It's never been "The Pitching"

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

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching" : Of course we could use more timely hitting, but that is something that is hard to trade for, because it is hard to identify what player is about to hit well in the clutch. You put a good offensive team on the field and roll the dice. Right now, we have rolled snake eyes with 1/3rd of our line-up out, our defense in shambles, and our staff in disarray. The point is, right now, pitching is a higher priority than a big RH'd bat. That's not saying we don't need a bat. What silly clown won't tell you is that he was against the Matt Holliday signing, because he wasn't an "elite" hitter. His numbers since the deal? .309/.388/.534/.922 (BTW, had we signed Matt, we most likely wouldn't have CC.)
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    I don't disagree.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]It seems to me that Hank takes a lot of heat on here for stating his opinion. I happen to disagree with his evaluation of Ellsbury , but other than that , he makes good ,common sense baseball observations. Our " offense " leaves a lot to be desired. How can you dispute that ? Building up the stats in blowout games , but repeatedly failing in the close , clutch situations. This by no means absolves the starting pitching , which has absolutely stunk since last September , but our supposedly league leading offense has been atrocious , as well. The combination of lousy starting pitching and lousy clutch hitting is why we are where we are today. But I guess it is easier to blame HankWilliams for stating what should be obvious to all.
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]

    EXcept that we scored 5 runs today.  This would have been enough except we also gave up 5.

    Do I have to give the real records, not the blatant lies Softy posts?

    The Sox record in low scoring games is atrocious.   Basically, if they don't hit,they don't win.   And some games, you are going to go against a great pitcher, or a guy having a great day.  If you plan on giving up 4 or 5  runs and outslugging, you will lose 9 out of 9 times. You need to be able to pitch...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching" : EXcept that we scored 5 runs today.  This would have been enough except we also gave up 5. Do I have to give the real records, not the blatant lies Softy posts? The Sox record in low scoring games is atrocious.   Basically, if they don't hit,they don't win.   And some games, you are going to go against a great pitcher, or a guy having a great day.  If you plan on giving up 4 or 5  runs and outslugging, you will lose 9 out of 9 times. You need to be able to pitch...
    Posted by notin[/QUOTE]

     What a bunch of bunk this rant is, first of all if you think that givivng up 4-5 runs per game will cause you to lose 9 out of 9 times, then you weren't paying attention to professor Moon in this same thread; AL winning percentage when scoring 5 runs 71%, 6 runs 72%. The bullpen, much maligned earlier in the season has been decent, the starters are weak (1-3), the 4-5 guys are adequate,
    and the offense is clunky, getting 1-3 back to their median averages would help, and a RH boomer is the finishing touch.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    Buchholz is one of only two pitchers since 1920 that has given up at least 5 ER in each of his first 5 starts. What does that tell you? Most pitchers that have pitched this badly since 1920 are either taken out of rotation, sent down or released.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    I don't keep track of all that stuff. Just talking about what I see lately. We certainly could use a good right handed bat. Maybe it can come from within. I don't see any realistic trade opportunities out there at present.  But to say that our offense is fine , is to ignore what is going on. The problem is the starting pitching and the offense. 

    1) I have never said we don't need a big RH'd bat. I just said it was a lower priority than a solid depenable starting pitcher.

    2) You say you disagree with softy on Ells, but are you saying you think our pitching staff is fine?

    The title of this thread shows softy's position, what's yours?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE] No runs off a walk-on pitcher DH, any issues with this offense?
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    Are you really not getting the point?

    It's hard to tell.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching" :  What a bunch of bunk this rant is, first of all if you think that givivng up 4-5 runs per game will cause you to lose 9 out of 9 times, then you weren't paying attention to professor Moon in this same thread; AL winning percentage when scoring 5 runs 71%, 6 runs 72%. The bullpen, much maligned earlier in the season has been decent, the starters are weak (1-3), the 4-5 guys are adequate, and the offense is clunky, getting 1-3 back to their median averages would help, and a RH boomer is the finishing touch.
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    Didn't we have an entire topic on this stupid term? />:/
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching" : EXcept that we scored 5 runs today.  This would have been enough except we also gave up 5. Do I have to give the real records, not the blatant lies Softy posts? The Sox record in low scoring games is atrocious.   Basically, if they don't hit,they don't win.   And some games, you are going to go against a great pitcher, or a guy having a great day.  If you plan on giving up 4 or 5  runs and outslugging, you will lose 9 out of 9 times. You need to be able to pitch...
    Posted by notin[/QUOTE]
    We scored five runs today, four of them on one swing of the bat by a rookie. Then went inning after inning after inning without scoring. Same thing happened Friday night. All we needed was one big hit and we win both games. Our starting pitching was terrible , but the bullpen was great. Had every opportunity to win , but the offense failed time and again. A D.H. shutting you out for the final two innings is not something to be proud of.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]I don't keep track of all that stuff. Just talking about what I see lately. We certainly could use a good right handed bat. Maybe it can come from within. I don't see any realistic trade opportunities out there at present.  But to say that our offense is fine , is to ignore what is going on. The problem is the starting pitching and the offense.  1) I have never said we don't need a big RH'd bat. I just said it was a lower priority than a solid depenable starting pitcher. 2) You say you disagree with softy on Ells, but are you saying you think our pitching staff is fine? The title of this thread shows softy's position, what's yours?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    I think my position is clear. The starting pitching is a mess. The bullpen , for the most part , has been outstanding.  What I object to is the idea that the offense is fine. It is not. The vaunted Sox hitting has been a big disappointment. I don't know what the solution is. I think Hank's suggestion of trading Ellsbury for  a Hanley Ramirez is preposterous. For starters , I would ship Buchholz to Pawtucket or Portland. Maybe it would send a message , I don't know. I would make some changes. Lavarnway over Salty or Shoppach. Linares over Byrd or McDonald. Ciriaco over Punto. Middlebrooks stays at third when Youk returns. Not sure where we could find a spot for Gomez.  Iglesias may not be ready , but might fit in if Youk was dealt.  It is clear to me that changes are needed. To fall back on the idea that " our offense will have no trouble scoring runs " is not getting it done.  That is all that I'm trying to say.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    The pitching was outstanding, in what amounted to 2 baseball games! The offense, in AL/DH/Fenway stunk! Other than Middlebrooks (the inexperienced poster child for finding a proven experienced cure), the offense has been a value joke since nearly a half a decade ago when they won their last playoff games but were unable to score runs when it mattered after Manny aged out and was correctly discharged.

    And as far as the imbedded NYT propagandist Moonshwemp goes, he neglects to tell you that Softlaw said that Matt Holiday was too old in relation to younger and better RH OF trade values that needed to be used instead of blowing up the payroll and hanging on to players who needed to be traded. He also is lying about Mauer contract amount from Softlaw, who outlined the full details of the low and high offers and made the point that the Twins could afford and would resign Mauer. Moonshwemp claimed that the Twins couldn't afford Mauer, which he won't mention until such time as he reacts with his standard "I admitted I was wrong but, but, spin, spin, spin, spin". 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    The team is top 5 in almost every offensive category including runs scored (2nd in the AL).  Yet they are DEAD LAST in pitching, the Sox have the second to worst ERA in the Majors and are are FIRST in runs given up....

    oh it is about "the pitching" sure having another elite RH power bat would be nice, but it's a luxory at this point...the starting pitching is in really horrible shape right now...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    The team is top 5 in almost every offensive category including runs scored (2nd in the AL).  Yet they are DEAD LAST in pitching, the Sox have the second to worst ERA in the Majors and are are FIRST in runs given up....

    oh it is about "the pitching" sure having another elite RH power bat would be nice, but it's a luxory at this point...the starting pitching is in really horrible shape right now...

    Yes, I'd love to have a big RH'd bopper too, but just how easy will it be for us to first trade for a quality & dependable starter and then get a power bat? 

    Our farm has some nice prospects, but not enough to do it all.

    Trading Ells for a power RH'd bat just exchanges one hole with another.
    Trading Beckett for RH'd bat writes off any chance of our staff doing well enough for WS trip.

    At best, we could muster up enough prospects to get a solid #2 type starter. That may not be enough, but it's our best hope for 2012. The return of Ells, CC and Youk will have to be enough to boost the offense. The return of Dice-K is not going to do the same for our staff.

    It's always about the pitching...always!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    Looking at our game by game logs...

    Our pitching won one game for us that the odds say we should have lost: 1-0

    They lost one game in our 2 runs games. The league avg is 22% when scoring 2 runs. We are 0-4 when we should have been 1-3.

    They lost 1 game in our 3 run scored games. League avg 36%, We are 0-4, when we should have been 1-3.

    They lost a game we scored 9 runs (League avg 91%).

    They lost a game we scored 12 runs!

    Thats 1 plus and 4 minus for a net of -3.

    Our bats?

    1 lost in the 1-0 loss.
    1 lost in games we allowed 4 runs (league 64% we are 2-2 not 3-1)
    1 win by going 2-1 in 5 runs allowed games not 1-2.
    1 win in 6 run allowed games by going 2-3 not 1-4.

    Our bats are even.

    It's clear where most of the blame lies thus far... game by game.

    AL teams are 114-1 in games where they score 11 or more runs in a game since the start of 2011. Guess what staff lost that one game.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    Does the offense include Adrian Gonzalez?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    These threads are just wild.

    No one is saying the offense does not have problems.  the point is that these threads always pose the offense against the pitching and say that the offense is the bigger problem.

    It isn't.  That is factual.


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thomasmtom. Show Thomasmtom's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    Trying to salvage this season by trading prospects for established players would be a mistake. The Sox need to trade veteran players and clear salary. This may have to wait until July, but a youth movement is this teams only long term cure.

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

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    Real simple, folks. The team wins about 80% of the time is scores 4 or more runs.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]Real simple, folks. The team wins about 80% of the time is scores 4 or more runs.
    Posted by hankwilliamsjr[/QUOTE]

    Well, that's going to be a problem because 10 of the 14 teams in the AL have a team ERA under 4. 

    Oh, in 11 of the 16 games they've lost, the opposing team scored more that 4 runs.  So in those 11 games, if the Sox had scored 4 runs, they still would have lost.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In other words softy...it's always been about this pitching.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from gbman87603. Show gbman87603's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]It's the offense and the lack of a superstar RH profile in the middle of the lineup.
    Posted by hankwilliamsjr[/QUOTE]

    This is ridiculous. Look at the Rays.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from antiqueman1. Show antiqueman1's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    Wow. Of course it is about the pitching. The SOX pitchers are awful. Buch, Beckett, Lackey, and Lester are just not pitching well. I would think once Lackey gets healthy, if ever, all these guys should be available in trade.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from antiqueman1. Show antiqueman1's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    It is clearly about the overpaid contracts to Gonzo, Beckett, Crawford, Lackey, etc. When the Sox try to buy like the Yanks, they don't do so well. Stick to the guys like Youk(when signed) or the Pedrios or Ellsbury's. It is time to make a statement by getting rid of one of more of these crazy contracts even if it means eating some of it, which I sure it will. That will help make a statement.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    we really are argung apples and oranges here...they are both fruits so lets stop there...our starting pitching is a joke...i agree - the vaunted 2nd in offensive production is smoke and mirrors...feast or famine and never clutch (see yesterdays game/agon for conclusive proof)....

    play the kids and start fresh - like they shouldve done after 2011
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from antiqueman1. Show antiqueman1's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]we really are argung apples and oranges here...they are both fruits so lets stop there...our starting pitching is a joke...i agree - the vaunted 2nd in offensive production is smoke and mirrors...feast or famine and never clutch (see yesterdays game/agon for conclusive proof).... play the kids and start fresh - like they shouldve done after 2011
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    Agree. No time like the present to start playing the "kids". 2 reasons. Maybe they perform well(can't do much worse) and perhaps it lights a fire under this team( and its overpaid players)
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: It's never been "The Pitching"

    In Response to Re: It's never been "The Pitching":
    [QUOTE]It is clearly about the overpaid contracts to Gonzo, Beckett, Crawford, Lackey, etc. When the Sox try to buy like the Yanks, they don't do so well. Stick to the guys like Youk(when signed) or the Pedrios or Ellsbury's. It is time to make a statement by getting rid of one of more of these crazy contracts even if it means eating some of it, which I sure it will. That will help make a statement.
    Posted by antiqueman1[/QUOTE]While the RS may have made the wrong choice in resigning Beckett he was one of the key reasons the RS won the WS in 2007. And both the 2004 and 2007 teams had many key components that came from FA and trade and then extend deals. Notable high profile deals:

    Pedro Martinez - trade and extend
    Curt Schilling - trade and extend
    Keith Foulke - FA signing
    Manny Ramirez - FA signing
    Johnny Damon - FA signing
    Josh Beckett - trade and extend
    Mike Lowell - trade and extend in the Beckett deal

    Lackey's signing in hindsight given that there was a pre-existing history of elbow issues was a bad gamble. Heavens knows I can't figure out what made the RS brass think Crawford was a value at $140M. But I get why they resigned Beckett and aside from his last few starts of 2011 the signing looked good. A-Gon is in a horrid slump but it is not hard to understand why the RS did the deal and signed him.

    There is only so much predictability to any signing, whether it is extending your own (Buchholz is a shining example right now) or FA.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share