Maxbialystock

I don't know about the actual game thread, but this is already a pretty good pre-game thread. I'm with Bellhorn and take nothing for granted. Archer isn't that bad. Buchholz isn't that good. What I like is that right now the Sox are engaged and determined. Benintendi made that spectacular catch, but earlier Young made a really good one that could easily have been a double. Ortiz legged out that double. Betts and HanRam had back to back sac flies to bring in I think the 3d run. Price went 8 cotton-pickin scoreless innings. And Barnes topped it all off by reminding us that our guys aren't dominant as long as we still have to go to the bullpen.

Love those numbers.

Last night was all most too good to be true--until Barnes came in for a quick dose of reality. The bullpen stinks enough that last time I finally agreed with a700hitter maybe we should give Papelbon a try, and I really don't like that guy. I like Buch tonight because lately he has pitched well, and, Archer, on the other hand, has already lost 3 times to the Sox this season. My guess is Sandy Leon will catch his third game in a row. Question is, will Shaw play 1B instead of HanRam and Holt play 3B? If so, that's 6 lefty bats against righty Archer.

Might be worth trying. My fear is Pap is toxic.

I was one of those pushing Barnes--wrongly, it seems. But Pap is a jerk of the first order and absolutely not a team player. Make him the JC Superstar Closer, and he will still be a jerk and not be a good closer. And let's not forget he's coming from the NL and the weakly NL East with no DH.

Moonslav, I was already there before tonight. Not claiming a great rotation, mind you, but a decent one, even a good one. Whether or not Price is an ace, those five guys you named are a pretty high average. And, if Buch pitches well again tomorrow night, that's six.

Finally. Our bullpen, let's face it, does not like a dull game. Is your offense anemic, even ghost-like? Just call on our ghostbusters.

I'm guilty, your honor.

I said it on another thread, that I would use Barnes for late and close games in the 7th or 8th inning. And he goes and does that, a clean single and a destroyed fastball dinger by Longoria.

f***ing barnes

A very satisfying game all around. Price goes 8 shut out innings. Benintendi gets a nice rbi sac fly then a great catch to save 2 runs when the game was close. Bogie's 2 run dinger, a hooded 8 iron on a low inside pitch, only attempted because he was compensating for that running error early in the game. Pedroia and Ortiz single followed by two nice sac flies by Betts and HanRam to get the 3d run. I hope I am stating the obvious when I say these guys are seem to be coming together--a nice blend of old and young, pitching and hitting, but most of all finding ways to win. I love it.

In comes the righty against Bogaerts.

Very nice at bat by Benintendi.

Awful. Bogaerts screwed up royally.

Hope you are right.

Snell, unfortunately, is also looking tough.

Hill looked like an idiot on the first pitch fastball in the dirt, but then made excellent contact on the lineout to LF. Price looking pretty good so far.

Good rule.

Did you just split an infinitive? Yes, indeed, the guys need to avoid the squandering syndrome. Yesterday, on the other hand, the Tigers had 10 hits and 10 runs--helped in no small measure by Owens's propensity for walking guys.

About balls and strikes: I am simply a strong proponent of having umpires call them and against robots or TV cameras or computers or whatever.

Happy birthday, Yaz, even though I rarely you saw you play because I was out of range of Boston TV, to say nothing of Boston itself.

That's like that story about a reporter interviewing Ty Cobb in his 60's and asking him what he thought of the great AL pitching. Not bad, said Ty. Not bad, questioned the reporter, what would you hit? About .300. Well, that's not so great for a guy with a lifetime BA of .367. Yeah, said Cobb, but I'm in my 60's. No further questions.

You're completely right. Criticizing decisions should be a normal part of the game dialogue from the announcers. However, announcers often avoid that because they know the manager or because they don't like confrontation or they don't want the owner on their backs.

You're completely right. Criticizing decisions should be a normal part of the game dialogue from the announcers. However, announcers often avoid that because they know the manager or because they don't like confrontation.

Don't agree with the word asinine, do agree it took me quite awhile to agree on Wright. "A few others" is in the eye of the beholder. You seem to think that the bullpen can do no wrong and that it's the manager who simply failed to use the right guys at the right time. I see a very inconsistent bullpen in addition to a manager with a wealth of information/stats, constant up close observation of his players/pitchers, and two good advisers--Lovullo and the pitching coach--with whom to consult well in advance of any pitching changes. Your rule seems to be, "if the Sox lost, it must be Farrell's fault." Mine is, "if the Sox lost, the players weren't hitting or the pitchers weren't pitching or errors were committed or 2 out of 3." I normally accept all managerial in-game decisions but hold managers, Farrell included, accountable for overall wins and losses. On July 28 or August 12, I would have been fine with firing Farrell. But I honestly do not sweat the small stuff the way you do. As I recall, you also agonize over "miscalled" balls and strikes, whereas I firmly believe they do not prevent the better team that day from winning, nor do they prevent good pitchers from excelling and weak pitchers from failing.