A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III


    Boom, there isn't much to comment about when so many things go wrong.  I'm an 'old-timer' and remember the implosions very well.

    With all the juggling on the staff, injuries etc., it's like re-arranging the chairs on the Titanic.

    IF we make the playoff, and that's a BIG IF, I can't see us competing with other healthier and motivated teams.

    To add insult to injury, the Orioles are the bottom of the barrell.  The way we play against them should really tell us something.

    Personally, I'd LOVE to see them turn things around, but with present personnel, I can't see how it's possible.

    Maybe we should call Pedro..*laugh*.  And, I'll never get to know the real reason why Colon didn't work out with us.  If I remember correctly, he left the club under mysterious circumstances.

    It really disappointed me the other day when Crawford didn't slide into home.  He claims Scutaro didn't give him a sign...maybe he was obstructed, but I saw the slide sign.  So, I'm sure 'friendships' in the clubhouse are strained.

    While I'm at it, did you guys enjoy Bogar giving the wave-in sign and then change to stop the other day as the player was rounding third(forgot who it was), fell down trying to stop and was tagged out?  I say to dump Bogar the first thing after the season.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Boom, there isn't much to comment about when so many things go wrong.  I'm an 'old-timer' and remember the implosions very well. With all the juggling on the staff, injuries etc., it's like re-arranging the chairs on the Titanic. IF we make the playoff, and that's a BIG IF, I can't see us competing with other healthier and motivated teams. To add insult to injury, the Orioles are the bottom of the barrell.  The way we play against them should really tell us something. Personally, I'd LOVE to see them turn things around, but with present personnel, I can't see how it's possible. Maybe we should call Pedro..*laugh*.  And, I'll never get to know the real reason why Colon didn't work out with us.  If I remember correctly, he left the club under mysterious circumstances. It really disappointed me the other day when Crawford didn't slide into home.  He claims Scutaro didn't give him a sign...maybe he was obstructed, but I saw the slide sign.  So, I'm sure 'friendships' in the clubhouse are strained. While I'm at it, did you guys enjoy Bogar giving the wave-in sign and then change to stop the other day as the player was rounding third(forgot who it was), fell down trying to stop and was tagged out?  I say to dump Bogar the first thing after the season.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]I don't remember all the specifics regarding Colon but he did Ok for us, suffered a non-pitching injury and wasn't able to come back. The RS did not tender him after that year.

    In fairness to Carl, IMO Scutaro was very late in giving the slide signal not unlike Bogar's late stop sign. In fairness to Scutaro, judging plays and relaying signals is not Scoots primary job unlike Bogar.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : What I've been trying to get across to you is that Lester and Beckett's longest pitch count games were in non-crucial games. When we have rested and babied them all year, the time comes to let them go 125-135 pitches in the big game. Instead, they pitch 105-110 (again).  My position is different from Burrito's in that I am just talking about a handful of games and 10-20 more pitches in each of those games. I do agree with Burrito that there is no way we can expect Beckett and Lester to suddenly pitch 8 innings in October. Verlander, Sabathia, and others will go 8.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Especially when their avg. IP per start all year has been 6.4 and 6.3 respectively.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Moon and Harness, I really am not obsessing about Aceves starting and you two guys offer the best stat support of anyone on here, and I the worst.  But here is the stat I responded to Harness.  In Aceves 4 starts: 5-5-6-5.  Is anyone else doing that now?  Not really for some time.  I am not arguing that this is Aceves best role, just that NOW it's best for the team, just as you are saying NOW let the starters go a little longer or NOW let the starters go on 4 day rest.  Not hollering here, only for emphasis on temporary.  Then, Doobie, Bowden, Miller probably don't have the experience or mental makeup to start in this do or die atmosphere at this time, but I think they would be more comfortable coming in in the 6th or 7th to work and could actually be more effective for several innings as opposed to starting.  Finally, I think you each have said Bedard is our best bet going forward.  Please, I want to believe that, but all my eyes and empirical evidence does not support that in any way.  I'm not anti-Bedard but I think it's crazy to think he and Buch are our saviors without any backup plan--thus, Aceves.  Has Bedard even won one game for us yet?  I don't recall.  This situation has been caused by injury--Dice, Buch, Bedard, and I believe Lackey.
    What have we done pro-actively to turn this around?  As Boom says, I think we need a new approach to this problem.  Running the same guys out there has not worked for a month.  Harness, when you have a question that doesn't get answered, you always re-ask so...Do you think Aceves-Doobie, Bowden, Miller
    going forward would be worse than Lackey-Aceves, Wake-Aceves, etc.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Hey Boom, I for one will miss you if you don't keep posting,  and I hope I'm not an idiot.  If I am an idiot, I hope you and others will indulge me because I love to come here and read what true fans and intelligent people have to say about the RS.   Please don't go now when "the brain trust" has problems to solve.  I've used up all my arguments about Aceves so I won't be prodding anyone with that again.  But wait until the PO's are over.  I have a bomb to drop for next year.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Aceves 4 starts: 5-5-6-5.  Is anyone else doing that now?  Not really for some time

    Wake (in reverse order):
    5
    6
    5
    4
    5.1
    8 (CG)
    7
    6.2
    7
    6.1

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Yes Moon but one win and I know all your stats say it's not all his fault but we have needed a shakeup.  I will answer my own question.  If Aceves had been starting for the last month with X-pitchers following him, it couldn't be worse could it?  Admittedly, this is all conjecture.  Maybe he would have done just as poorly.  But what about looking ahead.  I think you have said (could be wrong about source) that you don't expect to see Lackey or Wake in first round and Bedard is the guy.  Did he go three yesterday or 2.5?  I say make Aceves the 3rd guy and Bedard the long reliever.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Am I to understand for the 3rd time all year Tito puts Josh out in the 8th and after having just given up 4 runs? Logic?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Yes Moon but one win and I know all your stats say it's not all his fault but we have needed a shakeup.  

    It has been Wake's fault. My point is that Wake has been unfairly singled out as the biggest or close to the biggest problem. The guy is our 6/7 started.

    I will answer my own question.  If Aceves had been starting for the last month with X-pitchers following him, it couldn't be worse could it?  

    Perhaps it could have, but it's easy to look in hindisght after a losing stretch and say "what if". Just because you may be right about the past, does not mean it is the right thing to do in the future. One could easily envision a scenario where we start Aceves, he goes 5 goo innings, someone else comes in and blows the game, and the next two games we need a middle reliever badly, and then lose those two as well.

    Admittedly, this is all conjecture.  Maybe he would have done just as poorly.  But what about looking ahead.  I think you have said (could be wrong about source) that you don't expect to see Lackey or Wake in first round and Bedard is the guy.  Did he go three yesterday or 2.5?  I say make Aceves the 3rd guy and Bedard the long reliever.
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]

    I think Bedard is the #3 man if he is healthy, and we don't use 4 in the 1st round.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Hey Boom, I for one will miss you if you don't keep posting,  and I hope I'm not an idiot.  If I am an idiot, I hope you and others will indulge me because I love to come here and read what true fans and intelligent people have to say about the RS.   Please don't go now when "the brain trust" has problems to solve.  I've used up all my arguments about Aceves so I won't be prodding anyone with that again.  But wait until the PO's are over.  I have a bomb to drop for next year.
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]

    Crit, it's not you of course. It's expitch the half wit. He completely destroyed a good thread on Ellsbury and the mvp vote. It makes me not even want to come here when I have to deal with nit wits like him and softy.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Moon, at this rate we might lose the wild card to the Angels!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from FredMertz. Show FredMertz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Moon, Harness, Katz, Amp...etc.   I'm growing weary of this forum. There are a lot of things we can do with our lives rather than suffer fools. I appreciate the friendship of many of you. I'm not commenting on your posts. It's just that there are often complete idiots here. We all know some people here who don't know their rear from a hole in the ground. I'm sick of it.  I'll see you guys in the playoffs!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Which year?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Moon, at this rate we might lose the wild card to the Angels!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Teams and players have ups and downs. This team could choke or they could just as easily revert to the team of a month or so ago.

    I still have faith. When things turn around, they usually do it in a big way. Getting hot gets contagious.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    It's been a total team pitching meltdown though. There is no indication this is going to change any time soon. God help us!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Boom, did we have a near total pitching meltdown in April? 

    Did many posters jump ship and say no way could we make up that amount of ground in 130 games?

    Our pitchers had a great run even after Buch went down. It can still turn around on a dime. One strong game by one guy could light the fire. I'm not saying it will happen, but there certainly is hope.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : What I've been trying to get across to you is that Lester and Beckett's longest pitch count games were in non-crucial games. When we have rested and babied them all year, the time comes to let them go 125-135 pitches in the big game. Instead, they pitch 105-110 (again).  My position is different from Burrito's in that I am just talking about a handful of games and 10-20 more pitches in each of those games. I do agree with Burrito that there is no way we can expect Beckett and Lester to suddenly pitch 8 innings in October.Verlander, Sabathia, and others will go 8.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Beckett/Lester can "suddenly" pitch 8 innings in October if their pitch count is manageable. If they are productive after 7 and pitch count is around 105, I say Tito will stay with them in PO scenario.
    Especially when the alternative is an over-worked pen.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    They may pitch 8, but I don't expect them to be accustomed to it, and they may flounder. I don't doubt that Tito may let them go 120-130 pitches, I doubt they will be effective after 105-110, since they are not used to it.

    I see this:

    Game 1: Beckett  6-7IP- Aceves 1-2 IP- Papelbon 1 IP
    Game 2: Lester 7IP- Bard 1 IP- Papelbon 1 IP
    Day off
    Game 3: Bedard 4-5 IP- Aceves 2-3 IP- Bard/Paps 1 IP each.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Today didn't Tito send Beckett out in the 8th because he hadn't reached 100 pitches? He is not managing this staff - he is using 100 pitches as his managing ruler. I do not understand this at all. 


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Is Lester pitching tomorrow?  Please let there be a strongly pitched game soon.  Now LA is rearing its ugly head. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I believe the team has a day off and they can use it to decide wether or not they want to win the World Series.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Today didn't Tito send Beckett out in the 8th because he hadn't reached 100 pitches? He is not managing this staff - he is using 100 pitches as his managing ruler. I do not understand this at all. 
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    He uses pitch count as a back-drop.
    His main indicator is effectiveness.
    Beckett lost his as the game wore on.

    DC has mentioned several times that not all pitches carry the same weight/burden. Especially when it's in a case where Beckett has an ankle issue.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    so for the first time in 3 months Tito sends Beckett out into the 8th and with an ankle issue?

    Me thinks you buy into the tummy aches, and sore knee propaganda too much.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]They may pitch 8, but I don't expect them to be accustomed to it, and they may flounder. I don't doubt that Tito may let them go 120-130 pitches, I doubt they will be effective after 105-110, since they are not used to it. I see this: Game 1: Beckett  6-7IP- Aceves 1-2 IP- Papelbon 1 IP Game 2: Lester 7IP- Bard 1 IP- Papelbon 1 IP Day off Game 3: Bedard 4-5 IP- Aceves 2-3 IP- Bard/Paps 1 IP each.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    It's not the inning that's the issue. It's how effective they are in their pitch count.
    They aren't accustomed to going 120-130 pitches, granted. They may not have to go that deep. But they could if they are healthy and in sharp form. Such is not the case, so the very possibility of 130 pitches thrown may be a moot point.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    The last two complete games I looked at the pitchers threw 114 pitches each. Tito would have pulled either of those other teams starters at 100. He isn't managing.

    The team has been criticized this year even in the best of times for playing unsound ball in the field and on the base paths.

    This r-l-r-l fetish has caused him to place some of the most unseemly players in the top of the order, names we never heard of before and names we will have all forgotten within 2 years.

    He never put Crawford in the 9 spot, which would have made total sense. Its where he stuck Ellesbury many times over the past 2 years when Jacoby struggled.

    Tito is not doing his job.

    I hate to climb all over him and I know the forum is full of posters who want him fired on a daily basis, I hate to look like I am one of those. 

    He is not doing his job.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]so for the first time in 3 months Tito sends Beckett out into the 8th and with an ankle issue? Me thinks you buy into the tummy aches, and sore knee propaganda too much.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Me thinks you don't pay attention to detail.
    Beckett didn't have the ankle issue until he slipped taking off his uniform.
    Look at his form since he returned.
     

Share