Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

sk7326

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,631

  • 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 sk7326

  1. sk7326
    I agree with others - it is a boring topic. Believe it or not, I actually do agree with your feeling. But - and I've struggled trying to put the "clutch is bunk" argument together in a simple way that doesn't sound like I don't believe in players makeup - there is essentially nothing I can meaningfully say that separates a clutch hitter from a good one. To refer to your specific example, very few hitters get enough chances in those arenas for that .220 to be indicative of anything. After all if you have 20 at-bats the difference between .220 and .300 is 2 texas leaguers. I think Ortiz is good. And almost every clutch hitter identified in the vernacular we use is a good hitter. Good is good enough.
  2. sk7326
    I have seen Ortiz come up very big, the famous homerun against Detroit for instance. It was funny since it was in a closely contested series where he was otherwise horrendous. Clutch is a fan's term - I get nervous and excited at big moments. But I don't think it is a skill you pay for - often coming up big is a function of just coming up. Ortiz has had a lot of clutch moments - but a lot of that is because the Red Sox have been a hell of a good team during his tenure.
  3. sk7326
    I wasn't sure - but this deal was good for both sides. Some risk reduction for Porcello - and a potential substantial discount for a #2 pitcher for the Sox.
  4. sk7326
    Also i think the purpose of this extension (and stuff like this) is to buy a couple of Porcello's UFA years. As UN noted, the deal is partially paying a little extra for a short haul - it is also buying a year or two of free agency leverage in exchange for not being jerks about arbitration deals.
  5. sk7326
    But that's why GM's get the big bucks. Porcello has done what he has done entering his Age 26 season. If you think he's going to put up his 2013 for the next 4 years, then $20M a year is going to be high. If you think his 2014 is the baseline, then $20M a year is going to be high-ish but reasonable. But if you project improvement - the sort of thing you expect from 26 year olds? (Remember Jason Varitek entered the majors as a 25 year old) Then $20M a year is absolutely his going rate and maybe even cheap. The Sox are projecting growth - and projecting growth from a 26 year old who is already a mid-rotation level starter, can lead to a good place.
  6. sk7326
    The problem with Masterson has always been the same. His 3/4 arm slot means he offers lefties no deception. And since he does not have a credible changeup, he has nothing to keep lefties off of him. His stuff needs to be good and he needs to be precise against lefties. One of the hypotheses I think the Red Sox made was that with half of his starts in front of a cavernous RF and in front of a plus defense (especially on the right side of the infield) that his lefty issues can be mitigated or hidden. I am not sure if it was on purpose, but Sox were smart to put Masterson in at #3 and avoid subjecting him to Yankee Stadium.
  7. sk7326
    The assertion here is that the opportunity cost of $20M a year is in fact an elite pitcher. That is almost certainly not going to be true in 4 years (maybe not even in 1). I have my doubts how often the Sox will dip their tool into the UFA pitching pool, just because of the low likelihood that the contract will deliver value. There are excpetions in my mind (I think Lester will deliver sufficient value for that deal for instance). If a star-level pitcher it's coming, it's via trade or development. Budgetarily it's a relative non-issue. They ignored all of baseball's deterrents to sign Moncada for instance ... if there is a good reason to stretch, they will.
  8. sk7326
    Well, not at this second, but given his age and what $20M will buy in the future? It's not that much of a gamble if he stays healthy.
  9. sk7326
    Long season. First start. There was some promise. I'll have to settle for 161-1.
  10. sk7326
    1 mistake ruined a good outing. Yesterday was about the offense.
  11. sk7326
    Also 3 years older than Porcello at the time all of this happened.
  12. sk7326
    Stolen bases are awesome. Fun TV, I love em. And they are more important in a lower scoring environment. But Earl Weaver's ideas about offense are still the more accurate ones.
  13. sk7326
    When a guy goes, it is possible that the batter is less inclined to take a pitch he'd normally take.
  14. sk7326
    The march towards history continues tonight.
  15. sk7326
    Oh sure Verlander wasn't - but every manager would give him benefit of the doubt there. Ausmus has generally done a not good job - but not for that.
  16. sk7326
    I am sure it helped a little. At the same time, Pedroia's numbers have been relatively consistent regardless of what was going on in front of him.
  17. sk7326
    Considering the top 3 starters were three of the last 4 Cy Young Award winners - that hardly seems to be a dig.
  18. sk7326
    Indeed - that said for him to reach a consistent 3-4 win level (i.e. what he is being paid for allegedly) ... an uptick in the strikeouts would be a good thing
  19. sk7326
    Castellanos had a bad year in the field - but it was not much worse than Cabrera and since Castellanos should improve and he is a living breathing human, he should represent a signficant improvement going forward. Kinsler is above average at 2B, maybe a bit less. Pedroia is one of the very best. Napoli is better than Cabrera at 1B. Miggy is a bad 1B too - better than Fielder but that says more about Prince.
  20. sk7326
    Fielder for Cabrera was a small uptick (if that) at the least essential position. Castellanos was the biggest improvement since he was replacing a catastrophe.
  21. sk7326
    I do agree - a tick up in the K-rate would be a little bit reassuring. Red Sox ARE above average at 3 of the 4 infield spots - although the left side is a little dicier. (because of Bogaerts' uncertainty) I do wonder how many Sox fans actually realize how positive the projections for this team defensively is? Now it got REALLY positive (2nd in the AL) if you accept the pitch framing impact measurements for Vasquez. (and I'm not sure how much Hanigan and co drops off there) But if Bogaerts improves enough and Ramirez does not get totally bamboozled by the Wall like Crawford did, this team should be a very good defensive squad.
  22. sk7326
    The big issue is pitching out of the stretch vs the windup ... there is some substantial difference there with many pitchers. The mythology of the base stealer making pitchers nervous is there - but this isn't 1983. TEAMS just don't run that much anymore. I mean aside from your Dee Gordon or Billy Hamilton outlier, we're still taking about 40-50 steals leading the league.
  23. sk7326
    When we talk affordability, we are discussing two considerations: 1. Is the cost-benefit analysis favorable? 2. Do we have the money? A real world example: I got an estimate to put a second floor on my starter home. It was $X and would increase the house's value by $3X. So CLEARLY it is a good financial move - if I could actually afford the $X (which I can't). The Red Sox basically do not have to worry about the second consideration, and can ALWAYS stretch for a bonanza.
  24. sk7326
    you kidding? They lost 46 times!! A little bit of optimism man!
  25. sk7326
    Porcello's career has been marked by shaky BABIPs and FIPs which trend below his actual ERAs. He has generally played in front of bad defensive teams. Ground ball rates have been excellent and he has been trending positively generally. It will be interesting.
×
×
  • Create New...