5GoldGlovesOF,75
-
Posts
14,931 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
29
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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by 5GoldGlovesOF,75
-
But post #8793 was way typed way back yesterday afternoon...
-
A couple?!? The front office told Werner if the Sox just had a "normal" defense, they would've had 11 more wins!
-
A Realistic View at 2024: Part I
5GoldGlovesOF,75 replied to moonslav59's topic in Boston Red Sox Talk
I read one KC prospect site last night that had him rated #2 overall last summer... -
A Realistic View at 2024: Part I
5GoldGlovesOF,75 replied to moonslav59's topic in Boston Red Sox Talk
Best-case scenario for Boston: Sandlin turns into David Cone, who had just made the majors and was traded to the Mets at age 24 in Spring Training 1987 for basically a back-up catcher... to Kansas City. There has to be a few longtime Royals fans worrying the same thing this morning... "Our top pitching prospect -- for a journeyman set-up guy?" -
Let's not assume the same squad is returning and just needs to improve against a handful of teams. Excluding the six clubs you list, it's impressive they had a winning record vs. the other 23 despite atrocious defense, inept baserunning, poor contact hitters and half a rotation. Maybe it's a testament to the contributions of guys like Turner, Verdugo, Duvall, Sale and Paxton -- who have been replaced this winter by O'Neill, Grissom and Giolito. Nothing against those three, but the rest of the 26 better be better or there's realistically little chance Boston can even repeat 78 wins. What am I missing (about the Red Sox... I know I'm missing a lot of other mental and physical attributes)?
-
Sandlin reportedly has a mid-rotation ceiling -- which instantly ties him with Perales and Winkelman as best starting prospect in the system. So Breslow just increased our mid-rotation potential by 50%! How can that be a bad thing... Is-tree-noisy-falling-on-a-bare-pope-in-the-woods question: If a team has zero #1 or #2 starters, isn't that entire narrative negated if they still choose to open the season and complete a three-game series? Story said he doesn't see any reason why this club can't go all the way. Instead of mocking him, who wants to cite any reason it can? I'll start: Story reverts to 2018/19 Trevor (in Fenway), Raffy reverts into 2019 Devers, Giolito has a 2019 year, Cora reverts to 2018 AC... these are all things that have happened at least once. Then, to win a ring: Casas morphs into 2010 Votto, Grissom develops into 1982 Molitor, Rafaela becomes 2016 JBJ, but most importantly -- Bello evolves into 1985 Dwight Gooden.
-
Any guy who admits he has lust in his heart, and swears he saw a UFO, has no skeletons in his closet. But he may have bones in his ashtray (maybe just a roach).
-
He kinda resembles an old Grissom.
-
A Realistic View at 2024: Part I
5GoldGlovesOF,75 replied to moonslav59's topic in Boston Red Sox Talk
Push them OUT the door -- before they bump their heads on the ceiling! In houses built for the size of people who could fit in the original seats in Fenway Park -- which are still there... Squeeze, Car-o-line Good seats never felt so g- so ga so gaaah -
Ornery old umps on ego trips would never do that to a rookie who yelled out calls before they were made. (don't ever underestimate the reason people in authority take jobs in authority...)
-
Looking at that list of potential hitters and wondering how many, if any, will ever have a season of .900+ OPS in the bigs... The defending cellar dwellers in Boston had zero at .900 last year, but Devers has done it before in 2019 (the year he had 92 extra-base hits). He was joined by Betts, Bogaerts and Martinez that summer... the pennant-winning Astros had five at .900. And not all guys have to be stars, just solid batters; the '03 Sox also had four at .900 -- Manny and Papi, plus Nixon and Mueller. Casas seems capable of .900 OPS. Anthony may hit with enough power... There are talented prospects, but right now, who else has that "ceiling?"
-
It's all about the legs -- the biggest muscles of the body. If Teel has strong legs and optimizes them, he takes most of the strain off his arm (which controls direction/trajectory of the throw). Most catcher's mitts sweep the ball to bare hands moving close to right ears, from where throws come straight over the top. Teel is young, and his release point got him to the pros. Sale's delivery was also described as odd, and he was a great MLB pitcher in his 20s... then his body blew apart.
-
Zorro has Xander's pronunciation.
-
Last summer one report said Keel's pop-time to second was quicker than any big leaguer's. Now that I read he throws side-arm, wondering if they meant "popping" his UCL...
-
Great -- we're counting on an odd duck and a worried-he'll-suck. But how credible can Fangraphs really be, when they somehow project the Sox' MLB team -- as is -- better than 16 other clubs in 2024... while allowing more runs per game than only 6, yet scoring more per game than everyone, except the Braves, Dodgers and Astros (yes, even slighter ahead of the Verdugo pinstripes).
-
A Realistic View at 2024: Part I
5GoldGlovesOF,75 replied to moonslav59's topic in Boston Red Sox Talk
He does play on a team in the basement after all; even if there's a drop ceiling with acoustical tiles, it's no higher than eight feet. Varitek played in a basilica of Sox history, with a cathedral ceiling with open skylights where guys like Martinez and Lowe regularly fired projectiles to pick off flocks of bats from Louisville. -
I'm confident I'm coming into this season in the worst shape of my life. But at least I'm realistic to admit this may be as good as it gets.
-
A Realistic View at 2024: Part I
5GoldGlovesOF,75 replied to moonslav59's topic in Boston Red Sox Talk
Mazz is just going OFF on the Sox today... in one 10-minute rant, he repeated his delivery more than the Red Sox' entire starting notation: "They did nothing this offseason! Nothing! NOTHING!! Not. Even. Trying! NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!" -
Not saying I'm against it, but banning technology anywhere for anything nowadays seems absurd. And I'm a dinosaur who can't even touch a dumbphone without it face-timing random people (I've never consciously used FT in my life) -- so imagine telling that to actual young competitors? It's like banning cellphones from schools -- how is that working out, when parents want access to kids 24-7... Remember back in 2019, when NY was beating up on the Sox, and Cora noted -- not with displeasure -- that the Yankees were paying better attention to details? It was a contest between AC and Beltran, who was hired to "coach" the Yanks for obvious reasons...
-
Isn't your answer just like the Astros -- the only ones who really bother people are those who benefit the most from perceived unfair advantages.
-
We know that -- but like a certain group of radical lawfakers, it seems inevitable that history will not look favorably on the most infamous misdeed that occurred while Bloom was in charge.
-
The serious baseball fans I know feel much more betrayed by the players who broke rules to inflate their bodies and deflate statistical records cherished and memorized for a century, rather than by one team of players in one year who pissed off the Dodgers and Yankees for doing a better job than they did at an accepted part of the game that has been in existence since it was invented.
-
Good post. And I bet if you surveyed 100 casual Red Sox fans, the most typical reply would be: "Because they suck!" But if you asked 100 more serious fans, those who not only watch or listen to most games and can recite most Sox line-ups, but don't post on or read daily forums, the consensus just may be: "Because he traded Mookie!"
-
One has been tried since the invention of baseball; the other since before "striking out, while trying to hit a home run" was invented, and could be used as a metaphor (but not necessarily always in public).
-
In a somewhat related tangent to these lists: it's no coincidence that the Red Sox contended and even won titles with the first group, who were all high performing starting pitchers at the time of acquisition (counting the expenditure of top prospects traded for Sale). The second group were all either mediocre and/or rehabbing bounceback candidates... and we got what we paid for.
