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.
8/14-8/16 Red Sox vs. Mariners Series Thread
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 16, 2015 16:50:44 GMT -5
Breslow's continued presence on this team truly is a mystery. Masterson, as wretched as he was, had some utility. He could make a start spot, if needed, and be used out of the pen against RHH. Breslow just brings you nothing. I don't like him this last 2 years either but to be fair he did give them 2 shots to win this game ... it isn't his fault they got runners on both times and didn't score.
|
|
atzar
Veteran
Posts: 1,817
|
Post by atzar on Aug 16, 2015 17:00:03 GMT -5
Goodness.
There was a time when Cecchini was an exciting prospect. How things have changed...
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,421
|
Post by ianrs on Aug 16, 2015 17:00:32 GMT -5
Breslow and Cecchini need to be off the 40 man roster yesterday. Aside from that, amazing series.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Aug 16, 2015 17:27:09 GMT -5
Yeah, Aro should be up here over Breslow. The results may not be much better at first, but let him iron out some kinks and figure out if he can be an option in next years pen. Breslow, who is probably a perpetual 5+ FIP guy at this point, serves no useful purpose. Great dude, but like with Masterson, it's time to say goodbye.
Cecchini makes me sad. Another good dude who a lot of us had pretty high hopes for. To see him fail at third, never develop power, and lose the attributes that you thought would make him be a useful MLB hitter regardless has been tough. He is still just 24 though, so not all hope is lost. But, for now, I'd rather not see him pinch-hit for Josh Rutledge -- and that's something I never thought I'd say.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 16, 2015 17:31:50 GMT -5
Trying to get three innings out of Breslow was the victory of hope over experience. The same was true with trying to get Ortiz home. Two pretty poor management/coaching decisions.
I particularly don't get the Ortiz thing. The game was tied. The winning run was going to be at third and the team was hot. The worst that could happen by not trying to score was that the game remained tied. But there was a reasonable chance the next batter might knock the winning run. Something could happen. But that possibility was ruled out by the reckless attempt to have Ortiz score.
I'm not nearly as down on Breslow as many are, and he did a very good job for two innings. That was more than the team had a right to expect. Again, pushing well beyond reasonable probabilities.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Aug 16, 2015 17:37:39 GMT -5
As most of us will secretly admit. losing the game is probably positive. The other positive thing,IMO, is they fought and came back. WOW....how novel! One of the sad parts of this team has been their lack of ability to get back up and get back into a game. The minute they got down by a few runs....it was over.
I appreciated their "fight" today. I appreciated their comeback after being down 7 runs. You would never have seen that over the 1st 4 months. We didn't sweep, but we may have done something better.
We sure are a better club without certain players!
|
|
|
Post by huskies15 on Aug 16, 2015 20:42:55 GMT -5
In reference to the above post concerning the "fight": I think that it is hard to keep trying to get up every game when your starters routinely spot the other team 2-3+ runs early. At some point it just reaches a breaking point and the will to "fight" wanes. Not that it is a good thing, and they get paid a lot to put their all out there, but some human nature could set in.
Happy to see Bogie with a bomb today, and a lot of production from the young guys has me excited for next year already.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Aug 16, 2015 22:12:55 GMT -5
This was a really good weekend for the bats. I love the guts we showed today.
We had a lot of fight in us despite missing three veterans.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 16, 2015 22:25:25 GMT -5
Re the Bogaerts homer:
A no time this year have I doubted that he would again hit for power, and sooner than later. What I've seen this year is a guy who, every PA, is consciously working on hitting balls on the outer half to the opposite field, and hitting them hard. Which is to say, a guy learning, at the MLB level, at an age where most players are in AAA or even AA, how to do something important that he never needed to do to succeed in the minors.
The key word in that paragraph is "conscious." It seemed to me that as long as there is still a conscious effort to go the other way with outside pitches, it has to be really difficult to turn on an inside pitch and drive it. The opposite field hitting has to become reflexive, reactive, part of "muscle memory," in order to be incorporated into an overall process of reflexive, reactive hitting.
It's common wisdom that you can't think and hit at the same time, but I think we've watched Xander do precisely that all year. It meant that he was limited to hitting just one way, but he was still able to hit.
Today may have marked the point at which the opposite field stroke has become fully incorporated into his approach, or it may just have marked a point where he's comfortable enough with it to set it aside when he's guessing inside pitch. IOW, we have no way of knowing whether he was just reacting to that pitch, or looking for it. If the former, the HRs are going to start coming in bunches, and even if it's the latter, you're going to see more. I'm thinking 6 HRs the rest of the way if the former, 3 or 4 if the latter. And 20 or more next year.
And the more I think about this, and what he's done this year (including defensively), the more I think I want to reverse myself (I think for the fourth time) and declare him an even greater talent than Mookie.
Heck of a dilemma to have!
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Aug 17, 2015 4:16:35 GMT -5
Re the Bogaerts homer: A no time this year have I doubted that he would again hit for power, and sooner than later. What I've seen this year is a guy who, every PA, is consciously working on hitting balls on the outer half to the opposite field, and hitting them hard. Which is to say, a guy learning, at the MLB level, at an age where most players are in AAA or even AA, how to do something important that he never needed to do to succeed in the minors. The key word in that paragraph is "conscious." It seemed to me that as long as there is still a conscious effort to go the other way with outside pitches, it has to be really difficult to turn on an inside pitch and drive it. The opposite field hitting has to become reflexive, reactive, part of "muscle memory," in order to be incorporated into an overall process of reflexive, reactive hitting. It's common wisdom that you can't think and hit at the same time, but I think we've watched Xander do precisely that all year. It meant that he was limited to hitting just one way, but he was still able to hit. Today may have marked the point at which the opposite field stroke has become fully incorporated into his approach, or it may just have marked a point where he's comfortable enough with it to set it aside when he's guessing inside pitch. IOW, we have no way of knowing whether he was just reacting to that pitch, or looking for it. If the former, the HRs are going to start coming in bunches, and even if it's the latter, you're going to see more. I'm thinking 6 HRs the rest of the way if the former, 3 or 4 if the latter. And 20 or more next year. And the more I think about this, and what he's done this year (including defensively), the more I think I want to reverse myself (I think for the fourth time) and declare him an even greater talent than Mookie. Heck of a dilemma to have! That's exactly what I'M thinking/hoping. I'm not seeing enough games, but I watch every Xander-highlight and I totally see what you are describing. If our assumption is right (that' still a big if, but I believe in it) you projection might be very realistic and will give us joy and who knows what more in the coming seasons. I actually see X and Mookie on one level. I'll lean back and watch the race between them and enjoy it. Sometimes I wonder how much these two are competing with each other, given they're born 6 days apart and capable of so much.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Aug 17, 2015 9:36:41 GMT -5
Haha Butterfield. How hasn't that dude been canned yet? Moron. The dude is clearly terrible at sending runners, but the statement that he should be canned is ridiculous. Every time you hear about an infielder improving his defense they're quick to praise Butterfield. Every player that works with the guy says he points out something they're doing wrong and shows them an easy way to correct it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 17, 2015 9:43:27 GMT -5
Yeah, Butterfield is worth keeping around based on what we've read, but holy hell get him off of third base, please. The number of levels on which that send was bad is just incredible.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Aug 17, 2015 9:55:43 GMT -5
Re the Bogaerts homer: A no time this year have I doubted that he would again hit for power, and sooner than later. What I've seen this year is a guy who, every PA, is consciously working on hitting balls on the outer half to the opposite field, and hitting them hard. Which is to say, a guy learning, at the MLB level, at an age where most players are in AAA or even AA, how to do something important that he never needed to do to succeed in the minors. The key word in that paragraph is "conscious." It seemed to me that as long as there is still a conscious effort to go the other way with outside pitches, it has to be really difficult to turn on an inside pitch and drive it. The opposite field hitting has to become reflexive, reactive, part of "muscle memory," in order to be incorporated into an overall process of reflexive, reactive hitting. It's common wisdom that you can't think and hit at the same time, but I think we've watched Xander do precisely that all year. It meant that he was limited to hitting just one way, but he was still able to hit. Today may have marked the point at which the opposite field stroke has become fully incorporated into his approach, or it may just have marked a point where he's comfortable enough with it to set it aside when he's guessing inside pitch. IOW, we have no way of knowing whether he was just reacting to that pitch, or looking for it. If the former, the HRs are going to start coming in bunches, and even if it's the latter, you're going to see more. I'm thinking 6 HRs the rest of the way if the former, 3 or 4 if the latter. And 20 or more next year. And the more I think about this, and what he's done this year (including defensively), the more I think I want to reverse myself (I think for the fourth time) and declare him an even greater talent than Mookie. Heck of a dilemma to have! An even more obviously different swing was the one he just missed in the 10th inning ... he was definitely putting a power swing on that. If he had caught it instead of fouling it back, the game would've been over, and the ball would've been bouncing around the parking lot behind the Monster. I've never given up any hope in Xander, although the difference between Mookie and Xander is more in emphasis than quality. They're different players with different skills, but they really could both be elite players at premium positions.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,833
|
Post by wcp3 on Aug 17, 2015 10:54:56 GMT -5
Haha Butterfield. How hasn't that dude been canned yet? Moron. The dude is clearly terrible at sending runners, but the statement that he should be canned is ridiculous. Every time you hear about an infielder improving his defense they're quick to praise Butterfield. Every player that works with the guy says he points out something they're doing wrong and shows them an easy way to correct it. That's fine, but move someone else to third base coach now rather than after the season. They're leaving him in a spot where he's clearly inept, and it's hurting everyone. There's no need for it.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Aug 17, 2015 10:57:52 GMT -5
The dude is clearly terrible at sending runners, but the statement that he should be canned is ridiculous. Every time you hear about an infielder improving his defense they're quick to praise Butterfield. Every player that works with the guy says he points out something they're doing wrong and shows them an easy way to correct it. That's fine, but move someone else to third base coach now rather than after the season. They're leaving him in a spot where he's clearly inept, and it's hurting everyone. There's no need for it. I agree completely. Does anyone know if there's a limit to the number of ML coaching spots a team can have?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 12:00:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 17, 2015 12:13:07 GMT -5
That's fine, but move someone else to third base coach now rather than after the season. They're leaving him in a spot where he's clearly inept, and it's hurting everyone. There's no need for it. I agree completely. Does anyone know if there's a limit to the number of ML coaching spots a team can have? At the very end of his coaching career, didn't Zip Zimmer have to sit in the stands for that very reason? A limit to how many could be in the dugout, if I remember correctly.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 17, 2015 12:33:33 GMT -5
I agree completely. Does anyone know if there's a limit to the number of ML coaching spots a team can have? At the very end of his coaching career, didn't Zip Zimmer have to sit in the stands for that very reason? A limit to how many could be in the dugout, if I remember correctly. LINKThis is a story from 2007 about Johnny Pesky that talks about the rule.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 17, 2015 12:36:49 GMT -5
Yeah, Butterfield is worth keeping around based on what we've read, but holy hell get him off of third base, please. The number of levels on which that send was bad is just incredible. Was it my imagination or didn't he send a high number of runners home in 2013 that you would have thought he probably should have held up - yet those guys seemed to score a high percentage of the time? It's like the opinion was let's make them do everything perfectly. And it seemed to work swimmingly. I remember being shocked at how successfully the Sox seemed to run the bases, and I'm not even talking Ellsbury, Victorino, and Pedroia, but I'm talking Gomes, Napoli, and others. For the past two years it now seems like just about everybody he sends home (hyperbole of course) gets thrown out at home, and the same aggressiveness that seemed to steal runs in 2013 is now taking away runs in 2014 and 2015. All this of course if my perception. Do others have that same perception? I mean didn't it seem like those guys he was sending home in 2013 were safe a high pct of the time, yet the guys he sends home now and last year wind up nailed at the plate?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 12:40:59 GMT -5
I wonder if they've changed the rule about interpreters.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 17, 2015 13:22:24 GMT -5
Yeah, Butterfield is worth keeping around based on what we've read, but holy hell get him off of third base, please. The number of levels on which that send was bad is just incredible. Was it my imagination or didn't he send a high number of runners home in 2013 that you would have thought he probably should have held up - yet those guys seemed to score a high percentage of the time? It's like the opinion was let's make them do everything perfectly. And it seemed to work swimmingly. I remember being shocked at how successfully the Sox seemed to run the bases, and I'm not even talking Ellsbury, Victorino, and Pedroia, but I'm talking Gomes, Napoli, and others. For the past two years it now seems like just about everybody he sends home (hyperbole of course) gets thrown out at home, and the same aggressiveness that seemed to steal runs in 2013 is now taking away runs in 2014 and 2015. All this of course if my perception. Do others have that same perception? I mean didn't it seem like those guys he was sending home in 2013 were safe a high pct of the time, yet the guys he sends home now and last year wind up nailed at the plate? Yeah, Farrell and Butterfield have always been members of the "challenge the defense" school of baserunning where if it's close, you send them and force the defense to make a play (or, less charitably, pray the defense screws up). Like everything else, my recollection is that it worked a lot better in 2013 than it has this year.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,897
|
Post by nomar on Aug 17, 2015 13:30:17 GMT -5
Was it my imagination or didn't he send a high number of runners home in 2013 that you would have thought he probably should have held up - yet those guys seemed to score a high percentage of the time? It's like the opinion was let's make them do everything perfectly. And it seemed to work swimmingly. I remember being shocked at how successfully the Sox seemed to run the bases, and I'm not even talking Ellsbury, Victorino, and Pedroia, but I'm talking Gomes, Napoli, and others. For the past two years it now seems like just about everybody he sends home (hyperbole of course) gets thrown out at home, and the same aggressiveness that seemed to steal runs in 2013 is now taking away runs in 2014 and 2015. All this of course if my perception. Do others have that same perception? I mean didn't it seem like those guys he was sending home in 2013 were safe a high pct of the time, yet the guys he sends home now and last year wind up nailed at the plate? Yeah, Farrell and Butterfield have always been members of the "challenge the defense" school of baserunning where if it's close, you send them and force the defense to make a play (or, less charitably, pray the defense screws up). Like everything else, my recollection is that it worked a lot better in 2013 than it has this year. Statistically speaking, it's a bad strategy period. In 2013 it didn't matter as much because Nava, Victorino, Carp and Drew all performed better than expected and our offense was great. I don't like aggressive baserunning, but I can live with it. What Butterfield does is in its own league though. He's a complete detriment as a third base coach.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 17, 2015 13:33:16 GMT -5
Yeah, Butterfield is worth keeping around based on what we've read, but holy hell get him off of third base, please. The number of levels on which that send was bad is just incredible. You would of thought Bench Coach would of had the best ring to it... Especially when they are bringing up a coach from Pawtucket. But alas last report I saw that wasn't to be!
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 17, 2015 13:46:11 GMT -5
... What Butterfield does is in its own league though. He's a complete detriment as a third base coach. That's a strong statement — have any hard data to support the opinion?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 13:48:36 GMT -5
Yeah, Farrell and Butterfield have always been members of the "challenge the defense" school of baserunning where if it's close, you send them and force the defense to make a play (or, less charitably, pray the defense screws up). Like everything else, my recollection is that it worked a lot better in 2013 than it has this year. I'm not sure how it could be quantified, but I imagine being extremely neutral between aggressive and passive is the best strategy for baserunning.
|
|
|