Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    107,366

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    145

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    We can afford to trade a couple guys that may not make the 40 man, next year- guys like Potts, Rosario, Chavis or someone we might be surprised by Bloom thinking we can do without. I don't see him trading anyone very promising. I think the highest he goes is maybe Groome or Ward.
  2. moonslav59
    I wouldn't trade Casas for Freeman & Rizzo.
  3. moonslav59
    4:05 start time Eovaldi- the Yankee killer. The team is pulling together, nicely, with some newbies onboard and Houck & Valdez back in the saddle. The bats are showing life- Kike is leading the way. Devers is on pace for somewhere near 50 HRs and 150 RBI. All is good in Red Sox Nation.
  4. moonslav59
    Nice win. I stayed away to keep my sanity. Last night's negativism was a bit overboard, to me. This season is magical. I can't think of a better word to describe some of the wins we have gotten. I've said it before, "Devers forevers: lock him up! (long term)" The pen was astounding, especially since the big 2 weren't involved or needed. Keep it rolling. Keep the mojo rising!
  5. moonslav59
    No way Bloom trades anyone this good. NO WAY!
  6. moonslav59
    Going 6 and allowing 3 ERs is a quality start. I guess that's mediocre on your scale. Porcello averaged slightly better than that. (2.9 ERs per 6 IP)
  7. moonslav59
    That is a big "IF," but if you compare Houck with the Perezof late, yes, it's clear, but I doubt GMs go by just recency valuations. The Perez of his first 11 starts was a 3.09 Perez. The Perez of an 8 game stretch early in the year was a .614 OPS Against Perez. The sample size on Houck is very small, and it should include his 5.14 ERA in AAA, this year (18 innings- some in rehab). I'd say Sale will take Richards' slot. Perez gets a couple more starts to show improvement, at least, unless he totally bombs.
  8. moonslav59
    Is Henry planning a trip to space?
  9. moonslav59
    Was he very good the other part of his career? If so, doesn't a little very good mixed in with mostly mediocre, make you "good" overall?
  10. moonslav59
    Inherited Runners Scored % 5% Ottavino 14% Sawamura 20% Barnes 25% Taylor 29% DHern 33% Rios 35% League 38% Whitlock 45% Workman 50% Valdez 83% Brice 100% Andriese (31% team) _________________ Save% 100% Valdez (1-1) 83% Barnes (20-24) 70% Ottavinoe (7-10) 62% League 50% Whitlock (1-2) 25% Andriese (1-4) 0% DHern (0-3) 69% Team
  11. moonslav59
    Trade the bum!
  12. moonslav59
    Thanks, Max, but you got us 9 straight. I'm more of the stopper, as I have not lost on my first post, which always comes after a loss. I think my streaks are: 3 4 5 3 1 and now 2 and counting.
  13. moonslav59
    That does add value as he saves the pen by being consistent and durable. IMO, he was between a top mediocre pitcher to a low very good pitcher- depending on how much you value innings pitched.
  14. moonslav59
    No, it doesn't, but pitching way more innings than other pitchers and doing pretty good for most of them does add value. The debate seems to be more about how much value is to be added?
  15. moonslav59
    Actually, no. 8 other pitchers had as many or more IP as Porcello from 2009-2020. All had fWARs over 40. Porcello was 22.6- way behind. 9th out of 9 in xFIP at 4.04 (next guy at 3.64) 9th in ERA- at 102 (next guy at 84) 9th in WHIP at 1.32 (next guy at 1.25)
  16. moonslav59
    So, we have another example of a contending team trading a key player in July. The Rays are buyers and sellers, at the same time.
  17. moonslav59
    I was actually thinking of going smaller sample, where Porcello would rank last or next to last in every category. In a sense, nobody pitched more innings than Porcello and was worse.
  18. moonslav59
    Oh, "it doesn't work that way?" You are the one doing all the assuming. You assume Duran scores from 2B on an IF hit to SS. You assume the Yanks don't score 6 in the 8th. You assume Duran doesn't make an error later in the game to give the Yanks the lead. Go ahead and think Cora is a bozo for not PR'ing Duran for Dalbec in the 7th. I think he knew what he was doing, and the results worked, precisely because Dalbec was able to hit in the 9th. There's no assumption, there. It happened.
  19. moonslav59
    You still don't get our position. Fine with disagreeing, but at least try to understand our position and stop misquoting us. If 1000 people rolled the dice 100 times, they would not get the same results. Some would have wildly different results than others- by chance or luck- not by skill. How can anyone know a certain player's numbers in a super small sample size that is often scattered over different games and seasons is just the results of dice-rolling or some skill they have or lack that caused the varying results? Nobody can prove they are right.
  20. moonslav59
    It's a pain going back and finding tid bits like this. I had to do it on 700's bashing of Pivetta.
  21. moonslav59
    How does being up 2-1 after 7, assuming Duran scores, which was not automatic, keep the Yanks from scoring 2 in the 8th? We'd still be down 3-2 with no Bobby Dee big hit in the 9th.
  22. moonslav59
    That was just before his implosion.
  23. moonslav59
    Nobody says that. We say it is not a repeatable or sustainable skill. Big difference. Of course there are clutch moments, clutch hits and pitching performances.
  24. moonslav59
    I gave the numbers for top 150 and top 300 by innings. This sample size was to compare Rick to other big inning pitchers of his time.
  25. moonslav59
    We've been through this. Do you really want me to say it again. I'm fine with you disagreeing, but why act like you don't know my reasons for saying that. Not going over, now, pushes all the tax years back one more year- step 1, step 2, step 3. Welook to be really good in 2-3 years. Let's keep the step taxes one rung down the ladder.
×
×
  • Create New...