A Realistic View at 2021: Part I

[a700hitter]

The 1998 Red Sox had an outfield of Troy O’Leary, Darren Lewis and Darren Bragg and actually (gasp!) made the postseason....

It was exciting having Pedro in 1998. He made up for that subpar OF. The 2020 staff will not compensate for this OF.

[moonslav59]

Really looking forward to a dull season with nothing to cheer for.

 

Thanks, Dave.

[Larry Cook]

Really looking forward to a dull season with nothing to cheer for.

 

Thanks, Dave.

 

Everybody starts the year 0 and 0. Sometimes the glass really is less than half full!

[moonslav59]

Everybody starts the year 0 and 0. Sometimes the glass really is less than half full!

 

I can't help it if I'm feeling optimistic.

 

Not for a great season but for a a clear sign we are getting much better.

[a700hitter]

I can't help it if I'm feeling optimistic.

 

Not for a great season but for a a clear sign we are getting much better.

And that sign would be...?

[oldtimer]

And that sign would be...?

 

Better pitching

[moonslav59]

And that sign would be...?

 

I've already seen many signs. Our roster is way better than last year. I realize better than worst can still be bad, but we are not bad.

 

Signs from the season?

 

Many more wins.

 

Improvement from many of our pre-prime and prime players, which is a huge percentage of our roster.

 

Watching some kids get a look-see, at some point, this year.

 

Excitement from Devers, Bogey, JD, Verdugo and others, including a few pitchers many have all but written off.

 

[moonslav59]

Better pitching

 

On paper, we're light years better than 2020.

[notin]

It was exciting having Pedro in 1998. He made up for that subpar OF. The 2020 staff will not compensate for this OF.

 

The 1998 Red Sox were 70-59 (.542) in games not started by Pedro.

[moonslav59]

The 1998 Red Sox were 70-59 (.542) in games not started by Pedro.

 

Those games were so boring.

[moonslav59]

2020 Starting Pitchers By IP'd:

 

Red= Will have zero IP for the Sox in 2021

 

Blue= Will likely have less IP in 2021(pro-rated)

 

IP Starter GS

62 Perez 12

48 Eovaldi 9

25 Godley 7

23 Mazza 6

19 Weber 5

17 Houck 3

14 Brewer 4

10 Pivetta 2

9 Hart 3

7 Kickham 2

4 Triggs 2

3 Hall 1

2 Osich 1

1 Brice 1

1 Brasier 1

1 Lever 1

 

Pen By IP'd

30 Valdez

24 Weber

24 Brasier

23 Barnes

20 Springs

19 Brice

14 Covey

13 Stock

13 Walden

11 Brewer

10 Hembree

8 DHern

7 Kickham

7 Taylor

7 Workman

7 Mazza

6 Hall

4 Tapia

4 Godley

4 Triggs

4 Lever

2 Hart

1 Lin, Plawecki, Peraza

 

Pitchers who should see significantly more IP in 2021 than 2020 (prorated):

 

SP

ERod

Richards

Sale

Pivetta

Houck

(Andriese, Whitlock, Seabold, Mata)

 

RP:

Ottavino

Andriese

Sawamura

DHern

Taylor

Whitlock

(Bazardo, Houck)

 

 

Edited March 1, 2021 by moonslav59

[kenmeister]

Those games were so boring.

 

Except for Tom Gordon at the end of the game. He was awesome. 46 saves that year led the league.

[notin]

Those games were so boring.

 

Maybe.

 

But the other starters were Wakefield , Saberhagen, Avery, Lowe (10 starts), Wasdin (8 stats), and Schourek (8 starts). And those starters put the Sox on a pace for 88 wins. Is this rotation comparable to those pitchers?

[notin]

Except for Tom Gordon at the end of the game. He was awesome. 46 saves that year led the league.

 

And only 1 blown save. Plus one awful one in the ALDS against Cleveland...

[mvp 78]

Maybe.

 

But the other starters were Wakefield , Saberhagen, Avery, Lowe (10 starts), Wasdin (8 stats), and Schourek (8 starts). And those starters put the Sox on a pace for 88 wins. Is this rotation comparable to those pitchers?

 

The era of Wakefield and Saberhagen was pretty decent. Maybe it was "boring" but that team was better than you'd expect from just looking at the names.

 

Reggie Jefferson and John Valentin will always be perpetually underrated on here.

[mvp 78]

Also, Mo Vaughn was really great. It's easy to forget how great he actually was since he declined substantially after leaving the Sox.

 

Buford, Stanley, Cummings and Leyritz all had OPS+ above 100.

 

Sox as a whole were:

 

8th in HR

3rd in RBI

2nd in SLG

5th in OBP

18th in offensive LOB

 

4th in ERA+

26th in CG (heavy reliance on bullpen)

 

Was it really bringing in Rich Garces and Jim Corsi that made the games boring? This team hit well, had some stars (Pedro, Nomar, Mo) and didn't give up a lot of runs. Maybe they were just so good they were boring? IDK.

[notin]

Also, Mo Vaughn was really great. It's easy to forget how great he actually was since he declined substantially after leaving the Sox.

 

Buford, Stanley, Cummings and Leyritz all had OPS+ above 100.

 

Sox as a whole were:

 

8th in HR

3rd in RBI

2nd in SLG

5th in OBP

18th in offensive LOB

 

4th in ERA+

26th in CG (heavy reliance on bullpen)

 

Was it really bringing in Rich Garces and Jim Corsi that made the games boring? This team hit well, had some stars (Pedro, Nomar, Mo) and didn't give up a lot of runs. Maybe they were just so good they were boring? IDK.

 

Really there are a lot of rather mundane players who just had good seasons. But that can happen to any team.

 

Having Pedro was a huge advantage, and havig Vaughn and Nomar was also a big deal. But this team in non-Pedro games was on a pace for a 88-74 season with a bunch of starters no different that the staff on the current team. Is there any reason the Sox cannot get Vaugh/Garciaparra type production out of Devers and Bogaerts, get good seasons out of a few others, and then put together an 88 win season? Can we really make the argument that it's impossible because this team has no one as good as Damon Buford?

[kenmeister]

Mike Stanley, yes! The greatest pinch hitter of all time.

[Bellhorn04]

And only 1 blown save. Plus one awful one in the ALDS against Cleveland...

 

And a Stephen King novel LOL

[Bellhorn04]

To me the 1998 team was the team that broke a skein of 13 postseason losses in a row, but then promptly lost 3 more. They were also part of a more hopeful period for Sox fans (largely due to Pedro) that culminated in 2004.

[Bellhorn04]

Always liked Bret Saberhagen too. A pretty exemplary major league pitcher with a lot of guts.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Really there are a lot of rather mundane players who just had good seasons. But that can happen to any team.

 

Having Pedro was a huge advantage, and havig Vaughn and Nomar was also a big deal. But this team in non-Pedro games was on a pace for a 88-74 season with a bunch of starters no different that the staff on the current team. Is there any reason the Sox cannot get Vaugh/Garciaparra type production out of Devers and Bogaerts, get good seasons out of a few others, and then put together an 88 win season? Can we really make the argument that it's impossible because this team has no one as good as Damon Buford?

 

Without wrapping stats around it, can we at least consider that Pedro's greatness may have been responsible -- in a way -- for that 88-win pace by the rest of the club? All his innings of excellence had to have had a part in keeping the bullpen from burn-out. Also, knowing you'll have one of the game's aces on the mound every five days gives teammates and management confidence, and allows guys to relax and get the most out of their abilities by not pressing. He may have even spread his pitching acumen around the clubhouse and dugout to teach others a new grip, new pitch, how to set up certain batters, even a winning attitude and assassin mindset.

 

These are reasons why I'll always advocate acquiring a legitimate ace whenever possible... even if a team isn't deemed "good enough yet" to invest in one.

[mvp 78]

Without wrapping stats around it, can we at least consider that Pedro's greatness may have been responsible -- in a way -- for that 88-win pace

 

He can have the smallest slice of the blame pie.

[Bellhorn04]

Without wrapping stats around it, can we at least consider that Pedro's greatness may have been responsible -- in a way -- for that 88-win pace by the rest of the club? All his innings of excellence had to have had a part in keeping the bullpen from burn-out. Also, knowing you'll have one of the game's aces on the mound every five days gives teammates and management confidence, and allows guys to relax and get the most out of their abilities by not pressing. He may have even spread his pitching acumen around the clubhouse and dugout to teach others a new grip, new pitch, how to set up certain batters, even a winning attitude and assassin mindset.

 

These are reasons why I'll always advocate acquiring a legitimate ace whenever possible... even if a team isn't deemed "good enough yet" to invest in one.

 

I largely agree. It was the same with Clemens, then with Beckett when he was at his best, and now with Sale. Guys like these have huge value that goes beyond their own stats.

[notin]

Without wrapping stats around it, can we at least consider that Pedro's greatness may have been responsible -- in a way -- for that 88-win pace by the rest of the club? All his innings of excellence had to have had a part in keeping the bullpen from burn-out. Also, knowing you'll have one of the game's aces on the mound every five days gives teammates and management confidence, and allows guys to relax and get the most out of their abilities by not pressing. He may have even spread his pitching acumen around the clubhouse and dugout to teach others a new grip, new pitch, how to set up certain batters, even a winning attitude and assassin mindset.

 

These are reasons why I'll always advocate acquiring a legitimate ace whenever possible... even if a team isn't deemed "good enough yet" to invest in one.

 

Agreed on helping the bullpen. As for his pitching acumen, there is no real correlation between being a great player and being a great mentor. Ever notice most hitting coaches were lousy hitters? It's just as easily defensible that Saberhagen or Avery were as/more effective in this regard.

 

And as for instilling confidence in his teammates, that is a case-by-case argument. I assume they still worry about their own individual performances. You're theory operates on the assumption that all everyone cares about is the team performance, but I have my doubts about how true that really is. After all, not one of them was going to get their next contract based on being Pedro's teammate...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Agreed on helping the bullpen. As for his pitching acumen, there is no real correlation between being a great player and being a great mentor. Ever notice most hitting coaches were lousy hitters? It's just as easily defensible that Saberhagen or Avery were as/more effective in this regard.

 

And as for instilling confidence in his teammates, that is a case-by-case argument. I assume they still worry about their own individual performances. You're theory operates on the assumption that all everyone cares about is the team performance, but I have my doubts about how true that really is. After all, not one of them was going to get their next contract based on being Pedro's teammate...

 

I've lost my italics and bold-face so this part of my post was worded carefully: "may have been responsible -- in a way - he may have even..."

 

Pedro MAY be a Hall of Famer who helps lesser lights; we at least know he coached Eovaldi's throwing workouts right before Nate had his career peak in '18. I also considered Saberhagen -- good catch on Avery, too -- as pedigree influences... the more the merrier. This is another reason -- IN A WAY -- why the Sox, Bloom, and I would bet, Cora, recruited Kike and Marwin to help mentor and bring ring experience to a suddenly, mostly unproven lineup on the diamond and in the batting order.

 

As for confidence, for those -- WHO MAY -- care more about a paycheck, it may pay off to relax and stress less about making a living playing a game while your window is still open. But some posters who said this winter that pros only care about the highest bidders have also admitted recently that certain veterans may also prefer contenders with a chance to win.

[moonslav59]

I was being sarcastic when I said "boring."

[mvp 78]

I was being sarcastic when I said "boring."

POSTER 1: It was exciting having Pedro in 1998. He made up for that subpar OF. The 2020 staff will not compensate for this OF.

 

POSTER 2: The 1998 Red Sox were 70-59 (.542) in games not started by Pedro.

 

POSTER 3: Those games were so boring.

 

 

Shame for not making the sarcasm more obvious!

[moonslav59]

POSTER 1: It was exciting having Pedro in 1998. He made up for that subpar OF. The 2020 staff will not compensate for this OF.

 

POSTER 2: The 1998 Red Sox were 70-59 (.542) in games not started by Pedro.

 

POSTER 3: Those games were so boring.

 

 

Shame for not making the sarcasm more obvious!

 

I had been giving poster one a lot of grief about being such a debbie downer, so I felt my sarcasm would be obvious.

[notin]

POSTER 1: It was exciting having Pedro in 1998. He made up for that subpar OF. The 2020 staff will not compensate for this OF.

 

POSTER 2: The 1998 Red Sox were 70-59 (.542) in games not started by Pedro.

 

POSTER 3: Those games were so boring.

 

 

Shame for not making the sarcasm more obvious!

 

Not to mention, the 2020 staff won't be needed to compensate for this outfield, as they have been disbanded and replaced by the 2021 staff...