Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    Wait Pedroia is now a weak link? When did this happen?


     


    [/QUOTE]


    Amazing, isn't it? He hasn't gotten off to the most spectacular start, but to think he isn't going to get hot is just silly. In fact, he already has...batting .333/.429/.500 over his last 13 games. (Am I being a sugar coater or a small sample size guru by pointing that out?)


    [/QUOTE]


    Pedey isn't a weak link but he was playing like one - well below his expectations which was really hurting us.  Do I think he'll turn it around?  Absolutely.  Do I think he'll steal 20 bases again - nope.  Do I think he'll even come close to 20 Homers again?  Heck no.  He's become a singles hitter and that is very concerning to me (this started since last year's AS break).

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    He was better in April of 2011 which is why on May 1, 2011 you had more confidence than today to say "they can turn things around"


     


    Your statement was "His #'s in 2014 tell me you can't rely on him for great numbers at this stage of his career." I pointed out that this makes no sense...I don't see what April 2011 has to do with it. His 3.10 ERA doesn't inspire confidence because it isn't a 2.50 ERA? Come on.


    For whatever it's worth, I believed on May 1, 2011 that they could turn things around (which they did, until September), and I believe the same today.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    I am more and more convinced Andrewmitch's arguments are off base.  He attacks Bogaerts for his fielding but conveniently ignores the whole player, who in fact has a WAR of .5, which is good enough to rank him the 5th best overall SS in the AL.  And we are talking about a 21 year old MLB SS who is only going to get better, but apparently not good enough to suit Andrewmitch.  Same deal for Bradley, whose defense Andrewmitch conveniently ignores.  Now I do agree Ellsbury is easily the better offensive player.  Heck, at $24M/year he better be.  But guess what?  Ellsbury's overall WAR is 1.0, 3d best in the AL, but Bradley's WAR is .6, 8th best in the AL, and again Bradley is the rookie.  So far, I think the two rookies have held up pretty well.  And what is the stuff about how Napoli is the only good hitter in the lineup and needs to be protected?  I am delighted he is off to a good start, but Ortiz will once again prove he is the best hitter in the lineup and he guy needing protection.  Napoli strikes out a lot, especially against anyone with a decent breaking ball.  He has by far the best OPS in the lineup and bats cleanup, but has just one more rbi than Ortiz, 3 more than Pierzynski, and 4 more than--are you ready for this?--Bradley, who has 13 rbi's, the same number Ellsbury has, FWIW.  But the real point is that this lineup will succeed only if the whole lineup--or at least the top third, the middle third, and the bottom third--are contributing.  So far with Pierzynski and Bradley usually in the bottom third, they have contributed.  Top third, no question, has struggled, but you gotta believe in Pedroia, Victorino, and Ortiz.  And the leaves the middle third of Napoli, Gomes/Sizemore, and Bogaerts, which again I think has potential.  Platooning Sizemore just might be the ideal way to use him, and I think there is no way he can't hit if he is healthy.  Finally, Andrewmitch maligns the starting pitching.  A quick glance at the stats page (ESPN), shows that Buchholz has had 4 quality starts of 6 overall and Doubront has had 3 of 6.  Not bad for the 4th and 5th starters.   Oh, and the Sox have easily the lowest ERA in the AL East. 


     


    All in all, while I share Andrewmitch's frustration and have been guilty myself in the past of over-reacting to a bad May, I think his specific assertions don't bear up under any reasonable scrutiny.   I continue to believe these guys will get better and that two decent albeit sniveling excuses are the cold weather and the schedule, which has been a steady dose of AL East teams plus Milwaukee, best record in MLB, Oakland, most wins in the AL, and the so-so White Sox. 


    [/QUOTE]


    some of the comments you made were items that I did not comment on (Ortiz, Naps, Vic).......


    Now, yes Boggarts I criticize his glove.  I don't talk about his bat b/c his bat is great.  Opposite w/ JBJ - his bat concerns me and his glove does not.  But I don't even bash JBJ - I simply say if we are to have him in CF then we need to make it up w/ a big bat in LF.  And when did say we should had kept Ellsbury?  Again, point is we need to find a place to make up losing his bat which is in LF right now.  Saying Sizemore can't hit if he's healthy is irresonsible; he is healthy and he is not hitting.


    Buck has somehow turned in some QS's but history (robust sample size) has proven to me to not rely on that lasting for any period of time; his body is a ticking time bomb.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    He was better in April of 2011 which is why on May 1, 2011 you had more confidence than today to say "they can turn things around"


     


     


     


    Your statement was "His #'s in 2014 tell me you can't rely on him for great numbers at this stage of his career." I pointed out that this makes no sense...I don't see what April 2011 has to do with it. His 3.10 ERA doesn't inspire confidence because it isn't a 2.50 ERA? Come on.


     


    For whatever it's worth, I believed on May 1, 2011 that they could turn things around (which they did, until September), and I believe the same today.


    [/QUOTE]


    Lester's #'s in 2011 (APR) were significantly better - I mean 3.10 is good.  Very comfortable with that.  But a 2.52 ERA w/ a WHIP of 1.1119 gives you Pedro-like confidence.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    I am more and more convinced Andrewmitch's arguments are off base.  He attacks Bogaerts for his fielding but conveniently ignores the whole player, who in fact has a WAR of .5, which is good enough to rank him the 5th best overall SS in the AL.  And we are talking about a 21 year old MLB SS who is only going to get better, but apparently not good enough to suit Andrewmitch.  Same deal for Bradley, whose defense Andrewmitch conveniently ignores.  Now I do agree Ellsbury is easily the better offensive player.  Heck, at $24M/year he better be.  But guess what?  Ellsbury's overall WAR is 1.0, 3d best in the AL, but Bradley's WAR is .6, 8th best in the AL, and again Bradley is the rookie.  So far, I think the two rookies have held up pretty well.  And what is the stuff about how Napoli is the only good hitter in the lineup and needs to be protected?  I am delighted he is off to a good start, but Ortiz will once again prove he is the best hitter in the lineup and he guy needing protection.  Napoli strikes out a lot, especially against anyone with a decent breaking ball.  He has by far the best OPS in the lineup and bats cleanup, but has just one more rbi than Ortiz, 3 more than Pierzynski, and 4 more than--are you ready for this?--Bradley, who has 13 rbi's, the same number Ellsbury has, FWIW.  But the real point is that this lineup will succeed only if the whole lineup--or at least the top third, the middle third, and the bottom third--are contributing.  So far with Pierzynski and Bradley usually in the bottom third, they have contributed.  Top third, no question, has struggled, but you gotta believe in Pedroia, Victorino, and Ortiz.  And the leaves the middle third of Napoli, Gomes/Sizemore, and Bogaerts, which again I think has potential.  Platooning Sizemore just might be the ideal way to use him, and I think there is no way he can't hit if he is healthy.  Finally, Andrewmitch maligns the starting pitching.  A quick glance at the stats page (ESPN), shows that Buchholz has had 4 quality starts of 6 overall and Doubront has had 3 of 6.  Not bad for the 4th and 5th starters.   Oh, and the Sox have easily the lowest ERA in the AL East. 


     


    All in all, while I share Andrewmitch's frustration and have been guilty myself in the past of over-reacting to a bad May, I think his specific assertions don't bear up under any reasonable scrutiny.   I continue to believe these guys will get better and that two decent albeit sniveling excuses are the cold weather and the schedule, which has been a steady dose of AL East teams plus Milwaukee, best record in MLB, Oakland, most wins in the AL, and the so-so White Sox. 


    [/QUOTE]

    Very well put....sanity is alive!!!

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    And to add to what andrew conveniently ignores is when he call Pedroia a singles hitter, ignoring that with 10 doubles, Pedey is tied for fourth in the league.


    No doubt that the home run power hasn't been there, but if his wrist is healthy, I expect Pedey will wind up in the mid-teens. I never really expect Pedroia to hit 20 anyway.


     

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    And to add to what andrew conveniently ignores is when he call Pedroia a singles hitter, ignoring that with 10 doubles, Pedey is tied for fourth in the league.


     


    No doubt that the home run power hasn't been there, but if his wrist is healthy, I expect Pedey will wind up in the mid-teens. I never really expect Pedroia to hit 20 anyway.


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    Good point, people always talk about power and look at HR's and nothing more but they ignore game power.  There is a lot of value in someone who can rack up the doubles. 

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    They can't win 1 run games


    They blow too many chances with runners on base


    Boeggarts is not a good defensive SS


    [/QUOTE]



    Winning or losing one run games has much more to do with randomness than it does with the team's ability. Being 3-7 in one run games is actually a good sign, in an indirect way.


    Leaving a lot of runners on base is also a good sign, despite how frustrating it may be. It would be far more discouraging if the Sox were not getting runners on base, and thereby weren't able to leave said runners on. As Farrell said yesterday, the key is for the offense to continue creating opportunities. If they do that, the runs will come. The runs will come.


    IMO, the signs all point to this offense breaking out soon.


    As far as Bogaerts' defense goes, the defensive miscues for the team as a whole have to improve. They cannot continue to give their opponents extra outs and "free" runs.


    I have been as frustrated as any fan with the team's overall play so far. That said, I still have them penciled in for October baseball!


     

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    "I appreciate the response but how could you expect them to turn things around?" 


    Umm....perhaps by making a couple of personnel moves before the deadline? This might blow your mind but the team doesn't have to sit around if they see lineup flaws.


    What we don't know is whether management will need fan pressure from a losing season to tweak their philosophy on bigger contracts. The Lester negotiations will be a good test.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    Pedey isn't a weak link but he was playing like one - well below his expectations which was really hurting us. Do I think he'll turn it around? Absolutely. Do I think he'll steal 20 bases again - nope. Do I think he'll even come close to 20 Homers again? Heck no. He's become a singles hitter and that is very concerning to me (this started since last year's AS break).


    You think he'll turn it around?


    Dude, he's been killing the ball for 2 weeks now.  Do you even bother looking at the games or reading the boxscores?


     

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    Baseball is like a box of chocolates...many small sugar coated samples. 

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    Pedey over the last 2 weeks (not counting today's 1 for 5):


    .306/.414/.469/.883


    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to moonslav59's comment:



     




     




    Pedey over the last 2 weeks (not counting today's 1 for 5):




     




     




     




    .306/.414/.469/.883




     




     




     




     




     




    Sox4ever




     




     






    the first 3 weeks of the season he was hitting 250 w/ maybe a couple of Walks and Slugging about 333 (Several Doubles but no homers), SLUGGING 333............and I think maybe 1 SB by that point in time.


     

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    the first 3 weeks of the season he was hitting 250 w/ maybe a couple of Walks and Slugging about 333 (Several Doubles but no homers), SLUGGING 333............and I think maybe 1 SB by that point in time.


    1-That pretty much happens to every player.  Some weeks good and some weeks bad.


    2-But that doesn't matter.  What matters is that you thought he would turn it around.  If you didn't know he had already turned it around, then you haven't been watching the games and haven't been reading the boxscores.


     

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    the first 3 weeks of the season he was hitting 250 w/ maybe a couple of Walks and Slugging about 333 (Several Doubles but no homers), SLUGGING 333............and I think maybe 1 SB by that point in time.


     


    1-That pretty much happens to every player.  Some weeks good and some weeks bad.


     


    2-But that doesn't matter.  What matters is that you thought he would turn it around.  If you didn't know he had already turned it around, then you haven't been watching the games and haven't been reading the boxscores.


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    Do I think he will turn it around?  Yes but not his power #s, I need some evidence that he'll be a 20 HR guy again.


    Has he turned it around?  Too early to tell.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:


     


    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


     


    the first 3 weeks of the season he was hitting 250 w/ maybe a couple of Walks and Slugging about 333 (Several Doubles but no homers), SLUGGING 333............and I think maybe 1 SB by that point in time.


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    1-That pretty much happens to every player.  Some weeks good and some weeks bad.


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    2-But that doesn't matter.  What matters is that you thought he would turn it around.  If you didn't know he had already turned it around, then you haven't been watching the games and haven't been reading the boxscores.


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     





    Do I think he will turn it around?  Yes but not his power #s, I need some evidence that he'll be a 20 HR guy again.


     


     


     


    Has he turned it around?  Too early to tell.


     


    [/QUOTE]

    Anybody who thought that a little guy like Pedey could swing so violently and average 20 HR per season is on KRak!


     


    He's been in the top 3 2nd basemen since he came up.  He's a +.300 hitter with an average ops probably around +.830.   ARE YOU KIDDING ME?


     


    He's simply one of the best Red Sox players, IF'rs of all time.  To be unhappy because he's not going to average 20 HR's is beyond ignorant.  It's childish.  It shows a lack of baseball knowledge.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]



    Do I think he will turn it around?  Yes but not his power #s, I need some evidence that he'll be a 20 HR guy again.


     


    Has he turned it around?  Too early to tell.


    [/QUOTE]

    Andrew - why does he need to hit 20 HR's?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to slasher9's comment:


    Andrew - why does he need to hit 20 HR's?






     


    Exactly. Pedroia has done that once in his career, but for some reason Andrew keeps saying that like it's a benchmark he needs to match to be a considered a success. I agree that it seems doubtful we'll see 20 HR from him again...I'd be pretty happy with 10-15. His power decline (which has been a trend for several years now) is definitely a little worrisome, but even a Pedey who hits for less power at this stage of his career can be a huge part of this offense.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    Home runs mean everything.  If you have a guy who can hit about 15 HR's bat .300 get on base at a .370 clip, show average to above average speed and play elite defense up the middle he is useless.  That is literally a horrible player if he can't hit at least 25 HR's....If you haven't realized by now I'm being sarcastic please slap palm onto forehead. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

    In response to slasher9's comment:[QUOTE]Andrew - why does he need to hit 20 HR's?
    Exactly. Pedroia has done that once in his career, but for some reason Andrew keeps saying that like it's a benchmark he needs to match to be a considered a success. I agree that it seems doubtful we'll see 20 HR from him again...I'd be pretty happy with 10-15. His power decline (which has been a trend for several years now) is definitely a little worrisome, but even a Pedey who hits for less power at this stage of his career can be a huge part of this offense[/QUOTE]


    He only hit 20 HR's once. He averages 15 a season. Last year he hit 9 after injuring his thumb which balances the 21 he awhile back.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    I really don't mean to pile on Andrew, though...if anything, there seems to be some good karma going in this thread.


    After he bashed Buchholz, Clay started pitching much better; he brought up Pedroia's lack of power, and he jacked a grand slam the other day; said Lester wasn't "Pedro-like," and Lester proceeded to have a downright Pedro-like outing.


    Maybe we should turn the discussion to why Bogaerts is no Nomar Garciaparra.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    Pedey life time BA .301 


                   2013 BA .301


    Pedey lifetime OBP .369


                  2013 OBP .371


    Pedey also smacked 42 2B's stole 17 bags and walked 73 times.  All pretty much inline with his career avgs. 


    Pedey had about a career avg to slightly above in almost every category BUT HR's (which can be partially explained away by his thumb injury and was about only 4-5 less than avg.)  OH AND he won a gold glove last year.


    So in conclusion anyone who says Pedey is not really in any kind of decline just yet. Unless THIS is the season he doesn't hit and starts to decline.


    I don't know about you guys?!?!?!? But I'm pretty sure the laser show will be in town any day now. 

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    pedroia isn't even on the radar of radar as a concern.


    X-bo has made a couple, three excellent defensive plays over the weekend.  arm strength is ++.


    take xanax and relax.

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Pedey life time BA .301 


                   2013 BA .301


    Pedey lifetime OBP .369


                  2013 OBP .371


    Pedey also smacked 42 2B's stole 17 bags and walked 73 times.  All pretty much inline with his career avgs. 


    Pedey had about a career avg to slightly above in almost every category BUT HR's (which can be partially explained away by his thumb injury and was about only 4-5 less than avg.)  OH AND he won a gold glove last year.


    So in conclusion anyone who says Pedey is not really in any kind of decline just yet. Unless THIS is the season he doesn't hit and starts to decline.


    I don't know about you guys?!?!?!? But I'm pretty sure the laser show will be in town any day now.  [/QUOTE]


    I'm pretty sure Pedey will get back on track, and I'm pretty sure injuries have affected his numbers, but overall, he has declined from his best seasons years ago.


    OPS by year:


    823>869>819>860>861 (2011)>


    797 (2012)> 787 (2013) > 722 (so far 2014)


    His 2012 and 2013 numbers were about 60-70 points below his 2008, 2010, and 1011 numbers. That is a significant drop.


     




    [object HTMLDivElement]

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

    Re: Sugar Coaters and Small Sample Size Gurus

    I forgot I think this is a good topic and thread.  Nothing wrong with challenging optimists.  But I also gotta say that right now I am pretty happy with being on the side of the optimists because I thought the Sox played a heckuva good series vs. the Athletics who going in had the most wins in the AL and the best record in the AL West and have been very good on the road.  Against pretty much the best starter in the AL yesterday the Sox definitely had their chances.  Too bad Bradley didn't make either bunt successful because he has shown he can bunt well.    Bogaerts made a nice place on the grounder to his left, etc.  I don't think Lackey had his best command, but he pitched his guts out and only gave up 2 in 6--thanks to the terrific play to get Donaldson (?) at the plate on that double.  I do agree Sizemore hasn't proven he can still hit, but find it hard to believe he won't.  And a reminder to Andrewmitch:  why do the Sox have to replace Ellsbury with a big bat in left field?  Me, I will settle for the same numbers Nava/Gomes had last year, something over .800 in OPS, etc.  That should be doable, especially if Nava gets his swing back and returns.  The theory is that the Sox make up for Ellsbury with better infield bats at SS and 3B, and I think that is doable. 

     

Share