moonslav59

I meant in the 16-4 stretch before these 3 losses. Since July 31st, we've went... 4-3 vs CLE 4-2 vs NYY 2-0 vs TBR We padded our lead, and it helped allow us to have a 3 game losing streak and still be okay.

He's 20 (21 in Oct), first time in the Majors, in a pressure-filled pennant race, and started out like a house afire. I would argue that prudence would let him bat later if only to give him more time to size up the starter and to put less pressure on him. If he's better than HRam and Moreland, I'd bat him 4th. Little data there.

Did I forget to mention that throughout August, which has gone well overall, Farrell has not hesitated to shift almost everyone around in the batting order? I've always been fine with moving players around and poo-pooing the idea that players need slot stability and improve production in "comfort" slots. I've been wrong a lot this year on who should bat where and when. Players have reverse splits this year, and several times, I have been critical of JF for playing someone, they have done well. I've been highly critical of JF, but I've never said I'm better than he is. I think I've been right a lot and wrong a lot. It's kind of interesting for me to see how my suggestions turn out, although one never knows what might have happened, if _______.

Look at JBJ. He's a veteran whose OWAR (which does not include his defense) this year is the 2d best on the team and 80% of his 389 at bats have been in the 6th thru 9th slots. His lowest OPS? The 61 at bats while in the 5th slot--.480. Is that a decent sample size? To me, 61 PAs is small, especially when scattered over a season. Over his career, his best slot is 6th (.854) and his worst is 5th (.562). It doesn't make sense that this is anything more than just freaky happenings. (It should be noted that JBj has batted 5th only 165 times over his career, which is less than 9% of his total PAs. It's less than half of his PAs up 6th (364) and less than a 4th of his PAs batting 9th. )

The studies might be skewed by teams losing near the end of the season, because they rested starters.

That's why doing so well vs our nearest contenders mattered so much.

It could be a natural progression, but it will be hard to change overnight. My guess is, it might start with just the 4 and 5 slot pitchers and maybe slowly move to all 5.

I missed that. Moreland moved to P, HRam took Young's place as DH and then moved to 1B (negating the DH, which was fine, because Moreland was pitching, and we were out of it anyways), but the box score says Young PH for Ramirez in the 9th. How could Young start as the DH, be replaced and then come back as a PH'er later? Doesn't the ump keep track?

I agree, the Porcello signing was not "long term", but my point was about how much of the contract is within prime or just barely post prime. I was "not for" the Price signing, but I realized that FA gambles have to be made in order to save the farm. Signing mid level free agents to 2-4 year deals is less risky, but the impact has less of a chance at helping as well. The 2013 championship showed that theory can work, but it's still hard to justify the Vic and Dempster signings. Stanton is a once in a generation type player. He is signed from ages 28-37. To me, that is only maybe 2 seasons past prime, 2 seasons barely post prime, and 6 in prime. At $25M a year against the luxury tax, I could envision him giving us 4-6 $30M+ value seasons and maybe even a couple $40M+ value seasons. That would more than make up for his post prime seasons. My biggest concern is his injury history, not a flop. The other downside to Stanton is that not only are we risking a decline from Stanton, and taking up $25M on the luxury tax for 10 years, but we'd lose the rest of our current farm top prospects. I am not "for" trading for Stanton at any cost, but I think we need to look into it. Betts will be 25 next season. If we extended him this winter to 10 years, we'd have him from ages 25 to 34. Virtually every season would be in prime or 8 in prime and two is barely post-prime years. This is way different than any 8-10 year FA deal ever signed. Way different. I'm not saying both of these deals don't have a high risk, but I'd look into both, especially Betts. In my opinion, Betts will not sign this winter after a "bad year", although maybe he will be thinking "what if,..." and go for the security. Who knows. I'd kick the tires on both.

Of course, disagreeing with a choice here and there is fine. In an overall sense, this pen has way over performed, and it's one reason we are in first place. Blaming JF for our pen's season performance just doesn't make sense to me.

His whole MLB career is a tiny sample size. His sample sizes at each slot are teenie-weenie.

Yes, I am glossing over a 3 game sample size- good or bad. It doesn't mean it is meaningless, and if we continue losing I'll begin to get worried, but this team is not this bad. They likely are not as good as the 16-4 stretch Sox as well. If I had to choose which team we are closer to- the last 3 days or the 20 games before, I'd choose the 16-4. I think they are somewhere in between, hence the term "gray area". I hope we get healthy for the playoffs, and if we are, I will not look back at these 3 games and stress over them.

I'm glad it's the O's. We won't have to face them in the playoffs.

There is a lot of gray area between ignoring a 3 game sample size and proclaiming the end of the world as we know it.

Okay. Based on3 games, we suck and will always suck forever.

We just won 16 out of 20 games before dropping two games, and that shows "zero life"? Wow. You guys are tough.

I get it, but you are assuming 3-4+ 3-4 IP each and every 4 games. And, when one fails to go even 1 IP, you're stuck with just 4 pitchers to end the game and be ready for the next one. You'd probably need one of the 4 to be a 2-3 IP type RP'er leaving just 3 short guys.

More than just Kershaw...

I'm one of the biggest supporters of avoiding large and long contracts. I've posted countless threads shwoing how most of each year's biggest contracts not only failed to meet expectations, but they often fail right out of the gate. That being said, I loved the Porcello extension, because all the years fell within prime. Extending Betts for 10 years would place most of the years in prime and the rest near prime. Stanton is different. He's 27 and has 10 years left. The luxury hit is only $25M though, and he'll be be 33 during the 6th year of the deal. That's about 5-6 years in prime, 2-3 years close to prime, and the final 3 years at ages 35-37. That's not great, but it's not 38-40 either. The injuries are worrisome, but to me, Stanton is like Sale. These opportunities only come along once a decade or so, and I feel we should at least kick the tires.

I suggested, what I called, "tandem starters" a few years back, but mostly as an idea for maybe the 4 and 5 slot only. The idea of having 8 tandem starters on a roster seems too problematic, unless one or two of them could be used more than once every 4 days. The plan would only work, if you were pretty much sure the tandem would get you to the 8th or 9th inning very often. I'm not sure how realistic that is. Having only 4 short relievers could be big trouble, if they don't get you at least into the 7th inning just about every game.

Has anyone ever done a study? Remember the year we swept the Rickies in the WS, they had an incredible hot streak just to make the playoffs, then they ona nd on, until they met the Sox. I realize that is just one example, but I am wondering about studies on this matter.

I've been highly critical of JF for a while, but there is no way he should get any flack for his pen decisions. Before the year started, I felt our pen was our biggest weakness, and that was before Thornburg and Ross went out for the season with injuries, and Carson Smith's scheduled return moved from about June to possibly September. I'm not sure if JF deserves much of the credit, but he certainly should not take any blame for how this pen has performed this year. Getting a close to A performance from a pen that includes these IP'd by these RP'ers is something to be commended: 60 Barnes 54 Hembree 36 Abad 30 Scott 28 Boyer 27 Workman 17 Tayloer 35 Others Pitchers with brighter expectations: 54 Kimbrel 0 C Smith 0 Thornburg 9 R Ross 42 Kelly Our pen ranks 6th in RP'er WAR. Considering what JF had to work with, who can complain? 5th in xFIP (3.88) 5th K/BB (3.01) T4th WHIP (1.20) 2nd ERA- (71)

Yeah, it's a small sample size, but Bogey does have a hit in 8 of his last 10 games and reached on a BB in one of those two oh -fer games. He's 12 for his last 35 ABs and has reached base in 18 of his last 41 PAs. Let's hope this has been more than a blip.

There's a stark difference between signing HRam and extending Betts/ trading for Stanton: age and/or recent production

I had hoped we signed him to play 3B, but then I heard about Pablito. I didn't really like the signing, but I felt it was a good attempt at filling a very high need without trading away top prospects. HRam is still young enough to have a long stretch of high productivity. I'm hopeful, but I would not project greatness going forward.