Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 9:54 PM EDT
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on Farrell this time.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:01 PM EDT
In response to craze4sox's comment:
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on his ones on Farrell this time.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:06 PM EDT
In response to ADG's comment:
In response to craze4sox's comment:
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on his ones on Farrell this time.
Really? If you have to blow threw 7 innings of bullpen, what will the effects be future games? The issue would be if it happens a few more times, you remove him from rotation.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:10 PM EDT
this is hardly Farrells fault...If Doubie did his job and could be more consistent we'd be ok. his 20 pitches per innings and 4-5 walks a game isnt going to cut it. Farrell was hoping he could right the ship like he did the least game. No need to burn the pen. Wilson will probably go 3 innings if he can.
Holland is mowing them down tonight. Rangers have great pitching.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:22 PM EDT
In response to craze4sox's comment:
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on his ones on Farrell this time.
That's 6 guys in one night. They used to say that about Francona all the time too, but that is just the way in works in BB. No one is willing to burn out their BP
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:24 PM EDT
In response to southpaw777's comment:
this is hardly Farrells fault...If Doubie did his job and could be more consistent we'd be ok. his 20 pitches per innings and 4-5 walks a game isnt going to cut it. Farrell was hoping he could right the ship like he did the least game. No need to burn the pen. Wilson will probably go 3 innings if he can.
Holland is mowing them down tonight. Rangers have great pitching.
Holland is mowing us down while Doub continued putting Texas on base. You don't allow this to continue with half the game remaining and because you are trying to save the pen for the next game or two. It's Farrells choice and responsibility period at least we were fortunate the Yanks lost.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:25 PM EDT
You play every game to win. But you can't play every game like it's Game 7.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:25 PM EDT
In response to craze4sox's comment:
In response to ADG's comment:
In response to craze4sox's comment:
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on his ones on Farrell this time.
Really? If you have to blow threw 7 innings of bullpen, what will the effects be future games? The issue would be if it happens a few more times, you remove him from rotation.
Who cares, you take one game at a time and hope for the best, not just give a game away to hope for best in the next game or two.
And instead of pitching Lester and Buchholz every 5th day, you'd pitch them every other day.
And everyone would play all 162 games.
And SPs would throw 140 pitches.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:26 PM EDT
In response to craze4sox's comment:
In response to southpaw777's comment:
this is hardly Farrells fault...If Doubie did his job and could be more consistent we'd be ok. his 20 pitches per innings and 4-5 walks a game isnt going to cut it. Farrell was hoping he could right the ship like he did the least game. No need to burn the pen. Wilson will probably go 3 innings if he can.
Holland is mowing them down tonight. Rangers have great pitching.
My point exactly southpaw,
Holland is mowing us down while Doub continued putting Texas on base. You don't allow this to continue with half the game remaining and because you are trying to save the pen for the next game or two. It's Farrells choice and responsibility period at least we were fortunate the Yanks lost.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:35 PM EDT
In response to Joebreidey's comment:
In response to craze4sox's comment:
In response to ADG's comment:
In response to craze4sox's comment:
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on his ones on Farrell this time.
Really? If you have to blow threw 7 innings of bullpen, what will the effects be future games? The issue would be if it happens a few more times, you remove him from rotation.
Who cares, you take one game at a time and hope for the best, not just give a game away to hope for best in the next game or two.
According to that logic, you would bring in your closer for 3 innings every time you had the lead.
And instead of pitching Lester and Buchholz every 5th day, you'd pitch them every other day.
And everyone would play all 162 games.
And SPs would throw 140 pitches.
Making up two runs compared to seven or 8 is achievable, we basically threw in the flag.
Glad I never had a manger like you!
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:42 PM EDT
In response to southpaw777's comment:
In response to craze4sox's comment:
In response to southpaw777's comment:
this is hardly Farrells fault...If Doubie did his job and could be more consistent we'd be ok. his 20 pitches per innings and 4-5 walks a game isnt going to cut it. Farrell was hoping he could right the ship like he did the least game. No need to burn the pen. Wilson will probably go 3 innings if he can.
Holland is mowing them down tonight. Rangers have great pitching.
My point exactly southpaw,
Holland is mowing us down while Doub continued putting Texas on base. You don't allow this to continue with half the game remaining and because you are trying to save the pen for the next game or two. It's Farrells choice and responsibility period at least we were fortunate the Yanks lost.
Sometimes you have to stick with your starter to see if he can pull through it. Lots of guys are left in and give up 6 runs. See Joes post above. its not unusual.
But managers don't pull starters early unless they are getting killed.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:46 PM EDT
Sometimes a pitcher has to be a sacrificial lamb for the team....it's not a pleasant feeling..LOL
140 pitches? I'm not really that adverse to it. Perhaps not 140, but certainly more than the rediculous 100 pitch rule. What ever happened to pitchers consistently throwing 120-125 pitches or so?
I think todays pitchers are unnecessarily babied.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:47 PM EDT
Glad I never had a manger like you!
Every manager is like me. The fact that you don't know that is meaningless to me.
Also meaningless is the rest of the blah, blah, blah.
Doubront gave up one run in three innings. Show me all the times this year that a manager has pulled an SP after 3 innings and 1 run.
I'll wait for the results.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 10:57 PM EDT
In response to ampoule's comment:
Sometimes a pitcher has to be a sacrificial lamb for the team....it's not a pleasant feeling..LOL
140 pitches? I'm not really that adverse to it. Perhaps not 140, but certainly more than the rediculous 100 pitch rule. What ever happened to pitchers consistently throwing 120-125 pitches or so?
I think todays pitchers are unnecessarily babied.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:06 PM EDT
Craze4sox, you are way off on this one and all these guys are making great points. It's a long season, a season in which you would be extremely happy if you lose 60 to 70 games. Doubront is still young and obviously a bit raw, but he has shown the ability to settle down. You don't blow out the bullpen in a game where the other pitcher is clearly dealing. The reality of this series is that they would LOVE to take 2 out of 3, but they will go home with a smile if they grab only one of these games. Besides, Moon jinxed Doubront in his predictions. ;)
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:11 PM EDT
In response to Joebreidey's comment:
In response to ampoule's comment:
Sometimes a pitcher has to be a sacrificial lamb for the team....it's not a pleasant feeling..LOL
140 pitches? I'm not really that adverse to it. Perhaps not 140, but certainly more than the rediculous 100 pitch rule. What ever happened to pitchers consistently throwing 120-125 pitches or so?
I think todays pitchers are unnecessarily babied.
Babying the arm is not why they restrict pitchers to 100 or so pitches.
Is it because of the supposed 'new era' of specialists?
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:16 PM EDT
In response to ADG's comment:
In response to craze4sox's comment:
Who feels when your starting pitcher gives up 11 hits and a BB in less than 4 innings with no K's we propably shouldn't be pressing our luck being down just two? Sure we don't want to tax the pen but now we probably handed Texas the game.
If we lose it's strictly on his ones on Farrell this time.
Really? If you have to blow threw 7 innings of bullpen, what will the effects be future games? The issue would be if it happens a few more times, you remove him from rotation.
it will and they will. the sooner the better. webster will be here shortly. good-bye, do bee.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:24 PM EDT
In response to craze4sox's comment:
In response to southpaw777's comment:
this is hardly Farrells fault...If Doubie did his job and could be more consistent we'd be ok. his 20 pitches per innings and 4-5 walks a game isnt going to cut it. Farrell was hoping he could right the ship like he did the least game. No need to burn the pen. Wilson will probably go 3 innings if he can.
Holland is mowing them down tonight. Rangers have great pitching.
My point exactly southpaw,
Holland is mowing us down while Doub continued putting Texas on base. You don't allow this to continue with half the game remaining and because you are trying to save the pen for the next game or two. It's Farrells choice and responsibility period at least we were fortunate the Yanks lost.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:24 PM EDT
Cut the season to 142 games, go with a 4 man rotation, and still every few days one of your starters will give up 7 runs.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:27 PM EDT
In response to ampoule's comment:
In response to Joebreidey's comment:
In response to ampoule's comment:
Sometimes a pitcher has to be a sacrificial lamb for the team....it's not a pleasant feeling..LOL
140 pitches? I'm not really that adverse to it. Perhaps not 140, but certainly more than the rediculous 100 pitch rule. What ever happened to pitchers consistently throwing 120-125 pitches or so?
I think todays pitchers are unnecessarily babied.
Babying the arm is not why they restrict pitchers to 100 or so pitches.
Educate me.
Is it because of the supposed 'new era' of specialists?
As you can see, the results get worse as the pitch count mounts up. This is the same with any athletic event. The more you do anything, the more tired you get. By the time you've reached the 100th pitch, you are .063 worse than when you started.
And you know how many teams have RPs with better OPSa than .773? All of them. As good as Verlander is, his 76-100 is still .690. Tazawa, Uhera and Bailey have an OPSa of .695, .600, and .469.
So even the best pitcher in BB is not as good after 100 pitches as good BP pitchers are for one inning. So it is actually the opposite of babying the SPs arm. They only keep him in for as long as they do so that they can baby the BP arms. Very few SPs are as good after 100 pitches as an average BP arm will be for one.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:31 PM EDT
When a pitcher is around 100 pitches and he is dominating the opposition I see zero reason to bring in a cold arm and give the other team a chance to face a pitcher they can hot off. When a pitcher is on then you leave him in the game right through the 8th inning (unless you have such a lead that dictates otherwise).
I would think it better my starters normally thrown 115 a start, up to 125 if required.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:33 PM EDT
craze4sox is dead wrong on this one. All managers will leave their starters in up to about 7 runs or even more unless it's a close game or the starter has already pitched, say, 5 innings or more. If Farrell had done anything other than that, he would have been justifiably second guessed.
craze4sox right now is looking pretty foolish blaming a loss on the manager when the pitching staff gave up 18 hits and the lineup couldn't score a single run. This was a decisive win by Texas and unpreventable by any managerial moves.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/3/2013 11:37 PM EDT
The Red Sox put absolutely zero doubt into the Rangers mind, that the Rangers would feel pressure for the need to score more than one or two runs.
Pitching when the lineup is doing zilch is harder to do. Game pressure is one of the least understood aspects of competition.
Makes a difference playing the Rangers on the road, as opposed to the inferior rosters at home.
Nothing has changed, in that the Tigers are still the team to beat, in the AL, with the Rangers and Yankees (when they get back Granderson and Tex) being the contenders for the AL flag.
What April did was give the Red Sox a better chance to make the playoffs, but that lineup isn't any contender lineup. In the AL/DH, the offense takes the pressure off the pitching.
Middlebrooks is the only hope for the Red Sox season long offensive needs, and he's off to a confidence hole first month. It's early enough to where he could turn it around, but unless he hits about 30 homers and slugs at a top tier level, the Red Sox offense isn't going to get it done over the marathong. Napoli and Ortiz are part-time players who must have a 140 plus game slugging producer to carry the season long team load.
Beyond Buch and Lester, the Red Sox starting pitching is weak. Little chance that Dumpster and Lackey get the deep innings season long consistency that the Red Sox will need to avoid burning out the quality in the pen. Doubrant's showing tonight is not a good sign, because he is the only profile who has a clean enough slate to where there is some possibility he could mature into the quality starter the Red Sox need.
Unless Middlebrooks and Doubrant have quality full season production work slates (.500 are slugging and about 30 HR for Middlebrooks and about 150 innings and around a 4.0 ERA for Doubrant). this Red Sox team will have a hard time making the playoffs. But if they do, and it will take both of them, the Red Sox join the Yankees and the Rangers as legitimate competition for the Tigers. The odds of that happening aren't good.
Ellsbury, Shane, Pedroia, Ortiz and Napoli aren't going to get it done in the slugging department because Ellsbury, Shane and Pedroia aren't top tier slugging material and Ortiz and Napoli can't produce the full season load required. Nava and Gomes are platoon guys who give up so much on defense that they aren't capable of producing enough season long offense to offset the deficit. The only way to approach the Red Sox OF that the GM constructed was to go for the best defensive lineup and use Gomes and Nava as pinh hitter bench guys.
Carp and S. Drew do not fit. Carp and S. Drew should be on the trade block ASAP. Iglesias and Bradley should replace those guys. Gomes and Nava should be the bench guys. Ross should be starting, with Salty as the bench pinch hitter and replaced for defensive purposes guy.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/4/2013 12:01 AM EDT
In response to Joebreidey's comment:
In response to ampoule's comment:
In response to Joebreidey's comment:
In response to ampoule's comment:
Sometimes a pitcher has to be a sacrificial lamb for the team....it's not a pleasant feeling..LOL
140 pitches? I'm not really that adverse to it. Perhaps not 140, but certainly more than the rediculous 100 pitch rule. What ever happened to pitchers consistently throwing 120-125 pitches or so?
I think todays pitchers are unnecessarily babied.
Babying the arm is not why they restrict pitchers to 100 or so pitches.
Educate me.
Is it because of the supposed 'new era' of specialists?
It's related. Pitchers get tired. It isn't so much the injury, though that could certainly be one more thing on that side of the ledger, but the pitchers get tired. Take the following splits from the 2012 AL
As you can see, the results get worse as the pitch count mounts up. This is the same with any athletic event. The more you do anything, the more tired you get. By the time you've reached the 100th pitch, you are .063 worse than when you started.
And you know how many teams have RPs with better OPSa than .773? All of them. As good as Verlander is, his 76-100 is still .690. Tazawa, Uhera and Bailey have an OPSa of .695, .600, and .469.
So even the best pitcher in BB is not as good after 100 pitches as good BP pitchers are for one inning. So it is actually the opposite of babying the SPs arm. They only keep him in for as long as they do so that they can baby the BP arms. Very few SPs are as good after 100 pitches as an average BP arm will be for one.
I realize what the 'stats' say, yet I just have trouble being totally convinced. Maybe it's me...a dinosaur living in the 21st century.
I just feel that intangibles make a significant impact. Things being equal, why do some players, or pitchers for that matter, do better against some teams than others? How do you measure momentum? It certainly exists..big time. How do you measure 'clutch'? How is team chemistry measured and the impact it has in the clubhouse?
In essence, I'm sure that some stats make a difference, but it's certainly not the absolute.
Re: Is it just me?
posted at 5/4/2013 1:01 AM EDT
Beyond Buch and Lester, the Red Sox starting pitching is weak.
Lucky you feel pitching is meaningless.
