Red Sox: Off Season '23-'24

[Old Red]

Of course eye test is different in person than on TV. When you watch a game on TV, you only get to watch what the director shows you.

 

For example, you can watch a hitter hit a flyball, and if you’re seated in a good spot, actually watch the outfielder get a jump on it. On TV, by time the camera cuts to the outfielder, he’s already in motion. And you only see a small area of the park. You missed his jump. You probably didn’t get to see if he took a good route. What exactly are you judging at that point? That he caught the ball?

 

And I think far too many people watch baseball and draw weird conclusions because they don’t understand angles and perspective. I can’t tell you how many people have tried to argue with me that left handed pitchers as are biomechanically different from righties, and they throw across their bodies. And not, you know, that they’ve spent their lives watching baseball get filmed from left-center field…

 

I know watching on TV is different, but I just didn’t put it in green. How would anyone know if some batter got a hit, or grounded into a DP? Eye test, and stats come from that. How would anyone know if pitcher struck out a batter, and with what pitch? Eye test, and stats come from that. How would anyone know if a runner stole a base, or got thrown out by the catcher? Eye test, and stats come from that. How would anyone know if a IF booted a ground ball, or made a throwing error? Eye test, and stats come from that. How would anyone know how much range a SS, or a CF has, or what kind of arms they have? Eye test. How would anyone know what went on in a game anywhere if someone wasn’t watching? Eye test. How many stats would you really have if someone wasn’t watching somewhere?

[moonslav59]

The eye test thing makes me chuckle. For one thing, most MLB games I've seen in person, I was too far from the field to have anything but a rough idea of what just happened on that play. Thank God for replays on giant video screens!

 

The other thing is, there's obvious stuff, like a ball going through the wickets or a throw that ends up in the dugout. Pretty hard for anybody to miss. There's also stuff that only a trained eye would notice.

 

The thing is, the obvious ball between the legs of a throw off the mark is not just noticed with the eye test, but also every single defensive metric and even fldg%. Nothing is gained with the eye test on those plays. It's the range plays, the difficult and semi-difficult plays that are hard to judge from a TV.

 

If one OF'er consistently gets a great break and takes the exact right angle nearly every time, it's hard to see that on TV. We see him running hard and catching or missing the ball. When the opposite type OF'er goes after a ball that the previous OF'er catches easily or maybe spectacularly, we might not even notice it could have been caught. Maybe he has to dive to make a catch the other guy glides to an easily makes the out. We might even think the guy who took the wrong angle and made the diving catch is the better defender, because he made the highlight reel.

 

[Old Red]

The eye test thing makes me chuckle. For one thing, most MLB games I've seen in person, I was too far from the field to have anything but a rough idea of what just happened on that play. Thank God for replays on giant video screens!

 

The other thing is, there's obvious stuff, like a ball going through the wickets or a throw that ends up in the dugout. Pretty hard for anybody to miss. There's also stuff that only a trained eye would notice.

 

The eye test makes me chuckle too. I’ve never said it was the be all end all. All I’ve ever said was it was good enough for me, and some just don’t like that. Like that makes any difference, or not, and it’s never changed anything.

[dgalehouse]

The folks who compile all the analytic stats: How do they get their input? From watching the games? In person? On TV? On tape? Using their superior eye test? How?

[Old Red]

The folks who compile all the analytic stats: How do they get their input? From watching the games? In person? On TV? On tape? Using their superior eye test? How?

 

That’s what I asked earlier. How many stats would there really be in any sport if someone wasn’t watching somewhere somehow?

[Old Red]

The eye test thing makes me chuckle. For one thing, most MLB games I've seen in person, I was too far from the field to have anything but a rough idea of what just happened on that play. Thank God for replays on giant video screens!

 

The other thing is, there's obvious stuff, like a ball going through the wickets or a throw that ends up in the dugout. Pretty hard for anybody to miss. There's also stuff that only a trained eye would notice.

 

If it takes a so called trained eye to notice something, and a fan doesn’t have that so called trained eye it probably doesn’t matter to them anyway that only a trained would notice something that they didn’t. How many fans who go to a ballpark do you think all see the same thing, or care about the same thing?

[notin]

I can’t believe that eye test in person, and watching on TV are two different things, but to say watching on TV is hardly worth anything I don’t believe is accurate at all. What did any analytic stat tell you that doing the eye test from TV didn’t when it came to how bad Kike was at SS last year, or how bad Raffy, and Casas was on D last year not to mention Franchy Strangeglove try to play 1B. Now I’ll admit being in person is better that watching on TV, but to say the eye test from TV is far from hardly worth anything. Then again it depends who’s watching.

 

Yes, you can use the eye test on TV to make INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS conclusions, like Kike isn’ta good shortstop. Of course, you could have come to that same conclusion without watching games and just reading box scores…

[Dipre]

There's also stuff that only a trained eye would notice.

 

This is the answer to the entire eye test argument in a neat, one-sentence package.

 

Anyone with basic reading comprehension can interpret stats. It takes years of work to be able to accurate evaluate a player's skill. Years of work I'm sure none of us dum dums here have actually gone through. So some people should stop pretending that they did.

[Dipre]

If it takes a so called trained eye to notice something, and a fan doesn’t have that so called trained eye it probably doesn’t matter to them anyway that only a trained would notice something that they didn’t. How many fans who go to a ballpark do you think all see the same thing, or care about the same thing?

 

You're not versed in the art of player scouting. Don't pretend that you are from your partial years of watching the Red Sox on tv.

[moonslav59]

The folks who compile all the analytic stats: How do they get their input? From watching the games? In person? On TV? On tape? Using their superior eye test? How?

 

Yes, indeed. They do use some other data, like how hard the ball was hit and how far from the fielder it was hit, but yes, eye tests by people watching ever play of every games (at the ball parks)and entering calibrated data into a formula beats one guy watching most of the Sox games on TV.

[moonslav59]

You're not versed in the art of player scouting. Don't pretend that you are from your partial years of watching the Red Sox on tv.

 

How many scouts rely on watching TV to make evaluations of player's skills?

 

Hell, they rely more on radar guns and stats like On base % than TV highlights.

[dgalehouse]

If it takes a so called trained eye to notice something, and a fan doesn’t have that so called trained eye it probably doesn’t matter to them anyway that only a trained would notice something that they didn’t. How many fans who go to a ballpark do you think all see the same thing, or care about the same thing?

 

Red, guys like us will just have to watch and enjoy the games in our ignorance. We can know about useless stats like a pitcher's won/loss record and ERA , but we will never be able to figure out his xFIP. That we have to be told by experts who have gone through many hours of specialized training. In short, the eye test matters, but not your eye test.

[moonslav59]

Red, guys like us will just have to watch and enjoy the games in our ignorance. We can know about useless stats like a pitcher's won/loss record and ERA , but we will never be able to figure out his xFIP. That we have to be told by experts who have gone through many hours of specialized training. In short, the eye test matters, but not your eye test.

 

If there were 15- trained Reds and Dales watching every game, every day and entering their eye test information, consistently and in an unbiased manner, it would be worth much more than just one of you saying Bogey is a better than average defensive SS.

[notin]

This is the answer to the entire eye test argument in a neat, one-sentence package.

 

Anyone with basic reading comprehension can interpret stats. It takes years of work to be able to accurate evaluate a player's skill. Years of work I'm sure none of us dum dums here have actually gone through. So some people should stop pretending that they did.

 

Nope!

 

I’m going to keep pretending I can interpret this stuff!

[Randy Red Sox]

This is the answer to the entire eye test argument in a neat, one-sentence package.

 

Anyone with basic reading comprehension can interpret stats. It takes years of work to be able to accurate evaluate a player's skill. Years of work I'm sure none of us dum dums here have actually gone through. So some people should stop pretending that they did.

 

unreal--the lack of activity has us discussing this??

[moonslav59]

Looks like another rich guy gets off the hook.

 

Julio Urias will not face felony charges:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/l-a-district-attorneys-office-will-not-file-felony-charges-against-julio-urias-case-referred-for-misdemeanor-consideration.html

[Oscars]

Imanaga signs with the Cubs.

[Old Red]

Red, guys like us will just have to watch and enjoy the games in our ignorance. We can know about useless stats like a pitcher's won/loss record and ERA , but we will never be able to figure out his xFIP. That we have to be told by experts who have gone through many hours of specialized training. In short, the eye test matters, but not your eye test.

 

And the funny part is it bothers the rest on HERE.🙈 Next they’ll tell us a team’s WL record doesn’t matter either.

[vjcsmoke]

Imanaga signs with the Cubs.

 

He's reportedly going to earn 15m per season on a total deal over 100m. Too rich for the Red Sox blood!

 

It's pretty sad to see how much the Red Sox pinches pennies and gets outbid on 15m per year pitchers now.

 

report: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/cubs-to-sign-shota-imanaga.html

[moonslav59]

He's reportedly going to earn 15m per season on a total deal over 100m. Too rich for the Red Sox blood!

 

It's pretty sad to see how much the Red Sox pinches pennies and gets outbid on 15m per year pitchers now.

 

report: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/cubs-to-sign-shota-imanaga.html

 

I'm not sure this guy was the best SP'er for the money, but we could have afforded anybody, so far, except maybe Yamo.

[Larry Cook]

Imanaga signs with the Cubs.

 

This one hurts a little!!! We may need to go the trade route for help

[moonslav59]

This one hurts a little!!! We may need to go the trade route for help

 

It looks like offering Gray $80M/3 might have been the best, "We shoulda, coulda..."

 

(Not sure we'd have gotten him for that.)

[harmony]

The Red Sox promote Paul Toboni to assistant general manager:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/red-sox-promote-paul-toboni-to-assistant-gm.html

 

The Hot Stove is heating up.

[Hitch]

This one hurts a little!!! We may need to go the trade route for help

 

Why? We need a 1 or at least a 2.

 

We're 100% going trade route for our main guy, assuming we pull it off.

[Hugh2]

This stats argument is just ridiculous. Advance stats are just stats, all a stat does is measure something. You're feelings are valid, ERA, W-L, all those stats tell us something, just like FIP, wRC+, and Z-contact% etc etc. All stats matters guys! honestly, it doesn't make sense to discount something just because you don't understand it, which seems to happen at times.

 

There's no GM/POBO/Front office on earth that looks at a guy and uses a singular stat to judge them. Being able to measure different things tells you more,it's more information, and more information allows you to make better judgements and predictions.

 

One of my favorite examples of this was Jarren Duran.

 

And old schooler might of looked at his .195 batting average in AAA and thought "this guy SUCKS" but he was squaring up, and hitting the ball hard. The totality of the picture said this guy was getting unlucky with the number of hits he was getting but was hitting the ball well. He came up to the majors and IMMEDIATELY was getting better results.

 

ERA is nice, but how much can ERA differentiate between having the best defense and the worse defense in baseball behind a pitcher? Do you want to chalk that s*** up to Voodoo, magic and just believe it's all somehow the same? we've been complaining about defense in here. DEFENSE FOLKS!!!! defense matters, if you truly believe defense matters then how can look at ERA without considering how defense might influence that stat? why WOULDN'T you want to know how good a pitcher really is when comparing pitcher A to pitcher B.

 

It's not that more conventional stats don't matter, or don't tell you something, or aren't important. It's just an incomplete picture. Why would you want incomplete information. If you were wronglyfully accused of murder, would you want your defense lawyer to use a narrow set of facts in the defense and when provided with cameras from different angles and other witness, facts that might help you are going to want those things employed or not?

 

It's that line of thinking that got Bartolo Colon a CY-Young award over Johan Santana in 2005, who was CLEARLY a much better pitcher.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

My eye tests reveal 24-25 vision: forget about who the Red Sox didn't sign -- the Giolito contract tells us all we need to know about how they view the next two years.

 

If Giolito is good in '24, he's as good as gone, opting out... unless anyone in the industry thinks Boston will give him more money to stay (ha, what a joke).

 

But the worst part is if Giolito sucks like the last two years, and knows he can't make more money in the market, then he has to stay for 2025.

 

What? Why would any full-throttle all-in championship contender want to guarantee a bad player an additional year -- unless they're not really full-throttle/all-in/champ-contending... but just want to field a team so they can overcharge fans to attend their debacles?!?!?!?

[Hugh2]

My eye tests reveal 24-25 vision: forget about who the Red Sox didn't sign -- the Giolito contract tells us all we need to know about how they view the next two years.

 

If Giolito is good in '24, he's as good as gone, opting out... unless anyone in the industry thinks Boston will give him more money to stay (ha, what a joke).

 

But the worst part is if Giolito sucks like the last two years, and knows he can't make more money in the market, then he has to stay for 2025.

 

What? Why would any full-throttle all-in championship contender want to guarantee a bad player an additional year -- unless they're not really full-throttle/all-in/champ-contending... but just want to field a team so they can overcharge fans to attend their debacles?!?!?!?

 

I can't deny that the actions of this offseason do not look like that of a club that is all in, and to be honest I don't blame them, yet I myself am frustrated.

 

However, I doubt they would sign a guy like Giolito if they didn't think they can get him right. Doesn't mean they will be successful, but oftem teams are. There's a new guy in town, new pitching coach, and other personel, who look at and evaluate these pitchers. They have something prove, but at the very least it's obvious they think Giolitos issues from the last 1/3 of last season are fixable. If they're right, he leaves, but at least they get a draft pick, OR they could even trade him at the deadline.

 

We can sit here and August and talk about how Breslow is Bloom 2.0 and Giolito is Kluber 2.0. Or we may be talking about how great of a move it was.

[Hitch]

My eye tests reveal 24-25 vision: forget about who the Red Sox didn't sign -- the Giolito contract tells us all we need to know about how they view the next two years.

 

If Giolito is good in '24, he's as good as gone, opting out... unless anyone in the industry thinks Boston will give him more money to stay (ha, what a joke).

 

But the worst part is if Giolito sucks like the last two years, and knows he can't make more money in the market, then he has to stay for 2025.

 

What? Why would any full-throttle all-in championship contender want to guarantee a bad player an additional year -- unless they're not really full-throttle/all-in/champ-contending... but just want to field a team so they can overcharge fans to attend their debacles?!?!?!?

 

Some evaluators had Giolito going for four years. MLB and Fangraphs both had him at the length we attained him for, opt outs mentioned. I know the front office has done a lot wrong, for a long time, but of all the things to get bent out of shape over, this really is mad. He was going to get 2 years. If he pitches well in the first year and opts out, great, we'll tag on a QO and take the extra draft pick, thank you. If he doesn't pitch well, that's the risk we take with giving up the contract he was minimally expected to get.

 

Stop looking for reasons to get angry. There's plenty of real ones hanging from the low hanging branches.

[moonslav59]

The Red Sox promote Paul Toboni to assistant general manager:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/red-sox-promote-paul-toboni-to-assistant-gm.html

 

The Hot Stove is heating up.

 

One more asst GM and no GM.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I can't deny that the actions of this offseason do not look like that of a club that is all in, and to be honest I don't blame them, yet I myself am frustrated.

 

However, I doubt they would sign a guy like Giolito if they didn't think they can get him right. Doesn't mean they will be successful, but oftem teams are. There's a new guy in town, new pitching coach, and other personel, who look at and evaluate these pitchers. They have something prove, but at the very least it's obvious they think Giolitos issues from the last 1/3 of last season are fixable. If they're right, he leaves, but at least they get a draft pick, OR they could even trade him at the deadline.

 

We can sit here and August and talk about how Breslow is Bloom 2.0 and Giolito is Kluber 2.0. Or we may be talking about how great of a move it was.

 

Whether they fix him or not, one year with an opt-out just means Giolito's another place-holder.

 

Big news of the day is that the Sox promoted another employee to Assistant GM -- that makes FOUR more, backing Ace CBO Breslow.

 

Yet, where are the core starting pitchers for the rotation of the next great Red Sox team?

 

Richard Fitts... does anyone else?