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.
6/10-6/13 Red Sox vs. Rangers Series Thread
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jun 11, 2019 10:00:19 GMT -5
Some of the depth problems right now make it absolutely clear that they are paying a price for their 2016-2018 run right now. Frustrating as it is at the moment, I'll take it. They'd be better in 2019 off with Logan Allen, Shaun Anderson, Steven Nogosek and a couple others of those types, but that's part of the game. They made win-now trades and they won because of it. Adding to that frustration even more is that the core has been excellent. Not 2018 excellent, I'd put their six best players (Betts, Bogaerts, Devers, Martinez, Sale, and Price) against any other team's. They just don't have the resources to fill out the roster right now. It sucks, but it's part of the price they paid to average 98 wins over three years and peak with a 108 win season. There are a lot of factors in play some of which we probably won't be able to identify or determine relative importance. I'm not sure how many guys traded away (necessarily) in the quest for the Grail, would have helped much at this point tho. I do think the team will profit by this experience next year. As an aside, how amazing is it that the Rays have done so well in drafting, developing and sagaciously trading for their team....and with miniscule bucks?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 11, 2019 10:05:52 GMT -5
I find it kind of mystifying that people consider the 2019 Red Sox to be a completely distinct entity from the 2018 team despite the fact that it's all the same dudes. Like people argued with such great conviction that last year's postseason run proved this team's superiority to the Yankees, Astros, and Dodgers, they could not have possibly lost those series, but now those same people are convinced that the 2019 team will never win a series against a quality opponent again. It's the same team! It's a new year. Their bullpen is even worse than it was a year ago, their organizational depth is non-existent, they have 2 quality starters right now, there's been a slight regression from JD, marked regression from Mookie "every other year" Betts, and Benny has no pop in his bat (last night withstanding). Chavis filled a void at 2B remarkably last month, but now he looks completely lost at the plate. JBJ has a WAR of exactly 0.0. What worked in 2018 is not working in 2019, for whatever reason. I think it's fair to say that 67 games is a fairly sizeable sample size. I wouldn't have looked at this team in February and thought 34-33, but after what they've shown us, I can't even see them as an 88-win team, let alone serious playoff contenders. People keep saying, "they'll obviously get there". Is it? Is it really obvious, because everything they've shown us is that they can't compete against teams with winning records, can't sustain stretches of success, haven't shown glimpses of hitting or pitching that will turn things around, their bullpen can't be expressed enough about how much of a dumpster fire it is, and we still have Sale's second half swoon to deal with in their uphill climb. All this team has shown is that they can really beat the bag out of the KC of the world. Since 5/10 the Red Sox, at home, are the following: 3-0 against the 28-41 Mariners 1-1 against the 34-31 Rockies 1-2 against the 45-22 Astros 1-2 against the 33-32 Indians 1-3 against the 41-24 Rays 0-1 against the 35-30 Rangers (so far) That's a record of 7-9 AT Fenway. In fact, they're 15-16 at home this year. Again, including a 3-0 sweep of the lowly Mariners. The Red Sox have scored 350 times and have allowed 317 runs. By comparison: TB: 310-210 NYY: 339-270 Astros: 342-245 Rangers: 368-335 Indians: 271-277 A's: 332-312 Angels: 339-342 White Sox: 273-330 Right now, the Red Sox are projected to win anywhere between 77-92 games and have a 30% chance at making the postseason: www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-playoff-odds.shtmlThe silver bullet for this team is their remaining strength of schedule at .491. This team has me in a bad mood and this series is a real killer if it goes sour. My hope going in was, "win the Price and Sale games and maybe you can snag one in between".
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 11, 2019 11:08:08 GMT -5
Frustrations aside, the #1 pitching prospect in the organization is making his first major league start tonight. I'm always going to be excited about that.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,489
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 11, 2019 11:15:43 GMT -5
I find it kind of mystifying that people consider the 2019 Red Sox to be a completely distinct entity from the 2018 team despite the fact that it's all the same dudes. Like people argued with such great conviction that last year's postseason run proved this team's superiority to the Yankees, Astros, and Dodgers, they could not have possibly lost those series, but now those same people are convinced that the 2019 team will never win a series against a quality opponent again. It's the same team! It's a new year. Their bullpen is even worse than it was a year ago, their organizational depth is non-existent, they have 2 quality starters right now, there's been a slight regression from JD, marked regression from Mookie "every other year" Betts, and Benny has no pop in his bat (last night withstanding). Chavis filled a void at 2B remarkably last month, but now he looks completely lost at the plate. JBJ has a WAR of exactly 0.0. What worked in 2018 is not working in 2019, for whatever reason. I think it's fair to say that 67 games is a fairly sizeable sample size. I wouldn't have looked at this team in February and thought 34-33, but after what they've shown us, I can't even see them as an 88-win team, let alone serious playoff contenders. People keep saying, "they'll obviously get there". Is it? Is it really obvious, because everything they've shown us is that they can't compete against teams with winning records, can't sustain stretches of success, haven't shown glimpses of hitting or pitching that will turn things around, their bullpen can't be expressed enough about how much of a dumpster fire it is, and we still have Sale's second half swoon to deal with in their uphill climb. All this team has shown is that they can really beat the bag out of the KC of the world. Since 5/10 the Red Sox, at home, are the following: 3-0 against the 28-41 Mariners 1-1 against the 34-31 Rockies 1-2 against the 45-22 Astros 1-2 against the 33-32 Indians 1-3 against the 41-24 Rays 0-1 against the 35-30 Rangers (so far) That's a record of 7-9 AT Fenway. In fact, they're 15-16 at home this year. Again, including a 3-0 sweep of the lowly Mariners. The Red Sox have scored 350 times and have allowed 317 runs. By comparison: TB: 310-210 NYY: 339-270 Astros: 342-245 Rangers: 368-335 Indians: 271-277 A's: 332-312 Angels: 339-342 White Sox: 273-330 Right now, the Red Sox are projected to win anywhere between 77-92 games and have a 30% chance at making the postseason: www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-playoff-odds.shtmlThe silver bullet for this team is their remaining strength of schedule at .491. This team has me in a bad mood and this series is a real killer if it goes sour. My hope going in was, "win the Price and Sale games and maybe you can snag one in between". I don't consider myself a homer. No doubt they're playing lousy, but teams do go through large stretches of mediocrity. It happens. It's disappointing they're playing like this. But consider this. The 2004 Red Sox started out 15-6 and then had a long stretch of 95 games in which they went 49-46 to bring them to 64-52. That stretch is similar to how this team has played. Then the 2004 Red Sox went 34-12 to finish up 98-64. So does that mean that we can expect the Sox to go 15-6 like the 2004 team did? I think at some point they'll pull that off. How about 34-12? Hell no. Not impossible, but not likely. One season that really stands out is the forgotten 1991 season. Were you a fan back then? The Sox got off to a 51-59 start or something like that. I remember there being something about a mock funeral for the team that made the news. Then this mediocre team that showed absolutely nothing all season, suddenly took off and had a stretch of something like 31-9, out of nowhere. They got to 81-67 and were 1 strike away from beating the Yankees and pulling into a first place tie - until Jeff Reardon gave up a game tying HR to Roberto Kelly and Matt Young (of course) lost the game in extra innings. From there the Sox went belly up and finished 84-78, 7 games out of 1st place. Take a look at baseball reference. You'll see that it was a thoroughly mediocre team with a meh lineup and the pitching staff had Roger Clemens and ......? You can argue - well the rest of the league was kind of mediocre and you'd be correct. You didn't have any dominating teams but compare that team to the talent on this 2019 Red Sox team and you can see that team was nowhere near as good as what the Sox have today. The point is that a much crappier Red Sox team, out of nowhere played their butts off for six weeks to go from 8 games under .500 to 14 games over .500. This team is capable of going on a big run for a six week stretch, even against some of the better teams - and they'll have more dregs to deal with - there were very few awful teams in 1991 - as a matter of fact all 7 teams in the AL West played at least .500 ball. Of course after the big stretch of good ballplaying, it's not hard to imagine a team like the 2019 come crashing back to earth and putting up a bad few weeks afterwards, but I still think the good would outweigh the bad. That's why I think it's highly possible that this team will have a really good run in them and it could put them into that 90 - 93 win category. That said, the 88 wins or so that Telson was talking about, isn't an unreasonable take either, although I think they'll do better. But I just don't see the 83 wins or whatever you have them down for. Anything's possible. The defending 1975 AL champs had a great young core and added Fergie Jenkins to Luis Tiant, Bill Lee, and Rick Wise, and yet that team only finished 83-79 (before rebounding to 97 wins and 99 wins the next 2 seasons). But I have trouble seeing the 2019 Red Sox being THAT bad.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 11, 2019 11:36:05 GMT -5
It's a new year. Their bullpen is even worse than it was a year ago, their organizational depth is non-existent, they have 2 quality starters right now, there's been a slight regression from JD, marked regression from Mookie "every other year" Betts, and Benny has no pop in his bat (last night withstanding). Chavis filled a void at 2B remarkably last month, but now he looks completely lost at the plate. JBJ has a WAR of exactly 0.0. What worked in 2018 is not working in 2019, for whatever reason. I think it's fair to say that 67 games is a fairly sizeable sample size. I wouldn't have looked at this team in February and thought 34-33, but after what they've shown us, I can't even see them as an 88-win team, let alone serious playoff contenders. People keep saying, "they'll obviously get there". Is it? Is it really obvious, because everything they've shown us is that they can't compete against teams with winning records, can't sustain stretches of success, haven't shown glimpses of hitting or pitching that will turn things around, their bullpen can't be expressed enough about how much of a dumpster fire it is, and we still have Sale's second half swoon to deal with in their uphill climb. All this team has shown is that they can really beat the bag out of the KC of the world. Since 5/10 the Red Sox, at home, are the following: 3-0 against the 28-41 Mariners 1-1 against the 34-31 Rockies 1-2 against the 45-22 Astros 1-2 against the 33-32 Indians 1-3 against the 41-24 Rays 0-1 against the 35-30 Rangers (so far) That's a record of 7-9 AT Fenway. In fact, they're 15-16 at home this year. Again, including a 3-0 sweep of the lowly Mariners. The Red Sox have scored 350 times and have allowed 317 runs. By comparison: TB: 310-210 NYY: 339-270 Astros: 342-245 Rangers: 368-335 Indians: 271-277 A's: 332-312 Angels: 339-342 White Sox: 273-330 Right now, the Red Sox are projected to win anywhere between 77-92 games and have a 30% chance at making the postseason: www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-playoff-odds.shtmlThe silver bullet for this team is their remaining strength of schedule at .491. This team has me in a bad mood and this series is a real killer if it goes sour. My hope going in was, "win the Price and Sale games and maybe you can snag one in between". I don't consider myself a homer. No doubt they're playing lousy, but teams do go through large stretches of mediocrity. It happens. It's disappointing they're playing like this. But consider this. The 2004 Red Sox started out 15-6 and then had a long stretch of 95 games in which they went 49-46 to bring them to 64-52. That stretch is similar to how this team has played. Then the 2004 Red Sox went 34-12 to finish up 98-64. So does that mean that we can expect the Sox to go 15-6 like the 2004 team did? I think at some point they'll pull that off. How about 34-12? Hell no. Not impossible, but not likely. One season that really stands out is the forgotten 1991 season. Were you a fan back then? The Sox got off to a 51-59 start or something like that. I remember there being something about a mock funeral for the team that made the news. Then this mediocre team that showed absolutely nothing all season, suddenly took off and had a stretch of something like 31-9, out of nowhere. They got to 81-67 and were 1 strike away from beating the Yankees and pulling into a first place tie - until Jeff Reardon gave up a game tying HR to Roberto Kelly and Matt Young (of course) lost the game in extra innings. From there the Sox went belly up and finished 84-78, 7 games out of 1st place. Take a look at baseball reference. You'll see that it was a thoroughly mediocre team with a meh lineup and the pitching staff had Roger Clemens and ......? You can argue - well the rest of the league was kind of mediocre and you'd be correct. You didn't have any dominating teams but compare that team to the talent on this 2019 Red Sox team and you can see that team was nowhere near as good as what the Sox have today. The point is that a much crappier Red Sox team, out of nowhere played their butts off for six weeks to go from 8 games under .500 to 14 games over .500. This team is capable of going on a big run for a six week stretch, even against some of the better teams - and they'll have more dregs to deal with - there were very few awful teams in 1991 - as a matter of fact all 7 teams in the AL West played at least .500 ball. Of course after the big stretch of good ballplaying, it's not hard to imagine a team like the 2019 come crashing back to earth and putting up a bad few weeks afterwards, but I still think the good would outweigh the bad. That's why I think it's highly possible that this team will have a really good run in them and it could put them into that 90 - 93 win category. That said, the 88 wins or so that Telson was talking about, isn't an unreasonable take either, although I think they'll do better. But I just don't see the 83 wins or whatever you have them down for. Anything's possible. The defending 1975 AL champs had a great young core and added Fergie Jenkins to Luis Tiant, Bill Lee, and Rick Wise, and yet that team only finished 83-79 (before rebounding to 97 wins and 99 wins the next 2 seasons). But I have trouble seeing the 2019 Red Sox being THAT bad. I don't necessarily have them any lower than 88, but if I had to make a hard guess/prediction, it's looking like to me 85-88 wins. I can certainly see them going on a 15-6 run, but it will be against the likes of the Orioles, Blue Jays, Tigers, Royals, and maybe a quasi-good team like the Angels, White Sox, Indians, et. Teams go through stretches, sure, but team at its best this year worked to just get them over .500 and they're back to being a loss away from being exactly .500 again, by June 11th. They've failed to take a series against a quality opponent since either late April or early May. At some point, just prove you can win a series against the Astros to inspire some hope. They only have a handful of guys who can carry a team and the team seems to only go when they go. The 2004 Red Sox, despite a prolonged slump, did have the clear talent up and down the order with some strong starters to show you that they didn't need Manny to be hot all the time to win. I was born in 88 so I don't have a strong memory of the Sox back that far. Unfortunately, the probable cause of my mindset was becoming a fan back during the '03 season and onwards. The problem with the example of the '91 example is that, despite having a miracle run they still lost. They needed a miraculous drive to get into a position to win 1st place and lost. Had they won a game or two prior to that miracle run, they're in. That's the situation we're getting into now with the Red Sox. They need a miracle run just to be competitive. The plus for this team is that their schedule is going to be much easier than most moving forward. I; however, don't find it to be inspiring that they could potentially sneak in because they played weaker competition. When I said, "I can't see them winning 88". I just mean right now. The team that's on the field now isn't a team that looks like an 88 win team, but I think 85-88 is likely.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jun 11, 2019 12:38:15 GMT -5
I am psyched to see Sale’s numbers rebounded to where they should be. That is a huge relief.
And... this team may struggle all year for a host of reasons, but the wild card is still there to be had. Then it is a whole new season. If the Sox make the playoffs (even as the second WC) the year after winning it all, I feel like it is tough to ask more.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,489
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 11, 2019 13:06:39 GMT -5
I don't consider myself a homer. No doubt they're playing lousy, but teams do go through large stretches of mediocrity. It happens. It's disappointing they're playing like this. But consider this. The 2004 Red Sox started out 15-6 and then had a long stretch of 95 games in which they went 49-46 to bring them to 64-52. That stretch is similar to how this team has played. Then the 2004 Red Sox went 34-12 to finish up 98-64. So does that mean that we can expect the Sox to go 15-6 like the 2004 team did? I think at some point they'll pull that off. How about 34-12? Hell no. Not impossible, but not likely. One season that really stands out is the forgotten 1991 season. Were you a fan back then? The Sox got off to a 51-59 start or something like that. I remember there being something about a mock funeral for the team that made the news. Then this mediocre team that showed absolutely nothing all season, suddenly took off and had a stretch of something like 31-9, out of nowhere. They got to 81-67 and were 1 strike away from beating the Yankees and pulling into a first place tie - until Jeff Reardon gave up a game tying HR to Roberto Kelly and Matt Young (of course) lost the game in extra innings. From there the Sox went belly up and finished 84-78, 7 games out of 1st place. Take a look at baseball reference. You'll see that it was a thoroughly mediocre team with a meh lineup and the pitching staff had Roger Clemens and ......? You can argue - well the rest of the league was kind of mediocre and you'd be correct. You didn't have any dominating teams but compare that team to the talent on this 2019 Red Sox team and you can see that team was nowhere near as good as what the Sox have today. The point is that a much crappier Red Sox team, out of nowhere played their butts off for six weeks to go from 8 games under .500 to 14 games over .500. This team is capable of going on a big run for a six week stretch, even against some of the better teams - and they'll have more dregs to deal with - there were very few awful teams in 1991 - as a matter of fact all 7 teams in the AL West played at least .500 ball. Of course after the big stretch of good ballplaying, it's not hard to imagine a team like the 2019 come crashing back to earth and putting up a bad few weeks afterwards, but I still think the good would outweigh the bad. That's why I think it's highly possible that this team will have a really good run in them and it could put them into that 90 - 93 win category. That said, the 88 wins or so that Telson was talking about, isn't an unreasonable take either, although I think they'll do better. But I just don't see the 83 wins or whatever you have them down for. Anything's possible. The defending 1975 AL champs had a great young core and added Fergie Jenkins to Luis Tiant, Bill Lee, and Rick Wise, and yet that team only finished 83-79 (before rebounding to 97 wins and 99 wins the next 2 seasons). But I have trouble seeing the 2019 Red Sox being THAT bad. I don't necessarily have them any lower than 88, but if I had to make a hard guess/prediction, it's looking like to me 85-88 wins. I can certainly see them going on a 15-6 run, but it will be against the likes of the Orioles, Blue Jays, Tigers, Royals, and maybe a quasi-good team like the Angels, White Sox, Indians, et. Teams go through stretches, sure, but team at its best this year worked to just get them over .500 and they're back to being a loss away from being exactly .500 again, by June 11th. They've failed to take a series against a quality opponent since either late April or early May. At some point, just prove you can win a series against the Astros to inspire some hope. They only have a handful of guys who can carry a team and the team seems to only go when they go. The 2004 Red Sox, despite a prolonged slump, did have the clear talent up and down the order with some strong starters to show you that they didn't need Manny to be hot all the time to win. I was born in 88 so I don't have a strong memory of the Sox back that far. Unfortunately, the probable cause of my mindset was becoming a fan back during the '03 season and onwards. The problem with the example of the '91 example is that, despite having a miracle run they still lost. They needed a miraculous drive to get into a position to win 1st place and lost. Had they won a game or two prior to that miracle run, they're in. That's the situation we're getting into now with the Red Sox. They need a miracle run just to be competitive. The plus for this team is that their schedule is going to be much easier than most moving forward. I; however, don't find it to be inspiring that they could potentially sneak in because they played weaker competition. When I said, "I can't see them winning 88". I just mean right now. The team that's on the field now isn't a team that looks like an 88 win team, but I think 85-88 is likely. Well, you were right that the 1991 Red Sox needed a near miracle to finish first and that they ran out of gas and lost. The 2019 Red Sox don't need a miracle. They need to remove head from sphincter. The 2019 Red Sox would need a near miracle to win the division. Your birth year is the one year I can think of that the Sox were this far back and came back to win the division and the 1988 division was pretty balanced. The Sox beat Detroit by a game, Toronto and Milwaukee by 2 games and NYY by 3.5 games and trailed 1st place NY by 10 games on June 14th. The Yankees tailed off after their great start as did Detroit while Milwaukee and Toronto got hot down the stretch, but too late. The Red Sox pretty much lived off of their 19-1 stretch that summer. And if the Sox have a 16-4 stretch or something like that they can kind of live off of that - to make the playoffs and that's the big difference. The Sox lost in 1991. They didn't have the luxury of two wild cards and a ton of crappy teams to play. The 2019 Red Sox have that luxury, so while, yeah, the odds of them winning the division are pretty minimal - a historic 19-1 stretch would obviously get them back in the division race, but what's the odds that's happening? The event that fueled that was John McNamara's long overdue removal. The big takeaway is that there is very little that should prevent the Red Sox from taking the 2nd Wild Card other than themselves. The Rangers are hardly the 1998 Yankees, nor are the A's, the Indians, the Angels, the White Sox and whoever else is hanging around .500. The Red Sox are better than all of those teams. They're not playing better. I suspect Oakland will wake up at some point and Cleveland shouldn't be this bad - but their clock is ticking before they sell off some players, and the Rangers have been better than expected....but the Red Sox, who are playing their absolute worst, are better than these teams. If they win the 88 games you're talking about they probably are the 2nd wild card. If they win the 93 I'm talking about, it's probably the same result but with extra breathing room.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 11, 2019 13:36:38 GMT -5
Some of the depth problems right now make it absolutely clear that they are paying a price for their 2016-2018 run right now. Frustrating as it is at the moment, I'll take it. They'd be better in 2019 off with Logan Allen, Shaun Anderson, Steven Nogosek and a couple others of those types, but that's part of the game. They made win-now trades and they won because of it. Adding to that frustration even more is that the core has been excellent. Not 2018 excellent, I'd put their six best players (Betts, Bogaerts, Devers, Martinez, Sale, and Price) against any other team's. They just don't have the resources to fill out the roster right now. It sucks, but it's part of the price they paid to average 98 wins over three years and peak with a 108 win season. If that’s the case, I’ll take it everytime.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 11, 2019 13:45:33 GMT -5
I find it kind of mystifying that people consider the 2019 Red Sox to be a completely distinct entity from the 2018 team despite the fact that it's all the same dudes. Like people argued with such great conviction that last year's postseason run proved this team's superiority to the Yankees, Astros, and Dodgers, they could not have possibly lost those series, but now those same people are convinced that the 2019 team will never win a series against a quality opponent again. It's the same team! THERE IS NO JOE KELLY ON THIS TEAM!!! But yeah, you’re right. These guys just aren’t performing like last year and other teams got better.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jun 11, 2019 14:03:51 GMT -5
I find it kind of mystifying that people consider the 2019 Red Sox to be a completely distinct entity from the 2018 team despite the fact that it's all the same dudes. Like people argued with such great conviction that last year's postseason run proved this team's superiority to the Yankees, Astros, and Dodgers, they could not have possibly lost those series, but now those same people are convinced that the 2019 team will never win a series against a quality opponent again. It's the same team! Yeah, it's the magical thinking that drives me kind of bananas. For instance, one commenter has apparently decided Mookis Betts is an "every other year" player, as if that's a thing. What is this based on - that he's been a little off so far this season, and otherwise this pattern has exhibited itself exactly once? What is the mystical force that suggests he's going to continue to slump, as opposed to regressing toward his 2016-2018 average level of performance? It's the same sort of magical thinking that keeps popping up to "explain" why the team isn't as good as last year, like there's some sort of cosmic law that's being enforced. But teams start off hot and get cold, or start off cold and get hot. For instance, the Red Sox started off hot last year (17-2!), after which they went 91-52, a 103-win pace. This season they started off cold (6-13) before going 27-16, a 102-win pace. Since then they're 1-4, and I actually do think this stretch is partially attributable to their main weakness: the lack of depth, so that when a couple guys get injured they have to run out those pathetic lineups we saw in games 2 and 4 of the TB series. But I also think they could easily go 10-2 in their next 12 games or something. Because it is, after all, basically the same team that won 108 games last season. (If I were to join the pessimists, I'd do so not on the grounds that the team is lacking in special magical powers, but on the grounds that they're really boned if they lose any of the core guys to injury for an extended period of time, and they've actually been pretty fortunate in that department so far.)
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 11, 2019 14:18:29 GMT -5
I find it kind of mystifying that people consider the 2019 Red Sox to be a completely distinct entity from the 2018 team despite the fact that it's all the same dudes. Like people argued with such great conviction that last year's postseason run proved this team's superiority to the Yankees, Astros, and Dodgers, they could not have possibly lost those series, but now those same people are convinced that the 2019 team will never win a series against a quality opponent again. It's the same team! Yeah, it's the magical thinking that drives me kind of bananas. For instance, one commenter has apparently decided Mookis Betts is an "every other year" player, as if that's a thing. What is this based on - that he's been a little off so far this season, and otherwise this pattern has exhibited itself exactly once? What is the mystical force that suggests he's going to continue to slump, as opposed to regressing toward his 2016-2018 average level of performance? It's the same sort of magical thinking that keeps popping up to "explain" why the team isn't as good as last year, like there's some sort of cosmic law that's being enforced. But teams start off hot and get cold, or start off cold and get hot. For instance, the Red Sox started off hot last year (17-2!), after which they went 91-52, a 103-win pace. This season they started off cold (6-13) before going 27-16, a 102-win pace.Since then they're 1-4, and I actually do think this stretch is partially attributable to their main weakness: the lack of depth, so that when a couple guys get injured they have to run out those pathetic lineups we saw in games 2 and 4 of the TB series. But I also think they could easily go 10-2 in their next 12 games or something. Because it is, after all, basically the same team that won 108 games last season. (If I were to join the pessimists, I'd do so not on the grounds that the team is lacking in special magical powers, but on the grounds that they're really boned if they lose any of the core guys to injury for an extended period of time, and they've actually been pretty fortunate in that department so far.) A. No one has said Betts "sucks" or anything of the like, but: 2015: .820 OPS 2016: .897 OPS 2017: .803 OPS 2018: 1.078 OPS 2019: .838 OPS Seems rather, "every other year" to me. People said the same thing about Josh Beckett too. This isn't a new concept. Mookie still has a 2.7 WAR. He's just not Mike Trout valuable. And in their 27-16 run they clawed their way to a little over .500 and are getting pressed back down. They're sub-.500 on the year at home and in the last month or so they're 6-0 against the Royals and Mariners which is helping their record.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 11, 2019 14:36:18 GMT -5
2015: .820 OPS 2016: .897 OPS 2017: .803 OPS 2018: 1.078 OPS 2019: .838 OPS Seems rather, "every other year" to me. People said the same thing about Josh Beckett too. This isn't a new concept. Mookie still has a 2.7 WAR. He's just not Mike Trout valuable. Yeah, it SEEMS like it. That doesn't make it meaningful or predictive, though.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,584
|
Post by radiohix on Jun 11, 2019 14:53:37 GMT -5
Frustrations aside, the #1 pitching prospect in the organization is making his first major league start tonight. I'm always going to be excited about that. Different context but I adore the fact that our other young Venezuelan lefty first start was against the Rangers too.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 11, 2019 15:17:29 GMT -5
2015: .820 OPS 2016: .897 OPS 2017: .803 OPS 2018: 1.078 OPS 2019: .838 OPS Seems rather, "every other year" to me. People said the same thing about Josh Beckett too. This isn't a new concept. Mookie still has a 2.7 WAR. He's just not Mike Trout valuable. Yeah, it SEEMS like it. That doesn't make it meaningful or predictive, though. Would I bet my life-savings on it? No, of course not. It's just what he has been. Just as much as Sale has been a pitcher who has faded at the end of the year. Betts is entering 2020 in a bit of a lose-lose situation. If he performs like it's 2018 then he continues the narrative. If he "struggles" then this becomes more of a reputation of who he is as a hitter. Someone capable of putting up a big year, but ultimately is a .830 OPS hitter with great defense. Josh Beckett had the same reputation: 2002: 4.10 ERA 2003: 3.04 2004: 3.79 2005: 3.38 2006: 5.01 2007: 3.27 2008: 4.03 2009: 3.86 2010: 5.78 2011: 2.89 2012: 4.65 2013: 5.19 2014: 2.88 There's a couple a breaks in the pattern, but its there. It's probably purely coincidental, but it was still basically who he was. Still would take Betts on my team any day, because again, not saying he sucks in "down" years.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 11, 2019 15:31:29 GMT -5
That's a different person. You can't use Josh Beckett's inconsistency as evidence that Mookie Betts is somehow better in even numbered years. Betts also has the second highest OBP of his career, and if you take out his otherworldly 2018 his year-to-year offensive output looks quite consistent.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 11, 2019 15:39:43 GMT -5
Yeah, it's the magical thinking that drives me kind of bananas. For instance, one commenter has apparently decided Mookis Betts is an "every other year" player, as if that's a thing. What is this based on - that he's been a little off so far this season, and otherwise this pattern has exhibited itself exactly once? What is the mystical force that suggests he's going to continue to slump, as opposed to regressing toward his 2016-2018 average level of performance? It's the same sort of magical thinking that keeps popping up to "explain" why the team isn't as good as last year, like there's some sort of cosmic law that's being enforced. But teams start off hot and get cold, or start off cold and get hot. For instance, the Red Sox started off hot last year (17-2!), after which they went 91-52, a 103-win pace. This season they started off cold (6-13) before going 27-16, a 102-win pace.Since then they're 1-4, and I actually do think this stretch is partially attributable to their main weakness: the lack of depth, so that when a couple guys get injured they have to run out those pathetic lineups we saw in games 2 and 4 of the TB series. But I also think they could easily go 10-2 in their next 12 games or something. Because it is, after all, basically the same team that won 108 games last season. (If I were to join the pessimists, I'd do so not on the grounds that the team is lacking in special magical powers, but on the grounds that they're really boned if they lose any of the core guys to injury for an extended period of time, and they've actually been pretty fortunate in that department so far.) A. No one has said Betts "sucks" or anything of the like, but: 2015: .820 OPS 2016: .897 OPS 2017: .803 OPS 2018: 1.078 OPS 2019: .838 OPS Seems rather, "every other year" to me. People said the same thing about Josh Beckett too. This isn't a new concept. Mookie still has a 2.7 WAR. He's just not Mike Trout valuable. His fWar is 1.8, though he’s getting dinged quite a bit for his D by them. His trajectory this year seems a little closer to his 2017 season - nothing to sneeze at, but his performance against lefties just seems odd - worst of his career so far.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 11, 2019 15:41:06 GMT -5
That's a different person. You can't use Josh Beckett's inconsistency as evidence that Mookie Betts is somehow better in even numbered years. Betts also has the second highest OBP of his career, and if you take out his otherworldly 2018 his year-to-year offensive output looks quite consistent. Not using it as a baseline, just as an example of. The trade off in a very high OBP is the depreciation of his power. Again, he's still a very valuable player. It's not like he's JBJ. He's just not other worldly this year or the year before or the year before that. His OBP, and his numbers for that matter, are basically what you want out of a leadoff hitter.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,664
|
Post by cdj on Jun 11, 2019 18:17:50 GMT -5
Darwinzon’s fastball looks ridiculously hard to hit
|
|
|
Post by station13 on Jun 11, 2019 18:21:53 GMT -5
is it my imagination, or has every at bat by Mookie has been 90% ball over the last month?
|
|
|
Post by kevfc89 on Jun 11, 2019 18:22:06 GMT -5
Darwinzon’s fastball looks ridiculously hard to hit especially when he's getting it up to 98mph
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 11, 2019 18:22:13 GMT -5
Are there many doubts that Darwinzon is going to be replacing Porcello in the 2020 rotation?
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jun 11, 2019 18:23:07 GMT -5
Wonderful thing about baseball....lots of regular season games to turn things around.
|
|
|
Post by kevfc89 on Jun 11, 2019 18:25:03 GMT -5
Are there many doubts that Darwinzon is going to be replacing Porcello in the 2020 rotation? i think he can, but does need to continue to work on his control through the rest of the year. He's walking 7 batters per 9 in Portland, can't get away with that as a big league starter no matter how good your stuff is.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 11, 2019 18:32:17 GMT -5
Darwinzon needs to stop shaking off Vazquez. Vazquez does the homework on how to sequence.
|
|
|
Post by station13 on Jun 11, 2019 18:33:14 GMT -5
the ugly side is showing with control issues
|
|
|