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.
9/24-9/26 Red Sox vs. Yankees Series Thread
|
Post by curtisw on Sept 27, 2021 11:44:57 GMT -5
We are talking pitching, pitching, pitching - why let the offense off the hook? We averaged 3 runs per game against the MFY in the second half. We scored 3, 3, and 3 runs (so the average hasn't budged), left a boatload on base, and expanded the zone. We can fix the pitching all we want - but we are not scoring enough to take pressure off of the pitchers to be perfect. This is a great point. I guess it’s harder to water cooler about because it’s harder to explain why such good offensive players go cold like this, often it seems against the teams we really need to beat. People smarter than I am can maybe come up with some better reasons.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 27, 2021 11:52:02 GMT -5
I think the reason people are focusing less on the hitting is that the hitting has for the most part been very good.
People keep pointing to the same couple of guys slumping, but in a 9-man lineup there are generally going to be a couple guys slumping. Overall they've been a top-4 offense in the AL this month.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 27, 2021 12:02:57 GMT -5
Also… they were up in in the 8th twice. 2-1, 10-9 whatever. At that point, the offense has put you in a position to win, and the pen needs to hold the lead. Blowing it once… that happens. Twice? Not good at all.
|
|
|
Post by aznpopsical on Sept 27, 2021 12:21:11 GMT -5
Going into this series, our runs scored against the MFY averaged 3 runs per game in the second half. In our three losses, we scored exactly 3 runs each game. So - we are consistent. There is that. we've also been hella consistent in losing to winning teams, so there's no reason to believe that consistency is not going to continue in the wild card game
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 27, 2021 12:22:38 GMT -5
Going into this series, our runs scored against the MFY averaged 3 runs per game in the second half. In our three losses, we scored exactly 3 runs each game. So - we are consistent. There is that. we've also been hella consistent in losing to winning teams, so there's no reason to believe that consistency is not going to continue in the wild card game All it takes is one game to change that pattern and that's what the wild card game is, but what reason have they given to believe it will be any different?
|
|
|
Post by aznpopsical on Sept 27, 2021 12:24:40 GMT -5
we've also been hella consistent in losing to winning teams, so there's no reason to believe that consistency is not going to continue in the wild card game All it takes is one game to change that pattern and that's what the wild card game is, but what reason have they given to believe it will be any different? short answer is: none this year's team will find a way to lose when the stakes are high
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 27, 2021 12:41:00 GMT -5
All it takes is one game to change that pattern and that's what the wild card game is, but what reason have they given to believe it will be any different? short answer is: none this year's team will find a way to lose when the stakes are high That seems a tad unfair. This month’s team, maybe. But they found ways to win in the first half. So partly it will be a question of who shows up in the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by station13 on Sept 27, 2021 12:42:04 GMT -5
All it takes is one game to change that pattern and that's what the wild card game is, but what reason have they given to believe it will be any different? short answer is: none this year's team will find a way to lose when the stakes are high That's very real. Watching Barnes burning games was tough. Now the rest of them are unable to close the deal after this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 27, 2021 12:54:21 GMT -5
short answer is: none this year's team will find a way to lose when the stakes are high That seems a tad unfair. This month’s team, maybe. But they found ways to win in the first half. So partly it will be a question of who shows up in the playoffs. Hell, they're 6-8 against teams with winning records this month. Whereas the indomitable, terrifying Yankees that everyone is being so mopey about are... 3-4.
(And note that the Yankees are 13-11 in the month while only playing 7 games against winning clubs. The Red Sox are 13-9 while playing 14 games against winning clubs.)
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 27, 2021 13:00:07 GMT -5
That seems a tad unfair. This month’s team, maybe. But they found ways to win in the first half. So partly it will be a question of who shows up in the playoffs. Hell, they're 6-8 against teams with winning records this month. Whereas the indomitable, terrifying Yankees that everyone is being so mopey about are... 3-4.
(And note that the Yankees are 13-11 in the month while only playing 7 games against winning clubs. The Red Sox are 13-9 while playing 14 games against winning clubs.) And the Yankee wins this weekend weren’t the kind they should count on. That is, give us a 1-game all-or-nothing, I hardly think “well, Stanton hit that homer, so we are doomed.” Anything can happen.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 27, 2021 13:00:34 GMT -5
That seems a tad unfair. This month’s team, maybe. But they found ways to win in the first half. So partly it will be a question of who shows up in the playoffs. Hell, they're 6-8 against teams with winning records this month. Whereas the indomitable, terrifying Yankees that everyone is being so mopey about are... 3-4.
(And note that the Yankees are 13-11 in the month while only playing 7 games against winning clubs. The Red Sox are 13-9 while playing 14 games against winning clubs.) Gee, remind us where those 3 wins from those Yankees against winning ballclubs came from because us mopey people have already forgotten. And you also forgot to mention the 8-21 mark since the trade deadline the Sox have against winning teams. The fact is that Tampa, Toronto, and New York (the current iterations of those teams) beat up on the current iteration of the Red Sox. That's what the last two months have been since teams basically cemented the rosters they'll have in the playoffs should they advance. Maybe you're right those big bad Yankees aren't so bad, because really the team that has beaten the Red Sox the most the past couple of months are.....the Boston Red Sox. They have beaten themselves in so many ways...with terrible defense, lost bullpen leads, etc...... so the Red Sox must be a juggernaut. So if/when the Sox make the Wild Card, I have faith that the Red Sox can beat....themselves.
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Sept 27, 2021 13:07:35 GMT -5
Joe West wasn't the one who dropped the easy transfer. I mean, how many times have you seen a pitcher throw a perfect strike but the catcher speared at the ball rather than framed it nicely and it gets called a ball? The umpire messes up those calls but the catcher contributes to them. If Vazquez makes the easy transfer of the ball from glove to hand, Joe West isn't in position to mess up the call. Vazquez contributed to that. And Joe West isn't the guy that gave up a rocket to Giancarlo Stanton either. At some point, it's ok to point fingers at the players. Joe West didn't help the situation, but the loss wasn't on him. It was on the bullpen for the second straight night not throwing strikes, nibbling rather than being able to overpower batters, a 1b not catching a foul ball for the second straight night, and poor offense that can't score more than 3 runs a game against this team. I mean, it was a terrible blown call. But, my question is why was Vazquez so quick to make ( try to make) that transfer. Generally in that situation, it seems any C would hold the ball for a couple of beats to make sure of the call before making ( attempting to make) that transfer. I don't like the way Vazquez plays, and really never have. It just felt like that move was a typical move from him- kind of making a stylish quick move rather than the smart baseball one. Maybe that's just me hating on a guy I don't like, but if felt like exactly the kind of thing that he has earned my distrust with.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 27, 2021 13:19:04 GMT -5
Hell, they're 6-8 against teams with winning records this month. Whereas the indomitable, terrifying Yankees that everyone is being so mopey about are... 3-4.
(And note that the Yankees are 13-11 in the month while only playing 7 games against winning clubs. The Red Sox are 13-9 while playing 14 games against winning clubs.) Gee, remind us where those 3 wins from those Yankees against winning ballclubs came from because us mopey people have already forgotten. And you also forgot to mention the 8-21 mark since the trade deadline the Sox have against winning teams. The fact is that Tampa, Toronto, and New York (the current iterations of those teams) beat up on the current iteration of the Red Sox. That's what the last two months have been since teams basically cemented the rosters they'll have in the playoffs should they advance. Maybe you're right those big bad Yankees aren't so bad, because really the team that has beaten the Red Sox the most the past couple of months are.....the Boston Red Sox. They have beaten themselves in so many ways...with terrible defense, lost bullpen leads, etc...... so the Red Sox must be a juggernaut. So if/when the Sox make the Wild Card, I have faith that the Red Sox can beat....themselves. I understand your view is that the Red Sox are inherently deficient, possibly in a moral sense, and that a loss in the wild card game is inevitable; but all your strawmen notwithstanding, my own view - expressed on the previous page of this thread - is that the "current iteration" of this team has existed for about 2 weeks and has gone 7-4. Also getting Whitlock back for the wild card game would give them one of the two big weapons that they sorely lacked in this series, the other being Chris Sale.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 27, 2021 13:25:53 GMT -5
Incidentally, I haven't seen anyone mention it, including the announcers, but all 3 of those missed popups late in the game last night (the two by the Yankees, plus Dalbec's) had the ball peeling off toward the first base/RF side. Seems likely there was some weird atmospheric rip current pushing them that way, no?
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Sept 27, 2021 14:34:21 GMT -5
Incidentally, I haven't seen anyone mention it, including the announcers, but all 3 of those missed popups late in the game last night (the two by the Yankees, plus Dalbec's) had the ball peeling off toward the first base/RF side. Seems likely there was some weird atmospheric rip current pushing them that way, no? Both the Dalbec and the Sanchez misses were relatively close to the stands, but Bobby’s was not a misreading of the air currants so much as a misreading of the space he had available to go after the ball. Sanchez and LeMahieu lost balls that were drifting away from the stands. We have seen that before, and some folks say that the added height on the stands behind the plate and down the lines is the reason. The LeMahieu miss was the most surprising as it was out in the short outfield. The Sanchez miss was a classic example of the issue you are pointing out—aside from the fact that he is not a particularly good defensive catcher.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 27, 2021 14:48:04 GMT -5
Gee, remind us where those 3 wins from those Yankees against winning ballclubs came from because us mopey people have already forgotten. And you also forgot to mention the 8-21 mark since the trade deadline the Sox have against winning teams. The fact is that Tampa, Toronto, and New York (the current iterations of those teams) beat up on the current iteration of the Red Sox. That's what the last two months have been since teams basically cemented the rosters they'll have in the playoffs should they advance. Maybe you're right those big bad Yankees aren't so bad, because really the team that has beaten the Red Sox the most the past couple of months are.....the Boston Red Sox. They have beaten themselves in so many ways...with terrible defense, lost bullpen leads, etc...... so the Red Sox must be a juggernaut. So if/when the Sox make the Wild Card, I have faith that the Red Sox can beat....themselves. I understand your view is that the Red Sox are inherently deficient, possibly in a moral sense, and that a loss in the wild card game is inevitable; but all your strawmen notwithstanding, my own view - expressed on the previous page of this thread - is that the "current iteration" of this team has existed for about 2 weeks and has gone 7-4. Also getting Whitlock back for the wild card game would give them one of the two big weapons that they sorely lacked in this series, the other being Chris Sale. And I understand your inherent view is that the Sox situation has to be glass half full, no matter what's going on and that they're guaranteed to win because you're a Red Sox fan. I can only imagine you in the Kevin Bacon Animal House role when September 2011 unfurled. No, it's not inevitable that the Sox lose. The way they have played it's damn likely, although I would like their chances better against the Blue Jays. They haven't played particularly well against the Yankees in case you hadn't noticed. I'd love to be wrong about this. They beat the Yankees, I don't care what they do the rest of the post-season, it's been a successful season. Fact of the matter is I hate the Yankees almost as much as I love the Sox. Yes, this iteration of the Red Sox is 7-4, 7-0 against the O's and Mets and 0-3 against the Yankees, or perhaps 0-1 against the Yankees, and 0-2 against themselves, so if they run into the Mets or O's in the playoffs I like their chances. If they run into the O's in say the next few days, I like their chances of winning that series, too. You raise Chris Sale and Garrett Whitlock as two weapons they lacked. I agree. I kind of wanted the rotation reconfigured so that Sale started Game 1 and Pivetta wasn't in the rotation. As it turned out, Cora was right about this one. Sale got the win against the Mets when he got the weekly supply of runs and there's no way he could have been any more effective than Nick Pivetta was. But you seem to miss the obvious - that Sale isn't his old self to the point where he's going to go out and throw 7 shutout innings with 15 Ks and 0 walks. He's good for about 5 - 6 innings these days and his presence doesn't stop the bullpen from screwing up the game even if he did go 7 innings. Having Whitlock could have made a difference. But then again he helped blow that first game in NY when he walked 2 of the 3 guys he faced and Cora was quick with the hook and a 3-2 lead became a 5-3 deficit, so who knows, but yes I think Whitlock perhaps might have made a difference for the good for one of the games. The problem is that he's coming back from an injury and we have no idea how effective/rusty he's going to be, so I can't simply say, stick in Whitlock and it's virtually automatic. I hope he does come back healthy and sharp. I thought having Houck, a stretched out starter, in his spot would make it ok, but even Houck couldn't get through his second inning without walking two guys with 2 outs. I don't know why you have such confidence for any other reason than you're a fan so of course they'll win - you're as dug in about that as I am worried that they won't, but if that's the way you think that's your prerogative and who am I to tell you you're wrong or vice versa?
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Sept 27, 2021 14:50:24 GMT -5
Can the Red Sox win the Wild Card game?
Of course they can. In the last month we have seen both Cole and Eavoldi pitch well and pitch poorly. We have seen Sale and Richards and Robles pitch lights out. We have seen the Sox hit really well and fail to hit. A one-game series is a crapshoot. We don’t need Whitlock to have a chance. We need great pitching and timely hitting.
This is baseball. We do not mail the results in.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 27, 2021 15:21:47 GMT -5
I understand your view is that the Red Sox are inherently deficient, possibly in a moral sense, and that a loss in the wild card game is inevitable; but all your strawmen notwithstanding, my own view - expressed on the previous page of this thread - is that the "current iteration" of this team has existed for about 2 weeks and has gone 7-4. Also getting Whitlock back for the wild card game would give them one of the two big weapons that they sorely lacked in this series, the other being Chris Sale. And I understand your inherent view is that the Sox situation has to be glass half full, no matter what's going on and that they're guaranteed to win because you're a Red Sox fan. I can only imagine you in the Kevin Bacon Animal House role when September 2011 unfurled. No, it's not inevitable that the Sox lose. The way they have played it's damn likely, although I would like their chances better against the Blue Jays. They haven't played particularly well against the Yankees in case you hadn't noticed. I'd love to be wrong about this. They beat the Yankees, I don't care what they do the rest of the post-season, it's been a successful season. Fact of the matter is I hate the Yankees almost as much as I love the Sox. Yes, this iteration of the Red Sox is 7-4, 7-0 against the O's and Mets and 0-3 against the Yankees, or perhaps 0-1 against the Yankees, and 0-2 against themselves, so if they run into the Mets or O's in the playoffs I like their chances. If they run into the O's in say the next few days, I like their chances of winning that series, too. You raise Chris Sale and Garrett Whitlock as two weapons they lacked. I agree. I kind of wanted the rotation reconfigured so that Sale started Game 1 and Pivetta wasn't in the rotation. As it turned out, Cora was right about this one. Sale got the win against the Mets when he got the weekly supply of runs and there's no way he could have been any more effective than Nick Pivetta was. But you seem to miss the obvious - that Sale isn't his old self to the point where he's going to go out and throw 7 shutout innings with 15 Ks and 0 walks. He's good for about 5 - 6 innings these days and his presence doesn't stop the bullpen from screwing up the game even if he did go 7 innings.
Having Whitlock could have made a difference. But then again he helped blow that first game in NY when he walked 2 of the 3 guys he faced and Cora was quick with the hook and a 3-2 lead became a 5-3 deficit, so who knows, but yes I think Whitlock perhaps might have made a difference for the good for one of the games. The problem is that he's coming back from an injury and we have no idea how effective/rusty he's going to be, so I can't simply say, stick in Whitlock and it's virtually automatic. I hope he does come back healthy and sharp. I thought having Houck, a stretched out starter, in his spot would make it ok, but even Houck couldn't get through his second inning without walking two guys with 2 outs. I don't know why you have such confidence for any other reason than you're a fan so of course they'll win - you're as dug in about that as I am worried that they won't, but if that's the way you think that's your prerogative and who am I to tell you you're wrong or vice versa? I really wish you would make your arguments without setting up these hyperbolic strawmen. I have never said they're guaranteed to win no matter what. I explicitly gave them a 50% chance of winning yesterday's game after dropping the first two. My current view is that the wild card game will be a coin flip as well.
There's an asymmetry here: you have "faith" that they will lose the wild card game; I think it's possible that they'll win. You read this as my being unduly optimistic - guaranteeing victory, no less! - but that is explicitly not what I am doing. I'm only so consistently optimistic in the face of these irrational claims about the certainty of their failure. See also my view that they're basically as good as their record indicates. Is this an unreasonably optimistic take on the quality of the team? Only from an unreasonably pessimistic perspective!
They were 7-0 against the O's, Mets, and Mariners in Seattle. You predicted they'd lose the Seattle series, and that they'd go 2-5 in a stretch against the Rays, White Sox, and Mariners in which they actually went 4-3; your selective memory here sort of suggests that when things go well you tend to forget it while having bad events forever imprinted on your memory.
On Sale only going 5 innings... That's all they need out of him in a wild card game: Sale for 5, Houck for 2, Whitlock for 2. (Am I guaranteeing victory with this formula? No! I am saying it gives them a coin flip's chance of winning the game.) To be honest, Cole might not go more than 5 for the Yankees - he went 6 mediocre innings against us the other day and has averaged about 5 IP in his last 4 starts.
Anyways, I think we agree on this much: if they can squeeze the Yankees out of the playoffs then it will have been a successful season for the Red Sox, whatever happens; fail to do that and it won't.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 27, 2021 15:52:02 GMT -5
And I understand your inherent view is that the Sox situation has to be glass half full, no matter what's going on and that they're guaranteed to win because you're a Red Sox fan. I can only imagine you in the Kevin Bacon Animal House role when September 2011 unfurled. No, it's not inevitable that the Sox lose. The way they have played it's damn likely, although I would like their chances better against the Blue Jays. They haven't played particularly well against the Yankees in case you hadn't noticed. I'd love to be wrong about this. They beat the Yankees, I don't care what they do the rest of the post-season, it's been a successful season. Fact of the matter is I hate the Yankees almost as much as I love the Sox. Yes, this iteration of the Red Sox is 7-4, 7-0 against the O's and Mets and 0-3 against the Yankees, or perhaps 0-1 against the Yankees, and 0-2 against themselves, so if they run into the Mets or O's in the playoffs I like their chances. If they run into the O's in say the next few days, I like their chances of winning that series, too. You raise Chris Sale and Garrett Whitlock as two weapons they lacked. I agree. I kind of wanted the rotation reconfigured so that Sale started Game 1 and Pivetta wasn't in the rotation. As it turned out, Cora was right about this one. Sale got the win against the Mets when he got the weekly supply of runs and there's no way he could have been any more effective than Nick Pivetta was. But you seem to miss the obvious - that Sale isn't his old self to the point where he's going to go out and throw 7 shutout innings with 15 Ks and 0 walks. He's good for about 5 - 6 innings these days and his presence doesn't stop the bullpen from screwing up the game even if he did go 7 innings.
Having Whitlock could have made a difference. But then again he helped blow that first game in NY when he walked 2 of the 3 guys he faced and Cora was quick with the hook and a 3-2 lead became a 5-3 deficit, so who knows, but yes I think Whitlock perhaps might have made a difference for the good for one of the games. The problem is that he's coming back from an injury and we have no idea how effective/rusty he's going to be, so I can't simply say, stick in Whitlock and it's virtually automatic. I hope he does come back healthy and sharp. I thought having Houck, a stretched out starter, in his spot would make it ok, but even Houck couldn't get through his second inning without walking two guys with 2 outs. I don't know why you have such confidence for any other reason than you're a fan so of course they'll win - you're as dug in about that as I am worried that they won't, but if that's the way you think that's your prerogative and who am I to tell you you're wrong or vice versa? I really wish you would make your arguments without setting up these hyperbolic strawmen. I have never said they're guaranteed to win no matter what. I explicitly gave them a 50% chance of winning yesterday's game after dropping the first two. My current view is that the wild card game will be a coin flip as well. There's an asymmetry here: you have "faith" that they will lose the wild card game; I think it's possible that they'll win. You read this as my being unduly optimistic - guaranteeing victory, no less! - but that is explicitly not what I am doing. I'm only so consistently optimistic in the face of these irrational claims about the certainty of their failure. See also my view that they're basically as good as their record indicates. Is this an unreasonably optimistic take on the quality of the team? Only from an unreasonably pessimistic perspective!
They were 7-0 against the O's, Mets, and Mariners in Seattle. You predicted they'd lose the Seattle series, and that they'd go 2-5 in a stretch against the Rays, White Sox, and Mariners in which they actually went 4-3; your selective memory here sort of suggests that when things go well you tend to forget it while having bad events forever imprinted on your memory. On Sale only going 5 innings... That's all they need out of him in a wild card game: Sale for 5, Houck for 2, Whitlock for 2. (Am I guaranteeing victory with this formula? No! I am saying it gives them a coin flip's chance of winning the game.) To be honest, Cole might not go more than 5 for the Yankees - he went 6 mediocre innings against us the other day and has averaged about 5 IP in his last 4 starts. Anyways, I think we agree on this much: if they can squeeze the Yankees out of the playoffs then it will have been a successful season for the Red Sox, whatever happens; fail to do that and it won't.
Dude, what do you want me to say? Stick the Orioles in a Wild Card game with the Dodgers and they could have the day of their lives and knock off the Dodgers. We all know that. Yes, it's not impossible for the Sox to finally get their crap together and play NY in a way we'd be proud of. I don't think they will, but I hope I'm wrong. I don't know why you have such an issue with me not really caring much for their chances if they get into a matchup with the Yankees. This is how I feel. This doesn't mean that my crystal ball is infallible. If it were perfect, I'd see the winning lottery numbers and start my early retirement. I know that I am, along with others, I'm sure, tiring of the back and forth arguing. You feel the way you do and I feel the way I do. Hope you're ultimately right. So we'll agree to disagree. The bolded - we can agree to agree on that one!
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Sept 27, 2021 16:15:08 GMT -5
I think this might speak to my stating that their needs to be fewer 1 inning guys, more relievers that can go 2 helps spread the workload. I just read that Richards seems to be embracing his new role as a reliever, that is good news. He could have a great ending to his career in a 2,3 inning role. Maybe. But Whitlock — their multi-inning guy — is hurt, even as they’ve been especially careful with him. The multi-inning guy is hardly new, of course. But many of the rubber arm guys in the ye olde were sinker ballers. It’ll be tough to have guys come out and throw 96+ for 2 innings a few times a week AND keep them healthy for the season and beyond. It seems like a formula for short careers. The truth is that guys spinning it and velocity to get guys out will shorten careers. Can't blame the pitchers for doing what they have to to get guys out. Their are no more easy outs and the hitters are better than ever. It is what it is. With all the money involved you don't have guys getting out of shape in the offseason, they are all playing to win and throwing meatballs doesn't work PERIOD.
|
|
|
Post by trajanacc on Sept 27, 2021 19:09:28 GMT -5
Of course the wild card game would be close to a coin flip. Check the odds of baseball games and they almost always imply 50/50 to 60/40 probability. Worst case would be maybe 75/25 if you had an elite team throwing their ace against the Orioles.
Two teams with similar records, each throwing their ace, in one game, is very close to a coin flip. At worst, a roulette spin.
People that believe in this Team of Destiny crap, or its opposite, This Team Doesn’t Have What it Takes, are completely delusional.
If you’re so certain the Red Sox are going to find a way to lose, cash out your savings and go to Vegas, you can nearly double your money, because the odds will be close to even.
It’s easy to creative narratives about past games, but those narratives are generally not reliable predictors of future ones.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 27, 2021 20:02:46 GMT -5
Joe West wasn't the one who dropped the easy transfer. I mean, how many times have you seen a pitcher throw a perfect strike but the catcher speared at the ball rather than framed it nicely and it gets called a ball? The umpire messes up those calls but the catcher contributes to them. If Vazquez makes the easy transfer of the ball from glove to hand, Joe West isn't in position to mess up the call. Vazquez contributed to that. And Joe West isn't the guy that gave up a rocket to Giancarlo Stanton either. At some point, it's ok to point fingers at the players. Joe West didn't help the situation, but the loss wasn't on him. It was on the bullpen for the second straight night not throwing strikes, nibbling rather than being able to overpower batters, a 1b not catching a foul ball for the second straight night, and poor offense that can't score more than 3 runs a game against this team. I mean, it was a terrible blown call. But, my question is why was Vazquez so quick to make ( try to make) that transfer. Generally in that situation, it seems any C would hold the ball for a couple of beats to make sure of the call before making ( attempting to make) that transfer. I don't like the way Vazquez plays, and really never have. It just felt like that move was a typical move from him- kind of making a stylish quick move rather than the smart baseball one. Maybe that's just me hating on a guy I don't like, but if felt like exactly the kind of thing that he has earned my distrust with. It seemed to me that Vaz DID hold it long enough, It was clear on the replays that he didn't drop it until he stuck his right hand in there to take it out and throw it back to the P. (My memory of this may not be perfect. At the time I was so consumed by rage that it may have affected my ability to see straight, but I'm telling you what I recall.) It's also not CV's job to spoon-feed Joe West, who fancies himself a HOF umpire. Get the call right, Big Man. My biggest beef is that Cora didn't come out and demand that West check with the 1B umpire. As we know, West has famously shown a willingness to huddle with his crew to make sure a big call is correct. If Cora had gone out there and told him the replay clearly showed he was wrong, West would have checked with the 1B ump to avoid the embarrassment of blowing such a big call.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 27, 2021 20:11:28 GMT -5
Of course the wild card game would be close to a coin flip. Check the odds of baseball games and they almost always imply 50/50 to 60/40 probability. Worst case would be maybe 75/25 if you had an elite team throwing their ace against the Orioles. Two teams with similar records, each throwing their ace, in one game, is very close to a coin flip. At worst, a roulette spin. People that believe in this Team of Destiny crap, or its opposite, This Team Doesn’t Have What it Takes, are completely delusional. If you’re so certain the Red Sox are going to find a way to lose, cash out your savings and go to Vegas, you can nearly double your money, because the odds will be close to even. It’s easy to creative narratives about past games, but those narratives are generally not reliable predictors of future ones. My belief that the MFYs will beat us in a playoff game is not based on anything mystical. They have clearly been the better team the second half of the season, especially head to head. I think Cole is better than Eovaldi or Sale, the MFYs' middle of the order is more likely to produce a three-run jack that breaks a game open, and their bullpen is far superior to ours, Chapman's troubles notwithstanding. I live and die for this team and plan on getting tickets for the wife and me to make the 170-mile trip to Fenway for that game. I've already booked Tuesday and Wednesday as off-days. But I expect a long, quiet drive home.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 27, 2021 20:20:53 GMT -5
Of course the wild card game would be close to a coin flip. Check the odds of baseball games and they almost always imply 50/50 to 60/40 probability. Worst case would be maybe 75/25 if you had an elite team throwing their ace against the Orioles. Two teams with similar records, each throwing their ace, in one game, is very close to a coin flip. At worst, a roulette spin. People that believe in this Team of Destiny crap, or its opposite, This Team Doesn’t Have What it Takes, are completely delusional. If you’re so certain the Red Sox are going to find a way to lose, cash out your savings and go to Vegas, you can nearly double your money, because the odds will be close to even. It’s easy to creative narratives about past games, but those narratives are generally not reliable predictors of future ones. My belief that the MFYs will beat us in a playoff game is not based on anything mystical. They have clearly been the better team the second half of the season, especially head to head. I think Cole is better than Eovaldi or Sale, the MFYs' middle of the order is more likely to produce a three-run jack that breaks a game open, and their bullpen is far superior to ours, Chapman's troubles notwithstanding. I live and die for this team and plan on getting tickets for the wife and me to make the 170-mile trip to Fenway for that game. I've already booked Tuesday and Wednesday as off-days. But I expect a long, quiet drive home. Hope you'll be pleasantly surprised
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Sept 27, 2021 21:39:20 GMT -5
I mean, it was a terrible blown call. But, my question is why was Vazquez so quick to make ( try to make) that transfer. Generally in that situation, it seems any C would hold the ball for a couple of beats to make sure of the call before making ( attempting to make) that transfer. I don't like the way Vazquez plays, and really never have. It just felt like that move was a typical move from him- kind of making a stylish quick move rather than the smart baseball one. Maybe that's just me hating on a guy I don't like, but if felt like exactly the kind of thing that he has earned my distrust with. It seemed to me that Vaz DID hold it long enough, It was clear on the replays that he didn't drop it until he stuck his right hand in there to take it out and throw it back to the P. (My memory of this may not be perfect. At the time I was so consumed by rage that it may have affected my ability to see straight, but I'm telling you what I recall.) It's also not CV's job to spoon-feed Joe West, who fancies himself a HOF umpire. Get the call right, Big Man. My biggest beef is that Cora didn't come out and demand that West check with the 1B umpire. As we know, West has famously shown a willingness to huddle with his crew to make sure a big call is correct. If Cora had gone out there and told him the replay clearly showed he was wrong, West would have checked with the 1B ump to avoid the embarrassment of blowing such a big call. I didn't say he didn't hold it long enough for it not to be a missed call. I said it was a missed call. But I don't know why he had to transfer it as quickly as he did. I've seen that kind of play thousands of times and the C always holds it for a second to make sure of the call.It just felt like typical Vazquez, making a style play rather than the smart one.
|
|
|