Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Dipre

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    20,953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 Dipre

  1. Let me get this straight: So because it is more "important", the competition level is inherently higher even if you are playing a clearly inferior team than in your past two postseason series. *Head explodes.*
  2. That doesn't mean the level of play in the other postseason series is lower, even if the final objective is to win the WS, and that's the point of the argument. Postseason baseball is postseason baseball. Win or go home.
  3. He's my favorite Mexican, and i like a lot of Mexicans!
  4. I see, i see. Because winning the rest of the postseason series is simply not as important as the actual WS, in which case, you wouldn't actually make it to the WS. It all makes sense now! Eight words sum up my thoughts on this: Two Thousand And Four American League Championship Series. Different level of play you say?
  5. That's why using the entire post-season body of work is better than using a couple WS innings no?
  6. I'm so gay for Gonzo it's not even funny.
  7. Really? No one in the history of the Red Sox has been s*** on more by the fans by JD Drew no matter how well he plays. If that's not being "underrated" then i don't know what is.
  8. Sample size? No matter how important the series is, baseball is a game of inches, and anything can happen in two or three games no matter who's pitching.
  9. What's next, Lincecum for a couple bottles or Gatorade, or no wait, maybe Ricky Romero for some chewing tobacco?
  10. That could be plausible if my blood wasn't too busy redirecting itself to my penis.
  11. The problem with disregarding the worst three but keeping the best three is that it skews the sample size towards the good end. That's really all there is to it. Many have tried, few have succeeded. Consider yourself challenged.
  12. Then you're cherry-picking. Go ahead and fix it young'un. Gotta take away the best three starts so you don't skew the sample size. You can take your anger out on me online in MLB The show.
  13. I'm not talking about you regarding the article, because you didn't write the article, but the article is a clear example of cherry picking. What i do disagree with you on is on Bucholz. He will be effective in 2011, but there's just no way of knowing to what extent.
  14. Why is it cherry-picking? There are legitimate concerns about the pitching staff, and the issue of Bucholz' potential spike in K's and lowering of BB/9 not being enough to overcome the extreme luck he exhibited last season is absolutely legitimate as well. By the way, if you were to use that analysis to judge the pitcher's performance last year, you'd have to remove their three best performances as well to level the playing field. The person who wrote that piece did not do that. If we criticize Yankee fans for being homers, we need to be objective in our analysis. Station 13, if you are referring to the writer of the article as the one doing the cherry-picking, then i agree, and disregard my earlier statement, but you didn't express who you were talking about, and ORS' post was the latest one.
  15. I really really really wanna see Super Dwight win a championship. For that reason, i wish he ends up with the Lakers, even if in a couple of years.. :thumbsup:
  16. Did you really just post an article defending LeBron's candidacy over Rose's? I'm going to honor your name by buying a big bag of Mini-Pretzels and enjoying the ensuing shitstorm. /cueLebronhaters.
  17. You throwing a tantrum brah? That's for little kids! I've been wrong about plenty of things, and that's exactly why i pat my back after i've been proven right. See, it's as easy as connect the dots!
  18. According to Fangraphs, in 2007, his average fastball velocity was 94.6: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=510&position=P And 2009, by the way, was also an excellent year, in which he pitched with similar velocity to 2010.
  19. Beckett lost velocity on his fastball? News to me, because his average fastball velocity last year was 93.5 MPH, down from 94.3 the two previous years, however, over the last two months, his velocity creeped up into an average of 94.1, so i have no clue where you came up with that info, good sir. As for the Tomase article, it seems like more of a "It's Spring Training so there's nothing to write about". And it is, in fact, Spring Training, which is indicative of nothing. Anyways, Beckett's stuff is still good, but his stamina seems to be lacking, and until he actually gets shelled in the regular season i won't declare him "one and done", because like everyone else here, i don't know the specifics of his throwing program, and i haven't seen any indication of worry from the team.
×
×
  • Create New...