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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by notguilty on Apr 13, 2016 9:46:36 GMT -5
I'm with you there. Kelly may surprise tonight, but I don't really see it. The O's really come to play for the Red Sox, and man, can they hit mediocre pitching. And the Sox starting staff is the absolute definition of mediocre. I mean, freakin' JJ Hardy kills the Sox and sucks against everybody else. You need very good pitching to shut them down, and other than Price, it's really not there for the Sox. I'm pretty scared guys like Buchholz and Kelly and Porcello will get enough "but it's still early" rope to bury this team fast, at least enough for Farrell to get fired. The hope, to be honest, is that E-Rod comes back soon, really lives up to that #2 spot, and Wright stays steady. Then you can handle the volatility from Porcello and Buchholz and send Kelly to the pen, and at the deadline, you trade for another real pitcher (you know DD will do it, he doesn't care about stinkin' prospects) + one of the kids (Johnson / Owens). You forgot the italics bro'? Lol, I did, Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Apr 13, 2016 8:11:17 GMT -5
I really hope Kelly throws well tonight. I'm so sick of losing to the Orioles. I'm with you there. Kelly may surprise tonight, but I don't really see it. The O's really come to play for the Red Sox, and man, can they hit mediocre pitching. And the Sox starting staff is the absolute definition of mediocre. I mean, freakin' JJ Hardy kills the Sox and sucks against everybody else. You need very good pitching to shut them down, and other than Price, it's really not there for the Sox. I'm pretty scared guys like Buchholz and Kelly and Porcello will get enough "but it's still early" rope to bury this team fast, at least enough for Farrell to get fired. The hope, to be honest, is that E-Rod comes back soon, really lives up to that #2 spot, and Wright stays steady. Then you can handle the volatility from Porcello and Buchholz and send Kelly to the pen, and at the deadline, you trade for another real pitcher (you know DD will do it, he doesn't care about stinkin' prospects) + one of the kids (Johnson / Owens).
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Apr 9, 2016 12:39:30 GMT -5
These awful pitchers are going to get Benintendi traded. Absolutely. I can see the DD plan from here. Trade 3-4 prospects for a starter (Moncada, Espinoza, Benitendi, doesn't matter who), then give $200m to Strasburg or some other FA.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Apr 9, 2016 7:01:31 GMT -5
A quick lesson in the vagaries of baseball: Matt Barnes has pitched 2.66 scoreless innings, but his average exit velocity: 95.5 MLB average: 90.3 He's fooling no one so far Is he getting outs? Which you know, I thought was kind of the point...?
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Apr 5, 2016 15:27:05 GMT -5
Farrell off the hot seat.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Apr 4, 2016 19:34:39 GMT -5
I shudder at the thought of Porcello facing this Blue Jays team...
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 31, 2016 10:08:10 GMT -5
At some point, you just have to try and go ahead and play the better players. Contracts, regression and whatever else be damned. I'm not a Farrell fan, but you really can't say he's not trying to win. Which is really all a fan can ask.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 31, 2016 6:52:22 GMT -5
For those worried about Porcello, I'm watching KC's Ventura get blasted by SF's minor leaguers, 8-1 in the 3rd. It may be a little early to get overwrought about the results of these games. The reaction to spring training records always amaze me. I guess it gives the media something to write about. Yeah, but that's awfully simplistic too. Spring training results are a bit like a Rorschach test. You kind of see what you want to see. The difference between the perception of Porcello and Ventura is that one reinforces a fear, while the other can be dismissed because of past performance. A big Porcello problem is home runs and not being very good for long stretches, so when you see him blasted a few times, I think you it's fair to worry/wonder, spring training or not (even if that's no reason to panic). Ventura, Price, Bumgarner, and some other guys, results are whatever. Get your work in and don't get hurt.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 30, 2016 8:28:48 GMT -5
OMG..The Red Sox are planning to play the players that give them the best chance to win at a given point in time! No "we know he's terrible, but his track record is great", "he's a veteran", "he's got a big contract so you've got to play him", etc. Somewhat reasonable excuses that meant you kept the better players on the bench or in the minors. I think that kind of complacency has really killed this team over the past two years. Now, maybe you trade a Panda or a Castillo and they go on to flourish elsewhere. But if that's the price to pay to get rid of complacency, I'll take it. Man, managing for your job is quite something. John Farrell feeling like the rest of us, actually having to perform to keep our jobs. Welcome to our world, John. You know, after a night of sleep, reading the thread and listening to some commentary as to why the Holt to LF might not be such a great move, I've changed my mind a bit. I still appreciate the team showing a sense of urgency, but I'm starting to think this is probably not the best roster construction (especially considering the fact that they let Murphy go). Now I'm panicked that John "I'm managing for my job here" Farrell is actually going to be making terrible decisions in the name of winning here and now. Flip-flopping, I know, probably speaks more to the real lack of trust in Farrell making the right calls. I mean, DD has to let him make those calls so he has cause to fire him later if they don't work out... My hope now is after Cleveland, Castillo goes back to regular LF and Brock to jack of all trades. Otherwise, yes, I don't quite understand why they'd have Rusney on the bench rather than playing every day in AAA.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 29, 2016 10:21:08 GMT -5
OMG..The Red Sox are planning to play the players that give them the best chance to win at a given point in time! No "we know he's terrible, but his track record is great", "he's a veteran", "he's got a big contract so you've got to play him", etc. Somewhat reasonable excuses that meant you kept the better players on the bench or in the minors. I think that kind of complacency has really killed this team over the past two years.
Now, maybe you trade a Panda or a Castillo and they go on to flourish elsewhere. But if that's the price to pay to get rid of complacency, I'll take it.
Man, managing for your job is quite something.
John Farrell feeling like the rest of us, actually having to perform to keep our jobs. Welcome to our world, John.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 22, 2016 7:52:40 GMT -5
How is it not a good sign? I would much rather my young players are doing well in spring training then not doing well. I'd rather they do well during the season that actually counts than spring training which hardly anybody remembers afterwards. It's nice to see Sam Travis rake now, but if he goes out and hits .275 with little power at Pawtucket, his lackluster season will be remembered a heckuva lot more than his "eye opening" spring training. I'd rather they do well in Spring Training and during the season. Come on man, everybody be happy now.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 19, 2016 13:47:36 GMT -5
Well, well, this thread so full of hope it makes me want to give up already...
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 18, 2016 11:28:30 GMT -5
Chris Sale taking this kinda personal, isn't he? It's like the kid was his best friend or something, lol.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 16, 2016 8:03:12 GMT -5
Maybe they're working on an extension...
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 14, 2016 7:47:01 GMT -5
I understand the need to cool expectations, but the flip side of that is to be too quickly dismissive. I haven't seen anybody saying that Shaw is going to be a HoF at 3B. Just that on the basis of what he did last year and this spring training, if he keeps most of this up, Shaw is the probably the best option you've got at third.
It is a bit silly, I think, to essentially tell people that what they are seeing with their eyes isn't really what they're seeing. And what's the cut-off for acceptable sample size? This isn't a JBJ hot spring training situation; He's been doing this since the second half of last year. At a minimum, you ride the hot hand. If he keeps this up.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 12, 2016 17:08:10 GMT -5
LOL, didn't notice but it's funny and I'm guessing intentional. Definitely a travisty of fairness. Missed most of the game but the highlight show all three HRs were hammered and cleared everything. Hanley, Young & Shaw. (Young's was of course off a lefty. I know it's spring training and all, but Shaw has been doing it since the second half of last year. How do you keep him off the everyday line-up at this point (assuming he keeps this up throughout spring training)? A "travisty" that'd be indeed.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 5, 2016 10:38:30 GMT -5
Sounds like Farrell's nice and focused on the season Seriously. They better get to a fast start, or Farrell is really going to be in trouble.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 3, 2016 16:54:02 GMT -5
The Dodgers remind me of the Red Sox and their "we have 5 aces" strategy last year. The strategy kinda makes some sense on paper. In practice, it looks pretty tough. In hindsight, it looks downright stupid. Which guy was Clayton Kershaw for the Red Sox last year? I find this question rather odd. Because the Dodgers have Kershaw fronting their staff, they can afford to have 3-4 injury question marks, including a bunch of guys coming back from Tommy John? Will Kershaw pitch every day? The Dodgers' rotation (prior to the Anderson injury), looked like this: -Kershaw - yeah, "he's the ace". [He is, I'm not being sarcastic] -Ryu - Coming back from injury, injury probn. -Kazmir - Durable, more of a #3, though could be a #2 in the NL. -Anderson - injury prone; makes Buchholz look like the iron man. -Maeda - First year in the Majors; #3? -Wood - ok, but injury question mark - #3/4 -McCarthy - on his way back from Tommy John, injury-prone. And some depth in the minors. I suppose one can find it ok, but if I'm a fan of a team spending $300m on payroll, I can't say I'd be too ecstatic about it. My point wasn't that the Dodgers rotation 2016 = Red Sox rotation 2015. It was that the broad approach in building the rotation, like the approach used by the Red Sox, was riskier than it perhaps needed to be (notwithstanding the distribution of that risk). I'll just agree to disagree on that I guess. I mean last year, I actually defended the Red Sox approach, lol. And the Dodgers have like 5 genius GMs, so what do I know.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 3, 2016 14:03:40 GMT -5
The Dodgers remind me of the Red Sox and their "we have 5 aces" strategy last year. The strategy kinda makes some sense on paper. In practice, it looks pretty tough. In hindsight, it looks downright stupid.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 2, 2016 15:26:04 GMT -5
Hanley hasn't had any difficult plays that I've seen. He had a recovered bobble on a high chopper in the first inning today. Looks OK stretching at first but no extreme stretches. Not much 'scouting' to go on, likely more info from watching infield practice. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 2, 2016 15:05:06 GMT -5
Given all the silly hoopla from the start of spring training, I'm surprised there's so little discussion/insight on how Hanley looks at 1B (I don't know, genuinely wondering). I take it that means he looks ok. And I fully expect people to leap out of the woodwork once he gets his first couple of errors.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Feb 29, 2016 10:16:42 GMT -5
I think I'm going to be sick. Should have been Betts, Bogaerts, and Swihart. I don't get this. The Red Sox added the AL CY young runner-up and the most successful closer over the past five years. Why would they NOT be on the media guide? This is soxprospects, man. Even if they added Cy young himself, we'd still want Mookie, X and Swihart on the cover, lol.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Feb 24, 2016 23:14:01 GMT -5
Anyone who actually listened to what Henry said rather than just believe what the media manipulate his words into, clearly heard him say they are looking to find the right balance between the traditional "scouting" outlook and the analytic outlook. It was heavily insinuated that Ben Cherrington was too absorbed in analytics that it lead to bad decisions. Additionally, he termed it evolutionary. Not revolutionary. Jeez. So Cherington was really the devil, heh? Who knew. And those damn Analytics. Surely things will be great now that he's gone.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Feb 24, 2016 9:19:54 GMT -5
Yeah, it's a fine line. Some of the commentary can get a bit over the top, but you can't just dismiss it as "biased". I shut down most of the local media, but I listen when somebody like Lou says it, even if I don't agree. As I said, he highlighted the fact that Hanley didn't seem to put in extra work last year, and we all saw it. And to be clear, from what I heard at least, he wasn't saying that Hanley shouldn't be laughing, etc. (now that would be silly). Just pointing that he's got a lot of work to do in pinning down some of the fundamentals of playing first base, and that the way he was going about it so far, goofing off, a little bit unfocused seemed a bit worrying. He talked about Hanley continuously snapping his glove (or something) when he received the ball, kind of to play it "I got this" cool, but a habit that may lead to a lot of dropped balls if that keeps up.
By the same token, he seemed surprisingly positive on Sandoval's bat, and has been pretty positive all along on Kelly as a fifth starter. So I actually happen to think it's fair to pay attention to his commentary.
Now Felger, Mazz, Ordway, people like that - just shut off the radio, that's what I do.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Feb 24, 2016 7:55:16 GMT -5
Reports out of camp is that Hanley is goofing around and laughing while not putting extra work at first base already. Is anybody else worried? I kind of am, I want this guy succeed here at first for just one year. The Sox could really use his bat potential this year. God this stinks link? Lou Merloni. Heard him on the radio yesterday, saying pretty much that. I'm mixed about it, because Merloni's opinion is probably the only one in the local baseball media I really care to listen to, but I think he's been pretty hard on Hanley (vs. Sandoval, for example). At the same time, he said this last year as well, about Hanley not taking the time to do the work in Left field, and that showed up in the results.
|
|
|