Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
9/10 winning begins again
#351
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:53 PM
#352
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:53 PM
Nice RH bat off the bench. Jesus fuck me.
Varitek would be a better option. Seriously.
#353
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:54 PM
#354
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:54 PM
What really worries me is they can't seem to beat ANYONE now.
I'm worried too, but keep a couple of things in mind...
1. The Sox are still closer to the Yankees (and closer to the best record in the AL) than the Rays are to the Red Sox.
2. Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that the Sox lose tonight. They'd be up 4.5 with 17 to play for Boston and 18 to play for Tampa. That would mean that...
- if the Sox go 9-8, the Rays would have to go 14-4 to catch them. Both are possible, but that's a great run for Tampa.
- if the Sox go 10-7, the Rays would have to go 15-3 to catch them. That ain't happening.
- if the Sox go 11-6, the Rays would need to 16-2 to catch them. No way.
- and if the Sox just go 7-10, the Rays would have to go 12-6 to catch them. That's very possible, but still, not too likely.
All the Sox have to do, presuming they lose tonight, is take 2 of the next 4 from Tampa to, I believe, salt this thing away.
#355
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:54 PM
Not that I'm not worried, but through the same number of games last year, the Giants were only a half game behind the Padres.Padres blew a huge lead last season, Sox are on the verge of doing so, too. It's the Adrian Gonzalez curse.
#356
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:54 PM
I think the larger problem is that there is no cut-off play given the arrangement of the players, no?
Pedroia chased the ball. Scut covered the bag. Weiland's backing up third.
The whole thing is sorta a clusterfrick. Maybe Reddick threw to 3rd because there was no cutoff man, but if Pedey's in short right... I'm actually trying to figure out what should have happened.
It's up to Scutaro to judge the situation, but I think part of that judgment is that the cutoff man is the first job, and covering second is the last job. First things first, and all that...
I just don't want Reddick to catch flak when he made a very good throw in both line and trajectory.
Also, where does the pitcher go in all this mess? To back up 3B?
#357
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:54 PM
Lavarnway would have been a better choice.Nice RH bat off the bench. Jesus fuck me.
#358
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:55 PM
Varitek would be a better option. Seriously.
Eh, Darnell has an .820 OPS since the ASB and an .899 in the last 7 days. I'm OK with him as the RHH off the bench.
#359
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:56 PM
#360
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:56 PM
Nice RH bat off the bench. Jesus fuck me.
If your going to pinch hit for the lefty, pinch hit for Crawford for Christ sake.
#361
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:56 PM
His ERA in August was 1.23 and his opponent's OBP was 267. He's pitching better than his numbers indicate.
Don't bother me with stats when I'm trying to be optimistic
#362
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:56 PM
#363
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:56 PM
#364
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:56 PM
Hey Carl. If you tie it up here I'll take back every negative thing I've ever said about you. All two of them.
Guess the ration stands at 198 positive to 2 negative.
#365
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:57 PM
#366
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:57 PM
#367
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:57 PM
- if the Sox go 9-8, the Rays would have to go 14-4 to catch them. Both are possible, but that's a great run for Tampa.
Sox go 9-8, they'll make the playoffs.
But, what if they go 6-11, or 5-12? Then the Rays (or Angels, or Rangers) need to go 12-6 to catch them.
Not likely...but again, any game started by a pitcher not named Lester, Beckett, or Bedard is going to be ugly.
#368
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:57 PM
Is Francona obviously right to remove Reddick every time a LHP shows up? Is he that much worse against them than Crawfid, for example?
No. But no team is going to admit spending $142M on a platoon player, so Crawford gets to take his hacks.
#369
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:58 PM
#370
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:58 PM
Eh, Darnell has an .820 OPS since the ASB and an .899 in the last 7 days. I'm OK with him as the RHH off the bench.
He has been better. But you could also hit Tek for Crawford, who's putrid vs. lefties. Like, Trot-level putrid.
#371
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:58 PM
#372
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:58 PM
#373
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:59 PM
#374
Posted 10 September 2011 - 08:59 PM
I agree, but I'd like to see Lavarway get some opportunities to see what he can do. Now's the time to find out.Eh, Darnell has an .820 OPS since the ASB and an .899 in the last 7 days. I'm OK with him as the RHH off the bench.
#375
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:00 PM
Sox go 9-8, they'll make the playoffs.
But, what if they go 6-11, or 5-12? Then the Rays (or Angels, or Rangers) need to go 12-6 to catch them.
Not likely...but again, any game started by a pitcher not named Lester, Beckett, or Bedard is going to be ugly.
If the Sox go 6-11 they'll have finished the season on a 9-19 run... by far their worst of the season. Granted 2-10 is worse percentage wise, but 9-19 is such an extended run of bad play it would have to qualify as the worst run of the year.
I just can't see that happening. They're too talented, even with the rotation being Lester and the island of misfit toys.
#376
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:00 PM
He has been better. But you could also hit Tek for Crawford, who's putrid vs. lefties. Like, Trot-level putrid.
We probably won't see Crawford pinch hit for often till at least next year. Got to get him going and all that. although after you yank the starter 3 or 4 hundread times, you should probably realize something is wrong.
#377
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:01 PM
#378
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:01 PM
Sox go 9-8, they'll make the playoffs.
But, what if they go 6-11, or 5-12? Then the Rays (or Angels, or Rangers) need to go 12-6 to catch them.
Not likely...but again, any game started by a pitcher not named Lester, Beckett, or Bedard is going to be ugly.
The way this team is going I'll be thrilled if they can manage 9-8 to finish up, but.....
#379
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:01 PM
They should be crucified. Career.average seasons from both equals division lead+.Good luck to Crawford and Lackey if the Sox somehow miss the playoffs.
#380
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:01 PM
#381
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:02 PM
I'm trying but it sure is hard to like Carl Crawford.
I'm finding it hard not to wish him dead.
#382
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:02 PM
I beg to differ. The only place that throw should have gone was to 2B. Reddick made a bad decision to throw to 3B. There was zero chance of getting him there. Scutaro moved over to the line that the ball was thrown on to try and cut it off, but Reddick threw it to high to do that. He was where he was supposed to be. There was zero need for a cutoff man. Reddick was shallow enough to get the throw to second easily.It's up to Scutaro to judge the situation, but I think part of that judgment is that the cutoff man is the first job, and covering second is the last job. First things first, and all that...
I just don't want Reddick to catch flak when he made a very good throw in both line and trajectory.
Also, where does the pitcher go in all this mess? To back up 3B?
#383
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:02 PM
#384
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:02 PM
If the Sox go 6-11 they'll have finished the season on a 9-19 run... by far their worst of the season. Granted 2-10 is worse percentage wise, but 9-19 is such an extended run of bad play it would have to qualify as the worst run of the year.
I just can't see that happening. They're too talented, even with the rotation being Lester and the island of misfit toys.
If they go 6-11 they'll have finished the season on a 6-11 run. The rest has already happened, proving that they are quite capable of pulling it off the way they are playing.
#385
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:04 PM
If the Sox go 6-11 they'll have finished the season on a 9-19 run... by far their worst of the season. Granted 2-10 is worse percentage wise, but 9-19 is such an extended run of bad play it would have to qualify as the worst run of the year.
I just can't see that happening. They're too talented, even with the rotation being Lester and the island of misfit toys.
I dunno, lets say Beckett and Bedard each miss 1 more start. Is it inconceivable that Lackey, Wakefield, Miller, and Weiland continue to each get rocked? I mean, these guys are among the worst starters in the league, aren't they?
#386
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:04 PM
Sox go 9-8, they'll make the playoffs.
But, what if they go 6-11, or 5-12? Then the Rays (or Angels, or Rangers) need to go 12-6 to catch them.
Yes, I think I mentioned that.
Not likely...but again, any game started by a pitcher not named Lester, Beckett, or Bedard is going to be ugly.
Listen, I already said I'm worried, and there's good cause for concern here. But with just 17 games left, a *LOT* has to go wrong for the Sox to miss the playoffs. Doesn't mean it can't go wrong, but not only do the Sox have to continue to play horrific baseball (if they went 7-10 over their last 17, it would mean they would be on a 10-18 stretch to end the year. I think, even with the injuries, this team is too good to basically have a month like that.
And even if they do that, another team has to play .667 ball from here on out, which is possible given the smallish number of games, but still, that's a really good stretch for anybody.
All they have to do is take a couple from Tampa and essentially play .500 ball the rest of the season and they're in. Dear God, just get into the playoffs!
#387
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:04 PM
#388
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:04 PM
I'd give up the "switch hitting" ghost.
#389
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:04 PM
Theory....Friedman targets players with legit talent but can only thrive in low pressure environments like the Flying Saucer.
#390
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:06 PM
#391
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:08 PM
Papelbon has a migraine, Bard has dead arm, and the rest of the pen sucks.Just a long outing for Aceves, or stretching him out to start?
#392
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:08 PM
If they go 6-11 they'll have finished the season on a 6-11 run. The rest has already happened, proving that they are quite capable of pulling it off the way they are playing.
What they haven't done, however, is play that poorly for that long at any point in the season... which was my point. You don't simply lop off the previous 11 games as if they didn't happen when talking about the likelihood of them continuing to play this poorly. Previous play counts and has to be taken into account when predicting future performance. And I just can't see them extending this poor run that long. It would be the worst run of the season, by far.
#393
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:10 PM
#394
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:10 PM
Well,... prior to their hottest streak this year, thay hadn't played that well before, either, and yet they did.What they haven't done, however, is play that poorly for that long at any point in the season... which was my point. You don't simply lop off the previous 11 games as if they didn't happen when talking about the likelihood of them continuing to play this poorly. Previous play counts and has to be taken into account when predicting future performance. And I just can't see them extending this poor run that long. It would be the worst run of the season, by far.
#395
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:10 PM
#396
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:10 PM
#397
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:10 PM
I dunno, lets say Beckett and Bedard each miss 1 more start. Is it inconceivable that Lackey, Wakefield, Miller, and Weiland continue to each get rocked? I mean, these guys are among the worst starters in the league, aren't they?
It's not inconceivable, but I think the team losing that many games is certainly unlikely. The offense can win more than 6 games on their own.
#398
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:11 PM
Edit: looking forward to the offense winning this game on their own....
Edited by kartvelo, 10 September 2011 - 09:12 PM.
#399
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:11 PM
#400
Posted 10 September 2011 - 09:11 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users




This topic is locked






