Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

S5Dewey

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,043

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by S5Dewey

  1. S5Dewey
    Again, IF Pom's issue is related to the original - unreported - issue at the trade this is pretty good ammunition for the Sox to go to MLB with to get the trade reversed. Or at the least get some compensation. We gave up a lot for Pom and apparently we got "damaged goods" in return.
  2. S5Dewey
    yes. This is one of the things that really pisses me off. I could get a package without NESN that would give me everything I watch but when I add in NESN I get lots of junk I'd never watch and have to pay nearly 2X as much for it.
  3. S5Dewey
    Two things... Given the possible lack of depth, Chris Sale is looking better every day. and.. If this injury to Pom is a part of his history we really got screwed on that deal!
  4. S5Dewey
    Yep. Again, it goes back to the medical department.
  5. S5Dewey
    It seems like there are only two possibilities. Either the Medical department is incompetent or the Sox FO has a history of not being candid with the fans regarding injuries, going back to Buch's being listed as day-to-day because he slept with the baby wrong. I understand competitive advantage and why the FO doesn't want every Tom, Dick, and Harry knowing about the health of the players. If they don't want to tell US... that's fine. But now it goes back to our medical department. Are they accurately diagnosing injuries? If they aren't they need to be replaced and if they are the FO needs to be more pro-active in getting treatment for these injuries.
  6. S5Dewey
    Could it be that all the hand-wringing was for naught?
  7. S5Dewey
    3a. You sure have this habit of asking multiple questions! I didn't know there was going to be a quiz. 3a.1 I'm sorry they find that challenging. I'm also sorry you find it to be an "incorrect answer", but in order to know that one is incorrect you must know the "correct" one. Would you be willing to share the correct one with us? My point is that people tend to believe what they want to believe, often times what the already "know" to be true. 3a.2. No.
  8. S5Dewey
    The question was... Why do stat deniers worry about the motives of stat geeks? I thought I'd answered the question but I'll expound on it a bit. If a person who knows the outcome of a research before he starts it his "motive" will be to prove himself right - much like a poster who can do research to find you an orange elephant if it "proves" his point. Every so-called "stat-geek" I've seen here has already questioned even the possibility that "clutch" could exist - although some have back-peddled away from that position a bit - so I have to question their objectivity and therefore their results. I strongly question the stance that since something can't be proven mathematically the conclusion is that it doesn't exist.
  9. S5Dewey
    This. I stopped reading Harmony's posts some time ago. IMO his points would be better made if he didn't try to take every opportunity to "prove" that the Red Sox players are inferior to the Mariners players. Is there no one else in professional baseball that Mariners players can be compared with?
  10. S5Dewey
    Because it's human nature that if a person goes into a situation "knowing" what the outcome will be they won't have much trouble proving what they already "know".
  11. S5Dewey
    Why would stat geeks spend time doing research on topics like clutch? Could anyone believe the conclusions they reach when it's known that they're going into it with the belief it doesn't exist? In addition, haven't we already decided that if it does exist then it's not measurable?
  12. S5Dewey
    It's pretty obvious that there are some questions asked there that only Papi could answer. He could be asked if he felt any different in certain situations than in others - if he felt he could 'turn it on' when he needed to and be successful. I think most of us would agree that there is such a thing as a "choker" (or a chocker, if you will!) whether it's at work on on the golf course. Some people simply don't respond well to pressure. We continually talk about a player putting too much pressure on himself and the negative effect of it. He's choking, if you will. So if we can buy into that why can't we buy into the exact opposite being true - that some people respond better than others to pressure? When Chuck Knoblock couldn't get the ball to first base if they'd let him use a wheelbarrow it was mental. He choked up when he tried to throw the ball and it affected his ability to throw. Whether it's choking or being clutch, it's all mental and it's all real.
  13. S5Dewey
    This is getting very close to being a theological discussion.
  14. S5Dewey
    I disagree. The fact that it happened proves that it exists. And your comment doesn't remove the fact that it exists.
  15. S5Dewey
    I don't find it any more insulting than being told that something doesn't exist - after I've lived it.
  16. S5Dewey
    happy truck day!!
  17. S5Dewey
    This whole discussion seems to come down into two camps. Those who have actually played on winning teams and know the personalities involved in winning and those who haven't played on winning teams so they rely on statistics as an answer to everything . The fact that "clutch" can't be proven statistically doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I personally know of no one who's played on a winning team who wouldn't recognize that some people are more clutch than others.
  18. S5Dewey
    True enough, but Peralta did test positive and DD went looking for a SS. He then thought enough of Iggy's defense @ SS that he left Iggy there and moved Peralta - who had been the regular SS before the positive test - into the OF when Peralta came back for the playoffs.
  19. S5Dewey
    Isn't this the same Dombrowski who traded for Iggy when Iggy's best stock in trade was his defense? And the same Dombrowski who tried to lure JBJ away from Boston when fans here were saying that he was nothing more than an adequate platoon player because he couldn't hit? It's DD's focus on up-the-middle defense that makes me like him!
  20. S5Dewey
    ...Which tells us nothing about individual player's performances. If one player is 40-50 in the post season and another is 10-50 we can surmise that they're equal because the sample size isn't large enough to draw a conclusion from. It's hard to even type that with a straight face.
  21. S5Dewey
    As was once said, if you want to find an purple 2-toed elephant Harmony will find one for you. My issue is that Harmony isn't here to discuss baseball. His focus is on finding those elephants and then using them in an effort to discredit the Red Sox. Me? I take everything he posts with a grain of salt. I keep waiting for Paul Harvey to give us "the rest of the story".
  22. S5Dewey
    I'll take the "over" on that 84.
  23. S5Dewey
    I love Truck Day for two reasons. It marks the beginning of baseball season (for me, anyway), and I enjoy being a part of a rabid fan base that acknowledges it as an informal holiday. I've been known to greet my Sox friends on that day with "Happy Truck Day!"
  24. S5Dewey
    This was my problem with this contract all along. If he pitches well we lose him and "get" to replace him, possibly at an even higher cost. The only way we get to keep him is if he stinks the place up for a couple of years and isn't worth what he's getting paid. What kind of a deal is that??
  25. S5Dewey
    Don't even go there! :D
×
×
  • Create New...