A Realistic View at 2019: Part II

[Bellhorn04]

Road rate includes the 43 or whatever it was they hit at Camden Yards. They’re all done with Orioles, so the road home run rate figures to take a dive.

 

Excellent point sir.

[Bellhorn04]

THe funny thing is, Lackey is remembered as a good signing by a lot of people despite his horrific first two seasons followed by a missed third season. He did bounce back, but it's not like his trade netted that much - Joe Kelly and what was left of Allen Craig. But his bounceback season netted a ring.

 

Consequently, JD Drew gave the Sox two good seasons on a five year deal, just like Lackey, but was never appreciated at all, despite playing for the same number of title teams. But Drew gt his ring in the first season and then nothing for the next 4.

 

I guess it's also in the timing.

 

Julio Lugo also won a ring here, but no one thinks he was a good signing...

 

This might sound a little pompous, but knowledgeable Sox fans consider Drew a good acquisition in spite of his obvious faults.

[Carpin]

...and has good opposite field power.

 

Like every team, the yankees adjust their approach based on the ballpark they play half the games, every team does this

[Carpin]

Yes, and the question might be, why did the changed ball hurt our staff more than others?

 

We have a high K rate. I can understand Porcello, since he always let up a lot of HRs and fly balls, but why the whole staff?

 

The whole league has seen a higher ERA, but we've jumped way more than the norm.

 

There has to be other factors.

 

Last year everything went your way, pitching, hitting, this is just one of those years for you guys

[kenmeister]

Maybe this year he does. But Chris Sale is vastly better than Clay.

 

Sure, although Clay in 2013 was a mirror image of Chris Sale in 2018:

Clay 2013: 12-1 with a 1.74 ERA in 108.1 innings, then the show was over.

Chris 2018: 12-4 with a 2.11 ERA in 158 innings, and if you take out his August & September starts, I think the numbers are truly identical.

[jung]

This might sound a little pompous, but knowledgeable Sox fans consider Drew a good acquisition in spite of his obvious faults.

 

JD Drew was a good acquisition. So was Steven Drew for that matter.

[Bellhorn04]

Sure, although Clay in 2013 was a mirror image of Chris Sale in 2018:

Clay 2013: 12-1 with a 1.74 ERA in 108.1 innings, then the show was over.

Chris 2018: 12-4 with a 2.11 ERA in 158 innings, and if you take out his August & September starts, I think the numbers are truly identical.

 

OK, but you're picking by far the best 3 months of Clay's career there.

[a700hitter]

The old school numbers for Sale, Price and Porcello are pretty damn awful, no?

 

Sale 6-11 4.40

Price 7-5 4.36 (and only 105.1 innings)

Porcello 10-9 5.67

 

If someone told you before the season those would be their numbers on August 15, you'd probably think we were screwed, right?

EROD 13-5 4.31

 

Like I said, the obvious black hole is the 5th spot. And the outlier horrible starter has been Porcello. If those 2 spots and the bullpen had just been adequate, this would be a 93-95 win playoff team, despite Sale's and Price's off years.

[a700hitter]

Very true, but had the top 3 starters, who had just 9 starts with 4 or more runs allowed last year and 31 this year in way less games, had, instead, 20 of those bad starts, we'd still be in the division race and leading the WC race.

I don't disagree, but they have not been bad enough to send to the pen. Like it or not, we have had to ride with them. Even with them under performing, this team would still be playoff bound if the 4th and 5th spots were not complete garbage. Porcello's 5.63 ERA is atrocious. But for him making $22.5 million, I think he would have been DFA'd. The 4th and 5th spots needed new personnel, but the team owners and GM didn't address it. The no-name bullpen just did not have enough quality major league arms. That to cried out for new personnel, and DD did nothing. There were issues that DD could have addressed to right this ship. Unfortunately, Sale and Price were not at the top of that list, because their contracts made them unmovable.

[moonslav59]

THe funny thing is, Lackey is remembered as a good signing by a lot of people despite his horrific first two seasons followed by a missed third season. He did bounce back, but it's not like his trade netted that much - Joe Kelly and what was left of Allen Craig. But his bounceback season netted a ring.

 

Consequently, JD Drew gave the Sox two good seasons on a five year deal, just like Lackey, but was never appreciated at all, despite playing for the same number of title teams. But Drew gt his ring in the first season and then nothing for the next 4.

 

I guess it's also in the timing.

 

Julio Lugo also won a ring here, but no one thinks he was a good signing...

 

Porcello is facing the same fate as JD Drew.

 

As for Lugo, remember softlaw (the clown from that other site). He used to argue Lugo was the "wire to wire SS on a championship team" and was a good signing.

[moonslav59]

Last year everything went your way, pitching, hitting, this is just one of those years for you guys

 

Well, not quite everything.

 

Imagine if Devers, Workman and Vaz played like this, last year.

[moonslav59]

JD Drew was a good acquisition. So was Steven Drew for that matter.

 

The first Stephen Drew one, yes. The second one, no.

[jung]

The first Stephen Drew one, yes. The second one, no.

 

You are right about that.

[moonslav59]

I don't disagree, but they have not been bad enough to send to the pen. Like it or not, we have had to ride with them. Even with them under performing, this team would still be playoff bound if the 4th and 5th spots were not complete garbage. Porcello's 5.63 ERA is atrocious. But for him making $22.5 million, I think he would have been DFA'd. The 4th and 5th spots needed new personnel, but the team owners and GM didn't address it. The no-name bullpen just did not have enough quality major league arms. That to cried out for new personnel, and DD did nothing. There were issues that DD could have addressed to right this ship. Unfortunately, Sale and Price were not at the top of that list, because their contracts made them unmovable.

 

I have to disagree. While our 4 and 5 slot have been garbage, our 4 and 5 slots don't have a horrible W-L record. Had they pitched better, we'd likely not have gained as many wins as the 1+2 slot differentials.

 

The 1 (Sale) and 2 (Price starters have killed us more than 4+5, despite having better ERAs.

 

Record in Starts:

1) 10-15 Sale

2) 9-12 Price

19-27 Total 1 & 2 slots

 

3) 17-7 ERod

 

4) 14-10 Porcello

5) We got Cashner to solve the 5 slot issues. He tilted the W-L record from plus to minus.

5-3 Velazquez

1-5 Cashner

3-2 Johnson

3-1 Eovaldi

2-1 Weber

0-2 Josh Smith

0-1 DHernandez

13-10 before Cashner

14-15 after Casher

28-25 Total 4 & 5 Slots

 

[moonslav59]

Down 12 from our 1&2 slot starters is about the same as the amount of more blown saves we have as compared to 2018.

[a700hitter]

I have to disagree. While our 4 and 5 slot have been garbage, our 4 and 5 slots don't have a horrible W-L record. Had they pitched better, we'd likely not have gained as many wins as the 1+2 slot differentials.

 

The 1 (Sale) and 2 (Price starters have killed us more than 4+5, despite having better ERAs.

 

Record in Starts:

1) 10-15 Sale

2) 9-12 Price

19-27 Total 1 & 2 slots

 

3) 17-7 ERod

 

4) 14-10 Porcello

5) We got Cashner to solve the 5 slot issues. He tilted the W-L record from plus to minus.

5-3 Velazquez

1-5 Cashner

3-2 Johnson

3-1 Eovaldi

2-1 Weber

0-2 Josh Smith

0-1 DHernandez

13-10 before Cashner

14-15 after Casher

28-25 Total 4 & 5 Slots

 

The distinction is that we had no choice but to ride with Sale and Price for good or bad. Everything else was fixable by changing personnel.

[moonslav59]

The distinction is that we had no choice but to ride with Sale and Price for good or bad. Everything else was fixable by changing personnel.

 

That has nothing to do with your point made. You claimed we are where we are because our 4 & 5 starters pitched like garbage, and we could have won enough to compete had we had other starters. To improve on 28-25, we'd have had to win at a much higher rate than 28-25, which would have meant acquiring way better than just decent 4-5 slot pitchers.

 

We could not have afford 2 pitchers that much better, but that was not even what the debate was about.

 

It was about why we are where we are in the standings.

 

On that, it seems to me, is simple: Our starters sucked, except for ERod, and our pen sucked.

 

If blame is to be placed on the 1-2 starters vs the 4-5 starters, clearly the 1-2 starters pitched better than the 4-5, but we lost way more than with the 4-5 starters. This isn't about contracts or expectations or who we had to ride with or not. It's about Sale & Price not doing what they needed to do. Had they just gone 50-50, we'd be 6 games better and just 1.5 games behind the WC slot. Had they gone 27-19, we'd have the second best record in the AL and be ahead in the WC with home field in our favor.

 

I doubt we'd have done much better than 28-25 from our 4-5 slots. After all, we tried with Cashner and ended up doing much worse.

 

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

The commish has admitted it. The ball has less drag. Do you want to know how to create less drag on a ball? Lower the seams. Lower seams means more hanging breaking balls and less command of all pitches, ie creating better contact. The ball is getting hit harder and has less drag, so it is traveling further.

 

That 'seams' more than reasonable.

[jung]

Thank you. This is what I've been saying for over a month now.

 

You'll have to admit - and I'm not suggesting any collusion between the Y's and MLB - that this change played right into the hands of the Yankees with their power hitters and short porch.

 

This is what Manfred actually said:

“There is no evidence from the scientists the baseball is harder,” Manfred said Tuesday at a meeting of the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. “The basic characteristics of the baseball, as measured by the independent scientists who we asked to do the study, provides no support for that. What there is support for is the drag is a little less, and when you have less drag, it goes farther.

 

“We had a spike (in homers) this year. We went back to those scientists and they said, ‘Look, you have baseballs with less drag.’ We’ve acknowledged that, said it a number of times. We went back to the scientists and said, ‘We need to figure out why.’

 

That is hardly an admission from the commission of MLB WHICH OWNS the company that makes the baseballs. Notice Manfred said absolutely nothing about the seams simply stating that the baseball's "have less drag".

 

"Really Rod...so how is that? Why do they have less drag?"

 

Manfred: "We need to figure out why".

 

"My ass Rod. You own the f***ing company dickhead."

Edited August 16, 2019 by jung

[a700hitter]

That has nothing to do with your point made. You claimed we are where we are because our 4 & 5 starters pitched like garbage, and we could have won enough to compete had we had other starters. To improve on 28-25, we'd have had to win at a much higher rate than 28-25, which would have meant acquiring way better than just decent 4-5 slot pitchers.

 

We could not have afford 2 pitchers that much better, but that was not even what the debate was about.

 

It was about why we are where we are in the standings.

 

On that, it seems to me, is simple: Our starters sucked, except for ERod, and our pen sucked.

 

If blame is to be placed on the 1-2 starters vs the 4-5 starters, clearly the 1-2 starters pitched better than the 4-5, but we lost way more than with the 4-5 starters. This isn't about contracts or expectations or who we had to ride with or not. It's about Sale & Price not doing what they needed to do. Had they just gone 50-50, we'd be 6 games better and just 1.5 games behind the WC slot. Had they gone 27-19, we'd have the second best record in the AL and be ahead in the WC with home field in our favor.

 

I doubt we'd have done much better than 28-25 from our 4-5 slots. After all, we tried with Cashner and ended up doing much worse.

 

The pen lost quite a few games for Sale and Price. Using the record in games that they pitched is misleading. The bullpen blew several leads that they inherited from Sale and Price. There have to be at least 6 or 7 games like that. As for your assertion that it couldn't be expected to do much better out of the 4th and 5th slots than 28-25, I think we should have done much better than that in our 4/5 slots. Porcello has enjoyed great run support. If he pitched to his career norm of a 4.25 ERA, he would probably be 10 games over .500 like he was last year. What was our record in the 4th and 5th slots in 2018?

 

There is no arguing that we would be a better team if the 1/2 guys pitched to expectations, and I am not denying that. As I said, we are stuck with those guys for contractual reasons. That being said, DD didn't fix or upgrade those parts of the staff that was fixable through acquisition. Also, Cora took way too long to realize that he has to drop Porcello from the rotation, and it looks like he is getting another start on Friday. Ughhh. You mentioned Cashner, but I view him as a trash heap pick up. It was a lame attempt at a fix.

[Sox75]

Have you ever stripped your deck?

[Sox75]

s***! I'm so tired, I thought I was texting that to my brother.

 

Sorry ;{

[Sox75]

LOL now I'm remembering a text to my wife earlier, when she texted me, "anything you need at the store?"

 

I text back, "deck stripper."

 

She texts back, "how much does it pay, & do they need their own pole?"

 

LMFAO :0

 

True story! LOOOOOONG DAY.

p.s. I really thought I was texting my brother in the previous post.

 

I think I might have heat prostration?

 

I hope that deck stripper shows up with nothing but a tool belt tonight!

[moonslav59]

The pen lost quite a few games for Sale and Price. Using the record in games that they pitched is misleading. The bullpen blew several leads that they inherited from Sale and Price. There have to be at least 6 or 7 games like that. As for your assertion that it couldn't be expected to do much better out of the 4th and 5th slots than 28-25, I think we should have done much better than that in our 4/5 slots. Porcello has enjoyed great run support. If he pitched to his career norm of a 4.25 ERA, he would probably be 10 games over .500 like he was last year. What was our record in the 4th and 5th slots in 2018?

 

There is no arguing that we would be a better team if the 1/2 guys pitched to expectations, and I am not denying that. As I said, we are stuck with those guys for contractual reasons. That being said, DD didn't fix or upgrade those parts of the staff that was fixable through acquisition. Also, Cora took way too long to realize that he has to drop Porcello from the rotation, and it looks like he is getting another start on Friday. Ughhh. You mentioned Cashner, but I view him as a trash heap pick up. It was a lame attempt at a fix.

 

You keep saying "The pen lost games." Sure, the blown saves contributed to the loss, but many times they blew games that the starter had already let up 4 or 5 runs in 3-6 IP. The pen actually let up less runs per inning, but the blown save is blamed for the loss.

 

On Porcello, it's hard to calculate 10 wins over .500, because the pen numbers would have changed had he not been pulled as early. He's at 14-10, now, so he'd have to be 17-7. The numbers support 3 or 4 more wins (see below), but changing 3 losses to wins would barely change our standing position. (It would change much more, if we look at Sale's starts and losses one-by-one.)

 

Here are Porcello losses:

IP ER Result

2.2 4 Lost 10-8 (Likely a win, but we may still have lost this one despite scoring 8 runs.)

4.2 7 Lost 15-8 (Probably would have lost had he gone 6 IP with 3 ERs- 4.50 ERA)

4.0 3 Lost 9-5 (Probably still a loss.)

7.0 2 Lost 4-3 (Would have lost by more.)

4.2 5 Lost 5-4 (Probably a win.)

6.0 4 Lost 5-1 (Still a loss.)

 

Then, the complete meltdown:

6.0 5 Lost 7-5 (50-50 chance)

0.1 6 Lost 17-13 (Hard to know, say 50-50)

5.2 6 Lost 8-5 (Likely a win.)

5.0 5 Lost 12-4 (Likely still a loss)

 

Porcello won a lot of games despite pitching poorly or awful. I see one game where had he let up 3 ERs in 6.2 IP, instead of 2 (like he did), we might have lost, since we won that game 4-3. That means the net gains of wins might be 2-4 games.

 

Think about how many games the pen won or held a win for Porcello (and others) or the team. Here are some of Porcello's wins:

 

IP Runs Result:

6.0 3 Won 7-3 (Pen 3.0 IP 0 ERs)

6.2 4 Won 9-5 (Pen 2.1 IP 1 ER- better ERA than Porcello)

6.2 5 Won 12-5 (Pen 2.1 IP 0 ER)

5.2 6 Won 10-6 (Pen 3.1 IP 0 ER)

5.0 6 Won 17-6 (Pen 4.0 IP 0 ER)

6.0 3 Won 19-3 (Pen 3.0 IP 0 ER)

 

(Yes, with these many runs scored in support, it is unlikely we'd have lost many of these games had the pen done worse, but the fact is, they did better than Rick in 6 of the 14 wins.)

 

 

 

 

[moonslav59]

s***! I'm so tired, I thought I was texting that to my brother.

 

Sorry ;{

 

I was so tired, one morning, that when I got to my office door, I tried to unlock it with my car key auto unlock button!

 

[a700hitter]

You keep saying "The pen lost games." Sure, the blown saves contributed to the loss, but many times they blew games that the starter had already let up 4 or 5 runs in 3-6 IP. The pen actually let up less runs per inning, but the blown save is blamed for the loss.

 

On Porcello, it's hard to calculate 10 wins over .500, because the pen numbers would have changed had he not been pulled as early. He's at 14-10, now, so he'd have to be 17-7. The numbers support 3 or 4 more wins (see below), but changing 3 losses to wins would barely change our standing position. (It would change much more, if we look at Sale's starts and losses one-by-one.)

 

Here are Porcello losses:

IP ER Result

2.2 4 Lost 10-8 (Likely a win, but we may still have lost this one despite scoring 8 runs.)

4.2 7 Lost 15-8 (Probably would have lost had he gone 6 IP with 3 ERs- 4.50 ERA)

4.0 3 Lost 9-5 (Probably still a loss.)

7.0 2 Lost 4-3 (Would have lost by more.)

4.2 5 Lost 5-4 (Probably a win.)

6.0 4 Lost 5-1 (Still a loss.)

 

Then, the complete meltdown:

6.0 5 Lost 7-5 (50-50 chance)

0.1 6 Lost 17-13 (Hard to know, say 50-50)

5.2 6 Lost 8-5 (Likely a win.)

5.0 5 Lost 12-4 (Likely still a loss)

 

Porcello won a lot of games despite pitching poorly or awful. I see one game where had he let up 3 ERs in 6.2 IP, instead of 2 (like he did), we might have lost, since we won that game 4-3. That means the net gains of wins might be 2-4 games.

 

Think about how many games the pen won or held a win for Porcello (and others) or the team. Here are some of Porcello's wins:

 

IP Runs Result:

6.0 3 Won 7-3 (Pen 3.0 IP 0 ERs)

6.2 4 Won 9-5 (Pen 2.1 IP 1 ER- better ERA than Porcello)

6.2 5 Won 12-5 (Pen 2.1 IP 0 ER)

5.2 6 Won 10-6 (Pen 3.1 IP 0 ER)

5.0 6 Won 17-6 (Pen 4.0 IP 0 ER)

6.0 3 Won 19-3 (Pen 3.0 IP 0 ER)

 

(Yes, with these many runs scored in support, it is unlikely we'd have lost many of these games had the pen done worse, but the fact is, they did better than Rick in 6 of the 14 wins.)

 

 

 

 

Your post above is 3/4 about Porcello. This shows me that you really don’t read my posts or try to understand what I am saying. In multiple posts, I have identified as one of the 3 big reasons for this team’s failure along with the vacant 5th spot and the bullpen. All of these were fixable by DD and/or Cora. Porcello gets a ton of offensive support. If he pitched just mediocre 4.25-4.50 ERA, he would be 10 games over .500. The bullpen cannot be blamed for his games to any significant extent. He has consistently sucked. It’s weird that we always talk past or around each other.

[moonslav59]

Your post above is 3/4 about Porcello. This shows me that you really don’t read my posts or try to understand what I am saying. In multiple posts, I have identified as one of the 3 big reasons for this team’s failure along with the vacant 5th spot and the bullpen. All of these were fixable by DD and/or Cora. Porcello gets a ton of offensive support. If he pitched just mediocre 4.25-4.50 ERA, he would be 10 games over .500. The bullpen cannot be blamed for his games to any significant extent. He has consistently sucked. It’s weird that we always talk past or around each other.

 

I was mostly responding to this part of your post. I thought I was clear, but I'll work on being more specific.

 

 

Porcello has enjoyed great run support. If he pitched to his career norm of a 4.25 ERA, he would probably be 10 games over .500 like he was last year.

[moonslav59]

Your post above is 3/4 about Porcello. This shows me that you really don’t read my posts or try to understand what I am saying. In multiple posts, I have identified as one of the 3 big reasons for this team’s failure along with the vacant 5th spot and the bullpen. All of these were fixable by DD and/or Cora. Porcello gets a ton of offensive support. If he pitched just mediocre 4.25-4.50 ERA, he would be 10 games over .500. The bullpen cannot be blamed for his games to any significant extent. He has consistently sucked. It’s weird that we always talk past or around each other.

 

Clearly the pen was a major reason for our huge downswing, particularly the blown saves. (The pen has pitched many very good games that led to wins despite very poor starter numbers.)

 

The 5 slot has pitched very poorly, but were 13-10 in their starts before DD addressed the problem by trading for Cashner. It's hard to say that was a major reason we lost way more games, this year, when our 5 slot was 13-10 (due mainly to massive run support). Had our 5th starter had a 4.00 or 4.50 ERA, about the best one can expect, I doubt it would make a big difference.

 

We are 14-10 in Porcello starts. Had we been 17-7 (10 games over .500), we'd be just a little closer.

 

I know you recognize the top 2 starters have not done as well as we expected or wished, and I get your point about "having to ride with them" no matter what. I agree on that 100%, but it seems like you have an aversion to mentioning them as a primary reason for the spot we are in now. We are currently 19-27 in their starts. Sure, several of their losses have been due to pen meltdowns and blown saves, but clearly most are due to their own meltdowns.

 

Here's a look at Sale's losing starts:

IP Runs Result

3.0 7 lost 12-4 (Not pen's fault)

6.0 1 lost 1-0 (Not pen's fault)

4.0 5 lost 7-5 (Not pen's fault)

5.0 4 lost 8-0 NPF

5.0 2 Lost 7-4 Yes, Pen's fault

7.0 4 lost 5-2 NPF

7.0 2 lost 5-4 YES, pen's fault

6.0 3 lost 4-3 NPF

6.0 4 lost 4-1 NPF

7.0 1 lost 4-3 YES Pen's fault

6.0 5 lost 8-7 NPF

5.2 5 lost 6-3 NPF

4.2 5 lost 11-2 NPF

5.1 6 lost 9-6 NPF

3.2 8 lost 9-2 NPF

 

(Note: To be fair, some NPF might have seen a blown save.)

 

Only 3 of the losses in Sale's starts were the pen's fault.

 

Look at some wins:

5.1 3 won 4-3 (Pen did better)

6.0 2 won 7-2 PDB

5.0 4 won 7-5 PDB

6.2 5 won 7-6 PDB

 

That's four of the 10 wins where the pen did better and only 3 of the 15 losses where the pen did worse.

 

We have to face the facts. Sale has been a big part of our situation.

 

Price, too.

 

 

 

 

[kenmeister]

Is anyone interested in chatting offseason free agent signings yet? https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/

 

Assuming they don't bring Porcello back, we need at least one starting pitcher (Sale-Price-ERod-Eovalid-?).

They need potentially 5 quality relievers.

We can move Mookie to center field (if he isn't traded), and then we need a right fielder unless we put JDM there.

At least one infielder.

A back up catcher.

 

That's a lot of needs, so they may have to bargain shop

 

Okay, hunting through the free agent list, here's what I've got:

Starting pitcher: How about bringing Wade Miley back? He's only making 4.5 million this year, has a 3.11 ERA, and an 11-4 record. Otherwise Michael Pineda looks like a decent pickup.

Relief pitchers: I won't even try...

Outfielder: Nick Castellanos

Infielder: Eric Sogard

Catcher: Austin Romine

[Sox75]

LOL :0

Too funny Moon.