A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Moon, your reasoned argument about Aceves starting reminds me of Brutus thinking about killing Caesar and saying something like this:  Our purpose is so full of good reason that even his own brother would applaud the deed.  I agree with all your arguments but I think it's like letting the pitchers stay in longer sometimes: at this time we are desperate for starters and seem to be down by three.  Since he was deemed good enough to start earlier this year, why not try him again.  I am not actually saying this out of desperation as I firmly believe we will make the PO's.
    But what if we get there?  Don't we still need that third pitcher?  It seems like Buch is a maybe/not sure at all/I think you're saying a no--so wouldn't we be smart to start stretching out Aceves now?  Does it not come down to Aceves vs. Bedard?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    moon or anyone - I was lucky to watch yestedays game (must be why we won) but today it was not on - I think that just looking at it on paper this team really is in a sad state and if we make the play-offs it will be because we played such an amazing stretch over the summer.

    Most teams could never ecover from an April/September like this.
     
  3. 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:
    I understand the desire to search around and try and find "the better way" or the reason for this collapse. But sending these guys deeper in their starts hasn't been the primary cause of the collapse and might not even be a secondary factor. (katz) I, for one, have not tried to claim it was a major issue. I know some may advocate pitching Beckett, Lester and Bedard 130-140 pitches nearly every game, but not me. I actually like the idea of saving our starters of rthe playoffs while possibly extending their careers, since most have long term deals. My issue was that we allowed our key starters extra days rest almost everytime we had a day off and kept them on a low to medium pitch count almost every start they had, but then when we got to a big and crucial game, we yanked them at the same time as other less important games. I'm only talking maybe an extra inning in 2-3 games for each of Beckett and Lester. I was wrong about the low pitchvs NY and TB  accounting for maybe 2-3 losses. In hindsight, it doesn't look like any were lost to those two teams in particular. Lester has been between 87 and 115 pitches in all but 3 games this year (May 30th vs CWS 127 pitches, 6/30 with 120 pitches vs Phi, and 119 vs MN on 8/10). None of these games were really urgent win games.  8/5 vs NYY  108 pitches (3-2 loss) 8/16 vs TB  113 pitches (3-1 loss) 9/1 vs NYY  114 pitches (4-2 loss) 9/17vs TB   107 pitches (4-3 loss) (We ended up losing all of these games without any relievers letting up any runs, so it is doubtful we would have won any of them, but my point is, Tito did not let a rested pitcher go a few extra pitches in a key game.) Beckett pitched 125 pitches on April 21st at LAA. He hasn't gone over 111 since. 7/17 @ TB  106 pitches (win 1-0) 8/7  v NYY  101 pitches (win 3-2) 8/31 v NYY  111 pitches (win 9-5) 9/16 vs TB  109 pitches (win 4-3) Some surprising numbers on TB pitchers: Shields: as many complete games he has, he does not have many games with a lot of pitches. He only has 4 games with over 118 pitches topping out at 126 once.  Price: went over 119 pitches just twice and never over 121 pitches.I think our biggest issue seems to be Dice-K-itus: the inability to go beyond 5 or 6 IP on 110-120 pitches.
    Posted by moonslav59


    This is what I've been trying to get across to you & Burrito.
    Pitchers will go as long as their pitch count allows.
    That means 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9 frames.
    Pitch efficiency is part of a pitcher's skill-set.
    It's also reflective of a given battery.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Not all teams pull starters after 110 pitches and 5 or 6 innings.

    No team uses someone like Wakefield.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    harness its ridiculous that Tito applies the same management style to each pitcher regardless of ability or performance. He does not adjust for any of them, and subsequently has diminished the abilities of our two Ace's.

    Verlander pitched 8 innings again the other day even though his team has qualified for the post-season and they may need him on short days rest.... yet Leyland still let him do what he is best at, pitch.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Does not anyone remember what we loved about Pedro... he was the stopper, almost perfect. A stopper doesn not come in and pitch 5 or 6 innings and leave the game.

    What about that have you all forgotten? You believe so much in stats you did not see the ground shifting the last 3 season where Tito weakened our staff's best pitchers. Instead you justified it as being "trendy," the "thing to do." 

    I have not seen either Lester or Beckett step up all year - where is that mojo? Where is the "give me the damn ball" mentality out of either of them.

    All year Beckett has pitched well, though I have heard criticism that he is taking too long to throw the ball and maybe that is part of the reason he does it - gives him some edge over the batter. That in itself may be a bad sign that he doesn't think he can clean clocks like the days of old and has to resort to slowing up the game to his advantage.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I don't think we should project Aceves as a starter in the playoffs ( sorry Crit ) but I would rather throw him out there now instead of Wakefield, Miller, Wieland, Lackey to try to get in the playoffs. I would go Beckett, Lester, Bedard, Aceves, Buchholz going forward ( starting when Buchholz can join that group ) and if it means Beckett and Lester go on 3 days rest so be it.
     
  8. 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:
    I have seen several games where Beckett and Lester were pulled early when pitching well as you said Moon.  Beckett was frustrated and acted snappy with Tito.  I agree with you that if the game is critical and the pitcher is doing well, leave him in for 1-3 batters longer. Harness, I think of you as "the pitching guy" and I know you and others are saying that we make a huge hole when we take Aceves out of his highly successful assignment--and I agree.  However, right now by the time we get to him, we are down 7-2, so what good is he?  I just think he could give us five good innings when no one else can right now, then we use Miller, Doobie, Bowden.  Can you convince me we would be doing worse than starting Lackey and then going to Aceves? While on pitching, I was amazed at you analysis of Wake's start and his pitching arc(s).  I't really sad if he went away from his best arc because we didn't have anyone to catch it--if that's what you're saying. 5K, I think your evaluation of this season and pitching is right on.
    Posted by Critter23


    You want to use Miller/Doobie/Bowden after Aceves?
    Miller:    5.63 ERA  1.828 WHIP (6.35/2.118 as reliver)
    Douby:   7.27 ERA 1.962 WHIP
    Bowden: 4.26 ERA  1.579 WHIP 

    Why start Aceves then? You've got a better chance of getting to Bard with the Flying Wallendas.

    Aceves has 4 starts this year: 5  5  6  5  IP  5.14 ERA  1.571 WHIP
    Aceves as a reliever:  2.12 ERA  1.012 WHIP

    If starters can't go 5 frames without getting blown away, ACEVES won't be the difference maker either way.

    Beckett/Lester can pitch 4 of the remaining games if necessary.
    I think the worst of the starting pitching woes may now be in the rear view.
    Aceves in the pen is critical now.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from caseycsw. Show caseycsw's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : You want to use Miller/Doobie/Bowden after Aceves? Miller:    5.63 ERA  1.828 WHIP ( 6.35/2.118 as reliver) Douby:   7.27 ERA  1.962 WHIP Bowden: 4.26 ERA  1.579 WHIP  Why start Aceves then? You've got a better chance of getting to Bard with the F lying Wallendas. Aceves has 4 starts this year: 5  5  6  5  IP  5.14 ERA  1.571 WHIP Aceves as a reliever:  2.12 ERA  1.012 WHIP If starters can't go 5 frames without getting blown away, ACEVES won't be the difference maker either way. Beckett/Lester can pitch 4 of the remaining games if necessary. I think the worst of the starting pitching woes may now be in the rear view. Aceves in the pen is critical now.
    Posted by harness

         To further support Harness' point, I suspect it occurs to Red Sox management that Aceves was a Yankee throwaway precisely because they suspected his arm was shot.  If you put him out there as a starter and he runs off 4 or 5 good innings, do you automatically yank him or are you tempted to keep him in.  The Bosox management might not want to put themsleves in that situation because of the potential damage that Aceves might sustain.  I realize this is all conjecture, but I think Aceves will not see any starts period...

    Warning: This post was created by a Yankee fan, and may be intended to cause irreparable emotional and psychological harm to any Red Sox fan who might read it.

    "Pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living."

    Mary Harris "Mother" Jones (union and community organizer, born 1837 (Ireland) - 1930 (U.S.) )

     
    when the boss comes callin' his take his toll 
    when the boss comes callin' don't you sell your soul 
    when the boss comes callin' we gotta organize 

            - Dropkick Murphys (for the workers of Wisconsin)

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    If we throw Lackey out there it is a near automatic 6.30 ERA after 28 starts ( or whatever he is up to now ).

    If we throw Wakefield out there, it's been at least 5-6 terrible starts in a row hasn't it? what good is it when we give upa a consistent 5 runs by the 4th inning?

    You want Miller to start rather than be a mop up reliever? Pitch him more innings?

    I think Aceves is clearly a reliever. We don't disagree on that. The difference is that I think we have a very poor chance of getting a single win from Lackey, Wakefield, Miller in the remainder of this year. They have pitched a lot of innings and they have stunk it up. No reason to be polite at this point. It's been a large sample size of miserable. I'd rather try to get one freaking win out of the Aceves, Doubront, Bowden combo. Between them we should be able to get a good 6-7 innings. Their numbers are a much smaller sample size ( Doubront & Bowden and both look like they have better stuff and control right now but not a lot of luck ). Go Right ( Aceves ), Left ( Doubront ), Right ( Bowden ). We still would have a lot of pen talent remaining. Go with a 4 man rotation the remainder of this year or until we clinch it. If we clinch it early slack off. Pitch Wakefield then!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Boom, as I see it, with Lester/Beckett available to pitch 4 games of remaining 7, two vs. O's, the odds of winning 3 are pretty good. That means if they get just one win from Lackey/Bedard/Wake trio, also probable, they go 4-3.
    That means Rays have to go 8-1 to beat us.

    I like our chances very much. Bedard in next start is a key going forward.
     
  12. 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:
    harness its ridiculous that Tito applies the same management style to each pitcher regardless of ability or performance. He does not adjust for any of them, and subsequently has diminished the abilities of our two Ace's. Verlander pitched 8 innings again the other day even though his team has qualified for the post-season and they may need him on short days rest.... yet Leyland still let him do what he is best at, pitch.
    Posted by BurritoT


    When you drive, do you drive differently on Mondays as compared to Wednesdays?
    Do you eat UR food differently depending on the hours of consumption?

    When pitchers pitch inefficiently, be it via form or pitch efficiency, they are treated the same. RedSox don't have a Verlander or a Pedro. Tito is managing what he's got to work with.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Lester and/or Beckett should be our ACE, neither is this year... and not because of health.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Beckett has reached ACE status, depending on UR criteria.
    I'll take him and Lester over most other top two pitchers, so long as the others pitch in the A. L. East...in a notorious hitter's venue.
     
  15. 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:
    harness its ridiculous that Tito applies the same management style to each pitcher regardless of ability or performance. He does not adjust for any of them, and subsequently has diminished the abilities of our two Ace's. Verlander pitched 8 innings again the other day even though his team has qualified for the post-season and they may need him on short days rest.... yet Leyland still let him do what he is best at, pitch.
    Posted by BurritoT


    Leyland let Verlander pitch 8 innings but only because he got through 8 on 116 pitches.  The game before that was 7 innings, 106 pitches.  The game before that was 6 innings, 113 pitches.  Verlander is on a pitch count too.  But he is having an incredible season and he is very strong and durable.  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    you miss the point - we don't pitch 8 because we have zero ACES on the team this year. 

    do or die game in the play-offs do you really expect Beckett or Lester to go 8? Can they step up after being treated like glass all year?


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    Beckett has reached ACE status, depending on UR criteria. I'll take him and Lester over most other top two pitchers, so long as the others pitch in the A. L. East...in a notorious hitter's venue.
    Posted by harness


    Your the first person ever in my life that I have heard a definition for an ACE being someone who pitches 6 innings. 
     
  18. 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:
    you miss the point - we don't pitch 8 because we have zero ACES on the team this year.  do or die game in the play-offs do you really expect Beckett or Lester to go 8? Can they step up after being treated like glass all year?
    Posted by BurritoT


    I just don't think Tito is doing things any differently than he did in, say, 2007.  It just seems like our pitchers keep having short starts due to pitching poorly or having high pitch counts.  I'm not saying it isn't a problem, I just don't think it's the manager causing it.
     
  19. 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:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : Your the first person ever in my life that I have heard a definition for an ACE being someone who pitches 6 innings. 
    Posted by BurritoT


    Well, there's a first for everything!
    As I said, ACE status depends on criteria.

    Sabathia is an ACE, I'm sure you'll agree.
    IP per start:
    Beckett: 6.43
    CC:       7.19

    That's not much difference.
    Weaver is having a career year, and his ratio is 7.09 per start.
    Point is, that's the way the game is today.
    And in that context, 13-5  2.50 ERA  0.996 WHIP for Beckett justifies ACE status.

    Pedro's career in Boston: 2.52 ERA  0.978 WHIP  6.89 IP per start.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    ACE Beckett pitches tonight and I really like our chances.
    He also impacts the following, but not as much as ya might think:

    RedSox are 22-27 since Aug. 1st.
    With Salty starting: 12-21 (.363)
    With Tek starting:   10-8  (.556)

    As you might recall, in April:
    With Salty: 5-10
    With Tek:   6-5
    (First ten games each catcher started in April: W/Salty 1-9  w/Tek: 6-4).

    Total between both catchers starting in April/Aug./Sept.:
    W/Salty:  17-31 (.354)
    W/Tek:   16-13  (.552)

    Might be time to let Tek catch most of the remaining games.
     
  21. 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:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : This is what I've been trying to get across to you & Burrito. Pitchers will go as long as their pitch count allows. That means 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9 frames. Pitch efficiency is part of a pitcher's skill-set. It's also reflective of a given battery.
    Posted by harness

    What I've been trying to get across to you is that Lester and Beckett's longest pitch count games were in non-crucial games. When we have rested and babied them all year, the time comes to let them go 125-135 pitches in the big game. Instead, they pitch 105-110 (again). 

    My position is different from Burrito's in that I am just talking about a handful of games and 10-20 more pitches in each of those games.

    I do agree with Burrito that there is no way we can expect Beckett and Lester to suddenly pitch 8 innings in October. Verlander, Sabathia, and others will go 8.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Well I am almost a little surprised that such a spirited debate is taking place about staying with starters because they are aces well past 100 pitches and taking them to the point of failure before pulling them amongst fans of a team who lost a huge ALCS game when the manager did just that.

    I haven't the focus or time to go through and figure out the deep math but I am not surprise that Francona took his pitchers deeper into games not based on the critical nature of the game relative to other 161 but rather focused on the start itself and how taxing the pitch count was physically and how well they were throwing later into the pitch count.

    I also would be curious just what the start of each pitcher looked like right after a 130 pitch start, because they have had those starts this year.

    The other thing that is interesting about the conversation that my ancedotal impression of watching the RS under Francona is that his first inclination is to try and get 7 complete from his starters to shorten his bullpen. Only in 2009 was he less likely to do this when his bullpen was very deep. It has always been my general impression that he would take his starters to the point of failure to get there. And to me the by-product of that was he put his relievers in tougher spots by bringing them in with RISP and little to no margin for error.

    At this point the club is a train wreck. Last night's loss was another killer. Whether it was the urgency the swoon has caused or a bullpen depleted, Tito went to his 8-9 guys he looks to for 6 outs to get nine and it just did not work out. Again the starter put them in a hole and did not eat innings along the way.

    The pitching staff may well have suffered "fatal body blows" through depletion and the over use of the bullpen that depletion has caused.

    At this point the RS just aren't a very good team and it isn't how that pitching staff is being used IMO, it just is to thin and too worn out.

    For those that aren't "old timers" this may be their first Red Sox experience in the tradition of '49, '74, '78 etc. It certainly is our first real taste since the Trio bought this club. 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    We kind of imploded last year also, with all the injuries. Pedroia, Youk, Ellsbury, Cameron and others out for a long time. It is definitely something that has happened to the Redsox in the past as us old timers have seared into our souls!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Moon, Harness, Katz, Amp...etc.
     
    I'm growing weary of this forum. There are a lot of things we can do with our lives rather than suffer fools. I appreciate the friendship of many of you. I'm not commenting on your posts. It's just that there are often complete idiots here. We all know some people here who don't know their rear from a hole in the ground. I'm sick of it. 

    I'll see you guys in the playoffs!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Bomm, take a deep breath. See you soon.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share