Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

dgalehouse

Verified Member
  • Posts

    6,898
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 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 dgalehouse

  1. Bichette is the only one of Toronto's second generation guys who is actually better than his old man.
  2. Maybe he should stay where he is then. Plenty of Japanese players there.
  3. I said , AS A RULE, the better pitchers will have better records. Are you saying that is not so ?
  4. Well, if I was his agent , I certainly would mention that.
  5. When a pitcher got credit for a win that they didn't deserve , they were said to have " vultured " it. Don't hear that much any more. I would still say , as a rule, the better pitchers have better won/loss records than the lesser ones. I realize there are exceptions to this. But saying that the won/loss record is meaningless is a gross exaggeration.
  6. With the large number of major leaguers who have played a large number of games, you can always find an example to support almost any opinion. It doesn't prove anything.
  7. That is not a convincing argument. Of course, won/loss records would not be the only thing you look at. Just that they should not be thrown out the window either.
  8. Andrew (George) Bailey starring in; It's A Wonderful Pitching Staff.
  9. If a pitcher has a mediocre win/loss record, but an excellent ERA, then the win/loss record can be deceiving. And vice versa. It does happen. No question. But I don't think it means that won/loss records are obsolete by any means. And these anomalies tend to even out over time. DeGrom is an excellent pitcher with a career record of 84-57, which goes pretty well with his ERA of 2.53. The reason that some might question Montgomery is that he has pitched for seven years and his highest win total in that time was ten. That is not to say that he is not a good pitcher. Just that you might not want to go overboard on him.
  10. That wouldn't be a bad nickname. Jordan " Tweener " Montgomery .
  11. But where does it come from ? How is it derived ? Who does it ? Is it some secret calculation or formula ?
  12. What is BTV anyway ? Is it some highly advanced, scientific player evaluation system ? Or is it just some guy with too much time on his hands playing around with different stats ? Does anyone know ?
  13. I think the only signing that could be called a " Big splash " would be the You Tube sensation, Yamamoto. Possibly Snell. Montgomery would be a nice addition, but definitely not something to get all excited over.
  14. Notre Dame did what you have to do when playing at home against a weaker opponent. They took care of business. Easily and efficiently. On to Stanford.
  15. Pitching for a team that doesn't provide much run support , plays poor defense, blows saves, etc. could be legitimate reasons for a starter having a low win total. No question. I am just saying that it's a mistake to just disregard the won/loss record. It definitely does matter. Every starter begins the game with the goal of winning it. When they never win much , I would take another look rather than just disregard it. I do think it has become trendy in the analytic world to automatically dismiss things like wins and losses. And I disagree.
  16. There are a hundred different stats out there for those who are into that. In the end , they are all just components of winning the game. Winning is the end result that is desired. The starter may not get credit for winning a game in which he pitched well, but I would be concerned about signing a guy who never seems to win many games . That's all.
  17. A starting pitcher's win total is not as significant as it used to be , largely due to the fewer number of innings they pitch and the increased reliance on bullpens. But it should not be disregarded either because winning is the entire objective. A reliever may get credit for the win , but the starter needs to set the tone. I would think twice about signing a starter who never seems to win many games. There may be a legitimate reason, but it is something to be concerned about.
  18. Professional sports is a competitive business. The top athletes get paid a lot of money. You can say they are overpaid and the contracts will go sour due to injury, aging or underperformance , but that's just the way it is. If you want to compete and win , you have to pay . Or you can try to win on the cheap ( so to speak ) , which is possible, but difficult to do without alienating your paying customers.
  19. If you are a fan who likes Cora and also likes Bloom, you probably like to think that Cora and Bloom like each other as well. It can be hard to accept that maybe they didn't.
  20. John Henry is an eccentric billionaire. An odd duck. Who knows what motivates him? You win - you get fired. You lose - you get fired. You become a great player - you get traded. He gets bored with spending and winning. He gets tired of scrimping and losing. Such is the life of the super rich. The rest of us have to keep pumping so we can afford the ever rising cost of a ticket, a beer, a hotdog and a bag of peanuts. That's life.
  21. I usually go by what the boys down at Clancy's are saying.
  22. There were folks who said last season's Red Sox were " fun to watch " . Really. They actually said that.
  23. It is understandable that a new boss would want to have some familiar and friendly faces around. And Bailey does seem capable. No problem here.
  24. The Blue Jays have hired former Sox stalwart DeMarlo Hale as " associate manager " , whatever that is.
  25. Endowments, donations, tuition. All into one big pot of money . And it just keeps rolling in despite how poorly these " institutions of higher learning " are run.
×
×
  • Create New...