Article: Nolan Arenado Makes Sense for the Red Sox (If They Make the Right Trade)

[moonslav59]

26 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Trying to look for a team that matches this description:

2022 HOU: 6th batting, 1st SP, 2nd in RP, 2nd Fielding NOPE

2021 ATL: 7th batting, 13th SP, 13th RP, 15th Fielding Counting on duplicating a team that was below .500 in August is certainly trying to do it on hard mode IMO. 

Just go to the next full season: 2019

The Nats were 9th in wRC+ and 6th in OPS

They were 5th in fWAR pitching but 13th in ERA-

5th in OAA and 12th in DRS

[drewski6]

53 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Trying to look for a team that matches this description:

2022 HOU: 6th batting, 1st SP, 2nd in RP, 2nd Fielding NOPE

2021 ATL: 7th batting, 13th SP, 13th RP, 15th Fielding Counting on duplicating a team that was below .500 in August is certainly trying to do it on hard mode IMO. 

^This dudes the man.

Trying to win it without elite bats is like trying to win a super bowl without an elite QB.  Sure, you can, but like the Ravens when they did - you need one of the best defenses OF ALL TIME, not just in the league.  You can win a world series with an above average offense, im sure, but you need crazy good pitching, crazy good defense, or just ridiculous luck.  Akin to trying to win a super bowl with a serviceable qb, trying to win a world series with a merely adequate offense is hard mode.

[moonslav59]

6 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

^This dudes the man.

Trying to win it without elite bats is like trying to win a super bowl without an elite QB.  Sure, you can, but like the Ravens when they did - you need one of the best defenses OF ALL TIME, not just in the league.  You can win a world series with an above average offense, im sure, but you need crazy good pitching, crazy good defense, or just ridiculous luck.  Akin to trying to win a super bowl with a serviceable qb, trying to win a world series with a merely adequate offense is hard mode.

You moved the goal posts from a general just "fine hitting" to having no "elite bats."

[drewski6]

33 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Just go to the next full season: 2019

The Nats were 9th in wRC+ and 6th in OPS

They were 5th in fWAR pitching but 13th in ERA-

5th in OAA and 12th in DRS

The Nats had Juan Soto, Trea Turner, Anthony Rendon (who absolutely mashed all year and through the playoffs).

At C , they went bat first with Suzuki. At SS they went bat first Asdruble Cabrera

[moonslav59]

9 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

^This dudes the man.

Trying to win it without elite bats is like trying to win a super bowl without an elite QB.  Sure, you can, but like the Ravens when they did - you need one of the best defenses OF ALL TIME, not just in the league.  You can win a world series with an above average offense, im sure, but you need crazy good pitching, crazy good defense, or just ridiculous luck.  Akin to trying to win a super bowl with a serviceable qb, trying to win a world series with a merely adequate offense is hard mode.

Did the Royals have "crazy" anything?

The 2014 Giants were tied for 11th in wRC+. They were 26th in pitching fWAR and 19th in ERA-

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

The Nats had Juan Soto, Trea Turner, Anthony Rendon (who absolutely mashed all year and through the playoffs).

At C , they went bat first with Suzuki. At SS they went bat first Asdruble Cabrera

So, 9th is "fine," then, right?

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You moved the goal posts from a general just "fine hitting" to having no "elite bats."

Without elite hitting is my point.  Trying to win in baseball without elite hitting is more trouble than its worth.

[notin]

6 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I think you would need to flesh out that point a bit.

Steroids are used medically to reduce inflammation and promote healing of certain injuries.  If so, it could reduce injury or injury time for some players

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

Did the Royals have "crazy" anything?

The 2014 Giants were tied for 11th in wRC+. They were 26th in pitching fWAR and 19th in ERA-

Mediocre teams can get hot and win, it doesnt mean that without the benefit of hindsight you should be comfortable with mediocre hitting entering a season.

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Without elite hitting is my point.  Trying to win in baseball without elite hitting is more trouble than its worth.

They did have two mashers and a very good 3rd hitter, but they placed 9th.

I guess 9th can be "fine" if it's top heavy, only.

[drewski6]

5 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Did the Royals have "crazy" anything?

The 2014 Giants were tied for 11th in wRC+. They were 26th in pitching fWAR and 19th in ERA-

The Royals had crazy likability.  Everyone likes a late bloomer and they had a few of them.

[drewski6]

Just now, moonslav59 said:

They did have two mashers and a very good 3rd hitter, but they placed 9th.

I guess 9th can be "fine" if it's top heavy, only.

No, anything can be fine.  Theres a universe out there with a team that was 30th in offense won a world series. But my point is merely that having a great offense makes everything else easier moreso than having a great pitching staff does and having a great defense and hitting should be prioritized as a result.

Im not trying to nuance / dial-in elite hitting vs having elite hitters and get all ocd about my word choice. If my exact phrasing is jumping around (and Im not doubting that it is), its not intentional.

[notin]

6 hours ago, drewski6 said:

You are going to see more Zobrists , more Brock Holts, more swiss army knives.  Less: you cant put a SS at RF, what are you crazy?!?! Players are going to try to be more versatile on their come-up too.  Different positions in college as opposed to the best one always plays SS, because they want to get themselves ready for the pros.

More of it?

This has been the Rays’ game plan for what? 15 years now?

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Mediocre teams can get hot and win, it doesnt mean that without the benefit of hindsight you should be comfortable with mediocre hitting entering a season.

I'm not comfortable with mediocre, and I said top 8-10, which is better than mediocre and exactly the ranking the Nats had in 2019.

We don't have a Soto or Rendon. We might have a couple Turners and better balance, but not a lot of elite batters.

I'd love to see us add one, and certainly think it would improve our chances.

I'm not predicting a top 3 rotation, but I do think it is possible.

I have serious doubts our pen can stay 11-20th.

I have serious doubts our defense can finish top 20.

I have more confidence in our batting finishing top 10 than the pen and defense finishing top 20.

It's rally hard to win with a 20th ranked pen and D, just as it is with less than 2-3 elite hitters.

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, notin said:

More of it?

This has been the Rays’ game plan for what? 15 years now?

Yes, more of it.

[drewski6]

Just now, moonslav59 said:

I'm not comfortable with mediocre, and I said top 8-10, which is better than mediocre and exactly the ranking the Nats had in 2019.

We don't have a Soto or Rendon. We might have a couple Turners and better balance, but not a lot of elite batters.

I'd love to see us add one, and certainly think it would improve our chances.

I'm not predicting a top 3 rotation, but I do think it is possible.

I have serious doubts our pen can stay 11-20th.

I have serious doubts our defense can finish top 20.

I have more confidence in our batting finishing top 10 than the pen and defense finishing top 20.

It's rally hard to win with a 20th ranked pen and D, just as it is with less than 2-3 elite hitters.

Thats fair.

[drewski6]

2 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Yes, more of it.

Even more Louis Rengifo. It will get to the point where guys who are one position specialists are rare. Its already kind of heading that way, but it will full get there.

[notin]

22 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

^This dudes the man.

Trying to win it without elite bats is like trying to win a super bowl without an elite QB.  Sure, you can, but like the Ravens when they did - you need one of the best defenses OF ALL TIME, not just in the league.  You can win a world series with an above average offense, im sure, but you need crazy good pitching, crazy good defense, or just ridiculous luck.  Akin to trying to win a super bowl with a serviceable qb, trying to win a world series with a merely adequate offense is hard mode.

Trent Dilfer isn’t the only mediocre QB to win a Super Bowl.  And Jeff Hostetler and Brad Johnson, while both backed by very good defenses, were not backed by historically great defenses.

Any championship team in any sports excels in at least one aspect of the game.  I agree mediocrity never gets rings, but there’s no magic formula beyond that…

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

No, anything can be fine.  Theres a universe out there with a team that was 30th in offense won a world series. But my point is merely that having a great offense makes everything else easier moreso than having a great pitching staff does and having a great defense and hitting should be prioritized as a result.

Im not trying to nuance / dial-in elite hitting vs having elite hitters and get all ocd about my word choice. If my exact phrasing is jumping around (and Im not doubting that it is), its not intentional.

I don't disagree, but great defense makes pitching easier. A great pen makes mediocre starters enough to give a team a shot.

Of course great batting helps. This all started with you saying "fine is not enough" for batting. I think it is, if the other areas make up for it. Right now, ours does not.

Our weakest area is not batting. It's not the rotation or depth.

It's the pen and defense.

I was pulling for a Soto signing, like all of us, even if it meant not upgrading a SP'er. His impact would have been immense.

[notin]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Yes, more of it.

It’s never proven helpful to a team beyond maybe enhancing the occasional fWAR of the player. The problem with these versatile guys is they don’t always excel at every position they try.

Now more 2-way players?  I think teams are going to try that. Or want to, as it can increase the number of available arms.  The problem is, MLB has added rules that inhibit it.  (For example, is it using a position player to pitch?). Of course if said position player is a superstar DH, MLB went all out of its own way to create rules to help him…

[Bellhorn04]

13 hours ago, notin said:

Trent Dilfer isn’t the only mediocre QB to win a Super Bowl.  And Jeff Hostetler and Brad Johnson, while both backed by very good defenses, were not backed by historically great defenses.

Any championship team in any sports excels in at least one aspect of the game.  I agree mediocrity never gets rings, but there’s no magic formula beyond that…

Yes, a few teams with mediocre QBs have won the Super Bowl.

But 10 of the Super Bowl winners this century have had Brady or Mahomes.  If you add the Manning brothers and Roethlisberger, it's 16 rings won by 5 QBs.  

The importance of the QB is pretty large.

 

[Hugh2]

20 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I think the real question is, do steroids ever prevent injuries?

yes

[Bellhorn04]

14 hours ago, notin said:

Steroids are used medically to reduce inflammation and promote healing of certain injuries.  If so, it could reduce injury or injury time for some players

Agreed.  OTOH steroids have been connected to injuries as well - weakening of bones and tendons etc.

 

[Hugh2]

6 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Agreed.  OTOH steroids have been connected to injuries as well - weakening of bones and tendons etc.

 

This is also true, it's kind of a conundrum.  Steroids' are both an injury risk and have preventative properties as well. 

Steroids' are a blanket term, there's a lot of different types that have different benefits and adverse affects.  More so if you want to throw a blanket term around like PED's. 

The human body is at an increased risk of injury when one is tired.  When a muscle is fatigued, other parts of the body overcompensate which can lead to imbalances and overloads that result in an acute injury.  Steroids' allow for rapid healing that can prevent this.  But on the other hand....as you said, they can also lead to weakening of the bones because they can decrease the amount of Vitamin D and Calcium that is absorbed into the bones. 

[notin]

14 hours ago, drewski6 said:

The Nats had Juan Soto, Trea Turner, Anthony Rendon (who absolutely mashed all year and through the playoffs).

At C , they went bat first with Suzuki. At SS they went bat first Asdruble Cabrera

The year before they had Harper and didn’t win..

[Bellhorn04]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

And yet it was Michael A. Taylor that Carrie’s then through the postseason…

Lesser-known guys Coming Up Clutch always helps.  Like the guy in my avatar. 🙃

[notin]

22 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Agreed.  OTOH steroids have been connected to injuries as well - weakening of bones and tendons etc.

 

True, although thats more often a long term (I.e. post-playing) effect…

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, notin said:

True, although thats more often a long term (I.e. post-playing) effect…

The whole thing is a rabbit hole.  Not that that's ever stopped us... 

[moonslav59]

We added Pedro and Schilling and won.

We added Beckett and won.

We added Lackey and won.

We added Price & Sale and won.

We traded one of the Sox greatest hitters, Nomar, for a glove at SS and won.

 

Of course hitting matters, bigtime, but the Sox have traditionally been great hitting teams for decades, even beyond the park padding stats, but we tend to win, or come close to winning, when we boost the pitching, or have some elite pitchers. (Lonborg '67, Tiant & Lee '75, added Torrez in '78, Clemens & Co in '86...

[notin]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Yes, a few teams with mediocre QBs have won the Super Bowl.

But 10 of the Super Bowl winners this century have had Brady or Mahomes.  If you add the Manning brothers and Roethlisberger, it's 16 rings won by 5 QBs.  

The importance of the QB is pretty large.

 

But in the NFL, greatness is defined by winning.  And quite often by winning the Super Bowl.  At some point, you’re saying “in order to win the Super Bowl, you need a QB that can win the Super Bowl.”  The logic is getting circular…