A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I'm curious.  What were Yaz's or Teddy Ballgame's stats against LHP?
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]
    The career splits:

    Ted Williams
    vs. RHP .347/.489/.676/1.165
    vs. LHP .298/.427/.474/.901

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=willite01&year=Career&t=b

    Carl Yastrzemski
    vs. RHP .299/.398/.492/.891
    vs. LHP .244/.321/.371/.692

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=yastrca01&year=Career&t=b
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Correction Hill. You are looking at LH starting pitchers.
    Re-check Yaz's #'s vs. all LH pitching.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Correction Hill . You are looking at LH starting pitchers. Re-check Yaz's #'s vs. all LH pitching.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]
    Harness, thanks for pointing out the errors ... I've made the corrections.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Theo carried 5 outfielders for a reason, Moon . He knew the line-up was susceptible to lefties, so he had CAM/MAC as RH depth. I doubt Theo was blind to CC's splits. The problem was CAM. Now it's finding his replacement. To draw an analogy, Yaz was a .244 career hitter vs. lefties. .692 OPS. Was he platooned? His managers wisely saw his overall value. CC can look pathetic against a mediocre LH pitcher for 2-3 AB's. Then maybe he gets a scratch hit or reaches on a FC. Close game. Steals 2nd. Scores on a bloop hit and ties the game. Not everything translates on paper.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Actually, Yaz is the perfect example of why you can't go with career numbers sometimes in evaluations. If you look at him year-by-year, he was up and down. He also played in the pitching era of the 1960 and he had two down years (.636 and .662) in years that should have been among his prime (1971 and 1972) when he had the wrist injury. His career numbers also were down because of his longevity.

    His OPS vs. LHP in 1979 when he turned 40 was .551 followed by .593, .292, .722 (hence the up and down) and .591.

    And if you look how he went up and down why it's dangerous to manage by one stat. 

    And it's worth nothign that Crawford had a .837 OPS against LHP in 2007. In 2006, he hit .288 and had a .776 OPS In 2004, he batted .295 and had a .764 OPS.

    So looking at career numbers don't make things cut and dry.
     
  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]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : Actually, Yaz is the perfect example of why you can't go with career numbers sometimes in evaluations. If you look at him year-by-year, he was up and down. He also played in the pitching era of the 1960 and he had two down years (.636 and .662) in years that should have been among his prime (1971 and 1972) when he had the wrist injury. His career numbers also were down because of his longevity. His OPS vs. LHP in 1979 when he turned 40 was .551 followed by .593, .292, .722 (hence the up and down) and .591. And if you look how he went up and down why it's dangerous to manage by one stat.  And it's worth nothign that Crawford had a .837 OPS against LHP in 2007. In 2006, he hit .288 and had a .776 OPS In 2004, he batted .295 and had a .764 OPS. So looking at career numbers don't make things cut and dry.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    Try getting this point across to Softy!
    I agree with you, and it's especially true in CC's case because his early years would have been spent in the minors for other franchises.

    Yaz did say his one regret was not switch-hitting. And CC does look pretty bad vs. many southpaws, but the point is, there's more to their over-all game than hitting. And a platoon for a player of the quality of CC or Yaz in his hey day must involve all aspects of the trade-off.

    BTW: Your post reminds me of our famous Fisk debate:)
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]If Salty keeps hitting over .250 with Pop, he's the find of the year! No doubt that Miller could well be a huge find also. Too bad he is only under contract for the next year and a half. He could become an extremely valuable commodity. Is it time already to try to extend him? I know that will not happen but it's tempting! Some great news from the farm still but I'm not convinced this was a good draft year yet. Got to go but I check in from time to time still.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]


    i would extend him now (certainly be end of season), cheap!, possibly with incentives. i think the guy is a legit #2. he just has to mature and continue to learn to pitch. if he continues (without a contract ext) he and everyone else is gonna know it (that he's legit #2), then he will be costly.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Extend him after 3 starts against N.L. competition?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]The one team we do not match up well against is the Phillies. We should have spent the Carl Crawford money for Cliff Lee. The combinbation of Haliday, Lee and Hamels is one no team will want to face.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    hey boomer we think alike, i wanted lee when he was available twice, otherwise when halladay cam available. our mgt is somewhat smart, but not VERY smart.
    they try to take the middle road, ie lackey vs a top pticher (sabathia, lee, halladay) . or after they make that mistake, they make anotherr saying we cant spend now after spending for beckett and lackey. sure they could have and it's possible they will pay twice. once for signing lackey. once for not signing lee bacause "we cant do that now, we have lackey".

    the phillies had no problem signing all those pichters even though it made them #2 spenders in mlb at 175 mil.

    and who wants to face lee, halladay, hamels. no one. hope they dont make it out of the nl.

    if they beat us it will be mnagement's stupidity for not going for lee (twice) or halladay (or sabathia).

    lee is up there in age, so youd think he wont be there forever. but damn! they are good.

    henry pretends we are not as rich as the yankees. he is. he just doesnt want to  put himself in that category
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Extend him after 3 starts against N.L. competition?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    i dont care who he faces. i'm sure you have watcehd him pitch. they can watch him  the rest of the year, IN THE STARTING ROTATION. but i would not wait past the end of the year. he would not be looking for big $. the earlier we sign him, ie now would be the smartest, the cheaper he will be. so, yeah i would. you wont be risking much wiht what you would be paying, nor with how hes pitched since solving the control issues. he has always had dominating mlb stuff.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]On a positive note, Lavarnway is sure looking like a mlb level hitter to me. Check out the below links! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsVuZJuCaMY An interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxjOC6xQJUc&feature=related More and more positive comments about his fielding also. this guy looks like he is going to make it. The ability to take the ball to opposite field and hit off speed stuff is a very positive sign. If he catches he has a chance to be our best hitting catcher since Fisk.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]


    fisk, that bringsup one of my alltime favs.
    if he comes up  next year, what would you do with salty?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]We are winning now, because I'm not going to the games.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]


    i know that one :)
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]My sense is that Boston doesn't want to go over the luxury tax limit. They have to move some salary in order to pick up anyone significant unless they include some minor league talent in the deal. I think we end up giving Reddick a solid shot in RF. We use the farm for pen needs and starter replacements. They may do a small deal but it will take significant minor league talent to land anyone significant. Who knows what will happen but that is my sense.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]


    hey boom, like your posts. i was on that lavarway too.
    what is the deal anyway with henry not wanting to pay the luxury tax.
    i mean who cares. you got the money, youre no tgoing to miss it. a few mil and a world championship whats that worth (in his terms, in advertising alone).
    doesnt seem to make sense to me.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19'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 : Try getting this point across to Softy! I agree with you, and it's especially true in CC's case because his early years would have been spent in the minors for other franchises. Yaz did say his one regret was not switch-hitting. And CC does look pretty bad vs. many southpaws, but the point is, there's more to their over-all game than hitting . And a platoon for a player of the quality of CC or Yaz in his hey day must involve all aspects of the trade-off. BTW: Your post reminds me of our famous Fisk debate:)
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    That was fun, although we're in agreement here.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Gammons just ruined the next hour of my life - he says there is No Way we get Beltran or Cudduyer. He then re-emphasized "no way".
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ---The-Babe---. Show ---The-Babe---'s posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Gammons just ruined the next hour of my life - he says there is No Way we get Beltran or Cudduyer. He then re-emphasized "no way".
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    That old geezer needs to just retire already.......

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]henry pretends we are not as rich as the yankees. he is. he just doesnt want to  put himself in that category
    Posted by brdbreu[/QUOTE]

    The Yankees' market value is more than 85% larger than the Red Sox and their annual revenues are more than 55% larger.  So they are a much richer team.  What you're talking about is the personal wealth of the principal owner, which is a whole different matter.  We shouldn't expect Henry or any owner to dip into their personal wealth to fund the team.  See Carl Pohlad of the Twins on that one.  The Red Sox are spending a very high percentage of their revenues on payroll.  We should be grateful to have an owner like Henry.  
     
  17. 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]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : hey boomer we think alike, i wanted lee when he was available twice, otherwise when halladay cam available. our mgt is somewhat smart, but not VERY smart. they try to take the middle road, ie lackey vs a top pticher (sabathia, lee, halladay) . or after they make that mistake, they make anotherr saying we cant spend now after spending for beckett and lackey. sure they could have and it's possible they will pay twice. once for signing lackey. once for not signing lee bacause "we cant do that now, we have lackey". the phillies had no problem signing all those pichters even though it made them #2 spenders in mlb at 175 mil. and who wants to face lee, halladay, hamels. no one. hope they dont make it out of the nl. if they beat us it will be mnagement's stupidity for not going for lee (twice) or halladay (or sabathia). lee is up there in age, so youd think he wont be there forever. but damn! they are good. henry pretends we are not as rich as the yankees. he is. he just doesnt want to  put himself in that category
    Posted by brdbreu[/QUOTE]

    It's nice to see another "Great Mind"!  How's that for my best softy impression! JK!

    It's a tough call on what to do with Lavarnway. Historically I think I read once that Salty was better from the left side but I'm seeing a decent RH stroke also. The numbers indicate to me that Lavarnway will be a better hitter in the long run than Salty will ever be but who knows? They wouldn't be a bad platoon.

    Will the Sox want a top defensive catcher type to combine with Salty? I wouldn't be surprised if they bring back Tek again! He seems to be doing well with Beckett at least.

    Lavarnway probably spends most of next year in AA ball continuing to improve his defense. He may well be called into service at some point though due to injuries.

    To me, Lavarnway seems like the guy that everyone said would never make it early on and he just keeps getting better. Let me just come out and say it. He's a lot like Youk! I hope that comparison continues to track accurately.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu'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 : The Yankees' market value is more than 85% larger than the Red Sox and their annual revenues are more than 55% larger.  So they are a much richer team.  What you're talking about is the personal wealth of the principal owner, which is a whole different matter.  We shouldn't expect Henry or any owner to dip into their personal wealth to fund the team.  See Carl Pohlad of the Twins on that one.  The Red Sox are spending a very high percentage of their revenues on payroll.  We should be grateful to have an owner like Henry.  
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    agreed, that is what i meant. personal wealth, again more than he could ever spend. #2 he will make money on that investment, esp if we win the world series.

    i am aware the yanks have more revenue.

    thanks,
    peace
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu'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 : It's nice to see another "Great Mind"!  How's that for my best softy impression! JK! It's a tough call on what to do with Lavarnway. Historically I think I read once that Salty was better from the left side but I'm seeing a decent RH stroke also. The numbers indicate to me that Lavarnway will be a better hitter in the long run than Salty will ever be but who knows? They wouldn't be a bad platoon. Will the Sox want a top defensive catcher type to combine with Salty? I wouldn't be surprised if they bring back Tek again! He seems to be doing well with Beckett at least. Lavarnway probably spends most of next year in AA ball continuing to improve his defense. He may well be called into service at some point though due to injuries. To me, Lavarnway seems like the guy that everyone said would never make it early on and he just keeps getting better. Let me just come out and say it. He's a lot like Youk! I hope that comparison continues to track accurately.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    thnaks for the thoughts boomer.
    if he makes it youre thinking a year or more?
    i think if he doesnt become a good catcher he should be brought up for hi sbat anyway.
      2 years out if salty continues to improve, and ryan is crushing it and only decent at catching, i wouldnt want to split the duties. i'd want both in the lineup, one to catch the other to hit.
     
  20. 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 dont 

    care who he faces
    . i'm sure you have watcehd him pitch. they can watch him  the rest of the year, IN THE STARTING ROTATION. but i would not wait past the end of the year. he would not be looking for big $. the earlier we sign him, ie now would be the smartest, the cheaper he will be. so, yeah i would. you wont be risking much wiht what you would be paying, nor with how hes pitched since solving the control issues. he has always had dominating mlb stuff.
    Posted by brdbreu[/QUOTE]

    I do care who he faces.
    N.L. line-ups aren't much of an upgrade from legit AAA line-ups.

    Miller is completely unproven against tougher. He's the unknown right now. Let's see what happens when teams see him once.
    Let's see what happens when he gets a true taste of Fenway's Harvey Wallbangers...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven'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 do care who he faces. N.L. line-ups aren't much of an upgrade from legit AAA line-ups. Miller is completely unproven against tougher. He's the unknown right now. Let's see what happens when teams see him once. Let's see what happens when he gets a true taste of Fenway's Harvey Wallbangers...
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I don't know about that. If this was true, the NL wouldn't have won so many games this yr in interleague play. (And I'm an AL fan, who always heard as a kid, "Who's the stronger league? The NL; why do they win the AS Game every yr? The AL is a joke".)
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Andrew Miller, who entered this season with two years and 132 days of MLB service, should be arbitration eligible after this season if he remains up with the parent club. However, Cot's Baseball Contracts reports that the Red Sox have an unspecified club option for 2013.

    http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2004/12/boston-red-sox.html

    Does anyone have the details on the 2013 club option?

    FWIW, I think it's too early to extend Miller.
     
  23. 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]Andrew Miller, who entered this season with two years and 132 days of MLB service, should be arbitration eligible after this season if he remains up with the parent club. However,  Cot's Baseball Contracts reports that the Red Sox have an unspecified club option for 2013. http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2004/12/boston-red-sox.html Does anyone have the details on the 2013 club option? FWIW, I think it's too early to extend Miller.
    Posted by hill55[/QUOTE]
    I agree on the extension issue. I posed a hypothetical that he has the potential to be a tremendous find but an extention is very unlikely.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu'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 do care who he faces. N.L. line-ups aren't much of an upgrade from legit AAA line-ups. Miller is completely unproven against tougher. He's the unknown right now. Let's see what happens when teams see him once. Let's see what happens when he gets a true taste of Fenway's Harvey Wallbangers...
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    i'll be watcing with you. again, miler has always had major league stuff, but didnt make it cause of control issues. if they keep him in the rotation and his confidence grows lookout.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777'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 don't know about that . If this was true, the NL wouldn't have won so many games this yr in interleague play. (And I'm an AL fan, who always heard as a kid, "Who's the stronger league? The NL; why do they win the AS Game every yr? The AL is a joke". )
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    With AL teams playing 9 games in a row in NL parks, I think that gives NL teams a great advantage..
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share