notin

Especially now that I jinxed him on the grad slam thing...

Well, how much of that is due to the criminally poor run support he received that the 7-8-9 starters did not?

Porcello has a 0.987 WHIP through August and September. The only issue is that in those 52.2IP, he has allowed 12 HRs. The home run has been an issue for him all year, He has allowed 27 HR's this year. 18 of them have been solo HRs. Seven more 2-run HRs. And two 3-run HRs. No grand slams...

The only way he opts out is if he really wants to leave. But even then, his agent (whom he did hire for career advice) would strongly recommend against it....

Except last year the Sox were dead last in the AL in home runs by a wide margin. This year, they're seventh and one good inning away from sixth...

But if that is your case, Sale has a significant lead in bWAR over Verlander this year. And he would have to be a massive disappointment in those 40 IP to narrow the gap. The missing IP will certainly be a factor, but Sale is a better candidate than many realize...

It could also not matter. Houston has been struggling with the closer role for the past 2 seasons and it hasn't hurt them. If the bullpen has good pitchers, the closer becomes a little less relevant. Most people do seem to think that relief pitchers are inconsistent from year to year. This is backwards. The truth is, pitchers who are inconsistent from year to year become relief pitchers. There are plenty of relievers who consistent performers who can be had to build a bullpen. And the Sox will still have Thornburg, who was a very good reliever anf closer before the Sox acquired him. His struggles this year are very likely related to an injury and excessive time off. As long as there are no lingering effects to his shoulder, he is an excellent bounce back candidate to start the new 2019 bullpen, along with Barnes, Brasier, Poyner, and Hembree and possibly even Velasquez. Carson Smith is a non-tender candidate whose return is and should be in question. So if the Sox go the free agent route, for example, there are a few intriguing candidates who won't break the bank like Kimbrel, including Jeurys Familia, Brad Brach, and Adam Ottavino. It's also possible to convert a talented starter to a reliever/closer role. (Obviously a closer role would be closer to starter money, making the transition more appealing.) Two candidates that leap out at me right away who cannot handle a full season as a starter but are very talented pitchers are Garrett Richards and Matt Harvey. (Tyson Ross should also consider the idea.)

Ok, but Bob Melvin’s team is easily the biggest surprise in MLB...

1. Doesn't "runs allowed" involve input from the defense? 2. While WAT can go negative, there is a strong trend towards positive. Even the lowest negative players rarely reach -3.0 WAR...

I would disagree Kluber was the best by a “wide margin” last year, especially since voting takes place before the postseason. If anything, you pointed out a potential example of a “makeup vote”, with Kluber getting the nod in 2017 because many felt it was an injustice that he lost in 2016. And while I agree there is value in those extra IP, the fact that Sale has still accrued more value in fewer IP should be a point in his favor. Should be...

So much for all those fans who called in sick so they could go today...

10 years ago, he'd be a better candidate and the argument would be Verlander vs. Snell. But apparently there is a cabal of voters who do consider the advanced metrics and those numbers do support Sale over Verlander. However, with all voters, Verlander is certainly going to be a terrific candidate and, even if he doesn't win, won't miss out by much. But sometimes these votes make up for past awards, such as last year when Sale lost to Kluber. It's always possible Sale gets a "makeup" award from the human voters, since he has never won one and has always been deserving...

I think "average" works out well, and has some statistical support. And, as I keep saying, is more than sufficient for him as a player...

Mean, median and mode are 3 completely different things. Mean is the average, median is the midpoint, and mode is the most common element in a set. So a set of {1,1,2,4,7} has a mean of 3, a median of 2 and a mode of 1. There are certainly reasons to consider the median a baseline I don't disagree with. But I guess I enjoy the occasional math lesson and, maybe I'm getting too much like Bellhorn when it comes to correcting people...

Well, if we give the Yankees another tough series, the team penciled in to win it all in March might wind up hitting the road for a wild card game...

Not to mention, he has kids he might like to see a little more often...

And they cut his head off. No one did that to Hanley Ramirez, either...

Median is absolutely not a reasonable definition of average. The two concepts are completely different. The number sets of {1,2,3,10} and {1,2,3,1000000} have the same median. Does that mean they have the approximately the same average? I do get what you're saying, and the use of median might be more appropriate in this case, as there is one certain player (Andrelton Simmons) who is that outlier that significantly influences the average. But if Boagerts is being measured against other shortstops defensively, I think "average" is probably the best way to describe his defense. And all things considered, I think that is a very good thing...

He did have a top ten MVP finish for the Dodgers in a year he barely played half a season. Overall for that team, he had an OPS+ of 144, which is higher than Mookie Betts has for his career in Boston. I never heard the Dodgers were happy to see him go, but a big reason he left was he was simply getting too expensive for them and he was no longer the durable bastion of health to earn that pay. An AL team, like Boston, at least had the option of playing him at DH...

Besides, Kimbrel is going to stop being dominant at some point. And it will happen sometime during his next contract...

Best way to avoid it will be to retain the Killer Bs and not retain Sale and Kimbrel...

Dombrowski typically does value offense. I could see that being one of his off-season goals. He did keep Swihart around for a reason...

And they also valued Jackie Bradley’s 255 plate appearances from 2015 more than all the ones that came before it, right?

We throw around the “blocked prospect” thing too quickly. Really, who was blocking Margot on Boston? Benintendi, from a level behind? Bradley? Certainly, and while I love Bradley, he’s not irreplaceable. Margot hasn’t hit like Bradley has yet, but then JBJ certainly required patience for that to happen. And I’ve seen people call Javier Guerra and Logan Allen “blocked prospects.” How can an A-ball player be blocked? But really, the bottom line is we gave up a lot of prospects and too often I see fans justifying it with “but how many are starters?” Or “how many turned out to be any good?” Like we weeded out the failures here. The truth is, we probably gave up several good players. Not sure why anyone wants to admit that. Why are people so afraid to say we gave up good prospects? Or we might have given up good prospects?

Why phrase that in the past tense like it's already a foregone conclusion? Are the career paths for Margot, Moncada, Guerra, Kopech, Dubon, and Espinoza already at their peak or something? Are any of those players even 24 yet? Margot is like 9 months older than Dalbec, who is still in AA and yet some fans are excited about his potential...