Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

User Name

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    18,192

  • 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 User Name

  1. User Name
    Guys can learn to handle "big city syndrome", but a guy with a mental block for performing at big spots almost never recovers. Also, guys with problems handling the spotlight tend to fare better being moved to a smaller/less insane city (think Mark Melancon), but when what you can't handle is the bright spot, how do you change scenery? Do they replace you when the game's on the line?
  2. User Name
    I wholeheartedly disagree. Environmental and situational pressure are extremely different IMO.
  3. User Name
    With a fully healthy Victorino, that is my ideal lineup.
  4. User Name
    Stats can show you that, and scouts can see it too. The problem is that the guys who "can't handle" certain situations usually get themselves ousted from the league pretty fast.
  5. User Name
    Except that the closer argument, unlike the clutch argument, is retarded. Pressure situations are pressure situations no matter the inning, depending of course on closeness of the score. The whole "Ask anyone who has pitched" argument is also BS. I have actually attended a public gathering with a pitcher who has pitched both as a setup guy and closer (Joaquin Benoit) and he addressed the misconception. It's all context-dependant. Sometimes the setup guy will get the meat of the order and the closer gets the easy outs, and sometimes it's the other way around. The game hanging in the balance doesn't necessarily depend on the inning. Please debunk the experiences of an actual (and succesful) MLB pitcher with your made up blanket statements.
  6. User Name
    You can quantify a choker. You just can't quantify him over a one-year sample because with the amount of luck (or lack thereof) involved in a one-year sample, that is ridiculous. That's why fred gets called out for his assertion on Bogaerts. When he was struggling, he was struggling in general, not just with RISP.
  7. User Name
    The "stat people" here is a gross generalization. A lot of "stat people" have spent countless hours trying to measure hitter's ability to perform (or choke) under pressure. You are essentially saying that "stat" people can't admit that some players choke. That's just not right.
  8. User Name
    The Moncada situation is different. They will have 6 years of control over him no matter what. They didn't sign him to an actual structured MLB contract, he just got a signing bonus.
  9. User Name
    That's not a game I think he should be desiring to play.
  10. User Name
    This is nonsense, because a player can't look "very, very good statistically" if he consistently fails in pressure situations. There are statistical measurements for that too, and are part of a player's overall profile. This is why I said in our previous conversation that you really don't know what you're talking about here. It's not an insult, it's just the feeling I get with all of the misconceptions you have about how stats work, what they measure, and why.
  11. User Name
    You can't just day they got lucky. That is an oversimplification that borders in the ridiculous. It also tells me you dom't actually understand the topic we are discussing (no offense), so.I'll just drop this conversation right here.
  12. User Name
    Trade for him, and yes.
  13. User Name
    They didn'r roll the dice. They expected him to produce through their analysis of his statistical profile.
  14. User Name
    Exactly what advanced analytics are all about.
  15. User Name
    Fred, didn't we conclude that polyanna is an insult? If you can call people "polyannish" then people should be able to call you "Negative Nellyish" without you getting up in arms about it. The best idea is to just stop it with the name-calling. Period. Why is that so hard?
  16. User Name
    If you don't think the Yankees were all in on Sabermetrics from the start, then you really don't understand what they are. The Yankees were one of the first teams to create an offensive juggernaut based on the "OBP+ power" model. The fact that they spend absurd amounts of money doesn't mean they spend that money without applying advanced statistical analysis to their signings/trades. Case in point: Nick Swisher. Dude looked done, but the Yanks saw a trend of bad luck and bought, getting several seasons of great value and production from a guy that doesn't offer a "traditional" skillset.
  17. User Name
    No seriously, you should be like, permanently logged in here. You can post from your pc, tablet or smartphone. Just have all of those logged in at all times.
  18. User Name
    And stats trump uninformed opinions yet again!
  19. User Name
    It's just really easy to play baseball from one's comfortable couch. Do you know how goddamn hard it is to hit? Once a guy finds an approach that works, and has taken thousand of reps refining it, it's almost impossible to change it. Specially if it works, and it works for Napoli, who is a very productive hitter. Everyone's a couch expert.
  20. User Name
    You two complete me.
  21. User Name
    I was about to post the same thing. It's like we're long lost brothers. Except I'm cool and you wear dad pants. Ew.
  22. User Name
    I like you.
  23. User Name
    Actually with men on base and less than two outs, a GO to second is way worse than a K.
  24. User Name
    An accomplishment is an accomplishment. Trying to rationalize it for the sake of being a contrarian is just stupid.
  25. User Name
    Lol. Good post.
×
×
  • Create New...