Halfway Point-- Biggest Surprises and Biggest Disappointments

[Standing Room]

I read your posts. They are nonsense.

 

Talk baseball or STFU.

[a700hitter]

Talk baseball or STFU.

You started the insults jerkoff.

[Standing Room]

You started the insults jerkoff.

 

You are now on my ignore list. I literally can't remember the last time you made a baseball related post.

[a700hitter]

You are now on my ignore list. I literally can't remember the last time you made a baseball related post.

I guess you must have short term memory issues. I welcome being on your ignore list-- a badge of honor.

[redsoxfan3]

I don't know if someone has pointed this out yet, and I don't know if it is a big surprise by how well we are doing, but we could finish the rest of the year with a record of 15-59 to match last season's total in wins.

 

It is awesome that we are 20 games over and I hope we can keep playing at this level for the remainder of the year. I guess my point is that I am just surprised at how much of a difference one season can make. It has been a complete turn-a-round. People even talked about this being a rebuilding year. Well, I guess we rebuilt pretty fast.

 

The rotation has been solid.

 

Iglesias has been solid.

 

The production we are getting from Nava, Carp, and recently Snyder has been great.

 

Not to mention Uehara has been a great closer so far after the Hanrahan fail and Bailey bust.

[Behindenemylines]

Biggest surprise has to be the way the starters have pitched. Considering Buchholtz has been hurt and Lester has struggled it is very surprising that the Sox are in first.

 

Biggest disappointment has to be either the failure of our off season closers (Bailey and Hanrahan) or the struggles of Middlebrooks.

[italstallianion]

I'm too lazy to read through the thread, but has anyone mentioned that Ortiz is 3/3 in stealing bases this season as one of their biggest surprises?

[mvp 78]

I'm too lazy to read through the thread, but has anyone mentioned that Ortiz is 3/3 in stealing bases this season as one of their biggest surprises?

 

Nope.

[Behindenemylines]

Papi dropped the pounds and now is a demon on the base paths with his 3 for 3 stealing of bases.

[italstallianion]

He's stolen 3rd base twice too.

[mvp 78]

It's easier to steal third as you can get a larger lead with pitchers paying less attention to you.

[Standing Room]

It's easier to steal third as you can get a larger lead with pitchers paying less attention to you.

 

No, it's not. It's easier for most pitcher to look to the right at second base than it is to look behind them at first base. But most importantly the distance from the catcher to third base is shorter so the throw gets there sooner. That's why in a double steal, the catcher throws to third.

[User Name]

The depends on the pitcher imo. While the distance is shorter, a lot of pitchers pay so little attention to 2nd base runners that getting a lead large enough to steal on them without the catcher having any chance to throw them out is relatively easy.

[mvp 78]

No, it's not. It's easier for most pitcher to look to the right at second base than it is to look behind them at first base. But most importantly the distance from the catcher to third base is shorter so the throw gets there sooner. That's why in a double steal, the catcher throws to third.

 

It's ok to be wrong. They throw to 3rd because a runner getting to third is more likely to score. You can typically get a much larger lead at second as no one is holding you on.

 

Furthermore success rates for stealing third are higher than for stealing second by a few percentage points.

Edited July 11, 2013 by mvp 78

[Spitball]

Third base is easier to steal. Unlike the runner at first who has a first baseman holding him on, the runner at second has middle infielders having to sneak in behind him. The runner at second can actually take off before the pitch is thrown.

 

Although the throw is shorter to third, the catcher has to throw around the batter with a right handed hitter in the box.

 

That all said, stealing third isn't a good idea unless the runner is 100% sure he can make it...and it is foolish to try to steal with a left hander batting.

[Standing Room]

It's ok to be wrong. They throw to 3rd because a runner getting to third is more likely to score. You can typically get a much larger lead at second as no one is holding you on.

 

Furthermore success rates for stealing third are higher than for stealing second by a few percentage points.

 

They throw to third because it's 37 feet closer to the catcher than second base is, plain and simple. Infielders don't stand on the base like they do at first, but they do sneak in behind you and feint plays behind you to keep you honest. And any extra lead a runner gets is completely negated by the base behind 37 feet shorter to the catcher. The fact that players are slightly more successful at stealing third doesn't mean it's easier. Players are much more selective about when they steal third base, since they're already in scoring position and the throw gets there sooner.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Standing Room

[Standing Room]

Third base is easier to steal. Unlike the runner at first who has a first baseman holding him on, the runner at second has middle infielders having to sneak in behind him. The runner at second can actually take off before the pitch is thrown.

 

Although the throw is shorter to third, the catcher has to throw around the batter with a right handed hitter in the box.

 

That all said, stealing third isn't a good idea unless the runner is 100% sure he can make it...and it is foolish to try to steal with a left hander batting.

 

Unless it's a delayed steal, the runner always takes off before the pitch is thrown, regardless of the base they're stealing.

[Spitball]

Unless it's a delayed steal, the runner always takes off before the pitch is thrown, regardless of the base they're stealing.

 

Perhaps I did not make my point clearly enough. On a steal of second base, the runner takes off for second the moment the pitcher moves toward his release point. On a steal of third, the runner can take off as the pitcher goes into his motion and before the commitment to deliver.

 

In a totally unrelated note and using Bill James's Pythagorean record formula, The Red Sox should have a winning percentage of .600 which is pretty damn close to their actual record of .598%. Btw, Tampa Bay's Pythagorean record should be .571% and it is actually .573%. The Yankees are over-performing with actual winning percentage of .537 compared to their projected .497%.

Edited July 17, 2013 by Spitball

[SoxSport]

And I think we ought to start considering the idea of signing him to a new contract after the season. We will be hard pressed to replace him as a leadoff hitter and 300 hitters do not grow on trees in the Major Leagues. Ells has quieted his critics and rebounded nicely and has stayed healthy up to now. It now seems those past injuries were more freakish than anything and we do not know how long it will take for Jackie to hit ML pitching on a consistent basis. I would like to have both of them in the lineup for us next season.

 

Take what he's worth, multiply by 2, and that's what Boras will want.

[rjortiz]

I could see him getting 6/90. That would take him to his age 36 season.

[User Name]

I would not be uncomfortable with the Sox going to 6/90 for Ellsbury, but there's a very significant chance he makes at least 30 million more over that same timespan.

[BornToRun]

What do we all think about Shin Soo Choo? He's a year older and is supposed to be an a FA at year's end. Do we look at him if Ells walks or do we let Ells go and take Choo?

 

His defense and speed aren't up to to Ellsbury's level but he's got great on base skills and much more consistent power. I'm thinking about the possibility of an outfield that consists of Choo, JBJ, and some combo of Vic/Nava/Gomes in right.

 

Thoughts?

[mvp 78]

Ellsbury's defense isn't really that good to begin with seeing that he has a weaker arm than Damon.

[italstallianion]

I'd prefer to spend more money on Choo than I would on Ellsbury if it were possible.

[Youk Of The Nation]

I would love having Choo, the easy puns would be awesome for me.

[rjortiz]

Ellsbury's defense isn't really that good to begin with seeing that he has a weaker arm than Damon.

 

More to defense than just throwing out runners.

[BornToRun]

I'd prefer to spend more money on Choo than I would on Ellsbury if it were possible.

I wouldn't be too opposed to it. What do you think Choo will get in FA?

[rjortiz]

What do we all think about Shin Soo Choo? He's a year older and is supposed to be an a FA at year's end. Do we look at him if Ells walks or do we let Ells go and take Choo?

 

His defense and speed aren't up to to Ellsbury's level but he's got great on base skills and much more consistent power. I'm thinking about the possibility of an outfield that consists of Choo, JBJ, and some combo of Vic/Nava/Gomes in right.

 

Thoughts?

 

Victorino or Bradley Jr. would probably be our CF, with Choo manning a corner spot. Choo is probably going to get $16-18 AAV over 4-5 years. I don't know if I want him at that price.

[italstallianion]

Do we need either Ellsbury/Choo though? Can't we have an OF of Nava/Gomes, JBJ and Victorino? We can get the draft pick for Ellsbury and potentially spend money to benefit the team in other ways. (1B or SP)

[BornToRun]

Do we need either Ellsbury/Choo though? Can't we have an OF of Nava/Gomes, JBJ and Victorino? We can get the draft pick for Ellsbury and potentially spend money to benefit the team in other ways. (1B or SP)

Well aside from Nava and Gomes, I don't think you can necessarily count on there being enough offense in the OF because Victorino has been okay with the bat but his value is mostly with the glove and there's no guarantee that JBJ has success right off the bat. And I bring it up because general consensus seems to be that we are going to make an effort to keep Jacoby and I'm just wondering whether we'd be better off targeting Choo instead.