A Realistic View at 2020: Part II

[Kimmi]

I assume you're on the optimist side of the "pollyanna" scale. I think your opinions are typically grounded in data and facts (more so than say... mine). I wouldn't say you come across as a pessimist by any means.

 

Who was the idiot that predicted 33 wins???

[moonslav59]

If we end up with a winning % under .383 (the 1965 Red Sox team), it will be our worst record since 1932!

 

I'd say it's safe to call this the cliff.

 

[oldtimer]

If we end up with a winning % under .383 (the 1965 Red Sox team), it will be our worst record since 1932!

 

I'd say it's safe to call this the cliff.

 

 

I expected we would win 1/3 of our games and we have done slightly better. Awful season but things are looking up.

[Bellhorn04]

If we end up with a winning % under .383 (the 1965 Red Sox team), it will be our worst record since 1932!

 

I'd say it's safe to call this the cliff.

 

 

But maybe other Red Sox teams have had worse 60 game stretches?

[Bellhorn04]

The 2012 team finished the season on an 18-42 run.

 

So you only have to go back 8 years to find an even worse 60-game stretch than this.

[Kimmi]

The 2012 team finished the season on an 18-42 run.

 

So you only have to go back 8 years to find an even worse 60-game stretch than this.

 

It has more to do with our inability to make any moves to improve the team, not that I would have made them anyway during this shortened season. The FO's hands were tied.

[Bellhorn04]

It has more to do with our inability to make any moves to improve the team, not that I would have made them anyway during this shortened season. The FO's hands were tied.

 

That plus the losses of Sale and E-Rod, made it a lost "season" and the right time to tank.

[Kimmi]

That plus the losses of Sale and E-Rod, made it a lost "season" and the right time to tank.

 

To be fair, I thought that the Sox could be competitive when we still had Sale and ERod. I didn't like Price being traded for that very reason. Also to be fair, it would have been very difficult for any team to overcome losing as many starting pitchers as we lost between 2019 and 2020, be it through trade, free agency, or injury.

 

But that doesn't erase the fact that the team had very little flexibility to make any moves, and losing Price and Porcello was a direct result of trying to regain some flexibility back.

[moonslav59]

But maybe other Red Sox teams have had worse 60 game stretches?

 

I'm sure there are many.

[moonslav59]

To be fair, I thought that the Sox could be competitive when we still had Sale and ERod. I didn't like Price being traded for that very reason. Also to be fair, it would have been very difficult for any team to overcome losing as many starting pitchers as we lost between 2019 and 2020, be it through trade, free agency, or injury.

 

But that doesn't erase the fact that the team had very little flexibility to make any moves, and losing Price and Porcello was a direct result of trying to regain some flexibility back.

 

When did you think "the cliff" was going to start? 2021? 2022?

[moonslav59]

Houck is looking more and more legit.

 

It's still a small sample size, but this was a good team he shut down.

 

Who da thunk?

[Key2Delock]

On September 1, the Red Sox were 12-24 (a .333 winning percentage). After starting September with two wins in eight games, the Red Sox have “rallied” to finish the month with nine wins in their most-recent 16 games and a chance to catch the Orioles for fourth place and end the season with having won 40% of their games, if they beat the Braves and Baltimore loses to Toronto on Sunday.

 

While that will be the franchise’s worst winning percentage since 1965, considering that they’ve been using a pitching staff that’s missing four of its five starters from 2019 and had the worst ERA in the major leagues before tonight, and that they lost one of MLB’s best players in a trade to the Dodgers, this strange, abbreviated season could’ve been worse.

[moonslav59]

JBJ may end the season over .800!

 

Vaz just went over.800.

 

Who-da-thunk both may pass Devers in OPS tomorrow.

[Kimmi]

When did you think "the cliff" was going to start? 2021? 2022?

 

The financial and prospect constraints were going to be here in 2020, no doubt, which is a big part of why Dombrowski was let go. However, I was hopeful that we still had the talent to keep us competitive this year. One big problem with hitting a cliff is that if anything goes wrong in terms of injury or underperformance, the team doesn't have the flexibility to fix it.

[Kimmi]

JBJ may end the season over .800!

 

Vaz just went over.800.

 

Who-da-thunk both may pass Devers in OPS tomorrow.

 

#BringJBJBack

[Bellhorn04]

JBJ may end the season over .800!

 

Vaz just went over.800.

 

Who-da-thunk both may pass Devers in OPS tomorrow.

 

It shows you how much OPS can bounce even at the 60-game point.

 

Vaz's OPS has increased by 76 points, from 725, in his last 5 games.

[moonslav59]

The financial and prospect constraints were going to be here in 2020, no doubt, which is a big part of why Dombrowski was let go. However, I was hopeful that we still had the talent to keep us competitive this year. One big problem with hitting a cliff is that if anything goes wrong in terms of injury or underperformance, the team doesn't have the flexibility to fix it.

 

I get that, but you didn't answer my question.

 

I know you have been on the side of the "cliff" being unavoidable, as I was, but I'm wondering when you expected it to arrive?

 

To me,last year's performance and and the reset priority being known were big clues that the cliff had already arrived.

 

Sure, without the Sale and ERod health issues, we'd have been "better," but both of them are signed through 2021 or longer, so were you thinking 2022 or 2023?

[moonslav59]

It shows you how much OPS can bounce even at the 60-game point.

 

Vaz's OPS has increased by 76 points, from 725, in his last 5 games.

 

Yes, indeed, and we should be cautious about anointing Houck our 2021 ace based on 3 games sample sizes.

[dgalehouse]

It shows you how much OPS can bounce even at the 60-game point.

 

Vaz's OPS has increased by 76 points, from 725, in his last 5 games.

 

In an abbreviated, crazy season like this one , the stats are going to be skewed , both pro and con . They may or may not be an indication of anything.

[dgalehouse]

Off topic , but here is a question for the official scorers. Why can't you " assume the double play " ? The outs are made separately. Once the first out is recorded, you should be able to assume that , if correctly played , the second out should be made as well.

[moonslav59]

Off topic , but here is a question for the official scorers. Why can't you " assume the double play " ? The outs are made separately. Once the first out is recorded, you should be able to assume that , if correctly played , the second out should be made as well.

 

I think the difficulty in turning to throw from 2B is why, but clearly there are some easy turns that go awry. Also, if the 1Bman drops a perfect throw after the turn, it should be an error.

[dgalehouse]

I think the difficulty in turning to throw from 2B is why, but clearly there are some easy turns that go awry. Also, if the 1Bman drops a perfect throw after the turn, it should be an error.

 

Okay . To me , the thing is ; on any tough play , the scorer has the discretion whether to charge an error. But on a double play attempt, it is automatic that you can't assume it will be made . End of story.

[moonslav59]

Okay . To me , the thing is ; on any tough play , the scorer has the discretion whether to charge an error. But on a double play attempt, it is automatic that you can't assume it will be made . End of story.

 

Yes, I know the rule. It seems unfair, since many plays are not rules as errors due to the difficulty factor, but this specific play takes away all choice.

 

I agree with your position. The scorer should be allowed to make the call.

[moonslav59]

Okay . To me , the thing is ; on any tough play , the scorer has the discretion whether to charge an error. But on a double play attempt, it is automatic that you can't assume it will be made . End of story.

 

Here's another issue: A grounder or lined shot is hit right to an infielder's feet. The ball goes under his glove. Error.

 

A throw is made right to the 1Bman, but at his feet. The ball goes under his glove: Error on the thrower not the 1Bman.

[illinoisredsox]

Here's another issue: A grounder or lined shot is hit right to an infielder's feet. The ball goes under his glove. Error.

 

A throw is made right to the 1Bman, but at his feet. The ball goes under his glove: Error on the thrower not the 1Bman.

 

At least in that one, somebody actually did something wrong.

 

The crazier one is the perfect throw from the outfield that hits a runner and bounces away, allowing him to advance.

[notin]

Off topic , but here is a question for the official scorers. Why can't you " assume the double play " ? The outs are made separately. Once the first out is recorded, you should be able to assume that , if correctly played , the second out should be made as well.

 

Well, a player can get an error if a wild throw allows a runner to advance a base. But the “not assuming a double play” is more for determining if a run that scores is earned or not....

[moonslav59]

At least in that one, somebody actually did something wrong.

 

The crazier one is the perfect throw from the outfield that hits a runner and bounces away, allowing him to advance.

 

The one that bugs me the most is when an OF'er makes a long run for a ball and it hits right in the middle of his glove and pops out: error.

 

Another OF'er loses it in the sun and falls right next to him: no error.

[harmony]

The one that bugs me the most is when an OF'er makes a long run for a ball and it hits right in the middle of his glove and pops out: error.

 

Another OF'er loses it in the sun and falls right next to him: no error.

That's why teams use advanced defensive metrics such as those provided at Statcast.

[notin]

The one that bugs me the most is when an OF'er makes a long run for a ball and it hits right in the middle of his glove and pops out: error.

 

Another OF'er loses it in the sun and falls right next to him: no error.

 

To be fair, I’ve seen the “long run ending in dropped ball” scored a hit sometimes...

[moonslav59]

To be fair, I’ve seen the “long run ending in dropped ball” scored a hit sometimes...

 

Usually, if there no lunge or extended reach, it's an error.