S5Dewey

Moreland more than earns his keep out there defensively. He's made what... three... four...outstanding plays in this series? Thanks for that one, DD

The thing is, he's around .700 for the year now after that abysmal start. Moon knows how to access a certain time frame - I don't - but he's got to be .800+ for the past couple of months.

I'm not usually a fan of kids in the booth but that young man was good. He was bright, articulate and personable. I've seen a lot of "guests" do a lot worse.

Your entire argument is nothing but bizarre. You say something and then you try to blame someone else for quoting you. As someone once told me, "The only thing worse than being misquoted is being accurately quoted". You're not going to respond to me again? Two words: Thank God!

Well, while we're doing the name calling, you're just a dick. I can't figure out if it's just toward me or toward everyone (there's evidence of both) but a dick is a dick. Now exactly what part of this did I misinterpret? "You don't hold onto a guy like JBJ, because they are almost dime a dozen these days." [Cut and pasted from Post #27 in this thread] Or are you saying that "a guy like JBJ" doesn't have have JBJ's WAR?

BLASPHEMY! (but true).

Mallex Smith has a dWAR of 0.2 this year as compared to JBJ's 0.8. (just for clarification, 0.2 x 4 = 0.8. If you believe in WAR JBJ is 4x the CF Smith is. Sure, we'd all like to have a CF who plays defense like Bradley and hits like Smith but those guys aren't "a dime a dozen'.

The fact that there are 4-5 very good outfielders in the AL right now doesn't mean there are dozens more pounding down the door to get in.

Allen's two plays go to show why you DO hold onto a guy with GG skills in CF, almost regardless of how he's hitting. Those two plays may very well have saved the game for them. And his 0-3 didn't hurt the Guardians a bit. They still won.

This^^ As I was telling someone a week ago, the Sox are playing very well 'right now', possibly as well as they can play, but it's hard to maintain that level of play over an extended period. Teams ebb and flow. I don't know if we're on a downslide at the moment or if we just ran into some good pitching but the Guardians are on a run at the moment. If they can keep it up for another 10 weeks they may be WS champions but that's hard to do. OTOH this break might be just what the Sox need to gather themselves and find that momentum again. I still think our offense and defense are ok overall. We just need for the pitchers to shut down some good hitting - and if that doesn't happen we have no chance in the playoffs anyway.

There is something to be said for both arguments. As Jax says, we have feasted on the bottom teams - but at the same time you have to play the teams on your schedule and beating them - regardless of their quality - is a lot better than losing to them. OTOH, we've faced two good pitchers in two days and lost both games. Since these are the quality of the pitchers we'll be facing in the playoffs there's room for a little concern here. My personal concern isn't the offense. The Sox have scored enough runs in each game to have won them. It's our pitching. Again, the Guardians are the caliber of team we'll be seeing in the playoffs and our pitchers need to be able to hold these teams to And BTW, who in Hell does that CF for the Guardians think he is.... Jackie Bradly Jr? A couple of great and game changing catches in CF last night.

Ahh.. Thanks. Now it sounds familiar!

What's the LM13 on the Indian's hats for?

I'm not sure you can equate a game of skills with a game of pure chance. And I agree with Galehouse that the word "luck" is used too loosely even by James. IMO the only sure thing about one-run games is that exactly as many one run games will be won as lost during an entire MLB season.

You believe in WAR and statistical analysis. I challenged that and you took it personally. It became personal at post 119 of this thread when three of your points started with the word "you".

You're right. Not if you already have your beliefs firmly set in your mind and you're not willing to entertain or have any respect for any other opinions.

I think he may be a sleeper for us. He's had one great start, one dreadful start, and one mediocre start in his past three starts for the Sox. His good start was against a good hitting team (MFY) and his bad start was against a dreadfully bad team (BAL). Go figure. Being an optimist I tend to put little stock in one bad outing because it's easier to have a bad start than a good one so I still have some faith in him but he's going to have to prove it. In fairness, I'm not looking for anything great from him tonight because Cleveland is another good hitting team, but he pitched well against the MFY so who knows? IIRC he's got something like a 1.05 WHIP in his last 15 starts so there's something there. IMO Cora - is/should be - feeling the same way I do, that the jury is out on him but that ~1.05 certainly should give him a chance to prove himself. I'd be surprised if Eovaldi gets a sniff at a playoff game - or maybe even the roster - but he's got over a month to prove he's worthy.

As Bill James said in one of his early Baseball Abstracts, (and I'm paraphrasing here) Most one-run games are decided by luck and luck will eventually even itself out. If a team wins an inordinate number of one-run games in one season you can look for them to lose an inordinate number over the next season. Obviously it's not as cut and dried as exactly two seasons but you get the point.

As with anytime your beliefs are challenged you're not interested in seeing another's point of view. I was hoping you might take a moment to reflect on your attitude/posts here on the topics of stats vs. intangibles. I guess I was hoping for too much. You could learn a lot from Bellhorn & Moon.

So it's NOT all about the statistics! Sometimes its also about the intangibles. Some of us think there's such a thing as "protection" but since there are no statistics to back it up we're told it doesn't exist. Some of us think there's such a thing as "clutch" but since there are no statistics...... ^^ I think most of us now agree that there's such a thing as "choke" in spite of the fact that there are no stats to back it up due to SSS's. Sometimes we throw in the intangibles, but only when it suits our purposes. All I'm asking is that people be consistent. Either you think Stats are the be-all, end-all or you don't. The (IMO) more reasonable of us believe that both stats and intangibles play into a player's performance but when we have the audacity to say it we're hit with a barrage of statistics saying we're wrong. Especially from those who give lip service to "intangibles" but then use statistics to quash any differing viewpoints. I'm sorry. I know I've been disagreeable lately, but can you at least see why I'm going nutso here?

These are the qualities (as I see it) for 4 of the top 5 in the order, #1 - Good OB %-age, ideally good speed too. #2 - LH hitter who makes good contact and can hit behind runners #3 - #4 - LH with Power #5 - RH, also power, lower OPS than the #4 guy So what are the desired qualities of a #3 hitter other than be a RHH? ?

I love our outfield!

Red Sox fans" "Wow! This team can really hit, even against good pitching!" Guardians fans: "Obviously Kluber doesn't have his good stuff tonight. Damn." Sometimes perspective is everything.

Yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!!!!

gotta make it happen now. Don't miss this opportunity!