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.
Red Sox vs. Dodgers 2018 World Series Gameday Thread
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Oct 25, 2018 9:43:08 GMT -5
Sleeping on this game...a few things that came to mind this morning that shouldn't get lost...
Kelly, Eovaldi, and Kimbrel's stunning work
Rafi's defense
Kinsler's huge hit
Mookie catching fire
A nearly perfectly played game all around.
|
|
|
Post by trajanacc on Oct 25, 2018 10:00:35 GMT -5
I remember being at a concert a few years back in Mansfield Mass. and a massive "yankees suck" chant broke out. Why? just....WHY? Because they do suck?
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Oct 25, 2018 10:04:06 GMT -5
I remember being at a concert a few years back in Mansfield Mass. and a massive "yankees suck" chant broke out. Why? just....WHY? Because they do suck? Yeah. I think we’ve pinpointed it. The chants break out because the Yankees do, in fact, suck.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,018
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 25, 2018 10:27:52 GMT -5
Is it really a downgrade though? Would you have thought that before Eovaldi's two great starts against NYY and HOU, two teams that hit LHP better than RHP? Going into the playoffs, Eovaldi and E-Rod were on pretty equal footing. Without digging too deep, the Dodgers are different than our AL foes and hit RHP better than LHP this year. Putting E-Rod in the starter position and gaining a bullpen arm as good as Eovaldi's seems to make a fair amount of sense. On a sidenote -- thats something that has bothered me about the 'why didn't we add a bullpen arm?' critique. When you add an arm like Eovaldi to the rotation, you know you are either getting his arm in the postseason bullpen or another starter's arm pushed to the bullpen (E-Rod and/or a Steven Wright). As a guy that really wanted a bullpen arm you have a point, but its not like we haven't relied on Kelly, Hembree, Workman, and Erod. They got Eovaldi because they didn't know what was up with Wright and ERod. Its worked out, everyone basically got hot all at the sametime and ERod got healthy. We didn't have any major injuries. Heck though even now your taking a guy that has arguably been your best starter and using him in relief. I get it, it makes sense. Almost must wins games at home because no DH on the road and the lefty thing, but man o man could it back fire also. It just look like a magical run, Cora can't do any wrong. Which is awesome, but man did we get lucky. The bullpen was crap down the stretch and was seen as our biggest weakness. It almost feels like a poker guy going all in needing runner runner for a flush. Then he gets it and start bad mouthing the other player. Everything has gone right, but this is way more luck than DD grand plan. No, we did not get lucky. The Wright injury was a lot less likely than the offsetting Kelly resurgence, which I'm pretty sure I said all along was essentially a coin toss.
I didn't think it would be necessary to explain one more time that the folks who thought we didn't need a reliever were 100% correct from the beginning, but here goes. And note that I don't think I'm always right: I hated the Sale trade and was 100% wrong about it, for instance.
The argument was threefold.
1) Barnes and Brasier are better than Soria, Familia, et al. Not by a lot, but by enough to make the new guy the #3 option as the setup guy. This was incontrovertibly right then, it is now, and I don't recall anyone arguing otherwise. (Barnes did have a fatigue slump after the deadline; they backed off on his usage, and he's back to being that guy again.)
2) There will be one or more starters in the bullpen, and that will bump the acquisition down to the #4 setup guy. Wright came back and was going to be so good that he may have slotted ahead of Barnes and Brasier, and then unexpectedly got hurt. E-Rod was so inconsistent after his return that he's been used sparingly in relief (in part also because we saw so many RHB in the first two rounds), but he got an immense out in game 1 and will very likely have a larger role in the remaining games. And Cora was able to fill the Wright role with Eovaldi, Sale, and Porcello pitching on their side-session days, with terrific results (including Price fixing himself while warming up to do that). None of us foresaw the extent of that, but it was always on the table, and so in retrospect this argument that you were actually acquiring a #4 setup guy was even stronger than it seemed at the time.
3) There's a 50% chance (meaning nobody really knows anything) that Kelly will return to being a total stud, but if you acquire a guy, he probably will never get a chance to re-establish himself. (In fact, I thought at the time that they'd have to trade him, but now I think they may have put Hembree on the DL with mild shoulder fatigue. But in that case, Kelly likely never gets a chance to shine.) There were smaller chances that Thornburg, Pomeranz, or Workman would step up and be a solid to excellent 4th option. Between the bunch, the odds were probably better than 50% that we already had a guy as good as the potential acquisition, or better, to be the #4 set-up option.
In general, you're not going to trade prospects from the #29 farm system in baseball to get a guy to be the #4 set-up option in the post-season. When when your internal options for that role are actually promising, it makes even less sense. If Wright had been healthy and Kelly had never turned it around, then we're just as good as we are now. If both possibilities had been negative, then E-Rod would have been given a shot at it, and in that role, any downgrade from Soria / Familia (which is probably non-existent) would, again, not be worth the acquisition price.
I mean, the worst case scenarios here have the absence of an extra guy costing you a run at some point in a series. One run is not looking likely to decide any of these series.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Oct 25, 2018 10:51:52 GMT -5
The National broadcast detailed the number of home runs on the Dodgers bench last night, 2 lefty starting pitchers in the first 2 games is the reason for Muncy, Bellinger, Pederson, and Grandal coming off the bench, and it’s been a great formula for the Sox. The RH options the Dodgers are going with are not getting the job done for the Dodgers, and are not the offensive threat that their lefty replacements are. Limiting Muncy, Bellinger, Pederson to 1 or 2 at-bats a game effectively limits the opportunities these big bats have to impact the game.
That said, would it be a good idea to go with E-Rod in game 3 or 4? This would force the Dodgers to either start with the less than spectacular RH lineup, or go against what they’ve been doing the entire 2nd half of the season, and start their LHH against a southpaw. Eovaldi pitched an inning in game 1 and 2, pushing him back to game 5 would get him some extra rest, and you would still have Sale and Price available for Game 6 and 7 as needed.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Oct 25, 2018 10:54:02 GMT -5
Steve Hewitt steve _hewitt 2h2 hours ago Alex Cora says Rick Porcello will start Game 3 in Los Angeles. He’s unsure if Nathan Eovaldi will start Game 4. Said he could pitch again in Game 3 if they have a chance to go up 3-0. I’m more than ok with this. Play to win not to lose. If you have a lead that’s 4 runs or less in LA come the 8th inning go with Eovaldi and start Pomeranz game 4. Going into the 8th inning with a 2-run lead yesterday, the Red Sox' win expectancy was 85%. With a 4-run lead it'd be, what, 95%? You'd burn Eovaldi in that situation and make game 4 a - gulp - Pomeranz start? When there are other adequate options available? I don't get that logic. Yeah, you "play to win" in the World Series. Obviously you don't treat it like the regular season. But you still have to play to win four games. If the game is within a run either way, I'd consider Eovaldi, but that's about it.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Oct 25, 2018 11:02:28 GMT -5
The National broadcast detailed the number of home runs on the Dodgers bench last night, 2 lefty starting pitchers in the first 2 games is the reason for Muncy, Bellinger, Pederson, and Grandal coming off the bench, and it’s been a great formula for the Sox. The RH options the Dodgers are going with are not getting the job done for the Dodgers, and are not the offensive threat that their lefty replacements are. Limiting Muncy, Bellinger, Pederson to 1 or 2 at-bats a game effectively limits the opportunities these big bats have to impact the game. That said, would it be a good idea to go with E-Rod in game 3 or 4? This would force the Dodgers to either start with the less than spectacular RH lineup, or go against what they’ve been doing the entire 2nd half of the season, and start their LHH against a southpaw. Eovaldi pitched an inning in game 1 and 2, pushing him back to game 5 would get him some extra rest, and you would still have Sale and Price available for Game 6 and 7 as needed. I think no matter what the plan is, Cora and the gang need to keep it a mystery. One option is to put in Eovaldi as the starter in an attempt to lure the potent LH options (Bellinger, Muncy, Pederson) into the starting lineup. Perhaps Eovaldi pitches an inning before a switch to E-Rod who is prepared to go 3-4 innings and forces Roberts into a decision to go to his RH lineup (and leaving those LH options useless for the rest of the game) OR he has to leave in a lineup which might be suboptimal against ERod. Of course, Roberts should be prepared for this potential plan and you might see that reflected in his lineup but I think this could be a fair strategy.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 25, 2018 11:37:41 GMT -5
So how good do we expect Porcello to be with 8 days of rest?
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Oct 25, 2018 11:40:01 GMT -5
So how good do we expect Porcello to be with 8 days of rest? 2-4 with a couple doubles
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 25, 2018 11:56:41 GMT -5
I mean, what Cora has been doing in the postseason by using his starters in the 8th inning has been unprecedented. No other manager has done this before. So this was entirely unpredictable. He's lucky that the Sox haven't gone to extra innings or the Sox haven't needed Hembree for much of anything this postseason. Cora has basically ambushed the opponent early and often by using this starter to the bullpen strategy and it has worked. The Sox haven't blown a lead once doing this. They had a bunch of chances to blow it with Kimbrel on the mound, but it didn't happen. The Sox had only one albatross start where they needed to pull their starters before the 4th inning too. This start was one of their 2 losses so far in the postseason. Good fortune is the word you should use when describing the Sox avoiding Hembree in October this year. Remember when the Sox were using Curtis Leskanic in 2004 a BUNCH of times in important spots and games? Yeah, me too. I literally predicted it. And yeah, this did happen last year. It happened sometimes, not to the point where everyday was a literal sidesession for every starting pitcher in the postseason. I think the Sox used a starter in the bullpen in all but one or two games this postseason.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 25, 2018 12:08:31 GMT -5
I’m more than ok with this. Play to win not to lose. If you have a lead that’s 4 runs or less in LA come the 8th inning go with Eovaldi and start Pomeranz game 4. Going into the 8th inning with a 2-run lead yesterday, the Red Sox' win expectancy was 85%. With a 4-run lead it'd be, what, 95%? You'd burn Eovaldi in that situation and make game 4 a - gulp - Pomeranz start? When there are other adequate options available? I don't get that logic. Yeah, you "play to win" in the World Series. Obviously you don't treat it like the regular season. But you still have to play to win four games. If the game is within a run either way, I'd consider Eovaldi, but that's about it. There’s a lot of nuances to this so it’s hard to say with certainty without knowing the circumstances. When did they go up 3/4 runs (was Eovaldi already warming up), how many and which relievers were used already, etc. But my general feeling is if you can step on the throat and take a 3-0 lead you do it and worry about game 4 later. It’s not like Pomeranz can’t start and give innings and a chance to win.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 25, 2018 12:11:06 GMT -5
Going into the 8th inning with a 2-run lead yesterday, the Red Sox' win expectancy was 85%. With a 4-run lead it'd be, what, 95%? You'd burn Eovaldi in that situation and make game 4 a - gulp - Pomeranz start? When there are other adequate options available? I don't get that logic. Yeah, you "play to win" in the World Series. Obviously you don't treat it like the regular season. But you still have to play to win four games. If the game is within a run either way, I'd consider Eovaldi, but that's about it. There’s a lot of nuances to this so it’s hard to say with certainty without knowing the circumstances. When did they go up 3/4 runs (was Eovaldi already warming up), how many and which relievers were used already, etc. But my general feeling is if you can step on the throat and take a 3-0 lead you do it and worry about game 4 later. It’s not like Pomeranz can’t start and give innings and a chance to win. Yeap. I fully expect Sale to be ready out of the bullpen tomorrow if they have a lead in the 8th. No messing around here.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 25, 2018 12:27:20 GMT -5
Steve Hewitt steve _hewitt 2h2 hours ago Alex Cora says Rick Porcello will start Game 3 in Los Angeles. He’s unsure if Nathan Eovaldi will start Game 4. Said he could pitch again in Game 3 if they have a chance to go up 3-0. I’m more than ok with this. Play to win not to lose. If you have a lead that’s 4 runs or less in LA come the 8th inning go with Eovaldi and start Pomeranz game 4. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Slow down there Tex. ERod is one thing, Pomeranz is quite another.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 25, 2018 12:38:16 GMT -5
As a guy that really wanted a bullpen arm you have a point, but its not like we haven't relied on Kelly, Hembree, Workman, and Erod. They got Eovaldi because they didn't know what was up with Wright and ERod. Its worked out, everyone basically got hot all at the sametime and ERod got healthy. We didn't have any major injuries. Heck though even now your taking a guy that has arguably been your best starter and using him in relief. I get it, it makes sense. Almost must wins games at home because no DH on the road and the lefty thing, but man o man could it back fire also. It just look like a magical run, Cora can't do any wrong. Which is awesome, but man did we get lucky. The bullpen was crap down the stretch and was seen as our biggest weakness. It almost feels like a poker guy going all in needing runner runner for a flush. Then he gets it and start bad mouthing the other player. Everything has gone right, but this is way more luck than DD grand plan. Yeah, and that's how bullpens are. Remember how superior the Yankees and Astros bullpens were to ours as the Red Sox destroyed them? They can be, but this has to be the best the bullpen has performed over a long stretch all year. While facing three of the best offenses in Baseball. The Red Sox offense tore up those teams Bullpens, yet our looks better. My only point is we have gotten crazy lucky, with basically the whole pen doing great and all getting hot at the sametime. Reminds me of 2003, when a guy like Scott Williamson and the rest just went from bad to shutdown pen overnight. It can happen, I just haven't seen it in 15 years. Not to this degree.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Oct 25, 2018 12:38:51 GMT -5
I mean, what Cora has been doing in the postseason by using his starters in the 8th inning has been unprecedented. No other manager has done this before. So this was entirely unpredictable. He's lucky that the Sox haven't gone to extra innings or the Sox haven't needed Hembree for much of anything this postseason. Cora has basically ambushed the opponent early and often by using this starter to the bullpen strategy and it has worked. The Sox haven't blown a lead once doing this. They had a bunch of chances to blow it with Kimbrel on the mound, but it didn't happen. The Sox had only one albatross start where they needed to pull their starters before the 4th inning too. This start was one of their 2 losses so far in the postseason. Good fortune is the word you should use when describing the Sox avoiding Hembree in October this year. Remember when the Sox were using Curtis Leskanic in 2004 a BUNCH of times in important spots and games? Yeah, me too. You're splitting hairs. Houston used their starters aggressively. Cora is using his aggressively. The sox/Farell used Lackey from the bullpen. DOes it matter last year that Farell also used Sale in game 4 vs Houston? Regardless of how unprecedented it is, I could see it being more of a general trend in upcoming years, maybe only sporadically in the regular season, but certainly in the postseason. If the baseball trend is to yank starters earlier with regard to both total pitches and times through the lineup, that is going to create more relief innings. So it would seem that, if a starter is going to throw fewer pitches on his starting assignment, couldn't he throw an inning of relief sometimes between starts, especially in times where he throws fewer pitches than usual in his previous start? That being said, given that Eovaldi has pitched on back-to-back days, I'd almost rather have him available for relief work tomorrow if it indicates that the Sox are holding a lead looking to go up 3-0. Then if the Sox get to 3-0, pitch ERod/Pomeranz/Hembree/whatever in game 4, and if that doesn't get it done, reset for game 5. Game 4 makes sense as a "giveaway" game because it allows the business end of the pen game/offday/game/offday/game/offday/game from games 2-6 with all hands on deck for game 7 if necessary.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 25, 2018 12:41:54 GMT -5
I mean it really is a no-brainer to take every win you can get over worrying about who the game 4 starter is. Every single game is almost played as an elimination game.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Oct 25, 2018 12:43:32 GMT -5
There's one little flaw in your graphic -- you don't show the extension in the pinkie of Air Beni's left hand. That iconic photo shows how a terrific baseball athlete uses all parts of his body to maintain balance as he attempts to make a difficult fielding play.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 25, 2018 13:01:06 GMT -5
I mean it really is a no-brainer to take every win you can get over worrying about who the game 4 starter is. Every single game is almost played as an elimination game. You see what happens in game 3 and then go from there. If we win game 3 it opens up a lot of options, including potentially starting ERod in game 4, Eovaldi in game 5, Price in game 6 and saving Sale for game 7 given his ailments. If we lose game 3, then maybe you think about Eovaldi in game 4.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 25, 2018 13:15:14 GMT -5
I’m more than ok with this. Play to win not to lose. If you have a lead that’s 4 runs or less in LA come the 8th inning go with Eovaldi and start Pomeranz game 4. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Slow down there Tex. ERod is one thing, Pomeranz is quite another. Lol this did make me spit out my soda.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Oct 25, 2018 13:22:13 GMT -5
I think you start Pomeranz in games 3 and 4 because he's had so much rest and has valuable experience against LA from his Padre days. Should make for an easy sweep.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 25, 2018 13:37:03 GMT -5
As a guy that really wanted a bullpen arm you have a point, but its not like we haven't relied on Kelly, Hembree, Workman, and Erod. They got Eovaldi because they didn't know what was up with Wright and ERod. Its worked out, everyone basically got hot all at the sametime and ERod got healthy. We didn't have any major injuries. Heck though even now your taking a guy that has arguably been your best starter and using him in relief. I get it, it makes sense. Almost must wins games at home because no DH on the road and the lefty thing, but man o man could it back fire also. It just look like a magical run, Cora can't do any wrong. Which is awesome, but man did we get lucky. The bullpen was crap down the stretch and was seen as our biggest weakness. It almost feels like a poker guy going all in needing runner runner for a flush. Then he gets it and start bad mouthing the other player. Everything has gone right, but this is way more luck than DD grand plan. No, we did not get lucky. The Wright injury was a lot less likely than the offsetting Kelly resurgence, which I'm pretty sure I said all along was essentially a coin toss.
I didn't think it would be necessary to explain one more time that the folks who thought we didn't need a reliever were 100% correct from the beginning, but here goes. And note that I don't think I'm always right: I hated the Sale trade and was 100% wrong about it, for instance.
The argument was threefold.
1) Barnes and Brasier are better than Soria, Familia, et al. Not by a lot, but by enough to make the new guy the #3 option as the setup guy. This was incontrovertibly right then, it is now, and I don't recall anyone arguing otherwise. (Barnes did have a fatigue slump after the deadline; they backed off on his usage, and he's back to being that guy again.)
2) There will be one or more starters in the bullpen, and that will bump the acquisition down to the #4 setup guy. Wright came back and was going to be so good that he may have slotted ahead of Barnes and Brasier, and then unexpectedly got hurt. E-Rod was so inconsistent after his return that he's been used sparingly in relief (in part also because we saw so many RHB in the first two rounds), but he got an immense out in game 1 and will very likely have a larger role in the remaining games. And Cora was able to fill the Wright role with Eovaldi, Sale, and Porcello pitching on their side-session days, with terrific results (including Price fixing himself while warming up to do that). None of us foresaw the extent of that, but it was always on the table, and so in retrospect this argument that you were actually acquiring a #4 setup guy was even stronger than it seemed at the time.
3) There's a 50% chance (meaning nobody really knows anything) that Kelly will return to being a total stud, but if you acquire a guy, he probably will never get a chance to re-establish himself. (In fact, I thought at the time that they'd have to trade him, but now I think they may have put Hembree on the DL with mild shoulder fatigue. But in that case, Kelly likely never gets a chance to shine.) There were smaller chances that Thornburg, Pomeranz, or Workman would step up and be a solid to excellent 4th option. Between the bunch, the odds were probably better than 50% that we already had a guy as good as the potential acquisition, or better, to be the #4 set-up option.
In general, you're not going to trade prospects from the #29 farm system in baseball to get a guy to be the #4 set-up option in the post-season. When when your internal options for that role are actually promising, it makes even less sense. If Wright had been healthy and Kelly had never turned it around, then we're just as good as we are now. If both possibilities had been negative, then E-Rod would have been given a shot at it, and in that role, any downgrade from Soria / Familia (which is probably non-existent) would, again, not be worth the acquisition price.
I mean, the worst case scenarios here have the absence of an extra guy costing you a run at some point in a series. One run is not looking likely to decide any of these series.
If you think Joe Kelly having maybe the best 6 game stretch of his career, after the way he had pitched for the last 4 months was 50% I don't know what to tell you. He's gone 7 and 1/3 innings without a walk. Going to guess that is the longest of the season, heck this might be the best stretch of control from him ever as a reliever. Yet you think it was a coin flip? After an ERA over 8, guys hitting. 324 against him and a WHIP of almost 2 the last month of the season. Heck I want to say this is like 10% type stuff but it might be lower than that. It can certainly happen, but its crazy good luck, not a coin flip. It's not just him either, its everyone all at the sametime. Just like 2003, when the whole bullpen got hot. Hembree has pitched well, Barnes bounced back, Braisers arm didn't fall off after a massive innings increase, Eovaldi bounced back after a rough stretch, ERod got healthy, Kimbrel while looking like crap for the first two rounds was perfect in save situations. Given the competition this is by far the best stretch the bullpen has had all year. Kimbrel pitching the first two inning save of his career without close to his best stuff. This is a magical run, not a dominant bullpen just pitching like they did all year. I just have to ask in what world is Wright having knee issues after knee surgery less likely than Kelly having one of best stretches of his career? Didn't he have the same surgery as Pedroia? They guy that basically missed the whole year. The whole point of getting another bullpen arm was to reduce risk if everything didn't go our way. So we wouldn't need a magical run of almost everything going right to win a world series. We got the magical run, so its kinda a moot point now. At the sametime this isn't some coin flip crap either, its a crazy lucky run after our bullpen was one of the worst in the league for the second half of the season. Type of crap that happens once ever 15 years.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 25, 2018 13:40:32 GMT -5
I mean it really is a no-brainer to take every win you can get over worrying about who the game 4 starter is. Every single game is almost played as an elimination game. Yeah! And not to mention that Eovaldi has been absolutely unhittable out of the pen. Last night the trio of Kelly, Eovaldi and Kimbrel were throwing Bugs Bunny stuff.
|
|
|
Post by carmenfanzone on Oct 25, 2018 14:08:32 GMT -5
So looking ahead, what is the lineup going to be for game 3? If there is ever going to be a game where Mookie starts at 2nd base, this is it But what is JD's ankle going to be like playing in the field? I certainly don't want to see Kinsler at 2nd against a hard throwing high hander. So 2nd is either Holt or Betts. Should Moreland start at 1st against the righty? IF not him, is Swihart an option or do you go with Pierce?
If Martinez' ankle is still sore, I am leaning to not starting him and playing Holt at 2nd. Will be interesting to see what Cora decides.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Oct 25, 2018 14:24:53 GMT -5
I mean it really is a no-brainer to take every win you can get over worrying about who the game 4 starter is. Every single game is almost played as an elimination game. If the question is, "Hey, should we win this game or should we set up the best possible starter for game 4?" then yeah, sure. But that's obviously not the question. Using Eovaldi instead of Barnes might have increased our odds of winning yesterday from, I don't know, 87% to 89%. Is a 2% improvement in winning one game worth losing Eovaldi as a starter in what could actually be an elimination game? And remember, you're potentially losing him as a starter in game 7.
I admit, I'm devil's advocating a little here, because honestly I do trust Cora to handle the pitching roles - he's proved his mettle this postseason as far as I'm concerned. But I just can't quite get myself to buy into the logic.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 25, 2018 14:30:56 GMT -5
Eric made my point for me. It's really foolish to blow assets on relievers because of the perceived failures of the incumbents in really small sample sizes. Does everyone now have a feel for what reliever volatility really means?
Kimbrel simply hadn't seen much action. That along with the pitch tipping, and what might have been a mechanical flaw in his ability to locate his pitches, made him a candidate for just this sort of recovery. I also think he's back to getting the kind of workload he needs to stay sharp. And as far as the 98+ mph fb average last evening, it's par for the course for Kelly, Eovaldi and Kimbrel. It's not as if they ramped up their existing velocity. Those are the three hardest throwers on the team. Again, they identified and fixed Kelly's giveaways and once again he's back to using what we all know is phenomenal stuff to blow hitters away. As for Eovaldi, he's been mowing people down since he showed up.
There's a bit at play here. Cora has been a brilliant tactician in the way he horded resources. His staff is outstanding in identifying weakness on the other side, and fixing flaws on the team. And Martinez has been a fantastic addition - check out the way Vazquez mimics his deep breathing to regain focus as he prepares for the next pitch.
It's time to acknowledge that Dombrowski built a deep roster, he added parts as needed without too much of an overpay, and that the choice of manager was exceptional. I'd agree with those who've made the case that LA has a weaker lineup against left-handed pitching, and that it may lead to a start for Rodriguez. That's the strategic vision thing, and Cora and staff have it.
It isn't over, but the team has really exerted it's dominance in Boston. Lets see how it goes in Chavez Ravine.
|
|
|