sk7326

You are right - Choo is a bad CF. He was forced to play there by the Reds due to their alignment. Here he would play LF most likely. He will be more like "decent" than bad there.

Some pitches have lost luster, often for health reasons (although not sure how much of those concerns are fair). Splitter, Screwball ... I still see the curve a lot, although clearly the preference is to work off the fastball. Starters I think in older times had a lot of pitches to mess around with, but now the philosophy is to throw 3 pitches well and focus on that. It is hard to start without a quality 3rd pitch - especially something that can impact both sides of the plate.

Choo will get an 8-figure salary. He'll probably get 4 years too. The question about his value as teams assess him will probably be whether they think he can hit lefties enough to not be a minus. That to me will be the main driver of his contract. I agree that Gomes/Nava/Carp can do a sufficient job - not as good as Choo, but close enough, close enough for the Sox to not have to go crazy in the market.

Tigers defense is horrid. Cabrera is the worst 3B in the league and Fielder is below average at 1B (much more an example of how teams have historically used 1B/LF, as a place to hide somebody who can't field). Victor Martinez might catch in the NL park but that's it. The Tigers have TWO legitimately excellent defenders and lucky for them they are both in the middle of the field (Iglesias and Jackson). But otherwise Boston outflanks them across the board. Middlebrooks has the tools to be above average, Drew, Pedroia and Napoli have all been good to very good. The outfield defense has only LF as a weak spot, but in Fenway the LF defensive "norms" go out the window. Salty is an average to slightly below average catcher, but honestly nothing that causes one to think Boston is at a minus there - and if you add Ross in, the position is in solid shape.

Sorry ... MY early pick, Tigers in 7 ... etc etc etc

The early pick is Tigers in 7 ... the ability to miss bats is enough ... barely. If this sounds like at least a partial reverse jinx - I'll let you decide.

Right on Gomes - I keep forgetting him. I do think the larger point holds - the red flag on Choo if there is one is that he has over the last 3 years a significant platoon split. That would need to be addressed - either with a Gomes playing a good amount or just living with him being a .6xx OPS guy against lefties. It's not a terminal problem necessarily (Ortiz has made giant strides the last couple of years there), but still something which diminishes his value to me if I were playing GM.

I don't know if it was feast or famine - I'd say it is fairly similar. The difference between then and 2013 was honestly that this year we were coming off of the Valentine disaster. In those years we were coming off of perennial contenders. But you look at 2007 when we had a juggernaut. 2008 it was a tough loss to Tampa but an incredibly gritty, tough series against a team that was clearly not a fluke. 2010 was one of Francona's finest managing jobs - 89 wins with a team that had to play Darnell McDonald a lot and were just torched by injury all season. Injuries also were a primary driver of 2011's stuff. I look at it this way - 8 years is a long time, so Francona might have been right to leave. But the Red Sox have regained their mojo with Theo's right hand man and Francona's pitching coach ... that speaks volumes about the real verdict on the 2003-2011 system that was in place. I am just grateful the opportunity was there to correct the panic-driven overreaction that was the 2011 offseason.

The reads and such are less the problem than just covering the ground. It's why he has been magic in RF - because you'd expect an average-ish CF to be a knockout RF. He has delivered on that front. I have no fear of Bradley earning the gig.

The tricky thing with keeping all of those guys is that if anything Choo could use a right handed partner - and the current guys don't provide that (Victorino aside and he is not platooning with anybody). Nava switchhits but is FAR less useful as a righty - and Carp, Bradley etc etc are lefty too. I'd rather not move Victorino to CF full time, clearly the corner position has really helped him in all aspects ... he is still a good defensive CF, but he will be less good most likely heading into his mid 30s - and keeping him in a corner still allows him to provide a ton of value on that side of the field. I say be ready for Bradley in CF and deal with Choo from a position of strength.

Boston's bullpen is nothing special - 10th in ERA this season. Detroits also not special - 12th. Now, what is interesting is that for the most part, bullpen ERA did not correlate much with who actually was successful. Tampa was 7th, Toronto was 4th. In 2012, this was more in line with Tampa, Oakland, Baltimore, leading the pack. Though once again Detroit 10th, Yanks 7th, Rangers 6th. Red Sox 4th in 2011 and so on. On the other hand: 2013: The top 5 teams in Starters ERA: Detroit, Oakland, Tampa, Boston, Kansas City (with Cleveland, Texas taking next 2 spots) 2012: Tampa, Detroit, Oakland, Seattle, Anaheim (Yankees #6, Rangers #8) 2011: Tampa, Anaheim, Texas, Oakland, Yankees, Mariners, Tigers Basically starter's ERA has been a much more durable predictor of playoff timber than bullpen ERA. I guess what I am saying is - we quibble about the Red Sox middle relief, but I'd temper it by noting: 1. Middle relief is the weak spot of EVERY bullpen, even the good ones 2. If we are getting into any bullpen early our chances to win go up The Red Sox back of the bullpen is very strong, stronger than Detroit's ... if we are counting on 5th and 6th inning guys to win a postseason series, we have much bigger problems.

Offenses were nearly identical in production, though the Tigers are a little more top heavy. The Red Sox ability to start rallies from any spot in the order - as well as them just being healthier, gives them an edge. But I am expecting this to be a grind.

One of the big edges Boston had with the way the series broke down is only having to face Verlander in Games 3 and 7. Yeah it sucks to get him for a Game 7, but if this series gets to 7 - we are depending on a coin flip anyway. The Tigers have the edge in the rotation, with a LOT of bat-missers. But clearly ours is plenty good enough and is CAPABLE of outpitching anybody in a short series - we just saw that.

Well this year was only Choo's 2nd 5-win caliber season, which puts him in line with Ellsbury. But yes, the games played matter and Choo has made more of them. The dangers with Choo are an alarming split against lefties, and just the general risk of giving any 31 year old corner guy a contract into his mid-30s. Free agent signings are - as a general rule - losing propositions so it's something you have to live with. I do think his ghastly defensive numbers this year are really a function more of playing out of position than anything - move him to LF and things will be fine, even if the metrics might not show it. (Fenway's left field has confounded UZR through the history of the tool) His on-base skills might not be .423 for the next 2-3 years, but solid high .300s are completely reasonable. I do think the probability of him maintaining his value is greater than Ellsbury over the next 4 years.

It is so silly - baseball's economic system is probably the most stable outside of the NFL (where so much of the revenue is centralized). Is it sad that Tampa has to trade guys? Sure - but they at least do not have to maintain a minimum payroll (and thus employ useless veterans) and tie Friedman's hands behind his back. That was the beauty of Moneyball for baseball fans - it took the excuses for smaller market teams and created some expectations.

Here is the thing using the Victorino comparison. Victorino was a really shaky deal at the signing - a lot of projection for a guy who had a poor season with increasingly intolerable splits. The Red Sox blew the market away with that signing. 32 years old, coming off of a bad season with increasing evidence he could not hit righties ... that did not make for an $13M player. The Red Sox did a good job projecting the defensive impact - more than what a lot of folks expected - and when Victorino scrapped switch hitting, his ghastly platoon split went with it. He doesn't even have to be that good the next 2 seasons for the contract to be a major win for the Red Sox. Ellsbury has a lot more going for him entering the market - he was arguable the Red Sox best player his last 2 healthy seasons. Of course there is the rub - and because he is 30 and not 27/28 like BJ Upton was entering the market last year, it is harder to close your eyes and dream of any yet-to-be-realized upside. (never mind that Upton fell on his face, there is at least more prime years to project at his age) I'd like him back - but it is hard to commit the years that undoubtedly somebody will offer him.

Actual age, assessment of defense matter. Using those numbers though it'd be non-Ellsbury.

Sox-Cards would be a good series. So would the Dodgers - a grand stage for Kershaw, Puig is nothing but good for baseball.

The pitchers that can get the Sox are the guys who can pound the strike zone - and get a lot of swing and miss in the strike zone. Fortunately, that is a very short list of guys.

This. Basically there are times when you need one and only one run ... 9th inning, tie/down one ... other obvious spots. In the NL there is the pitcher coming up (why the notion the NL has more strategy is a little foolish - the manager has fewer options when one of their players is totally useless offensively). But - and this Red Sox team (as the 2003-2009 vintages do also) show - you cannot give outs away. Your 27 outs is your team's time limit essentially - gotta make it count. The Sox with this collective approach, like the aforementioned teams or the Yankee title winners since 1998, it's like a fighter who just keeps leaning on you. Even if the knockout doesn't appear early, the body blows add up - it is just very very hard to keep the focus through the ordeal they put you through.

ARod should appeal - it's his right, no reason not to hear it. Baseball wants him badly, and it is totally possible for them to have screwed up the investigation. I expect that if Price is dealt, Rays want real value - not a ton of teams that can give it to them while being able to extend Price - the Sox interestingly are one of those teams, and Blue Jays are another, Orioles yet another. The Dodgers can pay him but I don't know if they can pay the Rays.

In 2008 and 2009 they were exposed as a Top 3 offensive team that averaged 95 wins a year?? Oh-kayyyy ... the Red Sox have been aggressive because they have the personnel to be opportunistic. This ain't the 1985 Cardinals or anything. The Red Sox stole 123 bases in 2013 ... they stole 120 in 2008 and 126 in 2009. What is different is the unsustainably crazy percentage (only caught 10 times all season). They have picked their spots beautifully. The station to station legend of 2007 is also not very true - 96 stolen bases, 7th in the AL. Hell, the go-go Red Sox of 2013 were 3rd in the AL in steals. 4th? The station to station Guardians. Moving runners, hit and run ... they sound interesting but giving away outs is generally bad. They didn't score a run because they missed in a couple of key spots and Tampa pitched well - none of this is new fangled, this is stuff Earl Weaver figured out 40 years ago. Get baserunners, wait for the crooked number - that is higher percentage than over-bunting and wasting time on so-called productive outs. That it doesn't work all the time doesn't prove that it's not the right door to go through. Last night's rally was thrilling. But it is much more a triumph of the stuff that carried the 2004-2010 era than it looks - zero extra base hits yes, but great at bat after great at bat ... sixteen baserunners in 9 innings and being able to shake off some really awful luck. The lineup and approach just wears down teams that whose pitchers aren't dialed in the entire way. The team is a reflection on what a mistake it was to panic like they did in 2012 - this team has had a winning approach for the better part of a decade ... you just never know how October will shake out.

Body of work - no chance ... especially since you have to count the last month of a hobbled Miguel Cabrera. Now would I pick the Tigers over the Sox in a best of 7? It would be tempting with those Top 4 starters - but Tampa's aren't slouches and Boston figured out a way there.

The extra travel day has definitely changed how managers are handling Game 4. With the extra day it allows you to have EITHER your #1 or #2 lined up with short rest. Detroit was able to exploit it with Scherzer as was LA with Kershaw. The Rays did to a degree too with Moore although Maddon was not taking any chances with asking for much inningswise from him. In particular, teams with a quality #2 starter now have an extra bullet to throw at Game 4.

It's not really a contrast - both worked in the same management structure. These are not opposing schools at all - Farrell bench coach is a former PawSox manager. So is his first base coach. This season has been more of a throwback to the 2007 days than any kind of rebuke of them.