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.
Red Sox vs. Dodgers 2018 World Series Gameday Thread
|
Post by patford on Oct 31, 2018 16:27:48 GMT -5
I'm not really sure how Deflategate became a thing on this thread, but, uh, please move it to off-topic or something if you'd like to continue that line of discussion. That was my fault. But seriously, it is reasonable for deflategate to come up in almost any conversation. But I am moving on . . . . really. Thanks for taking the bullet even though I brought it up first. And not at all to debate it. It was just to show that Shaugnessey does not confine his vendettas to the Sox. Many of us who are over fifty share with Shaugnessey the learned tendency to be pessimistic about the Sox. Just like Shaugnessey we learned it from our fathers and grew up with it. We never expected to see the Sox win. Personally I was so ecstatic when the Sox came back from down 0-3 to beat the Yankees my baseball life as satisfied. Everything after than was just gravy. Shaugnessey isn't merely critical or pessimistic. He tries to ruin people. And not creeps to might deserve it but guys with integrity who play the game the right way.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 31, 2018 21:34:38 GMT -5
I’m one of the few who likes Shaughnessy. I don’t often agree with him, but the man can write and he writes some damn good stuff at times. It’s just hidden behind a lot of pessimistic stuff which is too bad because when he writes about stuff he’s passionate about he’s damn good. I’ve emailed him a few times and he’s been very complimentary and gracious. I agree 100%...great writer who’s gotten sucked into the negative media vortex created by years of Sox heartbreak.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 31, 2018 21:36:43 GMT -5
Here's the thing I don't like about Shaughnessy: He treats the changes to the Red Sox over time as a sort of weird, ephemeral, almost mystical thing. They had a cloud hanging over them, but then everything changed because... reasons? Like I don't know how you give this oral history of the Red Sox and talk about how oh, it used to be like this, but then then it was like this, and act like all of that stuff just fell from the sky. Like no wonder you can't get over your "Red Sox Will Blow It Syndrome" when you don't seem to think at all about how changes in ownership and management drive the events on the field. Stuff like being one of the last teams to integrate, or then later being the first team to pair modern baseball analytics with a large payroll, that stuff is just all incidental to him apparently, doesn't rate a mention in this story. But those things are the story. "The Red Sox never used to win, but now they do, and I don't understand or accept that" is not a story about a baseball team, it's a story about the superstitions that are rolling around in Dan's head, which... who cares? The generous read of Shaughnessy here is that he's channeling the fan's experience - we can't help but narrativize our experiences, and when the Red Sox come so close yet lose so many times, over such a long period of time, it can't help but feel like there is a kind of mystical power at work. And there is something to be said for having the ability to give expression to that experience. But ultimately you're right - it is absolutely a dereliction of duty for a reporter not to go deeper than that, to explain the changes in team philosophy that are behind the changes in their degree of success, and so on. It's just a very shallow approach compared to the excellent analysis that's out there these days. Damn...that was spot-on. Great insight.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 31, 2018 22:54:17 GMT -5
Not good, a beer can.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 31, 2018 23:41:01 GMT -5
Mike Napoli would have caught that beer.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Nov 1, 2018 0:03:08 GMT -5
Mike Napoli would have caught that beer. Mike Napoli would have already drank that beer*
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 1, 2018 0:21:45 GMT -5
It's always about him. He's literally a cancer. This goes way beyond Price. I felt him siding with the NFL against Brady was the lowest he's gone. I don't ever read him, but "literally a cancer" is both linguistically wrong and a metaphor I don't care for. He's a troll and I haven't read him for years. Growing up I'd read the Globe every day (former delivery boy 1991-95!), there was such a stark contrast between Shaughnessy and Gammons. Shaughnessy could really write but seemed to be in the business of writing just to show he was more clever than you for hating everything. Gammons, meanwhile, put together some cockamamie sentence structure but his humanity and enjoyment of baseball really would shine through. A bit off topic but somewhat interesting is the origins of worlds, expressions and customs. It's Halloween, witches are a major part of the tradition. Real witches aren't what's commonly portrayed. That picture was dreamed up in the middle ages to discredit a religion. Real witches were pastors of various Pagan religions (the majority population at the time) who generally considered woman to be the mother of mankind. That picture was made to discredit that. www.mlb.com/cut4/red-sox-ended-losing-streak-thanks-to-witch-laurie-cabot/c-299743668Christmas is celebrated on December 25th which virtually every scholar says was not actually Jesus' birthday. We don't even have the year right (this should be 2025). December 25th was a day the majority of Romans were already taking off because it was the feast day for the Pagan god (the sun) and the Niccean Council decided to combine that for convenience. The expression "rule of thumb" came from Puritan days when it was legal to beat your wife with a switch as long as the switch was smaller than the husband's thumbs. The expression "hanging by a thread" came from the days when hanging was done with a string. If the string broke, the man was innocent. If it didn't, he was guilty. The word boycott came from an English land dealer that was so hated, he became a word. The word sodomy has nothing to do with but sects. Sodom's crime was lack of hospitality.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 1, 2018 5:58:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 1, 2018 8:08:26 GMT -5
I don't know what the hell was wrong with the fans at the parade yesterday throwing full beers. It was absurd and a lot of people were hit by them, some in the head.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 1, 2018 8:56:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 1, 2018 9:00:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 1, 2018 11:37:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by michael on Nov 1, 2018 12:24:54 GMT -5
I think that fan got it wrong. SB. Machado pees when he sits!
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 1, 2018 12:27:38 GMT -5
They shouldn’t do parades anymore if this is how people are going to act. And it’s not an isolated instance.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Nov 1, 2018 13:56:23 GMT -5
I don't know what the hell was wrong with the fans at the parade yesterday throwing full beers. It was absurd and a lot of people were hit by them, some in the head. I agree but I also saw a couple of guys on one of the boats (don't remember who they were) who caught cans and drank out of them. That just tells the crowd it's OK and encourages more.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 1, 2018 14:50:06 GMT -5
I don't know what the hell was wrong with the fans at the parade yesterday throwing full beers. It was absurd and a lot of people were hit by them, some in the head. I agree but I also saw a couple of guys on one of the boats (don't remember who they were) who caught cans and drank out of them. That just tells the crowd it's OK and encourages more. There’s a difference between a guy leaning over, looking directly at a fan and asking him/her for a beer and that fan tossing it underhand to them versus whipping beers at the duck boats when no one is talking to you. Anyone who can’t tell the difference and just whips beers at players and their families should play frogger on the Mass pike.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Nov 1, 2018 14:59:03 GMT -5
I agree but I also saw a couple of guys on one of the boats (don't remember who they were) who caught cans and drank out of them. That just tells the crowd it's OK and encourages more. There’s a difference between a guy leaning over, looking directly at a fan and asking him/her for a beer and that fan tossing it underhand to them versus whipping beers at the duck boats when no one is talking to you. Anyone who can’t tell the difference and just whips beers at players and their families should play frogger on the Mass pike. It’s from the last Pats parade - fans were tossing beers to Gronk and he made a show of catching them, opening them, and “drinking” a tiny bit (really pouring them out over his face). Kind of a way for fans to “buy him a beer.” That was largely unique to Gronk and his personality, but it was widely broadcast on social media. I can see how that gets twisted in an immature drunk fan’s head to “throw beers at my favorite players!”
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 1, 2018 15:07:53 GMT -5
There’s a difference between a guy leaning over, looking directly at a fan and asking him/her for a beer and that fan tossing it underhand to them versus whipping beers at the duck boats when no one is talking to you. Anyone who can’t tell the difference and just whips beers at players and their families should play frogger on the Mass pike. It’s from the last Pats parade - fans were tossing beers to Gronk and he made a show of catching them, opening them, and “drinking” a tiny bit (really pouring them out over his face). Kind of a way for fans to “buy him a beer.” That was largely unique to Gronk and his personality, but it was widely broadcast on social media. I can see how that gets twisted in an immature drunk fan’s head to “throw beers at my favorite players!” I can’t tell if you’re making an excuse for the fans doing this or not.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Nov 1, 2018 20:10:48 GMT -5
I agree but I also saw a couple of guys on one of the boats (don't remember who they were) who caught cans and drank out of them. That just tells the crowd it's OK and encourages more. There’s a difference between a guy leaning over, looking directly at a fan and asking him/her for a beer and that fan tossing it underhand to them versus whipping beers at the duck boats when no one is talking to you. Anyone who can’t tell the difference and just whips beers at players and their families should play frogger on the Mass pike. Crowds are generally moronic and dangerous. They should be treated accordingly. Not an excuse. Just a reality.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 1, 2018 22:33:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Nov 2, 2018 1:31:04 GMT -5
There’s a difference between a guy leaning over, looking directly at a fan and asking him/her for a beer and that fan tossing it underhand to them versus whipping beers at the duck boats when no one is talking to you. Anyone who can’t tell the difference and just whips beers at players and their families should play frogger on the Mass pike. Crowds are generally moronic and dangerous. They should be treated accordingly. Not an excuse. Just a reality. Yep, and especially ones that have been drinking moderately to heavily before noon.
Probably best to ban all metal/glass/plastic beverage containers the next time if possible.
No excuses should be made, everyone should realize that chucking unopen cans of beer at unsuspecting people is completely unacceptable behavior all the time.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 2, 2018 7:39:16 GMT -5
Crowds are generally moronic and dangerous. They should be treated accordingly. Not an excuse. Just a reality. Yep, and especially ones that have been drinking moderately to heavily before noon.
Probably best to ban all metal/glass/plastic beverage containers the next time if possible.
No excuses should be made, everyone should realize that chucking unopen cans of beer at unsuspecting people is completely unacceptable behavior all the time.
Or just enforce the current laws like no open container...
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Nov 2, 2018 8:10:29 GMT -5
There’s a difference between a guy leaning over, looking directly at a fan and asking him/her for a beer and that fan tossing it underhand to them versus whipping beers at the duck boats when no one is talking to you. Anyone who can’t tell the difference and just whips beers at players and their families should play frogger on the Mass pike. I agree, a big difference. There may have been communication before what I saw, don't know. It would have been better however if the players and others on the boats just didn't play into it. That's all I'm saying. I'm certainly not excusing the beer can throwers.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 2, 2018 11:16:32 GMT -5
How They Did It, a/k/a, I Know What You Did Last October. I'm intentionally burying this in the game thread. Don't tell anyone who knows somebody who works in baseball analytics. There was much media talk about how well the Sox hit in the post-season with RISP, especially with RISP and 2 out. Let's start with the regular season splits (PA excludes SH).
Instead of OPS as an overall measure, I'm using estimated EqA derived from OBP and SA. Much more accurate, and scaled like a batting average to boot. Split PA BA OBP SA EqA Lg EqA+ Empty 3472 .258 .321 .436 .269 .257 105 On 1B 1074 .271 .331 .453 .278 .269 103 RISP 0 out 312 .301 .349 .474 .290 .272 107 RISP 1 out 647 .307 .390 .545 .324 .274 118 RISP 2 out 1102 .269 .382 .459 .301 .271 111
The sample sizes are quite large, so it's clear that the Sox hit somewhat better with RISP. The splits in RISP by outs are interesting and almost certainly not random; you can see that their IsoD goes .049, .083, .113. But what they did in the regular season is a topic for another time. (How about never? Does never work for you?)
------ This post uses the same 5-way breakdown. It turns out to be more detail than is relevant, and in the next post I'll reduce it to a simple 2-way breakdown, and that's where I'll explain what I believe happened. You can read this now for the exciting narrative of what happened, as it happened, or you can wait until later (probably this evening) for the post with the explanation, and then come back here to see that I didn't fudge when I collapsed the data into a binary set of conditions. If you've decided to stick with the extra detail here's your reward (which you probably figured out already): you really only have to look at the last column!
Here's what they did in the Yankees series: Split PA BA OBP SA EqA EqA+ Empty 86 .237 .326 .355 .252 98 On 1B 29 .241 .241 .379 .221 82 RISP 0 out 11 .571 .545 .857 .451 166 RISP 1 out 16 .308 .375 .538 .316 116 RISP 2 out 18 .400 .550 .600 .401 148 The sample sizes with RISP are obviously so small they're silly. I wish I had pointed them out at the time and speculated on why it might make sense that they were much better in the post-season with RISP and specially with 0 outs and 2 outs, because jmei would have rationally attacked me and jimoh would have mocked me. But I think everyone would have agreed that this couldn't happen again. Correct? (I'd have pointed out that the effect sizes are so large that the general RISP split must be at least partly real.) Here's what they did in the Astros series: Split PA BA OBP SA EqA EqA+ Empty 107 .214 .280 .337 .227 88 On 1B 39 .167 .231 .194 .169 63 RISP 0 out 6 .667 .667 1.333 .582 214 RISP 1 out 20 .143 .400 .214 .253 93 RISP 2 out 24 .389 .542 .833 .445 164 Wow. The same pattern, only exaggerated. The Astros staff was much tougher without RISP, exactly as expected. But the RISP splits are also more extreme.
Here's what they did in the WS: Split PA BA OBP SA EqA EqA+ Empty 133 .174 .248 .331 .211 82 On 1B 36 .265 .306 .412 .257 95 RISP 0 out 7 .333 .429 .333 .293 108 RISP 1 out 12 .182 .250 .182 .175 64 RISP 2 out 23 .471 .609 .882 .479 177 Holy wow. For the third straight series they were much better with RISP than without, and much better with RISP and either 0 or 2 outs than with 1 out. Here are the post-season totals:
Split PA BA OBP SA EqA EqA+ Empty 326 .203 .279 .339 .227 88 On 1B 104 .222 .260 .323 .215 80 RISP 0 out 24 .526 .542 .842 .447 164 RISP 1 out 48 .211 .354 .316 .256 93 RISP 2 out 67 .420 .567 .780 .444 164
It's unclear that they hit any better or worse with a man on 1B versus the bases empty. With RISP and 1 out, they drew a lot more walks (almost all of which came with first base open, exactly as you'd expect) but actually had a lower SA than without RISP, which is 100% consistent with the standard change in pitching approach in those situations, plus their not performing any better, beyond the willingness to take the walk.
But those 91 PA with RISP and 0 out, or 2 out? Unreal. Insane. Absurd.
And they make perfect sense.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 2, 2018 12:10:44 GMT -5
Foulke's pitch was okay and all but the other 3 were just ridiculous. Maybe it's my irrational love for Uehara, but I honestly can't decide which pitch was the best of them.
|
|
|