Kimmi
-
Posts
27,857 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
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 Kimmi
-
LOL There's a reason for that. Most people have openly admitted that if a post is too long, they won't read it. I agree with your opening paragraph, but I will once again give the majority of credit to Ben and Theo, not to Dombrowski. Dombrowski did a great job of getting the players that he wanted. I will give him credit for that. I agree with your assessment of the rotation. Two concerns: 1. We need some more depth, which you pointed out. That said, it's difficult to find solid depth that can be 'stashed' in AAA. If those guys are anywhere near decent, they'll be starting for a team somewhere. 2. I have concerns with the effect that pitching in the WBC might have on ERod. Especially since he was injured last year. If the WBC adversely affects him, that could be a huge knock to our rotation.
-
Haha. Key word in my sentence being 'may'. Every stat has its problems. As does every pair of eyes. That doesn't mean they aren't useful.
-
I think other GMs value Swihart more highly than some people here do.
-
WAR is relevant. It is very relevant to know how much a player is worth over the course of a full season. I would have no problem if sites started posting the stat both ways, as WAR and as WAR/Game, but it's easy enough to figure that out. Seriously, WAR may have its problems, but this is not one of them.
-
WAR is not without its flaws, but the point that you are trying to make is not a flaw in WAR. Most people understand that WAR is partly based on the number of games played. This point is true of ANY counting stat, as opposed to a rate stat. In terms of WAR though, a player who plays 160 games and provides 5 WAR is worth more overall than a player who plays 40 games and provides 1.25 WAR, though they both have the same WAR/game.
-
I agree. All of the catchers project to be worth about the same in terms of WAR/game. I don't see the point of paying $9 million dollars for virtually no upgrade. That money can be better spent elsewhere.
-
Yeah, I don't think the Las Vegas Golden Knights is that bad. I've heard much worse.
-
The Pomeranz trade made plenty of sense. Do you have any idea how bad the #4 and #5 spots in our rotation were? We needed another solid pitcher. I did not like the price that we paid for Pom, but it needed to be done.
-
Yes, he really did. The Tigers' farm system has not been good for a while, though it might finally be trending upward.
-
Yeah, I don't get the whole not voting for a pitcher thing. IMO, a pitcher can absolutely be the most valuable player on a team. Not voting for them because they have 'their own' award is kind of silly. Again, I think a problem with the MVP award is the subjective nature of what 'most valuable' means.
-
Ha ha. I hear ya. I can certainly understand why.
-
The day the trade was made, I was like WHAT?????? Is Theo crazy???? I was so young and naive back then.
-
No, you can't. The voters are getting better. They took a huge step forward when they gave King Felix the Cy Young a few years back with his 13-12 record.
-
There are many fine writers at sites like Fangraphs and Baseball Prospectus. Their writing is much more interesting to me than most of the sports writers.
-
Ha ha. I was going to post something very similar. For Dewey, Fangraphs has JBJ at 4.8 WAR, which according to their rating system, puts him in the "All Star" range. WAR really is your friend. It gives defense the credit it deserves.
-
One example why Theo is the best.
-
That was the reason why I used the word 'demotion' in quotes. I didn't think Mookie was demoted, nor did I think that Xander was demoted when he was moved to 3B.. That said, I can see how some people or some players would look at those moves as demotions even though they shouldn't.
-
I have no problem with a player having an ego. I do have a problem with a player having an ego so big that he thinks he's better than the team. You can't have a player on the team who's going to pout because he thinks he's too good to play a position or a role that the team asks him to play. You take that ego and you channel it into becoming the best player in whatever role the team asks you to fill.
-
Nope, I don't think they will. Not when it comes to voting on the best. If there are two candidates who are neck and neck, sure, they might go with their biases. But they certainly won't pick Derek Jeter to win a Gold Glove Award.
-
I think I love you.
-
That's the point of letting the stat geeks vote. They will not vote on popularity or on reputation.
-
Fair enough point regarding 'most valuable' and the human element.
-
In terms of the awards, look at the Gold Gloves. They were a joke. A few years back, Rawlings acknowledged this fact, and added a 'saber' component to the voting. Since then, the Gold Gloves have become much more reputable. They are still not as accurate as the Fielding Bible Awards, because too many managers/coaches are still voting based on a player's reputation, but they have become much, much better. Also, if you're looking for the 'best' player, pitcher, or defender, you can get that from stats alone. If you're looking for the 'most valuable' or for MOTY, that's a different story.
-
No, those two posts are not difficult to reconcile with each other. The problem, IMO, is that people have strong misconceptions about stat geeks. Being a stat geek does not preclude one from understanding the human element of the game. And what do I have to 'come around' to? I am there. It's most other people who have to 'come around'.
-
LOL I was thinking about Koji and Andrew Miller when I was typing my post. Also, look at Mookie. He was moved from second base to the outfield. Then, he was moved from CF to RF. Both moves could be thought of as 'demotions', but Mookie did what the team asked him to do and made the best of it.
