ORS
-
Posts
19,682 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by ORS
-
It's OK. We both win. Your guy is the best of all time. Our's is the best this season.
-
How is it apples and oranges? Rivera has the better WHIP, ERA, etc. Hoffman has the better SV/SVO ratio. This is just like your argument for why Nathan is the better closer this year.
-
Sorry for the slight hijack, but.... You aren't allowed to make sensible arguments with stats like VORP if you think SV/SVO is how to judge RP.........it's just not allowed.
-
Of course I'd rather we win it, but I'd like a chance to be there 5 times in 9 years, because anything can happen in a 7 game series. Name one team with 5 moderately good SP and a dominant closer that ever did anything like that.
-
Sorry, the "legend" doesn't do it for me. Either that efficiency is the be all end all of closer discussion, and Hoffman and Nathan are the winner. Or the actual better closers, Rivera and Papelbon, are. Parsing it so your guy wins and our guy loses is pretty transparent. I don't think you can back-pedal fast enough out of this one.
-
Anything can happen in a 7 game series. The only guarantee is that you won't win if you aren't there. Nice dodge of the fact that your trite Braves example crashed and burned pretty badly, though.
-
Yet they made the playoffs every year, and made it to the show 5 times. The Padres went once and lost with a decade of having a great closer. Swing and a miss.
-
Sure, if those are the only numbers you look at. But, given more relevant information, I can tell that in the next game I want the guy that allows less base runners, less total bases per AB, and gives up runs less frequently. I can't believe this is actually being argued. By this logic, Hoffman (470 SV, 55 BSV) is the better career closer than Rivera (410 SV, 55 BSV) -- do you agree with this?
-
That suggests having someone else do it in place of Ortiz, ie replacing him. Nobody has suggested replacing Papelbon outright. This is about maximizing his value to the team. An Ortiz analogy would be considering using him at 1B. If we didn't know about his defensive ability or potential for injury (knees), it would be something worth trying. We don't know what Papelbon can do as a starter, but we do know that a good SP is more valuable than a good RP -- well, most of us know that, but you're coming along.
-
The save/save opp. ratio is a function of more than talent. The situation matters. Using the definition of save opportunity, it is possible for a pitcher to have an 18.00 ERA and 5.00 WHIP and a perfect SV/SVO ratio. That is a huge contradiction, and it is the reason why I think SV/SVO is worthless. I'll take the guy with a lower ERA and WHIP every time, because they are better indicators of performance.
-
I agree, and that's why they need to try it for a season. It didn't kill Rivera, or Nathan, or Gagne (pre-injury) to get sent to the BP when they didn't flourish as SP. I think Papelbon's got the head to go right back to closing if the SP gig doesn't work out.
-
Saves and wins are the most meaningless stats to gauge pitcher performance. You know this. BTW, Papelbon's LEV is 2.13 to Nathan's 1.87.
-
Please. Name one pitcher who was "ruined" by, and only by, switching roles. I'd love to see you isolate that as the only contributing variable.
-
You aren't serious, are you?
-
Give either of the the '03 or '05 team another stopper in the rotation, and we could be looking at 3 straight. Passing up the opportunity to see if he can be a stopper is wasteful. We already know he can handle the 'pen. If he doesn't work as a SP, there's no rule saying he can't go back to the BP -- like all the other failed SP.
-
Hanging on to him guarantees nothing in return when he retires. It's worth a shot.
-
August 29 @ Oakland
ORS replied to Youk Of The Nation's topic in Mike Grace Memorial Game Thread Forum
Boomer cuts his a bit, but Curt's is pretty straight. He just throws it where it's very tough to handle. -
Ultimately, he should be starting. Great closers are worthless if you can't get them the ball with a lead. The 2006 Red Sox have the best closer in baseball -- right now, not ever, for the knee jerk Yankee fan reaction -- and won't make the playoffs. The 2003 and 2005 Red Sox had reliable SP and a hodge podge at the back end of the BP, yet they managed to win 95 or more games. I think that says it all.
-
They should have him close only if they go all out and try for a championship. That means bringing in Zito or Schmidt, signing good arms for the bully, bringing in help for Papi and Manny. If they aren't going to roll the dice and make a run for it, then he shoud start.
-
I can't imagine why a Yankee fan would rather face a team, the Twins, that resembles a team that kills them, the Angels (pitching and D with less potent offense), in the playoffs vs. facing a team, the White Sox, that resembles a team they play well against, the Red Sox (all stick, no throw).
-
I would bet he could have, but that wasn't the plan, so Huckaby caught him more than anyone in ST. I was a proponent of having Varitek catch him then and during the season so that they didn't need to take his bat out of the lineup if they made the postseason. So, in some sense, I do think the plan was flawed. I just don't think the Bard idea was purely a bad idea because the ST injury played a role in sending the plan awry.
-
During Era of Fair Competition, 1966-75 ,Sox Were Superior to Yankees
ORS replied to bobby jr's topic in Boston Red Sox Talk
Those contracts would get grandfathered in, like when the NFL adopted a cap, and the team wouldn't be held against the cap until they ran out. Take off the blinders. Just because a random team can win it from time to time doesn't make the system equitable. The NFL system is much more fair, yet the good organizations stay near the top. I have no doubt something similar would occur with baseball, and that the Yankees would be good more often than bad because they would hire the best and brightest to run the show. They just wouldn't get every player that they target -- like the rest of the league. -
That's 20/20 hindsight. Bard's a big league ball player. I'm sure the plan was that, given time, he'd adjust to catching the knuckler. What screwed up the plan was when he had a couple of weeks of down time in ST nursing an injury, meaning his acclimation period occured in meaningful games. Sorry, but I can't fault the FO for not predicting injuries.
-
I assumed Johnson and Alexander were going 1/2, so I had LT in the selection bar. Unbelievable pick, especially since Brady, while a rock solid QB, isn't the best Fantasy Football QB.
-
Unlikely. I doubt they win the WC, and they a bit of a gap to make up in the West.