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.
9/17-9/19 Red Sox vs. Orioles Series Thread
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 19, 2013 13:01:17 GMT -5
I agree this will happen by why SHOULD it happen? I would think the Sox would choose Bogaerts on the post-season roster over McDonald so he'd be available to hit lefties and I don't think he'd be an automatic out against righties, so the Bogaerts option would still be there. According to Eck anyways during the broadcast one of the Salty "double steals" over the past few days was due to a missed sign by Xander and only a missed tag or call saved them. This factors in regardless of if a prospect board likes it or not when they decide playoff rosters and playing time. Seems to me ECK is still wrong there, (he was wrong when he called it a double steal on the broadcast too) when Xander swung at that pitch that was way outside and unhittable it wasn't a missed sign but an unhittable pitch that no one could do anything with. Then again on another issue last night... Just like when you go back and look at Middlebrooks at second while his hand was on the foot instead of the bag my TIVO sure shows the tag never touched him and was Phantom as it was only on the dirt short of his body. But heck eck is fun to listen to on TV. So does that factor into the playoff or do announcers now get to decide on what they think they see and make the decision themselves for Farrell?
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Sept 19, 2013 13:28:23 GMT -5
Lol Seriously people. So we should only talk about the success not an obvious liability the Red Sox have heading into the playoffs. What's wrong with making that point even when it has been made a gazillion times? There is nothing wrong with being critical about it. I don't even care if its Bogaerts. I sure as heck know there are better options on the bench against a tough lefty late in the game at home to potentially end the game than Drew. And guess what if it happens in the playoffs prepare to hear about it. Because it's annoying and pointless if it's constantly being brought up and nothings changed. We know where Farrell stands on the issue, and we also know that's he's wrong. So, until something changes, clogging the thread with straight bitching about it and not adding any other substance to the post is just a nuisance. It has nothing to do with trying to only talk about success and not liabilities, so I wouldn't try to generalize the X/Drew case as doing such. It's probably a lot more engaging when we discuss and argue about liabilities on here, typically, but this isn't about that. It's about how the complaints are being posted constantly in these threads without any new noteworthy comments being brought to the table. Also, if it couldn't be anymore clear, this is on Farrell, not Drew. Drew's been a truly remarkable shortstop against righties, so it gets under my skin a bit when people rip on him whenever they see him in a lineup vs. a lefty. Yes, it's a terrible decision, and I don't think you can keep backing it up with defense or "he knows the plays," but it's not his fault. I don't think it helped that the Rangers blew it as well.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Sept 19, 2013 14:27:10 GMT -5
Pedroia 2B, Nava RF, Ortiz DH, Napoli 1B, Carp LF, Saltalamacchia C, Middlebrooks 3B, Drew SS, Bradley Jr CF, Lackey SP.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 19, 2013 15:29:57 GMT -5
Just stopping by the gameday thread with the thought that some people might be losing it and sure enough the same usual suspects are barely treading water in a pool of tears. Guys, I can't say that I disagree with the whole Stephen Drew vs. lefties dilemma, but this has been happening since Bogaerts was called up. Honestly, I don't think it's going to change once the playoffs begin. I think Farrell views Drew as his starting shortstop and I think you're going to see him start vs LHP (or at least >50% of at bats) in the playoffs. I don't love this, but its time to stop the same tired complaints. Deal with it. You're derailing what should be a fun thread to read given the unexpected success of the sox this season. I agree with this in the mean except for the highlighted part. Most managers manage one way in a 162 game season and slightly differently in the playoffs. For example, Francona got tighter with the pen, had reliable guys go longer etc. One would expect this manager to do so, as well (though it's not guaranteed) and I think some here have the expectation that he might start doing so now since he's trying a few other options to see how players respond. That, and what is it to be a Red Sox fan (or a true fan of any team) if you're not frustrated by bases loaded no outs and no runs scored (two nights in a row no less, and both times having the starter teetering on coming out)? And what fan of ANY team doesn't flame the manager/coach when they do something repeatedly that has repeated shown itself to be ineffective. I mean make a mistake once, ok. Make a mistake 187 times and counting, well, people who care will notice. It's a gameday thread. It's a vent when things go wrong. In a way there's a tremendous existential beauty to the whole thing. That's gotta have value, right? That and typing it out here instead of dropping F-bombs so loud you can't even hear your neighbors swearing over the exact same play. Well I hope you're right for the sake of the Red Sox and the sake of this board, but if Farrell is suddenly thinking of batting Bogaerts against lefties in the playoffs, I'd sure as hell be trying to get him some at bats against LHP now. I think its one thing managing the bullpen a bit differently in the playoffs, but I don't know if you all of a sudden turn to a strict platoon when you haven't all year. I just don't see it happening unfortunately.....unless you know, unless Xander pulls on a Tonya Harding on Drew.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 19, 2013 15:50:54 GMT -5
I agree with this in the mean except for the highlighted part. Most managers manage one way in a 162 game season and slightly differently in the playoffs. For example, Francona got tighter with the pen, had reliable guys go longer etc. One would expect this manager to do so, as well (though it's not guaranteed) and I think some here have the expectation that he might start doing so now since he's trying a few other options to see how players respond. That, and what is it to be a Red Sox fan (or a true fan of any team) if you're not frustrated by bases loaded no outs and no runs scored (two nights in a row no less, and both times having the starter teetering on coming out)? And what fan of ANY team doesn't flame the manager/coach when they do something repeatedly that has repeated shown itself to be ineffective. I mean make a mistake once, ok. Make a mistake 187 times and counting, well, people who care will notice. It's a gameday thread. It's a vent when things go wrong. In a way there's a tremendous existential beauty to the whole thing. That's gotta have value, right? That and typing it out here instead of dropping F-bombs so loud you can't even hear your neighbors swearing over the exact same play. Well I hope you're right for the sake of the Red Sox and the sake of this board, but if Farrell is suddenly thinking of batting Bogaerts against lefties in the playoffs, I'd sure as hell be trying to get him some at bats against LHP now. I think its one thing managing the bullpen a bit differently in the playoffs, but I don't know if you all of a sudden turn to a strict platoon when you haven't all year. I just don't see it happening unfortunately.....unless you know, unless Xander pulls on a Tonya Harding on Drew. I did not pay ramieja to set me up for this: @alexspeier Farrell on possibility of Bogaerts PH for Drew: 'There might be a time for that.' Suggests decision could change when more urgency to games
So it appears that Farrell even agrees with us that with all this data in hand, the guy who has traditionally hit lefties may well be a better choice when the game is on the line than the guy who doesn't. But it still looks like Mr. Farrell's going to wait until the Titanic's sinking before he checks whether the lifeboat might work or not.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Sept 19, 2013 15:57:25 GMT -5
Well I hope you're right for the sake of the Red Sox and the sake of this board, but if Farrell is suddenly thinking of batting Bogaerts against lefties in the playoffs, I'd sure as hell be trying to get him some at bats against LHP now. I think its one thing managing the bullpen a bit differently in the playoffs, but I don't know if you all of a sudden turn to a strict platoon when you haven't all year. I just don't see it happening unfortunately.....unless you know, unless Xander pulls on a Tonya Harding on Drew. I did not pay ramieja to set me up for this: @alexspeier Farrell on possibility of Bogaerts PH for Drew: 'There might be a time for that.' Suggests decision could change when more urgency to games
So it appears that Farrell even agrees with us that with all this data in hand, the guy who has traditionally hit lefties may well be a better choice when the game is on the line than the guy who doesn't. But it still looks like Mr. Farrell's going to wait until the Titanic's sinking before he checks whether the lifeboat might work or not. This is, for me, the most frustrating part of Sox management in particular.....deference to the established played when you know, in your heart, that it is the wrong decision.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 19, 2013 16:05:44 GMT -5
I did not pay ramieja to set me up for this: @alexspeier Farrell on possibility of Bogaerts PH for Drew: 'There might be a time for that.' Suggests decision could change when more urgency to games
So it appears that Farrell even agrees with us that with all this data in hand, the guy who has traditionally hit lefties may well be a better choice when the game is on the line than the guy who doesn't. But it still looks like Mr. Farrell's going to wait until the Titanic's sinking before he checks whether the lifeboat might work or not. This is, for me, the most frustrating part of Sox management in particular.....deference to the established played when you know, in your heart, that it is the wrong decision. And if the player is a veteran and you think you're going to lose him because you pinch hit for him when a win is in the line, then he's not much of a veteran - or at least a professional - anyway. It was the same when they brought in a righty to face Ross late in the tie game with men in scoring position. You have two catchers on the bench, both of whom hit righties better, and a few left-handed hitters avail. Shouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger there either. The idea is to win the game. And as Farrell said yesterday before the game, "We haven't clinched anything yet."
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 19, 2013 16:54:21 GMT -5
Nice find Senor Guidas
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 19, 2013 17:01:53 GMT -5
OK, now I think Farrell is just trolling us: "Going forward, when there’s maybe more of a sense of urgency with postseason situations, I’m sure that’s something that [Drew] and I will talk to well in advance when that situation may come up again,” Farrell said of the possibility of using Bogaerts to pinch-hit for Drew against lefties. “ I’m well aware of what Stephen is doing against left-handed pitching, but there might be a time for that.” Translation: "I know the facts. But I wouldn't let stuff like facts and data and a large body of past performance and all that other junk ever cloud my judgement when it comes to what I believe about veteran ballplayers." fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2013/09/19/john-farrell-there-might-be-a-time-to-pinch-hit-xander-bogaerts-for-stephen-drew-in-the-playoffs/
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 19, 2013 17:23:37 GMT -5
I mean, would you rather he pretend to be ignorant of the splits or dismiss them entirely? As a Red Sox fan who wants them to do well in the playoffs, isn't this the best possible explanation for Farrell's tactical decisions the past few weeks?
|
|
|
Post by MLBDreams on Sept 19, 2013 17:34:23 GMT -5
Oakland is only 2 games behind the Red Sox for AL best overall record & home field advantage throughout the playoffs. The problem is John Farrell didn't do his job as the game management as Baltimore continued to punch them out by late innings and won both games. They've been unable to push them away from the race as WC hopeful. The Orioles are more likely to knock them out of the home field advantage during the final season if the Red Sox won the division and give the players rest for (?) games. Oakland have the easiest rest of the schedule.
All I want is they playing for win the games until they clinched the home field advantage. John Farrell, please use the common of sense with his game management. Play for win!
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Sept 19, 2013 18:06:30 GMT -5
I mean, would you rather he pretend to be ignorant of the splits or dismiss them entirely? As a Red Sox fan who wants them to do well in the playoffs, isn't this the best possible explanation for Farrell's tactical decisions the past few weeks? As a guy that has been vocal about pinch hitting for Drew my main worry was if this was going to continue in the playoffs. It seems like it will not.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 19, 2013 18:50:36 GMT -5
Attention John Lackey: Run Support has entered the building.
|
|
|
Post by nationinthesouth on Sept 19, 2013 19:42:28 GMT -5
This game is following an eerily similiar path.
Edit- Oh wait, are we not supposed to talk?, not sure of the rule in this situation
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 19, 2013 19:50:38 GMT -5
Katrina and the Waves currently have more hits than the Orioles.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Sept 19, 2013 19:52:46 GMT -5
Huge hit on an infield single for the Rangers, barely beating out the throw. 2 runs scored, 6-2 Rangers.
We could be looking to clinch tomorrow with Lester on the mound.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 19, 2013 19:56:05 GMT -5
Watch Ken Burn's Baseball (which you should do for its own sake) and look at how many people were in the stands for games in the 1950s and 1960s. You'll see many empty seats. BTW, TV Ratings are down for most sports. Mostly, it has to do with the increased number of alternative options available on TV. 40 years ago, when the World Series Ratings spiked, there really was not much else on TV. Now, there are tons of cable options, not to mention on demand, Netflix, apple TV, HBOgo, ect... Thanks for a thoughtful reply. Some good points. Baseball has always had it's ups and downs but it was by far the most popular sport in the 50's and 60's. I mentioned the decline was do to many things. TV choices are many now. But the population has also doubled since the decades you mentioned. So maybe % of people is a better way to look at it.Football, pro and college kill baseball in ratings. Basketball beats baseball head to head most of the time. Soccer is being played by more kids than baseball. TV ratings still lag but are growing not declining. Heck, golf beats Saturday baseball on fox most weeks in the ratings. Yeah, back in the glory days, when the Brooklyn Dodgers packed up and moved because they couldn't get anyone to come to the games: www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/laatte.shtmlOr look at the Red Sox: www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/laatte.shtmlIn the "golden age" of the 50s-60s, the Sox were lucky to average 20,000 fans a game. If the percentage of people interested in baseball is down, the absolute number of people interested in baseball continues to rise. It's a healthy sport by any measure.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 19, 2013 20:01:12 GMT -5
I'll never understand why Farrell didn't pull Lackey earlier
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Sept 19, 2013 20:15:42 GMT -5
This is, for me, the most frustrating part of Sox all the f*cking teams management in particular.....deference to the established played when you know, in your heart, that it is the wrong decision. FTFY.
|
|
|
Post by threeifbaerga on Sept 19, 2013 20:17:45 GMT -5
It's strange how there are much fewer posts when the team is winning the game and looking good.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Sept 19, 2013 20:21:32 GMT -5
Some of these teams just need to move. Its as simple as that. There are plenty of cities out there that would support MLB teams that don't have teams.
What would be really intriguing would be to open up a team in Mexico City.
You also got cities like Memphis, Louisville, Portland OR, Charlotte, Vancouver, etc that could support teams.
|
|
|
Post by nationinthesouth on Sept 19, 2013 20:21:36 GMT -5
It's strange how there are much fewer posts when the team is winning the game and looking good. Arm chair Managers/GM'S/Base Coaches/ Bat Boy's are waiting in the weeds....something will happen at some point. -Sending Lackey out for the ninth.....They are getting ready to tee it up
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 19, 2013 20:38:51 GMT -5
See what Lackey can do wifh just a little run support.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 19, 2013 20:42:57 GMT -5
Some of these teams just need to move. Its as simple as that. There are plenty of cities out there that would support MLB teams that don't have teams. What would be really intriguing would be to open up a team in Mexico City. You also got cities like Memphis, Louisville, Portland OR, Charlotte, Vancouver, etc that could support teams. Hey if we here in the e Mp Tyland are lucky maybe the Mariners will now move and we won't have to be blacked out when we live 479 miles away! Come on baseball now that Nintendo is dead move em to Memphis!!!
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 19, 2013 20:48:06 GMT -5
You also got cities like Memphis, Louisville, Portland OR, Charlotte, Vancouver, etc that could support teams. I really can't tell if you're being sarcastic here.
|
|
|