Maxbialystock

Not really a game thread, but an attempt at seeing the whole series-- Rockies are up and down but overall one game below .500. They are on the final leg of 9 games on the road, during which they lost a series at St Louis and then one at Pittsburgh. Their first starter tonight, De La Rosa, is a veteran lefty starter who hasn't pitched since April and has struggled this year, only going more than 4.2 innings once, April 14, when he went 6.2 and gave up 3 earned runs against the Giants. ERA over 10. The other two starters, both righties, are Bettis, not bad (and going against Wright) with an ERA of 4.18, and Gray, a rookie who has been up and down with an ERA of 6.75 (and going against Buchholz. Their closer McGee has 13 saves and an ERA of 3.57. Their offense is 5th in MLB in runs scored, which is better than all AL teams except the Sox--despite no DH. On average the Sox score 1 more run per game. Their team ERA is worse than ours by .75 runs/game. I assume that the runs scored and ERA are partly the result of playing half their games at altitude, but it is worth noting that they have a winning record, 13-12, on the road. Assuming Price and Wright are pitching to their capabilities, I think the Sox could win the first two games and maybe the third depending on which rookie and which Buchholz show up. However, the Rockies just took 1 of 3 from both the Pirates and Cardinals, both strong teams (winning records). We will not face their best starter, Chatwood, ERA 3.02. The Sox have not lost a series at home in May but lost two series--to Baltimore and Tampa--at home in April.

To answer your earlier question first, there was no Rockies game thread when I posted. Plus I didn't know what the rules were. As it turns out, I guess I would have violated the gamethread mojo rule. On the other hand, where else to put it because it clearly is a precursor to the game thread? If I had been smarter, I would have waited until there was a game thread and then posted, but I expect a game thread a lot sooner than the one that finally showed up. I say again, "unnecessary new threads," in my opinion, is in the eye of the beholder. No new thread is truly necessary, but some are more interesting than others. Some yield better responses and discussion than others. At the end of the day, one guy needs to make the call on what to keep and what not. Clearly, that should be you. I will copy my OP and post it on the game thread.

sk7326, I kind of like that. You can have a really good year with a ruined fall, specifically, in the post-season. A ruined spring tends to make a ruined season.

Fair enough, but I blame him for the 2011 late season collapse and the whole beer and chicken thing. He might have gotten a little loose with the reins. But, as you suggest, he had a very good run, especially given what had gone on before.

Not really a game thread, but an attempt at seeing the whole series-- Rockies are up and down but overall one game below .500. They are on the final leg of 9 games on the road, during which they lost a series at St Louis and then one at Pittsburgh. Their first starter tonight, De La Rosa, is a veteran lefty starter who hasn't pitched since April and has struggled this year, only going more than 4.2 innings once, April 14, when he went 6.2 and gave up 3 earned runs against the Giants. ERA over 10. The other two starters, both righties, are Bettis, not bad (and going against Wright) with an ERA of 4.18, and Gray, a rookie who has been up and down with an ERA of 6.75 (and going against Buchholz. Their closer McGee has 13 saves and an ERA of 3.57. Their offense is 5th in MLB in runs scored, which is better than all AL teams except the Sox--despite no DH. On average the Sox score 1 more run per game. Their team ERA is worse than ours by .75 runs/game. I assume that the runs scored and ERA are partly the result of playing half their games at altitude, but it is worth noting that they have a winning record, 13-12, on the road. Assuming Price and Wright are pitching to their capabilities, I think the Sox could win the first two games and maybe the third depending on which rookie and which Buchholz show up. However, the Rockies just took 1 of 3 from both the Pirates and Cardinals, both strong teams (winning records). We will not face their best starter, Chatwood, ERA 3.02. The Sox have not lost a series at home in May but lost two series--to Baltimore and Tampa--at home in April. My guess is that Young will play LF tonight. It's possible Rutledge will play for Shaw, who has not hit lefties well (.577 OPS). How does the weather look? My NOAA radar map sees clouds to the west of MA but which could miss Boston even if they get this far east tonight.

To remind: the abysmal, horrible, last place Sox of 2014 won 43.8% of their games and beyond question meet your criterion of having "a chance of winning."

I'm always reluctant to call a manager great because so much depends on the FO and ownership, but will agree on Dick Williams in his heyday. Truly a great manager and deservedly in the HOF. I didn't think Francona should have been fired, but don't claim he was great. Frankly, I think the lion's share of the credit since 2002 goes to John Henry who has paid the bills and found competent executives who collectively ended the 86 year drought and won three WS despite changes in both the GM and manager positions. Right now the Henry era is on its third GM and third manager. I think one can even argue that Bobby Valentine was a good choice because he made it possible for the entire franchise to welcome John Farrell back the next year. Francona did a good job too. So would Lovullo, one assumes. And right now I think Farrell is doing a good job, which he also did in 2013. But it's the executives above Farrell, Francona, Lovullo, Valentine, et al, who have made the biggest difference because they provide the players. Even Ben Cherington made one great trade when he sent Beckett, AGon, and Crawford to the Dodgers in 2012 and made 2013 possible (with some additions).

I'm not sure of this, but my guess is the Sox have never had hitting this good early in the season and with so many contributors at age 26 and under. 1967 had some youngsters--Tony C, Petrocelli, Reggie Smith--but they didn't hit as well as these guys (at least, so far).

For anyone who says it's still May with plenty of time for the bubble to burst, I can only say, "sure, but right now it's so great it's unprecedented. The Sox lead MLB in scoring and OPS and our lineup is blessed with more than our share of solid young players--Betts, Bogaerts, JBJ, and Shaw--and that ignores the catcher Vazquez who looks pretty darn good behind the plate." I don't expect the bubble to burst, but do expect some of those lofty OPS's to drop back a little.

Well, maybe not the roses, but surely the Sox. Last night I checked espn.com's MLB stats for individuals batting and discover that the Sox have six players--Betts, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Shaw, JBJ, and Pedroia--in the top 23 WAR (wins above replacement) ratings for all of MLB, not just the AL. Think about that. With 30 MLB teams, every team theoretically should have 1 in the top 30 or the top 23 for that matter. But the Sox have six. Missing in action, I hasten to add, is Hanley Ramirez who wasn't even in the top 50 despite having an OPS over .800 and showing himself to be a very capable fielding first baseman. Right now his overall WAR is .8, a huge improvement over last year and one that ranks him (WAR-wise) as the 5th best firstbaseman in the AL. And he ain't part of our "big six" or whatever you want to call them. The downside of the six (or seven--HanRam bats 5th, after all) is sometimes on game treads we get mad at the other two slots--such was my reaction when JBJ was walked intentionally his first two times in order to bring Hannigan to the plate.

Meh. So far it looks like he is a better leftfielder than a catcher. My strong impression is that he was moved to Pawtucket because management--Farrell, Lovullo, the pitching coach, and the front office--agreed that as a catcher he was hurting the pitching staff. He did not grow up as a catcher but as an infielder/outfielder thru high school. I'm sure he caught a lot in the minors and last year caught around 84 games at Boston. What he is getting now is another chance to show he can hit, especially from the left side. It is almost a truism in MLB that, if you can hit, you can play.

Completely agree. He usually left a starter in for 7 runs or 100 pitches. But then I learned other managers usually use the same rule. This year Farrell has not generally used that rule, but he also has had 8 guys in the bullpen rather than the usual 7. I never thought the 7 run rule had anything to do with loyalty toward his starters. Far from it. I thought Francona used it to keep from overworking his bullpen. If anything, it was punitive to the starters, but it also gave them an opportunity to right the ship before getting the hook at 7 runs.

I would just like to point out that Hannigan, who is probably a better catcher than Swihart, is 11 years older--35 vs. 24--and can't hit as well. Long term, I sure would want to hang onto Swihart, especially if he can also play the outfield. If he is traded, it should be for a good starter. .

I'm not sure "chance after chance after chance" is the right take on Buchholz. He has had several good years, including last year. His problem is durability, including last year. Given how hard it is to get a good starter for less than a king's ransom, it made sense to bring him back another year if only because he wasn't bad last year (ERA of 3.26). His best season, albeit a short one, was just 3 years ago, 2013, when he was 12-1 with an ERA of 1.74 while starting 16 games. Last year he started 18 games. He turns 32 in August. I am not any great Buchholz defender because he drives me nuts too. But at this point I don't think it's unreasonable to keep him around if only because the Sox are not knee deep in good starters. We think/hope Price has turned it around. Wright has been great, but is also a knuckleballer. Porcello has been good. After those three, not a lot to choose from, including Buchholz.

Francoma was convenient for the carping critics, but was not based on "a long established tendency to prefer to stay the course . . . and was sometimes slow with the hook." When you are too quick with the hook, you put the bullpen at risk.

Castillo can't catch. With Swihart the Sox have a third catcher if needed, which came handy when Hannigan got that HBP on his left hand. My guess is they don't give Castillo a shot until someone is hurt and/or he starts hitting in AAA. In any case, it's hard to argue with the way they have stuck with these players--the ones how are leading MLB in runs scored, OPS, etc. In other words, who needs Castillo?

Ellsbury is happy as a clam with those $24M/year for 5 more years when he can retire.

Ah, the trade wars are back. With all due respect to moonslav, I am an almost total nonbeliever. Why? Because whoever is available via trade probably isn't worth what we would have to give up. One of the best trades recently was in 2012 when the Sox gave up A-Gon, Beckett, and Crawford--three guys the Sox had previously gone after in trades or via free agency. Yes, the Sox need pitching, but the price is almost always too high and the good too suspect.

If trading Swihart meant getting a reliable starter, make the deal. Otherwise, don't.

Rainy yesterday and again today in Fairfax County, VA. Steady drizzle. I notice Bradley has moved up to 6th with Shaw, this time, getting to bat in front of the catcher, this time Vazquez. Bradley missed two at bats yesterday, his first two, because he was walked twice intentionally although the second walk involved throwing pitches near the strike zone. The usual suspects batting 1 thru 5 and our new leftfielder batting 9th. I see no report on Hannigan, so assume he isn't on the DL but maybe can't play for awhile. Another reason to have Swihart in Boston.

Might as well use this thread as a dump. Not many, it seems, were interested in the game.

Is that JOba Chamberlain in there? The same guy who as a rookie Yankee twice threw behind Youk's head?

With Hanigan out, the Sox still have a spare catcher in leftfielder Swihart.

Where is everyone and why is this such a dead thread with so much going on in this game? Kelly pitched a great game despite huge control issues. With Hanigan following him, JBJ almost wasn't going to get a real at bat, but he did and singled. Some good fielding plays, but I really like the one when Hanigan had to find the plate with his foot--just in time.

Right now only the Cubs have won more games than the Sox, and to me that's the measure of a manager. Yes, absolutely, the players deserve the lion's share of the credit. Give some as well to the hitting coach and maybe to the FO. But Farrell gets the blame and the credit when the team under performs whether or not it is his fault. Funny thing, but I think he easiest part of his job is making up the lineup card that has very few, if any, holes. Trickier, however, is dealing with an inconsistent rotation, especially when that involves a lot of innings for the bullpen.