Fire Bloom .

[dgalehouse]

I have to agree for the most part.

 

I also get notin's argument that the pitching the 8th inning can sometimes be harder, if the heart of the order is up.

 

But there's something about having a guy like Kimbrel or Papelbon or Rivera pitching the 9th every time you have the lead. It's a sort of comfortable feeling. They will occasionally blow games but they usually bounce right back. It's something you can count on.

 

As for the pressure of pitching the 9th, I do think it's different. To me it's like a field goal kicker who has a chance to win or lose the game on the last play from say 35 or 40 yards. It's a high-percentage play for them. But the thing is, the whole game is on them, and everyone is watching them, maybe many millions of people. Are you Adam Vinatieri, or Scott Norwood? Keith Foulke, or Calvin Schiraldi? Your career is going to be defined by this moment, and possibly ruined by this moment.

 

Yes . In the ninth inning everything is amped up , no matter where you are in the batting order . The players feel it , the fans feel it , the managers feel it, the announcers feel it and even the umps feel it. The moment of truth.

[Larry Cook]

At the end of the day, we keep rolling out guys with substandard stuff in the 9th inning and expect superior results! Not going to happen with the current cast of characters Cora is using.

 

Houck with his wipe out slider could be the answer. He should be able to easily do the three or four out save.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I have no evidence but maybe one of the reasons the Sox haven't named Houck closer is because he isn't always available. That's just unacceptable in that role -- and I'm not talking about a guy who is used three nights in a row and needs a day or two off.

 

Now that Boston is only three games behind the Blue Jays for the third Wild Card, imagine a month from now going into Toronto for a head-to-head showdown without your closer because he chooses to be ineligible.

[notin]

I have no evidence but maybe one of the reasons the Sox haven't named Houck closer is because he isn't always available. That's just unacceptable in that role -- and I'm not talking about a guy who is used three nights in a row and needs a day or two off.

 

Now that Boston is only three games behind the Blue Jays for the third Wild Card, imagine a month from now going into Toronto for a head-to-head showdown without your closer because he chooses to be ineligible.

 

 

I’ve been touting the “Houck for closer” banner as high as anyone. But honestly, Cora knows the guy better than I do and maybe just thinks it’s not the right role for him for whatever reason.

 

And maybe you’re right and the reason is the vaccine…

[moonslav59]

I’ve been touting the “Houck for closer” banner as high as anyone. But honestly, Cora knows the guy better than I do and maybe just thinks it’s not the right role for him for whatever reason.

 

And maybe you’re right and the reason is the vaccine…

 

It might not be right, but nothing else has worked.

 

If he waits until Sale and or Paxton return before making Houck or Whitlock the closer, it might be too late.

 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I’ve been touting the “Houck for closer” banner as high as anyone. But honestly, Cora knows the guy better than I do and maybe just thinks it’s not the right role for him for whatever reason.

 

And maybe you’re right and the reason is the vaccine…

 

AC may just like Houck better as a bulk guy for older starters whose pitch counts run out too early in games. Cora may not trust guys like Barnes or Robles more than us, but maybe he keeps running them out there -- not only because he has no choice -- but to show Bloom that the pen is just inadequate.

 

Everyone can read the stats about the Sox bullpen, and now that the role position players are contributing, Bloom may have no choice but to bite the bullet and acquire a legit closer. Do you think it turns his stomach to see what San Diego traded for Taylor Rogers: 26-year-old Chris Paddock, plus Pagan and another minor league arm? Rogers already has 16 saves and 1.2 bWAR, which is great for an entire year...

[Nick]

Bloom got us to within 2 games of World Series. I'd say he had a good annual review last year.

[moonslav59]

Bloom got us to within 2 games of World Series. I'd say he had a good annual review last year.

 

...and he did that with about $40M to spend on about 10 open slots from a last place 2020 team.

 

He had more to spend, this year, and a few less slots to fill, so the training wheels are coming off.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Bloom got us to within 2 games of World Series. I'd say he had a good annual review last year.

 

The offense carried the Sox in the '21 postseason and shouldn't be blamed for whatever Houston did to totally shut them down at the end. But it's no surprise the team that did win it all had solid starting and the best bullpen.

 

In two playoff series, the Boston relievers were not good enough to get us to the World Series. Robles (twice), Braiser, Barnes, Houck, Sawamura, Darwinzon, Ottavino, Taylor and even Whitlock all took turns coughing up leads or giving up runs. Yes, they were overworked because the starters were just adequate, except Sale, who wasn't even.

 

Bloom chose to address the depth in the rotation and bullpen by adding Wacha, Hill, Strahm and Diekman. Those were the upgrades to take this contender to the next level.

[moonslav59]

The offense carried the Sox in the '21 postseason and shouldn't be blamed for whatever Houston did to totally shut them down at the end. But it's no surprise the team that did win it all had solid starting and the best bullpen.

 

In two playoff series, the Boston relievers were not good enough to get us to the World Series. Robles (twice), Braiser, Barnes, Houck, Sawamura, Darwinzon, Ottavino, Taylor and even Whitlock all took turns coughing up leads or giving up runs. Yes, they were overworked because the starters were just adequate, except Sale, who wasn't even.

 

Bloom chose to address the depth in the rotation and bullpen by adding Wacha, Hill, Strahm and Diekman. Those were the upgrades to take this contender to the next level.

 

He also added Paxton, this winter, as well as the questionable Danish.

 

The expectation, faulty or otherwise, was that Sale would be back, too. (Not really an "addition" but in a sense, he was supposed to be.

[notin]

AC may just like Houck better as a bulk guy for older starters whose pitch counts run out too early in games. Cora may not trust guys like Barnes or Robles more than us, but maybe he keeps running them out there -- not only because he has no choice -- but to show Bloom that the pen is just inadequate.

 

Everyone can read the stats about the Sox bullpen, and now that the role position players are contributing, Bloom may have no choice but to bite the bullet and acquire a legit closer. Do you think it turns his stomach to see what San Diego traded for Taylor Rogers: 26-year-old Chris Paddock, plus Pagan and another minor league arm? Rogers already has 16 saves and 1.2 bWAR, which is great for an entire year...

 

 

Is Paddack plus Pagan really a great package?

 

Paddack is still young, but he’s been going downhill fast since his rookie year three years ago. And he’s done for this year. Pagan is a middle relief arm occasionally trusted with closing duties, but he’s been slowed down a lot by injuries. He’s not the same guy he was in Tampa…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Is Paddack plus Pagan really a great package?

 

Paddack is still young, but he’s been going downhill fast since his rookie year three years ago. And he’s done for this year. Pagan is a middle relief arm occasionally trusted with closing duties, but he’s been slowed down a lot by injuries. He’s not the same guy he was in Tampa…

 

Paddock may be a guy Bloom would want to acquire: still young, promising, semi-established in the bigs, and ever-affordable.

 

That said, would it be worth three Aldo Ramirezes to land a quality closer to go for it this year?

[notin]

I have to agree for the most part.

 

I also get notin's argument that the pitching the 8th inning can sometimes be harder, if the heart of the order is up.

 

But there's something about having a guy like Kimbrel or Papelbon or Rivera pitching the 9th every time you have the lead. It's a sort of comfortable feeling. They will occasionally blow games but they usually bounce right back. It's something you can count on.

 

As for the pressure of pitching the 9th, I do think it's different. To me it's like a field goal kicker who has a chance to win or lose the game on the last play from say 35 or 40 yards. It's a high-percentage play for them. But the thing is, the whole game is on them, and everyone is watching them, maybe many millions of people. Are you Adam Vinatieri, or Scott Norwood? Keith Foulke, or Calvin Schiraldi? Your career is going to be defined by this moment, and possibly ruined by this moment.

 

But how much of a player getting defined by a play is just fan perception?

 

I mean, Scott Norwood is the definitive goat (lowercase - not the acronym - you mentioned. But he missed a 47 yard field goal. Not a high percentage kick for any kicker. Mariano Rivera, for all his reputation, only pitched in one game seven of his career. And it didn’t end well for him. Yet Rivera was a unanimous HOF selection while Norwood pretty much quit football. (Norwood’s issue for his whole career was he was never very good beyond 40 yards; it was a miracle he played as long as he did.)

 

The Sox right now need better relievers. Brasier was demoted after spending 6 weeks among the hardest hit pitchers in MLB. Well, Robles’ numbers in that regard are almost identical. He’s simply not fooling anyone. He’s not even coming close. Stop using him late in games!

 

I loved the idea of Houck and Whitlock - in whatever order - taking the bulk of the late inning work. And not being used as rotation depth. That’s what Seabold and Winckowski - both of whom are showing AAA is not a challenge - are for. Not sure why the Sox like to empty the bullpen to backfill the rotation and then backfill the bullpen with waiver claims. (Although Schreiber has been impressive to date.)

[Bellhorn04]

But how much of a player getting defined by a play is just fan perception?

 

Fan perception/media perception. Bill Buckner's career was negatively defined on one play and he freely admitted that it made his life miserable. It's a real thing.

[Bellhorn04]

I mean, Scott Norwood is the definitive goat (lowercase - not the acronym - you mentioned. But he missed a 47 yard field goal. Not a high percentage kick for any kicker.

 

I don't think that's right.

[notin]

I don't think that's right.

 

Find me a kicker where his higher percentages are over 45 yards.

 

And really, Norwood had career long struggles beyond 40 yards on grass. He was basically asked to make a kick under pressure that he struggled with under any circumstance…

[Bellhorn04]

Find me a kicker where his higher percentages are over 45 yards.

 

And really, Norwood had career long struggles beyond 40 yards on grass. He was basically asked to make a kick under pressure that he struggled with under any circumstance…

 

This homemade chart shows the NFL average from 47 yards for the years 2009-2019 at 75%. That's a fairly high percentage play.

 

 

You're right about Norwood not being good beyond 40.

Edited May 23, 2022 by Bellhorn04

[illinoisredsox]

This homemade chart shows the NFL average from 47 yards for the years 2009-2019 at 75%. That's a fairly high percentage play.

 

 

You're right about Norwood not being good beyond 40.

 

That’s now. What was the conversion rate in 1990, when his famous miss took place? I wouldn’t be shocked to find overall accuracy at 75% back then, let alone from over 45 yards.

[Bellhorn04]

That’s now. What was the conversion rate in 1990, when his famous miss took place? I wouldn’t be shocked to find overall accuracy at 75% back then, let alone from over 45 yards.

 

Overall accuracy was 74.4% that year.

 

My original reference was to 35-40 yard kicks as being high-percentage.

 

I had forgotten that Norwood's attempt was from 47. Nonetheless his is the missed FG everyone remembers most.

[jad]

And now, everyone MUST go out and see the movie "Buffalo '66".

[cp176]

It was a great day to be a New York Giants fan!!!

[moonslav59]

It was a great day to be a New York Giants fan!!!

 

One of the very few.

[Bellhorn04]

One of the very few.

 

Giants and your Packers are tied for 5th place in Super Bowl wins with 4.

[Swiharts Ghost]

Bumping this accurate thread until he’s gone .

[moonslav59]

Giants and your Packers are tied for 5th place in Super Bowl wins with 4.

 

I'm not sure why people only count NFL championships by Super Bowl wins.

 

The real totals are:

 

13 Green Bay

 

 

 

9 Chicago

8 NY Giants

 

6 Boston/New England

6 Pittsburgh

5 Dallas, SFG & Redskins/+++

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not sure why people only count NFL championships by Super Bowl wins.

 

I do it because:

 

a) it's easier.

before the Super Bowl era there were a much smaller number of teams.

 

But I do agree that in reality the Packers have the most championships.

[notin]

I'm not sure why people only count NFL championships by Super Bowl wins.

 

The real totals are:

 

13 Green Bay

 

 

 

9 Chicago

8 NY Giants

 

6 Boston/New England

6 Pittsburgh

5 Dallas, SFG & Redskins/+++

 

Maybe for the same reason fans only count World Series titles as if there were no playoffs in the first 30 seasons of MLB?

[moonslav59]

I do it because:

 

a) it's easier.

before the Super Bowl era there were a much smaller number of teams.

 

But I do agree that in reality the Packers have the most championships.

 

Can't you say the same about MLB, the NBA and NHL?

 

All have expanded.

 

Why is it harder to count? Just look it up.

 

Now, one can argue about AFL champions counting before the merger, but one could say that about the ABA, too.

 

Back in 1965, before the Super Bowl, there were 14 NFL teams and 9 NBA teams. Should we discount those championships by the Celtics due to only 9 teams and a truncated playoff schedule?

 

I think there was like 6 or 8 NHL teams back in the mid 60's. There were 20 MLB teams.

 

The NFL was pretty established, as a league and had as many teams or more than the other 3 major sports leagues all the way up to the first Super Bowl.

[moonslav59]

Maybe for the same reason fans only count World Series titles as if there were no playoffs in the first 30 seasons of MLB?

 

But the NFL had playoffs before the Super Bowl.

 

Counting only Super Bowl wins implies there was no NFL before 1967.

 

The NFL before 1967 was a hell of a lot different than MLB before their first World Series.

[moonslav59]

The Packers won 5 championships in 7 years during the 60's.

The Steelers won 4 of 6 in the 70's.

The Bears won 4 of 7 in the 40's.

The Patriots won 3 of 4 in 00's and 3 of 5 in the 10's (6 of 18 combined*)

The Lions won 3 of 6 in the 50's.

The 49'ers won 4 of 9 in the 80's and 5 of 14 (80's-90's)

The Packers also won 3 in a row and 5 in 11 back in the 20'2-30's.

 

*as far as I know, no team has ever won more than 6 in 18 years, but the Bears won 6 in 15, one stretch.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2022 by moonslav59