moonslav59

I was thinking more about all the TJ surgeries and injuries and guys like Casey Kelly, Ranaudo, Owens, Kopech, Espinoza and now Groome.

Excellent point, but I think successful teams need a good combination of both. I'm hopeful someone in the organization will focus on mechanics and be able to spot when a pitcher is moving away from his normal or most effective mechanics.

I thought I heard them say, last night, none had 6, but you are right.

I think no series ever had 5 road wins in the first 5 games. No major sport had 6, until the 7 this year.

Yup, and 26 man rosters until SEPT when everyone has to have 28- no more or less.

7 road wins is pretty amazing. I guess home field advantage is just a crap shoot.

Sox Management: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/red-sox-front-office-notes.html

Even if the Yanks paid the $5M, it wouldn't count against the 2020 luxury tax budget. Buy-out money is added to the previous guaranteed years.

They also saved $1M when the Sox claimed Osich.

Red Sox Claim Josh Osich By Mark Polishuk | October 31, 2019 at 1:04pm CDT The Red Sox have claimed left-hander Josh Osich off waivers from the White Sox, as per a team announcement. Originally claimed off waivers from the Orioles last March, Osich posted a 4.66 ERA, 4.07 K/9 rate, and 8.1 K/9 over 67 2/3 relief innings for the White Sox last season. Osich’s effectiveness was limited to same-sided batters, as he held left-handed hitters to only a .551 OPS (115 plate appearances) while right-handed hitters mashed him to the tune of a .903 OPS (157 PA). These numbers largely match Osich’s rather lopsided splits for his career, making him one of many specialist relievers (particularly lefties) whose careers could be altered by the three-batter minimum rule coming into effect in 2020. From Boston team in need of bullpen reinforcements, however, clearly the team sees value in exploring Osich’s potential. The 31-year-old does possess a mid-90’s fastball, and he has a solid 48.5% grounder rate over his 188 career MLB innings. The waiver claim will shave a little bit of money off Chicago’s book, as Osich was projected to earn $1MM in his first year of arbitration eligibility. The Bloom era has begun.

If we traded Betts and JBJ and JD do not return, there would be plenty of room under the luxury line to sign Cole, but it ain't happenin'.

They also will call plays at the plate or around it. They will call runner out of the baseline at key moments in World Series games. They may have to call foul tips and foul tips caught or not. They also have to get in the way of the catcher, annoy some pitchers and eject people from time to time. All the fun stuff stays.

We'd still need an ump behind home plate, so no umps jobs are in danger. Question, do robo umps detect foul tips?

It's totally different. I played the game for many years. I totally believe in the "human element" of the game as from a player's perspective. I might disagree on some things like comfort in a batting slot, but the human element is real and significant. I just don't think we need a human element (translated to mistakes being made) by umps. They shouldn't be "part of the game," unless there is no way around it. Technology can call balls & strikes way more consistently. Trained observers who watch every game not just a few can judge better than I how good the CF'er of the padres is on D. I don't see a disconnect.

I might add this: 1 pt for 82 wins 1 more point for 91 wins 1 more for 101 wins

He probably knows more about incoming pitchers from our farm more than any outsider. That may be the plus that makes him better than someone else.

That can be corrected, and my guess is, they are already working on it. Having one consistent strike zone has to outweigh any negatives, IMO. Pitchers and batters will continue to have to adjust to each other, but they never should have and never should have to adjust to an ump. Plus, even when you adjust to an ump, they still make mistakes- more often than maybe we even know.

b-i-n-g-o!

Umps should not be part of the game, especially in the sense where teams have to research what calls certain umps make or don't make and adjust your approach accordingly. I doubt any other sport does that. I don't think it will, in any way, ruin the game. It might seem weird for a while, but it should not change anything about the game, except for drunk fans not being able to yell at the ump as much. Is that a bad thing?

One could also debate bringing in Harris vs Osuna or having Cole warmed up near the start of the 7th.

To me, all robo umps need to do is be consistent. That seems like the easiest part of it to do, so it seems like a no brainer. Pitchers and catchers will quickly adjust to the strike zone set by the program. As a hitter or a pitcher, I'd love to know what a strike is and always will be.

Actually, I don't. It seems like the traditionalist ("human element people") and anti-stat people are all against robo umps. The stat guys may seem a little more mixed. Just my impression. I haven't really noticed any one person being contradictory on the two issues.

Good point. I'm not sure how you do that, but the Rays seemed to be pretty good at evaluating ML talent and finding hidden gems that didn't cost much. I'm hopeful Bloom will carry some of that over to the Sox where he can maybe get even better pitchers, because we can spend more than TB could. The Astros traded for Verlander, Cole and Greinke. They gave up some top prospects and got one ring, so far. We traded a lot to get Sale and spent a fortune on Price.

Who dat?

Maybe not totally meaningless, but your point is well taken. BTW, we will never see the day of a 100% balanced schedule in any major sport.