moonslav59

He's looked good lately, but his AAA WHIP number is not that encouraging: 1.443 WHIP (4.0 BB/9) I do agree; he deserves a chance.

He'll be our 9th starter this year. 13 Price & Porcello 12 Wright 10 Buchholz 6 Kelly 3 ERod & Owens 2 O'Sullivan

I seriously doubt we get a bat. We have 9 guys with an OPS above .777 over the past 365 days, and HanRam is not one of them. Neither is Holt, Castillo, Vazquez and Rutledge. I think we have enough depth to replace just about any one guy who might get injured or struggle to the point of losing his full time job. We need pitching, and pitching is costly. Getting a solid #2 or 3 starter and a nice set-up guy will cost us dearly. I'm okay with trading some of our future away for the here and now, but getting three pieces may be too much.

I met Tommy Harper when he was a Brewer and I lived 2 blocks from the olf County Stadium. I was just 10 years old. It was at a NAACP civil rights march led by Father Groppi through the streets of Milwaukee. ,He was not the bitter man some Sox fans view him as after his squabbles with Sox management over institutional racism Tommy became my favorite player that day, and when he was traded to the Red Sox shortly after my family moved to Maine, I became a Sox fan.

Trending Sox hitters by OPS: Last 365/last 28 days 1.073/1.238 Ortiz +135 .968 /1.191 Young +223 .919 /.952 JBJ +33 .892 /1.079 Betts +186 .856 /1.009 Bogey +153 .808 / .890 Pedey +82 .802 /.477 Shaw -325 .777 /.739 Swihart -38 .701 /.351 Rutledge -350 .689 /.000 Holt n/a .686 /n/a Castillo n/a .673 /.480 HanRam -193 .595 /.358 Hanigan -237 .576 /.492 Vazquez -84

How about the balance of the Sox offense? .841 vs RHPs .831 vs LHPs .867 Home .813 Away .851 batting 1st .868 2nd .924 3rd 1.040 4th .699 5th (HanRam .712 from this slot) .829 6th .881 7th .641 8th (Vazquez & Hanigans the main culprits) .791 9th My guess is we are the only AL team with just one batting slot below .699.

Agreed, but it's also about getting JBJ closer to the guys who get on base more often.

I think we can all agree that the uncertainty about Buch, Kelly, Owens, Johnson and Elias this year should force us to look long and hard for a decent and solid starter.

I'll agree to that--just how I like my Rib Eye Steaks!

He's either been injured by June in 2 of the last 4 years or pitching too poorly to deserve a rotation slot by June in the other 2 of 4 years. That's unreliable. However, those two half seasons of 2013 and 2015 of fine pitching was apparently enough for Sox management to want to risk keeping him around. I agreed with the choice, and it certainly appears we were wrong. I've never tried to hide these facts or my mistake opinion. I only tried to correct a statement I felt was wrong or at least misleading.

Agreed, but my point was that it was not rare for him to last past June.

The statement I responded to said it was a CERTAINTY that Buch has to b e replaced EVERY June. Let me ask you, is that a valid statement? Was it wrong for me to point out the statement is invalid? If it was meant to be hyperbole, then so be it, but others seem to be defending the validity of that statement. Buch pitched well enough in 2010 and 2012 to not need replacing. Since then, he's been pitching well but injured in June 2 of those 4 seasons after 2012. I've never tried to mislead anyone about the facts. Yes, the last 4 seasons have met your criteria of "needing replacement". I've never argues against that point. I'm sorry, if it appeared I was, but looking back at my statements, I don't see it that way.

1) It's not rare he pitches past the ALL Star Game (now I'll do some cherry picking) when he's gone over 27 starts in 3 of the previous 6 seasons. 2) If you count minor leagues and go back to 2007, he's pitched 27 or more starts in 6 of his last 9 seasons, so it's not "rare" for him to last past the ALL Star Game healthwise anyways. 3) When he does pitch in MLB past the ALL Star Game, he's been mediocre not poor (one very good, one so-so and one bad). 4) When he's pitched a half season, he's been good to great 3 out of 4 seasons. True, most of the bad has been recently, but even cherry picking the sample size to make him look as bad as possible, he's been bad in 2 of the last 3 seasons and missed time or lost his starting job in 2 of the last 3 seasons. That's certainly bad, but I wouldn't say 1 out of 3 is "rare". Maybe we're arguing semantics now, but I still think some people are making him look worse and less durable than he has been. I don't think it's an extreme position, and I think there is ample evidence to show it's not rare that he lasts past June or rare that he pitches well. It's certainly not often, but it's not rare either.

But, my original point was that he has been more durable than some give him credit for, as the hyperbole implied he's always or nearly always out by June. 60% half seasons, if you cherry pick the previous 5 seasons only, is quite a use of hyperbole to say or imply 100%.

I've stated my point over and over, and it looks like I have to again. You say that the times he has pitched past the ALL Star Game, he's done poorly. . I said, since 2010, he's pitched past the Allstar game 3 times. Once, he was really good (2010), once he was so-so (2012) and once he was bad (2014). That's not a great record, but ...and here comes my point again... he's done better than some have given him credit for doing.

Actually, he's been a half season pitcher in 3 of the prior 6 seasons, and he may last all this season (probably not as a starter though, but there is a chance he lasts all year 4 of the last 7, so it may not be over half the time. I agree, that when he does pitch a full season, he has only been very good once, so-so once and very bad once. I'm not sure I'd call that "sucks", but if you want to say it, I won't argue too much. Three of his 4 half seasons have ranged from pretty good to near legendary great. Again, I will say, he's been more durable than some seem to think he has been, and he's had more good stretches than some seem to want to give him credit for. He has certainly sucked recently, and with pitchers, it's often said they are only as good as their last start, so I get the sentiment over his last 14 starts. The guy is rotten right now. Nobody is saying he isn't. Just don't let the now cloud historical truths. There's no doubt, Buch has sucked over the last few years too often for anyone's tastes. I caught a ton of grief from a poster a couple years back for listing Buch as our #5 starter after his 2013 season of greatness for 16 starts, so I get the point people are making. My only point being made here is that over his career, he has been more durable than some think and a decent to great pitcher for more stretches than some want to give him credit for. Baseball is a "what have you done for me lately" sport, and I get that, but history is history and Buch has had some fantastic stretches, some very good stretches and some decent stretches mixed in with too many DL stints and bad stretches for anyone to overlook. 3 near full seasons 2010 Very good 2012 Servicable 2014 Very bad 4 half seasons 2011 Pretty good 2013 Excellent 2015 Very good 2016 Horrible (still in progress)

You named 3 out of the last 5 years, how is that a "certainty"? Again, I never claimed he was an iron man or durable. I just claimed he's not a certainty to always go on the DL every June. My statement is more logical than his.

Now, let's talk quality along with durability: Counting this year and going back to 2010, Buch has pitched... 3 near full seasons 2010 Very good 2012 Servicable 2014 Very bad 4 half seasons 2011 Pretty good 2013 Excellent 2015 Very good 2016 Horrible While Buch's quality stretches have been few and far between, especially since the start of 2012, I'm not sure I'd call them rare. There's a heck of a lot of SPe'rs in MLB who have less good stretches in their recent pasts than Buch. Now, before you twist what I say into something like me saying he's an Allstar, I am totally frustrated with Buch and his injuries and poor performance stretches, but I wouldn't say good stretches in 2 of the last 4 seasons and 4 in the last 7 seasons with one halfway decent one not included is clearly "rare occasions".

So, he's as fragile as the guy who says it's a certainty he will have to replace him every June or July? That's a solid fact-based opinion, but mine isn't? Hmm... I never implied he pitched well enough to not be replaced when he was healthy all year. How many times do I have to repeat that his last full season of good pitching was 2010. I was responding to the durability claim. You keep expanding it farther than I went, and that's strawman building.

Pablo, Castillo, Owens & Johnson for Braun.

I'm not taking the position that Shaw ought to sit. He's earned a chance to fight through his .551 OPS over the last 28 days stretch. I will say that his sample size of doing very well in MLB looks pretty big, but it is not large enough to know for sure that the stretch from last year to 28 days ago was the real Shaw. Anytime I see a player having a stretch much higher than his most recent 2-3 years in the minors, some sort of doubt lingers. Here's Shaw's splits in the minors: ...................vs RHP/Vs LHP 2015 AAA .703/.610 2014 AAA .850/.508 2014 AA 1.093/.782 2013 AA .719/.775 2012 AA .847/.659 There is a pattern of struggling vs LHPs, so it's not absurd to think that pitchers might have figured something out about Shaw, and if he can't make significant adjustments, he may end up as a platoon player over time. I'm not projecting or expecting it to happen, but I am mindful to the possibility.

One problem with trying to find trade partners these days is parity. As of now there are only a handful of teams that have virtually no chance at even making the playoffs: ATL -16.5 from wildcard OAK -14.5 Cincy -10.0 SDP -9.0 Maybe by the deadline these teams may be toast: OAK -7.5 AZ -7.5 PHIL -5.0 MIL -4.5 COL -4.5 Even if all these teams are sellers come trade deadline time, I don't see much of anything we could realistically trade for on these teams without drastically overpaying

No doubt. Let's hope this is just a slump for Shaw.

The whole "no-brainer" analysis aside, the Red Sox needed to move on from Buchholz simply because the one certainty that he provides is that you have to scramble to replace him every June or July. This statement is not based on anything logical, and this was what I was responding to.

Where did I ever say Buch has been durable or effective since 2010? All I said was Buch has not been as fragile as some seem to think he has been and that he has had a few stretches of fantastic pitching and a few decent ones too. I went out of my way to popint out that the only time he put durability and quality together was 2010. Stop building strawmen by twisting my words and then calling the strawman's intentions dishonest or illogical.