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.
10/16 Red Sox vs. Tigers ALCS Game 4 Thread
|
Post by jmei on Oct 16, 2013 21:41:18 GMT -5
The Red Sox now have seven singles, three doubles, and a walk. The Tigers have five singles, two doubles, and four walks, but lead by five runs.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 16, 2013 21:44:07 GMT -5
As a general rule, the team with the higher "net bases" (TB + BB + HBP - GDP) wins.
We have a 14 to 12 edge in net bases.
The silver lining here is that this impending loss is all about sequencing rather than raw performance, and Ellsbury and others have looked much better at the plate than previously.
|
|
|
Post by nationinthesouth on Oct 16, 2013 21:44:49 GMT -5
Maybe the Sox losing makes me extra grumpy....but Fox broadcasts are unwatchable
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 16, 2013 21:46:43 GMT -5
Okay, that does it.
|
|
|
Post by huskies15 on Oct 16, 2013 21:46:53 GMT -5
at least victorino still remembers how to play a good rf
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,666
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 16, 2013 21:53:00 GMT -5
As a general rule, the team with the higher "net bases" (TB + BB + HBP - GDP) wins. We have a 14 to 12 edge in net bases. The silver lining here is that this impending loss is all about sequencing rather than raw performance, and Ellsbury and others have looked much better at the plate than previously. Generally what you say makes sense, but it's of little consolation tonight. Frankly the Sox have stolen two games this series, and they still haven't figured out a way to score off the Tigers' starters. Honestly, I think they look better at the plate because they're not facing Sanchez, Scherzer, or Verlander. Fister is very hittable. The other pitchers not so much. They're extreme power pitchers and the Sox hitters haven't really been able to catch up to them. If they don't then the Sox will not win this series. They can't rely on miracle comebacks and expect Lackey to outduel Verlander again - I mean Lackey pitched the game of his life. The Sox really need to take Game 5 and Buchholz finally has to pitch the way he did before he got hurt. The Sox need to stop being shut down for five to six innings at a clip. The only silver lining I can think of is that if the Sox are to lose, I'm glad they got pounded. I'd hate to see them lose with Koji and Breslow pitching. These guys should have enough rest to be available for the rest of the series.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 16, 2013 22:00:00 GMT -5
At the start of this inning ...
The Sox in this game are 7/14, 2 2B with the bases empty, and 3/17, 2B, BB with runners on, including 1/12 with RISP.
The extra bitch is that, to a small and large extent respectively, the Tigers as a team and Fister in particular were bedeviled by the opposite splits.
The team allowed a 662 OPS with the bases empty, 708 with runners on, 734 with RISP.
Fister allowed 684 with bases empty, 744 with runners on, 787 with RISP.
Baseball.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,666
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 16, 2013 22:10:35 GMT -5
It seems to me that ever since Jake Peavy went back to his old delivery, the one that Pedro suggested he go back to, Peavy's control hasn't been as good and he hasn't been as effective.
Before then, he rarely walked anybody. He'd give up a bunch of HRs, but his BB/9 was great. It seems to me since then that his control hasn't been anywhere near as sharp. Tonight he walked three batters in an inning, which is something he wasn't doing previously with his old windup.
Anybody else notice this? Strange that he'd experiment with this so late in the season. You'd think he'd try this in spring training to master the feel of it.
|
|
|
Post by bsout2 on Oct 16, 2013 22:11:17 GMT -5
Kinda worried about the series now. Drew and Middlebrooks have become a collective black hole at the bottom of the lineup. It will interesting to see if either is sat tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 16, 2013 22:14:18 GMT -5
As a general rule, the team with the higher "net bases" (TB + BB + HBP - GDP) wins. We have a 14 to 12 edge in net bases. The silver lining here is that this impending loss is all about sequencing rather than raw performance, and Ellsbury and others have looked much better at the plate than previously. 1. I contend that this example is spurious as the quality of the pitcher the Sox faced tonight is nowhere near equivalent to the other three they have faced thus far. 2. I also contend that there are no silver linings to losing winnable games in which the loss is almost completely self-inflicted through unforced errors (Peavy's rash of walks in the second) and actual errors (Pedroia's bungling of a room-service double play) as well as Farrell being too slow to get a reliever into the game. 3. I finally contend that this is an extremely damaging loss because of the quality of the pitcher the Sox faced tonight - a #2-3 starter. Losing to Fister has forced them to now win the series against pitchers who profile more as # 1-2s, especially given that Buchholz has not pitched like a #1 since his return from injury and that Lackey's tremendous performance was likely aberrant. Meanwhile, Sanchez, Scherzer and Verlander have a much higher probability of repeating their relative performances in games 1-3 than Lackey does in repeating his, or Buchholz has of rediscovering his pre-injury performance level. And if that occurs the cheery silver lining articulated above will be moot as the Sox offense will likely rediscover its anemia. Done contending. Now a quick gut feeling: The Sox lost the series tonight. Taking one out of the next three is not unreasonable. Taking two, seems a much less likely outcome. Caveat: I hope I'm completely wrong about the gut feeling (and will continue to watch every inning and root for wins).
|
|
|
Post by nationinthesouth on Oct 16, 2013 22:16:37 GMT -5
Kinda worried about the series now. Drew and Middlebrooks have become a collective black hole at the bottom of the lineup. It will interesting to see if either is sat tomorrow. Who are both hitting for a higher avg. than Ortiz. Obviously the one hit being huge but Papi needs to step up some as well.
|
|
|
Post by bsout2 on Oct 16, 2013 22:20:33 GMT -5
Kinda worried about the series now. Drew and Middlebrooks have become a collective black hole at the bottom of the lineup. It will interesting to see if either is sat tomorrow. Who are both hitting for a higher avg. than Ortiz. Obviously the one hit being huge but Papi needs to step up some as well. Saw how bad his numbers were after I posted.
|
|
|
Post by threeifbaerga on Oct 16, 2013 22:31:05 GMT -5
Xander called his shot two days ago. Said if he got Benoit again he'd "probably do damage".
Two year from now that will be out.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 16, 2013 22:32:58 GMT -5
Dustin was shit today on both ends of the field
|
|
|
Post by nationinthesouth on Oct 16, 2013 22:40:55 GMT -5
Dustin was shit today on both ends of the field That, Papi at the plate and a horrific performance by Peavy. If you sit back and really look at the game, it all played out like the series has gone so far with the exception of the three innings by Peavy and the fielding early by Pedroia.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Oct 16, 2013 22:45:39 GMT -5
It seems to me that ever since Jake Peavy went back to his old delivery, the one that Pedro suggested he go back to, Peavy's control hasn't been as good and he hasn't been as effective. Before then, he rarely walked anybody. He'd give up a bunch of HRs, but his BB/9 was great. It seems to me since then that his control hasn't been anywhere near as sharp. Tonight he walked three batters in an inning, which is something he wasn't doing previously with his old windup. Anybody else notice this? Strange that he'd experiment with this so late in the season. You'd think he'd try this in spring training to master the feel of it. He had more BBs in his three games after changing it than his first seven starts as a Red Sox. www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=peavyja01&t=p&year=2013
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 16, 2013 23:03:07 GMT -5
It seems to me that ever since Jake Peavy went back to his old delivery, the one that Pedro suggested he go back to, Peavy's control hasn't been as good and he hasn't been as effective. Before then, he rarely walked anybody. He'd give up a bunch of HRs, but his BB/9 was great. It seems to me since then that his control hasn't been anywhere near as sharp. Tonight he walked three batters in an inning, which is something he wasn't doing previously with his old windup. Anybody else notice this? Strange that he'd experiment with this so late in the season. You'd think he'd try this in spring training to master the feel of it. He had more BBs in his three games after changing it than his first seven starts as a Red Sox. www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=peavyja01&t=p&year=2013I definitely noticed it and I think a few of us have commented about it during many of his post-slot return starts. Why his last start was so impressive in fact was the dearth of BB.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 16, 2013 23:20:19 GMT -5
3. I finally contend that this is an extremely damaging loss because of the quality of the pitcher the Sox faced tonight - a #2-3 starter. Losing to Fister has forced them to now win the series against pitchers who profile more as # 1-2s, especially given that Buchholz has not pitched like a #1 since his return from injury and that Lackey's tremendous performance was likely aberrant. Meanwhile, Sanchez, Scherzer and Verlander have a much higher probability of repeating their relative performances in games 1-3 than Lackey does in repeating his, or Buchholz has of rediscovering his pre-injury performance level. And if that occurs the cheery silver lining articulated above will be moot as the Sox offense will likely rediscover its anemia. Just because a pitcher has pitched extremely well against the Red Sox once does not mean that they will do so again-- I hoped we'd learned this lesson after the ALDS where everyone was petrified of Price and Moore. Obviously, winning tonight would have made the Red Sox much, much more likely to win the series, and the Red Sox are probably slight underdogs if you projected the rest of the series out with a simulator. But you're doing this team a disservice if you don't think they still have a pretty good shot of taking two of three. Don't forget that Detroit has only scored off Boston pitching in 5 of 36 innings so far, and they looked pretty helpless against Lester, Lackey, and Buchholz's first five innings. I know defeatism has a long history 'round these parts, but it seems slightly misplaced to me.
|
|
|
Post by nationinthesouth on Oct 16, 2013 23:52:41 GMT -5
Man I love Jim Leyland, listening to his post game as much as losing to Maddon would have killed me if we were lose to Leyland it wouldnt seem the end of the world.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,666
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 17, 2013 0:05:21 GMT -5
As a general rule, the team with the higher "net bases" (TB + BB + HBP - GDP) wins. We have a 14 to 12 edge in net bases. The silver lining here is that this impending loss is all about sequencing rather than raw performance, and Ellsbury and others have looked much better at the plate than previously. 1. I contend that this example is spurious as the quality of the pitcher the Sox faced tonight is nowhere near equivalent to the other three they have faced thus far. 2. I also contend that there are no silver linings to losing winnable games in which the loss is almost completely self-inflicted through unforced errors (Peavy's rash of walks in the second) and actual errors (Pedroia's bungling of a room-service double play) as well as Farrell being too slow to get a reliever into the game. 3. I finally contend that this is an extremely damaging loss because of the quality of the pitcher the Sox faced tonight - a #2-3 starter. Losing to Fister has forced them to now win the series against pitchers who profile more as # 1-2s, especially given that Buchholz has not pitched like a #1 since his return from injury and that Lackey's tremendous performance was likely aberrant. Meanwhile, Sanchez, Scherzer and Verlander have a much higher probability of repeating their relative performances in games 1-3 than Lackey does in repeating his, or Buchholz has of rediscovering his pre-injury performance level. And if that occurs the cheery silver lining articulated above will be moot as the Sox offense will likely rediscover its anemia. Done contending. Now a quick gut feeling: The Sox lost the series tonight. Taking one out of the next three is not unreasonable. Taking two, seems a much less likely outcome. Caveat: I hope I'm completely wrong about the gut feeling (and will continue to watch every inning and root for wins). That's kind of where I'm at. Tomorrow is a huge game for the Sox. They need to win that game. Fenway or not, I don't expect the Sox to win the Buchholz/Scherzer matchup AND the Lackey/Verlander matchups again. Like you I can see the Sox as most likely winning one of those games, but as I felt last series if the Sox were to win that last series I felt they had to do it in 4 games rather than tempt fate a second time with David Price. I know the hubris around after Price got smashed was high, but honestly it's not fear of Price but rather the law of averages. Great pitcher pitches a crappy game the first time around. I would think he'd pitch a gem the next time out. Conversely a mediocre pitcher pitches the game of his life the first time out. I would expect a mediocre performance the next time out. It doesn't always work out that way, but I think it's a reasonable expectation. I'm glad the Sox dodged Price in Game 5, and likewise I don't want to see the Sox tempt fate twice with another Lackey/Verlander showdown. The only positives in that is that they're at Fenway and Verlander was worked hard during the last game throwing 120 pitches, but I doubt Lackey would be anywhere near that dominant again. So for me, for the Sox to win, Lester has to give them seven strong innings, and the Sox must score early and set the tone for tomorrow's game. They've been letting five or six innings go by before the offense starts to function. They need to hit Sanchez and/or hopefully get him out of the game reasonably early. And then the Sox need Clay Buchholz to be at his best in Game 6. They need the guy who pitched to a 1.74 ERA rather than the guy who's been homer prone the past few outings. Perhaps they can eek out a 3-2 victory. My concern is that Buchholz after the injury bears little resemblance to the guy from May. His breaking stuff doesn't seem as sharp. Price is an ace who fortunately has a bad track record in the start after throwing a lot of pitches - fortunately Texas paid that price. Like Buchholz, Moore wasn't the same after his injury. This is a tougher situation. All three of these guys throw pellets and have good control which is a combo that's tough on the Sox offense. Scherzer is an ace. Sanchez was the ERA champ and was just about as good. Verlander struggled early on, but is now pitching like the ace he has been. This is a tougher trio than what Tampa threw at the Sox. And Detroit certainly has a better offense. The Red Sox have their work cut out for them. Detroit has outplayed them this series and could have swept this series, and it's a credit to the Sox that they have two wins under their belt. They need to play better or they're not going to the World Series. I hope this gutsy team can do it, and I feel for them to do it, they must win the next two games.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 17, 2013 1:11:58 GMT -5
I was a big Peavy fan, but there is no excuse for a pitcher of his caliber to have the kind of inning he did. Pedroia can be forgiven, but Peavy cannot be. Any major league pitcher should be able to get the ball over the plate, especially in this situation.
What bothered me greatly at the time was the fact that no one came out of the dugout to talk to Peavy as he fell apart. I thought I could tell what his problem was - his release point was too low, i.e. he was holding the ball too long - and if I could see that on TV, why couldn't someone come out from the dugout and chew his behind? He needed an ass chewing and I think he would have responded to it.
This is not the first time that I thought Farrell was far too tolerant of a pitcher's failures.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 17, 2013 1:32:50 GMT -5
I contend ... [various things already quoted in full] Done contending. Now a quick gut feeling: The Sox lost the series tonight. Taking one out of the next three is not unreasonable. Taking two, seems a much less likely outcome. Caveat: I hope I'm completely wrong about the gut feeling (and will continue to watch every inning and root for wins). I'm genetically predisposed to seeing silver linings. I can't disagree with anything you've said until your gut feeling. You're talking to a guy who picked the Tigers in 7 (after having correctly picked the Sox in 4 versus TB, and, for the record, the Cardinals in 7 over the Dodgers). I do think it's true that if Fister had dominated us, we'd be in much worse shape. Then we'd know that the team was collectively hitting like crap and/or being baffled by the Tigers' pitch sequencing. But the reason I picked the Tigers in 7 is now staring us in the face, and to win this, we need some combination of a Tiger starter having an off night (a la Sanchez versus Oakland), Buchholz returning to form, winning a low-scoring game tomorrow, or Lackey outdueling Verlander again. It's doable, but the odds are a bit against us. Another silver lining: we can bet on seeing Bogaerts at 3B tomorrow night.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 17, 2013 7:50:16 GMT -5
Man I love Jim Leyland, listening to his post game as much as losing to Maddon would have killed me if we were lose to Leyland it wouldnt seem the end of the world. Leyland was one of the finest managers I ever saw on a often basis in his days as a minor league manager when he managed the Lakeland Tigers years ago. Nothing seems to have changed over the years in his style either. He isn't afraid to play rookies when they should over veterans, nor a hot player over another, regardless of who it is. It's the equal emotion he's always had. Only thing that seems to have changed is the smoking habit and trail of smoke coming up from the dugout that would emit from a troubling situation his team would get into.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Oct 17, 2013 7:58:40 GMT -5
Man I love Jim Leyland, listening to his post game as much as losing to Maddon would have killed me if we were lose to Leyland it wouldnt seem the end of the world. Leyland was one of the finest managers I ever saw on a often basis in his days as a minor league manager when he managed the Lakeland Tigers years ago. Nothing seems to have changed over the years in his style either. He isn't afraid to play rookies when they should over veterans, nor a hot player over another, regardless of who it is. It's the equal emotion he's always had. Only thing that seems to have changed is the smoking habit and trail of smoke coming up from the dugout that would emit from a troubling situation his team would get into. www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/jim-leyland-smoking-dugout-erin-andrews_n_4102770.html?utm_hp_ref=sports
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Oct 17, 2013 8:05:16 GMT -5
Buster tweet
ESPN Stats/Info:Jake Peavy’s strike percentage in Game 4 was 53.9, his 3rd-worst rate in 309 career starts(regular season and postseason).
|
|
|