moonslav59

It's 50 percent half mental.

True, but we were losing to some bad teams earlier. I'm not saying we don't have to keep getting better, but we've walloped these bad teams, for the most part. I think we've turned the corner.

Michael Chavis hardest-hitting Red Sox player WWW.MLB.COM The Red Sox lineup features the reigning American League MVP, a guy coming off back-to-back seasons of more than 40 home runs, and other talented players who helped the Sox win 108 games and a World Series championship in 2018. But in what has been a topsy-turvy ‘19 thus far

I think winning 6 of the last 8 might show we have already "started" playing better baseball. We've also gone 11-6 in the last 17. If we win at an 11-6 pace the rest of the way, we'll be fine.

Don't get me started. Jeter was one of the very worst full-time fielding SS's of his era. DRS shows him as the worst. UZR/150 as bottom 3-4. He and Palmeiro are two reasons I stopped paying attention to awards, and yes, that means maybe JBJ didn't deserve his. (Betts did.)

Last year, the CWS and Reds had 74 unearned runs- the most in MLB. The Astros had 31. I know earned vs unearned runs are somewhat subjective, but that's a difference of 43 runs right there. That's about 0.25 runs per game, if taken at face value. My guess is defense plays at least an equal role in earned runs scored or not scored, so it must be at least a half run difference.

It's probably top end, but there is a big difference between the best fielding team and the worst. Maybe 0.50 on an ERA might be more like it, and then there are the unearned runs that impact a game, too. So, maybe 1 run counting unearned and earned. Is that better?

GG's are largely political, but again, I have no beef with anyone who says Lynn was better, defensively.

I feel there is some degree of subjectivity when the place a ball hit inot the 10%, 10-40%, 40-60% or whatever other categories they use. I remember that play JBJ made that robbed a HR in the triangle. It looked like a 0% play--maybe 1-10%, but I think I recall, they called it "routine". (I could be wrong.)

Yes, this methodology is flawed, but it does show they are pretty close, which is what my eye test supports, as well. There's no way anyone can know for certain who is the best defensive CF'er in MLB, but most, if not all, experts would put these two int heir top 4-5.

Very close, and I mentioned him on another thread. Lynn was fantastic and "elite" on defense. He blew JBJ away on offense. I would not argue with anyone who says Lynn was better. (I do think JBJ makes many plays look much easier than they really are, and that hurts is metrics. Fred was a bit reckless- in a good way- and both were clearly elite defenders.

Just look at one defensive player: the catcher. He, alone, can have a huge influence. If you put the best defensive team vs the worst defensive team, I think you'd see a very big difference in any pitcher's numbers-- probably over or near a run in ERA.

I disagree. Let's compare total tough plays by positions between the SOx positions from 2017-2019: 1% to 40% 112 3B 76 SS 73 2B 64 RF 50 CF 40% to 90% 156 3B 100 SS 73 2B 54 RF 44 CF 90-100% 871 SS 729 3B 698 2B 697 CF 683 RF Even if you don't count the massive amount of routine balls hit to the SS position, there are more tough plays hit there as well. 2018 MLB Numbers 1-40%/ 40-90%/ 90-100% Position 2245/536/1276 C 1390/1872/10533 3B 1372/1664/13527 SS 1129/1326/12562 2B 883/791/11207 CF 823/858/8757 RF 714/801/8366 LF 596/1087/7922 1B Surprisingly, 3B looks tougher than given credit for.

Inside Edge gives these numbers. If you look at percentage of plays made by degree of difficulty, it should factor out the number of chances one CF'er gets vs the other: 2017-2019 1-10% Diffuclty 26% JBJ (27 total plays) 23% KK (17) 10-40% (14) 73% KK (11) 40-60% 62% KK (13) 50% JBJ (10) 60-90% 96% JBJ (29) 95% KK (19) 90-100% 100% JBJ (551) 99.5% KK (438)

I agree. His defense does not sustain a .450 OPS. Even .550 is too low. .650 might be the tipping point, but I wouldn't argue against .675 all that much.

1. Elite does not mean nobody else is as good as you. 2. Why bring up "elite" defense and then show WAR numbers that include offense? I'd be fine with replacing JBJ and Leon with equal defenders who can hit better. Tell me how we do that while staying under the max spending limit or by not opening a massive hole somewhere else by trading for such a player. (Note: I would never and have never argued JBJ is the best defensive CF'er in MLB. I have said he's the best defensive SOX CF'er I have ever seen. That's much different.) Why must you continuously argue against positions nobody is taking?

Not the PC answer, but I'd give both nuts to the latter.

I'd say pitching + defense has to equal 50%, just as hitting + base running should equal 50%. I'd say ... Pitching 40% Defense 10% Hitting 46% Base Running 4% Great defense can change an average pitcher to a good one, a good one to a great one, and a bad one to a decent one, especially at the catcher, SS, 2B and CF positions. Off the top of my head, I'd rank defensive positions as such: 22% Catcher 22% SS 14% 2B 14% CF 8% 3B 7% RF (maybe more in Fenway) 6% LF 6% 1B 1% P

We do have 40, now, with the additions of Weber, Curletta, Josh Smith and the re-addition of Leon. Who would be the first to go, if we added another player or when Wright comes off his suspension? 1. Shepherd 2. an out-of-options player due to the 25 man roster squeeze created by Chavis' excellent start? (Nunez, Pearce, Thornburg?) 3. Curletta 4. Weber 5. Josh A Smith 6. Josh Taylor 7. Brewer 8. Travis 9. Wright If you count Thornburg, I count about 10 guys we could DFA, and I wouldn't complain at all.

Very true. The difference is, I would not argue JBJ is close to Ellsbury, if you took away his hottest streak(s). My point was that JBJ is about as good as Ellsbury, if you take away Jacboy's freak season, and Some strongly disagree with that position. That's fine with me, but nobody is saying JBJ is an elite offensive player or HOF candidate. We are not acting or implying he is even close to that. I responded to the points that JBJ had no upside, despite finishing last year with 120 straight games of about the most consistent hitting we've ever seen from him. I responded to the point that those 120 games and the 900+ PAs from his 2015-2016 seasons can hardly be called "lucky streaks." They were both way too long to be lucky. They both prove he has "possible" upside, because he's already shown he can do it- twice for long stretches and several more times for 3-5 week torrid stretches here and there. I'm fine with anyone thinking Ellsbury is better than JBJ, but I responded to the statement that he was twice as good as JBJ. He was and is not. Yes, I cherry-picked stats to make my points, but how else can you respond to a statement that his hot streaks were all lucky? I had to show some evidence that 120 games and another of 900+ PAs show it's more than luck and it may be repeatable at age 29.

Hopefully just a blip on a long stretch of good playing. I had hoped our offense was going to keep doing well, but we're bound to have a bad day here and there. Weber looked good.

Single and HBP with 2 outs in the 6th.

Probably right, but just think about how many people would give their left nut to get the chance he got...

...and one would expect a better WAR when you factor in Ellsbury had about 600 more PAs with the Sox than JBJ has right now. That's 23% more than JBJ has.

His "lucky streak" last year was 106 games long. His lucky streak from 2015-2016 was over 900 PAs long. Look, I never said I expect JBJ to hit that well again, but to think that saying he has "no upside", when he has already shown he can have extended productive offensive streaks, some how "pleases yourself", then maybe I'm missing something. Go ahead an count 5 weeks as a season--twice. Go ahead on keep expecting JBJ to never do okay or better on offense ever again. You might end up being right, but 29 is not over the hill, and if you count the 14 playoff games with the last 106 games of the regular season as a "lucky streak", then so be it. When you're 28 you can do those things, but now that he's 29, he's toast. I'm choosing to think (or hope) that if he can hit over .790 for his previous 120 games before the start of this season, maybe he can hit over .750 the last 125+ games this year-- just a few months removed from that pro-longed "lucky streak". Last 120 games of 2018, including the playoffs: 443 PAs/390 ABs 99 H 43 BB 31 2B 4 3B 14 HR 60 rbi 64 R 3 SF .254 BA .323 OBP .461 SLG .784 OPS .784 way way way back so long ago!