Red Sox Offense 2016

[SinceYaz]

That is what it is. It gives broadcasters something to talk about and ooh and ah about it. I am with Jerry Remy on this in that I don't really care about it. It iis a meaningless stat imo.

 

If I could have any similar talent ... I might be more interested.

 

I am continuously amused at the expansion of stats. I am waiting to someone to quantify HRs not only by distance but also the force in which it punches out the parked car outside of the ballpark. The HR that someone can catch with their bare hands wouldn't have the same value/factor as the one that blisters a fan's hands ...

 

 

Yup.... tongue in cheek

[sk7326]

I don't think Ortiz' season is a miracle at all. That dude put in the hours for making his final season the best final season everyone has ever had.

 

For me the miracle is that it is so far the best season HE has had ... 195 RC+ which dwarfs his own career best and leads the majors by quite a bit. More hard contact then ever. I just remember how much he was flailing against the Rays in 2008 and how in 2009 it looked like the ride was over to some degree. He has been remarkable.

[User Name]

For me the miracle is that it is so far the best season HE has had ... 195 RC+ which dwarfs his own career best and leads the majors by quite a bit. More hard contact then ever. I just remember how much he was flailing against the Rays in 2008 and how in 2009 it looked like the ride was over to some degree. He has been remarkable.

 

I remember reading somewhere a couple days ago that he knows why he's been so good in his final years: He's working pitchers instead of pitchers working him.

[greenwell]

One thing that worries me with the offense is that practically none of the starters have had any sort of slump yet this year. The worst they've seen is a slightly bad start from Hanley. Does this mean that 3 or 4 guys are going to hit a dry spell at the same time?

[moonslav59]

Maybe when they slump, the pitchers will hit their stride.

[mvp 78]

@michaelsilverman

2016 Bogaerts:

In extra innings: 3-for-6 (.500)

In hi-leverage: 21-for-47 (.447)

In tie games: 24-for-68 (.353)

With RISP: 23-for-61 (.377)

[User Name]

@michaelsilverman

2016 Bogaerts:

In extra innings: 3-for-6 (.500)

In hi-leverage: 21-for-47 (.447)

In tie games: 24-for-68 (.353)

With RISP: 23-for-61 (.377)

 

I wonder what seabeachfred thinks about that?

[Bellhorn04]

I wonder what seabeachfred thinks about that?

 

fred would have moved on from Bogaerts with a 'Glad to be proven wrong on that one'. But he would be railing away about a bunch of other things, like the starting pitching and Hanley's hitting.

[User Name]

Good times.

[mvp 78]

fred would have moved on from Bogaerts with a 'Glad to be proven wrong on that one'. But he would be railing away about a bunch of other things, like the starting pitching and Hanley's hitting.

 

Hi-Ho Silva...

[Kimmi]

@michaelsilverman

2016 Bogaerts:

In extra innings: 3-for-6 (.500)

In hi-leverage: 21-for-47 (.447)

In tie games: 24-for-68 (.353)

With RISP: 23-for-61 (.377)

 

Those numbers almost make you believe in "clutch".

[mvp 78]

Almost!

[devildavid]

In addition to questioning Hanley hitting in the 5 hole (on a new thread) how about swapping Bogaerts and Betts in the batting order? Bogaerts gets on base and Betts hits for power. Or is this too psychologically challenging for both of them?

[S5Dewey]

In addition to questioning Hanley hitting in the 5 hole (on a new thread) how about swapping Bogaerts and Betts in the batting order? Bogaerts gets on base and Betts hits for power. Or is this too psychologically challenging for both of them?

 

I know you're probably right but it's hard for me to even think about dickin' with Bogarts in any way while he's hitting like he is.

[mvp 78]

@redsoxstats The 6 players with a 3+ WAR so far

3.7 Xander Bogaerts

3.5 Mike Trout

3.5 Jose Altuve

3.5 Manny Machado

3.2 Dexter Fowler

3.1 Kris Bryant

[Jasonbay44]

In addition to questioning Hanley hitting in the 5 hole (on a new thread) how about swapping Bogaerts and Betts in the batting order? Bogaerts gets on base and Betts hits for power. Or is this too psychologically challenging for both of them?

 

Again.. I just don't see the reason for messing with the lineup.. Especially when you have two guys who are both doing well where they are, why change the top 4 at all?

[moonslav59]

Again.. I just don't see the reason for messing with the lineup.. Especially when you have two guys who are both doing well where they are, why change the top 4 at all?

 

I can see putting JBJ 5th.

[Bellhorn04]

I can see putting JBJ 5th.

 

Farrell likes the L-R-L thing with Papi-Hanley-JBJ.

[Slasher9]

Hanram will heat up soon. Leave it as is.

[moonslav59]

Farrell likes the L-R-L thing with Papi-Hanley-JBJ.

 

The whole lefty-righty thing is over-rated.

I can see not messing with the top 4, but I still like this line-up best:

1) Betts

2) Bogey

3) Papi

4) Pedey

5) JBJ

6) HanRam

7) Shaw(1B) /Young (LF)

8) Swihart (LF)/Shaw (1B)

9) Vazquez/Hanigan/Swihart ©

[devildavid]

Again.. I just don't see the reason for messing with the lineup.. Especially when you have two guys who are both doing well where they are, why change the top 4 at all?

 

Bogaerts gets on base better, Betts hits more HRs. That is my reasoning. I don't think it amounts to messing with the lineup. Why not put your best hitter in the leadoff spot? Bogaerts should be getting more plate appearances than Betts. Even JBJ could be moved up.

[devildavid]

The whole lefty-righty thing is over-rated.

I can see not messing with the top 4, but I still like this line-up best:

1) Betts

2) Bogey

3) Papi

4) Pedey

5) JBJ

6) HanRam

7) Shaw(1B) /Young (LF)

8) Swihart (LF)/Shaw (1B)

9) Vazquez/Hanigan/Swihart ©

 

I think the whole Betts having to lead off is over-rated.

[moonslav59]

I think the whole Betts having to lead off is over-rated.

 

I never said Betts "had to" leadoff, and I'd be fine flipping B & B, but I think from here on out Betts will have as good an OBP as Bogey.

 

I kinda made the line-up as a compromise to Farrell's L-R hang-up. Personally, I'd bat Papi 3rd and JBJ 4th. Both do fine vs lefties, so just put 'em both up when it counts most. Maybe something like this:

 

Betts-Bogey-Papi-JBJ-Pedey-Ram-Young-Shaw-Vaz (or flip B &

.

[Hugh2]

I hope Shaw gets out of his funk, he was starting to turn me into a believer. Although I always saw some type of regression coming I was hoping he wouldn't turn back into a pumpkin.

 

Still, I will practice the same patience I show with everyone. He deserves an earned time, even the best players in the league slump.

 

But over the last month he is hitting .191/.232/.319

[devildavid]

I never said Betts "had to" leadoff, and I'd be fine flipping B & B, but I think from here on out Betts will have as good an OBP as Bogey.

 

I kinda made the line-up as a compromise to Farrell's L-R hang-up. Personally, I'd bat Papi 3rd and JBJ 4th. Both do fine vs lefties, so just put 'em both up when it counts most. Maybe something like this:

 

Betts-Bogey-Papi-JBJ-Pedey-Ram-Young-Shaw-Vaz (or flip B &

.

 

No, you didn't, but it seems to be the general consensus that he is the best choice for leadoff, which I happen to disagree with. This season I'd rather have Bogaerts leading off. I do agree on the righty lefty thing being over-rated. Just give you best hitters the most plate appearances.

[mvp 78]

I hope Shaw gets out of his funk, he was starting to turn me into a believer. Although I always saw some type of regression coming I was hoping he wouldn't turn back into a pumpkin.

 

Still, I will practice the same patience I show with everyone. He deserves an earned time, even the best players in the league slump.

 

But over the last month he is hitting .191/.232/.319

 

His numbers are skewed because of the last two weeks where he's hitting 137/200/196. He's pulled out of slumps before and this isn't really unexpected. I like Shaw, but don't see him as an irreplaceable guy. To me, he's a spot holder until one of the younger IFers is ready. A good comp for him would be Brian Daubach.

[sk7326]

Bogaerts gets on base better, Betts hits more HRs. That is my reasoning. I don't think it amounts to messing with the lineup. Why not put your best hitter in the leadoff spot? Bogaerts should be getting more plate appearances than Betts. Even JBJ could be moved up.

 

To be fair, Bogaerts' power is arriving ...

[Nick]

I want speed at the top...

 

Betts

JBJ

Xander

Papi

Pedroia

Hanley

Young/Swihart

Shaw

Vazquez

 

Pedy can hit anywhere...JBJ will get to see more good pitches, a lefty with speed and power

[Kimmi]

In addition to questioning Hanley hitting in the 5 hole (on a new thread) how about swapping Bogaerts and Betts in the batting order? Bogaerts gets on base and Betts hits for power. Or is this too psychologically challenging for both of them?

 

As I posted in the other thread, this could end up doing more harm than good, due to messing with the comfort level and/or confidence of both players.

[Kimmi]

I know you're probably right but it's hard for me to even think about dickin' with Bogarts in any way while he's hitting like he is.

 

You know the old adage, if it ain't broke....