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.
|
Post by jmei on Jul 26, 2015 17:26:43 GMT -5
jmei, I see there is a new thread, culture of winning. You might considering moving the last three posts to that thread. They fit right in!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 26, 2015 17:43:34 GMT -5
Maybe we should send Sandoval down to Salem to help out and maybe send Craig to the DSL. We need to win more games.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Jul 26, 2015 17:50:12 GMT -5
I have a hard time buying the idea that the W-L records of our minor league affiliates, the vast majority of whose players will never see meaningful major league action much less have any kind of impact there, is some kind of barometer of the health of the organization. (Or am I misunderstanding the thesis of this thread?)
The Sea Dogs could lose every remaining game this season, but if Margot and Travis make great strides and continue their climb up the prospect charts I would consider Portland's season a success; yeah, I'd be a bit bummed that the rest of their squad is so terrible, but at the end of the day my interest is based on the impact those minor leaguers are eventually going to make on the big league club, and most of the ones down there at any given time stand little to no chance of ever doing that.
But that's just me.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,660
|
Post by gerry on Jul 26, 2015 18:01:54 GMT -5
Yes, but the concepts of "team" and "winning team" and winning attitutude are both imprtant and related. I am thinking of a certain player named James, and his tram, in the playoffs.
Further, if Margot and Travis actually believe it is their job to carry their team, this does NOT help their development as individuals, much less ayers in a team sport. I think this development pbilosophy, which seems to exist, also feeds the Boras attittude of "i am in it for me". Not wise in any sense for the Sox. The Orie way seems preferable
|
|
rjp313jr
Veteran
Posts: 14,012
Member is Online
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 26, 2015 18:07:59 GMT -5
Haven't the minor league teams dine very well in recent years especially Pawtucket? You can't just point to this years losing and say it's some culture when they've been very successful recently.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 26, 2015 18:08:45 GMT -5
Yes, but the concepts of "team" and "winning team" and winning attitutude are both imprtant and related. I am thinking of a certain player named James, and his tram, in the playoffs. Further, if Margot and Travis actually believe it is their job to carry their team, this does NOT help their development as individuals, much less ayers in a team sport. I think this development pbilosophy, which seems to exist, also feeds the Boras attittude of "i am in it for me". Not wise in any sense for the Sox. The Orie way seems preferable I would pretty much guarantee that coaches and managers tell prospects that their job is to improve, not to win at any cost. I mean should they start pushing for more innings from the young pitchers to win more? Maybe a few games with 3 days rest? Should they not call players up to the majors so the minor league teams win more? Maybe they shouldn't rest the good position player prospects? Should Owens only throw changeups which can't be hit and not develop his other pitchers so he can win more? This thread is pretty absurd to me. Winning games in the minors is one of the least important things on the list of things to work on. We should be glad that the Red Sox have so many good age-advanced prospects up and down the system. They could dominate more if they were held back and the teams would win more, but that's not the goal? I mean does anyone really think that Xander and Mookie don't care about winning because it wasn't stressed in the minors? C'mon. You don't get to the majors unless you have an insane desire to win and be the best. I mean just look at how hard Xander worked in the offseason to improve his defense and how Mookie has taken to the outfield.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,660
|
Post by gerry on Jul 26, 2015 18:20:43 GMT -5
It's not absurd to consider every aspect of becoming a good player, and one of these aspects is being a team player, whether a star or a journeyman. I receltly listened to a very good pitcher complain that the only reason he didn't win was because of errors or boehead plays by his team mates. He may be good but his future is dim unless he can reconnect with his team.
I don't believe the thread emphises putting mL teams ahead of the needs of their players. Rather, that the emphasis must always be on winning as a team, by playimg solidly as individuals and as a team to win every game. Specifically lime XB and Mookie and Pedey style. They are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 26, 2015 18:34:15 GMT -5
Strange premise for a discussion. The Red Sox' 5 best players by fWAR are Buchholz, Betts, Bogaerts, Holt, and Pedroia. Hard to find evidence of a system-wide culture of failure there. Meanwhile, after recently graduating 2 generational talents, the Sox were just named Keith Law's #1 farm system. That's borderline incredible.
The argument that the team is lousy at evaluating major league-level talent is a lot more persuasive - though that still has to contend with the fact that that looked like a huge strength in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 26, 2015 18:54:49 GMT -5
It's not absurd to consider every aspect of becoming a good player, and one of these aspects is being a team player, whether a star or a journeyman. I receltly listened to a very good pitcher complain that the only reason he didn't win was because of errors or boehead plays by his team mates. He may be good but his future is dim unless he can reconnect with his team. I'm not sure how "being a team player" help a baseball team win games. Baseball is fundamentally a game of one on one matchups. No amount of being a team player from Pedroia is going to make Hanley Ramirez a better defender in LF or improve Joe Kelly's command. I think you're conflating makeup or hustle with "being a team player." Yes, effort and baseball intelligence are important, but you don't have to be in a winning team environment to develop them.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 26, 2015 18:58:51 GMT -5
It's not absurd to consider every aspect of becoming a good player, and one of these aspects is being a team player, whether a star or a journeyman. I receltly listened to a very good pitcher complain that the only reason he didn't win was because of errors or boehead plays by his team mates. He may be good but his future is dim unless he can reconnect with his team. I don't believe the thread emphises putting mL teams ahead of the needs of their players. Rather, that the emphasis must always be on winning as a team, by playimg solidly as individuals and as a team to win every game. Specifically lime XB and Mookie and Pedey style. They are not mutually exclusive. There is so much turnover, I bet that a minor league player is lucky if he plays all season with 10 other guys. You can't force what you're talking about. Baseball is pretty much exclusively an individual sport except on defense on some plays. The main exception being catchers who have to develop a rapport with pitchers. Whether you're a good teammate comes down to the makeup you had before you started playing. Personalities don't change much other than maturity. The emphasis for the minor leagues is to develop major league players and that's it.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jul 26, 2015 19:42:08 GMT -5
… I know that many (most?) are going to say it's pop psychology ..,
No. Psychology is legit.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 27, 2015 7:59:37 GMT -5
"Losing is like a disease..."
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 27, 2015 8:00:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jul 27, 2015 8:05:07 GMT -5
I just think there is a huge fundamental flaw with the idea of "culture of winning" when no players came from said system. We might as well say that since the Nashua Pride and my old HS baseball team are doing extremely well, the Red Sox should be as well. They're just about as relevant to the Red Sox as the Yankees farm system is to the parent club.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 27, 2015 9:21:25 GMT -5
jmei, I see there is a new thread, culture of winning. You might considering moving the last three posts to that thread. They fit right in! LOL
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 27, 2015 9:59:07 GMT -5
It is true that baseball is not the kind of team sport that basketball, hockey and football are. It also is true that winning games is not the most important goal of the minor league system. But teaching players how to play winning baseball should be a major goal and that sometimes does involve playing as a team.
Players should learn how to win games and while it always involves individual performance, winning baseball means that players know how to perform under almost all circumstances of a game. Scoring runs and keeping the other team from scoring runs are the two keys to winning baseball.
Perhaps the most revealing stat about recent Red Sox teams is hitting with runs in scoring position. The Sox have really sucked at this for a while now. Teams win by scoring runs when the opportunities present themselves. The Red Sox are terrible at this. If the player leading off an inning hits a double, does the next hitter get him to third, or to home? If he gets to third, does the next hitter do something that allows him to score? What has to be done under these circumstances is different for the hitter than when he comes to back with the bases empty. How many times have we seen batters striking out - especially taking called third strikes - under these circumstances this year? How many times have we seen players try to hit homeruns when what was needed was just hitting the ball?
When I write about the importance of winning in the minor leagues I mean teaching players the right way to play the game, the way of winning baseball. If the talent is there, and these skills are learned, teams will win. Yes, teams full of great players also usually will win even if these skills are not applied, but very few teams are that loaded with talent, especially at the major league level. So to me the won-lost record is not a big deal, but is in an indicator, especially if there is a lot of talent on a team but not a winning record.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 27, 2015 10:05:24 GMT -5
Perhaps the most revealing stat about recent Red Sox teams is hitting with runs in scoring position. The Sox have really sucked at this for a while now. They are hitting .254/.314/.389 overall and .249/.319/.375 with runners in scoring position. The Red Sox don't have a problem hitting with runners in scoring position. They have a problem hitting. It's especially frustrating to watch when they have runners on, but it's not its own problem and there is no fix for it other than getting hitters who are better.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 27, 2015 10:08:43 GMT -5
It is true that baseball is not the kind of team sport that basketball, hockey and football are. It also is true that winning games is not the most important goal of the minor league system. But teaching players how to play winning baseball should be a major goal and that sometimes does involve playing as a team. Players should learn how to win games and while it always involves individual performance, winning baseball means that players know how to perform under almost all circumstances of a game. Scoring runs and keeping the other team from scoring runs are the two keys to winning baseball. Perhaps the most revealing stat about recent Red Sox teams is hitting with runs in scoring position. The Sox have really sucked at this for a while now. Teams win by scoring runs when the opportunities present themselves. The Red Sox are terrible at this. If the player leading off an inning hits a double, does the next hitter get him to third, or to home? If he gets to third, does the next hitter do something that allows him to score? What has to be done under these circumstances is different for the hitter than when he comes to back with the bases empty. How many times have we seen batters striking out - especially taking called third strikes - under these circumstances this year? How many times have we seen players try to hit homeruns when what was needed was just hitting the ball? When I write about the importance of winning in the minor leagues I mean teaching players the right way to play the game, the way of winning baseball. If the talent is there, and these skills are learned, teams will win. Yes, teams full of great players also usually will win even if these skills are not applied, but very few teams are that loaded with talent, especially at the major league level. So to me the won-lost record is not a big deal, but is in an indicator, especially if there is a lot of talent on a team but not a winning record. 14% of the Red Sox baserunners have scored this year (league average: 14%), last year a horrifically low 13% of their baserunners scored (league average: 14%), in 2013 they were amazing! 15% of their baserunners scored compared to the league average 14%! The real difference is in 2013 the Red Sox were first in the league in getting on base and lead the league in slugging, in 2014 they were about league average at getting on base and below average in slugging, this year slightly better but more of the same. Amazingly, in 2013 they had the best offense in baseball, in 2014 it was below average (but not one of the worst) and this year it is completely average.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 27, 2015 13:18:18 GMT -5
When I write about the importance of winning in the minor leagues I mean teaching players the right way to play the game, the way of winning baseball. If the talent is there, and these skills are learned, teams will win. Yes, teams full of great players also usually will win even if these skills are not applied, but very few teams are that loaded with talent, especially at the major league level. So to me the won-lost record is not a big deal, but is in an indicator, especially if there is a lot of talent on a team but not a winning record. Even if we assume that it is critically important to learn to play the game the right way, minor league affiliate won/loss record seems like a pretty poor proxy for that, no? You don't have to be a winning team to teach the right way to play the game.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 27, 2015 13:35:16 GMT -5
No you don't have to have a winning team to teach the right way to play but, as I wrote, it is an indicator. But I should have made it plainer that I don't think it is a definitive one.
As to RISP, I didn't check the Sox overall stats. I wrote that from memory of commentaries during games for some of the players. I haven't checked the individual stats but I suspect there is a considerable variance. I know Bogaerts is at about ,400 (hell, he's hit close to .400 for the several weeks) so there have to be some players way below average. When I get a chance I'll look them up and compare them. It just seemed to me that so many times at the end of a game I hear how horrible they have been with RISP.
And it is true that the Sox have a hitting problem. On average they are about average, but they have been enormously streaky. And, of course the team plan was to hit really well to offset the mediocre pitching.
Just look at this last losing streak. For ten games they didn't hit. Then last night they got 20 hits. So the average over those games will look a whole lot better, but the W-L doesn't. It is a good example of why looking beyond the averages is important.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jul 27, 2015 20:24:33 GMT -5
… Perhaps the most revealing stat about recent Red Sox teams is hitting with runs in scoring position ... If you're suggesting hitting with runners in scoring position is a skill, a learned skill, why doesn't the player then apply this skill of hitting with runners in scoring position to when there isn't runners in scoring position? Then they'd get themselves on base more often, thus creating more opportunities for their teammates to demonstrate their own new learned skill of hitting with runners in scoring position. Why hasn't this happened? Has no one thought of it yet, or is it maybe not a skill?
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Jul 29, 2015 22:50:43 GMT -5
I am glad to know that wins and losses don't mea that much in the minors because they have done a terrific job of the latter. It would be nice to see them win more than lose just 1 day.
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Jul 30, 2015 11:07:56 GMT -5
Minor league affiliates a robust 2-6 last night. success continues on. Portland had 11 hits, but only scored 2 runs because of runners left on base. they fit right in with the parent club. I guess the teaching works all through the system.
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Aug 3, 2015 20:52:42 GMT -5
I stand by original statement that "losing begets losing". Theo made it a main priority to get the minor league teams to start winning to change the culture of losing all the time that made its way throughout the system. some here that feel that is not the case are DEAD WRONG. For many years the Sox had losing teams in the minors and we all know that the major league teams were a joke back then. Theo put a stop to that pretty quick and all of a sudden we had a winning attitude that went up to the Sox. Now we are back to whatever. It doesn't matter if the minors are a losing bunch we only concentrate on certain players. This is supposed to be the number 1 minor league system, but you couldn't tell it by Pawtucket and Portland that are REALLY losing teams. Must be a real thrill to attend those games. Greenville is supposed to be stacked, but they are only a couple of games above 500. I notice in yesterdays box scores that 3 teams had an unbelevable amount of runners left in scoring position. Boston must have taught their minor leaguers very well. they are learning the new Red Sox way.I am the only one commenting here now because I guess most here want this thread to die. Bring back Theo's winning attitude.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 3, 2015 21:10:50 GMT -5
I stand by original statement that "losing begets losing". Theo made it a main priority to get the minor league teams to start winning to change the culture of losing all the time that made its way throughout the system. some here that feel that is not the case are DEAD WRONG. For many years the Sox had losing teams in the minors and we all know that the major league teams were a joke back then. Theo put a stop to that pretty quick and all of a sudden we had a winning attitude that went up to the Sox. Now we are back to whatever. It doesn't matter if the minors are a losing bunch we only concentrate on certain players. This is supposed to be the number 1 minor league system, but you couldn't tell it by Pawtucket and Portland that are REALLY losing teams. Must be a real thrill to attend those games. Greenville is supposed to be stacked, but they are only a couple of games above 500. I notice in yesterdays box scores that 3 teams had an unbelevable amount of runners left in scoring position. Boston must have taught their minor leaguers very well. they are learning the new Red Sox way.I am the only one commenting here now because I guess most here want this thread to die. Bring back Theo's winning attitude. If Nashua High School South has a winning season, does that mean the Red Sox are going to be a more powerful organization? If not, then why do you think the Yankees having a winning minor league season affects the Yankees when barely,if any, are a product of this "winning culture"? That's actually a factually incorrect statement about Theo. He made it a point to take a team with no farm system and barely any ML talent to flip as many pieces as he could and to tank his ML franchise for a few years while he accumulated kids with very high ceilings. If anything, he helped the culture of losing as he burned the parent club while he got the necessary pieces.
|
|
|