Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

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

    Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Statistics on injuries in baseball are, somewhat surprisingly, hard to come by.

    But this much we do know: Based on the available information, the Red Sox have set a team record by putting 23 players on the disabled list 27 times this season.

    Going back to 1987, the 23 players are the most put on the DL in a single season by any team in the majors.

    The 2008 Nationals used the DL 30 times and the 2004 Rangers 29 times. The Red Sox are one of five teams tied for third with 27 uses of the DL. Those stats go back 25 years according to Buster Olney of ESPN.com.

    For all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about this team, you can make a case that it's somewhat of a miracle they're 53-53 given all the injuries. The Phillies, who also have been plagued by injuries, are 47-58.

    Thursday night marked the 75th defensive lineup and 91st batting order the Red Sox have used in 106 games.

    The player with the most starts in left field is Daniel Nava. Most starts in center? Jacoby Ellsbury is tied with Marlon Byrd who was designated for assignment on June 9. Adrian Gonzalez has started more games in the outfield than Carl Crawford.

    Meanwhile, we await news on Josh Beckett and his sore back.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Sounds to me like it's more the medical/training staff making the decisions as to whether a player plays or not. The Sox need Obama care so the players will have to wait 6 months to see a doctor. They can play while they are waiting.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    In Response to Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham:
    [QUOTE]Sounds to me like it's more the medical/training staff making the decisions as to whether a player plays or not. The Sox need Obama care so the players will have to wait 6 months to see a doctor. They can play while they are waiting.
    Posted by harv53[/QUOTE]

    The Sox have had Obamneycare for years. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Good grief, that's a lot of injuries.

    Let's hope nobody is silly enough to say that the injuries don't matter.

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

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    We still have about 30% of the season to go and a few guys who haven't got hurt yet.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    our team has the resiliency of a wet noodle...i heard someone on the team read this report and went straight to Ben to tell them about it...
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    This does not even take into account the guys who are not on the D.L. , but who are on the bench but not available , due to minor injuries or illnesses. Many nights , we are playing a man short.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    What is not said is that most of the RS DL stints are not due to conditioning. From broken feet, to spriained thumbs/wrists, broken hand, TJ surgery 2 current and 2 just returning % one more potential, etc...
    Yes there are some DL because of pitchers with dead or sore arms but not sure that is conditioning. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    In Response to Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham:
    [QUOTE]This does not even take into account the guys who are not on the D.L. , but who are on the bench but not available , due to minor injuries or illnesses. Many nights , we are playing a man short.
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]

    ...then you have guys rushing back and re-injurying themselves and guys supposedly taking too much time coming back.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Sometimes it's "who" is injured and not "how many" or "how many times."

    The bulk of the "man games lost to injury" for the Red Sox is to outfielders. Yet the outfield defense and team offense are surprisingly unaffected by the loss of some "so called key players."

    What has been the major problem is the "Big 3" starters ( Lester, Beckett and Buchholz) who have had long stretches of ineffective pitching. While two high priced starters ( Matsuzaka and Lackey) remain on the DL, it can be argued that the pitchers who have taken their spots have been at least as effective if not actually better.

    So, in a nutshell, you try hard to blame injuries , but under closer examination, the healthy players have been terrible , miserable and mostly are underperforming.

    The team certainly has enough organizational depth to cover injuries to Sweeney, Ross, Podsednick and even Pedroia  ( his replacement , Ciriaco, actually had been outhitting him!). Nava filled in nicely for Crawford, Middlebrooks out hit Youkilis during his time as Youk's fill-in. You could easily say that Doubront has pitched as well, or better, than Lackey. Marlon Byrd played well in his short stay....he became a victim of age and a numbers game.

    Really, the only time you can play the "woe is us injury card" is when the call-ups and bench players do not step up and fill the shoes of the injured starters....this has not been the case. In many ways the younger replacements have made it more glaringly obvious that the high paid veterans are lacking in motivation and desire ( possibly skill , too).

    There is whole lot wrong here, and injuries are not it.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Sometimes it's "who" is injured and not "how many" or "how many times."

    The bulk of the "man games lost to injury" for the Red Sox is to outfielders. Yet the outfield defense and team offense are surprisingly unaffected by the loss of some "so called key players."

    With all due respect, we've had injuries in the OF, then injuries to the replacement OF'ers, and then injuries to the replacements of the replacements.

    We've used 16 different OF'ers.

    Our leading OF'ers were supposed to be Ellsbury, Crawford, Sweeney and Ross.

    Here's what we got (innings):
    1) Ross  581
    2) Nava  483
    3) Swee 467
    4) Byrd  256
    5) Ellsb  227
    6) DMac  215
    7) Kalish 158
    8) Pods   138
    9) AGon  127
    6 others   96

    While we have done better in LF and RF than last year by OPS, the drop off in CF has been large.

    CF:
    2011: .316  34  112 (.918 OPS)
    2012: .249   5    33  (.623)

    All OF:
    2011: .272  64  245  (.772)
    2012: .258  29  143  (.724)


    What has been the major problem is the "Big 3" starters ( Lester, Beckett and Buchholz) who have had long stretches of ineffective pitching. While two high priced starters ( Matsuzaka and Lackey) remain on the DL, it can be argued that the pitchers who have taken their spots have been at least as effective if not actually better.

    Yes, and much better than Weiland, Miller and others as well.

    Buch has been hurt, and Beckett a little here and there too.

    We also lost our closer for the whole year so far, and we were forced to take Aceves out of a slot he did well in to try and learn how to be a closer overnight.

    So, in a nutshell, you try hard to blame injuries , but under closer examination, the healthy players have been terrible , miserable and mostly are underperforming.

    All but Papi.

    The team certainly has enough organizational depth to cover injuries to Sweeney, Ross, Podsednick and even Pedroia  ( his replacement , Ciriaco, actually had been outhitting him!). Nava filled in nicely for Crawford, Middlebrooks out hit Youkilis during his time as Youk's fill-in. You could easily say that Doubront has pitched as well, or better, than Lackey. Marlon Byrd played well in his short stay....he became a victim of age and a numbers game.

    Really, the only time you can play the "woe is us injury card" is when the call-ups and bench players do not step up and fill the shoes of the injured starters....this has not been the case. In many ways the younger replacements have made it more glaringly obvious that the high paid veterans are lacking in motivation and desire ( possibly skill , too). 

    Good point, but eventually the subs' well-doing dropped off, or they got hurt themselves.

    Nava slumped (He still has the most PAs in LF).
    Byrd leads all Sox in CF PAs and had a .606 OPS.
    Pods got hurt.
    Middlebrooks has done great, but his .319 OBP is a big drop from our 2011 3B.

    There is whole lot wrong here, and injuries are not it.

    Injuries are not the whole problem. 
    They may not even be the number one problem.
    Yes, if just a couple of these vets did better, we'd be in the WC:
    Beckett, Lester, Buch, AGon, Pedey, or Youk.

    However, one has to think we'd be in the WC slot right now had one or two of these injuries not occured:

    Ellsbury
    Bailey
    Crawford

    ...not to mention a few minor injured players:
    Papi
    AGon
    Pedey
    Ross
    Beckett
    Buchholtz
    Pods/Sweeney


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

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Great response Mr. Moonslav. Very thorough and loaded with pertinent facts. Most teams never would have had the bench and ready callups from AAA ball to fill in and perform so well.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Great post and one that is very true.  The DL rotation has not been the pitching staff but rather the OF.  The fairly healthy SP has been the main underperforming issue on the team.  I am beginning to think that our big 3 would have problems starting on most of the contending teams in MLB...and if that wasn't the case, why wouldn't contending teams be beating a path to the Sox door for the likes of Lester, Beckett and Buch? (Don't tell me that the Braves wanted Lester...they merely inquired about him...big difference)

    In Response to Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham:
    [QUOTE]Sometimes it's "who" is injured and not "how many" or "how many times." The bulk of the "man games lost to injury" for the Red Sox is to outfielders. Yet the outfield defense and team offense are surprisingly unaffected by the loss of some "so called key players." With all due respect, we've had injuries in the OF, then injuries to the replacement OF'ers, and then injuries to the replacements of the replacements. We've used 16 different OF'ers. Our leading OF'ers were supposed to be Ellsbury, Crawford, Sweeney and Ross. Here's what we got (innings): 1) Ross  581 2) Nava  483 3) Swee 467 4) Byrd  256 5) Ellsb  227 6) DMac  215 7) Kalish 158 8) Pods   138 9) AGon  127 6 others   96 While we have done better in LF and RF than last year by OPS, the drop off in CF has been large. CF: 2011: .316  34  112 (.918 OPS) 2012: .249   5    33  (.623) All OF: 2011: .272  64  245  (.772) 2012: .258  29  143  (.724) What has been the major problem is the "Big 3" starters ( Lester, Beckett and Buchholz) who have had long stretches of ineffective pitching. While two high priced starters ( Matsuzaka and Lackey) remain on the DL, it can be argued that the pitchers who have taken their spots have been at least as effective if not actually better. Yes, and much better than Weiland, Miller and others as well. Buch has been hurt, and Beckett a little here and there too. We also lost our closer for the whole year so far, and we were forced to take Aceves out of a slot he did well in to try and learn how to be a closer overnight. So, in a nutshell, you try hard to blame injuries , but under closer examination, the healthy players have been terrible , miserable and mostly are underperforming. All but Papi. The team certainly has enough organizational depth to cover injuries to Sweeney, Ross, Podsednick and even Pedroia  ( his replacement , Ciriaco, actually had been outhitting him!). Nava filled in nicely for Crawford, Middlebrooks out hit Youkilis during his time as Youk's fill-in. You could easily say that Doubront has pitched as well, or better, than Lackey. Marlon Byrd played well in his short stay....he became a victim of age and a numbers game. Really, the only time you can play the "woe is us injury card" is when the call-ups and bench players do not step up and fill the shoes of the injured starters....this has not been the case. In many ways the younger replacements have made it more glaringly obvious that the high paid veterans are lacking in motivation and desire ( possibly skill , too).  Good point, but eventually the subs' well-doing dropped off, or they got hurt themselves. Nava slumped (He still has the most PAs in LF). Byrd leads all Sox in CF PAs and had a .606 OPS. Pods got hurt. Middlebrooks has done great, but his .319 OBP is a big drop from our 2011 3B. There is whole lot wrong here, and injuries are not it. Injuries are not the whole problem.  They may not even be the number one problem. Yes, if just a couple of these vets did better, we'd be in the WC: Beckett, Lester, Buch, AGon, Pedey, or Youk. However, one has to think we'd be in the WC slot right now had one or two of these injuries not occured: Ellsbury Bailey Crawford ...not to mention a few minor injured players: Papi AGon Pedey Ross Beckett Buchholtz Pods/Sweeney
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fenwayjimy. Show Fenwayjimy's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    As Moonslav says injuries were a problem but not the whole problem. I think that we can all agree on that. However the injuries were more than any other team since 1987 as Peter Abraham states.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Injuries aside, Beckett and Lester have been pitching all year, and for the supposed #1 and #2 starters, they stink. That's the issue.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fenwayjimy. Show Fenwayjimy's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    In Response to Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham:
    [QUOTE]Injuries aside, Beckett and Lester have been pitching all year, and for the supposed #1 and #2 starters, they stink. That's the issue.
    Posted by ADG[/QUOTE]

    Beckett and Lester are underperforming but probably deserve about eight more wins between them than they have.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    Every team has injuries and a few guys underperforming. Ours seem a bit more extreme than most teams, and that's why we are sub 500.
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Motown9009. Show Motown9009's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham


    It's funny but for a team that has suffered such an incredible number of injuries, it's not the injuries that stand out as reasons they're in the position they are. I don't know if the clubhouse problems or playing hating Bobby V are true or as significant as they're made out to be, but it seems there's a weekly dramatic event - someone is always saying one thing while someone else says another....but the starting pitching under-performing, not being able to turn it around and not seemingly too concerned about it is the main issue. Bailey's injury is signicant because they've blown some games late, but he's an injury prone closer who's currently injuried, can't say that was an unexpected occurance.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    In Response to Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham:
    [QUOTE]It's funny but for a team that has suffered such an incredible number of injuries, it's not the injuries that stand out as reasons they're in the position they are. I don't know if the clubhouse problems or playing hating Bobby V are true or as significant as they're made out to be, but it seems there's a weekly dramatic event - someone is always saying one thing while someone else says another....but the starting pitching under-performing, not being able to turn it around and not seemingly too concerned about it is the main issue. Bailey's injury is signicant because they've blown some games late, but he's an injury prone closer who's currently injuried, can't say that was an unexpected occurance.
    Posted by Motown9009[/QUOTE]

    I pointed out this spring that our big 3 starters have never all been healthy and on top of their games at the same time for a full season. I had been projecting great things for the Sox the last couple of years, and finally realized that counting on the big 3 to carry us was a losing gamble. 

    While our 4/5 slot starters have done better than expected after the bard experiment ended, it hasn't been enough to overcome the dissapointments, bad breaks, lost velocity, and injuries to our big 3.

    None of our top 6 starters have an ERA below 4.54. None have a WHIP below 1.209. 4 starters with an ERA over 4.75. 

    It is so obvious that our starting pitching has been our beiggest weakness, and i still think the only way we become serious contenders again is to somehow get a top quality starter without creating too many holes elsewhere or sacrificing our future too much.

    I know we have millions and millions tied up in our pitching staff already. I know we have Lackey coming back next year. I'm hoping Bailey will be healthy next year, and Bard and Aceves can go back to being 2 of the best set-up guys in MLB again. I know Doubront and Morales look promising. I know we need to find a solid RH'd clean-up type hitter and deal with the Papi decision this winter. But, if we don't get a solid ace-type starter this winter, we'll be left with praying for our "big 3" to all gell at the same time for the first time ever! 

    I don't like those odds.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    This should end the "all teams have injuries" debates. I'm really not interested in hearing how the Yankees, yada, yada, yada, have injuries, too. There's just no contest. And this has been going on for three years now.

    And enough with the starting pitching. Let's face it. The players that are in the games aren't really hitting that well. At least when it counts. That's a fact.
     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham

    In Response to Re: Injury stats--most since 1987--Peter Abraham:
    [QUOTE]Sounds to me like it's more the medical/training staff making the decisions as to whether a player plays or not. The Sox need Obama care so the players will have to wait 6 months to see a doctor. They can play while they are waiting.
    Posted by harv53[/QUOTE]

    Right.

    The medical staff needs to teach Ellsbury to withstand bouncing shortstops off his shoulder.

    They should start with Ciriaco, obviously the lightest, work up to Aviles, and by the time they stat bouncing Punto off his shoulder, he'll be ready to play.

    Also, they should stop ripping apart Buchholz' esophagus...
     

Share