moonslav59

I'm low carbing it.

It is. ..and I ain't no Limburger!

Top WHIP from 2003-2017 0.81 Uehara 0.87 Kimbrel 1.00 Papelbon 1.11 D Bard 1.17 Aceves 1.17 Foulke 1.17 Atchinson 1.18 A Miller 1.21 Tazawa 1.23 Embree 1.25 Okajima 1.27 Timlin 1.32 R Ross Best seasons (40+ IP) since 2003: 0.57 Uehara '13 0.67 Kimbrel '17 0.77 Paps '07 0.78 Paps '06 0.90 Miller '14 0.92 Uehara '14 0.92 Uehara '15 0.93 Paps '11 0.94 Foulke '04 0.95 Paps '08 0.95 Tazawa '12 0.96 Uehara '16 0.96 D Bard '11 0.97 Okajima '07 0.99 Atchison '12 1.00 D Bard '10 1.00 Aceves '11

0.667 Kimbrel 2017 0.565 Uehara 2013 0.771 Papelbon 2007 0.940 Foulke 2004 Other than Kimbrel's 2012 season at 0.654 and a couple of better seasons by Foulke, all of these closers had their best WHIP seasons in our championship seasons.

DD didn't even get a 5th starter to replace Price this year. I think he signs a couple Fister types and puts all his eggs in a clean-up hitting 1Bman.

2017 Pen Numbers (before tonight) IP RP'er WHIP/K-BB 60 Barnes 1.20/2.4 57 Kimbrel 0.67/9.6 54 Hembree 1.46/4.0 44 J Kelly 1.28/1.7 37 F Abad 1.14/2.4 31 R Scott 1.03/2.1 29 Workman 1.06/4.6 29 B Boyer 1.70/2.1 17 B Taylor 1.67/2.0 12 A Reed 0.81/5.0 9.0 R Ross 1.89/1.8 26 IP Others No Abad or Boyer next year. That's 54+ IP to be replaced. If we trade Hembree, we'll have over 110 IP to replace. Carson Smith and Thornburg seem to be the guys we'd expect to take those innings, but we'll also have Robbie Ross, a full season from Workman and some young bucks trying to make a mark. If healthy, I like how our pen looks next year.

I doubt we trade Kimbrel, Smith, Thornburg or Kelly, and nobody else is going to bring us the hitter (or SP'er) we need. I could see us trading out-of-options Hembree for a prospect and keeping all the rest. With Wright as a starter in Price's slot, and Hembree traded, our pen looks very good and just deep enough: Closer: Kimbrel RP2: Smith RP3: Thornburg RP4: Kelly RP5: Workman RP6: Ross RP7: Barnes AAA: Scott, Maddox, Taylor, Martin and converted starters- Johnson, Beeks, Velazquez, Cosart & Haley

I'd "do all 16 Dances!" (Dance This Mess Around)

Remaining games: Boston: 6 TOR (3H/3A) 6 TBR (3H/3A) 4 @ NYY 4 v HOU 3@ CIN 3@ BAL 3 v OAK NYY: 7 BAL (4H/3A) 6 TBR (3H/3A) 6 TOR (3H/3A) 4 v BOS 3@ TEX 3 v MN 1 v KCR They have 1 day off from SEP 7 to OCT 1. CLE 7 DET (3H/4A) 7 CHE (4H/3A) 4 v KCR 3 v MN 3 v BAL 3@ LAA 3@ SEA

As I said on another thread... The Yanks are toast. Cut 'em up and make croutons out of 'em.

In baseball anything can happen, but let the best team win. We all know who that is. Sweep the Bronx bums.

Chavis and Travis with dingers tonight (Wed). With all the creamed jeans over Brentz and his mega HR stretch, he's kind of cooled off over the last 11 games. 10 games without an HR or RBI. .220 BA 0 for his last 16 For those wanting to play "the hot hands", is Brentz "hot" or not? Is he a better choice vs LHPs than Young now?

The Yanks are toast. Cut 'em up and make croutons out of 'em!

Showing how to dominate without the Ks.

For those obsessed with how well players do in certain batting slots or situations based on tiny sample sizes, and you know who you are , here's a number to ponder... OPS 1.457 before tonight Moreland's OPS as a sub. Add 2 for 2 from tonight's game, and we're looking at Moreland being 8 for 16 with 3 HRs and 10 RBI. Maybe starting Young is not such a bad thing despite his poor numbers (although Young did get on base once in 2 PAs tonight).

Now Young is being used to take Moreland out of the second game in a row when he has been one of our hottest hitters. Young has been pathetic of late and consistently so. Quoting when he has done in the past doesn't mean much when you have to win a game tonight. As we saw tonight, starting Young over Moreland does not mean Moreland won't play. Bat alive tonight!

I might be in the minority, and I hate the Yanks as much as any Sox fan, but I'm worried more about the Guardians. I'm not worried about winning the division. I can't see the Yanks passing us with the schedule we have left. If they do, we won't win it all anyways.

We knew he was done for 2017 already. Is this about 2018? Not that it matters. He'll be off the 40 man by rule 5 day anyways.

I wish I could say it like that without a 1000 page dissertation.

Yes, I fely he needed a 10 day DL stint while recovering from the toe injury. He got hot shortly after I suggested that. Like I said, I have never claimed to know more than JF and DD. I have been wrong enough to prove that.

I get the mentality of "what have you done lately", and I do agree that is very important, but I think these numbers speak volumes: ALL MLB Hitters vs LHPs from 2015-2016 (250+ PAs) 1.076 Goldschmidt 1.061 N Cruz 1.011 Trout .984 Ryan Braun (159 wRC+) .980 Chris Young (164 wRC+) Only 3-4 players in all of MLB were better than Young over the prior two years. Young has an .875 OPS vs LHPs from 2014-2016. That places him 24th in MLB and ahead of everyone on the Sox, except HRam. He's at .872 from 2015-2017, which places him 23rd, which is better than HRam and Bogey (the next best Sox players). Young had had a rough couple weeks, but it's too early to give up on a guy who has been a proven lefty killer.

Young has been one of the best hitters vs LHPs in MLB for 2-3 years before this year. That's solid proof he can and has done it for extended times. Brentz has a shorter time frame of success vs LHPs in the minor leagues. I'd like to see Brentz called up in September and given a chance to shine, but I'm not giving up on Young yet. Also, if we are going to make decisions based on just 2017 numbers, and that's what you are doing here, then Young should start vs every RHP'er. 2017 OPS vs RHPs: .994 Nunez .831 Beni .812 Young .807 Devers .800 Moreland .768 HRam .760 Betts .756 Pedey .747 Bogey .736 Vaz .729 JBJ If we went totally by lefty-righty splits in 2017, Beni would be benched vs LHPs (.656). Plus, how well would any hitter do when they are asked to play as sporadically as Young? Brentz plays everyday and is allowed to find and stay in a groove. Young never gets that chance. He's done fine as our 4th OF'er and 2nd DH, and quite frankly, I'm baffled why his name keeps coming up so often.

A question: if your don't believe line-up slots make a significant difference, what the heck are we arguing about? Kimmi is the one who has provided studies that show line-up construction barely makes a difference. I feel it does matter. You are misinterpreting my point. My point is that a small sample size showing Devers does better in the 6 or 7 slot instead of the 5 slot is near meaningless, NOT that batting him 7th vs 5th is meaningless. Your point was that batting Devers 6th instead of 5th was what was making him do better. My response was that Devers batting 5th or 6th did not affect how well he did. It was happenstance. That is different than saying it makes no difference where he bats in terms of us scoring more runs. You see Devers going 4 for in the 7 slot and say, "See, I was right: he should bat 7th." I see Devers go 4 for 4 in the 7 slot and tahink, we'd have scored more runs, if he went 4 for 4 in the 4 slot instead of the 7 slot. Heck, we might score more, if he went 3 for 4 in the 4 slot vs 4 for 4 in 7 slot. Where Devers bats does matter, to me. I'm not being swayed by sample sizes as low as 8 and 16 PAs. He's better than HRam and Moreland, and he should be batting 3-5 vs RHPs. I'd prefer 3 or 4. I enjoy arguing, for one thing. But, believe me, I am normally happy with almost any lineup, especially right now thanks to your "everybody is gravitating toward the OPS mean of .750" theory. In that context, almost any lineup should work. Agreed, but again, unlike Kimmi, I believe in playing the hot hand more often and in more important slots. I like talking about the idea of any given lineup mostly because it's pre-game stuff. I like that "comfortable slot" idea, but am not wedded to it. Your numbers and reminders about Devers minor league slots are good points. Plus, as I said, I'm happy if Farrell moves him right back up to the 5th or higher slot. In the heat of the moment, I will admit, I was grasping at straws when the great Devers was looking a little too human--thus the comfort zone thesis. When my prediction--moving him back down--seemed to go right, I crowed about it. But I cannot emphasize too strongly the kid has great potential, has already delivered on much of it way sooner than we expected, and can bat anywhere. You are right about that. I think Devers was bound to return to earth no matter what slot they batted him in.

I think his best slot is probably 3d or 4th. But I'm not so sure about right now, which is when we need him contributing in the late stages of a very competitive pennant race with a lot at stake. Agree completely the stats have a very small sample size, but that's all we've got. It's not "all we got", and what we have should not be considered the only evidence we are forced to use. I seriouslu doubt any player does better or worse because they are dropped from 5th to 7th, 6th to 7th or 8th, etc... I'm totally against the idea of comfort slots, but even if you believe it matters, Devers has no comfort in the lower slots- he's barely played there. He's batted 3-5 almost his whol professional career and done well. I do agree that batting 3rd or 4th might put added pressure on a player, but IMO, Devers can handle it. Look what he did against the Yanks. This kid seems impervious to pressure. So far dropping him down has worked. So many factors go into small sample size data. Strength or pitcher facing. Pitchers adjusting to Devers. Lefty-righty/home-away. Fastball-breaking ball. The teenie weenie sample sizes Devers has had in the 7, 8 and 9 slots are almost certainly independent of the fact that he was in those slots vs others. 7th-- 16 PAs (1.313) 8th-- 8 PAs (1.125) 9th-- 16 PAs (1.109) Even all combined, 40 PAs is near meaningless in terms of making determinations of line-up placement. One could just as easily argue that his 62 PAs and .669 OPS in the 5 slot is because we did not bat him 3rd or 4th--where he was most comfortable in the minors. You're entitled to your opinions, but I'll never believe line-up slots make a significant difference, especially when we're not talking about the lead-off slot or the 3-4 slots that hold certain higher expectations. 5 vs 6 is nothing. Respectfully, I just can't disagree more.

He might, but I want Betts from ages 31-34. I want 10 years. Yes, it's riskier, but there's upside to 10 over 6.