Emp9

Still, a +184 run differential and scoring 119 more runs than Toronto and 134 more runs than Baltimore was pretty impressive. I'll take the blow-out wins too. Good teams should probably have a lot of Blow-out wins. However, I'd like to see more consistency to hopefully win more close games. When I say close games, I don't necessarily mean one-run games, just close games in general. Within 3 runs is fair I think? One-run games we were 20 W - 24 L. I think I can tack-on another 24 losses that were games lost by 2-3 runs. We were 2nd in the AL East in Runs Against and hopefully our Starters this season make us 1st in that department.

Never heard of a Head Orthopedist.... Oh, a head Orthopedist.

"The 15 runs difference is not looking at the pitcher in a vacuum or out of context." Seems a bit out of the abstract to me. Tell me how it isn't then. I'm usually a good sport. ;/ Protection is a myth? Tell that to 2016's Bryce Harper and the Nationals then. See pitchers can pitch around batters they don't want to face. This is less likely to happen when there's more than just one batter in a row they also don't want to face. Look, a well functioning offense is one that scores runs, to an end. In order to score runs, besides hitting homeruns of course, is to have your offense hitting at the same time. You want to increase the chances of that happening. It's a chain of events. You want multi-hit innings. You want to increase your chances of having multi-hit innings. A randomized order wouldn't help you with this. I don't think a randomized batting order with no strategic value at all would be equal to that of an optimized batting order. I don't know where this 15 runs came from, but in theory 15 less runs COULD mean 15 more games lost. I'm betting it's more than 15 though. But hey, I agree to disagree. Not a big deal really.

I'm the opposite. I didn't mind who they traded for, it's who they gave up I have a problem with. Pom was a good target in my opinion. And remember, there wasn't much out there at the time either.

Maybe 15 runs for the pitcher, alone, in a vacuum. The team as a whole on the other hand would lose out on creating runs substantially. You seem to be leaving out a much more capable hitter who could bat clean up in the pitcher's stead. I'm not sold on this Kimmi. Maybe you are just using this as an example for a point I'm missing. But It's an isolated, inverse, and out of context way of breaking down any given lineup. Mookie could bat 9th for all I care and I doubt HIS numbers change all that much (his rbi might take a hit though). He's one of the best young hitters I've seen in a long time. But the team would not be as productive. I admit there are many games where the lineup doesn't seem to matter for good or bad, for varying reasons. I tend to look at the lineup as one would use a pinch-hitter, but on a much larger scale. You want to up your chances with what's available, and the sooner the better. L/R match-ups, more overall ABs for your best hitters, protection, B/P history (if applicable)... and so on. These mini strategies don't work all the time, but they help increase the pressure on the opposing team, they take advantage of isolated skills, and increase, for lack of a better word... Luck. All that said, I agree, descending OBP is a nice base to start with. I would micro-manage a bit further. Hell, that's part of the fun.

... and 70 more runs than the Cubs. #1 in MLB: AB, Hits, Runs, 2B, TB, RBI, Avg, OBP, SLG, OPS. Our offense will suffer from not having Papi anymore. Suffer as in drop a spot or two from within the top 5 offenses, not suffer and miss the post season, I don't think. That'd be a whole hell of a lot of suffering. Moreland may only give us half of Papi's production, but using last years totals as a simple guide that'd still leave the Sox 1st and 2nd in many offensive categories and still a top 5 offense. The end of the day, it's how they match up against the AL East (not the entire MLB) anyway. I do hope the Sox offense will be less streaky than last season. I still think if the Sox were less streaky and even scored less they'd win more games overall.

Price wasn't really pitching Ace-like his first month and a half last season. I think the offense carried him to more wins and more no decisions (which would've surely been losses) through much of that time. Either way, it would be a huge loss if Price missed the whole year. I happen to really like our last 3 starters to cover for Price's absence, but I'm still hoping it's only for the first month. I'll put it this way, I think the Sox' Starting staff 1-6 are talented enough that we shouldn't see THAT MUCH of a difference in respect to overall team wins and losses. I'm more concerned with our BP (Thornburg, Smith out) blowing leads than anything else.

Yeah it's Moreland, Young, and Abad that come off the books. It also looks like Kimbrel's '18 option is $0.25M less than what he's getting paid now. In the event Kimbrel's option isn't picked-up, that trade would look 1/3 worse than I originally thought. Let's hope he has a good to great season because reallocating his money would seem more counter-productive than anything else at this point.

Ummm...ladies and gents. Just a friendly reminder that it's still Spring Training. Let's not get too down or too up on anyone's performance right now. Staying healthy is more important than any ST performance. If a player doesn't get hurt by the end of the day, consider it a good day.

"the Red Sox, who have their own shoulder maintenance program, sent Thornburg a list of exercises to perform daily." I want a copy of this shoulder maintenance program or is it a team secret?

Even if Leon continues to be streaky and say gets demoted to backup at some point down the road, having a backup catcher that could hit the cover off the ball at times can be a pretty nice thing. I tend to agree with you about Swihart, there's no huge rush as far as I'm concerned.

You guys sound like me last winter regarding Fister. I like him as an 7th or 8th SP depth piece this year. Why not? Well, unless it's about money. I wanted him last year as a depth for $2M ( maybe incentives ), but Houston swooped in at $7M. His ERA is rising and so is his BBs, but 180 innings and won 12 games. I'd have to look at his game logs to see if and how many of those 12 wins were really his but...

ERod definetly has the best "stuff" out of the 3. I'm betting on Wright ( if shoulder is healthy) to be the most reliable though.

I guess I started paying attention to pitch counts back in 2003 or around there and rally increased when Youk got on the scene. Only not so much for our pitchers. Sox were REALLY wearing down opposing SPers during that era. It was a strategy that worked for a long time, over a decade. Still can versus certain teams that don't have a lights out BP.

Right, his #1 problem is Command and Control from pitch to pitch. His CB & FB (even his Change, but that's OK by me because well, it's a Change) are typically below avg velocity. So I think it's fair to say his #2 problem is his velocity. Problem #3 is throwing a consistent CB. A recent article on SoxProspects said he was 6'-6" 220 lbs, but his Bio says 6'-7" 200 lbs, so I'm not sure what to believe. Brooks baseball covers MLB games only while SoxProspects takes into account all games pitched. If I'm reading things correctly, I think there's a slight uptick in Owen's velocity when pitching in MLB games compared to his MiLB averages. Which could mean he's trying to force things when called up. What MPH he tops out at doesn't concern me as much as his average MPH especially his FB. A starker contrast in velocity on his FB from his other pitches would of course be ideal. Any gains there within the next two years would be awesome. Of course Hugh2 could be right, this may not happen at all. I love the fact that he has a definite 'Out Pitch' regarding his Change-up. Command with an Out-Pitch could go a long way in the majors... so I'm still holding out hope for this kid. Good thing we barely need him right now.

I agree that I'd be more optimistic if he developed better control and it would be more relevant going forward towards any success he could have. On the velocity though, I mean... 6-7, 24 yrs old, tops out at 94, something tells me he's not taking advantage of his frame and there may be still time/room for improvement. He has yet to put it together. Not saying he'd ever throw 100 mph or even 98, but could hit 96 consistently if he took advantage of his frame. Would you disagree? Maybe he still needs to fill-out more? Eventually he will... a little. Gain more strength in his legs? My man could stand to gain 30-40 lbs and still be "skinny".

You're probably right. I'm on the fence concerning Abad.

Wise Chef- "You don't make hoisin sauce, you buuuuuuy it'

I'm for quarantining Abad's salary. Who's with me??!!

q g ... (testing)

You're right. You could say I was not sneezing at a 2 MPH difference. I sensed a slight hyperbole. Don't worry about it. I do think there is a chance Owens could increase his velocity over the next few years-which is more why I posted at all.

You said it better than I.

That's understandable. I need another 2 seasons to totally give up on him though.

Miller throws 102mph on a consistent basis? I think you mean more like 6? ANywho, Owens could still see an uptick in velocity, again because of his age and his frame. It's possible he could narrow that gap is all I'm saying really.