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
    Yeah but attacking the "don't sacrifice the future argument" is right a lot of the times, especially since every established player was once a prospect. I bet there are some trades for "established players" teams would like to have back right now. Ask the Blue Jays. The Dickey trade doesn't look so good now and the prospects they gave up are probably going to make an impact as soon as next year.
  2. User Name
    Right now it'd be Doubront.
  3. User Name
    Yeah but that's certainly a limitation of xFip, which i like, but is not always reflective of the effectiveness of certain pitcher's skillset. Per xFIP, Lester was better in 2012 and has been better this year than he was in 2008, mostly because of K rate, and the normalization of HR rate, that is the reason why his xFIP was so high relative to his ERA too. I think both of us know that the 2008 version of Lester was better than the current version, even though the 2008 Lester actually had lower velocity than he does now. I think that instead of immediately assuming that he got lucky with homers, we should instead look at the difference in Lester's pitch sequence and pitching habits. He's constantly behind in the count in the innings where he gives up big run totals. I know it's observation, but so many people talking about Lester's tendency to nibble and eroding command can't be wrong. Most of the problem is in his head.
  4. User Name
    In 2008, Lester's (arguably) best season, he posted a very pedestrian (6.5) K rate with pretty much league average BABIP and strand rate. So it's not necessarily strikeout reliance. In my opinion, it's all in the loss of velocity and in his head. He still throws hard enough to not have to nibble, so why does he?
  5. User Name
    Lincecum got it
  6. User Name
    s*** at the wall is exactly what s***** teams do picking these players up in the Rule 5. If a team like the Astros had selected him, the chance that he could have spent all season on their roster as at least a backup is pretty good. There's a precedent for it too, since teams have caught lightning in a bottle with this type of roster crunch victim before. I'm sorry if it doesn't fit your narrative, but them's the breaks.
  7. User Name
    ^Case in point. Also, Jacobs is currently in AA.
  8. User Name
    It's less likely, but it has been done, albeit mostly with pitchers.
  9. User Name
    This is not true. Teams do this a lot if their roster is bad and they are in rebuilding mode to see if they catch lightning in a bottle.
  10. User Name
    Sticking on another team's roster may not necessarily be a reflection of his talent, but rather extreme suckitude on the receiving team's end. The Cubs would have spent almost all of 2013 with Ryan Sweeney on their 25 man roster had he not gotten injured. Food for thought.
  11. User Name
    Have you seen the OF situation of the Astros, Cubs and Marlins?
  12. User Name
    Have you noticed the repeated mention of the fact that he was almost certain to be lost on the Rule V draft? Had they gotten nothing for him, you'd probably be complaining about that too.
  13. User Name
    You really don't know who Shin-Soo Choo is do ya?
  14. User Name
    Buxton plays OF, and positional value is important in prospect evaluation. We'll see.
  15. User Name
    No it doesn't. Again, you simply cannot win a ballgame without scoring at least one run. The other team can score 20 against you, and if you score 21, you win. Because of that, one can conclude that preventing and scoring are on near equal grounds in terms of importance, but because you can't win without outscoring your opponent, scoring is inherently more important than preventing.
  16. User Name
    If he does not exhaust his rookie status this year, i'll be surprised if he's not the consensus top prospect in baseball.
  17. User Name
    I will gladly relinquish my stance when someone shows me a team that has won a game without scoring a run.
  18. User Name
    This has absolutely nothing to do with the reason this discussion is even taking place.
  19. User Name
    This is faulty logic. They are close in value, but because you can't win without scoring a run, it's impossible for prevention and scoring to have the same overall worth. Again, you can't win without scoring at least one run.
  20. User Name
    Close, but not accurate. You can't win a 0-0 ballgame. You need to score to be able to win.
  21. User Name
    If the Sox keep winning at a .600 pace, it really doesn't matter what the Rays do.
  22. User Name
    That should be the alignment anyways imo.
  23. User Name
    Sox stole one today. Heart of a champion. Wright was the star of the game.
  24. User Name
    Who trusts Bailey right now? And like you, Breslow is pretty damn sketchy.
  25. User Name
    Is it just me, or is Wright actually being useful?
×
×
  • Create New...