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.
4/16-4/17 Red Sox @ Yankees Series Thread
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 18, 2019 4:00:06 GMT -5
17-2 to 6-13. What a difference a year makes. This is the hardest thing to understand. It doesn't make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 18, 2019 7:20:19 GMT -5
17-2 to 6-13. What a difference a year makes. This is the hardest thing to understand. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Perhaps there was more luck to last year than the 8-10 game regression expected for this year. Also, an argument could be made that this team did not get better in some key spots (catcher, second base, possibly third base), which, in pro sports often constitutes further regression. Finally, the slow ramp-up of the starting staff, and perhaps the whole team, in spring training appears to have been poorly executed or ill-advised.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2019 7:49:41 GMT -5
This is the hardest thing to understand. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Perhaps there was more luck to last year than the 8-10 game regression expected for this year. Also, an argument could be made that this team did not get better in some key spots (catcher, second base, possibly third base), which, in pro sports often constitutes further regression. Finally, the slow ramp-up of the starting staff, and perhaps the whole team, in spring training appears to have been poorly executed or ill-advised. I actually don't think it's that crazy at all. 1. The 2018 team was a historically great team, but it wasn't a team with a historically high level of talent. Don't get me wrong, it was a fantastic roster, but as people have mentioned, their catchers couldn't hit at all, the second base situation was bad, third base wasn't a ton better. The top end talent was ridiculous, but the back end of the roster was mediocre if not actually bad. It wasn't a team you'd actually expect another 108 win season out of, and they didn't improve any of its weaknesses in the offseason. 2. Ok, so if we're assuming a baseline of like a 95 win team and not a 105 win team, going .500ish for a three week stretch is a normal thing in baseball. If the Red Sox were just 9-10 instead of 6-13, there'd be some grumbling for sure, but it wouldn't be the full scale disaster/freakout we're currently experiencing. 3. Here's where we get into real trouble: no one pitched in spring training. The Red Sox have mostly been in kind of a normal slump for a good team, but it's been exacerbated by a starting pitching staff that was crazy-insane bad to start the year. And maybe that doesn't have anything to do with Cora's decision to bring his pitchers along super slowly, but boy, it sure seems like everyone's finding their level after the extra two weeks they didn't get in spring training. So there you have it. A roster that wasn't as good as its win total last year, with obvious weaknesses which weren't addressed, plus a really bad decision on the starting pitching, plus just a normal slump. None of these things alone would have doomed this team, and they're not out of it yet, but the confluence of bad luck, bad roster management, and bad player management has left with with very little room for error the rest of the way.
|
|
|
Post by tomhouse on Apr 18, 2019 8:34:32 GMT -5
Mark Shapiro once said words to this effect, "it takes two months before you know what you've got." That's how I look at this team right now. I'll give them until June 1 or so to see what they've got. As ugly as this start has been, 19 games is too small a sample size to panic.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,753
|
Post by mobaz on Apr 18, 2019 8:43:33 GMT -5
Me, in November: The Sox won, and boy I'm so excited for this Celtics season! Forget the Pats, they are toast. Me, in January: Wow, the Pats are amazing, can't believe they turned it around. Forget the Celts, they are toast. Me, in March: The defending champs are coming back and could be even BETTER than last year! Forget the Celts, they are even more toast. Me, mid-April: Wow, the Celtics are amazing, can't believe they turned it around. Forget the Sox, they are toast. Hopefully this means the Celts make a run to the ECF and beyond and come June 1 I'll be talking about how great the turnaround for the Sox is and how toast the ... Pats are I guess?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 18, 2019 9:48:06 GMT -5
Perhaps there was more luck to last year than the 8-10 game regression expected for this year. Also, an argument could be made that this team did not get better in some key spots (catcher, second base, possibly third base), which, in pro sports often constitutes further regression. Finally, the slow ramp-up of the starting staff, and perhaps the whole team, in spring training appears to have been poorly executed or ill-advised. I actually don't think it's that crazy at all. 1. The 2018 team was a historically great team, but it wasn't a team with a historically high level of talent. Don't get me wrong, it was a fantastic roster, but as people have mentioned, their catchers couldn't hit at all, the second base situation was bad, third base wasn't a ton better. The top end talent was ridiculous, but the back end of the roster was mediocre if not actually bad. It wasn't a team you'd actually expect another 108 win season out of, and they didn't improve any of its weaknesses in the offseason. 2. Ok, so if we're assuming a baseline of like a 95 win team and not a 105 win team, going .500ish for a three week stretch is a normal thing in baseball. If the Red Sox were just 9-10 instead of 6-13, there'd be some grumbling for sure, but it wouldn't be the full scale disaster/freakout we're currently experiencing. 3. H ere's where we get into real trouble: no one pitched in spring training. The Red Sox have mostly been in kind of a normal slump for a good team, but it's been exacerbated by a starting pitching staff that was crazy-insane bad to start the year. And maybe that doesn't have anything to do with Cora's decision to bring his pitchers along super slowly, but boy, it sure seems like everyone's finding their level after the extra two weeks they didn't get in spring training.
So there you have it. A roster that wasn't as good as its win total last year, with obvious weaknesses which weren't addressed, plus a really bad decision on the starting pitching, plus just a normal slump. None of these things alone would have doomed this team, and they're not out of it yet, but the confluence of bad luck, bad roster management, and bad player management has left with with very little room for error the rest of the way. Completely agree with this, but I also think this team did not get better and in failing to do so, got a bit worse. I also believe there may have been some self-basting hubris going on at baseball ops, but that’s just conjecture on my part. But best laid plans and analysis aside, this game will humble you, almost daily. But as was said, first two months you see what you have, next two adjust, then play it out. After winning the WS I see this as a mulligan year anyway. All success in 2019 is gravy. Doesn’t mean I don’t want the Sox to go all Negan on every team they play, but it’s easier when they don’t because of the gift that was last year.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Apr 18, 2019 10:11:25 GMT -5
Perhaps there was more luck to last year than the 8-10 game regression expected for this year. Also, an argument could be made that this team did not get better in some key spots (catcher, second base, possibly third base), which, in pro sports often constitutes further regression. Finally, the slow ramp-up of the starting staff, and perhaps the whole team, in spring training appears to have been poorly executed or ill-advised. I actually don't think it's that crazy at all. 1. The 2018 team was a historically great team, but it wasn't a team with a historically high level of talent. Don't get me wrong, it was a fantastic roster, but as people have mentioned, their catchers couldn't hit at all, the second base situation was bad, third base wasn't a ton better. The top end talent was ridiculous, but the back end of the roster was mediocre if not actually bad. It wasn't a team you'd actually expect another 108 win season out of, and they didn't improve any of its weaknesses in the offseason. 2. Ok, so if we're assuming a baseline of like a 95 win team and not a 105 win team, going .500ish for a three week stretch is a normal thing in baseball. If the Red Sox were just 9-10 instead of 6-13, there'd be some grumbling for sure, but it wouldn't be the full scale disaster/freakout we're currently experiencing. 3. Here's where we get into real trouble: no one pitched in spring training. The Red Sox have mostly been in kind of a normal slump for a good team, but it's been exacerbated by a starting pitching staff that was crazy-insane bad to start the year. And maybe that doesn't have anything to do with Cora's decision to bring his pitchers along super slowly, but boy, it sure seems like everyone's finding their level after the extra two weeks they didn't get in spring training. So there you have it. A roster that wasn't as good as its win total last year, with obvious weaknesses which weren't addressed, plus a really bad decision on the starting pitching, plus just a normal slump. None of these things alone would have doomed this team, and they're not out of it yet, but the confluence of bad luck, bad roster management, and bad player management has left with with very little room for error the rest of the way. Best explanation I've seen for why we're 6-13 by far. It's not as simple as one decision or one player.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 18, 2019 11:31:43 GMT -5
Sure...there is always variance. But if we assume both ends, up to this point, are the outliers.....what is the chance of that happening ? Those have to be long odds....but it is happening.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Apr 18, 2019 13:19:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 18, 2019 13:39:27 GMT -5
Way too early to think about that, yet the idea of what you could get for one of the best players in the game, one of the best hitters and a TOR pitcher is something you just can't overlook if you want to think long-term. You could rebuild the system overnight, but also be raising the white flag for a team that just went huge signing three veterans to long-term deals. This season will be interesting one way or another haha.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2019 13:41:53 GMT -5
I think (hope?) the trading Betts stuff is totally backwards. You trade old but performing players in Martinez and Price, and that clears the way to a Betts extension.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 18, 2019 13:52:07 GMT -5
I think (hope?) the trading Betts stuff is totally backwards. You trade old but performing players in Martinez and Price, and that clears the way to a Betts extension. Depends on the price Betts is asking for and what you could get back. I think Martinez has a better chance of getting traded, but wouldn't doubt both. Betts is the kind of guy that can turn a farm from last to top 10.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 18, 2019 13:52:30 GMT -5
I think (hope?) the trading Betts stuff is totally backwards. You trade old but performing players in Martinez and Price, and that clears the way to a Betts extension. Depends on the price Betts is asking for and what you could get back. I think Martinez has a better chance of getting traded, but wouldn't doubt both. Betts is the kind of guy that can turn a farm from last to top 10.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Apr 18, 2019 14:08:33 GMT -5
For Price to go there at this juncture seems really...strange.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 18, 2019 14:43:37 GMT -5
For Price to go there at this juncture seems really...strange. Don’t try to understand Price he just says things other people wouldn’t.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Apr 18, 2019 14:48:45 GMT -5
I think (hope?) the trading Betts stuff is totally backwards. You trade old but performing players in Martinez and Price, and that clears the way to a Betts extension. You can probably get something for Martinez from the right team, but Khechul can't even get a 3 year deal in this market and holding out hope to trade 4 years of Price?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2019 15:40:32 GMT -5
I think (hope?) the trading Betts stuff is totally backwards. You trade old but performing players in Martinez and Price, and that clears the way to a Betts extension. You can probably get something for Martinez from the right team, but Khechul can't even get a 3 year deal in this market and holding out hope to trade 4 years of Price? Keuchel got $0, Corbin got $140m, and so based on that I am going to conclude that Price's value on the market is somewhere between zero and a hundred and forty million dollars. I doubt you could get anyone to take the whole contract, but if he's pitching well, I think there's a chance someone would pick up a decent chunk of it. Depends on the price Betts is asking for and what you could get back. I think Martinez has a better chance of getting traded, but wouldn't doubt both. Betts is the kind of guy that can turn a farm from last to top 10. I understand the reasoning here, but in this case I extremely do not care about $ per WAR efficiency. I want them to resign Betts, period.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 18, 2019 16:04:02 GMT -5
I love Betts, but given the current market and if Betts makes this a bidding war, we could be looking at 12-13 year deal at $400 to $450 million. All indications are he wants to be a free agent and get the biggest deal he can. Like what does Trout get if he was actually a free agent? You have to see what your options are because that is a very risky deal. That could hurt you for a long-time. I don't mind big money, yet contracts that long scare the crap out of me no matter how good the player is.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 18, 2019 16:19:44 GMT -5
I love Betts, but given the current market and if Betts makes this a bidding war, we could be looking at 12-13 year deal at $400 to $450 million. All indications are he wants to be a free agent and get the biggest deal he can. Like what does Trout get if he was actually a free agent? You have to see what your options are because that is a very risky deal. That could hurt you for a long-time. I don't mind big money, yet contracts that long scare the crap out of me no matter how good the player is. Betts isn’t Trout yet wants to get paid similar to him. Betts being that small should scare the crap out of you as he ages. The contract he wants isn’t a “well he will always give you value because of his D” contract. It’s a “you better be a star and hit 30 and carry an offense” contract. Has Trout ever had a prolonged slump at the plate? If Mookie is going to want 10+ at 400+ and he and the team won’t get their heads out of their asses you might as well at least see what teams would give up for him. If you could get 2 blue chip prospects plus 2 more really good ones you need to look into it... Might be a reaction to how annoying this team is - talk about flipping the script this team went from ridiculously good to lousy
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 18, 2019 16:51:42 GMT -5
I love Betts, but given the current market and if Betts makes this a bidding war, we could be looking at 12-13 year deal at $400 to $450 million. All indications are he wants to be a free agent and get the biggest deal he can. Like what does Trout get if he was actually a free agent? You have to see what your options are because that is a very risky deal. That could hurt you for a long-time. I don't mind big money, yet contracts that long scare the crap out of me no matter how good the player is. Betts isn’t Trout yet wants to get paid similar to him. Betts being that small should scare the crap out of you as he ages. The contract he wants isn’t a “well he will always give you value because of his D” contract. It’s a “you better be a star and hit 30 and carry an offense” contract. Has Trout ever had a prolonged slump at the plate? If Mookie is going to want 10+ at 400+ and he and the team won’t get their heads out of their asses you might as well at least see what teams would give up for him. If you could get 2 blue chip prospects plus 2 more really good ones you need to look into it... Might be a reaction to how annoying this team is - talk about flipping the script this team went from ridiculously good to lousy I agree Betts isn't Trout and with so much of his value tied up in D he likely doesn't age as well either. Yet last three years he's also the second best player in Baseball and is only .3 bwar behind Trout. Unless his struggles continue and I don't think they will, I don't see how he isn't a 10 plus year, 400 million guy after what Harper got. Heck Harper's deal makes Trouts look like a bargain, which is crazy.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2019 17:19:01 GMT -5
I love Betts, but given the current market and if Betts makes this a bidding war, we could be looking at 12-13 year deal at $400 to $450 million. All indications are he wants to be a free agent and get the biggest deal he can. Like what does Trout get if he was actually a free agent? You have to see what your options are because that is a very risky deal. That could hurt you for a long-time. I don't mind big money, yet contracts that long scare the crap out of me no matter how good the player is. Betts isn’t Trout yet wants to get paid similar to him. Betts being that small should scare the crap out of you as he ages. The contract he wants isn’t a “well he will always give you value because of his D” contract. It’s a “you better be a star and hit 30 and carry an offense” contract. Has Trout ever had a prolonged slump at the plate? If Mookie is going to want 10+ at 400+ and he and the team won’t get their heads out of their asses you might as well at least see what teams would give up for him. If you could get 2 blue chip prospects plus 2 more really good ones you need to look into it... Might be a reaction to how annoying this team is - talk about flipping the script this team went from ridiculously good to lousy Fortunately, Trout took a contract that's massively lower than his actual value.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 18, 2019 18:27:04 GMT -5
Betts isn’t Trout yet wants to get paid similar to him. Betts being that small should scare the crap out of you as he ages. The contract he wants isn’t a “well he will always give you value because of his D” contract. It’s a “you better be a star and hit 30 and carry an offense” contract. Has Trout ever had a prolonged slump at the plate? If Mookie is going to want 10+ at 400+ and he and the team won’t get their heads out of their asses you might as well at least see what teams would give up for him. If you could get 2 blue chip prospects plus 2 more really good ones you need to look into it... Might be a reaction to how annoying this team is - talk about flipping the script this team went from ridiculously good to lousy Fortunately, Trout took a contract that's massively lower than his actual value. It makes me sad to see this once in a generation talent completely wasted on a team with zero interest and zero playoff aspirations.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2019 20:40:43 GMT -5
It makes me sad to see this once in a generation talent completely wasted on a team with zero interest and zero playoff aspirations. They literally have the two most interesting baseball players in the world on their roster! Also, I know they’ve been ravaged by injuries the last few years, but I would hardly assume they’re never going to be competitive while they have Trout. The farm system has improved under Eppler, they’ve got money to spend, and oh yeah... they have Mike Trout.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 18, 2019 21:29:35 GMT -5
It makes me sad to see this once in a generation talent completely wasted on a team with zero interest and zero playoff aspirations. They literally have the two most interesting baseball players in the world on their roster! Also, I know they’ve been ravaged by injuries the last few years, but I would hardly assume they’re never going to be competitive while they have Trout. The farm system has improved under Eppler, they’ve got money to spend, and oh yeah... they have Mike Trout. I really hope things improve with LAA. I really do. In 9 years he has 15 at bats in 3 playoff games and this year isn't looking promising to add to those numbers.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Apr 18, 2019 23:12:16 GMT -5
Scary stat. Sox are ranked 29th in team pitching sporting a 6.01 ERA. Baltimore, last year's worst team is ranked last at 6.05. If we 'try' we can catch them.
|
|
|