|
Post by soxfansince67 on May 22, 2018 22:00:55 GMT -5
Great win....can Texas hold on? Mookie, Sale, Kelly...and heart attack Kimbrel.
Let's keep it rolling!
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on May 22, 2018 22:31:44 GMT -5
I'm starting to think Mookie is going to score some runs this year! 49 runs scored in 44 games so far.... Who the hell is David Ortiz?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 23, 2018 0:06:43 GMT -5
I'm starting to think Mookie is going to score some runs this year! 49 runs scored in 44 games so far.... Who the hell is David Ortiz? The only other player to do this in Red Sox history was 1940 Ted Williams. This run is unheard of.
|
|
|
Post by pedey on May 23, 2018 6:54:44 GMT -5
Thanks Kimbrel for yet another heart attack. What good is a relief pitcher if he is ONLY effective when given a clean inning? Or if he gives you a heart attack EVERY time he pitches?
Kimbrel has served this team well, but I really hope the Sox let him walk after this year. He's far overrated. I'm not a fan of keeping a relief pitcher like that on this team into his 30s when his only effective pitch is his fastball. I don't know what the QO would be after this year, probably very high. The free agent system is so messed up. I miss when they had type A and B free agents. Let's hope another team takes a risk with him and then the Sox get a compensation pick.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 23, 2018 7:18:44 GMT -5
Thanks Kimbrel for yet another heart attack. What good is a relief pitcher if he is ONLY effective when given a clean inning? Or if he gives you a heart attack EVERY time he pitches?. Craig Kimbrel has the third lowest WHIP in baseball (min. 120 innings) since the Red Sox acquired him. Everyone except Kenley Jansen and Andrew Miller allows baserunners more frequently than Kimbrel has, and Kimbrel has been significantly more effective than either in 2018. If you're getting a heart attack every time he pitches, that's your reaction to the ninth inning of close baseball games, not to Kimbrel.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,485
|
Post by radiohix on May 23, 2018 7:36:36 GMT -5
Hanley Ramirez probably doesn't understand the concept of launch angle, his GB% for the month of May is 58.7%, playing him behind 2 high OBP guys in Mookie and Benintendi is asking for GIDP. In fact he shouldn't be even playing.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 23, 2018 7:48:39 GMT -5
Thanks Kimbrel for yet another heart attack. What good is a relief pitcher if he is ONLY effective when given a clean inning? Or if he gives you a heart attack EVERY time he pitches? Kimbrel has served this team well, but I really hope the Sox let him walk after this year. He's far overrated. I'm not a fan of keeping a relief pitcher like that on this team into his 30s when his only effective pitch is his fastball. I don't know what the QO would be after this year, probably very high. The free agent system is so messed up. I miss when they had type A and B free agents. Let's hope another team takes a risk with him and then the Sox get a compensation pick. Yea I just can't wait to get a pick after the 4th round for him, which is what we'll get because we are a luxury tax team under the new rules.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 23, 2018 8:33:25 GMT -5
Joe Kelly doesn't get enough credit. He has been elite and Kimbrel has also except for the past week or so.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on May 23, 2018 8:50:23 GMT -5
I'm starting to think Mookie is going to score some runs this year! 49 runs scored in 44 games so far.... Who the hell is David Ortiz? The only other player to do this in Red Sox history was 1940 Ted Williams. This run is unheard of.I thought I heard Casigliano say he scored?
Seriously, no one has scored more runs than scheduled games since 1939. Since then, only Rickey Henderson has had more R than G played (1985, 146 R, 143 G).
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 23, 2018 8:54:23 GMT -5
Rare anomoly, sox in first by a half game but behind in winning % by .001.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 23, 2018 9:02:49 GMT -5
Hah, that rare feature when winning 2 of the 3 extra games causes the winning percentage to go down.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on May 23, 2018 9:26:06 GMT -5
Joe Kelly doesn't get enough credit. He has been elite and Kimbrel has also except for the past week or so. Since the Opening Day disaster. Kelly has been awesome. 21 1/3 IP 10 h 1 R 1 ER 5 BB 24 K Sure looks like a dominant set up guy this year.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 23, 2018 9:38:07 GMT -5
Listening to thr Wharton Moneyball guys today on Sirius (podcast available of each episode, as well). Said this year so far, teams scoring first have 71.2% chance of winning the game. They were also talking about opening the games with your best set-up men THEN going to you starter in 2nd inning. Interesting all around.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 23, 2018 9:41:40 GMT -5
Joe Kelly doesn't get enough credit. He has been elite and Kimbrel has also except for the past week or so. Since the Opening Day disaster. Kelly has been awesome. 21 1/3 IP 10 h 1 R 1 ER 5 BB 24 K Sure looks like a dominant set up guy this year. He has earned the 8th inning job. Hopefully Thornburg and Velazquez can solidify the rest of the pen. Considering the way things have gone with relievers traded for by the Sox they are due some really good pitching from Thornburg, can the law of averages kick in please.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on May 23, 2018 9:59:23 GMT -5
Since the Opening Day disaster. Kelly has been awesome. 21 1/3 IP 10 h 1 R 1 ER 5 BB 24 K Sure looks like a dominant set up guy this year. He has earned the 8th inning job. Hopefully Thornburg and Velazquez can solidify the rest of the pen. Considering the way things have gone with relievers traded for by the Sox they are due some really good pitching from Thornburg, can the law of averages kick in please. Is that the Eric Gagne, Mark Melancon, Joel Hanrahan or Carson Smith rule?
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on May 23, 2018 10:07:52 GMT -5
He has earned the 8th inning job. Hopefully Thornburg and Velazquez can solidify the rest of the pen. Considering the way things have gone with relievers traded for by the Sox they are due some really good pitching from Thornburg, can the law of averages kick in please. Is that the Eric Gagne, Mark Melancon, Joel Hanrahan or Carson Smith rule? Somewhere Andrew Bailey cries reading this.
|
|
|
Post by jbuttah on May 23, 2018 10:22:06 GMT -5
Listening to thr Wharton Moneyball guys today on Sirius (podcast available of each episode, as well). Said this year so far, teams scoring first have 71.2% chance of winning the game. They were also talking about opening the games with your best set-up men THEN going to you starter in 2nd inning. Interesting all around. Jerry and Dave were talking about this during last night's game. TB started the same reliever to pitch just the 1st inning 2 days in a row. I believe the thinking is that would give the "starting" pitcher a better chance to go deeper into games if they don't have to face the best hitters 3rd time through the lineup until after 24 outs (versus 18 if they actually start the game).
|
|
|
Post by p23w on May 23, 2018 11:35:37 GMT -5
Stay hot Texas. Stay cool Kimbrel. Get warm JBJ. Keep on keeping' on Kelly. We're at the 5 mile marker of this marathon.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 23, 2018 12:13:40 GMT -5
Listening to thr Wharton Moneyball guys today on Sirius (podcast available of each episode, as well). Said this year so far, teams scoring first have 71.2% chance of winning the game. They were also talking about opening the games with your best set-up men THEN going to you starter in 2nd inning. Interesting all around. Jerry and Dave were talking about this during last night's game. TB started the same reliever to pitch just the 1st inning 2 days in a row. I believe the thinking is that would give the "starting" pitcher a better chance to go deeper into games if they don't have to face the best hitters 3rd time through the lineup until after 24 outs (versus 18 if they actually start the game). Exactly, and apparently some modeling supports this, at least according to the Wharton guys.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 23, 2018 12:45:50 GMT -5
Jerry and Dave were talking about this during last night's game. TB started the same reliever to pitch just the 1st inning 2 days in a row. I believe the thinking is that would give the "starting" pitcher a better chance to go deeper into games if they don't have to face the best hitters 3rd time through the lineup until after 24 outs (versus 18 if they actually start the game). Exactly, and apparently some modeling supports this, at least according to the Wharton guys. It's interesting strategy although I wonder what you do if the middle reliever struggles facing the top of the order and can't complete the inning. Do you burn out two relievers before you start fresh with a starter? Would teams counter the reliever starting by moving their best hitters to 4-5-6-7 instead of 1-2-3-4 or something like that? Doubtful, but you wonder how this kind of thing would be countered or if they'd even want to or try to counter this strategy. So I guess Joe Kelly can be a starter after all! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by jbuttah on May 23, 2018 12:58:27 GMT -5
Exactly, and apparently some modeling supports this, at least according to the Wharton guys. It's interesting strategy although I wonder what you do if the middle reliever struggles facing the top of the order and can't complete the inning. Do you burn out two relievers before you start fresh with a starter? Would teams counter the reliever starting by moving their best hitters to 4-5-6-7 instead of 1-2-3-4 or something like that? Doubtful, but you wonder how this kind of thing would be countered or if they'd even want to or try to counter this strategy. So I guess Joe Kelly can be a starter after all! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) If the Sox were to try this strategy, I'd think someone like Steve Wright would be the perfect candidate.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 23, 2018 13:18:21 GMT -5
Steve Wright would be the perfect piggyback starter after someone who throws hard. Starter goes thru the order twice then make them look at a dancing floater, that would be a difficult adjustment.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 23, 2018 13:20:39 GMT -5
Steve Wright would be the perfect piggyback starter after someone who throws hard. Starter goes thru the order twice then make them look at a dancing floater, that would be a difficult adjustment. I agree. Plus he's useful for multiple innings.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 23, 2018 13:28:47 GMT -5
Steve Wright would be the perfect piggyback starter after someone who throws hard. Starter goes thru the order twice then make them look at a dancing floater, that would be a difficult adjustment. I agree. Plus he's useful for multiple innings. If you wanted to really get creative, with 3 catchers on the roster, you could bring in a new catcher with Wright too to hopefully mitigate the effect that switch would have on the starting catcher. But yeah, starting Wright would just be... starting a starting pitcher. Using Wright for 1 inning kind of defeats the purpose of using him, no? To me, the best way of doing the 1-inning starter thing would be a very top-heavy lineup (the Angels were perfect in this respect) with guys with heavy splits. By the way, MLB.com's page for Mike Trout says his nickname is, and I quote, "Kiiiiid". WTF? m.mlb.com/player/545361/mike-trout
|
|
|
Post by jackiebradleyjrjr on May 23, 2018 13:58:05 GMT -5
Jerry and Dave were talking about this during last night's game. TB started the same reliever to pitch just the 1st inning 2 days in a row. I believe the thinking is that would give the "starting" pitcher a better chance to go deeper into games if they don't have to face the best hitters 3rd time through the lineup until after 24 outs (versus 18 if they actually start the game). Exactly, and apparently some modeling supports this, at least according to the Wharton guys. It’s certainly interesting, and I love Tampa trying new things out. The logic of getting your number four or five starter deeper in games by allowing them to avoid the best hitters as much as possible makes sense. I’m not sure I think having your set-up man “start” is the greatest of ideas though. While it is true that more runs are scored in the first inning than any other inning and there is a very high correlation between scoring first and winning, the first inning is also one of the lowest leverage situations in baseball for a pitcher. So to use one of your best bullpen guys in a low leverage situation... well it’ll take some more empirical evidence for me. What Tampa did is put Romo in there who is great against righties (and terrible against lefties) against a very righty dominant Angels lineup. In essence, they exploited a weakness of the Angels that I don’t think can be replicated quite so similarly against a better team without using one of your top bullpen guys. And that again may not be a great idea either.
|
|