moonslav59

...and if they groove one to Pearce, because they rather he beat them than Betts, then maybe it wasn't so much Pearce was "clutch" but rather he was the beneficiary of being in the right place at the right time with the best strategy against him in place.

Yes, 50-50 is a huge risk, and I didn't dive deep into the rating, but I think the ones that were signed younger did better. BTW, which ratings do you disagree on? (Also, the 50-50 was on all contracts over $20M/yr. The mega deals- $25+M worked out better than 50-50.)

While Vic declined sharply afterwards, it was only for 2 years after 2013 not 5 or 6.

He also drafted Ty Buttrey and signed IFAs: Espinoza, D Hernandez & Gerson Bautista. (More may end up developing into ML pitchers in the next few years.)

And, all the bad signings after 2013 made people forget about Vic, Uehara, David Ross, Napoli I and Drew I signed for the 2013 championship (None became 5 year albatrosses). Plus, he arguable made the best trade in Red Sox history when he dumped CC & Beckett on the Dodgers (and AGon declined sharply not long afterwards, too).

That's a great example or what can happen in small sample sizes. On the flip side, maybe some other players "looked clutch" because pitchers chose to not "pitch around" them, instead. Also, so much of this game is about millimeters, so when we are looking at a short period of time, it's hard to definitively call anyone a choke or clutch because one or two plays might have been decided by 1 millimeter one way or another. BTW, I told my wife before the series, that it would be won by Bregman. I was wrong, but possibly because the managers felt the same way, and made sure he didn't (or couldn't) beat them.

During hazing week.

MLBTR reports he got the job, too.

Every stat is, really. No player in MLB history has ever player more than 158 games in the playoffs, total. Only 5 players have over 100 games played in the PO's. Only 3 pitchers have over 200 IP.

I'd say the 13 IP (and 22 as well) is way too small to make any definitive judgement about. It could be just one bad pitch over 13 innings.

Isn't it usually -10 with the wind chill in January? (I used to live in Milwaukee and went to college in South Bend.)

Yes, but saying Betts has, say, a 0.2 playoff WAR means less, since most don't know how his games compare to others.

The only problem is not being able to be on the 60 day DL until opening day, but with our 40 man roster so shallow, it should not be a problem, unless Bloom starts wheeling and dealing for low cost players that need to be on the 40 man roster. I'm usually thinking we should make some 2 or 3 for 1 deals this time of year, but we may see some 1 for 3 deals this winter.

86-89

And, the next guys would probably be worse. Blaming Cora for 2019, to the point of saying he should be fired, is like DFA'ing Betts, JD, Sale, Price, Eovaldi and anyone else who declined from 2018.

Or, WAR/gm since WAR rewards those who play more than others, but we still have to realize the sample size is small.

Post season sample sizes are usually too small to weigh heavily on a player's value. When they do become significant after many post seasons, one should also factor in how spread out most of the sample sizes are. Yes, they should count, but I feel only proportionate to the sample size.

Got that right.

To me, not even close to not even close.

This whole "over-valued" prospect thing is unfounded. We'll never know one way or another, but I'm convinced he'd have traded several top prospects that next winter, if he was given another year. He also did trade some prospects.

Not even close.

Nothing to do with firing Cora.

Bloom won't fire the best Sox manager in history over this. (Okay,arguably second best.)

I can see AGon, Tex and Kemp being red, but Cano's is so-so and/or pending. Stanton has 8 years left. You may think he will be red, but he has to be, at worst, pending. Machado & Harper have to be pending since they just finished year 1. ARod's deals were NOT red. No way. (ARod3, yes, but that wasn't a 7+ year deal.) I'll recatagorize things with those 3 changed to red. 11 Deals over $25M/yr x 7+ yrs 5 Good 4 Pending 2 Bad 17 Deals between $20M/yr to $25M/yr x 7+ yrs 4 Good 4 Pending 9 Bad Seems like the mega deals are better than the semi-mega deals. Combined (all $20+M) 9 Good 8 Pending 11 Bad Even these numbers do not indicate a horrible record for big signings. I'm thinking Altuve's and Votto's deals will end up being good, and if we assume all the other 6 pending end up being bad (Trout, Arenado, Machado, Harper, Stanton & Cano), the record would be: 11 Good 17 Bad That's about 60% bad & 40% good, which does not appear to be as bad as many make it out to be. If I had to vote on those 6 and their projections, I'd put Trout, Arenado and Cano as so-so, but maybe Cano could be bad, my totals would be 11 Good 3 so-so 14 bad That's only 50% bad.

Exactly. The Sox should not, and I believe will not plan on 1 inning from Pedey. If he plays, then so be it. We will not trade Chatham, Marco or Lin. I'm not sure if they seriously see Chavis as a long term 2B option, but in my opinion, his bat does not support him playing 1B, so maybe 2B is his best shot.