A Realistic View at 2022: Part I

[Old Red]

I apologized for saying all your Cora bashing meant the same as hating, but you can't let go. I can keep apologizing, but it won't help.

 

If having the best stats of any Sox starter is "inconsistent", then yes, that is bashing, IMO. Not overanalyzing, not exaggerating and not lying. It's an opinion, and I stand by my opinion- to "balance you out"- LOL.

 

You did criticize me for slotting Houck as next year's closer. That's another example of you not thinking Houck is as good as most do.

 

Since "mistakes" by managers in MLB are highly subjective, a statement like the one I made about Cora is an opinion not a fact. It's not overanalyzing, so you can drop that nonsense.

 

"People like you" -nice one.

 

Once again you are wrong, and I did not criticize you for slotting Houck as the closer next year. What I said was you had Houck penciled in the bullpen next year That’s all I said, and as a matter of fact I like the idea of Houck being the closer, so once again over analyzing. You keep talking that Houck had the best stats as a starter, but how many wins did he have? A few wins would have been nice. Just like you used hate to fit your narrative you did the same with bad mouthing. Houck even when he is on is only good for 4-5 innings, and that why I think that is more suited for the pen. That is not bad mouthing. You still haven’t showed where I said Houck was babied, so where is it. You show it, and I’ll admit I was wrong. Glad you are not the judge, and jury, or the interpreter for everyone.

[mvp 78]

Interesting.

 

Not so sure Mata, who is probably out until June or so, and even then hassome minor league work to do, is tht much of a trade entivement. But Oakland might be interested.

 

The one caveat is that if Oakland is able to offer arbitration with any players I listed, I would say Pinder is the most likely, followed by Bassitt...

 

Mata was a throw in to get the numbers to match.

[mvp 78]

How does that reconstruct?

 

a) Fans who like Cora have never blamed him much for that.

Fans who don't like Cora will still blame him just as much for that.

 

 

Yes

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

How does that reconstruct?

 

a) Fans who like Cora have never blamed him much for that.

Fans who don't like Cora will still blame him just as much for that.

 

 

These new findings reveal once again he was just part of an organizational paradigm (albeit a vital cog in the wheel). Manfred and the MLB still scapegoated him as poor handler of pitchers.

[jad]

These new findings reveal once again he was just part of an organizational paradigm (albeit a vital cog in the wheel). Manfred and the MLB still scapegoated him as poor handler of pitchers.

 

He was also one of the very few who didn't line up to throw others under the bus.

[notin]

Mata was a throw in to get the numbers to match.

 

FAir enough.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

He was also one of the very few who didn't line up to throw others under the bus.

 

He may see a few of the bus drivers Friday night.

 

We shouldn't underestimate postseason experience, especially for those pros who have actually won it all. The Rays were big favorites in the ALDS, but had zero players with World Series rings.

 

Boston has at least 10: Schwarber, Kike, Vazquez, X, Rafie, JD, Eovaldi, Braiser, ERod, Sale, and maybe Barnes. Plus, Manager Cora.

 

Houston has 5: Gurriel, Altuve, Correa, Bregman and McCullers... and possibly, Marwin, if he makes the roster. Dusty Baker won one as a player, but never as a skipper.

[sk7326]

I agree, Bloom will bring in 75,000 Robles, Davis, Workman, Rios, Feliz, Gonsalves and Brice types, again, this year, but you know, we just barely made the playoffs and losing one or two games as we trial-and-error it for months might nnot work out so well in 2022.

 

We used 33 pitchers in relief, this year and 37 overall. That's a stunning number, especially when you figure 29 of them got 3 or more IP.

 

21 pitchers got 12+ IP.

 

17 got 24+

 

One important priority of Bloom, last summer and winter was to build 40 man roster and beyond depth. While he must still look to improve and build up that area, it is no longer such a high priority, IMO. We will also be adding 5-6 Rule 5 protectess to the 40 man, so that will lessen his need to add scrubs in hopes a few stick.

 

We should have about the same winter spending budget, but only 3-4 slots to fill instead of 10:

 

CF/2B Kike

RF Renfroe

SP Richards

SP Perez

P Whitlock

RP Ottavino

RP Sawamura

RP Andriese

UT Marwin

UT Santana

 

 

 

I think the team would like more certainty - but the bullpen is always going to be a place to throw bodies at. There is just a large universe of guys who 1) have awful platoon splits, 2) have no third pitch, 3) have scary looking deliveries ...that are worth trying to see if there is something there. I will say with Bloom in charge - I'd expect the ability for Boston to "make" relievers out of these sorts of guys to be better.

[moonslav59]

My thinking is changing to reflect the changing approach towards starting pitchers. I've heard and read quotes indicating that the way the pitching staff won the WC and ALDS was planned by Cora and the Sox by limiting starters' innings... all season, since Spring Training.

 

Now, how does that reconstruct history of 2019's infamous "restgate"?

 

Even starting pitchers that go 4-5 innings are very important.

 

We'll need 5-6 of them.

 

We have 2 and a bunch of maybes.

[notin]

He may see a few of the bus drivers Friday night.

 

We shouldn't underestimate postseason experience, especially for those pros who have actually won it all. The Rays were big favorites in the ALDS, but had zero players with World Series rings.

 

Boston has at least 10: Schwarber, Kike, Vazquez, X, Rafie, JD, Eovaldi, Braiser, ERod, Sale, and maybe Barnes. Plus, Manager Cora.

 

Houston has 5: Gurriel, Altuve, Correa, Bregman and McCullers... and possibly, Marwin, if he makes the roster.

 

There' a big difference between "post-season experience" and World Series rings. The entire Rays' lineup had post-season experience except for Wander Franco, and he did not exactly look like he felt intimidated at the plate. And they got much further with last year's team that had barely any post-season experience.

 

What the Rays did have was a team that a little too dependent on it's bullpen. Shane McClanahan in game one was their only starter to go beyond 2 innings (and did so in the only game they won). And after that, the Sox saw the same parade of relievers and maybe got a little too used to them...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Even starting pitchers that go 4-5 innings are very important.

 

We'll need 5-6 of them.

 

We have 2 and a bunch of maybes.

 

Agree with the need, but I'm increasingly thinking a Cole-type or even Sale-type contract for production done with baseball's most delicate body part (above the waist) is way more of a risk than a Betts-type contract to a position player who is just short. I doubt Bloom or any other GM/CBO will ever again try to compete with the two-team market of NY and LA.

 

There's just more value long-term in loading up on a bunch of maybes, year to year. The innings that a Martin Perez can give a club -- unless he's the visage of abject horror -- are now part of the big picture plan of saving other arms for the autumn.

[notin]

Agree with the need, but I'm increasingly thinking a Cole-type or even Sale-type contract for production done with baseball's most delicate body part (above the waist) is way more of a risk than a Betts-type contract to a position player who is just short. I doubt Bloom or any other GM/CBO will ever again try to compete with the two-team market of NY and LA.

 

There's just more value long-term in loading up on a bunch of maybes, year to year. The innings that a Martin Perez can give a club -- unless he's the visage of abject horror -- are now part of the big picture plan of saving other arms for the autumn.

 

And that was all made extremely evident in the ALDS with Tampa, where teams that got 5 IP from their starter went 3-0. Tampa's downfall was trying to get 25 IP from their bullpen in 3 games...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

There' a big difference between "post-season experience" and World Series rings. The entire Rays' lineup had post-season experience except for Wander Franco, and he did not exactly look like he felt intimidated at the plate. And they got much further with last year's team that had barely any post-season experience.

 

What the Rays did have was a team that a little too dependent on it's bullpen. Shane McClanahan in game one was their only starter to go beyond 2 innings (and did so in the only game they won). And after that, the Sox saw the same parade of relievers and maybe got a little too used to them...

 

I agree with most of this. The Rays are so innovative out of necessity that they can trade a veteran starter like Rich Hill in the middle of a pennant race -- and after losing their ace for the season with an injury. But I bet some of Hill's ex-teammates wish he was still around to give them five innings in one of those games last weekend.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

And that was all made extremely evident in the ALDS with Tampa, where teams that got 5 IP from their starter went 3-0. Tampa's downfall was trying to get 25 IP from their bullpen in 3 games...

 

A lot of us have been saying -- for any pitcher -- that continued use will eventually lead to a less effective outing... and the more relievers that are used in a game, the better the chance that at least one just doesn't have it that day.

 

We love Pivetta for last weekend, but be prepared for maybe something less than stellar vs. Houston... because his arm may never be the same.

[notin]

I agree with most of this. The Rays are so innovative out of necessity that they can trade a veteran starter like Rich Hill in the middle of a pennant race -- and after losing their ace for the season with an injury. But I bet some of Hill's ex-teammates wish he was still around to give them five innings in one of those games last weekend.

 

They also lived and died with rookie pitchers. The only reason their rookie pitchers' records were 1-2 in the series as opposed to 1-3 was because they pulled Shane Baz before he could blow the entire lead in game two...

[notin]

A lot of us have been saying -- for any pitcher -- that continued use will eventually lead to a less effective outing... and the more relievers that are used in a game, the better the chance that at least one just doesn't have it that day.

 

We love Pivetta for last weekend, but be prepared for maybe something less than stellar vs. Houston... because his arm may never be the same.

 

He threw 8 IP in 4 games. Since he is off until at minimum Friday, I don't that workload was career-ending...

[Bellhorn04]

He threw 8 IP in 4 games. Since he is off until at minimum Friday, I don't that workload was career-ending...

 

I'd say it's more pertinent that he threw 73 pitches on Oct 7 and 67 pitches on Oct 10. That's an unusually high number of pitches on 2 days rest.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

He threw 8 IP in 4 games. Since he is off until at minimum Friday, I don't that workload was career-ending...

 

Hope not, but nobody knows the stress his ligaments and tendons endured during the heat of the moments. And we never will, until players eventually fade out of the picture, are cut or retire. Imagine Cora pretending there was nothing wrong with Devers, whose arm was literally wrapped and couldn't swing a bat unless he spun his entire body around in the batter's box.

[moonslav59]

Once again you are wrong, and I did not criticize you for slotting Houck as the closer next year. What I said was you had Houck penciled in the bullpen next year That’s all I said, and as a matter of fact I like the idea of Houck being the closer, so once again over analyzing. You keep talking that Houck had the best stats as a starter, but how many wins did he have? A few wins would have been nice. Just like you used hate to fit your narrative you did the same with bad mouthing. Houck even when he is on is only good for 4-5 innings, and that why I think that is more suited for the pen. That is not bad mouthing. You still haven’t showed where I said Houck was babied, so where is it. You show it, and I’ll admit I was wrong. Glad you are not the judge, and jury, or the interpreter for everyone.

 

So, now looking at starter wins is not overanalyzing, but showing ERA, WHIP and OPS Against only as a response to you saying "stats anybody."

 

You can keep bashing me for implying "hate" when it was not called for. Apparently you like hearing yourself saying it over and over, but I don't want to be accused of making assumptions or overanalyzing anything you say.

 

You bad- mouthed Houck. Bad mouthing is a word that can be interpreted differently, but to me calling someone inconsistent when they had the best starter numbers on the team is not good. It is bad.

[mvp 78]

I'd say it's more pertinent that he threw 73 pitches on Oct 7 and 67 pitches on Oct 10. That's an unusually high number of pitches on 2 days rest.

 

And he won't go again until 10/15 at the soonest which would be normal rest for a starter.

[Old Red]

So, now looking at starter wins is not overanalyzing, but showing ERA, WHIP and OPS Against only as a response to you saying "stats anybody."

 

You can keep bashing me for implying "hate" when it was not called for. Apparently you like hearing yourself saying it over and over, but I don't want to be accused of making assumptions or overanalyzing anything you say.

 

You bad- mouthed Houck. Bad mouthing is a word that can be interpreted differently, but to me calling someone inconsistent when they had the best starter numbers on the team is not good. It is bad.

 

Are you saying that Houck is the best starter on the team with your stats. And if not where does he rank? You still haven’t showed me where I said Houck was babied? Think maybe, because it didn’t happen, but you just want to throw it in there. You can disagree with my opinion all the time, which you usually do, but at least know what my opinion is before you do it. I keep using the hate analogy, because you assumed something to fit your analogy just like you are doing with Houck that I didn’t even want him in the bullpen, but yet I agreed with you about trying him as a closer. If saying someone is inconsistent under your interpretation then I guess I,’m guilty, but under my interpretation I’m not, and like I said you are not the Judge, and jury for anything. Once again that you haven’t answered where did I say Houck was babied?

Edited October 13, 2021 by Old Red

[moonslav59]

Are you saying that Houck is the best starter on the team with your stats. And if not where does he rank? You still haven’t showed me where I said Houck was babied? Think maybe, because it didn’t happen, but you just want to throw it in there. You can disagree with my options all the time, which you usually do, but at least know what my option is before you do it. I keep using the hate analogy, because you assumed something to fit your analogy just like you are doing with Houck that I didn’t even want him in the bullpen, but yet I agreed with you about trying him as a closer. If saying someone is inconsistent under your interpretation then I guess I,’m guilty, but under my interpretation I’m not, and like I said you are not the Jude, and jury for anything. Once again that you haven’t answered whey did I say Houck was babied?

 

I said he had the best starter stats in areas that did not involve innings. I never said he was "the best starter."

 

IMO, Eovaldi was and still is our best starter. If I had to rank them, he might be 3rd behind Nate and Sale. If I went by who I want starting nexy, he's maybe second behind Nate or third behind nate and Pivetta, but probably second. I don't want to overanalyze, though.

 

I'm not looking up where you said Houck was babied. If I got that one wrong, too, shoot me. You've been ranting about babying starters for a while.

 

I'm not understanding why you can't own up to your own opinions, and why you think people voicing their opinions are acting like their opinions are facts. If I disagree with someone, I let them know. You may think I'm judging, but I don't see it that way.

Edited October 13, 2021 by moonslav59

[Old Red]

I said he had the best starter stats in areas that did not involve innings. I never said he was "the best starter."

 

IMO, Eovaldi was and still is our best starter.

 

I'm not looking up where you said Houck was babied. If I got that one wrong, too, shoot me. You've been ranting about babying starters for a while.

 

I'm not understanding why you can't own up to your own opinions, and why you think people voicing their opinions are acting like their opinions are facts. If I disagree with someone, I let them know. You may think I'm judging, but I don't see it that way.

 

The point is you are always putting words in my mouth like hating Cora, and babying Houck. That’s what you do, and if it had been out there that I said Houck was babied you would have used it in a second, and you know you would have. I never said you said Houck was the best starter I just asked you if he was, and where you had him ranked. Once again you are injecting words into a conversation. The only starter I said was babied was Sale, but you said starters, so once again you inject things that aren’t there. All I’m saying if you disagree with my opinion know what my opinion is first, and most of the time you don’t. You just make things up.

[moonslav59]

The point is you are always putting words in my mouth like hating Cora, and babying Houck. That’s what you do, and if it had been out there that I said Houck was babied you would have used it in a second, and you know you would have. I never said you said Houck was the best starter I just asked you if he was, and where you had him ranked. Once again you are injecting words into a conversation. The only starter I said was babied was Sale, but you said starters, so once again you inject things that aren’t there. All I’m saying if you disagree with my opinion know what my opinion is first, and most of the time you don’t. You just make things up.

 

You asked if I thought Houck was the best starter based on stats. I answered as clearly as possible, so you would not take it the wrong way, and whaat do you do? You go all convoluted, again.

 

I never said you said I said Houck was the best starter. I just answered your question.

 

Stop overanalyzing everything and making things up.

 

I did not further inject anything about you saying other starters were babied. That's a lie. I actually said, I'm not going to go look for it, and if I am wrong, "shoot me." If anything, that sounds like I'm backing away and not furtherin it along. I didn't double down on that position, yet you say I "once again inject things that are not there." How did I do that?

 

This is getting comical. You can misinterpret that statement all you want.

[Old Red]

You asked if I thought Houck was the best starter based on stats. I answered as clearly as possible, so you would not take it the wrong way, and whaat do you do? You go all convoluted, again.

 

I never said you said I said Houck was the best starter. I just answered your question.

 

Stop overanalyzing everything and making things up.

 

I did not further inject anything about you saying other starters were babied. That's a lie. I actually said, I'm not going to go look for it, and if I am wrong, "shoot me." If anything, that sounds like I'm backing away and not furtherin it along. I didn't double down on that position, yet you say I "once again inject things that are not there." How did I do that?

 

This is getting comical. You can misinterpret that statement all you want.

 

You didn’t finish the sentence after you said shoot me. You followed with you’ve been ranting about babying STARTERS for a while. You didn’t say Sale you said STARTERS, so where is the lie? Like I said if you could have found where I said Houck was babied you would have used it in a second.Come on man.

[moonslav59]

I admit I have said things like you hate Cora, but that's not "putting words in your mouth." I never said you made that statement. I made an inference off your constant bashing and saying things like we should never have hired him back and you weren't the "only one" who would not bring him back next year. "Hate" is a harsh word, and I should not have said that. I have admitted I was wrong in saying that, but I do still think you don't like him.

 

Do you want him back, next year?

 

Do you like him as a manager?

 

Next issue, "babying starters." Again, I could be wrong, but it seems like you have been saying you don't like the direction baseball is going when yanking starters so early. I thought you made some statement like that, at some point. Maybe I'm wrong. maybe I confused you with someone else. If I'm wrong about that, I'm sorry, but can you clear something up?

 

Do you think starters being pulled after 2 times through the line-up is a good direction for baseball?

 

Is it really a crazy thing to equate pulling starters early with "babying," a term you used for Sale?

 

Do you think too many starters in MLB are babied?

[moonslav59]

You didn’t finish the sentence after you said shoot me. You followed with you’ve been ranting about babying STARTERS for a while. You didn’t say Sale you said STARTERS, so where is the lie? Like I said if you could have found where I said Houck was babied you would have used it in a second.Come on man.

 

Okay, I went and looked... It didn't take me long to find one exaample.

 

You didn't say "babied," but you made it clear you thought Cora yanked him too early more than once...

 

No lies. Just maybe a little inference, which looks correct, even now.

 

I take back that apology.

 

09-27-2021, 03:01 PM#300

Old Red Old Red is online now

Major Leaguer

 

Join Date

Aug 2021

Posts

368

Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post

If the numbers show a pitcher gets crushed the third time through a line-up are you guys saying keep the guy in out of some sort of macho act or tradition- keeping philosophy?

 

I can just imagine the game threads after Cora leaves a starter in to get drilled.

 

(You replied)

 

 

I wouldn’t take a pitcher out like Cora has with Houck more than once even though he was pitching good just, because I’m afraid of what might happen. Nonsense to me.

[moonslav59]

Back to 2022...

 

Answer these questions, if you dare:

 

1) If you could trade JD and pay $3M and then sign Schwarber for $16M (basically breaking even with JD's contract), would you do it?

 

2) Would you offer ERod an $18.6M QO?

 

3) If you offered Bogey a fair extension, and he said no, do you look into trading him?

 

4) Do you bring back Iggy at $6M/2?

 

5) Do you bring back Robles at $5M/2?

 

6) Do you try to sign a top starter or RP'er, assuming you can only get one?

 

7) Do you trust Dalbec to be our FT 1Bman, at least until Casas is ready?

 

8) Do you think about moving Bogey (3B/2B) or Devers(1B/OF/DH) to another position?

 

My answers:

1) yes

2) yes

3) yes

4) yes

5) yes

6) SP

7) yes (fingers crossed- knowing picking up a cheap 1B is usually easy))

8) no, not this winter

 

[Old Red]

I admit I have said things like you hate Cora, but that's not "putting words in your mouth." I never said you made that statement. I made an inference off your constant bashing and saying things like we should never have hired him back and you weren't the "only one" who would not bring him back next year. "Hate" is a harsh word, and I should not have said that. I have admitted I was wrong in saying that, but I do still think you don't like him.

 

Do you want him back, next year?

 

Do you like him as a manager?

 

Next issue, "babying starters." Again, I could be wrong, but it seems like you have been saying you don't like the direction baseball is going when yanking starters so early. I thought you made some statement like that, at some point. Maybe I'm wrong. maybe I confused you with someone else. If I'm wrong about that, I'm sorry, but can you clear something up?

 

Do you think starters being pulled after 2 times through the line-up is a good direction for baseball?

 

Is it really a crazy thing to equate pulling starters early with "babying," a term you used for Sale?

 

Do you think too many starters in MLB are babied?

 

We’ve already gone over the Cora thing many times, and just because I wouldn’t have hired him back that doesn’t mean I don’t like him, and certainly don’t hate him. Would you say the same thing about Cora if he had come back, and managed the Yankees instead? I would have said the same thing about anybody in that situation. There is a hoody down at Foxboro I would say the same thing about.Getting back to Cora like I said before the players like him, and play for him, and I’m fine with him coming back.

 

Now you are right on about me, and the state of baseball, and how the game is played. To me if a starter can’t go 6 innings he’s useless, and when starters are pulled, because something might happen if they face a batter for a third time is just crazy like EO against the Yankees, because he gave up a slow bouncer to SS he had to come out, and the best example was Snell in the WS last year. Openers to start games, and bringing in a different pitcher every inning is not baseball to me.

 

I said Sale was babied, because who he pitched against for the most part, and not how many innings he threw. I don’t think 2 times through the order is the only thing on why a pitcher doesn’t do as well, but also the amount of pitchers thrown through 5 innings.

[sk7326]

Back to 2022...

 

Answer these questions, if you dare:

 

1) If you could trade JD and pay $3M and then sign Schwarber for $16M (basically breaking even with JD's contract), would you do it?

 

2) Would you offer ERod an $18.6M QO?

 

3) If you offered Bogey a fair extension, and he said no, do you look into trading him?

 

4) Do you bring back Iggy at $6M/2?

 

5) Do you bring back Robles at $5M/2?

 

6) Do you try to sign a top starter or RP'er, assuming you can only get one?

 

7) Do you trust Dalbec to be our FT 1Bman, at least until Casas is ready?

 

8) Do you think about moving Bogey (3B/2B) or Devers(1B/OF/DH) to another position?

 

My answers:

1) yes

2) yes

3) yes

4) yes

5) yes

6) SP

7) yes (fingers crossed- knowing picking up a cheap 1B is usually easy))

8) no, not this winter

 

 

1. Yes, but I think it's moot

2. Absolutely

3. Sure,

4. Fine

5. Absolutely

6. Starter

7. Not really. But he's a good platoon bat who should be able to defend the corners - and it's worth looking into it.

8. No.