A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    The Sox seem to be botching this Toroto game. Aviles lets a ball by him that Youk would have snagged. The ball gets away on the throw to 1st. Tito takes Gonzalez out of the lineup for a pinch hitter with 2 outs when he is standing on 2nd.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III



    Why is it that our pitchers are so f...ing fragile?

    Maybe they should be carted around in wheelchairs between starts.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Just don't let Curt Young anywhere near dem wheelchairs!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Yeah, Curt should have had Beckett on ankle strengthening excersises months ago.

    (LOL)
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Curt was eating his usual 12 hotdogs when Bedard/Josh went down.
    His cell number is 888-at da buffet.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    harness, I think that is uncalled for. 

    Are you parodying softy (with Wake)?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Wake hasn't been detrimental to this pitching staff. Young might be. But my humah is a bit satirical.

    On a different subject: We were discussing the merits of Wake on/off the PO roster.
    I think it would be wise to carry two lefty specialists. This would hurt Drew's/Wake's chances (although I think Wake will make one playoff round, as he can negate lefty bats).

    One other option is: In the first round, I think Tito goes with three starters (if healthy): Josh/Lester/Bedard. That means there's really no need to carry Lackey, unless he's seen as BP depth. The second round, if we get there, would likely have Lackey pitching game 4 and perhaps Wake sitting.

    Thoughts?

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    The whole lefty specialist thing is overblown. We have several right handed relievers who do great against lefties...I mean great. Some have been better vs LHBs than RHBs. Now that Albers is unreliable and Wheeler is sketchy, we basically have Aceves as the middle-long guy and Bard/Papelbon as the short guys. 

    Since are starters are not accustomed to going past 7 IP, I'm not sure we can suddenly let them go 8. They are well-rested, so maybe that could be a plan.  I can't see bringing in Miller with men on base. I do think Morales will be on the playoff roster. 

    I think Wake will not be on the first round roster. I think we go with 11 or maybe even 10 pitchers. We'll have a day off before the series and a day during. 

    Could we go with 3 starters? Yes, if down 2-1. Does that make lackey a possible reliever? Hmmm...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I think if Wakefield throws well v. Toronto, it may change a lot of thinking as to his worth come playoff time. First of all, we have no idea if any more injuries will occur. We don't know if Bedard and Beckett will be healthy (not a certainty now), we are pretty sure that Lackey is not exactly going to be a go-to starter in the playoffs. Clay is too far away. Miller is suddenly back to being a massive question mark. For all the Wake bashing that goes on, for all the people who support Wakefield and yet don't think he's viable for a playoff roster spot (that is what I gather by these recent posts), you better start thinking in terms of who is healthy and who is pitching well going into the playoffs. Right now, Wake is coming off a 4-inn scoreless relief job and has an important start coming up. To me, he determines his own fate. Before, I'd say he had no shot determining that fate and had 90 percent chance of likely being left off a playoff roster. Not now though. Things change, and they can change in a hurry.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Things shouldn't change based on 1 game (1 start). This logic kills me. No player should ever be judged on one game...ever. Even 2-3 games is bad. 

    That  being said, it is a three man race for the 4th slot, and since all are pretty even, the last 2-3 games might tip the balance any which way.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I see no way the team goes with 4 starters in a 3 of 5 game series.
    Recall in 2009, they opted for 3, (Lester was to pitch game 4 if Nec). even though Dice pitched well in Sept.
    If they are up 2-1, no way they risk going game 5 when they can nail it down in 4.

    I agree with you the lefty specialist is overblown in the regular season.
    But Bard/Aceves have issues with NY and the PO's involve higher caliber LH hitters.

    That's why I think they'll go with more than 10 pitchers in the post season.

    BTW: If you prefer to play the Tigers over TX in the first round, (and I do), root for Detroit from here on out. They are one win behind TX and if they end up with the better record and Boston takes the WC, NY will be playing TX!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    harness, there is one less day off now in the first series. That may change strategy from years past. I think we go with 4 unless down 2-1. Up 2-1, we try to win with our 4th guy and be lined up for the next round with our top guys first (again).

    I think they will go with 11 pitchers (not 12 like the regular season), but could go with 10, but it is risky if someone has to come out very early in a game...God forbid.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Things shouldn't change based on 1 game (1 start). This logic kills me. No player should ever be judged on one game...ever. Even 2-3 games is bad.  That  being said, it is a three man race for the 4th slot, and since all are pretty even, the last 2-3 games might tip the balance any which way.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    moon, I agree with you in theory, but not in reality, meaning what you believe is to be so isn't what the teams or even the managers do when evaluating things especially during a crisis time for the team. They have to be unhappy overall with Lackey, they have to be scared of Miller, they have to be wondering if Beckett is about to go on the DL, they have to be wondering if Bedard is now a health risk. If you believe what you believe to be the case, then Wakefield would have been a case study earlier TO NOT HAVE BEEN PULLED FROM THE ROTATION....So my feeling is he throws well v. Toronto coupled with his relief outing v. Texas and voila, he's back in Tito's good graces. Don't you think that is reasonable?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Look, Miller's great start v. Texas in Texas was a huge, huge game for Andrew Miller and how his team viewed him. So one start there seemed to change everything in the rotation to that point, no? One game.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    The one less day makes it mandatory to carry a deeper pen.
    The only way they use 4 starters is if Tito has confidence in the 4th starter.
    I'll tell ya this: Lackey will really raise a stink if he's left out of the first round. And he might be.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I'm not saying that small sample sizes SHOULD determine fates of players, I'm saying that it does.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Not really, danny. Not by managers and GMs. 

    Wake's fate was sealed long before his bad game. You knew it and you called it. The decision was made before that. That game was just a token of something that was brewing for weeks.

    Yes, GMs have sent many a player down after one game after being called up. yes, it happens more if he played poorly than if he did well, but definitive judgements are very rarely made on 1 game, 1 week, or even one month in the bigs.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    But what do you do now? In other words, if you have these slew of injuries, then isn't a short sample size of September starts going to determine a possible switch in who is kept on or off a playoff roster? Look at Albers? He was a sure thing if you go off of large sample size, but he's not a sure thing if you go off of his recent failures. Again, I agree with you in theory.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    No question Wake was a pre-determined thing. They were definitely waiting for a bad start to make a switch.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    But I look at the large sample size of his overall starts, and then I say why was he given such a fate? It's an antithesis look at statistics for pitchers. He was determined odd man out, but it doesn't seem it had anything to do with large sample size for 2011 starts.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Lackey should be closer to losing his rotation spot than Wakefield being pulled from the rotation in the first place. If you look at large sample size of 2011 starts between the 2 pitchers.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Any new news on Buchholz sinse the end of August?

    Maybe the best news is there's no news, huh ?


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I don't like losing that first game of a series and especially this late in the season. Don't like starting off the month that way. April was, of course, the worst with starting a series with a loss ( 6 out of 9 ). But over the course of the season, these Sox have seemed to squelch the habit. Until this past week, that is:


    Month    # Series Started     1st Game Losses
    April                 9                         6
    May                 9                         4
    June                8                         3   (+ a nine game Winning Streak)
    July                 8                         4
    August             9                         2
    Sept.               2                         2

    However, you have to lose sometimes. In July, the Sox lost the first game of a series 50% of the time, but it didn't matter. They won every series in the month of July. Oh, man.... July was soo awesome!

    Yeah, it's a basic, overall, backwards look at the season from a far. Monday Quarterbacking. But teams get into their habits. I just hope they don't take this one into the post season. In September, they're already 0 for 2 ( in every aspect ). 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    danny, I think it had to do with Theo and Tito wanted Lackey and Miller to work out. They are younger. lackey gets all the money. Wake was always seen as the last (6th-7th) option.
     
  25. 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]I don't like losing that first game of a series and especially this late in the season. Don't like starting off the month that way. April was, of course, the worst with starting a series with a loss ( 6 out of 9 ). But over the course of the season, these Sox have seemed to squelch the habit. Until this past week, that is: Month     # Series Started      1st Game Losses April                 9                         6 May                 9                         4 June                8                         3   (+ a nine game Winning Streak) July                 8                         4 August             9                         2 Sept.               2                         2 However, you have to lose sometimes. In July, the Sox lost the first game of a series 50% of the time, but it didn't matter. They won every series in the month of July. Oh, man.... July was soo awesome! Yeah, it's a basic, overall, backwards look at the season from a far. Monday Quarterbacking. But teams get into their habits. I just hope they don't take this one into the post season. In September, they're already 0 for 2 ( in every aspect ). 
    Posted by emp9[/QUOTE]

    The first game is crucial in a 5 game playoff series, especially when you look at who our 3/4 starters might be.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share