A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    moon - great reminisce over the 1975 team.

    I too have contended that if Jim Rice had not had his wrist broken by a fastball from Vernon Ruhle of the Tigers, things would have been different. Very different.


     



    But as Ron Washington says, "That's how baseball go!"
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    As close as the '75 series was, I think there's no doubt.
     
  3. 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]Aviles appeared in 90 games at SS for the Royals in 2008. After that he played mainly second or third. He was not nudged out by Escobar, who didn't arrive in KC until 2011. Apparently, that club decided that he is not a ML shortstop. With all due respect, the same was said of Scutaro when Toronto made him their FT Short Stop. All the scouting reports I read said Scutaro did not have a strong enough arm for SS and had poor range. We also do not know why KC went with Escobar over Aviles. They may have wanted to save money (likely at least part of the reason), or they thought Aviles was a capable or even good fielding SS, but knew Escobar was better. Yet, at the moment, he is probably the front runner for the job in Boston -- unless Iglesias dazzles Valentine and shows some decent work with the stick.  I think Bobby might surprise us and go with defense. I hope so. I also love the thought of Aviles as our utility player. IMO, this is a dicey proposition. The left side will need all the defense the Sox can muster. And the club, given its offense, would appear to want more glove than bat at the position. Indeed, the offense looks better on paper than it was last season. Youk is healthy, at least to start with. Better production is expected from the corner outfielders -- though it must be seen first.  It isn't likely that the Sox will try to acquire yet another SS before the season starts.  The more one thinks about it, the more one would like to see Iglesias tucked away in the 9 hole while Aviles is reserved to fill in here and there, and as a bat off the bench. I know that several posters -- Moon, Boom, Notin, others -- feel the same way. But none of us will make out the lineup card. I still feel the same way, ex. I want Iggy as our starting SS even if he hits .180-.190 to July 31st. However, I do not see Aviles as a drop off from Scutaro's defense at SS, especially Scutaro's 2010-2011 SS defense. Scutaro's career RF/9 at SS is 4.19, but here in Boston, it was 3.83 & 4.03. Fangraphs shows these numbers: Scutaro:  -2.8 UZR/150  (with Boston it was -3.3 and +1.0). However, his rangeR is -16.2 over 5,552 innings at SS. Aviles: +12.4 UZR/150 (in limted action). His RangeR is +9.4 in 1,212 career innings as a SS. I know these numbers are not large enough sample sizes to make definitive judgements, but they are encouraging to me. Punto is also a much better back-up SS defensively than Lowrie.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    Check me, but I believe that Aviles was switched from SS to 2nd and 3rd 

     
  4. 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]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Check me, but I believe that Aviles was switched from SS to 2nd and 3rd before Escobar was acquired in 2011. Aviles didn't play much SS after the 90 games in 2008. KC did not regard him as an everyday SS. 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    moon -

    Your Yankee thread may yet see the light of day.

    Check this out from Kim's defense thread:

    Re: Realistic Yankee Thread

    posted at 2/20/2012 4:16 PM EST
    Posts: 928
    First: 5/29/2008
    Last: 2/20/2012            
    Sorry, folks, I was unaware Moon had started such a thread and didn't know it had been removed. We use a moderation company to handle abuse reports, but they are not supposed to remove threads ... only Boston.com employees can. I'll try to find out who did it, but in the meantime, my apologies.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    m
     
  7. 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 : Check me, but I believe that Aviles was switched from SS to 2nd and 3rd 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Yes, but my point was that Scutaro moved from 2B/3B to SS after playing SS earlier in his career.

    Aviles:
    Minors:
    SS  411 gms
    3B  164
    2B    80

    MLB
    '08
    SS 748 Inn
    2B 114
    3B   30
    '09
    SS  269
    3B    10
    '10
    SS  104
    2B  756
    3B    35
    '11 (with KC)
    SS    91
    2B  192
    3B  348  

    Scutaro:
    Minors:
    SS  79 gms
    2B  719
    3B 78

    Majors:
    2002 small sample, but more SS.
    2003 small sample almost all 2B
    2004 969 innings at 2B/113 at SS
    2005 663 at SS/149 2B
    2006 572 SS/302 2B
    2007 348 SS/296 3B
    2008 472 SS/354 2B/332 3B
    2009 1,253 SS

    The two are not really that comparable, but I was trying to point out that Scutaro became a FT very late in his career after being bounced around SS, 2B & 3B. In that way, Aviles is similar.
     
  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]moon - Your Yankee thread may yet see the light of day. Check this out from Kim's defense thread: Re: Realistic Yankee Thread posted at 2/20/2012 4:16 PM EST BDCDottie Posts: 928 First: 5/29/2008 Last: 2/20/2012             84e35910bd3ddfa418af2a9677405e97 Sorry, folks, I was unaware Moon had started such a thread and didn't know it had been removed. We use a moderation company to handle abuse reports, but they are not supposed to remove threads ... only Boston.com employees can. I'll try to find out who did it, but in the meantime, my apologies.
    Posted by summerof67[/QUOTE]

    My guess is it will be deleted Monday.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    moonie, even after all your hard work the previous two off seasons, all the countless numbers crunching, the late night digging up stats by candlelight that you did, etc, I was still closer on my predictions as far as win totals and no playoffs for your beloved sawx. I think this year they will finish with around 90 wins and miss the playoffs again.
     
  10. 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]moonie, even after all your hard work the previous two off seasons, all the countless numbers crunching, the late night digging up stats by candlelight that you did, etc, I was still closer on my predictions as far as win totals and no playoffs for your beloved sawx. I think this year they will finish with around 90 wins and miss the playoffs again.
    Posted by TBSHBT1969[/QUOTE]

    So, you think we will have about the same amount of injuries?

    (BTW, I projected TB to have 90-92 wins last year, so I was 1-1...LOL)

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969'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 : So, you think we will have about the same amount of injuries? (BTW, I projected TB to have 90-92 wins last year, so I was 1-1...LOL)
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Doesn't necessarily need to be the same amount of injuries. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I



    Great memories on the '72 team, Moon.

    Isn't it incredible the innings pitched some guys threw back then as compared to now?
     
  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:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Doesn't necessarily need to be the same amount of injuries. 
    Posted by TBSHBT1969[/QUOTE]

    You realize we lost 51 starts from our top 5 and had 28 lousy starts from our injured 5th starter (Lackey)?

    I'd say, if we have just half the starter injuries, we should do much better. I can't imagine Bard, Aceves, Cook, Padilla, Doubront and others doing worse than Miller, Weiland, Lackey, and Wake. 

    The pen, with Paps, Bard and Aceves being replaced by Bailey, Melancon and full seasons from Morales, Doubront, Tazawa, and others will be a challenge, but I like the odds.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969'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 : You realize we lost 51 starts from our top 5 and had 28 lousy starts from our injured 5th starter (Lackey)? I'd say, if we have just half the starter injuries, we should do much better. I can't imagine Bard, Aceves, Cook, Padilla, Doubront and others doing worse than Miller, Weiland, Lackey, and Wake.  The pen, with Paps, Bard and Aceves being replaced by Bailey, Melancon and full seasons from Morales, Doubront, Tazawa, and others will be a challenge, but I like the odds.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Of course you do, but you also did the last two seasons.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Great memories on the '72 team, Moon. Isn't it incredible the innings pitched some guys threw back then as compared to now?
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    m
     
  16. 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 : Of course you do, but you also did the last two seasons.
    Posted by TBSHBT1969[/QUOTE]

    Predicting injuries is not easy, and just because one loses his bet 2 times in a row, doesn't mean he is bound to get it wrong again.  If we had just close to the norm of injuries, we'd have won 96+ easily.  I don't think I'm going out on a limb expecting way less than 80+ starts effected by injuries this year.

    You may be right again, but saying injuries are not important to your prediction is really pushing the envelope.
     
  17. 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]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Yes, but my point was that Scutaro moved from 2B/3B to SS after playing SS earlier in his career. Aviles: Minors: SS  411 gms 3B  164 2B    80 MLB '08 SS 748 Inn 2B 114 3B   30 '09 SS  269 3B    10 '10 SS  104 2B  756 3B    35 '11 (with KC) SS    91 2B  192 3B  348    Scutaro: Minors: SS  79 gms 2B  719 3B 78 Majors: 2002 small sample, but more SS. 2003 small sample almost all 2B 2004 969 innings at 2B/113 at SS 2005 663 at SS/149 2B 2006 572 SS/302 2B 2007 348 SS/296 3B 2008 472 SS/354 2B/332 3B 2009 1,253 SS The two are not really that comparable, but I was trying to point out that Scutaro became a FT very late in his career after being bounced around SS, 2B & 3B. In that way, Aviles is similar.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    My point is pretty simple. KC obviously didn't consider Aviles a bonafide ML shortstop, even before Escobar arrived. That club didn't replace Aviles with Escobar to save money, as you surmised earlier. Aviles was displaced after 2008. Escobar came aboard in 2011.
    I don't think that the number of innings at this and that position, minors and majors, is as important NOW as is the fact that Aviles's last club didn't trust him at SS.  We should stick with his case. 
    It turned out that Scutaro in fact wasn't a legit ML shortstop. Let's hope he and Aviles are not "similar."

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969'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 : Predicting injuries is not easy, and just because one loses his bet 2 times in a row, doesn't mean he is bound to get it wrong again.  If we had just close to the norm of injuries, we'd have won 96+ easily.  I don't think I'm going out on a limb expecting way less than 80+ starts effected by injuries this year. You may be right again, but saying injuries are not important to your prediction is really pushing the envelope.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Never said either of those things.

    But just because one spends hours and hours spinning stats doesn't mean they will be right in the end either.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    okay a question for all, between having Tony C. in 1967 or Rice in 1975 which one might have made the biggest difference?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    IMO, Aviles will have to be much better than Scutaro in the field, especially on range to his right, to make a desirable difference. Maybe the Sox will be content to move slightly upwards from "below average" to "average" or even to "slightly below average" ( we'll see ), but that would still amount to neglect of the most important defensive spot on the field, IMO. 
    Aviles seems well suited to the role of super-sub. He could probably fill in almost anywhere except center and catcher. He could pinch hit. He, not McDonald, could be the "fifth outfielder."
    I assume that we all will be keeping a  close eye on Valentine keeping a close eye on shortstop.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    n Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Predicting injuries is not easy, and just because one loses his bet 2 times in a row, doesn't mean he is bound to get it wrong again.  If we had just close to the norm of injuries, we'd have won 96+ easily.  I don't think I'm going out on a limb expecting way less than 80+ starts effected by injuries this year. You may be right again, but saying injuries are not important to your prediction is really pushing the envelope.
    Posted by moonslav59

    Never said either of those things.

    I never said you said those things.

    But just because one spends hours and hours spinning stats doesn't mean they will be right in the end either.

    Just because I rely on stats to support my positions, doesn't mean that's all I use to come up with my projections. (Not that you said I did)

    Undecided
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    m
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    IMO, Aviles will have to be much better than Scutaro in the field, especially on range to his right, to make a desirable difference. Maybe the Sox will be content to move slightly upwards from "below average" to "average" or even to "slightly below average" ( we'll see ), but that would still amount to neglect of the most important defensive spot on the field, IMO. 

    Singing to the choir. I wish we'd go with Iggy, but I do see Aviles as an upgrade defensively, plus he has a better arm for relays.


    Aviles seems well suited to the role of super-sub. He could probably fill in almost anywhere except center and catcher. He could pinch hit. He, not McDonald, could be the "fifth outfielder."

    I agree 100%. Aviles would be an excellent utility player, including the 5th OF'er role.

    I assume that we all will be keeping a  close eye on Valentine keeping a close eye on shortstop.

    I think Bobby will think long and hard about picking Iggy.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]okay a question for all, between having Tony C. in 1967 or Rice in 1975 which one might have made the biggest difference?
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]
    I don't think Tony C nor anybody else was going to make much of a difference against Gibson, but the Reds' pitching staff would have had lots of trouble with Jim Ed.
     

Share