|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 12, 2014 20:01:08 GMT -5
Vazquez is fantastic. He keeps pulling in strikes for Webster.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Sept 12, 2014 20:36:32 GMT -5
Lovely baserunning as always.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 12, 2014 20:48:10 GMT -5
Middlebrooks has been making good contact the last two weeks.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 12, 2014 20:48:14 GMT -5
Take a look at the last 5 in the batting order for Boston, then look at the PawSox lineup. How many would prefer the Pawsox guys to be playing (by a ton) and those others to be back at Pawtucket? Or Vazquez's case.. Splitting time with Swihart right about now?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 12, 2014 20:49:36 GMT -5
Take a look at the last 5 in the batting order for Boston, then look at the PawSox lineup. How many would prefer the Pawsox guys to be playing (by a ton) and those others to be back at Pawtucket? Or Vazquez's case.. Splitting time with Swihart right about now? I've watched Swihart the last two nights and think his bat isn't close to MLB ready yet. Won't be long, but not yet.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Sept 12, 2014 21:06:46 GMT -5
The number of players they could trade Mookie for that wouldn't annoy me continues to dwindle
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 12, 2014 21:08:25 GMT -5
Betts' bat is so ridiculously quick. Ventura, who throws hard, can't sneek anything by him. He turns on that heat and just hammers it down the left field line
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Sept 12, 2014 21:13:36 GMT -5
Betts' bat is so ridiculously quick. Ventura, who throws hard, can't sneek anything by him. He turns on that heat and just hammers it down the left field line .293/.369/.459/.828 through 133 AB's. Still somewhat small of a sample size, but man have the results been superb.
|
|
|
Post by godot on Sept 12, 2014 21:36:37 GMT -5
Middlebrooks needs to be more aggressive than "selective", believe it or not. He takes too many good pitches and gets behind the count. Forget about him being a " patient" hitter.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 12, 2014 21:48:38 GMT -5
Best start by Webster all year. He got bailed out a bit but if he could bottle this and repeat it in 60-70% of his starts he'd finally start looking like a #3 starter.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 12, 2014 22:04:28 GMT -5
Great win! We're ready for the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 12, 2014 22:18:45 GMT -5
Great win! We're ready for the playoffs. lol, I've only watched the PawSox the last two nights. Figures.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 12, 2014 22:57:01 GMT -5
Amazingly, we were 3 for 10 with RISP. And that is with middlebrooks and Bradley in the lineup.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on Sept 12, 2014 22:59:06 GMT -5
Looking at the boxscore Allen Craig is a mess. Anyone batting 093 is a joke in my opinion. We cannot depend on Craig next year. Especially with his injurie history. That was an awful trade, I would of rather of had a good prospect then an bum who is hurt. I am also not sold on Joe Kelly. he reminds me of Brad Penny, too many walks and not consistent.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Sept 13, 2014 7:43:24 GMT -5
That was an awful trade, I would of rather of had a good prospect then an bum who is hurt. I am also not sold on Joe Kelly. he reminds me of Brad Penny, too many walks and not consistent. I would much rather have John Lackey.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Sept 13, 2014 7:59:04 GMT -5
That was an awful trade, I would of rather of had a good prospect then an bum who is hurt. I am also not sold on Joe Kelly. he reminds me of Brad Penny, too many walks and not consistent. I would much rather have John Lackey. Well, Lackey has been horrible for St. Louis and he is much older than Kelly. I'll still take the deal. Let's wait for Craig next year. The guy has done well before and, unless injured, is young enough to resurrect. Not many players fall off the cliff as his age.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Sept 13, 2014 9:17:46 GMT -5
A good night for Webster. If Buchholz gets 7 years of second chances because of his potential, Webster should not get written off in 1.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 13, 2014 9:19:30 GMT -5
John Lackey didn't want to pitch in Boston. C'est la vie. His five year career had 4 disastrous seasons that was salvaged with one glorious run. He had a good year and a half. Missed one. Sucked in one. And, we didn't get what we paid for in his first year.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 13, 2014 10:07:34 GMT -5
I would much rather have John Lackey. Well, Lackey has been horrible for St. Louis and he is much older than Kelly. I'll still take the deal. Let's wait for Craig next year. The guy has done well before and, unless injured, is young enough to resurrect. Not many players fall off the cliff as his age. Yea, but guess who was his personal catcher on almost all the bad starts with Cruz and Molina he had one bad game and of course the last one with Molina when he got throwed out yelling at the ump after 2 innings and 2 runs. LOL Poor Aj just can't win for losing!
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Sept 13, 2014 10:39:04 GMT -5
Also, most of Lackey's "horribleness" has been due to a very high HR/FB rate which is more likely to be a fluke than a talent change in such a SSS.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 13, 2014 10:44:39 GMT -5
Not many would pitch a full season knowing they were in need of an elbow reconstruction like lackey did. Saying he was trying to avoid the free season in his deal won't hold water. He still had 3 left on it at the time. Lackey is a hard nosed competitor, nothing else. Maybe something certain NE types just can't figure out, like the majority of the media there.
Lackey was one of the whipping boys for Boston since he signed there, yet he took the ball whenever he could/was able and did a good job when he was healthy, certainly not deserving the negative nonsense some shove at him, that is what should have been shoved at the Beckett's and Clement's they have piled wasted cash onto.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 13, 2014 11:02:39 GMT -5
Didn't Clement pitch with 2 arm injuries one year? I agree with everything eles you said about Lackey. He gave it everything he had.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 13, 2014 11:36:12 GMT -5
Best start by Webster all year. He got bailed out a bit but if he could bottle this and repeat it in 60-70% of his starts he'd finally start looking like a #3 starter. I'm not going to get too excited - yet. When he does have that heavy sinker working, it's a gopher-killing machine. He made one big mistake to Hosmer but that was it. The biggest deal was that he got ahead and stayed ahead of many of the hitters, and when he did fall behind he came back quickly. I think having Vazquez back there is a huge plus for the guy. I get the feeling there's a strong level of trust. No doubt he's got the stuff, but he's been on and off. I'm going to reserve judgement but last night goes into the positive column.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 13, 2014 12:20:25 GMT -5
Didn't Clement pitch with 2 arm injuries one year? I agree with everything eles you said about Lackey. He gave it everything he had. He changed his delivery after getting hit in the head. Never was the same, probably a poor choice on my part to list. A better name would have been Matt Young, the guy with the best "stuff on paper" who pitched just well enough to lose and get good contracts I ever saw. He was good at suckering teams out of decent deals, then either leading the league in losses, or putting up numbers like 8-18 in others. Boston finally cut ties after y2 in the 3y deal they gave him. anyway.. THAT would have been a better choice for a loser who should have been vilified by the media and fans and I don't really remember him being flayed by them.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Sept 13, 2014 14:07:56 GMT -5
Also, most of Lackey's "horribleness" has been due to a very high HR/FB rate which is more likely to be a fluke than a talent change in such a SSS. I'd call 58 hits in 46 innings with a 5+ ERA and a 1.49 WHIP over 8 starts in the NL pretty poor. As you point out, he has allowed a high volume of hrs. (9). For St. Louis Lackey has been pitching at a worth commensurate with his next year's salary.
|
|