TedYazPapiMookie

I mean no disrespect but nearly everything you just wrote is unequivocally incorrect. The comment about it negating the entirety of human scientific discovery is such an exaggeration I'm not even going to address it any farther, I get you are passionate about this, but you need to keep your wits about you and not use hyperboles because you are passionate. Look up fact. Look up estimate. Stats are after the fact. Estimates project the future or retrofit components into other numbers historically by normalizing data into a fact. The result is an estimate. That's how estimates work. Also, you have faulty logic saying SLG is a guess. SLG is total bases divided by at bats. Each component is a fact that results in a fact. Your interpretation of what SLG is simply wrong. The definition of a double is not that it's some % better than a single, it's a two base hit which is one base more than a single. That can't be clearer. You have presented a lot that has nothing to do with the discussion.

No offense but I respectfully disagree with your comment. They are guesses. The fact that you want to call them educated guesses doesn't make them any more accurate because unless something changes the future is ALWAYS unknown. Stats are recorded facts, metrics are estimates. That's a fact of life and as much as you choose to rationalize the validity of guesses, they are still guesses which makes them no more valid than if you or I chose to guess how a player is to perform at an aspect of baseball. In business it is common practice to run what-if scenarios to estimate future outcomes. They don't have to be done by economists, mathematicians or Ivy League graduates for them to achieve their goal of simulation. That doesn't render the results correct, it simply provides a series of possible outcomes that could be correct and SOMEONE (whether it's STATCAST or the person that ordered the what-if analysis) needs to choose the guess that best suits them for the decision that is to be made. Each decision maker in baseball has the choice of using fabricated estimates or real statistics or a combination of the two. Since metrics are filled with constants, variables and normalizations they have been tweaked for a couple of decades and will be tweaked for many more decades. Will they EVER be facts like statistics? No. That's the simple truth. Will the 2050 metrics be potentially more accurate than the 2025 metrics? Absolutely. Will they still be estimates? YEP!!

The Red Sox need to tweak their line-up so both buying and selling will be involved. Needs include: 1 Pitching - both a SP and relievers 2 Salary dumping - Yoshida needs to be moved by being coupled with Abreu who is the odd man out in the outfield 3 A Breslow chosen manager (not Cora) who brings his own coaching staff 4 Reshuffling of the roster so the future players are on the MLB roster and the AAA guys are back in AAA like Hamilton What can Yoshida and Abreu bring to Boston? $18 Million a year and a prospect, preferably a pitching prospect. Who might need Abreu and be willing to eat Yoshida's money because they are more likely to use him than Boston? That's the million-dollar question. Let's see what Breslow can do!!

Your interpretation of metrics seems normal to me. You take a very gross estimate with very little accuracy and try to rationalize why the numbers were reasonably close to the actual number of wins. That's what estimates are for. They are GUESSES. Sometimes they are right and sometimes they are very wrong and everything in between. It's fun to try to retrofit these guesses into a pattern that makes you think there is some validity to the formula but as I always say, predicting the future is simply a guess because it's unknown. If you notice that heads, come up every third flip and use it as a predictor you can then rationalize that it's a great predictor if heads actually come up 3rd frequently. Baseball fans are always looking for an edge or insight into the future. It's easy to be fooled to think these estimates are accurate. They aren't. It's luck or a coincidence or simply the odds that occasionally the guess will be a good one. A clock reads 12 twice a day! If you want to know if a guy is good? Look at his stats not metrics. Want fun facts about what he can theoretically do based on a set of assumptions chosen by a Fangraphs or Statcast? Check out his metrics. Both sources of information tell a story, the only difference is stats are after the fact results and metrics are guesses that may or may not reflect reality, but they aren't reality. Hope you don't mind one question. In bWAR or any estimate you like to use, there is some normalization. How many players are in the normalization? All or some and how much different would it be if you chose a number customized for a specific group of players like using elite pitchers for calculating a bWAR for an elite pitcher and using bad pitchers with ERAs over 5.00 for calculating bWAR for players in that group. Would you be more accurate, less accurate or wouldn't it matter since the number is strictly a guess?

All tools are at their fingertips. Yes, I am well aware. The point is you start with the reliable data and then you run your what-if analysis just like you do in the business world. The metrics are supplements whereas the stats are the diet. You can't live on supplements.

As far as the article goes, SD has the only stated need for Duran because he's an all star and they want the upgrade. Abreu wasn't mentioned because they already have Wade and he's better than Abreu if you make Abreu bat against LH pitchers. STL, PHI and KC don't have a need for either of the players, especially Philly. KC is set in the outfield and STL is too. In fact, STL is like BOS with too many. There is no big demand for either Boston outfielder, it's a big need by Boston to trim back Abreu so Anthony has a place to play even if he hits under .100. Duran simply needs to move to CF where his fielding percentage is outstanding and Rafaela needs to move to right because he doesn't have the yips like Abreu and is faster with a better glove and comparable arm. Anthony needs to step in the shoes of YAZ and TED in LF. Abreu needs to be traded so Refsnyder can be the 4th outfielder. Breslow needs to package player to see if he can off load some future payroll, even if it's only a partial off load. Yoshida has nowhere to play just like Abreu.

Since the Red Sox usually follow a winning streak with a nearly equal losing streak, with two weeks left in June, it's hard to say which way the wind will be blowing with regards to trades in another two weeks. Buyers? Sellers? A little of both? Tough to say this early. NINE game road trip after Sunday!! All on the West Coast. SEA, SF and LAA (who just surprised Boston in Fenway by taking 2 of 3). The team is too streaky to guess this early whether they buy or sell. To make 90 wins they need 54 of their next 90 games to be wins. Only 6 of their final 30 series are against weak teams. 54 might be a bit ambitious but it's possible assuming no key injuries. 90 wins doesn't assure them of the last WC spot, but it should be close.

For me, bWAR, FWAR or ANY OTHER WAR is meaningless because it's not accurate because the sheer concept of wins above replacement is silly. It's a guess. The index is supposed to measure performance, but it creates a fantasy world where a RUN is inferred by actions universally across all players. When in baseball is anything universally comparable among players? What makes any of the specific WAR values more accurate in defining the value of a player than an equation that incorporates BA, ISO, Walk Rate, SB, Runs Produced and Fielding Percentage? Those are the factual components of a player's performance. Nothing extrapolated, nothing normalized, just the key components of value produced by a player. Hypothetical runs scored equivalents? Seriously. That even sounds bogus. I appreciate you providing a perfect example supporting my comments!! The public has bought into the fabricated metrics unfortunately because they want answers, no matter how incorrect, to the question of who is better than this player? Think about how much the industry grew without a mathematically valid product!! The fact that maybe the single most critical ESTIMATE called WAR couldn't be agreed upon so companies started adding prefixes to avoid resolving the issue tells you everything about the accuracy of these numbers. FYI.... there are a billion examples like the one above because the techniques used in calculating WAR are invalid and render inconsistent results as shown above.

Let's be fair. Crochet going against the Yankees is a game Boston must win. He's one of the top 3 pitchers in the AL What that says is Boston has ONE GUY who can shut the Yankees down. I don't think anyone at this point doubts Crochet as a top ace. The next two games flip the script. Rodon vs Dobbins. Advantage NYY. Winning that game means a lot more than today's victory. I love Dobbin's attitude toward the Yankees; it's a throwback to yesteryear. Can he match-up effectively with Rodon a second time? Maybe. If the Red Sox win that game, they might have some momentum. If they get slaughtered, nobody would be surprised because it is a mismatch on paper. The trick is to pick up the pieces and take a shot at an even better pitcher the next day: Fried. If Boston gets beat easily the next two days that's no big deal. The team has assembled a future group of stars and are feeling their way as they adjust to all the new skills available to Cora. If he is not successful with them, then it's time to move on. If his illogical batting orders and poorly timed pitching substitutions still provide wins, then you have the formula for the 2026 Red Sox. Time will tell. Today was a fun game. You got to see Crochet's greatness. You got to see Judge's greatness and you got to see an extra inning win which has been hard to come by. I hope all the games in the series are as exciting.

Actually, that's exactly what he's been. There hasn't been one person that you have suggested that could replace him and have the body of work he's had. There was Mookie before him but nobody in between. Disliking the guy is your prerogative but if there is nobody waiting in the wings that can do as good of a job, he is irreplaceable by definition.

I guess that supports my belief that Tito was a far, far superior manager to Cora. Thanks for that tidbit.

NOTE: This is a warning for the folks that don't want to hear about the massive issues with metrics, please skip this response because it conflicts with everything you believe about metrics. Having just read the equation above; one realizes that metrics are a fabrication of data because formulas include arbitrary components like FIP Constant. Stats are facts and this formula is nothing more than an ESTIMATE. Why? The data is normalized and there is a constant that is arbitrary. That means the specifics of a pitcher are put into a caldron with all the other pitchers to create a universal pourage that represents baseball regardless of whether the data should be further stratified because all pitchers ARE NOT alike. Do we want to blend data from guys like Skubal, Skene, deGrom and Wheeler with slugs so we can pretend this particular clustering of the data represents the league? This concept alone negates any relevance to this specific metric. There is no scientific justification for what constants are accurate or why the size of the sample is appropriate. For you who are fantasy players this might make the most sense since you must deal with this predicament prior to each season. If you are in a league with 12 teams and each team must start 9 starting pitchers or relievers. When you calculate averages for the league rankings do you use: 1 - All pitchers 2 - 9 times 12 or 108 pitchers (the max that can be played in the league at one time) 3 - Less than 108 because you only want to compare Starting Pitchers and the 108 is comprised of both starters and relievers. 4 - What point in time do you pick to use in the estimate? 2024, the last 3 years or maybe a projection provided by someone else or your own projection? 5 - How does one account for time lost to injury? Is the player's numbers normalized to eliminate the time lost or is the actual number used reducing the players effectiveness due to lost time? This is a small sample of how many things we need to consider in ranking a pitcher prior to a draft. Each decision above impacts what goes into the caldron that gets normalized. Each choice creates a unique result for the caldron. Each choice varies the estimate to varying degrees. When I see a pitcher's ERA and his historical ERA and see if there is any trending, I am using real performance data not something that gets thrown in a caldron for normalization. The numbers are his and his alone. I can then look at the next pitcher and see the exact same numbers and compare them, Facts vs Facts. Now if a fabricated number comes out of the caldron like FIP or any of the other metrics, what do we know about that number? There is a generation who has grown up on the fabrications and completely believes in them. They say things like average doesn't matter or fielding percentage doesn't matter without having a clue as to why they actually do matter and are the foundation of baseball statistics. If you like what-if analysis, then metrics are great. They pretend their numbers are real and try to compare things that can't be compared effectively. Check out the list of issues above related to drafting in fantasy baseball with respect to the normalization that happens in metrics. Now calculate the number of permutations that could be generated by FanGraphs or any of the other metric sites based on simply varying the sample size of players to be thrown into the caldron to determine what is a fair sample size. Each permutation provides a different estimate, so which one is the most accurate? I'll take baseball stats over guesses from companies that provide massive equations filled with constants THEY pick, variables THEY pick and normalization techniques THEY pick. That's why so much of metrics is questionable with regard to accuracy. Here is the key to all metrics from my perspective: Is the metric (let's use FIP) a stat pulled from a record book or an interesting estimate of reality that is plus or minor percentage points wrong? The answer is it's an estimate suggesting that the unique set of circumstances that occurred on one play, or one week or one season or one career rendered a conclusion about how lucky a pitcher was? Is indicating that the pitcher was luckier or unluckier than he could have been relevant to his stats? No because it might not have been luck. Does it project his future? Nope because the future is unknown. So then why should an estimate like FIP be invented and how does it help analyze data when it's not accurate? The ultimate answer is it doesn't and for fans like me I ask who cares and why? Fun trivia? Maybe. Valid future indicator? ABSOLUTELY NOT. The unique set of circumstances that fabricated a specific FIP is not repeatable because it is historic and to predict using the number is like guessing heads or tails. The number is of no assistance in predicting the future. It's a poorly constructed recap of real baseball stats that try to introduce implications that can't be validly calculated. That's why it seems like a massive waste of time due to the inaccuracy of the data. If someone came to me and said I can take your data as recorded officially in the record books and put it into a computer with a few folks providing interpretations of that data through extremely complicated algorithms that make gross assumptions about the game, the data and how to use it to conclude the estimates needed to analyze baseball and it will be delivered to you since you can't really calculate it yourself, would you believe the results as an act of faith? I don't. I walk away when the salesman says, "trust me". When estimates determine such important things as WAR and WAR is calculated by every outlet that hustles metrics, the game is in bad shape and needs to rethink the concept of stats versus metrics. Stats represent what you did, and metrics are things you might theoretically do but it's pure conjecture. Players can only produce during real events, those real events can be interpreted to suggest what a player might do if not constrained by reality. Hypotheticals are extrapolations of reality that don't truly exist so they should have no place in reality where ball players can only do what the circumstances allow him. Baseball is about scoring more runs than the other team not being more athletic than the other team. Winning is the essence of the game not the individual feats that can be extrapolated thanks to athleticism. Without the out on each play, the athleticism is of no value at all. Metrics are designed for showcase events as a way to guess what happens when an apples to oranges situation occurs in baseball. Stats are the recorded events and reflect the achievements of the player and team. Now baseball needs to figure out how to keep fans from thinking the metric estimates representing hypotheticals reflect reality or predict the future. They are simply fun what-ifs that fans have done since the inception of baseball that try to answer the age-old question: Was Babe Ruth better than Hank Aaron? Any precision in the numbers? NOPE. Is it fun to make estimates support any argument you want to make to come out on top in your argument? YEP. Factual or reliable? NOPE. Entertaining? YEP There is a place for metrics in baseball as long as there is a HUGE caveat that nobody takes them seriously. They are hypothetical because you can't rewind a groundball, and have it match the length of the guy you are comparing him with so you can see if both players are defensively comparable. Instead, you assume one has more skills because he had a larger average distance to balls hit to him so therefore, he has greater range because the universe of plays was not as kind to the second player who ended up closer to all balls hit to him. Without complete control over the environment one player is at a disadvantage being evaluated by the very estimates that are supposed to clear up the shortcomings of the Fielding Percentage. That is the double edge sword of metrics. Seeking more precision by grossly estimating averages and applying them equally to unequal game situations. It simply creates different apples to oranges comparisons, it resolves nothing. I hope a few old school folks got a kick out of the detailed dissection of metrics. So go use those metrics for your entertainment just remember they are only estimates with massive shortcomings.

Duran is hitting .281 and .246 versus RH and LH pitchers. His OBP is .342 and .309 vs RH and LH pitchers. Any mid-season cherry picked stat is irrelevant since he isn't being evaluated as a point in time, it's about total performance in a season. That's incredibly shortsighted by the fans who don't get why a season matters more than a hot or cold segment in a season as it was mentioned above. Once again, the lead-off spot failed miserably until Duran got the job and he's done well and there is no better alternative on the team and both Anthony and Duran need to play when a lefty pitches because Abreu can't hit lefties at all. It's not a small differential like with Duran, it's huge. Put Anthony in LF and bat him 5th from now on. He's only fifth because Devers is 3rd and still deserves to be batting before Anthony. That pushes Mayer to 7th. So Duran is 1st in CF, Devers 3rd at DH, Anthony 5th in LF, Mayer 7th at SS. That puts Bregman 2nd at 3B, Toro 4th at 1B, Narvaez 6th at C and Campbell 8th at 2B. Rafaela is 9th in RF. While Bregman is out Story should be the 3B but when Bregman returns he backs up Mayer and Campbell. Gonzalez backs up Bregman and Toro and Wong backs up Narvaez while Abreu backs up all three outfield spots where he has played nearly equally in the minors.

Let me know if you want daily documentation. I am happy to provide it.

I'm a OBP supporter too. This list doesn't include anyone who is a full-time player that fits the description of a lead-off man leaving Duran still the best option unless they trade for one. Bregman's and Devers' OBP make them perfect for the 2nd and 3rd holes. I would use Bregman 2 and Devers 3 using traditional line-up thinking. I want Devers to have as many men on base as possible since he swings for the fences on every pitch.

OK. Understood. Then, if you profile the players on the team who maintains a high average, high OBP, great speed and is an excellent base runner who can steal? That's what Duran's been doing the last couple of years. His slump this season is over and his average has climbed from .195 after the 9th game of the season to .271 where he has been for roughly 3 weeks. He's hit .285 and .295 the last two years and that has been the highest average of any starter during both seasons. This year, even with the horrendous start, Duran is now only behind Toro a part time player, Gonzalez a part time player, Bregman, Refsnyder a platoon player, Narvaez the catcher and Devers (.276 to .271). He is still the best lead-off man on the roster so if we trade him we need to return a lead-off man or we'll need to use Rafaela or Campbell until they develop into one. We have other young candidates as well but I think allowing Campbell, Mayer and Anthony to develop as players not lead-off men makes sense. I'm not against getting another lead-off man but I don't see anyone on this roster other than Rafaela who fits the general make-up of a lead-off man. His issue is a huge one, his average isn't one of the best on the team yet, so I don't see him as a good fit now. As he develops, maybe. He's fast, a good base runner but he needs more power to be balanced like Duran. If we could trade for Cruz or Happ, great. But if we are picking from the current roster, the cupboard is bare.

I only think he is irreplaceable because that is what actually happened in Boston for several years until he settled in at the lead-off spot. Is he Mookie or Ohtani, no!!! But who is? Compare him to all the lead-off men in the MLB and list the one that made the all-star team last year and was MVP of the game. He has the skills but has gotten off to a bad start. A bad streak isn't the same as a bad player!! Now name me someone better than your two examples. I don't think there is anyone so that's a tough comparison especially in light of the fact that we had Mookie and gave him away.

Great link. Thanks. How credible do you believe Bowden's information to be? It reminded me of off-season articles where writers speculate because they don't know anything, so they guess what they think is logical and it usually never happens. What's your take? With Abreu being so obvious as the weak link since he can't hit lefties, I would like to think Breslow has more smarts than to lose their only lead-off man. Five years ago, when Mookie was ousted the team struggled for years to find a lead-off man replacement. They finally got one who becomes an all-star and they trade him because Cora assigned him left field in Fenway as the fasted outfielder in the group? Abreu should have been in left field from the beginning and Rafaela in Right Field with his arm and incredible defense. FYI... Rafaela's DRS in 2024 was good enough to beat Abreu for the gold glove. Duran's DRS in CF in 2024 was also better than Abreu's GG DRS in right field. Duran has 10 errors in LF in less than half the total chances he's had in CF and 2 in 550 total chances in CF. Duran should never have been moved from CF; Abreu's skills dictate his need to be the left fielder until Anthony arrives and steps into the shoes of Yaz and Teddy Ballgame. If we got a vote, I'd vote Abreu. It's a no brainer with his key limitation of not hitting lefties!! (the Red Sox face left-handed pitchers 40% of the time!!).

Building for the future is the way I look at 2025. The remaining games are against good enough teams that the 36 losses in the first 70 games would need to occur for the last 92 games. That means a record of 54 and 36 or 18 over .500 for the rest of the season. While anything is possible, realistically Boston winning 90 games is a very long shot. That number won't win the division, but it might get you in the playoffs. So if that is not truly feasible, shouldn't the team be settling in at their long-term positions and performing the best they can to provide the front office with some answers that are needed for the future? 1 - Will Cora be here? 2 - Will Bregman be here? 3 - If not Bregman who at 3B? 4 - Is Mayer capable of defense good enough to replace Story at SS? 5 - Is Cora going to figure out that Anthony needs to be the LF like Yaz and Williams because Duran is an elite CF but a bad LF and Rafaela can play RF with his speed and superior defensive skills and much stronger arm than Duran. 6 - Can Abreu provide any value to the team when he's a platoon player that forces the team to eat a roster spot for the 40% of the time that Abreu can't start due to a lefty pitcher? 7 - Will Casas be a better candidate for 1B than Toro? 8 - Can Breslow plug all the holes in the pitching staff? If so, with whom? 9 - Will Buehler want to come back and will Breslow want him to return? 10 - Who will be the closer in 2026? These are just 10 items that need to be worked out if the young team of 2025 is to develop into the division winning team of 2026.

Since I had Notin on my "ignore list" it must have re-sequenced the names and made it show GG as the originator. GG, I apologize. And thanks, drewsik6 for clearing things up. Now the event makes perfect sense.

You can rationalize the inappropriate behavior towards me however you want; you are the moderator. I tried to end this discuss to go talk baseball, but you chose not to. I now understand your club and that as moderator you have authority to keep the club closed to people unlike you. Suggesting I go away is a unique marketing strategy. Maybe you should just point out that you want fans that will fall in line with your way of thinking. You want young people who think it's funny to insult ideas that are outside your mainstream of comments. I get it now but believe it or not there are people on the site that ACTUALLY know baseball and if I filter out the fun guys as you call them and focus on the real baseball people using the site filters, I can enjoy this site too. I just need to find the niche of baseball fans who are mature enough to handle an adult conversation away from all the fun you and your friends are having insulting people. Simple solution. I will pursue that. Thanks for all your help.

Abreu is the only player who needs a platoon mate to roster at the same time for LH pitchers. He's the obvious choice for who needs to go. The additional roster spot is too precious for a guy who can't hit lefties to consume with his own spot. 3B needs to be Story right now. Mayer needs to prove he can handle SS and if he can't then Campbell can take over as the better fielder not anointed to the position at the draft. Story will be the utility middle infielder when Bregman returns. Simple line-up: Duran CF Rafaela RF Devers DH Toro 1B Anthony LF Narvaez C Mayer SS Story 3B Campbell 2B Then when Bregman returns: Duran CF Bregman 3B Devers DH Toro 1B Anthony LF Narvaez C Mayer SS Campbell 2B Rafaela RF Trade Yoshida and Abreu for pitching. Reserve hitters - C Wong, MI - Story, CI - Gonzalez, OF - Refsnyder. Add experience and you have an excellent 2026 offensive/defensive roster that will be better than the 2025 hitting roster.

If that works for you great. Dictating what can be said seems like an odd philosophy for a site like this. Sounds a bit more like your club. Oh well, like I said, there are plenty of actual knowledgeable baseball fans on the site that I'm sure I'll find my own niche and screen out the fans solely here to have fun busting others chops.

There are lots of people on the site. Ignoring the insulting ones isn't that hard once you see the personalities and baseball knowledge they have. The obnoxious few won't deter me from finding the real baseball people.

He was an all-star and could be again this year with a good second half of June.