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
    Gonzalez' problem was not mental, it was physical. Namely that bad shoulder that sapped him of his power. James was right about his swing, but all predictions assume freedom from injury, and that's where it gets dicey.
  2. User Name
    General expenses is a number by itself, and it's usually around 10 million. You'd have to make the calculation closer to 140 for it to be realistic. Also, i very much doubt Swisher gets 18 per.
  3. User Name
    That's without $10 million in general expenses. Calculate the salary at $130, and the arb numbers are just estimations and could go higher. And they still need at least one FA pitcher.
  4. User Name
    Look at the post by Jacko he quoted. That's what you missed. Again, he wasn't directing it at you.
  5. User Name
    He doesn't do it. He provides the formula, FanGraphs staff does it. The point of this clarification is to let people know that James doesn't "create" these predictions one by one.
  6. User Name
    He's not directing it at you. He's directing it at people saying James "skewed" the numbers. Read, then respond.
  7. User Name
    Because he's going to be extremely expensive, he's not a need and would clog up payroll in case they need to make in-season acquisitions. Lack of flexibility has killed them before, why do it again? If they're going to sign a bat, sign Swisher.
  8. User Name
    Not only that, but the contradiction of "no more insane long term contracts" then "give a guy who may or may not be able to handle Boston an insane long term contract" is f***ing ridiculous. Swisher? Whole other story. Using the word "swagger" to describe something, anything makes me want to punt a bag with a kitten and a puppy in it though.
  9. User Name
    That's why i bolded the should. With all of the under-performance the Red Sox got from the pitching staff last year, specially in the IP department, how can two head cases, a post-op guy and a sophomore all break the 190 IP? With above league average ERA's to boot.
  10. User Name
    Forget about Hamilton. Get two starters and call it a day.
  11. User Name
    James doesn't "make" these projections himself. The fangraphs staff uses his formula to calculate the projections. They seem to be a lot more optimistic for pitchers everywhere, not just the Red Sox. Guys like Adam Wainwright (210 IP, 3.33 ERA) and Rick Porcello (168 IP, 4.50 ERA) have very optimistic projections despite some past issues.
  12. User Name
    No he didn't. LL was (and still is) running the show. If you think CC and Lackey are Epstein signings, you either haven't been paying attention or don't know what you're talking about.
  13. User Name
    The usually conservative Bill James estimations seems painfully optimistic to me. If any pitcher other than Lester hits James' benchmarks for 2013, consider me completely and utterly surprised.
  14. User Name
    I wouldn't. Bailey had flashes of brilliance last year in what has otherwise been a mediocre, injury-filled career. Let someone else be suckered by that small sample of success.
  15. User Name
    There's a massive amount of assumption here that doesn't correspond with what is probably the truth: Crawford and Lackey were both Larry Lucchino deals, and his meddling was what ultimately drove Theo Epstein out of town. He was never going to be given freedom to spend with the Cubs, who are in flat-out rebuilding mode anyways. I don't know where you came up with this idea.
  16. User Name
    James' model not only uses a compilation of past data, but also a "progression" model that assumes how a pitcher should behave given his past history, current age, and the assumption of freedom from injury.
  17. User Name
    If they sign Dempster i'm going to consider it the same as standing pat and i'll be just as pissed.
  18. User Name
    The problem here is trading Ellsbury for a pitcher who not only isn't that good, but is only controlled for a year. It makes no sense.
  19. User Name
    Bailey has been a mediocre, injury-riddled pitcher his entire career. One decent year and he's already being penciled in as an effective AL East pitcher. I don't think so.
  20. User Name
    He has more value to the Red Sox than anyone else. And that value is comparable to a couple packets of chewing gum.
  21. User Name
    Sheets had a myriad other maladies. Paul Byrd? Lawl Hampton? Made of glass. Milton? s***** pitcher. Volquez? Jury's out. Devine? Never that good. I can give you a s***-ton of examples of pre-and post-30's guys who have come back from TJ surgery throwing harder and being generally more effective after they fully recovered from TJ. You picked and chose some of the worst cases, because your argument holds little merit. There's a higher chance he comes back with similar stuff than what he had a couple years pre-surgery than there is of him coming back with further diminished stuff. Can you stop being a whiny bitch for just a minute and acknowledge the possibility, minuscule as it is, that Lackey's problems could have stemmed from his need for TJS? If that was the problem, then the possibility of him being at least decent after the surgery are real.
  22. User Name
    That's because you're apparently too stupid to understand that steak and potatoes does, in fact, require steak and potatoes. If you're not smart enough to understand this, how can we trust your baseball-team assembly skills?
  23. User Name
    Sign Edwin Jackson then trade Ellsbury + for another starter. Then you can focus on Hamilton/Swisher.
  24. User Name
    This makes absolutely no sense. The offense as it is can score runs, yet the pitching is in shambles. Taking that into account, why should Josh Hamilton be the number one target? It's like cooking steak and mashed potatoes. You have a steak and need potatoes, but you go out and buy another steak. Where's the potatoes? Are you going to mash one of the steaks?
  25. User Name
    I highly disagree with this. Not only is he 35, but he's coming off two very inconsistent years. In 2011, he pitched a lot of innings but was not very effective. Last year, he was effective but didn't pitch a lot of innings and looked over matched with the Rangers. His velocity also dipped to below 90 MPH for the first time in his career last year. I don't understand the FO's boner for Dempster. He doesn't fit the bill of a pitcher who would succeed at Fenway. Advanced age, diminishing velocity and inconsistency are not things this team should be looking for in terms of prospective pitching acquisitions.
×
×
  • Create New...