Countdown to the Playoffs - 2017 Edition

[moonslav59]

Proof is there, but not just in the box score. Look at the inning by inning and play by play summary available in the mlb.com package. That's what I did for the first game against the Yankees last week (a week ago). Assume Beni stays put in that 3d inning. Men on 1st and 3d and no one out. After Beni's single, no more Sox hits in the 3d. Betts walked. Bogie ground out scoring Nunez from 3d. Devers walked. HanRam ground out for out #2. Next better was Young, who was hitless in the game. I think it a very reasonable assumption the Sox score no more than the run they did score even though Beni was out. Plus the Sox only had four lousy singles in the game, I mean who are we kidding blaming this on Beni's intemperance? And don't forget that great 9th inning rally when we had the based loaded and no outs and again had no hits. The one run came on third walk. We got killed because we couldn't hit Sabathia and they scored 5 runs off our starter.

 

That's one game, and you never know what might have happened, if just one thing changes in a game.

 

Nobody can prove we have lost a game or not lost a game based on conjecture or "what ifs" something different happened in a game.

 

Note: we've had multiple games with multiple blunders. It's almost impossible to not have lost a games based on a blunder (or two or three).

[a700hitter]

That's one game, and you never know what might have happened, if just one thing changes in a game.

 

Nobody can prove we have lost a game or not lost a game based on conjecture or "what ifs" something different happened in a game.

 

Note: we've had multiple games with multiple blunders. It's almost impossible to not have lost a games based on a blunder (or two or three).

In that game if we had put up an additional run an CC had to pitch to an additional batter in a stressful AB in that inning, the whole game could have changed.

[moonslav59]

In that game if we had put up an additional run an CC had to pitch to an additional batter in a stressful AB in that inning, the whole game could have changed.

 

Exactly. Maybe not, but we'll never know.

 

Plus, we might have handled our pitching changes differently with a different score.

 

I'm not playing the "When a butterfly flaps his wings" argument here, but games can and do turn on single plays.

[Maxbialystock]

Show me. I've provided data that point the other way. For you to be right, I really would like just one example of where terrible baserunning or boneheaded plays cost us even one game, let along several. To me runs scored for and against a team are all about hitting and pitching and occasionally defense, but rarely boneheadedness.

 

I have said the same to moonslav, who has yet to identify just that one game, let alone several.

 

I did respond..

 

I said no game is won or lost on one play, so the question is worthless.

 

That being said, here's one: the game where Holt held onto the ball as the winning run crossed the plate.

 

Sure, argue, maybe he doesn't get him anyways, but it was a close play, even after he hesitated,

 

There are countless close games we lost where a bonehead play led to a run scored or maybe have prevented us from scoring one or more.

 

Stop pretending no games have been lost by mental mistakes. We've made 343 this year. It's impossible for none to have mattered.

 

Your definition of bonehead plays keeps shifting. I honestly thought it was all about "running into outs." Holt hesitated on a throw home? That's what you got? Do you remember which game? I ask because i'm sure I can find a replay with my mlb.com package. But hesitating is boneheaded? Heck, Devers has been doing that on maybe half of his throws to first. Is that really because he's not paying attention or lacks fundamental game and situation awareness?

 

Love the 343 mental mistakes. With that many the Sox have to be not only the worst team in the AL but maybe in the last 10 or 20 years. 343--Goodness gracious. That's more than 2 a game. Those hitting and pitching numbers pale in comparison. Who the heck cares about OPS's, ERA's, and silly things like that? Eliminate just half of those 343 mental mistakes, and the Sox would have a better record than the Dodgers.

[Maxbialystock]

That's one game, and you never know what might have happened, if just one thing changes in a game.

 

Nobody can prove we have lost a game or not lost a game based on conjecture or "what ifs" something different happened in a game.

 

Note: we've had multiple games with multiple blunders. It's almost impossible to not have lost a games based on a blunder (or two or three).

 

Excuse me, but I didn't just analyze that one inning (the 3d). I also cited just 4 singles in the game and the total abortion of a 9th inning rally when the Sox had the bases loaded with no one out and got zero, repeat zero hits. We got the one run when I think Beni got walked. We were vastly outplayed in that game, top to bottom, and all the blather about mental mistakes won't change that fact. It was 6-2, not 2-1.

[moonslav59]

Excuse me, but I didn't just analyze that one inning (the 3d). I also cited just 4 singles in the game and the total abortion of a 9th inning rally when the Sox had the bases loaded with no one out and got zero, repeat zero hits. We got the one run when I think Beni got walked. We were vastly outplayed in that game, top to bottom, and all the blather about mental mistakes won't change that fact. It was 6-2, not 2-1.

 

Look, I've never used that game as an example of a game lost by a blunder, but yes a 6-2 game could change to a win based on one play changed.

 

We'll never know how that game would have unfolded. Your reference to 4 singles is not meaningless, but it proves nothing. CC would have pitched differently had Beni not been out. We really will never know.

 

Chances are strong, we'd still have lost, but it's not 100% lock loss.

[a700hitter]

Exactly. Maybe not, but we'll never know.

 

Plus, we might have handled our pitching changes differently with a different score.

 

I'm not playing the "When a butterfly flaps his wings" argument here, but games can and do turn on single plays.

His whole position is untenable. They don't coach kids and professionals about sound situational base running, because it doesn't matter. It is good baseball that helps you win games. If it didn't cost us a single game this year, then we were just randomly lucky. Until I see an analysis of every base running blunder and defensible provable analysis that it didn't affect the outcome of any game, his argument goes into the worthless blather category. You and others have astutely and correctly made the point that a single play can affect the entire dynamics of a game, so no such analysis he might make would be reliable.

[Maxbialystock]

In that game if we had put up an additional run an CC had to pitch to an additional batter in a stressful AB in that inning, the whole game could have changed.

 

Go back to my blow by blow, play by play, and tell me where that 2d run in the 3d inning comes from. CC walked a ton of people (5), but to me he never looked stressed. Hell, he has owned us this year. On top of which the Yankees scoredd 6 runs. Our half of the 9th inning underscores just how really rotten we were in that game with men on base and with bases loaded and no on out. You, sir, are simply projecting a best case that was very unlikely.

[a700hitter]

Go back to my blow by blow, play by play, and tell me where that 2d run in the 3d inning comes from. CC walked a ton of people (5), but to me he never looked stressed. Hell, he has owned us this year. On top of which the Yankees scoredd 6 runs. Our half of the 9th inning underscores just how really rotten we were in that game with men on base and with bases loaded and no on out. You, sir, are simply projecting a best case that was very unlikely.

You think you are proving something, but you are not proving anything. It is worthless blather with no point, unless your point is that sound base running doesn't matter in baseball. If that is your point, you are just 100% wrong.

[Maxbialystock]

His whole position is untenable. They don't coach kids and professionals about sound situational base running, because it doesn't matter. It is good baseball that helps you win games. If it didn't cost us a single game this year, then we were just randomly lucky. Until I see an analysis of every base running blunder and defensible provable analysis that it didn't affect the outcome of any game, his argument goes into the worthless blather category. You and others have astutely and correctly made the point that a single play can affect the entire dynamics of a game, so no such analysis he might make would be reliable.

 

You're right, I only analyzed one game, mostly because i remember it and because the near universal reaction on the game thread was that Beni stretching that single and being thrown out basically killed us. I think I've done a pretty good and basically factual job of showing that judgment (on the game thread) is wrong. Your saying that one play combined with bunch of conjectural bs about what might have happened does not sway me. My analysis is far more factual than yours, and, pardon me, but you cannot suppose away a 6-2 loss and blame it on Beni. No sir.

 

I have asked no one to analyze every game--way too hard. But I have asked for an analysis of just one game to show that a boneheaded play, baserunning or otherwise, cost us that game.

 

I am heartened by the fact that one or two others find the thesis that baserunning is causing us to lose games is unproven and likely not credible. I do find Kimmi's stats (not conjecture) on that subject informative. I like numbers and facts, so sue me.d I also like hitting and pitching stats which tell me that is primarily where games are won and lost and, best of all, we can count them and not guess at them. Ditto on the fielding. For baserunning, we now have Kimmi's stats.

 

I don't deny Sox players have made some lousy decisions, but for the most part I accept them as part of the game--remember, 162 interminable (3.5 hours, maybe less) games in which there is actually about 10-15 minutes of real action. Modern MLB encourages inattention. The miracle is that the focus and situational awareness are usually pretty good. This is almost certainly because the pay is fantastic. Novices get half a million a year. So-so contributors like Ellsbury can get $24M a year for 7 years (if they have that one great year). Hell, in MLB you can get those great contracts and still miss tons of games, even entire seasons, and still get paid the full contract. Right now I think we are paying Pablo $15M or so this year not to play for us.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[moonslav59]

I have asked no one to analyze every game--way too hard. But I have asked for an analysis of just one game to show that a boneheaded play, baserunning or otherwise, cost us that game.

 

I'm not going to make any claim that can't be proven. You shouldn't either.

 

That being said, analyze the game where the winning run scored as Holt held onto the ball. Are you saying there was no way we lost that game because of a blunder?

 

That's just one game, and since the play was at the end of the game, it stands out, but there are dozens more where one play could have increased our odds more than the one Yankee game you selected to prove your point about all games.

 

[moonslav59]

I do find Kimmi's stats (not conjecture) on that subject informative. I like numbers and facts, so sue me.

 

Kimmi's numbers only tell us that over the season we are at a net +1. It doesn't say whether we could be -3 in blunders and +4 in good running plays for a net +1 overall.

 

Plus, even if the number was -3, I wouldn't say that is proof that blunders made it so.

 

We're talking about changing a result of a play in the middle (or end) of a game, the ensuing results are impossible to predict. There are computer programs that figure out the chances of winning that game after every play, and I suppose someone could go back and find instances where a single blunder changed the odds from in favor to against, but even that wouldn't prove we lost a game. heck, i even believable it could be possible to have won a game we lost due to taking away a mistake we made. A lot can change after one play. A pitcher could be replaced, a PH'er used, a different pitch called. The possibilities are endless.

 

It's absurd to think by analyzing what happened after a play and changing a play, you can prove what was going to happen next. Only God knows.

 

[a700hitter]

You're right, I only analyzed one game, mostly because i remember it and because the near universal reaction on the game thread was that Beni stretching that single and being thrown out basically killed us. I think I've done a pretty good and basically factual job of showing that judgment (on the game thread) is wrong. Your saying that one play combined with bunch of conjectural bs about what might have happened does not sway me. My analysis is far more factual than yours, and, pardon me, but you cannot suppose away a 6-2 loss and blame it on Beni. No sir.

 

I have asked no one to analyze every game--way too hard. But I have asked for an analysis of just one game to show that a boneheaded play, baserunning or otherwise, cost us that game.

 

I am heartened by the fact that one or two others find the thesis that baserunning is causing us to lose games is unproven and likely not credible. I do find Kimmi's stats (not conjecture) on that subject informative. I like numbers and facts, so sue me.d I also like hitting and pitching stats which tell me that is primarily where games are won and lost and, best of all, we can count them and not guess at them. Ditto on the fielding. For baserunning, we now have Kimmi's stats.

 

I don't deny Sox players have made some lousy decisions, but for the most part I accept them as part of the game--remember, 162 interminable (3.5 hours, maybe less) games in which there is actually about 10-15 minutes of real action. Modern MLB encourages inattention. The miracle is that the focus and situational awareness are usually pretty good. This is almost certainly because the pay is fantastic. Novices get half a million a year. So-so contributors like Ellsbury can get $24M a year for 7 years (if they have that one great year). Hell, in MLB you can get those great contracts and still miss tons of games, even entire seasons, and still get paid the full contract. Right now I think we are paying Pablo $15M or so this year not to play for us.

And even assuming that it could be proved (and it cannot) that we did not lose a single game due to base running blunders, that would be pure random luck. Or are you saying that a noted flaw of this team (poor base running awareness) will not or cannot cost us any games? If you can prove the former, I really don't care about identifying and quantifying the reasons for each of our losses. If you are taking the position that a recurrent flaw can never cost us a game, then you are just wrong, and on that there can be no countervailing argument.

[moonslav59]

And even assuming that it could be proved (and it cannot) that we did not lose a single game due to base running blunders, that would be pure random luck. Or are you saying that a noted flaw of this team (poor base running awareness) will not or cannot cost us any games? If you can prove the former, I really don't care about identifying and quantifying the reasons for each of our losses. If you are taking the position that a recurrent flaw can never cost us a game, then you are just wrong, and on that there can be no countervailing argument.

 

Well said, and it's such an obvious and repeated flaw.

 

Every Sox team and every other team makes mental blunders during every season. This Sox team has exceeded the norm and then some.

[SoxHop]

Well said, and it's such an obvious and repeated flaw.

 

Every Sox team and every other team makes mental blunders during every season. This Sox team has exceeded the norm and then some.

 

It has stuck out like a sore thumb. We have people on this board who have been watching almost every Sox game for decades. And people who haven't have equated some of the running to stuff they learned in early years of playing ball.

 

Things can get overblown here on this board. But, the running this year has been abnormal.

 

I have to salute Farrell for being aggressive with a fast team. I think he deserves quite a bit of credit for using the tools he has been given.

 

But to not even note that the absent minded running is a concern or that it cost a game or is a problem, is mind boggling to me.

[moonslav59]

It has stuck out like a sore thumb. We have people on this board who have been watching almost every Sox game for decades. And people who haven't have equated some of the running to stuff they learned in early years of playing ball.

 

Things can get overblown here on this board. But, the running this year has been abnormal.

 

I have to salute Farrell for being aggressive with a fast team. I think he deserves quite a bit of credit for using the tools he has been given.

 

But to not even note that the absent minded running is a concern or that it cost a game or is a problem, is mind boggling to me.

 

Exactly.

 

I have no problem with aggressive base running, and I realize it will, at times, mean we run into outs. Sometimes there may be a thin line between good aggressive running and over aggressiveness that is borderline stupidity.

 

I'm not talking about those plays at all. Not one of them.

 

Running into an out at 3B when the grounder is hit in front of you is not aggressive base running: it's a blunder.

 

Forgetting how many outs there are, even if it does not lead to an out is a blunder, but I'm only focused on blunders leading to outs (and likely loss of runs and games).

 

Making the first or third out at 3B, especially when one run is needed may not always be a "blunder". Sometimes a weak- armed OF'er happens to make a perfect throw, or a runner stumbles. Most of the time, it's probably a blunder by the runner or 3B coach. Getting thrown out at home is usually not a blunder, but if you are thrown out by 15 or more feet, one has to wonder if someone made a mistake.

 

Not running full speed is a mental mistake or blunder.

 

Not going about a third of the way to the next base on a fly ball, in case it is dropped or misplayed is a blunder.

 

I'm sure I'm forgetting some, but I've seen too much of the above to think this is normal.

 

I realize personal observations can be biased. I try not to be, but I realize I can be. I have watched just about every single play of every single game for over 25 years. I know: I'm a freak. I really do believe I've never seen anything like this team and bonehead plays on the base paths and on defense. I could be wrong. i have no data to support my claims. But, I am 100% certain the odds are we have lost multiple games due to blunders this year.

 

[a700hitter]

Exactly.

 

I have no problem with aggressive base running, and I realize it will, at times, mean we run into outs. Sometimes there may be a thin line between good aggressive running and over aggressiveness that is borderline stupidity.

 

I'm not talking about those plays at all. Not one of them.

 

Running into an out at 3B when the grounder is hit in front of you is not aggressive base running: it's a blunder.

 

Forgetting how many outs there are, even if it does not lead to an out is a blunder, but I'm only focused on blunders leading to outs (and likely loss of runs and games).

 

Making the first or third out at 3B, especially when one run is needed may not always be a "blunder". Sometimes a weak- armed OF'er happens to make a perfect throw, or a runner stumbles. Most of the time, it's probably a blunder by the runner or 3B coach. Getting thrown out at home is usually not a blunder, but if you are thrown out by 15 or more feet, one has to wonder if someone made a mistake.

 

Not running full speed is a mental mistake or blunder.

 

Not going about a third of the way to the next base on a fly ball, in case it is dropped or misplayed is a blunder.

 

I'm sure I'm forgetting some, but I've seen too much of the above to think this is normal.

 

I realize personal observations can be biased. I try not to be, but I realize I can be. I have watched just about every single play of every single game for over 25 years. I know: I'm a freak. I really do believe I've never seen anything like this team and bonehead plays on the base paths and on defense. I could be wrong. i have no data to support my claims. But, I am 100% certain the odds are we have lost multiple games due to blunders this year.

 

Running with your head down without noticing that the lead runner is returning to the base that you are running toward.

[Slasher9]

A butterfly flaps its wings in china....

[SoxHop]

A butterfly flaps its wings in china....

 

No one cares, unless it could have meant resting a starting pitcher a game or two or setting up the starters for the first game series..... or home field advantage...

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not going to make any claim that can't be proven. You shouldn't either.

 

Actually moon, having followed this whole discussion with a lot of interest, I think one of your statements that got Max worked up, and bothered me as well, was that we would have a 10 or 15 game lead without all the mental mistakes - suggesting they had cost us 5 to 10 games.

[cp176]

I've also obviously been following this lengthy debate/discussion. To be honest, it isn't really about what the numerous mental mistakes both on the field and base paths equate to in terms of wins and losses for me. It has more to do with having to watch bad baseball whether we win or lose. Teams that continually make mental mistakes deserve to lose. We have survived. maybe it is all about the quality of baseball that we are seeing in general.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm as baffled as anyone about the mental blunders. I think maybe you have to look at them on a player-by-player basis. I have seen Bogaerts make a couple that suggested his mind was elsewhere at the time. Those are the ones where the player really has to be straightened out by the manager.

 

JBJ has made some of the blunders. But when you look at how this guy plays in the outfield it's hard to believe that he suffers from a lack of focus.

[Slasher9]

No one cares, unless it could have meant resting a starting pitcher a game or two or setting up the starters for the first game series..... or home field advantage...

 

you just cant predict what would have happened for the entire game if one play changes early on. CC/Sanchez most def have a different sequence with 1st and 3rd no out. the outcome is not predictable. y'all need to watch some Star Trek and learn on alternate timelines.....

[Slasher9]

I've also obviously been following this lengthy debate/discussion. To be honest, it isn't really about what the numerous mental mistakes both on the field and base paths equate to in terms of wins and losses for me. It has more to do with having to watch bad baseball whether we win or lose. Teams that continually make mental mistakes deserve to lose. We have survived. maybe it is all about the quality of baseball that we are seeing in general.

 

excellent post.

[moonslav59]

Running with your head down without noticing that the lead runner is returning to the base that you are running toward.

 

That's another one that has happened multiple times.

[Slasher9]

In that game if we had put up an additional run an CC had to pitch to an additional batter in a stressful AB in that inning, the whole game could have changed.

i'm not sure how often we see eye to eye but this is for damn sure one of them....

[moonslav59]

Actually moon, having followed this whole discussion with a lot of interest, I think one of your statements that got Max worked up, and bothered me as well, was that we would have a 10 or 15 game lead without all the mental mistakes - suggesting they had cost us 5 to 10 games.

 

Maybe 10 is pushing it, but I firmly believe it cost us at least 4-5 games. Like I said, no one play costs us any game. Maybe a grand slam in a 0-0 game gets a big chunk of the credit- having a major impact on the odds of winning, but many plays contribute to a win or a loss, and changing one play, even if it seems like a little mistake at the time, can (not always) have a major impact on the odds of winning or losing. It changes who leads off th next inning and the ones after that. It changes the pitch count and possibly the choice of pitches to be thrown next. It may not be like a butterfly flapping its wings in China, but at times, it could be.

 

To dismiss it out of hand, especially when we have seen dozens and dozens of mental mistakes on this team is just not something I can ever support.

 

Sure, it's possible we might have only lost 1-2 games as a result of mental mistakes, but I'm thinking 4-5 is on the light side.

 

For all those who preach how attitude, club house atmosphere and intangibles make a difference in winning or losing, there's nothing like a bonehead play to take the wind out of a team's sails. An error is bad enough. An error of neglect or lack of focus can be an negatively influencing force on a team. I'm not even speaking to that: I'm speaking to bonehead plays actually stopping rallies (or helping along opponent rallies with defensive blunders) and losing us games directly or indirectly.

 

Blunders on defense have been more plentiful than on the base paths. We all know defensive mistakes are not always counted as errors, especially mental ones. We all agree,

some of our "errors" have been mental blunders. Throwing to the wrong base, forgetting how many outs there are and many other types of mental mistakes have taken place this year. Look at the best pitching teams in MLB and the differential between runs and unearned runs. I'm not dissing our defense. Overall, it has been very good or even great, but defense blunders have certainly caused us games.

 

Runs/Unearned Runs (differential)

 

LAD 494/464 (30)

CLE 511/480 (31)

AZD 553/494 (59)

WSH 574/528 (36)

NYY 579/524 (55)

BOS 581/533 (48)

 

As you can see, we do not have the worst R/ER differential, but the teams that have worse also have much worse defenses. We have a very good defense that happens to allow too many unearned runs. To me, although some could see this as a "stretch", this shows mental mistakes has cost us runs. It's impossible to think enough runs have been scored off defensive blunders to cause at least one loss.

 

Defensive rankings of best pitching teams

UZR/150

2. LAD

6. BOS

8. CLE

11. WSH

18. NYY

28. AZ

 

DRS

1. LAD

4. BOS

9. NYY

10. CLE

17. AZ

25. WSH

 

As you can see, the other teams that allowed more unearned runs have much worse defenses than us. I can only assume our "extra" unearned runs are a result of blunders not poor defensive skills. Maybe I'm assuming wrongly, but my eye test confirms the numbers.

[S5Dewey]

I don't see this as being a debate with any clear resolution to it - in spite of the fact that I've been involved in it.

 

We truly don't know what effect having Beni on 1st with the chance of stealing 2B would have on CC's pitch selection. Maybe he would have hung a curve and a 3-run homer would have resulted. We don't know.

 

OTOH, Max has a point to when he says that CC was dealing like he always does against the Sox. We just don't know what would have happened.

 

Generally speaking, and this is just IMO, under the circumstances I'd rather have had sure runners on 1st & 3rd with nobody out than risk having Beni thrown out trying to advance a base on what was going to be a close play, risking 'losing' 1/3 of an inning + a baserunner.

 

But again, that's just IMO.

[moonslav59]

I've also obviously been following this lengthy debate/discussion. To be honest, it isn't really about what the numerous mental mistakes both on the field and base paths equate to in terms of wins and losses for me. It has more to do with having to watch bad baseball whether we win or lose. Teams that continually make mental mistakes deserve to lose. We have survived. maybe it is all about the quality of baseball that we are seeing in general.

 

Great point, cp.

 

It's easy to get frustrated over mental blunders. That frustration builds and builds with each occurrence. It's one thing to not have running or defensive skills: it's another to have them and squander them by lack of focus or mental lapses.

 

Past Sox teams have been slow and poor on defense. I expected losses from those areas. This team has very good to excellent fielders at almost all positions. We have decent base runners, and I'm not talking SBs only. We've squandered some of those skills-- maybe not enough to make those areas a net loss, but we've prevented more runs or less runs allowed, and by assumption lost games, by not fully capitalizing on these two "strength" areas.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe 10 is pushing it, but I firmly believe it cost us at least 4-5 games.

Sure, it's possible we might have only lost 1-2 games as a result of mental mistakes, but I'm thinking 4-5 is on the light side.

 

And yet you're telling Max not to make any claim that can't be proven!

 

You're contradicting the heck out of yourself, and it really diminishes your credibility.

 

Suggesting these mistakes have cost us 6 or 7 games is like saying they are the equivalent of having a replacement level pitcher this year instead of Sale.