sk7326
-
Posts
7,659 -
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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by sk7326
-
Well it depends on how you frame the problem. The analysis that has been done on "clutch" trying to isolate those situations (close and late, base runners, down a run) all have resulted in no satisfactory answers. You just get good hitters being good hitters. You also get to the conceptual problem - for instance Ortiz hit one of the most clutch home runs in recent history in 2013. He also had a very bad series in general - considering the Sox lost 2 games, there were a myriad of important at bats he did not deliver. Did the clutchiness go away? Now, just thinking about it, I'd expect anti-clutchness to be more measurable - but there has not been a unified definition of what is a clutch situation. Kimmi is right though. Large issues of makeup keep guys out of the show.
-
Only suspense with Moncada is whether he starts in Greenville or Salem. Given how little baseball he has played lately, Greenville makes the most sense and let him crash through levels on his own pace.
-
True - although he does have options, which might make him in the minors at least a short short term way to solve the roster issue.
-
Oh they have plenty of cover to start Castillo in the minors. He has played so little actual baseball recently that it would make sense. The thing is, nobody else among the candidates has minor league options. You basically have to cut a guy outright to make room - and only Nava is any sort of candidate for that. Now, Victorino should be - because he is in the last of year of his deal, and it's all sunk cost anyhoo - but that won't happen, which is cool. Now maybe somebody catches the Fort Myers Flu and makes the decision easier.
-
In theory it makes sense - but contractually this is the only real scenario that makes sense. This strongly implies that they are carrying 12 pitchers up north. Until an injury or trade comes up, one of these two have to be sent down.
-
Except this misses the part where Napoli doesn't actually make that many outs - it's just that the outs he makes are often whiffs. Kingman was a career .302 OBP after all.
-
Well it ultimately becomes the value of a run vs the value of lots of runs. Certainly there are select times when a single run is what you need - but it's pretty rare.
-
You are right ... I was going back to when the ownership changed prior to the 2002 season. So a 13 year run, 2 years with fewer than 86 wins. Now I am as worried that two of the last three years are those seasons. But there has been quite a stretch of genuinely good teams.
-
and geographic coincidences could win titles
-
12 years, 5 teams ... 2-3 titles a team would be an expectation. But even pulling back from that, you are referring to a 12 year run where the Red Sox had two seasons where they won fewer than 86 games (sadly two of the last three). That is right there with any historical run any team not named the Yankees has had.
-
That is an interesting intellectual exercise ... going into the BBR wayback machine ... Assuming that we go with an 8 team field (no byes), the ALDS would have been: Yankees v Brewers, Red Sox v Royals. What is funny is both teams would have been paired with somewhat lousy matchups. (Sox were below .500 against Royals that year, Brewers went 10-5 against those Yanks).
-
Definitely a lot of bad luck in the RISP situations. Outs are the only measure of time in baseball - and the only thing you can't get back. The occasions where there are "good outs" are very very very scant. 8th inning or later, tied/down a run - a guy is already on base ... maybe
-
Considering that this PoV would end up saying a 95-67's accomplishment is not as great as an 83-79 team's accomplishment - I'd have to disagree. Also, without the Wild Card you would expect the Red Sox mathematically to win 2 division titles in 12 seasons, and that would be overachieving if you went back to 4 teams. I will promptly get off of your lawn now.
-
Lucchino is annoying and has a big mouth - but he is also the one who bridges the two Sox views (the Sox as a baseball team AND the Sox as a TV show on NESN). To call him an empty suit is not fair - as the guy who developed Camden Yards and more or less discovered guys like Theo, his eye for baseball exec talent is excellent. But yes, the tension in ownership between the Sox as a team and as a TV show is constant and has driven a lot of the short sighted moves. One of the interesting paradoxes I think is that the current Sox trajectory - dramatic down and up - is probably better for the business.
-
This is with NBA Analytics guys, but it is a really good discussion on tools and scouting and how they fit together: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2378041-nba-insider-is-it-numbers-or-talent-sorting-fact-fiction-in-nba-stats-wave
-
Yes and no - he doesn't hit the baseball all that much, which makes him look worse than he is. But because of his style, he still gets on base at a decent clip even when he is not making contact regularly. Craig is definitely more "classic" in this sense.
-
My theory is that they looked at the declining strikeout rate, his age, one good-verygood season in the last 3 and priced that into their "pre-season" negotiating strategy. They crafted an offer that would satisfy a "past peak" guy (and might in fact be fair looking at future performance) but nothing that could prevent Lester from making a bet on himself and going to the open market. But then Lester bounced back and bore an amazing resemblance to the 2009 version of Jon Lester, and when you take that combined with his remarkable durability - he changed the parameters. And you get to an open market, it's a crapshoot. I think the Red Sox view of Lester fundamentally changed based on Lester's form in 2014 - the continuation and improvement on his end of 2013 form might have gone from outlier to "genuine improvement". The problem is by the time they figured this out - Lester was available for all to bid.
-
The thing with groundball pitchers is that they are more likely to give up actual hits than flyball guys are - flyballs for the most part are either outs or disasters. Groundball guys challenge the team run prevention concept a bit more. K's are still the best
-
This is all true - although that describes any projection. The prospect burnout rate is high - but not all of said prospects are created equal. Guys who outperform their age at a given level are far less likely to bust. Betts might be a flash in the pan, but a guy who was a 2 win player in 1/3 of a season before his 22nd birthday is (assuming health) as strong a bet as you get.
-
What is insane is not those contracts specifically, but that they cheaped out on Cano! Both of those moves actually make sense if you keep the actual superstar.
-
A lot of where Moncada starts is also based on where the Sox start him - maybe they'll start him at 2B and Devers at 3B if they are starting Moncada in Greenville.
-
2B is sensible, although there is a lot of high contact there and he has the arm for 3B. I think given his age and his size already, 3B/RF is the realistic outcome - if he just grows a little.
-
It's a vesting option - it would just mean getting rid of the vest part. Now a key thing here is that Lee would be waiving a no-trade clause to go to Boston too ... and that normally costs money. Basically the Sox would be paying $15M to waive his no-trade.
-
I think the agreement you'd see might be him waiving the buyout in exchange for guaranteeing the option. (which even at his age is not terrible) - turns it into 2 years $52.5M
-
Steamer has Hamels for 2.7 WAR this season. So, if you extrapolate this to the next 4 years with a slight downward trend, let's estimate 10 WAR between 2015 and 2018. Assuming 7.5 million per win (which assumes some inflation and the Red Sox are always on the high end of this scale) let's call it $75M of value. We'd be paying $110M for it. Time value of money is a non-issue in this case. Suppose we add Mookie Betts as the core prospect. Steamer used 2.6 WAR. So you'd have 12 WAR over those 4 seasons using conservative estimates for development. That's $90M of value. We'd be paying 2 arb years at best, so let's say it would cost Boston $50 million maybe. Now the dollars for WAR and stuff are really sketchy for lots of good reasons - but this gives some idea of the cost of doing business in a deal like this.