Jump to content
Angels and Sox on July 4th, join our game thread! ×
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

notin

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    53,401

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    45

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by notin

  1. notin
    I think it's easier to pencil in Grissom for 2025 than Story for 2025. Or at least for all of 2025. Right now, Grissom is certainly head of Nick Yorke and his .725 OPS in AA. If we are not penciling in Grissom, there are fewer reason to pencil in Yorke. Certainly trades could change everything, but as the organization stands now, Grissom appears to be the frontrunner at 2B. Mayer is the only threat, and it seems more likely than Story will clear that path for him...
  2. notin
    You don't think so? I can name four players who have done it since 1900. Fox (1951), Musial (1943), Dale Mitchell (1949) and Joe Sewell (1925 and 1930). There might be others, but this is not something that anyone accomplishes very often...
  3. notin
    I do not agree. I absolutely would have him PENCILED in at a minimum. And even if he does have a very bad season - which he is off to so far - I don't think the Sox should just pack it in with him and look elsewhere.
  4. notin
    I'd say so. It's just below league average by definition. And his OPS was dragged down significantly because the diminutive Fox had almost no power with a career .363 SLG. His BA (.288) and OBP (.348) were actually very good over his career. What little "power" he had was probably more related to speed, since he had 112 career triples and only 35 career home runs. And he has to be on a very short list of players who had a season with more triples than strikeouts...
  5. notin
    I think the Sox have also done well against some good teams, with a road split against 20-17 Seattle and a series win at home against 22-16 Chicago. I'm on board with this team being able to improve. But their lack of depth could be a killer...
  6. notin
    Joe Sewell was another HOF player who had an elite ability to make contact. In 8,333 career PA, he struck out 114 times for a 1.3% K rate. Granted, his offensive numbers for the rest of his game were not as pedestrian as former MVP Fox...
  7. notin
    The bottom half of the order has been filled with guys no one expected any production from, let alone relied on it. This team is still down 3 starters from the lineup. If they could replace Romy/Hamilton/Cooper/Smith types with Casas, Yoshida, and Story, I suspect the hitting would be noticeably better. And even Romy is in there as an upgrade over the deadweight occupying that spot previously...
  8. notin
    A lot of the cards the sox dealt themselves are sitting out the games right now. Two of the three players you highlight are not available and the Sox have had to dig deep for replacements. When was the last time you saw a player get called up simply because he was the only healthy bat left on the 40 man roster? This team isn't a great defensive team with Casas and Yoshida in the lineup, but it is a better overall team...
  9. notin
    He could be absolutely brutal, but again, 4 games. At a bare minimum he should be "penciled" long enough to see how good he really is, and right now, like it or not, he is the clear frontrunner for the 2b position in 2025. The only other feasible option within the organization is Mayer, and you don't move him to 2B unless you have confidence Story will be showing up for work a rather large amount of time over the next 3 seasons. But right now any questions we have about Grissom - most of which I would suspect are tied to his 2 for 17 start - apply just as easily to any other internal option that we have. And if Grissom even appears to be a league average secondbaseman with the glove, how high is upgrading over him on the priority list? I mean, even if Grissom is a complete bust this year all around, is that the extent of his opportunity?
  10. notin
    Better summary. Despite finishing last the past two seasons, it's not like the Sox are winning 50 games or even 60 games. They're hanging around the .500 mark...
  11. notin
    I would right now. Who's knocking on that door?
  12. notin
    It doesn't increase his value, but it doesn't hurt it either. Devers' value is solely tied to his bat. But moving him does stand a chance at improving overall team play by upgrading the defense. Austin Riley made a difference with his glove last night, for example...
  13. notin
    "Rebuilding years" is a quaint little euphemism for "going cheap." Far too many teams have gone that route only to stay on it far longer than anticipated. Quite often the only real accomplishment is saving cash. And even of there is a brief period of semi-success, it is very often followed up with another "rebuilding" period that may or may not work...
  14. notin
    Mookie should have been extended before 2019 ever got here...
  15. notin
    Again, probably happened a lot. Money may have changed some attitudes, but you don’t see MLB players skipping the All Star game due to injury risk like you do in the NBA. Pitchers do skip it if it messes up their turn, but that’s very understandable. And when I watch some SP that I’m used to watch throwing 93-94 suddenly ramp up to 98mph because he knows he’s only pitching one inning, I certainly don’t think he’s not trying and not taking this meaningless exhibition seriously…
  16. notin
    I can agree. I’ve always heard Larry Walker, for example, was very indifferent about baseball and greatly preferred hockey. Anthony Rendon has drawn some ire this year for being less than enthusiastic as well…
  17. notin
    Sale vs Grissom. What’s the over/under for number of posts declaring the trade winner based on the performances of these two individuals today?
  18. notin
    More important is not whether or not Ted Williams cared. That lends no support to whether players did all through the 1990s and 2000s. I would imagine, like most things, there was no singular universal attitude. Ted Williams probably played with a few All Stars who were more apathetic. And there is probably a full spectrum of attitudes among today’s stars as well…
  19. notin
    There was also a ratings dip in the All Star game in 1972.
  20. notin
    Ted Williams retired before I was born. But I looked into All Star game viewership history. Pretty consistent from 1967 (as far back as the site went) until 1980. Then it dipped significantly in 1981, slight bump back up in 1982 and then continuously dropping since. So 1981 was really the turning point. And what happened that year? Player strike. So the interest in the game from fans appears to be unrelated to the players’ attitudes or free agency or interleague play, and rather can be linked directly to a labor dispute…
  21. notin
    I think it lost appeal due to more entertainment options and a foolish experiment to attach postseason significance. But, bragging rights or not, it’s always been a meaningless exhibition. And the very history of the All Star game tells you that…
  22. notin
    ??? Going out of context on me?
  23. notin
    What year was that? I’m guessing in the 1960s, when the American League faced a massive talent gap and most (all?) of the games big stars were in the National League. Don’t you think his goal was to prove the teams in his league were worth watching and going to see? The AL back then was the “watered down” league we keep hearing about, and this talent gap lead to one of the worst rule changes in sports history - the creation of the DH in the AL only…
  24. notin
    I have no idea how much it mattered to the players then nor do I know now. I’m also not sure how you know. What are you basing how much it matters to the players on now? I’ve never once heard a player get upset about going, but I’ve heard many express their excitement. This perception change in the game is probably more on developments in society. I think a big part of the reason it mattered to fans in the 70s and 80s was that it occurred on a very special 3 day stretch when there are no other professional sports of any kind. And back before cable television, you either watched the All Star game or watched some s***** network show like “The Love Boat,” the very existence of which proves how low our entertainment threshold was back then. Now, people have numerous other entertainment options and only the diehards and a few others watch the All Star game. I’m a fan, and I view the game the same way as I did when I was a kid. Was I included in your poll about our attitude on viewership?
  25. notin
    Didn’t the NL winning streak occur long after free agency? And didn’t interleague trades start long before the All Star game?
×
×
  • Create New...