redoctober

This is what I am trying to say, also aren't they trying to get even more youthful in the coming years? Why would they bring in somebody who's 32 years old?

I've been hearing the deal would have to involve either Delcarmen or Hansen, and if thats the case then the trade is tragic and doesn't make any sense. Who cares if the Yankees want Abreu? I understand they're in the same division and are Boston's historic rivals, but stop making moves based on what the Yankees desire. I understand Abreu is an on-base machine and is also sporting a .914 OPS so far this year. He certainly would be a good # 5 hitter. It's just that they are starting to develop a nice little bridge to Papelbon with Manny in the 7th and Hansen in the 8th. I don't want to sacrifice the future bullpen.

Stats can project a trend before the masses can come to the same conclusion which definately helps the front office in making a personnel decision. Nobody ever said that stats could show how a player swings, or what their arm slot is, thats for physics.

Welcome to the Information Age my friend.

Ok, when did I say I was against scouting? When I look at our prospects I always look at the scouting report first. But the scouting report does not translate production trends. It's simply observational. No sabermetrician will sit here and deem scouting obsolete, nobody. As for the 2004 World Series sample, there wasn't really any sample size to judge our hitters against their pitchers, because the Cardinals don't play the Red Sox nineteen times in the regular season as the Yankees do so you can't really play a numbers/probability game.

Going by numbers heading into that World Series I knew right away that the Red Sox had better pitching. Actually, I didn't even need to use statistics for that one, but now it solidifies that statement. Also, what the hell are you talking about to begin your second paragraph? Over a large sample size if you see using one pitcher over another increases your odds of success, wouldn't you not make that move?

Whoa, whats with the hostility? Yes, you're right in a hitters park like Fenway, Renteria should have put up stellar offensive numbers last season, but he didn't. We all know that. However, if you read my previous posts on the first page of this thread I have not once claimed sabermetrics as an infallible system, nor will it ever be. There are people out there researching and analyzing and coming up with more accurate formulas, particularly projection stats to get the whole system closer to the infallible extreme.

What about Bill James being apart of the Red Sox braintrust? He's the brainchild of sabermetrics. So don't tell me the Red Sox are not a sabermetric team. They're like a high powered Oakland A's. Yes they take into consideration of costs, just like any franchise does, and yes Theo also believes in scouting, and so do I, but the bottomline is, the team is based on sabermetrics. Also, who doesn't want a higher probability of success? I don't know what point you were trying to make with that, but it wasn't logical.

And look at how Edgar is doing this year in Atlanta. Yes, it's the National League he's playing in, but I think you were trying to hit home with the Edgar statement, and you only reached 2nd. Now, I did a cursory check of the Sons of Sam Horn forums so I can't give you an informed opinion as of yet, but they seem like baseball junkies, just like you and me. Just because they're more stat driven doesn't dilute the inner fan in them. As for scouting, who says I was against scouting? I respect scouts, and I always look at scouting reports, as well as the stats. As far as your last statement goes concerning chemistry, it's a little bit overrated. You can have all the chemistry you want, but if all of your players are hitting below the Mendoza line you're going to have a 100+ loss season. Production is the bottomline, and sabermetrics helps.

I know Tango Tiger over there. That guy has done some excellent work. Really, I don't see what the fuss is all about.

It will be with more research and accurate formulas. I've noticed a glaring similarity with people who don't believe sabermetrics helps us understand the game of baseball better and that is: they think analyzing with the eyes tells you everything. However, that couldn't be more untrue. I even noticed this once I started getting into sabermetrics. I couldn't believe how distorted my view of the game was. Actually, I haven't been to SOSH yet, but I may just give it a view later on to see exactly what you're talking about. Because I don't think it's accurate or right to say that this forum is any better because we're more simple with our discussions instead of delving into statistics. Theres nothing wrong with statistical analysis. It does not hurt the game of baseball, it only makes teams dig up the dark horses that maybe they wouldn't have looked into years ago. By the way, the playoffs are a crapshoot as Beane once said, and that statement is true. If last years playoffs were played all over again, we'd probably crown a new World Series champion.

I'm a stat head myself, "sabermetrician," and I hate to break it to you, but statistical analysis has been very useful to the sport of baseball. I understand scouting is very useful, and one who just simply watches the game could point out whos good and whos not. However, sabermetrics is just an objective way of looking at the game. Is there anything wrong with that? Or is it that you can't handle the truth that could break your distorted perception of a favorite player? Also, the Sox are built on statistical analysis (as well as cost effectiveness too). Bill James, the brainchild of sabermetrics works for the Red Sox front office, and Theo is also a big believer in it. Yes theres still plenty of flaws within the system, but I know plenty of people out there researching, and coming up with new ways of making the system more accurate, especially the projection stats. You should take the time to learn it, and enhance your baseball knowledge. Complexity doesn't make you stupid.

And like most NY/BOS games, due to local blackout restrictions, I am once again forced to watch the YES Network and listen to their generalities. It should be fun listening to Michael Kay ramble on without any dead air passing.

Man, this is going to be some series this coming week, with some great pitching matchups too.

Wheres Declarmen? They're using Foulke in a blowout?

Like you always do.

It's ok Papi will make you cry like a little boy who spilled his milk this coming week.

17 Doubles on the season and it's only May. Way to make em pay Mr. Doubles.

Anyone here like Godsmack?

Your perception is a bit distorted. You don't even understand Theo's philosophy for building and sustaining this franchise. This year's team is full of stopgaps because next year is when more of the prospects will start being brought up (Pedoria, Hansen etc.). With that in mind, come 2008-2009 there will be very little need to go out and make trades or sign FAs to construct the team. Most of the players will be on a home town discount which is why the payroll will be significantly lower. So theres nothing wrong with being wise with your money. At least we don't have a front office that wants to sign Torri Hunter after they've signed Damon.

I don't care. Take your Damon love fest elsewhere.

I wish the Sox had been in the World Series 39 times. Seriously, I get sick of people who first meet me and see my Sox gear and always ask me "so how did it feel in 2004?" I really don't want that to be the only year in my lifetime that the Sox win or were in the World Series. As far as Ruffing's poll results are concerned, that is quite sad, and the same type of s*** that gives me a bad rap. I have a kid in my school who wears a Red Sox hat, but could care less about the actual sport itself. He only wears the hat because he hates the Yankees. Does that even make any sense? It pisses me off. I don't care who the Sox beat in the postseason to win a championship. I even said the same thing in 2004. I remember Chris Berman, that jerkoff trying to convince everyone that if the Sox won the World Series without beating the Yankees how in someway the championship would be diluted. Now that was the dumbest comment I've ever heard from someone. So do we have to beat the Yankees everytime to win a pennant? Or else it's not winning a pennant? Lame. The bottom line is winning, thats the only fruition you strive for in sports. Yes, you enjoy the actual sport itself, but when you compete, you want to win, period. End of rant. GO SOX!

The chant doesn't even make sense to begin with though. It makes fans like me who don't chant it look like I envy the Yankees when thats strictly not the case. I care about my team the Red Sox, and the Red Sox only. As long as the Sox win, nothing else really matters. As far as the comment from before about the notion that some fans actually hate the Yankees more than they like their team, I can definately buy into that, and to be frank about it, it's quite sad.

It looks like someone has an ego.

I'm saying this because I'm sick of all the homeristic comments made by many Sox fans that just because of 2004 that the Yankees history as 26 time World Champions goes obsolete, and becomes disregarded. The name of the game is to win it all, and despite of the Yankees failing for 5 years and counting, they've made two World Series appearances, won two A.L Pennants, made the postseason and won the division every year during this five year interval. It's not like they've been in the basement. All I'm saying is people who cannot concede this notion are morons and ultimate homers, and no, just because I concede this notion as a Red Sox fan doesn't make me a Yankee fan. As for your second question, Posts #4 and #22 I am referring to. The homeristic comments are giving me a bad rap. Think before you refute.