How Good Are The Sox Now?

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,219
Portland
The interesting question is: why? It could be that they have faced more teams with better bullpens. Indeed, the Yankees and Orioles have two of the better pens in the AL. The Jays are sort of the top of the bottom third. Perhaps also they are in relatively more close games in the 7-9th, prompting teams to use their better relievers? I don't know. Another small contribution might come from having a higher % of ABs vs LHP in innings 7-9 (is this true?) The AL OPSs 0.747 vRHP and 0.749 vLHP, while the Red Sox are 0.835 vRHP and 0.826 vLHP.

Anyhow, some food for thought.
Their bench has been utterly awful all year too, so they haven't had many weapons that provide favorable matchups late in games when you'd maybe pinch hit for Shore, whichever left fielder, or the catchers. Not having Young has probably hurt too.
 
Last edited:

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,595
Maine
The interesting question is: why? It could be that they have faced more teams with better bullpens. Indeed, the Yankees and Orioles have two of the better pens in the AL. The Jays are sort of the top of the bottom third. Perhaps also they are in relatively more close games in the 7-9th, prompting teams to use their better relievers? I don't know. Another small contribution might come from having a higher % of ABs vs LHP in innings 7-9 (is this true?) The AL OPSs 0.747 vRHP and 0.749 vLHP, while the Red Sox are 0.835 vRHP and 0.826 vLHP.

Anyhow, some food for thought.
The thing is, it's not unique to the Red Sox. In fact, the numbers show that all teams' offense dips in the late innings, and while the Red Sox do dip, they are still performing above league average in those innings. I don't think it has anything to do with facing teams with better bullpens, but everything to do with facing bullpens period. Fresher arms set up for short bursts of tough pitching (and short leashes if they struggle) and not seeing the same guy twice...they suppress offense by design.

I'd be surprised if there's any team that has consistent or improved slash numbers in innings 7-9 relative to earlier innings.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
The thing is, it's not unique to the Red Sox. In fact, the numbers show that all teams' offense dips in the late innings, and while the Red Sox do dip, they are still performing above league average in those innings. I don't think it has anything to do with facing teams with better bullpens, but everything to do with facing bullpens period. Fresher arms set up for short bursts of tough pitching (and short leashes if they struggle) and not seeing the same guy twice...they suppress offense by design.

I'd be surprised if there's any team that has consistent or improved slash numbers in innings 7-9 relative to earlier innings.
Not to be rude, but are you reading the posts? E.g.:

Sure, that's why he included the AL for comparison.

Look at it this way: the Red Sox OPS is 16.6% higher than the AL in general during innings 1-3, 11.0% higher during innings 4-6, and 5.1% higher during innings 7-9. The good news is that they are still an above-average innings 7-9 offense, but not the juggernaut they are during innings 1-6.
The AL average OPS decreases in innings 7-9 relative to innings 1-6. The Red Sox's OPS decreases in innings 7-9 relative to innings 1-6 much more than does the AL average. That's what we're trying to discuss. Maybe there is an interesting cause, maybe not. Without doing a robust statistical analysis, the eyeball-test suggests that the difference in differences is significant.


(edit: maybe the above-quoted post of mine was unclear. The comparisons aren't between the Red Sox in innings X-Y to the AL in innings 1-9, they are between Red Sox X-Y to AL X-Y. That is, they are apples to apples; the Red Sox's OPS falls more than does the OPS of the typical AL team.)
 
Last edited:

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
Look at it this way: the Red Sox OPS is 16.6% higher than the AL in general during innings 1-3, 11.0% higher during innings 4-6, and 5.1% higher during innings 7-9. The good news is that they are still an above-average innings 7-9 offense, but not the juggernaut they are during innings 1-6.
My mathematical intuition tells me that the lower the hitting environment, the lower the difference will be between good and average hitting. My intuition could be somewhat simply tested by noting the Red Sox OPS rank by these 3 inning clusters.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,192
This thread looks silly after this week :p

We're a good team but not elite. That gives you a decent chance at a WC, and that's where we are. It is what it is
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
26-27, which is basically 500 over almost 1/3 of a season despite scoring 5.4 RPG. Of course, the 2007 team played a bit over 500 for almost half a season after a hot start. Its going to come down to the pitching. Pen has to get healthy, and the SP'ers have to be better. Pomeranz should help there, Porcello and Wright have been pretty good but Wright looks to have some tough times in the summer heat, E-Rods a bit shaky, and Price has to earn his salary. Rich Hill would look pretty good about now (bump E-Rod to the pen). But short of anymore additions, the pitching is either going to come together or its not and that will determine this teams fate.
 

Gubanich Plague

New Member
Jul 14, 2005
63
26-27, which is basically 500 over almost 1/3 of a season despite scoring 5.4 RPG. Of course, the 2007 team played a bit over 500 for almost half a season after a hot start. Its going to come down to the pitching. Pen has to get healthy, and the SP'ers have to be better. Pomeranz should help there, Porcello and Wright have been pretty good but Wright looks to have some tough times in the summer heat, E-Rods a bit shaky, and Price has to earn his salary. Rich Hill would look pretty good about now (bump E-Rod to the pen). But short of anymore additions, the pitching is either going to come together or its not and that will determine this teams fate.
A few years ago Stupendous Man wrote a very impressive article in Maple Street Press detailing the longest .500 streak in each of a huge number of seasons. The takeaway was that even the very best (and worst) seasons have surprisingly long streaks of .500 ball. I'd have to look it up, but a 54-game stretch of .500 ball seems pretty normal for even a team that ends up with a great record for the season. Of course, that's assuming that this marks the end of the .500 streak.
 

#1GreenwellFan

New Member
Jun 12, 2016
22
Alabama
I'm certainly less optimistic than I was 3 days ago and, depending on the day, I have different reasons for feeling the way I do. Over the last couple of days, I've decided this team just has no identity and maybe even no heart. Sure, they're having fun but I'm seeing way too many close losses when we've been in prefect position to steal the game. Take bases loaded, nobody out, down by one in the bottom of the 9th on Friday for example or bases loaded with nobody out in the 9th inning of a tie game several weeks back. How do you lose those games?

That got me thinking about some teams that seemed similar. At this point in 2004, the team had a very similar personality. They had just come off the big win against the Yankees a few days before and, after 99 games, we're 55-44. That's exactly where we stand today. The team jelled after that game but the results weren't immediate. It still took a while for them to go from a fun, decent team to a fun team that refused to go down.

I don't see a trade changing the personality of this team. I think we will either see them bond in a similar manner and start winning some big, close games or we won't.

I also, before really looking at the numbers, saw a lot of the 2011 team in this team, but through 99 games that team was 62-37. Hard to make good comparisons there.

In the past week, we have seen them go 1-3 in 4 one-run games and also lose two 2-run games. In those games, about half fall squarely on pitching and the other half fall on hitting, so I can't get behind the idea of Sale being the difference maker. We need to see better, or at least more consistent offensive production from 3B and LF. Far too often, we can't count on production there.

So, I can't make a prediction on how this will play out or what it would take to fix it but I'm convinced another trade isn't the answer.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
There may be a synergistic relationship in bullpens that gives us some reason to be hopeful. That is, by fixing one piece you strengthen the other pieces -- whether by reducing their leverage a bit or by giving them more defined roles or by decreasing the number of batters they need to face. Whatever it is. Get Kimbrel back and maybe there is a domino effect on the rest of the bullpen that allows guys to succeed with the addition of Ziegler. Maybe add Koji later in the year to get over the hump. The starting rotation is definitely improved with Pomeranz. Combine that with Price figuring things out a bit better, and everyone staying healthy, getting Young back, and perhaps this team can still compete for a season around 90 wins. Not needing any starts out of Buchholz would help, and hope that maybe one of Buchholz and Kelly can reliable get outs without giving up too many runs, and that would be icing on the cake.

The problem is that I just don't see all of that falling into place. It's one thing if we needed just one of those things to break correctly our way, but needing 3 to do so, or 4 out of 5, or whatever, may be too big an ask. And nothing else going wrong at the same time too? Not realistic. We can hope, but we cannot expect it.

21-20 on the road is probably a realistic expectation for the rest of the season even if most things go well. If the schedule were more balanced, maybe they could do better, but I think it's just too much to ask a team playing 41 out of 63 games on the road to win significantly more than half of them. That's just a brutal grind. Any worse than that, and they aren't going to make the post-season, I don't think. Even if they manage it, that means they need to go 14-8 or so at home to get the wild card.
 

#1GreenwellFan

New Member
Jun 12, 2016
22
Alabama
The injury bug seems to usually (not always) let go eventually. Maybe it's more wishful thinking than anything but I think we're close to having everyone back healthy and maybe they'll stay that way.

I do expect Kimbrel to come back as good as ever. That knee scope is about the most minor thing an athlete can have done, so in some ways, this could end up being a badly needed rest. We'll know soon enough.

I disagree on Koji though. I think he's done. He doesn't seem to have the confidence and I know I don't have any confidence in him. Hope he's not needed...or better yet, I hope I'm wrong.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
I disagree on Koji though. I think he's done. He doesn't seem to have the confidence and I know I don't have any confidence in him. Hope he's not needed...or better yet, I hope I'm wrong.
Koji may be too old to get it done, but confidence isn't the problem with Koji I don't think. 18-2 in save or hold situations this year. Yes, he's given up runs in bunches at times, but he knows how to get batters out and he knows how to do it with the season on the line. I'll take Koji back any day.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,415
Not here
This thread looks silly after this week :p

We're a good team but not elite. That gives you a decent chance at a WC, and that's where we are. It is what it is
There is absolutely nothing that has happened in the last week or so that doesn't happen to elite teams. Seriously, pick a good team, they'll have a week like this.

It's been three one-run losses and two two-run losses at a time when the bullpen has been stretched thin. It happens. It sucks when it happens, but it happens.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
I disagree on Koji though. I think he's done. He doesn't seem to have the confidence and I know I don't have any confidence in him. Hope he's not needed...or better yet, I hope I'm wrong.
I'd give a guy with his WHIP and K/9 numbers a shot any day. His ERA is the outlier, and that's the one I'd expect to change.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,219
Portland
I hope at this point that they start thinking about skipping the 5th starter whenever possible.
Price/Wright and Porcello have thrown quality starts in 40 of 61 games (14 for Wright and 13 each for Porcello/Price).

The rest of the rotation has combined for 8 of 32. That is a whole lot of crappy innings that is also forcing the bullpen to be overworked. Eddy has only managed 3 and that's not going to get it done. They can't afford to see if he can figure it out on the run since every game is critical.

Pomeranz should help, as on his own he has thrown 11 out of his 19 starts, though he was, more or less a 6 inning guy -5.8 per start - in the NL and that probably won't translate as often with the DH, though It can't possibly be worse than the back end.

Basically, they need Kimbrel back stat, and someone other than a LOOGY wasting a spot.
Layne would be more useful during roster expansion, but they need another innings eater this month. I'd see if they can get something for him, personally.
 
Last edited:

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,397
Overland Park, KS
They have lost 5 close games in a week. It happens. I would be more worried if they were getting their brains beat in. I think the return of Kimbrel will help greatly as it pushes everyone down one rung in the bullpen.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,595
Maine
They have lost 5 close games in a week. It happens. I would be more worried if they were getting their brains beat in. I think the return of Kimbrel will help greatly as it pushes everyone down one rung in the bullpen.
Agreed. They're 4-6 in their last 10. Meanwhile, the Orioles are 5-5 and the Jays are 6-4. They're not really falling out of the race or anything. Getting healthy will do a lot for the team's prospects.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
21-20 on the road is probably a realistic expectation for the rest of the season even if most things go well. If the schedule were more balanced, maybe they could do better, but I think it's just too much to ask a team playing 41 out of 63 games on the road to win significantly more than half of them. That's just a brutal grind. Any worse than that, and they aren't going to make the post-season, I don't think. Even if they manage it, that means they need to go 14-8 or so at home to get the wild card.
DDB has bingo, as usual. The problem isn't that the Sox have lost 5 of 6; it's that they did this in one of the few remaining easy stretches on their schedule.

BP expresses the same idea quantitatively; the Sox' odds of missing the playoffs have more than doubled (from 14% to 29%) in the past 7 days; like DDB, I'd say those numbers are probably a tad optimistic.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/odds/index.php?dispgroup=div&standings_rsort=ppct
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
DDB has bingo, as usual. The problem isn't that the Sox have lost 5 of 6; it's that they did this in one of the few remaining easy stretches on their schedule.

BP expresses the same idea quantitatively; the Sox' odds of missing the playoffs have more than doubled (from 14% to 29%) in the past 7 days; like DDB, I'd say those numbers are probably a tad optimistic.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/odds/index.php?dispgroup=div&standings_rsort=ppct
Good stuff. I haven't seen that page before. I'm a bit surprised at Baltimore's projection, especially because they play the majority of their games against the Sox in Baltimore.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,192
538 projections have us at 62% to make the playoffs now.

As said, it's not that we slumped / got unlucky for a week, it's that it happened at this particular time that's damning. I was hoping to be near or at 20 games over before the first west coast game, then hold at .500 the rest of the season for 90-92 wins. Instead we're only at 11 over - when we really should be at least 15 over.

We can argue forever about what type of extended slump damns an elite team or not, but they seem to have found ways to lose more than the other way around.

We've already played the best of the west on the road (Houston & Texas) - Angels, Padres, A's are all bad. Mariners are OK. Dodgers are OK and no Kershaw. It would be great to have a year where we capitalize on this despite the locations.

Also, the next homestand (NYY and ARI, each 3) after a day off - going 5-1 there would also help a rebound.
 

Max Venerable

done galavanting around Lebanon
SoSH Member
Feb 27, 2002
1,187
Brooklyn, NY
As a pretty regular spectator this year, I've found myself getting more aggrieved at Farrel as the season goes on. Obviously the Sox have had some performance issues and injuries in the staff that have made things more difficult, but it seems to me like they have been in position to win in several close games recently, and haven't. I noticed that Farrel was managing every game early in the season like a must win. It was one of my favorite things about the team early on. He was aggressive with pitching changes, especially - in a way that reminded me of playoff baseball... and it worked. More recently has become a bit more of a passive, long haul manager.... maybe this is needed to keep his guys healthy or whatever, but then again the season is getting short.

I'm not saying this is the only reason for the slide, but I do think it has contributed. Given how they will need to beat their expected win totals going forward to land in the playoffs (as has been demonstrated up-thread).... I'd really like to see Farrell get back to what he was doing early in the season. Lets see some shorter hooks.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
A few years ago Stupendous Man wrote a very impressive article in Maple Street Press detailing the longest .500 streak in each of a huge number of seasons. The takeaway was that even the very best (and worst) seasons have surprisingly long streaks of .500 ball. I'd have to look it up, but a 54-game stretch of .500 ball seems pretty normal for even a team that ends up with a great record for the season. Of course, that's assuming that this marks the end of the .500 streak.
The 2004 Sox were 9 games over on May 1 and 9 games over on August 1, making for three months of .500 ball. Obviously trades then helped things fall into place, in a way that doesn't correlate directly to this team -- they needed a change in the everyday lineup, whereas the current team needs pitching depth, a scarce resource.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Good stuff. I haven't seen that page before. I'm a bit surprised at Baltimore's projection, especially because they play the majority of their games against the Sox in Baltimore.
538 projections have us at 62% to make the playoffs now.

As said, it's not that we slumped / got unlucky for a week, it's that it happened at this particular time that's damning. I was hoping to be near or at 20 games over before the first west coast game, then hold at .500 the rest of the season for 90-92 wins. Instead we're only at 11 over - when we really should be at least 15 over.

We can argue forever about what type of extended slump damns an elite team or not, but they seem to have found ways to lose more than the other way around.
Any projection from BP is going to have a healthy dose of "Baltimore isn't nearly as good as Boston or Toronto" baked in, because that's what their advanced metrics say. I'm not sure if teams "find ways to win/lose," but I'm skeptical of any projection that assumes a difference in quality between the teams over the 60-ish remaining games that's greater than their YTD Pythagorean records would suggest. So yeah, 538's projection rings more true to me than BP's.
 

StupendousMan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,897
A few years ago Stupendous Man wrote a very impressive article in Maple Street Press detailing the longest .500 streak in each of a huge number of seasons. The takeaway was that even the very best (and worst) seasons have surprisingly long streaks of .500 ball. I'd have to look it up, but a 54-game stretch of .500 ball seems pretty normal for even a team that ends up with a great record for the season. Of course, that's assuming that this marks the end of the .500 streak.
Thanks for the kind words. I think one can summarize it with this graph:

Figure_1.jpg
 

Schadenfreude

New Member
Apr 9, 2016
89
Geneva, Switzerland
As a pretty regular spectator this year, I've found myself getting more aggrieved at Farrel as the season goes on. Obviously the Sox have had some performance issues and injuries in the staff that have made things more difficult, but it seems to me like they have been in position to win in several close games recently, and haven't. I noticed that Farrel was managing every game early in the season like a must win. It was one of my favorite things about the team early on. He was aggressive with pitching changes, especially - in a way that reminded me of playoff baseball... and it worked. More recently has become a bit more of a passive, long haul manager.... maybe this is needed to keep his guys healthy or whatever, but then again the season is getting short.

I'm not saying this is the only reason for the slide, but I do think it has contributed. Given how they will need to beat their expected win totals going forward to land in the playoffs (as has been demonstrated up-thread).... I'd really like to see Farrell get back to what he was doing early in the season. Lets see some shorter hooks.
Good observation. I tend to think that JF used the short leash for his starters early on, when the relief core was relatively healthy, because of the reasonable expectation that the starting pitchers would eventually get over the usual early season hiccups and develop some good constancy and pitch deep into games. Unfortunately this has not happened, and so the heavy bullpen use continues. It is apparent to me that the starting pitchers were not adequately prepared to pitch 7 innings this season, notwithstanding the improvement of Porcello over last year, and the early season excellence of Wright. Anyway my $0.02 worth given that I am located in a time zone 6 hours ahead of Boston and rarely watch games.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Good observation. I tend to think that JF used the short leash for his starters early on, when the relief core was relatively healthy, because of the reasonable expectation that the starting pitchers would eventually get over the usual early season hiccups and develop some good constancy and pitch deep into games. Unfortunately this has not happened, and so the heavy bullpen use continues. It is apparent to me that the starting pitchers were not adequately prepared to pitch 7 innings this season, notwithstanding the improvement of Porcello over last year, and the early season excellence of Wright. Anyway my $0.02 worth given that I am located in a time zone 6 hours ahead of Boston and rarely watch games.
How many starting pitchers in the Majors do you think average 7 innings per start?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,595
Maine
How many starting pitchers in the Majors do you think average 7 innings per start?
For the record, there are exactly three starters who are averaging 7 innings or better per start: Chris Sale 7.0 per start (19 starts), Johnny Cueto 7.12 per start (20 starts), Clayton Kershaw 7.56 per start (16 starts).

For what it's worth, three Red Sox starters are averaging over 6 innings per start (Porcello, Wright, Price) which means the majority of the staff is, on average, pitching into the seventh each time out.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
then again the season is getting short.
This strikes me as an absolutely absurd thing to say about a team that would have a playoff spot if the season ended today, and is only 2.5 games off the division lead with more than 60 left to play. The season may be getting just a wee bit short for the Tigers, and it's getting seriously short for the Yankees and Mariners. For the Red Sox, not so much.

Would it be better to be leading the division by 10 games? Of course. But just because we still need to play a lot of good baseball to win anything, that doesn't mean we're running out of time; time is, if anything, on our side. The season, for us, is still 162 games long.
 
Last edited:

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
This strikes me as an absolutely absurd thing to say about a team that would have a playoff spot if the season ended today, and is only 2.5 games off the division lead with more than 60 left to play. The season may be getting just a wee bit short for the Tigers, and it's getting seriously short for the Yankees and Mariners. For the Red Sox, not so much.

Would it be better to be leading the division by 10 games? Of course. But just because we still need to play a lot of good baseball to win anything, that doesn't mean we're up against it in any sense. The season, for us, is still 162 games long.
It is definitely absurd on the surface, but when you take in all factors it seems less so. If they didn't have only one day off in the next six weeks and we're playing more than a third of their remaining games at home and just acted like a monkey jumping a football on one of their last home stands against a shitty team and a team they shouldn't get swept by - well, it might be easier to not have a pessimistic outlook.

They have an 11 game west coast trip starting tonight. They need to sweep LAA and split the remaining games. Otherwise, yeah the forecast isn't rosy. They won't be mathematically out of it, but it certainly lowers the expectations of them breaking out.

This team is entirely frustrating and I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Ultimately I think they get into the dance, but they should be leading the division right now, by a lot. If they lose the one game WC play in because they finished a game or two back, then heads should roll.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
36,921
Hingham, MA
First of all they play 7 games after LAA so they can't split those

Second, if they can manage 21-20 in the 41 road games, and just 12-9 in the remaining home games, that gets them to 88 wins. 88 wins would be good enough for at least the 2nd WC every year, I think
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
First of all they play 7 games after LAA so they can't split those

Second, if they can manage 21-20 in the 41 road games, and just 12-9 in the remaining home games, that gets them to 88 wins. 88 wins would be good enough for at least the 2nd WC every year, I think
First, seriously? You know what I meant. If they can't go 4-3 or 3-4 then they're going to have issues.

Second, I don't consider second Wild card to be all that lofty a goal, given the new format. This team is underperforming their abilities and talent level (on the pitching side). If that's the way it ends, then yeah, someone needs to go. And you can't fire the players.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I'm a little on the bearish side by SoSH standards, but even I don't think a 5-5 road trip (or even a 4-6 one) would be the death knell for the season.

I don't consider second Wild card to be all that lofty a goal, given the new format. This team is underperforming their abilities and talent level (on the pitching side). If that's the way it ends, then yeah, someone needs to go. And you can't fire the players.
The Jays are as likely to finish strong as the Sox, and the O's lead, though modest, is significant this late in the season. I would rate the Sox' chances of winning the ALE no better than one in three, probably a touch less.

Obviously, if you must play in the wild card game, you would prefer to play at home, but the difference between the 1st and 2nd Wild Card isn't huge in the grand scheme of things.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,415
Not here
Second, I don't consider second Wild card to be all that lofty a goal, given the new format. This team is underperforming their abilities and talent level (on the pitching side). If that's the way it ends, then yeah, someone needs to go. And you can't fire the players.
I'm pretty sure you won't find a seingle person here or in the organization that thinks the second wild card is the goal. The goal is to win the division then the world series.

That means winning four more games than Baltimore and three more games than Toronto.

Yes, there are an undue number of road games left, but quite a few of them are against teams that aren't that good. If I counted right, the Sox have 18 games left against teams that are in last place in their respective divisions (Tampa, LAA, Arizona) and that comes in a schedule of I think 63 games remaining. That's pretty close to a third of the remaining schedule being against bad teams. Plus we have nine left against the Orioles and Six against the Jays.

There's plenty of time and plenty of reason for optimism.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,415
Not here
There's plenty of time. Coming off their performance on this past home stand, I disagree that there's plenty of reason for optimism.
That's what pessimists do, take the normal fluctuations of every day everydayness and look at them as portents of doom.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
That's what pessimists do, take the normal fluctuations of every day everydayness and look at them as portents of doom.
No that's what people that aren't blindly optimistic see when looking back over the last month. They had a chance to regroup over the break and they have t shown they did so. They need to take advantage of the remaining home games they have and they just pissed away five of them. I know you're the eternal optimist and that's great, but there's a pragmatic view of this team that results in a negative prognostication. Completely unbiased, non- regional analysts have pointed out on many occasions that this team has far more talent than they would appear to have if you looked at their record.

It's not *just the last home stand. It's the whole season. The last home stand just reinforced that the second half doesn't look to be better than the first. I don't really care how many games they have against shitty teams, when they can't win a home series against the Twins and then get swept by the Tigers, yeah I question how they're going to end up when 2/3s of their remaining games are on the road and most of those are on the west coast or against the two teams ahead of them.

If you're happy with where they sit now, their promise or with a WC, good for you. I don't see this team winning anything meaningful and I pray to God DD doesn't waste any assets trying to get them to that point.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,415
Not here
No that's what people that aren't blindly optimistic see when looking back over the last month.
I like how the last week suddenly becomes the last month.

They had a chance to regroup over the break and they have't shown they did so. They need to take advantage of the remaining home games they have and they just pissed away five of them. I know you're the eternal optimist and that's great, but there's a pragmatic view of this team that results in a negative prognostication. Completely unbiased, non- regional analysts have pointed out on many occasions that this team has far more talent than they would appear to have if you looked at their record.
Why is your pessimistic view of the remainder of the season more pragmatic than my optimistic one? You look at the fact that there are more road games remaining and decide to be woe. I look at the fact that we're playing almost a third of the remaining season against crappy teams.

It's not *just the last home stand. It's the whole season. The last home stand just reinforced that the second half doesn't look to be better than the first. I don't really care how many games they have against shitty teams, when they can't win a home series against the Twins and then get swept by the Tigers, yeah I question how they're going to end up when 2/3s of their remaining games are on the road and most of those are on the west coast or against the two teams ahead of them.
Recency bias. The same team that split with the Twins and got swept by the Tigers beat the Giants, Yankees, Rays, Rangers, and Angels in the five series that immediately preceded the series against the Twins. And you're ignoring the fundamental difference between now and before. The makeup of the starting rotation is different.

If you're happy with where they sit now, their promise or with a WC, good for you. I don't see this team winning anything meaningful and I pray to God DD doesn't waste any assets trying to get them to that point.
Do you really think this team is incapable of winning anything meaningful or do you really just have a remarkably narrow definition of what "meaningful" means? This team can win the division. It can win the division series. It can win the league championship series. It can win the World Series. All of those things are meaningful. Some more meaningful than others, of course.

I don't want to win the wild card and I have been pretty vocal about not making moves to try to win the wild card, but the division is certainly within striking distance. The Sox are two games out with over sixty games to play.

I think I've also been pretty clear that I think the Sox shouldn't be trading Moncada or Benintendi for pretty much anything. I'd like to see a relatively minor deal for left field so Holt can go back to his supersub role, and I'd like another bullpen arm, especially if Koji isn't coming back. I'm not willing to pay a huge price for either, and if management thinks they can get help from within, I'm okay with that.

Baseball Prospectus's playoff odds page has the Sox at a 35.5% chance to win the division and a 35.7% chance to win a wild card for a 71.2% chance to make the playoffs. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

Honestly, after the past two seasons, how you can wallow in the mire just because the team isn't clearly the best in the league is really rather ridiculous.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,200
“@JonCouture: #RedSox are 3-4 (.429) in games David Price throws eight innings. Entering tonight, rest of league was 90-27 (.769) when starter went 8.”

“@RyanHannable: The Red Sox’ last seven losses have been by one or two runs. 21-24 in such games this season.”
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,192
Honestly, after the past two seasons, how you can wallow in the mire just because the team isn't clearly the best in the league is really rather ridiculous.
This is a really, really down stretch right now. The fact we're still only two in the loss column behind Baltimore has to be considered a silver lining.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
It feels like the bullpen is putting too much pressure on the rest of the team. Game thread angst isn't exactly sabermetrics, but every observant fan who watches this team has to have the same sense of unease whenever the starter seems to be laboring. It's hard to imagine the team itself isn't feeling that way. Even when they prevent runs, they are giving up baserunners, throwing a lot of pitches, making platoon matchups impossible. They are making it difficult for the team to sandpaper over mistakes. Six losses in seven games, and five of the six were come from behind wins for the other team (and the seventh was close, we tied it late and then coughed up the win).

It's not always going to be like that. But to be a playoff team with this schedule, the team is going to need some easy wins and some hot streaks. Unless the team scores 10 runs, the bullpen always gives the other team a punchers' chance and I think that kind of pressure on a team makes for a really tough environment. Just can't win with this bullpen. The only question is whether we can tread water until the bullpen gets healthy or figures things out. The kids have been so fun, and hitting game 100 for the year really makes the Papi thing start to seem real. It's sad to think this all could be effectively over in a week and a half. Would anyone predict 2-8 for the rest of the trip? Of course not -- it will probably be 5-5 with ups and downs. But does anyone genuinely think 2-8 isn't at least a reasonable possibility? Our bullpen can't get anyone out.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,415
Not here
It feels like the bullpen is putting too much pressure on the rest of the team. Game thread angst isn't exactly sabermetrics, but every observant fan who watches this team has to have the same sense of unease whenever the starter seems to be laboring. It's hard to imagine the team itself isn't feeling that way. Even when they prevent runs, they are giving up baserunners, throwing a lot of pitches, making platoon matchups impossible. They are making it difficult for the team to sandpaper over mistakes. Six losses in seven games, and five of the six were come from behind wins for the other team (and the seventh was close, we tied it late and then coughed up the win).

It's not always going to be like that. But to be a playoff team with this schedule, the team is going to need some easy wins and some hot streaks. Unless the team scores 10 runs, the bullpen always gives the other team a punchers' chance and I think that kind of pressure on a team makes for a really tough environment. Just can't win with this bullpen. The only question is whether we can tread water until the bullpen gets healthy or figures things out. The kids have been so fun, and hitting game 100 for the year really makes the Papi thing start to seem real. It's sad to think this all could be effectively over in a week and a half. Would anyone predict 2-8 for the rest of the trip? Of course not -- it will probably be 5-5 with ups and downs. But does anyone genuinely think 2-8 isn't at least a reasonable possibility? Our bullpen can't get anyone out.
Three of our top four relievers are on the DL. Shit's gonna happen. That shit might keep us from the post season but it's not like you can undo injuries.

I don't think 2-8 isn't any more realistic than 8-2.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,675
Deep inside Muppet Labs
This is a really, really down stretch right now. The fact we're still only two in the loss column behind Baltimore has to be considered a silver lining.
On the other hand, they've lost 6 of 8 in every nut-crunching way possible, all started when they had bases loaded and no one out against the worst team in the league and Ortiz at the plate. The fact that failure in that situation might well be the catalyst that pushes them out of the playoff picture is just infuriating. The fact that they lost another game in that series and the one last night on little-league style defense is completely indefensible.

And the rest of the road trip looms. They haven't a way to win close games. When they don't get 8 runs they don't win. Hell, sometimes when they do get 8 runs they don't win.

The season stands on the brink right now. This trip will determine if they get into the playoffs. It would help if they stopped playing like crap.
 
Last edited:

Schadenfreude

New Member
Apr 9, 2016
89
Geneva, Switzerland
How many starting pitchers in the Majors do you think average 7 innings per start?
I would guesstimate a handful, but I really don't care about what other teams and pitchers are doing in this regard: notice I used the word "prepared". Average is a meaningless statistic by itself because of a SP would almost never pitch more than nine innings, so the range of data would not exceed nine. A better comparison might be comparing the fraction of starts in which a pitcher pitches seven complete innings. Have at it.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,934
Why can't they hit junk ballers? It seems like the slower the fastball the worse this team looks. Some of their worst games have come against soft tossing pitchers with ERAs in the mid 4s or higher. A couple times could be a fluke but they have been stymied far too many times by garbage pitchers. Obviously the offense is low on the blame list but last night is 80% on the offense. Jeff Weaver and his 82MPH fastball should not hold this team to 1 run, ever.
 

Monbonthbump

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2005
222
Lincoln,NE
OK, here's a theory I will toss out. It is MLB's fault. I have always watched the Red Sox games which are not on national tv on my computer using the "Classic" format. Suddenly I stopped getting that option this week. I hate the "newer" format. We have lost every game since this happened. MLB just told me that the classic version will no longer be available. We may not win any more games this year. Thanks, MLB.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,133
I would guesstimate a handful, but I really don't care about what other teams and pitchers are doing in this regard: notice I used the word "prepared". Average is a meaningless statistic by itself because of a SP would almost never pitch more than nine innings, so the range of data would not exceed nine. A better comparison might be comparing the fraction of starts in which a pitcher pitches seven complete innings. Have at it.

Before last night, the Sox had 3 guys in the top 16 in innings pitched. At least those 3 guys seem prepared. So does Toronto. No one else. The problem has been that 2 rotation spots (originally occuipied by Kelly and Buchholz) have been terrible, and one has been inconsistent at best (Price). Maybe Rodriguez and Pomerantz change that.
How does lack of preparation to pitch 7 manifest itself?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,219
Portland
I know it seems like the Sox don't win the close ones, but a lot of the contenders don't as well. Good teams, because they have a much higher run differential, are often mediocre in the one run games and make their hay in blow outs

The Sox are 11-13
The Jays are 10-18
The Indians are 14-14
The Cubs are 12-16
The Astros are 18-18
The Dodgers are 16-17
The Cards are 13-16
That is a combined record of 19 games under .500
Of note is that the Red Sox have been in the fewest amount of those games - (perhaps due to playing a lopsided amount of games at home whereas the road games are likely to be closer with the lower differential).

The Giants are one of the best at 21-13 - Yay Bruce Bochy
And shockingly the O's and Showalter are 12-9

And then in blowouts

The Sox are 18-8
The Jays are 19-8
The Indians are 23-10
The Cubs are 30-9
The Astros are 16-7
The Dodgers are 13-9
The Cards are 23-9
The O's are 15-14
That is a combined 82 and over.

The weirdest team in baseball, the Rangers, are living the dream. 22-7 in one run games and 12-15 in blowouts.

These losses have sucked, but they are in the same boat as many of the other contenders.
 
Last edited: