Maxbialystock

Two straight extra inning wins in which the bullpen was superb, going 11 innings with 0 runs. It's remotely possible Farrell knows what he is doing.

No disagreement about sample size, which is incredibly small. So of course there is hope. On the other hand, we know for a fact that Price's lifetime ERA is 3.24 but last year it was 3.99, which was his highest season ERA since his first year, 2009. And this year so far--granted, a small sample--his ERA is 5.09. So it very much seems to me that the burden of proof lies on those who say, "Price is just as good as he always was." Another thing about Price worries me. He seems to love his fastball almost as much as opposing hitters love it. It's his go to pitch, which means those hitters can sit on it whenever he is behind in the count. On top of that, as we saw last night, he now seems to be using other pitches--especially changeup (essential for a lefty who normally will fact 75% or more righty bats), but also curve and slider--but he can't put them where they will do some good. Those breaking balls seem to alternate between being up in the strike zone and close to the center or so far outside the strike zone they are not tempting. If you check the speed gun results usually displayed on the TV screen, you will notice that Price seems capable of consistently throwing a 95-96 mph fast ball, which is excellent. Normally, usually, he can also spot it (if not all the time). The problem is that no fastball by a starter is good enough to rely on solely for 6, 7, 8, or 9 innings. You must be able to keep batters off balance with a mix of pitches that go to the right places in the strike zone or close to it. Since he came to the Sox, I have not seen Price do that.

52 pages now on the rotation and 0 pages on the bullpen.

My HS senior year was 59 years ago and we went to class every day to the bitter end. I mean, that's what HS students do--like a job.

I could of course be wrong, but last night I thought Price's lack of control was the direct result of not over-relying on his fastball, which he is prone to do and which is why his ERA last year and this year has been high. The good news is he still went 6 innings, giving up 3, and has begun the process--my opinion--of learning how to throw other pitches (besides his fast ball) effectively.

During the game last night someone flashed a stat that said HanRam already so many 440 foot dingers this year. I keep the sound off, so I don't know what they said. But, if asked, I would have said, "can there be any doubt this guy is a swinger and not a true hitter? " I think he loves swinging the bat so hard his helmet falls off. He doesn't go to the plate to get a hit or to help the team, but to get some good exercise with those really hard cuts at the ball. Remember the other Ramirez, Manny? He looked a lot like the current one--stocky, long hair, etc. But Manny was a real student of hitting and made a huge difference in the Sox lineup, especially in combination with Ortiz.

Another amazing win. Yes, it's just the Phillies, but it still counts and, by the by, narrowed the gap to 3 games. Amazing applies especially to the bullpen, who I believe have now gone 12 straight scoreless innings in just two games, both of which the Sox won. Which leads me again to this cantankerous thought. I have said on other threads that generally managers just don't have that big an effect on most aspects of the game--they can't call many plays or make in-game adjustments the way NBA and NFL coaches can. The exception of course is how the pitching is managed and that mostly means the bullpen. The pitchers, I hasten to add, did all the work and got the outs last night and the night before. Nevertheless, I think Farrell was masterful in those two games. On to Philly and, one hopes, a deluge of hits by the Sox. Johnson tonight and Sale tomorrow night.

yesterday NPR did a story on Yankees home attendance, which has been going steadily down, mostly because of the drastic increase in seat prices in the new stadium, but also because of "all that razzmatazz." The Yankees management thinks that a trip to the ball park should be an event and a shopping trip and entertainment, only some of which is baseball. In those few movies--like Bull Durham--with scenes in minor league ball parks, it is abundantly clear the owners are trying to entertain fans with more than baseball. On the other hand, we have younger women in our office--and older ones--and they all seem to know something about sports teams. Sometimes it's MLB, sometimes the NFL, and very occasionally the NBA. All in all, I think the "product," which is what I watch almost every day on my TV or computer, is still pretty darn good. In the other two major sports, size counts, but right now the Sox seem to be doing fine with an array of midgets in the outfield and at 2B. Pitchers are bigger, of course. But MLB to me has remained remarkably stable/pure, so I can live with all the bs at the ballparks.

Are you kidding me? You're in high school?

Good stuff, thanks. I always liked Pete Abraham. As for Price, my only--repeat only--heartburn with him is how he pitches. I don't care if talks all the time to reporters or never talks to them. I just wish he wouldn't thrown so darn many fastballs. He needs to mix it up.

Lively has given up 4 runs in 14 innings (just 2 starts) and could be force to be reckoned with. The Phillies, on the other hand, are 9-27 on the road.

I dislike Pomeranz intensely. To me he looks soft. Plus he basically depend on 2 pitches, neither of which is outstanding. And he doesn't have great control. Nevertheless, stupidity--which you two agree on--might be a strength for him. Maybe he's too dumb to say, "I have no business in the Bigs because maxbialystock (and others) think I don't have much going for me. My manager is right, I don't deserve to stay in games when the situation is tough.

Here's a stat I invented which holds up pretty well in seeing why one team won and the other lost. Believe it or not, the winning team has a higher percentage of K's vs. BB's than the losing team. After I wrote that, I checked last night's game's box score. We had 11 K's and 2 BB's, and the Phillies has 8 K's and 3 BB's. Hence we won.

What is? Range?

Meh. What I'm seeing is a guy with control issues. Good repertoire, good fastball speed, but can't seem to place the ball where it will do the most good. Last night his strike percentage was 72%, which is excellent. But what I'm talking about is putting the ball where it can be hit, but not solidly. Last night I didn't see, for example, a lot of pitches low in the strike zone.

A great win, but I missed the last 3 innings. Semi-miraculous, given Porcello's horrendous start. Charge this win up to the bullpen and, as someone else has said already, gritty play in coming from behind.

1. It's Fenway Park. 2. It's in Boston, not Philadelphia. Both cradles for the Republic--Philly was where the 2d Continental Congress was in session--but over time Boston has become the better city, and I say that as an outsider who has never lived in or near either city. 3. It's time for summer fun, including driving to away games. 4. I feel confident they are still obnoxious at home games.

The mind does indeed boggle.

About right, except the announcers--I almost never listen. I thought the gal was that young pitcher in the minors, but I guess not. Everybody's mad at Hembree, but I thought was a good pitch--fastball outside--then turned into the grand slam. To me there is an emerging pattern, which is that somehow our best pitchers can get hit, our middle pitchers can get hit harder, and the other team's pitchers always seem to have decent control and a decent repertoire except for the bullpen.

You're right, of course. We all believe that some players focus better, but don't tighten up, in clutch situations. The problem as I see is that the opposing manager has the power to affect that, the simplest being to walk the good hitter, which we saw Ausmus (?) do at least once. Another is to bring in a specialty or other effective reliever for that specific batter. Interestingly, that's exactly what Farrell did last night the bases loaded and 1 out in the 5th. Hembree's 96 mph fastball was actually outside, but the batter still hit it hard enough to get it to the Pesky pole, which, as I recall, is still a cheap dinger but one that nevertheless counts--it was a clutch at bat in my opinion.

Since this thread is about the rotation, I thought I would insert an observation about one member of the rotation--Pomeranz. I have watched him pitch a bunch of innings and games this year and remain astonished--there is no other word for it--that he is a lefty who simply can't throw a changeup. Now I think most of us have seen the most recent version of Andrew Miller, who used to pitch for the Sox and is now I think with Cleveland. He too only has two pitches, but they are both excellent pitches--a hard fastball and a great slider--that make him very effective as a reliever. Pomeranz basically uses his so-so fastball--91 mph--and a knuckle curve that does not seem to me to break sharply downward. That's basically his repertoire, and he is a starter. He does have a changeup, I think, but doesn't throw it but maybe once a game. He might have a slider, I'm not sure. Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but I think it's really hard to get away with a so-so fast ball, ditto knuckle curve, against a lineup up of all righty bats, which is what the Tigers had yesterday. He went 4.1 innings and gave up 6 runs. Season to date, he has started 12 games with 4 quality starts and an average of 5 innings per game. Thoughts from anyone else?

Last time Sale got hammered in the 1st, but then did 5 scoreless innings, I think because he starting using his curve and changeup. Be interesting to see what he does tonight.

Up to me, I play Marrero because Rutledge's OPS is only .620 or so and I like the good defense. But maybe Rutledge has a bigger edge batting against Verlander. The hilarious--not really--part is that nobody is saying Pablo, who actually hits better from the left side (against righty Verlander).

Rutledge has the better bat and Marrero the better glove.

A lot of heroes in last night's game--bullpen, Moreland, JBJ, even Johnson, who got hammered and threw a lot of pitches by still managed to go 4.1 innings while giving up 3 runs. HanRam and Pablo pissed me off , but others came thru--as it turned out, just in time. More and more I am convinced, however, that this just might be the first Sox team in the John Henry era that relies on pitching more than hitting and is--the operative term--successful.