Maxbialystock

A very timely winning streak, but aren't they all? This one, however, comes after going 2-4 vs. the Royals and Rays and during the brand new enforcement of not allowing pitcher to doctor up the ball.

Beyond question Sale is the man based on his track record in the past and spot reports on his recovery this year.

Meh. I think Bloom and Cora both would counter with, "slow down. This team is a work in progress." Yes, the hitting is good and could be better with Arroyo and Duran, but for now I like Hernandez leading off and playing CF. Plus we don't know Duran at Worcester will hit that well at Boston. These days that gap is larger than ever. Rotation has been way better than expected, but 1-3 it has not been. Team ERA is ranked 15th in MLB, mostly because of the rotation. I given Cora and his pitching coach a ton of credit for how they have managed/coached the pitching staff. However, what should make all of us nervous is the Commish's dictum banning foreign substances on the ball. It clearly has affected Richards, and I think Barnes as well. Probably Perez. Probably not Eovaldi, Pivetta, and ERod who who just maybe weren't "using" much anyway.

Exactly.

I think Girardi over-reacted and had to pay the price of looking like a fool. I was delighted to learn that his target, who has in fact been very effective getting hitters out and being paid handsomely to do so, either wasn't using foreign substances or learned very quickly how to pitch without spotrac or whatever. Or put it this way. The Commish gave everyone fair warning he was going to do this, and then he did what he said he would do--via inspections by the umpires. So far, it sure looks like a problem solved in an efficacious manner. But not effectively enough for one manager. He challenged not only the pitcher, but also the umpires and the Commish--and lost.

Completely disagree. The Commish warned everyone in spring training this was going to happen. And there is no effective way to check pitchers for foreign substances without physically inspecting cap, glove, belt, whatever on the field of play. Indeed, the reason why pitchers flouted the rule all this time is they weren't being checked. I thought the umpires were going to catch a bunch of guys, but so far it looks as though: 1) almost all pitchers are abiding by the rule; 2) most of them are discovering they can still get hitters out without spotrac or whatever it's call. Even the worst of the worst, Garrett Richards, went 4.1 shutout innings last night after getting hammered for 5 runs in the first 1.1 innings. Plus, I don't know about anyone else, but I kind of liked how Joe Girardi went completely ape trying to get Kershaw--who had to submit to three inspections--nailed for using foreign substances and failed completely and got thrown out of the game.

Agree on Cora--of course. Everyone agrees he is a difference maker. But I think you give him too little credit on his decision-making, both during games and in terms of who plays on which days. Last night he stayed with Richards, who delivered 4.1 innings of shut out ball after giving up that final dinger by the Royals to give them the 5-0 lead with 1 out in the 2d inning. But Friday against the Yankees he pulled Perez after 3.2 innings when he had only given up 3 runs. In that game he decided he was going all in for the win. Last night, down 5-0, he stuck with Richards both to save his bullpen (worked hard recently) and to give Garrett an opportunity to show he can still pitch. He got two wins because both times he used his bullpen just the right amount. Oh, and he pulled Pivetta when he had a no-hitter going, another good decision that secured a win in a game in which Pivetta was very unlikely to be able to go 9. In fact, Pivetta, was smiling when he came off the mound. You have cited experts who say that run differential is a vital stat in determining the overall talent/worth of a team, which means the Houston Astros are absolute world-beaters, talent-wise, because theirs is an amazing +140. Next best are the Dodgers at +104. Meanwhile, the Sox are at a meager +43. Yet they are just 1/2 game behind the Astros. The experts say that just shows the Sox are lucky, but I'm thinking just maybe Cora knows what he is doing. Or he is what Napoleon used to say he preferred--a lucky general rather than a smart one. I can say all this now because of course the proof of the pudding is the postseason. As you have said, the big run differential teams tend to do better then.

On paper--his MLB track record--I wouldn't think so. But Bloom has done pretty good finding/picking up players. As for leading off, it's a simple fact that no Sox player has done that well this year. Indeed, I think most or all of them don't want to lead off. So, Kike's recent and modest (short term) success leading off is a veritable bonanza.

Probably. Youk was a third baseman who moved to 1B and did great immediately. Why? Because 1b is a much easier position to play.

About Bobby Dalbec. JBJ, a terrific defensive outfielder, inherited the starting CF position in 2014 after Ellsbury went to the Yankees. He started and stopped (meaning he was sent back to AAA) several times that season because his hitting stunk. Then, somehow, in August he finally started to hit. But over the next 5 years he would have greater fits and spurts than most players. He was an improvement over Ellsbury--despite Jacoby's incredible 2011 season--because he was a better defensive centerfielder and not excessively prone (as Ellsbury was) to season-ending and career-ending injuries. Bobby Dalbec, on the other hand, is a defensive liability (DWAR -1.1) while playing the easiest infield position. Thus, despite being 5th on the Sox in dingers (11) and RBI's (40), his overall WAR is -.9. He also leads the position players in strikeouts with 86 in 213 AB's. What keeps Dalbec on the big club is in fact his hitting and the lack of it from guys like Chavis, Gonzalez, Cordero, Santana, etc.

Too bad you couldn't watch the game last night and decided to look up spin rates instead. If you had watched, you would have noticed that command in the first 2 innings was a bigger problem than spin rate. Both dingers were off pitches--a fastball and a slider--in the geometric center of the strike zone. After the second one, Richards pitched 4.1 innings of shut out baseball and kept the Sox in the game long enough to get the score to 5-5 with 2 outs in the top of the 6th inning. In terms of bullpen usage, this game had disaster written all over it.

Pitchers, especially starters, care.

Absolutely. In this case justice was served. Besides, Richards' 3.2 shutout innings give him something to build on. His big curve did not look half bad tonight. And that 93 mph fast ball has a nice bend to it. A changeup is still too much to ask.

Stunning win, beginning with Richards reversal after giving up 5 runs. He then went 3.2 unscored upon. Slumping Dalbec was benched in favor of hitting Dalbec. Rike continues to act as though he belongs in the leadoff position, which we all know to be impossible. The only non-surprise: bullpen 3.1 scoreless innings for the win, hold, and save. Dever's continued defensive prowess not so surprising. 4 in a row--wild applause, mvp78--when backs were to the wall after losing 2 of 3 in the Trop, which I swear bothered out players as much as the Rays prowess did. Sox 1 up on the Rays, 6.5 on the Jays, and 7.5 on the Yanknays. And just 1/2 game behind the Astros with their astronomical (pun intended) run differential of +142. Kimmi keeps reminding us that the experts say winning by just one run is luck, not merit. Tonight did not look like luck to me, especially--and I have to admit it--Garrett Richards gritty comeback after giving up 5 runs in 2 innings.

A grounder with eyes! 5-5!

That's only because Cora has absolutely no feel for the game or his pitchers.

Who was that masked man who got 2 more for the good guys?

Agree. I wrote the Sox off after the first two innings and will be delighted to be wrong. Again.

Not being able to doctor the ball might be part of the problem, but the real issue with Richards is command. Both those dingers, one on a fastball and the other on a slider, were right down the middle. Someone last night opined that ERod needed to pound the strike zone, but in fact what worked for him was moving the location around and mixing up his pitches and not throwing too many pitches right down the middle. Richards gave up way too many runs, but has now thrown 2 straight shut out innings. Of course Cora will stay with him awhile long. Bullpen was heavily used vs. the Yankees. Also at Tampa. And no off day until July 8.

Got it. Professional baseball, which has been played for 150 years with human umpires, was, well, sad to say, illegitimate. Forget Don Larsen's perfect game because he had a human umpire. Same goes for the brilliance of Sandy Koufax because those home plate umpires were probably giving him the benefit of the doubt. And just how many of Babe Ruth's home runs were the result of home plate umpires not calling strikes by opposing pitchers? To me part of the greatness of all sports, very definitely including MLB, is that they are human endeavors--including the humans officiating. The most popular sport in the entire world is soccer football, which is also the least officiated sport in the world. One official calls all the fouls wherever they occur on a very large field of play and is assisted only by sideline judges who call offsides. I don't like the replays we now have to live with, but do recognize they definitely limit on field tantrums we used to see by players, coaches, and managers. Overall, I think they save time in an era when games take longer and longer. Speaking of which, why is there almost no effective control of the time between thrown pitches, which I believe is supposed to be 25 seconds? Speaking of level playing fields, what about all those pitchers doctoring baseballs for the past 100 years? PED's? Ballpark idiosyncracies that favor the home team? Stealing signals, which we know both the Astros and the Red Sox have done--and probably plenty of other teams who weren't caught? The Black Sox, who created an unlevel playing field for their Chicago fans by intentionally throwing games? And how about MLB's occasional dictums which can greatly affect the game, like lowering the mound, suddenly enforcing a 100 year old rule, etc? What you call a level playing field I call a desire for a reality that does not exist on the field with the players and umpires. They cannot see balls and strikes with the accuracy of that rectangle, so it is a false assumption that it's an unlevel playing field. Or take your point about players having to adjust to what the umpire is calling in that game. How is that different from having to adjust to the idiosyncracies of the pitcher you are facing or the batter you are facing? Indeed, by now every player and every pitcher goes into a game with computerized info on the tendencies of whomever they are going to face. That does not mean the opposing pitcher or hitter will conform to what the computer predicts. Hence in game adjustments. Hence better success for hitters the third time they face a pitcher in that game.

My point remains: the home plate ump is in the best position to call balls and strikes, and the rectangle we see on our screens provides an ideal that does not exist on the field of play. Baseball is a human endeavor, not a computer game, which is that the robo-ump fanatics keep insisting we must have.

Ditto. Except that I was impressed with him Tuesday because it seems to me that this year ERod was one of the few pitchers who was not cheating.

Umpiring is fine. Not just the umpire, but the players do not see the ball with the accuracy of that strike zone imposed on the screen. That imposed strike zone is not what the players see, especially not the hitters who are making split second decisions on whether to swing. I favor a pitcher-friendly home plate umpire who basically forces the hitters to swing rather than try to get a walk.

It would seem that Verdugo just doesn't want to get walked.

Angels go up 5-4 with no help from Ohtani. Astounding.