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.
7/27-7/30 Red Sox vs. White Sox Series Thread
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 28, 2015 21:27:04 GMT -5
Masterson has actually been pretty okay since moving to the pen - 3.75 ERA and a 13:2 K to BB ratio. I know everyone wants to play the kids, but with the pretense that he can be a starter out of the way he's a serviceable veteran long reliever on a team that kinda needs that.
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Jul 28, 2015 22:22:07 GMT -5
Mookie has concussion symptoms, probably is going to the 7-day DL. Guessing I'll get my wish to see JBJ up... I hate 2015.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on Jul 28, 2015 22:34:43 GMT -5
Well, hate to say it but it looks like you will be right....
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 28, 2015 22:45:27 GMT -5
Today was the most fun I've had watching the Red Sox all season. Too bad they had to subject Sox fans to actually having to watch the 2015 Red Sox play baseball.
I so enjoyed the Pedro Martinez number retiring ceremony. It was great to see him and hear him again, and it was great to see who came to the park. I was pleasantly surprised to see Yaz there. And to see Schilling, OC, Nixon, Tek, Wake, Tiant, Harper, Evans, Rice, Fisk, Eck, Merloni, Corsi, and of course, Big Papi was a wonderful treat.
The game...? Well, at least the Sox are working hard on getting that #2 pick in the draft. Keep it going. My God, what a brutal pitching staff the Red Sox have.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 28, 2015 22:56:47 GMT -5
Well, hate to say it but it looks like you will be right.... When I heard Chicago was holding off on deciding whether to sell or not until after this series you knew they thought they could win three or four. The White Sox are now only a half game behind Toronto, a game behind Tampa and a game and a half behind the Orioles rand 6.5 out of the wildcard as a whole. They also send Sale and Quintana out the next two and I agree can close that gap further. This season is painful to watch. At least the team is closing on Philly and only 6 back from the #1 pick.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 28, 2015 23:12:12 GMT -5
Well, hate to say it but it looks like you will be right.... Does it really matter at this point? Why be sad about it? Might as well go after the 2nd pick of the draft. There's nothing else to really play for anyways.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on Jul 28, 2015 23:44:45 GMT -5
Can anyone tell me who else has EARNED a spot in the rotation besides Eduardo? Who knows if Buchholz will be back, the Porcello contract is an absolute killer
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 28, 2015 23:54:14 GMT -5
Can anyone tell me who else has EARNED a spot in the rotation besides Eduardo? Who knows if Buchholz will be back, the Porcello contract is an absolute killer Well in some regard the most deserving after Rodriguez are Johnson and Owens who continue to throw well in Pawtucket and deserve a shot. I'd feel better next season if it was Cueto, Rodriguez, Buchholz, Owens, Porcello, Johnson as a top six then what we had going into this season. Thing is Miley still has a spot here so he's in there somewhere unless he gets moved. I just don't see a spot for Kelly and would go ahead and see how he performs in the bullpen this season. Next season stretch him out and let him compete for a rotation spot and if he can't win one convert him full time.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 29, 2015 1:49:17 GMT -5
I also don't like knucklers, who, in general I find almost unbearable to watch. If there was such a great chance of being R.A. Dickey or Tim Wakefield every team would be developing multiple knucklers or at the very least teaching the pitch to more of their starters, especially with the rash of arm injuries. But guys like Wakefield et al are extreme outliers, as well. Of course there isn't a great chance - it's very hard to consistently throw a good knuckleball. But Wright had already demonstrated the ability to do that for a significant stretch of time, i.e. most of 2014. Should we project Wright to be as good as Dickey as a 50% outcome? No, probably not. But he definitely has the upside to be as good as Dickey, which is why I found jmei's comment rather silly.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,700
|
Post by nomar on Jul 29, 2015 8:03:27 GMT -5
Whatever feel for the knuckle you think he had last year, he's lost this year. He is a LR guy, that's it.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 29, 2015 8:37:16 GMT -5
I also don't like knucklers, who, in general I find almost unbearable to watch. If there was such a great chance of being R.A. Dickey or Tim Wakefield every team would be developing multiple knucklers or at the very least teaching the pitch to more of their starters, especially with the rash of arm injuries. But guys like Wakefield et al are extreme outliers, as well. Of course there isn't a great chance - it's very hard to consistently throw a good knuckleball. But Wright had already demonstrated the ability to do that for a significant stretch of time, i.e. most of 2014. Should we project Wright to be as good as Dickey as a 50% outcome? No, probably not. But he definitely has the upside to be as good as Dickey, which is why I found jmei's comment rather silly. It's small samples all around but even as his BABIP has gone down this year, everything else has taken a turn for the meh. K % down significantly (13.7% vs. 25.6%), Ball % up nearly double (7.9% vs. 4.7%) Fly Ball % has more than doubled while Ground Ball % is down nearly 20%. And the beloved XFIP has more than doubled (2.31 to 4.94). With twice the innings as last year, Wright's 2014 starter promise looking more like small sample flash that's fizzled. That knuckler's either not dancing like it was or MLB batters are just seeing it better. Either way he's getting knocked around like a sparring partner off the street. Bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Jul 29, 2015 10:23:27 GMT -5
Betts just got hurt and gave Abreu a homer. Looked to be a great catch but he jumped and fell over the bullpen fence and dropped the ball. I was at the game last night, so I missed the commentary, but how long do you have to have the ball before it's a catch?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 29, 2015 10:38:21 GMT -5
Betts just got hurt and gave Abreu a homer. Looked to be a great catch but he jumped and fell over the bullpen fence and dropped the ball. I was at the game last night, so I missed the commentary, but how long do you have to have the ball before it's a catch? Here's the relevant rule: Unfortunately, based on the above, it seems like it's the right call. I suppose there is some ambiguity with respect to the word "immediately," but the ball came out pretty quickly, and at best it's still a gray area.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Jul 29, 2015 10:57:25 GMT -5
I was at the game last night, so I missed the commentary, but how long do you have to have the ball before it's a catch? Here's the relevant rule: Unfortunately, based on the above, it seems like it's the right call. I suppose there is some ambiguity with respect to the word "immediately," but the ball came out pretty quickly, and at best it's still a gray area. I dunno. I hope I'm not being a homer (pun!) but it seems to me there's a LOT of ambiguity there. He caught the ball. He took 2 short steps. Looked at the wall. Put out his left (glove) hand and then his right to brace himself on the wall as he leaped. He then spun in the air. (Looks like he was trying to land sitting on the wall as opposed to crashing into it.) His butt hit the top of the wall (still with control of the ball) and he lost his balance. As he went over backwards he held the ball (in his glove) up (as part of his attempt to balance). He then reached down with his right hand to brace himself on the tarp. He landed on his back behind the tarp with his glove hand under him. He still had the ball until, as part of the fall, his glove hand slid on the ground and hit the tarp. He had the ball for a long time. I read somewhere that the MLB comment on it was about his momentum. The word in the rule is "immediately". Momentum isn't in the rule. At best it seems like a very questionable call.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 29, 2015 11:02:27 GMT -5
Important to note that "immediately" refers to contact with the wall, not dropping the ball. In other words, only the contact with the wall has to be immediate, not the subsequent drop (the dropping of the ball only has to result from the contact with the wall). Hard to argue that he didn't contact the wall "immediately" after the catch (or that such contact with the wall didn't result in the drop).
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 29, 2015 11:07:06 GMT -5
Yeah, seems to me the phrasing "simultaneously or immediately following" suggests that "immediately following" is essentially modifying "simultaneously," so that an umpire can say that the ball came out basically at the same time as the fielder hits a wall, etc., without having to rely on any dubious philosophical judgments about the nature of time to make his judgment. Like dd says, Betts did a bunch of stuff with the ball in his glove before it popped out. I'd have called it a catch.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 29, 2015 12:01:40 GMT -5
Today was the most fun I've had watching the Red Sox all season. Too bad they had to subject Sox fans to actually having to watch the 2015 Red Sox play baseball. I so enjoyed the Pedro Martinez number retiring ceremony. It was great to see him and hear him again, and it was great to see who came to the park. I was pleasantly surprised to see Yaz there. And to see Schilling, OC, Nixon, Tek, Wake, Tiant, Harper, Evans, Rice, Fisk, Eck, Merloni, Corsi, and of course, Big Papi was a wonderful treat. The game...? Well, at least the Sox are working hard on getting that #2 pick in the draft. Keep it going. My God, what a brutal pitching staff the Red Sox have. Totally agree. That was so awesome that even the game didn't ruin it for me.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 29, 2015 12:02:49 GMT -5
Can anyone tell me who else has EARNED a spot in the rotation besides Eduardo? What is the alternative? Have no one pitch?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 29, 2015 12:06:57 GMT -5
Battle Royale style. A spot in the Red Sox rotation is EARNED every year. Featuring a rotation of Rodriguez, John Cena, Ronda Rousey, and Hacksaw Jim Duggan.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Jul 29, 2015 12:44:01 GMT -5
Important to note that "immediately" refers to contact with the wall, not dropping the ball. In other words, only the contact with the wall has to be immediate, not the subsequent drop (the dropping of the ball only has to result from the contact with the wall). Hard to argue that he didn't contact the wall "immediately" after the catch (or that such contact with the wall didn't result in the drop). That's a good point. If that call was good I'd argue they should rewrite the rule. Mookie had control of the ball in the field of play, was able to take steps and spin, etc. Another unfortunate aspect of it (besides Mookies concussion of course) is that it didn't appear to be a home run if he hadn't touched it. - Dick
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 29, 2015 12:56:36 GMT -5
Important to note that "immediately" refers to contact with the wall, not dropping the ball. In other words, only the contact with the wall has to be immediate, not the subsequent drop (the dropping of the ball only has to result from the contact with the wall). Hard to argue that he didn't contact the wall "immediately" after the catch (or that such contact with the wall didn't result in the drop). Could the argument be made that the wall didn't cause the ball to come out, but the ground did? What if a player catches the ball at the dugout, hits the rail and while still holding the ball falls down the stairs of the dugout and then the bench causes the ball to come out? The rule isn't nearly clear enough.
|
|
Gwell55
Veteran
Posts: 616
Member is Online
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jul 29, 2015 13:02:54 GMT -5
Important to note that "immediately" refers to contact with the wall, not dropping the ball. In other words, only the contact with the wall has to be immediate, not the subsequent drop (the dropping of the ball only has to result from the contact with the wall). Hard to argue that he didn't contact the wall "immediately" after the catch (or that such contact with the wall didn't result in the drop). Could the argument be made that the wall didn't cause the ball to come out, but the ground did? What if a player catches the ball at the dugout, hits the rail and while still holding the ball falls down the stairs of the dugout and then the bench causes the ball to come out? The rule isn't nearly clear enough. Here is another one... The right fielder goes to the wall reaches and catches the ball and then hits the wall continues to take two steps and then slips while flipping it to a fan... with this rule then that to has to be a home run... just saying this rule needs to be clearer and non-bias.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 29, 2015 13:06:27 GMT -5
No it wouldn't, because the action of flipping the ball is an intentional one.
|
|
|
Post by marrcus on Jul 29, 2015 13:24:23 GMT -5
Betts has done some stupid things this season. I'm sure the RS have not told him that's it's better to hit the padded wall than try to hurdle it and take your chance in the air. They should have. I hope he's back soon and never does this again.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 29, 2015 13:28:23 GMT -5
Important to note that "immediately" refers to contact with the wall, not dropping the ball. In other words, only the contact with the wall has to be immediate, not the subsequent drop (the dropping of the ball only has to result from the contact with the wall). Hard to argue that he didn't contact the wall "immediately" after the catch (or that such contact with the wall didn't result in the drop). Could the argument be made that the wall didn't cause the ball to come out, but the ground did? What if a player catches the ball at the dugout, hits the rail and while still holding the ball falls down the stairs of the dugout and then the bench causes the ball to come out? The rule isn't nearly clear enough. Eh, I think the causation piece of it is pretty clear (both your hypotheticals would be drops). There is some ambiguity with "immediately", which incandenza pointed out above, but I don't know that there's a way to write that rule without some ambiguity or judgment involved about the timing of how quickly a drop needs to follow a catch for it to be a drop.
|
|
|