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.
10/30 Red Sox vs. Cardinals World Series Game 6 Thread
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Oct 29, 2013 21:03:46 GMT -5
It's tomorrow night. Bottom of the 8th, Cards up by 4 runs. Sox load the bases, Ortiz up with 2 out. He's 2 for 3 on the night, with a HR for the only Sox run. Do you walk him? Nope, seems every time they do something like that Naps or who ever is next gets a huge hit and takes the lead for the sox!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 29, 2013 21:56:52 GMT -5
It's tomorrow night. Bottom of the 8th, Cards up by 4 runs. Sox load the bases, Ortiz up with 2 out. He's 2 for 3 on the night, with a HR for the only Sox run. Do you walk him? Is there any correct answer other than you bring in Joaquin Benoit? |
|
|
|
Post by station13 on Oct 29, 2013 22:07:43 GMT -5
Did anyone notice that after Nava got a solid double the other day when he was playing for Gomes, Farrell and Victorino seemed to be arguing vociferously and then the next game Victorino had a back ailment. It makes one wonder. Maybe it's just me but when Gomes is on the bench he seems to be hanging around Farrell all the time. I think he's the equivalent of a teachers pet. I wouldn't be surprised to see Nava traded this off season. It's really a shame because I'd rather see Gomes go. What did I just read? |
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 29, 2013 22:48:42 GMT -5
In the game 5 thread I listed what happened to all of the teams that have been in our position -- coming home with a 3-2 lead and needing to win just one game. Of 39 such clubs, 32 have won their series, including 18 of the last 20.
I decided to take a look at the seven clubs that couldn't seal the deal. I wondered if one of two things were true: they were the lesser regular-season club, or they hadn't significantly outscored their (eventually triumphant) opponents in the course of gaining their 3-2 edge. Because neither is true of the Sox. Although their Pyth W/L record is 1 game worse than the Cardinals (100 versus 101), they played in a league that was 2 wins tougher, so the evidence says they were the slightly better regular-season team. And they have outscored the Cards, 21-13.
1952 Dodgers, who were up 3-2 to the Yankess when their subway series (without an off day) switched back to Ebbbets field. They'd been outscored 19-16, and had one fewer Pyth win (95 to 94).
1958 Braves, who lost to the Yankees. They'd been clobbered, 98-92, in Pyth wins (and had only outscored the Yankees 20-19).
1968 Cardinals, losers to the Tigers. The lesser club by a similar margin, 103 to 96 Pyth wins. (They had outscored the Tigers, 25-17.)
1979 Orioles, beaten by the Pirates. Only had a 25-24 scoring advantage. They were the better Pyth team, though, 98 to 95.
1991 Pirates, who lost the NLCS to the Braves. They'd been outscored 14-12 (although they, too, had a Pyth edge, 95-92).
2003 Cubs, who infamously lost Game 6 (I refuse to blame it on you-know who) and then 7 to eventual WS champs the Marlins. They had outscored the Marlins 33-23, but the Marlins were clearly the better team. They had an 87 to 85 Pyth edge, but had played in a much tougher division, which had to be worth another 2 wins or so.
2004 Yankees. And they'd outscored us 40-27. Doesn't this break the pattern? No, because we had clobbered them in Pyth wins 96 to 89. (And of course we also know that our record in August and September was extraordinary.)
Now, this is not scientific, because I'm not looking (yet, at least) at all of the clubs who did seal the deal. It's possible that so many of those have had one or both of these caveats that these factors actually don't matter and aren't predictive at all.
But it is anecdotal. No club coming home with a 3-2 win that was both the better regular-season better club by Pyth wins, and had outscored their opponents by more than a run, has ever failed to seal the deal. Only three of these clubs had significantly outscored their opponents, and those three had Pyth win disadvantages of 7, 4 (estimated), and 7 wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by semperfisox on Oct 29, 2013 23:22:10 GMT -5
I'm so freaking anxious right now. I'll be at work for the game, but I'll be staring at my computer for updates every couple of seconds.
|
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 30, 2013 0:09:50 GMT -5
Did anyone notice that after Nava got a solid double the other day when he was playing for Gomes, Farrell and Victorino seemed to be arguing vociferously and then the next game Victorino had a back ailment. It makes one wonder. Maybe it's just me but when Gomes is on the bench he seems to be hanging around Farrell all the time. I think he's the equivalent of a teachers pet. I wouldn't be surprised to see Nava traded this off season. It's really a shame because I'd rather see Gomes go. What did I just read? When Nava finally was playing in the World Series in place of Gomes, he got a solid hit to LF late in the game. Directly after the hit the camera feed showed Victorino and Farrell either arguing or in some way having a heated discussion. It may well be that it was both of them celebrating but upon quick glance it didn't appear that way to me. The cutaway was only for a second or 2. I was just commenting that the very next game it was Victorino benched, not Gomes. And they said it was due to lower back stiffness. I'm not sure I believe that report. That's what I'm saying. It's probably nothing. I just noticed it happened. What were they talking about directly after Nava's hit. It didn't look celebratory. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 30, 2013 0:16:19 GMT -5
I When Nava finally was playing in the World Series in place of Gomes, he got a solid hit to LF late in the game. Directly after the hit the camera feed showed Victorino and Farrell either arguing or in some way having a heated discussion. It may well be that it was both of them celebrating but upon quick glance it didn't appear that way to me. The cutaway was only for a second or 2. I was just commenting that the very next game it was Victorino benched, not Gomes. And they said it was due to lower back stiffness. I'm not sure I believe that report. That's what I'm saying. It's probably nothing. I just noticed it happened. What were they talking about directly after Nava's hit. It didn't look celebratory. Victorino was in the lineup when it was announced and was a late scratch. If he were being punished, then they would have just not had him in the initial lineup. And Victorino scored on the single you're talking about. You realize that this theory of yours is entirely nonsensical, right? Please, think this stuff through before posting. They're trying to win a World Series and they're benching Victorino for two games because he got in an argument with Farrell during the game that the Boston press, of all things, completely missed, and it was because of "teacher's pet" Jonny Gomes, WHO FARRELL HAD PUT ON THE BENCH FOR THE VERY GAME YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? How on earth does that even work? Oh I get it, it was Jonny Gomes on the grassy knoll. Right. |
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Oct 30, 2013 1:14:17 GMT -5
I think the argument over Gomes is this: we need that one BIG swing against a pitcher like Wacha. A walk and a blast may be our best chance. Doubt we will string a lot of hits together tomorrow. These are my thoughts exactly. Would 42.5% of runs created via HR be a high percentage compared to whatever the mean is? I believe so, and that's what Boston's percentage is since the start of the ALCS (biased i know, i know). The fact of the matter is that this team, since that time, has struggled in what their offensive forte is...getting on base. They've been dependent on the long-ball and Gomes is a guy who can provide that. Honestly I've been in favor of Nava starting all postseason...until Game 4. Some are acting like nothing happened that game, but Jonny Gomes happened. HE WON US THAT GAME PEOPLE! I'd like to see Nava out there, but I am perfectly fine with Gomes starting tomorrow. Regardless, Go Sox. Optimism people, 1 more win! |
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 30, 2013 1:41:35 GMT -5
What doesn't make sense is Gomes playing against RH pitching over and over and over again. After his career number splits. After his fairly extensive post season numbers now ( a career .130 hitter in 50, count them, 50 post season AB). His rep was that he helped his teams get into the playoffs but he had a total of 7 AB over 2 seasons in playoff at bats before he joined the Redsox. The other teams he played on which made the PO didn't play him much at all in the playoffs and maybe there was a reason for that. Yet Farrell is playing Gomes over and over again against RH pitching no less over a 300 hitter? Who also is a better fielder?
Gomes is clearly Farrell's binky. There is something going on there besides baseball analysis. He is effectively the manager's buddy. The guy who sucks up to the manager. Isn't that obvious to everyone here with a brain at this point? Objectively, Jonny Gomes shouldn't be on the field over Nava against RH pitching. Definitely not 5-6 right handed pitchers in a row. Farrell's explanations just do not make sense.
For the point where Gomes is more likely to hit a HR and they think that might make the difference so they go with Gomes, I also considered that a few days ago but this season Nava had 12 HR and Gomes had 13. It's almost irrelevant. At this point the explanations Farrell is noting after consistent failure with the Gomes option are just excuses. Hunches. And he's doubling down on them until hopefully he gets lucky enough for them to justify his choices.
I saw a heated conversation of some sort but it could have been positive as I noted. It was only on the screen for a second or 2. I've managed hundreds of people in my lifetime. All is not what it appears sometimes when you manage people. Especially in the public eye like with a major league team. Problems often exist which are not revealed to the general public or even up the management chain quite often. You can have guys on your staff that you dislike intensely but for whatever reason you can't easily fire them and no one knows about it on the outside. Farrell may just not be impressed with Nava's intensity or his attitude or whatever personality quirk there is. Apparently a lot of other coaches in Nava's life weren't impressed much either but look at the results this year compared to Gomes. Nava should be playing at this time, against these pitchers.
These sorts of interpersonal things happen and it's probably happening some on the Redsox as well. It's not one big happy family every day with every player. I guarantee you there are things going on which never make it beyond the team itself. And sometimes guys are benched for reasons other than what are told to the press. And sometimes managers have players they show favoritism to, for unjustified reasons. It is actually very likely that guys are benched frequently for reasons which are completely unrelated to what is told to the press. And if the press finds out they know not to bring it up sometimes if they ever want access to the manager again.
|
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 30, 2013 1:45:30 GMT -5
Look how fat that pitch to Gomes was. Any of our players could have hit that pitch out. It was grooved bigtime and the way Gomes has been playing he won't even swing at anything other than an extremely fat pitch. He is in there looking for his pitch and against good competition like this he is almost never getting that pitch. We'd be better off drawing a walk and getting the starter out of the game, maybe having a guy on base once in a while when someone hits one out. Again, the difference this year in HR between Nava and Gomes was 1 HR.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Oct 30, 2013 2:09:29 GMT -5
Making too much out of nothing. The team is 1 WIN AWAY FROM A CHAMPIONSHIP while apparently going with an inferior match up. That fact in it of it self should quite people down at least for now.
1) Nobody thinks the Red Sox are one big happy family where they get together sing kumbaya and hold hands all day. 2) A vast majority agrees that Gomes is inferior to Nava against RHP but its not as huge a deal as you are making it to be. Fact is the man hit a 3-run shot in a tie game where the team looked unable to get anything going. I don't care if it was off a tee HE HIT A 3-RUN SHOT thats a fact. He also hit a lead off doable off of Max Scherzer in game 6 of the previous series, remember that inning when Victorino hit a HR with the Bases loaded? Yeah that inning.
Really I have been critical of Farrell all year long but at this moment in time is the wrong time for me to analyze what he is doing or not doing, he's 1 stinking win away from a World Series that not even the most optimist Red Sox fan really deep down thought it was possible. I guarantee you something Victorino wasn't bench. Anyone who thinks thats even possible has lost its mind
|
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Oct 30, 2013 6:32:10 GMT -5
Look how fat that pitch to Gomes was. Any of our players could have hit that pitch out. It was grooved bigtime and the way Gomes has been playing he won't even swing at anything other than an extremely fat pitch. He is in there looking for his pitch and against good competition like this he is almost never getting that pitch. We'd be better off drawing a walk and getting the starter out of the game, maybe having a guy on base once in a while when someone hits one out. Again, the difference this year in HR between Nava and Gomes was 1 HR. You do realize that Gomes had 200 fewer plate appearances right? This is all pretty ludicrous . As Chris pointed out, this is the World Series if Farrell was basing his starting line-up on friendship he'd be fired the moment the season ended. This Organization analyzes everything down to the smallest minutia, yet Cherington and Henry would allow Farrell to bench Victorino over a grudge? Come on. And I do think this Red Sox team IS one big happy bearded family. |
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 30, 2013 6:59:31 GMT -5
I really want this win tonight for John Lackey more than anyone else. In retrospect his treatment at the beginning of his time here was utterly unfair, and he deserves a special place in Red Sox history for the way he's fought back from it all.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Oct 30, 2013 8:23:30 GMT -5
Gomes is clearly Farrell's binky. There is something going on there besides baseball analysis. He is effectively the manager's buddy. The guy who sucks up to the manager. Isn't that obvious to everyone here with a brain at this point? Objectively, Jonny Gomes shouldn't be on the field over Nava against RH pitching. Definitely not 5-6 right handed pitchers in a row. Farrell's explanations just do not make sense. Repeating what you said over and over isn't really making an argument. Farrell said that he believes that Gomes matches up better against the type of stuff that Wacha has. You can agree or disagree with that, but it's an objective statement that can be quantified. If you'd like to argue against that, fine, but just repeating your frankly ridiculous theory of a Farrell/Victorino rift and some kind of Farrell/Gomes bff thing ... well, let's just say that it's a little against the mood of the moment, with the Red Sox one win away from winning a World Series title that NONE of us could really believe was possible back in March. |
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 30, 2013 8:26:29 GMT -5
Gomes is clearly Farrell's binky. There is something going on there besides baseball analysis. He is effectively the manager's buddy. The guy who sucks up to the manager. Isn't that obvious to everyone here with a brain at this point? I don't wanna pile on, but come ON dude, not the best time for a post this long and this randomly wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Oct 30, 2013 8:32:54 GMT -5
I think changing the way we've done things for the entire year for a "hunch" is ridiculously stupid.
But we are 1 game away so I'm just gonna roll with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Oct 30, 2013 8:37:30 GMT -5
And for the record, since we are going with Gomes, I'd rather him bat behind Napoli. That way the bottom 3 of the order aren't all auto outs.
Ells
Victorino
Pedroia
Ortiz
Napoli
Gomes
Xander
Drew
Ross
That is what I hope for tonight.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 30, 2013 8:46:53 GMT -5
And for the record, since we are going with Gomes, I'd rather him bat behind Napoli. That way the bottom 3 of the order aren't all auto outs. Ells Victorino Pedroia Ortiz Napoli Gomes Xander Drew Ross That is what I hope for tonight. Not sure 3 righties in a row vs Wacha makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 30, 2013 8:54:16 GMT -5
Any more posts re: Gomes conspiracy theory will be deleted.
|
|
|
|
Post by nebraska4sox on Oct 30, 2013 9:01:05 GMT -5
Does anyone else think that Allen Craig is not really hurt as bad as he and the cardinals make him out to be.
I have sprained my foot before and I can tell you it hurts really bad, there is no way if he actually had aggravated it again after game 3 that he could play on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 30, 2013 9:09:28 GMT -5
In the game 5 thread I listed what happened to all of the teams that have been in our position -- coming home with a 3-2 lead and needing to win just one game. Of 39 such clubs, 32 have won their series, including 18 of the last 20. I decided to take a look at the seven clubs that couldn't seal the deal. I wondered if one of two things were true: they were the lesser regular-season club, or they hadn't significantly outscored their (eventually triumphant) opponents in the course of gaining their 3-2 edge. Because neither is true of the Sox. Although their Pyth W/L record is 1 game worse than the Cardinals (100 versus 101), they played in a league that was 2 wins tougher, so the evidence says they were the slightly better regular-season team. And they have outscored the Cards, 21-13. 1952 Dodgers, who were up 3-2 to the Yankess when their subway series (without an off day) switched back to Ebbbets field. They'd been outscored 19-16, and had one fewer Pyth win (95 to 94). 1958 Braves, who lost to the Yankees. They'd been clobbered, 98-92, in Pyth wins (and had only outscored the Yankees 20-19). 1968 Cardinals, losers to the Tigers. The lesser club by a similar margin, 103 to 96 Pyth wins. (They had outscored the Tigers, 25-17.) 1979 Orioles, beaten by the Pirates. Only had a 25-24 scoring advantage. They were the better Pyth team, though, 98 to 95. 1991 Pirates, who lost the NLCS to the Braves. They'd been outscored 14-12 (although they, too, had a Pyth edge, 95-92). 2003 Cubs, who infamously lost Game 6 (I refuse to blame it on you-know who) and then 7 to eventual WS champs the Marlins. They had outscored the Marlins 33-23, but the Marlins were clearly the better team. They had an 87 to 85 Pyth edge, but had played in a much tougher division, which had to be worth another 2 wins or so. 2004 Yankees. And they'd outscored us 40-27. Doesn't this break the pattern? No, because we had clobbered them in Pyth wins 96 to 89. (And of course we also know that our record in August and September was extraordinary.) Now, this is not scientific, because I'm not looking (yet, at least) at all of the clubs who did seal the deal. It's possible that so many of those have had one or both of these caveats that these factors actually don't matter and aren't predictive at all. But it is anecdotal. No club coming home with a 3-2 win that was both the better regular-season better club by Pyth wins, and had outscored their opponents by more than a run, has ever failed to seal the deal. Only three of these clubs had significantly outscored their opponents, and those three had Pyth win disadvantages of 7, 4 (estimated), and 7 wins. Did any of those clubs have Peavy slated to start for Game 7? Or a Peavy-like pitcher (other than the Yankees in 04, which, btw, terrifies me on certain levels and why I just want no Game 7. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 30, 2013 9:09:58 GMT -5
Does anyone else think that Allen Craig is not really hurt as bad as he and the cardinals make him out to be. I have sprained my foot before and I can tell you it hurts really bad, there is no way if he actually had aggravated it again after game 3 that he could play on it. Toradol plus addrenaline. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 30, 2013 9:14:50 GMT -5
btw, I just read that Jonny Gomes also programmed the entire HeathCare.gov site.
It is what it is folks. Some of us may not like it but it is outside our circle of influence. Feel free to lose your mind every time he Ks or hits into a DP to end an inning. Hopefully he'll serve CrowBurgers to all of us doubters.
|
|
|
|
Post by nebraska4sox on Oct 30, 2013 9:28:30 GMT -5
Hopefully the sox can pull ahead early tonight. My heart has been palpitating and beating a mile a minute this entire series
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,833
|
Post by wcp3 on Oct 30, 2013 9:33:41 GMT -5
And for the record, since we are going with Gomes, I'd rather him bat behind Napoli. That way the bottom 3 of the order aren't all auto outs. Ells Victorino Pedroia Ortiz Napoli Gomes Xander Drew Ross That is what I hope for tonight. I'd rather have him hit behind Xander. Gomes' offensive value is tied exclusively to his ability to hit mistake pitches out of the part - if he does connect on one, I'd rather there be guys on base for it, and Xander hitting in front of him gives em the best chance for that to happen. (Plus, it would be nice to split up to K machines like Napoli and Gomes.) It won't happen, though, so I won't bother wasting any more bandwidth. |
|
|
