Lackey: .476

    All Wake's fault.

    Wake's faced more batters than any other relief pitcher on our team, and it's his fault others are overworked. Interesting theory by the clown.
     
  18. 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]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : I respect your opinion, and agree that Pedroia should not hit in the 3-hole.  But Crawford is one of the best 2-hole hitters in all of baseball, IMHO, based on his work at TBR.  And he has already said that he thinks the same.  He is not a true 3-hole hitter, IMO, not in the sense of a Yaz or a Ted Williams or even a Wade Boggs. Batting Pedey in the 3-hole baffles me, sure, but that may be a sign that the FO and Tito may have no clue as to what to do against a lefty pitcher, or that they may be over-thinking the whole L-R-L-R-L structure for the batting order. To my way of thinking, Ellsbury should lead off and Crawford should follow. Regardless.  A-Gon is a classic 3-hole hitter in the mold of a young Yaz or Ted Williams. Why not put him there permanently, and let the very impressive hitters (Youk, Papi) bat after him - maybe putting Papi in the 4-hole and Youk in the 5-hole against righties and flipping them against lefties?  The real concern, though, is the bottom of the order. But this needs to play itself out. Scutaro can hit better. Can Salty? We'll see, depending on the magic that Dave Magadan can work. And, no. It is not appropriate to panic.    So what if no team has ever won the World Series after going 0-6 to start the season? The same was said about a certain team in the ALCS in 2004, down 0-3 to the dreaded Yankees, before this happened:   Yo, Derek!  The tag was late!!  Just so you know... Anyway, I am reminded of a classic moment in motion picture history:   Way too early to panic, still.  The ship can be righted, and it will be.
    Posted by summerof67[/QUOTE]

    Good going, my friend.
    You set a fine example.

    As I see it, the RedSox have never started this poorly in my lifetime. So, it's a new experience for me and many others. It presents an intriguing challenge.
    I do believe this team has the capacity to be as hot as they are cold.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The RS are finding so many different and "interesting" ways to lose games right now it is impossible to point at any one thing. Games they get enough pitching, they get little to no offense. They score a few runs and the bullpen or the starters put the game out of reach.

    Human nature is to find a person and assign them the blame but these six games tend to prove you win as a team and you lose as a team.

    Few other thoughts:

    Pedroia does not belong in the three slot but with the two lefties at the top of the order Youk would seem to be the logical choice and he just has looked awful since he arrived in Ft. Myers this year. It is hard to rip Francona on this because of that but on a team with Gonzalez, Youk, Ortiz and even Drew, you have to be kidding me that the self proclaimed Laser Show is the best hitter for the 3 spot.

    IMO the line-up reflects the fact that RS really did not know what do with Carl Crawford but they were enamored with his talents and knew they were a card short in the OF. The fact that he proclaims he is uncomfortable at lead-off has created different line-ups almost every game as Tito tries to find where he fits in the line-up given the other players the RS have.

    Maybe it is time to make two players unhappy and move Ellsbury to the 9 slot and Crawford to lead-off. Neither is taking advantage of being in slots of their preference any way and it would stop the merry-go-round of line-up changes where guys are out of slot while the RS figure out where to put CC. For a manager who believes that players perform best when their role is established and consistent, the current situation must be driving Francona nuts and it is not producing offense either. 

    Home cooking could be helpful but having to right the ship against the NYY is not ideal. On the flip side it would do a lot to wash away the bad taste in their mouths if they caught fire this weekend against a club that not only is excellent but is THE rival. OTOH the NYY have a chance to virtually put the 2011 RS to sleep with a sweep. Who would have thought it a week ago?

    While we can analyize it to death in the detail why the RS have not won yet because they are giving up too many runs and scoring too few. This start is even more perplexing than last year's when the new "run prevention RS" were kicking the ball all over the diamond. 

    Only half kidding when I say Francona should take the entire team out tonight and get them good and drunk. They clearly are too tight at this point. Where's this generations Kevin Millar?

    Just my takes...oh yeah and GO Celtics!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Hack writer. His job is to create controversy.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Well, the O's won again. Only Texas has a better record than them. I think ur right Moonwhen ya say 95 wins will be enough to get into the playoffs. Might even be less. I never bought into the 100-win hyperbole. Not after what I saw last year - and I'm not just referring to the injuries

    I think the AL is too good and balanced to have the wildcard be over 95 wins. I still think we can win 99-100. Is 100-56 that improbable?
     
  22. 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]All of Wakefield's appearances have been mop-up duty. He's been poor in doing that no stress situation. Wakefield needs to go, which is completely independent of the poor start to the season.
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]


    Let me get this straight: I gather you don't much care for Tim Wakefield.
    Is it safe to make this assumption?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    But the other team knows how to bunt evidently.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Yes, highly improbable. This is a very flawed team. Basically, they replaced vmart and beltre with crawford and agon, they tried to fix the bullpen which hasn't worked out to well as of yet and they have the same shoddy rotation as last year.

    No, basically they had a .793 OPS at catcher last year and are replacing...
     
    VMart/Cash/Molina/VTek with Salty/VTek.
    They are replacing Beltre with AGon
    They are replacing an awful pen with some guys that should do better.

    What you are continually leaving out is that they are also replacing...

    1) Nava/Hermy/DMac/Hall/etc... with Ellsbury & Cameron

    2) BHall/and others ... with Pedey

    3) Lowell/Anderson/others ... with Youk.

    If you think that doesn't/shoudln't make a difference over last year's record, then there's really nothing more to discuss.

    I'm not saying 100 wins is easy or will happen. I'm just saying it is still possible.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I think you are right Katz.
    I was of the belief that the organization was committed to Salty as they were committed to VMART. Tito is simply carrying it out.

    This slump proves one thing: This team may not be as good as advertised. They won't win on talent alone.
    They've got to be motivated to play as if they had a chip on their shoulder.

    I guess we should now expect to hear:

                     "We have to get back to the fundamentals..."

    Which means a return to ST.
     

Share