Red Sox in Trouble

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    Doubront is a bigger question mark than Buchholz right now.


     


    At least Buchholz has been pitching reasonably well in away games..

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    As I stated in another thread, the SOX should stand firm on their offer to Lester. If another team wants to give him more years and more money, let them. They'll rule the day they made that mistake.


    [/QUOTE]

    No worries, the Yankees will be happy to take him off our hands.  And don't be surprised when he has some very good years with them.


    Maybe it'll be us that rues that day.   


     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    I'm not concerned about Buchholz at all.  He actually looked good yesterday, he started off rough but was very good from the 2nd inning on.  His velocity was back up around 92-93 and he hit 94.  Of course there is the injury and durability concerns but we will cross that bridge when we get there....I'm expecting good things from Clay from here on out.

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    I'm not concerned about Buchholz at all.  He actually looked good yesterday, he started off rough but was very good from the 2nd inning on.  His velocity was back up around 92-93 and he hit 94.  Of course there is the injury and durability concerns but we will cross that bridge when we get there....I'm expecting good things from Clay from here on out.


    [/QUOTE]

    I think there is a good chance Buchholz will be fine. He has had success at the ML level and is regaining his velocity. When he is right he is our best SP. Doubront is another matter. He has never had sustained success and his lifetime ERA is 4.70. He continues to have a high WHIP and seems not to trust his stuff out there. IMO his chances of being a contributor in any major way are no better than 50-50.


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    If we lose Lester, I can see the same people okay with letting him go, complaining about our lack of quality pitching and advocating us spending even more on pitchers with worse histories than Lester.


    Sox4ever

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:


     


    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


     


    I'm not concerned about Buchholz at all.  He actually looked good yesterday, he started off rough but was very good from the 2nd inning on.  His velocity was back up around 92-93 and he hit 94.  Of course there is the injury and durability concerns but we will cross that bridge when we get there....I'm expecting good things from Clay from here on out.


     


     


     




    I think there is a good chance Buchholz will be fine. He has had success at the ML level and is regaining his velocity. When he is right he is our best SP. Doubront is another matter. He has never had sustained success and his lifetime ERA is 4.70. He continues to have a high WHIP and seems not to trust his stuff out there. IMO his chances of being a contributor in any major way are no better than 50-50.


     


     


     


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     


     


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed.  The biggest problem with Doubront might be the perception about him, I think a lot of us assumed some kind of forward progression when he might just be nothing more than he is; a 4th or 5th starter.  Personally, I don't mind a guy who is going to have a 4.5-5 era in the 5th slot, but only if he is going to be an innings eater....Doubront does not fit this mold.


    Perhaps I'm selling him a bit short, he did have a nice run in the middle of the season last year and for a month was our best pitcher. 

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

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


    Doubront is another matter. He has never had sustained success and his lifetime ERA is 4.70. He continues to have a high WHIP and seems not to trust his stuff out there. IMO his chances of being a contributor in any major way are no better than 50-50.


    [/QUOTE]

    A bit of an overstatement, although I'm not sure how many starts you think is required to qualify as sustained success. The fact of the matter is on Sept 1 last yeaer, after his 26th game (25 starts), he had an ERA of 3.89 and that was after a bad start. His ERA at the end of August was 3.74, which included a rough start. His ERA on May 8 was 6.40. So to go to from 6.40 to 3.74 in 3 1/2 months is a pretty good stretch of excellent pitching. He helped carry the staff  during that period.


    Having said that, I understand that it's easy to have little patience with him. Twice in three years he came in out of shape. Last year should have been a turning point. He ran out of gas to end the year, which OK, I can accept because he pitched well in the postseason.


    But he does need to turn it around fast. He's young and should be entering his prime years. If he wants to make the most out of his potential, now is the time to do it.


    I have no problem with anyone who has a short fuse with Doubront, but let's at least acknowledge how good he pitched for a considerable stretch last year.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    If we lose Lester, I can see the same people okay with letting him go, complaining about our lack of quality pitching and advocating us spending even more on pitchers with worse histories than Lester.


     


    Sox4ever


    [/QUOTE]

    What makes Lester any more important than Ellsbury? The SOX didn't want to overspend on him and he's an everyday player. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    If we lose Lester, I can see the same people okay with letting him go, complaining about our lack of quality pitching and advocating us spending even more on pitchers with worse histories than Lester.


     


     


     


    Sox4ever


     


    [/QUOTE]

    What makes Lester any more important than Ellsbury? The SOX didn't want to overspend on him and he's an everyday player. 


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement].   That is the crux of the situation. In today's game , players are being overpaid. It happens all the time. If you refuse to overpay, you will seldom sign a top player. That is the reality. You become reduced to trying to compete without the top talent. If you have a good enough farm system, you might be able to do it, but it is very hard to do. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


     


    If we lose Lester, I can see the same people okay with letting him go, complaining about our lack of quality pitching and advocating us spending even more on pitchers with worse histories than Lester.


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    Sox4ever


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]

    What makes Lester any more important than Ellsbury? The SOX didn't want to overspend on him and he's an everyday player. 


     


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement].   That is the crux of the situation. In today's game , players are being overpaid. It happens all the time. If you refuse to overpay, you will seldom sign a top player. That is the reality. You become reduced to trying to compete without the top talent. If you have a good enough farm system, you might be able to do it, but it is very hard to do. 


    [/QUOTE]

    Some, myself included, might consider 4/70 million in the overpay category. But what the hell, it's not my money, so if the SOX want him bad enough, they'll sign the check.

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


     


    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    If we lose Lester, I can see the same people okay with letting him go, complaining about our lack of quality pitching and advocating us spending even more on pitchers with worse histories than Lester.


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    Sox4ever


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]

    What makes Lester any more important than Ellsbury? The SOX didn't want to overspend on him and he's an everyday player. 


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement].   That is the crux of the situation. In today's game , players are being overpaid. It happens all the time. If you refuse to overpay, you will seldom sign a top player. That is the reality. You become reduced to trying to compete without the top talent. If you have a good enough farm system, you might be able to do it, but it is very hard to do. 


     


    [/QUOTE]

    Some, myself included, might consider 4/70 million in the overpay category. But what the hell, it's not my money, so if the SOX want him bad enough, they'll sign the check.


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement].  Well, that's it. We might not want to overpay ten dollars for something we want on e -bay. But baseball owners are billionaires. The reality of the game today, like it or not, is that it is going  to cost a lot of money to sign the top players. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE] 


    Well, that's it. We might not want to overpay ten dollars for something we want on e -bay. But baseball owners are billionaires. The reality of the game today, like it or not, is that it is going  to cost a lot of money to sign the top players. 


    [/QUOTE]


    That is true.  The other reality is that if you sign one or two expensive players who turn out to be busts you could mess up your team for several years.  This leads to some difficult decisions.


     


     


     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    If Lester moves on it will be because BenC is not willing to go to a long term deal and he feels he can do better.


    I think 5 years --$100 is enough for the Sox to offer.

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE] 


     


    Well, that's it. We might not want to overpay ten dollars for something we want on e -bay. But baseball owners are billionaires. The reality of the game today, like it or not, is that it is going  to cost a lot of money to sign the top players. 


     


    [/QUOTE]


     


    That is true.  The other reality is that if you sign one or two expensive players who turn out to be busts you could mess up your team for several years.  This leads to some difficult decisions.


     


     


     


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement].  Difficult decisions.  That is life. For most of us.   But billionaire baseball owners are better equipped to deal with mistakes than are ordinary people. It may seem selfish, but I am not too worried about John Henry making an occasional mistake. I don't think it should mess up our team for years. 

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Difficult decisions.  That is life. For most of us.   But billionaire baseball owners are better equipped to deal with mistakes than are ordinary people. It may seem selfish, but I am not too worried about John Henry making an occasional mistake. I don't think it should mess up our team for years. 


    [/QUOTE]

    The thing is, billionaire baseball owners like Henry treat this as a business.  They're not to take money out of their own pockets to buy players they want.  They set budgets for their team.  The spending has its limits.


    The Yankees don't have an unlimited budget either.  If they did, they would have retained Cano, signed Stephen Drew etc.


    So busts are costly because they chew up the budget without providing a return.


    You keep pointing out that baseball is a business.  Being a successful business does not mean spending like the proverbial drunken sailor.  It means getting value for the dollar. 


     

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    Difficult decisions.  That is life. For most of us.   But billionaire baseball owners are better equipped to deal with mistakes than are ordinary people. It may seem selfish, but I am not too worried about John Henry making an occasional mistake. I don't think it should mess up our team for years. 


     


    [/QUOTE]

    The thing is, billionaire baseball owners like Henry treat this as a business.  They're not to take money out of their own pockets to buy players they want.  They set budgets for their team.  The spending has its limits.


     


    The Yankees don't have an unlimited budget either.  If they did, they would have retained Cano, signed Stephen Drew etc.


     


    So busts are costly because they chew up the budget without providing a return.


     


    You keep pointing out that baseball is a business.  Being a successful business does not mean spending like the proverbial drunken sailor.  It means getting value for the dollar. 


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]  We don't have the balance sheets. I doubt that Steinbrenner is in business to lose money just so his team can win a championship.  Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. We probably can take it for granted that all of these owners are successful businessmen. Sometimes you have to take risks in business. Sometimes you lose. If you are good enough, it will not have a long term negative effect. Playing it safe is not how these guys got that rich in the first place.

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    20+ games in and amazing how we have determined that this is a bad ball club? Doubie and Buch are terrible, Bogey can't play SS. Nava's a bum? Give it time. While they may not win a WS. This team is just off to a bad start. Bogey is pressing, sure he's heard the ? whether he can play SS, just trying to hard. Starters off to inconsistent start, I'm sure pitching into Nov. and getting late starts in ST doesn't help. Not everyone as it seems can have a good year, which seemed to happen last yr. Thats why last yr became so magical. I said it in the offseason RS are building a team that can be succesful for yrs to come. Thats why we will have some growing pains w/ WMB, Boegarts, and JBJ. But these are good players and RS will be better in the future because of it. Just make playoffs and be playing your best at end of yr and lets see what happens.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxnewmex. Show soxnewmex's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble


    Well, Ells switching teams has made a huge difference so far.  I suspect Yanks and our records would be roughly the same, maybe a game or two over .500, had he stayed with us.  Not saying we should have paid the big bucks to keep him, just saying the switch has been important.  No question we've missed Drew as well.  Still like our chances to get in a groove and compete for a playoff spot though.  Need to get to that tantalizingly elusive .500 mark first!

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    I’m all for oversimplifying, but the Marlins comparison is beyond insane.


     


     


     


    The 1997 Marlins went on a one season spending spree, won it all, and then traded as many players as possible.   Only one Marlin position player was a starter in both 1997 and 1998 (old friend Edgar Renteria).  They also had virtually no returning SP and dealt away their closer.   Is this REALLY the same as letting 3 free agents sign elsewhere? (OK, technically only 2 of them have signed.)  Really? Oh no!! We lost 3 starting players!  It was a firesale!!


     


     


     


    Reality check.   Teams lose 3 starters all the time.   Detroit lost 3 starters from last year (Fielder, Infante, Peralta) and gave away one of the most underrated SP in MLB (Doug Fister) for pretty much nothing  AND lost their starting LF to injury.  AND their only heavy spending was on  39yo Joe Nathan.   Other than that, they gave time to two younger players (Castellanos, Smyly) and stopgap solutions (Gonzalez, Romine, Davis).    It’s killing them, too.  They are only in first place.   Are the Tigers cheap?  


     


     


     


    Fans don’t get it.  Spending heavily on aging free agents for long term not only doesn’t guarantee short term success, like it hasn’t in Philadelphia and Anaheim.   It DOES guarantee long term struggles.   How are the Phillies doing this year?  If only we had an ownership team that would duplicate THAT spend-heavy model!


     


     


     


    One of the least-discussed matters of the Sox season this year has been the schedule.   The Sox have been playing better teams almost exclusively.  The combined record of Sox’ opponents this year is 65-45.   And they are not exactly building it up against the Sox, since that record is 20 games over .500, while the Sox are 3 games under.   Simple math tells you these teams (Baltimore, New York, Texas, Chicago, Milwaukee) are 17 games over .500 against the rest of the league.  That is pretty impressive.  We all got scared when the Sox were swept by Milwaukee, and feared this team was going nowhere, but really, the Brewers are the best team in MLB right now.  They are beating up on a lot of other teams.   It must have been that wild spending spree they went on this past off-season, which consisted of Matt Garza and Mark Reynolds.


     


     


     


    Conversely, the Yankees have played Boston, Baltimore, Toronto, Houston, Tampa, and the Cubs, basically the AL East and two last place teams. The combined records of those teams is 56-76.   The combined records of those teams in non-Yankee games is 47-63.   Who has had the tougher road so far?  The only team with a winning record the Yankees have played to date is Baltimore, and the Sox have played them over twice as many times.


     


     


     


    I know, I know.  The old “you have to beat the good teams.”  Sure ,at some point.  But also bear in mind, even the best teams are going to lose 40% of their games this year. And they aren’t going to have a .600 winning percentage against everyone.


     


     


     


    In fact, the only team so far the Sox have losing records against are New York and Milwaukee.  And Milwaukee is the surprise of MLB early on, with their insanely hot start.  So that leaves all of our fear and loathing over the games against the Yankees.   Really, isn’t that what this is all about?  That we lost to the Yankees? 


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    post of the year (so far).

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

     


    post of the year (so far).


    thing is


    IMO BB is not so much about whom


    it's about when U play the team


    so far yanks have won every series this yr but 1


    the astro's

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


    post of the year (so far).


     


    thing is


     


    IMO BB is not so much about whom


     


    it's about when U play the team


     


    so far yanks have won every series this yr but 1


     


    the astro's


    [/QUOTE]

             "when U play the team"


                  You pretty much nailed it.


                  The exception being.........


                  That and when a tem beats you 5 out of 7 in a short span of time it speaks more to talent level ie. pitching depth.


     


     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    One of the least-discussed matters of the Sox season this year has been the schedule. The Sox have been playing better teams almost exclusively. The combined record of Sox’ opponents this year is 65-45.


    I remember that in 2007.  After the ASB, the NYY had a ridiculously easy schedule.  Some of the posters were completely panicked because the NYY won a lot of those games.  But they only won the amount of games they were supposed to, so in effect, they really weren't catching up.  When they schedule reverted, so did the records.


     

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    Everybody just pray that Victorino and Middlebrooks stay healthy.  If they do we have a nice deep lineup again.  If this team stays reasonably healthy I still like our chances in the AL East.  Although the Yankees pounded us pretty good over 7 games, they have some significant issues of their own.  Tanaka has been golden, but Nova is gone for the year, Pineda is now hurt, Sabathia is still struggling, and Kuroda has a 5+ ERA for the 3rd month in a row. 

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

    Re: Red Sox in Trouble

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Everybody just pray that Victorino and Middlebrooks stay healthy.  If they do we have a nice deep lineup again.  If this team stays reasonably healthy I still like our chances in the AL East.  Although the Yankees pounded us pretty good over 7 games, they have some significant issues of their own.  Tanaka has been golden, but Nova is gone for the year, Pineda is now hurt, Sabathia is still struggling, and Kuroda has a 5+ ERA for the 3rd month in a row. [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    I hesitate to say what I said last year, because we ddi have injuries to key players, but still won it all. (Granted, less injuries than recent years)


    We need almost all our major players to stay healthy (not just Vic and Middy) to have a legitimate chance at a ring.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share