A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    The numbers overall for the year were not bad for Bard. They were similar if not better than Aceves if I remember correctly. And he probably did come in in more difficult circumstances. I still think there is something to be said for a closer mentality. Maybe Bard has it but I'm not at all convinced. I really think Aceves is the better bet. Keep Bard where he is. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I do not want to stir up a can of worms here but I think an astute analysis of the situation going forward, assuming that the new CBA actually allows blood testing as Bard said they were receptive to recently BTW, should be to seriously consider the possibility of PED use among players. We may be seeing some real precipitous declines in some players and not all of them will be HR hitters. This is unrelated to the above Bard situation as of course I am not speculating about him. 

    If we are going to sign players to multiple year deals and there are indicators of PED use, I wouldn't do that deal. Blood tests are a whole difference ball game. Just my take.
     
  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:
    We can agree to disagree slomag. I think he didn't want to put the ball over the plate, that he fought that until the very end. The guy would put base runners on rather than throwing the ball over the plate. It seems that in the press the Sox kept telling him to pitch to contact more. He rarely got past the 5th inning....etc. Even before he got here Bobby Valentine predicted that major league hitters would sometimes take his fastball out of the park. And I think he pitched the way he did because he knew that was true. On the other hand, I probably agree with you on Darvish's potential. I just don't think the Redsox are anxious to go down that road again. I also don't think I agree with the way the Sox managed Matsuzaka and Oki. Since we do not know all the facts maybe I'm unaware of key issues but they should have trusted Matsuzaka's judgement more IMO. He needed a lot of practise throws to refine his accuracy. As did Tazawa and Oki. It is part of Japanese pitching and what makes them so good when they are healthy. It's just that they do often wear out much sooner than US pitchers, or at least that is what we have been told. I'm not certain even that is true. What I think we do know however is that Matsuzaka needed pinpoint control to be successful  and if they didn't let him develop that to the needed level it affected his performance. His best 2 years were his first 2. Same thing with Oki and Tazawa. There may be something to their practice methods which are positive.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom
    Aside from nationality the three RS pitchers you mention have very little in common.

    Dice K - in his "prime" but heavy innings by the time he was 26.

    Oki - a journeyman verteran reliever in Japan

    Tazawa - 21 year old kid.
     
  4. 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 : Aside from nationality the three RS pitchers you mention have very little in common. Dice K - in his "prime" but heavy innings by the time he was 26. Oki - a journeyman verteran reliever in Japan Tazawa - 21 year old kid.
    Posted by fivekatz

    They all had very similar practice methods. They all threw a lot of side sessions, as in hundreds more pitches per week.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    We can agree to disagree slomag. I think he didn't want to put the ball over the plate, that he fought that until the very end. The guy would put base runners on rather than throwing the ball over the plate. It seems that in the press the Sox kept telling him to pitch to contact more. He rarely got past the 5th inning....etc. Even before he got here Bobby Valentine predicted that major league hitters would sometimes take his fastball out of the park. And I think he pitched the way he did because he knew that was true. On the other hand, I probably agree with you on Darvish's potential. I just don't think the Redsox are anxious to go down that road again. I also don't think I agree with the way the Sox managed Matsuzaka and Oki. Since we do not know all the facts maybe I'm unaware of key issues but they should have trusted Matsuzaka's judgement more IMO. He needed a lot of practise throws to refine his accuracy. As did Tazawa and Oki. It is part of Japanese pitching and what makes them so good when they are healthy. It's just that they do often wear out much sooner than US pitchers, or at least that is what we have been told. I'm not certain even that is true. What I think we do know however is that Matsuzaka needed pinpoint control to be successful  and if they didn't let him develop that to the needed level it affected his performance. His best 2 years were his first 2. Same thing with Oki and Tazawa. There may be something to their practice methods which are positive.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom

    I agree with all of that, but when the ball was in the strike zone, it was still very tough to hit.  We might not have that perception, because invariable when it was hit there were a couple of runners on base from walks and HBPs.  I think part of Matsuzaka's problem was that his stuff was so good, the movement on the pitches would carry it out of the zone.  When he tried to 'pitch to contact' that translated to flattening out his fastball, which made it much easier to hit.

    Tazawa is only 25, and I think he could still be a factor for the Sox next season and beyond.  Same with Miller, who I hope the Sox bring back next year.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    The numbers overall for the year were not bad for Bard. They were similar if not better than Aceves if I remember correctly. And he probably did come in in more difficult circumstances. I still think there is something to be said for a closer mentality. Maybe Bard has it but I'm not at all convinced. I really think Aceves is the better bet. Keep Bard where he is. 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom


    It seems like if we get a "sabermetric" manager, the closer role would be more similar to how Bard was used than Papelbon.  The manager would bring in the best pitcher in the 8th or 7th inning, if the game was on the line, and statistically stopping the opposition at that moment was more likely to result in a win.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Slomag, a strong sabermatric case could be made for Bard. No question about it.

    To me, guys like Papelbon are extremely well suited to the role. He is tough as nails, doesn't seem to let pressure get to him and even seems to thrive in it. I'm not sure Bard is that kind of guy. He's got tremendous stuff but the mental toughness still needs some work to me. The confidence. You've got to believe you are going to succeed. to be a top mlkb closer. Who is the guy you want closing out the last game of a world seres game? Look what happened the other day when the Yanks put Proctor out there and some other lightweights against the Rays. They came back from a 7 run deficit. In that situation anything can happen, if the pressure is nintense enough.

    When I look in Bard's eyes I see a guy who "thinks" he will succeed but there is a kernal of doubt. Guys like MArtinez, Papelbon and Aceves believe it even when there is less data supporting that position. I think Aceves would be a solid closer.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Bard has nasty stuff. I think he'd do fine as a closer after a few bumps in the road.

    I love Paps as our closer, but am not sure any closer is worth $40-45M/3.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Paps was for real wasn't he. We forget just how good he was for us.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Slomag, a strong sabermatric case could be made for Bard. No question about it. To me, guys like Papelbon are extremely well suited to the role. He is tough as nails, doesn't seem to let pressure get to him and even seems to thrive in it. I'm not sure Bard is that kind of guy. He's got tremendous stuff but the mental toughness still needs some work to me. The confidence. You've got to believe you are going to succeed. to be a top mlkb closer. Who is the guy you want closing out the last game of a world seres game? Look what happened the other day when the Yanks put Proctor out there and some other lightweights against the Rays. They came back from a 7 run deficit. In that situation anything can happen, if the pressure is nintense enough. When I look in Bard's eyes I see a guy who "thinks" he will succeed but there is a kernal of doubt. Guys like MArtinez, Papelbon and Aceves believe it even when there is less data supporting that position. I think Aceves would be a solid closer.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom


    I think Aceves would do fine as a closer, but would be more valuable as a starter.  He has enough pitches to go 7 innings / game, and I'd rather have him approach 200 IP on the season than the 65+ he would see as a closer.




     
  11. 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:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I think Aceves would do fine as a closer, but would be more valuable as a starter.  He has enough pitches to go 7 innings / game, and I'd rather have him approach 200 IP on the season than the 65+ he would see as a closer.
    Posted by slomag

    You may be right, but there is a reason he has been used much more as a reliever than a starter...

    Starter  2-1  4.18  1.394 WHIP (.722 OPS against)  1.09 K/BB
    Relief   22-1  2.62  1.007 WHIP (.603 OPS against)  2.86 K/BB

    The sample size is small- 9 starts and 47.1 IP as a starter.

    There's a risk that turning him into  a starter would burn out his arm and he'd never go back to the great reliever he was. There is a lot of value in a mid-reliver who can go 3 or 4 innings if needed. Hopefull, next year we will have more starters who can go deep and keep us in games, the value of Aceves in a relief role will be more noticable and recognized.


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I



    I remember when Toronto gave BJ Ryan a 5-year, $45 million contract a few years ago.  So I have a feeling that some team out there will do the same for Papelbon.

     
  13. 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:
    Bard has nasty stuff. I think he'd do fine as a closer after a few bumps in the road. I love Paps as our closer, but am not sure any closer is worth $40-45M/3.
    Posted by moonslav59


     The development model has Bard being groomed for the closer slot, the Sox will "let" Paps walk, no closer is worth that money, heck, there was a whole month where Paps didn't have a chance to "save" a game. We take the picks and move on. We originally gave Paps the role without a trial, Bard has two years of apprenticeship...he's ready!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I happen to agree. It's one thing to spend $12M on a one year arb deal, but quite another to spend $52M/4 or $$42M/3 on a guy who gets only 60-70 IP a season.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThunderCat2010. Show ThunderCat2010's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    We believe The Red Sox is EVIL... It is all about "MONEY"  No teamwork, no love, and hated.... The Red Sox cheated in 2004 World Series with 6 Red Sox players used STERIODS!!!!  bad bad bad boys red sox...
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    The whole league was/is a cheat... what's your point?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    The issue with Papelbon may well be even when you are right about letting a closer walk over the life of the contract in terms of sunk cost, your bullpen does not recover.

    And just to add so sobriety to who Jonathan Papelbon is he is the only reliever in the history of the game to save 30 or more his first six seasons in MLB. And in that span he has blown 29 SO. While it is apple's and oranges in some ways, Bard has 15 SO already.

    This is just one of the not very easy decisions that face the RS. It is avery deep reliever market (one of the few positions that is deep). Whether that drives contract values own is yet to be seen.

    I am no expert but if I were in the RS shoes I'd rather risk $45M for 3 years on Papelbon than two years at $30M for Ortiz.

    One thing for sure it has been a long time since we have experienced having a bad end of the bullpen for very long in Boston. Papelbon has been very special.




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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It's about what else you can get for $15M/yr not just if Paps is worth it. We could get 3-5 set up guys.

    If we don't raise our budget, tough choices will have to be made.

    If it comes down to Papi vs Paps, I think you may be right, katz. Youk and Lavarnway can fill in nicely, but Bard moving to closer is not only a big gamble, it will create a big void in the 8th inning.
     
  19. 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:
    It's about what else you can get for $15M/yr not just if Paps is worth it. We could get 3-5 set up guys. If we don't raise our budget, tough choices will have to be made. If it comes down to Papi vs Paps, I think you may be right, katz. Youk and Lavarnway can fill in nicely, but Bard moving to closer is not only a big gamble, it will create a big void in the 8th inning.
    Posted by moonslav59
    The drop off from Bard as the hold guy and Papelbon as closer certainly is a big part of what I am thinking. And you get 3 - 5 middle relief guys and hope 1-2 work out.

    If the back of the bullpen in 8th and 9th does not have it, the only thing that breaks a team's spirit faster is the starts that our pitcher's gave us in September.

    Now all that said, the odds are 50-50 the money goes beyond Boston's valuation, even though I think they have one and it is higher than some assume.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I like the way posters here are looking at any and all possibilities.  Comment about Lavarnway.  I have appreciated the way RS have tried not to rush pitchers and prospects, giving them successful "tastes" at the major league level, then sending them back down for seasoning.  However, I look around all the time at other teams without the resources to be patient who start rookie pitchers (or other players) in the playoffs who do quite well.  Just because we don't do this very often, doesn't mean we can't hit successfully when we do.  I remember Wade Boggs was kept in the minors a long time, but some said, "When he gets to the bigs, he will probably hit better."  And he did.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    We probably get more value keeping a guy in the minors a long time to let them improve. For example a guy like Youk took a long time to become a top player and we maximized our value with him by seasoning him a lot. He was a Thanksgiving day turkey but he ended up tasting real good! 

    We probably get more value if we season LAvarnway more, and we may end up doing that, but I for one want to see him next year. We need his potential production next year. It's going to be a hard slog unless we improve.

    BTW, I think Crawford should be able to rebound well in 2012. The only thing wrong wih him appears to be that his pitch selection is off. He's too anxious to prove that he is worth his contract. That's my opinion at least.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I



    In reality, all of the conjecture with the bullpen, closer, Papi etc. could certainly be premature with the Theo situation.  Onership has never denied the potential of Theo jetting off to the Cubs.  To Theo, the challenge of bringing them a champonship could certainly be enticing.  Especially now with trouble with the players and Henry more concerned about watching his soccer team.

    I mentioned in an earlier post that what has missing was an owner or GM being more like Steinbrenner.  Like him or not, he loved his Yankees and he was totally focused /involved.  I also see the same passion with Kraft and the Pats.  I just don't get that impression from Henry & Co. anymore.  I think they're more concerned now with promotion etc.

    We need to find out Theo's status quickly so that all the other problems can be addressed orderly.
      




    .










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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Francona probably gets a huge raise in his next job. The option was probably not all that attractive to him anyway. One could make the same case with Theo. I'm not saying Theo wants to leave but I be willing to bet he makes more money if he does.

    I'm just speculating here and I'm sure I'll get grief for it but possibly Theo could have been tougher with the players. I rarely see a fine applied. I see guys like Doubront and Navarro coming in way out of shape. Apparently there were some clubhouse problems and Tito alluded that possibly more support from the FO would have helped. Theo is relatively young with little management experience besides his job with the Redsox. Some employees lose motivation when they are in a lassaiz faire environment. When there is little accountability, the hens start taking over the hen house. Just my take.
     
  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:
    I like the way posters here are looking at any and all possibilities.  Comment about Lavarnway.  I have appreciated the way RS have tried not to rush pitchers and prospects, giving them successful "tastes" at the major league level, then sending them back down for seasoning.  However, I look around all the time at other teams without the resources to be patient who start rookie pitchers (or other players) in the playoffs who do quite well.  Just because we don't do this very often, doesn't mean we can't hit successfully when we do.  I remember Wade Boggs was kept in the minors a long time, but some said, "When he gets to the bigs, he will probably hit better."  And he did.
    Posted by Critter23

    There's also the issue of team controlability. Once a young player comes up and starts logging in a certain amount of MLB service time, the arb clock starts ticking. By holding off as long as reasonable, the team will get some of the better prime years of their players.

    I do agree though, sometimes, some players just need to be brought up sooner rather than later.

    I was shocked that Jennings was not on the 25 man roster for Tb this spring. Had he been there from the start, maybe the whole season ending would have played out much differently.  I wish we had a Matt Moore to bring up.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Few thoughts:

    Henry at moments still casts a pretty big shadow on RS operations but unlike Steinbrenner not only are Henry's sporting interests more diverse, he also has other stakeholder/shareholders who are much more vested and empowered than The Boss did. And Henry is not only not a camera hog, he appears to not be comfortable with or good at being a face-of-the-franchise sort of guy. George's over all impact on the NYY is quite a desperate debate. On could argue the only two real period's of championship team's were built the two times he was suspended form the game.

    Crawford's anxiousness to prove his worth might explain an expanded KZone but his sub-par OF play is nagging. Let's hope for the best beacuse the RS simply can't start a OF with his power and an OBP under .300.

    Moon, I think the Rays determined that Jennings was well served by more time in AAA, it certainly fit handy in terms of years of control and Sam Fuld's start to 2011 made it possible.

    For every Mike Moore there is a Andrew Miller and the reality more guys get crushed when rushed than not. But darn straight I wish we had some young, healthy, fast track arms this summer rather than the reminants of a rushed Andrew Miller.

    As far as the issues floating around the RS, from conditioning to clubhouse, it is some what over blown. Guys have different body types and all kind of crazy assumptions are being made now based on generalized comments from management and the scribes going every which way pointing their fingers with more but necessarily a lot more foundation than what is happening on BDC. It is only on man's opinion but with the change in field leadership and the humbling experience of the collapse, things will be different.

    But when you start looking at body types, you could put Migel Cabrera, CC Sabathia and list of HOFers on your list.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share