Tied for first--sort of

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

    Tied for first--sort of

    And it ain't even Memorial Day.  I couldn't see this a month ago.  Heck, I couldn't see it a week ago.  These guys are on the road playing two good teams (well, winning teams, especially at home).

    Well done, Sox.  If CC is now the real CC and Reddick is what we hoped, this is one very good lineup.   Without Drew, yet.  Hmmm. 

    And Aceves just pitched his second straight gem. 

    Still May, but a heckuva May. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Are you saying "without Drew" as if this makes a difference?

    Like the guy was really leading the way with his .232 batting average....

    Or because you are coming around to my way of thinking?...

    ...that the team is better off without him.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Reread the "hmmm."  I think it's unlikely, but still possible that the lineup flourishes best without him.  Crawford, who suffered through a horrible April, has twice as many rbi's as Drew, who has never delivered in a Sox uniform--his peak year was 68 rbi's.  He's a money player only in the sense that he gets paid a lot.  It's probably too much to ask Reddick to keep up the hitting, but it certainly is a hope of mine.  Worst case, Crawford and Ellsbury will compensate for Drew's inadequacies.  And, who know?  Maybe his OPS will one day reach the lofty, near unattainable peak of, say, .800. 

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

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    In Response to Re: Tied for first--sort of:
    [QUOTE]You didn't see it because you are that dense. I saw it, and said, when the team was 0-6, that this team, if Lester and Buch and Beckett stay off long DL, would start blowing by the AL. That's right, I said it.
    Posted by SoxSoldRed[/QUOTE]

    Well, good for you.  Were you softlaw back then or BaseballGM?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    In Response to Re: Tied for first--sort of:
    [QUOTE]You didn't see it because you are that dense. I saw it, and said, when the team was 0-6, that this team, if Lester and Buch and Beckett stay off long DL, would start blowing by the AL. That's right, I said it.
    Posted by SoxSoldRed[/QUOTE]

    Hey, softy, explain to us again why Drew is the indispensably brilliant rightfielder.    And how bad Ellsbury is--so bad he should be traded immediately for three french hens, two turtledoves, and a partridge in a pear tree.  Tell us, big guy.

    FYI, is you saw this coming right after the opening six games, my sincerest congratulations.  That was indeed prescient.   
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Your-Echo. Show Your-Echo's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    The winning in May is due to a myriad of factors that are all coming together at once. So why are we zeroing in again on JD Drew and Andrew is not even here. Why not list some of the unexpected good things that are happening. Don't let the threads be hijacked like this.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    How anyone can compare Drew to Ellsbury is beyond me.........
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from canetime. Show canetime's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    In Response to Re: Tied for first--sort of:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tied for first--sort of : Well, good for you.  Were you softlaw back then or BaseballGM?
    Posted by maxbialystock[/QUOTE]

    softhead said if we had lugo and hall we would be ten games ahead.he is JUST so smart.Tongue out.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from chuchos. Show chuchos's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    That's just it mr. multiple personalities, if this...if that...I said it.  Blah blah blah.
    I wish you could actually be pleased when the Sox do well, rather than relish in their failures.

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

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Drew is in the last year of his contract. The author punkishly piles on, ignroing that baseball has both offense and defense. Drew is one of the best Red Sox defensive OF'ers, who had a longer tenure, in many years. He also has a high OBP and was signed to the last phase of his career. He was a key starter on the 2007 title team.

    The fact is that the Red Sox have plenty of scatback lefty OF talent, so Ellsbury (closing down to final 2 years of arbitration) should not be given a giant contract for the last phase of his career. Translation, he needs to be traded before the end of next winter. j

    This team is built upon Lester, Buck and on and off a year Beckett, and AGon, Youk and Pedroia. 142M was foolishly locked into Crawford, so that means Ellsbury is quite expendable and a smart GM would sell on a short peak. The Red Sox need a solid young RH OF'er and need to recapture value in Kalish and/or Reddick on the scatback lefty profile. Crawford and the current makeup of the farm is most certainly a guarantee the career overrated Ellsbury is in his last phase of his Red Sox career. Years from now, he will be remembered as this "next Ted Williams/Ichiro bust", and will fade in the memory more than Dave Roberts. He will not be the indentity core players on any Red Sox championship team.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fancy-shamanski. Show fancy-shamanski's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Drew is as good at playing ball as softy is at analyzing ball... drew bats .230 w a whopping 10 rbi.  This guy wants attention just like law.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from playball01. Show playball01's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    In Response to Re: Tied for first--sort of:
    [QUOTE]You didn't see it because you are that dense. I saw it, and said, when the team was 0-6, that this team, if Lester and Buch and Beckett stay off long DL, would start blowing by the AL. That's right, I said it.
    Posted by SoxSoldRed[/QUOTE]

    If you said it then prove it!! Would we be in first place, or within percentage points of first, without the performances of Ellsbury, Lowrie, Wakefield and Crawford? An honest person knows the answer is a resounding NO ......AND That's right, I said it.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from playball01. Show playball01's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    CRICKETS!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Wrong! This team barometer is Lester, Beckett, Buch, AGon, Pedroia and Youk. When Buch returned to from and AGon turned it on and Youk started slugging is when the team turned North.

    But given someone who claimed AGon would be selling tickets in San Diego, this spring, who would be suprised how out to lunch you are.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    In Response to Re: Tied for first--sort of:
    [QUOTE]Wrong! This team barometer is Lester, Beckett, Buch, AGon, Pedroia and Youk. When Buch returned to from and AGon turned it on and Youk started slugging is when the team turned North. But given someone who claimed AGon would be selling tickets in San Diego, this spring, who would be suprised how out to lunch you are.
    Posted by SoxSoldRed[/QUOTE]
    Els's WAR is currently sitting at 1.5, Pedrioa's at 1.6, making them incredibly comperable to what they've given the Sox this season (Els has produced much better than Pedrioa, however Pedrioa plays a position with a much worse replacement, as the average second baseman isn't as good as the average CF). This makes them equal in importance to the team thus far in the season.

    The lack of Wake in the 'pen would've made us dip into the minor leagues for a starter, with Doubrant injured at the time, that's a crapshoot at best.

    The main point of this post is you cannot discredit Lowrie, Ellsbury, or Wakefield by bringing up impact of our other players, instead you need to discuss what we would have without them.

    Replacing Ellsbury would be incredibly difficult without getting a downgrade. In comparison to other centerfielders, he's 11th in WAR, 4th in OBP, and 6th in OPS.

    His fielding is almost impossible to accurately judge at the moment. Doubt was casted on his fielding by his UZR in 2009, however, UZR ratings are meant to be taken over large samples. More than one season, preferably 3. So after 2010 we where suppose to get a good tell of what kind of fielder Els is, however he was injured the entire season.

    Baseball isn't basketball. A team can't win with one or two stars leading the way. Gonzo and Youk needs Els, Lowrie, and Ortiz around them, otherwise this team will lose. Good hitters fail 70% of the time.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Where's my violin?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    This makes them equal in importance to the team thus far in the season.

    False. To submit such a claim is absurd.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    His fielding is almost impossible to accurately judge at the moment.

    False.

    And teams do win with a couple of star pitchers and position players who stay the same while other palyers come and go. Take away Ellsbury and the Red Sox simply change the lineup and get better CF defense and better hitting v. LHP and worse hitting v. RHP. Take away AGon and there is no answer. Take away  Pedroia and there is no answer. Take away Youk and there is no answer. Take away Papelbon and there is no answer. Take away Lester, Buch or Beckett and there is no answer.

    You don't have a clue what you are talking about. I've followed competitive sports for over 50 years, and studied it.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    You've done nothing to discredit such a statement whereas I've backed it up with statistic.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    If you've studied so hard you should be able to back your opinions with cold hard facts and stats. You cannot, you treat your word as fact, which makes me think you're probably a bored 15 year old sitting in his basement.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Over 50 years? Why, you ole' coot! Can't get skin from the games that way!!!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    You've backed your drivel with drivel. Which makes me know that you are board bully posting under another moniker. And I know which one that is. The same one who claims that 5 gold gloves mean nothing.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    Ahahahaha you think I'm moon! I don't know whether I'm flattered that I appear intelligent or embarassed for you that you can't even begin to counter my argument.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    WAR:

    WAR calculates the total number of wins that any player adds to his team over the course of a season by comparing the player's performance with that of a fictitious replacement

    Now, go back into your padded cell and get off the State computer system.

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

    Re: Tied for first--sort of

    You should be embarrassed that you can't spell or make drivel float.
     

Share