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.
4/30-5/2 Red Sox vs. Royals Series Thread
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on May 2, 2018 20:04:15 GMT -5
I fired up the computer to find that out, but came here first to see if Alex might save me the time. Meanwhile, all of ESPN's video for this series has the Royals' broadcast team. If you can find the Xander slam, the flatness of the reporting is kind of hysterical. At least they showed some awe today for Mookie.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on May 2, 2018 20:25:17 GMT -5
In fact, no one 26 had ever had a 4th 3+ homer game. The median age for accomplishing this feat is 31.
No one has ever had 5 games with 3+ homers before the age of 30.
Age for 4th 3-homer game (parentheses, ages for 5th and 6th when they happened)
27 Johnny Mize (+34, 37) 28 Ralph Kiner 29 Carlos Delgado (+31) 29 Joe Carter (+33) 29 Lou Gehrig 30 Dave Kingman (+35) 30 Albert Pujols 31 Willie Stargell 31 Larry Parrish 32 Sammy Sosa (+32, 33) 32 Aramis Ramirez 32 Ernie Banks 34 Alex Rodriguez (+39) 34 Mark McGwire (+36) 37 Barry Bonds 39 Steve Finley
Wry smile for the last 4 names on the list (and Sosa).
|
|
|
Post by p23w on May 2, 2018 21:33:35 GMT -5
Methinks the Phillies make a play for Trout. The Yankees are going to be paying Stanton still in 2020 and judge is going to start being expensive around then. I also think this coming off season will be one they spend huge on. I don't see them being in on trout in 2020 because I think they sign either Harper or Machado this year which will leave them with other big holes to fill than in the lineup. They still need pitching badly. I'm more worried about them going after sale than I am trout in the next few years. The Yankees whiffed on Cole.... they won't on Corbin.
|
|
|
Post by marrcus on May 2, 2018 23:38:40 GMT -5
It took a Mega performance from Mookie to take this series from the lowly royals. Hopefully the team is on the ball for the four with Texas who is like the Sox, 5/5 last ten but only playing .375 ball for the season.
Andrew has 9 hits the last ten games, needs to heat up with the warmer weather. As for JBJ:
“It’s not that his swing is too long for me, it’s more about his sights,” Cora said. “Where he wants to hit the ball — I had that conversation with him. I’d like him to stay in the middle of the field, left-center especially. ... Sometimes he gets caught up in trying to pull. And maybe that’s who he is but I do feel he can do a lot more offensively as far as driving the ball to the wall and left-center" Projo
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on May 3, 2018 0:27:29 GMT -5
Unpopular opinion time: Mookie Betts should absolutely be hitting second, behind Bogaerts (or Benintendi, if that's your bag). He is not getting nearly enough opportunities with men on base. He's hit 11 homers and knocked in precisely four teammates with them. And three of those happened at once. Here are the current rankings for the ability to provide RBI opportunities for the hitters after you: Name T-Set And. Benintendi .641 Brock Holt .593 Xander Bogaerts .553 Hanley Ramirez .525 J.D. Martinez .481 Mitch Moreland .480 Mookie Betts .453 Rafael Devers .427 Jackie Bradley .395 Eduardo Nunez .362 Christ. Vazquez .356 And the current rankings for the ability to knock your teammates in: Name Kn-In Mookie Betts 1.181 Xander Bogaerts 1.121 J.D. Martinez .957 Mitch Moreland .950 Brock Holt .913 Hanley Ramirez .750 Rafael Devers .727 Eduardo Nunez .702 And. Benintendi .645 Jackie Bradley .476 Christ. Vazquez .437 Ratio of the former to the latter, which indicates who should be hitting ahead of whom, were quality equal: Name Rat And. Benintendi .993 Jackie Bradley .829 Christ. Vazquez .814 Hanley Ramirez .700 Brock Holt .649 Rafael Devers .588 Eduardo Nunez .515 Mitch Moreland .505 J.D. Martinez .502 Xander Bogaerts .493 Mookie Betts .384 So Mookie's been the worst possible choice for a leadoff hitter: your best RBI guy and your 5th or 6th best table-setter. You'd actually go Bogaerts, Martinez, Ramirez, Betts if you were doing it just based on numbers so far, but Mookie 2 and JDM 4 obviously works, too. The problem with that, though, is that with Holt likely to get the bulk of the starts at 2B the rest of the month, you'd have 4 LHB out of the last 5, a LOOGY invitation. Benny's still been the 5th best of the 9 regulars, so getting him in at 3rd is defensible, in which case ... it actually makes nearly as much sense to bat Hanley 1 and Xander 5 as vice-versa! But 5 is a table-setter's spot, too. So I come back to roughly the same batting order I proposed the last time I ran those numbers (tweaked with Holt replacing Nunez): Bogaerts Betts Benintendi Martinez Ramirez Devers Bradley Vazquez Holt (as second lead-off man). The guys hitting 2 before Betts have averaged .377 T-Set; in this lineup, it's Holt, who's been .593. The guys hitting 1 before Betts have averaged .462; in this, it's Xander, who is .553. Even JBJ's .395 represents a mild upgrade to the 3-before spot (.367). What's underlined here is the value to the lineup if JBJ and CV can hit like they have in the past.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on May 3, 2018 0:56:45 GMT -5
This is the 22nd time that a player has had two 3+ HR games in a season. Mookie joins Johnny Mize as the only player to have done it twice.
It's also the 4th quickest of the 22 instances, in terms of time elapsed. This is days intervening, games intervening, PA in those games.
Doug DeCinces August 1982 (3, 3, 13). Only two such games of his career! Johnny Mize July 1938 (6, 6, 27) Willie Stargell April 1971 (10, 9, 37). Mookie Betts April-May 2018 (14, 10, 43)
Sammy Sosa in August 2001 had (11, 12, 53).
In contrast to DeCinces, Stargell did it 4 times in his career and Mize and Sosa did it 6.
Mookie is only one of two guys to have multiple 3+ HR games from the leadoff position, and both guys have done it three times--the other is Alfonso Soriano, who did it in three straight years (2006-8). Twenty guys have done it once.
And in a similar vein, here's the weirdest multiple-homer game fact of them all. Only 2 of the 16 players who have homered four times in a game had an opportunity to hit a 5th, and they both had two shots at it. Lou Gehrig, the first guy to ever accomplish the feat, did it in 7 innings, grounded out in the 8th, and hit what would now be a SF in the 9th. Mike Cameron did it in 5 innings (including twice in the first), was hit by a pitch in the 7th and lined out to deep right in the 9th.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 3, 2018 1:49:59 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 7:06:50 GMT -5
I don't think they should trade Johnson because he has a high potential, and he has shown flashes of it with is shutout last year and his many good appearances this year. Plus, he is the only lefty in their pen. I would trade Hembree before Johnson right now. How high is Johnson's potential really? His stuff isn't that great and he's in his mid 20s - he's no kid. He kind of is what he is. I don't see a big leap forward. That game against the Mariners last year was one of the best feel good stories of the year, but it was a career game. I doubt he comes close to matching that again. He can carve out a career as a cheap starter on a bad team. And is his potential really better than Velazquez or Beeks? They're better rotation options as is Wright. You can't keep them all. I'm just saying we shouldn't get rid of him because of 2 bad games.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on May 3, 2018 7:29:38 GMT -5
For Cora, it is about a plan. Because of all the early success and he is a new manager, he has a lot of rope. There is a certain degree of hubris at play, which is no different than most managers.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on May 3, 2018 8:11:41 GMT -5
It's one of those things where the representation of information disguises the irrationality of the decision. What I mean is: we all see the batting order presented as: Betts Benintendi Ramirez Martinez Bogaerts Devers Bradley Holt Vazquez (or whatever it is) But the batting order is actually: Betts Benintendi Ramirez Martinez Bogaerts Devers Bradley Holt Vazquez Betts Benintendi Ramirez Martinez Bogaerts Devers Bradley Holt Vazquez Betts etc.... And if it were presented that way it would immediately look ridiculous to have Betts batting after Bradley/Holt/Vazquez.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 3, 2018 8:22:48 GMT -5
How high is Johnson's potential really? His stuff isn't that great and he's in his mid 20s - he's no kid. He kind of is what he is. I don't see a big leap forward. That game against the Mariners last year was one of the best feel good stories of the year, but it was a career game. I doubt he comes close to matching that again. He can carve out a career as a cheap starter on a bad team. And is his potential really better than Velazquez or Beeks? They're better rotation options as is Wright. You can't keep them all. I'm just saying we shouldn't get rid of him because of 2 bad games. Johnson's game against Tampa included 3 ground ball singles that were hit between 80 and 90 mph and a 359 foot HR by a guy who failed to bunt. I wouldn't hold that against him much.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 3, 2018 8:28:34 GMT -5
How high is Johnson's potential really? His stuff isn't that great and he's in his mid 20s - he's no kid. He kind of is what he is. I don't see a big leap forward. That game against the Mariners last year was one of the best feel good stories of the year, but it was a career game. I doubt he comes close to matching that again. He can carve out a career as a cheap starter on a bad team. And is his potential really better than Velazquez or Beeks? They're better rotation options as is Wright. You can't keep them all. I'm just saying we shouldn't get rid of him because of 2 bad games. I'm not saying get rid of him because of 2 bad games. I'm saying get rid of him because of all the pitchers they have only Walden, who you can option, has less ceiling and Johnson is out of options, you can't keep everybody, and he's not better than the rest of the pitchers they have. Johnson is also the least effective pitcher they have as well. I though of him as a fringy pitcher going into this season and he still is. His best value is as a #5 starter with another team without playoff aspirations.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 3, 2018 8:40:28 GMT -5
The problems with Johnson are that his stuff hasn't played up in the bullpen, he's not going to be better than the current top five, and he's out of options. Also, this isn't a Bronson Arroyo 2006 situation where he's the sixth starter and there's a massive dropoff to #7. He's not so much better than Velazquez and Beeks (if he's better at all) that you need to hoard him.
Selling him now isn't ideal but neither is letting him languish. It's not even a Swihart situation, where there's a reasonable argument that he should be used more and you want to let that play itself out. If you can get a lottery ticket for him it's probably the right move. A team like Seattle should be interested - they're a borderline contender and they really could use someone to munch up some innings. I've always liked him and I still think he's going to be a decent contributor, but he doesn't fit the roster right now.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 3, 2018 9:05:41 GMT -5
The problems with Johnson are that his stuff hasn't played up in the bullpen, he's not going to be better than the current top five, and he's out of options. Also, this isn't a Bronson Arroyo 2006 situation where he's the sixth starter and there's a massive dropoff to #7. He's not so much better than Velazquez and Beeks (if he's better at all) that you need to hoard him. Selling him now isn't ideal but neither is letting him languish. It's not even a Swihart situation, where there's a reasonable argument that he should be used more and you want to let that play itself out. If you can get a lottery ticket for him it's probably the right move. A team like Seattle should be interested - they're a borderline contender and they really could use someone to munch up some innings. I've always liked him and I still think he's going to be a decent contributor, but he doesn't fit the roster right now. My thoughts exactly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 16:58:52 GMT -5
The problems with Johnson are that his stuff hasn't played up in the bullpen, he's not going to be better than the current top five, and he's out of options. Also, this isn't a Bronson Arroyo 2006 situation where he's the sixth starter and there's a massive dropoff to #7. He's not so much better than Velazquez and Beeks (if he's better at all) that you need to hoard him. Selling him now isn't ideal but neither is letting him languish. It's not even a Swihart situation, where there's a reasonable argument that he should be used more and you want to let that play itself out. If you can get a lottery ticket for him it's probably the right move. A team like Seattle should be interested - they're a borderline contender and they really could use someone to munch up some innings. I've always liked him and I still think he's going to be a decent contributor, but he doesn't fit the roster right now. I wouldn't say don't trade Johnson period. I'd just say don't trade him yet. If he has an ERA in the upper 5s by the trade deadline, then I would reluctantly agree to trade him.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 3, 2018 18:12:33 GMT -5
The problems with Johnson are that his stuff hasn't played up in the bullpen, he's not going to be better than the current top five, and he's out of options. Also, this isn't a Bronson Arroyo 2006 situation where he's the sixth starter and there's a massive dropoff to #7. He's not so much better than Velazquez and Beeks (if he's better at all) that you need to hoard him. Selling him now isn't ideal but neither is letting him languish. It's not even a Swihart situation, where there's a reasonable argument that he should be used more and you want to let that play itself out. If you can get a lottery ticket for him it's probably the right move. A team like Seattle should be interested - they're a borderline contender and they really could use someone to munch up some innings. I've always liked him and I still think he's going to be a decent contributor, but he doesn't fit the roster right now. I wouldn't say don't trade Johnson period. I'd just say don't trade him yet. If he has an ERA in the upper 5s by the trade deadline, then I would reluctantly agree to trade him. If they don't have any other injuries to other pitchers they're not going to have the luxury of waiting. Both Wright and Thornburg are coming back at some point this month. A couple of pitchers on the roster (not counting Walden who goes back when E-Rod is reinstated from his family situation) are going to have to go. They can option Velazquez reluctantly, but somebody else needs to go. And it doesn't matter if Johnson's ERA is 5.8 or 4.9 - it should be him. He's the 14th or 15th best pitcher on a 12 man staff.
|
|
|