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.
2024 Red Sox win projections
|
Post by incandenza on Jan 26, 2024 14:08:48 GMT -5
It’s not like they’re going to run an eight man rotation and a five man bullpen. The rotation is probably gonna be Giolito/Bello/Pivetta/Crawford and then whoever wins the fifth starter job in spring training—let’s just say it’s Houck for simplicity’s sake. The guys who lose that competition are gonna end up in the bullpen. If one of Pivetta, Crawford, or Houck falters, then they swap roles with someone who ended up in the pen, probably Whitlock. If you have a short term injury, you can probably get away with a Whitlock/Winckowski piggyback game, or you can call up Criswell and give him a spot start if they’re too gassed for that. If you have a long term injury, then one of them moves up into the rotation for a while. If you have multiple long-term injuries in the rotation, well, you’re probably screwed anyway, so it’s hard for me to get too worked up about not having the depth to cover that. Now hold on. The argument here is that they don't need depth in the rotation because if they have multiple injuries the depth won't matter anyway? This manages to reason away the value of depth altogether. Obviously adding a starter would provide more depth, and more depth would add resilience in the case of injuries. It takes logical contortions to avoid that pretty obvious conclusion.
That bullpen sounds... I don't know, fine I guess. Like, it's viable. But one argument for how the team might be good this year is that a Jansen/Martin/Winckowski/Houck/Whitlock bullpen (at least two of those last three guys as fixtures) could be elite. That could make up for a merely decent rotation and offense, as it did for the Orioles last season. If they had signed James Paxton he's not competing for a 5th spot in the rotation; he's one of their top three starters (until he probably gets injured at some point). You can guarantee a rotation spot to him or a half dozen other guys they passed on - never mind Montgomery or Snell.
And then this whole argument is predicated on the assumption that they're right that Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski are all viable starters. I don't even think they think that! As Speier talked about it, it's more like they want to see how it shakes out. And even if they did think they were all viable starters, they should have some humility about the possibility that they're wrong. Like, they may be very smart but they're not soothsayers.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Jan 26, 2024 14:11:59 GMT -5
The complexity in handicapping this team - even once we are on the cusp of spring training - are the factors that helped torpedo last year's team - injuries, incredibly bone headed baserunning, porous defense and bad clutch hitting for lots of the season. Just as important as getting the right players is hoping they play well - and stay healthy. Anything is possible with this team at this point.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jan 26, 2024 15:07:22 GMT -5
It’s not like they’re going to run an eight man rotation and a five man bullpen. The rotation is probably gonna be Giolito/Bello/Pivetta/Crawford and then whoever wins the fifth starter job in spring training—let’s just say it’s Houck for simplicity’s sake. The guys who lose that competition are gonna end up in the bullpen. If one of Pivetta, Crawford, or Houck falters, then they swap roles with someone who ended up in the pen, probably Whitlock. If you have a short term injury, you can probably get away with a Whitlock/Winckowski piggyback game, or you can call up Criswell and give him a spot start if they’re too gassed for that. If you have a long term injury, then one of them moves up into the rotation for a while. If you have multiple long-term injuries in the rotation, well, you’re probably screwed anyway, so it’s hard for me to get too worked up about not having the depth to cover that. Now hold on. The argument here is that they don't need depth in the rotation because if they have multiple injuries the depth won't matter anyway? This manages to reason away the value of depth altogether. Obviously adding a starter would provide more depth, and more depth would add resilience in the case of injuries. It takes logical contortions to avoid that pretty obvious conclusion.
That bullpen sounds... I don't know, fine I guess. Like, it's viable. But one argument for how the team might be good this year is that a Jansen/Martin/Winckowski/Houck/Whitlock bullpen (at least two of those last three guys as fixtures) could be elite. That could make up for a merely decent rotation and offense, as it did for the Orioles last season. If they had signed James Paxton he's not competing for a 5th spot in the rotation; he's one of their top three starters (until he probably gets injured at some point). You can guarantee a rotation spot to him or a half dozen other guys they passed on - never mind Montgomery or Snell.
And then this whole argument is predicated on the assumption that they're right that Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski are all viable starters. I don't even think they think that! As Speier talked about it, it's more like they want to see how it shakes out. And even if they did think they were all viable starters, they should have some humility about the possibility that they're wrong. Like, they may be very smart but they're not soothsayers.
I’m on my phone and am far from a master of proboards, so bear with me here. I’m not saying that depth is unimportant, I’m just saying I think it’s a little unreasonable to expect the team to have eight or so good options to start when most teams have like, three these days. Along those same lines, I agree that that bullpen is more fine than elite, but you have to keep in mind that it’s the bullpen in the after a starter goes down and someone needs to jump into the rotation. As for Paxton et al, I just don’t think it’s wise to go into the season with a guy like that as your third starter. If you’re already counting on him to get hurt then he doesn’t really even count as depth in my eyes, he’s a lottery ticket. I wouldn’t put him in front of any of the four guys they have now anyway, because I think Nick Pivetta and Kutter Crawford are roughly 1000 times more likely to put up 3+ WAR this year, simply because they aren’t guaranteed to get hurt. The more you dig into their underlying numbers the more breakout potential you see, there’s a ton to work with between those two. I don’t think any of the mid-tier pitchers they’ve missed out on are any better, either. I wouldn’t even be surprised if one of them outperforms Montgomery next year. I think you’re really underrating how good those guys were last year, they had just as many good outings as Paxton did. And I don’t see where you’re getting the idea that this relies on them all being viable starters. It relies on one of them being a viable starter, and the others being good enough to spot start. Do you really find it that outlandish that this collection of twenty-somethings with good command and solid stuff could yield a fifth starter? And I don’t see what’s hubristic about believing in your young guys and taking a shot on them. Again, how do you approach the other side of that coin and sell a free agent on that situation? Lie to them about how secure their place in the rotation is?
|
|
|
Post by itinerantherb on Jan 26, 2024 15:49:44 GMT -5
It seems entirely possible that they're both posturing for Boras/Montgomery and genuinely interested in giving Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski a hard look as starters. That's kind of my preference right now, too. If Montgomery can be had without mortgaging the future (say, 5/$100M), that sounds good to me. But if the choice is between paying a a 36 year old Jordan Montgomery $25M in 2029 and rolling with the internal options this year, I'd prefer the latter. (That sounds like more fun, anyway, but maybe that's just me.) But given normal SP attrition, they really need ML caliber depth unless they want Criswell starting games in May. Maybe that's Castillo, but it would be nice to have at least one more guy above him on the depth chart--someone like Lorenzen who they can stretch out and park in the bullpen as a long-man/reserve starter.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jan 26, 2024 17:14:22 GMT -5
Now hold on. The argument here is that they don't need depth in the rotation because if they have multiple injuries the depth won't matter anyway? This manages to reason away the value of depth altogether. Obviously adding a starter would provide more depth, and more depth would add resilience in the case of injuries. It takes logical contortions to avoid that pretty obvious conclusion.
That bullpen sounds... I don't know, fine I guess. Like, it's viable. But one argument for how the team might be good this year is that a Jansen/Martin/Winckowski/Houck/Whitlock bullpen (at least two of those last three guys as fixtures) could be elite. That could make up for a merely decent rotation and offense, as it did for the Orioles last season. If they had signed James Paxton he's not competing for a 5th spot in the rotation; he's one of their top three starters (until he probably gets injured at some point). You can guarantee a rotation spot to him or a half dozen other guys they passed on - never mind Montgomery or Snell.
And then this whole argument is predicated on the assumption that they're right that Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski are all viable starters. I don't even think they think that! As Speier talked about it, it's more like they want to see how it shakes out. And even if they did think they were all viable starters, they should have some humility about the possibility that they're wrong. Like, they may be very smart but they're not soothsayers.
I’m on my phone and am far from a master of proboards, so bear with me here. I’m not saying that depth is unimportant, I’m just saying I think it’s a little unreasonable to expect the team to have eight or so good options to start when most teams have like, three these days. Along those same lines, I agree that that bullpen is more fine than elite, but you have to keep in mind that it’s the bullpen in the after a starter goes down and someone needs to jump into the rotation. As for Paxton et al, I just don’t think it’s wise to go into the season with a guy like that as your third starter. If you’re already counting on him to get hurt then he doesn’t really even count as depth in my eyes, he’s a lottery ticket. I wouldn’t put him in front of any of the four guys they have now anyway, because I think Nick Pivetta and Kutter Crawford are roughly 1000 times more likely to put up 3+ WAR this year, simply because they aren’t guaranteed to get hurt. The more you dig into their underlying numbers the more breakout potential you see, there’s a ton to work with between those two. I don’t think any of the mid-tier pitchers they’ve missed out on are any better, either. I wouldn’t even be surprised if one of them outperforms Montgomery next year. I think you’re really underrating how good those guys were last year, they had just as many good outings as Paxton did. And I don’t see where you’re getting the idea that this relies on them all being viable starters. It relies on one of them being a viable starter, and the others being good enough to spot start. Do you really find it that outlandish that this collection of twenty-somethings with good command and solid stuff could yield a fifth starter? And I don’t see what’s hubristic about believing in your young guys and taking a shot on them. Again, how do you approach the other side of that coin and sell a free agent on that situation? Lie to them about how secure their place in the rotation is? Last year they started the season with 8: Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Bello, Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, and Whitlock, with Murphy, Walter, and Mata in the wings. It wasn't enough. (You can say Giolito is more reliable health-wise than some of those guys, but a) any pitcher can get injured, and b) he can hardly be expected to pitch 240 innings, which is what they got from Sale/Paxton/Kluber last year.)
If they had a top 4 of the rotation like the Blue Jays or Mariners I'd be comfortable with Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski as the #5/6/7 starters. But if they're not going to have any obviously top-of-the-rotation type starters the least they could do is try to make up for it with depth.
As for your other points, I'll just say that my median expectation is that 1-2 starters will be injured at all times, and they should plan accordingly. Both you and Breslow seem to think otherwise, and I think that's where the main difference of opinion lies.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jan 26, 2024 19:59:42 GMT -5
I’m on my phone and am far from a master of proboards, so bear with me here. I’m not saying that depth is unimportant, I’m just saying I think it’s a little unreasonable to expect the team to have eight or so good options to start when most teams have like, three these days. Along those same lines, I agree that that bullpen is more fine than elite, but you have to keep in mind that it’s the bullpen in the after a starter goes down and someone needs to jump into the rotation. As for Paxton et al, I just don’t think it’s wise to go into the season with a guy like that as your third starter. If you’re already counting on him to get hurt then he doesn’t really even count as depth in my eyes, he’s a lottery ticket. I wouldn’t put him in front of any of the four guys they have now anyway, because I think Nick Pivetta and Kutter Crawford are roughly 1000 times more likely to put up 3+ WAR this year, simply because they aren’t guaranteed to get hurt. The more you dig into their underlying numbers the more breakout potential you see, there’s a ton to work with between those two. I don’t think any of the mid-tier pitchers they’ve missed out on are any better, either. I wouldn’t even be surprised if one of them outperforms Montgomery next year. I think you’re really underrating how good those guys were last year, they had just as many good outings as Paxton did. And I don’t see where you’re getting the idea that this relies on them all being viable starters. It relies on one of them being a viable starter, and the others being good enough to spot start. Do you really find it that outlandish that this collection of twenty-somethings with good command and solid stuff could yield a fifth starter? And I don’t see what’s hubristic about believing in your young guys and taking a shot on them. Again, how do you approach the other side of that coin and sell a free agent on that situation? Lie to them about how secure their place in the rotation is? Last year they started the season with 8: Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Bello, Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, and Whitlock, with Murphy, Walter, and Mata in the wings. It wasn't enough. (You can say Giolito is more reliable health-wise than some of those guys, but a) any pitcher can get injured, and b) he can hardly be expected to pitch 240 innings, which is what they got from Sale/Paxton/Kluber last year.)
If they had a top 4 of the rotation like the Blue Jays or Mariners I'd be comfortable with Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski as the #5/6/7 starters. But if they're not going to have any obviously top-of-the-rotation type starters the least they could do is try to make up for it with depth.
As for your other points, I'll just say that my median expectation is that 1-2 starters will be injured at all times, and they should plan accordingly. Both you and Breslow seem to think otherwise, and I think that's where the main difference of opinion lies.
For what it's worth, ZiPS projects Giolito, Criswell, and Walter to outproduce Sale/Paxton/Kluber's output from last year by around 1 WAR in the same amount of innings, in no small part because they probably would've been better off giving Kluber's innings to Pablo Reyes. I guess I'm just curious what you want for depth. They've got Giolito, Bello, Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, Whitlock, Winckowski, Castillo, Criswell, Murphy, and Walter as options to start games. Sure, odds are good someone's gonna be banged up at any given moment, but it's not like they're all gonna have season-ending injuries. They have plenty of bodies to make a start here and there.
They could really use someone at the top, definitely. But are you gonna give Blake Snell $30 million/yr or Jordan Montgomery $25 million/yr when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two? I get why they're leaning "no" there. Missing out on Yamamoto basically guaranteed the roster wouldn't get where it needed to be this offseason. And like I said earlier, I do think this team is a tougher sell to a Lugo/Wacha/Lorenzen type, since it's really not guaranteed that they get enough starts to turn a short-term deal here into a bigger payday. At the end of the day I get the decision to trust their ability to help those guys turn flashes of brilliance into sustained success.
No reason not to add another bat, though. It's not like they can't afford it.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Jan 27, 2024 4:29:08 GMT -5
84. Book it
|
|
bigmarty58
Rookie
2011 Pancreatic Cancer Survivor - One of the lucky ones
Posts: 162
|
Post by bigmarty58 on Jan 27, 2024 10:40:08 GMT -5
I'm going with an optimistic 85 wins.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jan 27, 2024 19:36:32 GMT -5
Last year they started the season with 8: Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Bello, Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, and Whitlock, with Murphy, Walter, and Mata in the wings. It wasn't enough. (You can say Giolito is more reliable health-wise than some of those guys, but a) any pitcher can get injured, and b) he can hardly be expected to pitch 240 innings, which is what they got from Sale/Paxton/Kluber last year.)
If they had a top 4 of the rotation like the Blue Jays or Mariners I'd be comfortable with Houck/Whitlock/Winckowski as the #5/6/7 starters. But if they're not going to have any obviously top-of-the-rotation type starters the least they could do is try to make up for it with depth.
As for your other points, I'll just say that my median expectation is that 1-2 starters will be injured at all times, and they should plan accordingly. Both you and Breslow seem to think otherwise, and I think that's where the main difference of opinion lies.
For what it's worth, ZiPS projects Giolito, Criswell, and Walter to outproduce Sale/Paxton/Kluber's output from last year by around 1 WAR in the same amount of innings, in no small part because they probably would've been better off giving Kluber's innings to Pablo Reyes. I guess I'm just curious what you want for depth. They've got Giolito, Bello, Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, Whitlock, Winckowski, Castillo, Criswell, Murphy, and Walter as options to start games. Sure, odds are good someone's gonna be banged up at any given moment, but it's not like they're all gonna have season-ending injuries. They have plenty of bodies to make a start here and there.
They could really use someone at the top, definitely. But are you gonna give Blake Snell $30 million/yr or Jordan Montgomery $25 million/yr when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two? I get why they're leaning "no" there. Missing out on Yamamoto basically guaranteed the roster wouldn't get where it needed to be this offseason. And like I said earlier, I do think this team is a tougher sell to a Lugo/Wacha/Lorenzen type, since it's really not guaranteed that they get enough starts to turn a short-term deal here into a bigger payday. At the end of the day I get the decision to trust their ability to help those guys turn flashes of brilliance into sustained success.
No reason not to add another bat, though. It's not like they can't afford it.
You stated, "when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two?" we all know that they will not be free agents by the time it reaches that point. It's not a valid arguement it is speculative at best if I'm being generous.
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Jan 27, 2024 20:10:10 GMT -5
As the roster stands today, 81 wins and 81 losses. A ho hum mix of high hopes and low expectations. After some savy deadline moves and late season call ups, September will be the most fun month of the season.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jan 27, 2024 21:08:44 GMT -5
For what it's worth, ZiPS projects Giolito, Criswell, and Walter to outproduce Sale/Paxton/Kluber's output from last year by around 1 WAR in the same amount of innings, in no small part because they probably would've been better off giving Kluber's innings to Pablo Reyes. I guess I'm just curious what you want for depth. They've got Giolito, Bello, Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, Whitlock, Winckowski, Castillo, Criswell, Murphy, and Walter as options to start games. Sure, odds are good someone's gonna be banged up at any given moment, but it's not like they're all gonna have season-ending injuries. They have plenty of bodies to make a start here and there.
They could really use someone at the top, definitely. But are you gonna give Blake Snell $30 million/yr or Jordan Montgomery $25 million/yr when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two? I get why they're leaning "no" there. Missing out on Yamamoto basically guaranteed the roster wouldn't get where it needed to be this offseason. And like I said earlier, I do think this team is a tougher sell to a Lugo/Wacha/Lorenzen type, since it's really not guaranteed that they get enough starts to turn a short-term deal here into a bigger payday. At the end of the day I get the decision to trust their ability to help those guys turn flashes of brilliance into sustained success.
No reason not to add another bat, though. It's not like they can't afford it.
You stated, "when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two?" we all know that they will not be free agents by the time it reaches that point. It's not a valid arguement it is speculative at best if I'm being generous. Buehler and maybe Gallen are really the only ones I see as likely to sign an extension. Rosenthal has already said there’s a mutual understanding that Fried is leaving next offseason, for example. Burnes definitely isn’t re-signing. Rumors are that Houston doesn’t have the money for Valdez, either, and I’d imagine guys like Cease and Keller aren’t exactly raring to extend with their current teams. Tampa is Tampa, so I’d be surprised if they pay Eflin. And of course, those aren’t the only guys who would be hitting free agency over the next two years. Curious what it would be if you’re not being generous.
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Jan 27, 2024 21:22:34 GMT -5
You stated, "when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two?" we all know that they will not be free agents by the time it reaches that point. It's not a valid arguement it is speculative at best if I'm being generous. Buehler and maybe Gallen are really the only ones I see as likely to sign an extension. Rosenthal has already said there’s a mutual understanding that Fried is leaving next offseason, for example. Burnes definitely isn’t re-signing. Rumors are that Houston doesn’t have the money for Valdez, either, and I’d imagine guys like Cease and Keller aren’t exactly raring to extend with their current teams. Tampa is Tampa, so I’d be surprised if they pay Eflin. And of course, those aren’t the only guys who would be hitting free agency over the next two years. Curious what it would be if you’re not being generous. If you can get Monty for 22-4M per why would that have any bearing on signing a 1 next year?
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jan 27, 2024 22:17:41 GMT -5
Buehler and maybe Gallen are really the only ones I see as likely to sign an extension. Rosenthal has already said there’s a mutual understanding that Fried is leaving next offseason, for example. Burnes definitely isn’t re-signing. Rumors are that Houston doesn’t have the money for Valdez, either, and I’d imagine guys like Cease and Keller aren’t exactly raring to extend with their current teams. Tampa is Tampa, so I’d be surprised if they pay Eflin. And of course, those aren’t the only guys who would be hitting free agency over the next two years. Curious what it would be if you’re not being generous. If you can get Monty for 22-4M per why would that have any bearing on signing a 1 next year? Well getting him for 22-24 would be less than 25, right? That’s the whole point, why pay over the odds and go all out to get him when there are a number of options that, to my eye, look a lot more attractive coming up on the market.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jan 28, 2024 23:15:01 GMT -5
You stated, "when the likes of Max Fried, Walker Buehler, Corbin Burnes, Zach Wheeler, Zac Gallen, Framber Valdez, Dylan Cease, Mitch Keller, and Zach Eflin are gonna be free agents in the next year or two?" we all know that they will not be free agents by the time it reaches that point. It's not a valid arguement it is speculative at best if I'm being generous. Buehler and maybe Gallen are really the only ones I see as likely to sign an extension. Rosenthal has already said there’s a mutual understanding that Fried is leaving next offseason, for example. Burnes definitely isn’t re-signing. Rumors are that Houston doesn’t have the money for Valdez, either, and I’d imagine guys like Cease and Keller aren’t exactly raring to extend with their current teams. Tampa is Tampa, so I’d be surprised if they pay Eflin. And of course, those aren’t the only guys who would be hitting free agency over the next two years. Curious what it would be if you’re not being generous.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jan 28, 2024 23:31:15 GMT -5
Buehler and maybe Gallen are really the only ones I see as likely to sign an extension. Rosenthal has already said there’s a mutual understanding that Fried is leaving next offseason, for example. Burnes definitely isn’t re-signing. Rumors are that Houston doesn’t have the money for Valdez, either, and I’d imagine guys like Cease and Keller aren’t exactly raring to extend with their current teams. Tampa is Tampa, so I’d be surprised if they pay Eflin. And of course, those aren’t the only guys who would be hitting free agency over the next two years. Curious what it would be if you’re not being generous. Every-time someone list free agent pitchers to be, the list inevitably shrinks whether or not they are extended, which you already concede a few are likely to be, or they are traded, point being the list shrinks. No need not to be generous here.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Jan 29, 2024 11:25:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by iamnotluistiant on Jan 29, 2024 11:55:47 GMT -5
While it remains to be seen what is going to happen in the next couple of weeks but the Red Sox roster as currently constructed is somewhat like the Tower of London with a couple of base supports missing or using some wads of Bozooka bubble gum from those old sets of baseball cards to hold your dentures in place. It might work if everything goes right but it wouldn't take much to make it a disaster.
Can Whitlock get through a season without being injured? (The same question can be asked of half the roster). Can Houck make it through a line-up twice? Will we all be enthused about Raefala when he is hitting .080 in June as a regular in the line-up? What about Abreu when he is being called the 'Butcher of Fenway' when he is leading the major league outfielders in errors and is playing everyday because of injuries? What happens when Cora stops whining and showing up players in August if they get 15 ganes under .500
With rose colored glasses and squinting, there is path forward to 81 wins. It could just as easily (if not more likely) be 71.
Bring on the Patriots! lol
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jan 29, 2024 12:02:02 GMT -5
With rose colored glasses and squinting, there is path forward to 81 wins. It could just as easily (if not more likely) be 71. Actually based on publicly available models and data there is roughly a 50/50 chance they exceed 81 wins.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jan 29, 2024 12:21:39 GMT -5
With rose colored glasses and squinting, there is path forward to 81 wins. It could just as easily (if not more likely) be 71. Actually based on publicly available models and data there is roughly a 50/50 chance they exceed 81 wins. I really don’t get this insistence that people have that the team totally stinks. The team got 55 innings of 7+ ERA pitching from their opening day starter and something like -1.0 WAR from the middle infield. The fourth starter broke his face on a comebacker. Two of the three best players on the team missed the last month of the year with injury, and despite the other aforementioned disasters, they were on pace to win 85ish games before that happened. Like I get that we’re disappointed with the signals that ownership is putting out and that the last two years have been tough, but the constant doom and gloom is getting kinda ridiculous. The idea that the Red Sox are more likely to lose 90 games than win 81 in 2024 is just not founded on anything whatsoever.
|
|
shagworthy
Veteran
My neckbeard game is on point.
Posts: 1,492
|
Post by shagworthy on Jan 29, 2024 12:29:41 GMT -5
73, and they are out of it by the AS break and guys start getting sent to greener pastures.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jan 29, 2024 12:45:41 GMT -5
93 wins. Casas and Devers hit 40 bombs each, Duran hits 50 doubles and swipes 40 bags, Giolito puts up a vintage 4-WAR season, Pivetta finally puts it all together and gets Cy Young votes, Story stays healthy the whole season and hits 25 bombs, Grissom takes to second immediately and hits .300, Yoshida maintains an .880 OPS for the full season, and Abreu/O’Neill combine to significantly outproduce Verdugo and Duvall. Tanner Houck adds a nasty splitter that helps him hold lefties to a .700 OPS and greatly reduces his 3rd time penalty.
This isn’t especially likely to happen but it’s no less likely than the scenario where they lose 90 games.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jan 29, 2024 12:49:24 GMT -5
93 wins. Casas and Devers hit 40 bombs each, Duran hits 50 doubles and swipes 40 bags, Giolito puts up a vintage 4-WAR season, Pivetta finally puts it all together and gets Cy Young votes, Story stays healthy the whole season and hits 25 bombs, Grissom takes to second immediately and hits .300, Yoshida maintains an .880 OPS for the full season, and Abreu/O’Neill combine to significantly outproduce Verdugo and Duvall. Tanner Houck adds a nasty splitter that helps him hold lefties to a .700 OPS and greatly reduces his 3rd time penalty. This isn’t especially likely to happen but it’s no less likely than the scenario where they lose 90 games. This feels significantly less likely than a scenario in which they lose 90 games lol, and I say that as someone who is generally optimistic about things still. I would be thrilled if like 30% of these things happened.
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Jan 29, 2024 12:53:44 GMT -5
I'm going to go with 85 wins. I feel a lot better about a team with Story and Casas as the primary leaders than I did about a team with Verdugo being prominent. I also feel a lot better about the pitching than maybe is warranted, but I think the rotation is going to excel and be mostly healthy even with no new additions.
|
|
bloomstaxonomy
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 434
Member is Online
|
Post by bloomstaxonomy on Jan 29, 2024 12:54:22 GMT -5
Anybody who is good at statistics and/or psychology: is the 5th percentile outcome more likely than the 95th percentile outcome? Obviously the math will say no, but my gut says yes and I have nothing to back that up. I feel like it's easier to bet on failure, especially when it's a team stat, than success. So many things can go wrong but rarely does everything go right.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Jan 29, 2024 12:57:59 GMT -5
73, and they are out of it by the AS break and guys start getting sent to greener pastures. I agree with this. 73-75 wins. The offense will be a lot better, but unless Bello can make a Cy Young caliber leap, they took a sizable step back in the rotation. There's going to be a bunch of 9-7 losses in their future if they don't add anyone else.
|
|
|