A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    moon, I don't want to belabor a point, but then what does sample size have to do with anything anymore? I'm saying that based on the Wake decision making unless it's based on career sample size....That's why I believe if he throws well in his next start it will go a long way with his use after that start...so 1 start means a lot for him. And injuries to others as the way it is going. What's that line about good things happen to people who wait...it's happening now for Tim.
     
  2. 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, I don't want to belabor a point, but then what does sample size have to do with anything anymore? I'm saying that based on the Wake decision making unless it's based on career sample size....That's why I believe if he throws well in his next start it will go a long way with his use after that start...so 1 start means a lot for him. And injuries to others as the way it is going. What's that line about good things happen to people who wait...it's happening now for Tim.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    danny, you and I think more alike than either of us and Tito when it comes to Wake.

    I look at Wake's 2007-mid 2009 stretch of his career and see him at his best during those years. I see that those years were after age 40 and figure that age is not a huge factor for this guy. I see he got hurt in 2009 and required surgery. I know that back surgery at age 43 is normally the end of any player's career. His 2010 season was up and down. He was jerked aroung, yes, but I'm not sure he could have started 30 games either. His ERA was bad-no doubt, but many of his other stats were the same (WHIP) if not better than before (such as BB/9). He had a nice percent of his starts as QSs or near QSs. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and chalked the 2010 season up to injury-recovery, misuse, and it not being as bad as it seemed. This spring, Wake looked healthier than last year. He moved better and still had 2010 control (about 2.3BB/9-best of all Sox starters from 2010-2011). There was an argument for him to be our 5th starter in April, but I didn't have a big issue with him being our #6 based on 2010's numbers. When Dice-K and Buch went down, Wake pitched very well (for a #6 starter). From May 22nd to his ouster from teh rotation, he had more GS'd and more IP than any other Sox starter. He "saved" our pen, and often times Bard & Papelbon were not used in his starts. The Sox record after Wake's starts is something like 13-6. He helped this team win and in my mind, earned a chance to stay in the rotation. I know why Lackey was not ousted for Wake ($$$). The Miller move was a little more complex. At the time, I thought Wake needed a rest, but not a banishment.
    I agree, if he pitches well, he might be "back in", but I do not think it should ever come down to one start to decide when he was ousted or to decide if he is back in. Yes, most recnet starts (plural) is a factor, as is current season numbers and last 2-3 year numbers. It's hard to know how to weight all the timeframe factors and if the same timeframes should be applied to all pitchers involved in the decision. That's what bugs me about the silly clown who sayd Miller deserves to start over Wake, because Wake has an ERA over 5 from 2010 to 2011... well so does Miller! That kind of "logic" is not logic at all.
    I hope Wake does well. I hope Miller does too. I hope our playoff roster decision is not trying to pick the lesser of 3 evils.


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Who knows, Wake might end up as our #3. Wouldn't that be a great story if he pulled that off!

    Guys in the NL probably haven't seen him that much. I give it a 10% chance!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Boom, I have the same thought about Wake vs. NL teams.  They haven't seen him that much and I think he could really hoodwink them.  I think AL teams have faced him enough so they know how to get in his rhythm or "wait him out."  If that makes sense...Interesting interview on KNBR sports radio this morning here in the Bay Area with Collin Cowherd interviewing Schilling about NYY vs. RS in the playoffs.  He's very concerned about Beckett of course but not particularly complimentery about NYY rotation.  After Sabathia, he didn't have much good to say.  Thought their young kids might not stand up to the pressures of the PO's and their older guys in some cases had squandered their talent, not worked at it. 
     
  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 : The first game is crucial in a 5 game playoff series, especially when you look at who our 3/4 starters might be.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Depends on the other starters the Sox are facing. I like our chances against the Tigers after Verlander. He can win both games and the Tigers can still go home empty.
     
    Going back to a previous statement, there's no way I would go with 4 starters in a 5 game series, but, I can see Tito using Lackey in one scenario: as a sacrificial lamb vs. Verlander, saving a fully-rested Beckett  for a game 5. And if it comes down to facing Verlander in game 4 in Detroit, the chances of beating him there are very slim.

    If there's one team Lackey matches up fairly well with(among the Tigers/NY/TX, it's the Tigers. He's 6-2 with a 4 ERA career. He has had real trouble with LH hitters this year, which means he shouldn't be facing NY/TX. In fact, he shouldn't be on the roster against those teams. The Sox are better off with two lefty specialists against those line-ups, IMO.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Interesting idea. I've always hated when a No. 1 faces a No. 1. In tennis when it's a team v. team points in college, sometimes you play the 1 v. the 2 knowing your 1 one matchup with their 1. If anything, you could throw practically anyone v. a Verlander that wasn't Beckett or Lester and it would at least favor a better matchup for Beckett/Lester. Now with that said, sometimes having your best v. the best makes the other best blink first. This has happened quite a bit over the years in MLB. Just because you have the best SP doesn't mean your best SP will outpitch your best. It's a crapshoot.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Verlander isn't one to "blink". This guy is the modern day Nolan Ryan...with a better winning pct. The best chance to beat him is at Fenway on short rest...with Bedard/Lester/Beckett pitching. If it's in Detroit, why waste a good arm against this guy? 

    Note: He has actually just slightly better on the road this year, if that's possible. But the PO's are a different animal. I think he will be absolutely lethal at home on normal rest.

    He's just having an amazing year.
     
  8. 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]Who knows, Wake might end up as our #3. Wouldn't that be a great story if he pulled that off! Guys in the NL probably haven't seen him that much. I give it a 10% chance!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    That's a good point.

    Wake can be amazing a times. You guys have spoken much about delivery. With the knuckleball, which is probably one of the hardest pitches to throw as far as acuracy goes. But it's also the main reason he's been able to stick around so long, even with injuries. Not a lot of moving parts. Doesn't have to throw his arm out to be effective.

    Going back to Lackey's start vs Texas the other night. Before it got out of hand, which was the 5 or 6 inning ( ? I forget, try to mentaly block bad memories ). It was 4-0 at that point with nobody out and it seemed like a good time to pull the plug on Lackey. (Seemed like his usual time to leave anyway) Does anyone here think Wake could have been used  to stop the bleeding? Our bats were dead that game, so it didn't really matter anyway, but...

    I know we've tried to use Wake in the bullpen a few years back, and was a mixed bag.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    harness, while it is certainly possible that Tito uses just 3 starters in the first round, our pitchers are not conditioned to pitch like that. They have been babied all year, pulled on low-medium pitch counts, and given extra days rest. One might think this means they are fully rested to go deep when needed, but I don't think Tito thinks that way, and I'm not sure our top starters will do well on 3 days rest.
     
  10. 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]Verlander isn't one to "blink". This guy is the modern day Nolan Ryan...with a better winning pct. The best chance to beat him is at Fenway on short rest...with Bedard/Lester/Beckett pitching. If it's in Detroit, why waste a good arm against this guy?  Note: He has actually just slightly better on the road this year, if that's possible. But the PO's are a different animal. I think he will be absolutely lethal at home on normal rest. He's just having an amazing year.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]


    Gibson was amazing in 68, and the Cards lost the WS anyway. Pedro was rolling along in 03. It's not a 100 percent done deal that Verlander throws a shutout or throws a masterpiece. He is the best pitcher in the big leagues this season, no denying, but taking the attitude he's unhittable is purely ridiculous. Everyone can be hit. But he is the type of guy who can go 9 inn or at leat 8 and it increases his chances of controlling his own destiny, thus more pitching wins in my opinion.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Lonborg short rest in 67 WS....he was the 11 Verlander of 67.....
     
  12. 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]Boom, I have the same thought about Wake vs. NL teams.  They haven't seen him that much and I think he could really hoodwink them.  I think AL teams have faced him enough so they know how to get in his rhythm or "wait him out."  If that makes sense...Interesting interview on KNBR sports radio this morning here in the Bay Area with Collin Cowherd interviewing Schilling about NYY vs. RS in the playoffs.  He's very concerned about Beckett of course but not particularly complimentery about NYY rotation.  After Sabathia, he didn't have much good to say.  Thought their young kids might not stand up to the pressures of the PO's and their older guys in some cases had squandered their talent, not worked at it. 
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]

    I did give it a 10% likelihood! And only because the situation is so dire at #3.

    The most likely guy to me is Bedard with Buchholz close behind him. I'm not on the Lackey train and haven't been for a long time. Tito is probably on the Caboose at this point but he's still on the train man! Miller is very risky to count on as a # 3 in the playoffs. The pressure of that situation escalates any control issues he appears to have. 
     
  13. 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 : Gibson was amazing in 68, and the Cards lost the WS anyway. Pedro was rolling along in 03. It's not a 100 percent done deal that Verlander throws a shutout or throws a masterpiece. He is the best pitcher in the big leagues this season, no denying, but taking the attitude he's unhittable is purely ridiculous. Everyone can be hit. But he is the type of guy who can go 9 inn or at leat 8 and it increases his chances of controlling his own destiny, thus more pitching wins in my opinion.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    Everyone except Gibson in their prime! That guy put the kabosh on us so bad in 67 that I admit, I still think he's superman.

    I do agree strongly with your point though, after the hyperbole. We need to try to win every game. And I recall that Beckett was fairly good on 3 days rest against the yanks one year!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Anyone else here thinking Buchholz might get a start or 2 in the playoffs. He seems to be amenable to it. He seems to want it.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Not enough time boom. 

    I wish, but I seriously doubt it.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Everyone except Gibson in their prime! That guy put the kabosh on us so bad in 67 that I admit, I still think he's superman...

    He was superman.

    We win a ring in '67 if he's not there. Period.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Man, Scutaro is really doing everything he can do to help us win.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    A realistic look at 2011 would suggest the Sox are now in a little trouble.  Their odds of getting into the playoffs are still excellent, but I think there are two real concerns.

    First  the pitching is downright scary with Beckett out, Bedard missing a start, and folks like Miller, Wakefield, Weiland (for crying out loud), and Wakefield as the four starters after Lester.  And tonight we saw the bullpen give up six runs in three innings--Wheeler, Bard, and Albers were all terrible.  

    Second the Sox get to play another in Toronto tomorrow with Miller starting, then three at Tampa Bay with Weiland, Lackey, and Lester going, with Lester facing Price.  If the Sox lose tomorrow, a very good bet if the Mr. Hyde shows up with that long hair and scraggly beard and penchant for walking and balking, and the Rays win tomorrow, a sweep by the Rays would tighten things up considerably.  Tonight's 7 game lead could be a 3 game lead by Sunday night.  

    Losing five in a row right now seems unlikely, but not when you look at the starting pitching and real weaknesses in the bullpen. 

     


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    That's a nice positive spin Max. Maybe you missed it but these aren't the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's Red Sox. Yes tonight was ugly, but we still have arguably the best lineup in MLB and with Lester and Becket on the hill we are the best team in MLB. Have a little faith!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I think Sox management is being overly cautious with their staff. My feeling is that Beckett and Bedard will be fine. Youk will be in stride by the playoffs. This is the same team as we were a few weeks ago. 

    Keep the faith. 

    Believe.
     
  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]harness, while it is certainly possible that Tito uses just 3 starters in the first round, our pitchers are not conditioned to pitch like that. They have been babied all year, pulled on low-medium pitch counts, and given extra days rest. One might think this means they are fully rested to go deep when needed, but I don't think Tito thinks that way, and I'm not sure our top starters will do well on 3 days rest.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]


    Precisely why they are conditioned to go on short rest in October. They haven't been burnt out. Lester/Josh know what the grind is like n post season.
    They'll measure up.They should have plenty of gas left in the tank.
     
  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 : Gibson was amazing in 68, and the Cards lost the WS anyway. Pedro was rolling along in 03. It's not a 100 percent done deal that Verlander throws a shutout or throws a masterpiece. He is the best pitcher in the big leagues this season, no denying, but taking the attitude he's unhittable is purely ridiculous. Everyone can be hit. But he is the type of guy who can go 9 inn or at leat 8 and it increases his chances of controlling his own destiny, thus more pitching wins in my opinion.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    I'd say he's as close to unhittable as it gets. And putting UR ace against him in his home venue is not a wise pct. move.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Guys, just read a Globe article by Peter Abraham suggesting Buch start and not relieve if he comes back.  Thought it made sense and would suggest looking it over.  Harness?  I am looking at things positively at the moment.  Youk back is important as his experience is invaluable and I think he has been slightly "off" this year in comparison to the last several, and I think he rises to the PO's.  Hoping a missed turn will work for Beckett and Buch comes back.  We have been resilient this year and guys should be getting up and focused to play in important games.
     
  24. 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]Guys, just read a Globe article by Peter Abraham suggesting Buch start and not relieve if he comes back.  Thought it made sense and would suggest looking it over.  Harness?  I am looking at things positively at the moment.  Youk back is important as his experience is invaluable and I think he has been slightly "off" this year in comparison to the last several, and I think he rises to the PO's.  Hoping a missed turn will work for Beckett and Buch comes back.  We have been resilient this year and guys should be getting up and focused to play in important games.
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]

    Well, if the Sox go with three starters in the first round (incl. Bedard), then Buch won't pitch, unless it's BP duty, which I don't advocate.

    I think he may be a possible option in a 4 of 7 game series. He may have enough time to be a viable option to Lackey/Wake. But his form will be a question mark.

    It appears to me that the team is gonna baby Josh/Bedard for the PO's, and settle for the WC...unless NY starts losing. If the Tigers end up with a better record than TX (I just started a thread on this), Boston will get the Tigers in the PO's, despite not taking the division. That's why I'm hoping the Tigers keep on winning. VMART is on one of his hot streaks (GS tonight). That could be a difference maker.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    It appears to me that the team is gonna baby Josh/Bedard for the PO's, and settle for the WC

    You are a very dim bulb. It's been clear for weeks that management was playing for 2nd place and doing 6 man monte and "being cautious", as the favorite management line goes. The irony is that it has had zero affect on keeping any player healthy.  Doesn't mean playoff performance will mirror the bad team baseball the team has been playing since last long and compressed road trip, but it does invalidate the pampering approach to the impending post season.   
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share