A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I'm not saying you are wrong, and reading into this quote can look like he was being pushed, but I really doubt he was against the Lackey or CC signing, or Beckett extension. Maybe he wasn't as strongly for the deals as LL or others, but I find it hard to believe he was against them. Just my opinion.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Fair enough Moon.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]This paragraph is one that I'm interpreting as Theo giving into the pressure that he felt from ownership. “We kind of clung to that in the back of our minds, knowing it was impossible, recognizing that there was an inherent tension between that approach and bigger business. I kind of kick myself for letting my guard down and giving into it, because that might be a better team in some ways and resonate more with the fans than what we ended up with.   Theo did another interview on Felger and Mazz:  " Theo Epstein discussed his decade as GM of the Red Sox and admitted that his "one regret" during the period was big-name free-agent signings made in response to pressure from fans and management. " Here's a direct quote from Theo: “You had the realities of being in a big market and being in a really competitive atmosphere and a place that wasn’t that patient,” Epstein said. “Then, on top of that, we had the reality of what we came to call “The Monster"—which was what happened after we won in ’04. There became such an emphasis in the Red Sox organization of doing things bigger, better—pushing to be more marketable, more profitable, not to lose any fans, to keep pushing these numbers. It’s perfectly understandable, and I don’t blame anybody for it. It’s sort of a natural consequence of winning and a natural consequence of being in business." It's all open to individual interpretation.  I'm not saying I'm right either, it's just my opinion.  As you said, we don't know, and will probably never know the full truth in who was calling the shots. At any rate, they are all part of the management team.  They all share in any blame and in any credit that the FO deserves.
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]

    In the end someone or someones are responsible for the mess Epstein left this team in, yet there are some posters here who still think Epstein is a "top 5 GM". What a joke. Not only is he at least partially responsible for what has happened, but Cherington and Lucchino as well as the owners share the blame. Yet no one has been fired; NO ONE IN THE FO HAS BEEN FIRED! Epstein was clearly a poor GM in terms of recognizing FA talent, but he is gone. He cannot be fired. More posters LIKE YOU Kimmi should not be sugar coating the mess he left this franchise in. Why are you not calling for some substantial changes in terms of replacing those individuals who, along with Theo, have are responsible for this mess?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : In the end someone or someones are responsible for the mess Epstein left this team in, yet there are some posters here who still think Epstein is a "top 5 GM". What a joke. Not only is he at least partially responsible for what has happened, but Cherington and Lucchino as well as the owners share the blame. Yet no one has been fired; NO ONE IN THE FO HAS BEEN FIRED! Epstein was clearly a poor GM in terms of recognizing FA talent, but he is gone. He cannot be fired. More posters LIKE YOU Kimmi should not be sugar coating the mess he left this franchise in. Why are you not calling for some substantial changes in terms of replacing those individuals who, along with Theo, have are responsible for this mess?
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    The simple answer: you don't "fire" owners. Larry is part of the ownership group. Yes, he could be shifted to a more hands-off role, but he's not getting fired.

    Also, for the same reason BV will be fired instead of the players. It's easier.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : The simple answer: you don't "fire" owners. Larry is part of the ownership group. Yes, he could be shifted to a more hands-off role, but he's not getting fired. Also, for the same reason BV will be fired instead of the players. It's easier.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I realize that you do not fire owners. I guess that what I meant is that Lucchino, as you suggested, should be removed from his current role by the other two owners and forced into a more hands off position. Cherington is certainly fair game, though he has IMO been a puppet for LL this year and in all fairness hasn't had much to work with nor much time to do his job. What I have seen from him has been unimpressive, and the fact that he is an Epstein leftover also works against him. Valentine might have to go, I agree, but so do some of the ringleaders of the Yawkey Country Club, most notably Beckett and, hopefully, Lackey and Pedroia. You cannot fire all of the players, but you can identify and disinfect the team by getting rid of some of the ringleaders before they do more damage. This is why I find some of Kimmi's  posts offensive: I have yet to hear from her a single suggestion as to who should be held accountable AND PUNISHED for their roles in this disaster. Unless a major offseason housecleaning is undertaken everyone will be able to see that LL has once again been talking the talk without walking the walk.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I guess I'm just not into the blame game as much as others.

    I'm not saying changes aren't needed and people shouldn't be held accountable, but with all the injuries and Beckett and lester losing velocity, I'm not sure blaming BV, Cherrington, or LL is reasonable, but sometimes changes need to be made as more of a shock treatment than anything else. 

    Ben's record is very short. His hands were definitely tied. The budget was tight. In hindisght, the Reddick deal has strted off badly, but a Ross/Sweeney platoon looks to end up pretty close to Reddick's overall numbers. The Scutaro for Mortensen deal freed up money for Ross, Shoppach, Cook & Padilla and his replacement, Aviles, did about as well as Scutaro offensively this year and fields better as well. The Ross signing for $3M was one of the best FA signings of the year. Both Cook & Padilla did well for just $1.5M. Shoppach was a steal at $1.35M. Picking up Pods was genius.
     Yes, there were failures: Bard as starter, IMO the Youk deal, and Reddick (for now anyways).

    We used 16 OF'ers this year. Think about that for a moment: SIXTEEN!

    Ten with over 125 innings in the OF. TEN!

    With no Ellsbury, our OF OPS only slipped from .772 to .739 from 2011 to 2012.

    I don't blame Ben for Beckett and Lester losing velocity, AGon slumping for half a year. Pedey having his worst year. Record DL stints.

    I think he deserves a longer look.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I guess I'm just not into the blame game as much as others. I'm not saying changes aren't needed and people shouldn't be held accountable, but with all the injuries and Beckett and lester losing velocity, I'm not sure blaming BV, Cherrington, or LL is reasonable, but sometimes changes need to be made as more of a shock treatment than anything else.  Ben's record is very short. His hands were definitely tied. The budget was tight. In hindisght, the Reddick deal has strted off badly, but a Ross/Sweeney platoon looks to end up pretty close to Reddick's overall numbers. The Scutaro for Mortensen deal freed up money for Ross, Shoppach, Cook & Padilla and his replacement, Aviles, did about as well as Scutaro offensively this year and fields better as well. The Ross signing for $3M was one of the best FA signings of the year. Both Cook & Padilla did well for just $1.5M. Shoppach was a steal at $1.35M. Picking up Pods was genius.  Yes, there were failures: Bard as starter, IMO the Youk deal, and Reddick (for now anyways). We used 16 OF'ers this year. Think about that for a moment: SIXTEEN! Ten with over 125 innings in the OF. TEN! With no Ellsbury, our OF OPS only slipped from .772 to .739 from 2011 to 2012. I don't blame Ben for Beckett and Lester losing velocity, AGon slumping for half a year. Pedey having his worst year. Record DL stints. I think he deserves a longer look.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Here is the issue: the starting pitching has been consistently deteriorating since the 2007 season. This is not a new problem. Look at the ESPN stat site (or anywhere you choose) and you will see that the falloff is pretty dramatic. We were first in pitching in the AL in 07,and I believe fourth in 08 and dropped from there. This year we are 10th. Someone has to be held accountable for that. Its not just this year that the SP has been poor-and you know you cannot win rings without it. In a business those managers who make mistakes for 4-5 years running are no longer managers. Why are LL and an Epstein remnant still running the show? There is no accountability in this organization. That is a big problem.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Here is the issue: the starting pitching has been consistently deteriorating since the 2007 season. This is not a new problem. Look at the ESPN stat site (or anywhere you choose) and you will see that the falloff is pretty dramatic. We were first in pitching in the AL in 07,and I believe fourth in 08 and dropped from there. This year we are 10th. Someone has to be held accountable for that. Its not just this year that the SP has been poor-and you know you cannot win rings without it. In a business those managers who make mistakes for 4-5 years running are no longer managers. Why are LL and an Epstein remnant still running the show? There is no accountability in this organization. That is a big problem.

    I've been suggesting we rebuild the starting rotation from the top since after the 2008 season. I agree with you 100%. Theo tried the Smoltz/Penny experiment. Theo tried the Lackey experiment. This past winter, i said it was  huge mistake to count on the big 3 starters to all have health and productive years at the same time. It has never happened before, and expecting it ti happen in 2012 was our biggest mistake. I still think that, but I really am not sure Ben had the ability to sign a big-named starter at big money, and I was not for overpaying Buehrle or Wilson anyways. I did think we should have tried harder to get Gio Gonzalez instead of Bailey and Sweeney, but I'm not sure we did not try hard or not.

    I agree, we made a big mistake last winter, but I'm not prepared to blame Ben for it.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Here is the issue: the starting pitching has been consistently deteriorating since the 2007 season. This is not a new problem. Look at the ESPN stat site (or anywhere you choose) and you will see that the falloff is pretty dramatic. We were first in pitching in the AL in 07,and I believe fourth in 08 and dropped from there. This year we are 10th. Someone has to be held accountable for that. Its not just this year that the SP has been poor-and you know you cannot win rings without it. In a business those managers who make mistakes for 4-5 years running are no longer managers. Why are LL and an Epstein remnant still running the show? There is no accountability in this organization. That is a big problem. I've been suggesting we rebuild the starting rotation from the top since after the 2008 season. I agree with you 100%. Theo tried the Smoltz/Penny experiment. Theo tried the Lackey experiment. This past winter, i said it was  huge mistake to count on the big 3 starters to all have health and productive years at the same time. It has never happened before, and expecting it ti happen in 2012 was our biggest mistake. I still think that, but I really am not sure Ben had the ability to sign a big-named starter at big money, and I was not for overpaying Buehrle or Wilson anyways. I did think we should have tried harder to get Gio Gonzalez instead of Bailey and Sweeney, but I'm not sure we did not try hard or not. I agree, we made a big mistake last winter, but I'm not prepared to blame Ben for it.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    OK. Lets not blame Ben for it. Who IS accountable for it then? Thats the problem. There has been a lack of any ability whatsoever to rebuild our SP rotation. I too have been complaining on different boards that we have been unable to identify, obtain, and retain high quality starting pitching. So whose fault is it? Right now, the only individual who deserves to be removed from his current position in management is Larry Lucchino. He was Epstein's boss; he is Cherington's boss. Its the job of the GM to secure the talent to give the team a chance to win a ring, and Lucchino has hired GMs that have simply not done the job. He has failed this team for 4-5 years and there  is no end is sight. Also, he is not a majority owner. If Epstein were still here, I would get rid of him too. Before the Red Sox can compete for a ring again, those responsible for the decline of the franchise have to be eliminated. Accountability has to be re-established. I AM into the "blame game" as you call it. If it were my $$ I would be mad as hell and heads would roll.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    OK. Lets not blame Ben for it. Who IS accountable for it then? Thats the problem. 

    First of all, I think our society is way too hung up on the blame game. There are 30 MLB, so every year 29 teams must have done something wrong, and 29 fall guys made to beheld accountable. So, I guess I am a bit skeptical about the intial premise.

    Secondly, mistakes were probably made by everyone from top to bottom, and the accumulation of all the mistakes might have led to where we are now. One could also think that had we had just 1 or 2 injuries instead of 30, and had the best record in MLb right now, what would you and others be saying now? Ben and LL are a geniuses?

    There has been a lack of any ability whatsoever to rebuild our SP rotation. I too have been complaining on different boards that we have been unable to identify, obtain, and retain high quality starting pitching. So whose fault is it? 

    I agree 100% on the starting pitcher issue, but almost every MLB team is looking for the next Pedro. It's not easy to find them, and even harder to get them from another team.

    Right now, the only individual who deserves to be removed from his current position in management is Larry Lucchino. He was Epstein's boss; he is Cherington's boss. Its the job of the GM to secure the talent to give the team a chance to win a ring, and Lucchino has hired GMs that have simply not done the job.

    1) You are judging Ben on a tiny sample size.
    2) I think we did "secure the talent to give the team a chance to win a ring" even with the pitching weakness, but the injuries and underperformances were too much to overcome.
    3) On paper, our pitching staff still looked better than most teams if most just played to their career norms. I find serious flaws in blaming the GM or higher ups for their failure to perform.
    4) Maybe Ben wanted to make a trade for Gio, but Larry said no. Maybe vice versa. We don't know.

     He has failed this team for 4-5 years and there  is no end is sight. 

    The team failed as did 28 other teams every year. It's nice and neat to blame the guy at the top, but just as many felt firing Tito was going to bring a big change, firing Ben, LL or both could make things worse.

    Also, he is not a majority owner. If Epstein were still here, I would get rid of him too. Before the Red Sox can compete for a ring again, those responsible for the decline of the franchise have to be eliminated. 

    Maybe it is just the fault of 3-4 players and not Tito, or BV, or Ben, or LL. Maybe it is just LL's fault, or even Henry's for not ridding the team of LL's influence. Maybe LL is a genius and it was all Theo's fault. Maybe Theo only. Maybe Theo and Ben. You seem to know precisely who is to blame.  I am not so sure.

    Accountability has to be re-established.

    How about the players being held accountable?
    My guess is that if the salaries were equal, the TB GM would trade every positional player he has, except maybe Longoria for Middlebrooks and Zobrist for Sweeney for who the Sox have. 

    Of course, the TB GM would not trade starting pitchers, but you get my point. Our GMs past and present built a solid team if healthy. I guess they should have known that Beckett and Lester were going to lose 3mph velocity, and 30 guys would go on the DL. The should all be fired for not being fortune tellers. They should all be fired, because the players underperformed.

     I AM into the "blame game" as you call it. If it were my $$ I would be mad as hell and heads would roll.

    29 teams will be mad. Fewer really mad. I think firing management and letting these crybabies go free sends the wrong message. If I was going to blame anyone, I'd start with some players, the medical staff, and maybe make a manager (BV) change. I'd gibe Ben another season and more of a free hand in decisions. I'd let my next manager choose his own coaches. I'd trade some problem players this winter, and  I'd be firmly behind my next manager, and make examples of a player or two to let them know who is in charge.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    moon have you noted as AGon closes in on 100 ribbies that every other player with more ribbies has twice as many homers save one (Prince Fielder with 22) ?

    It must be a rarity each season to have more than 2 or 3 players with under 20 homers and more than 100 ribbies, maybe not but I should think.


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    moon have you noted as AGon closes in on 100 ribbies that every other player with more ribbies has twice as many homers save one (Prince Fielder with 22) ?

    It must be a rarity each season to have more than 2 or 3 players with under 20 homers and more than 100 ribbies, maybe not but I should think.

    AGon's low HR count has shocked me. I think something has happened physically, but it is nice to see he has brought his BA up. His OBP is still about 40-50 pts lower than expected as well.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III



    The Red Sox look so miserable with no sense of urgency. 

    I miss the days when the players were not only winning but also having a lot of fun (e.g. Nomar taping up Pedro or Damon cracking up with Manny).

    Next, I believe that the pitching coach (McClare) needs to go.  I wish they have kept Curt Young (who went back to Oakland). 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I'm not saying we don't need a new pitching coach, but losing Bailey all year (and other injuries to pitchers), the failed Bard to starter experiment, and lost velocity from Beckett & Lester can hardly be any coaches fault.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I'm not saying we don't need a new pitching coach, but losing Bailey all year (and other injuries to pitchers), the failed Bard to starter experiment, and lost velocity from Beckett & Lester can hardly be any coaches fault.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I am no expert on coaching pitching or pitching mechanics, but I have read that Bard's release point has been all over the place.  That he, or the coaches, tweaked his arm slot slightly, and that he has not been able to find a consistent release point.  Isn't this something that a pitching coach should be able to help him with? 

    Also, couldn't a drop in velocity be caused by and corrected by something in the pitcher's mechanics?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    It is more comforting sometimes to think in terms of whose fault it is when misfortune hits a franchise. The coaches? The manager? The GM or the team president? Certain players, clubhouse chemistry?

    But often when things go bad for a franchise there are a series of events and people that converge, some controllable, others not so much.

    There was a feeling in the RS Nation that being an uberteam was not just a possible but was a readily achievable reality.

    Now some moan that the RS FAs contracts and the contracts entered into with post arbitration year contracts with some of their own players were dumb deals.

    But the option would have have been to make a very deliberate decision to not compete for the post season for some period of time or sign similar risks at higher figures. Not a very acceptable option for an ownership group that wants to win all the time and a fan base that shares goal. This idea of building an all homegrown team is much more viable in Cleveland than Boston IMHO.

    There was a feeling amongst many that the RS could afford to make major mistakes in their FA signings and move past it by writing more checks. Not so as Ben Cherington found out this year when he was limited by contacts to Lackey, Dice-K and Crawford.

    To me every move any GM makes is a calculated gamble. Most of the moves the RS made in the recent years made sense at the moment but of course contained risks. Extending Beckett, Lester, Buch all made sense. Even Lackey made some sense, though in hindsight the RS knew his elbow was a serious issue because the built the contract with some protection for it, so perhaps they could have guessed that his decline and eventual TJ surgery was a likely conclusion of the signing.

    The deals for relievers last off season. Given that the RS were faced with replacing Papelbon, it made sense at the moment and while in a bubble the deals don't look good at all, it is fair to say that the bullpen has not been a major issue this season and that the production the RS have gotten from the their 3rd and 4th OFers has been adequate.

    IMO the big mistake of this season was what was reported as LL injecting himself into the selection of the next field manager. Without getting into the merits of BV either way, IMO baseball is a first a GM's game, next a player's game and then finally a field managers game. This isn't football where it is first a foremost a field manager (head coach's) game. If a manager is not the extension of the GM and what he has built, it is doomed for a bumpy ride.

    Even with the decision to go BV against the reported wishes of the front office, what has happened to the RS in many ways is more random.

    The struggles at various points of the season from Buch, Beckett and Lester weren't easily projectable events (not all three). That the RS would so mess up Bard with the attempt to make him a starter that he would be of no use to them at MLB level. Now could they have gone with more "sure thing" signings in those recent years? Perhaps, after all they had shots at Halladay and Lee. (Oh, never mind I just checked the Phils record).

    So you add up the endless number of injuries in 2012, the bad years from the top of the rotation and a manager who is not particularly embraced by either tyhe front office or the players and you have a disaster in the making. Sprinkle in the media the has fed the fanbase's disappointment with what are largely personal attacts on the players and Boston is a dark place to play baseball.

    That is a perfect storm, with enough elements in it that it is hard to blame a member of the manager's staff, the manager, a couple of veteran pitchers from Texas (one who isn't even playing this year), the training staff or the FO. Each may have contributed in some way but the end result is more complex to be able to find "the person" at fault and assign them blame.

    The road back keeps getting longer and tougher for a variety of reasons and perhaps it is a journey that the fans of the RS need to take because we probably took the run the RS had from 2003 - 2009 for granted and in the process became the "mini-me's" of the fans we loathe, NYY fans.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I am no expert on coaching pitching or pitching mechanics, but I have read that Bard's release point has been all over the place.  That he, or the coaches, tweaked his arm slot slightly, and that he has not been able to find a consistent release point.  Isn't this something that a pitching coach should be able to help him with?  

    Possibly. I'm sure our pitching coach, both here and in AAA, have tried. Maybe there is a better coach somewhere that could have done better.

    Also, couldn't a drop in velocity be caused by and corrected by something in the pitcher's mechanics?

    Again, possibly, but I read on fangraphs that it is an extreme rarity that a pitcher losing velocity ever regains it, unless his initial loss of velocity was injury-related.

    Good points.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I am no expert on coaching pitching or pitching mechanics, but I have read that Bard's release point has been all over the place.  That he, or the coaches, tweaked his arm slot slightly, and that he has not been able to find a consistent release point.  Isn't this something that a pitching coach should be able to help him with?   Possibly. I'm sure our pitching coach, both here and in AAA, have tried. Maybe there is a better coach somewhere that could have done better. Also, couldn't a drop in velocity be caused by and corrected by something in the pitcher's mechanics? Again, possibly, but I read on fangraphs that it is an extreme rarity that a pitcher losing velocity ever regains it, unless his initial loss of velocity was injury-related. Good points.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    Moon, Velocity is what a pitcher comes with, just like anyone else's arm. Injuries can surely affect it. So can mechanics -- up to a point. But, in general, a hose is a hose is a hose. If a loss in velocity shows consistently, as opposed to a few innings or on a night when a pitcher "doesn't have it," the loss is probably permanent.  A pitcher may be able to gear up to the old velocity a few times a game, but it will be gone as "the pitch."
    Both of us can name numerous pitchers who continued to be effective after a loss in velocity because they made compensatory adjustments.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III


    Velocity in a pitchers arm is God-given...

    Given all the strength exercises, conditioning, arm-slot, release point etc., etc., etc., will not make any significant changes in speed.  Like Ex alluded to, perhaps being able to crank it up a notch or two is possible for a pitch, or so.

    Take it from me, and a lot of others ex-pitchers out there who would have done anything for more speed, it can't be learned...just tweeked a bit.

    You can learn to throw a breaking pitch, but not speed.

    It's another reason why I think Bard is history.  Losing his velocity, on top of control, is disastrous.

    Not all power pitchers are capable of making the transition from power to finesse.
    It's certainly the exception and not the rule. With Bard's psychological make-up, expecially now, I seriously doubt it'll ever happen.

    Like I've posted dozens of times before, it's a shame that his career was placed in a secondary position in favor of ego or need.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Well said. Maybe Lester has some hidden injury and can regain his velocity soon of in 2013, but I think Beckett is another story. Josh has other pitches. He may be able to re-invent himself without having high velocity, and he has shown signs of being able to do that.

    We'll see.

    FYI:

    Papelbon:


    Lester:


    Beckett:

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    A guy can lose velocity when he is injured. A guy can lose velocity with a "dead arm" and come back after some rest. Isn't it reasonable that Bard simply pitched more innings in a short time this year and hurt his arm some. If they shut him down I bet he's fine next spring.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Yes, I mentioned velocity can be lost due to injury, and then regained. I hope Lester's loss of velocity was injury related, and he'll regain someday soon.

    As for Bard, I agree...





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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Ciriaco should play everyday. Period.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Thanks guys, for your responses regarding my pitching questions.

    I understand what you're saying that if a pitcher's max consistent velocity has always been 95 mph, then strengthening, conditioning, tweaking mechanics, etc is not going to change that significantly.

    What I'm still wondering though is what about the pitcher that has thrown 95 consistently, then suddenly loses 2 or 3 mph off his fastball.  Isn't it possible for that pitcher to regain that velocity?  I'm not talking about someone who has been injured.  I'm talking about someone who may have altered his mechanics knowingly or unknowingly.

    Here's a link to an article on the subject.  In particular, the quotes by Dr Glenn Fleisig toward the end.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/sports/baseball/17pitchers.html
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Thanks guys, for your responses regarding my pitching questions.

    I understand what you're saying that if a pitcher's max consistent velocity has always been 95 mph, then strengthening, conditioning, tweaking mechanics, etc is not going to change that significantly.

    What I'm still wondering though is what about the pitcher that has thrown 95 consistently, then suddenly loses 2 or 3 mph off his fastball.  Isn't it possible for that pitcher to regain that velocity?  I'm not talking about someone who has been injured.  I'm talking about someone who may have altered his mechanics knowingly or unknowingly.

    Here's a link to an article on the subject.  In particular, the quotes by Dr Glenn Fleisig toward the end.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/sports/baseball/17pitchers.html


    I can't find the article on fangraphs. It basically showed that it is a freak occurance for a non-injury pitcher to regain what was lost.

    Here's a related article:

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Since 2002, not one 31 year-old pitcher who has lost at least 1 mph managed to regain any velocity the following year. In fact, none of those 18 pitchers even managed to hold steady. All 18 lost additional velocity the following year, averaging 1.7 mph less on their fastball in their age-32 season.
     

Share