A Realistic View of the 2025 Red Sox: Part II

[Old Red]

17 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Said it better than I.

Again, moving Devers to 4 when we had Bregman might have made more sense, but the move would not make a significant impact. Almost all the studies show it does not matter all that much, but yes, it is very likely it never happens, especially with Bregman on the IL. Cora is clearly a "nerdy geek" who has bought into the modern line-up philosophy where your best hitter bats 2nd.

It's funny watching the traditionalist defending him batting 2nd, when the old school would bat him 3rd (not even 4th.) LOL.

It’s not funny  at all, but just plain common sense especially when Raffy is leading all of MLB in RBI with 52 all from the 2nd spot. MSNS🤭🙈.

[moonslav59]

36 minutes ago, Larry Cook said:

Our single biggest problem is the rotation. At 4 plus innings per start, our bullpen is being over utilized and come August, they will all have dead arms 
 

 

Although our pen is 4th in IP, we have played more games than almost everyone else and have more days off, going forward. We are also just 15 IP ahead of the average pen use.

We  have already used 16 pitchers in relief, not counting Toro, and could still see Penrod, I Campbell or a converted SP in the pen, before too long. We have yo-yo'd several pitchers to maximize IP use without overusing any particular pitchers.

What pen arm has been overused?

Chapman is on pace for about 65 games, which is high (maybe 55-60 IP.)

Whitlock is on pace for about 75-80 IP, which seems high, but he was a SP'er for a long time.

Weissert is on pace for 65-70 games and as many IP, like Whitlock.

Slaten missed some time. Bernardino and Wilson might get 60-65 appearances.

Kelly, Guerrero, Hendriks and Criswell have pitched some, but none have wow'd anyone. Maybe we'll see Fitts, Dobbins, Gio, Crawford or Sandoval in the pen, at some point- maybe even Houck.

[moonslav59]

Just now, Old Red said:

It’s not funny  at all, but just plain common sense especially when Raffy is leading all of MLB in RBI with 52 all from the 2nd spot. MSNS🤭🙈.

You act like leading the league means he could not have had more.

You're right: that's not funny. It's silly.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

It's funny watching the traditionalist defending him batting 2nd, when the old school would bat him 3rd (not even 4th.) LOL.

I'm as old school as it gets; I actually taught in the same elementary school I attended (different decades).

But I certainly appreciate and even embrace some modern metrics.

The thing is, I don't see any batting order approach that makes more sense than to bat the regular with the top On Base % directly in front of the team's best hitter. A lot of times he's the same guy, so bat the second-best OBP man in front of him.

It can make a difference. The '78 Red Sox lost a one-game playoff to the Yankees -- with Burleson .295 OBP and Remy .321 OBP batting 1-2 directly before AL MVP Rice all year. Wonder how many more games the Sox would've won if instead they batted Lynn .380, Yaz .367 and Fisk .366 in front of Big Jim?

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You act like leading the league means he could not have had more.

You're right: that's not funny. It's silly.

Show me the science, and studies for right now, and this year that shows that Raffy would have had more RBI opportunities in the 4th hole than he’s had in the 2nd hole. You can’t, because Raffy batting from the 2nd hole, and his .413 OBP you would have to take out for the opportunities that the 4th hole has had this year. How would your science explain that one away? It seems the Yankees don’t use your science, and studies either as Judge bats in the 2 hole more than anywhere else. As always MSNS.

[notin]

19 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Show me the science, and studies for right now, and this year that shows that Raffy would have had more RBI opportunities in the 4th hole than he’s had in the 2nd hole. You can’t, because Raffy batting from the 2nd hole, and his .413 OBP you would have to take out for the opportunities that the 4th hole has had this year. How would your science explain that one away? It seems the Yankees don’t use your science, and studies either as Judge bats in the 2 hole more than anywhere else. As always MSNS.

Judge might not be the best example to prove your point.

Judge has 19 HRs and 48 RBI.  That means he has driven in 29 baserunners this year who are not himself.  For some perspective, Jarren Duran has driven in 30 (4 HRs, 34 RBI).

Thats not science. It’s math and it actually happened…

[moonslav59]

13 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Show me the science, and studies for right now, and this year that shows that Raffy would have had more RBI opportunities in the 4th hole than he’s had in the 2nd hole. You can’t, because Raffy batting from the 2nd hole, and his .413 OBP you would have to take out for the opportunities that the 4th hole has had this year. How would your science explain that one away? It seems the Yankees don’t use your science, and studies either as Judge bats in the 2 hole more than anywhere else. As always MSNS.

Show me it's not.

I already went over the OBP numbers that have been ahead of Devers. It's absurd to think they'd be lower had he batted 4th, despite the fact that his 400+ OBP would, of course, not be batting ahead of him, Simply put, Bregman and whoever we batted 3rd would have been ahead of him, instead our our 8-9 hitters.

It's not rocket science.

You do the math. I'm not going through every game log to work it out. It is you who doubts my claim, so it's on you to prove I'm wrong.

Studies show the 4 slot gets the most rbi chances. Common sense, not nonsense shows that THIS YEAR, YES, THESE SOX, who bat ahead of Devers have had pretty poor OBPs, so far, When you look at how often Devers has walked, it's amazing he has so many rbis, but that does not prove he could not have had more, especially with more chances.

Again, these are the facts- the 4 slots up before the 2 vs 4 slots- THIS YEAR:

OBP by slot:

.328 7th

.298 8th

.288 9th

.331 1st

These are the OBPs of batters who likely would have batted 2nd and  third, since was can leave the 8-9-1 batters the same.

.288 9th

.331 1st

.385 Bregman (2nd)

.371 Refsnyder v L and .336 Abreu vs R (3rd)

Of course, who is up after these guys matters, and we can't assume all these numbers would be the same, had they batter in different slots, but the differential is so great that it's absurd to think Devers would not have more rbi opportunities batting 4th vs 2nd. It's downright silly.

Forget the stats, as you love to do: go by your famous eye test:

This year's line-ups:

8th: Narvaez (83 PAs) DHam (53) Wong (39) Rafaela (17)

9th: Rafaela (175) Narvaez (37)

1st: Duran (273)

vs

1st: Duran (273)

2nd: Bregman

3rd: Abreu & Refsnyder

Tell me your eye test prefers the first group. I dare you

[dgalehouse]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Crochet is 4-4.  Yes, I am very much scoffing at the idea that this means he's been mediocre.

 

Crochet is a good pitcher. The fact that he is 4-4 is mostly the fault of his teammates.  Looking at all his stats, it is clear that he deserves to have a better record. But the reality is that his record is 4-4.  You can't change that to 7-1 no matter how much you would like to.   You have to accept the reality of it. 

[notin]

25 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Show me it's not.

I already went over the OBP numbers that have been ahead of Devers. It's absurd to think they'd be lower had he batted 4th, despite the fact that his 400+ OBP would, of course, not be batting ahead of him, Simply put, Bregman and whoever we batted 3rd would have been ahead of him, instead our our 8-9 hitters.

It's not rocket science.

You do the math. I'm not going through every game log to work it out. It is you who doubts my claim, so it's on you to prove I'm wrong.

Studies show the 4 slot gets the most rbi chances. Common sense, not nonsense shows that THIS YEAR, YES, THESE SOX, who bat ahead of Devers have had pretty poor OBPs, so far, When you look at how often Devers has walked, it's amazing he has so many rbis, but that does not prove he could not have had more, especially with more chances.

Again, these are the facts- the 4 slots up before the 2 vs 4 slots- THIS YEAR:

OBP by slot:

.328 7th

.298 8th

.288 9th

.331 1st

These are the OBPs of batters who likely would have batted 2nd and  third, since was can leave the 8-9-1 batters the same.

.288 9th

.331 1st

.385 Bregman (2nd)

.371 Refsnyder v L and .336 Abreu vs R (3rd)

Of course, who is up after these guys matters, and we can't assume all these numbers would be the same, had they batter in different slots, but the differential is so great that it's absurd to think Devers would not have more rbi opportunities batting 4th vs 2nd. It's downright silly.

Forget the stats, as you love to do: go by your famous eye test:

This year's line-ups:

8th: Narvaez (83 PAs) DHam (53) Wong (39) Rafaela (17)

9th: Rafaela (175) Narvaez (37)

1st: Duran (273)

vs

1st: Duran (273)

2nd: Bregman

3rd: Abreu & Refsnyder

Tell me your eye test prefers the first group. I dare you

I don’t get this argument.

Devers has driven in Ceddane Rafaela 16 times.  Rafaela has a .287 OBP.  Devers has driven in Duran 15 times.  Duran has a .322 OBP.  But somehow someone is trying to argue that the .287 OBP and the .322 OBP hitters would be on base for Devers more than, say Abreu (.336 OBP) and Bregman (.385 OBP). Really? This isn’t Rocket Science or Nerd Math.  This is “Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader Being Asked Questions In A Language He Doesn’t Speak?” type stuff.  The only possible argument here is “Bregman would clear the bases more often and leave Raffy with no one on.” But thsts really not a good defense unless you cheer for Devers’ stats more than team wins…

 

[moonslav59]

27 minutes ago, notin said:

Judge might not be the best example to prove your point.

Judge has 19 HRs and 48 RBI.  That means he has driven in 29 baserunners this year who are not himself.  For some perspective, Jarren Duran has driven in 30 (4 HRs, 34 RBI).

Thats not science. It’s math and it actually happened…

This is the kind of "eye test" evidence red usually thrives on.

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Show me it's not.

I already went over the OBP numbers that have been ahead of Devers. It's absurd to think they'd be lower had he batted 4th, despite the fact that his 400+ OBP would, of course, not be batting ahead of him, Simply put, Bregman and whoever we batted 3rd would have been ahead of him, instead our our 8-9 hitters.

It's not rocket science.

You do the math. I'm not going through every game log to work it out. It is you who doubts my claim, so it's on you to prove I'm wrong.

Studies show the 4 slot gets the most rbi chances. Common sense, not nonsense shows that THIS YEAR, YES, THESE SOX, who bat ahead of Devers have had pretty poor OBPs, so far, When you look at how often Devers has walked, it's amazing he has so many rbis, but that does not prove he could not have had more, especially with more chances.

Again, these are the facts- the 4 slots up before the 2 vs 4 slots- THIS YEAR:

OBP by slot:

.328 7th

.298 8th

.288 9th

.331 1st

These are the OBPs of batters who likely would have batted 2nd and  third, since was can leave the 8-9-1 batters the same.

.288 9th

.331 1st

.385 Bregman (2nd)

.371 Refsnyder v L and .336 Abreu vs R (3rd)

Of course, who is up after these guys matters, and we can't assume all these numbers would be the same, had they batter in different slots, but the differential is so great that it's absurd to think Devers would not have more rbi opportunities batting 4th vs 2nd. It's downright silly.

Forget the stats, as you love to do: go by your famous eye test:

This year's line-ups:

8th: Narvaez (83 PAs) DHam (53) Wong (39) Rafaela (17)

9th: Rafaela (175) Narvaez (37)

1st: Duran (273)

vs

1st: Duran (273)

2nd: Bregman

3rd: Abreu & Refsnyder

Tell me your eye test prefers the first group. I dare you

You regurgitated all these numbers, but you didn’t come up with any actual figures. You  could figure out how many runners have been on base when Raffy has come up batting 2nd, but you can’t come up with a figure of how many runners would have been on base if Raffy has  batted 4th, because you would have to take out the amount of times Raffy has been on base batting 2nd, so you have proven Nothing. How many fans do you think on a nightly basis watching at Fenway, or on NESN are thinking let alone saying, because of studies, and science show Raffy should bat 4th? Most likely they are just saying Raffy leads all of MLB in RBI. Why does the Yankees bat Judge 2nd most of the time? They must be bad at science too. MSNS.👋

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

Crochet is a good pitcher. The fact that he is 4-4 is mostly the fault of his teammates.  Looking at all his stats, it is clear that he deserves to have a better record. But the reality is that his record is 4-4.  You can't change that to 7-1 no matter how much you would like to.   You have to accept the reality of it. 

We do accept the facts. We don't accept that Crochet is mediocre.

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

I don’t get this argument.

Devers has driven in Ceddane Rafaela 16 times.  Rafaela has a .287 OBP.  Devers has driven in Duran 15 times.  Duran has a .322 OBP.  But somehow someone is trying to argue that the .287 OBP and the .322 OBP hitters would be on base for Devers more than, say Abreu (.336 OBP) and Bregman (.385 OBP). Really? This isn’t Rocket Science or Nerd Math.  This is “Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader Being Asked Questions In A Language He Doesn’t Speak?” type stuff.  The only possible argument here is “Bregman would clear the bases more often and leave Raffy with no one on.” But thsts really not a good defense unless you cheer for Devers’ stats more than team wins…

 

NNN.

[notin]

13 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

Crochet is a good pitcher. The fact that he is 4-4 is mostly the fault of his teammates.  Looking at all his stats, it is clear that he deserves to have a better record. But the reality is that his record is 4-4.  You can't change that to 7-1 no matter how much you would like to.   You have to accept the reality of it. 

And the reality of it is that W-L records for pitchers are almost meaningless and certainly not reflective of the pitcher’s talent…

[Old Red]

14 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

Crochet is a good pitcher. The fact that he is 4-4 is mostly the fault of his teammates.  Looking at all his stats, it is clear that he deserves to have a better record. But the reality is that his record is 4-4.  You can't change that to 7-1 no matter how much you would like to.   You have to accept the reality of it. 

And the team has a 6-6 record when he pitches. Can’t change that either.

[notin]

5 minutes ago, Old Red said:

NNN.

So you’re saying you doubt that a hitter with a .385 OBP will be on base more than a hitter with a .287 OBP?  What do you think OBP stands for?

You wanted proof Devers would have more RBI chances.  OBP alone puts Bregman on base one more time FOR EVERY 10 PLATE APPEARANCES than Rafaela.  How is that NOT proof?

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

You regurgitated all these numbers, but you didn’t come up with any actual figures. You  could figure out how many runners have been on base when Raffy has come up batting 2nd, but you can’t come up with a figure of how many runners would have been on base if Raffy has  batted 4th, because you would have to take out the amount of times Raffy has been on base batting 2nd, so you have proven Nothing. How many fans do you think on a nightly basis watching at Fenway, or on NESN are thinking let alone saying, because of studies, and science show Raffy should bat 4th? Most likely they are just saying Raffy leads all of MLB in RBI. Why does the Yankees bat Judge 2nd most of the time? They must be bad at science too. MSNS.👋

I've already agreed, it's impossible to know for sure, and even if we plugged in the actual 2025 OBPs of who would have batter in front of Devers, and who would have taken Devers' 2 slot (or who bats 3rd if Bregman bats 2nd) butI think it is 100% safe to say, they'd have gotten on base more than Rafaela's 192 PAs (8th and 9th slot) Narvaez (120) and a mix of DHam, Wong and others (100 or so.)

Do you actually doubt this notion, in general?

There is no certainty on projected numbers for either side of the argument, but you are the only one claiming that if I cannot prove my position, I must be wrong.

It's just plain silly, to me, to think Devers has had more rbi opportunities with Duran, Rafaela, Narvaez and DHam ahead of him that he would have gotten with Bregman, Abreu/Ref and Duran ahead of him.

Why don't you give just one reason why you think this would not be true?

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, Old Red said:

And the team has a 6-6 record when he pitches. Can’t change that either.

So, this put you in the camp of thinking Crochet is a mediocre starter.

Talk about nonsense.

You continue to crack me up. literally, I'm laughing out loud, and my wife is asking me about what.

[Bellhorn04]

28 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

Crochet is a good pitcher. The fact that he is 4-4 is mostly the fault of his teammates.  Looking at all his stats, it is clear that he deserves to have a better record. But the reality is that his record is 4-4.  You can't change that to 7-1 no matter how much you would like to.   You have to accept the reality of it. 

Yes, I accept it all as reality.  It's reality that Crochet has pitched very well and it's reality that the offense has generally stunk when he pitches and it's reality that the 6-6 record in his starts is because of the second part and not the first.  

[Bellhorn04]

Pitcher W-L record is becoming even more meaningless as managers (including Cora last night) obviously have no compunction any more about pulling the starter in the 5th inning when the team is leading.

In last night's game the win was awarded to Whitlock in one of those "which relief pitcher deserved it most" judgment call deals. 

[Old Red]

19 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

So, this put you in the camp of thinking Crochet is a mediocre starter.

Talk about nonsense.

You continue to crack me up. literally, I'm laughing out loud, and my wife is asking me about what.

Once again over analyzing, and wrong once again. It’s already been pointed out that the 6-6 record is more indicative of of his teammates, and lack of offense., but as usual, and predictable you go off on a whole different tangent to fit a narrative you want to pursue. You, and your imaginary friend the Straw Man, are quite a team, but what do you expect from the Man Behind The Curtain. MSNS.

[Old Red]

9 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Pitcher W-L record is becoming even more meaningless as managers (including Cora last night) obviously have no compunction any more about pulling the starter in the 5th inning when the team is leading.

In last night's game the win was awarded to Whitlock in one of those "which relief pitcher  deserved it most" judgment call deals. 

I agree with what you say, but in every game someone will get a W, and someone will get an L. Same for the two teams playing..

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I agree with what you say, but in every game someone will get a W, and someone will get an L. Same for the two teams playing..

It matters very much for the team.  It doesn't matter which pitcher gets the W or L.  That's the difference.

[moonslav59]

7 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Once again over analyzing, and wrong once again. It’s already been pointed out that the 6-6 record is more indicative of of his teammates, and lack of offense., but as usual, and predictable you go off on a whole different tangent to fit a narrative you want to pursue. You, and your imaginary friend the Straw Man, are quite a team, but what do you expect from the Man Behind The Curtain. MSNS.

You and others have stressed that wins is a major stat in evaluating how good a SP'er is. It is you, not a strawman. I have never claimed you and others think it is the only stat.

You further prove you don't understand the concept of "strawman," once again.

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It matters very much for the team.  It doesn't matter which pitcher gets the W or L.  That's the difference.

..and they act like it's us that don't get the difference.

[Bellhorn04]

They could award Ws and Ls to hitters, too.  

Or they could have the 3 stars of the game like in hockey.

Or a game MVP like in football.

It all means the same - not much.

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It matters very much for the team.  It doesn't matter which pitcher gets the W or L.  That's the difference.

I agree on that. Like I’ve stated in the past that starting pitchers used to be as big a star as the sluggers, but the game today has turned into a whole different game with how things are analyzed.

[dgalehouse]

45 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

We do accept the facts. We don't accept that Crochet is mediocre.

You are replying to my post that stated that Crochet is a good pitcher who deserves to have a better record. You say that you don't accept that he is mediocre. I didn't say he was mediocre. You are just trying to be argumentative.  I am wasting my time. 

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

You and others have stressed that wins is a major stat in evaluating how good a SP'er is. It is you, not a strawman. I have never claimed you and others think it is the only stat.

You further prove you don't understand the concept of "strawman," once again.

How many times do you want to be wrong? I have never said wins are a major stat in evaluating how good a SP is. I have repeatedly said it’s the first thing I look at, and then go from there.MSNS.

[Old Red]

Just now, dgalehouse said:

You are replying to my post that stated that Crochet is a good pitcher who deserves to have a better record. You say that you don't accept that he is mediocre. I didn't say he was mediocre. You are just trying to be argumentative.  I am wasting my time. 

He wrote the book of over analyzing 101, and how to get your analysis wrong. MSNS.