moonslav59

My point is that although high K pitchers usually do better than low K pitchers, it doesn't mean K's equate to greatness. Great pitching is about getting guys out. When hitters do get on, it's about not letting them be HRs or XBHs. It's about limiting BBs and HBPs. It sometimes is about buckling down when men do get on base. I get how a K saves a fielder from having to make a play, but the Sox are not a better fielding team than the Guardians, so Porcello was not aided by greater fielding. The fact is, he walked less hitters. He allowed less men on base than Kluber. His adjusted ERA (or ERA-) was better than Kluber's. I just don't see why higher K's is enough to overturn the bottom line.

That was a great article that covered just about everything that needed to me covered. Papi will always be "the greatest" in my mind.

If Mo never got higher than #2 (the year Colon won it), i doubt any reliever will do better. I think it's Kluber or Porcello. There's enough to support both winning. I doubt Sale gets many votes, so I think it's a two man race. I'm not even sure britton can get enough votes for 3rd place.

3 Days off 8 pm @ CLE 4:30 @ CLE Day Off 4 pm CLE ? pm CLE (if needed) Day Off ? pm @ CLE (if needed) Plenty of rest and then 2 days off within the 5 game series. If needed, we could go with Porcello in game 1 and 4 on 3 days rest and then have Price in game 5 on regular rest. If up 2-1, we may go with out 4th starter (ERod or Buch, whoever doesn't start in game 3). This would allow Porcello to pitch game 5 on an extra day's rest, probably not against Kluber (who would likely have been used in game 4 down 1-2 games). Our offense should be well rested for every game. One would think every relief pitcher would be rested enough to pitch in all games, unless used for 2 or more innings in the previous game.

Maybe it will only be a partial eclipse.

I kind of expected he wouldn't. Not many players soar above their AA & AAA numbers.

Had we won one more game, wouldn't CLE have had to play another game to determine seeding in the playoff? Wouldn't that have been worth something to us?

Bogey did get 5 days off this year, and for a player his age, that seems about right. However, it did seem pretty clear he was running out of steam (or just slumping) towards the end. Since we really didn't have a good SS back-up, and the playoffs and division lead were in doubt until the big win streak, I can see the reasoning for playing Bogey a lot until the last week. Total games started: 157 Bogey & Betts 155 JBJ 151 Pedey 144 Ramirez 140 Ortiz 127 Shaw 76 Holt, 30 Hill 53 Young, 30 Beni 68 Leon, 49 Vazquez, 30 Hanigan, 10 Holaday PA (rank leaders in AL) 730 Betts (2) 719 Bogey (3) 698 Pedey (11) 636 JBJ (58) 626 Ortiz (69) amazing the numbers he put up with just 626 PAs 620 Ramirez (77) 530 T Shaw (131) Papi ended up tied for 8th in AL HRs with 38 T1st in RBI with 127 (with EE) 1st in OPS at 1.021 (30 points ahead of Trout) 1st in SLG at .620 (57 points ahead of Miggy)

2nd Half Pen WAR 1.5 Miller 0.7 Ziegler 0.8 Otero 0.5 Kelly 0.6 B Shaw 0.5 Uehara 0.4 McAllister 0.4 Kimbrel 0.2 Crockett 0.3 Barnes + 0.2 Ross

2nd Half ERA- 59 Porcello 59 Kluber 73 Buchholz 125 Bauer 73 ERod 131 Tomlin 80 Price 2nd Half WAR 3.4 Porcello 1.7 Kluber 1.8 Price 0.9 Bauer 1.7 ERod 0.4 Tomlin 1.1 Buch

On the Sox side, if you count Young and Beni with 345 PAs combined, we have 8 guys over .800! 1.021 Ortiz .897 Betts .866 Ramirez .850 Young/.835 Benintendi .845 Leon .835 Bradley .825 Pedroia .802 Bogey .726 Shaw/.705 Holt (3B) Too bad Young or Beni can't play 3B. Others: .730 Hernandez (56 PA) .585 Vaz .577 Hill .468 Hanigan Our Rotation: 3.15 Porcello 1.01 WHIP 3.99 D Price 1.20 4.78 Buchholz 1.33 (3.22/1.11 2nd half) 4.71 ERod 1.30 The pen: 3.40/1.09 Kimbrel (31 svs) 3.45/.096 Uehara 1.52/1.25 Ziegler 3.25/1.25 R Ross 4.17/1.23 Tazawa 5.18/1.70 Kelly (1.02/1.02 in relief) 6.39/1.66 Abad 0.00/1.33 R Scott in 6 IP

Well said. I do think players like Bogey and Pedey really needed the rest. I hope it's not too much rest, but I think it should be just right. Even with the injuries to the Guardians' rotation, we cannot take them lightly. While they don't have the bench we have, and they have a sub .600 catching OPS, they are a pretty balanced offensive team. They are one of the very few teams with 5 guys over .800, 6 guys over .790 and 7 guys over .760: .886 Naquin .865 Santana .825 Ramirez .811 Kipnis .800 Napoli .794 Lindor .767 Chisenhall .693 R Davis .527 Gomes Subs: .907 B Guyer (96 PA) .778 M Byrd .695 Almonte .602 Gimenez .591 Uribe .579 R Perez Their SP'ers: 3.14 Kluber (1.06 WHIP) 4.26 Bauer (1.31) 4.40 Tomlin (1.19) 5.26 Clevinger (1.49) The pen: 2.51/1.00 Cody Allen (32 Svs) 1.55/0.55 Andrew Miller (w CLE) 1.53/.0.91 Dan Otero 3.24/1.26 Bryan Shaw 3.74/1.20 Tommy Hunter 2.25/1.15 J Chamberlain This is a solid team with a good manager.

...will start Holt at 3rd ... Shows just how low Shaw has sunk.

Bunting is for girly men.

Price barely got his final ERA under 4.00 (3.99). Let's hope this was just a learning curve season.

Maybe, but I'd move batters more than one slot in some cases.

I feel very confident about the playoffs. Everyone is rested. We have the best three starters in the AL, the best offense, and very good defense. Now, we just have to translate all that into wins.

Top 15 prospect.

I totally get the correlation between K's and success, but it's not the only or most important correlation for success. Allowing less men on base and less XBHs is surely more important than more K's. There are countless pitchers who have long histories of greatness without high K rates. It's not an either or correlation. Allowing men on base (Kluber has a higher BB rate by far) has a higher correlation to runs scored than Ks. Yes, Porcello let more balls be put in play, but some oft hat is because he walked less men than Kluber did. The Guardians had abe tter defense than the sox, so it's hard to argue that Porcello was helped on balls in play more than Kluber was, but it's hard to know for sure. Here's a breakdown: Kluber/Porcello 860 PA 890 57 BB 32 7 HBP 13 170 H 193 234 men on base 238 .274 OBP .268 .357 SLG .367 106 1B 129 39 2B 36 3 3B 5 22 HR 23 SH+SF 5 GDP 16 K 189 So, Porcello faced 890 batters and 662 made outs (.743). Core Kluber faced 860 batters and 626 made outs (.728). Porcello gets outs 1.5% more than Kluber. To me, this matters more than how the outs were made, but here is how the outswe re made: Porcello 662 outs 189 K outs 473 other outs (71%) Kluber 626 outs 227 K outs 399 other outs (64%)

I was against the deal in the first place, but I certainly would have and still would rescind the deal.

A team winning 11 then losing 4/5 is usually the sign of an inconsistent team, just as teams who struggle on offense will have spells of winning 13-1. I disagree that this is the sign of a good team. Their record in one run/close games is right around .500, while they win many blowout games. Come playoff time, that will not fly. The 2013 team had many "inconsistent" stretches as well. They won 7 in a row followed by losing 3 or 4 and then won 5 more in a row and 7 out of 8. Right after this, they went 1-6 (and 2-9). Then, they won 5 straight. In many ways the 2013 Sox were more up and down than the 2016 team. They had a 4-8 stretch in June followed by a 9-1 streak. In July they lost 3 in a row, then won 4 in a row followed by going 3-6. In August, we had a 7-2 stretch followed immediately by a 2-6 stretch. That was then followed by a 12-2 run. They ended the season 5-6.

I'd rather adjust the line-up using the splits vs the starter. That way you maximize PAs and chances to score early or in a players first 2-4 PAs rather than just the last one. Here's our splits from 2015-2016: vs RHPs 1.047 Ortiz .875 JBJ .873 Betts .816 Pedey .766 Young .761 Ramirez .761 Bogey .751 Shaw .733 Pablo .732 Holt .727 Swihart .705 Leon .573 Hanigan .527 Vazquez vs LHPs .986 Young .916 Ramirez .882 Bogey .829 Betts .822 Pedey .808 Castillo .777 Ortiz .770 Hill .761 Shaw .759 Leon .748 JBJ .684 Holt .673 Swihart .649 Hanigan .465 Pablo As you can see, Pedey's splits are very similar, so moving someone around in order to avoid having a righty up before or after him makes little sense. Betts hits lefties very well, so I don't see how putting another lefty up before or after him matters much. I think it's more important to put Young in every line-up vs LHPs and to put him in the top 5 hitters. It's easy to PH for him late in the game. Some players have massive disparities in their splits, and I feel they should be dropped or raised in the order at least by 1 slot according to their strong preferences. Maybe something like this... vs RHP 1) R Pedey 2) L JBJ 3) R Betts 4) L Ortiz 5) R Ramirez 6) R Bogey 7) L Beni 8) L Shaw 9) S Leon vs LHPs 1) R Pedey 2) R Bogey 3) R Betts 4) L Ortiz 5) R Ramirez 6) R Young 7) L JBJ 8) S Leon 9) S Hernandez/ R Hill

Yes, it can be crucial, but so can having a lesser hitter up earlier for the first, second, third and sometimes fourth time around the line-up until you get to that late-inning situation that may not even occur in many games. Sure, if players are close to being even, then mixing up the lefties and righties makes a lot of sense, but sometimes I think managers go over-board based on 1 PA out of 3-5 in a game. Early innings are "crucial" too. Also, not all righty and lefty hitters are equally bad or good vs a certain armed pitcher. Some lefties are better than some righties on their own team vs lefties. Switching them around may not even create better match-ups, at times.

Trout is "the best", and he is "most valuable" to his team. Just because his team sucks doesn't mean he's not valuable or more valuable. One could argue that because the Sox have Betts, Ortiz, Pedey and other top hitters, they could "afford" to lose one more than the Angels could afford to lose Trout. Betts would be replaced with Young and Beni, and we'd still be a good team, maybe not in 1st place, but still very good. The Angels might have 120 losses without Trout.

I strongly disagree. Just as high K hitters can still be great offensive players, so too can low K pitchers be great pitchers. Just get the guy out. I can see, if Porcello has been letting up more than his fair share of line-outs, deep fly balls or spectacular defensive plays behind him, and so being called "somewhat lucky", but I haven't seen that being the case this year. BABIP .269 Porcello .271 Kluber LD% 18.8% Porcello 19.3% Kluber Yes, more K's means less work for your fielders, less chances the mess up, more chances for opponents to get a hit, but if the opponents aren't hitting the ball as hard as against the high K guy you are being compared to, and the low K guy is keeping his opponents off base more often, then I can't see how higher K's flips the narrative. Opponents have a lower OBP vs Porcello. The lower LD% seems to indicate that the slightly lower (.002) BABIP is not better luck but is what should be expected.