Red Sox 2012 fearless prediction thread

[jung]

I don't get it either. What is going to be different about Crawford on Monday that makes it worthwhile for him to miss being in these two games?

 

These guys seem to over-think everything to the wrong answer. If Crawford is going to hit on Monday he is going to hit today....in fact the best thing for him might be to start his return in a park where he is comfortable playing.

 

Between the players, upper management, the FO and its coaches at some point you begin to wonder if there is just to much weight going the wrong way and regardless of how much good stuff you throw into the mix there is just to much going the wrong way. Oh well this is why they play the games.

[User Name]

They create a rehab program for these guys and they stick to it to the end for a reason. Every team does this, and they, again, do it for a reason. I don't understand the line of thinking where not finishing out a player's rehab so they can get their timing back is a bad thing?

[jung]

UN normally I would completely agree were it not for the fact that CC would get to come back in a stadium he has been comfortable in and that might be a very convenient way to ease him back into the lineup without really doing anything other than having him play his first games in Tampa. Were it not for that I would say have him finish out and come back Monday. I just happen to think that given the player himself, playing in Tampa actually does him more good than finishing his rehab stint where he is.

[User Name]

Not how it works IMO. It doesn't help to come back to MLB games prematurely if you have a rehab plan previously prepared. Baseball players are creatures of habit.

[Laser Show]

He'll be facing easier SP against the White Sox, but I'm not sure if that has anything to do with his return.

[a700hitter]

Aceves had 3 games in which he blew the save and took the loss' date=' so we're really talking about 7 possible losses that could be blamed on him. But in 2 of his losses he was in his second or third inning of work. I don't think he should be blamed for those losses. I think he can be charged with 5 lost games. Using the same criteria I'm using for Aceves, Papelbon can be charged with 3 lost games.[/quote']Your premises here are faulty so your conclusion is invalid. The comparison here isn't merely Papelbon vs. Aceves as the closer. That is indeed part of it. If we kept Papelbon, we would still have Aceves. How many games more games would the Sox have won by Aceves holding leads in the 7th and/or 8th innings to hand over to Papelbon in the 9th? I think 5 more wins is a fairly conservative estimate.

[example1]

Your premises here are faulty so your conclusion is invalid. The comparison here isn't merely Papelbon vs. Aceves as the closer. That is indeed part of it. If we kept Papelbon' date=' we would still have Aceves. How many games more games would the Sox have won by Aceves holding leads in the 7th and/or 8th innings to hand over to Papelbon in the 9th? I think 5 more wins is a fairly conservative estimate.[/quote']

 

What about if the Sox had to decide to spend money on either Papelbon or Ortiz? Would they have the same number of wins, more, or fewer with Papelbon?

 

I'm not sure what to make of it, but Papelbon's velocity is somewhat down this year. Fangraphs has him at 93.7, compared to 95.0, 94.9 and 94.7 the previous years. His other pitches are down too. He's always seemed like the kind of pitcher who could dial it up as he needed to, and I wouldn't be shocked if he were being more conservative to save himself for the length of his contract, but in any case, it's interesting.

[Bellhorn04]

Your premises here are faulty so your conclusion is invalid. The comparison here isn't merely Papelbon vs. Aceves as the closer. That is indeed part of it. If we kept Papelbon' date=' we would still have Aceves. How many games more games would the Sox have won by Aceves holding leads in the 7th and/or 8th innings to hand over to Papelbon in the 9th? I think 5 more wins is a fairly conservative estimate.[/quote']

 

Our 7th and 8th guys, indeed the bullpen in general, has been doing an excellent job.

 

I thought we established that it's our starters that have been the big problem.

 

There's no statistical way you can support '5 more wins with Papelbon', and you know that.

[a700hitter]

What about if the Sox had to decide to spend money on either Papelbon or Ortiz? Would they have the same number of wins, more, or fewer with Papelbon?

 

I'm not sure what to make of it, but Papelbon's velocity is somewhat down this year. Fangraphs has him at 93.7, compared to 95.0, 94.9 and 94.7 the previous years. His other pitches are down too. He's always seemed like the kind of pitcher who could dial it up as he needed to, and I wouldn't be shocked if he were being more conservative to save himself for the length of his contract, but in any case, it's interesting.

Iwasn't arguing value of contract etc. I was just simply making the point that subtracting him from the roster has cost us wins. I think that is a fair statement.

[a700hitter]

Our 7th and 8th guys, indeed the bullpen in general, has been doing an excellent job.

 

I thought we established that it's our starters that have been the big problem.

 

There's no statistical way you can support '5 more wins with Papelbon', and you know that.

Nor can you disprove my proposition. The raw numbers show him 2 games better than Aceves if he just substituted for Aceves. I think my position that adding Papelbon to our bullpen which includes Aceves in a more comfortable role and dropping the 7th or 8th guy from our pen would have improved the pen and changed the dynamic of the late innings. If you want to say that I can't prove it with numbers, fine, but you can't disprove it either, because there is no way for you to model the changed dynamic of adding him to the pen. However, to think that adding Papelbon to any team's bullpen would not improve that pen would be absurd.

[User Name]

The funny thing is that Papelbon hasn't been nearly as good this season (in the NL no less!) as he was last year here with the Red Sox. His numbers would probably look a bit worse if he were still playing in the AL East. A 3.34 ERA and 1.14 WHIP aren't high echelon numbers for a reliever. The line of thinking that Papelbon would make this club that much better looks ridiculous to me if you take his actual numbers into account.

[Bellhorn04]

The funny thing is that Papelbon hasn't been nearly as good this season (in the NL no less!) as he was last year here with the Red Sox. His numbers would probably look a bit worse if he were still playing in the AL East. A 3.34 ERA and 1.14 WHIP aren't high echelon numbers for a reliever. The line of thinking that Papelbon would make this club that much better looks ridiculous to me if you take his actual numbers into account.

 

Especially when our bullpen's collective ERA is 3.08.

[ellsburyforMVP]

The funny thing is that Papelbon hasn't been nearly as good this season (in the NL no less!) as he was last year here with the Red Sox. His numbers would probably look a bit worse if he were still playing in the AL East. A 3.34 ERA and 1.14 WHIP aren't high echelon numbers for a reliever. The line of thinking that Papelbon would make this club that much better looks ridiculous to me if you take his actual numbers into account.

 

I think we all know that era for a closer is hogwash.... Midseason, let's say he's pitched 35 innings and had 2 bad outings giving up 5 combined runs in those 2, then through the other 33 innings he gives up 8? Total earned runs-said closers era would then be 3.34

 

I haven't followed paps season too closely to know if this might be the case, but era can be misleading with closers ( and idk how much Philly has used pap in " nonsave" opportunities, but he was horrible in those instances for us )

 

Edit: as of June 21st papelbon has allowed 7 runs in 10 1/3 innings in non-save situations , but while pitching 17 1/3 innings in a "save-opportunity" he has allowed 0 earned runs.... I always hated when we would throw pap out there in a game to " get some work in" then he gave up a couple runs... Small sample size I know for this season, but it does help prove that his era may be skewed some

[SoxSport]

Playing CC in Pawtucket for the weekend instead of TB defies logic. Pure and simple. It tells me there is something wrong with the Red Sox management structure. Here they have a guy they're paying $20 million, and they think he won't hit as good in TB vs Pawtucket for a couple of games? Give the fans a break...please. They have been playing retreads in the OF the past 3 months.

 

It tells me the Red Sox management are a bunch of fat cats who don't give a crap about winning. Kind of like the early Yawkey mentality. Time to sell the team, Henry, and roll a few heads.

[Bellhorn04]

I think we all know that era for a closer is hogwash.... Midseason, let's say he's pitched 35 innings and had 2 bad outings giving up 5 combined runs in those 2, then through the other 33 innings he gives up 8? Total earned runs-said closers era would then be 3.34

 

I haven't followed paps season too closely to know if this might be the case, but era can be misleading with closers ( and idk how much Philly has used pap in " nonsave" opportunities, but he was horrible in those instances for us )

 

Edit: as of June 21st papelbon has allowed 7 runs in 10 1/3 innings in non-save situations , but while pitching 17 1/3 innings in a "save-opportunity" he has allowed 0 earned runs.... I always hated when we would throw pap out there in a game to " get some work in" then he gave up a couple runs... Small sample size I know for this season, but it does help prove that his era may be skewed some

 

But 4 of those 7 runs in 'non-save situations' were in 2 games where he entered with the score tied and gave up the winning run(s). I think those situations should be treated as equal to save situations.

[a700hitter]

But 4 of those 7 runs in 'non-save situations' were in 2 games where he entered with the score tied and gave up the winning run(s). I think those situations should be treated as equal to save situations.

The fact is that the Red Sox bullpen was much better in late inning and pressure situauions in 2011 than it has been this season. The Bullpen was second best in batting average and OPS in 2011. This season they are the second worst in the AL in those categories. That's the relevant math. Last years bullpen had 16 blown saves for the entire season. This season we have 11 blown saves already.

[ellsburyforMVP]

But 4 of those 7 runs in 'non-save situations' were in 2 games where he entered with the score tied and gave up the winning run(s). I think those situations should be treated as equal to save situations.

 

That can be attributed to his "psyche"(sp?) pap was horrible in non-sv situation for us the last few yrs...his career numbers are about the same ( but he was so dominant his first couple yrs that it's helping keep his numbers down ).

 

I don't think they should be "equal" , yeah he might have lost those gms, but who knows if they would of won those gms? Point is, when he has the lead- I trust papelbon more than anyone

[a700hitter]

The fact is that the Red Sox bullpen was much better in late inning and pressure situauions in 2011 than it has been this season. The Bullpen was second best in batting average and OPS in 2011. This season they are the second worst in the AL in those categories. That's the relevant math. Last years bullpen had 16 blown saves for the entire season. This season we have 11 blown saves already.

Also, with regard just to innings 7 to 9, in 2011 our Bullpen was best in batting average against and OPS. This year it is 12th in both categories. These are the innings that are important -- the 7th thru 9th and the close and late situations. We kinda suck at those. We are blowing smoke up our own asses if we don't think losing Papelbon has hurt this team by at least 5 wins.

 

Look at tonight. In the 7th last year, Aceves and/or Bard would have stopped the bleeding in the 7th, shut them down in the 8th and handed Papelbon the ball in the 9th.

[ellsburyforMVP]

Also, with regard just to innings 7 to 9, in 2011 our Bullpen was best in batting average against and OPS. This year it is 12th in both categories. These are the innings that are important -- the 7th thru 9th and the close and late situations. We kinda suck at those. We are blowing smoke up our own asses if we don't think losing Papelbon has hurt this team by at least 5 wins.

 

Look at tonight. In the 7th last year, Aceves and/or Bard would have stopped the bleeding in the 7th, shut them down in the 8th and handed Papelbon the ball in the 9th.

 

 

THIS!!!!!!

[User Name]

But 4 of those 7 runs in 'non-save situations' were in 2 games where he entered with the score tied and gave up the winning run(s). I think those situations should be treated as equal to save situations.

 

Don't waste your time. Logic goes out the window when people have an emotional attachment to a player. Papelbon simply hasn't been that good this year. The excuse-making by Ellsbury and (surprisingly) a700 is quite funny considering they're part of the "no excuses" crowd. Papelbon hasn't been that good, period.

[redsoxbeatz]

Crawford with more HRs than Gonzalez. Probably not fearless with Gonzo only six ahead.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Don't waste your time. Logic goes out the window when people have an emotional attachment to a player. Papelbon simply hasn't been that good this year. The excuse-making by Ellsbury and (surprisingly) a700 is quite funny considering they're part of the "no excuses" crowd. Papelbon hasn't been that good' date=' period.[/quote']

 

 

I think their point is more that he has been better at closing than anyone on the Sox, and most importantly, better than Andrew Bailey by virtue of actually playing. I still think they have to wait until Bailey starts pitching to decide whether letting go of Papelbon was the right move, but in the meantime it sure would be nice to have him. He freaked me out sometimes but I was still more comfortable with him out there than I am with Aceves.

[a700hitter]

I think their point is more that he has been better at closing than anyone on the Sox' date=' and most importantly, better than Andrew Bailey by virtue of actually playing. I still think they have to wait until Bailey starts pitching to decide whether letting go of Papelbon was the right move, but in the meantime it sure would be nice to have him. He freaked me out sometimes but I was still more comfortable with him out there than I am with Aceves.[/quote']He had a 5 out save tonight allowing no base runners. Ah the good old days.

 

As for Bailey, when he's healthy, he can be pretty good, but when the best guy that you've seen in the role in 45 years leaves the team, you really don't expect to see another like him right away.

[User Name]

I think their point is more that he has been better at closing than anyone on the Sox' date=' and most importantly, better than Andrew Bailey by virtue of actually playing. I still think they have to wait until Bailey starts pitching to decide whether letting go of Papelbon was the right move, but in the meantime it sure would be nice to have him. He freaked me out sometimes but I was still more comfortable with him out there than I am with Aceves.[/quote']

 

But how much better? 11 million dollars better? I doubt it. I think that if the Sox would have gambled on a guy like Joe Nathan for much cheaper as many people thought they would and for less years, this would be much less of an issue. I do think that the expectation that Papelbon would regress/not be as good has been correct so far.

[jung]

Seems to me that season stats often don't really tell the story of a season because they don't tell you want the team did when it really mattered.

The fact is that the Red Sox bullpen was much better in late inning and pressure situauions in 2011 than it has been this season.

 

While I am sure this is true I just don't think it is as relevant as other elements of the team's play. In fact while I am taking a quote from a 700 post and I don't want to put words in his mouth I would bet he likely agrees with me.

 

As I recall the Sox record in games where they were behind after the 6th inning was 2-61 in 2011. The Sox lost 72 games on the season as a whole. So while they only came back to win 2 games while losing 61 when behind after the 6th inning by exception, they lost 11 games when leading or tied after the 6th inning. So they lost 11 and won 88 when they were leading or tied after the 6th inning. Therefore their winning % when behind after the 6th while terrible was not as bad as their losing % when ahead or tied after the 6th inning. Had they gone on to win in 7 of those 11 loses, they would have tied the Yanks for the division win! If one of those 7 was a game against the Yanks, they would have won the division over the Yanks by one game.

 

So it seems to me that while they ranked high in OPS and BA against for the late innings, they were also losing enough of those games where they were actually ahead or tied going into the late innings to have gone from a possible division winner to not making the post season at all. To be honest although those 11 late inning loses last year contradicts the view that our late inning relief performances were saving us in some relevant way last year, I prefer not to really focus much attention on those 11 loses.

 

It seems to me that it is not about what is different about the 2012 Sox when compared to the 2011 Sox. It is about what is the same.

 

All this talk about losing Paps and Bards demise and Aceves being forced to close, and injuries and for all intents and purposes it is the same damn team it was last year. It can't win close games and can't come from behind to save its skin.

 

What is most similar about the 2011 and 2012 teams? Its the starting pitching of course. The starting pitching on balance sucked last year and it sucks this year. The starters were generally out-pitched last year and they are being out-pitched this year. To many games were already decided against before the relief pitchers even get into the game last year. However if you do want to focus on the actual results when they were in the late innings tied or ahead last year, they actually still lost a high enough percentage of those games to have cost themselves the division.

 

If you really want to focus in on the crux of the matter it is those three guys at the top of the rotation. You can dance around those three guys till hell freezes over but that is where this team is being beaten more often than not. Second to starting pitching the other key element of similarity between the 2011 and 2012 teams is timely hitting. Here again the season numbers are misleading as the Sox score tons of runs but don't score enough with the game on the line.

 

Those two elements of the game, the starting pitching and particularly from the three guys at the top of the rotation and secondarily the lack of timely hitting is what killed the Sox last year and continues to kill them this year.

 

As for the starting pitching, I still think the only way to really do something that will matter will be to get rid of Beckett and move Lester probably as far down as the 3 in this rotation with Buch as the 2 and get a true 1 which they did not have last year and don't have this year. They may have enough depth to fill out the rotation with some combination of Morales, Doubront and Cook but I am not sure you want three LH starters when you have to play 81 in Fenway. Seems to me that the Sox will have to decide between Doubront and Morales and probably move Cook in order to fill out the bottom of the rotation as well as getting a true 1 which is still the first order of business in my view. So when viewed this way, while Morales might be a real find, realistically they need to move one guy and find two including an Ace for the top of the rotation just to compete in the AL East.

 

As for the timely hitting problem, there the Sox need a blood transfusion. They need to think like and play like a team as opposed to playing like a bunch of disassociated pieces. They need to look at their plate appearances from the perspective of what the team needs to forward their prospects within a game more than what they need as individuals to forward the prospects to improve their individual hitting stats. This might require a heck of a lot more than extra bunting drills as this does not seem to be something that gets any organizational attention these days and some of them may just not have it in them. Young guys like WMB are hacking away from the on deck circle. Nava is a very smart hitter and what they really need is nine guys in the line up every day that approach their plate appearances the way Nava approaches his. How many guys on this team approach their plate appearances the way Nava does now......well there's Nave......there's Nava.....there's Nava.....there's Ells, you get the picture?

 

Guys that clearly don't; Ross, Aviles, Agons, WMB, Salty.

Guys somewhere in the middle; Pedey, Sweeney, Ciriaco, Shop, Punto and maybe Crawford.

 

The only guy that is a good enough hitter for which this is not an issue is Ortiz. Every other hitter on this team is simply not good enough to treat his plate appearances like his own personal playground.

 

As you can probably tell, I think this "team" has much farther to go to actually be a team than most of my fellow forum members. I don't think the Sox really have very much for their $180M. Their Starting Pitching, starting pitching being the most important single aspect of baseball, sucks. They don't get timely hitting, they get runs....sometimes. Their defense.....sucks....in fact they are institutionalizing sucky defense by virtue of their insistence on sticking defensive stiffs in the most important defensive positions on the field. Their bull pen is actually a plus although if you have to go as deep into the team as the bullpen to find a plus you know you are in trouble. A plus bullpen should be the icing on the cake, not something you are relying on to win the bulk of your games. To be honest, the bullpen is barely a plus anyway. The bullpen is the one place where I think I can say with some confidence that V has had a very positive impact. I do think he outsmarted himself in the Saturday Rays game but for the most part V has done a terrific job finding the right slots for these guys. I really don't think they are that good. I think V has found how to use each guy so that his best talents are put forward more often than not.

[Youk Of The Nation]

You only have about 5000 posts but if we counted by individual letters you'd totally be winning.

[Bellhorn04]

Also, with regard just to innings 7 to 9, in 2011 our Bullpen was best in batting average against and OPS. This year it is 12th in both categories. These are the innings that are important -- the 7th thru 9th and the close and late situations. We kinda suck at those. We are blowing smoke up our own asses if we don't think losing Papelbon has hurt this team by at least 5 wins.

 

Look at tonight. In the 7th last year, Aceves and/or Bard would have stopped the bleeding in the 7th, shut them down in the 8th and handed Papelbon the ball in the 9th.

 

Bard had 9 losses and 5 blows last year. Not quite as automatic as you're making him out to be.

[iortiz]

He had a 5 out save tonight allowing no base runners. Ah the good old days.

 

As for Bailey, when he's healthy, he can be pretty good, but when the best guy that you've seen in the role in 45 years leaves the team, you really don't expect to see another like him right away.

 

Some are talking about regression?, ... "not that good"? hahaha he is 3.18 ERA (2.94, last year) with 90% SV (91% last year) whata hell are we talking about?, whata regression, Sounds like Lackey's one... hahahaha C'mon, he's been very good in Philly, and is only half season played, regardless his durability is out of question. It's funny how people support s***** players and pound elite players like him. His contract worth each penny, thus far. I simply do not see a decline or "regress" in coming years.

 

Remember, he is paid to save games, nothing more, nothing less, and he has 90%, for God's sake... Do not be surprised if someone come with other s***** stats in order to confuse/complicate his case.

 

Yes, we would be at very least 5 games better in the W column if he were here.

[SoxSport]

The fact is that the Red Sox bullpen was much better in late inning and pressure situauions in 2011 than it has been this season. The Bullpen was second best in batting average and OPS in 2011. This season they are the second worst in the AL in those categories. That's the relevant math. Last years bullpen had 16 blown saves for the entire season. This season we have 11 blown saves already.

 

A telltale stat showing the effect of losing Bard-Papelbon. The mistake Cherington made was

in not moving Bard to closer or setup when Bailey went down. He left the back end of the bullpen vulnerable.

[iortiz]

A telltale stat showing the effect of losing Bard-Papelbon. The mistake Cherington made was

in not moving Bard to closer or setup when Bailey went down. He left the back end of the bullpen vulnerable.

 

Yup, charge that to Benny boy, oh sorry, I meant the FO.