Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Kimmi

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. Kimmi
    The scout was not right to rule out a blue-eyed player just because of the eye color, however. Just as is the case with height and velocity, blue-eyed players do not fare any worse at the major league level than dark-eyed players. There might be a phyical disadvantage to players with light eyes, or shorter pitchers, but these players have found ways to overcome whatever physical disadvantage might have existed.
  2. Kimmi
    No, that wasn't the point.
  3. Kimmi
    Not in terms of value/dollar over the length of the contract though. I wish I knew more about cars so I could give the proper analogy here, but you're paying {insert most expensive car name here} prices for that Corvette and you're paying Corvette prices for the Fiesta. Same thing.
  4. Kimmi
    I agree that they needed pitching more. That is not the point.
  5. Kimmi
    A significant drop off in production at the age of 28? No. Even with his large size. Expecting a mild drop off is reasonable. OTOH, expecting an improvement playing in the friendly confines of Fenway and AL East parks is reasonable as well.
  6. Kimmi
    He is proud of his traditionalist views, and why shouldn't he be? Some of them are very wrong, but he has no reason to be ashamed of what he believes. Those beliefs are shaped from years and years of experience.
  7. Kimmi
    That's always the case though, isn't it? You need things to go according to plan.
  8. Kimmi
    That was mostly for Jacko and his "Sox may contend but only because of the sorry state of the division" argument.
  9. Kimmi
    When we first debated this, that is not the opinion that you gave.
  10. Kimmi
    Well if you think calling someone a traditionalist is an insult, I think that is rather telling of your opinion of traditionalist views, not mine. I've said many times that my father is very traditional in his baseball thinking, and he is the last person I would ever insult.
  11. Kimmi
    A slow guy on first is not as much of a concern to steal a base, but the defense still plays differently when there is a runner on first versus when there is not a runner on first, whether that runner is speedy or not. Having the defense out of its "typical" position is what creates an advantage for the hitter.
  12. Kimmi
    No it wasn't. Read my point #1 to you several pages back. Perhaps you took it on a different tangent, but my posts have been in regards to whether disrupting the defense helps the batter.
  13. Kimmi
    Homer is most definitely a derogatory term. Don't try to state otherwise. It has a negative connotation attached to it, and you know it. Having traditional baseball views or being old school does not have any negative connotation. Think of all of the players/managers that are traditional or old school. There is nothing but respect for those guys.
  14. Kimmi
    No, the initial argument was actually about whether the batter at the plate had an advantage when a speedy runner was on first base, due to the "disruption" that the speedy runner caused. The studies that I linked to you addressed that issue - the effect on the batter. It was even argued how the batter would see more fast balls and would thereby hit better. In terms of disrupting the defense to the extent that it gives the hitter any advantage, the hitter's advantage does not exist. In fact, the hitter is at a disadvantage. In that sense, "disrupting the defense" is actually hurting the offense. No one is denying that speed is a valuable weapon. Most of the team's advantage comes from the actual stolen bases, staying out of double plays, advancing an extra base, etc. There does tend to be more balks with a speedy runner on first, so there's that. But the whole notion of a speedy runner disrupting the defense is largely overstated.
  15. Kimmi
    Sounds about right.
  16. Kimmi
    Fangraphs currently has the Sox projected to have the second best record in baseball with 92 wins, behind only the Cubs. They like our offense.
  17. Kimmi
    Did signing Pablo make the Sox a better team, on paper? I don't think anyone can honestly say no to that. They spent a lot of money to make the team better. Isn't that what they did with Price?
  18. Kimmi
    It's not always easy, but somebody has to do it.
  19. Kimmi
    Thank you.
  20. Kimmi
    It's not fallacious. I am not saying that Sandoval is as good a player as Price. I also understand that Sandoval having a terrible year was more likely that Price having a terrible year. That said, despite the decline in Sandoval's offense, there was no reason to expect him not to be a 2.5 - 3 WAR player last year. And the money being paid to Price is significantly more than the money being paid to Sandoval.
  21. Kimmi
    On a related note, Tek and Wakefield will be inducted into the Red Sox Hall of Fame. Well-deserved for both.
  22. Kimmi
    You are correct sir. During the steroid era, the break even point on stolen bases was roughly 70%. Now, it's roughly 66-67%. Any success rate over that would be a benefit to the team. Below that would be a negative.
  23. Kimmi
    Not to mention Millar's walk.
  24. Kimmi
    Actually, it's just having a runner on first base that does that.
  25. Kimmi
    On this, you are correct. The value of the stolen base has gone up. That said, stolen bases have largely been overrated.
×
×
  • Create New...