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.
8/5-8/7 Red Sox vs. Royals Series Thread
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Aug 6, 2019 20:46:37 GMT -5
Cashner nuked again. Fallout should be removal from rotation after one more start.
Sox don't need a fifth starter ... off days aplenty in Aug. Piggyback guys in Sept.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Aug 6, 2019 20:48:12 GMT -5
But we should have traded prospects for a relief pitcher!
That would have solved ALL of our problems!
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,827
|
Post by wcp3 on Aug 6, 2019 20:57:08 GMT -5
I’m beginning to think this team isn’t good.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 6, 2019 20:57:10 GMT -5
I just feel bad for the kids at the 99.
|
|
kevfc89
Veteran
Posts: 5,327
Member is Online
|
Post by kevfc89 on Aug 6, 2019 21:01:52 GMT -5
The Mets are creeping pretty close to us in win percentage. Wouldn't have imagined that one two weeks ago.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Aug 6, 2019 21:05:44 GMT -5
Well, just got in from evening on the beach...looked at the box. Looks like vintage 2019 Sox. Back to the Past ...Growing up the cry was 'If only the Sox hitters could bat against the Sox pitchers'... I'm thinkin' along those lines again...
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 6, 2019 21:07:55 GMT -5
2-10 RISP. 8 LOB. 2 runs. This team embarrassed yet?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 6, 2019 21:09:54 GMT -5
Unfortunately Rick Porcello is so awful that he wins when the Red Sox are trying to tank. Luckily, Cashner was here to start a new streak. It's all about the draft now.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 6, 2019 21:30:00 GMT -5
I watched the second part of the game. This is a team that is just mailing it in - the at bats the "offense" put forward were pretty pathetic. With the talent on the team and the big payroll, this is inexcusable.
Fascinating buzz around the media - that DD will take the fall for this high priced team missing the playoffs. (I am just catching up = DD actually said the pen is fine?!?!?!).
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 6, 2019 21:36:15 GMT -5
I watched the second part of the game. This is a team that is just mailing it in - the at bats the "offense" put forward were pretty pathetic. With the talent on the team and the big payroll, this is inexcusable. Fascinating buzz around the media - that DD will take the fall for this high priced team missing the playoffs. (I am just catching up = DD actually said the pen is fine?!?!?!). 0 ER from the pen today. Problem is largely the SP I think. The bullpen is about average.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 6, 2019 21:40:51 GMT -5
I watched the second part of the game. This is a team that is just mailing it in - the at bats the "offense" put forward were pretty pathetic. With the talent on the team and the big payroll, this is inexcusable. Fascinating buzz around the media - that DD will take the fall for this high priced team missing the playoffs. (I am just catching up = DD actually said the pen is fine?!?!?!). 0 ER from the pen today. Problem is largely the SP I think. The bullpen is about average. This is a pretty good article - explains a lot. blogs.fangraphs.com/this-doesnt-look-like-the-red-soxs-year/
|
|
|
Post by kjkramer on Aug 6, 2019 22:11:39 GMT -5
The starting pitching is way more of a issue that the pen this year. DD is definitely not to blame. I actually applaud him for being able to see what this team is and NOT making a trade. Gutting our farm and Acquiring the 3 best bullpen arms would not have made a difference on this team. This is NOT on DD. No one would have guessed the pitchers would be this bad. No one. Whoever was in on the decision to mail in the spring training is to blame.... if it was him... blame him for that but not for his team construction or lack of moves. NOT saying the pen isn't an issue.....
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 6, 2019 22:37:39 GMT -5
I'm most frustrated that there won't be a best of 3 rematch with the Astros with hopefully one taking the crown.
|
|
art
Veteran
Posts: 339
|
Post by art on Aug 7, 2019 7:13:59 GMT -5
Go Sox. My biggest problem with O'Brien is his refusal to use any of the currently accepted measures of good performance. With pitchers it's wins. With hitters it's BA and rbi. I generally like O'Brien, maybe a carryover from his good work on the radio. But this post reminds me of one of the things that he does, using RBI as a plural, that really annoys me. It has been RBIs since I began listening to baseball in the 1950s. RBI is an acronym and the correct way to pluralize it is by adding an "s." It's not just my opinion. Check out the Associated Press Style Book, the standard for journalistic usage:
Also:
Sorry for the late reply. I'm in Europe right now and my clock is different.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 7, 2019 8:10:29 GMT -5
Go Sox. My biggest problem with O'Brien is his refusal to use any of the currently accepted measures of good performance. With pitchers it's wins. With hitters it's BA and rbi. I generally like O'Brien, maybe a carryover from his good work on the radio. But this post reminds me of one of the things that he does, using RBI as a plural, that really annoys me. It has been RBIs since I began listening to baseball in the 1950s. RBI is an acronym and the correct way to pluralize it is by adding an "s." It's not just my opinion. Check out the Associated Press Style Book, the standard for journalistic usage:
Also:
Sorry for the late reply. I'm in Europe right now and my clock is different.
Ok, this isn’t meant to start the wars again, but.... What % of baseball fans/viewers still adhere to the traditional stats? Still take great interest in them? I mean, personally, I get the new stuff, and they have their place, but I’d glaze over listening to announcers talking WAR or FIP or whatever. I also hate exit velocity and lift angle. Don’t care. 88 mph home run counts, too. And if the point is that he didn’t get great wood, I have eyes.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 7, 2019 8:33:12 GMT -5
I generally like O'Brien, maybe a carryover from his good work on the radio. But this post reminds me of one of the things that he does, using RBI as a plural, that really annoys me. It has been RBIs since I began listening to baseball in the 1950s. RBI is an acronym and the correct way to pluralize it is by adding an "s." It's not just my opinion. Check out the Associated Press Style Book, the standard for journalistic usage: Also: Sorry for the late reply. I'm in Europe right now and my clock is different.
Ok, this isn’t meant to start the wars again, but.... What % of baseball fans/viewers still adhere to the traditional stats? Still take great interest in them? I mean, personally, I get the new stuff, and they have their place, but I’d glaze over listening to announcers talking WAR or FIP or whatever. I also hate exit velocity and lift angle. Don’t care. 88 mph home run counts, too. And if the point is that he didn’t get great wood, I have eyes. I like when an announcer has some knowledge about the newer stats, but as far as the color analysts go, I'd rather hear Eck and Remy stories from their day or tell me what strategy is going to be employed next, etc. than listen to a dissertation of modern baseball stats. A little bit fine. I don't want things dumbed down so it's all about batting average, RBIs, saves, wins, etc, but at the same time I don't want to get overly inundated with the new sabermetrics. I like sabermetrics as much as the next guy, but I too would glaze over if it becomes a discussion of fWAR versus WAR or whatever the hell it is. It would probably make me reach for the remote honestly. I love baseball but not all baseball fans are statheads. I enjoy the history and the personal stories more than the numbers quite frankly. I appreciate the numbers because they are the bones of history, so to speak, what's left over after a player has finished his career, but there's more to the game, as far as enjoyment/entertainment goes, than being an analytical accountant with each pitch.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 7, 2019 8:46:26 GMT -5
The starting pitching is way more of a issue that the pen this year. DD is definitely not to blame. I actually applaud him for being able to see what this team is and NOT making a trade. Gutting our farm and Acquiring the 3 best bullpen arms would not have made a difference on this team. This is NOT on DD. No one would have guessed the pitchers would be this bad. No one. Whoever was in on the decision to mail in the spring training is to blame.... if it was him... blame him for that but not for his team construction or lack of moves. NOT saying the pen isn't an issue..... Dombrowski has been one of the best parts of the Sox this season. He put together a team which was well regarded with a starting staff judged by independent observers, prior to the start of the season, to be one of the best in baseball. He kept Vazquez and Devers. The fact he didn't trade prospects at the deadline is a big plus in his favor. The only thing he's done that I think was a huge mistake was extending Sale.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 7, 2019 8:57:56 GMT -5
I like when an announcer has some knowledge about the newer stats, but as far as the color analysts go, I'd rather hear Eck and Remy stories from their day or tell me what strategy is going to be employed next, etc. than listen to a dissertation of modern baseball stats. A little bit fine. I don't want things dumbed down so it's all about batting average, RBIs, saves, wins, etc, but at the same time I don't want to get overly inundated with the new sabermetrics. I like sabermetrics as much as the next guy, but I too would glaze over if it becomes a discussion of fWAR versus WAR or whatever the hell it is. It would probably make me reach for the remote honestly. I love baseball but not all baseball fans are statheads. I enjoy the history and the personal stories more than the numbers quite frankly. I appreciate the numbers because they are the bones of history, so to speak, what's left over after a player has finished his career, but there's more to the game, as far as enjoyment/entertainment goes, than being an analytical accountant with each pitch. This is a false dichotomy. Modern stats simple represent a larger, more capable toolbox for telling these stories. Just one example that comes to mind, Sam Miller has been doing a monthly series on all the Hall of Famers that Mike Trout is passing as he climbs the all time WAR leaderboards, and it's so, so, so, so good: www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/27018291/mike-trout-tracker-june-edition-now-better-tony-gwynn-seven-more-hall-famersThat's amazing. You can tell the story of baseball better with WAR than without it, simple as that. No dissertations required.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 7, 2019 9:08:36 GMT -5
I like when an announcer has some knowledge about the newer stats, but as far as the color analysts go, I'd rather hear Eck and Remy stories from their day or tell me what strategy is going to be employed next, etc. than listen to a dissertation of modern baseball stats. A little bit fine. I don't want things dumbed down so it's all about batting average, RBIs, saves, wins, etc, but at the same time I don't want to get overly inundated with the new sabermetrics. I like sabermetrics as much as the next guy, but I too would glaze over if it becomes a discussion of fWAR versus WAR or whatever the hell it is. It would probably make me reach for the remote honestly. I love baseball but not all baseball fans are statheads. I enjoy the history and the personal stories more than the numbers quite frankly. I appreciate the numbers because they are the bones of history, so to speak, what's left over after a player has finished his career, but there's more to the game, as far as enjoyment/entertainment goes, than being an analytical accountant with each pitch. This is a false dichotomy. Modern stats simple represent a larger, more capable toolbox for telling these stories. Just one example that comes to mind, Sam Miller has been doing a monthly series on all the Hall of Famers that Mike Trout is passing as he climbs the all time WAR leaderboards, and it's so, so, so, so good: www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/27018291/mike-trout-tracker-june-edition-now-better-tony-gwynn-seven-more-hall-famersThat's amazing. You can tell the story of baseball better with WAR than without it, simple as that. No dissertations required. To each their own. Like I said I don't mind some of that stuff (I remember as a kid I loved to compute Wade Boggs batting average and lifetime batting average after each AB as the sight of a guy batting .360 back then would blow me away) - the truth is WAR doesn't resonate much with me because I can't compute it the easy way I'd compute batting average. I doubt many people here can. That doesn't mean that it's an inferior analytical tool, because obviously it's not, but emotionally I'm not attached to the WAR stat and it doesn't really resonate with me. The emotional connection to that stat is just not there for me. I can't compute it easily, don't know what degree of accuracy it truly holds, and have to be told what it is by some on-line source because of its complicated nature.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 7, 2019 9:19:55 GMT -5
There's quite a gap between discussing the difference between fWAR and bWAR or bringing it to an Eric Van level of discussion and understanding that OBP is far more important than BA or that wRC+ or even OPS is more important than the number of home runs. I bet none of them understand that Puig is a below average MLB hitter even with 22 HR this season. I doubt they know that Roughned Odor is barely replacement level with 20 HR. They were gushing about Soler last night because of his 31 home runs(far more than anyone on the Red Sox), but he'd be the 5th best hitter and 8th best player in the Red Sox lineup. Bet they don't understand that either.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 7, 2019 9:29:18 GMT -5
This is just what baseball is now. If they don't fix the baseball I won't be watching many more years. It's garbage. Every bad pitch- is a home run and every great pitch can also be a home run. It doesn't even matter who the pitcher is. Verlander said he use to be able to miss barrels and get away with a pitch that was hit. Now he says he has to miss bats. Think about a third of the hits he gave up at the All Star break were HR's? If so, that's ridiculous and we're talking one of the best in the game. I found it hard to believe, but you’re right. As of today, 29 HR, 95 hits, so 30.5% of the hits he’s allowed have been out of the park. That IS ridiculous. In fairness, his repertoire (especially 4FB/SL) is prone to being hit in the air, but his 19%/34%/47% breakdown (LD/GB/FB) isn’t especially extreme. And his 17% HR/FB rate is high, but league average is something like 15% this year (versus 10.6% or whatever it USED to be, which is used as the normalizing value for xFIP). It’s certainly an issue, because it really does sort of eliminate the value of pitchers who rely on weak contact (probably a big reason Porcello has pitched so poorly) when EVs are exaggerated. I get that MLB was trying to boost offense to make the game “more interesting” after the swing towards the pitching end in the early-mid 20-teens, but it’s tending to make it less interesting by selecting against pitchers who don’t rely on whiffs. Guys like Stroman, Porcello, etc are a dying breed.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 7, 2019 9:32:12 GMT -5
There's quite a gap between discussing the difference between fWAR and bWAR or bringing it to an Eric Van level of discussion and understanding that OBP is far more important than BA or that wRC+ or even OPS is more important than the number of home runs. I bet none of them understand that Puig is a below average MLB hitter even with 22 HR this season. I doubt they know that Roughned Odor is barely replacement level with 20 HR. They were gushing about Soler last night because of his 31 home runs(far more than anyone on the Red Sox), but he'd be the 5th best hitter and 8th best player in the Red Sox lineup. Bet they don't understand that either. It shouldn't be complicated. At this point isn't it nearly universal that slugging average and on-base percentage make up most of the key components of offense for example?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Aug 7, 2019 9:33:17 GMT -5
I generally like O'Brien, maybe a carryover from his good work on the radio. But this post reminds me of one of the things that he does, using RBI as a plural, that really annoys me. It has been RBIs since I began listening to baseball in the 1950s. RBI is an acronym and the correct way to pluralize it is by adding an "s." It's not just my opinion. Check out the Associated Press Style Book, the standard for journalistic usage: Also: Sorry for the late reply. I'm in Europe right now and my clock is different.
Ok, this isn’t meant to start the wars again, but.... What % of baseball fans/viewers still adhere to the traditional stats? Still take great interest in them? I mean, personally, I get the new stuff, and they have their place, but I’d glaze over listening to announcers talking WAR or FIP or whatever. I also hate exit velocity and lift angle. Don’t care. 88 mph home run counts, too. And if the point is that he didn’t get great wood, I have eyes. The way I look at sabermetrics isn't gospel of performance. What I mean by that is, an 88 mph HR is still a HR. Where sabermetrics come into play is the likelihood of that happening again. If you give up 4 runs on bloop hits you still had a bad night. You gave up 4 runs. It's just encouraging in predicting future success that 4 runs on bloop hits isn't likely. Some people only look at RBI and BA while others will say a guy had a good night despite giving up 3 HR because the exit velocity wasn't there and they were the only 3 hits allowed.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 7, 2019 9:55:57 GMT -5
Ok, this isn’t meant to start the wars again, but.... What % of baseball fans/viewers still adhere to the traditional stats? Still take great interest in them? I mean, personally, I get the new stuff, and they have their place, but I’d glaze over listening to announcers talking WAR or FIP or whatever. I also hate exit velocity and lift angle. Don’t care. 88 mph home run counts, too. And if the point is that he didn’t get great wood, I have eyes. The way I look at sabermetrics isn't gospel of performance. What I mean by that is, an 88 mph HR is still a HR. Where sabermetrics come into play is the likelihood of that happening again. If you give up 4 runs on bloop hits you still had a bad night. You gave up 4 runs. It's just encouraging in predicting future success that 4 runs on bloop hits isn't likely. Some people only look at RBI and BA while others will say a guy had a good night despite giving up 3 HR because the exit velocity wasn't there and they were the only 3 hits allowed. Literally no one ever suggested it wasn't. Also, "sabermetrics" predates statcast numbers by like forty years....
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 7, 2019 10:02:44 GMT -5
Ok, this isn’t meant to start the wars again, but.... What % of baseball fans/viewers still adhere to the traditional stats? Still take great interest in them? I mean, personally, I get the new stuff, and they have their place, but I’d glaze over listening to announcers talking WAR or FIP or whatever. I also hate exit velocity and lift angle. Don’t care. 88 mph home run counts, too. And if the point is that he didn’t get great wood, I have eyes. The way I look at sabermetrics isn't gospel of performance. What I mean by that is, an 88 mph HR is still a HR. Where sabermetrics come into play is the likelihood of that happening again. If you give up 4 runs on bloop hits you still had a bad night. You gave up 4 runs. It's just encouraging in predicting future success that 4 runs on bloop hits isn't likely. Some people only look at RBI and BA while others will say a guy had a good night despite giving up 3 HR because the exit velocity wasn't there and they were the only 3 hits allowed. Yeah, it’s all just information. I mean, BA has *some* value as a statistic, provided it’s used in proper context. Old-school looked at BA as a measure of how good a hitter was, essentially *productivity*, but it’s pretty terrible for that. Same with HR. Or RBI (even more terrible because it’s so dependent on external factors). “SLG” provides a lot more info because it folds in not just HR, but xBH. And OBP folds in walks, which are nearly (but not quite) as valuable as singles. And OPS sort of folds it all together (although it still overweights BA, since it’s included in the weighting twice, for each OBP and SLG). And wRC+ goes a couple of steps further by folding all of that together while removing the BA overrepresentation, coming up with a value for run production (runs created), then weighting it by park factors and normalizing it to league average. wRC+ is an actual measurement of production where old school surrogates like BA, HR, and RBI totally fail. ERA isn’t very predictive, but it IS fairly representative of performance results. But there are issues there, too...hence the value of SIERA (and FIP, although FIP is flawed in its own way as far as being an end-all indicator of pitching performance). I don’t have an issue with talking about any stat as long as it’s in proper context. And most of them don’t really require in-depth explanations...FIP can be described as “fielding independent pitching...it’s a calculation similar to ERA that looks at how well a pitcher has done when he’s not relying on his fielders.” WAR too can be described in a similar way. I get that these numbers feel convoluted to many, because the calculations aren’t simple (FIP is intentionally manipulated with constants to make it LOOK like ERA). But the fundamental ideas are simple. I DO think there’s a bit much emphasis on Statcast metrics these days mostly because they’re new, but they too add information. The job of announcers is to put that information into appropriate and entertaining context. The dumber, more inflexible ones can’t do that, and it leads to shitty broadcasting as they resist or flail.
|
|
|