Kimmi

I understand what you're saying. I just don't think you can judge defense by errors alone. I think teams give up more runs defensively from players not getting to balls due to lack of range than they do by errors. Either way, when you see a huge gap between a pitcher's ERA and his FIP and/or SIERA, something is going on beyond a pitcher's control.

I disagree that ERA is an excellent measure of pitching excellence. Not as a stat in and of itself. ERA is very much a team driven stat. I am not saying that Porcello's poor season this year is due to poor defense. What I am saying is that Porcello had a poor defense playing behind him in Detroit, and his ERA reflected that. Therefore, it was not unrealistic to expect him to pitch better this year with what was supposed to be a very good defense behind him.

The offense was supposed to be the best in baseball. They were built to mash, not to pitch. Averaging 5 runs/game might be pushing it a bit (though not unrealistic), but they should be able to average 4.7 or 4.8 runs/game. In May, they averaged 2.8 runs/game and had a 10-19 record. If they could have scored 4 runs/game they would have had a 15-14 record that month and would be in first place.

I can't argue with that.

Losing this game is not the end of the world, but it sure would have been nice to end the first half on a high note. Now we have 5 days to sit on this loss. Losing series to our division rivals, especially the Yankees, is not going to get it done.

I like it too. I can't stand when the Sox are the Sunday Night game.

Bogus call. Hernandez was out to get the Sox today, it seemed.

Well, that's my point. Their conventional wisdom is so ingrained in them as being the truth, that it's going to take a long time for them to be convinced otherwise. That doesn't mean that they're right right. Could you imagine the outrage if a manager batted Barry Bonds lead off?

I am not a doctor, so I don't know how significant this is, but Buchholz was saying that the doctor told him that his arm looked like he had never pitched. The ligaments did not look "streteched" or anything along those lines. In other words, it didn't sound like he was in danger of being a future TJ victim based on this injury.

The conventional ideas about batting orders are so ingrained in managers', players', and fans' heads that no manager will create an optimal line up anytime in the near future.

Call it what you want, but it doesn't change the point. The fact remains that the idea that your #3 hitter should be the best hitter on the team is a myth. Best hitters, in terms of avoiding outs, should be at the top of the lineup. Currently Ortiz and Ramirez are not the best hitters in terms of OBP. Regardless, tweaks in the line up, such as changing the positions of Bogaerts and Ramirez, have very little effect over the course of the season. Your implication that Farrell is costing this team runs is false. OK, he might cost the team .2 runs for the whole season, if your belief that Hanley needs to bat 3rd were correct, which it's not.

They are where they are mostly because of the putrid offense in May. If the offense scored and average of 5 runs/game in May, even with the stafff underperforming, we'd be a first place team.

This is why you need to look at peripheral stats and other factors, and not go by ERA alone. Masterson, Buchholz, and Miley all pitched better than their ERAs. Masterson was injured last year. Porcello has been the victim of terrible defenses behind him. Vazquez and Hanigan are both highly touted defensive catchers, especially in the area of pitch framing. IMO, the level of underperformance this year is surprising.

I was sure that Ben would acquire a #1 pitcher this offseason too, but his strategy, in theory, should work. It's not a poplular strategy, but that doesn't mean it's a faulty one. It's difficult for any strategy to work when all facets of the team were underperforming - pitching, offense, and defense, not to mention losing our 2 starting catchers so early. IMO, the biggest reason why the Sox are in the hole that they are in has not been the SP, but rather the offense in May, and our offense was supposed to be a sure thing.

The fact of the matter is that batting order makes such little difference over the course of the season that it is better for a manager to put hitters into spots where they feel comfortable hitting, and to alternate righties and lefties to avoid allowing the opposing team's LOOGY to pitch to more than one lefty, than it is to try to put the "stereotypical" #3 hitter into the #3 slot. The idea that the #3 hitter should be your best hitter is a traditionalist view which has been proven false. The optimal lineup in terms of importance of OBP should be 1, 4, 2, 5, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, which would make our lineup look like this: Holt, De Aza (or Victorino), Betts, Hanigan, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Sandoval, Napoli. This goes so much against traditional thinking that a manager would never do this.

Well, that is encouraging, but with Clay, about a month could end up being 3 months.

I also don't think that any GM would openly state that they hope their pitching is just good enough to get them to the deadline, when they can bring in someone better.

No, but isn't that pretty much the plan for any GM going into the season? That the pieces that he put in place will be good enough to keep his team in the race until reinforcements could be brought in, if needed? He did say that rotations are not stagnant, and that he felt like the team had the pieces within the organization if and when they were needed. Youngsters in the minor league system are part of the reinforcements. Contrary to popular belief here, Ben is not stupid. Do you think that he, not to mention his entire scouting and analytics team, banked on Kelly giving the team 200 innings when he's never done it before? I'm sure that they hoped he would, but I'm also sure that they had midseason reincforcements in mind.

More analysts predicted the Red Sox to finish in first place than not, and they had many more first place predictions than any other team. For your reading pleasure: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=25949 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fangraphs-2015-staff-predictions/ http://espn.go.com/mlb/preview15/story/_/id/12588378/expert-team-predictions-2015-mlb-season http://m.mlb.com/news/article/116252342/mlb-experts-make-picks-who-will-win-it-all-in-2015 http://www.si.com/mlb/2015/04/02/playoff-picks-awards-predictions-mvp-cy-young-rookie-of-the-year http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/mlb-predictions-2015--standings--playoffs--awards-and-more-043325435.html http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2015-mlb-predictions-playoff-picks-mvp-cy-young-surprise-team-flop-team/ FTR, Ben has taken full ownership of and responsibilty for the team, which I admire and respect. He is not trying to pass the blame onto anyone else. However, I think he did a good job during the offseason and I cannot blame him for the players not performing up to expectations.

Oh, you mean reading comprehension skills? LOL Guilty as charged. I often don't understand what someone else is trying to say.

The plan was for the staff to be good enough to keep the team in the race until the deadline, when reinforcements could be brought in. I'm not sure that the FO expected him to be in the rotation for a full season. His ERA last season, while not great, is still almost a run and a half better than it is this season. IMO, there was no reason to expect that level of dropoff.

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. I put a lot of thought into most of my posts.

Who are you calling a fat loser?

I agree that they all had question marks, but then again, no player is a guarantee. IMO, the only ones who had a lot of downside risk were Masterson and Buchholz. There was no reason to expect Porcello to pitch considerably worse than he pitched last season. Same with Miley and Kelly. Last I checked, which was several weeks ago, these guys were not just underperforming, they were having career worst seasons. I understand people not liking the way the staff was constructed. I didn't particularly like it myself. However, it should have been enough to get the Sox to the trading deadline with the offense that they were supposed to have. Even with all of the problems that they've had, they may still get to the deadline in this race.

It is the GM's responsibility to address the issues and to try to correct them, but I don't think he can be held responsible for the way the players have underperformed. If Ben had signed Clayton Kershaw last offseason, and then for some inexplicable reason he had an ERA of 6 this season, would that be Ben's fault? I know that Kershaw would be a much more extreme case, and I know that our pitchers had more question marks, but the underlying point remains the same. I don't think Ben was gambling on everything working out in the Sox favor, but nor was he expecting almost everything to work against us. The staff was not supposed to be great, but mediocre. They have been worse than that. I don't think the staff is the biggest reason why this team is in last place. I still say that if the offense had been performing to expected levels all season, the Sox would be leading the division. Some analysts might have thought the team was poorly constructed, but most that I read thought the Sox would be competitive. More analysts had the Sox winning the division than any other team. The computer models all favored the Sox. On paper, this team should be leading the division.