What will be the 2017 greatest weakness for the Sox?

[a700hitter]

First off, as far as I know, I haven't 'pinned' the traditionalist label on any poster here. Yes, I talk about baseball traditionalists, but not about any poster in particular. At any rate, IMO, it's in no way a derogatory term, and it is not an all or nothing term. My father is a baseball traditionalist. I respect him more than any other man, and I have no desire to call him something derogatory. I, myself, am a traditionalist in many ways, even in certain aspects of baseball, and I am proud of it.

 

As a self-proclaimed stat geek, I have been labeled as someone who has never played on winning teams and therefore have to rely on statistics to answer everything. I have been labeled by you as being smug and, ironically, as someone who likes to give derogatory labels to everyone that I disagree with.

 

Unfortunately, there comes a point in many of your debates, where you stop debating the issue and you resort to trying to discredit the other poster with insults. You have labeled me as a homer, then turned around and labeled me as a negative whiner.

 

I made the mistake of engaging you with this nonsense. I won't make it again. If you're not up to the challenge of discussing or debating baseball with me, then you're not worth my time. Stick to baseball.

Glad that you have a thick skin.

 

And I never said that you in particular were smug.

[Kimmi]

Not since "The Big Bang Theory" hit the airwaves...

 

One of my favorite shows. Personally, I love 'geeks'. I think they're awesome. I love the math geek from the comic strip Foxtrot. Intelligence is a very sexy quality. Fangraphs and similar sites are baseball porn to me.

 

And +100 for your recent posts in this thread.

[Kimmi]

I think several of us 'clutch' believers have acknowledged that it simply can't be proven one way or the other.

 

The SSS of postseason numbers and the randomness of baseball make it a complete exercise in futility.

 

Why can't we just leave it at that.

 

And several of us clutch non-believers have acknowledged that there is no proof that it doesn't exist.

[Kimmi]

So, what is this team's greatest weakness?

(These are the choices I'd have provided.)

 

A) The pen

3B

C) Starter depth

D) 1B/DH (Moreland for Papi)

E) Catcher

F) Manager (Mangement)

G) Lack of clutch hitting (just kidding!)

 

 

I am still going with team depth, in general. Once again, I'm not talking about our bench players or any replacements that we might need for a week or so. I'm talking about a long term replacement in the case of a long term injury.

 

Is it more of a weakness than what other teams have? Perhaps not, in which case I don't think this team has any real weaknesses.

[Kimmi]

The bullpen is definitely a potential problem.

 

Third base is pure X factor.

 

We really don't know what we can expect from Pablo. However, I am pleased to see that he is still looking quite slim, and I am pleased that he reported to camp early. He is at least doing the right things so far in trying to make amends for last season.

[Fisk]

I think Sandavol will be fine. The bullpen will get a nice boost if Carson Smith has a successful comeback from TJ surgery.

[Kimmi]

I'm not sure I understand. There are lots of terms of "received wisdom" that become repeated so often they begin to be taken as fact. To say they are opinions and "accepted" opinions doesn't validate them at all. For some of these terms, the entire point of critiquing them is to question whether this received wisdom has any basis in fact (in part, the point of Moneyball, no?). And that seems to me a legitimate discussion: can "clutch" be supported statistically? It's quite different from "team-player," which we all know, even when we use it, is so vague as to be virtually meaningless (like the terms "nice guy, a-hole.")

 

Well said jad.

[Kimmi]

I'm going to disagree. The general bias on that part of stat heads is that if it can't currently be shown on fangraphs, then it can't be real.

 

I'm not sure where you're getting that idea from.

[cp176]

I'm not sure I understand. There are lots of terms of "received wisdom" that become repeated so often they begin to be taken as fact. To say they are opinions and "accepted" opinions doesn't validate them at all. For some of these terms, the entire point of critiquing them is to question whether this received wisdom has any basis in fact (in part, the point of Moneyball, no?). And that seems to me a legitimate discussion: can "clutch" be supported statistically? It's quite different from "team-player," which we all know, even when we use it, is so vague as to be virtually meaningless (like the terms "nice guy, a-hole.")

 

Well actually i am not looking for any validation what so ever. I like it of course when other posters say they like what I have posted - makes me feel appreciated but my whole point in this discussion isn't to get a hearty hooza pat on the back from anyone. I truly believe that there are times when the least likely athletes based on their stats are able to step up their games and play to a level that no one thinks that they can play to. I have been that athlete - I have seen that athlete- and I have coached that athlete. It isn't an opinion anymore - it is a fact - those players exist whether there are people who want to debate their existence or not. My guess would be yes - if people truly think that we don't have these types of players among us and the stats tell them so, there really is a pretty good chance that they really never have been involved in the competition to any degree.

[cp176]

It's all definitely debatable, but I'd be willing to bet that if you polled every player in baseball, without their answers being tied to them, on which teammate they'd want at the plate with the game on the line, the teammate with the best "stats" wouldn't be the answer a lot more often than people think.

 

thanks for posting this - my guess would be that you played a game or two.

[cp176]

++1

 

ty - it is starting now to get to the core as to why I spent my life involved in athletics. All these things that we are currently debating that seem so goddam mystical and unproveable, are so very real. Anyone who has really played knows this to be true.

[oldtimer]

We really don't know what we can expect from Pablo. However, I am pleased to see that he is still looking quite slim, and I am pleased that he reported to camp early. He is at least doing the right things so far in trying to make amends for last season.

 

Nice attempt to divert the conversation away from Statists vs anti-Statists, however there seems to be a need to continue with that as seen in some of the follow-on entries. I will be happy when spring training finally gives us more beneficial things to discuss.

[moonslav59]

I made the mistake of engaging you with this nonsense. I won't make it again. If you're not up to the challenge of discussing or debating baseball with me, then you're not worth my time. Stick to baseball.

 

Do you remember a poster on BDC who always used the word "specious"?

 

Just got me thinking...

[cp176]

Nice attempt to divert the conversation away from Statists vs anti-Statists, however there seems to be a need to continue with that as seen in some of the follow-on entries. I will be happy when spring training finally gives us more beneficial things to discuss.

 

If my comments caused am uptick, I apologize. It is a very important topic to me I guess.

[a700hitter]

I made the mistake of engaging you with this nonsense. I won't make it again. If you're not up to the challenge of discussing or debating baseball with me, then you're not worth my time. Stick to baseball.

 

Do you remember a poster on BDC who always used the word "specious"?

 

Just got me thinking...

Maybe your arguments are often specious.

[User Name]

Why is this argument still a thing? Don't you people know the immortal Carlos Quentin is now a Red Stocking? This team no longer has a single weakness!

[Spudboy]

I tried to tell them Hoss. I said to reserve the Duckboats but they ignored me.

 

This thread is a yawn. Same dumb argument.

[moonslav59]

Quentin & Selsky- sounds like a lawyers' firm.

 

Nothing more to ask for!

 

We gotta be faves now!

[Bellhorn04]

I made the mistake of engaging you with this nonsense. I won't make it again. If you're not up to the challenge of discussing or debating baseball with me, then you're not worth my time. Stick to baseball.

 

Do you remember a poster on BDC who always used the word "specious"?

 

Just got me thinking...

 

LOL 700hitter was a tax attorney and lawyers really like the word 'specious', but I can guarantee you he's not Softlaw.

 

Softlaw lived somewhere in the Carolinas, I think. I believe his real name was Chet, he once sent me a link to a blog he was writing, which I ignored.

[cp176]

I tried to tell them Hoss. I said to reserve the Duckboats but they ignored me.

 

This thread is a yawn. Same dumb argument.

 

When you see one other than the football thread that isn't a yawner right now, give me a nudge.

[notin]

I tried to tell them Hoss. I said to reserve the Duckboats but they ignored me.

 

This thread is a yawn. Same dumb argument.

 

So start an exciting one. You have the power.

 

You really do have the power. Talksox added a button for just that purpose. ..

[Kimmi]

if people truly think that we don't have these types of players among us and the stats tell them so, there really is a pretty good chance that they really never have been involved in the competition to any degree.

 

Anyone who has really played knows this to be true.

 

Three things about this type of statement:

 

1. Your idea that stat geeks have never experienced competition or championships is simply not true.

 

2. It's a copout. It's an easy way to discredit the work that is being done, and once again, it's not even true.

 

3. For someone who dislikes labels, you are painting a label on a large group of people with such statements.

[Kimmi]

ty - it is starting now to get to the core as to why I spent my life involved in athletics. All these things that we are currently debating that seem so goddam mystical and unproveable, are so very real. Anyone who has really played knows this to be true.

 

For years, people believed that the reason that they caught a cold or the flu was because they went out in bitter cold weather or they went out with wet hair, or something along those lines. My mom still believes that to be the case.

 

Why did they believe that? Because they experienced it. They lived it. They know it happened. They went out in the cold and they got sick.

 

There's a saying about correlation not implying causation that holds very true.

[Kimmi]

Nice attempt to divert the conversation away from Statists vs anti-Statists, however there seems to be a need to continue with that as seen in some of the follow-on entries. I will be happy when spring training finally gives us more beneficial things to discuss.

 

I have no problem with debating the existence of 'clutch'. I enjoy such topics.

 

I don't think there's a whole lot else to discuss right now that hasn't already been discussed.

 

Perhaps once spring training gets going.

 

But on the note of other topics, I am very displeased that ERod is still considering pitching in the WBC. If he did not have an injury concern, I still wouldn't like it, but I'd be okay with it. The fact that he retweaked his knee this offseason really puts me off on the idea.

 

I understand that he wants to represent his country in the WBC. However, the Red Sox have to be his top priority.

[Kimmi]

I made the mistake of engaging you with this nonsense. I won't make it again. If you're not up to the challenge of discussing or debating baseball with me, then you're not worth my time. Stick to baseball.

 

Do you remember a poster on BDC who always used the word "specious"?

 

Just got me thinking...

 

LOL Was that Softlaw?

 

While I have no way of knowing for certain, I am very certain that a700 and Softlaw are not the same poster.

[Kimmi]

I tried to tell them Hoss. I said to reserve the Duckboats but they ignored me.

 

This thread is a yawn. Same dumb argument.

 

Here's the thing. What other argument or discussion is going on right now? It's not like this discussion is hijacking any other discussions.

 

It's either discuss whatever topic is at least drawing some interest, even if it's been debated to death, or it's empty threads.

 

Maybe you prefer empty threads, which is fine. I prefer having something to talk about.

 

Start another topic, if you'd like. If it interests me, I'll participate. FTR, I approve of the Quentin signing, which I believe I already stated.

[Bellhorn04]

For years, people believed that the reason that they caught a cold or the flu was because they went out in bitter cold weather or they went out with wet hair, or something along those lines. My mom still believes that to be the case.

 

I still believe it too.

 

Well, to be more precise, I still don't think going out in bitter cold with wet hair is a great idea.

[cp176]

Three things about this type of statement:

 

1. Your idea that stat geeks have never experienced competition or championships is simply not true.

 

2. It's a copout. It's an easy way to discredit the work that is being done, and once again, it's not even true.

 

3. For someone who dislikes labels, you are painting a label on a large group of people with such statements.

 

I am sure that there are lots of "stat geeks" who have who have done their fair share of playing. I am sure that their are some who haven't. I'm not painting labels on anyone. If you want to interpret what I write in a way that really does sound kind of negative, that is your perogative. It isn't who I am.

[moonslav59]

LOL 700hitter was a tax attorney and lawyers really like the word 'specious', but I can guarantee you he's not Softlaw.

 

Softlaw lived somewhere in the Carolinas, I think. I believe his real name was Chet, he once sent me a link to a blog he was writing, which I ignored.

 

Yeah, I didn't think he was the same person, but some qualities are very similar.

[notin]

I am sure that there are lots of "stat geeks" who have who have done their fair share of playing. I am sure that their are some who haven't. I'm not painting labels on anyone. If you want to interpret what I write in a way that really does sound kind of negative, that is your perogative. It isn't who I am.

 

I'm a stat geek with degrees in engineering and math. I have played plenty of baseball.

 

I also get my experiences in Little League and high school, etc. have very little relevance to MLB games.

 

The whole idea that stat geeks have never a played and don't understand competition is condescending. And that's using the nicest term to describe it...