9/29 Red Sox and O's for the last time in '22

[moonslav59]

Sweet win!

[moonslav59]

Hey! We end up 10-9 vs BAL for the season. So much for losing records vs all ALE teams!

 

YEEE- HAW!!!

[harmony]

Thank you, Red Sox.

[moonslav59]

Now, let's sweep the other divisional bastards!

[moonslav59]

Thank you, Red Sox.

 

You owe us, bigtime!

 

(Although the 6-1 vs SEA was what led you to needs us to beat BAL, in the first place.)

[vegasbob]

Who knew ?? A winning streak , fully appreciated because the pitching overall was good enough to win.

[vegasbob]

With Duran and Houck no longer immediate factors, is there anyone who misses the last trip to Canada for vax reasons?

[harmony]

You owe us, bigtime!

 

(Although the 6-1 vs SEA was what led you to needs us to beat BAL, in the first place.)

Good point.

[harmony]

Wow that was quick!

Casas now has the same OPS as Xander for the season

At my fantasy auction in March I took Triston Casas for the league minimum thinking Casas would be an early-season callup.

 

I am now pleased that Casas did not burn a year of team control under our fantasy rules.

[jad]

I'd rather we offer neither one a QO than just Nate.

 

Nate's age and injury history is not good.

 

Wacha has missed time, too, but I like him better. Both would be high risk.

 

But then again, there are those troublesome fans who want to see players they've grown attached to, and don't see them as abstract pieces of a fantasy team.

[moonslav59]

But then again, there are those troublesome fans who want to see players they've grown attached to, and don't see them as abstract pieces of a fantasy team.

 

I'll always be grateful to Nate, but there comes a time when good bye is the best choice.

 

We can bring everyone back, and why will we be better? We can't even afford bringing everyone back. let alone add enough to get back to glory.

 

This is no fantasy team: it's the Red Sox future at stake.

[jad]

I'll always be grateful to Nate, but there comes a time when good bye is the best choice.

 

We can bring everyone back, and why will we be better? We can't even afford bringing everyone back. let alone add enough to get back to glory.

 

This is no fantasy team: it's the Red Sox future at stake.

 

"We" don't have to afford anything, because "we" are not the RS ownership, which has absolutely no constraints on spending other than their desire not to spend. The RS are not going to be better by virtue of getting rid of their best players.

[moonslav59]

"We" don't have to afford anything, because "we" are not the RS ownership, which has absolutely no constraints on spending other than their desire not to spend. The RS are not going to be better by virtue of getting rid of their best players.

 

Players age and decline. You don't get better by keeping everybody out of some attachment to their past glory years.

 

BTW, there are constraints on spending. Just because they are self imposed does not make them some fantasy.

 

We could bring Bogey, Nate and JD back, and they all could decline. There is actually a good chance 2 of the 3 will decline. That's not a winning startegy, unless their cost is still worth it.

 

You know it is possible to replace players we've come to like and still get better.

 

I grew attached to JBJ, but knew it was time to say good bye. I only wish Bloom & Cora didn't pine for him to come back.

[jad]

Players age and decline. You don't get better by keeping everybody out of some attachment to their past glory years.

 

BTW, there are constraints on spending. Just because they are self imposed does not make them some fantasy.

 

We could bring Bogey, Nate and JD back, and they all could decline. There is actually a good chance 2 of the 3 will decline. That's not a winning startegy, unless their cost is still worth it.

 

You know it is possible to replace players we've come to like and still get better.

 

I grew attached to JBJ, but knew it was time to say good bye. I only wish Bloom & Cora didn't pine for him to come back.

 

Even you, Zarathustra, do not believe Martinez, Betts, Bogey, and Devers are comparable to JBJ.

[Old Red]

"We" don't have to afford anything, because "we" are not the RS ownership, which has absolutely no constraints on spending other than their desire not to spend. The RS are not going to be better by virtue of getting rid of their best players.

 

Didn’t they find that out with Mookie? Get rid of the best players, and then you have to replace them with someone just as good just to stay even, and that will most likely be costly too, and then to run into the variable of playing in Boston that not everyone can do.

[mvp 78]

Does Rafy ever swing at pitch #1? (Serious question--I can't recall.) It's frustrating to watch him take one right down the middle (as that last AB) then wave at strike three no where close to the zone.

 

39.9% first pitch swing for Raffy. MLB average is 29.4.

[moonslav59]

Even you, Zarathustra, do not believe Martinez, Betts, Bogey, and Devers are comparable to JBJ.

 

No, but JD and Nate have very likely seen their better days.

 

I'm not against brining them back, but only at the right cost. I do not think Nate is worth $18M (the QO), and although the risk is mitigated by just being one year, it is a raise over the $17M a year he barely earned over 4 years.

 

I'd love to see Bogey and Devers back, too, but I'm not privy to the longer term spending plans and would not want Bogey back, if it meant we'd not be able to provide enough of a supporting cast to go for a ring in the next few years. Devers is different, because he's younger, and his "window" is wider.

 

In theory, I think I'd rather have Nimmo for $20M x 4 plus Swanson for $20M x 4 than Bogey for $26M x 8 with no money for RF and subtracting from other areas.

[moonslav59]

39.9% first pitch swing for Raffy. MLB average is 29.4.

 

Another case shattering the eye test theory.

[moonslav59]

Didn’t they find that out with Mookie? Get rid of the best players, and then you have to replace them with someone just as good just to stay even, and that will most likely be costly too, and then to run into the variable of playing in Boston that not everyone can do.

 

One problem was that they did not even attempt to fill the budget gains after trading Betts and Price. In fact, they cut more beyond them for the 2020 season.

 

Had they kept spending as high as it was in 2019, they'd have, in theory, replaced Betts & Price 9addition by subtraction) with Verdugo and $43M in yearly FA spending. That alone would have doubled winter spending in 2020 and 2021 and added $43M to 2022, too.

[Old Red]

Another case shattering the eye test theory.

 

The eye test has told you enough that you want to know. If you need the exact figures that’s another story, but I don’t think anything been shattered. Has the eye test not told you enough about this season? I think it has, and then some. You will never get rid of the eye test no matter how many kind of stats you come up with.

[Bellhorn04]

The eye test has told you enough that you want to know. If you need the exact figures that’s another story, but I don’t think anything been shattered. Has the eye test not told you enough about this season? I think it has, and then some. You will never get rid of the eye test no matter how many kind of stats you come up with.

 

It was a classic case of the eye test being totally wrong, though.

[Old Red]

It was a classic case of the eye test being totally wrong, though.

 

His eye test maybe, but mine is perfectly fine. Doesn’t everyone see things differently? What do you think would have told you more about how this season went the eye test, or analytics?

Edited September 30, 2022 by Old Red

[mvp 78]

His eye test maybe, but mine is perfectly fine. Doesn’t everyone see things differently? What do you think would have told you more about how this season went the eye test, or analytics?

 

That's why the eye test doesn't work actually.

[Old Red]

That's why the eye test doesn't work actually.

 

So like I asked what would tell you more about this season the eye test, or analytics? The eye test has told me all I want to know about this season, and has worked fine for me, but if you need more examples then that’s fine too. Imagine without the eye test you wouldn’t have seen Dr Strange Glove play 1B, or Duran try to catch butterflies in the OF. The eye test in fine, and well.

[moonslav59]

The eye test has told you enough that you want to know. If you need the exact figures that’s another story, but I don’t think anything been shattered. Has the eye test not told you enough about this season? I think it has, and then some. You will never get rid of the eye test no matter how many kind of stats you come up with.

 

That's not my goal or even desire.

 

I exposed an example where someone's "eye test" was clearly wrong. I'm sorry, if facts and data can prove what is right or wrong, in some cases. This was a clear example how eyes can be very deceiving- and not to just one person, but to all of us, myself included.

[moonslav59]

His eye test maybe, but mine is perfectly fine. Doesn’t everyone see things differently? What do you think would have told you more about how this season went the eye test, or analytics?

 

My eye test has bee3n wrong, before, too. Many times it is right, as yours are, too.

 

When you don't watch every play, or maybe don't pay close attention to the point being debated, one can make false assumptions. The biggest area for this is when comparing players to others we rarely see play.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

My eye test is from what I just read: in his first 22 games, Casas has an identical 21.8 K-rate and BB-rate.

 

The average MLB K-rate is 22.1; the average BB-rate is 8.4.

[moonslav59]

My eye test is from what I just read: in his first 22 games, Casas has an identical 21.8 K-rate and BB-rate.

 

The average MLB K-rate is 22.1; the average BB-rate is 8.4.

 

What amazes me about Casas is, that as a rookie, he's not getting a lot of close Ball-Strike calls in his favor, but he still has a great BB%.

 

That's my "eye test," and I could be wrong.

[mvp 78]

So like I asked what would tell you more about this season the eye test, or analytics? The eye test has told me all I want to know about this season, and has worked fine for me, but if you need more examples then that’s fine too. Imagine without the eye test you wouldn’t have seen Dr Strange Glove play 1B, or Duran try to catch butterflies in the OF. The eye test in fine, and well.

 

Advanced metrics show us that Franchy was -4 Defensive Runs Saved at 1B in 360 innings (about 40 full games). That's really terrible. -28 UZR/150.

 

As for Duran, he was -9 Defensive Runs Saved in CF in 408 innings. Again, that's really bad. Some people were saying "oh, his speed will make up for his lack of instincts," but analytics can support our conclusion that his defense was a nightmare. He was worse in CF than Franchy was at 1B, almost twice as bad.

[mvp 78]

My eye test has bee3n wrong, before, too. Many times it is right, as yours are, too.

 

When you don't watch every play, or maybe don't pay close attention to the point being debated, one can make false assumptions. The biggest area for this is when comparing players to others we rarely see play.

 

Use the stats to support what your eyes see. If the stats shows something else, you need to keep watching and maybe re-evaluate. Just using stats is not the right way to do it either.