Maxbialystock

The three guys in the NESN booth remind a little of the three who used to call Redskins game on the radio--Sonny Jurgensen, Sam Huff and the announcer. Very compatible.

Yankees need to go back to MLB and claim sign stealing again. Won't fly, of course, but they need to try it because what we are seeing right now is bad news for them.

Devers is hot! If there is a change, it might be he ss happy with just hitting the ball squarely and not whether it's a dinger. I'm not at all sure of that. Just an idle thought.

Wrong! He stayed with a heavy diet of breaking balls and needed just 10 pitches. This could not be better.

3 run lead. Sale might be a tad more aggressive in the 2d if only to get his pitch count down.

Mookie is so fast. 3 in the first, just like last night.

OK, if I'm a Yankee fan, I'm getting nervous because my guys can't catch the Sox alone. They need help from the guys they are chasing, and that should mean continued weak hitting except this is now two straight games when the Sox have scored early. Then a blast, caught, by Beni and a hard single by Mookie. Plus now the bulls are running.

OK, ump off--definite strike on that andriese ball.

Great steal, thereby proving it didn't need to stretch that single. Late and hard slide by Nunez showed determination, hopefully not to much.

New rules, it seems. Do not try to stretch singles off the wall. Let's see if Nunez goes.

I think the ump only took away one strike--a biggie-granted--but it was also right on the lline and not inside that rectangle. Sale has done exactly what Dr Max would have prescribed--mixed his pitches, plenty of changeups and sliders, lots of them low in the zone. But so far the Rays aint nibbling much and to me they are seeing the ball way too well. Thus 23 pitches and a walk and a single. Passed ball by Leon an irritant, but Sale sure didn't show it.

Guardians unreal right now. Helping ourselves vs. the Yankees is made better by the last 3 games and Sale tonight. As Kimmi keeps reminding us--we are in charge of our destiny and lately it looks like the pieces might be coming back together. Or as moonslav says, don't forget that 16-4 streak in August.

1 Nunez SS 2 Pedroia 2b 3 Benintendi LF 4 Betts RF 5 Moreland 1b 6 Ramirez DH 7 Devers 3B 8 Leon C 9 Bradley CF Against righty Andriese, 5 lefty bats, mostly because Sale likes Leon behind the plate. 3d game with Nunez in for Bogaerts at SS. This time with Pedroia at 2b, Devers at 3b, and HanRam at DH--I mention those three because Nunez could play/hit in place of any of them. Devers and JBJ remain in the bottom of the lineup, but it seems to work. Leon too of course--and all three have lefty bats.

I am longwinded, no question. But in my mind I lay out numbers as such as my case for support. I have, I think, made it clear that I think those "fundamentals," while they are real, are not in my judgment the cause or our problems this year, especially not when we are closing in on the AL East and 90 or more wins and the 3d best record in the AL despite weak hitting. Maybe I have overstepped on that topic, but lately I've noticed others saying just maybe Farrell isn't quite as bad as the talksox consensus (thus I am clearly in the minority) says he is. If you look at some of my other posts, I have ranted about him too--see especially his decision to leave Porcello in in his last start. I also hate that some of our pitchers are still slow to cover 1b on grounders to the right. Overall, however, you have a point. Lots of my stuff is both longwinded and pointed. Kimmi is far more gracious and accommodating.

Bosoxmal, I sure hope he isn't. Important, no question. But we got got killed by the Guardians last year because of three lousy starters, not one. They were ones with the deep rotation, remember? This year they are just as deep and can probably withstand an early win by Sale. What's more, they have hit Sale awfully well this year and before this year. Our 2013 WS win was mostly about our great pitching, but even then Lackey was as important as Lester. Lackey was the guy who held the Tigers scoreless against the Tigers and Verlander, who gave up just 1 run. Plus the bullpen was fantastic. Don't forget that in 2013 we still had Papi in his prime which meant good hitting and leading the AL in runs scored. In the postseason we got some very timely hitting, some clutch hitting, but not a whole lot of hitting. Sale can't fix our hitting, and he can't be the totality of our rotation. In fact, it may be in his case that less is more, that Farrell should not want to make him the iron man.

In fairness to ERod, I have to admit control/command of his pitches, especially the breaking balls and keeping the ball low in the zone (but not all the time) might be the real problem. In that respect, he is not alone. Porcello can't do that, neither can Pom. Heck, there are times when I think Sale can't do it.

As do we all, especially when we know he can do it.

Could be right. I cited one lousy game only because of how it happened--he started out great which he rarely, if ever, does. He loves blasting away that fast ball in the first inning, and if it works OK the 2d as well. He seems to eschew smart pitching. Besides, I'm desperate for something good to say about ERod. To me he has pretty good stuff, but only only from the neck down. He is the polar opposite of Fister.

Meh. Last year Betts, one example, prospered batting first: OPS .897, first in runs scored with 122, 2d after Ortiz in rbi's with 113 which was more than HanRam's 111 with a great OPS of .866. Besides, the Sox collective OPS's this year were better before the ASG than after. More and more I'm thinking there is an elusive (meaning I am clueless) psychological dimension to slotting hitters. Small sample size, but Devers has been incredible batting 7th with an OPS of 1.414. He batted there last night and the night before when he got out of that nasty little slump. My conclusion? I find it hard to second guess any lineup or even the idea of keeping the same one or changing them regularly. I simply cannot buy the notion that anything Farrell has done with the lineup is very good or very bad. Last year's lineup didn't need a lot of tinkering because Ortiz was so incredible and helped make everyone else better. He's gone and with him a bigger chunk of our run scoring that I thought possible.

In that case, I'm wrong and I mean it. I do indeed like debating, especially on a Saturday morning. And I suspect, based on those 30 years, you would demolish me if you wanted to. My one small rejoinder is that that lengthy first post was directed at no one in particular. It was meat on the table. And you, not me, decided to take a nibble. I did, however, use that as an excuse to expatiate further and at some length. A misread by me.

moonslav, no quarrel on that. How about last year and the year before when those three/two weren't half bad? Besides, you know my basic measurement for managers which I just repeated--wins, losses, and getting to the postseason. Them's my fundamentals.

A repeat. Disregard.

If you want to make the case against Farrell, try my fundamentals--wins, losses, and getting to the postseason. One guy calling talk radio? And you give him an entire sentence andmake him your key evidence to say "2 overpaid knuckleheads who do their job poorly?" Seriously?

I was being facetious to make a point. I think Farrell has done well with Devers, but do remember a lot of complaints recently when he sat him for two straight games. I am almost certain he was not the decider on when Devers would get to Boston. He might have had input. In any case, I thought the right decision was made. On talksox, however, there was much talk about the unnecessary delay caused by stupidly making Devers go through Pawtucket, however short the stay. I don't know whether Giradi has been good for Sanchez and Judge but both have been good and both are young. But I do know Farrell gets zero credit for anything good JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, Beni, Devers, or Vazquez does--at least, no credit on talksox. He does, however, regularly get credit for any mistakes they make because of course he knows nothing about and just doesn't care about those crucial "fundamentals."

Really? Yankees fans whose team pays a king's ransom for players are mad at the manager for not winning more WS (the Yankees have won 27 overall)? Astounding. Maybe they're spoiled rotten, just as we might be becoming now that the 86 year drought has been semi-eradicated by not one but three WS titles. Or maybe they should be blaming the guy (Cashman) who has basically spent that king's ransom. In any case, try building the case against Girardi the same way you have built the case against Farrell. Show me the weak fundamentals, the endless mental blunders, the pervasive boneheadedness. Show me all those lousy pitching decisions. You know, all that bad stuff that makes Farrell so worthless. And, while you are at it, don't forget that I have said repeatedly that the only fair measure of a manager is overall team performance measured almost solely by wins and losses. You win, you stay. You lose, goodbye. Farrell got through 2014 and 2015 because of that totally unexpected WS win in his first year 2013--the one that followed Francona's 2011 disastrous September and Valentine's even worse 2012. He lasted through 2016 because the Sox won the AL East. Also don't forget that Francona got those two WS with two really good bats--Manny and Big Papi--some other good hitters and just enough good pitching. He does get special credit for being in charge for that mind-bogglingly great ALCS in 2004 when the Sox came back from losing the the first three games to the Yankees. Nevertheless, he was gone after the 2011 September collapse. You like fundamentals? Try those--wins and losses and getting to the postseason.