sk7326
-
Posts
7,632 -
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
-
His 2019 arb won't be too difficult. The thing with Bradley will be the 2019-2020 offseason where it is the prime time to trade him if you don't want to re-sign him. The market of alternatives will be key - but Red Sox can replace him at CF internally quite credibly, and Bradley will be 30 by opening day 2020.
-
Probably still easing him back. I think he'll be a candidate for that sort of usage - though (like all relievers) the hook could be quick.
-
Of the four Red Sox in serious contention for postseason hardware I'd list Sale as the 2nd likeliest to actually win. I'd list in probability Betts Sale Cora Martinez
-
Right - and that is a pure rate stat with a minimum number of ABs. (502) The ERA title has a minimum number of innings (162, which Sale has not quite hit). Now looking at the numbers, Sale's IP per start is not greatly lower than Verlander (6.0 vs 6.3). That amounts to about 10-11 innings over the season - again, not much. What really is more relevant is Sale being mostly a noncontributor for the last 2 months of the season. There was a ton of value created in the starts he did make - but that the team has benefitted from his success less frequently than Verlander and Kluber by a pretty wide margin DOES matter - enough to make this pretty close. Again, if Sale wins it is a perfectly acceptable and just result.
-
Yes, it is a stupid award. Writers are not really in a good position to judge a good performance. It always goes to "which team did we underrate the most".
-
I look at cliff years as the sort of thing where your range of likely outcomes is something like 75-95 wins. That is a very large range, but reflective of the "maybes" a team would face. Again, the 2014ish Yankees is a good comp.
-
I think that is possible - although that is as much because 3B is the org's strongest position as anything else.
-
He has shown he can conquer every level - even after struggling early (like he did in Salem and Greenville). Bellhorn had the right perspective year. It has been a little disappointing but in no way discouraging.
-
They figured out how to efficiently build around their ballpark. Oakland indeed shifted their own philosophy to sort of do the same thing. And of course Kansas City was one win away from 2 WS doing the same thing. Have a ballpark where fly balls go to die, have pitchers who keep the ball in play and have fielders who can run down anything.
-
It's baseball. If you get to the postseason, you can win the whole thing. If you are FAVORED to win it all, it is more likely than not you will lose. You obviously want to maximize every shot you get because - as the 1975 Sox showed - stuff is flimsy. The Red Sox will always have a high payroll - and fans should demand no less given what they have to pay. The worst case we'll probably get is a season where you come into it with an uncomfortable amount of "maybes". You get seasons like 2012 and 2014 when the maybes don't hit. You get a season like 2013 when they do. When I read fears of a cliff, I read fear of becoming the 2010 Astros or the 1998 Marlins. That is not happening. There WILL be years where the Red Sox will be more impacted by stuff going right or wrong. I cite 2014 or 2015 as examples - teams that were relying on some risks to go well (in those years those risks did not go well).
-
That ain't happening either. They have significant young talent under pretty good deals for a while. I think the cliff will be something like the Yankees version of it - seasons with hope but a lot of variability. I don't see a scenario where we don't enter the season feeling a playoff spot is an attainable goal. Just like every other year with this ownership.
-
NARRATOR: He's STILL expected to do big things.
-
Pomeranz having a terrific season in SD was never a great indicator ... (very pitcher friendly). But he was young, controllable and had some projection. But the command has failed him mostly.
-
As you point out, that the Red Sox have capable relievers is incidental. This is a close race and Sale winning would be great.
-
bWAR takes runs allowed and makes adjustments from there. (including defense and such) fWAR starts with FIP and makes adjustments from there.
-
I am sorry Henry will have to wait a couple of weeks for another boat.
-
When you take the ball, your odds of success AND failure are higher. Sale has not had the chance to repeat his September 2017 for instance. While the Red Sox greatly benefit from Sale's starts, the pitching staff did not get the same amount of benefit that the Astros got by just not having to find substitutes. Verlander's struggles lately have hurt his case.
-
I think it's close. Sale wins on the rate stats - but that also acknowledges that he has had fewer opportunities to do both good and bad. There is at least some reason to think that more work would have lowered quality. (see 2017) Sale winning would not be a miscarriage of justice or anything. (same goes for Snell or Kluber)
-
The (very small) number of people outperforming him are guys who are very much in the 2022 MVP conversation. I get impatient too - but he has done just fine.
-
There are exactly 12 players in the major league younger than Devers. Of those 12, four have delivered more value (Acuna, Soto, Albes, Torres) Devers has also outperformed EVERY OTHER position player below the age of 23 besides the above.
-
Kluber was almost 2 wins better than any AL pitcher per bWAR, and neck and neck with Sale in fWAR. Usually for awards I look much harder at bWAR first (since it's built off of runs allowed instead of peripherals). Kluber was brilliant last season before the postseason. He also benefitted by not running out of gas like Sale did. Here is the thing with the quantity/quality argument. WAR is an accumulated stat, but it can also be negative. So a stretch where you pitched like garbage would subtract from WAR. So - for a position player - a high WAR performance from a platoon player in absolute terms has to be looked at skeptically, since his usage was giving him the best chances to succeed. If he faced right-handers, it would likely have been worse. The performance over a smaller number of innings can also be a reflection of usage - keeping a guy away from positions where value can decrease (actually where negative value can be accumulated). It's not a simple numerator/denominator thing.
-
Verlander is a perfectly good choice for Cy Young. Voters have gotten smarter over time - and have done a better job researching (includes using the advanced metrics). While WAR supports Sale over Verlander - the 50 IP advantage has tangible value outside of the WAR produced. Sale is not a bad choice - and if he won it'd be great. Last year Kluber was the best pitcher in the AL by a pretty significant margin. If anything the makeup call would be for Porcello winning the Cy over Kluber in 2016.
-
ftfy
-
For a closer to win the Cy Young - generally voters had to have made a mistake. No reliever provides as much value as a starter. That said, I am sympathetic to the idea that relief pitching should not be compared to starting - and effectiveness should be baselined separately. Edwin Diaz has been magnificent. But Blake Treinen and Jose LeClerc have been roughly as good. More to the point, the starter crop has been good enough that I don't feel the need to go to the relief one.
-
Mean, median and mode have been used casually as definitions of average ... that is all. I agree with your interpretation of Bogaerts defense - and where median is probably a better baseline than the mean here.