A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

  1. 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, isn't it time for a new Thread titled "A Realistic Look at 2012: Part I"?
    Posted by sindarin-erebor[/QUOTE]

    Maybe this weekend.  My thoughts are scattered right now.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I think you may be taking some of his statements from Wake out of context while also leaving many of his unselfish statements and actions over his career hear out. Wake is a fierce competitor. He has said some questionable things that undermine the authority of the manager and GM, but his statements pale compare to many other player's statements and actions that are not disected as readily as Wake's.
    Moon to qualify what I said, I am not over looking Wake's good points or trying not to. he has been fiercle about his PT and never has taken kindly to anybody messing with it. His volunteering to go in a get hammered in Game 3 ALCS a give up his game 4 start was admirable. But it appears that Wake does get pizzed about his PT. His reaction in 2010 in particular struck me as not very self aware given who the other 4 starters were, their age and salaries and his 2010 stats to date at the time. But hey, I am speculating and throwing darts blindly at a board. And I would not suggest he in himself would have been a central issues but rather part of a snow ball rolling down a hill.

    True, but it might have been a 2 game differential.
    It cost them two games easily! Then again I am not sure it was so avoidable. Losing is contagious and its side effect is to kill chemistry, no matter who the leaders are. I am actually quite impressed that Francona kept in a bottle and out of the media as well as he did. part of his gift and if he is gone, that gift will at some point be missed very much. 

    The Millar type leader doesn't work for every team. VTek is about as opposite from Millar as you can be. Maybe we did need a Millar, but I find it hard to fault VTek as a leader. We win when he catches. he's always 200% prepared. he even got some clutch hits.
    You will never find me questioning Jason varitek's ability to lead pitcher/catchers meetings or contribute to a leadership group. But IMO his personality has limitations in terms of being THE team leader and that aspect has been over blown every since the RS decided to pay him while letting other marquee stars walk back 2004. Again just a personal take.

    As for a Millar type of leader, IMO that was the difference in 2004, not Tek. And if ever a club needed one of those guys it was this September when 6 of the starting nine looked like they could crack a whole walnut in their butt cheeks.

    He has some valid points about the facilities in this modern era, but spouting off about them was not helpful at all. It does lead to the "Debbie Downer" syndrome.
    Agreed. And I am guessing the facilities BTW, I haven't read it. But if the schedule bothers you, I think the facilities probably would too coming from Petco. Lots of guys have intially had the issue and the RS have done their best giving the limited space to make it as good as they can. Part of a snow ball rolling down hill for sure but not a panic item IMO. 

    It amazed me how bad CC looked. The guy has one of the hardest working off-seasons of any MLB player, yet he looked out of breath and our of sorts all year long. He and lackey can't get any worse next year.
    I question just where Crawford invests his work, but I don't question his athletic gifts or conditioning. The appearance of breathlessness is probably just how his intensity translates in his facial expressions. But I can't get over his over all play. It appeared lazy at moments and fearful at others. And his baseball instincts are just poor too. having a endlessly bad year at the plate is one thing but the rest of his game was equally poor. Drew in 2007 was mired in a year long slump but his head was always in the game and his defense was never impacted. I'll get over it but after 162 games, I just don't like or admire CC, at all.

    As always just my takes 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I think you may be taking some of his statements from Wake out of context while also leaving many of his unselfish statements and actions over his career hear out. Wake is a fierce competitor. He has said some questionable things that undermine the authority of the manager and GM, but his statements pale compare to many other player's statements and actions that are not disected as readily as Wake's.

    I do think he was out of hand in 2010, but I happened to agree with him. Dice-K was not ready in May of last year. His May 7.89 ERA proved it, but Wake should not have aired his opinion. He was jerked from starter to pen 10 times in 2010. I can understand his frustration.

    Moon to qualify what I said, I am not over looking Wake's good points or trying not to. he has been fiercle about his PT and never has taken kindly to anybody messing with it. His volunteering to go in a get hammered in Game 3 ALCS a give up his game 4 start was admirable. But it appears that Wake does get pizzed about his PT. His reaction in 2010 in particular struck me as not very self aware given who the other 4 starters were, their age and salaries and his 2010 stats to date at the time. But hey, I am speculating and throwing darts blindly at a board. And I would not suggest he in himself would have been a central issues but rather part of a snow ball rolling down a hill. 

    True, but it might have been a 2 game differential.
    It cost them two games easily! Then again I am not sure it was so avoidable. Losing is contagious and its side effect is to kill chemistry, no matter who the leaders are. I am actually quite impressed that Francona kept in a bottle and out of the media as well as he did. part of his gift and if he is gone, that gift will at some point be missed very much.

    I didn't need the media to keep it quiet to know that Lackey's on the field antics were hurting the spirit of the team. Hardly anyone agreed with me.  

    The Millar type leader doesn't work for every team. VTek is about as opposite from Millar as you can be. Maybe we did need a Millar, but I find it hard to fault VTek as a leader. We win when he catches. he's always 200% prepared. he even got some clutch hits. 
    You will never find me questioning Jason varitek's ability to lead pitcher/catchers meetings or contribute to a leadership group. But IMO his personality has limitations in terms of being THE team leader and that aspect has been over blown every since the RS decided to pay him while letting other marquee stars walk back 2004. Again just a personal take. 

    As for a Millar type of leader, IMO that was the difference in 2004, not Tek. And if ever a club needed one of those guys it was this September when 6 of the starting nine looked like they could crack a whole walnut in their butt cheeks.

    I'd like to see the "C" on Pedey's uniform.

    He has some valid points about the facilities in this modern era, but spouting off about them was not helpful at all. It does lead to the "Debbie Downer" syndrome.
    Agreed. And I am guessing the facilities BTW, I haven't read it. But if the schedule bothers you, I think the facilities probably would too coming from Petco. Lots of guys have intially had the issue and the RS have done their best giving the limited space to make it as good as they can. Part of a snow ball rolling down hill for sure but not a panic item IMO.  

    True.

    It amazed me how bad CC looked. The guy has one of the hardest working off-seasons of any MLB player, yet he looked out of breath and our of sorts all year long. He and lackey can't get any worse next year.
    I question just where Crawford invests his work, but I don't question his athletic gifts or conditioning. The appearance of breathlessness is probably just how his intensity translates in his facial expressions. But I can't get over his over all play. It appeared lazy at moments and fearful at others. And his baseball instincts are just poor too. having a endlessly bad year at the plate is one thing but the rest of his game was equally poor. Drew in 2007 was mired in a year long slump but his head was always in the game and his defense was never impacted. I'll get over it but after 162 games, I just don't like or admire CC, at all. 

    CC never looked like this when playing against us.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I do think he was out of hand in 2010, but I happened to agree with him. Dice-K was not ready in May of last year. His May 7.89 ERA proved it, but Wake should not have aired his opinion. He was jerked from starter to pen 10 times in 2010. I can understand his frustration.

    We will never quite see eye to eye on 2010 but I promise not start two years of threads about it. :)

    I'd like to see the "C" on Pedey's uniform.

    Can't argue. Though I hope they never put that stupid C on anybody's chest again and let the players choose their captain, not make it part of a resigning announcement, but Pedey would be a great pick and I bet he would be the player's choice.

    I didn't need the media to keep it quiet to know that Lackey's on the field antics were hurting the spirit of the team. Hardly anyone agreed with me. 
    Forgetting lackey, the problems were from what is being intimated far deeper. It is quite remarkable that it was contained in the clubhouse. I was one that did not agree BTW and clearly I was likely wrong though as late as yesterday Theo was maintaining it cleaned it self up quickly every time and his teammates like him. In a vaccum it probably never would have been a big deal and if Lackey pitched like Beckett certainly would not have. Winning is a great deodorant after all. 
     
  5. 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]But the real b-o-n-e-r was letting Lavernway hit when they had the bases juiced and one out. Tito had illusions of grandeur with Lavernway the game before. Fact is, he hit two meatballs off southpaws on Tuesday. He wasn't doing anything vs. the RH pitchers in the finale and he had Lowrie/Redick lefty bats wasting on the wood. Maybe Tito was going by the fact O's reliever Johnson has actually been better vs. lefties. But I knew he'd eat the rookie up. -Harness I thought at the time it was more an indication of how much Reddick has had his stock fall. But it was an "oh no" moment and punctuated for me by his annoitment to the RS HOF next to Carllton Fisk the night before on BDC as I watched. This last week or so there have been lots of moments I imagined the worst and watched my imagination come to life and Lavarnway with RISP last night was that way more than once. It only stood to reason the way the seaso had turned. But consider this. It's Tito. He loves splits, works splits and percentages with all but his elite players (be that by reputation and investment like Crawford or by earned "respect" like Ortiz). He'll pull a lot hitters to go guys like a McDonald at key points because the match up works. The fact we did not have very many Reddick sightings as the season came to a close, tells you there are concerns amongst the management. And they may not just on the field performance but "coachability" Pure speculation on "coachability", I don't know. But Lavarnway being that spot I am sure made Francona unhappy, and unhappier still that this is what he had left to go with. And there is the other possibility which is Salty and/or Tek would be compromised out in the field and Exposito being thrown cold into a game of that magnitiude scared him more than Lavarnway batting. But my money is on versus a pitcher who eats up LH, Reddick had no appeal.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Meant to address this sooner. I actually was opting for Lowrie over Lavernway in that situation. I know Lowrie doesn't have great numbers hitting from the left side, but I liked his LH at bats over the last few weeks.

    I didn't think Reddick was an option for reasons you stated. Despite is talent level, I've alluded to his cockiness and maturity issues in the past as a possible hindrance to his development. I think his late season inactivity sends a strong message to him in this regard.

    Just a distant take.
     
  6. 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]Scut always finds new ways to screw up. His instincts are as poor as Jake's baserunning instincts.  He did, however, have great insticts on that double play shuffle.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    That a was a great play. And he's tried it before, unsuccessfully, all year long.
    Which is why it was less instinctual and more a matter of finally getting it right.

    I think EX-P brings up a good point about defensive positioning, which I believe is DeMarco Hale's job, as well as Tito's...

    Whoever replaces Tito better be a real stickler when it comes to baseball
    fundamentals.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch'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 : That a was a great play. And he's tried it before, unsuccessfully, all year long. Which is why it was less instinctual and more a matter of finally getting it right. I think EX-P brings up a good point about defensive positioning, which I believe is DeMarco Hale's job, as well as Tito's... Whoever replaces Tito better be a real stickler when it comes to baseball funda mentals .
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]
    I have now seen replays of the Last Play that show where Crawford started from. IMO, he should have been shallower. A rocket high over his head wouldn't have been catchable. A high fly ball he probably could have got back under. The potential killers were the dinker, the sinking liner, and the ground ball that goes through the left side. ( Has happened many times this year. ) A left fielder with a limited arm must play shallow in that situation at least to give himself a chance to throw out the runner on a ground ball single. All of this also applied to Ellsbury. I don't know where he was stationed.
    Defensive set-ups should be predicated on the most pressing danger in a given set of circumstances. Set-ups often require trade-offs, as does much in baseball. You try to guard against what will hurt you the most.
    It would not surprise me to learn that Varitek keeps this in mind when he calls pitches. Surveying the whole field with a particular batter at the plate, he kind of knows where he would like see the defense. Pedey relays the pitch call to the outfielders, and they set-up. Only step of two can make the difference. I'm not saying that Varitek or any other catcher directs the defense, but good catchers have their heads in it.
    The importance of defensive set-ups is not always recognized. ( Ripken, with limited range, made a career at SS by knowing where to set up. ) It was drilled into players and taught over and over in simulated situations by my coach. If a player did not make the right move on his own, direction came from the bench. Quickly.
    I'm assuming that nothing came from the bench on that ( gag ) Last Play.  

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Whoever replaces Tito better be a real stickler when it comes to baseball 
    fundamentals.

    It seems like as long as i have been a Sox fan (1971), the Sox have never been great on fundementals. Good a few times, but never great.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9'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 : I have now seen replays of the Last Play that show where Crawford started from. IMO, he should have been shallower. A rocket high over his head wouldn't have been catchable. A high fly ball he probably could have got back under. The potential killers were the dinker, the sinking liner, and the ground ball that goes through the left side. ( Has happened many times this year. ) A left fielder with a limited arm must play shallow in that situation at least to give himself a chance to throw out the runner on a ground ball single. All of this also applied to Ellsbury. I don't know where he was stationed. Defensive set-ups should be predicated on the most pressing danger in a given set of circumstances. Set-ups often require trade-offs, as does much in baseball. You try to guard against what will hurt you the most. It would not surprise me to learn that Varitek keeps this in mind when he calls pitches. Surveying the whole field with a particular batter at the plate, he kind of knows where he would like see the defense. Pedey relays the pitch call to the outfielders, and they set-up. Only step of two can make the difference. I'm not saying that Varitek or any other catcher directs  the defense, but good catchers have their heads in it. The importance of defensive set-ups is not always recognized. ( Ripken, with limited range, made a career at SS by knowing where to set up. ) It was drilled into players and taught over and over in simulated situations by my coach. If a player did not make the right move on his own, direction came from the bench. Quickly. I'm assuming that nothing came from the bench on that ( gag ) Last Play.  
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    But isn't that the manager's job also? To make sure the defense is set-up for optimal success? Listen, I love Tito and I already miss him. But maybe this isn't so bad?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Old tanget but why does MLB continue to operate with its head up its azz? A start time in the cold east of 8:30pm? The Super Bowl for crying out loud starts at 6 and most of the play-off games start in the day.

    What are the most common complaints about tv baseball from true fans? The game is too long and nobody wants to stay awake until 1AM .... true?

    Also it has been said for many years that they cannot get new youn fans because the alientate the enitere children bas because these kids can never watch a play-off game.

    Old tangent I know, but MLB really sucks in a lot of ways.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Managers are always second-guessed. The next one will be as well.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Players missing games with hang nails

    Wake is a fierce competitor

    Name the player who missed games with a hang nail.................

    Wake isn't a fierce competitor. Wake is a long tenured union member who is a loser. His ceremonial tour cost the team at least 2 or 3 games. I expect ceremonial tour 2 might happen, but most Red Sox fans are likely to create more static if they try and cart the bum Wakefield out another season.

    Ortiz is the only old face that warrants another year under contract. He has declined and is about aged out, but he was productive enough this year that he has earned another year at a position that the Red Sox are not going to have a realistic better option.

    Epstein, Wakefield and Varitek need to be shown the door. There is not a starting pitcher top tier value out there on the FA or trade market, so Papelbon needs to be resigned. They should take a look at making Bard a starter, and sign a couple of decent last 2 to 3 year metric veterans to one year deals.

    The most important move the organization can make is to fire Epstein. A new GM needs to bring in an entirely different staff and approach to pitching and young player development. Epstein is a zero confidence face. It is only because he hasn't been fired that most are ignoring just how incompetent he is. Should ownership wise up and pull the plug on his smarmy Tito fall guy comments, a level of confidence will be restored in the organization.

    Epstein has been the architect with the largest budget over the last 3 years, other than the Yankees. His budget decisions have produced WC and first round sweep in 3 years. If Epstein is not fired, my full confidence in Henry, Warner and Luchino will go to zero.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie'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 : But isn't that the manager's job also? To make sure the defense is set-up for optimal success? Listen, I love Tito and I already miss him. But maybe this isn't so bad?
    Posted by emp9[/QUOTE]Terry Francona had a great run with the Red Sox, and I'll miss him. But there might be something to the idea that he was tired of the job. Managing the Red Sox is a pressure cooker, and while I've never seen anyone handle it better than Mr. Francona, 8 years is a long time to be in that particular hot seat.
     
  14. 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]harness, I don'ty think Scutarohas great instincts, but I think he is aboutr average, That ball was hard to read in slow motion on a TV screen. Marco was running hard. It was a matter of inches. I can't agree with this  Moon . Not when there are proven dogs in the top slots, and Lester/Beckett have strong track records.  I love Beckett and Lester on our staff. They can both be true aces, however, Beckett has not had a 10 seasons of 23+ start/season sample size. He's never has more than 213 IP, and has been over 201 IP just twice. He has been under 179 six times. He has been out hurt or pitching hurtfor a pretty big percent of his career. He has been better in Boston, missing only about 25 starts over 6 years, but his 21 starts last year were not the "real" Beckett. The question always is, which Beckett are we going to get this year, this month, this game.  He was on pace for becomming one of the best "money pitchers" in baseball history, so I still think he has the winner's mentality even today, but he has had rough times when it counts in his last 4 playoff starts and the end of this year. His reliance on VTek is scary. While you know I agree with you on what a value VTek is with pitchers, there's a big concern on why Beckett totally loses it with anyone else. The disparity is frightening. Lester has put up fantastic numbers for 4 straight years. He's been within a pretty tight range of 3.21 to 3.47 ERA and 192 to 208 IP. His WHIP has also been between 1.202 and 1.274- very good. He's been even better in the playoffs (2.57/1.119) in 6 starts. He's ace material for sure. My point is that we need another top pitcher, not becaus these two are bad, but because our competition has had better from the #1 to #8 slots. Getting an arm better than those will be very, very difficult and costly. And while we are mentally paralyzed by the poor pitching for reasons already discussed, it doesn't mean spending a ton more will ease our minds. Pitchers' health is risky business. I know it will be costly and risky, but I am convinced we need to try hard to find  solid innings eater ace or #2 type pitcher. I think the best we can realistically hope for is that Theo addresses  depth  issues  and gets a really good sounding board willing to put in the time and effort. I'd like to see Guthrie in a Boston uniform. Rebuilding this present pitching staff is not likely. Hard not to like Lester/Beckett/Buich going into any season. I'd be happy with 2 Guthrie types. harness, if you had to bet on it,what are the chances that all of our top 3 starters have very good to great seasons in 2012? Beckett is about a 60-40 gamble, Lester is about a 90-10 good bet, and Buch with a back injury (which rarely ever get 100% better) is maybe a 70-30 bet. Add these all together and we're probably not going to win a trifecta. (I hope you appreciate the analogy.) I have zero confidence in Lackey, Dice or young starters to fill the 4/5 slots. ZERO! Maybe I'm over-reacting to the Ray's staff, but their model has been more successful than ours the last 4 years. They were much better than we were where it counts: pitching. Pitching down the stretch is almost always the biggest key to making the playoffs. They bring back all their starting 5 ... AND... have Alex Cobb and Matt Moore knocking on the door. Both those kids could be better than most of the top 5. The Rays should get vastly better next year, even of they deal away Upton. The pieces they will lose this winter pale compared to last year, and they never spent Manny's money. I think at worst, we need to sign Buehrleand get a guy like Guthrie. I know Theo won't like having Lackey at the 6 slot, but if he's number #5 we are in trouble. The Yankees got very lucky improving their staff "from the bottom" with garcia and Colon, but that is very hard to repeat. For every Garcia/Colon, there are 50 Penny/Smoltzs. If it takes losing Papi, Scutaro, and maybe even having to trade Youk in order to get a solid ace and #5 guy or two solid #2-3 guys, I'm thinking thats what I prefer. Pitching wins games. I have always believed that. I thought we had enough this year. It's the first year I can remember where I didn't say starting pitching was a high priority. I was wrong. I did want Cliff Lee over CC, but I'm not going to say we ever could have had him, so the argument is moot. I'm not sure about Wilson. He could easily be the next Lackey. Wilson is 31, but he doesn't have a ton of IP under his belt, since he's only been a starter for 2 years. Trading for an ace would be very costly indeed. Maybe we could pry Johnny Cueto from Cincy by giving them Youk and some kids. (I'm not saying I like this deal, but to keep the money even, maybe a Youk, Douby & Bard for Cueto & Cordero deal coul get it done.) Anyway you look at it, Theo is going to have to get creative if Henry's purse string's are not opened. Even if they are, it won't be easy.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    On Scutaro: Moon, that play was a no-brainer. It was a gapper from the time it left the bat. Certain players can read a play instantly. Like Pedey or Youk. You can look at Scutaro's decision-making since he came to Boston in a two-hour video...and find a series of question marks.

    Certain players see a play unfold in front of them and where it's going...instantaneously. Guys with limited vision, like Scut, see only the moment.
    This can best be described in hockey. Watch Gretzky or Orr and you'll see what I mean.

    In regards to pitching health, I can't set odds on that because ya just never know. I understand your concerns. Which is why I advocate getting a guy like Guthrie,who has a good health record. Problem is, there's a fine line between a moundsman having enough experience to produce at a relatively high level...and logging too many IP.

    I would never use the Rays model to draw a comparison. They got to monopolize the league's best picks. They get to play in a pitcher's venue with little pressure of expectation. A far cry from playing in Boston.

    In addition, I think you over-estimate the Rays FO. They inherited rich farmland and have little choice but to sell high on those they can't afford. I'm willing to bet you Theo's moves would also be viewed as "uncanny" if he had to market Lester or Pedey or Bard or Paps or Jake  - and got the low-cost goods in return.

    I also think perception of Wake/Miller as inadequate depth beyond the front 5 is short-sighted (read this from others). They filled in and were very serviceable for a time. They are not paid to replace Buch/Dice/Lackey. Long-term injuries, coupled with short-term ones, coupled with an inefficient sounding board will result in free-fall. Maybe we should consider how long the team was able to withstand losing so many arms for so long.

    Realistically, a GM can't stockpile starters. The good ones need to pitch. The journeymen have limited value. Ya can't just put #6's and #7's on the shelf.
    I have no problem with seeing Lackey, who is likely to continue to have physical issues if I read this year right, in the #5 slot, with a guy like Tazawa and a low-cost journeyman and Douby or Bowden returning to staters in AAA next year for insurance.

    I think we'll see one main acquisition to replace Dice, but that's about it.
    And I have no problem bringing back Wake for starter ins. He was healthy and gave the team several QS's, which is all one can ask from a "#6".
    You spent much of the season effectively comparing Wake to other spot starters or other #5's. No reason to stop that analogy. Show me any team that can withstand losing the amount of starts this team lost.

    I doubt we'll see a repeat of that. But making moves to insure against it may turn out to be very costly, and I'm not limiting this to $$$. Buehrle would make the commish happy with expedited games, but his stuff is pretty straight and his H/IP don't translate well to Fenway. Guthrie is a better bet, regarding both venue and health gamble. But it's all a gamble.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    "Wake isn't a fierce competitor. Wake is a long tenured union member who is a loser. His ceremonial tour cost the team at least 2 or 3 games. I expect ceremonial tour 2 might happen, but most Red Sox fans are likely to create more static if they try and cart the bum Wakefield out another season."

    That's right. Keep complaining abou the #7 SP. Sorry, the rest of us are more concerned about #1 through #6.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Falling upon deaf ears but you guys still begging for Wake to come back are really missing the boat. There is no reason for him to come back at all.

    His quest for 200 exemplified all that was wrong with the team... and if you are not even willing to get rid of the 45 year old pitcher how do you expect the team to improve?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Falling upon deaf ears but you guys still begging for Wake to come back are really missing the boat. There is no reason for him to come back at all. His quest for 200 exemplified all that was wrong with the team... and if you are not even willing to get rid of the 45 year old pitcher how do you expect the team to improve?
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]I agree with you there. Aceves is a better insurance policy than Wake at this point. Plus Aceves can pitch out of the bullpen, which Wake cannot at this point in his career. I also think it's time for the captain to hang up his spikes.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Name the player who missed games with a hang nail.................

    About the only Sox player you have never bashed: 

    JD Drew.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Managers are always second-guessed. The next one will be as well.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Speaking of the next one. Any guesses? I heard LaRussa's name thrown out there.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Falling upon deaf ears but you guys still begging for Wake to come back are really missing the boat. There is no reason for him to come back at all. His quest for 200 exemplified all that was wrong with the team... and if you are not even willing to get rid of the 45 year old pitcher how do you expect the team to improve?
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    I don't know? I don't spend too much time going on about 3rd-string quarterbacks either. But every football team's got 'em. 
     
  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]Falling upon deaf ears but you guys still begging for Wake to come back are really missing the boat. There is no reason for him to come back at all. His quest for 200 exemplified all that was wrong with the team... and if you are not even willing to get rid of the 45 year old pitcher how do you expect the team to improve?
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Falling upon deaf eras are echoes of #200, when the truth was simply that the team needed him as a starter. The record was and always will be secondary. Goes to show how fans will swallow the press; hook, line and sinker.
     
  22. 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 : I agree with you there. Aceves is a better insurance policy than Wake at this point. Plus Aceves can pitch out of the bullpen, which Wake cannot at this point in his career. I also think it's time for the captain to hang up his spikes.
    Posted by carnie[/QUOTE]

    Team played .667 with Tek starting.
    Team played .503 with Salty starting.
    Direct reflection of how much better pitching staff did with Tek.

    Whose spikes will replace that?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie'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 : Team played .667 with Tek starting. Team played .503 with Salty starting. Direct reflection of how much better pitching staff did with Tek. Whose spikes will replace that?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]I just think it's time to break in someone new. IMO it's time to let go of the past and start looking to the future. I think that future is probably Lavarnaway, he has nothing left to prove in the minors anyway. Please don't take this as a slight, because I think Tek has been the best catcher the Sox have had since Fisk, but I also think it's over for him. I personally would like to see what Lavarnaway could do with the big club.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I would never use the Rays model to draw a comparison. They got to monopolize the league's best picks. They get to play in a pitcher's venue with little pressure of expectation. A far cry from playing in Boston.

    There's about 10-20 teams in the same boat as TB: none have done as well as them, many with higher budgets.

    In addition, I think you over-estimate the Rays FO. They inherited rich farmland and have little choice but to sell high on those they can't afford. I'm willing to bet you Theo's moves would also be viewed as "uncanny" if he had to market Lester or Pedey or Bard or Paps or Jake  - and got the low-cost goods in return.

    You missed my point completely. If Pedey, Lester, and Youk were dealt instead of ectended, they would have gone on to have good years. The Tb players have not. It could be a fluke, but it seems to be "uncanny" how nearly everyone who leaves TB seems to decline sharply almost immediately.

    Yes, TB's current management inherited some good young players, but they have a large percent of their players on this year's roster that were drafted, traded for, or signed as FAs by the current GM. Besides, Theo inherited a stacked team as well, and was given the money to sign some key players. Theo also was given HanRam and Sanchez who were dealt for Beckett and Lowell. He used DanD's kids to trade for Schill, etc...

    The Rays are clearly "the model" for small market teams. They are even becomming a model for all teams. They have made some great draft choices. They have a stacked farm system thanks to current management. They locked up Longoria for sick low money. They have Shields locked up until 2014 at decent money. They continually create a new capable bullpen from scratch and for peanuts. 

    Maybe Theo should have traded some of our "stars" for some great kids "just in time".

    I also think perception of Wake/Miller as inadequate depth beyond the front 5 is short-sighted (read this from others). They filled in and were very serviceable for a time. They are not paid to replace Buch/Dice/Lackey. Long-term injuries, coupled with short-term ones, coupled with an inefficient sounding board will result in free-fall. Maybe we should consider how long the team was able to withstand losing so many arms for so long.

    This was the first season in my memory that I did not say "build our staff from the top". I did want Cliff Lee instead of CC, but it wasn't going to happen no matter what we offered. I thought we had good depth.

    Realistically, a GM can't stockpile starters. The good ones need to pitch. The journeymen have limited value. Ya can't just put #6's and #7's on the shelf.
    I have no problem with seeing Lackey, who is likely to continue to have physical issues if I read this year right, in the #5 slot, with a guy like Tazawa and a low-cost journeyman and Douby or Bowden returning to staters in AAA next year for insurance.

    If we have just Tazawa, Douby, Weiland and Bowden as out 6-9 starters, we are in big trouble.

    I think we'll see one main acquisition to replace Dice, but that's about it.
    And I have no problem bringing back Wake for starter ins. He was healthy and gave the team several QS's, which is all one can ask from a "#6".
    You spent much of the season effectively comparing Wake to other spot starters or other #5's. No reason to stop that analogy. Show me any team that can withstand losing the amount of starts this team lost. 

    I'm all for having Wake back at $1-1.5M as out 6-8 starter, but I want another starter who is not a typical #4/5 type. I think the chances are greater than not, that one of Beckett, lester or Buch will get hurt or have an off season next year. If that happens, we will need more than lackey, Taz, and the kids to pick up the pieces. I keep saying "if we stay healthy" we can win. I still believe half of that: we could have won if 100% healthy, but I realize now, the chances are slim we ever will be even 90% healthy.

    I doubt we'll see a repeat of that. But making moves to insure against it may turn out to be very costly, and I'm not limiting this to $$$. Buehrle would make the commish happy with expedited games, but his stuff is pretty straight and his H/IP don't translate well to Fenway. Guthrie is a better bet, regarding both venue and health gamble. But it's all a gamble.

    Guthrie will cost players and open new holes, but I do like him better. You could be right about Buehrle: he might be the next Lackey.
    in about the same amount of innings in Fenway, Buehrle has a 4.95 ERA and Guthrie a 5.88 ERA. (5.06 at NYY)

     
  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]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : Moon just to clarify, I was saying Wake was a "Debbie Downer" not Tek. Wake is percieved as this "whatever the team needs" guy but the sound bites with the media over the year often contradict that. He was in such a funk about his removal from the rotation in 2010 he would not talk to Francona for 5 days. He whined in 2005 when Tito skipped over him for one start in the launching pad better known as Coors Field. There are others. That's all I was saying. The Tek comment is he is an old school guy. He isn't exactly a Millar kind of leader. Did younger players or newer players to the RS tune him out? A-Gon? No doubt the "unique" nature of Boston, probably from sub-standard clubhouse facilities that the ancient Fenway dictates, schedule issues being the Rs and other stuff wore on him. Papi I think may have been more than just a show boat that did not run out grounders. Fill in the blanks but papi has become an increasingly myopic star who stops just short of talking about himself in the third person at moments and was pizzed off the RS did not extend him last year or during the season. My gut tells me Crawford probably became a great source of polarization amongst others but that's my gut. Did guys start to second guess Buch and or others over injuries? After the garbage with Ellsbury hard to dismiss. Hey we are all spit balling here because that is what we are left in the face of the little bit the RS as to the specifics. I am not buying everything in the media either because they IMHO are doing the same. Personally chemistry wasn't the undoing of the team, maybe it made the collapse so absolute that this team missed the playoffs. But the lack of starting pitching in September made a room with the type of problems lots of teams have within their inner workings explode. It may have cost them 5 games in September so it cost them the playoffs. But this team, with that starting pitching was going nowhere near a WS appearance. Winning makes for chemistry, losing kills it. Let's hope the RS don't use the chemistry to ignore the fact that this team's pitching depth stinks. Or that Carl Crawford can not play as badly as he did. I don't think we have really totally reconciled yet just how awful his year was. It wasn't just a bad year hitting. His defense blew chunks, he was reluctant to use his speed the 29% of the time he was lucky enough to get OB and his baseball instincts were at best poor. He is in the place holder of a star by contract and if he was a guy with options, he surely would have been sent down to AAA. That has to change. He makes Rentaria, Lugo and Drew look like brilliant RS signings today.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Katz, I know how much disdain you express about the press, but this post is the very hyperbole  you would hammer if you saw it in print..without UR fingerprints all over it.

    It's "highlighted" by UR Millar comment. I would never put Millar and leader in the same sentence - much less the same page. Players often say he's a clown. An obnoxious clown. He picked up on Timlin's COWBOY UP and rode it into the ears of the writers.

    He is and always was a personality. That's why he has the job he has.
     

Share