Lester

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

     

     

     

    Lets keep it real about Lester. While last night's outing was a much better effort than his most recent starts, he did surrender four ER in seven innings for an in game ERA of 5.14. His ERA actually went UP after yesterday's game and now is a lofty 4.61. Remember: ALL the runs he was charged with count. An ERA of 5.14 is more like a #5 SP or worse. He was better, but he was certainly not good yesterday.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     




    I am keeping it real and I dont use your favorite, "in game" ERA, as my main stat to judge a pitcher. Ive already told you that ERA alone is a very very rough way to determine the worth of a pitcher. I also put things in the correct context. I never said anything that wasnt realistic. He made an adjustment, could have gone longer and we will never know if he would have shut them down or not, Bullpen didnt shut things down and allowed 2 runs to score. He looked good, especially his change up. Nothing more nothing less. Those statements are all true, thus realistic.

     

     

     

    I also said there were still some "If's" and that the next 4 weeks were important.

    Im not ready to say he's "back", but Im also not ready to give up on Lester. Not sure whats not realistic about that. Unless you were talking to someone else.

     

     



    The tone of this thread is that somehow Lester did a good job last night. That is simply not true. Even though Taz let in some of the inherited runners, Lester did have two on and the count of 3-0 to another batter before he departed. He left a big mess and was charged with four ER in seven innings. I use the in game ERA only to gain a perspective of how well a pitcher did for an individual game, and I do not think that this kind of ERA, if carried out over a season, would be viewed as positive by too many posters here. The fact of the matter is that although his performance was better than the last few, it was not good. In fact, while Lester has had a few good games (as any ML pitcher with his number of games pitched has), for nearly two years he has performed close to the level of a #4 SP at best. If you are saying he is a #4 I would buy that. Better than that I would ask you to show me the evidence.

     

     

     



    Lester allowed 5 hits (4 singles and one double) and 2 3/4 walks (one completed by Tazawa) in 7 innings. Those are good numbers in anyone's books. To focus on the 4 ER is just myopic negativity.

     

    Anyone who watched the game saw a near dominant performance until the 7th.  That's what matters.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to DaffyDan's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

     

     

     

    Lets keep it real about Lester. While last night's outing was a much better effort than his most recent starts, he did surrender four ER in seven innings for an in game ERA of 5.14. His ERA actually went UP after yesterday's game and now is a lofty 4.61. Remember: ALL the runs he was charged with count. An ERA of 5.14 is more like a #5 SP or worse. He was better, but he was certainly not good yesterday.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     




    I am keeping it real and I dont use your favorite, "in game" ERA, as my main stat to judge a pitcher. Ive already told you that ERA alone is a very very rough way to determine the worth of a pitcher. I also put things in the correct context. I never said anything that wasnt realistic. He made an adjustment, could have gone longer and we will never know if he would have shut them down or not, Bullpen didnt shut things down and allowed 2 runs to score. He looked good, especially his change up. Nothing more nothing less. Those statements are all true, thus realistic.

     

     

     

    I also said there were still some "If's" and that the next 4 weeks were important.

    Im not ready to say he's "back", but Im also not ready to give up on Lester. Not sure whats not realistic about that. Unless you were talking to someone else.

     

     



    The tone of this thread is that somehow Lester did a good job last night. That is simply not true. Even though Taz let in some of the inherited runners, Lester did have two on and the count of 3-0 to another batter before he departed. He left a big mess and was charged with four ER in seven innings. I use the in game ERA only to gain a perspective of how well a pitcher did for an individual game, and I do not think that this kind of ERA, if carried out over a season, would be viewed as positive by too many posters here. The fact of the matter is that although his performance was better than the last few, it was not good. In fact, while Lester has had a few good games (as any ML pitcher with his number of games pitched has), for nearly two years he has performed close to the level of a #4 SP at best. If you are saying he is a #4 I would buy that. Better than that I would ask you to show me the evidence.

     

     

     



    Lester allowed 5 hits (4 singles and one double) and 2 3/4 walks (one completed by Tazawa) in 7 innings. Those are good numbers in anyone's books. To focus on the 4 ER is just myopic negativity.

     

    Anyone who watched the game saw a near dominant performance until the 7th.  That's what matters.

     




    Im not sure why some fans think like PG is. He knows his baseball so this isnt a dig at him, but I havent talked to one manager/GM/scout that thinks in those terms. They look at the whole picture because they know that there is much much more to it.

    They look at everything. He was ahead in the count with most batters. He was converting the 2 strike count and finishing. He had the change up working brilliantly and mixing his pitches better. He was efficient. The 2 runs that came across after he left was due to a WP and the BP not doing their job. All that, and they look at so many more stats than ERA, as well as examine every situation more thoroughly to get a full picture and the overall body of work. No manager/GM looks at his final game ERA and comes to a determination, so Im not sure why any fans do/should.

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to DaffyDan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

     

     

     

    Lets keep it real about Lester. While last night's outing was a much better effort than his most recent starts, he did surrender four ER in seven innings for an in game ERA of 5.14. His ERA actually went UP after yesterday's game and now is a lofty 4.61. Remember: ALL the runs he was charged with count. An ERA of 5.14 is more like a #5 SP or worse. He was better, but he was certainly not good yesterday.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     




    I am keeping it real and I dont use your favorite, "in game" ERA, as my main stat to judge a pitcher. Ive already told you that ERA alone is a very very rough way to determine the worth of a pitcher. I also put things in the correct context. I never said anything that wasnt realistic. He made an adjustment, could have gone longer and we will never know if he would have shut them down or not, Bullpen didnt shut things down and allowed 2 runs to score. He looked good, especially his change up. Nothing more nothing less. Those statements are all true, thus realistic.

     

     

     

    I also said there were still some "If's" and that the next 4 weeks were important.

    Im not ready to say he's "back", but Im also not ready to give up on Lester. Not sure whats not realistic about that. Unless you were talking to someone else.

     

     



    The tone of this thread is that somehow Lester did a good job last night. That is simply not true. Even though Taz let in some of the inherited runners, Lester did have two on and the count of 3-0 to another batter before he departed. He left a big mess and was charged with four ER in seven innings. I use the in game ERA only to gain a perspective of how well a pitcher did for an individual game, and I do not think that this kind of ERA, if carried out over a season, would be viewed as positive by too many posters here. The fact of the matter is that although his performance was better than the last few, it was not good. In fact, while Lester has had a few good games (as any ML pitcher with his number of games pitched has), for nearly two years he has performed close to the level of a #4 SP at best. If you are saying he is a #4 I would buy that. Better than that I would ask you to show me the evidence.

     

     

     



    Lester allowed 5 hits (4 singles and one double) and 2 3/4 walks (one completed by Tazawa) in 7 innings. Those are good numbers in anyone's books. To focus on the 4 ER is just myopic negativity.

     

    Anyone who watched the game saw a near dominant performance until the 7th.  That's what matters.

     

     




    Im not sure why some fans think like PG is. He knows his baseball so this isnt a dig at him, but I havent talked to one manager/GM/scout that thinks in those terms. They look at the whole picture because they know that there is much much more to it.

     

    They look at everything. He was ahead in the count with most batters. He was converting the 2 strike count and finishing. He had the change up working brilliantly and mixing his pitches better. He was efficient. The 2 runs that came across after he left was due to a WP and the BP not doing their job. All that, and they look at so many more stats than ERA, as well as examine every situation more thoroughly to get a full picture and the overall body of work. No manager/GM looks at his final game ERA and comes to a determination, so Im not sure why any fans do/should.

    [/QUOTE]

    I admit that it was a better performance than his last several outings-even much better. If he didn't fall apart in the seventh it would have been a very good performance. Unfortunately, he allowed the first two guys to reach and got to a 3-0 count on the third guy before his injury. This game was a microcosm of his struggles for nearly two years. He has been way too inconsistent. He has had some dominating games; he has had some so-so games; and he has had too many clunkers. I think its fine to say that Lester is a good pitcher as long as one realizes that he is OK in the context of being a #4 SP at best. Thats where he is right now. Where he is in a month from now is conjecture.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to DaffyDan's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

     

     

     

    Lets keep it real about Lester. While last night's outing was a much better effort than his most recent starts, he did surrender four ER in seven innings for an in game ERA of 5.14. His ERA actually went UP after yesterday's game and now is a lofty 4.61. Remember: ALL the runs he was charged with count. An ERA of 5.14 is more like a #5 SP or worse. He was better, but he was certainly not good yesterday.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     




    I am keeping it real and I dont use your favorite, "in game" ERA, as my main stat to judge a pitcher. Ive already told you that ERA alone is a very very rough way to determine the worth of a pitcher. I also put things in the correct context. I never said anything that wasnt realistic. He made an adjustment, could have gone longer and we will never know if he would have shut them down or not, Bullpen didnt shut things down and allowed 2 runs to score. He looked good, especially his change up. Nothing more nothing less. Those statements are all true, thus realistic.

     

     

     

    I also said there were still some "If's" and that the next 4 weeks were important.

    Im not ready to say he's "back", but Im also not ready to give up on Lester. Not sure whats not realistic about that. Unless you were talking to someone else.

     

     



    The tone of this thread is that somehow Lester did a good job last night. That is simply not true. Even though Taz let in some of the inherited runners, Lester did have two on and the count of 3-0 to another batter before he departed. He left a big mess and was charged with four ER in seven innings. I use the in game ERA only to gain a perspective of how well a pitcher did for an individual game, and I do not think that this kind of ERA, if carried out over a season, would be viewed as positive by too many posters here. The fact of the matter is that although his performance was better than the last few, it was not good. In fact, while Lester has had a few good games (as any ML pitcher with his number of games pitched has), for nearly two years he has performed close to the level of a #4 SP at best. If you are saying he is a #4 I would buy that. Better than that I would ask you to show me the evidence.

     

     

     



    Lester allowed 5 hits (4 singles and one double) and 2 3/4 walks (one completed by Tazawa) in 7 innings. Those are good numbers in anyone's books. To focus on the 4 ER is just myopic negativity.

     

    Anyone who watched the game saw a near dominant performance until the 7th.  That's what matters.

     

     

     




    Im not sure why some fans think like PG is. He knows his baseball so this isnt a dig at him, but I havent talked to one manager/GM/scout that thinks in those terms. They look at the whole picture because they know that there is much much more to it.

     

     

    They look at everything. He was ahead in the count with most batters. He was converting the 2 strike count and finishing. He had the change up working brilliantly and mixing his pitches better. He was efficient. The 2 runs that came across after he left was due to a WP and the BP not doing their job. All that, and they look at so many more stats than ERA, as well as examine every situation more thoroughly to get a full picture and the overall body of work. No manager/GM looks at his final game ERA and comes to a determination, so Im not sure why any fans do/should.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I admit that it was a better performance than his last several outings-even much better. If he didn't fall apart in the seventh it would have been a very good performance. Unfortunately, he allowed the first two guys to reach and got to a 3-0 count on the third guy before his injury. This game was a microcosm of his struggles for nearly two years. He has been way too inconsistent. He has had some dominating games; he has had some so-so games; and he has had too many clunkers. I think its fine to say that Lester is a good pitcher as long as one realizes that he is OK in the context of being a #4 SP at best. Thats where he is right now. Where he is in a month from now is conjecture.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    fair enough

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Lester

    OK, help me out. I'm a bit confused.

    According to pumpsie, the Red Sox are doomed because of pitching. Their ERA keeps trending higher.

    He posted yesterday that the Sox were seventh in ERA. When it was pointed out that the Sox were just .21 (I believe that was the number) from second, he noted that in other years, it's often like that. This is the first point where I'm confused.

    Last year, second place in ERA was about a half run higher than seventh. That's significant. Being just .21 higher isn't. That the Sox were closer yesterday to second place than they were to eighth place simply didn't mean anything to him. All he could parrot was that the ERA keeps going up and is the reason they're going to win 78 games (he posted on the predictions thread), which now means the Sox will go just 28-51 the rest of the way.

    Boston's ERA is now 3.91, which is higher than yesterday. So maybe pumpsie's right. It is trending in the wrong direction. On the other hand, the Sox are now sixth in ERA so they're moving up in the rankings. He seems to place a lot of importance in how they're ranked. And the Sox, ranked sixth, are closer to third in the league than they are to seventh.

    But here's what really has me confused. According to pumpsie, the Sox will finish fourth because of their pitching. So who is going to finish ahead Boston? Right now, only the Yankees have a lower ERA than Boston among AL East teams. 

    Here's how the AL East ranks in ERA:

    New York 3.77

    Boston 3.91

    Toronto 4.15

    Tampa Bay 4.22

    Baltimore 4.49

    The Sox are closer to the Yankees than they are to Toronto, yet Boston is doomed and pumpsie apparently things the other teams that have worse ERAs have better pitching.

    There's no doubt the Sox have issues in the bullpen where they rank 12th in ERA. But it's probably easier to find some bullpen arms than starters, and the Sox are second in starters ERA. Also, you never know when a struggling reliever is going to go on a run. It happens all the time. One minute, you cringe any time you see a certain reliever take the mound and the next thing you know he goes on an unhittable streak.

    Like all teams, the Sox have "ifs" concerning the starting staff. They'll be OK: if Lester gets back on track; if Buchholz returns soon and stays healthy; if Lackey can stay strong etc. etc. etc.

    But the rest of the AL East teams have just as many "ifs" concerning their pitching and are starting at a weaker point.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to royf19's comment:

     

    OK, help me out. I'm a bit confused.

    According to pumpsie, the Red Sox are doomed because of pitching. Their ERA keeps trending higher.

    He posted yesterday that the Sox were seventh in ERA. When it was pointed out that the Sox were just .21 (I believe that was the number) from second, he noted that in other years, it's often like that. This is the first point where I'm confused.

    Last year, second place in ERA was about a half run higher than seventh. That's significant. Being just .21 higher isn't. That the Sox were closer yesterday to second place than they were to eighth place simply didn't mean anything to him. All he could parrot was that the ERA keeps going up and is the reason they're going to win 78 games (he posted on the predictions thread), which now means the Sox will go just 28-51 the rest of the way.

    Boston's ERA is now 3.91, which is higher than yesterday. So maybe pumpsie's right. It is trending in the wrong direction. On the other hand, the Sox are now sixth in ERA so they're moving up in the rankings. He seems to place a lot of importance in how they're ranked. And the Sox, ranked sixth, are closer to third in the league than they are to seventh.

    But here's what really has me confused. According to pumpsie, the Sox will finish fourth because of their pitching. So who is going to finish ahead Boston? Right now, only the Yankees have a lower ERA than Boston among AL East teams. 

    Here's how the AL East ranks in ERA:

    New York 3.77

    Boston 3.91

    Toronto 4.15

    Tampa Bay 4.22

    Baltimore 4.49

    The Sox are closer to the Yankees than they are to Toronto, yet Boston is doomed and pumpsie apparently things the other teams that have worse ERAs have better pitching.

    There's no doubt the Sox have issues in the bullpen where they rank 12th in ERA. But it's probably easier to find some bullpen arms than starters, and the Sox are second in starters ERA. Also, you never know when a struggling reliever is going to go on a run. It happens all the time. One minute, you cringe any time you see a certain reliever take the mound and the next thing you know he goes on an unhittable streak.

    Like all teams, the Sox have "ifs" concerning the starting staff. They'll be OK: if Lester gets back on track; if Buchholz returns soon and stays healthy; if Lackey can stay strong etc. etc. etc.

    But the rest of the AL East teams have just as many "ifs" concerning their pitching and are starting at a weaker point.

     

     



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

    Re: Lester

    In response to royf19's comment:

    OK, help me out. I'm a bit confused.

    According to pumpsie, the Red Sox are doomed because of pitching. Their ERA keeps trending higher.

    He posted yesterday that the Sox were seventh in ERA. When it was pointed out that the Sox were just .21 (I believe that was the number) from second, he noted that in other years, it's often like that. This is the first point where I'm confused.

    Last year, second place in ERA was about a half run higher than seventh. That's significant. Being just .21 higher isn't. That the Sox were closer yesterday to second place than they were to eighth place simply didn't mean anything to him. All he could parrot was that the ERA keeps going up and is the reason they're going to win 78 games (he posted on the predictions thread), which now means the Sox will go just 28-51 the rest of the way.

    Boston's ERA is now 3.91, which is higher than yesterday. So maybe pumpsie's right. It is trending in the wrong direction. On the other hand, the Sox are now sixth in ERA so they're moving up in the rankings. He seems to place a lot of importance in how they're ranked. And the Sox, ranked sixth, are closer to third in the league than they are to seventh.

    But here's what really has me confused. According to pumpsie, the Sox will finish fourth because of their pitching. So who is going to finish ahead Boston? Right now, only the Yankees have a lower ERA than Boston among AL East teams. 

    Here's how the AL East ranks in ERA:

    New York 3.77

    Boston 3.91

    Toronto 4.15

    Tampa Bay 4.22

    Baltimore 4.49

    The Sox are closer to the Yankees than they are to Toronto, yet Boston is doomed and pumpsie apparently things the other teams that have worse ERAs have better pitching.

    There's no doubt the Sox have issues in the bullpen where they rank 12th in ERA. But it's probably easier to find some bullpen arms than starters, and the Sox are second in starters ERA. Also, you never know when a struggling reliever is going to go on a run. It happens all the time. One minute, you cringe any time you see a certain reliever take the mound and the next thing you know he goes on an unhittable streak.

    Like all teams, the Sox have "ifs" concerning the starting staff. They'll be OK: if Lester gets back on track; if Buchholz returns soon and stays healthy; if Lackey can stay strong etc. etc. etc.

    But the rest of the AL East teams have just as many "ifs" concerning their pitching and are starting at a weaker point.

     



    Question: is your goal to win the ALE or is it to win a ring? I have written many times here that you might be able to bash your way into the playoffs but the likelihood of winning a ring is very low if you do not have above average pitching in your league. Right now our ERA stands at #6 in the AL, right in the middle. That includes a very good start in April when we ranked 4th with an ERA of 3.58. In May we were worse with an ERA of 4.00 (7th) and in June still worse: 4.13 (10th). See the trend? Now Bucky is out and no one knows how long it will take for him to come back; Lester has returned to his normal form; and Bailey has proven that he is useless, and that will further tax an already very poor bullpen. We simply do not have the pitching, more than likely, to make a run at a ring this year.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to royf19's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    OK, help me out. I'm a bit confused.

    According to pumpsie, the Red Sox are doomed because of pitching. Their ERA keeps trending higher.

    He posted yesterday that the Sox were seventh in ERA. When it was pointed out that the Sox were just .21 (I believe that was the number) from second, he noted that in other years, it's often like that. This is the first point where I'm confused.

    Last year, second place in ERA was about a half run higher than seventh. That's significant. Being just .21 higher isn't. That the Sox were closer yesterday to second place than they were to eighth place simply didn't mean anything to him. All he could parrot was that the ERA keeps going up and is the reason they're going to win 78 games (he posted on the predictions thread), which now means the Sox will go just 28-51 the rest of the way.

    Boston's ERA is now 3.91, which is higher than yesterday. So maybe pumpsie's right. It is trending in the wrong direction. On the other hand, the Sox are now sixth in ERA so they're moving up in the rankings. He seems to place a lot of importance in how they're ranked. And the Sox, ranked sixth, are closer to third in the league than they are to seventh.

    But here's what really has me confused. According to pumpsie, the Sox will finish fourth because of their pitching. So who is going to finish ahead Boston? Right now, only the Yankees have a lower ERA than Boston among AL East teams. 

    Here's how the AL East ranks in ERA:

    New York 3.77

    Boston 3.91

    Toronto 4.15

    Tampa Bay 4.22

    Baltimore 4.49

    The Sox are closer to the Yankees than they are to Toronto, yet Boston is doomed and pumpsie apparently things the other teams that have worse ERAs have better pitching.

    There's no doubt the Sox have issues in the bullpen where they rank 12th in ERA. But it's probably easier to find some bullpen arms than starters, and the Sox are second in starters ERA. Also, you never know when a struggling reliever is going to go on a run. It happens all the time. One minute, you cringe any time you see a certain reliever take the mound and the next thing you know he goes on an unhittable streak.

    Like all teams, the Sox have "ifs" concerning the starting staff. They'll be OK: if Lester gets back on track; if Buchholz returns soon and stays healthy; if Lackey can stay strong etc. etc. etc.

    But the rest of the AL East teams have just as many "ifs" concerning their pitching and are starting at a weaker point.

     

     



    Question: is your goal to win the ALE or is it to win a ring? I have written many times here that you might be able to bash your way into the playoffs but the likelihood of winning a ring is very low if you do not have above average pitching in your league. Right now our ERA stands at #6 in the AL, right in the middle. That includes a very good start in April when we ranked 4th with an ERA of 3.58. In May we were worse with an ERA of 4.00 (7th) and in June still worse: 4.13 (10th). See the trend? Now Bucky is out and no one knows how long it will take for him to come back; Lester has returned to his normal form; and Bailey has proven that he is useless, and that will further tax an already very poor bullpen. We simply do not have the pitching, more than likely, to make a run at a ring this year.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Moving the goal lines are we. On the predictions thread, you said the Sox were going to finish fourth in the AL East (and win just 78 games). So the Sox are going to finish fourth because of poor pitching, yet the only team right now that ranks higher in pitching is a team (Yankees) that has a lot of issues.

    If you think regular-season numbers guarantee anything good or bad, you're a fool. For example, Derrick Lowe had an ERA over 5.00 in 2004. Seems to me he was pretty good in the postseaon. Clemens was lights out in 1986 but wasn't exactly lights out in the postseason. History is full of examples on both sides, so I'll worry about the postseason when the team gets there.

    You continually spout one stat but fail to provide any context. Why someone as intelligent about the game as yourself on other issues wants to argue in such a simple-minded way is beyond me. But context matters. For instance, you claim you're a bottom-line guy. Gee, if that's the case, why do you get so uptight about Lester's ERA. He's 8-4 at the halfway point, which is a very good record. Isn't that the bottom-line -- winning and losing? Of course, it's not that simple. And it's also not that simple to simply spout ERA w/o seeing what's causing the high ERA and also what other team's issues are.

    On another thread, you posted that it didn't matter why the ERA was going up, just that it was going up? Really? How are you going to fix a problem without knowing where the problem is. The major problem right now is the bullpen, and it doesn't really matter what Buchholz or Lester do the rest of the season. If the Sox don't fix the bullpen then they could very well be in trouble.

    And for all you doom and gloom, the Sox are 16-11 in June despite the ERA going up. ERAs often go up for all teams in the summer because as the weather heats up, hitting and runs scored goes up. Again, you're looking at it in a vaccuum w/o any context to what other teams are doing.

    You asked what my goal is? Simple -- make the playoffs. The Sox won 69 games last year and haven't been in the playoffs since 2009. You can't win any title w/o making the postseason. But it's not the only goal. I want the team to win the World Series every year, but I also know that's not going to happen. So I want the team to be competitive, be fun to watch, make the postseason and go from there. And I'll enjoy the ride. 

     

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

    Re: Lester

    Moving the goal lines are we. On the predictions thread, you said the Sox were going to finish fourth in the AL East (and win just 78 games). So the Sox are going to finish fourth because of poor pitching, yet the only team right now that ranks higher in pitching is a team (Yankees) that has a lot of issues.

     

    The ALE is a division marked by parity. There is no way to predict where any team will finish with accuracy-its anyone's guess. I am not using pitching alone to make a prediction about this: I am just looking at the rosters and giving my opinion. The pitching issue deals with winning a ring, my goal. More on that later.

     

    If you think regular-season numbers guarantee anything good or bad, you're a fool. For example, Derrick Lowe had an ERA over 5.00 in 2004. Seems to me he was pretty good in the postseaon. Clemens was lights out in 1986 but wasn't exactly lights out in the postseason. History is full of examples on both sides, so I'll worry about the postseason when the team gets there.

    Well, since I am not a fool, I guess I better behave the way you insist I do and believe what you do. Of course the regular season numbers don't GUARANTEE anything, but I would put my money on teams with both good hitting AND good pitching to win a ring over a team that does not have both. Is it a guarantee? Nope. But only a fool would bet on a team that does not excel in both areas over a team that excels in one.

     

    You continually spout one stat but fail to provide any context. Why someone as intelligent about the game as yourself on other issues wants to argue in such a simple-minded way is beyond me. But context matters. For instance, you claim you're a bottom-line guy. Gee, if that's the case, why do you get so uptight about Lester's ERA. He's 8-4 at the halfway point, which is a very good record. Isn't that the bottom-line -- winning and losing? Of course, it's not that simple. And it's also not that simple to simply spout ERA w/o seeing what's causing the high ERA and also what other team's issues are.

    Someone who is as intelligent about the game as you are should know that the W-L record is a very poor way to measure a pitcher's performance. I look at ERA or ERA+ as the single best stat, if you are going to use one stat, to measure that performance. Lester's ERA is 4.61 this year with an ERA+ of 94-below average. Last year his ERA was 4.82 and his ERA+ was 89. Would you prefer to use his numbers from 2008? If you cannot use his current stats you are living in the past and engaging in magical thinking. Admit it: he has performed below average for at least 21 months now.

    On another thread, you posted that it didn't matter why the ERA was going up, just that it was going up? Really? How are you going to fix a problem without knowing where the problem is. The major problem right now is the bullpen, and it doesn't really matter what Buchholz or Lester do the rest of the season. If the Sox don't fix the bullpen then they could very well be in trouble.

    And for all you doom and gloom, the Sox are 16-11 in June despite the ERA going up. ERAs often go up for all teams in the summer because as the weather heats up, hitting and runs scored goes up. Again, you're looking at it in a vaccuum w/o any context to what other teams are doing.

    You asked what my goal is? Simple -- make the playoffs. The Sox won 69 games last year and haven't been in the playoffs since 2009. You can't win any title w/o making the postseason. But it's not the only goal. I want the team to win the World Series every year, but I also know that's not going to happen. So I want the team to be competitive, be fun to watch, make the postseason and go from there. And I'll enjoy the ride. 

    I guess we have different goals. I want to have a team that not only can get into the playoffs but one that also stands a reasonable chance of winning a ring. A team with below average pitching (no, we are not there yet, but we are headed in that direction) does not stand a good chance of doing that. Only three teams in the last 100+ years with below average pitching in their league have won a ring whereas 33 with below average offense have done it. Hey-I WISH the Red Sox had the pitching to win a championship, but they most likely do not. I look at what is real, what is likely to happen, not what I WISH would happen. Pitching is likely the fatal weakness (again) for this version of the Boston Red Sox in their quest for another ring.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

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

    Re: Lester

    It won't be long before ERA and ERA+ are as worthless as batting average.  Through seven innings, Lester had given up 3 hits and 2 walks.  That's dominant, no matter how many runs had scored.  If he had not come out for the eighth, even PG would have to admit it was an excellent start.

    So a guy who pitches seven dominant innings and leaves in the eighth with a physical problem is treated as though he had struggled to keep batters off base throughout the game.  Not an accurate depiction - nobody who saw the game thought Lester was anything less than terrific. Drop ERA and ERA plus - Lester's WHIP went down; his H/9 went down.  His opponent batting average went down.  There are much better ways to determine a pitcher's performance than ERA.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Lester

    This goalpost definitely has been moved.  At the beginning of the season the discussion was all about whether the Sox would finish .500.  Now the discussion is all about whether they have the pitching staff to win the World Series.  That's pretty significant movement! 

    Here's my problem with the "7th in the league in ERA" statement.  Ok. It's true.  So what? It's the end of June and what does it matter what the team's ERA is now?  Nobody remembers who was ahead on July 1.  In a black and white world what matters is who makes the playoffs and ultimately who wins the WS.  (I don't live in that black and white world and I'm happy with where the Sox are and how they're playing, but that's another topic for another thread.)

    At this point in the season what I want to see is PROGRESS.  I want to see pitchers improving.  Sometimes pitchers fall back and that's fine as long as they make progress afterward.  Most of these high ERA's (with the exception of Lester's) are the result of early season games. 

    John Lackey went 4 1/3 in his second start and gave up 5 runs.  Since then 7 of his 8 starts have been QS's  That's not only progress, that's a good pitcher. 

    Felix Dubront, went 5.1 innings in his first start and gave up 6 runs.  Now seven of his last nine have been Quality Starts.  That's progress.

    Ryan Dempster gave up 5 runs in 6 innings in his first start.  Then he gave up 5 runs in 4.2 innings in his second start.  In his third start he went 3 innings and gave up 2 runs.  But since then 5 of his last 6 starts have been QS's.  That's progress.

    And lest we get into the discussion of a QS having an ERA of 4, let's remember that that's the worst possible scenario for a QS, and of those last 18 QS's only four of them have been 6IP - 3 ER allowed.  The rest have been better.  That's acceptable, especially from the #3, 4 & 5 pitchers!

    In the cases of Dubront and Dempster the high ERA has been the result of early season troubles, and I don't care about early season troubles.  I don't care what any pitcher did in April or May.  All I care about is what they're going to do in their NEXT start, and using an ERA of the entire year is misleading if you're trying to get a feel for what they're going to do in their next outing. 

    The ONLY thing the year-long ERA is good for at this point is to build a case that the pitching staff is worse than it currently is. 

    Having the right to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do.

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to S5's comment:

    This goalpost definitely has been moved.  At the beginning of the season the discussion was all about whether the Sox would finish .500.  Now the discussion is all about whether they have the pitching staff to win the World Series.  That's pretty significant movement! 

    Here's my problem with the "7th in the league in ERA" statement.  Ok. It's true.  So what? It's the end of June and what does it matter what the team's ERA is now?  Nobody remembers who was ahead on July 1.  In a black and white world what matters is who makes the playoffs and ultimately who wins the WS.  (I don't live in that black and white world and I'm happy with where the Sox are and how they're playing, but that's another topic for another thread.)

    At this point in the season what I want to see is PROGRESS.  I want to see pitchers improving.  Sometimes pitchers fall back and that's fine as long as they make progress afterward.  Most of these high ERA's (with the exception of Lester's) are the result of early season games. 

    John Lackey went 4 1/3 in his second start and gave up 5 runs.  Since then 7 of his 8 starts have been QS's  That's not only progress, that's a good pitcher. 

    Felix Dubront, went 5.1 innings in his first start and gave up 6 runs.  Now seven of his last nine have been Quality Starts.  That's progress.

    Ryan Dempster gave up 5 runs in 6 innings in his first start.  Then he gave up 5 runs in 4.2 innings in his second start.  In his third start he went 3 innings and gave up 2 runs.  But since then 5 of his last 6 starts have been QS's.  That's progress.

    And lest we get into the discussion of a QS having an ERA of 4, let's remember that that's the worst possible scenario for a QS, and of those last 18 QS's only four of them have been 6IP - 3 ER allowed.  The rest have been better.  That's acceptable, especially from the #3, 4 & 5 pitchers!

    In the cases of Dubront and Dempster the high ERA has been the result of early season troubles, and I don't care about early season troubles.  I don't care what any pitcher did in April or May.  All I care about is what they're going to do in their NEXT start, and using an ERA of the entire year is misleading if you're trying to get a feel for what they're going to do in their next outing. 

    The ONLY thing the year-long ERA is good for at this point is to build a case that the pitching staff is worse than it currently is. 

    Having the right to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do.



    The premise of your post is that if the pitching improves we have a chance at a ring. I agree. We certainly have the offense to do the job and if the end of year ERA is top third or so there is no reason we cannot compete for a ring. The question is: how is it going to make that jump? Don't tell me Lester is going to get it together or that Bucky is going to stay healthy all year from now on. Thats not realistic, its not their histories. How will we improve?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Lester

    Every pitchers ERA starts over come playoff time. I told you that the team that goes into the playoffs hot, usually goes pretty deep, regardless of in season ERA. That, and ERA alone is not a good way to truly define a pitchers performance. Not even close.

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    This goalpost definitely has been moved.  At the beginning of the season the discussion was all about whether the Sox would finish .500.  Now the discussion is all about whether they have the pitching staff to win the World Series.  That's pretty significant movement! 

    Here's my problem with the "7th in the league in ERA" statement.  Ok. It's true.  So what? It's the end of June and what does it matter what the team's ERA is now?  Nobody remembers who was ahead on July 1.  In a black and white world what matters is who makes the playoffs and ultimately who wins the WS.  (I don't live in that black and white world and I'm happy with where the Sox are and how they're playing, but that's another topic for another thread.)

    At this point in the season what I want to see is PROGRESS.  I want to see pitchers improving.  Sometimes pitchers fall back and that's fine as long as they make progress afterward.  Most of these high ERA's (with the exception of Lester's) are the result of early season games. 

    John Lackey went 4 1/3 in his second start and gave up 5 runs.  Since then 7 of his 8 starts have been QS's  That's not only progress, that's a good pitcher. 

    Felix Dubront, went 5.1 innings in his first start and gave up 6 runs.  Now seven of his last nine have been Quality Starts.  That's progress.

    Ryan Dempster gave up 5 runs in 6 innings in his first start.  Then he gave up 5 runs in 4.2 innings in his second start.  In his third start he went 3 innings and gave up 2 runs.  But since then 5 of his last 6 starts have been QS's.  That's progress.

    And lest we get into the discussion of a QS having an ERA of 4, let's remember that that's the worst possible scenario for a QS, and of those last 18 QS's only four of them have been 6IP - 3 ER allowed.  The rest have been better.  That's acceptable, especially from the #3, 4 & 5 pitchers!

    In the cases of Dubront and Dempster the high ERA has been the result of early season troubles, and I don't care about early season troubles.  I don't care what any pitcher did in April or May.  All I care about is what they're going to do in their NEXT start, and using an ERA of the entire year is misleading if you're trying to get a feel for what they're going to do in their next outing. 

    The ONLY thing the year-long ERA is good for at this point is to build a case that the pitching staff is worse than it currently is. 

    Having the right to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do.

     



    The premise of your post is that if the pitching improves we have a chance at a ring. I agree. We certainly have the offense to do the job and if the end of year ERA is top third or so there is no reason we cannot compete for a ring. The question is: how is it going to make that jump? Don't tell me Lester is going to get it together or that Bucky is going to stay healthy all year from now on. Thats not realistic, its not their histories. How will we improve?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Saying that a team with this much talent was going to play .500 wasn't realistic either, but that didn't slow you down any.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    This goalpost definitely has been moved.  At the beginning of the season the discussion was all about whether the Sox would finish .500.  Now the discussion is all about whether they have the pitching staff to win the World Series.  That's pretty significant movement! 

    Here's my problem with the "7th in the league in ERA" statement.  Ok. It's true.  So what? It's the end of June and what does it matter what the team's ERA is now?  Nobody remembers who was ahead on July 1.  In a black and white world what matters is who makes the playoffs and ultimately who wins the WS.  (I don't live in that black and white world and I'm happy with where the Sox are and how they're playing, but that's another topic for another thread.)

    At this point in the season what I want to see is PROGRESS.  I want to see pitchers improving.  Sometimes pitchers fall back and that's fine as long as they make progress afterward.  Most of these high ERA's (with the exception of Lester's) are the result of early season games. 

    John Lackey went 4 1/3 in his second start and gave up 5 runs.  Since then 7 of his 8 starts have been QS's  That's not only progress, that's a good pitcher. 

    Felix Dubront, went 5.1 innings in his first start and gave up 6 runs.  Now seven of his last nine have been Quality Starts.  That's progress.

    Ryan Dempster gave up 5 runs in 6 innings in his first start.  Then he gave up 5 runs in 4.2 innings in his second start.  In his third start he went 3 innings and gave up 2 runs.  But since then 5 of his last 6 starts have been QS's.  That's progress.

    And lest we get into the discussion of a QS having an ERA of 4, let's remember that that's the worst possible scenario for a QS, and of those last 18 QS's only four of them have been 6IP - 3 ER allowed.  The rest have been better.  That's acceptable, especially from the #3, 4 & 5 pitchers!

    In the cases of Dubront and Dempster the high ERA has been the result of early season troubles, and I don't care about early season troubles.  I don't care what any pitcher did in April or May.  All I care about is what they're going to do in their NEXT start, and using an ERA of the entire year is misleading if you're trying to get a feel for what they're going to do in their next outing. 

    The ONLY thing the year-long ERA is good for at this point is to build a case that the pitching staff is worse than it currently is. 

    Having the right to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do.

     



    The premise of your post is that if the pitching improves we have a chance at a ring. I agree. We certainly have the offense to do the job and if the end of year ERA is top third or so there is no reason we cannot compete for a ring. The question is: how is it going to make that jump? Don't tell me Lester is going to get it together or that Bucky is going to stay healthy all year from now on. Thats not realistic, its not their histories. How will we improve?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Nope.  The premise of my post is that anyone who is using year-long ERA as an indication of how good a pitching staff is at any given moment is ignoring recent performance, and recent peformance is a better indicator than three month old performance.

    I don't subscribe to your opinion that Lester isn't going to get better.  Lester has GOTTEN better within the past weeks.  Like Dubront when he started to improve, Lester is getting better in the same way.  He's getting more good innings in every game than he had in the previous one, and that's progress.  Should he continue to pitch better as the weather gets warmer, that would be consistent with his trends in past years. 

    I somewhat subscribe to your opinion that Buch won't be healthy for every start from here on in, but at the same time I would say that about ANY pitcher.  I realize you're not a betting man, but if you'd like to pick any SP in MLB and bet that he's not going to miss a start the rest of the year I'd give you pretty good odds on it. I also don't expect Buch to come back as Cy Young reincarnate.  I'd like to think he's "that good" but realistically he probably isn't.  If he is it will be a very pleasant surprise  and I'd be pleased to eat my words.

    Long and short:  I expect Lester to get better. I expect Buch to miss a few more starts and probably get his ERA up to around 3. One of those will offset the other and the SP will be as good overall as it's been. 

    What actually needs to be done is to improve the 'pen.  We need another dependable arm or two out there to take the pressure off the guys who are already there.

    And you can say what you want about Bailey. I haven't given up on him yet.  He challenged and struck out two of the better hitters in the AL in Reyes and Bautista in a pressure situation.  That's progress from his two prior starts.  IMO what he needs to do is do what he's doing, but keep that FB DOWN in the zone.  As someone else said here, throwing that thing UP as he did to Encarcion is begging for it to be hit out. 

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

    Re: Lester

    Nope.  The premise of my post is that anyone who is using year-long ERA as an indication of how good a pitching staff is at any given moment is ignoring recent performance, and recent peformance is a better indicator than three month old performance.

     

    I don't subscribe to your opinion that Lester isn't going to get better.  Lester has GOTTEN better within the past weeks.  Like Dubront when he started to improve, Lester is getting better in the same way.  He's getting more good innings in every game than he had in the previous one, and that's progress.  Should he continue to pitch better as the weather gets warmer, that would be consistent with his trends in past years. 

    Sorry S5, but those are simply not the facts. Lester's ERA has increased after every single start since his May 10 start. Here are the FACTS about Lester's ERA. They are not subject to reasonable debate:

    After his start on May 15: 2.72, May 20: 3.15, May 25: 3.34, May 31: 3.53, June 6: 3.60, June 11: 4.12, June 16: 4.37, June 21: 4.57, June 27: 4.61.

    You don't determine that a pitcher is "getting better" by watching him pitch alone. Thats primarily done through the use of statistics. Do you have any objective proof that Lester is "getting better"? I have some proof-pretty compelling IMO-that, in fact, he is getting WORSE. I don't think that trend will continue forever; he will level off with an ERA around 4.40-4.60 I now think ( he is pitching even worse than I thought he would at the beginning of the year when I thought he would end up closer to 4.40). The fact is that Lester is not getting better, he is getting worse.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    Nope.  The premise of my post is that anyone who is using year-long ERA as an indication of how good a pitching staff is at any given moment is ignoring recent performance, and recent peformance is a better indicator than three month old performance.

     

    I don't subscribe to your opinion that Lester isn't going to get better.  Lester has GOTTEN better within the past weeks.  Like Dubront when he started to improve, Lester is getting better in the same way.  He's getting more good innings in every game than he had in the previous one, and that's progress.  Should he continue to pitch better as the weather gets warmer, that would be consistent with his trends in past years. 

    Sorry S5, but those are simply not the facts. Lester's ERA has increased after every single start since his May 10 start. Here are the FACTS about Lester's ERA. They are not subject to reasonable debate:

    After his start on May 15: 2.72, May 20: 3.15, May 25: 3.34, May 31: 3.53, June 6: 3.60, June 11: 4.12, June 16: 4.37, June 21: 4.57, June 27: 4.61.

    You don't determine that a pitcher is "getting better" by watching him pitch alone. Thats primarily done through the use of statistics. Do you have any objective proof that Lester is "getting better"? I have some proof-pretty compelling IMO-that, in fact, he is getting WORSE. I don't think that trend will continue forever; he will level off with an ERA around 4.40-4.60 I now think ( he is pitching even worse than I thought he would at the beginning of the year when I thought he would end up closer to 4.40). The fact is that Lester is not getting better, he is getting worse.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE



    You certainly don't determine a pitcher is "getting worse" by charting his ERA.  Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?  You think Buchholz is having a better year than Matt Harvey?  You think Jeff Locke and Mike Leake are better pitchers than Cliff Lee and Chris Sale?  If we trade for a pitcher for the stretch run, you would rather have Jeremy Guthrie than Jake Peavy?

    Lester was struggling for several weeks, but his last performance was dominant.  It may have been a fluke, or it may have been something he can build off of, but it was not mediocre, and using one game's ERA to prove otherwise only argues against your criteria.  Advanced metrics and human beings with eyes are in consensus on this one.

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

    Re: Lester

    You certainly don't determine a pitcher is "getting worse" by charting his ERA.  Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?  You think Buchholz is having a better year than Matt Harvey?  You think Jeff Locke and Mike Leake are better pitchers than Cliff Lee and Chris Sale?  If we trade for a pitcher for the stretch run, you would rather have Jeremy Guthrie than Jake Peavy?

     

    Lester was struggling for several weeks, but his last performance was dominant.  It may have been a fluke, or it may have been something he can build off of, but it was not mediocre, and using one game's ERA to prove otherwise only argues against your criteria.  Advanced metrics and human beings with eyes are in consensus on this one.

    Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?

    Yes, I do. I also think that he has more talent that his ERA reflects, but I measure performance by NUMBERS, not by reputation. Like Lester, Cain has not performed well this year. I live out here near where the Giants play and their pitching has been a disappointment to their fans. Despite what some here to be a good performance by Lester, it wasn't. Four ER in 7 innings is not a good performance, and as a result of it his ERA went up. If you think Lester is getting better, show me the STATISTICS to prove your point. Telling me that he looks better out there is meaningless without the numbers back it up. He has been bad to mediocre for almost two years now and there is no rational basis for thinking he will turn it around.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    Nope.  The premise of my post is that anyone who is using year-long ERA as an indication of how good a pitching staff is at any given moment is ignoring recent performance, and recent peformance is a better indicator than three month old performance.

     

    I don't subscribe to your opinion that Lester isn't going to get better.  Lester has GOTTEN better within the past weeks.  Like Dubront when he started to improve, Lester is getting better in the same way.  He's getting more good innings in every game than he had in the previous one, and that's progress.  Should he continue to pitch better as the weather gets warmer, that would be consistent with his trends in past years. 

    Sorry S5, but those are simply not the facts. Lester's ERA has increased after every single start since his May 10 start. Here are the FACTS about Lester's ERA. They are not subject to reasonable debate:

    After his start on May 15: 2.72, May 20: 3.15, May 25: 3.34, May 31: 3.53, June 6: 3.60, June 11: 4.12, June 16: 4.37, June 21: 4.57, June 27: 4.61.

    You don't determine that a pitcher is "getting better" by watching him pitch alone. Thats primarily done through the use of statistics. Do you have any objective proof that Lester is "getting better"? I have some proof-pretty compelling IMO-that, in fact, he is getting WORSE. I don't think that trend will continue forever; he will level off with an ERA around 4.40-4.60 I now think ( he is pitching even worse than I thought he would at the beginning of the year when I thought he would end up closer to 4.40). The fact is that Lester is not getting better, he is getting worse.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

    Will you PLEASE dig a hole, put the goalposts in it, and pour cement around them!

    You started out this thread talking about Lester, then it went to team ERA, then it went to whether or not the Sox have enough pitching to win the WS, and now we're back at Lester again!  Probably because this is the only topic you can begin to make a case for. 

    You like to talk about ERA - Earned Run AVERAGE, and it's exactly that.  An average.  And as with many metrics it ignores the obvious in favor of the easy. 

    Lester got the snot kicked out of him on June 11 against TB when he went 4.2 and gave up 7 runs. 

    In his next start he pitched 4 good innings and got lit up in the 5th for 4 runs.

    In his next start he pitched 5.2 innings, again 4 good ones but didn't get out of the 5th although he went deeper into the 5th.

    In his next start he went 7 innings  (he gave up 2 runs through 6) and gave up 2 more in the 7th.

    That's progress. Progress that doesn't show up in the numbers but progress nontheless. 

    This is entirely a matter of how we look at things.  I look for progress and you look at numbers.  While I like to see the glass as being half full you prefer to think that not only is the glass half empty, the water in it is polluted.  :-)

     

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    Every pitchers ERA starts over come playoff time. I told you that the team that goes into the playoffs hot, usually goes pretty deep, regardless of in season ERA. That, and ERA alone is not a good way to truly define a pitchers performance. Not even close.




    Southpaw-----Pumpsie Green is a good friend of mine and he knows the game.  He is also very suspicious of how the team has been and is being run.  And he knows we are vulernable because we are now thin in the bullpen and our rotation in my opinion is maybe a shade above average if I stretch it a little.  However, I was very impressed with Lester's performance on Thursday.  Seven very good innings overall, but my complaint is that he had done enough and should not have been sent out for the 8th inning.

    Now what do we get from Lester here on out?  Does he return to the slovenly ways the past six weeks or do we see something of the pitcher we saw the first month of the season.  How he pitches and wins for us will determine how well we will do.  Lackey seems to be doing his job and Dempster does a yeoman job but is no ace.  Doubrant is a enigma and Webster is still untried.  See what I mean?  Lester must step up, Buchholz needs to come back and stay healthy (finally) and we may need another starting pitcher.  Let's see how Jon does the next two or three times out.  That should tell us a lot.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to seabeachfred's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Every pitchers ERA starts over come playoff time. I told you that the team that goes into the playoffs hot, usually goes pretty deep, regardless of in season ERA. That, and ERA alone is not a good way to truly define a pitchers performance. Not even close.

     




    Southpaw-----Pumpsie Green is a good friend of mine and he knows the game.  He is also very suspicious of how the team has been and is being run.  And he knows we are vulernable because we are now thin in the bullpen and our rotation in my opinion is maybe a shade above average if I stretch it a little.  However, I was very impressed with Lester's performance on Thursday.  Seven very good innings overall, but my complaint is that he had done enough and should not have been sent out for the 8th inning.

     

    Now what do we get from Lester here on out?  Does he return to the slovenly ways the past six weeks or do we see something of the pitcher we saw the first month of the season.  How he pitches and wins for us will determine how well we will do.  Lackey seems to be doing his job and Dempster does a yeoman job but is no ace.  Doubrant is a enigma and Webster is still untried.  See what I mean?  Lester must step up, Buchholz needs to come back and stay healthy (finally) and we may need another starting pitcher.  Let's see how Jon does the next two or three times out.  That should tell us a lot.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Hey Fred,

    Yeah, I know PG knows his baseball, as do I. I understand that Lester needs to step things up and Buch needs to get healthy. I would say though, not to sleep on Lackey. He looks like the lackey of old with a 95MPH FB and some nasty secondary pitches. Lester made a subtle adjustment with his glove. He seemed to have held it lower instead of so high. Lester even said so much himself. He said he felt more comfortable throwing his change up too. Unlike PG, I dont rely on ERA alone to tell the story, which is what his whole argument is based on. There are so many other stats that tell a much better story. You have to put things in the right context in baseball too. Lester was ahead in most counts, threw a great CU and mixed his pitches better last time out. I had no issue with him going out for the 8th, as he only had 92 pitches. Taz  came in and walked the batter at the plate when Lester left and threw a WP, causing a run to score . He didnt do his job, which seems to be a regular pattern for him.

    Im not saying Lester is "back", But hes done some things his last couple starts that would suggest he could be heading in the right direction. His next couple starts are very important. I think hes talented enough to come out of this and at least be a solid #2. Guess we'll just have to wait and see if he can indeed turn things around.

    Im not sure what you mean when you say he's suspicious about how the team is run. I think BC and Farrell are doing an overall fantastic job this year.

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to S5's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

     

    Nope.  The premise of my post is that anyone who is using year-long ERA as an indication of how good a pitching staff is at any given moment is ignoring recent performance, and recent peformance is a better indicator than three month old performance.

     

    I don't subscribe to your opinion that Lester isn't going to get better.  Lester has GOTTEN better within the past weeks.  Like Dubront when he started to improve, Lester is getting better in the same way.  He's getting more good innings in every game than he had in the previous one, and that's progress.  Should he continue to pitch better as the weather gets warmer, that would be consistent with his trends in past years. 

    Sorry S5, but those are simply not the facts. Lester's ERA has increased after every single start since his May 10 start. Here are the FACTS about Lester's ERA. They are not subject to reasonable debate:

    After his start on May 15: 2.72, May 20: 3.15, May 25: 3.34, May 31: 3.53, June 6: 3.60, June 11: 4.12, June 16: 4.37, June 21: 4.57, June 27: 4.61.

    You don't determine that a pitcher is "getting better" by watching him pitch alone. Thats primarily done through the use of statistics. Do you have any objective proof that Lester is "getting better"? I have some proof-pretty compelling IMO-that, in fact, he is getting WORSE. I don't think that trend will continue forever; he will level off with an ERA around 4.40-4.60 I now think ( he is pitching even worse than I thought he would at the beginning of the year when I thought he would end up closer to 4.40). The fact is that Lester is not getting better, he is getting worse.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     

     

    Will you PLEASE dig a hole, put the goalposts in it, and pour cement around them!

    You started out this thread talking about Lester, then it went to team ERA, then it went to whether or not the Sox have enough pitching to win the WS, and now we're back at Lester again!  Probably because this is the only topic you can begin to make a case for. 

    You like to talk about ERA - Earned Run AVERAGE, and it's exactly that.  An average.  And as with many metrics it ignores the obvious in favor of the easy. 

    Lester got the snot kicked out of him on June 11 against TB when he went 4.2 and gave up 7 runs. 

    In his next start he pitched 4 good innings and got lit up in the 5th for 4 runs.

    In his next start he pitched 5.2 innings, again 4 good ones but didn't get out of the 5th although he went deeper into the 5th.

    In his next start he went 7 innings  (he gave up 2 runs through 6) and gave up 2 more in the 7th.

    That's progress. Progress that doesn't show up in the numbers but progress nontheless. 

    This is entirely a matter of how we look at things.  I look for progress and you look at numbers.  While I like to see the glass as being half full you prefer to think that not only is the glass half empty, the water in it is polluted.  :-)

     



    This thread is no different than any other thread. The topic being discussed sometimes has nothing to do with the OP. The discussion meanders around but is usually about baseball.

     

    As for "progress", you have to be able to MEASURE it. To say that Lester pitched five great innings but gave up four runs in the sixth is meaningless to me because he DID give up four runs in six innings. ALL the runs and ALL the innings count. If you want to toss out some of the bad innings, lets toss out some of the good ones too. THEY ALL COUNT!!

    What I am saying is that if you think Lester is improving, show me the statistics to prove it. Otherwise its just opinion, which is fine, but it does not deserve equal weight to an arguement backed up by stats. I have presented many many stats that indicate that Lester is a below average pitcher who has shown no signs of becoming good for nearly two years. I WISH he were good, but that doesn't make him good. Where is will be in two months is pure conjecture. Right now, he is not very good and he is not getting better, objectively speaking.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    You certainly don't determine a pitcher is "getting worse" by charting his ERA.  Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?  You think Buchholz is having a better year than Matt Harvey?  You think Jeff Locke and Mike Leake are better pitchers than Cliff Lee and Chris Sale?  If we trade for a pitcher for the stretch run, you would rather have Jeremy Guthrie than Jake Peavy?

     

    Lester was struggling for several weeks, but his last performance was dominant.  It may have been a fluke, or it may have been something he can build off of, but it was not mediocre, and using one game's ERA to prove otherwise only argues against your criteria.  Advanced metrics and human beings with eyes are in consensus on this one.

    Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?

    Yes, I do. I also think that he has more talent that his ERA reflects, but I measure performance by NUMBERS, not by reputation. Like Lester, Cain has not performed well this year. I live out here near where the Giants play and their pitching has been a disappointment to their fans. Despite what some here to be a good performance by Lester, it wasn't. Four ER in 7 innings is not a good performance, and as a result of it his ERA went up. If you think Lester is getting better, show me the STATISTICS to prove your point. Telling me that he looks better out there is meaningless without the numbers back it up. He has been bad to mediocre for almost two years now and there is no rational basis for thinking he will turn it around.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

    I'm not arguing Lester has a trend of improvement, but his last game was dominant.  The statistics are three hits and two walks through seven innings, for an in-game WHIP of 0.714.  Don't discount the 8th inning, and you still have an in-game whip of 1.1 - a significant improvement over his season average, and the only way to get there is to completely ignore the injury that took him out of the game.

    Look at Matt Cain - he's been a Cy young contender each of the past three years.  His WHIP, his opponent batting average, his H/9, BB/9, K/9 - everything is exactly the same.  He's the exact same pitcher he's been the past three years, and he's terrific.  You know what I think is the reason for the higher ERA?  Ryan Vogelsong.  Cain never gave up more than 5 ER in a game last year, but this year he needs to tough out the stinkers to save the pen.  So 4 out of 5 starts are great, but in the fifth, he gives up 7 or 8 runs in six innings instead of 5 runs in 4 innings. Same pitcher as last year - ERA is 1.5 runs higher.

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

    Re: Lester

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    You certainly don't determine a pitcher is "getting worse" by charting his ERA.  Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?  You think Buchholz is having a better year than Matt Harvey?  You think Jeff Locke and Mike Leake are better pitchers than Cliff Lee and Chris Sale?  If we trade for a pitcher for the stretch run, you would rather have Jeremy Guthrie than Jake Peavy?

     

    Lester was struggling for several weeks, but his last performance was dominant.  It may have been a fluke, or it may have been something he can build off of, but it was not mediocre, and using one game's ERA to prove otherwise only argues against your criteria.  Advanced metrics and human beings with eyes are in consensus on this one.

    Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?

    Yes, I do. I also think that he has more talent that his ERA reflects, but I measure performance by NUMBERS, not by reputation. Like Lester, Cain has not performed well this year. I live out here near where the Giants play and their pitching has been a disappointment to their fans. Despite what some here to be a good performance by Lester, it wasn't. Four ER in 7 innings is not a good performance, and as a result of it his ERA went up. If you think Lester is getting better, show me the STATISTICS to prove your point. Telling me that he looks better out there is meaningless without the numbers back it up. He has been bad to mediocre for almost two years now and there is no rational basis for thinking he will turn it around.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

    I'm not arguing Lester has a trend of improvement, but his last game was dominant.  The statistics are three hits and two walks through seven innings, for an in-game WHIP of 0.714.  Don't discount the 8th inning, and you still have an in-game whip of 1.1 - a significant improvement over his season average, and the only way to get there is to completely ignore the injury that took him out of the game.

    Look at Matt Cain - he's been a Cy young contender each of the past three years.  His WHIP, his opponent batting average, his H/9, BB/9, K/9 - everything is exactly the same.  He's the exact same pitcher he's been the past three years, and he's terrific.  You know what I think is the reason for the higher ERA?  Ryan Vogelsong.  Cain never gave up more than 5 ER in a game last year, but this year he needs to tough out the stinkers to save the pen.  So 4 out of 5 starts are great, but in the fifth, he gives up 7 or 8 runs in six innings instead of 5 runs in 4 innings. Same pitcher as last year - ERA is 1.5 runs higher.

    [/QUOTE]


    Not sure exactly what is up with Cain. He is a very talented pitcher whose ERA is higher than it has been in the past. I don't really follow him very closely.

    I agree that if the game for Lester ended after 7 innings it could be classified as a very good game. His numbers, as you pointed out, were great after seven full. When you quote his WHIP for the game, hits agains, runs against its a stronger arguement than " He is getting better, I can just tell" or something like that. I admitted that his last game was an improvement over his previous efforts, but in the end, counting everything, it was not something I could say is "good". And until someone can come up with a cogent arguement backed up by statistics that show that Lester is on the mend I am going to continue to believe that he is stuck in the same mud he was in last year-below average and probably a #4 SP at best. Like all Sox fans, I hope he can regain the form that made him a dominant LHSP from 2008 to 2011.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Lester

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    You certainly don't determine a pitcher is "getting worse" by charting his ERA.  Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?  You think Buchholz is having a better year than Matt Harvey?  You think Jeff Locke and Mike Leake are better pitchers than Cliff Lee and Chris Sale?  If we trade for a pitcher for the stretch run, you would rather have Jeremy Guthrie than Jake Peavy?

     

    Lester was struggling for several weeks, but his last performance was dominant.  It may have been a fluke, or it may have been something he can build off of, but it was not mediocre, and using one game's ERA to prove otherwise only argues against your criteria.  Advanced metrics and human beings with eyes are in consensus on this one.

    Matt Cain's ERA is 4.29 - you think that's an accurate picture of his performance this year?

    Yes, I do. I also think that he has more talent that his ERA reflects, but I measure performance by NUMBERS, not by reputation. Like Lester, Cain has not performed well this year. I live out here near where the Giants play and their pitching has been a disappointment to their fans. Despite what some here to be a good performance by Lester, it wasn't. Four ER in 7 innings is not a good performance, and as a result of it his ERA went up. If you think Lester is getting better, show me the STATISTICS to prove your point. Telling me that he looks better out there is meaningless without the numbers back it up. He has been bad to mediocre for almost two years now and there is no rational basis for thinking he will turn it around.

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     

     

    I'm not arguing Lester has a trend of improvement, but his last game was dominant.  The statistics are three hits and two walks through seven innings, for an in-game WHIP of 0.714.  Don't discount the 8th inning, and you still have an in-game whip of 1.1 - a significant improvement over his season average, and the only way to get there is to completely ignore the injury that took him out of the game.

    Look at Matt Cain - he's been a Cy young contender each of the past three years.  His WHIP, his opponent batting average, his H/9, BB/9, K/9 - everything is exactly the same.  He's the exact same pitcher he's been the past three years, and he's terrific.  You know what I think is the reason for the higher ERA?  Ryan Vogelsong.  Cain never gave up more than 5 ER in a game last year, but this year he needs to tough out the stinkers to save the pen.  So 4 out of 5 starts are great, but in the fifth, he gives up 7 or 8 runs in six innings instead of 5 runs in 4 innings. Same pitcher as last year - ERA is 1.5 runs higher.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not sure exactly what is up with Cain. He is a very talented pitcher whose ERA is higher than it has been in the past. I don't really follow him very closely.

     

    I agree that if the game for Lester ended after 7 innings it could be classified as a very good game. His numbers, as you pointed out, were great after seven full. When you quote his WHIP for the game, hits agains, runs against its a stronger arguement than " He is getting better, I can just tell" or something like that. I admitted that his last game was an improvement over his previous efforts, but in the end, counting everything, it was not something I could say is "good". And until someone can come up with a cogent arguement backed up by statistics that show that Lester is on the mend I am going to continue to believe that he is stuck in the same mud he was in last year-below average and probably a #4 SP at best. Like all Sox fans, I hope he can regain the form that made him a dominant LHSP from 2008 to 2011.

    [/QUOTE]


    There. That's what I was saying all along - that he's making progress! 

    That wasn't so hard, now was it?  Cool

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share