moonslav59

I was agreeing with you in the post you are now bashing.

No, but you failed to take into account the other aspects of fielding beyond errors that I mentioned in my post. Also, I never hold any 9 game sample size against any player. My guess is Devers will be close to what we've gotten so far on defense at 3B this season as a whole, if not better. (Note: I only mentioned the errors as a response to a post. I do not use fldg% to judge defense.)

Even if the doctors say he can, I wouldn't do it. We need HRam's bat remaining healthy, rested and potent. It's not worth the risk. If we want a big bat added, and the Devers call-up is for the rest of the year, to me, 1B is the obvious upgrade position for the remainder of this year. Since we are likely to see Moreland depart this winter, we can also look for a longer term 1B solution, if a worthwhile deal is out there.

Whooosh!

Bright lights also help the fielder see the ball better. The fields are smoother, too.

Miggy's so-called decline is one year in the making and may be just a blip, but the Pablo experiment should be a warning sign. There is an $8M buyout on Miggy's contract after his age 40 season (after 2023). I doubt Detroit would pay enough of Miggy's deal for us to trade for him, but I'd love to see Miggy at 1B/DH for us going forward.

Hell no. We don't need another DH type.

The team has 18 errors in 100 games at 3B, and that's not even counting non-error misplays and range-lacking missed plays this season. Maybe Devers is not as good defensively as Lin or Marrero, but he should be a step up from the aggregate defense we've had at 3B this year, so far. His bat, even if he swings with his eyes closed, almost has to be better than what we've had so far this year.

CC sucked. We lucked out when the Dodgers took him off our hands. Had they not, CC's name would be major cah-cah in Boston... more than Pablo. It was a 7 year deal- not 5. Counting MLB inflation, CC's contract was more than the $3M differential between him and Pablo. I believe CC didn't even play his last contract year. (Pablo may not either, in fact, he may not even play in 3 of the 5 year deal.)

Agreed. I think the hold back was more about how Devers can or cannot adjust to ML pitching. I do not think his fielding was holding him back, especially when Pablo was playing.

Nope.....How long are you going to give credit to Theo? It's DD's team. Ben would not have signed Kimbrel and Price. THEY PUT THE TEAM OVER THE TOP. Otherwise we would have been in last place last year. We have no way of knowing. I feel certain that Ben would have signed someone big (maybe Cueto). I also feel he would have traded some of our top prospects in a blockbuster (like for Sale), but I do agree that he would not have made that exact same trade for a RP'er (KImbrel). I have little doubt that Ben was poised to pull some triggers, and if he was hesitant, Larry & Co would have insisted he do somethings large. DD inherited the worst signing in baseball history, Pablo Sandoval. No, inheriting CC was worse. ($142M / 7 was worse than $95M/5 not even counting inflation). Remind us who signed CC. And no way in hell Ben would have traded away Moncada and Kopech. Maybe- maybe not, but he'd have traded some big prospects. Even if for the simple reason that there just plainly was not enough room on the 40 man roster for all of them. Do you want to see this team without Price, Sale, Pomeranz and Kimbrel? Depends who we might have gotten instead, but the Sale trade was essential. Maybe we'd have Cueto & Quintana instead of Price and Kimbrel, Maybe we'd have Miller or Chapman instead of Kimbrel. (We would not have had Pomeranz for Espi.)

Nobody should know anything with any sort of certainty after any 8 day sample size.

I don't think it is. I've trusted DD on this decision all along. It seems like Devers has been "ML ready" for a while, so to me, the move looks fine.

Red Sox To Promote Rafael Devers By Mark Polishuk | July 23, 2017 at 5:13pm CDT The Red Sox will promote third base prospect Rafael Devers, president of baseball operations Dave Dombrowski announced to the Boston Herald’s Jason Mastrodonato (Twitter link) and other reporters. Devers will join the team in Seattle tomorrow and make his Major League debut on Tuesday when the Red Sox face the Mariners (hat tip to MassLive.com’s Jen McCaffrey). Let the Devers era begin. Let it be prosperous.

He traded de la Rosa & Webster for Wade Miley. He traded Frank Montas and Iggy for Peavy. Lars Anderson for Steven Wright. Anthony Ranaudo for Robbie Ross. Luis Ortega for B Badenhop. Brandon jacobs for Matt Thornton. Prospects and Melancon for Holt & Hanrihan. I probably missed a few others.

Yes, the study I provided assumed every sac bunt was successful, and the numbers still come out bad for all but 2 situations where one was a push (man on 1st and 0 outs) and one was slightly worth it (man on 1st & 2nd with 0 outs), but without a batter up who knows how to bunt well, there's probably no situation where bunting improves the odds of scoring.

Yes, I did not notice any studies made by Law. He basically cited other multiple sources that all came to the same conclusions.

I don't think anyone felt like more from Beni and a newly signed Moreland were going to "replace" Papi fully. The idea was that an improved defense and the addition of Sale would be enough to offset the slight loss on offense.

Other teams will have to hits vs our pitchers. I've always felt good pitching trumps good hitting, so we'll see, if we can score enough to win come playoff time. How much is "enough"? Depends.

It was a great read for the airport and plane rides to Maine. He touched on a few things we've discussed here in a chapter titled "Bulfinch's Baseball Mythology: Clutch Hitters, Lineup Protection and Other Things that Dob't Exist." On lineups: (after discussing more PAs for the first few hitters) ...why [not] simply suggest the best hitter lead off...? The answer is the lead off spot ...comes up far to often with the bases empty, and thus moving your best hitter to that spot gains you another 20 or so PAs but at the cost of a lot of run-scoring opportunities from other baserunners. The Book showed that the lead off slot has 64% of its PA come with bases empty, far more than any other spot in the line up, none of which comes in above 56%. So, your leadoff hitter should be someone who gets on base at a high clip but doesn't have much power..." "...your number 2 hitter should be your best overall bat...preferably someone who gets on base and also hits for power...." He doesn't really get into the whole line-up construction thing. He also dispels the "hot hand" theory.

Said better than I ever could have said it. Right on all fronts.

We actually seem to do better vs good pitchers and get stymied by unknowns or average pitchers. (No data to back this up, but my gut feels it.)

No, but there are several examples of smaller framed pitchers that are automatically labeled as non-starters. I do think Espi has enormous upside potential as other services must agree to have ranked him so highly based on little actual observational data. I do realize that his age and growth stage, there's a lot that can go wrong as well. You're right: we'll see.

Muchas Gracias!

Yeah, I heard the same about Pedro.