Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted
Our rotation, compared to our Opening Day projected rotation, is in shambles. And yet, the rotation has been holding its own.

 

It's way too soon to know how these youngsters will do, but these are exciting times for Red Sox fans.

 

Exciting and scary at the same time.

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Exciting and scary at the same time.

 

Thankfully, we have some pitching reinforcements coming in the way of players returning from the IL.

 

Regardless, it's still exciting times for Red Sox fans.

Posted
Thankfully, we have some pitching reinforcements coming in the way of players returning from the IL.

 

Regardless, it's still exciting times for Red Sox fans.

 

Having a lot of players on the IL is rarely exciting, but in our situation, there does seem to be a significant amount of optimistic anticipation about the future of our 26 man roster, this summer (and some improvement in ML ready AAA players, as some decent players will have to be demoted.)

 

Sale

Wacha

Eovaldi

Whitlock

Hill

Danish

Barnes

Paxton

Kike

 

It's like we are trading for these guys without giving up anything.

 

 

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Having a lot of players on the IL is rarely exciting, but in our situation, there does seem to be a significant amount of optimistic anticipation about the future of our 26 man roster, this summer (and some improvement in ML ready AAA players, as some decent players will have to be demoted.)

 

Sale

Wacha

Eovaldi

Whitlock

Hill

Danish

Barnes

Paxton

Kike

 

It's like we are trading for these guys without giving up anything.

 

 

 

Obviously, I'm not talking about excitement surrounding all our guys on the IL.

 

I'm talking about excitement surrounding some of the young guys we have waiting in the wings.

Posted
Obviously, I'm not talking about excitement surrounding all our guys on the IL.

 

I'm talking about excitement surrounding some of the young guys we have waiting in the wings.

 

Yes, I thought about that after I clicked "submit," but I think there is reason for optimism on both fronts.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Yes, I thought about that after I clicked "submit," but I think there is reason for optimism on both fronts.

 

The Sox currently have 9 pitchers on the IL including 80% of the originally projected starting rotation. It appears to have caught up to us. Our starting pitching is currently not getting the job done. Neither is our offense, although I will point out that the Sox had 13 hits last night compared to 14 hits by the Yankees. Clusterluck anyone?

 

The good news is, we should be getting some guys back soon.

 

It's amazing how a team can go from looking so bad, to looking so good, to looking so bad again.

 

Keep the faith. The good times will be back soon.

Posted
The Sox currently have 9 pitchers on the IL including 80% of the originally projected starting rotation. It appears to have caught up to us. Our starting pitching is currently not getting the job done. Neither is our offense, although I will point out that the Sox had 13 hits last night compared to 14 hits by the Yankees. Clusterluck anyone?

 

The good news is, we should be getting some guys back soon.

 

It's amazing how a team can go from looking so bad, to looking so good, to looking so bad again.

 

Keep the faith. The good times will be back soon.

 

The soft spot in the schedule may have had a lot to do with that. The sox are 19-21 against teams that are over .500

Old-Timey Member
Posted
The soft spot in the schedule may have had a lot to do with that. The sox are 19-21 against teams that are over .500

 

So?

 

If Cleveland wins two more games, the Sox are suddenly 22-21 vs teams over .500, something they can accomplish without even playing.

 

Would this mean the Sox got better?

 

Similarly, a Mariners’ two game losing “streak” devastates the Sox record vs teams over .500.

 

This stuff means very little, especially since most teams hover around .500 all year long…

Posted
So?

 

If Cleveland wins two more games, the Sox are suddenly 22-21 vs teams over .500, something they can accomplish without even playing.

 

Would this mean the Sox got better?

 

Similarly, a Mariners’ two game losing “streak” devastates the Sox record vs teams over .500.

 

This stuff means very little, especially since most teams hover around .500 all year long…

 

And IF the sox scored more runs than their opponents in every game they'd be undefeated. SMH......

Posted
So?

 

If Cleveland wins two more games, the Sox are suddenly 22-21 vs teams over .500, something they can accomplish without even playing.

 

Would this mean the Sox got better?

 

Similarly, a Mariners’ two game losing “streak” devastates the Sox record vs teams over .500.

 

This stuff means very little, especially since most teams hover around .500 all year long…

 

The team will get better when they get healthy. The question is whether or not they can start beating the Rays and Yankees. We have a LOT of games left against those two teams. If we continue to lose to them we will not make the playoffs.

Posted
So?

 

If Cleveland wins two more games, the Sox are suddenly 22-21 vs teams over .500, something they can accomplish without even playing.

 

Would this mean the Sox got better?

 

Similarly, a Mariners’ two game losing “streak” devastates the Sox record vs teams over .500.

 

This stuff means very little, especially since most teams hover around .500 all year long…

 

Well said.

 

Posted
Exciting and scary at the same time.

 

In my mind, it is more exciting than scary, these kids are putting it on the line against the best in the world.

 

Over the past month, I have seen growth in both Crawford and Winkowski,

 

I think Bello is the real deal but needs more experience.

 

Exciting times, if sale, eovaldi, wacha and Whitlock come back healthy!

Old-Timey Member
Posted
In my mind, it is more exciting than scary, these kids are putting it on the line against the best in the world.

 

Over the past month, I have seen growth in both Crawford and Winkowski,

 

I think Bello is the real deal but needs more experience.

 

Exciting times, if sale, eovaldi, wacha and Whitlock come back healthy!

 

And Paxton…

Posted

I'd have to see how well Sale pitches but the ultimate question is

 

How well will we fare against 110+ win Yankees in a short series.

 

Looks to me like we'll hit against them. Question is can they hit our major league pitching and not our AAA starters?

Posted
To be honest, I have not read much about how his recovery is going. But I will welcome him when he gets healthy,

 

I'm not counting on him, either, but adding one more arm into the mix can never hurt. The financial damage might, though.

Posted
Big Nate will see you when it counts-- IN OCTOBER!

 

Bottom line is we'll match up well vs the Yankees when everyone returns.

 

Sale, Pivetta, Eovaldi and Wacha. We'll need to lengthen our pen, add to Houck, Schrieber, Whitlock and Strahm. But the starters can also come in for an inning here and there.

 

I would love to see us add a bat at 1B.

 

We're no pushovers. Our secondary players have gained valuable playing time.

Posted
Bottom line is we'll match up well vs the Yankees when everyone returns.

 

Sale, Pivetta, Eovaldi and Wacha. We'll need to lengthen our pen, add to Houck, Schrieber, Whitlock and Strahm. But the starters can also come in for an inning here and there.

 

I would love to see us add a bat at 1B.

 

We're no pushovers. Our secondary players have gained valuable playing time.

Agreed. It does not matter who wins the ALE or by how much. What matters is which team has the healthiest pitching staff and roster in late September. The Yankees rotation did not suffer any significant injuries thus far. Can this continue. We will see.

Posted
Bottom line is we'll match up well vs the Yankees when everyone returns.

 

Sale, Pivetta, Eovaldi and Wacha. We'll need to lengthen our pen, add to Houck, Schrieber, Whitlock and Strahm. But the starters can also come in for an inning here and there.

 

I would love to see us add a bat at 1B.

 

We're no pushovers. Our secondary players have gained valuable playing time.

 

Indeed.

 

Think about where some of these players started out on our spring depth chart.

 

We knew Paxton was out for the first 4 months or so, but here was our "all healthy" rotation depth chart:

 

1. Eovaldi

2. Sale

3. Paxton

4. Wacha

5. Pivetta

6. Hill

7. Houck

8. Whitlock

9. Crawford

10. Winckowski

11. Seabold

12. Bello

 

Some could argue Houck & WShitlock were always meant for the pen, but either way, we just started our 9 through 12 starters, or 7 through 10, in our last 4 games (3 v NYY and 1 v TBR.)

 

We've used 14 pitchers in relief, not counting Plawecki & JBJ). We've used 13 over 9 innings. Danish is 4th in relief IP, and Schreiber is 7th and moving up. Nobody had them on their radar, last winter or early spring.

 

Who expected Cordero to have 195 PAs, at this point (10th on team?)

Who expected Refsnyder to be at .968 after 74 PAs.

Duran's 93 PAs (12th on team) may have been expected, but maybe not his ,809 OPS.

 

In some ways, our bench and depth have held us together long enough to stay relevant. They may not be needed as much, going forward, but they should not be forgotten.

 

Sure, some of these guys have had some very rough outings, and some stats look god-awful, but when we've needed them most, many have stepped up and delivered, unlike some of our most famous vets.

 

 

Old-Timey Member
Posted
The soft spot in the schedule may have had a lot to do with that. The sox are 19-21 against teams that are over .500

 

I understand the strength of the opposition. You expect that your team will not have as good a winning % against the better teams.

 

I would chalk it up to a team never being as good or as bad as they look when things are going good or going bad.

Posted
I understand the strength of the opposition. You expect that your team will not have as good a winning % against the better teams.

 

I would chalk it up to a team never being as good or as bad as they look when things are going good or going bad.

 

The Yanks are .667 vs .500+ teams.

The Yanks are .767 vs losing teams.

 

The Sox are .523 vs .500+ teams.

The Sox are .561 vs losing teams.

 

Which team has the larger disparity?

Posted
The Yanks are .667 vs .500+ teams.

The Yanks are .767 vs losing teams.

 

The Sox are .523 vs .500+ teams.

The Sox are .561 vs losing teams.

 

Which team has the larger disparity?

 

The Yankees' numbers are just a lot better every way you look at it...

Posted
The Yankees' numbers are just a lot better every way you look at it...

 

No doubt. They beat winning teams by 100 points more than we beat losing teams, but these numbers do show, almost all teams beat losing teams more than winning ones.

 

The Yanks beat winning teams 15% more than losing teams.

 

The Sox beat winning teams 7% more.

Posted
No doubt. They beat winning teams by 100 points more than we beat losing teams, but these numbers do show, almost all teams beat losing teams more than winning ones.

 

The Yanks beat winning teams 15% more than losing teams.

 

The Sox beat winning teams 7% more.

 

When you're 15 games behind, that all adds up to some mildly interesting random noise.

Posted
When you're 15 games behind, that all adds up to some mildly interesting random noise.

 

Indeed.

 

The Yanks deserve all the props they get. That was one hell of a half season, despite their pitching going into a slump after jacko jinxed them. (lol)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...