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
-
It's interesting that with all the stats I post, the response that I always get is that stats can't capture the human element of the game, things like heart, grit, leadership, etc. Then, whenever I post something about the human side of the game, people tell me that they don't really buy it. This statement is not directed at you, but just a general observation. I am a strong believer in the stats, obviously. But I am also a strong believer in qualities in players such as the ones mentioned above. I think having a great leader on the staff will make a difference. I think people perform better under great leadership/mentorship than they do under weak leadership.
-
Yes, stupid people can definitely be arrogant. That's a deadly combination, stupidity and arrogance.
-
What is the rule on testing anyway? Isn't anyone who tests positive once automatically tested more frequently?
-
Who is this slim looking player? http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/c4b1a0775396a6398d7e7fea54be4af6.jpg
-
I've posted this before, but after reading some comments from Hanigan about Price, I think it bears repeating how much I think Price's leadership and intangibles are going to help the rest of our staff. I know that some people think it's hogwash, but I think that just having him on our team will make the rest of the staff better. Have any of his former teammates ever had anything less than glowing to say about him?
-
I know that you can't field a team with all home grown players, and that free agents are a necessary evil, but I (and I'm sure most people feel the same) get so much more satisfaction from watching our young players play than I do from watching the free agents. This is nothing against someone like Price. I know I will love watching him pitch for us, but nothing beats the home grown talent.
-
You really have to wonder about the degree of arrogance that some athletes carry around with them. Clemens immediately comes to mind. No one can really be this stupid, can they? So, it must be arrogance in thinking that they're not going to get caught, despite the fact that they've already been caught twice.
-
The long term outlook of our team is very exciting. It's even more exciting that it looks like we have the real deal in a pitching prospect, something that the Sox have not fared well with recently.
-
That is exactly what I posted on another site. What could this dude possibly be thinking after the first two times he was caught?
-
Yes, this is what I'm saying. I honestly don't know the exact number of times a sac bunt would be called for. It may be a few more than five in some seasons. Regardless, the sac bunt is still grossly misused by AL managers. It should be used late in the game (8th or 9th inning, possibly 7th sometimes), with 0 outs and a runner on 2nd base, with a relatively weak hitter coming to the plate, when one run is needed. How often throughout the season does that situation come up?
-
I'm not sure exactly what info you are referring to, but if you mean the leverage index for each base/out state in the game, I have provided a link to the data. This link comes with the caveat that this table was first published in 2006. Since run expectancy changes as the scoring environment changes, so does the leverage index. However, the leverage index should not be that much different than it is in the chart, and the relative importance of each situation remains the same. If you're the away team and you're up by one run, with 0 outs and runners on 1st and 2nd in the 8th inning, the LI is 4.1. In the 9th inning with 0 outs and no runners on, the LI index is 2.9. If you're the home team with the same situations, the LIs are 4.4 and 3.6, respectively. Your best reliever should be pitching in that 8th inning situation, not being saved until the 9th inning. http://www.insidethebook.com/li.shtml
-
When it comes to most in game decisions, including use of relievers, I usually will give the manager the benefit of the doubt, even if I disagree with what they're doing. They are far better equipped to make such decisions than I am. That said, I think that some of their decisions are based on philosophies that are not statistically supported. For instance, I read this morning that the Sox attempted 30 sac bunts last last season. What??? That's at least 25 too many. I knew that the team was using the sac bunt far too often, I just didn't realize how often. As I posted before, this is something that I will be watching for this season. I may even start a thread titled "Games Farrell Has Cost the Team by Sacrificing".
-
Since the amateur June draft began in 1965, there have been 21 players who have gone straight to the majors after being drafted, the two most recent being Xavier Nady and Mike Leake. Going straight to the majors is something that has slowed considerably since the 70s. One of the reasons is probably because teams want to delay the player's arbitration clock.
-
Baseball America has 5 Sox in the top 100, and 4 in the top 20. #3 Moncada #15 Benintendi #18 Devers #19 Espinoza #89 Kopech Apparently, they really like Espinoza's fastball.
-
The ground rule double scoring was huge in keeping the Sox alive in the 2004 ALCS. I'm not sure how I feel about this. I understand the frustration on balls where the hitter clearly would have only had a single, or when a runner on first would have clearly made it home, but I'm hesitant to leave too much to the umpire's discretion.
-
The only rules that I can think of right now that I have issues with are scoring or stat rules, the first one being with how "wins" are awarded to pitchers. As far as the actual playing of the game on the field, I can think of anything off the top of my head, though I'm sure my memory will be jogged when I see it happen.
-
Ah. I will look into it.
-
Another silly reason why closers have to pitch the 9th is to get that "save" stat. Their salaries, unfortunately, are often largely based on how many saves they have.
-
If it's a one run game, I agree that the leverage factor will be higher in the 9th, provided that the base/out states are the same. However, if there are two on with no outs in a one run game in the 8th, the leverage factor will be higher than if you have no runners on with no outs in the 9th.
-
I don't think this is something that will occur so often that the closer will get burned out. Besides, closers used to pitch multiple innings all the time. They should be able to handle it from time to time. And if a manager is worried about overusing his closer, let him pitch the team out of the critical situation in the 8th, then bring in your next best reliever for the 9th. I agree that the pen has to have several good relievers. If all the relievers are roughly equally good, it should not matter. But I know we've all seen lesser relievers brought into a game to pitch out of a jam (for one reason or another), while the closer sits on the bench, waiting for a 9th inning save that may or may not happen. That should not happen.
-
The word "decimated" was used tongue in cheek, but the farm has lost a lot of good prospects in the past couple of years due to graduating them or due to trades. The fact that the farm is not decimated is a testament to how deep and strong it was to begin with.
-
Looking at data from 1987 through 2008, courtesy of Baseball America, 17.2% of signed draft picks will make it to the majors. Only 5.5% stick for at least 3 years. Most of the success rate comes from first round picks, as would be expected. 73% of first round picks make it to the majors, and 39.1% stick for at least 3 years.
-
I agree. Hanigan is not going anywhere, nor should he.
-
That's a good question. Personally, I don't think it's going to come down to Vazquez having to be at a certain level offensively, but rather whether Swihart can hold it together defensively. His defense last year was not good. If Swihart has not shown marked improvement defensively, I think Vazquez will be in as soon as it's deemed that he is 100%.
-
I know that if/when it comes to that, Swihart would likely be worth more to us in trade, but I have always liked the idea of playing him at 1st or 3rd base, and having that backup or emergency catcher available if needed. I think mostly it's just that I don't want to see Swihart traded because I've grown attached to him. But I do think that Vazquez will eventually serve the team better as our starting catcher.
