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.
10/8 Red Sox @ Rays ALDS Game 4 Thread
|
Post by Jonathan Singer on Oct 8, 2013 7:15:35 GMT -5
10/8 Red Sox (RHP Jake Peavy) @ Rays (RHP Jeremy Hellickson) 8:37 pm ET, TBS/WEEI ALDS Game 4Season SeriesRed Sox won 12-7 over the Rays How they got here?Red Sox 97-65 AL East Champions Rays 92-71 Beat Texas in AL Wild Card 1-game tiebreaker and Cleveland in 1-game Wild Card playoff Playoff HistoryPlayoff Appearances: 22 (Last in 2009) Last World Series Title: 2007 over Colorado Last playoff meeting with Tampa: 2008 ALCS won by Tampa in 7 games MLB StandingsRed Sox Hitting StatsRed Sox Pitching StatsMLB ScoreboardMLB TransactionsWeatherSeries Thread Disclaimer: The SoxProspects Moderators will be somewhat liberal in policing the Red Sox "Series" Threads. Some of the Ground Rules are applied loosely in here, as we understand that there is a tendency to want to react (or overreact) to every play of a Sox game with one line reactionary posts. Those posts are okay in the Red Sox Series threads to a point - we certainly appreciate the passion. Just try not to overdo it, and try to maintain some semblance of reason. In addition, please don't let those type of posts spill over to other more substantive threads, where they may be deleted. -The Management
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 8, 2013 8:47:14 GMT -5
Who thought 837 would be a good start time?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 8, 2013 8:59:14 GMT -5
Who thought 837 would be a good start time? The television geniuses at TBS.
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Oct 8, 2013 9:16:25 GMT -5
A rematch from 9/12 (Rays won 4-3). Both Ellsbury and Victorino were sitting. Rubby gave up game winner in 8th.
Peavy has to show better command or else this could quickly become a slugfest.
|
|
|
Post by rangoon82 on Oct 8, 2013 10:36:07 GMT -5
This Rays lineup can be shut down. This would be a good time for Peavy to be the ace the Sox traded for and for the bats to pound a pitcher who has been mediocre at best this year.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 8, 2013 11:15:37 GMT -5
Hellickson's season breaks down neatly into four chunks.
First, an absolutely bipolar phase of 14 starts, four great, ten awful: game scores of 71 (against us) and 76 back-to-back in his 2nd and 3rd starts, and 69 in each of his 10th and 13th starts, but 21 to 46 in the others. Overall ERA, 5.67.
Next, a 7 game stretch with a 2.07 ERA. That one started against us.
Then a 6 game stretch with a 9.00 ERA. His best game score in this stretch, 44, is worse than his worst in the previous, 49.
Finally, September, with a very good start against the Angels, a meh one against us, and bad ones against the Rangers and Blue Jays. His ERA as a starter was 5.50, so this may be the same as phase 1.
That they're going with him suggests that they have some saberemtric reasons why they think he matches up well against us.
I have to do some errands, but when I get back I'll try to run the components and BABIP luck analyses on those stretches (including separating out the good from the bad of the bipolar phases to see if they match the good and bad stretches) and maybe even look at some pitch/fx data.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Oct 8, 2013 11:53:59 GMT -5
wouldn't it be more relevant to see how Hellickson historically matches up to the sox perticluar line-up and how he has faired against these hitters this year.
Any word if Will Myers will play?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 8, 2013 11:53:59 GMT -5
It seems to me that the Rays could well start Hellickson and dump him for Moore at some point early in the game to turn the entire Redsox lineup around. The Redsox are designed for platooning in order to optimize performance. This approach can be used against us in this instance and I bet it will. We hopefully put up some good numbers against Hellickson early.
And I would leave Ortiz in the game almost all the time. I know he got on first with no outs and logic would indicate that as an ideal time to put in the pinch runner but our guy is not capable of getting a secure SB on demand, even though his career numbers are perfect. He was actually thrown out in this instance but we got the call and before this he was extremely hesitant to run when everyone knew he was going. We can't count on him to steal an on demand base when needed.
I'd rather have Ortiz in the game, even with no outs in the 8th. Some things defie logic. I'm not taking Ortiz out of the game period unless the stars align to 10,000 year precision.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Oct 8, 2013 11:55:52 GMT -5
If the sox beat up Hellickson, you'll see archer before Moore
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Oct 8, 2013 12:13:59 GMT -5
wouldn't it be more relevant to see how Hellickson historically matches up to the sox perticluar line-up and how he has faired against these hitters this year. Papi (1.391) and Salty (1.233) have hit Hellickson well. Pedroia (.597), Ellsbury (.639), Nava (.368), Napoli (.167), and Middlebrooks (.167) have all struggled (min 10 PAs). Napoli, Pedroia, Victorino, Nava, and Middlebrooks were a combined 2/30 with no XB hits and no BBs this year against Hellickson.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Oct 8, 2013 12:28:33 GMT -5
An unlikely lineup that'd I'd like to see out there tonight:
CF Ellsbury RF Victorino 2B Pedroia DH Ortiz LF Nava (PH-Gomes) 1B Carp (PH-Nap) C Salty (tough to have him and Drew back to back with the lefty threat, but I can't justify puting him above Nava or Carp, regardless of success vs. Helickson) SS Drew 3B Bogaerts
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Oct 8, 2013 12:32:05 GMT -5
Stating the obvious, you can't let Longoria beat you. I would pitch around him every time, just like the Rays did last night with Ortiz. I would also put Nava behind Ortiz in the lineup to rack up the pitch count for Hellickson. Win tonight.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Oct 8, 2013 13:27:17 GMT -5
Hellickson's season breaks down neatly into four chunks. First, an absolutely bipolar phase of 14 starts, four great, ten awful: game scores of 71 (against us) and 76 back-to-back in his 2nd and 3rd starts, and 69 in each of his 10th and 13th starts, but 21 to 46 in the others. Overall ERA, 5.67. Next, a 7 game stretch with a 2.07 ERA. That one started against us. Then a 6 game stretch with a 9.00 ERA. His best game score in this stretch, 44, is worse than his worst in the previous, 49. Finally, September, with a very good start against the Angels, a meh one against us, and bad ones against the Rangers and Blue Jays. His ERA as a starter was 5.50, so this may be the same as phase 1. That's not neat at all. In the first "stretch" he was up and down. In the next half "stretch" he was mostly up, but also some middle In the next half "stretch" he was mostly down, but also some middle (summarize 14 starts as "up and down" if you please) In the final "stretch, he pitched only 4 games, but was also up and down. Seems to me like he's up and down. Also, the xFIP's don't match the game scores, so.... once again, see first part of this sentence.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 8, 2013 13:41:14 GMT -5
A rematch from 9/12 (Rays won 4-3). Both Ellsbury and Victorino were sitting. Rubby gave up game winner in 8th. Peavy has to show better command or else this could quickly become a slugfest. Want more negative nostalgia? lets hope it doesn't turn out as bad as when Johnny Mac went with Al Nipper in game 4 of the '86 series, who at that time had the worst ERA to start a post season game EVER and put the Mets right back in the thing by promptly getting blown away and allowing the mets to tie the series up after the Sox had taken the 1st 2 games at NY.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 8, 2013 14:25:36 GMT -5
A rematch from 9/12 (Rays won 4-3). Both Ellsbury and Victorino were sitting. Rubby gave up game winner in 8th. Peavy has to show better command or else this could quickly become a slugfest. Perhaps ironically, another game JF mailed in.
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Oct 8, 2013 14:37:12 GMT -5
Of course the purpose of that decision was to get Hurst and Clemens extra rest for their starts, which looked brilliant until the wee hours of that Saturday night. Nipper wasn't that bad in game 4 either.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 8, 2013 15:17:20 GMT -5
Ryan Hannable ?@hannable84 37s Red Sox Game 4: Ellsbury CF, Victorino RF, Pedroia 2B, Ortiz DH, Napoli 1B, Nava LF, Saltalamacchia C, Drew SS, Middlebrooks 3B, Peavy SP
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 8, 2013 16:03:36 GMT -5
No Carp at 1st. There goes that idea.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 8, 2013 16:07:20 GMT -5
The Nava-Saltalamacchia-Drew trio in a row again. Must be counting on getting to Hellickson early.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 8, 2013 16:19:12 GMT -5
The Nava-Saltalamacchia-Drew trio in a row again. Must be counting on getting to Hellickson early. Hey's just trying to infuriate us by setting up a situation that calls for a right handed pinch hitter.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 8, 2013 16:27:35 GMT -5
Of course the purpose of that decision was to get Hurst and Clemens extra rest for their starts, which looked brilliant until the wee hours of that Saturday night. Nipper wasn't that bad in game 4 either. Too bad Tom Seaver got hurt that September or else he would have gotten the call against the Mets. I would have loved to see Seaver pitch against the Mets in the World Series. As it was Nipper was mediocre and Ron Darling pitched well that game, but the larger plan did look great until that 10th inning.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 8, 2013 16:34:22 GMT -5
This Rays lineup can be shut down. This would be a good time for Peavy to be the ace the Sox traded for and for the bats to pound a pitcher who has been mediocre at best this year. Don't think the Sox traded for Peavy to be an ace. They felt he's a quality pitcher and better option than Doubront and certainly better than Dempster and he was. They finished one game ahead of Oakland for home field advantage so the deal probably helped them get over that hump. I certainly hope he pitches like an ace tonight. The Red Sox could use a shutdown performance from a starter. My concern is that Lackey, Buchholz, and Peavy went a long time without making starts and Lackey and Buchholz didn't look particularly sharp. I hope the two weeks between starts doesn't mess up Peavy particularly with him experimenting with going to his old delivery. Before the change in delivery/arm angle he hardly walked anybody. I don't think his control has been as sharp since the change. Wonder what the layoff does to him. I think Napoli is key as there's no chance they pitch to Ortiz in a meaningful situation. They need Napoli to hit with power, particularly with runners on base. Other than Ortiz nobody has went deep for the Sox. Hope that happens tonight and hope it's with runners on. Hellickson, like Peavy, is certainly prone to the long ball. I also hope Farrell uses Tazawa and Breslow more smartly this time around.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 8, 2013 17:19:53 GMT -5
Of course the purpose of that decision was to get Hurst and Clemens extra rest for their starts, which looked brilliant until the wee hours of that Saturday night. Nipper wasn't that bad in game 4 either. Too bad Tom Seaver got hurt that September or else he would have gotten the call against the Mets. I would have loved to see Seaver pitch against the Mets in the World Series. As it was Nipper was mediocre and Ron Darling pitched well that game, but the larger plan did look great until that 10th inning. Yeah. Hopes were Seaver was going to be that 4th guy to team up with "Can Man" and help them out in the post season. Short of that? No way Nipper should have gotten a sniff of a start vs an offense as good as the Mets had in a game with that much importance attached. A classic Mac, Zimmer type blunder after they had already blown game 3 at home and were in danger of falling into a 2-2 tie after taking the 1st 2 at NY. The rotation was so awful that season before the acquisition of Seaver, they really only had a chance to win outside of slugfests whenever Clemens, Hurst or Boyd was pitching anyway. Nipper was a disaster on the mound and the mets had pitching. Am hoping Farrell does wake up some on his decisions. They can be overlooked during the regular season, not during the playoffs and especially this BP usage that is really starting to look a lot like the befuddled mess that Francona would go about constantly.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 8, 2013 17:51:33 GMT -5
Hellickson's season breaks down neatly into four chunks. First, an absolutely bipolar phase of 14 starts, four great, ten awful: game scores of 71 (against us) and 76 back-to-back in his 2nd and 3rd starts, and 69 in each of his 10th and 13th starts, but 21 to 46 in the others. Overall ERA, 5.67. Next, a 7 game stretch with a 2.07 ERA. That one started against us. Then a 6 game stretch with a 9.00 ERA. His best game score in this stretch, 44, is worse than his worst in the previous, 49. Finally, September, with a very good start against the Angels, a meh one against us, and bad ones against the Rangers and Blue Jays. His ERA as a starter was 5.50, so this may be the same as phase 1. That's not neat at all. In the first "stretch" he was up and down. In the next half "stretch" he was mostly up, but also some middleIn the next half "stretch" he was mostly down, but also some middle(summarize 14 starts as "up and down" if you please) In the final "stretch, he pitched only 4 games, but was also up and down. Seems to me like he's up and down. As we're about to see, there's no resemblance at all between the good games in what I called the bipolar stretches, and the sustained good stretch, or between the bipolar bad games and the sustained bad stretch. As I pointed out, by game score, all of the second stretch middle was better than all of the third stretch middle. You want to start an analysis like this with the actual results, for which game score is the best quick estimator, rather than making assumptions based on what may have happened underlying the results. Because the latter is precisely what we're trying to determine. And, yes, the last stretch was just four games (two good, two bad), which is why I want to see if it's the same as the first stretch and can be combined with it. xFIP is shit.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Oct 8, 2013 18:26:39 GMT -5
The Nava-Saltalamacchia-Drew trio in a row again. Must be counting on getting to Hellickson early. Yep. It's a huge issue late in game games though, considering how unlikely it is that Farrell will actually pinch-hit for Drew. That's why I advocated for Nava in the 5th spot ahead of Napoli. That breaks up the tough string against a lefty, and Nava is better against righties than Nap and Gomes is a plenty solid enough against lefties to justify having him in the 5-hole late in a game.
|
|
|