sk7326
-
Posts
7,647 -
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
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by sk7326
-
Depends on what you want - after all if you are looking at WAR to be a comprehensive "who's the best" measure it is destined to fail. For what any WAR measure is - a normalized sum of everything measurable a player does - it's good. Like any measure, you want consistency and that it is measuring what it is trying to measure. WAR (regardless of flavor - and teams use their own) fits the bill - much moreso than say RBIs.
-
Three years is a lot in the development curve
-
It's about staying current with the industry. One expects that out of someone covering, say financial markets. Seems like the least the writers can do - get current to reflect how front offices are actually making decisions.
-
Forearm problems = uh oh
-
I think it's like life. There are some bad eggs, and some true leader of men - and a bunch of guys in the middle. Beckett - in terms of chemistry hooey - was probably the middle. It went well when things went well and the reverse. (it's why chemistry is always a trailing factor to talent and success)
-
What does that even mean? All the criteria I can think of to define "most valuable" in this context comes down to; * Pretty good teammates (so your team contends) * A bad backup (so you are indispensible) Essentially Trout is penalized for having bad management. That team would be early 2000s Tigers bad without him - that sounds like a huge difference also. There is no win scenario for the Red Sox this year that did not involve Betts making a significant leap.
-
Certainly the way Beckett poisoned the clubhouse in 2007 was an issue.
-
For a combined $18M ... without the trade the roster spots would not have been there - although the money under Henry's sofa cushions probably would have been.
-
I think the trade was fine ... I always point out the 2013 title came because of (in no particular order) A. A totally out of nowhere year by Victorino (and for that matter Mike Carp, which allowed the Sox to operate a credible LF platoon) B. Our good players finally being healthy C. A remarkable (but not exactly out of nowhere) season by Uehara. There is not a ton which the trade directly contributed to otherwise.
-
The MVP rules explicitly say that pitchers are considered fair game. Starters pitch fewer games but have much more influence on the games than a position player. It is hard for a pitcher to deliver MVP level performances - but they can. Verlander did when he won. Now the Eck, Willie Hernandez atrocities are a different kettle of fish. And remember, when Pedro lost, two voters did not put him on the ballot due to feeling that pitchers have their own award. They violated the rules of the award by not considering pitchers. If you did not think Pedro was a Top 10 player that season you have left your sense.
-
I never said the budget is limitless. I did say that the Red Sox can always increase the budget for the right reasons - there is no practical move which is actually unaffordable i.e. preventing the store from being open. The budget is a matter of how much the owners want to put into their toy. The team is a mint.
-
makes sense - it was really a 4 man race until the end of september when it shrunk to two.
-
I think with baseball there are fewer excuses on that front. Performance is much easier to measure and separate than in a sport like basketball. A good player on a bad team's contribution is much more transparent.
-
The flexibility should be the same as the other months within a series - it also allows opponents to be able to prepare a bit more reasonably. Honestly in baseball the roster rules are precisely backwards. Seriously, they should start the minor league season later and expand the roster in APRIL when the players are still getting stretched out.
-
I agree, MJ had better teammates.
-
The idea that is freed up money is a bit of a red herring - imagining a salary cap which does not really exist. After all they ended up spending less to replace them. That it was a better trade than Slocumb for Lowe and Varitek (to name one) is a bit much.
-
In September it makes sense to have to freeze a 25-man active roster for each series. You can make injury substitutions, but the injured player has to go on the DL.
-
Trout could (should?) have won 5 straight MVPs at this point. Seriously - he's almost like Michael Jordan in the mid-90s. It's not fun to vote him MVP every year - but really he is. Betts was the only other remotely justifiable choice - and that is an achievement in itself.
-
In 1995 Mo Vaughn won the MVP and Tim Wakefield finished 3rd in the Cy Young (obviously one of the worst MVP selections in history - although it made me happy)
-
Gonzalez has continued to be a good player. He was not the anchor bat the Nation was looking for - and his end in SD portended. The shoulder injury sapped a lot of that - and as it turned out, a lot of his OBP was driven by being the only good hitter in a terrible lineup in SD. But he is still above average.
-
The K-rate problem at AA came with him, and was there at the AFL cameo also ... the field bit - he needs reps, no matter where. Describing the position choice as a zero sum thing is a little weird - the Sox will get him instruction wherever. Just because Hanley had such a comically bad adjustment to going to the outfield means that is typical - it's not.
-
That is very reasonable. I've always thought that his future was RF (because of having a shortstop's arm) - while allowing the Sox to use Bradley to fill some other gaps. (because he is a bit lower ceiling of their outfielders, and it's not like they don't have star caliber replacements in house)
-
His ability to make contact has been an issue - and there is a legitimate argument that the org sees Devers as the 3B future. There is clearly a lot of craft which needs to catch up - although the physical talent is remarkable. His body has always made more sense for an outfield corner.
-
Porcello is a keeper right now. Now - nobody is untradeable. The Angels offered Mike Trout for Rick Porcello, that's a no-brainer. But - obviously failing something like that. The funny thing to consider is that it's a reasonable possibility that the Cy Young award winner might end up the team's #3 pitcher by the end of next season. (same applies for Price)
-
Roger Clemens 1986 for the former, Pedro 1999 for the latter