Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

       Ok so the Sox have had more than their share of injuries, and in many cases that is a good thing. Would Middlebrooks be here if Youk was healthy all year, Lackey and Dice K being out opened up spot for Doubront. If Crawford were healthy would Ross have come to Sox knowing he would be in platoon in right, greatly reducing his AB or Would Sox have passed on him and gone with a Sweeney/ McDonald platoon. All these moves have improved team, and as far as injuries go I'm hoping Beckett and or Lester is hurt, which would explain their lackluster season.  Also other teams also have had more than their share of injuries, the list is too long to get into here, so they negate each other when teams are playing, case in point Ortiz out for Sox and Bautista out for Jays, so the injuries were a wash.  With the exception of Ellsbury most replacements have performed at a level exceeding players, in some cases in the short term i.e Nava Ciriaco etc, than the players they replaced.
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

    In Response to Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?:
    [QUOTE]It is mathematicaaly impossible for most teams to have more than their share of injuries. There must be a mean / average indicator and half of the teams will be above it and half below. Red Sox had 22 on the DL this year. Another indicator should measure days on the DL by impact players.
    Posted by Calzone65[/QUOTE]

       I was comparing teams injuries with that of past seasons i.e the Sox of '12 as opposed to '11 and before, so it is possible to having 100% teams with more than their share of injuries, just curious would you consider Youk an impact player  and if so, how do figure into your calculations if replacement out performs said player.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

    In Response to Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?:
    [QUOTE]Sorry, I see nothing in your OP that suggests that you are comparing injuries this year to those of previous years and anyway I see no use for that analysis.
    Posted by Calzone65[/QUOTE]

       Are you going to nit-pick my opening post. Do you have any comment that the injuries have actually aided the Sox.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

    Injuries are never helpful. However , they are part of the game. You just have to deal with it as best as you can. Nobody wants to hear excuses.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

    In Response to Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?:
    [QUOTE]Injuries are never helpful. However , they are part of the game. You just have to deal with it as best as you can. Nobody wants to hear excuses.
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]

      Never helpfull? tell that to the Pat's when Bledsoe went down. Are you telling me they would have won the SB without Brady as their QB.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?

    In Response to Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Enough with the injuries...the Sox are better because of them? :   Never helpfull? tell that to the Pat's when Bledsoe went down. Are you telling me they would have won the SB without Brady as their QB.
    Posted by attic-dan[/QUOTE]
    That is not the point. Brady was always better. They could have seen that.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share