[yalesoxfan]

jtn46, on Jul 17 2007, 10:23 PM, said:

This win one lose one shit really has to fucking stop. If there was ever a time to getting a little streak going, playing the Royals at home should be that time.

Come on. Waiting to get going on the road against Cleveland, Seattle, or LA makes much more sense...and more dramatic, too.

All June everyone said the schedule was brutal and to wait until July what they're at home against sub .500 teams. Yup. Good times.

[DaveRoberts'Shoes]

ManilaSoxFAN, on Jul 17 2007, 10:31 PM, said:

Lars, read the Manila Metric.

As an example, a 1-2 result on the road (or a 2-1 series win at home) vs a non-contender is consistent with a 98-win season. It's all about WHO you are playing and WHERE. It's basically a strength-of-schedule perspective. Looking only at the W-L column during a given stretch of time can be very misleading.....

If you say so, Manila2.50.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Last year, the Sox were 57-36. They were 1 1/2 games up on the Yankees.

They ended up 86-76, 11 games out.

This team is a lot better than last year's, but I'm officially worried about the MFY.

[NWsoxophile]

and the lead is now 8.

[normstalls]

this team blows

[yalesoxfan]

Yanks just won. Nice to see a team that can win a one run game nevermind one in extras.

[ManilaSoxFAN]

reggiecleveland, on Jul 17 2007, 10:25 PM, said:

Bullshit you picked June 7th to take the losing streak out of your statement. They are 21-10 since June 1, that is average.

I know your schtick is the positive guy, fine, but that was a blatant cherry pick.

To clear a few things up:

1. I don't have a schtick. I have protested repeatedly about the label that has been given me by others.

2. You earlier claimed that I told you last year that we'd win a lot or whatever. Wrong. I didn't post last year, did I? (BTW, I was not very positive about last year's team from the get-go).

3. My time frame, FYI, is for the whole season. We were on a 98/99-win pace since May 6. We then went up to a 100/101 pace from 5/17~6/7...after which we went back to a 98/99-win pace. We've been on that pace ever since. "Full season" does NOT equal "cherry-pick".


Losing at home vs KC, coupled with a Yankee win, is a bit mind-distorting. I'm sure many can't agree with me right now. So be it. My argument is quite logical, rational and is supported by fact. Ultimately, tho, it's a matter of point-of-view...or of perception. Pick yours.

[Zupcic Fan]

The lead is actually 7 1/2-----since there is absolutely no chance that they will lose that suspended game against Baltimore where they are up 2 in the 8th. It's getting a little scary since the Yanks are starting to hit in all the big spots.
If the lead is down to 4 or 5 by early August, then the Yankees have done exactly what they wanted to do.

[Rudy Pemberton]

The Yankees are starting to play really, really well. They've gone 26-15, and won 10 of 13. Can't let this get any closer.

[Razor Shines]

I guess we should have seen this coming with Nunez.

Meh...an 8 game lead is still a pretty fucking big lead.

At least Lugo is hot.

[Zupcic Fan]

Just a quick observation: I've always found it to be very pointless when people, in both football and baseball, start in on the schedule analyses and start predicting how teams will do over the rest of a given year.

Last year, for example, I'm sure that schedule analysis did not have the Sox going 0-5 vs. the Yankees in August and 0-3 vs. Kansas City---but that's what they did.
This year that same analysis would not have the Yankees going 3-1 vs Minnesota, 2-1 vs the Angels, 3-1 vs. Tampa, and on their way to maybe 4-0 vs Toronto, but that's what's happening.

It has always struck me as a nice fun thing to do but without any meaning. This is not the same Red sox team that existed when many of these analyses were made. There's no Schilling. Lowell and Youkilis look like the Lowell and Youkilis of 2nd half last year. Coco swings at everything. Drew and Lugo---well, we're still waiting---3 of our 5 starters are capable of pitching a bunch of bad games in a row, certainly.

So sit back and enjoy the show, but enough with the damned predictions and projections, as far as I'm concerned--unless you just enjoy doing them, for whatever reason.

It's even sillier when Chris russo does the same thing with every NFL team. "Well, Mike, let's go through the rest of the Giants schedule: Minnesota at home---win Buffalo on the road---losss etc etc etc etc. It never happens the way he says it will, but after all, it's only radio.

The Sox are on a pace to win 90 whatever games. What pace were that on last year when they were 56-35 or whatever. What pace were the Mets on a few weeks ago compared to now. All meaningless. Play the games.

This post has been edited by Zupcic Fan: 17 July 2007 - 09:56 PM

[Fratboy]

Zupcic Fan, on Jul 17 2007, 10:53 PM, said:

Coco swings at everything. Drew and Lugo---well, we're still waiting---

Excuse me?

Coco and Drew have played very well in the last few weeks, and Lugo has put up a nifty 378/425/486 line in his last 40 PA's before tonight's game. Considering he went 3 for 4, those numbers are even higher.

Just how much more are you expecting these guys to deliver?

They knocked out what, 12 hits in the game and got 3 runs for their trouble. They couldn't string stuff together. The offense wasn't really the problem tonight. The problem was Wakefield.

[soxfaninyankeeland]

That Jeremy Accardo sure is a gritty gamer.

[SinCitySoxFan1973]

In part wakefield, mostly the problem has been the same all season: No clutch hitting. This team will not win this year w/o some sort of shake up

This post has been edited by SinCitySoxFan1973: 17 July 2007 - 10:07 PM

[Zupcic Fan]

I'm just venting. Actually, though, I'm waiting for these guys to deliver hits in games where their hits are bigtiome contributors to the Sox actually winning the games. Any analysis that tells me that Drew has been doing great lately so goes against my definition of great that we're just on different planes. If you want to argue Drew, Crisp, and Lugo with me, please don't give me the numbers. Give me an anecdotal summary of the big moments in the games where what they did was a gigantic factor in the team winning the game big hits at big moments---big leadoff hits late in close games, big 2 out Rbi's etc.----things like, say, Andy Phillips has had about 3 of this week---or A Rod about 10 of this year, or even Pedroia. or Ortiz in previous years. You know what I mean.

To me, when I look at most of those big moments for the Sox, they've almost all gone to moments contributed by the pitching staff, and that's a problem. Mets are experiencing the same thing. The numbers, per se, aren't that bad. They just never come at the right times.

[ManilaSoxFAN]

Zupcic Fan, on Jul 17 2007, 10:53 PM, said:

Just a quick observation: I've always found it to be very pointless when people, in both football and baseball, start in on the schedule analyses and start predicting how teams will do over the rest of a given year.

Last year, for example, I'm sure that schedule analysis did not have the Sox going 0-5 vs. the Yankees in August and 0-3 vs. Kansas City---but that's what they did.
This year that same analysis would not have the Yankees going 3-1 vs Minnesota, 2-1 vs the Angels, 3-1 vs. Tampa, and on their way to maybe 4-0 vs Toronto, but that's what's happening.

It has always struck me as a nice fun thing to do but without any meaning. This is not the same Red sox team that existed when many of these analyses were made. There's no Schilling. Lowell and Youkilis look like the Lowell and Youkilis of 2nd half last year. Coco swings at everything. Drew and Lugo---well, we're still waiting---3 of our 5 starters are capable of pitching a bunch of bad games in a row, certainly.

So sit back and enjoy the show, but enough with the damned predictions and projections, as far as I'm concerned--unless you just enjoy doing them, for whatever reason.

It's even sillier when Chris russo does the same thing with every NFL team. "Well, Mike, let's go through the rest of the Giants schedule: Minnesota at home---win Buffalo on the road---losss etc etc etc etc. It never happens the way he says it will, but after all, it's only radio.

The Sox are on a pace to win 90 whatever games. What pace were that on last year when they were 56-35 or whatever. What pace were the Mets on a few weeks ago compared to now. All meaningless. Play the games.

Zup,

This is not football. Strength of schedule is INCREDIBLY SIGNIFICANT in baseball. You must consider the overwhelmingly large advantage a home team has...much more so than in other sports. Batting last for a win; always having the last say-so in a game plus the "normal" home turf advantages equals big edge. Bad teams win series at home all the time. Good teams lose series on the road all the time. That's the odds in baseball. Fact.

Measuring what pace a team is one -- by measuring their games played already -- is NOT a prediction. "Metric", NOT prediction or forecast.

A team can outperform the odds...or not. They can do so by a lot...or a little. One needs to understand the odds and measure accordingly. Once you understand that, you can see how a team is doing. The Sox have consistently played at a 98-win level. If they start playing at low 90's level, I'll get worried.

But yes, you are right about one thing: measuring a team's performance over a very short span is meaningless. Buuut...that's what many people do, right? Conversely, measuring a team's performance -- within a context proven over a span of 100 years of baseball -- is not meaningless...nor predictive. Metric. Measure. Not forecast. OK?

This post has been edited by ManilaSoxFAN: 17 July 2007 - 10:20 PM

[Zupcic Fan]

Manila: I kind of understand that, but the problem I have is that it so goes against what I'm observing that it's hard for me to learn anything from it. In my mind, the team got to that 98 win pace because guys like Youkilis and Lowell were pounding the ball big time, and Schilling was part of a rotation that had 3 solid pitchers, and Tavarez was pitching well. None of those things are true any more, so the pace seems a bit artificial to me, that's all

As far as Lugo and Coco and Drew go, I'm glad that they are starting to produce because I'm hoping that it will start to give them the confidence to produce in situations that really mean something. So far Drew has not done that when it comes to driving in runs when it matters but has led off some innings nicely. As far as Lugo goes, I'm still waiting. The fact that he goes 3-4 in a 9-3 loss is nice but means nothing to me. I still want to see how he performs with the tying runs on in a one run game, or leading off an inning in a tie game, etc over a period of time.

It's like the old ARod criticism. Even in his MVP year, Yankee fans were frustrated, perhaps wrongly so, by his inability to come through in situations they most cared about.

[Phil Nevin 23]

Slip, slip, errr, slip slidin' away...

[Drocca]

Phil Nevin 23, on Jul 17 2007, 11:26 PM, said:

Slip, slip, errr, slip slidin' away...

The fact you show up just to rub in rough losses is really rude and mean.

[Harry Hooper]

Quote

As an example, a 1-2 result on the road (or a 2-1 series win at home) vs a non-contender is consistent with a 98-win season. It's all about WHO you are playing and WHERE. It's basically a strength-of-schedule perspective. Looking only at the W-L column during a given stretch of time can be very misleading.....
...
You must consider the overwhelmingly large advantage a home team has...much more so than in other sports. Batting last for a win; always having the last say-so in a game plus the "normal" home turf advantages equals big edge. Bad teams win series at home all the time. Good teams lose series on the road all the time. That's the odds in baseball. Fact.

Manila, playing at HOME against TOR/KC, the Sox have gone 3-3. This is not fatal as yet, but it sure ain't acceptable either.

Zup has a point about the 2007 offense. It's like the football team that keeps driving down the field, piling up the yardage, yet can't put the ball in the end zone.