Farrell

[Slasher9]

Back to Kelly's tired arm. Anybody else notice those two horrible curves that bounced in front of the plate with the bases loaded yet? Only a tired arm can do that. Farrell is one of the most abusive, senseless managers these tired old eyes have ever seen. Pitchers, especially sensitive, skinny guys like Sale, need to handled very, very carefully. Kelly has been so mistreated he's stopped shaving--a sure sign of a resentful player.

Are you comparing Kelly and Maddox to Sale?

Seriously?

[devildavid]

Are you comparing Kelly and Maddox to Sale?

Seriously?

 

He is satirizing critics of Farrell. Seriously.

[Northern Star]

If we're swept, I want Farrell and half the team gone.

[devildavid]

If we're swept, I want Farrell and half the team gone.

 

So a major rebuild? Seems kind of radical.

[MADSTORK]

Farrell isn't the problem. One could conclude that he also is not the answer. 15 17 vs AL playoff teams minus the twins. Last week of the season you end at 2 5.

 

13 was magical, 16 was a blessing, 17 your paying for past players who have handcuffed your ability to add the missing piece at the deadline. The missing piece was or could have been Bruce and or Verlander this season.

 

If Farrell returns in 18 so be it. In the end, its up to Dombrowski to construct this roster with a veteran swagger that won this Organization the title in 13

Edited October 6, 2017 by MADSTORK

[Northern Star]

17 your paying for past players who have handcuffed your ability to add the missing piece at the deadline.

 

[moonslav59]

Deadwood and Broken Limbs...

 

Pablo: 2018: $18.1M, 2019: $18.1M, 2010: $5M buyout

--Luxury tax cost: $19M for 2018 & 2019

 

Castillo: 2018: $11.8M, 2019: $11.8M, 2020: $14.3M

-- Luxury tax cost: $0.0

 

Ramirez: 2018: $22.8M, 2019: $22M vesting option

 

 

Bending Branches...

 

Price: 2018: $30M (opt out before 2019), 2019: $31M, 2020-2022 $32M

--Luxury cost: $31M x4

 

Porcello: 2018: $21M, 2019: $21M

--Luxury cost: $20.6M x 2

 

Pedroia: 2018: $16M, 2019: $15M, 2020: $13M, 2021: $12M

-- Luxury cost: $13.8M x 4

 

 

[a700hitter]

You are getting way too subjective. Yaz failed in the biggest at bat of the game. He was not clutch at that moment and clutch is only about moments like that. Otherwise, we can choose to see clutch in any circumstances we want and can make it exist whenever we want.

I asked this earlier, but you still haven't responded. I have just said that clutch is an attribute -- one that would exhibit itself in different ways. What kind of measure would satisfy you? And how would you arrive at it? You are the one saying that it doesn't exist. Tell us what kind of measure or statistics would convince you of it's existence.

[cp176]

So what is your stingy criteria based on?

 

You are trying - i'll give you credit. It is my secret recipe.

[cp176]

I asked this earlier, but you still haven't responded. I have just said that clutch is an attribute -- one that would exhibit itself in different ways. What kind of measure would satisfy you? And how would you arrive at it? You are the one saying that it doesn't exist. Tell us what kind of measure or statistics would convince you of it's existence.

 

He does keep trying doesn't he. We have seen this type of effort before I think.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

Deadwood and Broken Limbs...

 

Pablo: 2018: $18.1M, 2019: $18.1M, 2010: $5M buyout

--Luxury tax cost: $19M for 2018 & 2019

 

Castillo: 2018: $11.8M, 2019: $11.8M, 2020: $14.3M

-- Luxury tax cost: $0.0

 

Ramirez: 2018: $22.8M, 2019: $22M vesting option

 

 

Bending Branches...

 

Price: 2018: $30M (opt out before 2019), 2019: $31M, 2020-2022 $32M

--Luxury cost: $31M x4

 

Porcello: 2018: $21M, 2019: $21M

--Luxury cost: $20.6M x 2

 

Pedroia: 2018: $16M, 2019: $15M, 2020: $13M, 2021: $12M

-- Luxury cost: $13.8M x 4

 

 

 

 

Good Lord....

[devildavid]

I asked this earlier, but you still haven't responded. I have just said that clutch is an attribute -- one that would exhibit itself in different ways. What kind of measure would satisfy you? And how would you arrive at it? You are the one saying that it doesn't exist. Tell us what kind of measure or statistics would convince you of it's existence.

 

For starters, there have to be actual results that qualify as clutch. Calling a hitter clutch without results is meaningless. These results may be measurable in some way such as frequency of occurrence. Then we have to establish what level of frequency qualifies as evidence of clutch being an inherent trait. I'm willing to hear suggestions on what percentage of frequency this should be. That is the subjective part but I am open to a reasonable threshold.

 

I didn't ever say clutch moments didn't exist. I also didn't say clutch players didn't exist. I am only asking for evidence other than personal feelings that they do.

[devildavid]

You are trying - i'll give you credit. It is my secret recipe.

 

And that is the problem. Everyone has their own recipe so claims of clutch are too subjective to have any real meaning.

[Bellhorn04]

For starters, there have to be actual results that qualify as clutch. Calling a hitter clutch without results is meaningless. These results may be measurable in some way such as frequency of occurrence. Then we have to establish what level of frequency qualifies as evidence of clutch being an inherent trait. I'm willing to hear suggestions on what percentage of frequency this should be. That is the subjective part but I am open to a reasonable threshold.

 

I didn't ever say clutch moments didn't exist. I also didn't say clutch players didn't exist. I am only asking for evidence other than personal feelings that they do.

 

To me Schilling's postseason numbers scream clutch.

[moonslav59]

To me Schilling's postseason numbers scream clutch.

 

He played in 12 different playoff series over 5 different seasons.

 

He won a series MVP twice: 1993 NLCS and 2001 WS.

 

He only had 4 series with an ERA above 2.69. three over 3.51 and 2 over 5.39.

 

That's pretty darn amazing!

 

19 starts. 133 IP.

 

2.23 ERA

 

0.968 WHIP

 

To me, he is one of the few players who meet the criteria of doing significantly better than his regular season level (the "rise to the occasion" factor").

 

His 133 IP might be a large enough sample size for some (or most) people, but I'm not in that group. Certainly, he had many "clutch performances", but I just don't feel we can prove or even come close to proving he consistently "rose to the occasion.

 

To me, we should see it in his regular season numbers as well, and we don't. This is a much larger sample size, too.

 

Career over all OPS against: .673 (an amazing number) and 8.6 K/9.

 

Late & Close (1592 PAs): .702 OPS

High Leverage (2163 PAs): .701 OPS

 

While these numbers are very good, they do NOT show he "rose to the occasion".

 

My criteria would be that a player must do significantly better than his career numbers in late & close/high leverage situations as well as playoff opportunities AND have large enough sample sizes. He must also be pretty darn consistently better, and I think we can say Schill was in the playoffs. I think Curt's regular season numbers are pretty close or above a significant sample size designation, and 133 IP in the playoffs are pretty high, but I just don't feel he's proven he's "clutch". I don't think anyone has, and to me, that strengthens my resolve that there is no such thing as a "clutch player" - just clutch moments and performances that happen more with some players than others just like regular non clutch moments and performances show.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[moonslav59]

Deadwood and Broken Limbs...

 

Pablo: 2018: $18.1M, 2019: $18.1M, 2020: $5M buyout

--Luxury tax cost: $19M for 2018 & 2019

 

Castillo: 2018: $11.8M, 2019: $11.8M, 2020: $14.3M

-- Luxury tax cost: $0.0

 

Ramirez: 2018: $22.8M, 2019: $22M vesting option

 

 

Bending Branches...

 

Price: 2018: $30M (opt out before 2019), 2019: $31M, 2020-2022 $32M

--Luxury cost: $31M x4

 

Porcello: 2018: $21M, 2019: $21M

--Luxury cost: $20.6M x 2

 

Pedroia: 2018: $16M, 2019: $15M, 2020: $13M, 2021: $12M

-- Luxury cost: $13.8M x 4

 

 

 

These 5 players will cost us this:

 

2018: $120M ($106M luxury)

 

2019: $120M ($106M luxury) or $98M ($84M) if HRam's option does not vest

 

2020: $64M ($45M)

 

2021: $46M ($45M)

 

2022: $32M ($31M)

 

 

[mvp 78]

These 5 players will cost us this:

 

2018: $120M ($106M luxury)

 

2019: $120M ($106M luxury) or $98M ($84M) if HRam's option does not vest

 

2020: $64M ($45M)

 

2021: $46M ($45M)

 

2022: $32M ($31M)

 

 

 

I expect him to get 496 plate appearances or less next year. That option is not going to vest. (To vest, he needs 1050 PA during 2017-18)

[devildavid]

To me Schilling's postseason numbers scream clutch.

 

I agree with that assessment. Schilling was a clutch performer in the postseason. Nothing wrong with a limited claim like that.

[cp176]

And that is the problem. Everyone has their own recipe so claims of clutch are too subjective to have any real meaning.

 

I understand your honest efforts to educate me but you have to understand that I love many things that can not be tracked and proven particularly when it comes to discussions dealing with athletes and athletics. This presents no problem for me. I absolutely love discussing things with people with respect to things like the existence of clutch and clutch players. That is fun for me perhaps because it is so subjective. I get to know people and the way they think this way. I might not agree with them but I listen and respect their feelings and their passion for the games. If things like this were definable in any way statistically, they would hold absolutely no interest for me at all.

[devildavid]

Farrell' s aggressive base running philosophy did not help the Sox in game 1 of the ALDS. It actually may have hurt when Pedroia was thrown out at third. Even though the run scored, Pedroia could have remained safely at second and extended the inning with two runners on base. Every out is magnified in the postseason and every potential run lost could impact the final outcome. Yes, the Astros killed our pitching but if the Sox had scored more in the inning the dynamic of the game changes.

[devildavid]

I understand your honest efforts to educate me but you have to understand that I love many things that can not be tracked and proven particularly when it comes to discussions dealing with athletes and athletics. This presents no problem for me. I absolutely love discussing things with people with respect to things like the existence of clutch and clutch players. That is fun for me perhaps because it is so subjective. I get to know people and the way they think this way. I might not agree with them but I listen and respect their feelings and their passion for the games. If things like this were definable in any way statistically, they would hold absolutely no interest for me at all.

 

I am not saying it has to be defined only by statistics, but there should be some observable evidence and not simply a feeling. The two things are complementary, not in opposition. I don't define a player by numbers alone, but by observing how they play the game and exhibit their baseball smarts. One of my favorite players was Jason Varitek because he always kept his head in the game and did not give up on any play until the final call was made. That will not show up statistically, but it is a critical component of playing the game to the peak of potential.

[a700hitter]

For starters, there have to be actual results that qualify as clutch. Calling a hitter clutch without results is meaningless. These results may be measurable in some way such as frequency of occurrence. Then we have to establish what level of frequency qualifies as evidence of clutch being an inherent trait. I'm willing to hear suggestions on what percentage of frequency this should be. That is the subjective part but I am open to a reasonable threshold.

 

I didn't ever say clutch moments didn't exist. I also didn't say clutch players didn't exist. I am only asking for evidence other than personal feelings that they do.

I asked you what kind of definition or measure would convince you that clutch exists and your answer was very vague. None of our measures satisfy you because they are not definitive enough. You give us a definition that would convince you.

[devildavid]

I asked you what kind of definition or measure would convince you that clutch exists and your answer was very vague. None of our measures satisfy you because they are not definitive enough. You give us a definition that would convince you.

 

Can you give me a percentage of success in the clutch that you feel is the minimum needed to be called clutch?

 

But the real issue here is more about defining a player as clutch, which requires more more definitive evidence. I think Ted Williams is a good test subject because he was such a good hitter I would not argue much against calling him clutch. If he is the measuring stick, how many hitters would qualify? I think Williams was so good that he exercised the most control a hitter possibly could in trying to hit safely. But he would also take a walk if the pitch wasn't there and I think that could be part of clutch as well.

[mvp 78]

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=willite01&t=b&year=0&post=1

 

Ted Williams sucked in the postseason. Not even one XBH.

[a700hitter]

Can you give me a percentage of success in the clutch that you feel is the minimum needed to be called clutch?

 

But the real issue here is more about defining a player as clutch, which requires more more definitive evidence. I think Ted Williams is a good test subject because he was such a good hitter I would not argue much against calling him clutch. If he is the measuring stick, how many hitters would qualify? I think Williams was so good that he exercised the most control a hitter possibly could in trying to hit safely. But he would also take a walk if the pitch wasn't there and I think that could be part of clutch as well.

What would convince you? Provide a measure that would definitely convince you?

[devildavid]

What would convince you? Provide a measure that would definitely convince you?

 

51% success rate.

[devildavid]

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=willite01&t=b&year=0&post=1

 

Ted Williams sucked in the postseason. Not even one XBH.

 

Two factors played against him. He was injured and the opposing team employed a defensive shift against him.

[a700hitter]

51% success rate.

In what situations? And 51% is ridiculously extreme. Basically, a player under that measure would need to have an OBP in high leverage situations that would be higher than Ted Williams lifetime OBP. That pretty much invalidates your position as your measure would be impossible to attain.

[mvp 78]

Two factors played against him. He was injured and the opposing team employed a defensive shift against him.

 

Defensive shifts? What are those?

[devildavid]

In what situations? And 51% is ridiculously extreme. Basically, a player under that measure would need to have an OBP in high leverage situations that would be higher than Ted Williams lifetime OBP. That pretty much invalidates your position as your measure would be impossible to attain.

 

In clutch situations. Clutch situations must exist if clutch performances exist. I thought you already knew all the situations that count in assessing clutch.

 

It is very possible to attain in small sample sizes. What percentage would you use?