Sox extend Whitlock

[mvp 78]

And given the new playoff format, you’ll never have to decide…

 

I was actively ignoring the new playoff structure and really didn't know how it was set up.

 

After digesting it for 30 seconds:

 

If you are the "third place" division winner and lose in the Wild Card round, it's not a success. You have homefield for the full WC best of 3 series and would be losing to a runner up.

 

If you win the WC round to get to the LCS, but lose the LCS can it be a success? Sure. Fine. It definitely waters down the playoffs though.

[moonslav59]

No, apparently 2016 and 2017 were better years than 2004.

 

You learn something new every day.

 

I guess it's entertaining to see some varying opinions.

[mvp 78]

No, apparently 2016 and 2017 were better years than 2004.

 

You learn something new every day.

 

I have a black hole in my memory for the teams that lost in the first round. I really don't remember much of 16 or 17.

[notin]

I loved those times. Honestly, right or wrong by today's watered down standards, I still believe that if your primary goal is to make the playoffs as opposed to being the number one seed then your chances of winning the whole thing might be wattered down just a bit because of this approach. It is pretty difficult to turn up the jets all of a sudden if they have been on standby for very long. I'm not saying that it is a good thing but this saying worked for me athletically - "What I had i gave because what i saved I lost." It's an antiquated way to approach life I guess but oh well I sure hope my grandchildren will see it that way. It is a guarantee for success no matter the job.

 

 

And for a long time, MLB never really incentivized teams to be the number one seed.

 

From the beginning of divisional play in 1969 until the creation of three divisions in 1994, postseason home fields just alternated. LCS would flip from East to West every year regardless of record, and WS home field alternated from AL to NL. This actually created a situation where teams in the AL East and NL West (I believe it was those two) could never have home field throughout the postseason, no matter what their records were.

 

And this was somehow eventually replaced with the whole “WS home field goes to the winner of the All Star game” system, because Selig was desperate to replace a dumb system with one that was even dumber…

[Bellhorn04]

It may be impossible for younger fans and posters to fathom there once was a time when the most important goal in baseball was to finish first. Imagine fretting over day-to-day battles for six long months, instead of just aiming to peak for a few weeks in October? Winning The Pennant was actually a bigger accomplishment than one best-of-seven series in the fall.

 

But that only mattered for a hundred years.

 

And it's now been over fifty years since the Great Expansion began.

[notin]

I have a black hole in my memory for the teams that lost in the first round. I really don't remember much of 16 or 17.

 

Those were the teams that ignored the drum banging and paid for it dearly…

[moonslav59]

And it's now been over fifty years since the Great Expansion began.

 

You think 32 teams is in the works?

[mvp 78]

You think 32 teams is in the works?

 

It will be for a balanced schedule.

[moonslav59]

It will be for a balanced schedule.

 

Would they go to 4 divisions of 4 in each league?

 

I'd like to see them break down the NL-AL barriers and re-align geographically.

 

At 30 teams:

 

5 divisions of 6

East

BOS

NYY

NYM

PHI

BAL

WSH

 

North

TOR

PIT

DET

CLE

CIN

CWS

 

South

TBR

MIA

ATL

HOU

TEX

KC

 

Central

Cubs

MN

MIL

STL

COL

AZ

 

West

SEA

OAK

SFG

LAD

LAA

SDP

 

6 divisions of 5

 

BOS

NYY

NYM

PHI

BAL

 

WSH

ATL

TBR

MIA

KC

 

TOR

PIT

DET

CLE

CIN

 

MN

MIL

CWS

CC

STL

 

TEX

HOU

COL

AZ

SDP

 

SEA

OAK

SFG

LAD

LAA

 

[moonslav59]

It will be for a balanced schedule.

 

If they go with 8 divisions of 4, how would they balance it?

 

3 games x 28 non div games? (84)

+

26 games x 3 div teams (78)

 

4 games x 28= 112

 

17 games x 2 div= 34 and 16 x 1 div= 16

 

5 games x 28 teams= 140

 

7 games x 3 div= 21 (8 gms vs 1 div foe)

 

If they went with 4 divisions of 8:

5 x 24 non div teams= 120

6 x 7 div teams= 42

 

This is balanced, but just 6 games vs your own division is lame.

 

4 x 24= 96

9 x 4= 36 + 10 x 3 div teams= 30

Not balanced

 

3 x 24 non div= 72

12 x 1 div=12

13 x 6 div=78

Close to balanced

[dgalehouse]

No, apparently 2016 and 2017 were better years than 2004.

 

You learn something new every day.

 

2004 was historic. Without question, the greatest moment in Red Sox history. I do feel that in evaluating a G.M.'s performance, winning the division is the best yardstick. That should be the objective when building a team.

[mvp 78]

2004 was historic. Without question, the greatest moment in Red Sox history. I do feel that in evaluating a G.M.'s performance, winning the division is the best yardstick. That should be the objective when building a team.

 

Who is better: Theo or Dombrowski?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Who is better: Theo or Dombrowski?

 

Not a slam-dunk if just comparing 2004 -- the year denny referenced -- with 2018, Dombro's crown. Both GMs took clubs with stars inherited from past GMs and then made major moves or moves that turned out to be major that put them over the top.

[dgalehouse]

Who is better: Theo or Dombrowski?

 

Theo Epstein. What Theo accomplished in breaking the curse ( and then again with the Cubs) overrides everything. As for Dombrowski, I cannot understand why he is so criticized when he took over a team that had finished in the cellar two years running, and immediately won three straight division titles and one world championship. Apparently, his big sin was trading away a handful of mostly mediocre farmhands. In my opinion, he deserves far more credit than he is given.

[mvp 78]

Not a slam-dunk if just comparing 2004 -- the year denny referenced -- with 2018, Dombro's crown. Both GMs took clubs with stars inherited from past GMs and then made major moves or moves that turned out to be major that put them over the top.

 

What I was referencing was the idea that 1st place in the division was the goal. Theo had 1 division title and 2 WS titles. Dombo had 3 division titles and 2 WS titles.

[Bellhorn04]

Theo Epstein. What Theo accomplished in breaking the curse ( and then again with the Cubs) overrides everything.

 

Winning rings overrides winning divisions. Yes, I agree.

[Bellhorn04]

Deal looks even better right now.

[Nick]

Whitlock pitched 4 innings today. He came in scored tied. It should be his game to lose. He could have won vs Yankees. I love watching him pitch. Great command. Gets the ball and pitches.

 

Thought I may see AC outsmart himself and bring in a 'closer' in the 9th.

[Bellhorn04]

Whitlock pitched 4 innings today. He came in scored tied. It should be his game to lose. He could have won vs Yankees.

 

How could he have won vs Yankees?

[moonslav59]

How could he have won vs Yankees?

 

Maybe had he not let up a run and finished the game unscored upon?

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe had he not let up a run and finished the game unscored upon?

 

It would have been a save. Eovaldi was pitcher of record.

[moonslav59]

It would have been a save. Eovaldi was pitcher of record.

 

True dat!

 

I guess had he let up a run, stayed in the game and shut the Yanks down, he could have maybe won by pitching 5 innings (6-10th).

[Bellhorn04]

True dat!

 

I guess had he let up a run, stayed in the game and shut the Yanks down, he could have maybe won by pitching 5 innings (6-10th).

 

True, but I think what Nick is talking about is him pitching 4 innings, which was supposedly the original plan.

 

If he pitched 4 innings against the Yankees, he likely wasn't available for this one. Cora made the right move pulling him when the Yanks tied it. Playing the percentages, that's what you're supposed to do.

[moonslav59]

True, but I think what Nick is talking about is him pitching 4 innings, which was supposedly the original plan.

 

If he pitched 4 innings against the Yankees, he likely wasn't available for this one. Cora made the right move pulling him when the Yanks tied it. Playing the percentages, that's what you're supposed to do.

 

Exactly.

[Nick]

I see now that Cora plans to use Whitlock with Hill. He obviously did not want Whitlock to sit idle waiting for #5 starter to start the season.

 

Apparently Cora also wanted to piggyback Houck with Chris Sale.

 

I like the plan. It allows the bullpen to reset every fifth day.

 

I'm okay with us having 7 or 8 starters on the staff. As starter innings shorten (4-5 innings), you can't just have one inning guys.

 

Maybe by August we'll have Eovaldi, Pivetta, Houck, Wacha, Hill, Sale, Paxton and Whitlock to start/long relieve. Only one pitcher out of five has to go long (7 innings).

 

You can then finish out the game with the likes of Barnes, Diekman, Strahm, Taylor, Crawford and Robles. That's 13 solid pitchers.

[moonslav59]

I see now that Cora plans to use Whitlock with Hill. He obviously did not want Whitlock to sit idle waiting for #5 starter to start the season.

 

Apparently Cora also wanted to piggyback Houck with Chris Sale.

 

I like the plan. It allows the bullpen to reset every fifth day.

 

I'm okay with us having 7 or 8 starters on the staff. As starter innings shorten (4-5 innings), you can't just have one inning guys.

 

Maybe by August we'll have Eovaldi, Pivetta, Houck, Wacha, Hill, Sale, Paxton and Whitlock to start/long relieve. Only one pitcher out of five has to go long (7 innings).

 

You can then finish out the game with the likes of Barnes, Diekman, Strahm, Taylor, Crawford and Robles. That's 13 solid pitchers.

 

If all 8 are healthy, we may not need to have one starter go 7. The rest of the pen should be well-rested and can handle pitching 4-6 innings.

[mvp 78]

If all 8 are healthy, we may not need to have one starter go 7. The rest of the pen should be well-rested and can handle pitching 4-6 innings.

 

That's just not realistic at all. A starter go 7 innings?

[Nick]

If all 8 are healthy, we may not need to have one starter go 7. The rest of the pen should be well-rested and can handle pitching 4-6 innings.

 

I can't see Sox keeping Davis when Taylor comes back. 4 lefties in the pen? At the very least, I see Davis gone when the roster is trimmed to 26 players.

 

I'm encouraged by our pitching thus far. Kutter has good stuff. He's better than both Brazier and Sawamura.

 

Eventually we'll score some runs. I just worry about JBJ in right. He's incapable of squaring up his bat to the ball. Countless weak ground balls. He's right up there with Marwin and Santana. It's scary to think they both hit better than JBJ. Ugh.

Edited April 13, 2022 by Nick

[moonslav59]

I can't see Sox keeping Davis when Taylor comes back. 4 lefties in the pen? At the very least, I see Davis gone when the roster is trimmed to 26 players.

 

I'm encouraged by our pitching thus far. Kutter has good stuff. He's better than both Brazier and Sawamura.

 

Eventually we'll score some runs. I just worry about JBJ in right. He's incapable of squaring up his bat to the ball. Countless weak ground balls. He's right up there with Marwin and Santana. It's scary to think they both hit better than JBJ. Ugh.

 

Other pitchers have options. Sometimes, that matters more than who is doing better.

[dgalehouse]

Baseball could reach the point where the bullpen is more important than the starting rotation.