S5Dewey

I've always said that JBJ makes catches on balls that would be spectacular if anyone else made them, and gets to balls that nobody else would. WAR not withstanding - and my feelings about defensive WAR have been documented ad nauseum, I know it's difficult to rank defense but I see JBJ as one of the three best CF's in the AL (I don't see many NL games), and #1 could be any one of the three including JBJ. Since the other two aren't available I like JBJ in CF for the Sox.

Butter on Devers: "I was told to 'Take this kid out to a back field and see what he can do', and I looked at his body type and said, 'THIS KID??'." :-( "He surprised me. He's surprisingly athletic for his body type. He can do it all. He has great quickness and an outstanding arm. He can make the one-handed pickup and throw as well as anyone In addition he's the fastest one on the team. You think Betts is fast? Devers can beat him running backwards!" (OK, that may have been an exaggeration, but it's what Butter said. LOL) "This guy's a good one. He's got some learning and some growing to do but he's going to be a good one". "He's got surprising power. His hands are quick from the middle of the swing point in." [This is one reason I like listening to someone who actually knows what he's talking about. I'd never heard anyone talk about a hitter 'from the middle of his swing point in' before]. Although Butter wasn't asked about transitioning Devers to 1B and didn't comment on it he believes that Devers is someone the team should hold onto. He alluded to the fact that in his opinion Devers could be one of the best players in baseball in a few years. Of course the big word there is COULD, but that's more than can be said about most players.

You may remember that I have a pretty big "man crush" on JBJ and always have. I never wanted to trade him but if he was going to have to go the only one I'd be willing to give him up for would have been Stanton. Again going back to what I heard last night, Tim Neverett said that JBJ is "the most boring outfielder in baseball". He'll make a few spectacular catches but when a ball is hit even into the gap he's always there waiting for the ball to come down and make the catch. Boring. But in a good way.

Contrary to the rumor I'd heard, Butter did want to stay with the Sox. He said he'd contacted DD and told him that since he was from Maine he'd been a Sox fan all his life and wanted to, as he put it, "Be buried in a Red Sox uniform". He also said that he "understood" the need for Cora to bring in his own people so he wasn't surprised that the Sox didn't rehire him.

It was many years ago, and both the SS & the 1B were young enough to have been my offspring. After the games were over we all - all of us - got together and did a lot of damage to some 30-packs. Those were the days when I drank cheap beer. :-) I've had some fun times.

That's my main objection to it. Baseball players are creatures of habit. There is a certain psychological 'comfort level' to be throwing to the same person all the time. The problem comes when that catcher isn't available. I think we've all seen times when throwing to a different catcher can disrupt a pitcher's psyche.

Yep. Been there, done that. I was on a team that won a state championship in the afternoon following a morning when our SS was chasing our 1B around a picnic table with a baseball bat after learning that the 1B was nailing the SS's girlfriend. Those were the days, my friend!

It was a great event. This is the 14th year of it and it always entertains. Stephen King lives in Bangor, Maine and owns a share of the Sox as well as owning the local radio station that broadcasts the game and he foots the bill for the entire evening, including the food (pizza, hot dogs, popcorn, drinks - ballpark food). Admission is free but you have to be listening to King's radio station to hear which business is giving away tickets that day and then go and visit the business to get the tickets. The only thing we have to pay for is our drinks at the cash bar. In the past it's only been the two radio guys there but this year it expanded to the four I mentioned. They come as emissaries of the Red Sox and always put the best spin on everything so I didn't expect any more than what I got. I guess I was being a bit of a dick by asking that question, but I thought it needed asking. I have to say, Dave O'Brian is extremely approachable. This is the second year in a row when I've been able to walk up to him and have a 'moment' - about a full minute with him - and he always seems genuinely glad to stop and talk with a fan. I even got him to do about 30 seconds of his dead-nuts on Vin Scully impression for me and the few people around me.

Thanks. There was what we here in Maine call a "Deer in the headlights moment" when nobody knew exactly what was going to be replied. I thought that moment answered my question. To expand on that a bit, Butter's first words were, "Errrr....That's a good question. That's a really good question....". I've done a little public speaking and found myself in situations like that where I had to come up with something to say that didn't throw anyone under the bus. When that happens I stall a bit by saying something like, "That's a good question". LOL Butter went on to say how Pedey is a very emotional player and wears those emotions on his sleeve and that's something he now wishes he hadn't said. To summarize, based on what I heard and saw I don't think it "played any better" in the clubhouse than it did with most fans.

I was at an event tonight where Stiggy, O'Brien, Neverett & Butterfield were present and taking questions from the audience. When asked about the rumor that the Sox were shopping JBJ, IIRC it was O'B who said that the entire pitching staff is hoping that's not true. They love having that guy out there. I asked the question of how "It's not me, it's them" played in the clubhouse. It got really quiet, then Butterfield deflected by talking about what a great baseball person Pedey is and how he shows up early for every game, etc., etc., etc. The closest thing to an answer I got was when Butter said that a person with Pedey's standing on the team gets cut a lot of leeway sometimes.

Yes. This is pretty much what I was saying, and you added details. Thanks.

MLB knows that everything you said here is true, and they're trying to get some sort of parity into the game. They first tried by instituting the Luxury Tax (otherwise known as the Competitive Balance Tax) and now they are including a revenue sharing penalty. However, they recognize that some teams with large revenue streams see these financial penalties as simply the cost of a player's salary and something the team can afford so these penalties are being pretty much ignored. As dgalenouse rightfully implies, there's a bajillion dollars floating around out there in MLB so the money doesn't mean that much to the owners who've figured out that winning increases their revenue stream. Now MLB has also instituted a draft pick penalty as well as controlling how much a team can pay draftees, and a limit on how much a team can pay international signings. We'll have to wait to see how that shakes out. The real problem IMO (and it pains me to say this since I spent 40 years in a labor union) is that the MLBPA has too much clout. Unlike in the NFL, the MLB owners are dancing to the union's tune - and for a very good reason. The owners have a cash cow in front of them and they know that a player's strike would hurt them (the owners) where it would hurt the most. Right in their pocketbooks. So life goes on.

By using the same logic that says that we use in knowing that he was arrested for "domestic assault" - We saw it online! Has anyone disputed his claim that the alleged assault was nothing more than verbal?

Hey! That's a terrible thing to say about ANYONE!! LOL

Since this is, after all, the "Realistic" thread.... Well, the past few days certainly have taken an ugly turn for the Sox fans. I was semi-enthused when Otani signed on the west coast. At least we wouldn't be facing him 19 times a year. However, the Yankees acquiring Stanton makes them an odds-on favorite to win the ALE and leaves the Sox playing for a wild card spot. Without establishing blame on prior GM's, not getting Stanton is the price the team is paying for burning up our FA's to acquire Kimbrel, Sale, et. al., along with the money spent signing Pablo, Moncada, and to a lesser degree, Hanley. At least Hanley is offering something in exchange for his pay. And to be honest, I'd still rather have what 'we' currently have than having Stanton and having to live with what we would have had if the Sox trades hadn't been made. That would have been ugly. IMHO the Yankees signing of Stanton will 'cost' the Sox 2-3 wins/year and 2-3 wins is often the difference between making the playoffs and playing golf in October. It's now incumbent on DD to stay the course with the intent of winning 90+ games in 2018 - although it just became a little harder - and get that WC spot because as we know, once the playoffs start 'anything can happen'.

See? We don't disagree on everything.

Leave it to Harmony to find something negative about the Sox and post it here.

For anyone who lives within a reasonable driving distance of Portland ME, the Sea Dogs have announced their plans for the 2018 Hot Stove night. It's going to be at the Sable Oaks (very nice place) on January 17 and their guest speaker will be Pedro Martinez. Tickets are $80 and available at the Sea Dogs website. I'll be there with my son. If anyone else is going maybe we can meet up there.

But if the "real closer" does the job in the 7th or 8th and keeps runs from scoring he's not wasted. I'm not sure "superstition" is the word you're looking for. When Farrell (or any other manager) brings in a relief pitcher and saves his "closer" for the 9th he's able to say "I did the right thing. I know that because this is the way we've always done it." I think the proper phrase is "CYA".

Following up on that.... I've always suspected that one very large reason closers like to start with a clean inning and only in save situations is because they get paid more to save games as closers than they would as setup men, and those situations are ripe for padding their stats. I know, I'm being cynical. LOL

I'm not sure what you're asking. I wouldn't put him in if the Sox were trailing, but I'd bring him in in the 7th or 8th with runners on base and the score tied or the Sox ahead by a run or two. Just to get out of a mess. Of course this brings up the issue of closers "liking" to start with a clean inning. Ya. Who wouldn't?? But as the best one-inning pitcher on the team it's when he should be used (IMO).

I'm always "interested" in trading anyone if someone wants to grossly overpay. I'm a big Christian Vazquez fan but if the Marlins call and say they'll trade Stanton and eat all of his salary in addition I'm game. But it's not going to happen in the real world.

Ya. That's pretty meaningless because so will management. I've never been a party to an MLB salary negotiation but from what I've heard it's a miracle that any player wants to play for a team after he hears management go on about all of his shortcomings. Unfortunately we don't know how the season will end until it ends. If we did we could make better decisions. With their resources the Sox have every reason to be optimistic every year. Therefore they feel a need to land the best players they can at every position within their own salary constraints every year. That's what they did with Kimbrel, and I have no problem with it. I also think that he's quite valuable as a trade chip although I don't think he gets traded.

Would you like to be his agent tell that to the other GM's in the league when it comes time to renegotiate his contract? Whether you agree with the concept of "save" or not, MLB and GM's do, and Kimbrel gets paid to "save" games. He's "Clutch".

Augggh. That's one of the biggest examples of cherry-picking I've seen here.