A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Guys, I went with some teacher friends to Oakland this fall to watch the A's vs. Detroit.  They're from Michigan and they wanted to see Verlander pitch.  It was late in the season, I think he was going for his 24th win, and the Tigers would shortly be in the playoffs.  Everyone was saying "He won't go long today.  Yeah, he'll try for the win, but they won't tire him out with the playoffs coming."  Well, it was a close game and I believe he pitched all the way until the eighth.  He didn't look that strong in the early going, but he definitely got stronger--and more overpowering--as the game went on.  I remember thinking "Wish our starters could do more of this and take some pressure off the pen."  I think if Leyland thinks the horse looks good that day, then they're gonna keep him in the plow.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : If we traded for Quentin he would be a LF in about 10 nanoseconds.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Or DH.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I don't know if I would touch Quentin though either. But DH probably makes even more sense!

    It looks like the Marlins are serious. Do you think that just maybe Hanley has played his last game as a Marlin? No one seems to be talking about that but the guy has had a rep for dogging it a while now. He could still be worth a lot of trade value.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]I don't know if I would touch Quentin though either. But DH probably makes even more sense! It looks like the Marlins are serious. Do you think that just maybe Hanley has played his last game as a Marlin? No one seems to be talking about that but the guy has had a rep for dogging it a while now. He could still be worth a lot of trade value.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    He may play 3B or OF, but I think the Marlins would trade him for the right package.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I don't know if I would touch Quentin though either. But DH probably makes even more sense!

    If we spend a lot of capital (Financial and/or players) on RF and let our upgrading of the staff suffer, I will not be happy.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    They really have to upgrade the pitching depth. I'd be very surprised if they do not make that their top priority this winter. A lot of that depends on what happens with Papi.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Guys, I went with some teacher friends to Oakland this fall to watch the A's vs. Detroit.  They're from Michigan and they wanted to see Verlander pitch.  It was late in the season, I think he was going for his 24th win, and the Tigers would shortly be in the playoffs.  Everyone was saying "He won't go long today.  Yeah, he'll try for the win, but they won't tire him out with the playoffs coming."  Well, it was a close game and I believe he pitched all the way until the eighth.  He didn't look that strong in the early going, but he definitely got stronger--and more overpowering--as the game went on.  I remember thinking "Wish our starters could do more of this and take some pressure off the pen."  I think if Leyland thinks the horse looks good that day, then they're gonna keep him in the plow.
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]

    Critter,
    Verlander is a tough one to use as a comparison. His season totals of 34 starts and 251IP were both among the leaders in all of baseball...He averaged 115 pitches and 7 1/3rd innings per start...Which calcualtes to 15.7 pitches per inning which is about as close to ideal as a pitcher can gat. The key to getting deep is pitch efficiancy and if a pitcher can avoid the 25 pitch innings and the 10 or 12 pitch at bats during a game it allows them to get deeper. Verlander clearly has the stuff to miss bats and challenge guys in the zone. So on day where he's been efficiant and goes the distance. He's managed to avoid the big inning where he's had to throw 25 or 30 pitches...His high water mark last season was against the Sox where he threw 132 pitches in 7 2/3rd innings or tick over 17 pitches per inning...
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Critter, Verlander is a tough one to use as a comparison. His season totals of 34 starts and 251IP were both among the leaders in all of baseball...He averaged 115 pitches and 7 1/3rd innings per start...Which calcualtes to 15.7 pitches per inning which is about as close to ideal as a pitcher can gat. The key to getting deep is pitch efficiancy and if a pitcher can avoid the 25 pitch innings and the 10 or 12 pitch at bats during a game it allows them to get deeper. Verlander clearly has the stuff to miss bats and challenge guys in the zone. So on day where he's been efficiant and goes the distance. He's managed to avoid the big inning where he's had to throw 25 or 30 pitches...His high water mark last season was against the Sox where he threw 132 pitches in 7 2/3rd innings or tick over 17 pitches per inning...
    Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE]

    It's strange that this team's philosophy on offense has always been to get guys who see a lot of pitches and have high OBP, both traits that force the opps to go to their pen early and often. Most teams' worst pitchers are their middle relievers. The strategy is a good one.

    Wouldn't the same strategy (in reverse) be a goal of our management team? Get starters who can and do go long into games? Pitchers with low pitches per innings counts or who have the ability to pitch 120-130 pitch outings more than the average good starters do? Knowing we do not have those guys then, means we need to have a strong and deep pen.

    Instead we have had one of the worst pitches per inning starters in MLB (Dice-K) and have babied the rest to the point where they couldn't pitch 120-125 pitches if their life depended on it. Well, our season depended on it this year, and to me, that was one reason we missed the dance. Next year promises to be even more challenging with Lackey out (one guy that ate innings). Guys, we have serious issues with our staff... SERIOUS! I'm not saying we need to overreact and make foolish overpays for marginal pitchers, but we have to focus our resources there:
     1) Add 3-5 quality arms to our staff (maybe some via trade).
     2) The new pitching coach needs to do better (easier said than done).
     3) Conditioning of pitchers (and all players) has to improve.
     4) Bobby V has to get our key starters accustomed to going 7 IP, somehow- someway... at least a few more times. Rest them when possible, but don't get them used to going 6 and being happy with it.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Agree with moon's outlook on the starters being babied and the taxing it ends up putting on our pen. Seems as if the way Mike Maddux handles that Texas staff could be an emerging newer blueprint to follow, he (and nolan ryan) really seem to emphasize higher pitch counts and getting bigger inning totals outta those guys and it seems to have worked well for them. (CJ Wilson 223 IP, Colby Lewis 200 IP, Derek Holland 198 IP, Matt Harrison 185 IP, and Alexi Ogando 169 IP). They got more innings outta their 3 guy Holland than we got outta both Beckett (193) and Lester (191). But it really shows even more in the 4/5 guys. Granted injuries play into this, although one could also speculate whether better conditioning and stretching them out even more, whether that prevents injuries or contributes to them. Who knows. But they have turned that Texas staff into durable innings eaters when just a few short years ago none of them were really projected to be much of anything special. Thats a credit to their philosophy and approach down there, and it doesnt seem like they used any magic bullet...just hard work, good conditioning and high expectations they need their guys going deep into games. 

    At times like this I wish we werent so hamstrung financially, because IMO Mark Buehrle would be ideal for what this team needs. If nothing else he's a horse, the guy hasnt thrown under 200 innings in a season since his rookie year. Very steady, very durable, and he's another quality lefthanded starter. Word is he will go for a 3 year deal between 13-15 per. I realize thats no chump change, but seems like a relative bargain compared to the commitments they had to make to Lackey and Dice K. 3/40 probably gets it done with Buerhle. 

    Anyway, over the years I typically avoid the Hanley love fest that usually pops up every season in RSN. But for a change there maybe, just maybe, could ultimately be a window this year depending on how the Pujols situation shakes out. I for one feel that if they happen to land Pujols they would be more likely (not less) to consider finally dealing him if he continues to balk at changing positions. You think there's any chance they'd consider a package built around Youkilis, who is a tad cheaper and will be off the books sooner than Hanley? Especially if they make monster commitments to both Pujols and Reyes? They may almost prefer the financial flexibility instead of being on the hook for 15+ of Hanley for the next 3 years.

    Do you any of you guys make that deal if you're BC? Especially when considering Hanley's rising pricetag and dwindling production? (at least last season).

    Tough predicament for Ramirez. On one hand it's easy to say he should just suck it up and be a team guy only concerned with winning. As a baseball fan first thats my kneejerk reaction. But from a business standpoint Hanley knows that surrendering his premium middle infield position hurts his bargaining power long term, particlarly if he ends up in the outfield. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Read an article in the Globe today about BiValve.  Says he won't mess with mechanics, but he does want to be "hands on" with the pitchers, know what they throw in certain situations, etc.  Says he wants to be involved in this major aspect of the game.  Sounds good to me.  Also looks like Aceves and Bard are going to start, so they'll have to rebuild the pen.  With Aceves-Bard-Pap out of the pen, that's a major job. 

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    No Paps (Top 3 closer)
    No Bard (Top 10 set up man)
    No Aceves (Top 10 mid-long man)

    That's just about impossible to replace.

    I wouldn't do it... maybe Aceves, but not Bard.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, that's a lot of firepower gone.  I remember some years where the idea was "bullpen by committee."  I've never seen a "bullpen by committee" that was much good.  It's a long time between now and ST and opening day.  Maybe some of the current thinking will change.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    1) I can't see both Bard and Aceves going to the rotation.
    2) We will sign some pen arms or trade for a couple.
    3) Buch coming back strong can make up for a lot of the losses.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    When they offered Ortiz arb they certainly look prepared to keep him. Which places other needs on the back burner. We are talking about Bard and Aceves in the rotation and we have no closer? I'm in the twilight zone.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I don't get it either, boom, unless we plan on signing or trading for a solid closer and 2 set-up men, it's just robbing Peter to pay Paul.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I


    They're putting all their eggs in one basket to get Bailey....it's scary.

    And, they're expecting Jenks back healthy....scary
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Gentlemen, I read Cafardo's article this morning on state of RS budget.  He essentially says what you've been saying forever, Moon.  He says after doing the math that if we take on Big Papi, we have about (5) million to solve all our pitching problems--and that FO is rumored to be against going over the 178 million cap figure.  In other words, salaries of all players who walked will go to Papi and raises elsewhere.  I guess I for one have been viewing this in the abstract but this reality is very disturbing.  Right now I would seriously like to kick whoever was in charge or everyone involved in signing CC last year.  (Sorry Boom, I think Agon was right for the franchise going forward...)  I admit to being excited when they went after the "plum du jour" but his subsequent performance and the present economic fix leave me cold.  Here's one of the best franchises in baseball handcuffed by itself.  Wasn't there anyone in FO smart enough to see this--other than some of you here?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Gentlemen, I read Cafardo's article this morning on state of RS budget.  He essentially says what you've been saying forever, Moon.  He says after doing the math that if we take on Big Papi, we have about (5) million to solve all our pitching problems--and that FO is rumored to be against going over the 178 million cap figure.  In other words, salaries of all players who walked will go to Papi and raises elsewhere.  I guess I for one have been viewing this in the abstract but this reality is very disturbing.  Right now I would seriously like to kick whoever was in charge or everyone involved in signing CC last year.  (Sorry Boom, I think Agon was right for the franchise going forward...)  I admit to being excited when they went after the "plum du jour" but his subsequent performance and the present economic fix leave me cold.  Here's one of the best franchises in baseball handcuffed by itself.  Wasn't there anyone in FO smart enough to see this--other than some of you here?

    I happen to think we will go over the cap, but not by much. It makes me have second thoughts about the Scutty and Papi decisions recently. Our pitching is going to suffer in 2012.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from HOFFBURGER. Show HOFFBURGER's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    the luxury tax threshold is a serious pickle this offseason for this team, it's not only about paying the tax this year at an increased percentage over the past, but it's also the difference between it either increasing yet again or beginning to decrease next year and beyond based on whether they go over this season. going over this year potentially has future ramifications and doesnt necessarily just affect this offseason. so there is a possibility they are even more focused on not going over this year.

    hate to say it, but maybe instead of lowrie they should be looking to deal scutaro and free up that 6 million for just a tad more wiggle room now that papi will be coming back with a raise. it's not ideal, but can we get thru the season with lowrie/aviles?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It's not likely that a team will trade for Scutaro as a SS with a salary of 6 million.
    Or maybe at all.  Low market teams will be looking to build with youth from within. Contenders are pretty much set at the position. 
    He is Boston's SS until further notice.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It's possible we could trade Scutaro for an equal salary, but get a pitcher in return. Then use Iggy as the FT SS and Aviles as the back-up.

    Other salary relief trades could involve Youk, and go with an Aviles/Lowrie platoon.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]It's possible we could trade Scutaro for an equal salary, but get a pitcher in return. Then use Iggy as the FT SS and Aviles as the back-up. Other salary relief trades could involve Youk, and go with an Aviles/Lowrie platoon.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    But, moon, who might want or need Scutaro? 

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Have a look at what starting pitchers have signed for thus far...

    Sabathia   $122M/5
    Buehrle       $58M/4
    Wainwright $21M/2
    Dempster   $14M/1
    Harang       $12M/2
    Capuano    $10M/2
    B.Chen       $9M/2
    Bedard       $4.5M/1
    C. Wang     $4M/1
    F.Garcia     $4M/1

    Some of these guys never truly hit the "open market", but of the ones who did, are there any here worth more to the Sox than what they signed for?

    Here's the RPs who have signed:
    Papelbon  $50M/4
    H. Bell      $27M/3
    Valverde   $9M/1
    Nathan     $14.75M/2
    F.Franc    $12M/2
    Affeldt        $5M/1
    M. Capps   $4.75M/1
    JLopez       $8.5M/2
    Frasor        $3.75M/1
    Rauch         $3.5M/1
    Farnswrth $3.3M/1
    Tatevama  $1M/1

    Minor deals:
    A. Russell & B. Sanchez
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : But, moon, who might want or need Scutaro? 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Not many teams.

    Maybe Philly, if Rollins walks?
    Maybe a team in May with a major SS injury?

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    If RS and Papi can't agree on a price, do we still get draft picks?
     

Share