5GoldGlovesOF,75

The pen was one of the many weak parts in 2020, but mainly weakened by the weakest part: the starting notation. If the starters can improve to mediocre, the pen could be above-average. Starting pitchers have to be either the biggest questions or weakest links, depending on the answers. The winter's lone acquisition for the rotation was good for a few seasons, six years ago. Three others have career losing records. ERod is such a key, if he's fully healthy and back to '19 form...

Are you basing this confidence on the pre-Bloom days or second-hand quotes you've read or heard the past year (from maybe Werner, Kennedy or Lebron)? Because Henry has been absolutely MIA for over a year since telling us how sad he was that his modern-day Stan Musial had to be traded to LA...

This is a good take. Barnes turns 31 in June and is gone by July unless the Sox are in contention... and maybe even if they are. Bloom passed on many better free agent relievers this winter, so there is little chance he'll keep Barnes and Ottavino, who may be his best trade chips this summer. This assumes Bloom won't take any Yankee fans' advice and deal ERod, the workhorse ace in his prime and most immediate candidate for a decent longterm extension. However, the next longterm extension Bloom offers anyone will be his first in Boston. As much as some fans have the utmost confidence in such a sudden change in Bloom's approach as Chief Officer, seeing will be believing...

An abundance of flexibility isn't a negative, but a dearth of daily regulars working together can be; for example on defense -- being in synch, knowing each other's proclivities, like with double play partners or outfield mates.

I applaud your applause of those of us who choose to drink beer and sit around. If we got up and moved around, we might bump into somebody else. Football players, on the other hand, want to run into somebody else -- at full speed -- with themselves...

I just think too many IFs have to be DIDs at once. Pitchers staying healthy is a requirement for any contender, but the Sox are also counting on a lot of versatility to mesh with platoons -- and having most of them make positive contributions while staying happy with part-time PT. Maybe this is why Munoz isn't likely to be part of the early roster... Having one or two guys like Holt or Ben Zobrist can boost a contender, providing competence at multi-positions, resting regulars, L-R match-ups... Marwin in Houston, Kike (and Taylor) in LA. But when the continuity is mix-and-match, it may be a lot to ask for it all to work out. Could be they're just hoping for minor leaguers to take over a few spots in the next year. I do think Cora will settle into some steady line-ups, like maybe one set outfield for Fenway, with maybe a different one on the road.

8th, sorry; that's when Gordon blew it, facing batters Lowe didn't even get to pitch to yet. Gordon was great all year, in 73 games, 79.1 IP... but that's not too many multiple-frame outings.

If Jimy let Lowe get three outs in the 9th, it would've been 2 2/3 IP. Derek was 6'5, 230 and may just have had enough energy and adrenaline to finish. It could've changed history, but it's all hindsight. It's what we do.

I did, while it was happening. On that particular night, Lowe was the one who was literally unhittable, retiring Manny, Fryman, Thome, Sexton and SAlomar in that order. After those guys, I would have taken my chances and let him finish off Joey Cora, Lofton and Vizquel. Pedro was waiting to win Game Five; it was his first year in Boston and he had won 20 games, including Game One. In '98, the Sox still hadn't won a World Series in my lifetime (or for 70 years), and he was our best chance. The Yankees were great, but who knows in a short series; Cleveland had a 2-1 lead in the LCS after three games... My issue with the way relief pitchers have been used for about 40 years is that certain guys who are lights-out -- like Lowe that night in '98 -- get replaced before even going one time through the order. If he rips through the toughest four or five hitters in a line-up, why not let him blow away the weaker links?

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course we do. That's we, as in -- those who post on a baseball forum year-round. There's no other outlet for fan addicts -- if you lived in New England, where the Red Sox supposedly reign over a "nation", you'd realize how outnumbered we are... at least, based on the sports talk shows on TV and radio that are really all about the Patriots 365 days of the year.

The next time you talk to them, do me a favor: ask Grady why a fan like me noticed Pedro tapping his heart and pointing to the heavens after the 7th in Game Seven of the '03 LCS, and ask Jimy why a fan like me wanted Derek Lowe to finish off Cleveland in Game Four of the '98 LDS... with Pedro waiting to win Game Five.

Maybe the only problem is people who have a problem with anything other posters say that they don't agree with. It's one thing to have discussions and debates, and another to constantly mock others who actually try to look at both sides of issues. None of us are professional ballplayers as far as I know, and most probably haven't even played at any level for quite awhile. But anyone who cares enough about the game -- in all its forms -- to type about it regularly here deserves respect for offering their thoughts.

Or if the Red Sox didn't get burned like at least once every game when they shift their D (at least it seems that way).

I still love it. But my favorite has to be Leon Russell's medley of "Jumpin' Jack Flash/Young Blood".

Yup -- jump on the trend wagon... which brings us back to what Bob Ryan calls "the LaRussafication of 9th inning closers" -- with everyone trying, mostly in vain, to fabricate their very own Automatic Eck.

The problem some of us dinosaurs have with yanking starters too soon isn't because don't we have faith in the good relievers scheduled to follow. It's because we don't have faith in good relievers always following with good performances. Let's say your starter is throwing lights-out -- we'll call him Blake Snell. You know Snell is on that night, but no one can guarantee the next arm will be (especially if that arm was used many times in the past week). And the more guys you bring in, the higher the chances that at least one of them will be ineffective. This is where phrases like over-thinking, over-managing, or lately -- over-analyzing -- clash with about 100 years or so of baseball strategy. But just to show that old dawgs can learn new tricks, the three-batter minimum rule will hopefully help such some pitching-change decisions be made more logically...

Actors flub a line, musicians miss a beat -- Ringo even forgot the lyrics of "It Don't Come Easy" in the Concert for Bangladesh. But there are probably not too many viewers or paying customers of any form of entertainment who stay amused watching the same mistakes over and over and over again...

Papi always seemed to snap out of slumps when he started taking outside stuff the other way. This approach is nothing new -- it's what we teach young hitters; to focus on the opposite field, if for nothing else, to keep from pulling their heads, and eyes, off the ball. Remy always suggested it was the best hope for JBJ, too. Not going oppo seemed to hurt Beni, once he hit the dark days. We know JD can use the whole field... at least he used to. I was at a game in '18 when Alex Cobb struck him out in the first. The next two ABs vs Cobb, Martinez doubled down the right field line and then doubled down the left field line.

Nothing mechanical is going to allow him to reach pitches low and away outside the strike zone, unless he uses an extension taped to the end of his bat. p.s. this is why I fear there may a vision issue, because you know he knows they're going to keep throwing the same crap every time he has two strikes.

... and got robbed of another extra-base hit his last AB. Good thing stats don't matter in ST... or Nate and Martin would be in mid-season form.

Right? Why would a rebuilding club with designs on returning to the postseason soon want to lock up an ace pitcher just entering his prime in his 20s? He's exactly the kind of guy any GM would love to trade for prospects who might -- I dunno, someday mature into an ace pitcher in his 20s and lead a rebuilding club back to contention...

I've said it a few times. My concern is that I haven't seen any adjustments to the same pitches he keeps getting that have plagued him in the recent past. That doesn't mean he's not trying to adjust... most likely something is holding him back: muscular, skeletal, deteriorating vision -- veteran pros don't suddenly forget how to be good. But we'll never know, because employers and employees are smart enough to keep such info private so opponents won't exploit them even more.

We all know we shouldn't overrate the Red Sox' strong start in Florida... I mean, come on? Second in the Grapefruit League in wins... behind only the great Yankees! Now that pitching staff -- man, New York is gonna be lights out all season. Wait, you mean Spring Training stats don't mean anything for ANY TEAM?

I really wasn't, and though virtually all my research begins with the Integration Era, I was thinking more of the faces and bodies on my baseball cards when I was a kid. Most weren't porkers, just not quite the physical specimens that tower over modern mounds and often get drafted for their dimensions. Back in 1974, for example, the Top 10 in Complete Games had nine men with 20 or more CG. But to Bell's point, they were all staff aces, which is how it should be -- if a guy was mowing 'em down, a manager let him finish (cough, Nate Snell). From that '74 list, only one had his career cut short via injury: Busby, he of two no-hitters. CG Leaders, 1974: Jenkins 29, GPerry 28, Lolich 27, Ryan 26, Tiant 25, Hunter 23, Wood 22, Busby 20, Cuellar 20, Blyleven 19. Most were also in the Top 10 in Innings Pitched, all pushing 300 IP... IP Leaders 1974: Ryan 332, Jenkins 328, GPerry 322, Wood 320, Hunter 318, Tiant 311, Lolich 308, PNiekro 302, Grimsley 292, Busby 292, Messersmith 292. Extending it to 200 IP -- ERod's goal he reached for the first time in 2019 -- in '74, the number of hurlers throwing a minimum of 200 frames was 65. In '19 there were 15. 1974 was also the third year in a row Oakland won the World Series with ace reliever Rollie Fingers pitching the fourth-most innings in those postseasons, behind the A's top three starters. Just tying this back into the multiple-inning bullpen guy discussion...

Good point. If modern athletes are bigger/stronger/faster, then why can't starting pitchers go deeper in games on the mound -- like the bad, old days? I'm sure analytics has stats about burn-out, and trainers can cite more frequent injury risk in muscle-joint ratios... but how were smaller/weaker/slower and even fatter pitchers once able to throw hundreds of more innings per year? Maybe the quicker-paced games and four-man rotations kept them in a different kind of condition: more loose, warm, durable, too-desperate-for-jobs-and-money-to-care, etc. It couldn't have been ancient medicine, old-fashioned diets, and obsolete training techniques... could it? Were recreational, pre-craft beer drugs cleaner, cut with less toxins?