A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    The media is playing a strange hand at this point IMO. It is a quick sell but I am not sure the end game is there for them.Heidi Whatney was on Planet Mikey tonight. She mentioned that there was even before the "collapse" a lot friction between a lot of players and the media because the players distrusted the media and many told them to their faces they felt that the media would try and hurt them. So where is this going? The team is not likely to dump every guy targeted and replace them with better players. So what is the end game? If the media makes the fans hate this team enough nobody is going to follow the team or read what writers write unless the RS are winning. And if the RS are winning who the heck is going to talk them if the feeding frenzy doesn't end soon? My guess it would be easier to get Pats players to tell you what they really think about Ryan and the Jets than it will be to get anything but cliche quotes out of RS players or a new manager. Buckle up for a whole lot of "manager's decisions" and "we deal with that in-house" from next skipper IMHO.
    Posted by fivekatz



    Well, I hear that Papi said on ESPN that he didn't care to play in Boston anymore (unsubstantiated). So, the media is affecting player outlook. And if Papi is gone,
    it'll affect both the team and the fans.

    If the Globe doesn't over-react, the Herald will. And vice-versa. It's a no-win situation that will have consequences either way.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It was always easier in "the old days". We simply blamed the manager and GM and kept on loving our bumbling Sox... now this. 

    I'm not falling for the poison, but katz is right, the damage might already be done and much of the fanbase will be turned away, maybe for a long time.

    You can bet that if we had won and made the playoffs and maybe advanced one round, all this stuff would have been minimized. People always seem to want to blame someone. Look at all the Theo and Tito bash threads all year long. Now, that both are gone, the bashing has got worse... hmmm...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : That is conjecture at best. Defensive/fundamental brushfire was present long before Sept. That's a reflection of skillset and coaching. Tito perceived issues after the team went 1-4 in Sept. and called a meeting after the 14-0 win. My guess is he wanted to get thru to the players off a high note, instead of rubbing it in after a demoralizing loss. Maybe not such a good idea in hindsight. One tends to learn more from losing than winning, IMO. The team had no margin for error giving up 6-7 runs in the majority of games. The pitching didn't fall apart because of dissention. They are professionals and their track records speak for themselves. You are buying into a smokescreen, my friend.
    Posted by harness
    I agree with you Harness. The team broke down because of pitching. Most everybody here sit back and remember those games please.

    Virtually every night the starters put the offense in a hole, the offense would work back into the game, the starters would give back runs and the BP had to go 4 plus innings.

    Guys started to press at the plate and on the basepaths knowing it was going to 8 runs or more to win a game. The bullpen wore down.

    Almost everybody but a handful of players pressed. The normal give and take and friction that exists on every ballclub magnified.

    IMO the only situation that is at a critical stage is Lackey and that is more about his personality and how he is going to react to a market now literally hates him.

    There is a reason why clubs change managers after a bad reaction like this to adversity. And it is because that "new voice" as Francona says often changes a lot of that. And frankly I am sure there are a lot guys in that room that are embarrassed and angry at how the team finished that are coming back with a renewed attitude.


     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I agree with you Harness. The team broke down because of pitching. Most everybody here sit back and remember those games please. Virtually every night the starters put the offense in a hole, the offense would work back into the game, the starters would give back runs and the BP had to go 4 plus innings. Guys started to press at the plate and on the basepaths knowing it was going to 8 runs or more to win a game. The bullpen wore down. Almost everybody but a handful of players pressed. The normal give and take and friction that exists on every ballclub magnified. IMO the only situation that is at a critical stage is Lackey and that is more about his personality and how he is going to react to a market now literally hates him. There is a reason why clubs change managers after a bad reaction like this to adversity. And it is because that "new voice" as Francona says often changes a lot of that. And frankly I am sure there are a lot guys in that room that are embarrassed and angry at how the team finished that are coming back with a renewed attitude.
    Posted by fivekatz


    I wish you could hammer this point home to those flying on the witch-hunt brooms.
    This board is as toxic as I've ever seen it. I go back to 2007...and I didn't want any part of it then.

    Rod Serling could write a great script from all of this.
    The end is endless.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Harness: (1) You're saying some of these problems are being overblown.  I disagree because if just one of these areas (defense, attitude, commitment, baserunning, etc. had been a team focus over the last two weeks, we may  have won that one more game.  And then maybe you're right, we wouldn't be talking about this stuff now.  But they didn't win that one game. 

    Crit, if the Sox won 1-2 more games and got into the PO's, I got a feeling RedSox nation would have wished otherwise. Their pitching was in no shape for the PO's.


    (2)  You use the argument that when we were 80-41 no one was worried about this stuff.  True.  But the way they ended the year, negates all that in my opinion.  They definitely should have made the playoffs, even with their pitching problems.  It would be like a kid making the Dean's list for three years flunking out as a senior.  Most wouldn't say "He did a great job for three years; this other stuff is overblown." 

    I don't see it that way. The team was the best team in the A.L. for 67% of the year. That's something to draw from, not dismiss.
    If they stunk all year, then that's about talent level. It's important to make this distinction, so that it can be addressed.


    (3) Harness, I get your disillusionment with the article's Tito remarks.  You see them as a low blow.  I see them as a possible contributing factor.  I think that's what he was saying.  For me the fact that Tito's own kid was worried about his health lends credence to the idea that maybe health issues were distracting Tito.  Let's put aside for a moment our view of this.  Isn't the main issue here that Tito said he couldn't reach these guys anymore and they needed to hear a new voice?  The writer isn't blowing that out of perspective. 

    I seriously doubt Tito would agree.
    Articles like this are damaging as we have already seen with Papi and possibly others. If the FO caves, they will address the wrong areas.
    Nothing good comes out of all this.

    Tito made allusions but nothing concrete. So the media and the fans can now get lost in the maze of what he meant. The whole thing might have been an allusion, or a smokescreen, to Tito's backing of some poor coaches for all we know. Anytime you don't start with a concrete truth, it only gets worse.
    Assumptions...allegations...finger-pointing...burning at the stake...


    (4)  You're right.  He should have talked more about the pitching as the major factor.  And yes, you are also right that Wake wasn't the major problem in Sept. though some of us did feel maybe Aceves should have been given a shot.  But you are not right that this is all the press's fault that Wake was given all those starts to spur their feeding frenzy.  Right or wrong, Wake started because Tito/FO wanted him starting.  The press does make a big deal of a lot of things in Boston, and in my view, Thank God!  We are so lucky.  That only reflects that everyone cares here.  Watch people in other parks start walking out when their team is behind. When they win, you can't always find it in the paper.  

    I didn't say the press was responsible for Wake's starts. I said they are the ones who brought so much attention to the chase for the record.
    I agree with you in that he starts either way. Moon already addressed this point. Wake pitched well enough to win half those starts. Hohler confused the record with the need for him to take the mound, and he did it purposely to make us think it was a team distraction.
    The players and the fans were pulling for Wake. How is that a distraction?


    (5)  Tito responded and said his committment was not in question.  I believe him.  But player committment did not match his.  That's still part of his job.   I want the RS to fix the pitching, first priority.  I want the new manager to tighten up these other areas as well. 
    Posted by Critter23

    I didn't see any evidence of this on the field. I saw a team trying to win - trying to overcome huge obstacles. When a man climbs a mountain and fails, he often blames the terrain. And if he's never climbed a mountain before, then maybe it's the man.

    But this team has a history of climbing mountains and getting to the top.
    The terrain was near impossible this time because the pitching kept the hitters in deep holes. And as Katz said, it wore the rest of the team down.
     
    The way the season ended fuels the speculation. And that's where the real issues are clouded.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, I have never ever doubted Harness and your acumen about the pitching.  You are one of the most reasoned people I know, and though I did want to give Aceves a start, I completely agree with your point that Wake was probably our best option for all his starts.  Your stats don't lie.  My point there was just that the press was not responsible for stirring things up and causing the RS to chase Wake's record.  The RS started whom they wanted. 

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Moon, I have never ever doubted Harness and your acumen about the pitching.  You are one of the most reasoned people I know, and though I did want to give Aceves a start, I completely agree with your point that Wake was probably our best option for all his starts.  Your stats don't lie.  My point there was just that the press was not responsible for stirring things up and causing the RS to chase Wake's record.  The RS started whom they wanted. 
    Posted by Critter23
    Fair enough Crit. OTOH the media and talk radio in Boston throws gasoline on sparks, let alone fires. They are a historically rough crew.

    I will say aside from talk radio I think the beat writers and op ed folks did not make too big an issue out of Wake too long. Some of that was the failings of Miller, Weiland and the highly compensated Mr Lackey.

    Hindsight is 20-20 of course and Epstein probably should have gotten more serious about his depth chart way back when Dice K went down. Lackey had started so badly and had both personal and health issues. That meant they were an injury away from Beckett - Lester and bunch bottom of the rotation options. And if that happened and somebody did not perform beyond the recent horizons the club was going to end up in a bad place.

    Of course as luck had it Buch got hurt, it turned out much worse they they first thought. The record up to the trade deadline clouded how much trouble that would be. But hey knew it was enough of problem they got Bedard, which was all they could do without emptying the top of the farm system.

    It isn't an "excuse" IMO. It is a chain of events that 162 game schedules can make happen.

    I don't care if everybody sits on the bench, sings happy songs together, go on low carb diets and the manager is hard azz. Any year the RS get under 110 starts from their opening day starting 5 and 28 of those are from a guy having a horrid year on and of the field, that team won't go far.

    Most of the rest will clean itself up. At this point the search for who is at fault is getting carried away.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I have to admit that the last couple of days, I really just don't understand what some of my respected friends are saying here; I feel like I'm hearing some of this through a time warp.

     Katz, what do you mean by this?  "If the media makes the fans hate this team enough nobody is going to follow the team or read what the writers write unless the RS are winning?  And if the RS are winning who the heck is going to talk to them if the feeding frenzy doesn't end soon?"

    I'm just completely nonplussed by this.  Do you really think the media can make the fans hate this team?  I watched Ted Williams hit his last  homer on my grandmother's black and white and I watched 40 years of futility.  Are you serious that people like me are going to stop watching this team after I have about fifty years in this?  Are you serious that I'm going to stop reading what the media says unless they are winning?  I've been reading at least one Boston paper daily since the summer of 1961.  You really think I'm going to wait now until they win again?  I'm not trying to be disrespectful in any way, but I think you and some others here are having your own feeding frenzy about the press.  You are giving the press way too much power here.  Finally, what do you mean "Who is going to talk to them?"  The bottom line is they will keep writing what they think is appropriate whether the athletes respond to them or not.  That's how it works.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : That's an excellent point. Hohler was assigned it and it fits his MO. So, the Globe gives the players/Tito, FO, etc. a sacrificial lamb. This is not to excuse Hohler, as any writer can draw the line as to where and how much he is willing to be compromised. Once a hack is known to be just that, it's like a stoolie in that it's not about the dirt anymore. It's about paychecks and dealing with the consequences. Reminds me of an old episode of Hawaii 5-0, where the mob recruits this really bright college kid by paying his way through school. The jobs they give him seem innocent at first, but as he climbs his way up the political landscape, the dirt starts to mount. He isn't in a position to get out as he finds himself locked in. A man has to be accountable for his actions. But his piece also might expose the situation he's really in.
    Posted by harness

    I see ZERO evidence that Hohler is anything other than one of the Globe's best investigative reporters. He has won several prestigious journalism awards. For example:


    The Globe has a reputation of being one of the finest newspapers in the US. It's generally regarded as a slight step down from the NY Times and has held that position for at least the 40 years I've been following it. If you want a hack, yellow journalism newspaper go look at the Herald!

    This is nothing short of you completely slandering Hohler with ZERO evidence. If you call him a hack over and over some people will start buying it but not me. I prefer those pesky things called FACTS.

    If you guys don't like the message that is one thing but look at your responses. Baseless accusations with not the slightest shred of veracity.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    I have to admit that the last couple of days, I really just don't understand what some of my respected friends are saying here; I feel like I'm hearing some of this through a time warp.  Katz, what do you mean by this?  "If the media makes the fans hate this team enough nobody is going to follow the team or read what the writers write unless the RS are winning?  And if the RS are winning who the heck is going to talk to them if the feeding frenzy doesn't end soon?" I'm just completely nonplussed by this.  Do you really think the media can make the fans hate this team?  I watched Ted Williams hit his last  homer on my grandmother's black and white and I watched 40 years of futility.  Are you serious that people like me are going to stop watching this team after I have about fifty years in this?  Are you serious that I'm going to stop reading what the media says unless they are winning?  I've been reading at least one Boston paper daily since the summer of 1961.  You really think I'm going to wait now until they win again?  I'm not trying to be disrespectful in any way, but I think you and some others here are having your own feeding frenzy about the press.  You are giving the press way too much power here.  Finally, what do you mean "Who is going to talk to them?"  The bottom line is they will keep writing what they think is appropriate whether the athletes respond to them or not.  That's how it works.
    Posted by Critter23


    This statement resonates. The press we read as kids is far different than what fills the headlines now. These cheap shots are affecting how players see this team. If Papi is wearing pinstripes next year, you'll then get a good idea about the impact a bad press can have.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness'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 : I see ZERO evidence that Hohler is anything other than one of the Globe's best investigative reporters.

    That's because you can't distinguish one hack from another.


    He has won several prestigious journalism awards.
    For example: http://www.ewa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=contest_grandprize

    Really? I only see one award for all his years in journalism. Where are the others?



    The Globe has a reputation of being one of the finest newspapers in the US. It's generally regarded as a slight step down from the NY Times and has held that position for at least the 40 years I've been following it.

    Then you should know how reputations can be altered. The Globe is a shell of what it once was. But compared to the other sources I've seen you use to justify your PED bloodhound hunt, I can see why you would say this.


    If you want a hack, yellow journalism newspaper go look at the Herald! This is nothing short of you completely slandering Hohler with ZERO evidence. If you call him a hack over and over some people will start buying it but not me. I prefer those pesky things called FACTS. If you guys don't like the message that is one thing but look at your responses. Baseless accusations with not the slightest shred of veracity.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom

    You champion baseless accusations with UR facts of suspicion.
    Hohler exemplifies the garbage readers are fed. For you to put him on some kind of a pedestal says everything about your low standards, which are quite apparent in your constant groundless PED accusations. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : If that were true, Youk, then Tito would now be signed. Don't you think the issues with his marriage and pain killers illuminated by the press have a bearing on his future employment as a manager? GM's will now think twice, as they have to answer for their decisions. You play a game of hoops many, many years ago with Hohler and feel his article was fair. I don't. Schilling called it "character assassination of the worst kind" (against Tito). Hohler clearly stated how much the subject matter bothered and hurt Tito, yet the SOB took it one step further. The piece brought attention to everything that had already been written, with the possible exception of Tito's marital issues. Hohler's intention was to link everything he could dig up with the collapse. Then Hohler gave the impression of fairness by quoting Tito. He put it in the minds of the reader and then tied to justify his actions. He never made a single quote from his sources. You call that fair? If any of his sources come back to him and say,"Hey man. I never even alluded to..." Hohler can respond with: "I know. I never quoted you, did I?". This hack took scraps from different "sources" and used it to feed the fan frenzy. Here's an example of how a writer can sway his readers: Let's say the Sox lost a really tough game in the 9th, 4-3. A writer can say "gallant effort! team just fell short as..." Or "RedSox choked again in the 9th when...". Hohler's piece exemplifies the garbage that the Globe allows to be printed. When they hired Mazz and Abraham and Hohler, the tide turned...for the worst.
    Posted by harness


     Harness, you jump to conclusions by stating a fact (Tito has not been signed to manage) and try to show that your reasoning is solid. Teams will be replacing managers, but will first interview multiple candidates, so staing the fact that Tito hasn't signed, doesn't prove he wont be signed. The Schilling conclusion is bereft of irreproachability, his record as a commentator is suspect. I suppose we won't see it the same way, I won't paint the press as the bad guys. Why do the players and coaches even bother to read the clippings?
     
  13. 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:
    Moon, I have never ever doubted Harness and your acumen about the pitching.  You are one of the most reasoned people I know, and though I did want to give Aceves a start, I completely agree with your point that Wake was probably our best option for all his starts.  Your stats don't lie.  My point there was just that the press was not responsible for stirring things up and causing the RS to chase Wake's record.  The RS started whom they wanted. 
    Posted by Critter23

    That was never my point (about the press).

    Wake would never have chased the record had every starter been healthy all year. Once he was forced into the regular rotation, I do not think the FO thought he'd start over 15- 20 games. Once the team went 11-4 in his first 15 starts, why would they ever consider replacing him with Aceves or anyone else? The Aceves start issue, IMO, was not related to Wake being removed from the rotation. It was related to Weiland, Miller or Lackey. As for the record, I do think it became a distraction, but not because he was starting when he shouldn't have been, but because it took so long between 199 and 200. That happenes with every record that is prolonged. I don't blame Wake, the press, or the FO. Wake pitched Ok in that stretch, but it just didn't happen (for way too long). 

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    This is nothing short of you completely slandering Hohler with ZERO evidence. If you call him a hack over and over some people will start buying it but not me. I prefer those pesky things called FACTS.

    If you guys don't like the message that is one thing but look at your responses. Baseless accusations with not the slightest shred of veracity.

    Boom, I don't know how much, if any, of the story was accurate, but I do know that many reporters sensationalize the story in order to create a buzz and get more readers. Maybe it can never be proven how much of the story was correct, but do you really believe every word was 100% accurate?
     
  15. 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:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Fair enough Crit. OTOH the media and talk radio in Boston throws gasoline on sparks, let alone fires. They are a historically rough crew. I will say aside from talk radio I think the beat writers and op ed folks did not make too big an issue out of Wake too long. Some of that was the failings of Miller, Weiland and the highly compensated Mr Lackey. Hindsight is 20-20 of course and Epstein probably should have gotten more serious about his depth chart way back when Dice K went down. Lackey had started so badly and had both personal and health issues. That meant they were an injury away from Beckett - Lester and bunch bottom of the rotation options. And if that happened and somebody did not perform beyond the recent horizons the club was going to end up in a bad place. Of course as luck had it Buch got hurt, it turned out much worse they they first thought. The record up to the trade deadline clouded how much trouble that would be. But hey knew it was enough of problem they got Bedard, which was all they could do without emptying the top of the farm system. It isn't an "excuse" IMO. It is a chain of events that 162 game schedules can make happen. I don't care if everybody sits on the bench, sings happy songs together, go on low carb diets and the manager is hard azz. Any year the RS get under 110 starts from their opening day starting 5 and 28 of those are from a guy having a horrid year on and of the field, that team won't go far. Most of the rest will clean itself up. At this point the search for who is at fault is getting carried away.
    Posted by fivekatz
    I am less sanguine than you that "most of the rest will clean itself up."  A dicey atmosphere on a sports team cannot be corrected quickly or easily, even if a drill sergeant is put in charge or if personal habits are altered.  While I agree with you and Harness and others about how pitching sank the ship, the question remains as to why pitching sank the ship specifically and when it did. ( Young and the conditioning coaches were incompetent or too permissive? Hard to believe that if those observations are in the story they are the whole story. ) Things went on amongst players on this club. ( No one is denying this. ) Most of those players will be on this club in ST. Anyone who thinks that those things will go away of their own accord or can be made to go away by a strong hand is, IMO, dealing more in hope than in human reality.
    I fear that this spectacular nosedive will have a longer hangover than some folks appear to believe.  I said "fear that," not "predict that." 
    Let's move away from all the tittle-tattle, naughty newsies, gossip, reprimanding of posters for venting, etc. On ground level, this club, as it stands, has problems in the corner outfields, in the rotation, in middle relief, behind the plate defensively, and defensively on the left side of the infield. The team will probably try to address some if not all of these problems in the off-season. But just like "don't fix it if it ain't broken," something broken is not fixed until it's fixed. The evidence for that, one way or the other, won't be available until well into next year. 
      

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Well said, ex. There's a boatload of problems and issues beyond the clubhouse atmosphere. It will be interesting to see which way they will be prioritized.
     
  17. 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:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I am less sanguine than you that "most of the rest will clean itself up."  A dicey atmosphere on a sports team cannot be corrected quickly or easily, even if a drill sergeant is put in charge or if personal habits are altered.  While I agree with you and Harness and others about how pitching sank the ship, the question remains as to why pitching sank the ship specifically and when it did. ( Young and the conditioning coaches were incompetent or too permissive? Hard to believe that if those observations are in the story they are the whole story. ) Things went on amongst players on this club. ( No one is denying this. ) Most of those players will be on this club in ST. Anyone who thinks that those things will go away of their own accord or can be made to go away by a strong hand is, IMO, dealing more in hope than in human reality. I fear that this spectacular nosedive will have a longer hangover than some folks appear to believe.  I said "fear that," not "predict that."  Let's move away from all the tittle-tattle, naughty newsies, gossip, reprimanding of posters for venting, etc. On ground level, this club, as it stands, has problems in the corner outfields, in the rotation, in middle relief, behind the plate defensively, and defensively on the left side of the infield. The team will probably try to address some if not all of these problems in the off-season. But just like "don't fix it if it ain't broken," something broken is not fixed until it's fixed. The evidence for that, one way or the other, won't be available until well into next year.    
    Posted by expitch


    Hey Ex,
    I tend to disagree that what ailed us last year can't be addresses and fixed next year...Jimy William and Kerrigan were replaced by the easy going Grady little and we made it to the ALCS...

    The fix starts with the new skipper and how he communicates the expectation of how best to trun the page will go a long ways towards cleaning up whatever transpired behind close doors last year...

    Job one for Cherington and the new skipper is to accertain who needs to go and who needs a sit down chat...then together make sure that every player shows up to camp ready to compete...
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    ...make sure that every player shows up to camp ready to compete...

    You'd think this was a given, but it never seems to be that way with the Sox. It's been this way for years. The "collapse" just put it under the magnifying glass.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, never had a problem with your views, and completely agree with you about Wake.  Never have a problem with people disagreeing with me.  The last few days I don't like the tone here, and I don't let people get away with talking down to me.  Because I do read everything I can find on the RS, I take it personally when called "bloodthirsty, a little mouse who believes everything, one of "those posters who suck up..."  I don't comment on people's spelling or grammar mistakes when I talk with them here.  I don't think smart people have to prove to other people they are smart.  I don't reprimand people for reading the Globe or not reading the Globe.  Maybe we're all riled up but I think the level of civility here is not what it should be right now.  Because I'm riled up about that, I decided to call people on what they were saying that makes absolutely no sense to me.  I truly admire you and Harness and Katz but in my view some of you are too focused on what the press is doing right now.  The press didn't play one baseball game this year.  The RS did. 

    To change the focus a bit, are you watching the Tigers?  I have so much respect for your guy Leyland now.  I think he does not have the horses that Texas has but he is managing masterfully and getting every last drop out of his staff and pitchers.  His moves are keeping that team in it.  Great defense and strategy and gutsy play.  I just want the RS to work together like that and not beat themselves.

    One more thing.  I think David Ortiz will play for the RS next year.  This is like a family fight--you say what's going to hurt the other guy the most.  Saying "NY" hurts the most.  In his own way I do think he tried to make a difference in the clubhouse from comments attributed to him, but he was no more successful than Tito. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    harness has a way with words
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Hey, Bean,
    Now go back and read my post again. What are you disagreeing with? So you are more sanguine than I? So you have less fear than I that the hangover MAY last at least a year, if not longer. I did not say flatly that the problems cannot be fixed next season. If you are disagreeing with that, you are disagreeing with what I did not say.
    My post was a statement of skepticism. Yours seems to suggest that a couple of sessions of tough-love therapy will straighten out the heads of players. I remain skeptical. How does one "disagree" with skepticism? I'm waiting to see. I gave reasons why. Not respectable reasons in your mind? Just curious.
    The two situations you compare are not alike. The circumstances then were not like the circumstances now. More to point, it's always easier to ease up than to clamp down.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I am less sanguine than you that "most of the rest will clean itself up."  A dicey atmosphere on a sports team cannot be corrected quickly or easily, even if a drill sergeant is put in charge or if personal habits are altered.  While I agree with you and Harness and others about how pitching sank the ship, the question remains as to why pitching sank the ship specifically and when it did. ( Young and the conditioning coaches were incompetent or too permissive? Hard to believe that if those observations are in the story they are the whole story. ) Things went on amongst players on this club. ( No one is denying this. ) Most of those players will be on this club in ST. Anyone who thinks that those things will go away of their own accord or can be made to go away by a strong hand is, IMO, dealing more in hope than in human reality. I fear that this spectacular nosedive will have a longer hangover than some folks appear to believe.  I said "fear that," not "predict that."  Let's move away from all the tittle-tattle, naughty newsies, gossip, reprimanding of posters for venting, etc. On ground level, this club, as it stands, has problems in the corner outfields, in the rotation, in middle relief, behind the plate defensively, and defensively on the left side of the infield. The team will probably try to address some if not all of these problems in the off-season. But just like "don't fix it if it ain't broken," something broken is not fixed until it's fixed. The evidence for that, one way or the other, won't be available until well into next year.    
    Posted by expitch
    Well there are a coupe of reasons why I am less concerned.

    One thing is the team's record from May-August. Many of the "problems" are over blown and come to light in the search for what went wrong.

    The search isn't hard to find. The team went 7-20 because they had a pitching staff that allowed over 7 earned runs in that stretch. The best offenses in baseball in 27 game stretch are going to average under 6 runs scored a game. It isn't good copy but there it is 7 plus allowed - 5 plus scored = lot's of losses.

    The environment Francona created was very lax in many ways. It worked for years. It did not work when the team came under the great changes of frankly having to go with three and then four marginal staring pitchers every 5 turns.

    Now as for in fighting, it is on every team to some extent. Here's how over blown some of this is IMHO (a pardon me if I use some acerbic wit the describe the many crisis that were a bigger deal than having to pitch Weiland, Miller, Wakefield and Lackey so often in September according to the media and much of RS Nation.

    The manager was a drug addict with a dysfunctional home life (he's gone - who cares but isn't that juicy and certain covers up that the FO whiffed on the Lackey and Crawford signings and did too little too late to address roster weakness)

    Youk annoyed guys trying to lead during the collapse (so what? 85% of the guys who ever played with Schill would probably say he ticked them off at some point in a very similar way). The worse thing about Youk's September was a sports hernia that did not allow him to play. Bit I am sure that this caused Miller and Weiland to be grease fires.

    Ortiz was vocal at moments about wanting an extension, answered questions about it when asked rather than giving a cliche non-answer and we had the one incident with the manager's press conference ( who is now gone BTW). He may be back, he may not but is this why the RS pitching allowed over 7 runs a game during the collapse?

    A-Gon when asked right after the final crushing defeat rather than railing on himself and his teammates for 10 minutes in a blue rant, the slug had ithe nsensitivity to say he guessed it just wasn't God's will. And when asked if he thought the RS very heavy night game - get away schedule (almost everybody home and road wants the higher drawing night games when the RS are in town) wore on him. He actually answered the question yes. OMG this is just awful huh?

    Now let's get to the biggest crisis of all. The starting pitchers addiction to KFC, Budweiser and Madden 2012. May I start by saying that starting pitchers in MLB tend to run in their own pack, kind of the way offensive and defensive players do in the NFL. Cut the details out about what the guys did in the clubhouse during games it isn't that unusual that starting pitchers not scheduled to start or having completed a start go to the clubhouse during games. But the fix is so easy. The next manager radically limits the privilege. And this  is a lot easier for a new voice to do, Tito knew that BTW and this was some of what he was talking about when he said it was a time for a new voice.

    Let's say for a minute there were conditioning issues. Again new manager sets new rules and if a player strays he hits him with fines or with reduced PT. That will change fast.

    I could go on about the RS comments about nutrition but I think they lost their way on this somewhere along the way and while not trying to dump on Terry, he must own a lot of that. When MLB and the MLBPA announced the tougher guidelines for drug testing many players expressed more concerns about the restrictions it was going to place on amphetamines use than they were about PEDs.

    The RS at the time said they were going to radically change the foods and drinks they made available to players in their home and away clubhouses to counter act the lack of greenies to "pick guys energy up" as the season dragged on. KFC and beer even being available during the game suggests that they did not follow through or let it slide. Easily fixed.

    Yes the roster structure was imperfect, but everyone in baseball's is. The RS just like any other year will go about making improvements where they can. The will look to improve RF if for no other reason that Ells could drop off by 10 HRs and 20 RBIs and will still be arguably the best lead-off guy in the sport. And yes they will try realy hard to make that a RH bat.

    I am less concerned about the catchers, though I would not be shocked to see the RS try and get a younger back-up than Tek, so Salty's PT could be more challenged if necessary and/or Lavarnway making the big club by June if his AAA numbers hold over another 100 plus sample set.

    I think the RS will live with the left side of IF unless Ortiz walks, in which case Youk will become a similar deployment to what Michael Young did in Texas this year. SS I think they wait out Iggy for the moment and live with some combination of Scoot, Aviles and no pop Jeff.

    What team does not have to tweak it's BP after almost every season? 

    The big one of course will be starting pitching. Now I happen to have sadly come to the conclusion that Lackey needs to be subtracted. He has a thin skin and just became BF Dent, Bill Buckner, Johnny Mac and Grady Little all rolled into one testy, defensive body. Forget the possibility/probability of Lackey being a valuable bottom of the rotation pitcher going forward his personality and the market's mood will never work.

    The RS will need to low risk high ceiling guys through trade or FA signings get a few and hope one sticks, like lots of teams have to every year. They are going to have to get about 130 starts from their opening day starting 5 and the aggregate ERA will need to be 4.50 or less. Every team in MLB is in that same position IMHO.

    The reason I think the "white noise" can be altered Expitch is because in large part players regardless of of salary, want to play. And when they play they like to win because it is more fun than losing. They will have learned from this experience frankly. And a more structured environment will assist them on that road.

    I read very little in the unwillingness of so many players to talk about the allegations. It a no gain exercise. That was obvious the last night in Baltimore when a deeply religious man said that he guessed it wasn't God's will and when asked about the schedule variances from San Diego to the mega attraction RS was tough was hard him in first year he actual said yes and then become the first victim of the which hunt. Right now, no matter what people say it will be spun in its worst light. It is like asking a guy if he is cheating on his wife. No matter what he says it is now alleged that he has a mistress.

    They'll get past this and be a pretty good team because outside of two bad stretches they were a great team in 2011. Not without flaws because there never has been one of those, even WS champs often have flaws.

    To me improving the core is the only way to go because only winning will take the stench off of the collapse. Blowing it up will feel great to a lot fans right until they realize in blowing it up the RS became Camden Yard North for half a decade "if" they got lucky with their trades and draft picks.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I truly admire you and Harness and Katz but in my view some of you are too focused on what the press is doing right now.  The press didn't play one baseball game this year.  The RS did. 

    Crit, I agree 100%. I have not said much about the press: only that I am reserving judgement until (if ever) more facts are revealed. I think others are making a big deal out of the press than I, either in support or against the stories.

    To change the focus a bit, are you watching the Tigers?  I have so much respect for your guy Leyland now.  I think he does not have the horses that Texas has but he is managing masterfully and getting every last drop out of his staff and pitchers.  His moves are keeping that team in it.  Great defense and strategy and gutsy play.  I just want the RS to work together like that and not beat themselves.

    I have always been a big Leyland fan. Nobody is perfect, but he's a no-nonsense kind of guy (or at least has that persona- which is half the battle sometimes).

    I do think the emotions are overflowing a bit here. I hope we won't hold grudges for too long over what was said out of frustration rather than reason. I respect many here who disagree with me. I think there is probably a little truth in both sides.

    One more thing.  I think David Ortiz will play for the RS next year.  This is like a family fight--you say what's going to hurt the other guy the most.  Saying "NY" hurts the most.  In his own way I do think he tried to make a difference in the clubhouse from comments attributed to him, but he was no more successful than Tito. 
     
  24. 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:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Well there are a coupe of reasons why I am less concerned. One thing is the team's record from May-August. Many of the "problems" are over blown and come to light in the search for what went wrong. The search isn't hard to find. The team went 7-20 because they had a pitching staff that allowed over 7 earned runs in that stretch. The best offenses in baseball in 27 game stretch are going to average under 6 runs scored a game. It isn't good copy but there it is 7 plus allowed - 5 plus scored = lot's of losses. The environment Francona created was very lax in many ways. It worked for years. It did not work when the team came under the great changes of frankly having to go with three and then four marginal staring pitchers every 5 turns. Now as for in fighting, it is on every team to some extent. Here's how over blown some of this is IMHO (a pardon me if I use some acerbic wit the describe the many crisis that were a bigger deal than having to pitch Weiland, Miller, Wakefield and Lackey so often in September according to the media and much of RS Nation. The manager was a drug addict with a dysfunctional home life (he's gone - who cares but isn't that juicy and certain covers up that the FO whiffed on the Lackey and Crawford signings and did too little too late to address roster weakness) Youk annoyed guys trying to lead during the collapse (so what? 85% of the guys who ever played with Schill would probably say he ticked them off at some point in a very similar way). The worse thing about Youk's September was a sports hernia that did not allow him to play. Bit I am sure that this caused Miller and Weiland to be grease fires. Ortiz was vocal at moments about wanting an extension, answered questions about it when asked rather than giving a cliche non-answer and we had the one incident with the manager's press conference ( who is now gone BTW). He may be back, he may not but is this why the RS pitching allowed over 7 runs a game during the collapse? A-Gon when asked right after the final crushing defeat rather than railing on himself and his teammates for 10 minutes in a blue rant, the slug had ithe nsensitivity to say he guessed it just wasn't God's will. And when asked if he thought the RS very heavy night game - get away schedule (almost everybody home and road wants the higher drawing night games when the RS are in town) wore on him. He actually answered the question yes. OMG this is just awful huh? Now let's get to the biggest crisis of all. The starting pitchers addiction to KFC, Budweiser and Madden 2012. May I start by saying that starting pitchers in MLB tend to run in their own pack, kind of the way offensive and defensive players do in the NFL. Cut the details out about what the guys did in the clubhouse during games it isn't that unusual that starting pitchers not scheduled to start or having completed a start go to the clubhouse during games. But the fix is so easy. The next manager radically limits the privilege. And this  is a lot easier for a new voice to do, Tito knew that BTW and this was some of what he was talking about when he said it was a time for a new voice. Let's say for a minute there were conditioning issues. Again new manager sets new rules and if a player strays he hits him with fines or with reduced PT. That will change fast. I could go on about the RS comments about nutrition but I think they lost their way on this somewhere along the way and while not trying to dump on Terry, he must own a lot of that. When MLB and the MLBPA announced the tougher guidelines for drug testing many players expressed more concerns about the restrictions it was going to place on amphetamines use than they were about PEDs. The RS at the time said they were going to radically change the foods and drinks they made available to players in their home and away clubhouses to counter act the lack of greenies to "pick guys energy up" as the season dragged on. KFC and beer even being available during the game suggests that they did not follow through or let it slide. Easily fixed. Yes the roster structure was imperfect, but everyone in baseball's is. The RS just like any other year will go about making improvements where they can. The will look to improve RF if for no other reason that Ells could drop off by 10 HRs and 20 RBIs and will still be arguably the best lead-off guy in the sport. And yes they will try realy hard to make that a RH bat. I am less concerned about the catchers, though I would not be shocked to see the RS try and get a younger back-up than Tek, so Salty's PT could be more challenged if necessary and/or Lavarnway making the big club by June if his AAA numbers hold over another 100 plus sample set. I think the RS will live with the left side of IF unless Ortiz walks, in which case Youk will become a similar deployment to what Michael Young did in Texas this year. SS I think they wait out Iggy for the moment and live with some combination of Scoot, Aviles and no pop Jeff. What team does not have to tweak it's BP after almost every season?  The big one of course will be starting pitching. Now I happen to have sadly come to the conclusion that Lackey needs to be subtracted. He has a thin skin and just became BF Dent, Bill Buckner, Johnny Mac and Grady Little all rolled into one testy, defensive body. Forget the possibility/probability of Lackey being a valuable bottom of the rotation pitcher going forward his personality and the market's mood will never work. The RS will need to low risk high ceiling guys through trade or FA signings get a few and hope one sticks, like lots of teams have to every year. They are going to have to get about 130 starts from their opening day starting 5 and the aggregate ERA will need to be 4.50 or less. Every team in MLB is in that same position IMHO. The reason I think the "white noise" can be altered Expitch is because in large part players regardless of of salary, want to play. And when they play they like to win because it is more fun than losing. They will have learned from this experience frankly. And a more structured environment will assist them on that road. I read very little in the unwillingness of so many players to talk about the allegations. It a no gain exercise. That was obvious the last night in Baltimore when a deeply religious man said that he guessed it wasn't God's will and when asked about the schedule variances from San Diego to the mega attraction RS was tough was hard him in first year he actual said yes and then become the first victim of the which hunt. Right now, no matter what people say it will be spun in its worst light. It is like asking a guy if he is cheating on his wife. No matter what he says it is now alleged that he has a mistress. They'll get past this and be a pretty good team because outside of two bad stretches they were a great team in 2011. Not without flaws because there never has been one of those, even WS champs often have flaws. To me improving the core is the only way to go because only winning will take the stench off of the collapse. Blowing it up will feel great to a lot fans right until they realize in blowing it up the RS became Camden Yard North for half a decade "if" they got lucky with their trades and draft picks. Just my take
    Posted by fivekatz
    IMO, the Boston organization has earned the healthy dose of skepticism that I expressed. Nothing you say about what went wrong or how it might be -- even certainly will be -- fixed alters my skepticism one bit. ( Fixing X has been known to cause a problem with Y. The Law of Intended Consequences appears to be one of the constants in life. ) This club put itself in the dumps. Myriad analyses, explanations, and projections are possible, including yours. IMO, the onus is not on skeptics but on the club itself and also on people who are confident that the club knows how to fix the problems. As always, the answers come with results.
    You say this and that happen on other teams too. But this and that never happen in exactly the same way and for the same reasons. No two mixes of players and circumstances are ever exactly alike. One could make the same kind of general remarks about life itself -- but  generalizations rarely apply the same way to disparate specific situations.  How do you know -- I mean know -- that this group of players will get it together and win because winning is more fun than losing? Right, that's what players should do, but neither players nor the rest of us always do what we should do. 
    The Sox for the moment are in an unprecedented status. Unique, in fact. Exactly why that happened is grist for the analytic mill. Whether it can be remedied fairly soon remains to be seen. 
    I'm waiting to see. 

     

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I :
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I see ZERO evidence that Hohler is anything other than one of the Globe's best investigative reporters. That's because you can't distinguish one hack from another . He has won several prestigious journalism awards. For example: http://www.ewa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=contest_grandprize Really? I only see one award for all his years in journalism . Where are the others? The Globe has a reputation of being one of the finest newspapers in the US. It's generally regarded as a slight step down from the NY Times and has held that position for at least the 40 years I've been following it. Then you should know how reputations can be altered. The Globe is a shell of what it once was. But compared to the other sources I've seen you use to justify your PED bloodhound hunt, I can see why you would say this. If you want a hack, yellow journalism newspaper go look at the Herald! This is nothing short of you completely slandering Hohler with ZERO evidence. If you call him a hack over and over some people will start buying it but not me. I prefer those pesky things called FACTS. If you guys don't like the message that is one thing but look at your responses. Baseless accusations with not the slightest shred of veracity. Posted by Boomerangsdotcom You champion baseless accusations with UR facts of suspicion. Hohler exemplifies the garbage readers are fed. For you to put him on some kind of a pedestal says everything about your low standards, which are quite apparent in your constant groundless PED accusations. 
    Posted by harness

    If you actually read the link harness you would see another award mentioned. Mr. "reading comprehension". You cite that in others often and you get it wrong yourself over and over.

    I'm still waiting for PROOF that you said you HAD and were waiting for the worst possible moment to UNLOAD on me. Nothing but crickets from your outrageous slander. Nothing but crickets.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share