Maxbialystock

I don't think I'm conflating anything. Young has been used sparingly despite being the 4th outfielder and Holt being called upon to play in the infield now and then. If you are right that he should only be platooned against lefty starters, the Sox are basically paying him $2.5M basically to sit on the bench. If he is as bad as you say he is, why did the Yankees play him in 140 games last year? And,remember, this is all in the context of whether Farrell should be fired. There is no way, no how any MLB manager would be fired because he gave some at bats and innings in the field to his 4th outfielder in April. As I pointed out earlier, for all we know Dombrowski asked him to play Young a few times just to see what he can do because we know the Sox would love to bring Castillo back but only if he can help.

I nominate Pedroia who was great in the field and at bat and played the game the way it's supposed to be played, which is a great example for the younger guys. I'm sure others have different ideas, which is fine.

To remind: 1) the Sox have faced very, very few lefties as starters or relievers. Young is the 4th outfielder, and, one of the outfielders, Holt, also plays the infield, so it would be hard not to play Young occasionally against righties. Young has the highest ratio of facing lefties vs. righties of anyone on the team--10 at bats vs. lefties and 16 vs. righties. 2) despite having a huge number of at bats--16--against righties, Young has been unable to prevent the Sox from leading the AL in runs scored (by a big margin), OBP, and doubles. 3) the Sox are now 15-10 and .5 games ahead of the Orioles in the AL East despite Young's and Farrell's best efforts to keep that from happening.

Me, I don't care that much about the velocity of the fastball because those with good ones tend to use them too much. What concerned me last night is that Price faced a lot of righties and didn't use his changeup very much. Kimbrel lives on his fastball, but last night he also got in some good breaking stuff.

I think it is fair to say that JD Drew was a five tool outfielder. He could hit, hit with power, field, throw, and run the bases. I thought he was a terrific rightfielder at Fenway--good range, good arm. The Sox paid him $14M/year which back then, almost 10 years ago, was a goodly sum, especially for a 31 year old outfielder signing for 5 years ($70M). In 2006 he knocked in 100 runs for the Dodgers. In 5 years with the Sox he never drove in more than 68, but did score 84 twice. He never played in more than 140 games in a season for the Sox. Looking back, I thought the Sox did OK with him even though, like most others, I thought he missed too many games when he was here. He kind of reminds me of Ellsbury because both have had a tendency to get hurt or otherwise miss games. And both, apparently, got worse after they signed final contracts--although Ellsbury's is for 7 years and I think $154 million.

I agree with those who say the sample is small, so just let me add that so far our righty-dominated lineup is handling righty pitchers pretty well. My goodness, last night Vazquez hit a crucial 2 run dinger against a very good reliever, a righty of course, named Betances. As for Girardi, he might not like facing lefties, but his guys killed Price last night.

Some day, some how, maybe this thread will get back to the 2016 season, which I happen to think is going pretty well despite real concerns about the rotation. On the latter, I would like to know how moonslav thinks that will work out. Will it turn around? Will new guys be brought in (or up from the minors)?

In case anyone is wondering, I am not now going to claim I was the lone Farrell supporter/booster because I was not. I defended not firing him, that's all, and did so on principle and not on any great insight into whether he is a good manager or not. I would have been fine with firing him last year. I also believe that his so-called dumb decisions weren't so dumb, and I give the players the lion's share of the credit for their success so far. I also give the rotation credit for keeping things interesting and making the manager's job harder.

You are certainly right about splits against lefties. But the Sox have accumulated somewhere around 700 or 800 at bats against righties , which ain't exactly infinitesimal. They pounded more righties again tonight.

Another thrilla from manilla, this time with Vazquez the hero. Price continues to struggle, but he had a nice 7th inning.

Wow. Just wow.

In trying to explain why Farrell has played Young, I discovered two fascinating stats about this team in this so far very young season (which means things could change). The first is that opposing managers appear to be terrified of sending lefties in against the Sox as starters or relievers. Betts, for example, has faced lefties in 6% (7 of 109) of his at bats, Pedroia about the same. Even Shaw, who has seen the highest percentage of lefties, still sees righties 80% of the time. The second is that every single member of the regular lineup--Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Shaw, Holt, both catchers, and Bradley--hits righties better than they hit lefties. Betts, granted, only hits righties slightly better--OPS 795 vs. 714. And Ortiz hits both sides well--over .800 against lefties and over 1.000 against righties. But almost everyone else hits righties three times as well as they hit lefties--like Pedroia, whose OPS against righties is .885 and against lefties .286. Someone else might have the answer on why this is so, but I can only offer three possibilities: 1) season is young and the righty pitchers will eventually get good against our lineup; 2) lefty pitchers are a dying breed; 3) lefty pitchers are alive and well but by happenstance haven't faced us yet. Let me add about our lineup is that we rarely have more than 4 lefty batters--Ortiz, Shaw, Holt, and Bradley. Of the remaining five lineup slots, all righties, four are in the top five slots--leading off with Betts, Pedroia, and Bogaerts with Ramirez betting right behind Ortiz in the 5th slot. In other words, this Sox lineup practically demands a righty starter--except of course that all of our righty regulars hit righties better than lefties.

Actually, I think it's a least three things--OBP, SB's (with few CS's), and doubles--all of which the Sox lead the AL in. Anyone know what the Sox team RISP OPS is?

Hard to believe they will play, but I agree it would be terrific even though I hate Sunday night games.

SinceYaz, "It's a blast" is exactly the right phrase. There were glimpses of that last year with Lovullo at the helm, but this year is better. Again, I'm not sure that's because of Farrell, but think Ramirez's transformation into a firstbaseman and the absence of Sandoval have helped. This is a younger team than the championship ones and maybe that's it. Of course, sometimes I think the youngest one of all is David Ortiz. Whatever the reasons, it truly is a blast.

I think aggressiveness on the base paths partly explains the Sox leading the AL--comfortably--in runs scored. They are below the League average in dingers, but have more SB's--with an insanely high percentage, 91%, for a team--and a lot more doubles than anyone else. The cold weather might be helping--if one assumes it affects outfielders and catchers ability to throw accurately.

Managing has been downright brilliant in this game so far. Farrell made up a lineup card, basically the one he has used all month long, and handed the ball to Porcello, who has pitched with grit in view of the umpire favoring Pineda. Holt's defense in LF is growing on me. He is not intimidated by the wall and actually plays caroms well, and his arm is pretty good.

I hear you, but have to say once again that I began this thread with a somewhat lengthy explanation of why I don't think Farrell needs to be fired right now. It was not only non-antagonistic and not high-handed, it was borderline apologetic because I said would have been fine with firing Farrell last year. I have said I agree that Young ain't hitting righties. And I did not say that my arguments or evidence were necessarily right, only that those disagreeing made no attempt to defeat them. I entirely agree that I've been a little harsh and high-handed--you say obnoxious-- but believe those comments were in response to unmerited insults. I am beginning to discover that on this board insults are apparently normal, so clearly I need to adjust. Meanwhile, I continue to believe the arguments and/or opinions that Farrell should be fired right now have little merit, that the team is playing solid ball (13-10 and leading the AL in runs scored) despite the issues with the rotation, and that a good case can be made for Farrell playing Young against righties, etc.

I entirely agree. He is getting more strikes outside the zone than is Porcello, and that ain't right. If it is going to be a liberal strike zone, which I like, it should be liberal for both pitchers. I like a big strike zone because it moves the game along.

I have to confess to not being a real Yankee-hater. To me they are the worthy rivals who are tough to beat but nevertheless beatable. There is always satisfaction in beating them, and these first two games have shown why that is true.

He's batting 6th. Bradley could move up to 7th, I like him 9th because he is effective there, either batting in runs or setting the table for the top of the order. Also, I like the idea of batting the weakest hitter 8th. I would not, however, be opposed to flip-flopping Holt and Bradley because Holt would probably be pretty good at batting 9th.

Let me make this very simple. You thrive on insulting newbies who disagree with you and even indulge in a little cyber bullying with your repeated insults. You are the one at fault, not I.

A fair point. Apparently, newbies on talksox are not supposed to have opinions or, if they do, they should only be to agree with what someone else said. I started this thread to get a discussion started and overall have been happy with the responses. But then I got my dander up when I was attacked by one guy largely because I just joined the site--a very mild form of cyberbullying. Somewhere in there came the argument that playing Young was a clear case of mismanagement, so I decided, what the hey, why not look at the numbers? And the numbers say to me that there are good reasons to play Young despite the fact that he can't hit righties (so far this season, anyway). I was astounded to discover that Betts has 97 at bats against righties and just 7 against lefties. Even Shaw, who owns righties and is owned by lefties, sees a lot of righty pitchers. Then I looked at the roster and realized that Young is more likely than the typical fourth outfielder (who is not platooned) to get at bats. He plays whenever Holt sits and whenever Holt moves to the infield. Plus the Castillo things. You call yourself "old fart," but I might be older (born 1940). I have found this thread to be rejuvenating.

I get verizon fios, which includes nesn, but only for pregame and postgame, Nevertheless, it was great to see shots of Yawkey Way, which is almost as great as seeing the inside of Fenway. Great atmosphere, but horrible sight lines down the right side, surely the worst in MLB.

Truer words were never written. I still remember that tying grandslam in game 2 of the 2013 ALCS against the Tigers. That whole postseason was filled with unexpected treats.