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.
Sale to BOS for Moncada, Kopech, Basabe, Diaz
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 25, 2016 23:26:09 GMT -5
1--- What is the relevance of "that they blew it?" How many times as Red Sox fans over our lifetime have we had to say that? So what does it mean? In our 3 championships, couldn't at least one of our opponents say the same thing too? For that matter nearly every year a team wins, almost every year, couldn't you say at least one other team had a chance "and they blew it too?" So when the Red Sox won their championships, it wasn't that they "really won" but the other teams "blew it?" What does "they blew it" really mean if every other team can say the same thing?
2-- You specifically highlight the position players, so now let's review the pitchers:
At the end of the year who was our number 3 starter? And how much better do you expect our number 3 pitcher to be this year vs last year? Doesn't that count?
How about our number 2 starter, Price. How much better can we expect this year's number 2 starter to be?
Last year the Red Sox had a historically bad 4/5 starters for the 1st month - to two months of the beginning of the season. Historically bad a poster on here had said and he provided data. Historically bad. DO we expect the Red Sox starters to be that bad this year? So going from "historically bad" to at least decent is pretty good, isn't it?
I get the feeling for those that thought we shouldn't have made this move getting Sale that they expect Wright to be real good and maybe even Erod. So if that were the case, won't these two starters seriously outshine last year's number 4 and number 5 starters?
As for the bullpen, according to Fangraphs Kimbrel was ranked 30th as a reliever. Can't expect much better from him this year?
As for 8th inning, Koji wasn't very good early in the season, and he missed quite a bit of a stretch. Isn't it probable that overall we are going to get improved production from the 8th inning over the course of a season and even the 7th inning especially if you put one of the 6 starters there for example as a 7th inning alternative?
Don't we remember how bad the bullpen was? You mean getting another guy (Sale) who could throw near 200 innings, with the acquisition of Thornburgh, and then put one starter in the bullpen, that we don't expect things to be better?
It's not just one point from above but the accumulation of points so a pitcher doesn't wear down. And if healthy, we're not supposed to assume that this staff will probably be much better prepared going into the 2017 playoffs?
The point I was trying to make was that their offense cost them dearly in the playoffs by failing to hit when it mattered (and getting Sale doesn't necessarily help that) and that Porcello pitched every bit as well as Sale did and he got knocked around anyways - the point being that having a guy that good guarantees very little. That's what I'm trying to say. I'm not trying to say that having Sale doesn't help, because it does. As far as the other points go I do remember Buchholz being awful and E-Rod being injured and awful, Price struggling early on before settling in and Porcello and Wright pitching well. The rotation should be better than historically awful even without Sale. As for the pen I like Thornburg and think he'll help a lot. It's hard for me to be super excited about Kimbrel as I watched his control disintegrate. He had way too many meltdowns for my tastes and too many Maalox moments, way too many 3-2 counts. I don't know that he'll be better next year. Hope he is. Being against the trade doesn't mean that I can't appreciate what Sale can offer the Red Sox in the regular season and what he could potentially mean in the post-season. I can appreciate it. I hope he pitches as well as he has and if he continues down a Cooperstown path I hope the Red Sox can re-sign him and he pitches well. That would make it easier to take if Moncada and Kopech and even Basabe develop into good players during the 2020s because if they do and Sale is long gone by then and the Sox didn't win the Series at all and the Sox are having problems getting good young cheap players to replace some of the departing players, that could be very problematic. I know you're heavily in favor of the trade and I get it, but can you see the flipside of it and why it might not feel like a slamdunk? Your post I replied to focused on the hitting primarily and you make comments like Porcello was like Sale—yes he was but in fact Porcello was God-awful in the post season. So you just continue to focus on the hitting. But Porcello had a 10.38 ERA in the post season. When your “ACE” has a 10.38 ERA in the psot season and you are playing away from home, you’re not going to win very often. Having a career 4.41 ERA leading up to this playoff series and being as bad as he is in the post season, I can ask similar to you or anyone – it looks pretty much like a slam dunk that we would have had no shot to win in the post season without Sale, right? Porcello as an ACE in the post season? What makes anyone think he can be an ACE post season shutdown pitcher? Then when you factor in Price’s post season performance (he's not an ACE post season pitcher, is he?). His ERA in the series was 13.5 in the series. And for his career he has 5.55 ERA. Before this series is 5.4. Yet all you spoke of why the Sox lost was hitting?
With this awful pitching from our 1 and 2 “ACE” starters, we can't win in the post season, can we? My point is, with the superior reg. season pitching we have, we can now not only win the division but maybe play in the post season at Fenway. If we play at Fenway – we play better usually – and hit better. Secondly, we picked up one of the best pitchers in all of baseball. That should count for a lot. And at times I think it gets a bit glossed over for hitting or for reg. season WAR. This can possibly set Price or Porcello better knowing they "ain't the ACE." I just look at it- "if oyu want to win, you just can't sit back and hope experienced career performers will magically change" without some other significant move.
Anyhow, look at your post in which I replied to you. It was mostly about the hitting. That why I made the following comment to you previously: 2-- You specifically highlight the position players, so now let's review the pitchers:
My post to you in category #2 highlighted the pitching issues similar to your highlighting the hitting issues. It was just a counter to your focus on hitting.
And I am not “all in” on DD. First off, I think it mistake he traded Clay. Secondly, I thought after 2015, the farm system was overrated and therefore I would have preferred a “slow build.” But marching orders are “to win now.” And DD had to address that pitching was a long ways away from being “a threat to contend.” We got the minor league bats but years away from anything good coming from the minor league pitching. So how else can you get it if you want to contend? You either overpay in FA and /or you have to trade your minor league players and give up more projected WAR to get players you need. And young ml pitchers don’t necessarily shine in their 1st or maybe their 2nd year. So to build up the staff we have made many trades to acquire pitching.
Sale gives us a chance to rearrange the staff in which guys like Pomz and ERod don’t have to pitch as much. Which I think a positive for post season. Also, maybe less pressure "being the man" for Price and Porcello will help them in the post season. Also so does our bullpen get some rest with another 200 inning pitcher. And I don’t like Kimbrel much either – but you- Wow. You are expecting he’ll be ranked around 25-30 again? I'm expecting him to be much better.
I’m just curious- you’ve seen how bullpens dominate in the post season and you’ve seen how Porcello and Price have performed in the post season and you seem very negative with Kimbrel. Then how can you have expected the Red Sox to pitch well enough to be a contender unless we got Sale?
|
|
|
Post by ponch73 on Dec 26, 2016 1:56:11 GMT -5
Your post I replied to focused on the hitting primarily and you make comments like Porcello was like Sale—yes he was but in fact Porcello was God-awful in the post season. So you just continue to focus on the hitting. But Porcello had a 10.38 ERA in the post season. When your “ACE” has a 10.38 ERA in the psot season and you are playing away from home, you’re not going to win very often. Having a career 4.41 ERA leading up to this playoff series and being as bad as he is in the post season, I can ask similar to you or anyone – it looks pretty much like a slam dunk that we would have had no shot to win in the post season without Sale, right? Porcello as an ACE in the post season? What makes anyone think he can be an ACE post season shutdown pitcher? What I find most frustrating about posts like this is that your assertions are made without substantiating evidence or context, and the logic that gets you from point A to point B is careless. Apparently, 20.2 IP is a large enough sample size and ERA is the appropriate stat for you to determine that Porcello can never become a shutdown pitcher in the postseason. What are you going to do with Sale if, heaven forbid, he puts up mediocre stat lines like that in his first 20 postseason innings? You still have in your mind the greatness of Josh Beckett in the postseason. Beckett was otherworldy in 2007. But do you remember how mediocre he was in the 2008 and 2009 postseasons? Josh Beckett (2008 and 2009): 21 IP. 18 ER. 7.71 ERA. Do you remember what Curt Schilling's stats were in the 2004 ALCS? How did we manage to win that series given that Schilling's stats were nowhere near that of a postseason shutdown pitcher. Curt Schilling (2004 ALCS): 10 IP. 7 ER. 6.30 ERA. Following the logic of your argument, the Cubs should have traded their top prospects last December to acquire a shutdown postseason pitcher. Because, Jon Lester's prior 20 IP were pretty bad too. Lester 2014 and 2015 postseason: 21.1 IP, 13 ER. 5.48 ERA. Your response might be that Lester had prior postseason success, so we should have expected mean reversion. Have there been any other pitchers who started off with mediocre 20 IP in the postseason, and then became good? Justin Verlander. First 4 postseason starts (2006): 21.2 IP, 17 ER. 7.06 ERA. Justin Verlander. Next 12 postseason starts (2011-2014): 76.2 IP, 20 ER. 2.35 ERA. So, Verlander from 2011-2014 was clearly a postseason shutdown pitcher. How many World Series rings has he delivered to Detroit? Should we have tried to trade for him instead of Sale? What happens if Sale performs just like Verlander 2011-2014 and the Sox don't win a title? Corey Kluber just put up 34.1 postseason IP of 1.83 ERA. You'll notice that he still didn't get a World Series ring. So, despite your mantra of obtaining a postseason stopper (despite the prohibitive cost), the facts remain: 1. Judging a pitcher on 20 postseason IP is foolish. 2. Even great (perhaps superlative) pitchers can put up poor postseason stats in small sample sizes 3. Great postseason starting pitching doesn't guarantee postseason victory in the absence of timely hitting and effective relief pitching 4. It is possible to win in the postseason with mediocre starting pitching if your hitting and relief pitching is up to the task
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 26, 2016 2:19:30 GMT -5
Ponch73 Do you really expect Porcello to pitch like he did last year going forward? I think he will be good, but I don't see an ACE. I hope I'm wrong but I have this feeling that we might just have watched a career year by Porcello. There is a saying that pitching and D wins Championships. That sure seems to be what DD is going for. Look at last year, we were a great hitting team but good pitchers could shut us down.
|
|
|
Post by ponch73 on Dec 26, 2016 4:26:42 GMT -5
Ponch73 Do you really expect Porcello to pitch like he did last year going forward? I think he will be good, but I don't see an ACE. I hope I'm wrong but I have this feeling that we might just have watched a career year by Porcello. There is a saying that pitching and D wins Championships. That sure seems to be what DD is going for. Look at last year, we were a great hitting team but good pitchers could shut us down. Honesty, I would personally bet on reversion to his career stat line for Porcello. But I'm neither arrogant nor smart enough to suggest that I can definitively predict what kind of playoff pitcher he is going to be after a 20 IP sample. Similarly, we can't really say for sure what kind of postseason pitcher Sale is going to be. Even a bona fide stud like Kershaw (4.55 ERA / 10.7 K per 9 / 2.7 BB per 9 in 89 IP) hasn't had nearly the same success in the postseason as he has in the regular season (2.37 ERA / 9.8 K per 9 / 2.4 BB per 9 in 1,760 IP). The postseason can be a little bit of a crapshoot. I'd personally like to build a team that can win in as many ways as possible (batting, slugging, patience, speed, starting pitching, relief). This begs the question what would I have done in lieu of acquiring Sale: A. Build a bullpen that could shorten playoff games and take pressure off Porcello and Price. B. Expect positive regression from Price and Kimbrel. C. Expect negative regression from Leon, Pedroia and Hanley. 1. Non-tender Abad 2. Make the Thornburg trade 3. Sign Koji to a 1-year deal 4. Make the Buchholz trade 5. Sign Encarnacion or trade for an impact bat 6. Call up Kopech to serve in a K-Rod type role after a successful season in AA 7. Stay patient with Moncada and Devers
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 26, 2016 6:23:30 GMT -5
I agree the new CBA is going to push down salaries. I just don't get how the luxury Tax isn't tied to revenue like in NBA and NFL. The luxury tax is going up much slower than revenue, which means owners are going to pocket more money. Just look at EE. You took out Yankees and Red Sox from bidding due to luxury tax and he gets way less than anyone thought. Both teams could have used him, but stayed away due to luxury tax. The Dodgers resigned there own players and didn't dive into free agent market. If you take the big spending teams out of free agent market your going to drive down salaries. If the new CBA is going to suppress salaries isn't that good for the Sox future to keep the core together?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 26, 2016 9:10:55 GMT -5
Soxjim,
Didn't want to requote our huge posts.
To go over some of the points we differ on:
I don't think the farm system was overrated after 2015. I think the farm system was as strong as the Red Sox have had in a very, very long time and I've been watching the Red Sox since 1980.
I'll agree that having Sale is helpful to the Red Sox' chances of winning the World Series, and yes he could be a difference maker. Our other agreement is that WAR isn't necessarily the best way to judge deals and it certainly doesn't factor in what a player can do during the post-season that adds value.
Where I disagree is your assessment that Porcello and Price will ALWAYS be a failure in the post-season. As ponch points out it's such a small sample size that anything can happen. Even the great David Ortiz can have a crappy series like he did against Cleveland. Even the dreadful Alex Rodriguez can have a great post-season like he did in 2009 or Bonds did in 2002. I have no idea how Porcello would pitch with more post-season exposure and I would think at some point the law of averages would catch up with David Price at some point (man how I wish he hadn't actually been successful in getting those last key four outs in Game 7 of the 2008 ALCS!)
I focused on the hitting because the hitting failed (or at least timely hitting) the Red Sox every bit as much if not more than their overall pitching did. They lost two of the three games by 5-4 and 4-3 and were shut out in the other game. The point is we imagine dominating Madison Bumgarner starters carrying their teams to Championships and it could happen with Sale, but it usually takes more than a dominating starter, which we don't even know if Sale would necessarily do - I mean out of nowhere for a short stretch a struggling Derek Lowe suddenly became unhittable in 2004.
That said I acknowledge that having Sale over the next three seasons do improve the Sox' chance of winning it all and he makes them a better team than if he weren't there, but there was a steep cost (as there should be) to acquiring him and it's very possible that bites the Sox in the butt hard at some point next decade - and there's a chance that Sale is long gone and those players the Sox gave up could be players the Sox badly needed but won't have and that hurts the team down the road as they pay the price for the deal (without even winning the Series in this window) - is that something you can see happening?
I think you kind of answer your own question in regards to Sale. Is it that difficult to imagine a scenario where Sales pitches his heart out, leaves with a 2-1 lead after 7 and then Kimbrel melts down in the 9th and holds a walk-a-thon?
Look, I'm not saying Kimbrel will be a total disaster. He could bounce back and be dominating and I hope he is - I hope he's the guy I thought they were trading for when they gave up Margot, Asuaje, Guerra, and Allen. I had no problem (I was among the few for the trade) with the trade if he was the guy he had been, but I was alarmed at his total lack of control, how badly he was missing with his pitches.
I see him as a guy on the edge. He's still pretty unhittable for now, but if that regresses at all and the control doesn't improve he might lose his closer job. Conversely if he maintains his unhittability and his control is a lot more reasonable (say 3.5 BB/9 instead of 5 BB/9), then you have a dominating all-star ability closer again. He could go either way. The fact that I feel like it's flip a coin doesn't make me feel better. I had a lot of certainty about him at the time of the deal. Right now I don't have any certainty about him and see him as a wild (no pun intended)card and if it goes the wrong way I can see a bunch of aggonizing blown saves and an opportunity for Thornburg or even Kelly or a July 31st deal.
Even with bullpen issues the Sox can still go far - I'm sure you remember the 03 squad who couldn't hold leads to save their lives, yet by the post-season everybody was wishing they would go to the pen. The point is the Sox can still succeed even if Kimbrel blows up, but obviously if it goes the other way that makes the Sox even more dangerous.
The last disagreement would be on the Buchholz deal. Paying $13.5 for a #7 starter insurance policy makes very little sense. They obviously care about staying under the luxury tax threshold or they would have gotten Encarnacion to (mostly) make up the huge loss of David Ortiz. Dumping Buchholz ensures that they have the wiggle room to get a bat or whatever they need come July 31st and it allows the Red Sox to over the luxury tax threshold the next few seasons without paying as high a tax at a time where the free agent market is a lot better then than it is now. Keeping Buchholz around because he might be needed for 10 starts makes very little sense, especially considering how up and down (and injury prone) he is. I wish they were able to get more for him, but I get the need to make sure they're under that limit and not stuck with that contract.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 9:33:01 GMT -5
Your post I replied to focused on the hitting primarily and you make comments like Porcello was like Sale—yes he was but in fact Porcello was God-awful in the post season. So you just continue to focus on the hitting. But Porcello had a 10.38 ERA in the post season. When your “ACE” has a 10.38 ERA in the psot season and you are playing away from home, you’re not going to win very often. Having a career 4.41 ERA leading up to this playoff series and being as bad as he is in the post season, I can ask similar to you or anyone – it looks pretty much like a slam dunk that we would have had no shot to win in the post season without Sale, right? Porcello as an ACE in the post season? What makes anyone think he can be an ACE post season shutdown pitcher? What I find most frustrating about posts like this is that your assertions are made without substantiating evidence or context, and the logic that gets you from point A to point B is careless. Apparently, 20.2 IP is a large enough sample size and ERA is the appropriate stat for you to determine that Porcello can never become a shutdown pitcher in the postseason. What are you going to do with Sale if, heaven forbid, he puts up mediocre stat lines like that in his first 20 postseason innings? You still have in your mind the greatness of Josh Beckett in the postseason. Beckett was otherworldy in 2007. But do you remember how mediocre he was in the 2008 and 2009 postseasons? Josh Beckett (2008 and 2009): 21 IP. 18 ER. 7.71 ERA. Do you remember what Curt Schilling's stats were in the 2004 ALCS? How did we manage to win that series given that Schilling's stats were nowhere near that of a postseason shutdown pitcher. Curt Schilling (2004 ALCS): 10 IP. 7 ER. 6.30 ERA. Following the logic of your argument, the Cubs should have traded their top prospects last December to acquire a shutdown postseason pitcher. Because, Jon Lester's prior 20 IP were pretty bad too. Lester 2014 and 2015 postseason: 21.1 IP, 13 ER. 5.48 ERA. Your response might be that Lester had prior postseason success, so we should have expected mean reversion. Have there been any other pitchers who started off with mediocre 20 IP in the postseason, and then became good? Justin Verlander. First 4 postseason starts (2006): 21.2 IP, 17 ER. 7.06 ERA. Justin Verlander. Next 12 postseason starts (2011-2014): 76.2 IP, 20 ER. 2.35 ERA. So, Verlander from 2011-2014 was clearly a postseason shutdown pitcher. How many World Series rings has he delivered to Detroit? Should we have tried to trade for him instead of Sale? What happens if Sale performs just like Verlander 2011-2014 and the Sox don't win a title? Corey Kluber just put up 34.1 postseason IP of 1.83 ERA. You'll notice that he still didn't get a World Series ring. So, despite your mantra of obtaining a postseason stopper (despite the prohibitive cost), the facts remain: 1. Judging a pitcher on 20 postseason IP is foolish. 2. Even great (perhaps superlative) pitchers can put up poor postseason stats in small sample sizes 3. Great postseason starting pitching doesn't guarantee postseason victory in the absence of timely hitting and effective relief pitching 4. It is possible to win in the postseason with mediocre starting pitching if your hitting and relief pitching is up to the task What I find awful about your post is not only it disregards stats just because it doesn’t fit your argument but the comedy that you are bashing Schilling – a career 2.23 era and with his bloody sock and all in 2004. You justify bashing schilling for his 2004 ALCS – but don’t understand he had the injury and don’t consider his career numbers? And when I say “post season shutdown” you disregard the context of my post by focusing just on one Schilling’s one series when his ankle was messed up? If you had confidence in Porcello after his 9 post season appearances – and you have complete confidence in him – I think that is for those Red Sox fans that only wish to wear their Red Sox goggles when evaluating a player. Nine appearances of pitching lousy baseball and we are desperately trying to win a championship by the moves DD is making and you want to bury your head in the sand even though stats show you different? What if you believe with your eyes and in the stats and you don’t make a move for a better post season starter? How many season’s would you have otherwise wasted by being so stubborn? I think you must question whether he is an ACE in the post season. It’s not like you get ten years to be the ACE and have chance after chance. To bury your head in the sand after nine post season appearances is just wrong. Now we move him to the 2nd best pitcher or maybe the 3rd and maybe that will change the fortunes. If he has a super season again- are you confident he is going to be a stopper?
In regards to your last post, that has NEVER been the case for the Red Sox winning a championship since 2004. They have had the dominant pitcher. The person I was replying to also thinks worse of Kimbrel than even I do. Therefore if you have mediocre starting pitching and you don’t have a very good closer – you aren’t winning. As for Kluber – I can’t believe what you’re trying to say here. He had a 1.83 ERA. Are you suggesting a pitcher that is a 1.83 while pitching in 6 games during the same season wasn’t a stopper? You mean because he had one bad start in those 6 games even though he pitched with a bit of injury that he was a failure? I hope you aren’t suggesting that.
You are the one that brought up the 1.83 ERA so I’ll end it with this. In Game 1 – if both Porcello and Kluber are healthy and they have had similar ERA’s during the season, who would you take? I’m taking Kluber. Do I know for certain? No. But the Red Sox are “telling us” that they can’t wait and just “hope” Porcello will show something in the post season as a number 1 like maybe some of you do? If they’re wrong they can get fired. You don’t have an unlimited number of opportunities to win championships. Your continued theory imo that the Red Sox don’t need great starting pitching is and imo always will be flawed. Bottomline is- are you confident in Porcello and Price as 1 and 2 starters for the post season? I am not. I think you have to be wearing Red Sox goggles if you are. Sure they can come though- but I wouldn't bet on it. But I would have bet on a healthy post season Schilling. And now I have hope with Sale that I didn't otherwise have with Price and Porcello.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 26, 2016 10:15:40 GMT -5
Multiple studies have shown that regular-season performance is far more predictive of future postseason performance than past postseason performance. It's nice that you think 20.1 innings (most which came 3+ years ago, when he was a very different pitcher) is a large enough sample to draw conclusions from, but it just isn't.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 10:47:03 GMT -5
Multiple studies have shown that regular-season performance is far more predictive of future postseason performance than past postseason performance. It's nice that you think 20.1 innings (most which came 3+ years ago, when he was a very different pitcher) is a large enough sample to draw conclusions from, but it just isn't. Do you have more confidence in Kluber or Porcello?
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 10:49:54 GMT -5
Redsox— The reason why I thought the farm was overrated was that we didn’t have the pitching to balance the hitting. If you notice DD has primarily done nothing but make pitching moves. IMO it’s because we needed pitching. Our hitting attack was historically great last year, right? Yet why did Farrell feel a need to play 7 of his position players 145 games or more? Because we often needed the hitting when our 4 and 5 starters were historically awful early, then when our bullpen collapsed (it did COLLAPSE for a time), and then when Wright got hurt we relied on minor league pitching which was awful, then Pomeranz sort of collapsed and Price was inconsistent all year. We didn’t have the ml pitching to offset this and it would have been a few years before a stud came through. Though Erod – still potentially a good trade.
And I don’t think Porcello and Price will ALWAYS struggle. I just think it is a good idea to mix it up with them. That’s why I have previously said “have them as the 2 and 3.” In other words, what I’m saying is if they are the number 1 starter, I don’t have the confidence in them as a number 1. The number 1 starter can go as many as three games. I think Bum went 4.
And when you say Sale can leave – sure he can. But I can’t see every quality pitcher the Sox have leaving either. I can’t believe everyone is going to the highest bidder. Add that to – I can’t believe that an impact player or two won’t be traded. I’m with you on Kimbrel. He has me concerned but I expect a bounce back. His “stuff” from what I read in here is too good. Five walks per 9 is insanely bad. I can’t expect he’d be that bad again.
**SO tell me- if you question whether Kimbrel can come back, and you see Price has had 15 appearances while pitching 66.67 innings, and you’re boss gave you direction that he wants to win, how confident are you in Price to help you win in the post season? How confident are you also in Porcello? You could give me the standard answer that “he didn’t pitch enough innings” but tell me now which of these two pitchers are you confident that they will outpitch Kluber or outpitch Sale in the post season? OFC we aren’t pitching against Sale nor do we know how he is going to be. But if all were healthy and had the same numbers going into the post season, where would your confidence lie? You asked me above about players like sale can go and can it get worse. I answered. Now I’d like to make a point and then ask you something. My confidence in Porcello and Price has been shaken. So that is in part why I like the Sale move (as stated my confidence in Moncada had waned. That doesn’t mean I think he will stink.) . Suppose they really are more comfortable as being a 2 and 3 starter – i.e. take a bit a pressure off. Isn’t that possible they can pitch better too as a 2 and 3 starter than as a number 1?
When you mention “if Kimbrel blows up.” Yes he can – but if he does they won’t win if Price and Porcello also blow up like they did in the post season. Or if they did win if Kimbrel and Price and Porcello blew up without Sale it would be like a one in 100 probability etc. But our posts are talking in generalities here, right? Not the 1 in 100 chance?
Here is what I see about Clay. His floor is higher than any of the other bottom 3 starters. You had asked me what happens if Sale leaves and other players leave etc. I ask similar what happens if the Pomeranz has shoulder issues, and Wright and ERod just aren’t very good? That is possible, isn’t it? IMO that 4th starter is crucial. This team is built on primarily on starting pitching. If both the 4th and 5th starters crap out, it puts much more pressure on our big 3 and more pressure on a guy like Kimbrel for example which neither of us is high on. Along with the other question marks in the pen. And added pressure to the hitting. Also, imo the point of under the cap is irrelevant because they were already under the cap, weren’t they? SO what they’re doing is “saving” for a “possible” move. That is such an uncertainty. I think if we had Clay, he would have allowed Erod to start in the minors. And put Pomeranz in the bullpen. These guys can’t be relied on either to pitch a full season, can they? So to start the year it makes sense imo to limit their exposure. Now there is a BETTER chance that at least one will be worn out by season’s end. The starting pitching is the main “weapon” for this team. If that cracks, imo we are more than likely screwed. Sure” 4 in 100” (whatever low probability) the bullpen and the hitting can pick things up. I don’t like the risk.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 26, 2016 10:52:48 GMT -5
Multiple studies have shown that regular-season performance is far more predictive of future postseason performance than past postseason performance. It's nice that you think 20.1 innings (most which came 3+ years ago, when he was a very different pitcher) is a large enough sample to draw conclusions from, but it just isn't. Do you have more confidence in Kluber or Porcello? False dichotomy. Why does that question matter? Price and Porcello are good pitchers and a more than adequate front two.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 11:43:06 GMT -5
Do you have more confidence in Kluber or Porcello? False dichotomy. Why does that question matter? Price and Porcello are good pitchers and a more than adequate front two. The question matters because it is relevant.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 26, 2016 12:09:37 GMT -5
Redsox— The reason why I thought the farm was overrated was that we didn’t have the pitching to balance the hitting. If you notice DD has primarily done nothing but make pitching moves. IMO it’s because we needed pitching. Our hitting attack was historically great last year, right? Yet why did Farrell feel a need to play 7 of his position players 145 games or more? Because we often needed the hitting when our 4 and 5 starters were historically awful early, then when our bullpen collapsed (it did COLLAPSE for a time), and then when Wright got hurt we relied on minor league pitching which was awful, then Pomeranz sort of collapsed and Price was inconsistent all year. We didn’t have the ml pitching to offset this and it would have been a few years before a stud came through. Though Erod – still potentially a good trade. And I don’t think Porcello and Price will ALWAYS struggle. I just think it is a good idea to mix it up with them. That’s why I have previously said “have them as the 2 and 3.” In other words, what I’m saying is if they are the number 1 starter, I don’t have the confidence in them as a number 1. The number 1 starter can go as many as three games. I think Bum went 4. And when you say Sale can leave – sure he can. But I can’t see every quality pitcher the Sox have leaving either. I can’t believe everyone is going to the highest bidder. Add that to – I can’t believe that an impact player or two won’t be traded. I’m with you on Kimbrel. He has me concerned but I expect a bounce back. His “stuff” from what I read in here is too good. Five walks per 9 is insanely bad. I can’t expect he’d be that bad again. **SO tell me- if you question whether Kimbrel can come back, and you see Price has had 15 appearances while pitching 66.67 innings, and you’re boss gave you direction that he wants to win, how confident are you in Price to help you win in the post season? How confident are you also in Porcello? You could give me the standard answer that “he didn’t pitch enough innings” but tell me now which of these two pitchers are you confident that they will outpitch Kluber or outpitch Sale in the post season? OFC we aren’t pitching against Sale nor do we know how he is going to be. But if all were healthy and had the same numbers going into the post season, where would your confidence lie? You asked me above about players like sale can go and can it get worse. I answered. Now I’d like to make a point and then ask you something. My confidence in Porcello and Price has been shaken. So that is in part why I like the Sale move (as stated my confidence in Moncada had waned. That doesn’t mean I think he will stink.) . Suppose they really are more comfortable as being a 2 and 3 starter – i.e. take a bit a pressure off. Isn’t that possible they can pitch better too as a 2 and 3 starter than as a number 1? When you mention “if Kimbrel blows up.” Yes he can – but if he does they won’t win if Price and Porcello also blow up like they did in the post season. Or if they did win if Kimbrel and Price and Porcello blew up without Sale it would be like a one in 100 probability etc. But our posts are talking in generalities here, right? Not the 1 in 100 chance? Here is what I see about Clay. His floor is higher than any of the other bottom 3 starters. You had asked me what happens if Sale leaves and other players leave etc. I ask similar what happens if the Pomeranz has shoulder issues, and Wright and ERod just aren’t very good? That is possible, isn’t it? IMO that 4th starter is crucial. This team is built on primarily on starting pitching. If both the 4th and 5th starters crap out, it puts much more pressure on our big 3 and more pressure on a guy like Kimbrel for example which neither of us is high on. Along with the other question marks in the pen. And added pressure to the hitting. Also, imo the point of under the cap is irrelevant because they were already under the cap, weren’t they? SO what they’re doing is “saving” for a “possible” move. That is such an uncertainty. I think if we had Clay, he would have allowed Erod to start in the minors. And put Pomeranz in the bullpen. These guys can’t be relied on either to pitch a full season, can they? So to start the year it makes sense imo to limit their exposure. Now there is a BETTER chance that at least one will be worn out by season’s end. The starting pitching is the main “weapon” for this team. If that cracks, imo we are more than likely screwed. Sure” 4 in 100” (whatever low probability) the bullpen and the hitting can pick things up. I don’t like the risk. I think we're hitting on the differences between statistical analysis and intuitive feeling. You're asking me about my confidence in a David Price or Rick Porcello post-start versus my confidence in a Chris Sale post-season start. We all know that Price and Porcello have lousy post-season track records, so if you ask me how I feel about it confidence-wise, I'd tell you not so good. If I think about it without any emotion attached to it all, I'd say that if Porcello pitches anywhere near as well as he did last season and Price pitches more as he has in the past prior to joining the Red Sox, I'd say I'd take my chances with the both of them and tell you that the post-season is a crapshoot and these guys are more likely to pitch well than badly. So it's a big difference - bias wrapped in feelings versus intellectual reasoning. Like you, I'm not a computer, so I have my biases and in the heat of the moment, I'd be thinking, "My God, not another crappy David Price post-season start!!" Hey, last season, except for an 11 game stretch (and in particular that 4 game series against the Yankees), I had zero confidence in the 2016 Red Sox team. I felt they had all the talent in the world, but something was just off about that team, like I had no doubt they could win 20-0, but if the game was tight they'd find a way to lose. One run games are kind of random, but some years you just feel like the team "has it" and other years you feel like the team just doesn't, which is how I felt about last year's team. Something just never smelled right about that team, which I thought was as talented as any Red Sox team I've seen in 37 seasons. And sure enough they dropped two one run games. So yes, I totally get about the "feeling confident" thing. But here, as I sit here in the calm of winter, and have zero emotions going and can be more clinical, I can tell you that there's no real reason why Price or Porcello can't turn things around in the post-season, and that what jmei intimates is more likely to be factually correct. As far as Buchholz goes, he's just too damn unreliable. If he hadn't crapped the bed during the first half, Espinoza wouldn't have been dealt for Pomeranz in what I think was a short-sighted move. E-Rod was terrible too but I he had a legit reason, that knee injury was a big issue. So while Buchholz's ceiling is high, his floor and reliability is low, and I think Wright has done nothing to make anybody feel he's not remotely for real. The guy has been a quality pitcher for the Sox from the get-go - he just finally got his chance last season. E-Rod, once he got healthy, and with that arm of his, should be a quality starter. Even if he struggles, Wright should pitch well. I have my doubts about Pomeranz, don't know if it was health issues or fatigue that caught up to him, but I wasn't very impressed by him. I didn't think his control was too good and he gave up way more homers than I was comfortable with, but I think between E-Rod, Wright, and Pomeranz the Sox should get at least one quality starter if not two, and it's hard to imagine that Johnson, Owens, and Elias can be as bad as they were last year. Johnson should be better and actually able to contribute and fill the back end slot more consistently than Buchholz and for a lot cheaper.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 26, 2016 12:10:57 GMT -5
False dichotomy. Why does that question matter? Price and Porcello are good pitchers and a more than adequate front two. The question matters because it is relevant. It really isn't, though. Multiple studies also show that having the best number one starter does not provide a measureable advantage in the postseason. For instance, here is Lindbergh and Wyers, 2012: and here is Lindbergh and Carlton, 2014: No offense, but I'm going to trust empirical analysis over the "soxjim's confidence" test.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 26, 2016 13:00:13 GMT -5
Your post I replied to focused on the hitting primarily and you make comments like Porcello was like Sale—yes he was but in fact Porcello was God-awful in the post season. So you just continue to focus on the hitting. But Porcello had a 10.38 ERA in the post season. When your “ACE” has a 10.38 ERA in the psot season and you are playing away from home, you’re not going to win very often. Having a career 4.41 ERA leading up to this playoff series and being as bad as he is in the post season, I can ask similar to you or anyone – it looks pretty much like a slam dunk that we would have had no shot to win in the post season without Sale, right? Porcello as an ACE in the post season? What makes anyone think he can be an ACE post season shutdown pitcher? What I find most frustrating about posts like this is that your assertions are made without substantiating evidence or context, and the logic that gets you from point A to point B is careless. Apparently, 20.2 IP is a large enough sample size and ERA is the appropriate stat for you to determine that Porcello can never become a shutdown pitcher in the postseason. What are you going to do with Sale if, heaven forbid, he puts up mediocre stat lines like that in his first 20 postseason innings? You still have in your mind the greatness of Josh Beckett in the postseason. Beckett was otherworldy in 2007. But do you remember how mediocre he was in the 2008 and 2009 postseasons? Josh Beckett (2008 and 2009): 21 IP. 18 ER. 7.71 ERA. Do you remember what Curt Schilling's stats were in the 2004 ALCS? How did we manage to win that series given that Schilling's stats were nowhere near that of a postseason shutdown pitcher. Curt Schilling (2004 ALCS): 10 IP. 7 ER. 6.30 ERA. Following the logic of your argument, the Cubs should have traded their top prospects last December to acquire a shutdown postseason pitcher. Because, Jon Lester's prior 20 IP were pretty bad too. Lester 2014 and 2015 postseason: 21.1 IP, 13 ER. 5.48 ERA. Your response might be that Lester had prior postseason success, so we should have expected mean reversion. Have there been any other pitchers who started off with mediocre 20 IP in the postseason, and then became good? Justin Verlander. First 4 postseason starts (2006): 21.2 IP, 17 ER. 7.06 ERA. Justin Verlander. Next 12 postseason starts (2011-2014): 76.2 IP, 20 ER. 2.35 ERA. So, Verlander from 2011-2014 was clearly a postseason shutdown pitcher. How many World Series rings has he delivered to Detroit? Should we have tried to trade for him instead of Sale? What happens if Sale performs just like Verlander 2011-2014 and the Sox don't win a title? Corey Kluber just put up 34.1 postseason IP of 1.83 ERA. You'll notice that he still didn't get a World Series ring. So, despite your mantra of obtaining a postseason stopper (despite the prohibitive cost), the facts remain: 1. Judging a pitcher on 20 postseason IP is foolish. 2. Even great (perhaps superlative) pitchers can put up poor postseason stats in small sample sizes 3. Great postseason starting pitching doesn't guarantee postseason victory in the absence of timely hitting and effective relief pitching 4. It is possible to win in the postseason with mediocre starting pitching if your hitting and relief pitching is up to the task This is glorious. And dead-on. And rationally, logically argued. With evidence. This really should be the last word on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 26, 2016 13:15:08 GMT -5
What I find most frustrating about posts like this is that your assertions are made without substantiating evidence or context, and the logic that gets you from point A to point B is careless. Apparently, 20.2 IP is a large enough sample size and ERA is the appropriate stat for you to determine that Porcello can never become a shutdown pitcher in the postseason. What are you going to do with Sale if, heaven forbid, he puts up mediocre stat lines like that in his first 20 postseason innings? You still have in your mind the greatness of Josh Beckett in the postseason. Beckett was otherworldy in 2007. But do you remember how mediocre he was in the 2008 and 2009 postseasons? Josh Beckett (2008 and 2009): 21 IP. 18 ER. 7.71 ERA. Do you remember what Curt Schilling's stats were in the 2004 ALCS? How did we manage to win that series given that Schilling's stats were nowhere near that of a postseason shutdown pitcher. Curt Schilling (2004 ALCS): 10 IP. 7 ER. 6.30 ERA. Following the logic of your argument, the Cubs should have traded their top prospects last December to acquire a shutdown postseason pitcher. Because, Jon Lester's prior 20 IP were pretty bad too. Lester 2014 and 2015 postseason: 21.1 IP, 13 ER. 5.48 ERA. Your response might be that Lester had prior postseason success, so we should have expected mean reversion. Have there been any other pitchers who started off with mediocre 20 IP in the postseason, and then became good? Justin Verlander. First 4 postseason starts (2006): 21.2 IP, 17 ER. 7.06 ERA. Justin Verlander. Next 12 postseason starts (2011-2014): 76.2 IP, 20 ER. 2.35 ERA. So, Verlander from 2011-2014 was clearly a postseason shutdown pitcher. How many World Series rings has he delivered to Detroit? Should we have tried to trade for him instead of Sale? What happens if Sale performs just like Verlander 2011-2014 and the Sox don't win a title? Corey Kluber just put up 34.1 postseason IP of 1.83 ERA. You'll notice that he still didn't get a World Series ring. So, despite your mantra of obtaining a postseason stopper (despite the prohibitive cost), the facts remain: 1. Judging a pitcher on 20 postseason IP is foolish. 2. Even great (perhaps superlative) pitchers can put up poor postseason stats in small sample sizes 3. Great postseason starting pitching doesn't guarantee postseason victory in the absence of timely hitting and effective relief pitching 4. It is possible to win in the postseason with mediocre starting pitching if your hitting and relief pitching is up to the task What I find awful about your post is not only it disregards stats just because it doesn’t fit your argument but the comedy that you are bashing Schilling – a career 2.23 era and with his bloody sock and all in 2004. You justify bashing schilling for his 2004 ALCS – but don’t understand he had the injury and don’t consider his career numbers? And when I say “post season shutdown” you disregard the context of my post by focusing just on one Schilling’s one series when his ankle was messed up? If you had confidence in Porcello after his 9 post season appearances – and you have complete confidence in him – I think that is for those Red Sox fans that only wish to wear their Red Sox goggles when evaluating a player. Nine appearances of pitching lousy baseball and we are desperately trying to win a championship by the moves DD is making and you want to bury your head in the sand even though stats show you different? What if you believe with your eyes and in the stats and you don’t make a move for a better post season starter? How many season’s would you have otherwise wasted by being so stubborn? I think you must question whether he is an ACE in the post season. It’s not like you get ten years to be the ACE and have chance after chance. To bury your head in the sand after nine post season appearances is just wrong. Now we move him to the 2nd best pitcher or maybe the 3rd and maybe that will change the fortunes. If he has a super season again- are you confident he is going to be a stopper?
In regards to your last post, that has NEVER been the case for the Red Sox winning a championship since 2004. They have had the dominant pitcher. The person I was replying to also thinks worse of Kimbrel than even I do. Therefore if you have mediocre starting pitching and you don’t have a very good closer – you aren’t winning. As for Kluber – I can’t believe what you’re trying to say here. He had a 1.83 ERA. Are you suggesting a pitcher that is a 1.83 while pitching in 6 games during the same season wasn’t a stopper? You mean because he had one bad start in those 6 games even though he pitched with a bit of injury that he was a failure? I hope you aren’t suggesting that.
You are the one that brought up the 1.83 ERA so I’ll end it with this. In Game 1 – if both Porcello and Kluber are healthy and they have had similar ERA’s during the season, who would you take? I’m taking Kluber. Do I know for certain? No. But the Red Sox are “telling us” that they can’t wait and just “hope” Porcello will show something in the post season as a number 1 like maybe some of you do? If they’re wrong they can get fired. You don’t have an unlimited number of opportunities to win championships. Your continued theory imo that the Red Sox don’t need great starting pitching is and imo always will be flawed. Bottomline is- are you confident in Porcello and Price as 1 and 2 starters for the post season? I am not. I think you have to be wearing Red Sox goggles if you are. Sure they can come though- but I wouldn't bet on it. But I would have bet on a healthy post season Schilling. And now I have hope with Sale that I didn't otherwise have with Price and Porcello.
I think the general issue that most people are having with your stance is that it is based on "feeling," and perception, but it is wholly refuted by evidence. Even your counter-argument against his Schilling rebuttal is the same thing: he's not "bashing" Schilling at all. That's a wholly outrageous claim. He's pointing out the logical fallacy in using small sample sizes as "proof" of postseason ability. Like every other small stretch, the playoffs represent microcosms of players' abilities. Those cases include hot streaks, cold streaks, injuries, etc. In large part, the "perception" is based on chance. If any of us DIDN'T have confidence in Porcello/Price, the problem is with us, not them. And that's because our "confidence" would be based entirely on an observational and temporal bias. You can argue against it all you want, but that's reality. The highest-likelihood outcome for both of them is reversion to the mean, meaning improved results. As jmei pointed out, this is a WELL-documented phenomenon. Extensively well-documented.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 26, 2016 13:20:01 GMT -5
False dichotomy. Why does that question matter? Price and Porcello are good pitchers and a more than adequate front two. The question matters because it is relevant. I'll answer this one. 2014-2016 regular season fWAR: Porcello - 9.7 Kluber - 18.1 Kluber has a much stronger regular season track record than Porcello and is widely regarded as an ace. Porcello had a great 2016 but few, if any, would consider him as good as Kluber - based on scouting and regular season results. In your previous posts it seems you are confusing reflective past results with predictive future results. You can feel a player was 'great' without thinking they will be 'great' going forward.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 13:27:02 GMT -5
The question matters because it is relevant. It really isn't, though. Multiple studies also show that having the best number one starter does not provide a measureable advantage in the postseason. For instance, here is Lindbergh and Wyers, 2012: and here is Lindbergh and Carlton, 2014: No offense, but I'm going to trust empirical analysis over the "soxjim's confidence" test. That's okay you pulled all this out - and I feel sort of bad that you did. Because its completely irrelevant. You don't need to have the best ACE. You are drawing conclusions from my posts that aren't there. I'm manly to blame because I can't articulate well enough. But I didn't sya you needed the best pitcher. I mentioned Fenway Park for a reason that the sox can score / play better at home. Anyhow- if a pitcher say Sale pitches 7 strong innings letting up two runs while Lester pitches 8 and lets up 1 and the red sox get two runs off the closer in the 9th, who is the better Ace?
In 2004 Sox had Schilling. The 2007 Sox had Beckett. The 2013 Sox had Lester. It's irrelevant as an example that maybe the Tigers had the better Aces, right? Anyhow, the guys I mention, those are post season Aces.
Price had made 15 appearances. His ERA is 5.54. I know several Mets fans and before their big game vs San Fran they weren't confident at all. Why? Because they were going against Bum. Even Bum can't be great all the time but he is a post season shutdown pitcher. The way he pitches in the post season gives his team a greater chance of success to win. The way the Red Sox can hit, especially at Fenway, they tend to win.
And since 2003 when Sox started the post season era with Ortiz, the team with the best record in the AL has won the title 6 out of 14 times.
1-- Win the AL. 2-- Play at Fenway Park 3-- Chance to win title improves.
I would seriously doubt with a short window you and others would continue to rely on Price and Porcello as a 1 and 2 if your jobs were on the line.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 13:34:26 GMT -5
The question matters because it is relevant. I'll answer this one. 2014-2016 regular season fWAR: Porcello - 9.7 Kluber - 18.1 Kluber has a much stronger regular season track record than Porcello and is widely regarded as an ace. Porcello had a great 2016 but few, if any, would consider him as good as Kluber - based on scouting and regular season results. In your previous posts it seems you are confusing reflective past results with predictive future results. You can feel a player was 'great' without thinking they will be 'great' going forward. So going forward, the Red sox are already at deficit of Cleveland having the better ACE, correct?
Cleveland has the better bullpen, correct?
And now with Brantley back and Encarcion in their mix - without having a guy like Sale you think Price and Porcello could hold their own? It is possible sure- but not probable is it? Their hitting is superior.
More than likely if we don't paly at Fenway and have to play at Cleveland, is that good or bad? Sure we won in 2004 away from home but listening to past players and from what I recall 2007 and 2013 both Cleveland and Detroit were not happy one bit about coming back to Boston. One can't say just because it is not an advantage all the time it isn't an advantage at all.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 26, 2016 14:34:34 GMT -5
On paper Cleve looks good. But, Brantley just had TWO shoulder surgeries & is just now getting back to BB activities. He's missed an entire year & there's talk of him being a DH. Salazar is a throw away from TJ. He had the dreaded forearm/elbow issue that shut him down. EE (as we all know) has been on a slight decline, so we'll see.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 26, 2016 15:21:49 GMT -5
On paper Cleve looks good. But, Brantley just had TWO shoulder surgeries & is just now getting back to BB activities. He's missed an entire year & there's talk of him being a DH. Salazar is a throw away from TJ. He had the dreaded forearm/elbow issue that shut him down. EE (as we all know) has been on a slight decline, so we'll see. Ya huge questions whether they'll even make it October healthy and I question there depth in the rotation. Cleveland should be competitive for the central all year but Detroit could easily take them for the top spot if they stay healthy too. The Sox are the favorites due to health and depth.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 26, 2016 16:29:55 GMT -5
What I find awful about your post is not only it disregards stats just because it doesn’t fit your argument but the comedy that you are bashing Schilling – a career 2.23 era and with his bloody sock and all in 2004. You justify bashing schilling for his 2004 ALCS – but don’t understand he had the injury and don’t consider his career numbers? And when I say “post season shutdown” you disregard the context of my post by focusing just on one Schilling’s one series when his ankle was messed up? If you had confidence in Porcello after his 9 post season appearances – and you have complete confidence in him – I think that is for those Red Sox fans that only wish to wear their Red Sox goggles when evaluating a player. Nine appearances of pitching lousy baseball and we are desperately trying to win a championship by the moves DD is making and you want to bury your head in the sand even though stats show you different? What if you believe with your eyes and in the stats and you don’t make a move for a better post season starter? How many season’s would you have otherwise wasted by being so stubborn? I think you must question whether he is an ACE in the post season. It’s not like you get ten years to be the ACE and have chance after chance. To bury your head in the sand after nine post season appearances is just wrong. Now we move him to the 2nd best pitcher or maybe the 3rd and maybe that will change the fortunes. If he has a super season again- are you confident he is going to be a stopper?
In regards to your last post, that has NEVER been the case for the Red Sox winning a championship since 2004. They have had the dominant pitcher. The person I was replying to also thinks worse of Kimbrel than even I do. Therefore if you have mediocre starting pitching and you don’t have a very good closer – you aren’t winning. As for Kluber – I can’t believe what you’re trying to say here. He had a 1.83 ERA. Are you suggesting a pitcher that is a 1.83 while pitching in 6 games during the same season wasn’t a stopper? You mean because he had one bad start in those 6 games even though he pitched with a bit of injury that he was a failure? I hope you aren’t suggesting that.
You are the one that brought up the 1.83 ERA so I’ll end it with this. In Game 1 – if both Porcello and Kluber are healthy and they have had similar ERA’s during the season, who would you take? I’m taking Kluber. Do I know for certain? No. But the Red Sox are “telling us” that they can’t wait and just “hope” Porcello will show something in the post season as a number 1 like maybe some of you do? If they’re wrong they can get fired. You don’t have an unlimited number of opportunities to win championships. Your continued theory imo that the Red Sox don’t need great starting pitching is and imo always will be flawed. Bottomline is- are you confident in Porcello and Price as 1 and 2 starters for the post season? I am not. I think you have to be wearing Red Sox goggles if you are. Sure they can come though- but I wouldn't bet on it. But I would have bet on a healthy post season Schilling. And now I have hope with Sale that I didn't otherwise have with Price and Porcello.
I think the general issue that most people are having with your stance is that it is based on "feeling," and perception, but it is wholly refuted by evidence. Even your counter-argument against his Schilling rebuttal is the same thing: he's not "bashing" Schilling at all. That's a wholly outrageous claim. He's pointing out the logical fallacy in using small sample sizes as "proof" of postseason ability. Like every other small stretch, the playoffs represent microcosms of players' abilities. Those cases include hot streaks, cold streaks, injuries, etc. In large part, the "perception" is based on chance. If any of us DIDN'T have confidence in Porcello/Price, the problem is with us, not them. And that's because our "confidence" would be based entirely on an observational and temporal bias. You can argue against it all you want, but that's reality. The highest-likelihood outcome for both of them is reversion to the mean, meaning improved results. As jmei pointed out, this is a WELL-documented phenomenon. Extensively well-documented. We're just going to have to agree to disagree. Most people wouldn't have said a word about Schilling not being a shutdown performer. To bring up his 2004 as a counter to my argument that Porcello and Price haven't been any good in the post season while Schilling is known for being a big game post season pitcher-- imo this IS "bashing." He was using one series and not looking at the entire post season without any consideration for injury.
What you say "microcosm" I say after a point that "microcosm" becomes "a concern." In 66.67 innings of Davis Price's work we see he is no Madison Bumgarner. We could se after 66.67 innings that Bum is a post season stud, right? Haven't we been able to tell Lester has been too?
The reality is - DD - a general manager got a big time Big 3 3rd starter who is most likely to be the ACE. To close your eyes and pretend Price and Porcello have been good pitchers in the post season despite what you see with your eyes- that's your business. No skin off my back.
IMO if the Red Sox won the title in 2015 DD wouldn't have done this. DD is making the moves and imo it is more align with what I'm figuring. And as I stated to jmei, he did some work to find the stats - which I feel bad about - but it's not refuting what I said. I never said Sox needed the best ACE.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 26, 2016 17:19:41 GMT -5
So who was the ace for the Royals in 2015? There are 100 different ways to win baseball games in short series. I'm not even sure what the argument is anymore, but having Sale doesn't guarantee a WS win or even an appearance. He wouldn't even have beaten the Indians in game 2 when they lost 6-0.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 26, 2016 17:39:31 GMT -5
So going forward, the Red sox are already at deficit of Cleveland having the better ACE, correct? No. Sale, Price and Kluber are all very comparable. This is not related to the previous discussion comparing the Indian's ace against the Red Sox third best pitcher.
Cleveland has the better bullpen, correct? Yes. It's well known that Andrew Miller gives the Indians the edge over Boston
And now with Brantley back and Encarcion in their mix - without having a guy like Sale you think Price and Porcello could hold their own? It is possible sure- but not probable is it? Their hitting is superior. Fangraphs gives the Red Sox the current edge over Cleveland for position players and I agree. They can hold their own and are likely superior to Cleveland
More than likely if we don't paly at Fenway and have to play at Cleveland, is that good or bad? Sure we won in 2004 away from home but listening to past players and from what I recall 2007 and 2013 both Cleveland and Detroit were not happy one bit about coming back to Boston. One can't say just because it is not an advantage all the time it isn't an advantage at all.
Everyone on this board knows that it's an advantage to be the home team. Your question is just silly. Right now Cleveland and Boston are about dead even in terms of talent. I think Boston's depth will give them an edge as attrition sets in throughout the season, but it will be interesting to watch.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 26, 2016 18:14:28 GMT -5
What you say "microcosm" I say after a point that "microcosm" becomes "a concern." In 66.67 innings of Davis Price's work we see he is no Madison Bumgarner. We could se after 66.67 innings that Bum is a post season stud, right? Haven't we been able to tell Lester has been too?
The reality is - DD - a general manager got a big time Big 3 3rd starter who is most likely to be the ACE. To close your eyes and pretend Price and Porcello have been good pitchers in the post season despite what you see with your eyes- that's your business. No skin off my back.
IMO if the Red Sox won the title in 2015 DD wouldn't have done this. DD is making the moves and imo it is more align with what I'm figuring. And as I stated to jmei, he did some work to find the stats - which I feel bad about - but it's not refuting what I said. I never said Sox needed the best ACE.
I mean, all of this continues to be empirically incorrect. The links I posted above show that having (or not having) an ace does not predict postseason success. Look, I'll even re-post it and bold the relevant parts:
|
|
|