SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
10/20-10/21 Red Sox vs. Cardinals World Series Offday Thread
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 22, 2013 8:31:00 GMT -5
I think nervousness (let's call it makeup) probably does have a small effect on performance. However, a few caveats:
-Almost every MLB player has the requisite makeup to play in the playoffs. You don't reach the major leagues without the ability to succeed in high pressure situations.
-To the extent that makeup matters, it's mostly reflected in the statistics and is thus incorporated into the projection. A pitcher who is fearless and goes after hitters in the zone will have better strikeout and walk numbers than a nervous pitcher who nibbles.
-Nervousness or lack thereof matters much, much less than the underlying physical skills. Uehara mentioned that he was so nervous he thought he was going to throw up before he entered Game 6 of the ALCS. He still retired the side in 11 pitches, all strikes, with two Ks.
Even if these guys aren't robots, they behave like robots most of the time. Statistical projection gets you much, much father than trying to read a guy's face or whatever, to the point where I think doing the latter is pretty much a waste of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Oct 22, 2013 8:43:50 GMT -5
FWIW, St. Louis games are Saturday-Sunday-Monday. From the National Weather Service - where all the other services get their un-modified forecasts from: Day/Night
| Forecast | | Saturday | Mostly sunny, with a high near 60. | | Saturday Night | Mostly clear, with a low around 41. | | Sunday | Sunny, with a high near 56. | | Sunday Night | Partly cloudy, with a low around 41. | | Monday | Partly sunny, with a high near 60.
|
This is less accurate more than a few days out, but the super-computers that do the modelling are fast enough, now, that they're quite good even beyond five days. Not too many years ago, that was the limit beyond which they were no better than 50/50. So this doesn't look too bad. All those warm bodies in the stands might even add a degree or two to this. My sister used to date a meteorologist, maybe 5 years ago, and he told us that anything more than 3 days out is a complete crapshoot. |
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 22, 2013 8:53:46 GMT -5
I just can't see Farrell starting gomes every game this series. It is just too stupid to even consider.
Maybe Nava gets one or two of the STL games.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 9:15:32 GMT -5
I think nervousness (let's call it makeup) probably does have a small effect on performance. However, a few caveats: -Almost every MLB player has the requisite makeup to play in the playoffs. You don't reach the major leagues without the ability to succeed in high pressure situations. -To the extent that makeup matters, it's mostly reflected in the statistics and is thus incorporated into the projection. A pitcher who is fearless and goes after hitters in the zone will have better strikeout and walk numbers than a nervous pitcher who nibbles. -Nervousness or lack thereof matters much, much less than the underlying physical skills. Uehara mentioned that he was so nervous he thought he was going to throw up before he entered Game 6 of the ALCS. He still retired the side in 11 pitches, all strikes, with two Ks. Even if these guys aren't robots, they behave like robots most of the time. Statistical projection gets you much, much father than trying to read a guy's face or whatever, to the point where I think doing the latter is pretty much a waste of time. Thank you |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 9:38:22 GMT -5
I think nervousness (let's call it makeup) probably does have a small effect on performance. However, a few caveats: -Almost every MLB player has the requisite makeup to play in the playoffs. You don't reach the major leagues without the ability to succeed in high pressure situations. Sorry, I wasn't at a real computer with my last response. I appreciate the answer and I'm not trying to push, trying to get a full understanding of this line of thinking. I'm not as stubborn as I seem; I can and do change my ways of thinking. Based on your answer, is it fair to say that you don't think there are players who can "handle Boston" and those who can't? It seems like you think players will perform the same regardless of the environment they are in because if they are in the major leagues they have the requisite makeup to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Oct 22, 2013 10:27:05 GMT -5
I think in a perfect world Andrew Miller is taking (or keeping) Morales off the roster.... But that ain't happening. I'm not sure there is a good option between Morales, Britton and Thornton. At least Thornton seems to throw more strikes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 22, 2013 10:33:16 GMT -5
I would be all for an inflatable canopy to cover ball parks during inclement weather. They woulg keep rain out and even retain a bit of the heat. These would have to be inlated and floated into place above the lights when needed - a 10-20 min process - and be secured by composite cables. The system would in let in the escence of the weather (temp, winkd can get though but not to large effect) but keep out rain & snow. What a great idea, though I can't imagine a place like that ever being built...   Yup - just replace the steel girding with Kevlar bands to maintain shape and install two or three long curved rails on the very edges of the park that span the field and stands, and a motor to draw the fabric over the rails. It's inflated with helium or another lighter than air gas (which is recaptured upon deflation) and anchored all around by steel cables. The result: the parks do not need to be rebuilt or re-lit, and they retain their inherent locational challenges inside and out (i.e It's cold in the east and north in April and October), but there's never a rainout or snow-out unless winds exceed 30 mph, or whatever the safe limit is for design; this also enhances the value of the facility as it allows it to host other events beyond the season, as long as folks don't mind sitting in the cold (or in Tampa's case, the sticky humidity). |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 22, 2013 10:35:09 GMT -5
I think in just about every case, players perform as well in Boston as they would elsewhere (caveat: they often play tougher competition in Boston, but we can measure that effect). For instance, I think they should have 100% kept Melancon and mentioned several times at the time of the Hanrahan trade that the "he can't handle pressure" narrative was BS.
I do think sometimes players will press or push themselves too hard and end up slumping, similar to Crawford circa 2011 or Middlebrooks earlier in 2013. But I don't think that means that a player can't "handle Boston"-- I think it means they're having mechanical or plate discipline issues that can be fixed. The media atmosphere probably has something to do with it, but that same dynamic of players getting in a mental funk happens just as much in small markets (see, e.g., Saltalamacchia's struggles to throw the ball back to the pitcher in 2010).
EDIT: this is getting pretty far off-topic. If you want to discuss it further, feel free to start a thread in the Off-Topic Forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by godot on Oct 22, 2013 11:15:29 GMT -5
Does anyone have a god feel of just who the Cards are? On the surface they seem to have a real good hitting lineup, one that may be a tad aggressive and has "doubles power". They will do well as Fenway. Outfield defense looks suspect. Don't know about their infield, but their catcher is not one to run on. They have some studs for starters, and a power closer. Don't know about the middle relievers. They also seemed well managed and are smart.
Just have a feeling that the Sox starters have to be on the top of their game. If not, it could be a short series.
|
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Oct 22, 2013 11:17:23 GMT -5
What a great idea, though I can't imagine a place like that ever being built... Yup - just replace the steel girding with Kevlar bands to maintain shape and install two or three long curved rails on the very edges of the park that span the field and stands, and a motor to draw the fabric over the rails. It's inflated with helium or another lighter than air gas (which is recaptured upon deflation) and anchored all around by steel cables. The result: the parks do not need to be rebuilt or re-lit, and they retain their inherent locational challenges inside and out (i.e It's cold in the east and north in April and October), but there's never a rainout or snow-out unless winds exceed 30 mph, or whatever the safe limit is for design; this also enhances the value of the facility as it allows it to host other events beyond the season, as long as folks don't mind sitting in the cold (or in Tampa's case, the sticky humidity). I'd propose a similar soft-roof idea but would leave all the structure in place. You'd either have an empty system of girders, or a covered system. I don't think you can rely on helium to support a roof, and it would move around in the wind quite a lot. |
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 22, 2013 11:18:16 GMT -5
Thornton isn't going to be of any use. Bring another P/R, utility OF on the roster who is KNOWN for glovework and that is JBJ. I have been for 3 catchers all along. Lavarnway is the only one of the 3 who can hit lefties and still is. Also gives more flexibility to P/R earlier in game (innings 5/6) when one is on.
Team only needs 10 pitchers with 4SP. Long guys are going to be Doubront, Dempster with Workman capable of. Dempster was barely used. Thornton not at all vs Detroit. Take people that the team needs, position players as PH for pitchers, 3rd catchers, PR/OF defensive replacements and leave off the chaff.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 11:30:09 GMT -5
The Red Sox didn't have Thornton on the roster, which is a good reason he wasn't used. Now, I'm not necessarily against having only 10 arms and moving Doubront into the Morales role...
Any idea as to how Berry is with the glove?
With Napoli on the roster, I don't think a 3rd catcher is all that important so Lavarnway would have to be there due to his bat more than the fact he can catch. A 3rd catcher is an emergency situation that is very unlikely to come up, even if you pinch hit for a catcher.
|
|
|
|
Post by onbase on Oct 22, 2013 11:42:18 GMT -5
Looks like Gomes is going again Game 1 as Farrell just not didn't commit to it but said something to the effect that he didn't want to mess with the "momentum" that the Game 6 line-up created. So there's that. THIS is a problem. Using a totally unmeasurable, etherial concept such as "momentum maintenance" to justify a player's place in the lineup is Stone Ages absurd. But beyond that, the Cardinals/Sox series is NOT the Detroit/Sox series. We have absolutely NO reason to expect it to be. We've witnessed in the past how a team's fortunes can change on a time from series to series (heck, from game to game.) And the Cardinals/Sox series figures to be much different from the one just completed. I do not expect the Cardinals' starters to show anything like the dominance that the Tigers' starters did. But the Cardinals' bullpen must be respected. We may be able to score off it here and there, but we cannot expect to pile on runs like we did in the just-completed series. Also, the Cardinals' lineup looks much deeper to me than a Detroit lineup with Cabrera somewhat muted by injuries and Fielder slumping. Those issues for Detroit dragged them down with us in dealing with starters. We can't expect the same lack of production against our starters from the Cardinals lineup. Ergo, it seems to me that it is going to be important to try to build innings, turn the lineup over, and craft leads against the Cardinals' starters, rather than designing the lineup thinking about a single swing against a mistake as our only hope of scoring in the early-to-mid game. Clearly, this argues for Xander to start in place of Middlebrooks (or Drew, but I agree with those who think Drew's defense keeps him in the lineup -- and it is precisely a player like Drew who may find himself and be a tough out in a series like this.) But it equally argues for Nava vs. Gomes. This fixation with Gomes is not only illogically stubborn; it may cost the team valuable OBP depth in this series, where avoiding outs, especially against the starters, could well be the single most important key to success. I have felt sympathy for Nava in his lesser presence in the earlier series, after the year he crafted. But at this point my feelings morph from sympathy to annoyance. This could be sabotaging the team's chances in what all indications are will be an extremely tough matchup. I'm simply bewildered. I thought outs were precious. |
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 22, 2013 12:21:56 GMT -5
Looks like Gomes is going again Game 1 as Farrell just not didn't commit to it but said something to the effect that he didn't want to mess with the "momentum" that the Game 6 line-up created. So there's that. THIS is a problem. Using a totally unmeasurable, etherial concept such as "momentum maintenance" to justify a player's place in the lineup is Stone Ages absurd. But beyond that, the Cardinals/Sox series is NOT the Detroit/Sox series. We have absolutely NO reason to expect it to be. We've witnessed in the past how a team's fortunes can change on a time from series to series (heck, from game to game.) And the Cardinals/Sox series figures to be much different from the one just completed. I do not expect the Cardinals' starters to show anything like the dominance that the Tigers' starters did. But the Cardinals' bullpen must be respected. We may be able to score off it here and there, but we cannot expect to pile on runs like we did in the just-completed series. Also, the Cardinals' lineup looks much deeper to me than a Detroit lineup with Cabrera somewhat muted by injuries and Fielder slumping. Those issues for Detroit dragged them down with us in dealing with starters. We can't expect the same lack of production against our starters from the Cardinals lineup. Ergo, it seems to me that it is going to be important to try to build innings, turn the lineup over, and craft leads against the Cardinals' starters, rather than designing the lineup thinking about a single swing against a mistake as our only hope of scoring in the early-to-mid game. Clearly, this argues for Xander to start in place of Middlebrooks (or Drew, but I agree with those who think Drew's defense keeps him in the lineup -- and it is precisely a player like Drew who may find himself and be a tough out in a series like this.) But it equally argues for Nava vs. Gomes. This fixation with Gomes is not only illogically stubborn; it may cost the team valuable OBP depth in this series, where avoiding outs, especially against the starters, could well be the single most important key to success. I have felt sympathy for Nava in his lesser presence in the earlier series, after the year he crafted. But at this point my feelings morph from sympathy to annoyance. This could be sabotaging the team's chances in what all indications are will be an extremely tough matchup. I agree completely. Different opponent, different needs. This series I think will cry out for getting an early lead and holding on for the 7-8-9 innings quite a bit. Manufacturing runs will be critical, and Nava can playa huge role in that. Also agree that a 3rd catcher should be added and a pitcher should be dropped. Its obvious who is pitching the end of the game (Koji, Breslow, Tazawa), we have two longer relievers (Doubront, Dempster) for potential extra innings or short starts, and Workman to fill in between the two roles. I'd rather have Lavarnway. |
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Oct 22, 2013 12:22:38 GMT -5
This looks like a really good series, pretty well matched teams. I think the tendency I've noticed for national pundits to choose the Cards is based a little bit on the "most recent observation" problem, where the Sox offense is being underestimated because everyone just saw them have to scratch and claw for single hits against Detroit's starting staff.
Personally, I think the Sox are a bit better than the Cards. Wacha is a little bit of a wild card; he's obviously really, really good, but the Sox lineup is different than the ones he faced. I think the Tigers were better at every spot in the rotation and, as many have mentioned, way better at 3 and 4. The Sox have the advantage at the 3 and 4 slots, and can possibly at least hold their own at 1 and 2. Bullpen goes to the Cards by a bit, but the back three of the Sox have been terrific. The lineup edge goes to the Sox to me ... not that the Cards are bad, but the Sox still have an elite offense that wore out the Rays vaunted staff.
I'm still sort of reflecting on how great that last series against Detroit was ... those were some amazing pitching performances from the Tigers, but the Red Sox just battled to the series win.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 22, 2013 12:44:13 GMT -5
I think its a bit ridiculous to say the Cards have the advantage at starting pitching as some have been saying on ESPN. Yes, Wacha and Wainwright are good but Lackey and Peavy are easily better than Kelly and Lynn.
Some of their regular season stats are inflated playing in the NL Central.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 22, 2013 12:48:27 GMT -5
...My sister used to date a meteorologist, maybe 5 years ago, and he told us that anything more than 3 days out is a complete crapshoot. And that's the way it was... five years ago. Sandy, the storm that hit the East Coast was predicted ten days out by a climate group in England. They did that despite relying completely on the big-iron to crank through the modeling for what they were seeing develop. They couldn't rely on past records because there wasn't anything in the synoptic climatology - the history book of previous pressure and air flow patterns - to guide them. They came within 50 miles of the precise landfall for that superstorm. Computing power has brought a new day to climatology, as it has to many other aspects of life on the planet. |
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 22, 2013 12:58:48 GMT -5
Yup - just replace the steel girding with Kevlar bands to maintain shape and install two or three long curved rails on the very edges of the park that span the field and stands, and a motor to draw the fabric over the rails. It's inflated with helium or another lighter than air gas (which is recaptured upon deflation) and anchored all around by steel cables. The result: the parks do not need to be rebuilt or re-lit, and they retain their inherent locational challenges inside and out (i.e It's cold in the east and north in April and October), but there's never a rainout or snow-out unless winds exceed 30 mph, or whatever the safe limit is for design; this also enhances the value of the facility as it allows it to host other events beyond the season, as long as folks don't mind sitting in the cold (or in Tampa's case, the sticky humidity). I've spent a bit of time at Safeco, both with the roof extended and retracted. You'd be amazed at how much warmth 30,000 people (and all the vendor and service operations) can generate. The north side of the stadium is quite open even when the roof is on, as you can see in the first photo. I've been to games when it's raining and that umbrella is up. It's maybe 55 outside, and more like 68 inside. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 22, 2013 13:23:31 GMT -5
I think its a bit ridiculous to say the Cards have the advantage at starting pitching as some have been saying on ESPN. Yes, Wacha and Wainwright are good but Lackey and Peavy are easily better than Kelly and Lynn. Some of their regular season stats are inflated playing in the NL Central. Arguably better, maybe - but certainly not "easily better." I'd call Lynn and Peavy about equal right now. I'd probably take Lackey over Kelly given Lackey's history of success (disastrous 2011 aside), but it's up for debate. Wainwright is the best pitcher in the series, and Wacha has been outstanding lately. Given Buchholz's lack of durability since his return, the edge really has to go to the Cardinals in starting pitching. Fortunately these series aren't won with starting pitching alone. The Red Sox have a deeper lineup, stronger bench, and better baserunning. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 13:42:29 GMT -5
I think its a bit ridiculous to say the Cards have the advantage at starting pitching as some have been saying on ESPN. Yes, Wacha and Wainwright are good but Lackey and Peavy are easily better than Kelly and Lynn. Some of their regular season stats are inflated playing in the NL Central. You mean Buchholz and Peavy... Isn't Lackey starting game 2? If not, why isn't he... |
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 22, 2013 13:46:57 GMT -5
I think its a bit ridiculous to say the Cards have the advantage at starting pitching as some have been saying on ESPN. Yes, Wacha and Wainwright are good but Lackey and Peavy are easily better than Kelly and Lynn. Some of their regular season stats are inflated playing in the NL Central. Arguably better, maybe - but certainly not "easily better." I'd call Lynn and Peavy about equal right now. I'd probably take Lackey over Kelly given Lackey's history of success (disastrous 2011 aside), but it's up for debate. Wainwright is the best pitcher in the series, and Wacha has been outstanding lately. Given Buchholz's lack of durability since his return, the edge really has to go to the Cardinals in starting pitching. Fortunately these series aren't won with starting pitching alone. The Red Sox have a deeper lineup, stronger bench, and better baserunning. Lets see how those guys hold up against an AL East line up. I'd be surprised if we got outpitched by their rotation top to bottom. |
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 22, 2013 13:54:33 GMT -5
The Red Sox didn't have Thornton on the roster, which is a good reason he wasn't used. Now, I'm not necessarily against having only 10 arms and moving Doubront into the Morales role... Any idea as to how Berry is with the glove? With Napoli on the roster, I don't think a 3rd catcher is all that important so Lavarnway would have to be there due to his bat more than the fact he can catch. A 3rd catcher is an emergency situation that is very unlikely to come up, even if you pinch hit for a catcher. Was thinking he was and odd for 3 LH.. Makes sense now that he wasn't even on the PO roster so far. Thanks. Lavarnway think gives the option not only for another RH bat, but PR for a catcher who gets on, it allows Ross/Lava/Salty to be ran/hit for 2 times as early as the 5-6th inning at St Louis where the team will possibly be scratching for runs as it is. Yeah on Berry, he has to be on the roster as a PR alone. Not that familiar with his defense though as detroit wasn't one of the teams watched a lot of last year when he was with them. No real fondness of their main PBP guy Rod Allen, who is a terrible "homer" announcer and watched them probably about as many times as you did. Maybe a few times more when Oakland, Mariners.. O's played them or another team I wanted to catch. JBJ is the one I can't see being left off tho. NL park for 3 games and his defense is the best on the club. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 13:55:35 GMT -5
The Cardinals are a pretty suspect defensive team as well. I think the areas we can compare are:
Manager/coaching: draw
Defense: Red Sox
Starting Pitching: Cardinals - slight edge
Relief Pitching: Cardinals
Closer: Red Sox
Line-up: draw
Base running: Red Sox
Bench: Red Sox
I think people are underestimating the St Louis Lineup. With Craig and Allen both in the lineup; it's deep and powerful. They aren't the typical NL team that will come to an AL park and get screwed because the Sox have Ortiz at DH and they have some utility infielder there. They scored 783 runs playing most of their games with the pitcher hitting. That was 3rd in baseball, obviously the Red Sox were first, but again they play in the AL with the DH almost every game. Big difference. They also put the ball in play a lot. Tough outs up and down the lineup. The Sox may be more dangerous in a lot of spots, but certain guys like Napoli, Gomes, Salty and Drew go through stretches where they become K machines. I don't think St Louis lineup is better than Boston, but right now, I'm not convinced Boston's is better than theirs. I'll have to look a little more deeply into each of their players individual numbers because comparing team stats from the AL to NL is difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Oct 22, 2013 14:37:23 GMT -5
The Boston Offense is superior to St. Louis' the question is by how much. Craig has been out for a long time and has been unable to face MLB pitching. To expect him to not "miss a beat" is a little bit presumptuous.
|
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Oct 22, 2013 14:48:48 GMT -5
The Boston Offense is superior to St. Louis' the question is by how much. Craig has been out for a long time and has been unable to face MLB pitching. To expect him to not "miss a beat" is a little bit presumptuous. The Red Sox had the best wOBA (.347) and best wRC+ (115) in baseball. The Cardinals were 10th (0.322) and 7th (106), respectively. If you look at WAR, the Red Sox edge increases slightly based on superior baserunning and defense (36.6 vs. 23.3). Pitching-wise: SP FIP, Cardinals = 3.45, Red Sox = 3.96 RP FIP, Cardinals = 3.26, Red Sox = 3.59 |
|
|
