Maxbialystock

But none of those sports' replays rely on a mythical rectangle that no one on the field of play can see. The basket in basketball is not not fabricated. It is not an estimate based on the shooters height, stance, etc. The tennis replays are of the actual ball and line, not an imaginary line.

Yes, they do, but those replays don't rely on that mythical rectangle you guys have all sworn allegiance to. In tennis, the replay looks at the actual line on the court. In football, the actual line on the field. And so on. Only baseball fans want to go by a made-up rectangle on a screen that we already know is flawed. And don't forget that in the most popular sport in the world there is just one ref making all kinds of calls without benefit of some stupid rectangle you can see on your screen.

The ALCS was just weird. The Sox looked invincible after 3 games and completely vincible in the next 3. The Astros pitching was amazing in those final 3 games. I griped about the Sox hitting, but only great pitching can emasculate a terrific lineup that quickly and for that long. I will probably root for the Astros in the WS. Also, I want that guy Alvarez investigated. Forget the righties. He destroyed our lefties. He likes fastballs, but he likes breaking balls even more. Down and away? No problemo. Also, check that birth certificate because no way he is 24. Same goes for that Wander guy with the Rays. He is not, repeat not, 20.

The Astros definitely cheated. I know for a fact that their pitchers unfairly knew what pitch their catcher was signaling for. This gave them a clear advantage over the Sox hitters.

Mostly it's the 3d time. Fatigue shouldn't figure if its 70 pitches or less. Indeed, despite your very low opinion of Cora, one of his very neat adjustments this season was in using several long relievers--Valdez, Whitlock, Richards, Houck, Pivetta, and even Perez a couple of times. Pivetta even did it twice, 4 innings and 4.2 innings, just 3 days apart in the ALDS. He threw 73 pitches on Oct 7 and 67 pitches on Oct 10. While moonslav's stats on Pivetta are convincing, I too think that MLB managers these days are too willing to pull their starter simply because it's the 3d time.

One more time. The rectangle you have fallen in love with is only an image on your screen. No one on the field of play can see it even though every thing else on the field of play is visible. In addition, that rectangle on your boob tube can't possibly be accurate because of the idiosyncracies of each batter's dimensions and stance, to say nothing of that weird shape of home plate and the variety of trajectories which pitches follow when they approach the plate. What I find especially laughable is your insistence that players, hitters and pitchers and catchers, crave perfection in the call of balls and strikes even though they cannot actually see small differences. No other sport on earth requires accuracy greater than the human eye can normally see. My other complaint is based on my preference for human umpires calling a game played by human players because to me that is the quintessential nature of sport and especially baseball. Would you not agree that players errors are far, far more egregious than anything an umpire would commit? Do you remember that play--and thank goodness I've forgotten the name of the Sox baserunner--when a Sox player was on 2d base and the another Sox player at the plate hit one off the right field wall and could only get to 1st base because--wait for it--the Sox guy on 2b slid back into 2b!!!! Compared to the players, umpires are the soul of consistency and demeanor (well, most of the time). More than that, the umpires ensure a competitive environment that assures fair play and, for the most part, quick determination of play outcomes--fair, foul, safe, out, yes or no infield fly rule, ball, strike, balk or no balk, ground rule double or not, etc, etc--all of which are outlined in a voluminous rule book. To me the umpires are very much the pros from dover. They do make mistakes, but very rarely do those change the outcome of the game. Umpires are visible on the field as they should be because they are vital to the game being played by the rules. I cannot imagine a game which seems to be your ideal: all players, no visible umpires. Instead, a computerized voice announcing, "ball, strike, out, safe, fair, foul, infield ground rule in effect, ground rule double, etc, etc."

Nice try, but it just won't fly. The Sox went from 108-54 in 2018 to 84-78 in 2019 to 24-36 in 2020. From that great 2018 team they lost or traded the entire outfield of Beni, JBJ, and Mookie and one of the best in MLB whose combined WAR was 16.9 (!!!!!), a pretty decent 1b combo of Moreland and Pearce (combined WAR 2.1), starters Price and Porcello (WAR's of 4.4 and 3.1), closer Kimbrel (WAR 2.3), starter Wright (1.7), and reliever Joe Kelly. Bloom did keep Bogey, Devers, and JDM--and catcher Vazquez, but brought in or up a whole new outfield, first baseman, second baseman, three new starters (Perez, Richards, and Pivetta) whom no one else particularly wanted, and assorted relievers while keeping relievers Barnes and Brasier and starters Eovaldi and ERod--the latter having missed all of 2020 from covid and cardiomyelitis. Oh, and Sale was expected to return at some point, which turned out to be soon enough for 9 starts and 42.2 innings and a WAR of 1.0. Any sensible appraisal of the 2021 Sox had to conclude it was a rebuilding year and not as good as the 84-78 Sox of 2019, which not only retained most of the 2018 team, but included a much-improved ERod and much-improved Devers. That the Sox finished with 92 wins and then beat the Yankees and Cole in the wild card game and the AL best team Rays in the ALDS was an astounding accomplishment and completely unexpected. And let's be fair. As always, the players get the lion's share of the credit. Bloom and Cora threw no pitches, swung no bats, and fielded nothing. Nevertheless, it is abundantly clear Cora knew the right buttons to push, especially with respect to the pitching staff. Richards, for example, came in as a starter, was emasculated by not being allowed to doctor up his knuckle curve, became unreliable, then became a great, if short-lived, reliever, only in the end to be not good enough to make the ALDS roster. Perez followed a similar route. Eovaldi stayed good, but was definitely helped when Cora made Plawecki his regular catcher. Sale came back wonderfully until the wheels came off in October--except for his final game when he looked pretty darn good. Barnes was the world's greatest closer for the first half of the season, but got so bad he wasn't on the the postseason roster. Indeed, just about every single reliever--Ottavino, Brasier, DHernandez, Robles, Perez, et was inconsistent. The exception was Whitlock--until he gave up that hugely damaging dinger in the 8th inning of game 4 of the ALCS. Indeed, during the second half of the season--and the postseason-- Cora brilliantly used five different pitchers--Valdez, Richards, Whitlock, Houck, and Pivetta--as long relievers to compensate for both weak starts and weak relievers. He also had to "misuse" Kike, who had an amazing season, but, thanks to the abysmal situation at 2b, was forced to play there instead of CF where he was badly needed. Dalbec at first base was an error and strikeout machine for 2/3 of the season but finally showed some promise. Nevertheless, Cora correctly used Schwarber, a late addition, at 1b in the postseason, except when JDM was hurt. In the final 10 days of the regular season, the Sox seemed to be out of it. They lost 3 straight at Fenway to the Yankees and 2 of 3 to the Orioles--and headed to the Nationals Ball Park with a real prospect of not making the postseason. The pitching was erratic and Cora couldn't use a DH. But the Sox swept the Nats in no small part because Cora played both Schwarber and JDM in all three games and somehow overcame the Sox somewhat erratic pitching. ERod and Houck both had good starts--5 innings each and 0 runs--but Ottavino, Barnes, Davis, et al tried to give the games back to the Nats. Then Sale bombed in game 3--2.1 innings, 2 runs--and Richards, who had been good earlier in relief, gave up 3 more runs. The above is both too long and too short, but it's one shot at explaining why Cora is regarded by most knowledgeable Sox fans as having done an excellent job this year.

Home runs sure helped in the postseason, but Cora also made some excellent decisions on relief pitchers, especially in how he used Houck and Pivetta in relief in the ALDS. In the regular season, the Sox were 10th in dingers. And in the first half of the season it was the bullpen that made a big difference in the Sox leading the AL East and indeed the AL in wins.

You and I see the ALCS differently. I completely agree the Sox looked great winning 2 of the first 3 games, but after that they simply could not hit the Astros pitching, scoring a total of 1 run in the final 26 innings. The Astros pitching dominated the Sox lineup, pure and simple.

Agree on all--although I do think the Astros deserve a shout-out. They deserved to win the ALCS, just as the Sox deserved to be in the ALCS after having to beat the Yankees and Cole in the wild card game and then the 100 game-winning Rays in the ALDS.

Why not?

You cannot have watched this series without believing the better team won. I loved the Sox getting out to that 2-1 lead in ALCS, but then they were crushed by the Astros pitching.

Nowhere. It's just nice to confirm you blind spot.

Going into this game, Ottavino had not been scored upon in the postseason and the great Whitlock had cost the Sox game 3 when he gave up that game-tying dinger in the 8th inning. I like Whitlock just like everyone else does, but Ottavino was a reasonable choice. Besides, the Sox lineup has scored 1 run in the last 26 freaking innings.

I was defending Cora, and you have never said a good thing about him. Far from it. So this is about Cora, not my analysis. The Sox are losing the final 3 games of this ALCS because they can't hit the Astros pitching and not because of some move Cora made or failed to make.

So that's what you think of Cora? Finally, the truth emerges.

You mean Whitlock, the guy who killed the Sox two games ago when he gave up that game-tying dinger in the 8th inning?

Fine. Let's agree it was a low percentage play. But none of the Sox other "plays" were working, not when they go 25 consecutive innings while scoring one freaking run. Frankly, I'd rather Cora do something, even low percentage, than let his guys roll over and play dead, which is what they have done. I hasten to add that I'm only talking about these last 3 games. This team, this lineup, this pitching staff, and this manager have had a terrific season.

Well, his team certainly won in decisive fashion, so I can't disagree. But I also think 25 consecutive Sox innings of scoring one total run is kind of hard to blame on Cora. But sure, give Dusty Baker credit for getting the right guys on the mound.

It can't get any worse, so why not try a hit and run?

Well, at least Dalbec hit it.

Winnable only if it was a 3 game series. So far in the final 3 games the Sox have scored a total of 3 runs in 25 innings. The Astros pitching have completely dominated the Sox bats.

Dalbec is hitless in the postseason with 6 K's in 11 at bats, and you think he's going to get a hit against the Astros pitching? The Sox--Devers--couldn't even bring Kike home from 3d base. They've gone 24 consecutive innings without scoring a single freaking run because they literally can't hit. So how about getting off Cora's back?

Pretty dumb. Renfroe badly malpositioned. But, more than that, a total failure by Cora, pitching coach, and Vazquez to give a hot bat his due. All Taylor needed to do was throw one of one more low and away sliders for ball four.

He and Ottavino (of all people) have given up no runs in the postseason. That said, Cora has also not used either one for more than an inning.