A Realistic View at 2021: Part III

[mvp 78]

thank you....it means something. Now we may go against the trend but it does not look good for us. Longer the game goes, our chances weaken against the Yankees. Their offense stacks up better against our pitching than vice versa.

 

I'd rather miss out on the WC game than get destroyed in it. Sure, it would be great to eliminate the Yanks, but there's a 73% chance the Yankee crowd goes home happy.

[mvp 78]

If the sox don't end up in a play in game at worst then the final week is an utter failure. They have the best setup of the 3 teams fighting for the ALWC

 

It was good that they didn't do anything at the deadline though!

[moonslav59]

An 8-21 streak against good teams is actually very meaningful. If they struggle to beat good teams, you can't say "well, it's just a crapshoot in the playoffs." In this situation, the deck would be extremely stacked against the Red Sox.

 

It's meaningful but not everything and likely not a major factor.

 

The Yanks have shown over and over, they fall flat right after looking unbeatable. plus, they have a manger prone to handing games away.

 

It's one game. lots of factors are involved, including home field, starting pitchers and head-to-head pitcher-batter match-ups.

 

We don't even know, if it will be Cole vs Sale or Eovaldi, and SP'er is usually the biggest factor in setting odds on winning.

 

If the Yanks clinch early and can set up their SP'er and rest their pen, I'd have to give them the edge, but with the jays and Rays left to play, that is far from a given with a 1 game lead on us.

 

Here's how their pitchers likely line up

 

Off

@TOR Taillon v Ryu

@TOR Cole v Berrios

@TOR Kluber v RRay

vTBR Montgomery

vTBR Cortes

vTBR Cole on short rest, if needed (Taillon, if not)

 

[moonslav59]

I'd rather miss out on the WC game than get destroyed in it. Sure, it would be great to eliminate the Yanks, but there's a 73% chance the Yankee crowd goes home happy.

 

I'll take those odds.

[jacksonianmarch]

It's meaningful but not everything and likely not a major factor.

 

The Yanks have shown over and over, they fall flat right after looking unbeatable. plus, they have a manger prone to handing games away.

 

It's one game. lots of factors are involved, including home field, starting pitchers and head-to-head pitcher-batter match-ups.

 

We don't even know, if it will be Cole vs Sale or Eovaldi, and SP'er is usually the biggest factor in setting odds on winning.

 

If the Yanks clinch early and can set up their SP'er and rest their pen, I'd have to give them the edge, but with the jays and Rays left to play, that is far from a given with a 1 game lead on us.

 

Here's how their pitchers likely line up

 

Off

@TOR Taillon v Ryu

@TOR Cole v Berrios

@TOR Kluber v RRay

vTBR Montgomery

vTBR Cortes

vTBR Cole on short rest, if needed (Taillon, if not)

 

 

I HIGHLY doubt the Yanks would sacrifice setting up Cole for the WC game to go all out for the WC1. As the Yanks proved, home field means nothing between these two. If on the last day, the Yanks are one game up on the sox for WC1, there is zero chance we go with Cole on short rest. We'd ride with Taillon and if we have a chance to win, take it. If we get way behind, send in some middle relievers of no consequence and rest up

[mvp 78]

It's meaningful but not everything and likely not a major factor.

 

The Yanks have shown over and over, they fall flat right after looking unbeatable. plus, they have a manger prone to handing games away.

 

It's one game. lots of factors are involved, including home field, starting pitchers and head-to-head pitcher-batter match-ups.

 

We don't even know, if it will be Cole vs Sale or Eovaldi, and SP'er is usually the biggest factor in setting odds on winning.

 

If the Yanks clinch early and can set up their SP'er and rest their pen, I'd have to give them the edge, but with the jays and Rays left to play, that is far from a given with a 1 game lead on us.

 

Here's how their pitchers likely line up

 

Off

@TOR Taillon v Ryu

@TOR Cole v Berrios

@TOR Kluber v RRay

vTBR Montgomery

vTBR Cortes

vTBR Cole on short rest, if needed (Taillon, if not)

 

 

It's a major factor because they struggle mightily against good teams. You think that portends for future success?

[mvp 78]

I'll take those odds.

 

For what? The Sox aren't perennial underdogs. This isn't 1998. Getting embarrassed in a WC game doesn't sound like a fun time to me.

[moonslav59]

It's a major factor because they struggle mightily against good teams. You think that portends for future success?

 

No, but it doesn't make the odds 73-27.

 

Who starts is the biggest factor in setting odds. Home field is maybe second. A rested and in tune pen maybe third, and what starters are available in a pinch for pen use.

 

Those are all unknown, for now.

[moonslav59]

I HIGHLY doubt the Yanks would sacrifice setting up Cole for the WC game to go all out for the WC1. As the Yanks proved, home field means nothing between these two. If on the last day, the Yanks are one game up on the sox for WC1, there is zero chance we go with Cole on short rest. We'd ride with Taillon and if we have a chance to win, take it. If we get way behind, send in some middle relievers of no consequence and rest up

 

Come on. Zero chance?

 

If they get swept by the jays, they may be in a win or out last game scenario.

 

If they go with Taillon, they will be watching the play-in game.

[mvp 78]

No, but it doesn't make the odds 73-27.

 

Who starts is the biggest factor in setting odds. Home field is maybe second. A rested and in tune pen maybe third, and what starters are available in a pinch for pen use.

 

Those are all unknown, for now.

 

You're wrong. The Sox beat up on weaker teams and fold against stronger teams. It's more likely than not that they get scorched in a WC game, because that is what past performance has shown. The coin flip idea doesn't work here.

[Bellhorn04]

An 8-21 streak against good teams is actually very meaningful. If they struggle to beat good teams, you can't say "well, it's just a crapshoot in the playoffs." In this situation, the deck would be extremely stacked against the Red Sox.

 

Some of it is just law of averages stuff though. Here's how we ended up against the other 3 AL East contenders:

 

Yankees 10-9

Jays 10-9

Rays 8-11

Total 28-29

[moonslav59]

You're wrong. The Sox beat up on weaker teams and fold against stronger teams. It's more likely than not that they get scorched in a WC game, because that is what past performance has shown. The coin flip idea doesn't work here.

 

Recent past performance has never indicated future results, especially pulling out an obscure stat that does have meaning but is surely not something odds makers use as their top factor. How far back do you go?

 

Why is the deadline the date you pick? (Not that the yanks don't still blow us away in shorter sample sizes, but longer ones, not so much.)

 

I've just never bought into the recency effect. Yes, it has value and meaning, but it's not the major factor.

 

What if the Yanks lose 5 of their last 6 vs "stronger teams?" Does that change the factor, or does the magic date of July 30th overpower everything?

 

We've gone 6 and 7 in our last 13 games. Before we played the yanks we were 6-4 vs winning teams, but how did that help?

 

If the Yanks go 2-4 in their last 6 games, they'll be 5-8 in their last 13 vs winning teams. Why would this not matter? If they go 3-3, they will have the same record as us vs winning teams in the last 13 games vs winners: 6-7. (They are 3-4 in their last 7 vs winners. They are 3-6 in their last 9.)

[dgalehouse]

So many games come down to a battle of the bullpens. And too often the Sox fall short .

[moonslav59]

Some of it is just law of averages stuff though. Here's how we ended up against the other 3 AL East contenders:

 

Yankees 10-9

Jays 10-9

Rays 8-11

Total 28-29

 

The Yanks are 22-29 with 6 to go.

 

I guess this has no meaning at all.

[dgalehouse]

At least we now get the saving gift from on high. Three more with the O's. Need to sweep them again . Should not be hard to do.

[Bellhorn04]

At least we now get the saving gift from on high. Three more with the O's. Need to sweep them again . Should not be hard to do.

 

You have a habit of saying things like this LOL

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

So many games come down to a battle of the bullpens. And too often the Sox fall short .

 

Yep, and "rest" had nothing to do with the past weekend. Every single "reliever" was well-rested and ready: Sawamura, Perez, Robles, Houck, Hernandez, Richards, Ottavino, Barnes, and Braiser. The latter was the only one who did his job -- and that includes Barnes, whose job was supposed to be closer or at least late-inning high-leverage guy.

 

The other EIGHT penmen totally gagged, by either walking batters, throwing wild pitches or getting ripped. Sure, one can say the Yankee stars are awesome power hitters, but at least Ottavino admitted what we saw: "bad pitches" (as in meatballs). Throw any MLBer a meatball and he'll hit it; it may not go 450 feet, but almost always will be barreled. And though NY leads the majors in free passes, no game plan ever starts off with, "Pitch around Gio and Gardy..."

[mvp 78]

Recent past performance has never indicated future results, especially pulling out an obscure stat that does have meaning but is surely not something odds makers use as their top factor. How far back do you go?

 

Why is the deadline the date you pick? (Not that the yanks don't still blow us away in shorter sample sizes, but longer ones, not so much.)

 

I've just never bought into the recency effect. Yes, it has value and meaning, but it's not the major factor.

 

What if the Yanks lose 5 of their last 6 vs "stronger teams?" Does that change the factor, or does the magic date of July 30th overpower everything?

 

We've gone 6 and 7 in our last 13 games. Before we played the yanks we were 6-4 vs winning teams, but how did that help?

 

If the Yanks go 2-4 in their last 6 games, they'll be 5-8 in their last 13 vs winning teams. Why would this not matter? If they go 3-3, they will have the same record as us vs winning teams in the last 13 games vs winners: 6-7. (They are 3-4 in their last 7 vs winners. They are 3-6 in their last 9.)

 

It's a magic date because the Sox magically started to suck at that time. I guess 2 straight months of playing poor to mediocre baseball is something people want to believe in, but I can't.

[mvp 78]

At least we now get the saving gift from on high. Three more with the O's. Need to sweep them again . Should not be hard to do.

 

I've seen this one before.

 

https://www.baseball-almanac.com/box-scores/boxscore.php?boxid=201109280BAL

[moonslav59]

It's a magic date because the Sox magically started to suck at that time. I guess 2 straight months of playing poor to mediocre baseball is something people want to believe in, but I can't.

 

It's the cherry-picked stat that makes us look the worst of any other date.

[notin]

At least we now get the saving gift from on high. Three more with the O's. Need to sweep them again . Should not be hard to do.

 

As bad as the Orioles are, the team still is made of Major League players. Not like the Sox are going up against Assumption College or the Dedham Lion’s Club here…

[moonslav59]

As bad as the Orioles are, the team still is made of Major League players. Not like the Sox are going up against Assumption College or the Dedham Lion’s Club here…

 

We miss Means, again, so that helps.

[dgalehouse]

You have a habit of saying things like this LOL

 

I said the Sox would sweep the O's in Boston. I was rebutted by those saying that the percentages were all against it . I was right. I don't like to brag , but I am right quite often.

[mvp 78]

As bad as the Orioles are, the team still is made of Major League players. Not like the Sox are going up against Assumption College or the Dedham Lion’s Club here…

 

They have one guy above 801 OPS and some huge offensive black holes. The starters aside from Means generally have 6+ ERA's. Game 3's starter Chris Ellis has started a few games recently, but has a 5.21 FIP.

[Bellhorn04]

I said the Sox would sweep the O's in Boston. I was rebutted by those saying that the percentages were all against it . I was right. I don't like to brag , but I am right quite often.

 

Seems to me you were confident in us winning last night and a few other times we've lost.

[dgalehouse]

Seems to me you were confident in us winning last night and a few other times we've lost.

 

You can't win them all.

[notin]

They have one guy above 801 OPS and some huge offensive black holes. The starters aside from Means generally have 6+ ERA's. Game 3's starter Chris Ellis has started a few games recently, but has a 5.21 FIP.

 

So… you’re saying it is like playing Assumption College? The school that (along with my high school) unleashed Chris Colabello on the world?

[mvp 78]

So… you’re saying it is like playing Assumption College? The school that (along with my high school) unleashed Chris Colabello on the world?

 

Yes, AND Ellis isn't even starting this series.

 

According to Fangraphs, they are starting the underwhelming Bruce Zimmermann (coming off the 60 day IL and gave up 3 ER in 2 Innings in AA 2 starts ago), Zac Lowther (7.66 ERA) and Alexander Wells (7.61 ERA).

[mvp 78]

Seems to me you were confident in us winning last night and a few other times we've lost.

 

Shame really.

[mvp 78]

You can't win them all.

 

And quite often you don't.